The Conservative. (M'connelsville, Ohio) 1866-1871, 1870-06-03
Selected tiseeIIanu.
TaE Nan IN THE IRON MASK.

THE MAN In THE IRON MASK.
That Saint-Mars, on being transferred in
1898 from Exiles to the governorship ofthe
Bastilie, brought with him to that fortress
prisoner whose face was hidden beneath
q black velvet masks, and that on the 29th
of November, 1903, the body of this pris-
oner was carried to the church of st Paul,
the name inscribed on the register of bur
ials being Marchially or Marchioly, are
facts which no one has disputed. On these
facts, as all know, has been raised a huge
mountain of romance and fiction, some in
sisting that the man IN the iron mask (the
iron being confined, it would seem, TO the
springs which fastened it on the head) was
q brother of Louis XIV; others maintain
ed not less stoutly that he was the Count
of Vermandois, or the Duke of Beaufort, or
even the ill-starred James Duke of Mon
mouth, who died by the warrant of his
uncle, James IL By others, again. he is
identified with Fouquet, also prisoner OF
Saint Mars at Pignerol, or with the Arme-
nian patriarch, Avedick. NJ. Topin be-
heves that he has not only set aside con-
cllsively every one of these suppositions,
but that he has proved beyond all doubtthe
identity of the masked prisoner with one OF
the many persons with whom conjecture
and argument have been busy.
BY the treaty of Cherasco in 1851, Richie
lieu, while surrendering Piedmont and s6a-
voy, contented himself with retaining pos
session of Pignerol as a gate of Italy; but
though the ambition of the French kings
had thus apparently received check, not
very many years had passed before thesuc |
cessor of Louis XIII, found much to- en-
courage him in the state of things In Italy.
The death of Charles Emmanuel had left a
child as the Duke of Savoy, under the
guardianship of a mother who was neither
keen-sighted nor judicious, Mantua was
in worse plight. Its Duke, CHARLES ", |
had wasted his substance and his health In |
riotous living, and found himself In the |
hands ofthe Jews, to whom he had pledged !
his revenue for many years to come. One
mode alone remained Of getting the money |
which he must have to prolong his plea
sures. and this mode involved no greater |
sacrifice than the surrender of one of his |
fortresses to the keeping of the King OF
France. For the privilege of sending some
troops to Casal, the capital of the Marquis |
ate of Monferrat, Louis was willing to pay
a high price, and the Able d'Estrades, his |
ambassador at Venice, threw himself heart |
ily into his masters plans. With Casal
and Pignerol the French King would COM
mand the roads into Northern and South
ern Italy alike; and it remained only to
bargain, if the means for making it could |
be found. The ambassador came to the
conclusion that the scheme could not be
better carried out than by the aid of Ercole
Mattlnoly, the minister highest in the con-
fidence Of the wretched Mantua Duke. By |
means of man named GiuIiani ID D'Estrades
discovered the dislike which Matthioly
felt for the Spaniards, and urged on him
the advantages which would spring from
the alliance and protection of the French
King. Matthioly, far from showing any
reluctance to the plan, arranged an inter |
view between the French ambassador and
the Duke of Mantua at Venice, and on the
9Th of December, 1878, treaty was sign
ed, by which the latter bound himself to
admit French garrison into Casal, while
Louis was pledged to name the Duke Gen
eral. in-chief of the French army, if one
should be sent into Italy, and to pay in two
instalments the sum of a hundred thou
sand Clowns.
Thus far everything had gone smoothly.
Matthioly had received from Louis XIV.
letter full of thanks and good wishes, dated
Msrch 13, 1878, and after the signing of
the treaty hehad been personally welcomed
with hattering distinction by the Grand |
Monarch, who gave him a costly diamond,
and held out the prospect of far more splen-
did rewards as soon as the treaty should be
ratified. Two months later the terms of
the engagement were known to the Vene-
tan Republic, and the courts of Turin,
Vienna, and Madrid; and Louis learnt, as
much perhaps to his veXation as to his dis
may, that the man who had done more than
any other to further his designs was the /
man who had betrayed them. Wat the |
motives of Matthioly may have been we
cannot tell; and NJ. Topin rightly insists |
that with these motives we really are not |
concerned. 1t is unlikely that he was the
mere little minded cheat and knave which |
Louis and his ministers would represent
him TO be; it is at least not improbable that
second thoughts may have led him to see
the dangers of French occupation in light
in which he had not viewed them before,
and that under these feelings he may have
felt it his duty to do what he could to
counteract the effects of his own work He |
did nos choose to counteract them openly;
French spies, as M. Topin suggests, may |
have rendered it almost impossible for him |
to do SO. But he assuredly made false |
step when he entrusted to the princess who |
acted as Regent of Savoy the secret of all
that had passed between himself, the Duke |
of Mantua. and the French King. The |
Du hess lost little time in sending the news
to Louis; but Matthioly remained ignorant
of this fact, and went on without misglving |
in his double game Louis also thought |
that the Italian could still be made TO fulfil
the obligations which he-had taken upon |
himself; but the Earcn of Asfeld, who was |
sent TO receive the notifications, was arrest |
ed at the instance of Matthioly, who failed
also to keep the appointment which he had
made for the same purpose with Catinat
Here. then, were important papers bearing
the SIGNATURE of the French King and re-
yealing his designs on Italy, in the hands
of an Italian state man who was lkely TO
use them as either his patriotism or hls
greed might lead him. Under these cir
cumstances D'Estrades was not the man
TO pause long in uncertainty. knowing
the disposition ofthe Regent ofSavoy, and
the necessities or perhaps even the secret
wishes of the Mantua Duke, he thought ne
saw his way clearly for removing this OBJ
stacle at once and for ever from his mas
tar's nath. This design he broached first |
in a letter of April s. 1879, to n de Pom !
poupe. whe in reply says that, whatever
NAV be done with Matthioly,. 1t Is OF tne
first consequence that the documents reiat-
inc tn the cession of Casal should be re-
covered. These documents 1t was sup
posed that Matthioly bore about his own