MEMOIRS OF THE SANSONS.
21
he the fourth of my family to whom it has de-
scended from father to son, and if hereditary
nobility were attached to it, as it ought to be, I
might stand on even ground with Mdme. la
Marquise.
' ' ' You laugh, gentlemen, at the word ' ' hered-
itary." I cannot find anything extraordinary
or preposterous in it. Military offices, which
have the same functions as mine, and which, as
I have observed, are inferior to it, eujoy the
same advantage. Yours, gentlemen—allow me
to say so—yours, which only contribute to the
public weal in aa indirect way, while mine has
a more direct application, have the same priv-
ilege. Why is the concession denied to my
office? It will not be denied, I suppose, that I
am a member of Parliament, and perhaps, I may
say, one of its most useful members. None
among you, gentlemen, can, individually, en-
sure public happiness effectually; none can pro-
nounce a sentence except in conjunction with
all the other members of the body. Thus you
never act otherwise than as members; whereas
I procure peace alone,and I act as a chief. Now
every chief is respectable, and to whatever cat-
egory he may belong be should enjoy the priv-
ilege of nobility. The general prosecutor, who
is the chief of his department, has it; so does
the chief clerk of the Court. Why should I
be deprived of it by an unrighteous exception?
I will press no further the sovereign reasons
suggested by the justice of my case; I merely
point them out as you may see. Men of my
profession can act better than they can speak,
handle the sword better than make a speech ; I
believe, nevertheless, that I have said enough
to urge confidently that Mdme. la Marquise
should be nonsuited. I might urge a plea
against her, but I consider tbe weakness of her
claim a sufficient rebuke. I therefore ask, not
that the alleged infamy of my office be removed,
for no infamy is attached to .it, but that it be
declared that not only am I a member of the
Sovereign Court, but that I *m the head of my
department; that my office has particular re-
semblance to tbe profession of arms; that in
consequence I have a right to the prerogative of
gown and sword; and I further ask that, in vir-
tue of this twofold title, nobility be conferred
upon me, as well as upon my posterity; and I
am confident that you cannot but grant my pe-
tition."
"The advocate for the plaintiff perceived
that my speech had impressed the judges, and
he hastened to reply. ' I do not know, gentle-
men,' he said, ' whether the speech you have
just heard is worthy of your contempt, or
whether it should not excite your indignation.'
'"What! a wretched executioner presume
to compare himself to you, and even dare to
claim pre-eminence! He claims tbe lead of the
officers of Parliament. What! although sol-
diers expose their lives for the safety of the
State, their glory does not equal his; and he
asks for nobility! In fact, he is the first func-
tionary of the State! I will not stoop to discuss
his arguments. It is sufficient to observe that
the contempt and hatred that are felt for his
office are as old as the world; they are common
to all nations and all times. It is an innate
sentiment, a cry of the heart, which discards
this minister of death; one can never see him
without feeling secret horror, and our eyes can-
not but seek on his clothes marks of his cruelty;
it always «seems to us that he is reeking with
human blood. Let him say what he likes; no
argument can stand «against the sentiment he
inspires; as long as his profession is to shed
blood and destroy men, nature must recoil be-
fore him.
"'Think of it, gentlemen; believe the im-
pulse of nature, and I am sure Mdme. la Mar-
quise shall win the dav.'
"I looked at him with pride and contempt,
and answered:
" ' I did not think that it required so little to
be an advocate. Since it is thus, and if I am
contradicted again, I can become a lawyer in
three days. What! you rejoice in the title and
you argue so lamely? I beg you to observe,
gentlemen, that feeling how impossible it is for
him to answer my arguments, he merely attacks
my conclusions and tries to turn them into
ridicule: he allows the premises, to use a legal
expression, and denies tbe consequences. A
curious answer, indeed! He should have at-
tacked my principles and denied my conse-
quences. He does neither the one nor the other ;
he knows that what I have said is so true that
he cannot even doubt it. He is angry with
me because I said that my calling is equal to
the military profession, and that it is closely
linked with your office. I am sorry for him,
but this truth is so clearly proved that I defy
him, or anyone else, to refute it. He feels that
common sense is against him. He appeals to
sentiment; a paltry trick, indeed! He says that
he feels a loathing for my office; I suppose he
does experience such a sentiment since he says
so. But, as for me, I assure you that I feel
quite differently. He boldly asserts that all
men feel like him. How can he say? Innate
sentiment is only Known to those who feel it.
And even if he were right, what of that? It
would be a traditional prejudice, a result of
education. This horror is just what I complain
of. The question is whether this horror is
equitable, and this my opponent refuses to
argue. The only reason on which he bases the
alleged infamy of my profession is that its
object is the death of men. I have already ob-
served that it is not disgraceful to shed blood
for the welfare of the State. I will only add a
few comments which will demonstrate my
right, and show the bad faith and ignorance of
the advocate of Mdme. la Marquise, who asserts
that at all times my office has been loathed by
the public. Is he not aware, then, that among
the ancients it was the custom to intrust the
functions I discharge to the most meritorious
in the State? Solomon, the wisest of all kings,
knew what glory was, and when he wished to
bestow on some one a token of his friendship,
he gave him an office similar to mine. Bena-
iah, the captain of bis guards and his favorite,
was invested with this dignity.
" ' It is true that there was no Parliament at
the time. There was only the sovereign and
his executioner for the maintenance of order.
These two dignitaries were correlative, and one
could not subsist without the other. Solomon
alone pronounced judgment, and Benaiah alone
could carry it out. Joab had prevaricated ; the
king sentenced him to death, and Benaiah kill-
ed him: " Lnterfice eum el sepeli," said theking
to him. Shimei suffered a like fate. David
acted in a similar manner. A young page for
whom he felt affection was intrusted by him
with the execution of the criminal Amalekite,
who had borne a sacrilegious hand on the per-
son of Saul, king of "Israel. My opponent
knows nothing of history, or is merely trying
to deceive the Court. Confess, gentlemen, that
if the King had attached a salary of one hun-
dred and fifty thousand livres to my office, to-
gether with suitable privileges, it would be the
finest office in the State. If you still doubt this,
let us attack my adversary's principles. So long
as my profession consists in shedding blood and
slaying men, my profession must remain in-
famous, and nature must recoil from me. Such
is his argument. If it is just, all those who
make a profession of sheading blood should
share my fate. The principle is common to all,
and the consequence applies to all in the same
way. Thereby he stigmatizes all soldiers; he
wounds the natural sentiments and tastes of all
nations, which always regarded them with
favor. According to him, a brave officer who
retires from battle covered with dust and blood
should be regarded as an unnatural monster,
deserving of horror and contempt. Who does
not feel "the absurdity of such reasoning? He
is bound to admit it or to discard his principle;
to excuse a soldier because he attacks armed
men and risks bis life is a frivolous exception;
his profession is, all the same, bloodshed and
killing. Thus the principle can apply to him
as well as to me. Six armed soldiers co-
operate against a poor deserter, who is pinioned
and unable to defend himself; they blow his
brains out, and they certainly do not risk their
lives in so doing; and yet no one will venture
to think them sullied. But what is the use of
so manv subterfuges? It is certain that it is
neither'humiliating nor low to shed blood when
the safety of the State demands it. It is even
an honorable function. My office is the only
one which it is intended to except. And if I
ask by what right, no other answer can be given
except that this state of things springs from
fancy and prejudice. Who, among sensible
men, would be guided by ideas that are in con-
tradiction to sound reason, which give the name
of virtue to vice, aud of vice to virtue?
" ' A man kills his enemy in a duel ; that is,
he transgresses all divine and human laws. He
deserves the worst punishment; he should be-
come in the eyes of the world an object of hor-
ror; no one should eat with him, or even speak
to him? Not at all; fancy decrees that he
should be regarded as a man of honor, and his
crime as an act of valor. How unfortunate is
the age we live in!   Fancy is supreme; virtue
is oppressed, and vice condoned! What! an in-
famous duelist who has. just killed a human
creature to satisfy his brutality is to be con-
sidered an honest man, while a deserving in-
dividual, who serves society in the most im-
portant function of the State, is to be regarded
as a ruffian who cannot sit down at table with
any other person ! It is a disgrace to our cent-
ury. It is your duty, gentlemen, to discard this
perverse taste. You cannot do better than
grant the prayer I address to you. I ask no-
favor; but I expect everything of your equity.' '"
The Court retired to confer, and decided that
the case should be indefinitely adjourned.
More than a century after this judgment was
pronounced, I publish my grandfather's curious
brief, in which he attempted a rehabilitation,
nay, a glorification which never occurred to
me. 1 abstain from any remark. What are
the arguments of logic against that innate feel-
ing which, as the advocate of the Marchioness
very well said, must always predominate. In-
nate feeling honors the soldier, absolves the
duelist, and brands the executioner; but how-
can it condemn him without also discarding
capital punishment?
I now return to my family and Charles Henri
Sanson. I have yet to relate his first love,
which is interesting for more than one reason,
inasmuch as the object of his affection was
Marie Jeanne Gomart Vaubernier, who was to
be the Comtesse du Barry.
CHAPTER XV.
FAMILY    ANECDOTES.
I have given a faithful description of
Marthe Dubut, widow of Charles Sanson IL,
who enjoyed a long life and saw her descend-
ants multiply in the profession she contributed
to maintain in the family. I bave not, how-
ever, sufficiently dwelt on Ihe career of Charles
Jean-Baptiste Sanson, her son, who was the
father of the numerous lineage which we have
been spreading over France in the capacity of
executioners. However, I must neglect M. de
Rheims, M. de Provins, and the others in favor
of Monsieur de Paris, the head of the family,
and the most important functionary of his
order. The house of the executioner of Paris
always held the first rank; it was a kind of me-
tropolis, of which the provincial executioners
considered themselves suffragans. We were
often sent out into the provinces to superintend
executions; advice was regularly asked of us
by our subordinates, and a constant correspond-
ence was carried on between Paris and the
other chief towns of the country. I may add,
that some of our confrères of the departments
sent us their sons as assistants for a certain
time, that they might acquire ability in the pro-
fession. We seldom refused to receive such
pupils, and we admitted the novices, who sat at
our table as long as they remained with us.
When the number of Charles Jean-Baptiste'S
children is remembered, one may have an idea
of the numerous company which assembled in
the dining-room of our house. Charles Jean-
Baptiste shared his mother's singular ideas and
strange principles; both were much respected
by their children and the strangers who found
hospitality under their roof. The life of Charles;
Jean-Baptiste was very active, and left him bis*
little time for amusement. He studied anatomy
with fervency, as Sanson de Longval had done.
He possessed the science to a greater degree
than any of my ancestors. He always rose
early; after a light meal, he went to church*at»
Saint Laurent and returned to his house, where
he received a certain number of patients whom
he treated according to their ailings. These con-
sultations lasted until dinner-time. After din-
ner the family took a stroll in the garden, and!
then my great-grandfather returned to his lab-
oratory, where he prepared his medicines or
pursued his studies. At dusk, until supper was
served, he sat down before his door, and
breathed the fresh air. He occasionally en-
countered the hostile look of some neighbor;
but he found ample compensation for such
signs of contempt in the bows of a throng of
paupers and patients who always found assist-
ance and advice under his roof.
It is difficult to explain the psychological
phenomena by which many of us have been
enabled to unite with a profession for which I
have always felt repugnance the practice of the-
highest virtue. I could quote many instances j
that among others, of the executioner Gasnier,
of Rennes, who, in his jurisdiction, was the