Executive: La Marche (parce-que je suis advocat …)
[“Title does not match description”: +2PP]
[“Title does not match description”: +2PP]
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Executive: La Marche
[Morning Star, +2.5 PP. I have been cast from heaven, only to raise hell on earth]
- Philippe Henri de Bourbon/la Marche
[Morning Star, +2.5 PP. I have been cast from heaven, only to raise hell on earth]
- Philippe Henri de Bourbon/la Marche
Sir,
At one point, I intended to respond to your entreaties with accord and satisfaction. I confess now that these sentiments are impossible to return, and I fear that for the moment I will have to be curt and distant. I do not know why you have cast your vote for M. de La Marche, but unless dictated of Providence, it must be after some reversal of those opinions which you so recently dictated in our correspondence. You have now prolonged, without doubt, the Republic of the liberal bourgeoisie, and have granted the Bonapartists their wildest wishes; that is, power, purchased from M. de la Marche. Our cause is now ruined.
Our bewilderment is total, not least on account of M. de la Marche's outright enmity to our party, and complete investment in its despoilment. It will be necessary for you to resign from the Committee of Monsieur de Chambord, and, if you have any love for him, make an account of this lèse majesté and repent for it. I would not extend to you these explanations if my affection for you was not total, and the bereavement we feel, absolute.
Charlus
An excerpt from the first in a series of essays by M. Lièvremont is submitted to publication in royalist and conservative newspapers, including L'Union and le Journal des Débats. The series is entitled "Tragédie à Française: les journées de juin":
Ballanche famously wrote, on his prolegomena to the Essais de Palingénesie Sociale, that the circumstances of our age do so prodigiously accelerate the march of the spirit of Man. As peoples all around Europe rise, as they did in far 1815, to react lawfully against the destruction of her traditions, the dear Ballanche had seen a much deeper movement than reaction; in fact, restoration was his chosen term. Restoration, because it does not blind Man to the active role he shall take in building the model of a new History of the peoples going forward, but it acts independently of the revolutionary spirit, Oriental and destructive, which composes in fact a much more primitive force, fit to the unreasonable and tribalistic. At the same time, the image of Man is not the sole symbol upon which the new History begins to be built, but is accompanied by that of Christ, whose banner that liberates Man from tyrants and despots is also the banner of liberty from eternal death.
Thinking on the words of Ballanche, it became a self-imposed task on myself that I should, as an agent of restoration, reflect publicly on the occurrences that have been named “Les journées de juin”, the June Days, which happened in Paris in this year of 1852. The legitimacy of my account as far as facts go is unblemished; I shall make no efforts to describe that which hasn’t been seen by my eyes, or heard by my own ears. The interpretation of such events, however, is inevitably left to the reader. The effort, though, to take up the mantle of writing the new History, carries with it a burden to Truth; to relieve oneself of such burden is not only dishonourable but misleading. The warning remains, therefore, that the inevitable interpretation which bleeds through the pen and into the paper from this author should at least be considered as the honest attempts of an actor to make sense of the historical narrative which develops all around him. I trust such interpretations shall find much corroboration, as times go on and other pens apply to the same task.
Since such considerations are already disposed, one should proceed to the overall panorama of the political landscape and the general wills which composed the Parisian atmosphere in the beginning of June. It could be described as a general and vague sort of tension which indisputably accompanies the upheaval and ressignification of the institutions. Let alone the occurrences which have led to the deposition of a divine institution such as the paternal monarchy into the throes of a “bleu sombre” revolutionary process, it is on the more mundane level that the analysis of the causes of the June Days should begin; and that is inextricably linked to such aforementioned upheaval, for it opened a breach unto which could climb the idea of the National Workshops, a most clever but failed scheme from their birth.
The revolutionary appraisal of the working classes as the clay from which to model mobs has undergone a most interesting transformation in France. Gone are the days of open resistance to authority and deference to values and traditions, to be supplanted by the instruments of coercion and persecution, a coup de disgrâce to the Order therein established. The revolutionary method, after its final defeat on the hands of History in 1815, has adapted to changing circumstances in order to legitimize pride. Its followers could be found in all levels of society, not unlike the previous revolutionaries, but now their strategy turned to the inside of learned society, of the nobility and even the palaces of government. There, all kinds of backstage negotiations were conducted to introduce French society into the spirit of legalism; in which the language of “rights” is freely banded about, and inevitably expanded into encroachment upon basic freedoms and the maintenance of order within the most essential nuclei of society like the family and the workplace. In so doing, the revolutionaries slowly bring the time-honoured institutions of civil society to an all-encompassing struggle against the artificial constructs of a positive law; wherein the latter shall always defeat the former, no matter how unethical the consequences of the pursuit of such so-called rights leads to.
The implementation of such a method was temporarily successful, until it was either recognized by the masses or brought to its own demise by the radicalism of its own leading minds. The scenario of the National Workshops brought to mind the most vivid images of the separation between the Platonic worlds: the upper crust in high places provided an unending stream of distorted shapes on the cave of the Workshops, in hopes the prisoners would never dare perceive the illusion. As the legal battles went on, on the subject of the Workshops, the pamphleteers and demagogues took the monopoly of power from within the careful revolutionaries from above, and proceeded to loosen the shackles which bound them. Their surprise upon encountering reality was to be destructive: after being given the illusion of a so-called progress and advancement in life, the prisoner finds the ruse which conspired only to maintain their puppetmasters’ comforts and hold on political power.
A sane mind would be quick to offer the prisoner a choice; yet the prisoner does not listen, for the shadows within the cave told him that those kinds of men would harm his interests and bring them onto new shackles. Unaware of his now inexorable fate, the prisoner dares reclaim his natural rights and dignity; the puppetmaster commands him to attack reality and submit to the illusion, which his senses are seduced to do. Such is the plight of the prisoner: the distance between those who would free him and himself is but a distorted shadow on a cave, that he believes blindly enough to kill those few who see reality for what it is.
Such is the narrative that is the close analogue of the spirit of mediocrity which installed itself upon Paris right before the events of June. After the revolutionary sectors of the French political life have found the nation unable to follow on their path of coercion by improving slightly the meager wages of the National Workshops, they quickly lost control over the situation. A politicized scheme from its inception, the very model of the Workshops was so far removed from the social and financial realities of France that it could be interpreted as little else than a ploy to brew radicalism from below through oppression of a group. The calls of the Right, on the Assembly and the press, towards a third solution that would restore social harmony without a political drive leading it, fell on deaf ears. An increasingly powerless government was crumbling at plain sight; the figures of Baron Descombes and M. Auberjonois being the only ones to regularly stand up in the Assembly as the President removed himself from the capital. All the while, the workers within the National Workshops, with such conversations and proposals obscured from them by illiteracy and the daily manipulation of the socialist rabble-rousers, had been convinced there was no way to maintain peace, and therefore led their own brothers to death, their families to sorrow, and Paris to turmoil.
However, how can one feel justified in promoting chaos to further the self-interest of a limited group, or even in self-interest? A deeper consideration of such developments does bring us back to an idea exposed by Ballanche in the beginning of this essay. In the course of human events, it is common to find how a society relativizes values upon a great transformation; the weave of History bundles upon itself, and Man, if not careful towards an overarching view of things, is destined to bundle with it, and as if a pendulum, swing violently to the opposite pole. Since my own experience within the advancement of education and my lengthy conversations with many learned people of an honourable persuasion, I have come to conclude our current clinging on to some failed values from the age past threatens to drive Man from a mystically-inclined perception of the world into a deadly form of “secular pelagianism”: that the individual, his wishes and perhaps follies, are considered the utmost goal of all action and supersede any sense of the collective or Universal good. Man now considers himself capable of achieving a personal salvation through personal attitudes; regardless of natural law or established order. Gone is the sense of analogy between the individual and collective existence which built civilization, for Man saves himself, and whatever common goals a group may have are simply the result of the conscious binding of their individual wills. How else can one explain that the workers of East Paris, Berlin, Prague or many other places, have decided to so carelessly believe a revolutionary demagoguery to the detriment of their families’ and communities’ safety and well-being? It does so become clear that the righteous struggle of our times is not against our fellow Man in the image of his own person, but against the blue haze which has slowly poisoned our own sense of ethics. (...)
- J.P.H. Lièvremont
Ballanche famously wrote, on his prolegomena to the Essais de Palingénesie Sociale, that the circumstances of our age do so prodigiously accelerate the march of the spirit of Man. As peoples all around Europe rise, as they did in far 1815, to react lawfully against the destruction of her traditions, the dear Ballanche had seen a much deeper movement than reaction; in fact, restoration was his chosen term. Restoration, because it does not blind Man to the active role he shall take in building the model of a new History of the peoples going forward, but it acts independently of the revolutionary spirit, Oriental and destructive, which composes in fact a much more primitive force, fit to the unreasonable and tribalistic. At the same time, the image of Man is not the sole symbol upon which the new History begins to be built, but is accompanied by that of Christ, whose banner that liberates Man from tyrants and despots is also the banner of liberty from eternal death.
Thinking on the words of Ballanche, it became a self-imposed task on myself that I should, as an agent of restoration, reflect publicly on the occurrences that have been named “Les journées de juin”, the June Days, which happened in Paris in this year of 1852. The legitimacy of my account as far as facts go is unblemished; I shall make no efforts to describe that which hasn’t been seen by my eyes, or heard by my own ears. The interpretation of such events, however, is inevitably left to the reader. The effort, though, to take up the mantle of writing the new History, carries with it a burden to Truth; to relieve oneself of such burden is not only dishonourable but misleading. The warning remains, therefore, that the inevitable interpretation which bleeds through the pen and into the paper from this author should at least be considered as the honest attempts of an actor to make sense of the historical narrative which develops all around him. I trust such interpretations shall find much corroboration, as times go on and other pens apply to the same task.
Since such considerations are already disposed, one should proceed to the overall panorama of the political landscape and the general wills which composed the Parisian atmosphere in the beginning of June. It could be described as a general and vague sort of tension which indisputably accompanies the upheaval and ressignification of the institutions. Let alone the occurrences which have led to the deposition of a divine institution such as the paternal monarchy into the throes of a “bleu sombre” revolutionary process, it is on the more mundane level that the analysis of the causes of the June Days should begin; and that is inextricably linked to such aforementioned upheaval, for it opened a breach unto which could climb the idea of the National Workshops, a most clever but failed scheme from their birth.
The revolutionary appraisal of the working classes as the clay from which to model mobs has undergone a most interesting transformation in France. Gone are the days of open resistance to authority and deference to values and traditions, to be supplanted by the instruments of coercion and persecution, a coup de disgrâce to the Order therein established. The revolutionary method, after its final defeat on the hands of History in 1815, has adapted to changing circumstances in order to legitimize pride. Its followers could be found in all levels of society, not unlike the previous revolutionaries, but now their strategy turned to the inside of learned society, of the nobility and even the palaces of government. There, all kinds of backstage negotiations were conducted to introduce French society into the spirit of legalism; in which the language of “rights” is freely banded about, and inevitably expanded into encroachment upon basic freedoms and the maintenance of order within the most essential nuclei of society like the family and the workplace. In so doing, the revolutionaries slowly bring the time-honoured institutions of civil society to an all-encompassing struggle against the artificial constructs of a positive law; wherein the latter shall always defeat the former, no matter how unethical the consequences of the pursuit of such so-called rights leads to.
The implementation of such a method was temporarily successful, until it was either recognized by the masses or brought to its own demise by the radicalism of its own leading minds. The scenario of the National Workshops brought to mind the most vivid images of the separation between the Platonic worlds: the upper crust in high places provided an unending stream of distorted shapes on the cave of the Workshops, in hopes the prisoners would never dare perceive the illusion. As the legal battles went on, on the subject of the Workshops, the pamphleteers and demagogues took the monopoly of power from within the careful revolutionaries from above, and proceeded to loosen the shackles which bound them. Their surprise upon encountering reality was to be destructive: after being given the illusion of a so-called progress and advancement in life, the prisoner finds the ruse which conspired only to maintain their puppetmasters’ comforts and hold on political power.
A sane mind would be quick to offer the prisoner a choice; yet the prisoner does not listen, for the shadows within the cave told him that those kinds of men would harm his interests and bring them onto new shackles. Unaware of his now inexorable fate, the prisoner dares reclaim his natural rights and dignity; the puppetmaster commands him to attack reality and submit to the illusion, which his senses are seduced to do. Such is the plight of the prisoner: the distance between those who would free him and himself is but a distorted shadow on a cave, that he believes blindly enough to kill those few who see reality for what it is.
Such is the narrative that is the close analogue of the spirit of mediocrity which installed itself upon Paris right before the events of June. After the revolutionary sectors of the French political life have found the nation unable to follow on their path of coercion by improving slightly the meager wages of the National Workshops, they quickly lost control over the situation. A politicized scheme from its inception, the very model of the Workshops was so far removed from the social and financial realities of France that it could be interpreted as little else than a ploy to brew radicalism from below through oppression of a group. The calls of the Right, on the Assembly and the press, towards a third solution that would restore social harmony without a political drive leading it, fell on deaf ears. An increasingly powerless government was crumbling at plain sight; the figures of Baron Descombes and M. Auberjonois being the only ones to regularly stand up in the Assembly as the President removed himself from the capital. All the while, the workers within the National Workshops, with such conversations and proposals obscured from them by illiteracy and the daily manipulation of the socialist rabble-rousers, had been convinced there was no way to maintain peace, and therefore led their own brothers to death, their families to sorrow, and Paris to turmoil.
However, how can one feel justified in promoting chaos to further the self-interest of a limited group, or even in self-interest? A deeper consideration of such developments does bring us back to an idea exposed by Ballanche in the beginning of this essay. In the course of human events, it is common to find how a society relativizes values upon a great transformation; the weave of History bundles upon itself, and Man, if not careful towards an overarching view of things, is destined to bundle with it, and as if a pendulum, swing violently to the opposite pole. Since my own experience within the advancement of education and my lengthy conversations with many learned people of an honourable persuasion, I have come to conclude our current clinging on to some failed values from the age past threatens to drive Man from a mystically-inclined perception of the world into a deadly form of “secular pelagianism”: that the individual, his wishes and perhaps follies, are considered the utmost goal of all action and supersede any sense of the collective or Universal good. Man now considers himself capable of achieving a personal salvation through personal attitudes; regardless of natural law or established order. Gone is the sense of analogy between the individual and collective existence which built civilization, for Man saves himself, and whatever common goals a group may have are simply the result of the conscious binding of their individual wills. How else can one explain that the workers of East Paris, Berlin, Prague or many other places, have decided to so carelessly believe a revolutionary demagoguery to the detriment of their families’ and communities’ safety and well-being? It does so become clear that the righteous struggle of our times is not against our fellow Man in the image of his own person, but against the blue haze which has slowly poisoned our own sense of ethics. (...)
- J.P.H. Lièvremont
Monsieur,
The tone of your letter, I admit, was a shock to me. Yet it was a needed shock, and I only wish I had received it sooner; the fault here is entirely mine, for having been given so much cause for despair over the last days I had resigned myself to the belief that, in settlement, the executive, so abased by its action in recent weeks, were best served with continuity, even if only for the present, that’s e might redouble our efforts in the Assembly, where the battle remains ours for the winning.
Nevertheless, having cleared my initial feelings of despair at my worries for the Republic having asserted themselves, I recognise my error of judgement: continuity is the solution of the lawyer, aloof from expressions of passionate sentiment. This is not a time for law, Sir, and it was my blunder in considering it such. This is fully the time for passion, and in coming to this conclusion I remain convinced once more of the truth that La Marche cannot endure.
I am still, however, at an uneasy junction, for in my mind no candidate proposed for the executive gives explicit hope for the furtherance of our cause. My initial resolution had been abstention, having found the idea of lending my support to any executive party as distasteful. This is the default to which, at this moment, I have returned.
If my friends still seek my resignation, they shall have it. I recognise my blunder and make no attempt to excuse it. I shall retire happily to my academic work, and you may be comforted in the knowledge that the cause will be safe from my lapses in judgement.
Merivée
Event: The Presidency, Prolonged
(September - October, 1852)
When Parliament assembled in September 1852, the national expectation was that preparations were being made for a monarchial restoration. Indeed, among the conservative members, General Changarnier was quickly countenanced as the best man to lead a legally elected regency council, and precipitate the event desired by the strongest proponents of order. (September - October, 1852)
It was with this threat that all the opponents of the Chambord claim—from the extreme Left to the sombre blues—pursued a 'frankenstin course.' They wished to prolong the situation until it struck to their advantage, and called upon La Marche to play défenseur de la république. He was the perfect choice, not least because (in addition to the sombre blues) he could draw away little conservative groupings to his candidature, such as coterie around the Duc de Montbazon (Rohan), who owed personal loyalty and deference to the son of Condé.
Changarnier also suffered, not from lack of notable popularity, but from those who feared his election might be done coercively, and militarily, and La Marche's election was advanced by the abstention of several significant conservatives, not least Merivée, himself an undisguised legitimist. Weeks of dealing between the camps, including a particularly clandestine one between La Marche and the fusionists, [1] could not save the cause of Changarnier in the Assembly. He could at least take comfort, when La Marche won the vote with a moderate majority, that his martial power over Paris, was essentially unaltered.
It was a victory, snatched from the desperate jaws of defeat, for the advocates of Bonaparte, and the liberal Republicans were relieved to see the prospect of a regency council slain on the floor. But the Assembly came thereupon into unchartered waters. The royalists wished for a prince, and could not sanction one forced upon him; the princes would demand a charter of King and Parliament. In defeat, the royalists fixed themselves against a new constitution, until their designs were satisfied, which forced all the power and peril of approving the national constitution to the horribly divided representatives of La Marche, from Montagnards to sombre blues.
[1] Not revealed for decades.
-
Have fun writing a constitution.
@Sneakyflaps can appoint his ministry; it is also vulnerable to be regulated by parliament. Or is it? Who knows? We don't have a constitution, or anything.
Last edited:
Merivée, resolved to conclude from the election results in his conclusion that his energies would best be applied elsewhere, quietly resigns from the Senate to devote more time to the writing of his next book.
Le Château de Beauvais, Nogent-le-Rotrou, Eure-et-Loir
It is my honour to appear today before such fine notables from this town and from the province as a whole, for it does benefit me as well to retrieve from Paris and find peace after the recent battles we have fought there, not for ourselves, but for the soul of France.
In Nogent, there is a most pertinent memory that became etched upon my mind ever since I arrived in the afternoon, to be so kindly welcomed by the authorities. This very place has once been under the protection and administration of le comte François de Saint-Pol, who passed it onto the Princes of Condé and finally under the careful wings of the Duc d’Enghien, almost 300 years ago. Such tricentennial could not be arriving at a more fitting time, messieurs; for such reminders bring also to mind how France has fallen since then, when the inheritances of Princes drift from noblesse and the Duc d’Enghien, as represented by the late Louis-Antoine, remains a glorious martyr for the cause of all that is good in France: a sense of honour, loyalty, nobility, and charity, whose mere life could not be tolerated by the forces of chaos and treason we all know so well. Let these snakes be not an impediment to the restoration of true France!
It brings me to a wider view of all which goes on in France today, messieurs. The daily tasks which occupy our minds should never distract us to certain unending values, such as the love and preservation of God and His commandments, of family, of community and of nation. You should know that our daily toil in Paris is aimed towards making the cause of royalism triumph over the agents of madness, so that it is never allowed to ever go beyond its already deadly consequences.
I hope the talks we so fruitfully exchange here and in many other places in my brief voyage can further such passions within all of you, and bring a larger perspective, in which you can safely trust in the representatives of the people who still look, with comfort and joy, towards what France once was and what France should be, ideals so beautifully inscribed in our fleur-de-lis, which I have seen flying proud in many places. Merci, messieurs, and God protect France. Le Roi et la France, c’est tout un!
A letter to M. Nettement ((@99KingHigh))
Monsieur,
In that spirit, I would ask that you proclaim your opinions in my behalf on the Assembly, as a trusted and loyal companion whose judgement is never to be doubted. I would also enjoy if you and Mme. Nettement provide company to Hélène in my absence, for my trust extends to your entire house also in matters personal. The soirées at Hautpoul should provide much lively entertainment.
I have also received notice of a possible arrival of many more notables from the junior and senior branches into the city, and ask that you be in attention to make their acquaintance or meet old friends again. Make sure to put in a good word for me, my friend. I expect to be with you all soon, to continue our discussions on the finer things in life, in, one may hope, a happier and more peaceful time.
Monsieur,
Allow me to address you in matters political, my friend. As you may know, I am in a voyage that should take some weeks, and therefore my participation in the Assembly is limited for the time being. As of now, I find myself close to the Sarthe - I thought you might want to know for this path must bring sweet memories of your travels from Morbihan to Paris. However, to the point; the threats to our dear cause and the stability of the nation are but some of the reasons why my presence in the Assembly should not be waived.In that spirit, I would ask that you proclaim your opinions in my behalf on the Assembly, as a trusted and loyal companion whose judgement is never to be doubted. I would also enjoy if you and Mme. Nettement provide company to Hélène in my absence, for my trust extends to your entire house also in matters personal. The soirées at Hautpoul should provide much lively entertainment.
I have also received notice of a possible arrival of many more notables from the junior and senior branches into the city, and ask that you be in attention to make their acquaintance or meet old friends again. Make sure to put in a good word for me, my friend. I expect to be with you all soon, to continue our discussions on the finer things in life, in, one may hope, a happier and more peaceful time.
My kindest regards,
Jean-Paul Henry Lièvremont
Jean-Paul Henry Lièvremont
Last edited:
Le Club de Joan d'Arc
- PRIVATE -
"Lo, so upon His and It's name we see the duality of the world. Where the Lords Above and Below are evil and good, are creator and destroyer, so we see within the individual themselves the same. Where a man made do his most righteous and pure deed in creating life, so he may do It's work a end life as well. For this to be so unanimous, so ubiquitous, it is naught but obvious that we reside within It's Realm, under the control of the Lord Below. But fret not my brethren, for the Lord Below is the Lord Above. Did not the Lord create all? Is not the Lord the one Lord of all?
So be it, in His name, that we take to our hand the heavenly symbols. To my left hand, I take upon the Rod of Iron. With it, I commit the most evil deed of death where I smote the enemies of His name. Indeed, it is the tool of It. However, does not He mention that the Rod of Iron is His tool? How can we do It's work with His tool unless He and It are one in the same. Further, to my right hand I take upon the humble trowel. This is an element of Him, as we use it to build both hearth and home. Lo, can we not use His tool to do It's work, building upon sacred ground? Fret not, for the Lords Above and Below are one in the same.
To within my hands I hold the Rod of Iron and the trowel. The tools of Him and It in which to do It's and His work. For He is It and It is He. So go, my brethren, and remember this. For we reside in Below, in It's lair, so are we all to be cleansed. Thus, we are all within His Light, even within It's lands. Take heart, for we will all be redeemed and head towards the lands of Him. For all, beautiful damnation for a life before eternal residence in the Heavens."
Place du Cardinal Grante, Le Mans, Sarthe
I would like to thank le maire M. Surmont for his invitation to this most effusive assembly wherein I could directly address some of the brightest and most influential people in the Sarthe. To visit Le Mans has been a long-standing wish of mine, ever since, from my friends within the Church, many of them who were my colleagues in seminary, have so extolled the virtues of le curé Moreau, whose intellectual pursuits, although very encompassing, famously do not take precedence to his pastoral care for our poor. Ever since I also heard of the formation of his Congregation of the Holy Cross, I could not wait to see his charitable work in person, and for that I thank Father Moreau for also being here and supporting our cause.
As one who dabbles on the world of knowledge but has not forgotten the importance of action, well-impressed upon me by the occupation of my parents in Minerve, I dare to say at least in one thing, my abilities follow the path of curé Moreau. My work, though, is one of politics; as much as I have written beforehand on my distaste for the entire concept. But such are the times, messieurs; in this republic, so-called of the people, where the people remain far from the centres of power, some have to stand up for the values of the French from the comfort of Paris. Such has always been the task of the noble, senior or junior line, and also of those who recognize their place as the bulwark of stability throughout the country. I know many of you have been taken aback with the surprise of the recent revolting in that city; in fact, that was what I could call more exactly a materialization of the mal du siècle which has been lingering whenever the forces of chaos take some folk on its grasp - as they had, in East Paris.
My journey around the departments of l’Ouest is a short one, for the duties of the upcoming revision of the Constitution shall call me back shortly to Paris. The end of the hostilities does not mean such forces of terror have stopped acting, although they may change in protagonist and method. Nevertheless, messieurs, upon learning of the most devout demonstrations of the popular will, which line up completely with the spirit of France and also with many noble men’s actions in Paris, I only thought fitting that I should talk directly to those whom we serve, in a manner like which the monarch is the servant of his nation; a notion that seems lost in the haze of these gargoyles who threatened once, twice, and may once again, to attack the wishes of the real working, honest men of France.
I exhort you, messieurs, to lend your support to our cause, to trust Providence and keep us always in our prayers, and expect this speech to lead to a night of spirituous conversation. Merci, and God protect France. Le Roi et la France, c’est tout un!
Cher Marie,
I write to you, my darling wife, in unhappy circumstances. My lack of political nous has been exposed, and having applyed a lawyer's mind to the passionate theatre of constitution I have much offended my friends among the party of Monsieur de Chambord, for which reason I have seen fit to resign my political posts here in Paris. Monsieur de Charlus, whom you know to be a most energetic operative of Chambord, wrote to me in, I must be frank, terms that tended towards melodramatic. From his words I do not imagine I shall be welcomed readily by my former friends here in Paris, and thus I have resolved to return to Normandy where I shall have the time to continue work on my next book untroubled by the wild temperament of partisan politicking, to which in my older and more jaded state I am evidently not suited.
I intend upon my return to Lisieux to take up the offer from an old friend at the Université de Caen Nomandie of a chair in history. From there I shall return to Paris only as my work with the Académie demands.
I shall see you, my love, very soon. Give my love to Joséphine in the meantime.
Je reste ton mari fidèle et adorant,
Esmé
Esmé
Au Prince de Polignac (( @m.equitum ))
Cher Monsieur,
You will by now be no doubt aware, Monsieur, that I have been forced from my position in the Assembly by certain partisans of Monsieur de Chambord. Alas, such are the consequences of treating the immediacy of settlement with the sobriety of academic enquiry, to which I am more than prone – but such is common knowledge! In truth, it will perhaps be a blessing for the legitimist party that I have been made to realise the shortcomings of my own political ability; the long gaze of the sociologue is not well suited to politick, and I am reminded constantly of the Duc de Cars' dismissal of me as un advocat.
I am quite certain that I have secured for myself, at least so long as my blunder remains fresh in the mémoire, the status of persona non grata among the men I used to call friends, who have for a great part taken my actions as nothing short of a personal betrayal. Monsieur de Charlus, that most passionate of agents of the Comte de Chambord, sent me a most upsetting letter, quite like something from the pages of the feuilletons, as if by inadvertently forestalling the ambitions of more earthly men of the party I had awakened in him a great psychic wound! In truth, I do not doubt that I have.
I have resolved therefore to leave Paris for some time and return to Normandy, whose temperament I feel accords far better with my own. I am privileged to be able finally to take up the kind offer, made by a friend long ago, of a chair in history at Caen-Normandie, where I shall devote myself fully to the realisation of my next philosophical work. It is in anticipation of this fact that I have discovered reason to write to you.
My next work shall treat in the main the problem of industry, which I have cited so often in my previous work. Yet my enquiries have so far produced conclusions that, for the most part, remain in the abstract, and I should feel myself confident in my study only once I am able to draw conclusions in the realm of praxis. In this spirit, I have taken up a gracious offer made by our old English friend the Duke of Devonshire of hospitality at Chatsworth during the autumn. While in England I intend to make a first-hand study of the phenomenon of industrialisation, which during my previous periods in the country as ambassador I was only able to conduct at the most superficial of levels. If you are at liberty, or else find yourself so willed, I should be glad to have you for a travelling companion in England. Devonshire, I am quite certain, would be happy to receive you as an old friend.
Nevertheless, this was not the prime reason for my writing. As I am certain that in my writing I will be aided by having experienced for myself the reality of the factory, I am equally convinced that I must take in the inverse phenomena with comparable positivity; that is to say, the present condition of the rural south, and the livelihood of the artisan and the peripatetic labourer. Regardless of your feelings toward the idea of accompanying me to England, I intend to make a study during my enquiry of the province of Occitania, where I understand one may begin to perceive the phenomenon of standardisation that seems to accompany that of industry. If you would be amenable to meeting while I explore your province, I should be glad of the chance to revive an old friendship.
Je vous prie de croire, Monsieur, l'assurance de mes sentiments amicales,
Merivée
Merivée
La Mayenne et le Vieux-Château, Laval, Mayenne
When I arrived in Laval, messieurs, a most quaint feeling came upon me. I have recently conversed with a few friends of the mouvement legitimiste et royaliste that hail from this region, which by itself is not surprising, since l’Ouest has long been a most loyal centre to our cause. In these conversations, many mentions were made to the hospitality of your people, and also its devoutness to God and His Church; as I could personally experience earlier today as I stopped to pray in l’Abbaye de Château-Gontier, which is also a most famous location throughout France, to those who hold the faith dear in our hearts and souls.
The hospitality of the lavallois comes as a most refreshing, and relieving feeling to me. I shall, whenever the circumstances allow, come back here to maybe spend a night in the Chêateau du Bois Thibault, which, as I have heard, has been one of the residences of du Bellay; a most influential and dear writer whose influence I follow, in full conscience or even unaware of it.
Such a comfort in a time of peace and my own lightheartedness, however, should not be confused for laxity, messieurs. We have long been held in tension as hommes politiques who listen to you, the people, in Paris; the revolutionary spirit of many a Robespierre has risen up, cloaked or uncloaked, to strike the dagger into the heart of France. There is a limit to danger and buffoonery, however; hence my own journey which has today brought me to you.
I come as the bearer of hopeful news. The nation has overwhelmingly spoken for change and the revision of the unworkable institutions men of ulterior interests have imposed upon her. The rapprochement between the supporters of the senior and junior lines to the throne goes forward in most promising steps. My own time in government has been enlightening, for my own convictions as a paysan have only been reaffirmed once and again: there is no Order without the legitimate power of monarchy to gently guide us to peaceful meadows, messieurs. For that end, I humbly ask for your support in our daily toil for this cause, in search of a better future. We remember many who have fallen, recently or in years past, as we struggle together to the France which should have never been lost. Merci, and God protect France. Le Roi et la France, c’est tout un!
Letter to the King
Monseigneur,
By now you will have received my full report of the situation in the Assembly. The departure of M. Merivée is an unfortunate business; but the situation accepted no other course. It is possible, I confess, to be afflicted with too much principle; a little less for Merivée, and a little more for La Marche, and the country would be saved. He remains loyal, if distant to the cause, and I recommend that you offer him your fidelity and forgiveness as he departs into retirement. Academic minds are vulnerable to excessive compunction; the kindest path is to see him at peace, now that he is removed from the functions of politics. He can do far more good to the legitimiate claim with his pen than he can with his tongue.
This is but a diversion, and I must return to the point that I briefly mentioned in my previous letter, but which has become a certainty to our party. Monsieur Changarnier was, in that moment, the desired choice; the situation having changed, it is necessary to change with it. Changarnier is aware that he enjoys out utmost confidence, and retains the favor; however, the person of the Baron Descombes should heretofore receive our sincerest sentiments. He is proximate to all the parties that will be required to overcome the obstructions that hinder our advance. Among the higher orders, the Baron is well-regarded, and popular in the country. Although he does not conform exactly to our likings, our situation demands this cooperation. The fusion is an elusive objective, but with assured patience, it will be achieved.
I remain, Monseigneur, your devoted and humble servant,
Charlus
Charlus
Place Saint-Germain, Rennes, Ille-et-Villaine
Power, however, does so corrupt, messieurs; one has to look no further than Paris to see it. Political power is one of a certain venom, for it provokes the unscrupulous to action, as they take France to a distant third priority, behind their own ambition and pride. There is power in symbols and names… the folly of the weak. Through its misuse did the socialist rabble threaten our nation for days, as I could well be witness to. Through deceit, they still try to, in the shadows. I rest assured by faith in Providence and in the popular will that their day of victory shall ever be only the resounding of empty speeches within immobile walls.
However, my journey through l’Ouest is meant to be a hopeful message to you who are standing up for everything decent and honourable in France. Know you have representatives of the people who actually listen to it, and aspire to make your will known in the upcoming Constitutional revision. I shall return to Paris and dutifully recall fondly of my time in Rennes, while mentioning, of course, some of your particular predicaments in such fine a place so that they can be solved in no time. I thank you for the attention, messieurs, and also hope for fruitful conversation amidst such good a company through the evening. Merci, and God protect France. Le Roi et la France, c’est tout un!
To: Esmé Merivée (@DensleyBlair)
M. Merivée,
I have just been informed that you have resigned your position within the new Assembly, and as such the seat which you held in the senate. I can only say that the news has not brought me happiness, for I once again feel that France only suffers, from the lack of expertise which you held, and which I hope that I may still employ.
While I am made to understand that you have resigned, so that you may focus on your academic pursuits once more, just as you told me a couple of years ago when I first made the offer. Then I would like to once again offer you the position of Foreign Minister. I am well aware that it is not as appealing an offer as it was when it was first offered. Certainly I understand that it is less appealing in light of all the events which have brought us here, the fighting in the party of order, and the continued disputes among all corners. But I for one would argue that this is the time, moreso than ever before, that we need a proper diplomat in place. Not only so that we may portray some sense of stability, not to mention confidence abroad in what can now only be described as a desperate situation. But so that the same be done at home, so that open channels may be kept. I believe it to be important that an open mind is kept, if France is to recover and not find another constitution at war with itself and those whom it is meant to represent.
I of course will fully understand, if it be your desire to decline this position That should you wish to take up the more academic path, rather than that of a slave in government building as we so often find ourselves in, for the coming months, then I can only say that the pursuit of knowledge is a most worthy goal, and that any who shall read your work or learn from it, will be blessed.
With the utmost respect
Philippe Henri de Bourbon
M. Merivée,
I have just been informed that you have resigned your position within the new Assembly, and as such the seat which you held in the senate. I can only say that the news has not brought me happiness, for I once again feel that France only suffers, from the lack of expertise which you held, and which I hope that I may still employ.
While I am made to understand that you have resigned, so that you may focus on your academic pursuits once more, just as you told me a couple of years ago when I first made the offer. Then I would like to once again offer you the position of Foreign Minister. I am well aware that it is not as appealing an offer as it was when it was first offered. Certainly I understand that it is less appealing in light of all the events which have brought us here, the fighting in the party of order, and the continued disputes among all corners. But I for one would argue that this is the time, moreso than ever before, that we need a proper diplomat in place. Not only so that we may portray some sense of stability, not to mention confidence abroad in what can now only be described as a desperate situation. But so that the same be done at home, so that open channels may be kept. I believe it to be important that an open mind is kept, if France is to recover and not find another constitution at war with itself and those whom it is meant to represent.
I of course will fully understand, if it be your desire to decline this position That should you wish to take up the more academic path, rather than that of a slave in government building as we so often find ourselves in, for the coming months, then I can only say that the pursuit of knowledge is a most worthy goal, and that any who shall read your work or learn from it, will be blessed.
With the utmost respect
Philippe Henri de Bourbon
To the Prince de Polignac (@m.equitum)
Votre Altesse,
I am reliably informed that Your Highness has recently been seen socially with my dear cousin Mathilde, and that the two of you are, to all appearances, dear friends and companions. I am therefore obliged to express to Your Highness my feelings on the subject, if Your Highness will but indulge me.
When I first heard the news -- directly from the better half of this amiable conspiracy, let it be said -- I must confess: I was overjoyed! Mathilde has been dear to my heart, moreso than is typical, for many years. You may know that we were briefly engaged to be married, and it was during that time that I learned to value her many fine qualities. That someone else has come to properly appreciate her spirit and grace is a source of great pleasure to me in an otherwise troubling time. Not all men are so perceptive, particularly those who should be most appreciative.
Please know that you have my entire support in this matter, so long as Mathilde's happiness is sustained, and do not take my interest for discouragement. On the contrary, Your Highness, please accept my invitation to my home at the Hôtel du Rhin at your earliest convenience, so that we may become better acquainted. My company is not quite so agreeable as my cousin's, but I shall bravely endeavor nonetheless.
Your obedient servant,
Louis-Napoleon
Louis-Napoleon
Last edited:
Excerpt from the notes of Jérôme.
The insurrection were beat down, order was maintained and democracy was preserved. While it was necessary, and I would not hesitate to repeat the actions during those June days, we can't ignore the plight of the worker. Some might be scared of the fury of the working class, and rightly so. But there's a great conflict in between the working class. The Mobile Guard was utterly loyal to the established order and democracy, their methods were ruthless and with utter dedication. The workingman is not solely loyal to Radicalism and Socialism, his anger may be harnessed by both sides. During those June days the far left capitalized on their anger and their desparation. They sought to turn their plight to propell their political ambition. After my visit to Neumors he left an impression on my simple soul. While I do not wish to enter politics, it got me thinking. Got me assessing the current situation, and how we ended up with the insurrection and how we may prevent another insurrection.
(...) Instead of harnessing their anger to either make for a revolution, or to establish order we should understand their plight, and help them overcome it. In my limited understanding of history the aristocracy was meant to guide the people. To shield the working class and middle class alike against deprivation, while the working and middle class provided the nation, and in turn the nobles, with foodstuff and other materials. This union of some sorts was in the end broken by the aristocracy who failed to grant the workingman and middle class of protection, failed to listen to their needs and adress their plight. Ever since the Three Glorious Days this mantle have been passed down to the middle class. Despite the obstruction from the ministerials and nobles, that led to the downfall of the June Monarchy, the middle class continue to lead society after the revolution of 1850 and the June days. The middle class need to take its mantle seriously, and adress the plight of the workers.
(...) In order to both prevent the rise of socialism (where demagogues and ceasarists mislead the workingman) and another insurrection we must adress their issues. Institute not only popular policies, but needed ones. The workshops might have been popular, but they did nothing to help the workingman in the long run, their strong side was, however, its effect on giving the workingman hope. A hope for a better future. The workingman must be given such a hope back, and participation in political and social life, however he must also be given practical solution that will help his situation, and that of the economy. (...)
First of all a man must secure his future, through honest work. But once a man reach an old age or is disabled his future is no longer secured, his life may be at jeopardy and that of his family. A man who can't provide for his family is no man, a man who is deprived of his work is a desarate one, desperate men turn to radical measures. After a worker reach the age of 70 he should be able to get pensions from a fund, a fund sponsored by the government. In turn the fund is provided through taxes, a portion of the taxes a workingman provide to the government will be included in this fund. But there are those who are forced into early retirement, perhaps due to industrial accidents. The government should pay a portion of accident insurance and widow insurance, with the employer another portion. If one is fully disabled, or widowed, one's life and family should not come to an end. Such insurances would ideally cover 2/3rds of the salary the workingman previously recieved. Had I been a workingman and not a man of means and contacts, I dare not to reflect over what might have happened once I lost my leg.
Then there's the issue of working hours. 12 hours is simply put, too stressfull for the workingman. He get up before sunrise, and can't see his family before sunset. It deprive the workingman of his sparetime, exhaust him and put family values at risk. A 10 hour work day is needed to better relieve the workingman of his plight.
Then there's the issue of cooperatives, there are rumors of support for such cooperatives among the legislators. My brother supported them, I fully endorse such initiatives.
(...) In effect I consider dealing with the plight of the workingman not a socialist measure, but practical Christianity. To stand in solidarity with out workingmen, to let the middle class lead the way forward. Meanwhile the hardship of the workingman may be lessened and from weaning them away from supporting Radical and Socialist policies. What France and the workingman need is a liberal or conservative programme with progressive ideas on labour, and provide an alternative for disillusioned workingmen. To deal with the growing social injustice and poverty as of late, to counter insurrections.
(...) The weather was lovely today, Elisabeth and I had a lovely time in the gardens while our children was out riding.
The insurrection were beat down, order was maintained and democracy was preserved. While it was necessary, and I would not hesitate to repeat the actions during those June days, we can't ignore the plight of the worker. Some might be scared of the fury of the working class, and rightly so. But there's a great conflict in between the working class. The Mobile Guard was utterly loyal to the established order and democracy, their methods were ruthless and with utter dedication. The workingman is not solely loyal to Radicalism and Socialism, his anger may be harnessed by both sides. During those June days the far left capitalized on their anger and their desparation. They sought to turn their plight to propell their political ambition. After my visit to Neumors he left an impression on my simple soul. While I do not wish to enter politics, it got me thinking. Got me assessing the current situation, and how we ended up with the insurrection and how we may prevent another insurrection.
(...) Instead of harnessing their anger to either make for a revolution, or to establish order we should understand their plight, and help them overcome it. In my limited understanding of history the aristocracy was meant to guide the people. To shield the working class and middle class alike against deprivation, while the working and middle class provided the nation, and in turn the nobles, with foodstuff and other materials. This union of some sorts was in the end broken by the aristocracy who failed to grant the workingman and middle class of protection, failed to listen to their needs and adress their plight. Ever since the Three Glorious Days this mantle have been passed down to the middle class. Despite the obstruction from the ministerials and nobles, that led to the downfall of the June Monarchy, the middle class continue to lead society after the revolution of 1850 and the June days. The middle class need to take its mantle seriously, and adress the plight of the workers.
(...) In order to both prevent the rise of socialism (where demagogues and ceasarists mislead the workingman) and another insurrection we must adress their issues. Institute not only popular policies, but needed ones. The workshops might have been popular, but they did nothing to help the workingman in the long run, their strong side was, however, its effect on giving the workingman hope. A hope for a better future. The workingman must be given such a hope back, and participation in political and social life, however he must also be given practical solution that will help his situation, and that of the economy. (...)
First of all a man must secure his future, through honest work. But once a man reach an old age or is disabled his future is no longer secured, his life may be at jeopardy and that of his family. A man who can't provide for his family is no man, a man who is deprived of his work is a desarate one, desperate men turn to radical measures. After a worker reach the age of 70 he should be able to get pensions from a fund, a fund sponsored by the government. In turn the fund is provided through taxes, a portion of the taxes a workingman provide to the government will be included in this fund. But there are those who are forced into early retirement, perhaps due to industrial accidents. The government should pay a portion of accident insurance and widow insurance, with the employer another portion. If one is fully disabled, or widowed, one's life and family should not come to an end. Such insurances would ideally cover 2/3rds of the salary the workingman previously recieved. Had I been a workingman and not a man of means and contacts, I dare not to reflect over what might have happened once I lost my leg.
Then there's the issue of working hours. 12 hours is simply put, too stressfull for the workingman. He get up before sunrise, and can't see his family before sunset. It deprive the workingman of his sparetime, exhaust him and put family values at risk. A 10 hour work day is needed to better relieve the workingman of his plight.
Then there's the issue of cooperatives, there are rumors of support for such cooperatives among the legislators. My brother supported them, I fully endorse such initiatives.
(...) In effect I consider dealing with the plight of the workingman not a socialist measure, but practical Christianity. To stand in solidarity with out workingmen, to let the middle class lead the way forward. Meanwhile the hardship of the workingman may be lessened and from weaning them away from supporting Radical and Socialist policies. What France and the workingman need is a liberal or conservative programme with progressive ideas on labour, and provide an alternative for disillusioned workingmen. To deal with the growing social injustice and poverty as of late, to counter insurrections.
(...) The weather was lovely today, Elisabeth and I had a lovely time in the gardens while our children was out riding.