Eve and David

by Honoré de Balzac

When the broker’s men came for Coralie’s furniture, the author of the Marguerites fled to a friend of Bixiou’s, one Desroches, a barrister, who burst out laughing at the sight of Lucien in such a state about nothing at all.

“That is nothing, my dear fellow. Do you want to gain time?”

“Yes, as much possible.”

“Very well, apply for stay of execution. Go and look up Masson, he is a solicitor in the Commercial Court, and a friend of mine. Take your documents to him. He will make a second application for you, and give notice of objection to the jurisdiction of the court. There is not the least difficulty; you are a journalist, your name is well known enough. If they summons you before a civil court, come to me about it, that will be my affair; I engage to send anybody who offers to annoy the fair Coralie about his business.”

On the 28th of May, Lucien’s case came on in the civil court, and judgment was given before Desroches expected it. Lucien’s creditor was pushing on the proceedings against him. A second execution was put in, and again Coralie’s pilasters were gilded with placards. Desroches felt rather foolish; a colleague had “caught him napping,” to use his own expression. He demurred, not without reason, that the furniture belonged to Mlle. Coralie, with whom Lucien was living, and demanded an order for inquiry. Thereupon the judge referred the matter to the registrar for inquiry, the furniture was proved to belong to the actress, and judgment was entered accordingly. Métivier appealed, and judgment was confirmed on appeal on the 30th of June.

On the 7th of August, Maître Cachan received by the coach a bulky package endorsed, “Métivier versus Séchard and Lucien Chardon.”

The first document was a neat little bill, of which a copy (accuracy guaranteed) is here given for the reader’s benefit:—

To Bill due the last day of April, drawn by Séchard, junior, to order of Lucien de
Rubempré, together with expenses of fr. c.
protest and return . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1037 45
May 5th—Serving notice of protest and
summons to appear before the
Tribunal of Commerce in
Paris, May 7th . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 75
“ 7th—Judgment by default and
warrant of arrest. . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 —
“ 10th—Notification of judgment . . . . . . . . . 8 50
“ 12th—Warrant of execution . . . . . . . . . . . 5 50
“ 14th—Inventory and appraisement
previous to execution. . . . . . . . . . . 16 —
“ 18th—Expenses of affixing placards. . . . . . . 15 25
“ 19th—Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 —
“ 24th—Verification of inventory, and
application for stay of execution
on the part of the said
Lucien de Rubempré, objecting
to the jurisdiction of the Court. . . . . . 12 —
“ 27th—Order of the Court upon application
duly repeated, and transfer of
of case to the Civil Court. . . . . . . . . 35 —
____ ____
Carried forward. . . . . . . . . . . . 1177 45
fr. c.
Brought forward 1177 45
May 28th—Notice of summary proceedings in
the Civil Court at the instance
of Métivier, represented by
counsel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 50
June 2nd—Judgment, after hearing both
parties, condemning Lucien for
expenses of protest and return;
the plaintiff to bear costs
of proceedings in the
Commercial Court. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 —
“ 6th—Notification of judgment. . . . . . . . . . 10 —
“ 15th—Warrant of execution. . . . . . . . . . . . 5 50
“ 19th—Inventory and appraisement preparatory
to execution; interpleader summons by
the Demoiselle Coralie, claiming goods
and chattels taken in execution; demand
for immediate special inquiry before
further proceedings be taken . . . . . . . 20 —
“ “ —Judge’s order referring matter to
registrar for immediate special inquiry. . 40 —
“ “ —Judgment in favor of the said
Mademoiselle Coralie . . . . . . . . . . . 250 —
“ 20th—Appeal by Métivier . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 —
“ 30th—Confirmation of judgment . . . . . . . . . 250 —
____ ____
Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1926 45
__________
Bill matured May 31st, with expenses of fr. c.
protest and return. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1037 45
Serving notice of protest. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 75
____ ____
Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1046 20
Bill matured June 30th, with expenses of
protest and return. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1037 45
Serving notice of protest. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 75
____ ____
Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1046 20
__________

This document was accompanied by a letter from Métivier, instructing Maître Cachan, notary of Angoulême, to prosecute David Séchard with the utmost rigor of the law. Wherefore Maître Victor-Ange-Herménégilde Doublon summoned David Séchard before the Tribunal of Commerce in Angoulême for the sum-total of four thousand and eighteen francs eighty-five centimes, the amount of the three bills and expenses already incurred. On the morning of the very day when Doublon served the writ upon Eve, requiring her to pay a sum so enormous in her eyes, there came a letter like a thunderbolt from Métivier:—

To Monsieur Séchard, Junior, Printer, Angoulême.
“SIR,—Your brother-in-law, M. Chardon, is so shamelessly
dishonest, that he declares his furniture to be the property of an
actress with whom he is living. You ought to have informed me
candidly of these circumstances, and not have allowed me to go to
useless expense over law proceedings. I have received no answer
to my letter of the 10th of May last. You must not, therefore,
take it amiss if I ask for immediate repayment of the three bills
and the expenses to which I have been put.—Yours, etc.,
“METIVIER.”