Memoirs of the Duchesse de Dino (Afterwards Duchesse de Talleyrand et de Sagan), 1836-1840
The results of this last step have not yet reached our knowledge, but
we expect information daily. I trust that information may be
favourable. As the different powers in France have recognised the
justice of our rights and the obligations imposed upon them by the
treaty of 1831, and as no real cause remains as an excuse for further
delay, we may hope that France will at length adopt that course of
procedure demanded no less imperiously by the interests of the two
nations than by the principles of justice. When once the treaty has
been carried out by France, few causes of disagreement will remain
between the two countries, and in short there will be nothing that
cannot be surmounted by the influence of a pacific and enlightened
policy and by the influence of that mutual good will and those
generous recollections which will, we trust, then be revived in all
their early strength; but in any case, the question of principle which
has been raised by the new turn given to the discussion is of such
vital importance to the independent action of the government, that we
cannot abandon it or make it the subject of a bargain without
compromising our national honour. I need not say that such a sacrifice
will never be made by any act of mine. I will never stain the honour
of my country to relieve myself of my obligation to tell the truth and
to do my duty; nor can I give any other explanations of my official
act than those required by honour and justice. This determination, I
feel sure, will meet with the approbation of my constituents. My
knowledge of their character is very inadequate if the sum of
twenty-five millions of francs should outweigh for a moment in their
eyes any question which affects their national independence; and if
unfortunately a different impression should prevail they would rally,
I feel certain, about their chosen Government vigorously and
unanimously, and silence for ever this degrading imputation.
Having thus frankly submitted to the Congress the further steps which
have taken place since last session, in this interesting and important
affair and also the views of the Executive power concerning it, it
only remains for me to add, that as soon as the information expected
by our Minister has been received, it will become the subject of a
special communication.[149]
[149] From the _Journal des Débats of January 1, 1836_.
II
_Speech by the_ DUC DE BROGLIE, _President of the Council,
Chamber of Deputies in the Session of January 6, 1836, on the
subject of Poland_.
GENTLEMEN,
I do full justice to high ideals and the noble passions with which the
orator whom you have just heard has been inspired;[150] but I will
venture to remind him that he has not done full justice to the
Government and to the Ministry of 1831 in expressing his apparent
belief that the difficulties of that period prevented our Cabinet from
showing that interest in the Polish nation which a French Government
will always feel for Poland.
[150] M. Odilon Barrot.
At that moment, difficult and dangerous as it was, when the domestic
circumstances of France were very perplexing, the French Government
did for the Polish nation all that it was its duty to do. It did more
than any other nation, and if history ever reveals the diplomatic
correspondence of the French Government at that time, I venture to
think that full justice will be done to the illustrious man who was
then President of the Cabinet.[151]
[151] M. Casimir Perier.
What was done at that time in the interests of humanity and justice,
the Government has never ceased to do whenever it thought that its
intervention could be of any use to the population of Poland.
But in the presence of so enlightened a Chamber as this, it is
unnecessary to recall the fact that the intervention of a foreign
Power in the domestic administration of another state must be
conducted with every care and precaution. There is often a reason to
fear that such intervention, far from calming irritation and
exasperation and far from weakening political animosity, may arouse
these passions to greater power. In a word, such a task can only be
fulfilled by the constant exercise of care and precaution.
I trust that the Chamber will understand me if I say that the French
Government has never neglected any opportunity of intervening in the
interests of humanity, but the Chamber will also understand perhaps
that this is not the right moment for serving humanity and that it is
indeed against the wishes of the Chamber to press the Government to
further efforts in this place. It is to be feared that words actuated
by generous feeling may indeed produce an effect entirely contrary to
the sentiments which inspires them and may merely be translated abroad
into greater ill-feeling. There is a fear, in short, that the cause of
humanity may be betrayed in the very wish to serve it and without the
knowledge of those who desire to defend it (General cries of Hear,
Hear).
On this point I shall say no more. The former speaker has himself
pointed out the difference that should characterise the observations
of one who speaks for the Government, and those of an isolated member
of the Chamber. The Chamber will certainly understand that it is not
for me to reply severally to the observations which have been laid
before you, because any answer to these observations will have an
undue importance as coming from myself.
As to the other branch of the question, the existence of treaties
which the first speaker has discussed, and to which the second[152]
has also referred; I will speak upon the matter as shortly as I can.
As far as I know, absolutely no one in Europe would assert that
treaties should not be faithfully executed both in their letter and
their spirit, but in the article of the treaty to which the two
orators have referred, different principles are enounced; principles
which are not incompatible, and should indeed be reconciled; on the
one hand the Independence of Poland, and on the other the Union of
Poland with Russia. In this article the principle is laid down that
representation and certain national institutions should exist; but
execution has been delayed until we know what these institutions are
to be, and under what form they will be established.
[152] M. Saint-Marc Girardin.
This article was not drawn up with all the clearness that might have
been desired. The possibility is thus open that the several Powers who
signed the treaty of 1815 may interpret it in different senses, and
emphasise more or less the principles therein enounced. It may be--I
am only putting a hypothetical case--that the several Powers will not
agree upon the application of these principles, or upon the nature of
the action that lies before them. Are we to say that the moment a
difference of opinion arises, we should immediately have recourse to
force? The Chamber cannot countenance such an idea. The maintenance of
relations between the Powers is upon the same footing as the
maintenance of harmony between the public bodies. The mere fact that
divergence of opinion is possible is no reason for an appeal to force.
Discussion, reason, and time will enable the truth to prevail.
Well, gentlemen, I am confident that the Chamber will understand
without further words from myself upon the question now before it,
that there are divergences of opinion between the different Powers
upon certain points. We consider that negotiations, discussion, and
time will enable the truth to prevail, and we trust that upon this
point you will agree with us. (Loud applause.)[153]
[153] From the _Journal des Débats of January 7, 1836_.
III
_Eulogy upon_ COUNT REINHART, _delivered at the Academy of Moral
and Political Science, by the_ PRINCE DE TALLEYRAND, _in the
Session of March, 3, 1838_.
GENTLEMEN,
I was in America when the kindnes of my friends appointed me a member
of the Institute, and thus connected me with the study of Moral and
Political Science, to which society I have had the honour to belong
since its origin.
On my return to France my first care was to attend the sessions of the
Institute, and thus to show the members of that time, many of whom we
have every reason to regret, what pleasure I felt at finding myself
one of their number. During the first session at which I was present
the committee was reappointed, and I received the honourable post of
secretary. The six months' report which I drew up, with all the care
that I could bring to it, was perhaps of a too deferential character,
as I was giving an account of work to which I was a complete stranger.
It was work which doubtless had cost much research and much labour to
one of our most learned colleagues, and was entitled, "Dissertations
upon the Riparian Laws." At the same time in our public meetings I
delivered some lectures which I was then allowed to insert in the
Memoirs of the Institute. Forty years have elapsed since that date,
during which this chair has been forbidden to me, first by long
absences, and also by duties to which I was obliged to devote the
whole of my time, and I may add by the discretion which times of
difficulty make incumbent upon a man whose business is political;
and, finally, by the infirmities which old age usually brings or
aggravates.
But to-day I feel it necessary--and, indeed, regard it as a duty--to
appear for the last time in memory of a man known throughout Europe, a
man who was my friend, and who was our colleague since the formation
of the Institute. I come forward publicly to testify to our esteem for
his person and to our regret for his loss. His position and mine
enable me to reveal several of his special merits. His principal, but
not his sole title to glory consists in a correspondence extending
over forty years, necessarily unknown to the public, who will probably
never hear of it. I asked myself, "Who will speak upon that matter
within these walls? Who will have any reason to speak of it except
myself, who have known so much of it, who have been so pleased by it,
and so often helped by it in the course of the Ministerial duties
which I have had to perform under three very different reigns?"
Count Reinhart was thirty years of age and I was thirty-seven when I
first met him. He entered public life with a large stock of
information; he knew five or six languages, and was familiar with
their literatures. He could have attained celebrity as a poet or
historian or geographer, and in this latter capacity he became a
member of the Institute at the time of its foundation.
At that time he was already a member of the Academy of Science in
Göttingen. Born and educated in Germany, he had published in his youth
certain poems which had attracted the attention of Gessner, Wieland
and Schiller. At a later date, when his health forced him to take the
waters of Carlsbad, he was fortunate enough to meet and to know the
famous Goethe, who so far appreciated his taste and his knowledge as
to apply to him for information upon any outstanding features in
French literature. Herr Reinhart promised to keep him informed.
Undertakings of this nature among men of first-rate intellectual power
are invariably mutual, and soon become bonds of friendship. The
intimacy between Count Reinhart and Goethe gave rise to a
correspondence which is now being printed in Germany.
Having thus reached that time of life when a man must definitely
choose that career for which he thinks himself best fitted, we shall
see that Herr Reinhart formed a resolution by no means consistent with
his character, his tastes, his own position, and that of his family:
remarkable as the fact was for that age, in preference to the many
careers in which he could have been independent, he chose one in which