Wednesday, 10 April 1878

At one o’clock, as I was returning to the atelier, I met Paul de Cassagnac on the boulevard. I was in a coupé and dressed like a Swiss woman — to put it badly — and at first, not recognising me, he took me for a woman charmed by his handsome appearance and peered into the carriage. I had the coachman turn and told him to stop beside “that stout gentleman.” The fact is he looked to have grown a good deal stouter, and not at all the ideal of beauty.
We talked for a few minutes; he told me in brief what you will read in Le Pays of Thursday 11 April, which I am keeping for you.
Here is Cassagnac’s article:
I was not in Paris yesterday, and it was difficult for me to reply myself to this question from La France:
Column 6 of the front page of Le Pays of 11 April 1878: the opening of Paul de Cassagnac's article on the election of M. Gent, “I was not in Paris yesterday…”
Le Pays, 11 April 1878, p. 1 — article by Paul de Cassagnac (beginning) gallica.bnf.fr / BnF
Foot of column 6 of the front page of Le Pays of 11 April 1878: continuation of Paul de Cassagnac's article, with the quotation from La France
Le Pays, 11 April 1878, p. 1 — article by Paul de Cassagnac (continued) gallica.bnf.fr / BnF
Top of column 1 of the second page of Le Pays of 11 April 1878: the end of Paul de Cassagnac's article, signed P. de C.
Le Pays, 11 April 1878, p. 2 — end of Paul de Cassagnac's article, signed P. de C. gallica.bnf.fr / BnF
What will be the position of M. Paul de Cassagnac — defeated at Auch in the person of his candidate M. Peyrusse — with regard to his colleague M. Alphonse Gent, victorious at Orange with a majority of 2,000 votes over M. le Marquis de Biliotti?
I was defeated, it is true, but after three invalidations and six ballots, in which I triumphed five times.
If there is such a thing as an honourable defeat, it is this one — the more so since M. Peyrusse’s majority was small and fluctuated between fifty and six hundred votes at most.
But that changes nothing in my position with regard to M. Gent.
I think as before that it is wrong to be one’s sister’s lover, and the fact that the voters of Vaucluse find this quite natural is no reason for me to modify my family tastes.
The voters can elect a deputy, but they are in no position to change human laws and proclaim the excellence of incestuous adultery.
All the ballots in the urn could pass over it without washing away the stain, as Musset would say.
M. Gent, elected deputy, remains the M. Gent we knew, and his success in no way alters our feelings towards him. It proves at most that his voters have different ideas from ours in matters of morality, and that is all!
Our friend Albert Rogat had replied to La France yesterday.
One question calls forth another.
What will be the position of the republican majority in the Chamber, which has sponsored and succeeded in admitting to its ranks a colleague whom it knows, beyond any possible doubt, to be an incestuous adulterer?
This morning La France retorts: “Although M. Alphonse Gent won by more than 1,700 votes over his opponent the Marquis de Biliotti, and universal suffrage has thus pronounced its sovereign verdict, Le Pays commits the impropriety and imprudence of persisting in its war of impunity against the deputy for Orange.
Today MM. Alphonse Gent and Paul de Cassagnac both belong to the same Assembly; does Le Pays not see, then, that the persistence of insults for which its director has refused satisfaction by arms exposes the deputy for the Gers to the deputy for Vaucluse confronting him and saying: “One of us two is one too many in this chamber... You have the choice either to leave it or to give yourself the lie.” To begin with, it was not we who started this. M. Gent’s election was used as an argument against us.
Le Pays simply replied that the argument was stupid.
They insisted, Le Pays insisted.
La France recalls that we refused M. Gent satisfaction by arms.
What would be the use?
Does La France consider that the duel exists to protect filth and indecency and to prevent them from being branded?
Either the Gazette des Tribunaux told the truth, or it lied.
If it told the truth, can one have an affair of honour with M. Gent?
If it lied, let it be proved to us, and we shall apologise most willingly.
As for the confrontation that La France imprudently urges upon M. Gent, we await it with sceptical curiosity, remembering that Colonel Tallandier broke only one of his brother-in-law’s arms, which leaves us all the rest to demolish, should that necessity be forced upon us by the needs of legitimate self-defence. P. de C.
I trembled like a leaf when I saw him approach the carriage; it was as though I had fifty thousand things to reproach myself for where he was concerned; then, as we talked, I rather forgot this fear. He arrived at eight this morning. “I am worn out!”
The fact is he looked quite ravaged. Small wonder — I, who am neither a man nor French, was strangely surprised by the election of M. Gent. It is a disgrace even for the republicans themselves. One may be a republican, but more decently. And above all the six ballots for M. Peyrusse. But never mind — none of that prevents my dear great man from having the skin of his neck in poor condition. I hope that the Paris air and the attentions of his dear Swedish wife will set all that right. I arrived at the atelier all smiles — think of it, I was thinking of him at the very moment I met him.
Second anatomy lesson. M. Angé evidently respects me; it is to me that he principally addresses himself and to me that he hands the plates, the bones, etc.
Berthe, who had gone out walking with her sister and Dina, ran off with Lancaster. She went into a shop asking them to wait and slipped out by another door.
I foresaw it — that repulsive man was bound to sully her.
Mme Yorke, who was privy to the secret and had only invited Dina to have a witness of her supposed innocence, is a little woman honest at heart perhaps, but dissolute on the surface and with no more principles than she has lovers. She and their elder sister — a well-bred and proper young lady and a woman of feeling — hurried here around six o’clock to reassure Dina on behalf of Mme Boyd and to beg us to keep the matter quiet.
I do not suppose it is pleasant not to recover the innocent child until the following day... Provided he agrees to marry her now. I tell you he is a vile man! I only caught a glimpse of him once — he is a vile man.
Let a girl fall — but what I hate is the recriminations, the tears afterwards. Either abstain, or frankly accept the situation and do not complain. It is base, it is squalid, it is revolting! He does not love you enough to marry you, and if you dare to love him knowing that, it is no longer love — it is bestiality. [Several words crossed out] Love resists forgetfulness, betrayal; but its delicacy, its divinity cannot withstand this species of incomplete, pitiable, base sentiment that this man has for you.
I went to see Mouzay before her guests had arrived; she receives on Wednesdays. I really behave like Cassagnac — she does everything for me and I do not even show her common courtesies. I had to go and I went. What a warm welcome — those excellent creatures take me seriously, they truly believe me to be something superior. I ate a bar of their chocolate and read them the article from Le Pays.
The observation I made on Monday about Multedo’s nose is correct. Moreover he must have a dreadful character.

Notes

Le Pays, Thursday 11 April 1878, pp. 1–2 — read the issue on Gallica (BnF). The article, signed P. de C. (Paul de Cassagnac), answers La France on the election of Alphonse Gent as deputy for Orange. ↩
Corrected from Le Pays (11 April 1878, p. 1, col. 6); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «il m’était difficile de répondre à cette question de la France.» ↩
Corrected from Le Pays (11 April 1878, p. 1, col. 6); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «le marquis de Bilioni». ↩
Corrected from Le Pays (11 April 1878, p. 1, col. 6); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «six cent voix». ↩
Corrected from Le Pays (11 April 1878, p. 1, col. 6); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «le M. Gent que nous connaissons» and «en matière de morale et voilà tout.» ↩
Corrected from Le Pays (11 April 1878, p. 1, col. 6); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «Une question en appel une autre». ↩
Corrected from Le Pays (11 April 1878, p. 1, col. 6); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «l’impudence de persister». ↩
Corrected from Le Pays (11 April 1878, p. 1, col. 6, and p. 2, col. 1); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «font tous deux partie», «le Pays ne voit donc pas que le député du Gers à ce que…» (the words «la persistance des injures dont son directeur a refusé réparation par les armes expose» are missing, which leaves the sentence incomplete) and «ou de donner à vous-même un démenti». ↩
Corrected from Le Pays (11 April 1878, p. 2, col. 1); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «On a insisté !» ↩
Corrected from Le Pays (11 April 1878, p. 2, col. 1); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) ends the sentence without a full stop. ↩
Corrected from Le Pays (11 April 1878, p. 2, col. 1); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «qu’on les flétrisse !» ↩
Corrected from Le Pays (11 April 1878, p. 2, col. 1); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «Si elle a menti qu’on nous le prouve, et nous ferons des excuses bien volontiers ?» ↩
Corrected from Le Pays (11 April 1878, p. 2, col. 1); the printed edition (Mon Journal t. 11) reads «la légitime défence» and the signature «P.de G». ↩
In French in the original: comme il faut. ↩