Sunday, 3 March 1878

I really was asleep as I was writing yesterday. This sleepless night makes me nervous — combined with reading all the newspapers, which reproduce and comment on Cassagnac’s speech, which describe his duel. I have had enough of that name, Paul de Cassagnac. Must that wretch be so fortunate?
Don Carlos, Paul de Cassagnac, and the tangerines I eat all day long — dry and too sweet — all of this stupefies me, not to mention the commotion in the streets, the carts, the whistles, the noise — which remind me of the last act of La Traviata; it goes without saying that I am Violetta, and that the carnival from which I am excluded makes me sad. Bah! I am not the only one. Not everyone has the good fortune of that wretch Cassagnac.
His luck really is becoming insulting in the end. I am keeping the newspapers, but the article from the Figaro I am attaching to this very sheet — it is so amusing.
Why M. de Cassagnac had requested a closed session
Foot of column 3 of the front page of Le Figaro of 3 March 1878: the heading “Figaro Pic-nic”, “Why M. de Cassagnac had requested a closed session”, Paul de Cassagnac's letter to Périvier and the opening of the 1836 report
Le Figaro, 3 March 1878, p. 1 — “Figaro Pic-nic”: “Why M. de Cassagnac had requested a closed session” (letter from Paul de Cassagnac) gallica.bnf.fr / BnF
Column 4 of the front page of Le Figaro of 3 March 1878: continuation and end of the report on the case of Lieutenant-Colonel Talandier before the court-martial in 1836, and the lines on M. Gent
Le Figaro, 3 March 1878, p. 1 — the 1836 report (column 4) gallica.bnf.fr / BnF
We have received the following letter:
My dear Périvier,
Regarding the incident raised in the Chamber by the allusion I made to certain antecedents of M. de Billiotti’s opponent in the Vaucluse election, you ask me, for the Figaro, to supply the documents I had in hand — which I was unable to read from the tribune and for which I requested, if necessary, a closed session. I have no objection to providing them. The document in question appears in full in the Annuaire historique de Lesur, year 1836, page 153, and in the Gazette des Tribunaux.
I submit it under my personal and legal responsibility.
With a handshake,
Paul de Cassagnac
Here is the document in question:
On the 18th of February, 1836, the lieutenant-colonel of the 46th of the Line appeared before the Second Court-Martial of the Seine under the following circumstances:
Lieutenant-Colonel Talandier married Mlle Virginie G..., then twenty years old, in Provence in 1827. Two children were born of the marriage. Until recently, nothing had disturbed the husband’s peace of mind; he had entire confidence in his wife. His regiment came to Paris, and shortly thereafter the wife’s half-brother arrived to continue his studies; he was received by his brother-in-law, who admitted him to his table whenever he wished. The young man renewed his visits with such assiduity as to arouse the husband’s suspicions; but the lieutenant-colonel repelled all the thoughts that beset him — he dared not believe in adultery, still less in incest.
However, what the husband scarcely dared suspect, the servants had observed. Prompted by curiosity, they had acquired indubitable proof of their mistress’s guilt. Her conduct had indeed become so free and familiar with M. Alphonse that the household staff felt a certain embarrassment whenever they found themselves in the drawing room at the same time as the young man: out of discretion they withdrew, and soon, from the kitchen, they could hear the expressions of tenderness that
the two lovers lavished upon each other.
The lieutenant-colonel told his wife of his fears and suspicions; she repelled these imputations with bitterness; however, as they were founded, the husband resolved to obtain the proof with his own eyes.
On the 21st of January, the lieutenant-colonel informed her of an invitation he had received to attend a ball on the 25th of the same month, quite persuaded that she would eagerly seize upon this circumstance to get her brother to come and dine with her. The husband had foreseen rightly: Alphonse was invited and came to dinner. Despite the cruel presentiments that gripped his heart, the lieutenant-colonel, so as to arouse no suspicion, was obliged to restrain himself and make his young brother-in-law welcome.
At last the hour to get ready for the ball arrived. A servant went to fetch a carriage and, at nine o’clock, the husband went down, leaving the young man in the drawing room, having received from him a firm handshake. The wife, though bareheaded, wished to accompany her husband into the street, and before he got into the carriage she embraced him with the most heartfelt effusion, wishing him great pleasure at the dance.
A few steps from the house, the lieutenant-colonel dismissed his cabriolet and re-entered secretly; he made his way to his manservant’s room and, having concerted with him, took up his two loaded pistols; he advanced toward the drawing room and, by means of two holes he had had made in the door, was able to satisfy himself that the incestuous adultery was flagrant. In that moment, difficult to describe, a convulsive movement seized the husband; he flung open the door and hurled himself at the guilty pair. The young brother immediately rose and received the first pistol shot, which struck him only in the left arm; the wife, who had stayed lying on the sofa, covering only her face with her hands, received the second shot, which likewise wounded her in the left arm.
Although wounded, the young man threw himself at the lieutenant-colonel and engaged him in a struggle in which he made vain efforts to overcome his adversary; struck violently on the head with the pistol butt, he took flight, while the wife had dragged herself to the cellar, where her groans soon drew the household.
The lieutenant-colonel, left alone in the drawing room, immediately sent word to the colonel and the surgeon-major of his regiment, as well as to the police commissioner of the district...
It was on account of these facts that Lieutenant-Colonel Talandier appeared before the court-martial. The president ordered a closed session for the testimony of the manservant and the cook, who had details too technical to allow that portion of the hearing to be public.
Major Mévil, the rapporteur, at the opening of his address, expressed himself thus: “The fact of the incestuous adultery is established, and the double attempt at murder is likewise certain; but the accused falls within the category of an excusable attempt at murder, provided for by articles 2, 304, 324, and 326 of the ordinary Penal Code. The question thus posed and resolved in favour of the prosecution would still carry a penalty: but the Code could not have foreseen the case in which adultery might be incestuous, and this circumstance so
extraordinary, which must have increased the exasperation of the accused lieutenant-colonel, appears to us also a reason to recommend him to your indulgence.”
Needless to say, the lieutenant-colonel was acquitted by a unanimous vote.
A rather curious detail: it is this same Colonel Talandier who, some months later, arrested Prince Louis-Napoleon in the Strasbourg affair.
Such are the facts to which M. de Cassagnac alluded.
We do not quite understand the contradictions that arose on this subject within the ranks of the left — and particularly on the part of M. Albert Joly, who claimed to have proof contrary to what M. de Cassagnac asserted.
The fact in question was raised by the republicans themselves at the elections of 1868, at the time when M. Gent was, in one of the Paris arrondissements, the rival of M. Emmanuel Arago.
As for any proof to the contrary, should anyone be able to produce it, we will record it with alacrity.”
As for the horrible accusation against M. Gent, one must truly be rabid to go digging up such a horror; but I rather like this malice — I would have done it myself to ruin an enemy.
Marcuard writes to me.
Florence, [Thursday] 28 Feb[ruary] 1878. Dear Mademoiselle,
Your kind letter of Saturday has just reached me. I thank you for it a thousand times. As I had the honour of telling you, carnival is nothing — no processions, no balls, nothing. Moreover it is over, and next week we enter Lent. The races will take place here and in Naples, as last year. And should that help you decide, we shall be delighted to have you. Melissano is here. I have not seen him for several days — he is indisposed — and I have had relatives here who have taken all my time in showing them the galleries and entertainments of Florence.
How can you think of Mlle Alexandrine for me? I find her very amiable, but I have not courted her at all. M. des Perrières is a gossipmonger. Besides, you saw at once from the way I spoke of it that I put no faith in what he said. The weather has been fine until now; today it is beginning to turn.
Alexandre is here — he is forever talking of marrying, of settling down. Does that not tempt you?
Give my warmest regards to the young harpist of my heart. I shall go today to Melissano and ask whether he returns to Naples, since you set store by his presence. I suspect him of being in poor — very poor — circumstances, but I never speak of such things with him. There are a few soirées; tonight a ball at the Skating, but there is very little
animation — yet do not let that prevent you from coming; a holiday will do you good. You are tiring yourself too much; you have embraced your art with too violent a passion and ardour. You will renew yourself in the Italian climate; you will draw new strength, or new ideas, from the contemplation of the masterworks you will now see from a different point of view than before.
Write to tell me what you decide — I am not leaving Florence.
I repeat that all that may be agreeable to you will be placed
at your feet.
I await your news and remain always your most devoted and obedient.
F. de Marcuard
Mme Van Schaick, who lived on the first floor of your house on the Champs-Elysées, is here for a few days. The rumour had circulated of your grandfather’s death — I contradicted it and hope he continues to improve. A thousand kind regards to your family.
There are people like that wretched deputy who have everything, and others who are like me.

Notes

Corrected from Le Figaro (3 March 1878, p. 1, col. 3); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «Pourquoi M. de Cassagnac avait demandé le huis clos». ↩
Le Figaro, no. 62, Sunday 3 March 1878, p. 1 — read the issue on Gallica (BnF). The letter and the 1836 report appear in the «Figaro Pic-nic» column at the bottom of columns 3–4 of the front page. ↩
The titles mean Historical Yearbook and Gazette of the Courts (a legal newspaper). ↩
Corrected from Le Figaro (3 March 1878, p. 1, col. 3); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «A props», «l’adversaire de M. Billioti, dans», «lire à la tribune et pour lesquels», «page 153 et dans la Gazette». ↩
Corrected from Le Figaro (3 March 1878, p. 1, col. 3 and col. 4); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «épousa en Provence», «Mlle Virginie G... alors». ↩
Corrected from Le Figaro (3 March 1878, p. 1, col. 4); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «maitresse», «Poussés par un sentiment», «et bientôt de la cuisine», «témoignages de tendresses». ↩
Corrected from Le Figaro (3 March 1878, p. 1, col. 4); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «M. le lieutenant-général communiqua», «ses craintes, et ses soupçons». ↩
Corrected from Le Figaro (3 March 1878, p. 1, col. 4); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «l’heure de se déposer pour le bal», «La femme quoique nu-tête voulut». ↩
Corrected from Le Figaro (3 March 1878, p. 1, col. 4); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «prendre les deux pistolets chargés», «s”avança vers le salon», «l’adultère incestueux été flagrant», «couverte de ses mains reçoit le second coup». ↩
Corrected from Le Figaro (3 March 1878, p. 1, col. 4); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «à la tête avec la crosse», «ses gémissement appelèrent». ↩
Corrected from Le Figaro (3 March 1878, p. 1, col. 4); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «M. le lieutenant-colonel Talendier». ↩
Corrected from Le Figaro (3 March 1878, p. 1, col. 4); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «dans le sens de l’accusation emporterait encore une peine : mais le Code». ↩
Corrected from Le Figaro (3 March 1878, p. 1, col. 4); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «qui à dû augmenter». ↩
Corrected from Le Figaro (3 March 1878, p. 1, col. 4); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «fut acquité à l’unanimité». ↩
Corrected from Le Figaro (3 March 1878, p. 1, col. 4); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «Tels sont les fait auxquels». ↩
Corrected from Le Figaro (3 March 1878, p. 1, col. 4); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «dans l’arrondissement de Paris». ↩
Corrected from Le Figaro (3 March 1878, p. 1, col. 4); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «Du reste quant à la preuve contraire». ↩