Berthier neither merited the one nor the other.  Bonaparte was a man of habit; he was much attached to all the people about him, and did not like new faces.  Berthier loved him.  He carried out his orders well, and that enabled him to pass off with his small portion of talent.

It was about this time that young Beauharnais came to Milan.  He was seventeen years old.  He had lived in Paris with his mother since the departure of Bonaparte.  On his arrival he immediately entered the service as ‘aide de camp’ to the General-in-Chief, who felt for him an affection which was justified by his good qualities.

Comte Delaunay d’Entraigues, well known in the French Revolution, held a diplomatic post at Venice when that city was threatened by the French.  Aware of his being considered the agent of all the machinations then existing against France, and especially against the army of Italy, he endeavoured to escape; but the city being, surrounded, he was seized, together with all his papers.  The apparently frank manners of the Count pleased Bonaparte, who treated him with indulgence.  His papers were restored, with the exception of three relating to political subjects.  He afterwards fled to Switzerland, and ungratefully represented himself as having been oppressed by Bonaparte.  His false statements have induced many writers to make of him an heroic victim.  He was assassinated by his own servant in 1802.

I kept a copy of one of his most interesting papers.  It has been much spoken of, and Fauche-Borel has, I believe, denied its authenticity and the truth of its contents.  The manner in which it fell into the hands of the General-in-Chief, the importance attached to it by d’Entraigues, the differences I have observed between the manuscript I copied and versions which I have since read, and the, knowledge of its, authenticity, having myself transcribed it from the handwriting of the Count, who in my presence vouched for the truth of the facts it details—­all these circumstances induce me to insert it here, and compel me to doubt that it was, as Fauche-Borel asserted, a fabrication.

This manuscript is entitled, ’My Conversation with Comte de Montgaillard, on the 4th of December 1796, from Six in the Afternoon till midnight, in the presence of the Abbe Dumontel.’

[On my copy are written the words, “Extracts from this conversation, made by me, from the original.”  I omitted what I thought unimportant, and transcribed only the most interesting passages.  Montgaillard spoke of his escape, of his flight to England, of his return to France, of his second departure, and finally of his arrival at Bale in August 1795.]