In this worship of the King Saint-Simon was very far from taking part, but on the other hand he entered with zest into all the futilities of precedence and etiquette which formed the most serious business of the Court. The right to wear one’s hat, or, in the case of a woman, to be seated in the royal presence (called _le droit du tabouret_), the right to be kissed by royalty, the right to a chair with arms, or merely to a folding-chair--all these were privileges which were claimed and contested with the utmost keenness, and which figure largely in the pages of our chronicler. It is with the utmost gravity that he relates the visit of the Elector of Cologne, Prince Clement of Bavaria, brother-in-law of Monseigneur, to Versailles in 1706; how the King, “standing and uncovered, received him with all the grace imaginable”; how he was presented to the Duchess of Burgundy, who received him standing, but did not kiss him, “because in the King’s presence she kisses nobody”; how he was next conducted to the bedroom of Madame, who kissed him and had a long conversation with him in German; and how finally he visited in her bed the Duchess of Orleans, who also kissed him. “Il ne s’assit nulle part.” A good instance of the passionate tenacity with which Saint-Simon took part in controversies on the most trivial questions of etiquette is what he calls _l’affaire de la quête_, to which he devotes no less than ten pages. On certain great festivals of the Church, when the King attended mass or vespers, it was the practice for the Queen, or, after her death, the Dauphine, to appoint one of the court-ladies to take round the bag. But the Lorraine princesses, who, according to Saint-Simon, the life-long enemy of their house, were always trying to usurp the privileges of princesses of the blood, quietly avoided this duty. Hence a long and bitter altercation, largely fomented by Saint-Simon, which resulted in the little Duke, on the advice of his friend Chamillart, obtaining an audience with the King, at which, according to his own account, he put the matter before him with great boldness and complete success. Saint-Simon apologises for the length of his narrative, but says with perfect truth that it is from the circumstantial account of such affairs that we get a knowledge of the Court and especially of the King, “so difficult to reach, so formidable to his intimates, so full of his despotism,... and yet capable of understanding reason when it was put forcibly before him, provided only the speaker flattered his love of despotism and seasoned his remarks with the most profound respect[9].” [9] _Mémoires_, IV. 42-52.