If certain traditions are to be trusted, Pontecoulant, who was supposed to be one of Acquet de Ferolles’ protectors, had insinuated to Mme. de Vaubadon that “her intrigues with the royalists had long been known in high places, and an order for her arrest and that of d’Ache, who was said to be her lover, was about to be issued.”  “You understand,” he added, “that the Emperor is as merciful as he is powerful, that he has a horror of punishment and only wants to conciliate, but that he must crush, at all costs, the aid given to England by the agitation on the coasts.  Redeem your past.  You know d’Ache’s retreat:  get him to leave France; his return will be prevented, but the certainty of his embarkation is wanted, and you will be furnished with agents who will be able to testify to it.”

In this way Mme. de Vaubadon would be led to the idea of revealing d’Ache’s retreat, believing that it was only a question of getting him over to England; but facts give slight support to this sugared version of the affair.  After the particularly odious drama that we are about to relate, all who had taken part in it tried to prove for themselves a moral alibi, and to throw on subordinates the horror of a crime that had been long and carefully prepared.  Fouche, whom few memories disturbed, was haunted by this one, and attributed to himself a role as chivalrous as unexpected.  According to him, d’Ache, in extremity, had tried a bold stroke.  This man, who, since Georges’ death, had so fortunately escaped all the spies of France, had of his own will suddenly presented himself before the Minister of Police, to convert him to royalist doctrines!  Fouche had shown a loyalty that equalled his visitor’s boldness.  “I do not wish,” he said, “to take advantage of your boldness and have you arrested hic et nunc; I give you three days to get out of France; during this time I will ignore you completely; on the fourth day I will set my men on you, and if you are taken you must bear the consequences.”

This is honourable, but without doubt false.  Besides the improbability of this conspirator offering himself without reason to the man who had hunted him so long, it is difficult to imagine that such a meeting could have taken place without any mention of it being made in the correspondence in the case.  None of the letters exchanged between the Minister of Police and the prefects makes any allusion to this visit; it seems to accord so little with the character of either that it must be relegated to the ranks of the legends with which Fouche sought to hide his perfidies.  It is certain that a snare was laid for d’Ache, that Mme. de Vaubadon was the direct instrument, that Pontecoulant acted as intermediary between the minister and the woman; but the inventor of the stratagem is unknown.  A simple recital of the facts will show that all three of those named are worthy to have combined in it.