We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 February 2009
The causes and consequences of the quarrels between Louis XV and the parlements in the third quarter of the eighteenth century continue to provoke a lively debate amongst historians. In France, the traditional thesis of a reforming monarchy confronted by the selfish obstructionism of the judiciary has many adherents. However, few Anglo-American scholars favour such an interpretation and some have gone as far as to reject the existence of a crisis altogether. Research is also concentrated upon the consequences of these disputes, and their importance to the development not only of parlementaire constitutionalism, but even of a new political culture. In order to contest these conflicting interpretations, this article takes afresh look at the Besançon affair of 1757–1761. In one of the most heated political battles of the reign, thirty judges were exiled from the parlements of Besançon, provoking a lively response from the other parlements, headed by that of Paris. By examining the origins of the dispute in Franche-Comté, and the subsequent reaction of both the government and the Parisian magistrates, this article offers a new picture of the causes of crisis and of how judicial politics actually worked.
1 The two most important studies of the crisis are by Estignard, A., Leparlement de Franche-Comté de son installation à Besançon à sa suppression, 1674–1790 (2 vols., Paris, 1892), 1, 271–398Google Scholar, and Marion, M., ‘Grèves et rentrées judiciaires au XVIIIe siècle. Le grand exil du parlement de Besançon, 1759–1761’, Revue des questions historiques, XCIV (1913), 65–93Google Scholar. Egret, Jean, Louis XV et l'opposition parlementaire (Paris, 1970), pp. 140–4Google Scholar, also provides a brief introduction to the subject. In his important study of the judicial system in Franche-Comté, , Maurice, Gresset, Gens de justice à Besançon, 1674–1789 (2 vols., Paris, 1978), II, 700–16Google Scholar, has followed the earlier accounts of Estignard and Marion, although he does make some important new points.
2 The work of Jean Egret, L'opposition parlementaire, remains the best introduction to the conflict between the crown and the parlements.
3 Good examples are the works of Estignard and Egret cited above.
4 Marion, M., Histoire financière de la France depuis 1715 (6 vols., Paris, 1927–1931), 1, 181–225Google Scholar, and Cobban, A., ‘The parlements of France in the eighteenth century’, History, XXXV (1950)Google Scholar, provide two classic examples of this interpretation.
5 An argument developed by Egret, , L'opposition parlementaire, pp. 93–181.Google Scholar
6 It is only possible to cite a limited selection of these studies but they include: Shennan, J. H., The parlement of Paris (London, 1968), pp. 285–328Google Scholar; Doyle, W., ‘The parlements of France and the breakdown of the old regime, 1771–1788’, French Historical Studies, VI (1970)Google Scholar; Rogister, J. M.J., ‘Conflict and harmony in eighteenth-century France: a reappraisal of the nature of the relations between the crown and the parlement of Paris under Louis XV, 1730–1754’, unpub. D.Phil, thesis (University of Oxford, 1972)Google Scholar; Hamscher, A. N., The parlement of Paris after the Fronde, 1653–1673 (Pittsburgh, 1976)Google Scholar; Stone, B., The parlement of Paris, 1774–1789 (Chapel Hill, 1981)Google Scholar; and Campbell, P. R., ‘The conduct of politics in France in the time of the cardinal de Fleury, 1723–1743’ (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of London, 1985).Google Scholar
7 Doyle, W., ‘The parlements’, in The French revolution and the creation of modern political culture, 1. The political culture of the old regime, ed. Baker, K. M. (Oxford), 1987), pp. 162–4.Google Scholar
8 A selection of the many works written on this theme include: Van Kley, D. K., The Jansenists and the expulsion of the Jesuits from France, 1757–1765 (New Haven, 1975)Google Scholar and The Damiens affair and the unraveling of the ancien régime, 1750–1770 (Princeton, 1984)Google Scholar; Echeverria, D., The Maupeou revolution. A study in the history of libertarianism, France 1770–1774 (Baton Rouge, 1985)Google Scholar; Joynes, D. C., ‘Jansenists and ideologues: opposition theory in the parlement of Paris, 1750–1775’ (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Chicago, 1981)Google Scholar; and Merrick, J. W.. The desacralization of the French monarchy in the eighteenth century (Baton Rouge, 1990).Google Scholar
9 Gresset, , Gens de Justice, II, 708–9.Google Scholar
10 The work of K. M. Baker has been especially important in opening this debate, see, for example, Inventing the French revolution. Essays on French political culture in the eighteenth century (Cambridge, 1990)Google Scholar, and his introduction to The French revolution and the creation of modern political culture. 1. The political culture of the old regime, ed. Baker, K. M. (Oxford, 1987).Google Scholar
11 Egret, , L'opposition parlementaire, p. 140Google Scholar, and Estignard, , Parlement de Franche-Comté, I, 271–4.Google Scholar
12 A[rchives] N[ationales] A[rchives] P[rivées] 162 mi 1, dos. 2, fo. 32, Bourgeois de Boynes to Lamoignon, 1 April 1757.
13 Egret, , L'opposition parlementaire, pp. 61–4.Google Scholar
14 Feydeau de Brou and Amelot, who had served alongside Bourgeois as avocats géneraux, were similarly rewarded.
15 Marion, , ‘Greves et rentrées’, p. 68Google Scholar, claims that Bourgeois had the reputation of being a gifted jurist.
16 Egret, , L'opposition parlementaire, p. 140.Google Scholar
17 Estignard, , Parlement de Franche-Comté, I, 301–2.Google Scholar
18 Egret, , L'opposition parlementaire, pp. 140–1.Google Scholar
19 It is true that in Provence the offices of intendant and of first president were in the same hands. However, this was an established tradition and the incumbent was always a local man and not an outsider like Bourgeois de Boynes in Franche-Comté.
20 Bernis, who was dismissed in November 1758, had played a key role in directing government policy towards the parlements.
21 That this was the intention of the judges who opposed Bourgeois de Boynes appears beyond doubt. See, for example, the pamphlet supporting their position entitled ‘Recit de ce qui a occasionné la détention de trente des soixante membres du parlement de Besançon en Janvier 1759’ and the ‘Mémoire’ sent to the Jansenist lawyer Le Paige titled ‘Eclaircissements donnés par M. Renard conseiller au parlement de Besançon, exilé à Antibes, sur l'imprimé ayant pour titre: “Récit de ce qui a occasionné la détention de trente des soixante membres du parlement de Besançon en Janvier 1759”. B[ibliothèque de] P[ort-]R[oyale] Collection Le Paige 556, fos.3–5. The following is based on the pamphlets listed above and on the notes of Renard, plus the registers of the Parlement, B[ibliothèque] M[unicipale de] B[esançon] Collection Chiflet 57.
22 Gresset, , Gens de justice, II, 712–16.Google Scholar
23 BMB Collection Chiflet 59, fos. 227–8.
24 Quoted in Estignard, , Parlement de Franche-Comté, I, 285Google Scholar. The incident took place on 29 Jan. 1757, before Bourgeois became first president.
25 The marquis de Paulmy succeeded his uncle as secretary of state for war in February 1757.
26 AN AP 162 mi I, dos. 2, fo. 32, Bourgeois de Boynes to Lamoignon, 1 April 1757. The commandant of the province, the due de Randan, saw matters in a similar light as can be seen from his letter quoted by Estignard, . Parlement de Franche-Comté, I, 284.Google Scholar
27 B[ibiliothèque] N[ationale] MS Fr. 10986, de Miromesnil, Hue, Lettres sur l'état de la magistrature en l'année 1772, fos. 89–90Google Scholar. Miromesnil cited the gradual eclipse of the moderate magistrates as one of the many reasons for the downfall of the parlements in 1771.
28 Le Verdier, P., Correspondance politique et administrative de Miromesnil premier président du parlement de Normandie (5 vols., Paris, 1899–1903), IV, 121Google Scholar, Miromesnil to the Controleur général de L'Averdy. 5 Feb. 1766.
29 BMB Collection Chiflet 195, fos. 19–20, Bourbonne to Chiflet, 5 Feb. 1757.
30 The present author is currently working on a larger study of those magistrates who opposed the more extreme claims of the Jansenists and their supporters in the parlements.
31 BMB Collection Chiflet 59, fos. 295–6, Randan to maréchal de Belle-Isle, 5 Feb. 1759. The commandant boasted in his letter to Belle-Isle that he had personally recommended Bourgeois to Louis XV prior to his appointment as first president.
32 Unfortunately, the commandants have been largely ignored by historians of the royal administration. For example, they were not included in Antione's, M., Le gouvernement et l'administration sous Louis XV. Dictionnaire biographique (Paris, 1978)Google Scholar, and such oversights are typical of most studies of eighteenth-century government and administration.
33 A[rchives] D[épartementales du] D[oubs] B2840.
34 Estignard, , Parlement de Franche-Comté, 1, 287.Google Scholar
35 Ibid. p. 288.
36 Mansergh, M., ‘The revolution of 1771 or the exile of the parlement of Paris’ (unpublished D.Phil, thesis, University of Oxford, 1973)Google Scholar, claimed that the clash between the robe and the sword was central to politics in France after 1750. The older view of a fusion of the two groups was best expressed by Ford, F. L., Robe and sword. The regrouping of the French aristocracy after Louis XIV (Harvard, 1953).Google Scholar
37 BMB Collection Chiflet 59, fos. 263–4, 19 Feb. 1757.
38 Ibid. fos. 295–6, Randan to Belle-Isle, 5 Feb. 1759. Randan was especially pleased by the calm manner in which the province had reacted to events. This peace was soon shattered and the city was soon split into two hostile camps, Marion, , ‘Grèves et rentrées’, pp. 77–9.Google Scholar
39 Estignard, , Parlement de Franche-Comté, 1, 325.Google Scholar
40 Ibid. p. 304.
41 Admittedly, he was chevalier d'honneur in the parlement, but his family had provided three archbishops of Besançon and was unquestionably of sword extraction: Gresset, , Gens de justice, II, 618 n. 29.Google Scholar
42 BMB Collection Chiflet 59, fos. 263–4, 19 Feb. 1757.
43 Ibid. fos. 229–30.
44 Other parlements, including Rouen and Dijon, played important roles, but the limits of space have forced the present author to concentrate upon events in the capital.
45 Barbier, E. J. F., Chronique de la régence et du règne de Louis XV, 1715–1763 (8 vols., Paris, 1857–1858), VII, 126–7.Google Scholar
46 AN X1A 8289, fo. 8.
47 Details of the debate are provided by Flammermont, J., Les remontrances du parlement de Pans au XVIIIe siècle (3 vols., Paris, 1888–1898), II, 172–6Google Scholar and AN U 1094, dos. 3, 16 Feb. 1759.
48 Between 1759 and 1761, the parlement of Paris made no fewer than seven protests to Louis XV about his policy in Franche-Comté, see Flammermont, , Remontrances, II, 172–221.Google Scholar
49 Flammermont, , Remontrances, II, 173.Google Scholar
50 Swann, J., ‘Politics and the parlement of Paris, 1754–1771’ (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Cambridge, 1989), pp. 126–57.Google Scholar
51 Barbier, , Chronique, VI, 609–13.Google Scholar
52 A good example of the continuing feud within the parlement was provided by the debate of 28 Aug. 1759 discussed below.
53 The means by which the parti janséniste succeeded in manipulating the parlement has been examined by the present author in a forthcoming article entitled, ‘Parlement, politics and the parti janséniste: the Grand Conseil affair, 1755–1756’, French History (1992).Google Scholar
54 The works of Van Kley and Joynes, cited above, provide the most comprehensive explanation of this process.
55 The theory of a union des classes was developed at great length in the remonstrances of 27 Nov. 1755 and 4 Aug. 1756, see Flammermont, , Remontrances, II, 12–107, 135–48.Google Scholar
56 Unfortunately, it is impossible in a short paper to do full justice to the parlementaire resistance to government policy in Franche-Comté. In addition to Paris, the parlements of Aix, Dijon, Grenoble, Rouen and Toulouse all sent repeated remonstrances to Louis XV, Marion, , ‘Grèves et rentrées’, pp. 83–5.Google Scholar
57 BPR Collection Le Paige, fos. 4–5. The network is revealed in a letter of Saint-Hilaire to Le Paige dated 10 July 1759, Ibid. fo. 21.
58 Ibid. Le Paige either wrote, or contributed to, several pamphlets including the ‘Récit de ce qui a occasionné la détention de trente des soixante membres du parlement de Besançon en Janvier 1759’, ‘Reflexions sur l'ouvrage intitulé “Rélation des troubles actuels du parlement de Franche-Comté’” and ‘Réponse à la lettre du Franc Comtois’.
59 AN U 1094, dos. 3, 6 Mar. 1759, and AN X1A 8289, fol. 13.
60 BPR Collection Le Paige 556, fo. 44.
61 Flammermont, , Remontrances, II, 179Google Scholar, and Barbier, , Chronique, VII, 141, 148–50.Google Scholar
62 Flammermont, , Remontrances, II, 180–1Google Scholar. Molé wrote that judges could not be: ‘troublés ni inquiétés dans l'exercice de leurs functions, par lettres de cachet ni autrement, ni perdre l'exercice de leurs charges autrement que par mort, résignation volontaire ou forfaiture, préalablement jugée et declarée judiciairement, et selon les termes de justice par des juges compétents’.
63 Ibid. pp. 184–6.
64 Ibid. pp. 186–7.
65 This was the title given to Louis XV's response of 3 March 1766 to the remonstrances of the parlement of Paris.
66 Barbier, , Chronique, VII, 149.Google Scholar
67 AN U 1094, dos. 3, 27 April. An earlier assembly, held on 9 April, had deferred the debate to allow time for reflection.
68 Ibid.
69 K. M. Baker has written extensively on this theme, see his ‘Memory and practice: politics and the representation of the past in eighteenth-century France’, Representations, II (1985), 134–64Google Scholar, and ‘Politics and public opinion under the old regime: some reflections’, in Press and politics inpre-revolutionary France, ed. Censer, J. R. and Popkin, J. D. (University of California Press, 1987), pp. 133–68.Google Scholar
70 Flammermont, , Remontrances, II, 188–203.Google Scholar
71 Barbier, , Chronique, VII, 172.Google Scholar
72 For details of the debate of 28 August see: AN U 1094, dos. 3, 28 Aug. 1759; AN X1A 8289, fos. 49–51: and Barbier, , Chronique, VII, 180.Google Scholar
73 AN U 1094, dos. 3, 28 Aug. 1759; AN X1A 8289, fos. 49–51; and Barbier, , Chronique, VII, 180.Google Scholar
74 During 1765 the parlements of Pau and of Rennes split in a manner not dissimilar to that of Besançon. It was the crisis in the parlement of Rennes which led to the famous Brittany affair and ultimately to the reforms of chancellor de Maupeou.
75 AN U 1094, dos. 3, 28 Aug. 1759.
76 Swann, , ‘Politics and the parlement’, pp. 159–73.Google Scholar
77 AN U 1109, fo. 30.
78 AN X1A 8289, fo. 180, 5 May 1760.
79 AN X1A 8290, fo. 28.
80 Flammermont, , Remontrances, II, 209–10.Google Scholar
81 Ibid. pp. 210–12.
82 Ibid. pp. 212–13.
83 BPR Collection Le Paige, fo. 56, L'Averdy to Le Paige, 10 and 12 June 1760. The other members of the council were: garde des sceaux, Berryer; due de Choiseul; maréchal d'Estrées; Gilbert de Voisins; comte de Saint-Florentin: and prince de Soubise.
84 de Croÿ, Due, Journal inédit du due de Croÿ, 1718–1784 eds., vicomte, de Grouchy and Cottin, P., 4 vols. (Paris, 1906), 1, 358Google Scholar, and Barbier, , Chronique, VI, 403.Google Scholar
85 See the correspondence between Louis XV and chancellor de Lamoignon, AN AP 162 mi 1, dos. 1–5.
86 Représentations tended to be much shorter than remonstrances and could be produced comparatively quickly.
87 Barbier, , Chronique, VII, 266–7.Google Scholar
88 AN X1A 8290, fo. 161.
89 BPR Collection Le Paige 556, fo. 27.
90 Barbier, , Chronique, VII, 308.Google Scholar
91 AN AP 162 mi 2, dos. 2, fos. 36–45.
92 AN X1A 8290, fo. 161.
93 Flammermont, , Remontrances, II, 217.Google Scholar
94 AN X1A 8290, fo. 161. According to the register it was adopted maximo numero.
95 This is the subject of the present author's forthcoming article, ‘Parlement politics and the parti janséniste’.
96 Mansergh, , ‘The revolution of 1771’, pp. 45–6.Google Scholar
97 BPR Collection Le Paige 556. fo. 32, M. de Boines [sic] to Mme de Montgeron, 1 Dec. 1760.
98 Kreiser, B. R., Miracles, convulsions and ecclesiastical politics in early eighteenth-century Paris (Princeton, 1978), pp. 379–82.Google Scholar
99 The rapporteur was appointed by the government and charged with presenting its edicts and declarations to the parlement.
100 bpr Collection Le Paige 556, fo. 33, Mémoire sur la lettre de m. le p.p. [de Besançon du 1 Decembre 1760].
101 Baker, , Inventing the French revolution, pp. 119–20, 126–7Google Scholar. The importance of these remonstrances and of Malesherbes' ‘liberal constitutionalism’ has been frequently stressed in Baker's work, Ibid. pp. 26, 182, 188–9, 234.
102 Moreau, J. N., Mes souvenirs (2 vols., Paris, 1898), 1, 79.Google Scholar
103 Foiset, T., Le président de Brosses. Histoire des lettres et desparlements au XVIIIe siècle (Paris, 1842), p. 218.Google Scholar
104 Details of the king's correspondence with the princes is contained in: AN K 703, fos. 15–19.
105 AN K 703, fo. 15. The document is headed ‘Rémis par le Roy à Mgr le due d'Orléans le 28 Xbre 1760’.
106 Ibid. fos. 16–17. They were entitled ‘Motifs des reflexions de M. le due d'Orléans sur le mémoire du Roy’, and ‘Reflexions de M. le due d'Orléans sur le projet qui lui a été remis par le Roy’.
107 BPR Collection Le Paige 556, fo. 64. These details were given to Le Paige by the prince de Conti.
108 For some examples of Conti's involvement in the affairs of the parlement see: Van, Kley, ‘The prince de Conty versus Mme de Pompadour and the political crisis of 1756–7 in France: an eighteenth-century fronde manqué’, Proceedings of the annual meeting of the western society for French history, VIII (1980)Google Scholar and his Damiens, pp. 144–7.
109 Ozanam, D. and Antoine, M., Correspondance secrète du comte de Broglie avec Louis XV, 1756–1774 (2 vols. Paris, 1956), pp. xxxvii–xli.Google Scholar
110 This relationship is examined in the present author's forthcoming article, ‘Parlement politics and the parti janséniste’.
111 BPR Collection Le Paige 556, fos. 59–64 and B[ibliothèque du] S[énat]MS 9418.
112 BPR Collection Le Paige 556, fo. 64, and AN K 703, fo. 25.
113 BPR Collection Le Paige 556, fo. 64. The prince was also congratulated by the due de Biron.
114 AN X1A 8290, fos. 167–70.
115 BPR Collection Le Paige 556, fo. 88.
116 Estignard, , Parlement de Franche-Comté, 1, 340–67.Google Scholar
117 Marion, , ‘Grèves et rentrées’, p. 92.Google Scholar
118 Ibid. pp. 88–9.
119 Bourgeois had been considering the idea for some time as his letters to Lamoignon of 26 Dec. 1760 and 14 Jan. 1761 show. AN AP 177 mi 82, dos. 28, fos. 42–3.
120 Ibid. fo. 44, 10 Feb. 1761.
121 In a letter to president de Chiflet, the conseiller d'état, d'Aguesseau de Fresnes, claimed that Choiseul was responsible for the new policy, BMB Collection Chiflet 194, fo. 254, 3 March 1761. Bourgeois also blamed Choiseul for his fall as can be seen from the text of his memoirs cited in Bourgeois de Boynes, J., ‘Pierre-Etienne Bourgeois de Boynes, intendant de Franche-Comté defenseur de l'autorité royale’, Extrait des mémoires de la sociéte d'émulation de Doubs, 20 (1978), p. 83Google Scholar and ‘Pierre-Etienne Bourgeois de Boynes premier président du parlement de Franche-Comté, 1757–1761’, Ibid. 21 (1979), p. 76. I am grateful to M. le marquis de Boynes for his help and advice in preparing this paper.
122 Van Kley's, Jansemsts and Jesuits, is an indispensable guide to the attack on the Jesuits and its consequences.
123 See: de Besenval, baron, Mémoires du baron de Besenval, ed. Ségur, A. J. P., 4 vols. (Paris, 1805), 1, 364–70Google Scholar and II, 2–8; Moreau, , Mes souvenirs, II, 568–74Google Scholar; and de Choiseul, duc, Mémoires du due de Choiseul, ed. Calmettes, F. (Paris, 1904), pp. 172–98.Google Scholar
124 Dufort, J. N., Mémoires sur les règnes de Louis XV et Louis XVI el sur la révolution, ed. de Crèvecoeur, R., 2 vols. (Paris, 1886), i, 260, 285–6, 392.Google Scholar
125 The author would like to thank Dale Van Kley for allowing him to consult a typed copy of Robert de Saint Vincent's memoirs. The original is in the possession of M. Vinot Prefontaine of Arpajon. The references here are to the typed copy, de Saint Vincent, Robert, Mémoires, pp. 210–15, 227–9, 268.Google Scholar
126 Félix, J., Les magistrats du parlement de Paris, 1771–1790 (Paris, 1990), p. 45.Google Scholar
127 Estignard, , Parlement de Franche-Comté, 1, 368–75.Google Scholar
128 Bibliothèque Municipale de Dijon, Ms 1233, fos. 22–6, ‘Recueil de la plus étonnante révolution arrivée en France depuis 1769 à 1775, par l'abbé Courtepée’.
129 The crisis has been examined in a perceptive article by Hudson, D., ‘The parlementary crisis of 1763 in France and its consequences’, Canadian Journal of History, VII (1972).Google Scholar
130 Antoine, M., Louis XV (Paris, 1989).Google Scholar
