you must make me look well.”  I knew that the King was not so well pleased at this as she was; he was afraid that it would give rise to scandal, and that it might be thought he had forced this nomination upon the Queen.  He had, however, done no such thing.  It had been represented to the Queen that it was an act of heroism on her part to forget the past; that all scandal would be obliterated when Madame de Pompadour was seen to belong to the Court in an honourable manner; and that it would be the best proof that nothing more than friendship now subsisted between the King and the favourite.  The Queen received her very graciously.  The devotees flattered themselves they should be protected by Madame, and, for some time, were full of her praises.  Several of the Dauphin’s friends came in private to see her, and some obtained promotion.  The Chevalier du Muy, however, refused to come.  The King had the greatest possible contempt for them, and granted them nothing with a good grace.  He, one day, said of a man of great family, who wished to be made Captain of the Guards, “He is a double spy, who wants to be paid on both sides.”  This was the moment at which Madame de Pompadour seemed to me to enjoy the most complete satisfaction.  The devotees came to visit her without scruple, and did not forget to make use of every opportunity of serving themselves.  Madame de Lu----- had set them the example.  The Doctor laughed at this change in affairs, and was very merry at the expense of the saints.  “You must allow, however, that they are consistent,” said I, “and may be sincere.”  “Yes,” said he; “but then they should not ask for anything.”

One day, I was at Doctor Quesnay’s, whilst Madame de Pompadour was at the theatre.  The Marquis de Mirabeau

[The author of “L’Ami des Hommes,” one of the leaders of the sect of Economistes, and father of the celebrated Mirabeau.  After the death of Quesnay, the Grand Master of the Order, the Marquis de Mirabeau was unanimously elected his successor.  Mirabeau was not deficient in a certain enlargement of mind, nor in acquirements, nor even in patriotism; but his writings are enthusiastical, and show that he had little more than glimpses of the truth.  The Friend of Man was the enemy of all his family.  He beat his servants, and did not pay them.  The reports of the lawsuit with his wife, in 1775, prove that this philosopher possessed, in the highest possible degree, all the anti-conjugal qualities.  It is said that his eldest son wrote two contradictory depositions, and was paid by both sides.]

came in, and the conversation was, for some time, extremely tedious to me, running entirely on ‘net produce’; at length, they talked of other things.