The record-union., 1891-07-14
ARE TALLEYRAND'S VOLUMES OF
MEMOIRS GENUINE2

1t has been charged that the book of
memoirs of Prince Talieyrand are spu-
rious. The Due de Broglie, who edited the
work, avows that he cannot produce the
original manuscript, and that he does not
know where ii is. 1t is pointed out in sup
port of the charge Of fraud, that the work
is replete with historical errors. 1t is adj
mitted that the work is not wholly fab
rication, but the charge is that it has been
so treated" that it cannot be said the
memoir is genuine in the sense claimed
for the book.
L. Farges, writing in the Revue His
toriQue, Paris, thinks, after a careful
study of the matter, that the genuineness
ofthe memoirs is established. He points
out that all who use memoirs as aids in
writing history are aware that in all of
them errors offact occur. He says: Some
times the chronological order is inverted;
sometimes important facts are forgotten
or omitted; sometimes the error is volun-
tary; sometimes it is unconsciously COM
mitted."
1t certainly is true that in the present
We make records that in the future will
be found TO be wanting in essential de-
tails. Those who write touching elbow
with the times are very apt to consider
unimportant the very things that are
necessary to future generation that it
may thoroughly understand the histor-
tcal record and accept it as genuine.
This fact is discovered by newspaper
men constantly. Turn back in the files
of any daily chronicle of events and look
for particular matter of a decade or so
in the past, and very frequently
the searcher will discover that nothing is
said of the essential points for which the
search is made. Memoirs are more
carefully written, unquestionably, but
they are nearly all subject to the fault
referred to. But memoirs are not fire.
quently diaries. On the contrary, they
are written some years after the occur
renee of the events treated. Memory is
thus put upon trial, and details fail it.
But it has been said that the inequali-
ties OF style signify that Talleyrand's
manuscript has not been given to us in
purity. NJ. Farges replies to this charge
that Talleyrand did not compose his
memoirs after the fashion of those of
Richelieu, by inserting among his recol-
lections dispatches and official papers,
documents and reports. etc. 1.-The same
ink is not used for the recital of the ad-
ventures and dreams of youth, and polit-
Ical reports treating one of those petty
details of diplomacy, which are some
times excessively thorny and dry"
But another charge is that the work is
not printed from the autographic manu-
script Of TalIeyrand, but from copy be-
queathed by Mr.. de Barcourt Has the
text in this copy been doctored? Com
parison would disclose the truth But
VI. Farges replies that it is possible, even
probable, that no original manuscript of
the memoirs ever existed. For Talley-
rand never gave up the idea of return
TO Office. He wrote, not to recall the
great events in which he played part,
but to explain and justify himself, and in
the writing he was thinking more of
Louis XVIII, and of his own family
than ofposterity. So they were probably
written without plan, and as the
political changes of the time de-
manded. So, then, they were not
written continuously, and he never
engaged in the task, in all probability, OF
uniting these writings and shaping them
into connected whole. He bequeathed
that labor TO his executors, and hence out
of the fragments Mr. de Barcourt made
the work, in rart by dictation, in part
from papers indicated by the Prince, and
in part from copies that Talleyrand di-
rected to be used.
These facts appear from de Barcoures
inventory, and his niece has said also in
support, ''My uncle classified, Joined to-
gether, copied-that is ALL" In this work
de Barcourt and Madame de Dino had to
deal with mass of papers, notes and
manuscript left by Talleyrand, with in
dicatons of what he deemed necessary to
be used. Hence there were suppressions,
inequalities, corrections and errors.
This is more than an ingenious expla-
nation-it is reasonable, probable, and is
supported by the memoirs in their style,
the method employed, and by the very
errors and omissions that are cited as ev-
dences justifying distrust. We opine
that the legal mind will consider the very
errors cited as evidences of genuineness,
rather than as fatal defects. Moreover,
the historical student win discover in the