magic and real detectives-第20部分

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！



State　and　family　politics　were　clearly　in　a　knot。　　Meanwhile；　the

Spanish　ambassador　kept　pressing　Montague　to　interfere　in　favor　of

Marsilly。　　After　Montague's　puzzled　note　had　been　read　to　the

English　Foreign　Committee　on　May　23；　Arlington　offered

explanations。　　Marsilly　came　to　England；　he　said；　when　Charles　was

entering　into　negotiations　for　peace　with　Holland；　and　when　France

seemed　likely　to　oppose　the　peace。　　No　proposition　was　made　to　him

or　by　him。　　Peace　being　made；　Marsilly　was　given　money　to　take　him

out　of　the　country。　　He　wanted　the　King　to　renew　his　alliance　with

the　Swiss　cantons；　but　was　told　that　the　cantons　must　first　expel

the　regicides　of　Charles　I。　　He　undertook　to　arrange　this；　and　some

eight　months　later　came　back　to　England。　　〃He　was　coldly　used；　and

I　was　complained　of　for　not　using　so　important　a　man　well　enough。〃





＇1＇　Cf。　Le　Secret　du　Roi；　by　the　Duc　de　Broglie。





As　we　saw；　Marsilly　expressed　the　most　effusive　gratitude　to

Arlington；　which　does　not　suggest　cold　usage。　　Arlington　told　the

complainers　that　Marsilly　was　〃another　man's　spy；〃　what　man's；

Dutch；　Spanish；　or　even　French；　he　does　not　explain。　　So　Charles

gave　Marsilly　money　to　go　away。　　He　was　never　trusted　with　anything

but　the　expulsion　of　the　regicides　from　Switzerland。　　Arlington　was

ordered　by　Charles　to　write　a　letter　thanking　Balthazar　for　his

good　offices。



These　explanations　by　Arlington　do　not　tally　with　Marsilly's

communications　to　him；　as　cited　at　the　beginning　of　this　inquiry。

Nothing　is　said　in　these　about　getting　the　regicides　of　Charles　I。

out　of　Switzerland：　the　paper　is　entirely　concerned　with　bringing

the　Protestant　Cantons　into　anti…French　League　with　England；

Holland；　Spain；　and　even　Sweden。　　On　the　other　hand；　Arlington's

acknowledged　letter　to　Balthazar；　carried　by　Marsilly；　may　be　the

〃commission〃　of　which　Marsilly　boasted。　　In　any　case；　on　June　2；

Charles　gave　Colbert；　the　French　ambassador；　an　audience；　turning

even　the　Duke　of　York　out　of　the　room。　　He　then　repeated　to　Colbert

the　explanations　of　Arlington；　already　cited；　and　Arlington；　in　a

separate　interview；　corroborated　Charles。　　So　Colbert　wrote　to

Louis　（June　3；　1669）；　but　to　de　Lyonne；　on　the　same　day；　〃I　trust

that　you　will　extract　from　Marsilly　much　matter　for　the　King's

service。　　It　seemed　to　me　that　milord　d'Arlington　was　uneasy　about

it　＇en　avait　de　l'inquitetude＇。　。　。　。　　There　is　here　in　England　one

Martin〃　（Eustace　Dauger）；　〃who　has　been　that　wretch's　valet；　and

who　left　him　discontent。〃　　Colbert　then　proposes　to　examine　Martin；

who　may　know　a　good　deal；　and　to　send　him　into　France。　　On　June　10；

Colbert　writes　to　Louis　that　he　expects　to　see　Martin。＇1＇





＇1＇　Bibl。　Nat。；　Fonds。　Francais；　No。　10665。





On　June　24；　Colbert　wrote　to　Louis　about　a　conversation　with

Charles。　　It　is　plain　that　proofs　of　a　murder…plot　by　Marsilly　were

scanty　or　non…existent；　though　Colbert　averred　that　Marsilly　had

discussed　the　matter　with　the　Spanish　Ministers。　　〃Charles　knew

that　he　had　had　much　conference　with　Isola；　the　Spanish

ambassador。〃　　Meanwhile；　up　to　July　1；　Colbert　was　trying　to

persuade　Marsilly's　valet　to　go　to　France；　which　he　declined　to　do；

as　we　have　seen。　　However；　the　luckless　lad；　by　nods　and　by　veiled

words；　indicated　that　he　knew　a　great　deal。　　But　not　by　promise　of

security　and　reward　could　the　valet　be　induced　to　return　to　France。

〃I　might　ask　the　King　to　give　up　Martin；　the　valet　of　Marsilly；　to

me；〃　Colbert　concludes；　and；　by　hook　or　by　crook；　he　secured　the

person　of　the　wretched　man；　as　we　have　seen。　　In　a　postcript；

Colbert　says　that　he　has　heard　of　the　execution　of　Marsilly。



By　July　19；　as　we　saw　in　the　previous　essay；　Louvois　was　bidding

Saint…Mars　expect；　at　Pignerol　from　Dunkirk；　a　prisoner　of　the

highest　political　importance；　to　be　guarded　with　the　utmost

secrecy；　yet　a　valet。　　That　valet　must　be　Martin；　now　called

Eustache　Dauger；　and　his　secret　can　only　be　connected　with

Marsilly。　　It　may　have　been　something　about　Arlington's

negotiations　through　Marsilly；　as　compromising　Charles　II。

Arlington's　explanations　to　the　Foreign　Committee　were　certainly

incomplete　and　disingenuous。　　He；　if　not　Charles；　was　more　deeply

engaged　with　Marsilly　than　he　ventured　to　report。　　But　Marsilly

himself　avowed　that　he　did　not　know　why　he　was　to　be　executed。



Executed　he　was；　in　circumstances　truly　hideous。　　Perwich；　June　5；

wrote　to　an　unnamed　correspondent　in　England：　〃They　have　all　his

papers；　which　speak　much　of　the　Triple　Alliance；　but　I　know　not

whether　they　can　lawfully　hang　him　for　this；　having　been

naturalized　in　Holland；　and　taken　in　a　privileged　country〃

（Switzerland）。　　Montague　（Paris；　June　22；　1669）　writes　to　Arlington

that　Marsilly　is　to　die；　so　it　has　been　decided；　for　〃a　rape　which

he　formerly　committed　at　Nismes；〃　and　after　the　execution；　on　June

26；　declares　that；　when　broken　on　the　wheel；　Marsilly　〃still

persisted　that　he　was　guilty　of　nothing；　nor　did　know　why　he　was

put　to　death。〃



Like　Eustache　Dauger；　Marsilly　professed　that　he　did　not　know　his

own　secret。　　The　charge　of　a　rape；　long　ago；　at　Nismes；　was

obviously　trumped　up　to　cover　the　real　reason　for　the　extraordinary

vindictiveness　with　which　he　was　pursued；　illegally　taken；　and

barbarously　slain。　　Mere　Protestant　restlessness　on　his　part　is

hardly　an　explanation。　　There　was　clearly　no　evidence　for　the

charge　of　a　plot　to　murder　Louis　XIV。；　in　which　Colbert；　in

England；　seems　to　have　believed。　　Even　if　the　French　Government

believed　that　he　was　at　once　an　agent　of　Charles　II。；　and　at　the

same　time　a　would…be　assassin　of　Louis　XIV。；　that　hardly　accounts

for　the　intense　secrecy　with　which　his　valet；　Eustache　Dauger；　was

always　surrounded。　　Did　Marsilly　know　of　the　Secret　Treaty；　and　was

it　from　him　that　Arlington　got　his　first　inkling　of　the　royal　plot？

If　so；　Marsilly　would　probably　have　exposed　the　mystery　in

Protestant　interests。　　We　are　entirely　baffled。



In　any　case；　Francis　Vernon；　writing　from　Paris　to　Williamson　（？）

（June　19/25；　1669）；　gave　a　terrible　account　of　Marsilly's　death。

（For　the　letter；　see　Note　V。）　With　a　broken　piece　of　glass　（as　we

learn　from　another　source）；　Marsilly；　in　prison；　wounded　himself　in

a　ghastly　manner；　probably　hoping　to　die　by　loss　of　blood。　　They

seared　him　with　a　red…hot　iron；　and　hurried　on　his　execution。　　He

was　broken　on　the　wheel；　and　was　two　hours　in　dying　（June　22）。

Contrary　to　usage；　a　Protestant　preacher　was　brought　to　attend　him

on　the　scaffold。　　He　came　most　reluctantly；　expecting　insult；　but

not　a　taunt　was　uttered　by　the　fanatic　populace。　　〃He　came　up　the

scaffold；　great　silence　all　about；〃　Marsilly　lay　naked；　stretched

on　a　St。　Andrew's　cross。　　He　had　seemed　half　dead；　his　head　hanging

limp；　〃like　a　drooping　calf。〃　　To　greet　the　minister　of　his　own

faith；　he　raised　himself；　to　the　surprise　of　all；　and　spoke　out

loud　and　clear。　　He　utterly　denied　all　share　in　a　scheme　to　murder

Louis。　　The　rest　may　be　read　in　the　original　letter　（p。　51）。



So　perished　Roux　de　Marsilly；　the　history　of　the　master　throws　no

light　on　the　secret　of　the　servant。　　That　secret；　for　many　years；

caused　the　keenest　anxiety　to　Louis　XIV。　and　Louvois。　　Saint…Mars

himself　must　not　pry　into　it。　　Yet　what　could　Dauger　know？　　That

there　had　been　a　conspiracy　against　the　King's　life？　　But　that　was

the　public　talk　of　Paris。　　If　Dauger　had　guilty　knowledge；　his　life

might　have　paid　for　it；　why　keep　him　a　secret　prisoner？　　Did　he

know　that　Charles　II。　had　been　guilty　of　double　dealing　in　1668…

1669？　　Probably　Charles　had　made　some　overtures　to　the　Swiss；　as　a

blind　to　his　private　dealings　with　Louis　XIV。；　but；　even　so；　how

could　the　fact　haunt　Louis　XIV。　like　a　ghost？　　We　leave　the　mystery

much　darker　than　we　found　it；　but　we　see　good　reason　why

diplomatists　should　have　murmured　of　a　crusade　against　the　cruel

and　brigand　Government　which　sent　soldiers　to　kidnap；　in

neighboring　states；　men　who　did　not　know　their　own　crime。



To　myself　it　seems　not　improbable　that　the　King　and　Louvois　were

but　stupidly　and　cruelly　nervous　about　what　Dauger　MIGHT　know。

Saint…Mars；　when　he　proposed　to　utilize　Dauger　as　a　prison　valet；

manifestly　did　not　share　the　trembling　anxieties　of　Louis　XIV。　and

his　Minister；　anxieties　which　grew　more　keen　as　time　went　on。

However；　〃a　soldier　only　has　his　orders；〃　and　Saint…Mars　executed

his　orders　with　minute　precision；　taking　such　unheard…of

precautions　that；　in　legend；　the　valet　blossomed　into　the　rightful

kind　of　France。







ORIGINAL　PAPERS　IN　THE　CASE　OF　ROUX　DE　MARSILLY。＇1＇





＇1＇　State　Papers；　France；　vol。　126。





I。　　Letter　of　Mons。　P。　du　Moulin　to　Arlington。



Paris；　May　ye　；　1669。



My　Lord；



Ever　since　that　Monsieur　de　Ruvigny　was　in　England　last；　and　upon

the　information　he　gave；　this　King　had　a　very　great　desire　to　seize

if　it　were　possible　this　Roux　de　Marsilly；　and　several　persons　were

sent　to　effect　it；　into　England；　Holland；　Flanders；　and　Franche

Compte：　amongst　the　rest　one　La　Grange；　exempt　des　Gardes；　was　a

good　while　in　Holland　with　fifty　of　the　guards　dispersed　in

severall　places　and　quarters；　But　all　having　miscarried　the　King

recommended　the　thing　to　Monsieur　de　Turenne　who　sent　some　of　his

gentlemen　and　officers　under　him　to　find　this　man　out　and　to

endeavor　to　bring　him　alive。　　These　men　after　foure　months　search

found　him　att　last　in　Switzerland；　and　having　laid　waite　for　him　as

he　came　out　from　Monsr　Baithazar's　house　（a　commander　well　knowne）

they　took　him　and　carryed　him　to　Gex　before　they　could　be

intercepted　and　he　rescued。　　This　was　done　only　by　a　warrant　from

Monsieur　de　Turenne　but　as　soone　as　they　came　into　the　french

dominions　they　had　full　powers　and　directions　from　this　court　for

the　bringing　of　him　hither。　　Those　that　tooke　him　say　they　found　no

papers　about　him；　but　that　he　desired　them　to　write　to　Mo