Cornell University Library
The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library.
There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text.
http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924100553852
CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY
3 1924 100 553 852
In compliance with current
Copyright law, Cornell University
Library produced this
replacement volume on paper
that meets the ANSI Standard
Z39.48-1992 to replace the
irreparably deteriorated original.
2005
CORNELL
UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY
BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME OF THE SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND GIVEN IN 189I BY
HENRY WILLIAMS SAGE
THE WRITINGS OF
THE FOUNDERS OF THE REPUBLIC.
THE WRITINGS OF GEORGE WASHINGTON, comprising his Diaries and his public and private correspondence, including many letters and documents never before in print, are being issued under the editorial supervision of WORTHINGTON C. FoRD. To be complete in fourteen royal octavo volumes. Nine volumes are now ready. Each ifs.oo
THE CORRESPONDENCE AND PUBLIC PAPERS OF JOHN JAY, First Chief-Justice of the United States. Edited by Henry P. Johnston, Professor of American History in the College of the City of New York. The set is to be complete in four royal octavo volumes. Two volumes are now ready. Each $5.00
Of the above works the edition ivitl be limited to "j^o copies, printed froTn type (the type being distributed as printed from), uniform -with the previously issued sets of " Hamilton '* and ^^ Franklin y
THE WRITINGS OF THOMAS JEFFERSON. Edited by Paul Leicester Ford. This set will be in about ten volumes octavo, uniform in size and style with the above works. A limited edition will be printed from type. (In press.) Price per volume ...... $5.00
G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS, Publishers
NEW YORK: LONDON;
27 £ 39 WEST 23D ST. 27 KING WILLIAM ST., STRAND
MEMOIRS
OF THE
PRINCE DE TALLEYRAND
VOL. II-
TALLEYRAND
PRINCE DE BENEVENTO, VICE GRAND ELECTOR OF THE EMFHE FROM THE PAINTING BY PRUD'HON
MEMOIRS
PRINCE DE TALLEYRAND
EDITED, WITH A PREFACE AND NOTES, BY
THE DUC DE BROGLIE
OF THE FRENCH ACADEMY
TRANSLATED UY
RAPHAfeL LEDOS DE BEAUFORT, F.R.HiST.S.
WITH AN INTRODUCnON BY
THE HONORABLE WHITELAW REID
AMERICAN MINISTER IN PARIS.
VOLUME II
H'lTH PORTRAITS.
G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS
NEW YORK LONDON
37 VTBST TWENTY-THIRD ST. 27 KING WILLIAM ST., STRAND
189I
Copyright, 1891
BY
G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS
Ubc ■Rnicfeetbocftet prcse ■Rew SJorl!
CONTENTS.
FART VI.
napoleon's marriage, his brothers, his struggle with PIUS VII.
i8og — 1813.
Talleyrand marries his nephew with the daughter of the Duchess of Courland — Napoleon's marriage with the Archduchess Marie-I.ouise — Napoleon's dream of universal domination — His brothers and his sisters' husbands — Why he gave them thrones — Joseph in Naples — Murat succeeds him — Murat endeav- ours to shake off the yoke of Napoleon — Murat's ambition — Napoleon and his brother Louis — Westphalia — King Jerome and the Germans — Joseph in Spain — Lord Wellington — The French driven from Spain — Blunder of Napoleon in Spain — Differences between Napoleon and the Fope — Fersecution of Pius VII. — Negotiations between the First Consul and Pius VII. — Some bishops decline to resign their sees — The Concordat — La petite Eglise — Home regu- lations concerning Public Worship — Cardinal Caprara — Coronation of Napoleon — Pius VII. at Paris — Napoleon crowned King of Italy at Milan — Refusal of the Pope to recognize Joseph as King of Naples — Occupation of Rome by General Miollis — Annexation of the legations of Urbino, Ancona, Macerata, and Camerino — Imprisonment of several cardinals — Disarming of the Papal [guards — Annexation of the Papal States to France — Protest of Pius VII. — The bull of excommunication — Arrest of the Pope — The King of Rome — Meeting of an ecclesiastical commission — Had the Pope any right to refuse the buU of confirmation to the French bishops ? — Did the French Government infringe the clauses of the Concordat by invading Rome ? — The Church in Germany and Italy — Measures to be taken to thwart the effect of the buU of excommunication — Considerations on the Commission — Cardinal Maury and the Pope's brief — Inconsistency of Pius VII. — Arrest of Abbe d'Astros — Cardinal di Pietro — Severe measures against the Pope — Summoning of a second ecclesiastical commission — Can bishops accord dispensations ? — Are Papal bulls indispensable to obtain the canonical confirmation ? — Interven- tion of the Bishop of Nantes — Napoleon agrees to summon a council and to negotiate with the Pope — Pius VII. withdraws his bull of excommuni- cation— The liberties of the' Church of [France — Pius VII. adheres to a
CONTENTS.
modification of the Concordat, with regard to the canonical confirmation of bishops — Misgivings of the Pope concerning the meeting of a council — Inutility of the latter — Napoleon insists on the meeting of the Council — Opening of the Council — The bishops at St. Cloud — Napoleon takes Cardinal Fesch to task — Dignified attitude of the latter — Napoleon flies into a passion — Je suis Charlemagne — The Emperor's message to the Council — Address of the Council in reply — Napoleon declines to receive it — The Council declares its incompetence to decide the question pending between Napoleon and the Pope — Wrath of the Emperor on hearing this — Napoleon's projects defeated by the Council — The Council dissolved by imperial decree — Imprisonment of three bishops — Re-assembling of the Coun- cil— The imperial decree adopted and sent to the Pope for his approval- Brief of Pius VII. approving the decree — Inconsistency of Napoleon — Re- turns the Pope's brief— Transfer of the Pope to Fontainebleau — Interview between Napoleon and Pius VII. — Signature of a new compact, which was not to be divulged — Breach of faith of Napoleon — Retractation of the Pope — Napoleon vainly tries to renew the negotiations — Return of Pius VII. to Rome — Political blunders of the Emperor in the course of the negotiations with the Pope . . Pages 1-95
PART VII.
THE FALL OF THE EMPIRE, THE RESTORATION. 1813 — 1814.
The political faults of Napoleon — What might have been a masterpiece of policy — No chance for the House of Bourbon — Why Louis XVIII. ascended the throne — Why Napoleon is the first and only man who could have given Europe her true equilibrium — The cause of his ruin — Talleyrand's apology for having left Napoleon's service — Rejects the imputation of having conspired against the Emperor — General Savary and Talleyrand — Napoleon wants Tal- leyrand to resume office — "Ah! si Talleyrand i<tait Ih!" — La Besnardi^re and Napoleon — Wrath of the latter against Murat — Napoleon alone plotted against himself— His obstinacy at the Congress of Chatillon — Lord Welling- ton— Abbe Juda — The Colossus has feet of clay — Lord Wellington's plan— The Due d'Angouleme and the Duke of Wellington— Sir Henry Bunbury— The Marquis de la Rochejacquelein — Wellington refuses to support a Bour- bon rising — Battle of Orthez — Wellington yields — Viscount Beresford — M. Lynch and the Bourbons— Lord Bathurst's letter to the Duke of Wellington — Battle of Toulouse— Correct attitude of Wellington— Colonels Frederick Ponsonby and H. Cook — The abdication of the Emperor — Charge brought
against the Provisory Government — The English Government and Napoleon
Louis XVIII. and the Prince Regent of England— Baron de VitroUes at the
headquarters of the allied sovereigns — Talleyrand and the Baron de VitroUes
Interview between the latter and Count von Stadion— Prince Metternich and
A^lit^UlCUli A lie glCiiL UCCLl UX lliUIUpC A UC ICglLllllclljy Ul gU VCi llillCllia V» llj*
Talleyrand supported the claims of the Bourbons — Napoleon's opinion of the Bourbons — Capitulation of Paris — The Czar and the King of Prussia in Paris — March past of the allied troops in the Champs Elysees — Talleyrand and the Czar Alexander — Negotiations relative to the recall of the Bourbons — The Czar Alexander amazed — The return of Louis XVIII. voted by former regi- cides— M. de Caulaincourt and Talleyrand — Declaration of the allies to Napoleon — The Provisory Government— Entrance of the Comte d'Artois into Paris — Interview between Talleyrand and Louis XVIII. at Compiegne — The Saint-Ouen proclamation — Return of Louis XVIII. to Paris — The Charter — Talleyrand appointed Minister of Foreign Affairs — The situation of France compared with Europe on the morrow of Napoleon's fall — The conventions between the Comte d'Artois and the Allies — Treaty of peace between Louis XVIII. and the Allies — Additional Articles — Separate and secret Articles to the Treaty of Paris — Decision relative to the assembling of a Congress at Vienna — Talleyrand's letter to the Czar Alexander— Instructions of Louis XVIII. to the French plenipotentiaries to the Congress of Vienna — Various considerations on the condition of Europe and the respective situations im- posed by Napoleon on its different States — How these are to be remedied by the Congress of Vienna . Pages 96-197
PART VIII.
CONGRESS OF VIENNA. 1814 — 1815.
Talleyrand's arrival at Vienna — Dispositions of the Allies towards France — The position of the French plenipotentiaries at the Congress — Difficulties to be contended with — Opening of the Congress — The intentions of the first-class Powers — Talleyrand finds unhoped-for support in Spain and the second-class Powers — Want of courtesy towards Talleyrand — Defeats the aim of the Allies — The first meeting of the Congress attended by Talleyrand — Prince Mettemich's speech — Talleyrand's reply — Puissances Alli/es — Count de Labrador's motion in support of Talleyrand's proposals — Embarrassment of the plenipotentiaries of the allied Powers — The Congress agrees to the an- nulling of the protocols of the preceding sittings — Distribution of the work of the Congress — Change of disposition towards France — The anniversary ser-
CONTENTS.
ice of the death of Louis XVI. — The Congress at work — The fate of the Kingdom of Saxony and of the Grand Duchy of Warsaw — Prussia's designs — Talleyrand demurs to the recognition of her claims — The sacred principle of legitimacy — Suum cuique — The laxity of the public law of Europe — Growing tendency to uphold usurpations — Indifference of the Allies as to the rights of the House of Bourbon — Obstacles encountered by Talleyrand in enforcing the triumph of legitimacy — Hostile attitude of Russia towards France — Compro- mise offered — "I am not here to strike a bargain ! " — " No compromise with principles ! " — England backs up the views of Russia and Prussia on Saxony — Her delusion — Doubtful attitude of Austria — Talleyrand wins her support — He succeeds in dispelling the prejudices of England — A secret alliance between France, Austria, and England, against Russia and Prussia — The prestige of principles — Discord among the Allies — Prussia gives way — Napo- leon's return from Elba — Anxiety of the Congress — The Comtesse de Brionne — " Politics must wait ! " — Indecision of the King of Saxony — His interview with Metternich, Wellington, and Talleyrand — A plenipotentiary of Saxony at the Congress — Russia compelled to desist — The deliberations of the Con- gress concerning Poland— France disposed to admit the restoration of inde- pendent Poland — Russia's Ministers give in — Ferdinand IV. and Murat — The latter defeated by the Austrians — Talleyrand created Due of Dino — Sardinia and the House of Carignan — Switzerland's neutrality — The Netherlands — The German Confederation — Louis XVIII. at Ghent — The Congress, at Talleyrand's suggestion, denounces the usurper — The Powers rush to arms — Louis XVIII. admitted into the Alliance of Europe against Napoleon — Cor- respondence exchanged between Louis XVIII. and Talleyrand at the Con- gress— Text of the secret Treaty of Defensive Alliance, concluded January 3, 181 5, between Austria, France, and Great Britain — Napoleon acquaints the Czar Alexander with the text of the above-mentioned Treaty — Interview between Alexander and Prince Metternich — Napoleon's aims defeated — In- dulgence of the Czar for Prince Metternich — The Czar Alexander incensed at Talleyrand's duplicity . . . Pages 198-392
ILLUSTRATIONS
Talleyrand — Prince de Benevento, Vice Grand Elector of the
Empire, from the painting by Pnid'hon . , . F^-antispiece
Charles Maurice Talleyrand . Facing page 160
Charles Maurice Talleyrand, from an early portrait. (Reprinted
by the courtesy of the Cosmopolitan Magazine) . . Facing page 288
MEMOIRS
OF THE
PRINCE DE TALLEYRAND.
PART VI.
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS— HIS STRUGGLE WITH PIUS VIL
1809 — 1813.
Talleyrand marries his nephew with the daughter of the Duchess of Courland — Napoleon's marriage with the Archduchess Marie-Louise — Napoleon's dream of universal domination — His brothers and his sisters' husbands — Why he gave them thrones — Joseph in Naples — Murat succeeds him — Murat endeavours to shake off the yoke of Napoleon — Murat's ambition — Napoleon and his brother Louis — Westphalia — King Jdr&me and the Germans — Joseph in Spain — Lord Wellington — The French driven from Spain — Blunder of Napoleon in Spain — Differences between Napoleon and the Pope — Persecution of Pius VII. — Negotiations between the First Consul and Pius VII. — Some bishops decline to resign their sees — The Concordat — La petUe Eglise — Home regulations concerning Public Worship — Cardinal Caprara — Coronation of Napoleon — Pius VII. at Paris — Napoleon crowned King of Italy at Milan — Refusal of the Pope to recognize Joseph as King of Naples — Occupation of Rome by General Miollis — Annexation of the legations of Urbino, Ancona, Macerata, and Camerino — Imprisonment of several cardinals— Disarming of the Papal guards — Annexation of the Papal States to France— Protest of Pius VII.— The bull of excom- munication—Arrest of the Pope— The King of Rome— Meeting of an ecclesiastical commission — Had the Pope any right to refuse the buU of institution to the French bishops .' — Had the French Government infringed the clauses of the Concordat by invading Rome ? — The Church in Germany and Italy — Measures to be taken to thwart the effect of the bull of excommunication — Considerations on the Council^Cardinal VOL. II. B
2 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
Maury and the Pope's brief — Inconsistency of Pius VII. — Arrest of Abbd d'Astros — Cardinal di Pietro — Severe measures against the Pope — Sxunmoning of a second ecclesiastical commission — Can bishops accord dispensations ? — Are papal bulls indispensable to obtain the canonical institution? — Intervention of the Bishop of Nantes — Napoleon agrees to summon a council and to negotiate with the Pope — Pius VII. with- draws his bull of excommunication — The liberties of the Church of France — Pius VII. adheres to a modification of the Concordat, with regard to the canonical institution of bishops — Misgivings of the Pope concerning the meeting of a council — Inutility of the latter — Napoleon insists on the meeting of the Council — Opening of the Council — The bishops at St. Cloud — Napoleon takes Cardinal Fesch to task — Dignified attitude of the latter — Napoleon flies into a ■passion— Je suis Charlemagne — The Emperor's message to the Council — Address of the Council in reply — Napoleon declines to receive it — The Council declares its incompetence to decide the question pending between Napoleon and the Pope — Wrath of the Emperor on hearing this — Napoleon's projects defeated by the Council — The Council dissolved by imperial decree — Imprisonment of three bishops — Re-assembling of the Council — The imperial decree adopted and sent to the Pope for his approval — Brief of Pius VII. approv- ing the decree — Inconsistency of Napoleon — Returns the Pope's brief — Transfer of the Pope to Fontainebleau — Interview between Napoleon and Pius VII. — Signature of a new compact, which was not to be divulged — • Breach of faith of Napoleon — Retractation of the Pope — Napoleon vainly tries to renew the negotiations — Return of Pius VII. to Rome — Political blunders of the Emperor in the course of the negotiations with the Pope.
On leaving a position long stirred by the illusions and excitement of power, I had to think of creating one which, though affording me needed rest, might offer interesting and pleasant occupations. Home-life alone can replace all chimera ; but, at the time of which I speak, home-life, sweet and calm, existed for but very few people. Napoleon did not allow any one to grow fond of it ; he believed that, to serve him, people should have no proper home. Carried away by the rapidity of events, by ambition, by the interest of each day ; placed in that mist of war and of political activity which hovered over all Europe, everybody was prevented from paying any attention to his own situation ; public life held too much room in his mind to allow of his giving a single thought to private life. People went home but accidentally, because it was necessary to take rest somewhere ; but no one was prepared to make his home an habitual abiding-place.
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 3
I was, like anybody else, placed in that position which explains the indifference everybody displayed in all the acts of his life, and that I regret having displayed in several of my own. It was then that I sought to marry my nephew, Edmond de P^rigord.^ It was important that the choice of the wife I should give him should not awaken the- susceptibility of Napoleon, who did not wish to have the destiny of a young man who bore one of the great names of France escape his jealous influence. He believed, that, a few years before, I had influenced the refusal of my niece, the Comtesse Just de Noailles,^ whom he had demanded from me for Eugene de Beauharnais, his adopted son. Whatever choice I might make for my nephew, I should still find the emperor dissatisfied. He would not have allowed me to choose in France, for he reserved for his devoted generals all the good matches found there. I bent my looks elsewhere. I had often, in Germany and Poland, heard much said of the Duchess of Courland.^ I knew that she was distinguished by the nobleness of her sentiments, by the elevation of her character and by the most amiable and brilliant qualities. The youngest of her daughters was then marriageable. This choice could but please Napoleon. It did not take away a match for his generals, who would have been refused, and it must even have flattered the vanity he displayed in trying to attract to France great foreign families. This vanity had, some time before, led him to have Marshal Earthier marry a princess of Bavaria. I resolved therefore to demand for my nephew the Princess Dorothee Courland, and in order that the Emperor Napoleon should not, by reflection or by caprice, withdraw an approbation once given, I solicited from the Emperor Alexander, particular friend of the Duchess of Courland, the favour of asking him- self the hand of her daughter for my nephew. I had the
1 Alexandre-Edmond de Talleyrand-Perif^ord, bom August 2, 1787, afterwards Due de Dino, and later, Due de Talleyrand-Perigord.
2 Fransoke de Talleyrand-Perigord, daughter of Archambauld Joseph, Comte, then Due de Talleyrand-Perigord, brother of the author. Born in 1785, she married in 1803 Just, Comte de Noailles, and later Due de Poix, who was ehamberlain of the emperor. She died in 1863.
3 Charlotte-Dorothee, Countess of Medem, widow of Pierre, last Duke of Courland and of Semi;ialle, bom Febraary 3, 1761, married November 6, 1779. Widowed January 13, 1800. Died August 20, 1821. „• j • 0.=
* Dorothee, Princess of Courland, bom August 20, 1793. Died in i!i62.
B 2
4 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
happiness of obtaining it, and the marriage took place at Frank- fort-on-Main, April 22, 1809.
While determining to no longer take part in anything done by Napoleon, I remained sufficiently acquainted with current affairs to be able to judge well of the general situation, to calculate what must be the date and veritable nature of the catastrophe which appeared inevitable, and to seek means for warding off from France the evils this must produce. All my antecedents, all my former relations with the influential men of the different courts, assured to me facilities for being informed of all that took place. But I must at the same time give to my manner of living an air of indifference and of inaction, which should not offer the least ground for the continual suspicions of Napoleon. I had the proof that one already ran risks by no longer serving him, for, on different occasions, he showed great animosity towards me, and several times publicly gave way to violent temper. This did not annoy me, for fear has never entered my nature ; and I might even say that the hatred he manifested against me was more harmful to him than to me. If it were not for anticipating in the order of time, I would say 'that this hatred maintained me in my independence and decided me to refuse the portfolio of Foreign Affairs, which he offered me later with much persistence. But at the time this offer was made to me, I already regarded his fine 7-6le as finished, for he no longer seemed to apply himself to anything but destroying the good he had done. There was no longer any possible trans- action for him with the interests of Europe. He had outraged at one and the same time kings and nations.
Whatever need people in France felt of deluding themselves, they were forced to recognize in the continental blockade, in the natural although dissimulated irritation of the deeply-wounded foreign cabinets, in the sufferings of industry bound by the pro- hibitive system, the impossibility for a state of things which offered no guarantee of tranquillity for the future to endure. Each victory, that of Wagram even, was only an obstacle the more to the strengthening of the emperor, and the hand of an archduchess which he obtained soon after, was only a sacrifice made by Austria to the necessities of the moment. Napoleon
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 5
might well attempt to represent his divorce as a duty he fulfilled solely to assure the stability of the Empire ; no one was deceived, and it was plainly seen that, in marrying the archduchess, he only sought one more satisfaction for his vanity.
The details of the council where the emperor put in delibera- tion the choice of his new empress are not without a certain historic interest ; I will give them a place here. For a long time Napoleon had caused it to be circulated in his court and in public that the Empress Josephine could not have any more children, and that Joseph Bonaparte, his brother, who had neither glory nor intellect, was incapable of succeeding him. This was circulated abroad, and from there was brought back to France. Fouche took care to spread these reports by his police ; the Due de Bassano instructed in the same manner the literary men : Berthier took the military in hand ; as has been seen at the interview at Erfurt, the Emperor Napoleon unbosomed himself in that respect to the Emperor Alexander ; finally all was ready, when in the month of January, 18 10, the emperor summoned a council extraordinary, composed of great dignitaries, ministers, the Grand Master of Public Instruction, and two or three other non-military eminent personages. The number and quality of the persons who composed this council, the silence observed as to the object of the meeting, the silence still lasting for some minute seven in the hall of assembly, all proclaimed the import- ance of what was going to take place.
The emperor, with a certain embarrassment and an emotion which appeared to me sincere, spoke mainly in these terms : —
" I have not renounced without regret, assuredly, an union which shed so much sweetness over my domestic life. If, to satisfy the hopes that the Empire places in the new ties that I must contract, I consulted only my personal feeling, it is from the midst of the young pupils of the Legion of Honour, among the daughters of the brave men of France, that I would choose a companion, and I would give to the French for empress the one whose qualities and virtues would render her most worthy of the throne. But it is necessary to make concessions to the customs of the times one lives in, to the usages of other States, and above all to the propriety which policy makes it a
6 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
duty to observe. Some sovereigns have desired the aUiance of my relations, and I believe there is now not one to whom I could not with confidence offer my personal alliance. Three reigning families could give an empress to France ; those of Russia, Austria, and Saxony. I have summoned you in order to examine with you which of these three alliances is that to which, in the interest of the Empire, preference should be given."
This discourse was followed by a long silence which the emperor broke by these words : " Monsieur the Arch-Chancellor, what is your opinion .-' "
Cambaceres, who appeared to me to have prepared what he was going to say, had raked up from his recollections as member of the committee of public safety, that Austria was and always would be our enemy. After having developed this idea at some length, supporting it by many facts and precedents, he finished by expressing the wish that the emperor should marry a grand- duchess of Russia.
Lebrun,! putting aside policy, employed plainly all the motives drawn from habits, education, and simplicity, to give the preference to the court of Saxony, and voted for that alliance. Murat and Fouch6 thought the revolutionary interests more in safety by a Russian alliance ; it appears that both found themselves more at ease with the descendants of the Czars than with those of Rudolph of Hapsburg.
My turn came ; there I was in my element ; I discharged my task tolerably well. I was able to sustain by excellent reasons that an Austrian alliance would be preferable for France. My secret motive was that the security of Austria depended on the resolution the emperor was going to take, but that was not the place to say it. After having briefly set forth the advantages and the inconveniences of a Russian marriage and of an Austrian
1 Charles Lebran, bom in 1739, was in 1768 revenue officer, and inspector-general of the royal domain. He was the friend and devoted assistant of Chancellor Maupeou. He was dismissed in 1774. Deputy of the Third at the States-General, then adminis- trator of the department of Seine-et-Oise, he was arrested in 1794, and not released until after the 9th Thermidor. He was named deputy to the Council of the Elders in 1796. After the l8th Brumaire, he became Third Consul, arch-treasurer in 1804, Prince and Due de Plaisance in 1808, lieutenant of the emperor in Holland in 1810. In 1814, he was appointed Royal Commissioner at Caen and peer of France. During the Hundred Days, he accepted both the imperial peerage and the functions of Grand Master of the University. He died in 1824.
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 7
marriage, I gave my voice for the latter. I addressed myself to the emperor, and as a Frenchman demanding of him that an Austrian princess might appear in our midst, in order to absolve France in the eyes of Europe and in her own eyes, of a crime that was not her own, and which belonged entirely to a faction. The term "European reconciliation" that I employed several times, pleased several members of the council, who had had enough of war. In spite of some objections the emperor made to me, I saw well that my advice suited him.
M. Mollien ^ spoke after me, and sustained the same opinion with the shrewd and brilliant mind that distinguished him.
The emperor, after having heard every one, thanked the council, said that the sitting was closed, and retired. On the same evening, he sent a messenger to Vienna, and at the end of a few days, the French ambassador wrote that the Emperor Francis granted the hand of his daughter, the Archduchess Marie-Louise to the Emperor Napoleon.
To connect this union to the glory of a conquest made by his army. Napoleon sent the Prince de Wagram (Berthier) to wed the Archduchess by proxy, and gave to the Mar^chale Lannes, Duchesse de Montebello (her husband had been killed at Wagram) ^ the place of lady of honour. As it would not do to omit the oddities of these times, I must call attention to the fact that, at the moment when the cannon announced to Paris the betrothal at Vienna, the letters from the French ambassador brought the news that the last treaty with Austria was faithfully executed, and that the cannon were blowing up the fortifications of Vienna. This remark shows with what strict exactness Napoleon treated his new father-in-law, and proves well that peace was then for him only a truce employed in preparing new conquests. Thus all nations were fretting; all the sovereigns were uneasy and anxious. Everywhere Napoleon caused the growth of hatred, and invented difficulties, which, in the long
1 Comte Mollien, born at Rouen in 1 758, was first clerk of the comptroller-general in 1789. He was arrested in 1794 as an accomplice oiXhafermiers-ghiSraux, but was saved by the 9th Thermidor. On the l8th Brumaire, he became Director of the Sinking Fund, Counsellor of State in 1804, Minister of the Treasury in 1806 : he remained at this post until 1814, and resumed it during the Hundred Days. He was created a peer of France in 1819. He died in 1850.
Marshal Lannes was killed at Esling, and not at Wagram.
8 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
run, must become insurmountable. And, as if Europe did not furnish him enough, he created himself new ones, by authorizing" the ambitions of his own family. The fatal word that he had uttered one day, that before his death his dynasty would be the most ancient in Europe, made him distribute to his brothers and to the husbands of his sisters the thrones and principalities that victory and perfidy put into his hands. It was thus he disposed of Naples, Westphalia, Holland, Spain, Lucca, even Sweden, seeing that it was the desire to please him that had caused Bemadotte to be elected Prince Royal of Sweden.
A puerile vanity urged him on that path which offered so many dangers. For, either these newly-created sovereigns re- mained in his great policy, and became its satellites, and then it was impossible for them to take root in the country confided to them ; or they must reject it more quickly than Philippe V. had discarded that of Louis XIV. The inevitable divergence existing between people soon alters the family ties of sovereigns. Thus each of these new creations became a principle of disso- lution in the fortune of Napoleon. It is found everywhere in the last years of his reign. When Napoleon gave a crown, he desired that the new king should remain bound to the system of this universal domination, of this grand Empire of which I have already spoken. The one, on the contrary, who mounted the throne, had no sooner seized the sceptre, than he wished for undivided power, and resisted with more or less audacity the hand which sought to subject him. Each of these improvised princes believed himself placed on a level with the most ancient sovereigns of Europe, by the sole fact of a decree and a solemn entry into his capital occupied by a corps of the French army. The vanity which led to show independence made him a more dangerous obstacle to the projects of Napoleon than would have been a natural enemy. Let us follow them a moment in their royal career.
The kingdom of Naples, with which I will begin, had been conferred, these were then the official terms, March 30, 1 806, upon Joseph Bonaparte, the eldest brother of the emperor. It was desired to give to his entry into this kingdom the air of a con- quest, but the fact is, he must have read with some astonishment
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 9
in the Momteur the recital of the so-called resistance with which he met.
At the end of four months the new king was already in a quarrel with his brother. Joseph resided but a short time at Naples ; circumstances led him soon to Spain. Power, during his sojourn at Naples, had been for him only a means of amuse- ment ; and, as if he had been the fifteenth of his race, he looked on to see how his ministers would extricate themselves, according to the expression of Louis XV., from the daily embarrassments of the government. On the throne he sought only the sweet- ness of private life and facile libertinage which great names rendered brilliant.
To Joseph succeeded Murat, whose grand duchy of Berg no longer contented him. He had no sooner set foot beyond the Alps, than his imagination presented to him already the whole of Italy as being his one day. By the treaty which secured to him the crown of Naples, he was bound to maintain the constitution given by his predecessor, Joseph. But as this constitution was not yet executed except in its administrative part, he left to one side the change in the civil and criminal laws that he had promised to make, and did not show himself in any haste to terminate the financial organization of the country. In order to facilitate the receipts and increase the revenues, he commenced to abolish all the feudal rights. Incited by his minister Lerlo,^ he desired that this operation, which he only considered from the fiscal side, should be immediately carried out. And the commission instituted to this effect pronounced on all the litigations existing between the lords and the parishes in a manner to favour the parish only ; and this was being done at the very time when Napoleon was seeking to found again an aristocracy in France and to create entailed estates. The result of this operation was not only to despoil the Neapolitan barons of all the feudal rights and of all the payments in kind to which
' Giuseppe, Count Lerlo, bom in 1759 at Naples, was Director of the Finances in 1798. In 1806, he accompanied King Ferdinand to Palermo, but joined Murat in 1809, became Counsellor of State, Minister of Justice and of Worship, and Minister of the Interior. In 1815, he took refuge in Rome, returned to Naples in 1820, was appointed Minister of the Interior, but was obliged to retire the same year. He died in 1828.
10 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
they were entitled, but also to take from them, to the profit of the parishes, the greater part of their lands, which had been jointly held for several centuries.
This measure was very detrimental to the fortunes of the nobles, but it rendered very much easier the assessment of the tax, and made the latter more productive. Thus, in the space of five years the Neapolitan government raised its public revenues from forty-four millions of francs to more than eighty. Some real ameliorations in the administration, which were the result of the prosperity of the treasury, directed by the skilful hands of M. Agar, since created Comte de Mosbourg,^ appeased the first dis- content of the country, and prevented their reaching Napoleon, who besides, was disposed to indulgence for Murat. The latter was still so weak that the emperor felt flattered at being con- stantly reminded that Murat was also one of his creatures. He allowed a thousand improper, and sometimes, even very grave things, to pass unnoticed before making any reproaches to him. He was bound however to break forth, when Murat ordered that the French who, on the authority of Napoleon were at Naples, should take the oath of fidelity to him, and be naturalized in the country. All were indignant at this demand ; and Napoleon, forced to extremes, manifested his displeasure with his custom- ary violence. He gave orders for the French troops who were in that kingdom to be mustered in a camp a dozen leagues from Naples ; and from this camp he had it declared that every French citizen was by right a citizen of the kingdom of Naples, because by the terms of the decree of its foundation, this king- dom formed a part of the Grand Empire.
Murat, who, in a moment of impetuosity, had allowed him- self to take so imprudent a step, persuaded himself that the emperor would never pardon him, and that there was no other course to follow than to seek safety in an increase of his power ; from that time his sole aim was to obtain means to invade all
^ Michel Agar, Comte de Mosbourg, bom iu 1771 near Cahors, was at first a barrister, and then professor in that city. In 1801, he entered the Legislative Body, became in 1806 Minister of Finances of Murat, his fellow-countryman, who had just been created Grand Due de Berg, and accompanied him in the same qualitv to Naples. He lived in retirement under the Restoration, was elected Deputy of Lot in 1830, and peer of France in 1837. He died in 1844.
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. ii
Italy. The annexation of Tuscany, Rome, Holland and the Hanseatic cities to the French Empire had already caused him much uneasiness. The employment, not defined, of this term Grand Empire, that he had just heard in the midst of his States, increased his perplexity, and he commenced to reveal his ulterior views.
The queen, who partook to a certain extent of the fears of Murat, was not however of the same opinion as he as to the manner of escaping the projects which might be planned by her brother. She believed that it was a poor way of preserving a rule but feebly established, to seek to extend it.
The arrival of Marshal P^rignon,^ at Naples to take the government of the city, justified, in the eyes of Murat, the extremities to which he might be carried. And soon, the events of Europe, in reviving his hopes of ambition and of vengeance, gave more activity to his combinations. In his twofold idea of escaping French influence and extending his domination in Italy, he only thought of increasing his army and of seeking to open negotiations with Austria, which was more and more affrighted at the invading policy of the French government. The queen took it upon herself to write to Prince Metternich, over whom she believed she still retained some influence, and whose discretion she had tested. The king, on the other hand, conducted secretly a negotiation with the English authorities, and particularly with Lord William Bentinck," who was in Sicily. The interests of commerce were the pretext of it. Murat, believing he had grounds for complaint against Napoleon and for throwing upon him the odium of the prohibitions, indicated
■■ Dominique, Comte, then Marquis Perignon, was an officer under the old rigime, deputy to the Legislative Assembly, then commander of a legion of the army of the Pyrenees, he succeeded Dugommier as commander-in-chief. Member of the council of the Five Hundred in 179S, ambassador at Madrid in 1796, he was after- wards placed at the head of a corps of the army of Italy, but was wounded and taken prisoner at Novi. He entered the senate in 1801, was appointed marshal of France in 1804, Governor of Parma and of Plaisance, and finally commander-in-chief of the armies of the kingdom of Naples. He was created peer of France in 1814, and died in 1818.
3 Lord William Cavendish Bentinck (1774-1839), son of the Duke of Portland, entered the army, became Governor of Madras in 1803, and major-general in 1808. In this capacity he made the campaigns of Portugal and Spain. In 181 1, he was appointed commander-in-chief of the English troops in Sicily. In 1827, Bentinck was named Governor of Bengal, then Governor-General of India. He was recalled in 1835.
12 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
his disposition to separate from him ; but time for rupture had not yet come. The Russian campaign had just opened, and Murat could not refuse to go there with his contingent, as to the number of which, he, as well as the other allies of the emperor, was not allowed to decide. The queen remained in charge of the government. A combination of reason, delicacy and gallantry gave her more influence and power than her hus- band had ever had. While Murat was fighting for and serving in person, the French cause, all his policy was then directed on a contrary side. This double part rather pleased him ; on one side he fulfilled his duty towards France and the emperor ; and, on the other, he believed he was acting as a king, as an independent prince called to the highest destiny.
When Austria declared against France, and the battle of Leipzig had marked the limit of the fortune of Napoleon, Murat hurried to Naples, and from that moment he used all his endeavours to render his defection useful, for the support of his crown, and to enter the great European league. He found it very easy ; the desire of all the Allied Powers to isolate Napoleon, and the refusal of Eugene de Beauharnais to enter this combina- tion, rendered the defection of Murat very useful to the united powers. Napoleon, informed of all that was passing, was not enlightened in these circumstances either by his genius or by his counsellors. He should, in his interest, have recalled Eugene de Beauharnais to Lyons, with all that remained of the French troops, and have abandoned Italy to the ambitious dreams of Murat. It was the only means left for preventing his junction with the Allied Powers, and to provoke, in Italy, a national rising which in this campaign would have been of great importance to Napoleon. But his eyes were blind, and the treason was consummated at the moment when he believed it useful to speak still of the fidelity of him who, for several months already, had signed his treaty with Austria. The intrigues of Murat for arriving at a general domination in Italy continued none the less ; one could follow the exact traces of them, until they became, at the Congress of Vienna, a motive of rupture with him on the part of the Powers. His ruin was the result of his intrigues.
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 13
My object was to point out here as a fact that there was in the power of Napoleon, up to the point it had now reached, and in his political creations, a radical defect, which, it appeared to me, must injure his consolidation and even prepare his fall. Napoleon delighted in annoying, humiliating, tormenting those whom he had elevated ; they, placed in a perpetual state of mistrust and irritation, worked secretly to injure the power which had created them, and that they already regarded as their principal enemy.
Under one form or another, the same principle of destruction of which I have just given details to show the condition of affairs at Naples, is found in all the establishments of the same kind that Napoleon had made.
In Holland, he had begun by placing the power, which was hitherto in the hands of a revocable directory, into those of a president. He had decided Count Schimmelpenninck,^ to accept the sovereign power under the title of Grand Pensioner. Schimmelpenninck was a man of too much sense to believe that the part he was called upon to play could be anything but temporary. But the exactions of the French agents, and the dilapidations of all kinds which were the result, naturally irritated public opinion in Holland. Schimmel- penninck had hoped to be of real service to his country by the momentary credit which was to be the price of his deference for Napoleon, and to obtain by it better conditions for Holland. His illusion in this respect could not be of long duration. The emperor, -vfrho always wished to give the appearance of a national movement to the crises which he brought on for the purpose of annihilating the independence of the conquered countries, encouraged secretly, from the beginning of the acces- sion of Schimmelpenninck, the complaints of the ancient privi- leged orders, of the magistracy of the cities, and of the nobility
^ Roger Jean, Count Schimmelpennick, bom in 1761, a Dutch statesman, was associated with the revolutionary movements which disturbed Holland in 1795. He was appointed ambassador at Paris in 1798, then at London in 1802. In 1805, the Dutch Constitution having been transformed at the instigation of Napoleon, he had to accept the charge of Grand Pensioner. Under the reign of Louis Bonaparte, Schimmelpennick lived in retirement. After the union of Holland with France, he was appointed senator. He resigned in 1814, and again become a Hollander, he was a member of the first Chamber of the States-General. He died in 1825.
14 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
of Holland against the Pensioner, who had come out of the middle-class ; he sought, at the same time, to rouse the revo- lutionary spirit of the people, in order to incite them to rise against the authority that the new order of things accorded to a single man. But the moderation, the wisdom of the Grand Pensioner, the profound good sense of the Hollanders, and the conviction that all attempt at rising would lead imme- diately to the peremptory intervention of France, decided the nation to submit quietly to its new government.
The emperor, who saw that his underhanded dealings did not lead to the end he had purposed, and that it had no effect upon the country, followed another plan. He got Admiral VerhuelP to inform Schimmelpenninck himself, and several prominent persons of the country, that this state of things could not last, and that it was indispensable for Holland to form with France a more intimate union, by demanding for sovereign a French prince. Some explanations made it clear to Napoleon that union with France was what the country dreaded most, and he skilfully made use of this disposition to make them almost desire one of his brothers. He not only promised to preserve the integrity of the territory, but he added to it Ost-Frise, and held out to the notable families hopes of all kinds. Schimmel- penninck was in a state of painful irresolution ; he neither dared to consult the nation nor to consent to what was exacted. The step of naming a deputation to go to Paris, and judge there upon the spot just how far resistance might go, appeared to him what was most prudent and wise to do. He composed this deputation of MM. Goldberg, Gogel,^ Six and Van Styrum. Their instructions, like those of Admiral Verhuell, were to
1 Charles-Henri Verhuell, Count of Sevenaar, born in 1764, entered the navy in 1779. Rear-Admiral in 1S03, he commanded the fleet destined to act against England, and was named Minister of Marine of Holland. In 1806, he presided over the commission charged to offer the crown of Holland to Louis Bonaparte. He became marshal and ambassador at Paris in 1807. In iSii, after the annexation of Holland to France, he entered the Legislative Body ; he commanded the armies of the Texel and of the Helder in 1813, and remained faithful to the emperor even to the last minute. Naturalized Frenchman in 1814, he was created peer of France in 1819, and died in 1855.
2 Alexander Gogel, born in 1765, a Dutch manufacturer and statesman. He was Minister of Finances of the Batavian Republic. He was also minister of Kins; Louis, and became member of the Council of State of France, after the union of Holland with the Empire. He died in 1821.
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. ij,
demur, under any pretext, to the union, and to dismiss all pro- positions tending to establish a monarchy, by sustaining that the forms of it were opposed to the customs and habits of the country.
The emperor knew all that as well as the Dutch deputies ; but his will was so positive, his vanity was so engaged, that no consideration, of whatever kind it might be, could prevent these unhappy negotiators from being led to demand formally that Louis Bonaparte should accept the crown of Holland. Louis on his side was constrained to accept it ; thus they erected a kingdom in Holland. From such an order of things difficulties could not fail to crop up for Napoleon. And so they did soon, in endless numbers.
Prince Louis, on arriving at the Hague, received a very cold greeting. He remained there at first but a short time ; called by the declaration of war against Prussia, to march at the head of the Dutch army into Westphalia, he commenced the siege of Hameln, when this fortress was included in the capitulation of Magdeburg ; his campaign finished there. Having returned to Amsterdam, he devoted himself to give Holland an inde- pendent existence ; hence arose interminable discussions between the two brothers. A treaty very hard for Holland was the result.
The emperor had it drawn up in a manner to offend his brother enough to decide him to abdicate. But the irritation of Louis Bonaparte carried him to extremities of another kind. He submitted in appearance, signed what was desired, and immediately opened negotiations with the courts of St. Peters- burg and of London. His overtures to those two courts how- ever failed. Then, decided that he was not to carry out the treaty he had signed with his brother, he prepared for open resistance; he excited all Holland to war, had fortifications raised against France, and would not cede even to the force that Napoleon was obliged to employ against him. When he saw his kingdom invaded by the army commanded by Marshal Oudinot, he furtively left the country, and retired to I do not know what corner of Germany, bequeathing to Holland all the hatred he bore his brother.^
1 Napoleon had only placed his brother on the throne of Holland to bind that
l6 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
The union of this country to France was the result of his departure. The emperor enlarged his empire by that, but diminished his forces ; for he had to employ constantly a portion of his army to assure himself of the fidelity of his new subjects. The latter were in much greater fear of the rigorous levies of the conscription, and of the guards of honour, than they were flattered to see the fort of Helder become one of the maritime bulwarks of the French Empire, and the Zuyder Zee furnish a great school of navigation where there might be exercised the crews of the fleets that France was building at Antwerp. The different governments through which Napoleon made Holland pass completely destroyed the confidence of the people, and made them detest the name of Frenchman ; but the greatest difficulties that he had to experience in that country arose, as has just been seen, there as elsewhere, from his own creatures, from his own family.
The aggregation of twenty little states, erected by decree into the Kingdom of Westphalia, in favour of Joseph Bonaparte his brother, brought new embarrassments to his ambition. This kingdom, whose population was about two millions of inhabitants, comprised the whole of the states of the Elector of Hesse-Cassel. It must be remembered that in Hesse the will of the sovereign replaced very nearly all institutions, and that the people, who were not over-burdened with taxes, did not yet wish for any other mode of government.
Jerome, a short time after his nomination (this was the term
country to the continental system. His task was difficult, for the interests and sympathies of the Hollanders reconciled them more to England, while the policy of Napoleon ruined them. King Louis did not wish to, or could not, carry out the in- tentions of the emperor in his kingdom, and allowed English smuggling to organize on his sea-hoard. Napoleon complained bitterly, and neglected nothing to constrain his brother to enter into his views. By the treaty of November II, 1807, he took away from him Flushing, one of the best ports of Holland, in exchange for some enlargements of no consequence. The situation remaining always the same, he went still further, and announced to the Legislative Body that the exigencies of his policy might force him to annex Holland (Speech of December 3, 1809). Nevertheless, this extreme measure was repugnant to him : he attempted to avoid it by signing with King Louis a second treaty (March 16, 1810), by which the latter ceded to him Zealand . and Dutch Brabant ; at the same time, it was stipulated that the coasts of Holland should be guarded by French customs officers assisted by a body of troops. Louis came to Paris to sign this treaty, but, returning to his States, he avoided applying it. Napoleon soon sent twenty thousand men into Holland. The king, for an instant, had the thought of resisting, but no one having wished to follow him, he abdicated and took refuge abroad. Holland was united to the Empire by a decree dated July I, 1810.
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 17
■which the emperor desired to have used), went to Cassel, the. capital of his States. His brother had given him a kind of regency, composed of M. Beugnot,i a man of much intelligence, and of MM. Simeon ^ and Jolivet,* whose directions he was to follow.
Their portfolios were full of organic decrees of all kinds. They had at first brought from Paris with them a constitution ; afterwards they were to adapt to it a judiciary, a military, and a financial system. Their first operation was to divide the terri- tory, and to change thus in a moment without the aid of revolutionary spirit, all the traditions, all the customs and all the relations that time had established. They then created prefectures sub-prefectures, and appointed mayors everywhere. They thus transferred into Germany all the machinery of French organization, and pretended to have set it in motion. Their task being over, M. Beugnot and M. JoUivet returned to France. Jerome Bonaparte hastened to facilitate their going. He retained M. Simeon as his Minister of Justice, and then he
'Jacques Claude, Comte Beugnot, bom in 1761, advocate to the /"ar/c/Kire^ in 1 782, frocureur- syndic for the department of the Aube in 1 790, deputy to the Legis- lative Assembly in 1791. He was arrested in 1793, but v^as set free by the 9th Thermidor. After the l8th Brumaire, he V9as named Prefect of the Lower Seine, and Councillor of State in 1806. In 1807, he was one of the administrators of the Kingdom of Westphalia ; Imperial Commissioner and Minister of Finances of the Grand Duchy of Berg in 1800. In 1814, he was named by the government Provisory Commissioner of the Interior, then Director-General of the Police. He passed from that into the navy. The second Restoration made him Director- General of Post Offices, Minister of State, and Member of the Privy Council. He was elected Deputy of the Mame. He died in 1835.
2 Joseph Jerome, Comte Simeon, bom at Aix in 1749, was Professor of Law in that city in 1 789. In 1 792, he was one of the leaders of the federalist movement pro- voked in the south by the Girondists. He was obliged to flee in 1793, returned to France in 1 795, entered the Council of the Five Hundred, and became its president. Proscribed at the 1 8th Fructidor, he was confined on the island of Oleron until the l8th Brumaire. He was elected Member of the Tribunate of 1800, Coun- cillor of State in 1804, Minister of the Interior and of Justice, and President of the Council of State in Westphalia, Minister of Westphalia at Berlin, and to the Con- federation of the Rhine. In 1814, he became Prefect of the North. Under the Second Restoration he was Counsellor of State (1815), Under Secretary of State of the Department of Justice, peer of France, Minister of State and Member of the Privy Council (1821). He was President of the Court of Accounts under the monarchy of July, and died in 1842.
' Jean-Baptiste, Comte Jolivet, bom in 1754, was a barrister at Melun in 1789. Administrator of the department of Seine-et-Marne, then Deputy to the Legislative Assembly, he sided with the constitutional party, was arrested under the Terror, and only recovered his freedom after the 9th Thermidor. He became Curator-General of Mortgages in 1795, Councillor of State after the l8lh Brumaire. Liquidator- General of the debt of the Departments of the left bank of the Rhine and Minister of Finances of Westphalia (1807). He retired in 1815, and died in 1818.
VOL. II. C
1 8 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
reigned alone, that is to say he had a court and a budget, or rather some women and some money.
The court formed spontaneously ; but the budget, raised to the point where the reserves for Napoleon which were composed of half the freehold wealth, forced them to carry it, was for the first years very difficult to establish. This dynasty commenced where the others finished. They were reduced to expedients from the second year of the reign. They did not seek these expedients in economies that might be made, but in the creation of new taxes. It became necessary, instead of thirty- seven millions of revenue, which would have been sufficient to furnish the necessary expenses of the state, to find more than fifty. For that, they had recourse to a means which displeases most people ; they issued a forced loan, which, according to the ordinary result of this kind of tax, caused many exactions and was not half covered. From thirty-seven millions the needs and expenses eventually rose to sixty. The court of Cassel had the pretension to rival the splendour of that of the Tuileries. The young sovereign so gave way to all his inclinations, that I have heard it said by the grave and truthful M. Reinhard,^ then minister of France at Cassel, that, with the exception of three or four women respectable by their age, there was scarcely one at the palace over the fidelity of whom His Majesty had not acquired some rights. Great though was the vigilance of the beautiful Frau von Truchsess and of Madame de la Fl^che, who had also to watch over the doings of the young Prince of Wiirtemberg. ^
The luxury of the court, its disorders, and the uneasy state of the country caused the detestation of France and of the
^ Charles-Frederic, Comte Reinhard, born in 1761, entered diplomacy as First Secretary at London in 1791. It was there he made the acquaintance of M. de Talleyrand. He went to Naples in 1793, became ; in 1794, head of a section of the department of Foreign Affairs. In 1795, he was appointed Minister Plenipotentiary in the Hanseatic cities and afterwards in Tuscany (1798). In July, 1799, he succeeded Talleyrand as Minister of Foreign Affairs, then was named successively minister to Helvetia (1800), at Milan (1801), to Saxony (1802), to Moldavia (1805), to Westphalia (1805-1814). In 1815, he entered the Council of State, was afterwards minister to the German Confederation (1815-1829). The Government of July appointed him minister at Dresden (1830), and peer of France (1832), He died in 1837. M. de Talleyrand pronounced his eulogy at the Academy of Moral and Political Sciences.
" The Prince Royal of Wiirtemberg, having quarrelled with the l^ing, his father, had taken refuge at that time with his brother-in-law Jerome Bonaparte, married to the Princess Catherine of Wiirtemberg.
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 19
emperor, to whom all was attributed, and if this uneasiness did not produce an immediate outbreak, it was because the natural resignation of the Germans was increased by the terror caused by the close alliance of the King of Westphalia with the colossus of French power. How must the grave universities of Gottingen and Halle, of which J^rdme was sovereign, have looked upon this unbridled luxury, this disorder, so foreign to the simplicity, the decency and the good sense for which this part of Germany was noted ? So, when in 1 8 1 3, the Russian troops entered Westphalia, Jerome's subjects regarded that moment as that of their deliverance. And yet the country fell again under the domination of that Elector of Hesse, who, thirty years before, sold his soldiers to England.^
The luxury of these courts founded by Napoleon, we may remark here, was absurd. The luxury of Bonaparte was neither German nor French ; it was a mixture, a species of learned luxury ; it was taken from every place. It had some of the gravity of that of Austria, something European and Asiatic drawn from St. Petersburg. It paraded some of the mantles taken from the Caesars at Rome ; but, in return, it showed very little of the ancient court of France where dress concealed so happily magnificence, under the spell of all the arts of taste. That which this kind of luxury set off above all, was the absolute lack of propriety ; and, in France, when propriety is too much lacking, mockery is near at hand.
This Bonaparte family, which arose from an obscure island, hardly French, where its members lived in a state of parsimony, having as head a man of genus, whose elevation was due to a military glory acquired as the leader of republican armies, them- selves the issue of a democracy in ebullition, ought indeed to have discarded the former luxury, and have adopted, even for the frivolous side of life, an entirely new route. Would it not have been more imposing by displaying a noble simplicity which would have inspired confidence in its strength and in its duration.? Instead of that, the Bonapartes were mistaken enough to
1 Willkm IX., Landgrave of Hesse-Cassel, Elector in 1803, despoiled of his states in 1806. He recovered his possessions in 1814. He died in 1821.
C 2
20 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
believe that, to imitate in a puerile manner the kings whose thrones they had taken, was one way of succeeding them.
I wish to avoid all that has a libellous appearance, and I have besides no need of citing proper names to prove that, by their morals also, these new dynasties have injured the moral power of the Emperor Napoleon. The morals of a people in times of trouble are often bad ; but even when the mob has all sorts of vices, its morality is severe. " Men," said Montesquieu, "corrupt in detail, are very honest men in the main." And these honest people are they who pronounce upon kings and queens. When their judgment is a blame, it is very difficult for a power, above all a new one, not to be shaken by it.
Spanish pride did not allow that great and generous people to concentrate its hatred so long as that of Westphalia had done. The perfidy of Napoleon gave it birth, and Joseph from his arrival in Spain fed it each day. He was persuaded that to speak ill of his brother, was to separate from him ; and that to separate from his brother was to take root in Spain. Hence he adopted a conduct and a language always in strict opposition to the will of the emperor. He never ceased saying that Napoleon despised the Spaniards. He spoke of the army that attacked Spain as being the refuse of the French army. He related all that could most injure his brother. He even went so far as to reveal the shameful secrets of his family, and that some- times in full council. " My brother is acquainted with only one government, " said he, " and that is a government of iron ; to accomplish that all means are good to him ; " and he stupidly added, " I am the only honest man in my family, and if the Spaniards wished to rally around me, they would soon learn to fear nothing from France." The emperor, on his side, spoke with the same impropriety of Joseph ; he covered him with scorn, and that also before the Spaniards, who, led away by their own exasperation, ended by believing them both, when they spoke of one another. The irritation of Napoleon against his brother made him act always on the first impulse in the affairs of Spain, and made him commit, incessantly, grave mistakes. The two brothers counteracted each other in all their opera- tions ; it was never possible for them to agree together upon
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 21
any plan of political action, any financial plan, or military arrangement.
It was important to establish a supreme command, to have an invading army and an army of operations, to agree as to means of nourishing, clothing, and paying his troops. All that could lead to this result failed successively, either through Napoleon's consideration for his generals, on whom he was known to rely, and who ever alleged, often in their personal interest, this trite pretext : the safety of the army I have the honour to command, demands such or such a thing ; or else, everything failed on account of the private policy of Joseph, which tended constantly, in opposition to his brother, to make all the expenses of the war fall upon France. The emperor, in order to avoid the obstacles that Joseph opposed constantly to the execution of his designs, ordered his generals to correspond directly with the Prince de Neufchatel, his major-general. They all did so, but without mutual agreement, solely enlightened by their interests ; in nearly all their correspondence, they desired the emperor to renounce his project of securing Spain there to establish a prince of his family, and to seek solely to parcel it out like Italy, and to distribute its principalities, duchies, and entailed estates, as rewards amongst his brave lieutenants. I have been told that the Due d'Albufera, ^ who was rather a wit, added that this would be going back to the times of the Moorish princes, vassals of the Caliph of the West.
What was going on in the quarters of the French generals was known week by week at Cadiz, and from there all over the kingdom ; and one can judge of the intensity that the fear of such prospects gave to the Spanish resistance. So, the French generals might conquer indeed, they always found new enemies before them, and there were no points really subdued, except those covered by French troops ; and even their communications were constantly cut off by guerrillas.
1 Louis-Gabriel Suchet, bom at Lyons in 1772, enlisted in 1791, became general in 1796, and head of the staff of the army in Italy in 1799. He played a brilliant part in the wars of the Empire until 1808, when he was sent to Spain, where his gallant conduct won for him the staff of marshal of France, and subsequently the title of Due d'AIbufera (1812). He became peer of France in 1814, and died in 1826.
22 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
As for Joseph, he only accorded his favours to a few French- men discontented with the emperor, who had embraced his cause ; these new Castilians slipped into all the offices of the court, civil and military ; they had penetrated into the Council of State ; treated the Spaniards with insupportable haughtiness ; flattered the vanity of the king in every way, and never failed to revile his brother. The hatred for the emperor was manifested as much in the palace of the king as in the hall of the Junta at Cadiz.
What could be the fate of an enterprise where the leaders were in open opposition to each other, and where -means were enfeebled by the successive recall of troops already acclimatized, but who were wanted, perhaps against Austria, against Russia, and who were replaced by wretched recruits .'
The emperor having again met at Wagram the good fortune which, for a time, had abandoned him at Lobau, had persuaded himself that the submission of Spain would follow the peace he had dictated at Vienna ; but it was not so at all. This peace exercised no influence over the affairs of the Peninsula ; resist- ance had had time to organize, and it had done so everywhere. Napoleon believed then that he must make a great effort and he made it, but in a wrong sense. He started with a false idea ; he believed he would make a good bargain with the Spaniards by driving Lord Wellington from Portugal. Marshal Massena displayed wondrous ability in and brought enormous resources to bear on this operation, which proved fruitless, and the success of which would, in any case, have been of insignificant influence on the point at issue. It was the whole Spanish people which had risen — which was armed, and which must be subdued. And supposing even the emperor to have succeeded in destroying armed resistance, there would not have remianed for long years a secret opposition — the most difficult of all to destroy .'
Joseph, whom the other enterprises of his brother, left a little more to himself and to his own methods, recognized at last that it was the people who were his veritable enemy. He then did all to win them ; his ministers spread pamphlets
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 23
filled with promises of all kinds ; it was the liberty of the Spaniards that Joseph desired — it was a constitution adapted to the customs of the country, the project for which he was going to submit to the most enlightened men ; he announced great economies and a considerable reduction of the taxes. In his proclamations all the revolutionary methods were put in motion. The Cortes of Cadiz, in order to destroy the effect of it, immediately vied in liberalism with Joseph, and went farther on all points than he had done. It was nothing but decrees from Cadiz, suppressing the Inquisition ; suppressing feudal rights, privileges, fiscal obstacles between provinces, the
censure of the press, &c And from the midst of these
ruins they brought forth a constitution all democratic ; in which, however, in order not to frighten too much the friends of mon- archy, they had placed an hereditary king. But no king would have been able with dignity, nor even with safety, to occupy such a throne. The Cortes of Cadiz would have been more circumspect in re-establishing the fundamental laws of Spain, so skilfully undermined and finally destroyed by the house of Austria.
Through all these intrigues. Lord Wellington penetrated into Spain ; he captured Badajoz from the Due de Dalmatie,^ and Ciudad Rodrigo from the Due de Raguse.^ Once master of these two keys of Spain at the northern and southern ex- tremities of the frontier of Portugal, the English general skilfully deceived the Due de Dalmatie, in making him believe he wished to fall upon Andalusia, while he bore towards Valla- dolid on the Douro. The Due de Raguse, on his side, without waiting for a reinforcement of 15,000 men who were within reach permitted the Battle of Arapiles ^ to be fought, at the beginning of which he received a serious wound. The army, having lost its leader at the outset, was cruelly beaten. Lord Wellington who, following his successes, had advanced too far towards the north, did not hesitate, as a prudent man to take retrograde steps ; he re-entered Portugal, whence the famous disasters of the campaign of Russia, which obliged
^ Marshal Soult. ^ Marshal Marmont.
» Village of Spain, near Salamanca. The battle was July 21, l8l2.
24 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
Napoleon to recall to his side the best troops that remained in Spain, induced him to dart out again in 1812.
The first news of those disasters had increased the dis- order which too numerous and unsubmissive leaders fomented around Joseph ; the loss of the fatal battle of Vittoria ^ was the result. The Due de Dalmatie, sent with all speed to Spain, tried to reorganize the remants of the army. He made learned marches, but they filled no other purpose than to dispute with his skilful adversary the possession of the southern provinces of France. Thus terminated this great conquest of Spain, as badly conducted as it was badly conceived ; and I say not only conducted by Napoleon's generals, but by himself ; for he, also, had com- mitted grave military faults in Spain. If, at the end of 1808, after the capitulation of Madrid, instead of rushing in pursuit of an English corps which was hastening to embark at Corunna, and to which he did little harm, he had marched on Andalusia c^nd had there struck a great blow, he would have disorganized the resistance of the Spanish generals, who would have had no other resource than to retire into Portugal.
The emperor, having once lost sight of the true interests of France, gave himself up, with the irreflection and ardour of passion, to the ambition of still placing a member of his family on one of the first thrones of Europe, and, to accomplish that, he attacked Spain without shame, and without the least pretext to justify himself; this is what the sense of justice in nations never allows them to forgive. When one studies all the actions or rather all the impulses of Napoleon at this all-important period of his life, one is inclined to believe that he was carried away by a sort of fatality which blinded his high intellect.
If the emperor had only seen in Spain a ground on which he could force England to peace, where all the great political questions then pending in Europe have been decided, and each sovereign ensured the safe possession of his dominions, his enter- prise would not have been more justifiable ; but, at least, it would have been more consonant with the bold policy of conquerors. I have met a few persons who did not know him, and whose
1 City of Spain, chief place of the province of Alava. The battle was fought Jvme 21, 1813.
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 25
minds, like those of our old diplomatists, being inclined to judge of events theoretically, supposed he had this intention. And, the fact is that the Bayonne transaction being revocable at will, might be regarded as a sacrifice good to make if need were for the general pacification of Europe ; but from the month of April, 18 1 2, all makers of political combinations were obliged to dismiss this hypothesis ; for, at that time, Napoleon refused the overtures of the British Cabinet, which declared it did not see any insurmountable difficulty to arrange with him, on all the points in litigation, if he himself admitted first of all the restoration of Ferdinand VII. on the throne of Spain, and that of Victor Amadeus on the throne of Sardinia. If he had accepted those propositions, he could easily have derived enormous moral advantages from his sacrifices, and all the cabinets could have believed that he had only invaded Spain in the hope of securing a lasting peace for France and of strengthening his dynasty.
But, for a long time. Napoleon was but little concerned with the policy of France, hardly with his own. He did not think of maintaining, but only of extending. It seemed as if the idea of preserving never entered his mind, and as if it were opposed to his nature.
Nevertheless, that which he did not do in the proper time, he was forced to do when it was too late, and without any profit to his power or to his glory. Sending back the Spanish princes to Madrid in the month of January, 18 14, and the pope to Rome at the same time, were only expedients inspired by distress ; and the sudden and even stealthy manner in which those measures were taken and executed, deprived them of every vestige of grandeur and of generosity. But I perceive, I am speaking of the return of the pope to his States, without our quarrels with the court of Rome having found a place in this recital It was, however, too remarkable an event of our times for me not to give here some of its details.
The differences which arose between Napoleon and the court of Rome, shortly after the Concordat of 1801, grew still more acute after the coronation — though those two events ought to have prevented that contest. Those differences were for a long
26 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
time only known by the rumour of the violence of the emperor towards the pope, and by the noble complaints of the Holy Father, which only reached the public with great difficulty and great confusion. Their origin and their causes might have been better appreciated, for all that concerned the purely theological part of those discussions, when Napoleon summoned at Paris an ecclesiastical council, of which I will speak soon. But the deliberations of that council, composed of very enlightened men, had been kept secret.
By what sequence of events did the pope find himself tormented and persecuted for nearly ten years, so odiously, with such want of policy and in so many ways .'
Let us run over the facts and their dates, looking at them from a distance. Several of these dates will explain the great misfortunes of Pius VII., supported with such heroic courage, that one hardly dares to note in the Holy Father, some slight wrongs of improvidence.
Pius VI., his predecessor, removed from Rome by order of the Directory, February lo, 1798, died at Valence, August 9, 1799. Pius VII. was elected March 14, 1800, at Venice, which belonged then to the Emperor of Germany, according to one of the stipulations of the treaty of Campo-Formio ; and, on July 13 of the same year, he made his entry into Rome which had been re-conquered with the Roman States by the allies, while Bonaparte was in Egypt.
I have already said somewhere that Bonaparte, on his return from Egypt, had arrived suddenly in Paris, October 16, 1799, and that as a result of the coup d'etat of the i8th Brumaire (November 9, 1799), he had been placed at the head of the government as First Consul, December 13, 1799. The conclave was opened at Venice, on the first of this same month of December, and while Pius VII., elected in the month of March following, was going from Venice to Rome, Bonaparte had just marked his taking possession of power by two acts which had the greatest influence over Italy. On June 2, 1800, he entered Milan where he had re-established the Cisalpine Republic, and twelve days later, on June 14, he gained the famous battle of Marengo, which gave France so large a portion
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 27
of Italy, and reduced the States of the Church to what had been fixed upon by the treaty of Tolentino.
Thus the pope, entering Rome after these two events, July 3, i8cx), must have felt how important it was for him to conciliate so powerful and so formidable a protector as Napoleon, and how important also it was for the religion of which he was the head, and which had experienced so many vicissitudes and persecu- tions in France, to bring to an end the schism which for so long a time obtained in that unhappy country.
Bonaparte also experienced this same need, and, on his passage through Milan, he heard with the greatest interest the first overtures which were made to him very secretly and very skilfully on the part of the court of Rome. Is it not a remarkable thing, that, raised at the head of the government by his military exploits and by the philosophical and liberal ideas which prevailed then, Bonaparte should have felt im- mediately the necessity of being reconciled with the court of Rome } It is perhaps in this circumstance that he has shown the greatest proof of the force of his character, for he braved then all the mockery of the army, and the opposition even of the two consuls, his colleagues. He remained firmly attached to the idea that, in order to sustain either the civil constitution of the clergy, or theo-philanthropy, which were equally discredited, he would have to play the part of per- secutor of the Catholic religion, and to arm against her and against her ministers the laws with severity, whereas in dis- carding the religious innovations of the Revolution, it would be easy for him to make our ancient religion a friend and even a supporter in all the Catholic consciences of France.
He then resolved, and it was one of the strokes of his great genius, to come to an understanding with the head of the Church, who, alone, could reconcile, lead back, pronounce as judge or as arbiter, and re-establish finally by his authority, to which no other was comparable, unity of worship and of doctrine.
To this authority was added, in the person of the pope, the influence of a great and sincere piety, of an enlightened mind, and of an attractive sweetness.
28 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
The Concordat could not appear under happier auspices ; it was greatly desired, above all in the provinces. It was con- verted into a law April 8, iSoi. It was composed of seventeen articles drawn up with remarkable wisdom and foresight. All was clear, without equivocation ; there was not a word which could offend or displease. Transferred ecclesiastical property could no longer be claimed back, and it was declared that the acquirers of such estates must be fully reassured in that respect. It was an immense point obtained from the con- descension of a pope filled with piety.
But one point presented prodigious difficulties. To re- establish religion in France there must be obtained the resig- nation of all the old bishops, or do without them. They had all offered and even sent them to Pius VI. in 1791, after the civil constitution of the clergy. Pius VI. thought he ought to refuse to accept them. Pope Pius VII. demanded them in 1 801, by his brief of August 24, Tarn multa, &c. ... as an indispensable preliminary to all negotiation, declaring to them nevertheless, with sweet, confiding, but firm expressions, that if they refused, which he presumed they would not, he should see himself with regret compelled to appoint new men to the government of the bishoprics of the new circumscription.
Of the eighty-one bishops who were still alive and who had not renounced the episcopacy, forty-five sent in their resigna- tions, thirty-six refused to do so ; the greater number, I think, less from theological conviction, although they were encouraged in their refusal by the learned theologian Asseline,^ than from attachment to the House of Bourbon, and hatred for the present government. It has been pretended that the refusal of some of them was rather dilatory than absolute, but all persevered in it, and their resistance even seemed to increase from day to day • for, after their canonical claims of 1803, signed by all the bishops who had not resigned,^ there appeared in April, 1804,
1 Jean- Rene Asseline, bom in 1742, entered the Church and became wand vicar of M. de Beaumont, Archbishop of Paris. In 1 790, he was named Bishop of Boulogne, refused to swear allegiance to the civil constitution, and emigrated in 1 79 1. He retired to Munster, whence he protested against the Concordat, in 1802. In 1807, he complied with the request of Louis XVXII. and lived in intimacy with the royal family until his death (1813). He has left numerous works on theology.
'^ It was in 1801 that the bishops, having refused to resign, assembled in London,
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 29
with a list of still stronger claims, a declaration on the rights of the king} signed by the thirteen bishops residing in England.
And, finally, anticipating events, I will say here that in 1 8 14, Louis XVIII., ascending the throne, these bishops pre- tended even with the pope, to make it a title to honour that they had resisted him, and had, to this effect, written him a haughty letter in which each of them had taken the title of his old bishopric. The pope refused to receive it, and led them, by his perseverance in refusing, to address him a letter of apology, in which they abandoned their pretensions, and which they signed only as late bishops. In order that there should not remain the slightest doubt in this respect, the pope desired that not one of them should be replaced in the see he had previously occupied, not even the Archbishop of Reims,^ in spite of all the propriety there would have been in making an exception in his favour.
I revert to what took place in 1801 and the following years. The pope saw the Concordat in full working order, without any trouble resulting for France ; in spite of the diversity of
to protest E^ainst the Concordat, and sent to the pope a long memonai in which they set forth the motives of their refusal. This memorial was published in London in 1801. It is signed by fourteen prelates : Arthur Dillon, Archbishop of Narbonne ; Louis de Conzie, Bishop of Arras ; Joseph de Malide, Bishop of Montpellier ; Louis de Grimaldi, Bishop-Comte of Noyon, peer of France ; Jean Lamarche, Bishop of Leon ; Pierre de Belboeuf, Bishop of Avranches ; Sebastien Amelot, I'.ishop of Vannes ; Henry de Bethisy, Bishop of Uzes ; Seignelai Colbert, Bishop of Rodez ; Charles de La Laurencie, Bishop of Nantes ; Philippe d'Albignac, Bishop of Angou- leme ; Alexandre de Chauvigny de Blot, Bishop of Lombez ; Emmanuel de Grossoles de Flammarens, Bishop of Perigueux ; Etienne de Galois de la Tour, Bishop (named) of Moulins.
^ On April 15, 1804, M. de Dillon, Archbishop of Narbonne, wrote to the pope to protest anew against the Concordat. This letter was accompanied by a declaration on the rights of the king, signed by the same bishops as above, with the exception of the Bishop of Perigueux. This declaration conveyed that the inviolable fidelity of the people to their sovereign is recommended by the Gospel ; that the prince is minister of God ; that every rebel to his king is guilty towards God ; that the present government of France where the legitimate prince has does not occupy the place due to him, though it may alleviate the burden of the calamities under which anarchy is causing the people to groan, does not satisfy either God or Ccesar. .... it constitutes a power of fact and not a power of right ; it has only possession or rather usurpa- tion ; but the legitimate prince continues to preserve all his rights, although he is forced to suspend their application. In consequence, the undersigned to fulfil their duty as bishops and as subjects, declare: i", That their very honoured lord and legitimate king, Louis XV J II., preserves, in all their integrity, the rights which he holds from God to the crown of France ; 2°, Thai nothing has been able to deprive the French, his subjects, of the fidelity they owe to this prince, in virtue of the law of God.
' M. de Talleyrand- Perigord, afterward Cardinal and Archbishop of Paris.
30 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLE YRAND.
opinions, the opposition was trifling, seldom offered, and without result.
It must, however, be said here that Pius VII. had displayed in this circumstance an authority which transcended the ordinary rules, and which would not have been recognized in any other time, if a pope had tried to exercise it — that of deposing bishops without trial, as also that of suppressing more than half the bishoprics of France without formality. At another epoch, nothing would have appeared in France more opposed to the liberties of the Galilean Church. But the case was here out of all comparison with ordinary times ; it was impossible and almost ridiculous to invoke and to wish to apply here the exercise of those liberties. The pope had vainly exhausted the most powerful entreaties with this minority, composed of thirty-six bishops, and then, supporting himself on the majority of the French Episcopacy, he employed the only means possible of destroying the schism which it was so urgent to have cease. What other means, in effect, could the pope have employed ? Let any one search, he cannot even imagine one. Abbe Fleury, ^ an ardent Gallican though he was, and certainly very little disposed to extend the authority of the pope, said none the less in his discourse on the liberties of the Gallicaii Church, that, " the authority of the pope is sovereign, and rises above all," when it is a question of maintaining the rules or causing the canons to be observed. Bossuet makes use of similar language : " It must be said, consequently and with much reason (adds M. Emery, ^ in one of his works), that the authority of the pope is sovereign, and takes precedence of all, even of the canons, when there is a question as to the preser-
^ Abbe Claude Fleury, bom in 1640, was at first preceptor of the sons of the Prince de Conde, then under-govemor of the Dukes of Burgundy, Anjou and Berry. In 1 7 1 6 he came again to the court as confessor of Louis XV. He resigned this appointment soon after, and died in 1723. Abbe Fleury has left a large number of works on ecclesiastical history and religious controversies.
2 Jacques- Andre Emery, born in 1732, received orders, in 1756, was Professor of Theology at Orleans, was named in 1776 Grand Vicar of the Diocese of Angers, Superior of the Seminary of that city, and shortly after Superior-General of the Order of Saint Sulpice. Under the Terror, he was imprisoned for eighteen months. After the 9th Thermidor, he was charged with the functions of Grand Vicar of the Diocese of Paris. Under the Consulate, he reorganized his congregation. He took part in the ecclesiastical commissions assembled by the emperor, and died in 1811.
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS.
31.
vation of the Church, since it is only for the maintenance of these great interests that these rules and these canons have been made." Father Thomassin, in his great and celebrated work on the discipline of the Church, says also: "Nothing is more consonant with the canons than to violate these canons, when from this violation, there must result a much greater good than from even their observance."
Pius VII. then, in these difficult circumstances, showed him- self to be possessed both of a strong will and of a profound knowledge of true principles. In acting as he did, he destroyed the schism without irritating, without humiliating the constitu- tional bishops, and yet without yielding to them any point, and order was restored everywhere.
There were, nevertheless, some people whose consciences felt uneasy in the dioceses where the former incumbents had not given their resignation. Some among them, while reserv- ing their jurisdiction, had consented nevertheless, to the exercise of the powers of the bishop who replaced them, and supplied by that the insufficiency of his title. But the most active in their resistance, those who, from political opinions had shown themselves most inimical to the principle of the Revolution, and who were imperturbably ruled by this sentiment, were careful not to do it. This persistent opposition did not produce, how- ever, either the effect, nor the results that they anticipated, and that might have been feared. Those of the parishioners of their dioceses whose consciences were more particularly timorous, though uneasy perhaps for a while, were not slow in compre- hending that their former bishop, not having wished either to come into their midst, or to give in his resignation at the demand of the pope, they were assuredly protected from all reproach in according under such circumstances their confidence to the new bishop sent to them by the Holy Father.
The bishops remaining in London saw surely with grief that men imbued with their doctrines, such as Abb6 Blanchard ^ and
1 Abbe Pierre Louis Blanchard, bom in 1762, was Professor of Philosophy in 1789. Having refused the oath, he emigrated to England, where he remained until 1814. From his retreat, he published a great number of statements and of libels in which he speaks with extreme violence of those who hurt the interests of religion. He attacks the Concordat, and does not spare even the pope, principally on the occasion
32 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
Abbe Gaschet, pushing to extremes the consequences (quite well deduced however) of these doctrines, published in England, and introduced as much as they could into France, a host of libels against the pope, in which, in a fanatical style which seemed copied from Luther's, they declared him heretical, schismatic, fallen from papacy, even from priesthood ; they said it was a blasphemy to pronounce his name at the canon of mass, that he was as much a stranger to the Church as if he was a Jew or a Pagan. They spoke of his outrages, of his scandals, &c. ... I do not alter a syllable. Let us believe for the honour of those bishops who constituted what was then called la petite Eglise that, however contrary they were, they did not approve of these mad fits, although they appeared to have been instigated by them. They were, however, solemnly con- demned by twenty-nine Catholic bishops of Ireland, and by the apostolic vicars who resided in London. What must be added is, that in France, where they spread these libels, universal scorn treated them as they deserved. I believe that the police denounced them or wished to denounce them one day to the tribunals, but even that could not remove them from obscurity.
Bonaparte had caused to be decreed, under form of law, at the same time as the Concordat, organic articles, concerning as much the Catholic as the Protestant clergy. Several of these articles displeased the pope, in as much as they appeared to put the Church of France in too great a dependence on the govern- ment, even in minor details. He complained with moderation, and demanded modification ; he obtained gradually, and even without much difficulty, essential alterations. Some of these articles were besides transitory ; their effects were to cease with the circumstances which had called them forth. There were others which proceeded naturally from old Gallican liberties ; modifica- tions could not be introduced in those, and the pope could not hope it. In order to draw up the Concordat, they had been obliged to renounce those liberties momentarily ; the Concordat once made, it was urgent to resume our privileges. All that was really necessary had been granted, if not at once, at least
of the consecration of the emperor. His numerous writings have been published in London.
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 33
in time. The pope was perfectly seconded in his desires by the Bishop of Nantes, as will be seen farther on, and by his legate. Cardinal Caprara. The latter, knowing the passionate temper of the First Consul, put great wisdom and extreme cir- cumspection in all his conduct, knowing how to wait, fearing to irritate, and deeming himself too happy for what had been obtained, to seek to compromise it.
Cardinal Caprara, appointed legate a latere to Bonaparte, had been invested with the most extensive powers by the bull Dextera. ... of the month of August, 1801, and by the bull Qiioniam. ... of November 29, of the same year, to enable him to carry out the Concordat, to institute the new bishops. . . and to solve all the difficulties which might arise. But, although the Concordat had been concluded and signed at Paris, July IS, 1 80 1, and ratified at Rome by Pius VII. in the month of August following, it had not been converted into a law (on account of the absence of the legislative body) until April 8, 1802 ; and it was not until that day that the legate could exercise his functions and institute the new bishops, after having taken oath the same day (April 8) at the hands of the First Consul. There is, in his oath, but only to trained eyes, a slight difference between that which had been settled by the decree of the consuls and the terms which he used. The decree bore these few words, "He shall, according to the usual formula, take the oath and promise to conform to the laws of the State, and to the liberties of the Gallican Church." But the cardinal took the oath and promised (in Latin) " to observe the constitu- tions, laws, statutes and usages of the French Republic," and at the same time, " not to derogate in any way from the authority and jurisdiction of the government of the Republic, nor from the rights, liberties and privileges of the Gallican Church." The whole was preceded by a compliment to the First Consul, such as was never paid, perhaps, to any sovereign. It can be seen, on close examination, that instead of promising to conform to the liberties of the Gallican Church (which implies a sort of adherence to or at least of recognition of these liberties), he promised only not to derogate from them, which is purely negative. The difference, at any rate, is very small or even VOL. II. I>
34
THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
insignificant in its result, and very likely passed unnoticed. Besides, he promised, in the other part of the oath, more than had been demanded of him, for they wished him to swear to conform to the laws of the state, and he took the positive oath to observe the Constitution, the laws, the statutes and the usages of the Republic, which expresses more.
As to the liberties of the Galilean Church, which rouse the fears of the court of Rome, to engage by oath not to derogate from them is assuredly all that could be expected of a legate, above all if we consider that no pope has ever recognized them. Innocent XI.^ (Odescalchi) disturbed for eight years the Church of France on account of these same liberties con* secrated in the Assembly of the Clergy of 1682, and repeatedly refused to grant bulls to the ecclesiastics of the second order, members of that assembly (where, however, they had no vote). His successor, Alexander VIII.^ (Ottoboni) was more opinionate still in his refusals, since two days before his death, he published a bull against the four articles of 1682, which, for that matter, had no effect, because he was dying. Innocent XII.^ (Pignatelli), good man as he was, could not make up his mind to grant bulls to the bishops appointed between 1682 and 1693, until they had each written him a letter of apology and of regret for what had taken place in that assembly. This letter was truly humiliating, and that which made it more so was that Louis XIV. added one from his own hand, in which he bound himself to give no sequel to his edict of March 22, 1682. The letter of the king must have seemed as a retractation, which however he withdrew before his death, since finally the edict was not revoked, and after him it continued to be executed.
It is almost useless to recall here that Bonaparte, proclaimed emperor by the senate, May 20, 1804, put a great price, and that is easily conceived, upon being consecrated by the pope. It is a wondrous feature of his destiny that he was able to obtain it, and at the time, I thought myself very happy in having con-
^ Innocent XI. (Benedict Odescalchi), bom at Como in 1611, Pope in 1671, died in 1689.
' Alexander VIII., bom at Venice in 1610, pope in 1689. He quashed the articles of the declaration of 1682 by the bull Inter muUiplkes, and died in 1691.
' Innocent XII. (Antoni Pignatelli), bora in Naples in 1615, pope from 1691 to 1700.
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 35
tributed to it, because I thought that thereby the ties of France with the court of Rome would become closer. Pius VII. having already recognized the consular government, since it was with that government he had treated for the Concordat, could not be stayed by the consideration of rights which might some day be brought forth by the House of Bourbon, if the new government, being itself overthrown, the nation should recall the former. He had then nothing to object against the title of emperor that Bonaparte had given himself, or that had been awarded him in France, with more solemnity, although perhaps with less sincerity, than that of First Consul. The pope had only to deliberate on a single point more wisely whether, in the sole interest of religion, to which the new emperor might do, by his immense power, so much good or so much harm, he ought to consent to come to consecrate him, as Saint Boniface, the legate of Pope Stephen III., had come to consecrate Pepin, during the life of the legitimate king, Childeric III. ; as Leo III. crowned Charlemagne emperor at Rome in 800, and as another pope, Stephen V., came afterwards to consecrate Louis le Debonnaire at Reims, after the death of Charlemagne.
The pope decided to come to perform this consecration at Paris, and this memorable ceremony took place December 2, 1804. Pius VII. was not influenced in this circumstance by temporal views, like Pope Stephen III., who had implored the assistance of Pepin against the Lombards, but very evidently and solely by purely religious motives, since he abstained from allowing even a glimpse to be seen of his desire, a very natural one, to recover his three legations of Bologna, Ferrara, and Ravenna, which the emperor besides was careful not to offer to return him, nor even to give him the hope of it. All the demands of the pope, without any exception, were in the interest of religion. None regarded himself personally, and he refused the presents that were offered him for his family.
He left Paris April 4, 1805, leaving everywhere on his passage the profound impression of his virtues, and of his benev- olence. Napoleon had left Paris some days before him ; he was bent on something else than on showing his gratitude to the Holy Father. On the i6th of May, the pope arrived in Rome,
D 2
36 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
and on the 26th of May the emperor had himself crowned at Milan as King of Italy. A short time after his troops occu- pied Ancona, on the Roman territory.^ The pope complained ; Napoleon did not reply ; but after the battle of Austerlitz on Dec. 2, 1805, and the peace of Presburg of the 26th, he wrote to the pope, Jan. 6, 1806, that he had wished to appropriate Ancona, but to occupy it as protector of the Holy See, and in order that that city should not be defiled by the Mussulmans.
Three months after, March 30, 1806, iSTapoleon places his brother Joseph on the throne of Naples, and asks the pope to recognize him. He asks him at the same time to make with him an offensive and defensive league ; to embrace the continental system — to close consequently his ports to the English, that is to say, to declare war against them. Such propositions, at a time above all when the emperor was trampling the Concordat under foot that he had concluded with the pope in 1803 for Italy ; when he was despoiling the bishoprics and the mon- asteries of their wealth, suppressing both at his will ; when he was plaguing the bishops and the cur6s with new oaths,
&c such propositions could not be accepted, and they
were not. They gave rise to that correspondence with the French authorities in which there is displayed so much force, reason, and propriety on the side of the court of Rome.
Such a refusal and so much reason could not fail to irritate the emperor. On February 2, 1808, he had Rome oc- cupied by his troops under the command of General Miollis.^ They took possession of the Chateau Saint- Ange. The general tried to oblige the pope to subscribe to all the demands that were made to him, under the menace of losing his states ; he
' Ancona had at that time great importance. Some Russian troops were con- centrated at Corfu, whence they were awaiting an occasion to pass into Italy and join the English. Ancona was then exposed to a coup de main, so much the more that its garrison was almost a. cypher, and its fortifications falling in ruins. Napoleon begged the pontifical government to put the city into a state of defence. His request was unheeded. Soon General Gouvion Saint-Cyr, wlio was at that moment crossing the States of the Church to go to the kingdom of Naples, received the order to take possession of the city. He entered it by surprise and established himself there November 6, 1 805.
2 Francois, Comte MioUis, bom in 1759, was captain of infantry in 1789. He served in the armies of the Republic, became general in 1794, and distinguished himself in the campaign of Italy. He v/as for a long time Governor of Mantua. In 1S07, he was appointed Governor of Rome and of the States of the Church. He retired in 1815, and died in 1828.
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 37
multiplied vexations, seized the mail and the press ; had twenty cardinals carried off, among whom were several ministers, &c. .... The pope protested in vain against such violence. Napoleon paid no attention. On the 2nd of April following, he united the legations of Urbino, Ancona, Macerata and Camerino with the kingdom of Italy to make three departments of them. He confiscated the wealth of the cardinals who did not return to the place of their birth. He disarmed nearly all the guards of the Holy Father — the nobles of this guard were im- prisoned. Finally, Miollis had Cardinal Gabrielle,^ pro- Secretary of State, carried off, and put seals upon his papers.
On May 17, 1809, a decree was issued by Napoleon, dated from Vienna, proclaiming the union (in his quality of successor to Charlemagne) of the States of the pope with the French Empire, ordaining that the city of Rome should be a free and imperial city; that the pope should continue to have his seat there, and that he should enjoy a revenue of two millions of francs. On June 10, he had this decree promulgated at Rome. On this same June 10, the pope protested against all these spoliations, refused all pensions, and recapitulating all the out- rages of which he had cause to complain, issued the famous and imprudent bull of excommunication against the authors, favourers, and executors of the acts of violence against him and the Holy See, but without naming any one.
Napoleon was incensed at it, and on the first impulse he wrote to the bishops of France a letter in which he spoke in almost revolutionary terms " of him who wished," said he, " to make dependent upon a perishable temporal power the eternal interest of consciences, and that of all spiritual affairs."
On the 6th of July, 1809, Pius VH;, taken from Rome, after he had been asked if he would renounce the temporal sovereignty of Rome and of the States of the Church, was conducted by General Radet^ as far as Savone, where he arrived alone,
^ Jtdes Gabrielle, issue of an old Roman family, bom in 1748, was Bishop of Sinigaglia, then cardinal in 1801. On March, 27, 1808, he became pro-Secretary of State. He protested energetically against all the unlawful measures against the rights of the pope, ordered by the emperor, and was arrested in June of the same year. He was sent to France, where he was confined and in 1813, repaired to Fontainebleau to stay with the pope. He died in 1822.
' Etienne, Baron Radet, born in 1762, had been non-commissioned officer under
38 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
August lO, the cardinals having all been previously transported to Paris. And to complete the spoliation of the pope, Napoleon issued on the 17th of February, 18 10, a senatus-consultum which bestowed upon the eldest son of the emperor the title of King of Rome, and even ordained that the emperor should be conse- crated a second time at Rome, in the first ten years of his reign.
It was while oppressed, captive and deprived of all council, that the pope refused the bulls to all the bishops named by the emperor, and then it was that all the discussions relative to the proper measures to put an end to the viduity of the churches were commenced.
Ecclesiastical Commission.
Formed in 1 809.
This council was composed of Cardinal Fesch, Cardinal Maury ,^ the Archbishop of Tours,^ the Bishop of Nantes,^ the
the old rigiine. In 1 792, he was sub-lieutenant in the National Guard at Varennes. Accused of having favoured the flight of Louis XVI., he viras acquitted by the Revo- lutionary Tribunal. He became brigadier-general in I799i and commander-in-chief of the gendarmerie. It was in this capacity that he received the order, July 6, 1809, to arrest the pope. In 1813, he was appointed Grand Provost of the Grand Army and general of division. Sentenced in 1816 to nine years' imprisonment, he was pardoned in 181 8, and died in 1825.
^ Jean Maury, bom in 1 746, at Valreas ( Vaucluse), was the son of a shoemaker. He took orders in 1 771, and soon made himself famous by his eloquence ; he entered the Academy in 1784. Deputy for the clergy of Peronne to the States- General, he became the leader of the Conservative side. He emigrated in 1 79 1, went to Rome, was named archbishop in fartihus, cardinal and Bishop of Montetiascone. Shortly after, Louis XVIII. accredited him as ambassador to the Holy See. He rallied, however, to the side of the emperor in 1807, and became senator and chaplain to Prince Jerome. In 1810, he was called to the archiepiscopal see of Paris, which caused' his condemnation by the pope, and later his disgrace vrith Louis XVIII. In 1815, he had to leave his archbishopric and reach Italy. He was momentarily confined at the Chateau Saint- Ange, but released soon after. He re- entered the good graces of Pius VII., and died in 1817.
^ Louis, Comte de Barral, bom in 1746, had been general agent of the clergy in 1785, then coadjutor of the Bishop of Troyes and bishop in partibus. He refused the oath and emigrated. In 1801, he sent his resignation to the pope, and was soon after named Bishop of Meaux, and, later, Archbishop of Tours. In 1S05, he accepted the office of chaplain to the empress, and later the dignity of senator. Mgr. de Barral pronounced, in 1814, the funeral oration of the Empress Josephine. It was he also, who, on June I, 1815, officiated pontifically on the Champs-de- Mars. On the return of Louis XVIII. he was forced to resign. He died in 1818.
' M. Duvoisin.
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 39
Bishop of Evreux.i the Bishop of Treves,^ the Bishop of Verceil.s Abb6 Emery, superior of Saint-Sulpice, and Father Fontana * General of the Barnabites. The government proposed to it three series of questions. The first on the interests of Christianity in general. The second on the interests of France especially. The third on the interests of the Churches of Germany, Italy, and the bull of excommunication.
Each of these series is divided into several questions. I am going to give them all with the answers, which I have abridged without altering, taking care to underline the expressions of the commission as well as the citations they invoke.
In the preamble heading, the answers made by the commis- sion to the questions put by the government, the following passage maybe noticed : " We do not separate from the homage we render to your Majesty, the tribute of interest, zeal and love com- manded by the actual situation of the Sovereign Pontiff. . . . All the spiritual good we can expect as the result of our deliberations is tlien solely in the hands of your Majesty . . . . and we dare to hope that you will enjoy soon this glory, if you deign to grant our wishes in accelerating so desirable a good harmony between your Majesty and the Sovereign Pontiff, by restoring entire freedom to the pope, surrounded by his natural counsellors, without whom he can neither com-municate with the Churches confided to his solici- tude, nor solve any question of importance nor provide for the needs ^f Catholicism.!'
FIRST SERIES.
Question I. — Is the government of the Church arbitrary ? Answer. — No ; it belongs, it is true, especially to the suc- cessor of Saint Peter, who is the head of it, having the supre-
^ M. Bourlier. ^ M. Mannay.
' Jean-Baptiste Canaveri, bom in 1753, entered the order of the Oratorians in 1771, became Bishop of Bielle in 1797, then of Verceil in 1808. He was soon after appoined first chaplain of Madame Lstitia Bonaparte. He died in 1818.
* Fran9ois- Louis Fontana, bom in 1750, entered the congregation of the Bama- tites in 1767, and was elected superior of his order in the province of Milan, In 1804 he accompanied the pope to Paris, and became afterwards procurator-general of his order, Counsellor of Rites, and finally general of his congregation. After the removal of the pope, he was confined at Arcis-sur-Aube, was a member of the Ecclesiastical Commission of 1809, but only attended its first sittings. He was arrested and imprisoned in the following year. He only recovered his liberty in 1814, returned to Rome, was named cardinal in 1819, and died in 1822.
40 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
macy of honour and jurisdiction in all the Church ; but it belongs also to the bishops, successors to the apostles ; and, however eminent may be the authority of the apostolic chair it is regulated in its exercise by the canons, that is to say by tlie laws common to the whole Church. Pope St. Martin wrote to a bishop ; " We are the defenders and the depositaries and not the transgressors of the holy canons!^ " It is in observing them and causing them to be observed by others" said Bossuet, " that the Church of Rome raised itself eminently above the ot/iers."
The commission adds that the usages in the possession of particular Churches, and which take their source in the ancient discipline, make the law for these churches. They constitute in some way their common law and m.ust be respected. It quotes Pope Saint Gregory who says expressly, in speaking of the Church of Africa, " The usages that do not injure the Catholic faith ought to remain intact"
Question 2. — Can the pope from motives of temporal welfare refuse his intervention in spiritual affairs ?
Answer. — The supremacy, by which the pope enjoys divine right, being all for the spiritual advantage of the Church, we believe we here pay him homage in replying that when temporal affairs have no necessary connection with spiritual ones, when they do not prevent the head of the Church fulfilling freely the functions of apostolic nuncio, the pope cannot, from the sole motive of temporal affairs, refuse his intervention in spiritual affairs.
Question 3. — It is beyond doubt that since a certain time the court of Rome is confined to a small number of families, that the affairs of the Church are there examined and treated by a small number of prelates and theologians, taken from the small
localities in the neighbourhood In this state of things,
would it be proper to convene a council ?
Answer. — If it is a question of a general council, it could not be held without the head of the Church, otherwise it would
not represent the Universal Church If it is of a national
council, its authority would be insufficient to rule upon any matter which would interest all Catholicism.
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HJS BROTHERS. 41
Question 4. — Should not the Consistory or Privy Council of the pope be composed of prelates of all nations in order to enlighten his Holiness ?
Answer. — The Council of Basel had decided (with some limiting clauses) that the cardinals should be taken from all the Catholic states. The orators of the King of France at the Council of Trent renewed the propositions that the Council of Basel had adopted, and this council limited itself to deciding that the pope should take cardinals from all nations as much as could be conveniently done, and according as he should find thejn worthy of that dignity.
The council said it could only formulate wishes for the execution of the measure which meets the desire of his Majesty.
Question 5. — Supposing that it should be recognized that there is no necessity for changes in the present organization of the Church, does not the emperor continue in his person the rights which were those of the Kings of France, the Dukes of Brabant, and other sovereigns of the Low Countries, the Kings of Sardinia, the Dukes of Tuscany, etc. — whether for the nom- ination of cardinals or for all other prerogatives t
Answer. — The commission thinks that the emperor is war- ranted in claiming the prerogatives of the sovereignties comprised in the empire.
SECOND SERIES. Questions which concern France especially.
Question i. — Have his Majesty or his ministers infringed the Concordat ?
Answer. — The commission thinks the pope has no cau&e to complain of any essential infringement of the Concordat. As to the organic articles added to the Concordat, the commission agrees that the pope, during his sojourn in Paris, laid before the emperor representations as to a certain number of these articles that he judged contrary to the free exercise of tJie Catholic religion. But several of the articles of which his Holiness complained, are only applications or consequences of maxims and usages received in the
42 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND,
Gallican Church, from which neither the emperor nor the clergy of France can depart.
Some others, in truth, it adds, comprise dispositions which would be very prejudicial to the Church if they were strictly enforced. There is every reason to believe that they were added to the Concordat as regulations dictated by circumstances, as considera- tions necessary for smoothing the way for the establishrjient of the Catholic religion ; and we expect Jrom the justice and piety of his Majesty, that he will deign to revoke or modify them in such a manner as to dissipate the annoyance to which they have given rise.
The commission indicates three of them : The first on the bulls, briefs, .... which were not to be received nor put into execution without the authorization of the government. It desires that the penitentiary' s briefs which were formally excepted by the parlements be excepted. The twenty-sixth on the fixation at three hundred francs of the title or revenue exacted from ecclesiastics in order to be ordained by the bishop, while it was only one hundred and fifty francs before the Revolution, when the candidates, belonging for the greater part to the higher classes, were very much "richer. The thirty-sixth on the vicars- general who were, according to this article, to continue their functions, even after the death of the bishop ; while it is a principle that the powers of the grand vicar expire with him who has given them, that the chapter ipso facto invested with episcopal jurisdiction, and that it is this chapter which appoints the vicars-general who govern during the vacancy in the see.
It is but right to observe that these three demands were granted by decree, February 28, 18 10.
Question 2. — Is the state of the clergy in France ameliorated on the whole or made worse since the Concordat has been in force .''
The answer is here most affirmative, most detailed, richest in facts. Besides the liberty of the Catholic religion, which is in itself alone the greatest of the benefits due to the Concordat, what new benefits did not accrue from it since that time ? The endowment of chapters ; thirty thousand supplementary chapels
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE—HIS BROTHERS. 43
pensioned ; four hundred scholarships and three hundred half- scholarships for the training-schools of the clergy ; exemption from conscription for students presented by the bishop ; invitation to the general councils of departments to supply the endowments of bishops and chapters, and to provide for the needs of religion ; re-establishment of religious congregations devoted to
gratuitous teaching, to the relief of the poor, sick, &c All
these facts are evident.
Question 3. — If the French government has not violated the Concordat, can the pope arbitrarily refuse the institution to appointed archbishops and bishops, and destroy religion in France as he has destroyed it in Germany, where, for the last ten years, no bishop has been appointed ?
Answer. — The Concordat is a synallagmatic contract between the Head of the State and the Head of the Church, by which each of them is under obligation to the other. IT IS ALSO a public treaty by which each of the contracting parties acquires rights and takes obligations upon himself. The right reserved by the pope cannot be exercised arbitrarily. By the Compact between King Francis I. and Leo X.^ (1515)1 the pope was held to grant bulls of institution to subjects named by the sovereign, or to allege canonical motives for his refusal. Pius VIL is equally bound towards the emperor and France by the Compact that he has solemnly ratified.
The Holy Father having written from Savone, August 28, 1809, ^ letter to Cardinal Caprara, to set forth the motives of his refusal, the commission does not think it is departing from the prof ound respect with which it is penetrated for the person and the supreme dignity of the Head of the Church, in putting under the eyes of the emperor the reflections that it would dare to present to his Holiness himself, if it were admitted to the honour of conferring with him.
The pope gave three motives for refusal in his letter, i.
The religious innovations introduced into France since the
1 This Compact, the preliminaries of which were agreed upon December 10, 1515, at an interview between the two sovereigns, was only signed August 18, 15 16. It provided, the abolition of the ' ' Pragmatic sanction, " gave up to the pope the income derived from sees left vacant a year or more, and acknowledged the supremacy of the pope over the councils. As compensation, it gave the king the right of nomination to all the prelacies of France.
44 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
Concordat, and yet he did not enumerate one which was an essential outrage upon this Compact. The known innovations had been in France benefits for religion. The government had met the remonstrances relative to the organic articles, and besides, this complaint, already an old one concerning France, had not been followed, hitherto, by a refusal of bulls on the part of the pope. 2. The second motive was founded on the events and political measures which it did not belong to him to judge. The principal event, said the council, is the decree of 1809, bearing upon the union of the Roman States to the French Empire. Is this motive canonical ? Is it founded on the prin- ciples and on the spirit of religion f The commission replies : Religion teaches us not to confound the spiritual order and the temporal order ; the jurisdiction that the pope exercises essen- tially by divine right is that which Saint Peter received frotn Christ, the only one he has been able to transmit to his successors ; and that is purely spiritual. The temporal sovereignty is for the popes only an accessory foreign to their authority. The first will last as long as the Church, as long as the world ; and the other, a human institution, not being comprised in the Divine promises that have been made to the Church, can be taken away, as it has been given, by men and events. In all suppositions in this respect, and whatever m.ay be the political position of the pope, his authority in the universal Church and his relations with individual churches ought always to he the same, and as he has only received his powers for the advantage of the faithful and for the government of the Church, the commission is persuaded that tlie Holy Father woidd put an end to his refusals, if he were convinced, like those who see things closely, that this refusal can only be very prejudicial to the Church.
According to the commission, the invasion of Rome cannot then be a motive for the refusal of the canonical institution of the bishops nominated. This invasion is not a violation of the Con- cordat. The Concordat stipulated nothing, guaranteed nothing temporal ; and so long as the jurisdiction of the pope over the Church of France is recognized, the ties which attach this Church to the chair of St. Peter are not relaxed, and the Concordat subsists in its integrity.
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 45
The pope recognizes this distinction in his letter, but he could not, said he, sacrifice the defence of the patrimony of tlie Church. That is not contested ; he might reclaim it with all the means at his disposal. But how could tJie refusal of the bulls be one of those ■means f If the em-peror exacted and obtained from the nominated bishops some declaration cofitrary to the authority of tJu Holy Father, or relative to the invasion of tlie Roman States, the pope would be in the right in .refusing them the canonical institution ; but there is nothing like it in the present circumstances. How then could he wish or could he believe he had, the power to punish them, for an event which could not be imputed to them f When Rome was stormed by the troops of Charles V., did Clement VH., to avenge himself on this prince, abandon all the churches to anarchy f 3. The third motive of refusal in the letter from the Holy Father is taken from the actual situation. God knows, says the pope, if we desire ardently to give to the vacant churches of France their pastors, and if we desire to find an expedient for doing it in a proper manner ; but ought we to act in so important a juncture without consulting our natural counsellors ? Then, how could we consult them, when, sepa- rated from them by violence, we have been deprived of all free eommunication with them, and besides, from all the necessary means for the expedition of such affairs, not even having, up to the present, obtained permission to have near us one of our secretaries ?
The objection was a strong one, and the commission saw itself compelled to make the following reply : To these last com- plaints, we have no other reply to m-ake than to place thetn ourselves under tfte eyes of his Majesty, who will feel all the force and all the justice of them.
This phrase was not perhaps lacking in courage, for it was to justify the refusal of the pope and to show clearly to the emperor his injustice and his inconsistence.
Question 4. — The French government not having broken the Concordat, if, on the other hand, the pope refuses to execute it, the intention of his Majesty is to regard the Con- cordat as abrogated ; but, in this case, what would it be proper to do for the good of religion .'
46 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
Answer. — If the pope persisted in the refusal to execute the Concordat, it is certain, strictly speaking, that the emperor would no longer be held to observe it, and that he could regard it as abrogated. These are the first words of the reply ; they appear to decide everything, but, nevertheless, this was not the case, and the commission soon adds : But this compact is not a purely
personal transaction It is a treaty which forms a part of
our public right. . . . and it is important to demand its execution, even in the supposition that the Holy Father should persist in refusing it as far as he is concerned.
This reasoning is subtle and even singular ; for the commis- sion seems to put forward with assurance a principle, only to recoil the more quickly before the consequence ; it seems even to have endeavoured to give rise again to the difficulty, at the moment when it appeared quite clearly solved.
The commission says afterwards that the Concordat should be considered not as abrogated, but as suspended, and that it would be necessary to protest always against the refusal of the pope, and to appeal either to the pope himself, better informed, or to his successor.
But whether tlu Concordat be regarded as abrogated, or remain suspended, adds the commission, what is it proper to do for the good of religion ? (These are the last words of the question.) Here the commission establishes clearly the principles and does not spare any argument. All the powers of the ministers of the Church being of a spiritual order, it is for the Church alone to confer them,. The bishops have powers of order and powers of jurisdiction. In the three first centuries of persecutions, the Church was obliged alone to invest its pastors with these powers, and she did not lose this right when kings became her children. The Church has never recognized any bishops but those she has instituted ; but the manner of proceeding to the election, and then of conferring the institution, have not always been the same. In tfie first centuries, tlie simple nomination, election, or presentation belonged to the co-provincial bishops to the clergy and to the people of the church that was to be supplied ; and this election was confirmed by the archbishop who consecrated the bishop ; or, if it was the archbishop himself wlw was to be confirmed, by the
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 47
council of the province that conferred the institution or the mission, for the particular church to which he had just been elected. Afterwards the emperors and other Christian princes had a great share in the nomination, that is to say, the election, and insensibly the people and the clergy of the country ceased to be called upon. The election passed then to the chapter of the metropolitan church, but always with the requirement of the consent of the prince {^representing the people) and of the confirmation or archiepiscopal institution or of that of the council of the province. The ecclesiastical commission forgot to add that, up to the thirteenth century, the popes had had no share either in the election or the institution. Since, by reservations and other principles inserted in the fausses dicritales} they assumed sometimes both the election and the confirmation. It was this state of things, so foreign to the ancient discipline, since there were no traces of it in the first twelve centuries of the Church, that the Council of Basel as well as the Pragmatic Sanction wished to remedy. After the Council of Basel and the Pragmatic Sanction published at Bourges in 1438^ conformably to the decrees of that council, it was decided that the election by the people and by the chapter should be confirmed by the archbishop or by the provincial council. In 1516, this Prag- matic Sanction was replaced by the compact between Francois I. and Leo X., in virtue of which the right of election passed entirely to the king in the place of the people or of the chapter, and the confirmation or .institution to the pope, instead of to the archbishops and provincial councils.
The ecclesiastical commission says, with reference to these modifications : these two modifications to the right of election have been regarded as made with the expressed or tacit consent of the Church. We might even say this approbation {of the Church) would still be indispensable, even if it were proposed to return to one of the methods adopted in the preceding centuries ; for a law
1 The name of faussis dkritales is applied to a collection of canonical rights of the sixth century, attributed to the monk Denys le Petit, which tended to con- siderably increase the power of the popes.
' The Pragmatic Sanction of Bourges is the name given to the ordinance that King Charles VII. issued, in 1438, on the affairs of the Church of France. This article said in substance that God had given neither to St. Peter nor to his successors. any direct power over temporal matters.
48 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
once abrogated is no longer a law, and it can only resume that character by an act of the authority that abrogated it. This is one of the capital vices of the civil constitution of the clergy, adopted by the Constituent Assembly . . . for, beyond the fact that the elections decreed by this Constitution resembled in no manner those of the first centuries, the Constituent Assembly which had only political powers was essentially incompetent to re-establish without tJte con- currence and consent of the Church these rules of discipline tJtat the Church had abolished.
Thus, in the supposition that by persevering in the refusal of the bulls the Concordat should be regarded as suspended or as abrogated, there would be no authority for reviving the Pragmatic Sanction, unless the ecclesiastical authority intervened for its re- vival. Except in that case, it would become the source of troubles similar to those excited throughout all France by the civil constitu- tion of the clergy in 1791.
What is it proper, then, to do for the good of religion ? For this question recurs constantly.
The commission has not the necessary authority to indicate measures suitable to replace the intervention of the pope in the con- firmation of the bishops. (Is this answer really accurate ? Would the suggesting of these measures presuppose an authority ? )
The com^nission thinks that the emperor can do nothi7ig wiser and more conformable to the rules than to convoke a national council which shall examine the question proposed and suggest tJu proper means for preventing the inconvenience of the refusal of the bulls. In 1688, on the occasion of a like refusal of bulls by Pope Innoceiit XI. to the bishops, as a sequel to the assembly of the clergy in 1682, the Parlement of Paris, in the opinion of tlie attorney- general Du Harley, i-endered a decree to the effect titat the king should be prayed to summon the provincial councils or even a national council.
The emperor, in a note which he dictated to the Bishop of Nantes, M. Duvoisin, found that this answer was not sufficiently clear upon the question. He had thought, he said in this note, that, the Concordat failing, France was ipso facto in the situation which existed before. But the commission had caused him to alter his opinion, and he too esteemed now that, the Concordat
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 49
having abrogated the law which existed at the time of its con- clusion, the former could no longer be re-established except by the power that had abrogated it, but he differed from the opinion of the council in that he thought the Gallican Church was sufficient to pronounce the re-establishment of the ancient law, without which there would be a gap in the legislation of the Church. The emperor did not explain his thought further, having been interrupted by other business.
The ecclesiastical commission, however, on the simple obser- vation contained in the note, discussed the question anew without entering too much into the idea of the emperor, for it commences by saying : that it persists in believing that the convocation of a national council is the only canonical way that can lead to the desired end. It supposes that : the council will address at first to the pope respectful remonstrances on the results likely to be entailed by a refusal prolonged any further, on the necessity in which the ■emperor and the clergy would find themselves to provide by some other -means for tlie preservation of religion and for the perpetuity of the episcopacy, and that they would propose afterwards all the means of conciliation, &c. . . . and if the pope refused these prayers and these conciliations of the assembled clergy of France, the council would examine (which we did not believe we ought to do) if it be competent to re-establish a mode of canonical institution which could replace the mode established by the Concordat. If it judged itself competent, it would decree, under the good pleasure of his Majesty, a regulation of discipline on this matter, but declaring that this regulation is only provisory, and that tlie Church of Fra7ice would not cease to demand the observation of the Concordat, being ■at all times ready to return to it. . . . And if the national council did uot judge itself competent, it would appeal to a general council, tJie only authority in the Church which is above the pope.
And if this resource became impossible because the pope would not recognize the council nor preside over it, or if in the political circumstances its convocation should present too many difficulties to assemble it — what would it be proper to do for the good of religion ? — Seeing the impossibility of having recourse to the general council, and seeing the imminent danger with which the Church is menaced, the national council could declare that the confirmation VOL. II. E
so THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
given by the archbishop to his suffragans, or by the oldest bishop of the province next to the archbishop, should take the place of the pontifical bulls until the pope or his successors consented to the full execution of the Concordat. This is a law of necessity, a law that the pope himself believed he had power to recognize, when, rising above all ordinary rules and by an act of authority witlwut example ^ he suppressed all the old bishoprics of France in order to create new ones.
Is it not astonishing tiiat the ecclesiastic commission, having arrived at such a solution, did not repeat here that, in order to put an end to the principal motive of opposition of the pope (the motive enunciated by him in his letter to Cardinal Caprara, where he declares that his refusal to give bulls is founded par- ticularly on the fact that in his prison at Savone he is deprived of all liberty) the emperor was begged to render to the pope at least the liberty necessary for the expedition of the bulls in order to constitute him in the wrong if he then still persisted in his refusal ? In place of that, the commission was ever dwelling upon the supposition that the pope only refused the bulls from purely temporal motives, and above all on account of the in- vasion of Rome, whilst the pope had formally declared that it was because he had been deprived of his liberty, of his counsellors, and even of his secretary, that he refused to have the bulls expedited.
The commission, which had felt all the force of this claim, which had already recognized the justice of it, should have renewed its instances in this respect. The liberty claimed here by the pope was not a purely temporal object ; it was an indis- pensable condition to validate the acts of the simplest citizen, and with much greater reason, those of the Head of the Church. The commission, in this long and concluding part of the discus- sion, has too much the appearance of believing that all the wrongs are on the side of the pope. Is this complacency or pusillanimity .'' That it did not counsel the emperor to return Rome may be conceived ; it was not called upon to treat this political question, which besides, was altogether independent of that of the delivery of the bulls, which had been submitted to it ; but not to repeat each day that, before thinking of a council
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 51
or of any other extraordinary remedy, to which they could have recourse, in case, without any reason, the pope should persist in his refusal to execute the Concordat, it was necessary to allow him enough liberty in order that he could not complain that they did him violence by such a demand, was not only pusil- lanimity towards the emperor, but also inconsistence ; it was appearing to wish to prolong the rupture, when perhaps only a word could have remedied it.
Third Series.
Questions which concern the Churches of Germany, of Italy, and the Bull of Excommunication.
Question i. — His Majesty, who can justly consider himself as the most powerful Christian, would feel his conscience dis- turbed if he paid no attention to the complaints of the Churches of Germany as to the state of helplessness in which the pope had left them for ten years. He desires, as suzerain of Germany, as heir of Charlemagne, as veritable Emperor of the West, as eldest son of the Church, to know what course he ought to take to restore the benefits of religion to the people of Germany.
Answer. — The one the commission gives to this question could not be more vague. The protractor believes he ought to re- call here the ancient compact of the Germanic nation of 1447, and the treaty of Munster of 1648 ; he then enters into long details on the Diet of Ratisbon of i S03, which overthrew by so many secularizations the political and religious state of Germany, and transferred the see of Mayence to Ratisbon ; on the preparatory conferences of 1804, between the nuncio of the pope, and the referendary of the Empire ; on the act of the Confederation of the Rhine, July 12, 1806 ; on the abdication of the imperial crown of Germany by the Emperor Francis H. (August 6, 1806), which effected the dissolution of the Germanic body; on the divers pretensions of a multitude of princes in regard to the Catholic clergy, religious instruction, matrimonial dispen- sations .... on the subjection of the bishops, curates, and prebendaries of all these princes, and finally on the new diffi-
E 2
52 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
culties caused in any arrangement whatever by the situation of the Holy Father.
The commission does not see, since the abdication of the Emperor Francis II., any one but the Protector of the Con- federation of the Rhine (Napoleon), who can, in conjunction with the Sovereign Pontiff, remedy these evils, and it limits itself to expressing wishes.
It must be agreed that there had been much bad grace, and above all much bad faith on the part of the Emperor Napoleon, in imputing at this time the religious troubles of Germany to the state of abandonment in which the pope left for ten years the Church of Germany, and the argument of the commission on this point is very feeble and very insignificant.
Question 2. — Is it indispensable to make a new circumscrip- tion of bishoprics in Tuscany, and in other parts of the Empire .'' If the pope refuses to co-operate in these arrangements, what course ought his Majesty to follow in order to make them regular ?
Answer. — The commission thinks that the churches of Tus- cany are not suffering like those of Germany ; that they are regularly organized and administered ; that thus a new circum- scription, although useful, is not urgent. All leads to the belief it adds, that when the pope shall be surrounded by his counsellors, his Holiness will give them an active and sustained attention. Finally, the commission believes that His Majesty can suspend the ameliorations he is planning for the churches of Tuscany until the general affairs of the Church are terminated, since the case of necessity is not here applicable.
Question 3. — The Bull of Excommunication of June 10, 1809, being contrary to Christian charity as well as to the independ- ence and honour of the throne, what course must be taken so that, in times of trouble and calamity, the popes may not arrive at such an excess of power .''
Answer. — The commission cites at first the extract from this bull which declares that the authors, abettors, coimsellors and perpetrators of the outrages {that is to say the invasion of Rome and of the provinces of the Roman States, as well as the other perse- cutions) in virtue of book xvii., chapter xi., which it calls attention
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 53
to, have incurred tJte excommunication pronounced by the Council of Trent, and tlie Holy FatJier excommunicates and anatJiematizes them, anew, without, nevertheless, nam.ing any special person. His Holiness forbids even tlie detracting from the rights and privileges of the persons comprised in this category.
The commission says afterwards: — That the bulls of Boniface Vin. against Philippe the Fair, of fulius IT. against Louis Xn., of Sixtus V. against Henry IV. have never taken effect in France, because the bishops of France refused toadm.it or to publish them. For the same reason, the bull In Ccena Domini, so long published in Rome, was always regarded in France as null and void.
If the bull of fune 10, 1809, had been addressed to tlie bishops of France, the commission thinks that they would have declared them, contrary to the discipline of the Galilean Church, to the authority of the sovereign, and capable, contrary to the intention of the pope, of troubling public tranquillity.
It reminds tliat Gregory XIV., successor of Sixtus V., issued, in 1591, MONITORY letters against Henry IV., and that tite bishops at Chartres declared that the censures and excomm.unica- tions conveyed by the aforesaid letters were void, as much in form, as in matter, and that they could not bind nor constrain the conscience.
The commission limits itself then to declaring : That it does not doubt tfiat the National Council, if it be assembled, remembering the true principles regarding this, and the spirit of the Church, in the application of censures, will declare also its nullity, and will lodge an appeal as tmich against this bull as against all similar bulls to tJie General Council, or to the pope better inform.ed, as has always taken place in tJie Church.
The commission might have added that the monitory letters against King Henry IV. were consigned to the fire by the parlements sitting at Tours and at Chalons.
As to Henry IV. himself, then King of Navarre, excom- municated by Sixtus V. in 1588, it is known that, following his natural bent, he had this act of appeal posted at the Vatican, and that the pope only esteemed him the more for that.
The ecclesiastic commission concluded, in its general answer,
54 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
by citing the first article of the declaration of the clergy, in 1682.1
It was by the delivery of these, January 11, 18 10, that the commission ended its labours begun on November 16, 1809.
I forgot to say that the work of the commission on the first series of questions is attributed to the Bishop of Treves ; that on the second series to the Bishop of Nantes, and that on the third to the Archbishop of Tours. It is affirmed that Father Fontana only attended the first sitting, and that M. Emery was not very punctual at the meetings, and did not sign the answers of the commission, alleging that it was not proper for him to put his signature beside those of cardinals and of bishops.
Reflections on this Ecclesiastic Commission.
I can quite conceive the consideration the members of this commission must have had for the emperor, for fear of irritating him and driving him to still more violent measures, that is to say, to a complete rupture with the pope, which would have revived the schism in the Church of France. But I cannot con- ceive why they did not try with more persistence to convince him, that, in order to be justified in imputing wrongs to the pope, he must, at least, accord him the kind of liberty that he himself judged necessary in order to give bulls, and to ask him consequently, what liberty he deemed indispensable for that. The pope would not have dared to say that he needed above all Rome and the patrimony of St. Peter ; that would have been too evidently false, natural though it might be that he should much desire this restitution, and that he should not cease to protest against the violence which had deprived him of his States. He would have been satisfied, without doubt, to demand a certain number of cardinals, his secretary, and his papers. If he had demanded more, or having ob- tained the objects of his first demand he had continued to refuse the bulls, then the answers of the commission, which we have just analyzed, would have offered to the public the
^ This article said in substance that God had not given either to Saint Peter or to his successors any direct or indirect power over temporal matters.
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 55
expression of just and suitable opinions, but as long as this indispensable point was not accorded, to press the pope (in the situation in which he was placed) by arguments which would have no value except in case he had been shown that his refusal was from ill-will, was greatly to enfeeble the reasoning, very good in other suppositions, but which, outside of that, must only appear sophistry mingled with a little bad faith and even with disloyalty.
Before the meeting and deliberations of the ecclesiastic com- mission, the emperor had made several advances to the pope in order to conquer his repugnance to give the bulls. He had had Cardinal Caprara say, in a letter, that this cardinal (who was no longer a legate, but who was, however, at Paris) wrote to the pope then at Savone, July 20, 1809, that the emperor consented to his own name (the emperor's), and even his right of nomination not being mentioned in the bulls which would then be delivered on the simple demand of the Council of State or of the Minister of Public Worship. To which the pope replied, August 26, that this Council of State, or this minister, being the organs of the emperor, it would be equivalent to recognizing in the emperor the right of nomination and the faculty of exercising it, which he did not wish to do.
And why did he not wish to recognize this right \ Was it then on account of the excommunication .i* If so, that was showing an unreasonable humour and beginning to place him- self in the wrong. Why, too, should the emperor have made this sacrifice t Would it not have been better not to have made any, and to have tried the effect upon the Holy Father of sufficient liberty that he might grant him >.
The year 1 810, far from bringing any alleviation to the situation of the pope and giving him, according to the wishes and prayers of the ecclesiastic commission, a little more liberty, aggravated, on the contrary, this situation, and rendered his captivity harder.
In effect, on February 17, 1810, appeared the senatus- consultum pronouncing the union of the Roman States with the French Empire ; the independence of the imperial throne of all authority on earth, and annulling the temporal existence of
S6 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
the popes. This senatus-consultum assured a pension to the pope, but it ordained also that the pope should take oath to d& nothing in opposition to the four articles of 1682. On the same day another senatus-consultum, which awards to the eldest son of the emperor the title of King of Rome, and enacts that the emperor shall be consecrated a second time at Rome, was passed.^
All these dispositions were hostile and irritating. The pope was not accorded even the right and liberty of complaining. How could he consider he had enough liberty for the rest ? To order by a senatus-consultum an oath from a captive pope, and an oath to do nothing against the four articles of 1682, were two points irritating in the highest degree, and very evidently- inadmissible, above all when they were imposed with such imperiousness.
The pope must have consoled himself, besides, even to rejoicing, that they made the insulting pension they offered him depend upon the taking of such an oath, and it is that which furnished him with a reply so nobly apostolic : tJiat lie had no need of this pension, and that he would live on the charity of the faithful.
All must be told. In spite of his captivity at Savone, the Holy Father had however replied in 1809 to each of the letters of nineteen bishops who had demanded of him extra- ordinary powers for dispensations of marriage, and had granted them. On November 5, 18 10, he published, at least as much as he could, his brief against Cardinal Maury, and addressed it to him in response to the communication the cardinal had made to him on his nomination to the archbishopric of Paris. The
^ The senatus-consultum of February 17, 1820, stipulated besides :
That the papal States should form two departments : that of Rome and that of Trasimeno ;
That a prince of the blood or a high dignitary should keep the imperial court at Rome ;
That all foreign sovereignty was incompatible with the exercise of any spiritual authority in France ;
That palaces should be prepared for the Sovereign Pontiff in all the various portions of the Empire where he might be pleased to reside ; that at all events a palace should always be at his disposal in Paris, and another in Rome ;
That' his Holiness should enjoy an income of two millions of francs, derived from capital invested in country estates ;
That the expenses of the Sacred College and those of the Propaganda should be provided for by the State.
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 57
cardinal, while waiting for the bulls of confirmation, had taken, the administration of the diocese which had been conferred upon him by the metropolitan chapter. The pope, in his brief,, reproaches him with having abandoned the holy cause, which he had so well defended hitherto ; with having violated his oath, with having left his see of Montefiascone, and taken the admin- istration of a see with which he could not be charged. He orders him to renounce it, and not force him to proceed against him conformably to the canons of the Church. This brief made a great noise, and caused, January i, 181 1, the public disgrace of Abbe d'Astros who had made it known, and soon after of his relation, M. Portalis the younger, who had learned it from him.^ There was here, it cannot be denied, a little contradiction on the part of the pope. To be able to issue a brief against Cardinal Maury ; to be able to reply to nineteen letters from bishops who demanded powers, and accord them ; — and not to be able, for want of liberty, to deliver the bulls of confirmation and put a stop to the long viduity of the churches ; was that very consistent .?
Two other facts came to the support of this reflection. Towards the end of the year 18 10, the emperor had named for the archbishopric of Florence M. d'Osmond,^ Bishop of Nancy. Pius VII., by a brief of December 2, 1810, declared that this bishop could not administer the diocese of Florence, sup-, porting himself for that on the decisions of the second Council of Lyons, and on those of the Council of Trent, which were not really applicable to this circumstance. The chapter of Florence deferred to the order of the pope, which caused trouble in the
* This brief had been addressed by Pius VII. to Abbe d'Astros, vicar-general of the diocese of Paris. He communicated it to his cousin, Comte Portalis, then councillor of state and director of the hbrary. Both kept the secret and the brief was published. Napoleon had knowledge of these facts ; his anger was very great. At the sitting of the Council of State of January 4, 181 1, he vehemently reproached Comte Portalis for his conduct, deprived him of all his functions and exiled him to Provence. As to Ab^le d'Astros, he was arrested and confined at Vincennes, whence he was not released until 1814.
* Antoine, Baron d'Osmond, bom in 1754, was at first vicar-general of M. de Brienne, Archbishop of Toulouse. On May i, 1785, he was consecrated Bishop of Comminge to succeed his uncle. He emigrated at the Revolution, resigned his seat in 1801, and was named Bishop of Nancy in 1802. In 1810, he was named Archbishop of Florence, but the pope refused to confirm him, and he was obliged, in 1814, to retake his see of Nancy. He died in 1823.
58 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
city. Napoleon had also named for the bishopric of Asti a M. Dejean ; ^ this brought forth another brief from the pope in order that the chapter should not confide to him the power of administration. The emperor, who saw that the pope wished to put limits to his power, then gave way to great violence.
On January i, 1811, occurred the affair of Abb^ d' Astros, who was arrested as he went out of the Tuileries. The chapter of Paris deprived him of his powers as grand vicar, and profited by this occasion to write, probably under the eyes of Cardinal Maury, a letter to the emperor, in which they established the right of the chapter to provide for the vacant see, and to confer upon a nominated bishop all the capitulary powers, that is to say, all the episcopal jurisdiction, basing this on what had been practised in the time of Louis XIV., and even by the advice of Bossuet, they said, though without being able to prove it. This letter, sent to all the dioceses of France and Italy, drew to them the adherence of a multitude of bishops and chapters, both in Italy and in France, who confirmed this doctrine.
The publication of all the briefs of which I have just spoken, far from disposing the emperor to grant more liberty to the pope, persuaded him that he had too much, since he thus abused it. The order was given January 7, 181 1, to make a strict perquisi- tion in his apartment. They ransacked everything, even his writing-desk ; and his papers and those of the members of his household were sent to Paris. There was found, it is said, a brief which conferred extraordinary powers on Cardinal di Pietro.* Then they took from the pope pens, ink, and paper. They took away his master of the chamber and the prelate Doria, his confessor. They deprived him of all communication with the Bishop of Savone ; * they seized the papers of the latter and
' Francois Andre, Baron Dejean, bom at Castelnaudary in 1745, nominated Bishop of Asti, February 9, 1809.
^ Michel di Pietro, bom in 1747, had been instituted apostolic delegate by Pius VI. in 1798, when that pope was carried away from Rome by order of tlie Directory. Pius VII. named him Patriarch of Jerusalem, cardinal and prefect of the Propaganda. He was obliged to come to Paris after the arrest of the pope, and was exiled to Semur for having refused to assist at the marriage of Napoleon and Marie-Louise. He returned to Rome in 1815, and became Grand Penitentiary and Bishop of Albano. He died in 1821.
' Here is the order signified to the Holy Father by the prefect of Montenotte, M. de Chabrol, according to the instructions sent from Paris: — "The undersigned, according to the orders emanating from his sovereign, His Imperial and Royal
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 59-
even removed him to Paris. There remained to the pope a few servants, to whom were assigned about forty sous per day for their expenses. It was at the moment when the emperor gave himself up to such unworthy violence, and when the pope con- tinued his noble and legitimate refusal, for that which concerned him personally, that Napoleon decided to appoint a second ecclesiastic commission.
Second Ecclesiastic Commission.
Formed in January, 181 1, this Commission ended its labours at the end of March. It was composed of Cardinals Fesch, Maury, and Caselli ; of the Archbishop of Tours, the Bishops of Ghent,^ Evreux, Nantes, and Treves, and of the Abbe Emery.
It had to reply only to these two questions :
Question I. — All communication between the pope and the subjects of the emperor, being interrupted for the present, to whom is it necessary to apply to obtain the dispensations that would be accorded by the Holy See t
Question II. — When the pope persistently refuses to accord the bulls to the bishops nominated by the emperor, to iill the vacant seats, what is the legitimate means of giving them canonical confirmation .■*
The Commission, before responding, expresses first its pro- found grief that all communication between the pope and the subjects of the emperor has just been broken. It can only foresee days of mourning and affliction for the Church, if these communi- cations remain long suspended.
Majesty Napoleon, Emperor of the French, King of Italy, Protector of the Con- federation of the Rhine .... is charged to notify Pope Pius VII. that he is for- bidden to communicate with any church of the empire, and with any subject of the emperor under pain of disobedience on his part and on theirs, that he who preaches rebellion and whose soul is full of gall ceases to be the organ of the Church ; that since nothing can render him wise, he shall see that his Majesty is powerful enough to do what his predecessors have done and deposeapope. — Savour, January 14, i8n." — {M. de Bacourt. )
1 Maurice-Madeleine de Broglie (1766-1821), third son of Marshal de Broglie, Bbhopof Acqui and chaplain of the emperor in 1805, promoted to the bishopric of Ghent in 1809 ; was imprisoned on account of his resistance to the wishes of the emperor at the council of 181 1. On his return to his episcopal see in 1814, he pro- tested against various dispositions of the constitution of the Kingdom of the Lovf Countries, was eidled anew, and came to die in Paris.
6o THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLE YRAND.
It was well to demand the liberty of the pope. But the Commission should not have limited itself to placing that in the preamble. It ought to have returned to it in its replies, other- wise it had the appearance of wishing to get rid, in a preliminary formula, not to return to it any more, of this objection which so strongly accused Napoleon.
Answer to the first question. — The Commission thinks that the power of reserving dispensations attributed to the pope in the Church of the West is very suitable in all that regards the general discipline of the clergy, and that, without examining whether it is of divine right or not, it has become, by this same suitability and by a very long exercise, a sort of common law, from which one ought not to seek exemption. But as to the reserve of the dispensations relative to the daily needs of the faithful, which is found also with many local diversities in his powers, the Commission affirms, without hesitation, that the bishops have, each in his diocese, entirely in their power to grant to the faithful the dispensations and absolutions belonging thereto; that this power has never been withdrawn by any law, nor by any canon ; that it is even untransferable, and that they recover this power very naturally, above all when, as in the present circumstances, recourse to the pope is almost impossible.
Answer to tJte second question. — This question had already been proposed to the Commission of 1809, and solved in some fashion by it. It had been reproduced here because the emperor presumed that he would have a more precise reply and more nearly like the note he had dictated, at the time, to M. Duvoisin ; in this he was not entirely deceived. The new Commission first laid stress on the fact that the pope had con- tinued to refuse the bulls, without alleging any canonical reason for his refusal, in spite of the supplications of the churches of France, and notwithstanding that the results of this refusal became every day more fatal. It recalled what passed in the time of Innocent XL, when the bishops nominated by the king could govern their dioceses in virtue of the powers given to them by the chapter. Fl^chier, thus appointed successively at Lavaur and at Nlmes, afforded a proof of this. It proceeded to say that the pope, in proscribing, by briefs addressed to the chapters of
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 6i
Paris, Florence, and Asti, this mode adopted in all times by the Church of France, openly attacked the ancient discipline of this Church, which was a sad proof of the prejudices that had been inspired in him.
But the emperor, adds the Commission, does not wish longer to ■make the existence of episcopacy in France depend on the canonical confirmation of the pope, who would thus be master of the episcopacy. What must be done ? It agrees that tlie Concordat gives a very fnarked advantage to the pope over the sovereign of Fra}ice. The prince loses the right to nom.inate if in a fixed time he does not present a suitable nominee. (The Commission is entirely mistaken here : he never loses it ; if so, to whom would it pass ?) In order that there should be equality, it would be necessary that the pope, on his side, should be obliged to give the confirm.ation, or to produce a canonical motive for refusing, in a determinate time, in default of which he would lose his right of confirmation, which would devolve upon whoever had the right. This clause is lacking in the Concordat. It ought to be added to it ; it is the simplest measure and the most conformed to the principles. The emperor, said the Commission, is right in exacting it, and the pope ought to consent to it (these are the terms employed) ; and if he did not consent, it would justify, in tJie eyes of Europe, the entire abolition of the Concordat, and the recourse to another m,eans of conferring canonical confirmation. (The Commission of 1809 had not used such strong and decided language.)
However just might bi, under the circumstances, the entire abolition of the Concordat, however legitimate might be the re- establishment of the Pragmatic Sanction or of any other method of canonical confirmation, the Commission thought, however, that it would be necessary to prepare the minds, and to have tlie faithful convinced that there remained no other resource for giving bishops to the Church of France, without which the position of the bishops confirmed according to the new fortns would be untenable. This change tvould be likened to the civil constitution of the clergy of ijgi, and would produce t/te same troubles. Enlightened persons -would clearly see that it cannot be compared with an ecclesiastical constitution decreed by a purely political autJtority, against the sentiment of the Sovereign Potitiff
62 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
and of nearly all the bishops of France. But others would probably not grasp the difference well, chiefly seeing the authority of the emperor displayed with so much ardour against the Holy Father. The one side in this struggle would take part for the pope against the French episcopacy ; the others would be separated too much from, the Holy See, and the schism would thus revive with all its disorders. It was barely stamped out in 1801, by means of the perfect accord between the pope and the majority of the bishops. How much cause should we not have to fear its revival, if the bishops should declare themselves separated from the pope by so grave a decision ?
However, things cannot be left in their present state. The jurisdiction accorded by the chapters to the nominated bishops, besides its having also the grave inconvenience of being dis- approved by the pope, does not really give to the dioceses the posses- sion of a complete episcopacy. If then the pope persists in his refusal without a canonical motive, we •permit ourselves to express the desire that it be declared to His Holiness, either that the Con- cordat already broken by his own action shall be publicly abolished by the emperor, or that it will only be preserved by favour of a clause appropriate for insuring against arbitrary refusals, which render those rights illusory which the Concordat assures to our sovereign.
These are the exact words of the Commission. It recognized then that the emperor had, in the present case, the right to declare the Concordat abolished, under the condition of seeking afterwards some means of doing without it. Then what other means were there, if not to recur to the ancient law, according to which bulls were not necessary (I make use of the expression of the Commission), or, if it was desired to retain the Concordat, to add to it a clause by which the right of the pope would pass to another authority, in default of being exercised by him within a determined time.
Thus, either the Concordat will be declared abolished, or it will be modified by the aid of a clause accepted by both parties, and which will prevent all abuses.
I remark that in the first case, they could do without the pope entirely, if he persisted in his refusal, and seek elsewhere
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 63
some canonical authority different from his. This is said by the
Commission without the least restriction. The emperor does not
wish, it says, that the episcopacy in France should depend upon
the confirmation by the pope, who would thus be master of the
episcopacy, and it proves that it is right, that it is just, and entirely
within the powers of the emperor, that the Concordat should be
abolished by him, since it is no longer executed except by him
It expresses in this respect neither doubt nor regret ; it is the
fault of the pope. But, from that to say that the emperor
could do the rest, or advise means by which the rest could be
done, was hardly a step. For if the emperor had not in himself
or at his disposition all that was necessary in order to secure
the substitution of another confirmation than that by the pope,
of what use would it be for him to abolish the Concordat .'' He
might find himself as embarrassed then in abolishing it, as he
was before.
The Commission, however, did not wish to take this step. It thought, it declared, that, by principle as by prudence, it was necessary that a national council should determine or find this confirmation. But was it sure that the council, influenced by party spirit and by intrigues of all kinds, would believe itself to possess such a right ? Would it not raise new difficulties, instead of solving those it was called to settle .'' Would it consent to seek whence the confirmation of the bishops might proceed } The solution might then remain incomplete.
The Commission ought not to have dwelt so much upon the right of the emperor to abolish the Concordat, and to have pro- claimed it so loudly, since it could not acquaint him with a means of doing without it. It was a mistake, I believe, and an inconsistency on the part of the Commission.
I have thought sometimes that if the emperor had made the Bishop of Nantes Minister of Public Worship, they might have been able to do without a council which could only involve matters. That bishop, so honest, so skilful, so versed in theo- logical knowledge, acting with the threefold authority of minister, bishop, and finished theologian, over each of the other bishops separately, would have much more easily obtained their con-_ sent to substitute another canonical confirmation for that of the
64 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
pope, than he could in a council where each bishop feared to appear governed by one more skilful than himself, and where the united bishops had no longer the same fear of the emperor that each of them had in private. Perhaps even the pope himself would have released them all from embarrassment by giving the confirmation this time for fear of losing the right of conferring it in the future.
Be it as it may with this idea which is purely conjectural, there was another supposition to be discussed besides that of the abolition of the Concordat ; it was that of its modification by a clause which would for ever prevent abuses, and this was incontestably everything that was most desirable and the step most conformable to the principles, and the most suitable, even in the opinion of the Commission, to reassure all consciences.
By that, in fact, both the contracting parties could be satisfied. The pope, in the drafting of it, could have reconciled this clause with even his most ultramontane views, by declaring that, after the expiration of the three or six months, he would authorize the archbishop to replace him ; thus it was he who was still the source of power ; he would be compromising nothing, even in the eyes of the most fas- tidious, and I think that this concession on the part of the pope might have been obtained, had the negotiation been well conducted. The emperor on his side, would have had all that he wished, more even than he wished up to that time ; for, up to the existence of the Commission, he had only desired that the pope should give the bulls to the bishops nominated by him, consenting even that the pope should not insert the name of the emperor in these bulls ; and in following the course I propose. Napoleon would have obtained, moreover, even with the consent of the pope, that they should no longer be refused by him in the future, without the confirmation he refused being at once replaced by an act none the less canonical. To obtain that from the pope, without returning to him Rome and his states, would have been a triumph worthy of the fabulous destiny of Napoleon, a triumph a thousand times more im- portant in its results than if he had secured it by means of a national council.
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 65
But the commission itself had, in the first place, put an obstacle in the way of obtaining such a clause. While agreeing that this clause in the Concordat was all that could most be desired, it had always insisted that to obtain it, or to do without it, it would be necessary to have recourse to a national council, which was not putting an end to the difficulty, for if the council eluded the question instead of solving it, what would become of it ? It had been careful, however, not to do away with the idea of a negotiation : only it did not believe itself qualified to make the proposition, not having been assembled for that.
What the commission did not believe it had the right to do, the Bishop of Nantes ventured to attempt it directly with the emperor, out of fear, no doubt, of the scandal that would accrue from the sudden rupture of the Concordat, which in the preambles of the decree, would surely be accompanied by hard expressions, and consequently of injurious effect. M. Duvoisin was also perhaps uneasy as to the dispositions in which the council might be, or as to those which might be suggested to it when it was once assembled. He therefore pressed the emperor not to send, if that did not suit him, the members of the commission to make a last effort with the pope, but merely to authorize them to go.
The emperor resisted for a long time, and M. Duvoisin had much difficulty in inducing him to yield. In a moment of passion he had resolved to destroy the Concordat ; he had said it, and he did not wish to retract ; I believe, in truth, he rather gloried in it, although there was not much occasion to do so. He wished, he said, to have done with the pope. The Concordat once destroyed, he believed all would be finished. He had con- sented, it is true, to summon a council, but he thought he had nothing to fear from it. " The Concordat once abolished by a decree," said he, " the council would of course be required, if it wished to preserve the episcopacy, to propose auother mode of confirmation for the bishops, since they could not have recourse to a Compact which would exist no longer."
M. Duvoisin did not give himself up as conquered, but insisted still ; finally he decided the emperor, who, while yielding, •did it with such a bad grace, that he applied himself in the VOL. II. F
66 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
instructions he gave more to increase the difficulties than to level them ; he seemed anxious to make the negotiation fail- It was known that the instructions given by the Minister of Public Worship ^ to the bishops leaving for Savona had been dictated by the emperor. The minister, who did not wish to be held responsible for them, had told it to several influential members of the clergy.
Instead of confining himself to the important point he would have been so happy to obtain, Napoleon desired the bishops to make the most inadmissible demands, as if it were a favour he was according to the pope to maintain the Concordat, even with the clause that he claimed. He wished them to inform him before all, that a national council was convened for June 9 following, and to expose to him the measures that the Church of France would be likely to take after former precedents. He would consent to maintain the Concordat, he said, in these same instructions, only provided the pope would first con- firm all the nominated bishops, and agree that, in future, the confirmations should be made by the archbishop, in case he should not have confirmed them himself in the term of three months. He wished, and this was a strict order, that the negotiators should declare to the pope that he should never re- enter Rome as sovereign ; but that he would be permitted to return there simply as head of the Catholic religion, if he con- sented to ratify the modifications demanded, to be introduced in the Concordat. In case it should no longer suit him to go to Rome, he could reside at Avignon, where he would enjoy sovereign honours, and where he would have the liberty of ad- ministering to the spiritual interests of the other countries of Christendom. Finally, they were to offer him two millions, all this on condition that he would promise to do nothing in the Empire contrary to the four articles of 1682.
1 The Minister of Public Worship was then Jean Bigot de Preameneu. Born in 1747, he had been an advocate in the Parlement. In 1791, he was elected deputy from Paris to the Legislative Assembly, and became its president in 1792. He lived in retirement during the Revolution. After the i8th Brumaire, he was named commissioner of the government at the Tribunal of Cassation, then councillor of state and president of the Legislative Section. He took part in the commission appointed with drawing up the civil code. In 1808, he became Minister of Public Worship. The first restoration retained him in his office, and created him peer of France. He lived in retirement under the second, and died in 1825.
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 67
The three negotiating deputies were : the Archbishop of Tours, the Bishop of Nantes and the Bishop of Treves, to whom were added the Bishop of Faenza ^ nominated Patriarch of Venice, who was himself to repair to Savona. They were deputed by all the cardinals and bishops who were then in Paris, and who had given to them seventeen letters addressed to the Holy Father ; the longest and most pressing was that of Cardinal Fesch.
Furnished with these letters, instructions and powers for concluding and signing an arrangement, the three deputies started at the end of April, 181 1. They arrived at Savona on the 9th of May. It had been strongly recommended to them to return to Paris eight days before the opening of the council, that is before June 9; they left Savona, in fact, May 19.
The contents of the letters, nine in number, they wrote from Savona to the Minister of Public Worship, and of the more detailed one they wrote to him afterwards from Paris, on their return, show with what wisdom and what propriety they con- ducted this negotiation, and how they led the pope, while disguising nothing from him, to show each day to them a sweeter and more conciliating disposition, and to cause him to ' consent at last, with a few slight modifications, to the principal demands they were charged to submit to him, or if one prefers, to impose upon him.
It is worthy of remark that on the day after their arrival, the pope, on seeing them, showed at first some uneasiness lest they came to announce to him that the future council was going to constitute itself a judge of his conduct. They denied most forcibly this idea, and made use of forms of the greatest respect in order to calm him. It was pretended at the time, that the fear he had allowed himself to manifest might well have had some influence on his benevolent dispositions. He resisted during the first days without bitterness, with an extreme moderation and even with some words of affection for the emperor ; but what they demanded of him was so important, that it necessitated his conferring with his customary counsellors, and he complained of
1 Monsignor Buonsignori, appointed by Napoleon, Patriarch Archbishop of Venice.
F 2
68 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
being deprived of them. The three negotiators could not return them to him, but they neglected nothing to persuade him that he would no longer be deprived of them, when he should have entered into the conciliatory and pacific ideas of which they were the agents with him ; they added that for that which concerned the bulls, there was no need of much deliberation nor of counsellors ; that in the main the demand was just and that he must see clearly how important it was for the good of the faithful, of the dioceses and of religion, that he should grant the bulls to the nominated bishops ; and, in his own interest, as sovereign pontiff, that he should preserve, in adopting the new clause in the Concordat, this precious tie with the episcopacy of France, which would be broken if that Compact were once abolished.
The pope made new objections, but each day less strong ; he expressed regret, never the appearance of ill-will. The bishops made no haste to speak to him of the sovereignty of Rome, for fear of injuring the principal negotiation. They believed, besides, that they could perceive that the Holy Father, no longer expecting to recover this sovereignty, would doubtless •always protest upon this point, since he had not the right to make the sacrifice of it ; but that he would engage to not return to Rome, rather than consent to take the oath by which he would recognize the emperor as sovereign ; finally, that he felt that the deprivation of this sovereignty ought not to prevent him from governing the Church, as soon as his coun- sellors should have been returned to him. The pope was then resigned ; it was all that the negotiating deputies wanted.
There was no real discussion on the subject of the Bull of Excommunication, on which, however, the bishops had had occasion to express their views. The Holy Father did not seem to them to hold to it, and but rather to consent to regard it as not having been issued.
The pope resisted gently but constantly, to make the promise to regard as a disciplinary regulation for the clergy of France the four articles of 16S2. He showed himself well disposed in favour of the first of these articles, which recognized the inde- pendence of the temporal sovereignty. But why, he added,
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 6$
exact from him a declaration on the three other articles ? He gave his word of honour to do nothing against them ; they could rely upon him. How could they demand of him what had never been demanded of any pope, a written promise to this effect ? There was a question here on one side and on the other as to free opinions. Bossuet himself did not ask anything else. He had taken care not to expose his to the theologians of Italy and above all to the pope. The Holy Father referred often to the bull of Alexander VHI. (Ottoboni) successor to Innocent XL, who far from relaxing from the inflexibility of his predecessor, had issued a bull against the declaration of 1682, three days before his death. He agreed that this bull had had no results ; he did not seek to justify it, but was it for him to judge his predecessor and to condemn him .' Would it not be said in Italy and in all Christendom, that he had con- sented to give this promise from weariness of his captivity .'' His memory would be tarnished by such suspicion. These questions were, besides, complicated and difficult ; there were
none on which he stood more in need of counsel
As to the bulls, we have not been able, wrote the three bishops, after seven or eight interviews, to obtain from the pope, the promise to accord them to the bishops already nominated ; he does not believe he can decide anything for the future without his council, and consequently, to consent to the new and im- portant clause, which would be inserted in the Concordat. We exhausted, on this point, all possible arguments and con- siderations, and we announced with regret that we would start on the morrow. This prompt departure appeared to affect him ; he expressed to us the desire to see us again ; we yielded to his desire, and it seemed to us that he no longer held to any point, except obtaining the substitution of the term of six months for that of three in which to exercise his right of confirmation. We presumed that that would not make any real difficulty ; we therefore expressed all our confidence in regard to this. Finally we led him, little by little, to agree to the following articles, drawn up, in a measure, under his dictation, and of which he wished to retain a copy as a witness to his own concessions, and of his ardent desire to restore peace in the Church.
70 the memoirs of prince talleyrand.
Articles to Which the Pope Consented.
His Holiness, taking into consideration the needs and tiie wish of the Churches of France and of Italy, which have been presented to him by the Archbishop of Tours and by the Bishops of Nantes, Treves, and Faenza, and wishing to give to these Churches a new proof of his paternal affection, has declared to the above-named archbishop and bishops
1. That he will accord canonical confirmation to the bishops and archbishops nominated by His Imperial and Royal Majesty, in the form agreed upon, at the time of the Concordats of France and Italy.
2. His Holiness will hold himself ready to extend the same dispositions to the Churches of Tuscany, Parma, and Plaisance, by a new Concordat.
3. His Holiness consents that there should be inserted in the Concordats, a clause by which he agrees to expedite the bulls of confirmation to the bishops nominated by His Majesty, in a fixed time which His Holiness esteems should not be less than six months ; and, in case he should defer longer than six months for other reasons than the personal unworthiness of the candi- dates, he would invest with the power of giving the bulls in his name, after the expiration of the six months, the archbishop of the vacant see, and in default of him, the oldest bishop of the province.
4. His Holiness only determines upon these concessions in the hope which has arisen from the interviews he has had with the deputy-bishops, that they would prepare the way for arrangements which would re-establish order and peace in the Church, and would restore to the Holy See the liberty, in- dependence and dignity which are befitting to it.
Savon A, May it^th, 181 1.
The declaration they obtained thus from the pope was a grand thing which closed so to say, for the future, all debate between the French government and the court of Rome. How could it in future trouble order in France .' The canonical confirmation of the bishops was the only arm by which the refusal of a pope and his inaction could bring trouble ; his action could never bring it ; for it could only be produced by briefs of bulls .... and France would always keep up the
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 71
custom of not permitting their publication until she had had them examined and judged as containing nothing contrary to the laws of the country. All hostile will of a pope and even all dissidence which would displease, would be paralyzed by this. It mattered little what the pope thought of Galilean liberties, since it would not be in his power to arrest the effect of them. To wish to make him sign in advance some promise to this effect, was then entirely useless. The pope himself had said so ; and besides, it was only a petty tyranny they exercised over him. They had the word of honour of the Holy Father ; that was indeed something ; it was even much more than any pope had ever done : and if he had not given it, there would have resulted no danger, not even the slightest inconvenience.
I forgot to say that there was another point on which he had shown in his conversation that he would never yield : it was that by which the emperor had the pretension to reserve to himself the nomination to all the bishops of Italy, leaving to the pope only the confirmation. " What ! " said he with emotion, " to recompense subjects, even cardinals who shall have served with zeal and talent the pontifical administration, the pope could not even nominate a single bishop in all Christendom, even in the churches which, from time immemorial, have formed part of the diocese of Rome, and whose titles would become annulled by a simple compact ? That would indeed be
terrible " This was his expression, the only one of the
kind which escaped him in his interviews with the French bishops. They had nothing to reply to him on this point, the wish of the Holy Father appearing to them so natural.
They had occasion to speak to him of the two millions of income in rural property, fixed by the decree of February 17, 1810, for the maintenance of the pope. Pius VII. began by an absolute refusal, being pleased to repeat what he had said from the outset, that he wished to live on very little and on the assist- ance that might be procured from the charity of the faithful. But the bishops combated this resolution, noble as it was, by showing him that he might deprive his successors of the temporal advantages accorded by the emperor, of the sovereign honours, and of means of communicating with Catholic princes ; and
72 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
also of the resources necessary for the maintenance of the Sacred College, which, by virtue of the decree of February 17, 1810, was charged to the imperial treasury.
These considerations appeared to shake him ; he did not insist ; but nothing was decided on this point.
The bishops returned to France convinced that with more liberty and good advice, the Holy Father, if his susceptibilities were not offended, might still make new concessions on several points of some importance. But they had obtained the prin- cipal one.
Such a negotiation, so well commenced, ought to have removed all contest in the end.
What was necessary for that .' A single thing, it seems to me : not to allow the council to open, and to adjourn it for a month. During this time. Napoleon would have treated with the pope on the article of the bulls and on the new clause to be added to the Concordat, without interfering with anything else. He might have returned to him a few counsellors and sufficient liberty, and the pope would have held himself in honour bound to ratify what he had promised, as the result of an intimate conviction, at least in appearance.
This treaty once signed, the emperor would no longer have need of the council, and he might be all the more inclined to adjourn it indefinitely, because its convocation had already thrown upon him some ridicule, which he could hardly ignore. Besides, would it not be better for him to agree to terminate with the pope himself, all of whose prejudices he had been able to conquer through his negotiators, than to have to do with an assembly which would surely be tumultuous, and probably, for him, ungovernable .■' With the promise of the pope, what was there to be done by a council which had only been convoked on the supposition that the pope would never consent to give confirmation to the nominated bishops, and still less to bind himself for the future in such a manner that he could no longer refuse this confirmation .? Then all this had been granted and could be embodied in the treaty. Should the council wish anything different on this point .' So much the worse ! and if it wished only that, of what use would be its
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 7 J
intervention ? It was not at all agreeable to the pope ; we have seen that. It could only be so to the emperor in a case which no longer existed. And more, it would have been preferable, in any case, to do without it. Was M. Duvoisin very sure of directing at his will those ninety-five bishops of France and of Italy, who, pliable enough individually, might easily become heated when in a body ? And precisely because they would feel that there was nothing to be decided, they would be all the more disposed to create a host of difficulties, to raise incidental and annoying questions, in order that they should not be reproached with not having been able to say or do anything.
The emperor counted without doubt on the influence in his favour Cardinal Fesch would obtain by presiding over the council. Here he was mistaken, as in all that he had done in raising every member of his family, with the thought of making use of him afterwards. His uncle. Cardinal Fesch, had to cause his origin to be forgotten ; and he wished, as did the brothers of Napoleon, to derive consideration from his opposition to the emperor's will and rigour, and not from the credit of his nephew. Neither the emperor nor the Bishop of Nantes, whom his success at Savone ought to have better enlightened, felt all the gravity of the assembling of the council. Napoleon, who was not disarmed either by the cruel situation of the pope, or by the prodigious concessions which, in spite of this situation, had been obtained from him, had some injurious expressions in store against the pope, and did not wish to lose them. He prized the ridiculous honour of having them heard in the council, without thinking that the assembly, even the most cowardly, could not refuse to show an interest, at least for the sake of propriety, in the misfortunes of the Holy Father, and would not wish to dishonour itself openly.
The Bishop of Nantes perhaps also flattered himself, and in that he was wrong, that he could exercise a paramount in- fluence in the council, by his great ability, and by his brilliant and fluent elocution. He believed he could interest at first, and acquire afterwards a right to, the confidence of the assembly, by relating his conferences with the pope. He only suc- ceeded in creating jealousy. They did not pardon him his^
74 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
success ; they refused to believe in it ; and as the four articles consented to by the pope were not signed by him, they pre- tended that no account should be taken of them. Besides, they knew that the emperor bore him special good will ; they soon spoke of him as being a favourite, and for this reason all his words were suspected. Thereupon the emperor, in his violence, spoke as severely of the council as of the pope ; and it was supposed that M. Duvoisin was the instigator of this language. Finally, when the latter read one day in the council the project of an address to the emperor in reply to his message, and when, on some objections being offered as to its drafting, he had the inconceivable ill-taste to try to dismiss them, by saying that the project, as he had just read it, had already been submitted to the emperor, he was lost irretrievably.
What remains clear for me, is that there cannot have been an instant when Napoleon must not have repented convoking this assembly, and having permitted it to meet, since he was able to ascertain to what extent, after the return of the deputa- tion from Savone, this council had become useless, and how it might become fatal for him. It is equally true that with the intention of the emperor to cause this assembly to turn to the profit of his power, it was impossible to follow a plan more in- considerate and more awkward than the one he followed.
I wish only to pass rapidly in review the direction taken by this assembly and some incidents which relate to it.
The council had been convoked for June 9, 181 1, but, under the pretext of the baptism of the King of Rome, son of Napoleon, it did not hold its opening sitting until June 17, in the Church of Notre Dame. M. de Boulogne,^ Bishop of Troyes, preached the sermon. The assembly numbered ninety-five bishops (six were cardinals) and nine bishops nominated by the emperor, but who had not received their confirmation from the pope.
' Etienne-Antoine de Boulogne, born in 1747, took orders in 1771, was in 1782 grand-vicar of M. de Clermont-Tonnerre at Chalons-sur-Mame. He lived at Paris during all the Revolution, was imprisoned three times under the Terror, and proscribed at the i8th Fractidor ; but he then escaped all researches. Under the Empire, he became grand-vicar of the bishopric of Versailles, then Bishop of Troyes (1807). At the close of the council of l8il, he was arrested and imprisoned at Vincennes. He gave in his resignation, and was exiled to Falaise ; but the pope did not accept his resignation, and M. de Boulogne returned to Troyes in 1814. He was created peer of France in 1822, and died in 1825.
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 75
Cardinal Fesch, as we have said, took, at the first onset, the presidency, which no one contested with him, and, in the enu- meration of his titles, that of Primate of Gaul, which came to him by right in his quality of Archbishop of Lyons. It will be seen further on, why we make mention of this particular. After the sermon, the president took the customary oath, which all the bishops repeated after him, and which is couched in the following terms :
" I recognize the Holy Catholic Roman, Apostolic Church, Mother and Mistress of all the other Churches ; I swear a true obedience to the Roman Pontiff, successor to Saint Peter, Prince of the Apostles, and Vicar of Jesus Christ."
This oath produced much effect, in attracting attention to the unhappy victim to whom it was addressed. Thereupon the council separated for that day.
On the 1 8th, the very day after the opening, Napoleon invited some of the bishops to Saint Cloud, to one of those evening receptions called entries. The Empress Marie Louise and the ladies who were in attendance upon her were present, as well as a number of other persons, and among them the Prince Eugene, Viceroy of Italy. The emperor, taking some coffee that the empress poured out for him, had Cardinal Fesch, Duvoisin, Bishop of Nantes ; Mannay, Bishop of Treves ; de Barral, Archbishop of Tours ; and an Italian prelate introduced. At the moment they entered. Napoleon seized quickly and so that they could see him, the Moniteur, placed probably by order on a table. This paper in his hand, he went up to these gentlemen. The excited countenance he assumed, the violence and confusion of his expressions and the attitude of those whom he addressed, made of this singular conference a scene such as he delighted in playing, and in which he displayed his brutal coarseness.
The report of the first sitting of the council was re- produced in the Moniteur the emperor was holding ; he creased it in his hands. He first attacked Cardinal Fesch, and, what is curious, he threw himself at the first onset, with singular volu- bility, into a discussion of ecclesiastical principles and usages, without the slightest previous knowledge, either historical or theological.
76 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
" By what right, Monsieur," said he to the cardinal, " do you take the title of Primate of Gaul ? What ridiculous preten- sion ! And what is more, without having requested of me the authority ! I see your subtlety ; it is easy to unravel. Your object was to raise yourself, Monsieur, in order to call attention to yourself and to prepare the public for a still higher rank in the future. Profiting by your relationship with my mother, you seek to make it believed that I wish one day to make you the Head of the Church ; for it would not enter into any one's mind that you would have the audacity to take, without my authorization, the title of Primate of Gaul. Europe would believe that I wish thus to prepare her to see in you the future pope. . . A fine pope, in truth ! . . . With this new title you wish to frighten Pius VII. and render him more intractable still ! "
The cardinal, wounded, replied with firmness, and caused one to forget, by his honourable reply, the little dignity of his figure, tone, manners, and even the recollection of his former profession,^ of which there were habitually seen too many traces in him, for the corsair re-appeared often under the coat of the archbishop. But there, before the emperor, he had all the advantage : he ex- plained that, from all time there had been in France, not only a Primate of Gaul, but a Primate of Aquitania, and a Primate of Neustria. Napoleon, a little astonished, turned towards the Bishop of Nantes and asked him if that was true. " The fact is incontestable," said the bishop. Then the emperor left the cardinal whom alone, until then, he had taken to task. lie generalized his anger, and on the word obedience in the oath, which he confounded with obeissance^ he became so heated as even to call the fathers a council of traitors. " For one is a traitor," he added, " when he takes two oaths of fidelity at the same time, and to two sovereigns, enemies."
The Bishop of Nantes spoke a few words to which the
^ During the first years of the naval war, that is to say in 1793, 1794 and 1795; Cardinal Fesch commanded a privateer named V Avenlurier. He took several prizes that he brought to Genoa, which later were the occasion of a suit against him which he defended warmly before the tribunals of that city, and for which he had several times to my knowledge demanded the support of the government (Talleyrand).
^ ObHssance means here allegiance, whereas obidience means the homage paid by Roman Catholics to the pope.
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. tj
emperor did not listen. He paid no attention either to the sad, discontented and reflective air of M. Duvoisin, to the dejected air of MM. de Barral and Mannay, to the submissive demeanour of the Italian, or to the angry liveliness of Cardinal Fesch, and he continued to talk for an hour with an incoherence, which would have left no recollection other than astonishment at his ignorance and his loquacity, if the phrase which follows, and which he repeated every three or four minutes, had not revealed the depth of his thought. " Messieurs," he exclaimed to them, " you wish to treat me as if I were Louis le Ddbonnaire. Do not confound the son with the father. You
see in me Charlemagne I am Charlemagne, I,
yes, I am Charlemagne ! " This " I am Charlemagne," recurred at each instant. The bishops, after a few vain efforts to make him understand the difference which exists between the word obMience, which is only said in a spiritual sense, and that of obeissance, whose meaning is more extended, became tired at last of their unfruitful attempts. There was nothing for them to do but to wait, in the most profound silence, until fatigue put an end to this ill-regulated flow of words. The Bishop of Nantes, profiting then by a moment of rest, asked the emperor to speak to him in private. Napoleon went out, and he followed him into his cabinet. It was nearly midnight, and each one went his way, carrying from Saint-Cloud strange im- pressions.
As a result of this scene the emperor exacted that the two Ministers of Public Worship, M. Bigot de Pr6ameneu for France, and M. Bovara for Italy, should attend all the sittings of the council. This was an impropriety added to so many others, these two laymen in the midst of an assembly entirely ecclesiastic, where they had no right to take part in the deliberations, and could only occupy there a position as humiliating for the assembly as for themselves.
The two ministers went, therefore, to the second sitting of the council, which was held on June 20. They produced an imperial decree which ordered that a committee should be formed of the president, three bishops, and of the two ministers, and that this committee should direct the operations of the council. There
78 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
was some debate on this subject, but they took no notice of it, and the committee was composed of Cardinal Fesch, president ; the Archbishop of Bordeaux (M. d'Aviau),^ the Archbishop of Ravenna (Codronchi), the Archbishop of Nantes, and the two ministers. The latter read immediately a message from the emperor, which was nothing more than a long manifesto against Pius VII. and against all popes in general. It was the emperor who had done everything for religion ; it was the pope who did everything against it in France and in Italy ; such was, in short, the sense of this message, the drafting of which was attributed at the time to M. Daunou, a former Oratorian monk. It set forth that the pope had broken the Concordat, that, conse- quently, this was abolished, and the assembly was called upon to find a new mode of providing for the confirmation of the bishops. This diatribe produced just the contrary effect to that expected by the emperor ; that is to say, increased interest for the calumniated and persecuted Sovereign-pontiff. And at this same sitting, the majority decided to exclude from the deliberations the nine bishops nominated by the emperor and not confirmed by the pope, who, up to that time, had taken part in the proceedings of the council. This was already a grievous omen for the government.
On June 25, the council nominated a commission which was called upon to propose an address to the emperor, in reply to his message. This commission was composed of twelve members, including the president. Cardinal Fesch ; Cardinals Spina and Caselli ^ who had concluded, in the name of Pius VII., the Concordat of 1801 ; the Archbishops of Bor- deaux and of Tours ; and the Bishops of Comacchio, Ivrea,^
' Charles-Francois, Comte d'Aviau de Sanzay, bom in 1736, was at first grand- vicar of the diocese of Angers. In 1789, he was nominated Archbishop of Vienna, but refused the oath to the civil constitution and emigrated. In 1802, he became Arch- bishop of Bordeaux, and died in 1826.
' Charles-Francois Caselli, bom in 1740, entered the order of the Servites, and became its procurator-general. After the signing of the Concordat of 1801, he became bishop in partibus and cardinal (1802), then Bishop of Parma in 1804. This city having been annexed to the Empire, the cardinal came to Paris, where he lived until 1814. He returned to Parma in 1814, became privy councillor of the Empress Marie Louise, who had become Duchess of Parma, and died in 1828.
* Joseph-Marie de Grimaldi, bom in 1754, Bishop of Pignerol in 1797, then of Ivree in 1805. In 1817, he became Archbishop of Verceil. He belonged to the old and powerful famUy of the Grimaldi, .who have long possessed the principahty of Monaco.
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HJS BROTHERS. 79.
Tournai,^ Troyes, Ghent, Nantes and Treves. On the 26th, they discussed the project of the address ; its drafting had been en- trusted to the Bishop of Nantes, and it was during this discussion that he had, as I have already said, the awkwardness to let it escape that the project had already been submitted to the em- peror, which did not prevent the majority's voting against the passage which found fault with the Bull of Excommunication. On the morrow, the 27th, after the adoption of the amended plan of the address, a bishop, I believe it was the one from Chambdry,^ made the motion and in very touching terms, that the council should go to Saint-Cloud and ask the emperor for the release of the Holy Father. Cardinal Fesch hastened to close the sitting in order to cut this motion short, without which it would certainly have been carried by acclamation.
Napoleon, greatly displeased, refused to receive the address.
It was necessary, now, that, the commission of twelve should report upon the proposition presented by the government, and which consisted in finding a means of supplying the canonical confirmation of bishops refused by the pope. The Bishop of Nantes made a report on the work of the commission of 1 8 10, on the subject of this question ; and M. de Barral, Archbishop of Tours, gave an account of the journey of the three bishops to Savona, and ended by reading the note drawn up in the presence of the Holy Father and approved but not signed by him.
This point was laid aside immediately and a member of the commission moved that, first of all, they should decide the question of the competency of the council. This proposition led to a lively discussion, in which the Bishop of Ghent (M. de Broglie) spoke with much heat against the competency of the council. The question put was : Is the council competent to ordain another mode of confirming bishops ? Eight votes were for the negative,' and the bishops who had been sent to Savona for the affirmative.* Cardinal Fesch did not vote.
' Francois-Joseph de Him, bom at Strasbourg in 1751, Bishop of Toumai in 1802.
^ Trenee Yves, Baron de Solles, bom at Auch in 1744, Bishop of Digne, April 29, 1802 ; Bishop of Chambery, May 30, 1805.
' The Cardinals Spina and Caselli, MM. de Broglie, d'Aviau, Him, de Boulogne, de Grimaldi, and the Bishop of Comacchio.
* MM. de Barral, Duvoisin and Mannay.
•So THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
Napoleon became furious when he learned this result ; he' exclaimed that he would dismiss the council, that he had no need of it, that he would himself make a decree which the whole -world would obey, and which would contain the concessions made at Savona. The Bishop of Nantes succeeded again this time in calming him, and in bringing him to consent to a pro- ject of decree being sent to the council, containing, in effect, the Savona concessions, but to which should be added an article thanking the pope for his concessions, and that the assembly- should be asked to sanction this project by its vote.
The commission of twelve welcomed the project of decree, but with one restriction, that before having the force of law, it should be submitted to the pope for approbation, which was implicitly declaring the incompetency of the council. On July lO, the plan of the amended decree was communicated on the same evening, Napoleon sent to Vincennes three members of the -commission, the Bishop of Ghent, M. de Broglie ; the Bishop of Troyes, M. de Boulogne ; and the bishop of Tournai, a German whose name I have forgotten,^ and an imperial decree announced that the council was dissolved.
This dissolution of the council pronounced ab zra/c', this violence exercised against three of its members, solved nothing and even created new embarrassments, for there was no longer any method of sending to the pope a projected decree in the name of a council which had been dissolved, and above all because it had been so on account of its having sustained that it was necessary that the project should be submitted to the Holy Father. That which could h-ave been so well done before the council and consequently without it, could no longer be done now.
Perplexed by the result of his passion, Napoleon was obliged to retrace his steps ; he had to fall back upon the pitiful means of reconstituting, so to speak, the council after having dissolved it. The bishops who had not left Paris were collected again, as well as those who had been retained there by force. They were each called separately to the residence of the Minister of Public Worship , and a written approbation obtained from them of the plan of decree with a new article nevertheless, which
' M. Him.
NAPOLEON'S MARRIAGE— HIS BROTHERS. 8i
Stated that the decree should be submitted to the pope, and that the emperor would be begged to permit a deputation of six bishops to go to His Holiness to pray him to confirm a decree which alone could put an end to the misfortunes of the Churches of France and of Italy.
This was a double inconsistency, since, on the one hand, they submitted to the pope propositions to which he had already con- sented, and on the other, they solicited his approbation when the council had been dissolved for having demanded this appro- bation.
The bishops, more despondent than irritated, signed separately what was proposed to them, and, at a general sitting, August 15, 18 1 1, adopted by rising or remaining seated (a new mode of voting suggested by a ruse of Cardinal Maury) the following project :
Art I. — Conformably to the spirit of the canons, the arch- bishoprics and bishoprics could not remain vacant more than a year at the longest. In this space of time the nomination, con^ firmation, and consecration, must have taken place.
Art. 2. — The emperor will be begged to nominate for the vacant sees, conformably to the Concordats, and those nominated by the emperor will address themselves to the Holy Father for canonical confirmation.
Art 3. — In the six months which will follow the notifica- tion to the pope in the usual forms, of the aforesaid nomination, the pope shall give the canonical confirmation, conformably to the Concordats.
Art 4. — The six months expiring without the pope's having accorded the confirmations, the archbishop, or, in default of him, the oldest bishop of the ecclesiastic province, shall proceed to the confirmation of the bishop nominated, and if it be to confirm an archbishop, the oldest bishop of the province shall confer the confirmation.
Art 5. — The present decree shall be submitted to the approbation of our Holy Father, the pope, and to this effect, his Majesty will be begged to permit a deputation of six bishops to go to His Holiness to pray him to confirm a decree which alone can put an end to the misfortunes of the Churches of France and of Italy.
There was absolutely no difference in reality between what was proposed at first by the council and this which was VOL. II. G
82 THE MEMOIRS OF PRINCE TALLEYRAND.
adopted by the new assembly. Article S demanded the appro- bation of the Holy Father, while in the primitive plan it was the approbation of the emperor which was to be solicited. It is true that this was very useless, since the plan was only the literal expression of the personal demand of the emperor. Of what use then to submit it to him ? But to substitute so literally one