Louvois, written on the 11th of October, 1680,
he admits that he cannot penetrate the darkness
by which he is environed, and asks for further
time for reflection, though he owns that, after
having reflected, he may probably be in the
position of seeing less what lie ought to do. La
Reynie was evidently bewildered in a labyrinth
of denunciations, and the trial seemed likely to
last for ever if the minister Colbert had not
decided to take up the question. He saw that its
continued agitation must have the effect of
compromising, and might, possibly, convict
Madame de Montespan and Madame de Vivonne, with
both of whom he was connected by family
alliances, and of turning to the disadvantage of
royalty itself.

He accordingly desired the advocate Duplessis,
of whom mention has been already made, to
lend his aid in bringing the matter to a crisis
by considering what course had better be adopted
towards the general body of the prisoners.
There were, he observed, three ways of proceeding:
To continue the trial, which was not now
the wish of the king; to pass sentence on the
most guilty—such as Lesage, Guibourg, and
the girl Voisin; or to transport, without
sentence, the whole lot (toutes ces canailles) to
Canada, Cayenne, the American islands, or St.
Domingo. Colbert himself preferred the adop-
tion of the second expedient, on the condition
of also confining some twenty of the minor
culprits in one of the prisons near Paris, and of
keeping the rest "au secret la plus rigoureux."
Duplessis eagerly took up the matter, but it
is not necessary for us to follow the details of
his arguments and opinions, with reference to
the persons of quality chiefly compromised, set
forth, as we have found them, by M. Pierre
Clement, of the Institute of France, who has
examined all the original documents bearing
upon the question—the conclusion at which he
arrived being the essential point. After pointing
out, as Colbert had done, that various
courses might be taken, he advised that all the
prisoners should be summarily dealt with,
insisting strongly upon the necessity of putting
no more of them to the question, and that all
the proceedings should be burnt. With certain
reservations the advice of Duplessis prevailed.
The papers were not destroyed, nor were all
the prisoners sentenced, but sacrifices enough
were made. La Reynie's report tells us how the
majority of the accused were disposed of—the
"canaille," be it understood, and not the king's
mistresses or the courtiers who had been implicated
in these dangerous and disreputable
transactions. Thirty-six persons were put to death,
among whom were La Voisin (the elder), La
Filastre, La Vigoureux, a certain Madame de
Carada, several priests, and Jean Maillard, an
auditor of accounts, a suspected agent of
Fouquet. A great number underwent imprisonment
and deportation, and no fewer than eighty were
detained by the king's order, and judgment was
suspended in the case of not the least guilty of
the series—such as the girl Voisin, Lesage,
Guibourg, and several others, whose depositions had
pressed most heavily on Madame de Montespan
and the Duchess de Vivonne. What became of
these people was never known, though the
registers of the Bastille and remoter fortresses
could doubtless have told.

Constituted by letters patent in the month of
April, 1679, the Chamber of the Arsenal (or
"Poison Chamber") was not dissolved till the
end of July, 1682, a period of rather more than
three years. The fact was announced in a letter
from the king to the Chancellor Boucherat, in
which it was stated that the principal authors of
the crimes which had been brought to the
knowledge of the commissaries of the court having
been punished, it had been deemed advisable to
dissolve the Chamber, at the same time providing
for the safety of the public. A royal ordonnance
was also issued about the same time, the
preamble of which set forth that "a great number
of magicians and enchanters, lately arrived in
France from foreign countries, had made many
dupes and victims by practising vain curiosities
and superstitions, and mingling sorcery and
poisoning with impiety and sacrilege." To
remedy this evil, Louis the Fourteenth decreed
that all fortune-tellers of both sexes should
immediately leave the kingdom, and ordered the
penalty of death to be inflicted on whosoever
should be convicted of having performed those
sacrilegious and abominable masses, which had
been one of the principal crimes borne witness
to in the late trial. The sixth article of the
ordonnance showed the uncertainty of the
Chamber respecting the agency of mysterious
poisons: "Shall be reputed amongst the number,
not only those which may cause sudden and
violent death, but those also which cause
illnesses by gradually undermining health,
whether the said poisons are simple, natural, or
compounded by artistic means." Finally, another
article, which betrayed one of the chief
preoccupations of La Reynie, prohibited the employment
as medicaments of certain creatures, such
as serpents, toads, vipers, &c., without special
permission, an injunction bearing upon the love
powders destined for the king by Madame de
Montespan, according to the testimony of various
witnesses. What degree of culpability attached
to the imperious favourite and the rest of the
great personages involved in the wide-spread
accusation, which led to the establishment of
the Poison Chamber of Paris, must rather be
inferred than declared, but the morals of the time
were such as to justify the worst suspicions.

NEW WORK BY MR. DICKENS,
In Monthly Parts, uniform with the Original Editions of
"Pickwick," "Copperfield," &c.
Now publishing, PART II., price 1s., of
OUR MUTUAL FRIEND.
BY CHARLES DICKENS.
IN TWENTY MONTHLY PARTS.
With Illustrations by MARCUS STONE.
London: CHAPMAN and HALL, 193, Piccadilly.