Memoirs of the Duchesse de Dino (Afterwards Duchesse de Talleyrand et de Sagan), 1831-1835

Here is a curious fact of which I am quite certain. M. Dupin had promised the King three days ago to support the order of the day. The day before yesterday he voted against it; yesterday again he spoke against it but voted for it. Why? Because after M. Sauzet's speech the Ministers thought they were lost, and said to M. Dupin: "M. le Président, prepare yourself to go to the King and have your Cabinet ready, for, in an hour from now, we shall have resigned." M. Dupin, much upset, said: "but I didn't think that all this would be so serious; I have no wish to see you fall, for I do not at all desire that the burden should again fall on my shoulders." With these words he tried to escape and leave the Vice-President in his place, when Thiers taking him by the arm said: "No, M. le Président, you shall not go till the question is settled; if it goes against us you will go nowhere else but to the King where you will be condemned to be Minister."

This, no doubt, is very interesting, but what an atmosphere! What people!

Paris, December 8, 1834.– Yesterday, when I got back at four, I was astonished to see the Duc d'Orléans, whom I supposed to be already on his way to Brussels. He was not to leave, however, for another hour, and he came to tell me that Sir Robert Peel had passed through Paris, and had sent his brother to him (the Duc d'Orléans) as an intimate friend, to beg him to make his excuses to the King for not requesting the honour of an audience. His Majesty would, however, easily understand that in the circumstances hours were centuries. We drew two conclusions from this: first, that Sir Robert Peel had decided to accept the Premiership, for an ordinary private individual would not have considered himself of sufficient importance to send such a message; secondly, that the courtesy of his language proved a feeling rather friendly to France than the reverse.

Speaking of Sir Robert Peel, I had a letter from him yesterday, written from Rome, about the Bassano Ministry, very civil and kind in its terms, in which he says that what alarms him most in this combination is that it may prevent M. de Talleyrand from returning to London.

Paris, December 9, 1834.– Frederick Lamb, who came to see me yesterday morning, told me several curious things. He gave me a worse idea than ever of Lord Palmerston; incredible details, for instance, on his conduct with regard to the Eastern Question, and many other matters of which in London we could only form a superficial opinion. He told me that at the time of the quarrel between England and Russia about Sir Stratford Canning, Madame de Lieven had wanted the matter to be arranged so that Frederick Lamb should go to St. Petersburg and Sir Stratford Canning to Vienna. This was proposed to Prince Metternich, who replied: "This arrangement will arrange nothing, for the one ambassador whom we will never agree to accept is Sir Stratford Canning."

He told me also that M. de Metternich said of Lord Palmerston: "He is a tyrant, and the age of tyrants is over."

Frederick Lamb detests Lord Granville, but he does not believe that the Tory Cabinet will succeed, though he does not think that the Radicals will necessarily be their successors. He thinks Lord Grey will come back, and is looking for means to extrude Lord Palmerston and Lord Holland. Like Pozzo and M. Molé, he says extraordinary things of M. de Broglie. If we may believe them, no one ever made such blunders.

When I got back yesterday, at four, I received M. Molé. It all passed off as if we had parted only yesterday. He spoke to me, as he used to do, of himself, his affections, friends, attitude of mind – all with the charm which is peculiar to him. He told me that I was much more amiable even than I was four years ago, and he stayed nearly an hour. I have always thought that nobody's conversation is so good, so rapid, or so agreeable as his. He is in very good taste in an age in which good taste is unknown. Perhaps he is not high-souled enough to rule, but he is high-minded enough to refuse to be degraded, and that is already much.

Many names, many facts and deeds, were passed in review during that hour, and I was much pleased with the natural manner in which he approached every topic. He told me that my mind was so just that even those who feared my enmity were reassured; and, in fact, all went off excellently. I am not sure that this will be so between M. de Talleyrand and him. I have undertaken to arrange a meeting, and both parties have begged me to be present at this first interview, which is rather amusing.

M. Molé told me that he yesterday refused an invitation to dine with M. Dupin on the ground that the latter had given a distorted version in the tribune of the purely unofficial relations between them a fortnight ago. M. Molé added that he had no thoughts of the English Embassy – as some people were saying – for he did not wish to accept anything from the present Ministry.

He never sees the Duc de Broglie at all now. He thinks Rayneval is the only possible Ambassador for London just now, and intends to speak about it to the King, with whom he says he is on very good terms. He is scarcely on bowing terms with Guizot, and his relations with Thiers are very cold.

Paris, December 10, 1834.– Yesterday evening M. de Talleyrand was overwhelmed with a procession of visitors. A great many things were said, of which the following seemed to me the best.

They come from Frederick Lamb, who came first, and with whom we were for some time alone. He talked a great deal of M. de Metternich and of his remark made four months ago about King Louis-Philippe: "I thought he was an intriguer, but now I see quite well he is a King." He also told us that on the day of the fall of the last English Ministry Lord Palmerston sent the news to the British chargé d'affaires at Vienna, and asked him to acquaint M. de Metternich, adding: "You will never be in a position to make to M. de Metternich a communication which will give him more pleasure." The chargé d'affaires took the despatch to the Prince, and for some unknown reason read the whole of it to him, including even this last phrase. M. de Metternich made the following reply, which, I think, is in very good taste: "Here is another proof of Lord Palmerston's ignorance of men and things. I cannot be pleased at an event the consequences of which I cannot yet measure. Tell him that I receive the news not with joy but with hope."

Paris, December 12, 1834.– I dined yesterday at the Tuileries; besides M. de Talleyrand, there were the Molliens, the Valençays, and Baron de Montmorency. I sat between the King and the Duc de Nemours; the last-named has conquered his shyness a little, but he is still very timid. He is as white and blonde and pink and slim and transparent as a young girl, and not pretty in my opinion.

No conversation could be more interesting than the King's, especially when, deserting politics, he plunges into the innumerable memories of his extraordinary life. I was struck by two anecdotes which he told extremely well, and though I fear I may spoil them in the repetition, I will put them down. There was in the room a portrait of M. de Biron, Duc de Lauzun, which the King has just had copied from one lent him by M. de Talleyrand. This naturally led the talk to the original of the portrait, and the King told how, when he came back to Paris in 1814, he saw at his first reception an old man, who approached him and asked for a few minutes private conversation away from the crowd. The King placed himself in the embrasure of a window, and then the unknown drew from his pocket a ring mounted with the portrait of the Duc d'Orléans, the King's father, and said: "When the Duc de Lauzun was condemned to death I was at the Revolutionary Tribunal, and as he was going out M. de Biron, whom I had met several times, stopped before me, and said: 'Monsieur, take this ring and promise me that if ever occasion offers you will give it to the children of M. le Duc d'Orléans, assuring them that I die a faithful friend of their father and a devoted servant of their House.'" The King was naturally touched by the scrupulous fidelity with which after so many years the commission had been discharged, and asked the unknown his name. The latter refused, however, saying: "My name will not interest you, and might even awake painful memories. I have carried out the promise I made to a man about to die. You will never see or hear of me again;" and, in fact, he never reappeared.

This is the second anecdote. When the present King was still in England with Louis XVIII. and the Comte d'Artois, the last-named insisted absolutely on his cousin wearing the uniform of the French emigrés, and especially the white cockade. This the Duc d'Orléans persistently refused, and said he would never do. He appeared always in civil dress, which gave rise to many bitter discussions. In 1814, the Duc d'Orléans, following the whole of France, adopted the white cockade, and the Comte d'Artois took the uniform of Colonel-General of the National Guard. The first day on which the Duc d'Orléans appeared at the Comte d'Artois', the latter said to him, "Give me your hat." He took it, turned it over, and, playing with the white cockade, said: "Ah, ah! my dear cousin, what is this cockade? I thought you were never going to wear it?" "I thought so too, Monsieur; and I thought also that you were never destined to wear the coat I see you in to-day. I am very sorry you have not adopted the cockade, which suits it best." "My dear fellow," replied Monsieur, "do not deceive yourself. A coat matters nothing. You may take it or leave it; it is all the same. But a cockade is a different thing; it is a party symbol, a rallying point; and the symbol which you adopt must never be withdrawn." What I liked in the King, as he was pleased to recount this scene, was that he hastened to add: "Well, Madame, Charles X. was right, and what he said was cleverer than might have been expected." "What the King says is true," I replied. "Charles X.'s explanation was that of a man of honour and a gentleman, and it is certain that in him there was much of both." "Assuredly there was," added the King; "and besides that he has a very good heart." I was very much pleased to see justice done to him in that quarter.

At nine I went with Madame Mollien to the Comtesse de Boigne's. She had been to see me first, and had caused me to be told at Madame Mollien's that she would be much flattered if I would come and see her sometimes in the evening. Hers is the leading salon at present; the one good house which belongs, I will not say to the Court, but to the Ministry, as that of Madame de Flahaut belongs to the Duc d'Orléans, and that of Madame de Massa to the Court proper. There is no fourth. At Madame de Boigne's there is a reception every evening; politics is the leading subject, and they talk of nothing else. The conversation seemed to me strained and rather embarrassing owing to the direct questions which the speakers rather indiscreetly hurled at each other. "Will the Duke of Wellington be able to go on?" – "Do you think that Mr. Stanley will join Sir Robert Peel?" – "Do you believe that a reconciliation between Lord Grey and Lord Brougham is possible?" These are specimens of the interrogations with which I was naïvely assailed. I escaped by pleading absolute ignorance, concluding with a laugh by saying that I did not expect to have to solve questions of conscience on a festive occasion. The matter ended there, but I got a disagreeable impression in spite of the excessive graciousness of our hostess, and I was glad to get away.

Paris, December 14, 1834.– Lady Clanricarde came to breakfast yesterday, and at half-past eleven we left for the Académie française. M. Thiers, who was being received, had secured the best places for us, which I was grateful to observe were far from those occupied by his family, who were with the Duchesse de Massa in an elevated gallery. In our neighbourhood there were only Madame de Boigne, M. and Madame de Rambuteau, Marshal Gérard, M. Molé, M. de Celles, and Madame de Castellane. The last-named has got stouter, heavier, and thicker, but she retains her pleasant face, the mobility of whose lower parts is so attractive. She seemed so delighted, so moved, and so touched on seeing me (I used to be intimate with her and knew all about her affairs, so much that the imprudence of her subsequent quarrel with me was incredible) that I was quite touched too, and we shook hands. She said, "May I come and see you again?" and I answered, "Yes, with all my heart."

Here is the story. When the Tuileries were against me under the Restoration, Madame de Castellane turned against me, and, without thinking of the injury it was in my power to inflict on her, she broke with me. I was deeply hurt, because I was very fond of her; but to revenge myself would have been mean, and, in spite of all my faults, I am incapable of doing anything so low as that would have been. I think that at the bottom of her heart she was grateful to me for having spared her.

M. de Talleyrand, as a member of the Institute, came into the hall leaning on the arm of M. de Valençay. The effect of his entry was unbelievable. Every one rose with one accord in the galleries, as well as on the floor of the house, and this, no doubt, with a certain stirring of curiosity, but also with an impulse of respect, of which he was deeply sensible. I know that in spite of the crowd which obstructed the approaches every one made way for him.

The sitting began at one. M. Thiers is so small that he entered without being seen, being surrounded by Villemain, Cousin, and some others. No one noticed him till he stood up alone to begin his speech. He spoke with the best possible accent, and pronounced everything distinctly. His voice was sustained, and his gestures rare. He was not over voluble, and for the first few moments he was as pale as death and trembling from head to foot. This made a much better impression than if he had displayed the insolence with which he is often reproached. In spite of the disagreeable tone of his voice, he never offended the ear; he was neither monotonous nor shrill; and, in fact, Lady Clanricarde went so far as to think him splendid!

M. de Talleyrand and M. Royer-Collard were opposite to him, and he seemed to speak only for them. His discourse was brilliant. I do not know whether it was precisely academic, though it was full of wit, of good taste, and fine language in certain places, but there is no doubt that it was political, and he spoke it much more as if it was an improvisation than as if it was a lecture. Certain of his movements, too, recalled the tribune, and on the audience the effect produced was much more parliamentary than literary, but always favourable and sometimes even enthusiastic. M. de Talleyrand was quite moved, and M. Royer-Collard moved his wig up and down in a way that signified the most lively approbation! The passage on calumny was spoken with a conviction and an intimacy which was contagious, and was received with a salvo of applause.

The discourse is in the highest degree anti-revolutionary. He is orthodox in his literary principles, he is – and this is what I like in him above all – he is penetrated through and through with a sentiment of honesty which greatly pleased me, and which should be useful to M. Thiers throughout the remainder of his career. This fine speech did not require the tedious reply of M. Viennet to bring out its excellence; no one listened to him, and he only succeeded in drawing attention to the fact that the hour was very late and that it was dreadfully hot.

It is said that during M. Thiers' speech M. de Broglie was making merry jests. M. Guizot was cross, and not very well satisfied, I think, to see his rival make a double success – political and literary – in the same week.

Paris, December 16, 1834.– Yesterday I paid several calls, and found Madame de Castellane in. She had missed me when she came to see me. She insisted on my hearing her history during the past twelve years; and she tells it so well that I thought she must have had some practice in pouring it into the ears of others than myself in these cooing tones. She has lost all her youth, and is a large, short, squat person. Except for her smile, she is no longer the same person that I once knew – physically, that is. Morally, I thought she had made up her mind to be grave, rather than that she had become serious. She is witty and caressing as ever, and she talked a great deal; I very little. My heart was full of many old memories; and though she was kind I could not recover my old confidence in her. However, I received all she said well, and I am not sorry to be on good terms with her again.

Paris, December 17, 1834.– Yesterday I allowed myself to be persuaded to go with her to the Court of Peers. We sat, not in a conspicuous box, but in that of the Duchesse Decazes, which is in a retired position, and from which one can see and hear without being seen. I had never been there, the sittings not having been public till 1830. The proceedings of yesterday had been very much advertised and excited general curiosity, so the House was full.

Whenever one comes to Paris one is always sure of finding some scandalous drama in progress for the amusement of the public. Yesterday it was the case against Armand Carrel of the National.

M. Carrel did not at all correspond to my expectations. No doubt he was impertinent, but not with that kind of bold and energetic insolence, that verve and talent which impress you even while you are offended with the man himself. The effect of the speech he had written was very feeble, and he made an impression which was positively painful when he tried to speak extempore. It was General Exelmans who vociferated about the assassination of Marshal Ney, and scandalised every one. His manner was that of a drunken man, and was all the more ridiculous as no one could help remembering the platitudes he used to utter during the Restoration; which, I understand, were very cruelly cast up against him last night at the Minister of Marine's party. In the morning in the House of Peers he was supported only by M. de Flahaut, who was in a great state of excitement, and whose behaviour was most improper.

He disgusted everybody by his cries of "Go on! Go on!" addressed to Carrel when the President wished to bring him to an end. It was this encouragement which made Carrel resist M. Pasquier and argue that he had no right to stop him when a member of the Chamber and, in fact, one of his judges, pressed him to continue.

On this occasion I learned from every one that M. de Flahaut was universally detested for his arrogance, ill-temper, acrimony, and ignorance. He will soon become as unpopular as his wife.

M. Pasquier presided with firmness, moderation, dignity, and coolness. I confess, however, that I agree with those who would have preferred him to stop M. Carrel when he spoke of "the young men who had fought gloriously in the troubles of last April," and not when he referred to the case of Marshal Ney. The first question dealt with – material interests – would have found more sympathy both inside and outside the House.

We had a dinner yesterday – a dozen people, my daughter Pauline being the twelfth. It is not a bad thing that she should learn to listen to serious conversation without being bored. She has a good manner in society, where her open countenance and kindly manners seem to please. After dinner people came to pay visits just as if we were Ministers. The fact is that it was Thursday, the reception day at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Marine, and I suppose that people took us on the way going or coming.

Paris, December 19, 1834.– M. le Duc d'Orléans is returned from Brussels; he came to see me yesterday, and invited me to a ball he is giving on the 29th. He stayed only a moment, when he was sent for by the King; the reason for which I learned later.

M. Guizot was the next visitor. He seemed less at his ease than usual, and tried to compose himself by prosing about England, France, and all sorts of things, but he must have found me a very unworthy listener. As a matter of fact, I listened without enthusiasm, for he was extremely tedious, and soon departed.

Madame de Castellane then came, quite out of breath, from M. Molé, in order that I might warn M. de Talleyrand of what was going on. M. le Duc d'Orléans, carried away by the deplorable Flahaut influence, proposed at the opening of the sitting of the House of Peers to-day and the reading of the minutes of last meeting, to protest along with his group against the assassination of Marshal Ney, and to demand the revision of the case. Fortunately, M. Decazes was warned, and went and told M. Pasquier. He rushed to M. Molé, who is one of the twenty-three survivors of the peers who tried the Marshal. There was a great and well-justified tumult in the camp. They went to Thiers, who hastened to the King, who knew nothing of the affair, and was very angry. He sent after his son everywhere, and after a very lively scene he forbade him to do anything. His great argument was as follows: "If you demand that Marshal Ney's case shall be re-opened, what will you say to any Carlist peer who comes (as some one very well may) and asks that the verdict against Louis XVI. – which was assassination if you like! – shall be reversed?" I heard the last part of the affair from M. Thiers, who came to see M. de Talleyrand quite at the end of the morning. Bertin de Veaux, who had got wind of the thing, also arrived quite out of breath.

Finally, the King's good sense prevailed and put a stop to this nice business. But that it should ever have entered any one's head to propose such a thing is one of the extraordinary features of this age!

Paris, December 20, 1834.– Yesterday I got a letter from London, dated the 18th, and took it at once to M. de Talleyrand. I read him a passage about the terror caused by the suggestion that M. de Broglie might be sent as Ambassador to England, and the necessity of nominating M. de Talleyrand's successor. He quite saw the point, and at once wrote that he wished to see the King. At this very moment M. de Rigny arrived, bringing him another private letter to see. M. de Talleyrand has been urging the choice of Rayneval, which, I think, has not pleased M. de Rigny, if I may judge by what he said to me at dinner: "There is a very strong reason for not sending M. de Rayneval to London, but that is the secret of the Minister of Foreign Affairs; if it was the Admiral's secret I would tell you." I did not insist.

I know that at five o'clock it was arranged with the King that Rigny should write a letter, confidential but producible, to London, in which he should say that the King would choose Molé, Sainte-Aulaire, or Rayneval, and that they would be glad to know which of the three would be most agreeable to the Duke of Wellington. I went so far as to say to M. de Talleyrand that this seemed to me a very maladroit proceeding, as if the Duke chooses Rayneval it will be very difficult not to appoint him, and if he wants Molé, Molé will refuse, and they will, in fact, have to take Sainte-Aulaire, who is not wanted either by the King or by the Council, or by the Duke. How badly everything is directed and managed here! There is no common sense or simplicity, or elevation of mind anywhere, and yet they pretend to govern not only thirty-two millions of subjects, but also all Europe!

Paris, December 21, 1834.– I heard the following facts on excellent authority: (1) They don't want to send Rayneval to London as ambassador; (2) it is Broglie's doctrinaire group who are opposing it; (3) London was yesterday offered formally and officially to Molé, who formally and officially declined it; (4) this morning they had got to Sébastiani but nothing was settled.

Paris, December 24, 1834.– Sébastiani was being talked of yesterday as if his appointment would be in the Moniteur of to-morrow, but the more public his name is made the greater clamour it excites. M. de Rigny is dying to resign his Ministry and ask for the London Embassy, but they are afraid that the machine might go to pieces under the difficulties caused by the resignation of an important member of the Cabinet. It seems that it is the condition of Rayneval's financial affairs which prevents his being appointed. He is said to be over head and ears in debt and almost bankrupt.

Paris, December 28, 1834.– I heard through M. Molé that M. de Broglie had an astonishing influence on the present Ministry, which was unsuspected by the King, that M. Decazes used to go every morning and tell him all that went on; that M. de Rigny and M. Guizot allowed themselves to be much influenced by him, and that no choice was made without being previously submitted to him.