The Sun.
London, England, 1860-08-28 00:00:00

CURIO ITS FRENCH WILL CASE.

(From Galignani's Messenger.)
A trial of some political interest has just been
submitted to the Civil Tribunal of Clermont (Oise).
The late Marquis de Villette, a very wealthy noble-
man of ancient family, who died on the 3d June of
last year, left a will, dated Bth April preceding,
thus conceived :—" I, Charles Villette, Marquis de
Villette, die in the bosom of the Roman Catholic
Church. I institute for my universal legatee my
dear old friend the Count of Dreux-Breze, Bishop
of Moulins. In case he will not, or cannot, receive
my legacy, I institute for my universal legatee my
dear cousin, Leon Cordier de Montreuil." After
some bequests to servants, the testator said :—"All
the articles of furniture and the works of art in my
chateau of Villette shall not be sold, but are to re-
main as they are now placed as long as the chateau
shall be in the hands of my universal legatee. This
collection.is the work of three generations." By a
codicil, dated the 27th of May, he substituted M.
Alfred de Montreuil for M. Leon de Montreuil, the
former being the son of the latter. The action
brought before the tribunal was instituted by M.
Alfred de Montreuil, and the object of it was to
have the will declared invalid, on the ground that
the bequest made by it to the Bishop of Moulins was
not meant for the prelate personally, but was in-
tended to be handed over by him to the Count de
Chambord, and that a bequest of that kind is ex-
pressly prohibited by the French law. Supposing
the will to be declared invalid, M. A. de Montreuil
maintained that the codicil was still good, and that
consequently, the property of the testator, esti-
mated at not less than 4,000,000 f., came to him.
To make out that the Bishop of Moulins was
only, in the testator's intention, a trustee for Count
de Chambord, the following facts were stated :
The late marquis always entertained an attachment
to the elder branch of the Bourbon family, and he
even adopted as his motto, " Toujours fidele, tou-
jours fidele !" The Revolution of 1830 increased
rather than diminished that attachment. The death
of the Duke de Bourbon just after that event pro-
duced a profound impression on his mind, anct he
was always convinced that it was caused by crime,
not by suicide. On the arrest of the Duchess de
Berry he offered himself as a hostage for her, and
wrote letters to her and other members of the
family, expressing unbounded devotedness.
One of these letters was thus conceived :—" Dis-
gusted with mankind on account of the crime of
1830, I intended to offer my services to their Ma-
jesties_ But of what use would an humble subject
have been ? I retired to private life, blessing and
adoring always the successor of our kings. He
fills all my thoughts ; all my affection is fixed on
him. He is my life ! The Queen alone is higher
than he." In 1836 he consulted an eminent judge,
M. Berard-Desglajeux, as to whether he could not
leave his fortune to the Count de Chambord, but
he was told that the count being excluded from
France by a law of 1832, was incapable of inherit-
ing, and that to leave his fortune to another in
trust for him would be invalid. Notwithstanding
he drew up in that year a will, in which, after
saying, "I declare on my soul and conscience that
the Prince de Conde did not commit suicide,
and that his death is the result of a crime," he
added, " I die in endeavouring to execute the
intention of the Prince de Conde, which was well
known to me, of leaving his property to the
Duke de Bordeaux and to his sister Made-
moiselle. In consequence, in dying, I supplicate
H.R.H. Henry of France to accept the offer which
I make of all my real and personal property exist-
ing at my death." Annexed to this will was a letter
to the Duke de Bordeaux, which terminated thus—
" I have no children—l have a little property—
deign to accept the offer of it. Oh ! do not reject
this respectful supplication !" Subsequently he
wrote to M. Berard-Desglajeux to say that, in order
to cause his property to reach the Duke de Bor-
deaux, he had by a new will left it to one of his re-
latives, who would fulfil his intentions, and had at
the same time made a second will, explaining what
he wished. In 1840, he went to Goritz, and in an
interview with the Count de Chambord, begged
him to accept his fortune, to which his Royal High-
ness consented. He afterwards wrote to the Prince :
—" I have no children, Monsignor, and I am there-
fore able to offer you the mite of a faithful subject.
I made my will in 1836, but I feared it would not
be accepted by you. I have, therefore, made two
wills—one being on account of the revolutionary
acts, a trusteeship, &c."
In subsequent years numerous letters passed be-
tween him and the exiled Royal family, all express-
ing his intention to leave the property to the Prince.
In 1849 and 1850 all his friends knew of his inten-
tion to leave the property to the Prince, and one of
them wrcte him letters, in which his Royal High-
ness was spoken of as " the future owner of the
Chateau of Villette." The testator, moreover, mani-
fested great pleasure on learning that bequests had
been made to the Prince by Mme. Du Cayla and
Count Do Talaru—a proof that his intention re-
mained unchanged. In 1857 he; consulted M. de
Royer, then procureur-general, as to whether he
could not leave his property to the Prince, and
that gentleman in answer sent him the law of
1832, which declares Charles X. and his descen-
dants for ever excluded from France, and that they
cannot " possess or acquire any property real or
personal in the country." He subsequently con-
sulted other lawyers, and though they told him the
bequest which he contemplated was illegal, he per-
sisted in making it. He at length informed a friend
that he had resolved on selecting the Bishop of
Moulins as trustee for the Prince, and the friend
said to him, " That will be a very bad choice. The
devotedness of the Dreux-Breze family to the elder
branch is well known, and everybody will suspect
that a legacy to one of them is not real." Finally
the draft of a letter written under his dictation to
the bishop had been found, saying, " I institute you,
monseigneur, my universal legatee, because you
know my intention to have my fortune go to the
Count de Chambord. It is a trusteeship which I
confide to your friendship and uprightness. I beg
General de la Rochejacquelein to present to you
this letter, to thank you from the bottom of the
tomb for the mission you will fulfil."
From all these facts, M. Marie, the counselsof the
plaintiff, contended that there was no doubt what-
ever that the testator had left his property to the
Bishop of Moulins in trust for the Count de Cham-
bord, and he then entered into a long argument for
the purpose of showing that trusteeships are pro-
hibited by law, and that they have been repeatedly
set aside by the courts. M. Berryer pleaded for the
Bishop of Moulins. After complaining, with some
severity, of M. Montreuil for attempting to disturb
the will, the learned gentleman proceeded to con-
tend that even supposing the Marquis de Villette
had at one time intended to leave his property to
the Count de Chambord, he being of very change-
able character, and finding, besides, the legal ob-
stacles which existed to such a bequest, had come
to the resolution to make the prelate his legatee.
In proof of this he read several letters from the mar-
quis to the bishop, one being thus conceived :—" If
you go to Paris, my dear bishop, you will come to
repose in' my hermitage, which is yours. You know
that I have left all to you by my will, and that will
I now renew. I had at one time given it to your be-
loved brother, but as he is dead and you succeed him,
it is to you, Count de Dreux-Breze, Bishop of Mou-
lins, whom I institute sole heir of all my property,
real and personal. By you at least my worship for
my princes and for the august Marie Therese of
France will be shared!" On the legal point of the
question, the learned gentleman contended that the
law of 1832 declaring the descendants of Charles X.
incapable of holding property in France was a mere
political measure never intended to be seriously
acted on ; and the proof of this was that the Count
de Chambord actually possessed real property in
France, and had several times pleaded before the
courts.

The tribunal, in a judgment of great length, de-
cided that though the Marquis de Villette had un-
doubtedly for many years entertained the intention
of leaving his property to the Count de Chambord,
there was not legal proof that when he made the will
in favour of the Bishop of Moulins he had not com-
pletely abandoned that intention, from the convic-
tion that tree bequest to the Prince would be illegal;
and it is said too that the various circumstances
mentioned did not prove that the bishop had re-
ceived the property on condition of transmitting it
to his Royal Highness. The Tribunal accordingly
rejected the action of M. de Montreuil.

GRIMSTONE'S EYE SNUFP.-Mr. Grimstone, Broad-street,
Bloomsbury.—Ophthalmic Hospital, Charing-cross. Sir,—
Perceiving that on one of your bills my name is mentioned
in union with that of my late patient, Mr. Lachfield, I be 4;
leave to confirm his testimony, and state the great benefit
derived by the use of your excellent herbaceous Eye Snuff
in his case, which was one of obstinate chronic ophthalmia,
accompanied by opacity of the cornea, and a varicose state of
the conjunctional vessels. Ilis case was the first under my
notice in which the preparation was used • but being struck
by the advantageous results, I resolved to lay aside preju-
dice, and advise its use in some cases in my practice at this
Hos] ital. The benefit was great, and has led me still fur-
ther to recommend it.—l am your obedient servant, J. G.
GUTHRIE. •

[ADVERTISEMENT.]—HoIIoway's Pills and Ointment.--
Mental Weakness.—To the stomach, liver, or circulation
must we generally look for the gloomy thoughts which
sometimes oppress us. A single dose of appropriate medi-
cine has prevented many an act of suicide. Whenever
apathy and depression overshadow us, let us take timely
warning and regulate the sources of health by Holloway's
remedies, which will infallihy set right the digestion ; nd
purify and invigorate the circulation. The ointment
should be rubbed twice a day over the liver and stoma( h,
and over the heart if palpitation distresses. It will be at-
operation
fol
sorbed, andwithout wonderfull
distry
essing ore assist h pills in their salutary
udu weakening the
ly
system. This treatment, perseverinngly ,
banishes melancholy and mental hallucinationlowed soon