Rochecotte, February 12, 1841.—Several Legitimist newspapers have published so-called letters written during the period of exile by King Louis-Philippe to the Marquis d'Entraigues, and a long letter written to the late M. de Talleyrand by the King, while M. de Talleyrand was ambassador at London. The Cabinet considers that the newspapers should be seized, the editors arrested and a charge of forgery brought against them before the courts. I sent for the newspaper containing the letter which was supposed to have been written to M. de Talleyrand. I am convinced that it is an absolute forgery. M. Delessert, prefect of police, has asked my son, M. de Valençay, to write to me and inquire whether I knew if any papers had been stolen from M. de Talleyrand at London; whether it was possible for any one to have abstracted them at Paris during his illness and at the time of his death; and finally, whether I knew a woman who was concerned in the whole business[ [4] who says that she had lived at Valençay and even in the château; in short, he wishes to know my recollections and my opinion of the whole story. I talked over the matter with my son-in-law, and we concluded that we would be bound to reply. I therefore gave M. de Valençay a reply, telling him to read my letter to M. Delessert but not to leave the letter in his hands. In it I said that I had never known this woman or heard of her, which is exactly true; that all M. de Talleyrand's important papers had been deposited by him in foreign countries in sure hands and in places which would render theft quite impossible, and that no papers could have been found at his house in Paris, if any attempt had been made to abstract them, of which I had no recollection; that, in short, all my recollections and impressions contributed to convince me that the letter in question was a forgery. As a matter of fact, it is a very long letter upon European affairs which was never written by the King; moreover, neither the King nor Madame Adélaide in their letters to M. de Talleyrand ever expressed the thoughts, the opinions, or the projects expounded in this letter. It appears that the Abbé Genoude and M. de la Rochejaquelein, in the course of a journey to England, bought the King's so-called letters from this woman and came to publish them in France under the deception of animosity and party spirit. However, the whole business is very unpleasant for the King and the trial very wearisome to follow; these men assert that they have originals in the King's handwriting, which are no doubt forgeries, though proving them to be so is a hateful business.
The Legitimist newspapers also publish some fragments of a diary, or rather some memoirs of Madame de Feuchères; the forgery here is obvious to myself, who am well aware of the relations which existed between her and the Royal Family, and are totally misrepresented by these fragments. Her family and the executors of her will have published an absolute denial of the existence of these supposed memoirs. However, the Legitimist newspapers proceed as before to publish instalments of this absurdity, and there are idiots or ill-disposed persons who still persist in believing them authentic.
Rochecotte, February 15, 1841.—I have been asked a question about Madame de Salvandy, who corresponds with the Austrian Minister to the United States; her maiden name was Mlle. Ferey, and she was a niece of the Oberkampf family; she is thus connected with the Jouy oilcloth.[ [5] She is not a distinguished person, though not vulgar; she is not pretty and not exactly ugly; she is not pleasant, but not badly brought up; not clever, but no fool; and after this I think it must be admitted that she is not a nonentity. I should add that she has been a good daughter, a good wife and a good mother; that she bores her husband and wearies her children by her continual efforts to be correct; and in conclusion that she is a thorough-going Protestant, always scattering little French Bibles about without her husband's knowledge, who is a good Catholic.
A summary of my correspondence is as follows. I found it here when I returned from Tours, where I had gone for a few hours to be present at a charity lottery.
Madame de Lieven writes: "Enthusiasm is rising once more at the Tuileries on behalf of the fortifications at Paris, and is said to have reached Dumouriez. The fortifications are desired and will be secured, for it is thought that the Chamber of Peers will show a majority in their favour, notwithstanding the Legitimist conspiracy of Molé and Pasquier. England will be obliged to make advances to France, as Parliament is urging it in that direction and society also. Notwithstanding the outward success of the English Cabinet, the Ministry is growing weak and it is even said that it will fall. Lord Palmerston alone retains full confidence in his fortune. The whole of Europe shows great confidence in M. Guizot, especially Prince Metternich, who asks of him only one thing—namely, that he will continue in office. I think he is as safe as any one can be in France. I think the proposal regarding Jerusalem will not pass unnoticed."
The Duchesse de Montmorency writes: "I told you a few days ago that Mgr. Affre had forbidden the Chapter to meet, and that the Chapter had strictly carried out his orders by offering him no New Year's congratulations, as a meeting would have been necessary for that purpose. The result has caused a disturbance among the clergy which is now at its height. Even at the Tuileries they are beginning to repent of the unfortunate choice that was made in M. Affre, as he had a violent quarrel with M. Guillon, Bishop of Morocco, the Queen's first almoner, and a great favourite at the château. M. Guillon, though he had been entirely hostile to Mgr. de Quélen, went to the King to complain of Mgr. Affre. Unfortunately he cannot be removed. He has turned M. de Courtier, the very popular priest of the foreign missions, out of his parish, and he has only his masses to live upon. The canons of Notre Dame no longer say mass at the high altar, as to do so would be a means of meeting, and similarly at matins and the other offices. Things are almost as if the cathedral was under an interdict. Mgr. Affre is so hot-tempered that when his secretary, a young and innocent abbé to whom he had dictated some extraordinary letters, ventured to remark upon the fact, he was immediately dismissed without notice. How Christian, pastoral and evangelical such conduct is!
"M. Demidoff has sent back the secretary, the butler and the servants that he had here; it is not yet known whether he has reached Russia, or whether the Emperor Nicholas will allow his wife to come with him; the possibility is doubted.
"The affairs of the Duc Decazes are in fearful disorder and his servants are leaving him; he is also said to be very ill."
M. Raullin writes: "Yesterday at Notre Dame we had a sermon from the Rev. Father Lacordaire, who wishes to restore or to establish in France the Order of Dominicans with their beautiful white cloaks. The whole of Paris was there and the church was crowded. The sermon provoked much criticism, both favourable and adverse. It was a harangue in the style of Peter the Hermit preaching the Crusade to the people, except that in this case the Crusade was directed against no one, but was to support Catholicism. It was Rome and France marching together since the time of Clovis to the conquest of true liberty and of civilisation. In all this there was a mixture of papacy and of nationalism, of spiritual monarchy and of universal liberty which was thundered forth in a style that might shake the pillars and the very foundations of every Gallic church. I hope that similar attempts will not often be made, but for once in a way such outbursts do no harm. I was especially struck by the vast concourse of people and the close attention with which they followed all the words of this Dominican revivalist. As to the result of his attempt, I am afraid that imagination and a sense of the picturesque are all that will be stimulated. I do not like attempts to start new movements by something extraordinary."
The Duchesse d'Albuféra writes: "Madame de Rambuteau, in order to avoid the terrible crowd which invades the rooms of the Hotel de Ville, declared that she would only ask those of her new acquaintances who were introduced to her on Tuesday mornings. Such was the reply that she sent to a note from Madame d'Istrie, who asked permission to introduce her sister, Madame de La Ferronnays. The idea of introduction as an excuse from Madame de Rambuteau to Madame de La Ferronnays has been considered ridiculous; it has become a jest and a byword and many people in high society decline to visit the Hotel de Ville.