The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1879-10-07
BOURBONS AND ORLEANISTS.

HOW A FAMOUS PUBLICIsT's LETTER GAVE ZEsT
To THE CHAMDoRD DASQUET-HAs THE
HOUSE OF ORLEANS THROWN IN ITS LOT
WITH THE REPUBLIC?
NJ. Edouard Herve, tho able and respected editor
of tho Soie. published the 23d ult letter which
is regarded the kncl of the fusion between the
two branches of the House of Bourbon. The legit-
imist party's celebration Of the birthday of the
Count dc Chambord fell on the 10th ult., and NJ.
Herve invited, probably as representing not
much Orleanist journalism as on account of tho
friendly relations and confidence with which no
is honored by the Princes of Orleans NJ. Hcrve
courtcously declined tho invitation, says the
Standard. on the ground that his presence at the
Chambord banquet would imply the existence
between Orleanism and legitimism Of UNDER
standing which would enable them to combine
political action founded common basis. ''Now,'
says NJ. Hervc "that common basis not only docs
not exist but accord seems further OF than
In other words. the House of Bourbon is house
divided against ITSELF in spite of the fusion. That
being SO, one cannot help thinking that the Count
do Paris must now regret his visit to frohsdorf in
1873. 1t was then construed aud until NJ. Herve's
letter this morning has ever since been regarded
as an act OF penancc Tor the assumption of
the throne by his grandfather. King Louis
Philippe, after the Revolution OF 1850. Tho able.
intelligent and moderate politicians whose views
NJ. Herve represents and the Orleans Princes them
selves have very good excuse for declining to bind
themselves to the absolute nan posaus doctrines to
which the grandson of Charles Y clings with such
pcrtinacity. But, as the Temps points out, cOnss-
tency would require them to 90 one step further,
and frankly their conversion to the Republic.
There is chasm between them and the Bona
partists-thcy have, NJ. Herye tells us, so nttlc
in common with the legitimists. that for rep
resentativo man of their party to attend BAN
quet in honor of the head of the House of Bour-
bon would DO mystiiication or an imposturc.
Therefore, tho Temps is fully warranted i'll calling
upon them to depart from negative position
which savors somewhat OF sulking. and openly avcw
their adoption OF "a regime which, though itrnay not
be the hcy would prefer liz adopted by the great
bulk of the country. and secures To every man in
France. be he prince or peasant all the liberty
which reasonable man can possibly desire. NJ.
Nerves letter became the topic of the hour.
IL much discussed. but according to account
nobody go much astonishcd as the author ut the
comments which have boon passed upon IL. lie
acted entirely his own responsibility and
only expressed his own opinion in the mat
tor. Ii Is thus said to be to in
tcrpret his letter as dcnoting u rupture which has
no existence in fact. NJ. Icrve is reported TO have
added that, knowing that u political dcmonstra-
ton being organized by the legitimists and be-
ing thoroughly in the dark as to its real character.
ho judged IT advisable to avoid mixing himself up in
an affair which might have compromised him seri-
ously. IL seems more probable however, that had
this been M. Nerves sole for declining his in
vItation to the Chambord banquet, he would have
been more explicit in his explanation. HIS remark
that there could be no agreement between tho rival
branches OF tho House OF Bourbon would have been
not only supcrfuous, butts gratuitoua piece of in
civty 20 his woult-bo hosts.