Revolution and Reaction - A (very) French Victoria II Interactive AAR

[ThaHoward]

When the laws were proposed.

"Your most Christian King, let me first commend you for your budget. Especially where you personally want to decrease your salary and that of government officials. Let us not forget why the masses confiscated properties of the rich, and why Napoleon despite his many flaws and running France straight to ruin still are seen as a champion by the ignorant masses. Indeed he made many social programs to improve their condition and I believe the budget the King propose set us forth on a desired course.

Now for the other proposals I have various objections. First let us examine The Oath of Allegiance Act. While I wholeheartly agree that we are to swear an oath to our desired King, I have reservations against swearing off previous oaths. Before anyone yell "traitor!" hear me out. While I do understand it's merits we need to look at what an oath is. For what is an oath? What is it that enforce an oath? It is indeed most sacred, but there is only a man's honor that uphold it. Many have broken oaths, and many more will. But if we now legally make it so tht we can just break oaths when it suit our need, then we take a radical step to water down the entire concept! For how is an oath sacred, what is it that bound a man's honor to it when he can just break it? How can then a man not swear an oath to a pretend king if he so seem fit? Afterall it is legally accepted then that oaths can be broken at own will! Also let us examine the oaths to the dreaded Republic and disastrous so called Empire. Those who swore oaths to the Republic are no longer bound by it. Why so? Because the Republic have been formally disbanded, and such those who owed alligiances to the Republic were thus released from their oaths. The same stand true for the oaths to the so called Emperor. Those oaths were sworn to Bonapart in the form of him as Emperor. Now he formally abdicated in 1814 and have not pushed to reclaim his title. And by that logic my esteemed colleagues and most gracious King the oaths to Bonaparte are no longer valid. But if we enforce to nullify those oaths, who already have ceased to be valid, we will legally weaken the power of oaths and in turn weaken the oaths to your majesty and it's meaning.

Now moving on to the Lustration of Public Offices Act. Once again I have concerns. Once again I understand and sympathise with it's merits, but once more I believe it is hurtful for the long term stability of our grand Nation and your majesty. If we follow through with this we will make the very same errors as teh Republic and Bonaparte! How many competent men of years of experience and networks will be lost? As a retired calvary officer myself I have witnessed the destructive force of these ideological purges. France had the finest calvary in the world, but then purges of the officers came around and it was reduced to nothing but a mere shadow. It took years to train up new and competent officers. And what happened to those purged? They fought against Bonaparte. Now this will be a huge strain on France. How many diplomats will we lose, how many skillfull buerecrats and officers? And then we need to hire new ones, train new ones. Remake cultures and networks. That will be a huge strain on the budget and will again lower the overall efficiency of French industry, government, military and diplomatic corpse. And those who are fired, what will they do with their experience and network? Will they simply sit by and view as injustice is fulfilled or perhaps go to exile an work for a malicious power? And what err have they done other than serving their country? It was not their fault that Bonaparte was the Emperor when they finished their education and applied for work.

For the pensions act, only yes if justice is also fulfilled to those who fought for France until 1814! So with no surprise, I guess you all will see what I will vote for".

------

Lustration of Public Offices Act: No!
The Oath of Allegiance Act: No!
The Loyalist Pensions Act: No.
The Budget: Oui!

[Deputy for the Seine.]
[Bonus: Downtrodden Figurehead +1 PP]

- Lothaire Lécuyer.

 

[Eid3r]

Chamber of Deputies, Paris
Debate on the Budget for 1815

The Bishop of Montauban had been quite agitated upon reading the budget proposal sent forward by the King. He was shocked and in disbelief that the Government recommended such a sinful course of action for the nation, as the unlawful liquidation of former church properties. So far, the debate had been acrimonious at best, with various members expressing themselves in favour or against, but many members, among the most vocals, had waited before taking position, quite certainly for dramatic purpose. When the Bishop of Montauban rose, a general silence occurred, mixed with trepidation in the Ultraroyalist camp, for they knew the stinging rebuke was on its way.

Monsieur le Président,

I must say that I am quite horrified when I look at this budget proposal, not only from a financial standpoint, but also from a moral one. I believe that not only this budget misjudged the current state of our finances, but also the inherent strength of our economy and of the French credit.

Shall I remind the Chamber that, the Nation having gone bankrupt during the Revolution, most of our ancient debt has been wiped cleaned, contrary to many nations in Europe still burdened by decades of deficit. At the present, our National Debt, while important, is thoroughly under control and could certainly be reined in by the emission of bonds. It is important to denote that the economic situation appears much direr in England, from what one can gather from the published proceedings of their Commons.

The situation not being so dire in France, one must be deeply troubled by the decision of the Government to proceed to the liquidation, at the highest bidder, of one million acres of land which belonged to the Church of France before its violent dispossession by the rabid anti-clericalist revolutionaries, which culminated in the Usurpation. While the nation is not facing financial bankruptcy, such proceeding would certainly make it morally bankrupt, damaging the most necessary support for the monarchy among the population. Such a move would therefore not only be damaging to the morality of this country but to the King himself, which should be a double cause of concerns for all who call themselves true royalists.

The said forests which are to be auctioned off, where once part of the patrimony of the Church, which derived from it the revenues needed to educate the masses, care for the sick and the mendicants and sustain a public morality that is sorely needed, as it was found lacking in the last 25 years. This patrimony was violently torn away from the care of the Church, an act of thievery that shall go down into the annals of infamy, for the Scriptures are clear as day on such an act, as recalled by Exodus 20:15 “You shall not steal”.

Now the time of the Usurper has passed, and the sun shines upon France once again. But we shall guard ourselves from benefiting from the sins of the latter. As stated in Ephesians 4:28 “He who steals must steal no longer, but rather he must labor, performing with his own hands what is good, so that he will have something to share with one who has needs.” The auctioning of land, illegally seized, who place the King into the terrible posture of benefiting from a most heinous crime, as he would appear to be the silent witness of the continuation of that thievery. Is it not said, in the Proverbs, 29:24 that he who is a partner with a thief hates his own life? That he hears the oath but tells nothing?” Now tell me, would good royalists, deputies of this chamber who have nothing else but love for their King, agree to make of him a miscreant? I am appalled that this government forced this idea upon the king, by which trickery I know naught.

One must recall that the Church, which in past eras was one of the country’s leading landowner, always administered the Patrimony in trust of the population. Was it not the Church who rented affordably the land to the peasants? Was it not the Church who would seek the quality of the land thrives, from a profound intimacy with it derived from centuries of benevolent administration? Was it not the Church, who took care of the citizens of France, tending to their wounds, curing their ailments and educating their mind? We all have seen how impossible a task it is for the government, for the past 25 years instructed us clearly that after wrestling control of these missions from the Church, the State pitifully failed at them, and failed the French people.

How can we morally, seek to collectively benefit from the products of thievery? Aren’t we ascribed to higher moral standards? Shouldn’t we follow the Scriptures, as in Roman 2:21 “You who teach that one shall not steal, do you steal?”. How can we honestly tell the masses to follow the law, when we would partake is so glaring a violation of it? The answer is quite simply that we cannot without incurring the most debasing moral bankruptcy, a bankruptcy whose sins are not washed away like debts, for the Lord is always watching. Should we not be worried to become ourselves thieves, for the two men who expired by crucifixion, to the right and the left of the Lord were indeed thieves? The Gospel is clear, let us keep in mind the wise words of Zaccheus, brought to us by Luke 19:8 “Behold Lord, half of my possessions, I will give to the poor and If I have defrauded anyone of anything, I will give back four times as much.”

Given the current situation of the nation, you will all notice that the Church is not heard clamoring for a restitution of its entire patrimony, of which so much has been sold. But it would be gravely injurious, should the Government pursue the wanton liquidation of that Patrimony, to private interests who cares naught for the people. What would then happen, might I ask? Once again, the scriptures are sibylline, as Leviticus teaches us that “The land shall not be sold in perpetuity, for the land is mine. For you are strangers and sojourners with me”. And Jeremiah 2:7 further added that God brought us into a plentiful land to enjoy its fruits and its good things. But when they came in, they defiled the land and made his heritage an abomination.” Let it be remembered that the Church is naught but the sum of the faithfuls. What it owns, what it administers, it does solely for the good of the faithful. The Church is the people, and selling away the property of the faithful, which was wrested violently from them, is a most sinful act.

Now, to conclude my exposé, of which length I am quite sorry and apologize for, I would like to appeal to the brave émigrés, who left everything behind on the account of their loyalty to the Crown. Should the Crown be in possession of your former estates, would you not believe it right and just that they be restored to you? Would you not be outraged shall they be sold to merchants and people of ill fortune, or as Hosea 12:7 instruct us, to “merchants in whose hands are false balances and who loves to oppress”?

To these questions, I offer a resounding no. I have no doubt that the Church will be a steadfast ally of your cause, just as you will be of hers, for only a strong clergy and a strong aristocracy can keep in check the forces of unbridled liberalism who would so gladly assault our monarchy, such has had befallen on this nation a generation past. Make no mistake, my noble friends, for this issue is not simply one of the Church’s possessions. It is one which touches you much closer than you would be led to believe it.

I am now ready to hear the arguments of the Government, but I will remind to all the wise words of the Proverbs, 1:10, which states that “if a sinner entice you, do not consent.”

Therefore, Monsieur le Président, I shall oppose this sinful budget, and I beseech and entreat any true supporters of the King to act in the same fashion.

Merci, Monsieur le Président.

 

[TJDS]

((Private - @99KingHigh))

Letter addressed to the Secretary of His Excellency, Monsieur le duc du Plessis de Richelieu, Ministère des finances​

Your Excellency,

In eager hope of response, I beg that you forgive my addressing His Excellency so directly. In order not to further waste His Excellency's time, allow me to make a brief account of myself. I am a Deputy in the Chamber of Deputies, having been elected in the recent election, and Prefect of the Nord Department, having been appointed by His Majesty as loyal servant of the Crown.

The reason for this direct address is the financial state of the Kingdom of France, which still, although greatly improved by His Excellency's Budget, to which I proudly lend my support, requires some years to recover from the costly wars waged by the Corsican. This financial state can, however slightly, be improved by the introduction of a seigniorage, which shall create a new source of revenue through the difference between the face value of coins and their production costs.

This new form of revenue does not require any large expansion of the civil list to work, nor will it place a heavy burden on the French people, which guarantees a more balanced budget and a more stable society. I further suggest increasing the required surety to be by tax farmers if they fail to meet their obligations towards the French state, or otherwise fail to adhere to their contracts, which will create a greater incentive among tax farmers to adhere to the demands and standards set out by His Excellency's Ministry.

Due to the aforementioned relative easy with which these measures can be implemented and the benefits they award to the Kingdom of France, I suggest to His Excellency that these measures are taken and offer my services if they may be needed, in implementing them.

Please deign to accept, Sir, this expression of my most humble sentiments,

Victor Henri Marie Louis Durand

Préfet et Député du Nord

​

((Private - @ThaHoward ))​

​

​

((Private, letter to Durand @TJDS ))

Fellow Deputy Durand,

Pardon, I must have overlooked your inclusion of said vital reforms in my own hubris. I would also like to thank you for demanding my release, but fear not I have not been mistreated. I have been accomodated well. That being said I believe we should include 1,3 and 7. 1 and 3 in order to educate the masses and to teach them real science instead of the "science" the clergy rather want to install on the masses - however do know that I believe the Clergy have much good to offer in our education. 7 would be a grand tool to measure the effect of our education. But for now as a sign of goodwill and to get a needed reform I will sign your petition.

-Capitaine Lothaire Lécuyer.​

​

​

My fellow deputy, Capitaine,

Regarding your release, it is a delight to see you freed from unconstitutional imprisonment, and hope this shall be the last time such dangerous situations come to pass.

I further wish to thank you for your support of my petition. Although it may not have been proposed by His Majesty, I believe the failure of the Utraroyalistes' to place the entire education system under the control of the Church is a victory for the moderates in Our Chamber.
​

Your Obedient Servant,​

​

Victor Henri Marie Louis Durand
Préfet et Député du Nord​

 

[ThaHoward]

Debate on Budget for 1815.

Lothaire sat on his bench seeing that France were slowly sliding back into darkness, and that the shadows of reaction might soon quell the little spark of hope the Nation still. It all culminated with the speech of the Bishop which showed that the Church had not adopted to modern times, but were still stuck in the age of witch burning.

"Dear President, Deputies and of course his most Christian King.

The arguments of the Bishop is many and well documented I may say. But his arguments show that the esteemed deputy of the Gers have his nose hurdled up in papers and fantasies rather than reality. His arguments are many, and his allegations are many. But Bishop may I ask you what our Saviour did to the profiteering Temples? Who did he champion? Did he champion the rich and fat priesthood? No he did not, he did not intend the Church to be powerful and rich. The Church have accumulated much power and wealth over the years, wealth they did not share! Yes they have been important for edcuation, health and so on, but that is only because they held monopoly on that! And you speak of budget deficits, yes that is true. But on the other hand you refuse to sell the acres of forests? What are you and your priests doing in these forests? Let us instead sell them, earning surplus in the state coffers and in turn to create vital industries and jobs. Are the Church not to be generous? Are it not to be ascetic? To use your own words and the words of the Bible: Behold Lord, half of my possessions, I will give to the poor and If I have defrauded anyone of anything, I will give back four times as much." Now do just that. Do give your possessions to the poor! And how did the few accumulate so much land on their own hand I may ask? Did it just fall to them or did they take it aswell? Take the log out of your own eye brother.

Now also you fail again to see the realities of the situation. You claim that "or only a strong clergy and a strong aristocracy can keep in check the forces of unbridled liberalism who would so gladly assault our monarchy". Have you not gone outside of your office? I must sadly inform you that what stopped the unbridled liberalism was not the clergy, not the aristocracy. Non! It was Prussian steel, Austrian blood, British wood and Russian savagery! It is the occupying forces and the great powers of Europe who checked the Revolution and so called Empire, not the clergy. But what caused the Revolution? Let us see. Yes indeed it was that the clergy and aristocracy accumulated too much power and wealth on behalf of other segments of the population. That led to the revolution. So a oppressive clergy and aristocracy cause social distress and that my friend cause unbridled liberalism. And I believe our most desired King in all his wisdom see this too. For why would he then adopt a constitutional monarchy and not go back to the dark ages? Why would he then propose this gracious budget? Because he see it for what it is, and see that we can't go back to the errors of our forefathers.

Also you claim that the King most not lose support among the population as that is where he get his position from. What do you mean? That the clergy will revolt against him, do you propose treason? Or do you propose that the King is King of the French and not of France? If so, then you are not only a radical liberal! But you also challenge his divine right and his mandate from heaven and claim that his mandate is from the people! And then your entire logic of the clergy needing to be strong to support the morality of the King falls like a house of cards. You confuse me on this matter esteemed Deputy of Gers.

That is all I have to say for now. Thank you for your time King, President and Deputies".

 

[TJDS]

Préfet et Deputé Victor Durand du Nord:​

«Monsieur Président de la Chambre,»

«Although I have the utmost respect for the Député de Gers, Monsignuer Montauban, and I yield to him on many areas of discussion, including, of course, theological debates, I cannot accept the premesis, nor the conclusions of the respected Monsignuer regarding the budget.»

«It is no secret to the French public that the economic toll on the Kingdom of France for the Wars of the Coalitions shall be high, indeed, the debt burden combined with war indemnities and personal claims against the Kingdom of France as successor to the French Empire might very well exceed 2,000 million francs. The Revered Député is correct in his assesment that the great burden whereunder the British crown now toils is far great, but he must not forget that the Kingdom of France faces a great hurdle that may very well hamper its ability to restructure and restore the workings of state and the thereby the repayment of her debt - the trust in the Kingdom of France to repay its debts.»

«For if we do not show our intent on repaying our loans and fulfilling our duties, which we fail to do if this Place opposes the budget, those that voted against this budget shall make France the victim of stagnation and ever increasing debt interest, as investors, rightfully fearing for another bankrupcy, and those foreign powers wishing to punish this Kingdom for the misdeeds of a Corsican will seize every opportunity to bleed this untrustworthy France dry of prosperity.»

«It is therefore that our Government should now take the necessary actions, which are undisputably within her powers, to secure the trust of the foreign powers and investors, so that our Kingdom may restore itself without once again failing under financial misamanagment.»

 

[Mikkel Glahder]

Lustration of Public Offices Act: Oui
The Oath of Allegiance Act: Oui
The Loyalist Pensions Act: Oui
The Budget: Oui

[Peer of France]
[Minister of War, + 1 PP]

 

[sealy300]

Lustration of Public Offices Act: Non
The Oath of Allegiance Act: Oui
The Loyalist Pensions Act: Oui
The Budget: Non

[Deputy for Finistere]
[Under Morfomocracy I would have a bonus]

 

[Sneakyflaps]

Lustration of Public Offices Act: Oui
The Oath of Allegiance Act: Oui
The Loyalist Pensions Act: Oui
The Budget: Non

[Prince du Sang, chamber of peers]
[No Bonus]

 

[MastahCheef117]

Lustration of Public Offices Act: Oui
The Oath of Allegiance Act: Oui
The Loyalist Pensions Act: Oui
The Budget: Oui

[President of the King's Council of State, Peer of France]
[Prime Minister +2 PP]
Auguste Philippe, comte de Dhuizon

_________________________________________
​

"May it please His Most Christian Majesty, our beloved King Louis: if I were granted the authority to speak, but for a brief moment, on these proposed bills—

"Some of the dialogue I have heard to-day in favor of and in opposition to the proposed bills on the floor are, without question, of a most constructive nature. I must, however, touch upon the root cause of the predicament of the Realm: that this France is off from some two and one-half decades of constant warfare of the most bloody, strenuous, and stressful of types; that there is no real means to uphold the natural law and the law of our most Christian King but with the soldiers of other monarchs planted on our soil; that our economy is in a total state of ruin, our finances led astray by a uncaring and illegitimate Bonapartist regime; that, while there is widespread love, on the surface, for His Majesty, there is seemingly little respect for the laws and proclamations He has given, to wit: the Royal Charter itself.

"This causes a problem in which the Realm suffers from a prolonged period of disorder and decay. When we look at the Greek city states in the times of Leonidas, and of Pericles, and others, we see that their prosperity waned when they became complacent; the monarch was distinguished not by his goodness and authority, but by his lack of both, and thus a lack of legitimacy and power. And thus the Greek was subjugated under the iron will of the Roman. And how did the Roman fall? The greatest civilization in all of God's earth, the most prosperous and fair and just in all manners of things, collapsed because of a lack of respect for the rule of law, and as each Emperor fell, one by one, to his successor's blade on the chaotic field of battle, the power and authority of that cherished law was continually chipped away at, until, as we can see in the cherished histories of Man, the barbarians of the north and east came down upon it like a swift hammer and destroyed its last semblance of unity and power. And the successor to that Empire, the Holy Roman Empire — how did it fall? It was a great state for many centuries, a bastion of the cherished law and Christian culture of the late Roman Empire, and yet it ultimately met its doom at the hands of the traitorous Bonapartist who, realizing the weakness of the institution, too, came down upon it like a hammer and smashed it into nothingness.

"Then we can see the course this Realm is taking. The Kingdom of France is not an eternal institution if the King's law is not unquestionably obeyed. Any true human society that has rejected the rule of law in favor of national anarchy or some ill-fated jump to republicanism or popularism will witness a continued erosion of the established order. The national necessity, as I have so written and spoken about for many months, is not one of expanded government, but of expanded law. The law must be fulfilled. The law must be obeyed if we are to have peace on His Majesty's streets and peace in our own hearts."

 

[Nax24]

Lustration of Public Offices Act: Oui
Oath of Allegiance Act: Oui
The Loyalist Pension Act: Oui
Budget: S'abstenir

[Peer]
[No Bonus]

-Nathanaël Barrande, Comte de L'Isle Jourdain

 

[Shynka]

The Comte de Saint-Germain finds himself far too busy not starting rebellions in the North to turn up to the vote.

Lustration of Public Offices Act: Abstention
The Oath of Allegiance Act: Abstention
The Loyalist Pensions Act: Abstention
The Budget: Abstention

[ Deputy for Pas de Calais]
[Hardly matters, does it]

 

[Dadarian]

Le Boucher is far too busy planning the deaths of many voters in this election to actually come by and vote in the election. He's also up north.

Lustration of Public Offices Act: Abstention
The Oath of Allegiance Act: Abstention
The Loyalist Pensions Act: Abstention
The Budget: Abstention

[Deputy for Toulouse]
[Le Boucher +1 PP to not utilise]

 

[Korona]

Lustration of Public Offices Act: Oui
The Oath of Allegiance Act: Oui
The Loyalist Pensions Act: Oui
The Budget: Non

[Peer of France]
[No Bonus]

 

[99KingHigh]

((Also, everyone can vote.))

 

[Flying mint bunny]

First of all I would like to apologize for my absence in this chamber I had a cousin who died I had to attend his funeral.

Lustration of Public Offices Act: Oui
The Oath of Allegiance Act: Oui
The Loyalist Pensions Act: Oui
The Budget: Oui

Mathieu Moreau deputy of Yonne

 

[ManuelD'Garkia]

- Even if completely against everything of the Ancien Régime, Alexandre decided to vote with the hopes of at least delaying the inevitable return of the Dark Ages while the Légion gained strenght.

- Lustration of Public Offices Act: No.
- The Oath of Allegiance Act: No.
- The Loyalist Pension Act: No.
- The Budget: No.

[Owner of a pub in Paris/Revolutionary leader]
[No bonus]

 

[LatinKaiser]

Lustration of Public Offices Act: Oui
The Oath of Allegiance Act: Oui
The Loyalist Pensions Act: Oui
The Budget: Non

[Pair de la France]
[No Bonus]

~ Lucien Antoine de Ladon, Comte de Graçay

 

[Dadarian]

A small letter comes in to the House of Whatever.

Budget: Non

[Spitemaster Fresh]
[Pure Spite +1 PP]

 

[99KingHigh]

((Private - @99KingHigh))

Letter addressed to the Secretary of His Excellency, Monsieur le duc du Plessis de Richelieu, Ministère des finances​

Your Excellency,

In eager hope of response, I beg that you forgive my addressing His Excellency so directly. In order not to further waste His Excellency's time, allow me to make a brief account of myself. I am a Deputy in the Chamber of Deputies, having been elected in the recent election, and Prefect of the Nord Department, having been appointed by His Majesty as loyal servant of the Crown.

The reason for this direct address is the financial state of the Kingdom of France, which still, although greatly improved by His Excellency's Budget, to which I proudly lend my support, requires some years to recover from the costly wars waged by the Corsican. This financial state can, however slightly, be improved by the introduction of a seigniorage, which shall create a new source of revenue through the difference between the face value of coins and their production costs.

This new form of revenue does not require any large expansion of the civil list to work, nor will it place a heavy burden on the French people, which guarantees a more balanced budget and a more stable society. I further suggest increasing the required surety to be by tax farmers if they fail to meet their obligations towards the French state, or otherwise fail to adhere to their contracts, which will create a greater incentive among tax farmers to adhere to the demands and standards set out by His Excellency's Ministry.

Due to the aforementioned relative easy with which these measures can be implemented and the benefits they award to the Kingdom of France, I suggest to His Excellency that these measures are taken and offer my services if they may be needed, in implementing them.

Please deign to accept, Sir, this expression of my most humble sentiments,

Victor Henri Marie Louis Durand

Préfet et Député du Nord​

Letter addressed to Monsieur Victor Henri Marie Louis Durand, Préfet et Député du Nord
​

Monsieur,

I am most gracious for the enthusiasm you exhibit in the fiscal rehabilitation of the Kingdom, and all the more thankful for the support you have lent to the budget in the Chamber of Deputies. I confess myself disabled in matters of public oratory, and thus any defense of my policies beyond the extension of my own person always must earn my acclaim.

With happy acceptance will I give review to your suggestions, but I must insist that before fresh pecuniary policies are permitted or given happy consideration, the contemporary budget must be allowed to pass. I hope you shall exert your energies to the safe passage of my proposition.

Please deign to accept, Monsieur, this expression of my most humble sentiments,

​

 

[ThaHoward]

((Private letter to the minister of finances. @99KingHigh ))

Your excellency,

Please pardon my intrusion and for taking up your time. I am sure you have more important tasks at hand than listening to me so I will be brief.

Let me commend your budget. But I have some proposals for its amendment. Looking at the 1814 budget we can see that the military got 55% of total national spending. In my opinion, and it is with no light heart as a former calvary officer, that we slash the budget. This way we will not only spend money on where it is needed and gaining extra capital, but it will also ease the current tension with the foreign powers. Showing them we are eager to have peace rather than rearmament.

My second point is more if a question. Our King Louis the Desired promised upon his ascension that he were to abolish the most unpooular taxes on salt, tobacoo and wine. Now I see no mention of said taxes. Are those to be kept or will they be abolished?

With great humility,
Capitaine and Deputy Lothaire Lécuyer.