card parties lasted, he would remain opposite her Majesty.  He placed himself in the same manner before her at chapel, and never failed to be at the King’s dinner or the dinner in public.  At the theatre he invariably seated himself as near the Queen’s box as possible.  He always set off for Fontainebleau or St. Cloud the day before the Court, and when her Majesty arrived at her various residences, the first person she met on getting out of her carriage was this melancholy madman, who never spoke to any one.  When the Queen stayed at Petit Trianon the passion of this unhappy man became still more annoying.  He would hastily swallow a morsel at some eating-house, and spend all the rest of the day, even when it rained, in going round and round the garden, always walking at the edge of the moat.  The Queen frequently met him when she was either alone or with her children; and yet she would not suffer any violence to be used to relieve her from this intolerable annoyance.  Having one day given M. de Seze permission to enter Trianon, she sent to desire he would come to me, and directed me to inform that celebrated advocate of M. de Castelnaux’s derangement, and then to send for him that M. de Seze might have some conversation with him.  He talked to him nearly an hour, and made considerable impression upon his mind; and at last M. de Castelnaux requested me to inform the Queen positively that, since his presence was disagreeable to her, he would retire to his province.  The Queen was very much rejoiced, and desired me to express her full satisfaction to M. de Seze.  Half an hour after M. de Seze was gone the unhappy madman was announced.  He came to tell me that he withdrew his promise, that he had not sufficient command of himself to give up seeing the Queen as often as possible.  This new determination:  was a disagreeable message to take to her Majesty but how was I affected at hearing her say, “Well, let him annoy me! but do not let him be deprived of the blessing of freedom.”

[On the arrest of the King and Queen at Varennes, this unfortunate Castelnaux attempted to starve himself to death.  The people in whose house he lived, becoming uneasy at his absence, had the door of his room forced open, when he was found stretched senseless on the floor.  I do not know what became of him after the 10th of August.—­Madame Campan.]

The direct influence of the Queen on affairs during the earlier years of the reign was shown only in her exertions to obtain from the King a revision of the decrees in two celebrated causes.  It was contrary to her principles to interfere in matters of justice, and never did she avail herself of her influence to bias the tribunals.  The Duchesse de Praslin, through a criminal caprice, carried her enmity to her husband so far as to disinherit her children in favour of the family of M. de Guemenee.  The Duchesse de Choiseul, who, was warmly interested in this affair, one day entreated the Queen, in my presence, at least to condescend to ask the first president when the cause would be called on; the Queen replied that she could not even do that, for it would manifest an interest which it was her duty not to show.