Paris, January 2, 1836. —M. de Talleyrand is working hard to advance the claims of M. Molé to a seat in the French Academy. He is supported alike by M. Royer-Collard and by the Ministers; hence M. de Villemain found occasion to say, yesterday evening, that all the most diverse and inverse influences were in combination to transport or to export M. Molé to the Academy, and that he himself was strongly in favour of importation, as a seat in the Academy was no obstacle to other posts. This play on words was no less pointed than malicious.
There was much talk of the various speeches delivered before the King on New Year's Day, and in particular of M. Pasquier's speech, which was remarkable for the boldness he displayed in his use of the word "subject," which M. de Villemain called a progressive term.
The King was delighted with Count Apponyi's speech, and the Diplomatic Service were equally pleased with the King's reply. In any case, Fieschi and Mascara1 were so much treasure-trove to all the speech-makers; emotion and sympathy in every degree were noticeable, and M. Dupin was moved even to sobs!
Concerning M. Pasquier, a notice was inserted by some jester in a low-class newspaper to the effect that his recent illness was caused by his recognition of Fieschi as his natural son! The old Comtesse de la Briche, who is falling into her dotage, went off in all seriousness to relate this piece of folly with sighs of profound emotion in the salon of Madame de Chastellux, the Carlist headquarters. Such want of tact is almost inconceivable, and great merriment was aroused!
Paris, January 4, 1836.– The illness of Madame de Flahaut's second daughter has become critical, and provided me yesterday with an illustration of that truest of parables, the beam and the mote, when Madame de Lieven said to me, in reference to Madame de Flahaut: "Can you conceive that she talks politics to me at a time like this and orders her carriage to visit Madame Adélaïde? She will even leave her daughter's room to discuss public affairs with her visitors, and asks me to dinner to-morrow to distract her thoughts, as she says, and not to be left alone in her anxiety!" Apparently people cannot see themselves as others see them, and such incidents give one startling cause for introspection.
The much-discussed communication from President Jackson,2 which has been expected with great impatience, has reached the Duc de Broglie, by way of England. He went to the King five hours later, to inform him that the communication had arrived; when the King asked to see it the Duc de Broglie told him that it was of no importance and that he had already sent it to the newspapers! He made the same observation to his colleague, M. de Thiers, who told every one he met during the evening, on the faith of this information, that the message was of no political significance. The next day the King and M. Thiers were able to read the message in the papers, and found that it was very cleverly conceived, very insolent to M. de Broglie personally, and exactly calculated to terminate the existing dispute. Council after council was then held, and lively discussions took place; at length the royal will has triumphed, with the support of M. Thiers, and the communication will be declared satisfactory. The intervention of England is to be declined, and a statement will be made that France is prepared to pay the sum of twenty-five millions as due under the terms specified. M. de Broglie eventually yielded, though his surrender was delayed by the wound to his self-esteem. At first he refused to submit for approval his note thanking England for her offer of intervention, but it was eventually shown to the King yesterday. It was criticised as being too long, too diffuse, and too metaphysical. There was a vigorous discussion in the council, but the King concluded the matter by giving his hand to the Duc de Broglie with a kind word. At the same time a considerable amount of ill-temper remains on both sides. However, a war with the United States would be very disadvantageous to French commerce; so this conclusion will probably have a good effect upon public opinion.
Paris, January 11, 1836.– Yesterday morning I had a call from M. Royer-Collard. He had just left M. de Berryer in a state of considerable vexation and disgust; their conversation had dealt with Prague. M. de Berryer said that at Prague M. Royer was in many men's minds and was well spoken of; that Charles X. had several times repeated his fear that he had not sufficiently considered several things which M. Royer had told him in a long conversation at the time of the much-discussed address3 of 1830. The curious point is that when the old king attempted to recall these important points, of which he had but a vague recollection, he found himself unable to remember them. The incident is very characteristic of the man's good intentions and incompetency.
Paris, January 16, 1836.– M. Humann, Financial Minister, delivered a tirade yesterday in the Chamber of Deputies, in which he very imprudently raised the question of the reduction of the State bonds, without previously consulting his colleagues. It was thought that a dissolution of the Ministry would be the consequence, but the difficulty has been settled, and matters remain as they were, for the moment.
The King has personally seen Count Pahlen and soothed his feelings, and it is hoped that the speech of the Duc de Broglie in the Chamber of Deputies will not lead to any outburst.4
Paris, January 24, 1836.– The Chamber of Deputies remains disturbed and restive. Apathetic as the session was at its opening, it provides vexation enough to those responsible for the government. The prevailing ill-temper is especially manifested against the Duc de Broglie, the tone of whose speeches displeases the Deputies. His observation in the Chamber the other day, "is that clear?" is regarded as almost unpardonable.5