The summing up was made by D’Aguesseau, who acquitted himself of the task with much eloquence and impartiality.  His speech lasted two days.  This being over, the court was cleared, and the judges were left alone to deliberate upon their verdict.  Some time after we were called in to hear that verdict given.  It was in favour of M. de Luxembourg in so far as the title dating from 1662 was concerned; but the consideration of his claim to the title of 1581 was adjourned indefinitely, so that he remained exactly in the same position as his father.

It was with difficulty we could believe in a decree so unjust and so novel, and which decided a question that was not under dispute.  I was outraged, but I endeavoured to contain myself.  I spoke to M. de la Rochefoucauld; I tried to make him listen to me, and to agree that we should complain to the King, but I spoke to a man furious, incapable of understanding anything or of doing anything.  Returning to my own house, I wrote a letter to the King, in which I complained of the opinion of the judges.  I also pointed out, that when everybody had been ordered to retire from the council chamber, Harlay and his secretary had been allowed to remain.  On these and other grounds I begged the King to grant a new trial.

I carried this letter to the Duc de la Tremoille, but I could not get him to look at it.  I returned home more vexed if possible than when I left.  The King, nevertheless, was exceedingly dissatisfied with the judgment.  He explained himself to that effect at his dinner, and in a manner but little advantageous to the Parliament, and prepared himself to receive the complaints he expected would be laid before him.  But the obstinacy of M. de la Rochefoucauld, which turned into vexation against himself, rendered it impossible for us to take any steps in the matter, and so overwhelmed me with displeasure, that I retired to La Trappe during Passion Week in order to recover myself.

At my return I learned that the King had spoken of this judgment to the Chief President, and that that magistrate had blamed it, saying the cause was indubitably ours, and that he had always thought so!  If he thought so, why oppose us so long? and if he did not think so, what a prevaricator was he to reply with this flattery, so as to be in accord with the King?  The judges themselves were ashamed of their verdict, and excused themselves for it on the ground of their compassion for the state in which M. de Luxembourg would have been placed had he lost the title of 1662, and upon its being impossible that he should gain the one of 1581, of which they had left him the chimera.  M. de Luxembourg was accordingly received at the Parliament on the 4th of the following May, with the rank of 1662.  He came and visited all of us, but we would have no intercourse with him or with his judges.  To the Advocate-General, D’Aguesseau, we carried our thanks.

CHAPTER VII