Monbarot languished in prison for three years—and to a solitary captive years are ages. He would, perhaps, have remained there during a much longer period, had not filial love been a persevering suitor for him. His only son repeatedly solicited the king to set his parent free; and, failing to obtain that boon, he entreated that he might be allowed to lighten his sorrows, by sharing his captivity. At length, Monbarot’s enemies having failed to procure any proof whatever against him, he was liberated by Henry. But, though he was declared to be innocent, he was punished as though he were guilty. Instead of being, as far as was possible, compensated for three years of suffering, he was deprived of the government of Rennes, which was given to Philip de Bethune, Sully’s younger brother. It is probable, indeed, that the persecution of Monbarot was set on foot for the sole purpose of wresting from him his coveted office. Charles of Valois, count of Auvergne, who was afterwards known as duke of Angoulême, was a son of Charles the ninth, by Maria Touchet, and was born in 1573. He was admitted a knight of Malta, and became grand prior of France; but Catherine of Medicis having bequeathed to him the counties of Auvergne and Lauragais, he quitted the order of Malta, and married a daughter of the constable Montmorenci. Charles was one of the first to join Henry of Navarre, on the accession of that prince, and he fought valiantly for him at Arques, Ivry, and Fontaine Française. In the course of a few years, however, his loyalty evaporated, and we find him an accomplice of Biron. When he was arrested, his pleasantry and presence of mind did not forsake him. On Praslin demanding his sword, he laughingly said, “Here it is; it has never killed any thing but wild boars. If you had given me a hint of this business, I should have been in bed and asleep two hours ago.” He preserved the same gay humour while he was in prison. In October he was released, after having disclosed the whole that he knew of the conspiracy. As, however, the king had procured the same information from other quarters, Auvergne would probably have been severely punished but for two favourable circumstances—he was the half brother of the king’s mistress, the marchioness of Verneuil, and he had been particularly recommended to him by Henry the third, when that monarch was on his death-bed.