Chapter CXXXIX: Letter VIII: Thursday, December 11, 1664

M. d’Ormesson has not yet finished. When he came to the article of the gold mark, Puissort said, “This speaks strongly against the accused.” “It may be so,” said M. d’Ormesson, “but there are no proofs.” “What!” said Puissort, “have not the two officers been examined?” “No,” replied M. d’Ormesson. “It can not be,” said Puissort. “I can find no such thing in the proceedings,” said M. d’Ormesson. Upon this, Puissort rose in a fury, and said, “Sir, you ought rather to say, I find here a very gross omission.” M. d’Ormesson made no answer, but if Puissort had addressed another word to him, he would have replied, “I am here, sir, as a judge, and not as an informer.” You may remember what I once said to you at Fresne, that M. d’Ormesson would not discover the omission till there was no remedy. The chancellor also interrupted M. d’Ormesson several times; he told him it was not necessary to speak of the project. This must be from malice; for many will suppose it a great crime, and the chancellor would be glad that the proofs, which are truly ridiculous, should be withheld, that the idea which prevails might not be weakened. As, however, it is one of the articles of the indictment, M. d’Ormesson will not omit it. He will finish to-morrow. Sainte-Hélène will speak on Saturday. On Monday the two reporters will give their opinion, and on Tuesday, the whole committee will assemble early in the morning, and not separate till judgment be passed. I tremble when I think of this day. The hopes of the family are very sanguine. Foucault goes about every where, and shows a writing of the king’s, in which he is made to say that he should think it very improper if any of the judges leaned toward the prisoner, from the circumstance of his papers being taken away; that it was he who ordered it to be done; that there is not one that can be of use to the prisoner in his defense; that they are papers that relate merely to his office; and that he makes this known that the judges may not draw improper inferences. What say you to this magnanimous proceeding? Are you not grieved that a prince, who would love justice and truth if he were left to himself, should be prevailed upon to act thus? He said the other day at his levee, that Fouquet was a dangerous man; this has been put into his head by some one. In short, our enemies no longer keep within bounds; they run at full speed; threats, promises, every thing is resorted to; but if God be on our side, we shall be stronger than they. You will perhaps have another letter from me; if we have good news, I shall dispatch an express to you, with all possible expedition; but how I shall act, or what will become of me, in any other case, I am at a loss to conjecture. A thousand compliments to our recluse, and to your better half. Pray earnestly to God for our friend.

Saturday, December, 13.

After having fixed and changed, and fixed and changed again, it was at length resolved that M. d’Ormesson should give his opinion to-day; that Sunday might pass over, and Sainte-Hélène begin anew on Monday, which would make a stronger impression. M. d’Ormesson’s opinion was, that the accused should be sentenced to perpetual banishment, and his property confiscated to the king. M. d’Ormesson has by this means established his reputation as a judge. The sentence is a little severe,[280] but let us pray that no worse counsel may be given; it is always glorious to be the first in an assault.

[280] Severe as it was, the king aggravated the punishment still
more. Fouquet’s dilapidations were certainly criminal, but
Cardinal Mazarin gave less and took much more. The licentiousness
of the times, and the force of example, were an excuse, if any
excuse could be made.