The Sun.
London, England, 1863-03-12 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, MARCH 12, 1863.

Assault on the Editor of the " Figaro."

A general subject of conversation in Paris during
the last two or three days is an attack, of which M.
de Villemessant has been the object, at his own re-
sidence, on the part of a member of the Legislative
Body. The motive of this act of violence was the
following article in the liga7o on the projected
marriage between M. Ed. About and the daughter
of Madame Denain, of the Theatre Francais ;
" The _Figaro ought to know everything, even
that which is it mystery to the rest of the world.
Now, everyone is ignorant that at the present time
M. Edmond About is on the point of bidding adieu
to a bachelor's life. The young and bril-
liant writer is in a few weeks to marry
the daughter of a ei-tA•vant dramatic nota-
bility of the Theatre Francais, retired in a
—fromage d'cr. The mother is a clever woman,
still young, and who was rather more celebrated
for beauty than her talent ; the future bride, who
is charming, brings a portion of half a million in
cash ; as much in diamonds, precious stones, valua-
ble lace, &c., and, moreover, expectations estimated
at 1,200,000 f. or 1,500,000 f. Just to think that so
many poor writers pass all their lives over their
desks to go at last to die at the Maison Dubois or
at Sainte-Perine, whilst it has only required one
campaign for 111. About to become a millionaire, like
Villars, after the battle of Denain !"
The following are the particulars of the case as
published by M. de Villemessant in the Ftgaro—
" Oar number of last week contained the fol-

lowing paragraph :—' On Wednesday night my
residence was violated, and my vigorous consti-
tution alone saved me from being the victim
of an infamous outrage. I had the imprudence,
out of respect fcr the present position of the
guilty party, to treat him as a gentleman. After
eight hours' reflection, he sent a written answer re-
fusing all kind of satisfaction. I have now, there-
fore, only to have recourse to the tribunals, and
have already lodged my complaint.'
On the evening of the same day the Presse pub-
lished the following answer :

" A person who acknowledges that a note in a
journal this day applied to him begs us to announce
that he protests against the assertions contained in
the said note.'

I had yielded to advice and resigned myself to
await the trial before publishing the particulars of
the infamous attack made on my person ; but
the lines published by the Presse compel me to
adopt another course. Moreover, as a report
has been set afloat that M. Didier had thrown his
card in my face, and that it was I who refused to
fight, I cannot allow public opinion to be misled for
a single moment, and therefore now state the affair
in full as follows :—On Wednesday evening, about
a quarter past six, a person came to my residence,
who gave the name of Didier, and, instead of wait-
ing in the ante-chamber, which was lighted, fol-
lowed my servant into a dark passage. I was at
the moment in Madame de Villemessant's room at
the farther end of the apartment. I told the ser-
vant to show the person into my study, and 1 im-
mediately rose to go and receive him. A lamp
burning in the chamber I was leaving threw its light
o❑ me and left my visitor in complete obscurity. As
I.was bowing to received several blows on my
head and body from a loaded cane. I immediately
rushed farward, and seizing him with one hand,
struck him several blows with the other, defending
myself as well as Icould withoutknowingwho wasmy
assailant. My wife hearing the noise of the struggle
which passed without a word being exchanged,
cried out, Help, help.' My valet and another man-
servant were soon on the spot, and the latter seized
my antagonist by the throat and held him so tight

that he could not utter a word. I then sent for the
commissary of police, and hastened to reassure my
wife, who had been crying for help till she lost her
voice, I next returned to the ante-chamber to get
sight of my aggressor's face, but during my momen-
tary absence my servants had imprudently allowed
him to escape. As he went away he said, lam
Henri Didier, deputy to the Legislative Body ; I
have given it to him well.' All this passed in less
time than is required to relate it. Such are the
facts which were a few minutes after consigned to
a proces verbal by the commissary of police. A
physician, who had been sent for will bear witness
to the traces of violence left on my person. My left
hand with which I had held my cowardly assailant,
was covered with blood which was not mine.
I ma; add that I have no acquaintance what-
ever with the person named Didier, that his
name has never been mentioned in the
" Figaro," and that in coming to my house he
had no motive, avowable or otherwise, for so doing
even in the character of a brave man who comes to
demand satisfaction for an offence of any kind."
The same evening M. de Lescure went to M. Didier,
in the name of M. de Villemessant, to inform him
that the latter intended to send two gentlemen
whom he had selected as his seconds to delnand
satisfaction. To this intimation M. Didier replied
by the following note ;

" Paris, sth March.
" Sir,—l will give M. de Villemessant any hon-
ourable reparation. Satisfaction in money is quite
sufficient .—Accept, &c., H. DIDIER."

On Thursday morning M. de Villemessant's seconds
—M. Henri de Pene and Baron de Bazancourt—
received the same answer, and M. de Villemessant
then decided on lodging a complaint with the Pro-
cureur-Imperial. Here, however, an obstacle
arises. M. Didier, being a member of the Legisla-
tive Body, cannot be prosecuted without the
authorisation of the Chamber, which will be
demanded by the Procureur-Imperial if M. de
Villemessant persists in prosecuting; and should
it be refused, M. de Villemessant will wait till after
dissolution. On Friday, however, M. Didier
changed his mind, and wrote to M. de Villemes-
sant's seconds that he was willing to fight. The
editor of the _Figaro then consulted his seconds and
the Marquis du Hallay, all well versed in the code
of honour, and it was unanimously decided that he
should abide by M. Dither's first answer, and so
the matter stands for the present.— Galignani.