suspect in any one of them a brother of Louis XIV. Certainly, one
would hardly expect to find a despatch designating one of Saint-Mars’
prisoners by the title of prince, and in order to be convinced we
do not exact anything of the kind. But when, examining, one by one,
each of the captives sent to the future governor of the Bastille, and
amongst whom is necessarily the one that he traversed France with in
1698, we account for the causes of their arrest, and penetrate into
their past; when a hundred authentic despatches[109] enable us to
affirm that there are no other prisoners besides these, are we not
justified in demanding where, then, is the son of Anne of Austria?
This famous despatch, a fragment of which was timidly quoted some
years ago in a work from which it has since been omitted,[110]--this
despatch, in the existence of which criticism had concluded to
disbelieve,[111] and which is of capital importance, actually does
exist and is authentic. It was dictated by Barbézieux,[112] and
addressed to Saint-Mars, at the moment when the latter had under his
guardianship the prisoner whom he was to take with him to the Bastille,
and who died there in 1703:--
“Monsieur--I have received, with your letter of the 10th of this
month, the copy of that which Monsieur de Pontchartrain has written to
you concerning the prisoners who are at the Isles Sainte-Marguerite,
upon orders of the King, signed by him, or of the late Monsieur de
Seignelay. You have no other rules of conduct to follow with respect to
all those who are confided to your keeping beyond continuing to look to
their security, _without explaining yourself to any one whatever about
what your old prisoner_ HAS DONE.”[113]
But what crime could this pretended brother of Louis XIV. have
committed, except, indeed, that of coming into the world? Is it
objected that a slight fault committed in prison may be referred to,
and that Barbézieux, in this despatch, alludes to a recent occurrence?
But, if he recommends Saint-Mars not to explain himself to any one
whatever, it is evident that curiosity had been excited, and that every
one on the island trying to satisfy it, the Minister thought it right
to recommend, more energetically than ever, an absolute discretion.
Would this discretion have been necessary, and would Saint-Mars have
been questioned, if only an insignificant breach of the internal rules
of the prison had been in question?
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account