5° Julia Crewitt Stoddard 



From so much concurrent testimony of reputable witnesses we 

 may be sure of two facts : — that there was an Orleans party, and 

 that this party was intriguing for power. But to know just how 

 much truth there is in the charge that the insurrection was 

 brought about by this faction, or just how far the duke was him- 

 self responsible for the acts of his party, are very difficult ques- 

 tions to answer. A study of the character of the witnesses, their 

 opportunities for gaining information, and also a knowledge of 

 the character of the duke himself may help somewhat. 



The foreign ambassadors in Paris at this time were men of 

 character and ability, and presumably free from party prejudice, 

 but they seldom give the source of their information. The depo- 

 sitions mentioned in Capello's despatch last cited are not to be 

 accepted as conclusive evidence. Indeed they sometimes contra- 

 dict each other. 1 Lafayette was persuaded that the Duke of Or- 

 leans played an important part in the October insurrection. But 

 was not Lafayette a prejudiced witness? A man of high ideals, 

 of private virtue and public honor, he could not but despise a 

 man so notorious for his vices as was Philippe of Orleans. 2 The 

 most suspicious circumstance in connection with the charges 

 against the duke is his going to England immediately after the 

 outbreak, in obedience to Lafayette's most urgent and threaten- 

 ing insistence 3 on a mission that was merely a pretext and which 

 deceived nobody as to the true character of his banishment. 4 

 The acceptance of such a mission under such circumstances is in 

 itself a confession of guilt. The efforts made by the friends of 

 the duke to keep him from going seem to show that they under- 

 stood this. Lafayette gives the following account of the matter: 

 "On the 7th of October Lafayette demanded an interview. After 

 a conversation which Mirabeau called Very imperious on one side 

 and very resigned on the other' it was resolved that the Duke of 



1 Revue historique, LXVIII, 276. 



2 Ibid., LXVIT, 259. Jefferson, Memoir, Correspondence and Miscellanies, 

 111,20. "The duke . . . sunk in debaucheries of the lowest kind, and 

 incapable of quitting them for business; not a fool, yet not head enough to 

 conduct anything," etc., etc. 



3 Montlosier, Mimoires, I, 315; Lafayette, Mhnoires, II, 357, 358. 



4 De Stael-Holstein, Correspondance diplomatique, 136. 



316 



