Today, October 1, 2013, I John Gregory Presco, the fiancé of Virginia Hambley de Bourmont, claim what was the Lousiana Territory in the name of the House of Bourbon, wherein said Territory, will be established a Democratic Monarchy, as was established by the Ligitimists of France.
Three generations of de Bourmonts, personally accompanied the Duchess Du Berry in her families efforts to claim the throne of France in the name of the Bourbons.
Today, the President of the United States claimed our Democracy was shut down by Republican Congressmen who were conducting a “ideological crusade”. I have identified this crusade as coming from the economic ideology being pushed upon this nation by Libertarianism and libertarian Republicans who site the economic philosophy of Jean Baptiste SAY, who is the brother of another economist philosopher, Louis (Augustin) SAY, who is Virginia’s great great, great, grandfather.
This is to SAY, if Libertarians believe they own the right to shut down the Government of the United States of America in the name Jean-Baptise Say, and are the true owners and rulers of this Democracy, then, it stands to reason this is a Family ‘‘ideological crusade’’, owned by the linear descendants of the Say family.
It is my intent to apply the de Bourmont Family Ideology to the formation of the Democratic Bourban Monarchy, and make a claim to the Louisiana Territory, declaring this sale null and void because it went against the very philosophy of the Say Economists who promoted ‘Small Government’ and no Government Involvement in Economic Matters. This so happens to be what the opponents of the Louisiana Purchase believed in, as it drastically affected the adventure capitalist pioneers who had a right to exploit the land and resources as they saw fit. This right has been held by royal families in Europe and America.
With the coming union of Virginia Hambley, and John Presco, we also have the purchase of the Oregon Territory as promoted by my kindred, Senator Thomas Benton who son-in-law. John Fremont co-founded the Republican Party and was its first Presidential nominee.
Whether there will be a hereditary monarchy established in the New Bourbon Monarchy in America, remains to be determined – by fate? If this is what was meant to be, then I hereby recognize Virginian Hambley’s siblings, Caroline, Heloise, and Mark Hambley – and their children – as Heirs to the Democratic Throne of New France in America.
It is my desire to see a marriage between the rulers and subjects of New France, with the Arts and the New Enlightened Business Man, who will take the very best from the Say Brothers in order to keep this Economy going forward, and give a base for all Americans to reunite.
Above is a photograph of me holding on to the root of the grape vines Clarke Hambley planted in frot of his daughters’ house seventeen years ago. He built the trellis. I believe he felt guilty for denying his children their French Heritage by marrying Elizabeth de Bourmont. He had seen the Bourmont castle surrounded by vineyards.
Because Clarke was born in a Democracy, and his wife was born in France, here is the Root of the Bourbon Democratic
Monarchy in America brought to this Democracy to take hold.
On this day, I hereby declare Virginia Hambley de Bourmont ‘Titular Queen of the Bourbon Democratic Monarchy in America’. May she rule with dignity and grace.
As a wedding present I will gift unto her the Oregon Territory that was established and protected by my kindred. For the reasons set forth by Jean-Baptise Say, this territory should not have been purchased by the Government of the United States, and is now under the protectorate Virginia Hambley de Bourmont ‘Queen of the House of Bourbon in America’.
As for Religious Permission, I am a Nazarite after the Prophet Samuel, known as ‘The King Maker’.
So be it!
Yours Truly
John Gregory Presco
Founder of New France
Copyright 2013
“Benton was instrumental in the sole administration of the Oregon Territory. Since the Anglo-American Convention of 1818, Oregon had been jointly occupied by both the United States and the United Kingdom.”
Some historians argue that Jefferson was a hypocrite in the Louisiana Purchase, primarily pointing to the fact that Jefferson was a strict constructionist in his views on the Constitution, yet allegedly took a loose constructionist view of the Constitution regarding the Louisiana Purchase.
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama says House Republicans have shut down the federal government over an ‘‘ideological crusade’’ against his health care law.
Obama is speaking in the Rose Garden on the first day of the government shutdown. He says the longer the shutdown continues, the worse the impact will be.
The president says Republicans should not be able to hold the entire economy ‘‘hostage.’’ He is urging them to reopen the government quickly and allow furloughed federal employees to go back to work.
The government shut down because Congress did not pass a funding bill ahead of Monday’s midnight deadline for the end of the 2013 fiscal year.
https://rosamondpress.wordpress.com/2013/09/30/genealogy-for-virginia-hambley/
This argument goes as follows:
The American purchase of the Louisiana territory was not accomplished without domestic opposition. Jefferson’s philosophical consistency was in question because of his strict interpretation of the Constitution. Many people believed he, and other Jeffersonians such as James Madison, were being hypocritical by doing something they surely would have argued against with Alexander Hamilton. The Federalists strongly opposed the purchase, favoring close relations with Britain over closer ties to Napoleon, and were concerned that the United States had paid a large sum of money just to declare war on Spain.[citation needed]
Both Federalists and Jeffersonians were concerned about whether the purchase was unconstitutional. Many members of the United States House of Representatives opposed the purchase. Majority Leader John Randolph led the opposition. The House called for a vote to deny the request for the purchase, but it failed by two votes, 59–57. The Federalists even tried to prove the land belonged to Spain, not France, but available records proved otherwise.[17]
The Federalists also feared that the political power of the Atlantic seaboard states would be threatened by the new citizens of the west, bringing about a clash of western farmers with the merchants and bankers of New England. There was concern that an increase in the number of slave-holding states created out of the new territory would exacerbate divisions between north and south as well. A group of northern Federalists led by Massachusetts Senator Timothy Pickering went so far as to explore the idea of a separate northern confederacy.
Another concern was whether it was proper to grant citizenship to the French, Spanish, and free black people living in New Orleans, as the treaty would dictate. Critics in Congress worried whether these “foreigners”, unacquainted with democracy, could or should become citizens.[18]
Most domestic objections were politically settled, overridden, or simply hushed up.[dubious – discuss] One problem, however, was too important to argue down convincingly: Napoleon did not have the right to sell Louisiana to the United States.[dubious – discuss] The sale violated the 1800 Third Treaty of San Ildefonso in several ways.[dubious – discuss] Furthermore, France had promised Spain it would never sell or alienate Louisiana to a third party. Napoleon, Jefferson, Madison, and the members of Congress all knew this during the debates about the purchase in 1803.[dubious – discuss] Spain protested strongly, and Madison made some attempt to justify the purchase to the Spanish government, but was unable to do so convincingly.[dubious – discuss] So, he tried continuously until results had been proven remorsefully inadequate.
The Louisiana Territory was broken into smaller portions for administration, and the territories passed slavery laws similar to those in the southern states but trying to encompass the preceding French and Spanish rule (for instance, Spain had prohibited slavery of Native Americans in 1769, but some slaves of mixed African-Native American descent were still being held in St. Louis when the US took over the Louisiana Territory).[35] In a freedom suit that went from Missouri to the US Supreme Court, slavery of Native Americans was finally ended in 1836.[35] The institutionalization of slavery under US territorial law in the Louisiana Territory contributed to the American Civil War a half century later.[34] As states organized within the territory, the status of slavery in each state became a matter of contention in Congress, as southern states wanted slavery extended to the west, and northern states just as strongly opposed new states being admitted as slave states. The Missouri Compromise of 1820 was a temporary solution.
Senator Benton’s greatest concern, however, was the territorial expansion of the United States to meet its “manifest destiny” as a continental power. He originally considered the natural border of the US to be the Rocky Mountains, but expanded his view to encompass the Pacific coast. He considered unsettled land to be insecure, and tirelessly worked for settlement. His efforts against soft money were mostly to discourage land speculation, and thus encourage settlement.
Benton was instrumental in the sole administration of the Oregon Territory. Since the Anglo-American Convention of 1818, Oregon had been jointly occupied by both the United States and the United Kingdom. Benton pushed for a settlement on Oregon and the Canadian border favorable to the United States. The current border at the 49th parallel set by the Oregon Treaty in 1846 was his choice; he was opposed to the extremism of the “Fifty-four forty or fight” movement during the Oregon boundary dispute.
Daguerreotype of Thomas Hart Benton, ca. 1850
Benton was the author of the first Homestead Acts, which encouraged settlement by giving land grants to anyone willing to work the soil. He pushed for greater exploration of the West, including support for his son-in-law John C. Frémont’s numerous treks.
A titular ruler, or titular head, is a person in an official position of leadership who possesses few, if any, actual powers.[1] Sometimes a person may inhabit a position of titular leadership and yet exercise more power than would normally be expected, as a result of their personality or experience. A titular ruler is not confined to political leadership but can also reference any organization, such as a corporation.
Etymology[edit]
Titular is formed from a combination of the Latin titulus (title) and the English suffix -ar,[2] which means “of or belonging to.” [3]
Development[edit]
In most parliamentary democracies today, the Head of State has either evolved into, or was created as, a position of titular leadership. In the former case, the leader may often have significant powers listed within the state’s constitution, but is no longer able to exercise them, due to historical changes within that country. In the latter case, it is often made clear within the document that the leader is intended to be powerless. Heads of State who inhabit positions of titular leadership are usually regarded as symbols of the people they “lead.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Country
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Territory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hart_Benton_(politician)
Jean Etienne SAY
Né en 1739
Décédé en 1806 , à l’âge de 67 ans
Parents
Jean SAY
Jeanne MUSSARD
Union(s) et enfant(s)
Marié avec Françoise CASTANET dont
Jean Baptiste SAY
Denis (André) SAY
Jean Honoré SAY
Louis (Augustin) SAY
Louis (Augustin) SAY
Parents
Jean Etienne SAY 1739-1806
Françoise CASTANET
Union(s) et enfant(s)
Marié avec Constance MARESSAL dont
Gustave SAY
Achille SAY
Constant SAY
Adolphe SAY
Louis (Octave) SAY
Laure SAY
Constance SAY
A libertarian Republican is a person who subscribes to libertarian philosophy while typically voting for and being involved with the United States Republican Party.
Sometimes the terms Republitarian or liberty Republican are used as well. Libertarian Republicans’ views are similar to Libertarian Party members, but differ in regard to the strategy used to implement libertarian policies.[citation needed]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_Republican
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism
Libertarianism (Latin: liber, “free”)[1] is a set of related political philosophies that uphold liberty as the highest political end.[2][3] This includes emphasis on the primacy of individual liberty,[4][5] political freedom, and voluntary association. It is the antonym to authoritarianism.[6] Different schools of libertarianism disagree over whether the state should exist and, if so, to what extent.[7] While minarchists propose a state limited in scope to preventing aggression, theft, breach of contract and fraud, anarchists advocate its complete elimination as a political system
Louis Say (1774–1840) was a French economist. Brother of Jean-Baptiste Say, he issued a number of economic pamphlets criticizing the latter’s opinions.
https://www.google.com/#psj=1&q=Louis+SAY
Adam Smith (5 June 1723 OS (16 June 1723 NS) – 17 July 1790) was a Scottish moral philosopher and a pioneer of political economy. One of the key figures of the Scottish Enlightenment,[1] Adam Smith is best known for two classic works: The Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759), and An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (1776). The latter, usually abbreviated as The Wealth of Nations, is considered his magnum opus and the first modern work of economics. Smith is cited as the “father of modern economics” and is still among the most influential thinkers in the field of economics today.[2]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Smith
David Ricardo (18 April 1772 – 11 September 1823) was a British political economist. He was often credited with systematizing economics, and was one of the most influential of the classical economists, along with Thomas Malthus, Adam Smith, and John Stuart Mill.[2][3] He was also a member of Parliament, businessman, financier and speculator, who amassed a considerable personal fortune. Perhaps his most important contribution was the theory of comparative advantage in which he advocates that a nation should abandon industries in which it is internationally competitive in order to concentrate solely on those industries in which it is most competitive.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ricardo
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Baptiste_Say
Jean-Baptiste Say (French: [ʒãbatist sɛ]; 5 January 1767 – 15 November 1832) was a French economist and businessman. He had classically liberal views and argued in favor of competition, free trade, and lifting restraints on business. He is best known due to Say’s Law, which is named after him and at times credited to him, but while he discussed and popularized it, he did not originate it.
In 1800, John retired and the company was reorganized as Francis Baring and Co. Francis’ new partners were his eldest son Thomas (later to be Sir Thomas Baring, 2nd Baronet) and son-in-law Charles Wall. Then, in 1802, Barings and Hope were called on to facilitate the largest land purchase in history – the Louisiana Purchase. This was accomplished despite the fact that Britain was at war with France and the sale had the effect of financing Napoleon’s war effort. Technically, the United States purchased Louisiana from Barings and Hope, not from Napoleon.[citation needed] After a $3 million down payment in gold, the remainder of the purchase was made in U.S. bonds, which Napoleon sold to Barings through Hope and Company of Amsterdam [4] at a discount of 87½ per $100. Francis’ second son Alexander, working for Hope & Co., made the arrangements in Paris with François Barbé-Marbois, Director of the Public Treasury. Alexander then sailed to the United States and back to pick up the bonds and deliver them to France.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barings_Bank
Louis Auguste Say, (born Lyon March 9, 1774 and died on March 6, 1840 in Paris) was a businessman, founding to large sugar refineries in Nantes and Paris, an economist and brother to the economist Jean-Baptiste Say (1767–1832). He was a severe critic of both Adam Smith and David Ricardo for their “looseness and fluctuations” in terminology.[1]
Selected works[edit]
1818 Principales causes de la richesse des peuples et des particuliers, Paris
http://mises.org/page/1462/Biography-of-JeanBaptiste-Say-Neglected-Champion-of-LaissezFaire
Nowhere is Say’s radicalism more evident than in his critique of government intervention into the economy.64 Most succinctly stated, he declares that self-interest and the search for profits will push entrepreneurs toward satisfying consumer demand. “[T]he nature of the products is always regulated by the wants of society,” therefore “legislative interference is superfluous altogether.”65
Say’s comments on one particular series of legislative acts is very instructive. The first of the British Navigation Acts was passed in 1581; these Acts were strengthened in 1651 and 1660; and the last was not repealed until 1849. Their purpose was to reserve Britain’s international trade exclusively for the shipowners of the British merchant marine. Say argues that such monopolization of the “carrying trade” diminishes national wealth because it often reduces the profits of those merchants shipping their goods to market.
He recognizes that defenders of such statutes may grant this, but still insist that the restrictions are justified on the grounds of national security. Say retorts that this is so only if “it is an advantage to one nation to domineer over others. . . . The love of domination never attains more than a factitious elevation, that is sure to make enemies of all its neighbors. It is this that engenders national debt, internal abuse, tyranny and revolution; while the sense of mutual interest begets international kindness, extends the sphere of useful intercourse, and leads to a prosperity, permanent, because it is natural.”
https://www.google.com/#q=jean-baptiste+say+republican+party
Baptistine SAY
Parents
Achille SAY
Françoise Sophie ETIENNE
Union(s) et enfant(s)
Mariée avec Dieudonné de GHAISNE de BOURMONT dont
Anne Marie de GHAISNE de BOURMONT
Louis de GHAISNE de BOURMONT
Bertrand de GHAISNE de BOURMONT
Victor de GHAISNE de BOURMONT
Sophie de GHAISNE de BOURMONT
Jean Etienne SAY
Né en 1739
Décédé en 1806 , à l’âge de 67 ans
Parents
Jean SAY
Jeanne MUSSARD
Union(s) et enfant(s)
Marié avec Françoise CASTANET dont
Jean Baptiste SAY
Denis (André) SAY
Jean Honoré SAY
Louis (Augustin) SAY
Louise de CHATEAUBRIAND
Parents
Jean de CHATEAUBRIAND , Sgr de saint-Jean des Mauvrets
Marié avec
Suzanne de MONTAUZIER
Union(s), enfant(s), les petits enfants et les arrière-petits-enfants
Mariée le 9 janvier 1602 avec Jean II de MAILLE de la TOUR LANDRY , décédé le 30 novembre 1635 , Sgr de Bourmont (Parents : François de MAILLE de la TOUR LANDRY 1540-1598 & Diane de ROHAN 1541-1585 ) dont
Louis de MAILLE de la TOUR LANDRY †1674 marié le 27 avril 1634 avec Eléonore de JALESNES 1614- dont
Charles de MAILLE de la TOUR LANDRY ca 1635-1701 marié en 1663 avec Marie Madeleine de BROC 1629-1713 dont :
Georges Henri de MAILLE de la TOUR LANDRY 1665-
Louis de MAILLE de la TOUR LANDRY †1674 marié le 4 novembre 1649 avec Louise de CHÉRITÉ dont
Charles de MAILLE de la TOUR LANDRY 1650-1722 marié avec Marie de GUITTON 1672-1724 dont :
Charles Louis de MAILLE de la TOUR LANDRY 1712-1780
André de MAILLE de la TOUR LANDRY 1651- marié avec Louise THIESLIN dont :
Charles André de MAILLE de la TOUR LANDRY
http://gw.geneanet.org/capreolus?lang=fr;p=louise;n=de+chateaubriand
Marguerite d’AUVERGNE
Parents
Béraud II d’AUVERGNE , né en 1333 , décédé en 1399 à l’âge de 66 ans , Dauphin d’Auvergne, comte de Clermont et de Sancerre
Marié avec
Marguerite de SANCERRE , décédée en 1419 , Comtesse de Sancerre
Union(s), enfant(s), les petits enfants et les arrière-petits-enfants
Mariée avec Jean IV de BUEIL , décédé en 1415 , Seigneur de Bueil (Parents : Jean III de BUEIL ca 1330-ca 1390 & Anne d’AVOIR ca 1340- ) dont
Anne de BUEIL mariée avec Pierre d’AMBOISE †1473 dont
Charles Ier d’AMBOISE ca 1430-1481 marié avec Catherine de CHAUVIGNY 1450-1485 dont :
Marie d’AMBOISE †1519
Marguerite d’AMBOISE †ca 1495 mariée le 6 novembre 1457 avec Jean II de ROCHECHOUART de MORTEMART †1477 dont :
Anne de ROCHECHOUART de MORTEMART †1508
Aimery III de ROCHECHOUART de MORTEMART †1516/
Louise d’AMBOISE †1516 mariée le 5 mai 1450, Tours,37000,Indre-et-Loire,Centre,FRANCE,, avec Guillaume GOUFFIER †1495 dont :
Artus GOUFFIER 1475-1519
Adrien GOUFFIER ca 1478-1525
Anne GOUFFIER
Anne d’AMBOISE mariée avec Jacques de CHAZERON dont :
Catherine de CHAZERON
Marie d’AMBOISE mariée avec Jean de HANGEST †1490 dont :
Hélène de HANGEST
Louis de HANGEST †1526/
Marie de BUEIL mariée avec Baudouin de CRENON ca 1345- dont
Ambroisie de CRENON mariée avec Jean III de CHAMPAGNE †1436 dont :
Pierre 1Er de CHAMPAGNE †1485
Frères et sœurs
Béraud III le Jeune Dauphin d’AUVERGNE †1426 Marié en 1409 avec Jeanne de La TOUR d’AUVERGNE
Demi frères et demi sœurs
Du côté de Béraud II d’AUVERGNE , né en 1333 , décédé en 1399 à l’âge de 66 ans , Dauphin d’Auvergne, comte de Clermont et de Sancerre
avec Jeanne de FOREZ , Dame d’Ussel
Anne d’AUVERGNE 1358-1417 Mariée en 1368 avec Louis II le Bon de BOURBON 1336..1337-1410
http://gw.geneanet.org/capreolus?lang=fr;p=louis+ii+le+bon;n=de+bourbon
Louis II le Bon de BOURBON
Né entre 1336 et 1337
Décédé en 1410
Duc de Bourbon
Parents
Pierre Ier de BOURBON , né vers 1311 , décédé le 13 octobre 1356 – Poitiers,86000,Vienne,Poitou-Charentes,FRANCE, à l’âge de peut-être 45 ans , Duc de Bourbon (1342-1356), tué
Marié le 18 février 1336 avec
Isabelle de VALOIS , née en 1313 , décédée le 19 août 1383 – Paris,75000,Paris,Île-de-France,FRANCE, à l’âge de 70 ans
Union(s), enfant(s), les petits enfants et les arrière-petits-enfants
Marié en 1368 avec Anne d’AUVERGNE , née en 1358 , décédée en 1417 à l’âge de 59 ans , Comtesse de Forez (Parents : Béraud II d’AUVERGNE 1333-1399 & Jeanne de FOREZ ) dont
Jean 1Er de BOURBON 1381-1434 marié le 21 juillet 1400, Paris,75005,Idf,FRANCE,, avec Marie de BERRY 1367-1434 dont
Charles Ier de BOURBON 1401-1456 marié avec Agnès de BOURGOGNE 1407-1476 dont :
Marie de BOURBON 1428-1448
Isabelle de BOURBON 1436-1465
Pierre II de BEAUJEU 1438-1503
Louis de BOURBON 1438-1482
Marguerite de BOURBON 1438-1483
Catherine de BOURBON ca 1440-1469
Jean II de BOURBON †1488
Louis Ier le Bon de BOURBON-MONTPENSIER ca 1403-1486 marié avec Gabrielle de La TOUR d’AUVERGNE †1486 dont :
Gabrielle de BOURBON-MONTPENSIER 1447-1516
Gilbert de BOURBON-MONTPENSIER ca 1448-1496
Charlotte de BOURBON-MONTPENSIER ca 1449-1478
Frères et sœurs
Jeanne de BOURBON 1338-1377 Mariée avec Charles V le Sage de VALOIS 1337-1380
Bonne de BOURBON 1341-1402 Mariée en 1355 avec Amédée VI de SAVOIE 1334-1383
Catherine de BOURBON ca 1342-1427 Mariée le 7 novembre 1359 avec Jean VI d’HARCOURT 1342-1388
Marguerite de BOURBON ca 1344-1416 Mariée le 28 mai 1368 avec Arnaud Amadieu IX d’ALBRET 1338-1401
http://home.comcast.net/~jamesleeweaver/weaverjl/pafg1265.htm
http://www.museeciotaden.org/Pages%20L%E9gendes/deberry.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Louise_%C3%89lisabeth_d’Orl%C3%A9ans
Maria Luisa was born a Princess of Naples and Sicily. Her father, the future Charles III of Spain, had become King of Naples and Sicily in 1735 after its occupation by the Spanish in the War of Polish Succession. After her father became King of Spain at the death of her half-uncle, Ferdinand VI of Spain, in 1759, she became known as Infanta Maria Luisa of Spain. She still had the use of the style of Royal Highness.
Background[edit]
Maria Louisa was born in Portici, in Campania, the site of the summer palace (Reggia di Portici) of her parents, King Charles, King of Naples and Sicily and Maria Amalia of Saxony. She was the fifth daughter, and second surviving child, of her parents. Her father became King of Spain as Charles III in 1759, and she moved with her family to Spain. Her first cousins included Louis XVI, Maria I of Portugal and Charles Emmanuel IV of Sardinia.
Caroline was born at the Caserta Palace as the eldest child of Prince Ferdinand, heir to the throne of Naples and Sicily. Her mother was an Archduchess of Austria herself the tenth child and third daughter of Leopold II, Holy Roman Emperor and Maria Luisa of Spain. Her parents were double first cousins.
Caroline was baptised with the names of her paternal grand parents, Maria Carolina of Austria and King Ferdinand of Naples.
She spent her youth in Palermo and in Naples. Her mother died in 1801 having given birth a son the previous year with a difficult birth. She died aged 24; her father married again in 1802 to the Infanta Maria Isabella of Spain, another first cousin. The couple would have a further twelve children.
Caroline married King Louis XVIII of France’s nephew, Charles Ferdinand d’Artois on 24 April 1816 in Naples, following negotiations with the Kingdoms of Naples and Sicily[a] by the French ambassador Pierre Louis Jean Casimir de Blacas, thus becoming the duchesse de Berry otherwise known as Madame de Berry in France.
Even though it was an arranged marriage, it was a happy marriage Caroline living at the Élysée Palace in Paris which was given to her.
She became an important figure during the Bourbon Restoration after the assassination of her husband in 1820. Caroline’s son, Henri, Count of Chambord, was named the “miracle child” because he was born after his father’s death and continued the direct Bourbon line of King Louis XIV of France. (The Duke of Berry saw only one child born by Caroline, Louise).
In 1824, King Louis XVIII died and was succeeded by Caroline’s father-in-law, King Charles X.
In 1830, she was forced to flee France when Charles X was overthrown during the July Revolution. She lived in Bath and Regent Terrace, Edinburgh for a time.[2]
In 1831 she returned to her family in Naples via the Netherlands, Prussia and Austria.[2] Later, however, with the help of Emmanuel Louis Marie de Guignard, vicomte de Saint Priest, she unsuccessfully attempted to restore the Legitimist Bourbon dynasty during the reign of the Orléanist monarch, King Louis Philippe of the French (1830–1848).
Her failed rebellion in the Vendée in 1832 was followed by her arrest and imprisonment in November, 1832. She was released in June, 1833 after giving birth to a daughter and revealing her secret marriage to an Italian nobleman, Ettore Carlo Lucchesi-Palli, 8th Duke della Grazia. In 1844, she and her husband purchased the beautiful palazzo Ca’ Vendramin Calergi on the Grand Canal in Venice from the last member of the Vendramin family line. In the turmoil of the Risorgimento, she was forced to sell the palazzo to her grandson, Prince Henry, Count of Bardi, and many of its fine works of art were auctioned in Paris.[3]
She returned to Sicily, ignored by other members of the House of Bourbon, and died near Graz (Austria-Hungary) in 1870.
French novelist Alexandre Dumas, père wrote two stories about her and her plotting.
Patron of the arts[edit]
Even as member of the royal family, the Duchess of Berry was an exceptional theatre-goer. She was the patron of the Théâtre du Gymnase, which changed its name, for a time, to the théâtre de Madame, in her honour. She attended the Odéon at least nine times during 1824 to 1828. She contributed to benefit performances, such as that of Rossini’s La dame du lac (1826), benefiting victims of the fire at the Antonio Franconi’s Cirque Olympique; she contributed 500 francs.[4]
La moisson (1822) by Auguste-Xavier Leprince, oil on canvas, 24.2 x 32.1 cm, featured in her 1822 sale
The Duchess of Berry and her first husband, Charles-Ferdinand d’Artois, were enthusiastic art collectors. Her sale of 1822 was novel for its catalogue which contained lithographic reproductions of all the works.[5][6] Lithography, invented by Alois Senefelder, had only been fully described in 1818 in Vollstandiges Lehrbuch der Steindruckerei, translated into French in 1819. The lithographs, produced by Isidore Laurent Deroy[7] sparked an interest in the technique as a means for reproducing art.[8]
She was a collector of landscapes; her collection featured at least three by Ruisdael.[9] She had several genre scenes by Auguste-Xavier Leprince[7] and she owned works by Jan van der Heyden,[10] Michel Philibert Genod,[11] François Marius Granet, Pauline Auzou, Jean-Claude Bonnefond, Charles Marie Bouton, Martin Drolling, Hortense Haudebourt-Lescot and Achille Etna Michallon, among many others.[5]
The duchess was known to patronise the Sèvres Porcelain Manufactory, commissioning notable works by Jean-Charles-François Leloy.[12]
Issue[edit]
Children with Charles Ferdinand, Duke of Berry:[1]
Princess Louise Élisabeth of France (13 July 1817 – 14 July 1817)
Prince Louis of France (born and died 13 September 1818)
Louise Marie Thérèse d’Artois (21 September 1819 – 1 February 1864)
Henri d’Artois, Duke of Bordeaux and Count of Chambord (29 September 1820 – 24 August 1883)
Children with Ettore Carlo Lucchesi-Palli, 8th Duke della Grazia:[1]
Anna Maria Rosalia Lucchesi-Palli (10 May 1833 – October 1833)[13]
Clementina Lucchesi-Palli (19 November 1835 – 22 March 1925)
Francesca di Paola Lucchesi-Palli (12 October 1836 – 10 May 1923; her son Camillo Massimo, Principe di Arsoli was the father-in-law of Princess Adelaide of Savoy, daughter of Prince Thomas, Duke of Genoa and his wife Princess Isabella of Bavaria; her other son Fabrizio Massimo, Principe di Roviano married Beatriz of Spain, daughter of Carlos, Duke of Madrid and his first wife Princess Margherita of Parma)
Maria Isabella Lucchesi-Palli (18 March 1838 – 1 April 1873)
Adinolfo Lucchesi-Palli, 9th Duke della Grazia (10 March 1840 – 4 February 1911; his son Pietro Lucchesi-Palli married Beatrice Colomba Maria di Borbone Principessa di Parma, the daughter of Robert I, Duke of Parma and his first wife Princess Maria Pia of the Two Sicilies).
Titles, styles, honours and arms[edit]
Titles and styles[edit]
5 November 1798 – 24 April 1816 Her Royal Highness Princess Carolina of Naples and Sicily
24 April 1816 – 14 February 1820 Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Berry
14 February 1820 – 17 April 1870 Her Royal Highness The Dowager Duchess of Berry
Caroline of Naples and Sicily[1] (Maria Carolina Ferdinanda Luise; 5 November 1798 – 17 April 1870) was the daughter of the future King Francis I of the Two Sicilies and his first wife, Maria Clementina of Austria.
Charles X (Charles Philippe; 9 October 1757 – 6 November 1836) was known for most of his life as the Count of Artois before he reigned as King of France and of Navarre from 16 September 1824 until 2 August 1830.[1] An uncle of the uncrowned King Louis XVII, and younger brother to reigning Kings Louis XVI and Louis XVIII, he supported the latter in exile and eventually succeeded him. His rule of almost six years ended in the July Revolution of 1830, which resulted in his abdication and the election of Louis Philippe, Duke of Orléans, as King of the French. Exiled once again, Charles died in Gorizia, then part of the Austrian Empire.[2] He was the last of the French rulers from the senior branch of the House of Bourbon descended from King Henry IV.
Henry IV (13 December 1553 – 14 May 1610), Henri-Quatre (French pronunciation: [ɑ̃.ʁi’katʁ]) was King of Navarre (as Henry III) from 1572 to 1610 and King of France from 1589 to 1610. He was the first French monarch of the House of Bourbon.
Baptised as a Catholic but raised in the Protestant faith by his mother Jeanne d’Albret, Queen of Navarre, he inherited the throne of Navarre in 1572 on the death of his mother. As a Huguenot, Henry was involved in the French Wars of Religion, he barely escaped assassination at the time of the St. Bartholomew’s Day massacre, and he later led Protestant forces against the royal army.
As a French “prince of the blood” by reason of his descent from King Louis IX, he ascended the throne of France upon the death of his childless cousin Henry III in 1589. In accepting the throne, he found it prudent to abjure his Calvinist faith. Regardless, his coronation was followed by a four-year war against the Catholic League to establish his legitimacy. As a pragmatic politician (in the parlance of the time, a politique), he displayed an unusual religious tolerance for the time. Notably, he promulgated the Edict of Nantes in 1598, which guaranteed religious liberties to Protestants, thereby effectively ending the Wars of Religion. He was assassinated by François Ravaillac, a fanatical Catholic, and was succeeded by his son Louis XIII.[1]
Considered as an usurper by Catholics and as a traitor by Protestants, Henry was hardly accepted by the population and escaped at least 12 assassination attempts.[2] An unpopular king during his reign, Henry’s popularity greatly improved posthumously.[3] The “Good King Henry” (le bon roi Henri) was remembered for his geniality and his great concern about the welfare of his subjects. He was celebrated in the popular song Vive le roi Henri and in Voltaire’s Henriade.
Upon the death of Henry III on 2 August 1589, Henry of Navarre nominally became king of France. The Catholic League, however, strengthened by support from outside the country—especially from Spain, was strong enough to force him to the south. He had to set about winning his kingdom by military conquest, aided by money and troops sent by Elizabeth I of England. Henry’s Catholic uncle Charles, Cardinal de Bourbon, was proclaimed king by the League, but the cardinal was Henry’s prisoner.[15] Henry was victorious at the Battle of Arques and the Battle of Ivry, but failed to take Paris after Siege of Paris in 1590.[16]
When the Cardinal de Bourbon died in 1590, the League could not agree on a new candidate. While some supported various Guise candidates, the strongest candidate was probably the Infanta Isabella Clara Eugenia of Spain, the daughter of Philip II of Spain, whose mother Elisabeth had been the eldest daughter of Henry II of France.[17] The prominence of her candidacy hurt the League, which became suspect as agents of the foreign Spanish. Nevertheless, Henry remained unable to take control of Paris.
Entrance of Henry IV in Paris, 22 March 1594, with 1,500 cuirassiers
“Paris is well worth a Mass”[edit]
On 25 July 1593, with the encouragement of the great love of his life, Gabrielle d’Estrées, Henry permanently renounced Protestantism, thus earning the resentment of the Huguenots and his former ally Queen Elizabeth I of England. He was said to have declared that Paris vaut bien une messe (“Paris is well worth a mass”),[18][19][20] although there is some doubt whether he said this, or whether the statement was attributed to him by his contemporaries.[21][22] His acceptance of Roman Catholicism secured for him the allegiance of the vast majority of his subjects, and he was crowned King of France at the Cathedral of Chartres on 27 February 1594. In 1598, however, he issued the Edict of Nantes, which granted circumscribed toleration to the Huguenots.[23]
When the French Revolutionary Wars broke out in 1792, Charles escaped to Great Britain, where King George III of Great Britain gave him a generous allowance. Charles lived in Edinburgh and London with his mistress Louise de Polastron[26] His older brother, dubbed Louis XVIII after the death of his nephew in June 1795, relocated to Verona and then to Jelgava Palace, Mitau, where Charles’ son Louis Antoine married Louis XVI’s only surviving child, Marie Thérèse, on 10 June 1799. In 1802, Charles supported his brother with several thousand pounds. In 1807, Louis XVIII moved to Great Britain.[27]
After the Hundred Days, Napoleon’s brief return to power in 1815,[33] the White Terror swept across France, when 80,000 Napoleonic officials and generals were removed from their positions and some even killed, most notably the Marshals Ney, who was executed for treason, and Brune, who was murdered by a mob.[34]
The king’s brother and heir presumptive[edit]
While the king retained the liberal charter, Charles patronised members of the ultra-royalists in parliament, such as Jules de Polignac, the writer François-René de Chateaubriand and Jean-Baptiste de Villèle.[35] On several occasions, Charles voiced his disapproval of his brother’s liberal ministers and threatened to leave the country unless Louis XVIII dismissed them.[36] Louis, in turn, feared that his brother’s and heir presumptive’s ultra-royalist tendencies would send the family into exile once more (which they did).
On 14 February 1820, Charles’s younger son, the Duke of Berry, was assassinated at the Paris Opera. This loss not only devastated the family but also put the continuation of the Bourbon dynasty in jeopardy, as the Duke of Angoulême’s marriage had not produced any children. Parliament debated the abolition of the Salic law, which excluded females from the succession and was long held inviolable. However, the Duke of Berry’s widow, Caroline of Naples and Sicily, was found to be pregnant and on 29 September 1820 gave birth to a son, Henry, Duke of Bordeaux.[37] His birth was hailed as “God-given”, and the people of France bought for him the Château de Chambord in celebration of his birth.[38] As a result, his granduncle, Louis XVIII, added the title Count of Chambord, hence Henry, Count of Chambord, the name by which he is usually known.
When it became apparent that a mob of 14,000 people was preparing to attack, the royal family left Rambouillet and, on 16 August, embarked on packet steamers provided by Louis Philippe to the United Kingdom. Informed by the British Prime Minister, the Duke of Wellington, that they needed to arrive in England as private citizens, all family members adopted pseudonyms; Charles X styled himself “Count of Ponthieu”. The Bourbons were greeted coldly by the English, who upon their arrival mockingly waved the newly adopted tri-colour flags at them.[56]
Charles X was quickly followed to Britain by his creditors, who had lent him vast sums during his first exile and were yet to be paid back in full. However, the family was able to use money Charles’s wife had deposited in London.[56]
The Bourbons were allowed to reside in Lulworth Castle in Dorset, but quickly moved to Holyrood Palace in Edinburgh,[56] where the Duchess of Berry also lived at Regent Terrace[57]
Charles’ relationship with his daughter-in-law proved uneasy, as the Duchess claimed the regency for her son Henry, whom the abdications of Rambouillet had left the legitimist pretender to the French throne. Charles at first denied her demands, but in December agreed to support her claim[58] once she had landed in France.[57] In 1831 the Duchess made her way from Britain by way of the Netherlands, Prussia and Austria to her family in Naples.[57] Having gained little support, she arrived in Marseilles in April 1832,[57] made her way to the Vendée, where she tried to instigate an uprising against the new regime, and was imprisoned, much to the embarrassment of her father-in-law.[58] He was further dismayed when after her release the Duchess married the Count of Lucchesi Palli, a minor Neapolitan noble. In response to this morganatic match, Charles banned her from seeing her children.[59]
At the invitation of Emperor Francis I of Austria, the Bourbons moved to Prague in winter 1832/33 and were given lodging at the Hradschin Palace by the Emperor.[58] In September 1833, Bourbon legitimists gathered in Prague to celebrate the Duke of Bordeaux’s thirteenth birthday. They expected grand celebrations, but Charles X merely proclaimed his grandson’s majority. On the same day, after much cajoling by Chateaubriand, Charles agreed to a meeting with his daughter-in-law, which took place in Leoben on 13 October 1833. The children of the Duchess refused to meet with her after they learned of her second marriage. Charles refused the various demands by the Duchess, but after protests from his other daughter-in-law, the Duchess of Angoulême, acquiesced. In the summer of 1834, he again allowed the Duchess of Berry to see her children.[60]
Upon the death of Emperor Francis in March 1835, the Bourbons left Prague Castle, as the new Emperor Ferdinand wished to use it for coronation ceremonies. The Bourbons moved initially to Teplitz, and then, as Ferdinand wanted the continued use Prague Castle, purchased Kirchberg Castle. Moving there was postponed due to an outbreak of cholera in the locality. In the meantime, Charles left for the warmer climate on Austria’s Mediterranean coast in October 1835. Upon his arrival at Görz he caught cholera and died on 6 November 1836. The townspeople draped their windows in black to mourn him. Charles was interred in the Church of the Annunciation of Our Lady, in the Franciscan Kostanjevica Monastery (now in Nova Gorica, Slovenia).[61] The remains of Charles X are in a crypt with those of other members of his family.
Constitutional monarchy is a form of government in which a monarch acts as head of state within the guidelines of a constitution, whether it be a written, uncodified, or blended constitution. This form of government differs from absolute monarchy in which an absolute monarch serves as the source of power in the state and is not legally bound by any constitution and has the powers to regulate his or her respective government.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_monarchy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourbon_Restoration
After a resounding victory, a new Ultra ministry was formed, headed by Jean-Baptiste de Villèle, a leading Ultra who served for six years. The ultras found themselves back in power in favourable circumstances: Berry’s wife, the duchesse de Berry, gave birth to “miracle child”, Henri, seven months after the duc’s death; Napoleon died on Saint Helena in 1821, and his son, the duc de Reichstadt, remained interned in Austrian hands. Literary figures, most notably Chateaubriand, but also Hugo, Lamartine, Vigny, and Nodier, rallied to the ultras’ cause.
During the restoration, the new Bourbon regime was a constitutional monarchy, unlike the absolutist Ancien Régime, and so it had some limits on its abilities to govern.
The House of Bourbon-Parma (Italian: Casa di Borbone di Parma) is an Italian cadet branch of the House of Bourbon. It is thus descended from the Capetian dynasty in male line. The name of Bourbon-Parma comes from the main name (Bourbon) and the other (Parma) from the title of Duke of Parma. The title was held by the Spanish Bourbons as the founder was the great-grandson of Duke Ranuccio II Farnese, Duke of Parma.
Since 1964 a cadet branch of the House of Bourbon-Parma rules Luxembourg as Grand Duke.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Bourbon-Parma
Louise Marie Thérèse d’Artois (Louise Marie Thérèse; 21 September 1819 – 1 February 1864) was a duchess and later a regent of Parma. She was the eldest daughter of Charles Ferdinand, Duke of Berry, younger son of King Charles X of France and his wife Carolina of Naples and Sicily, daughter of King Francis I of the Two Sicilies.
Princess Zita of Bourbon-Parma (Zita Maria delle Grazie Adelgonda Micaela Raffaela Gabriella Giuseppina Antonia Luisa Agnese; 9 May 1892 – 14 March 1989) was the wife of Emperor Charles of Austria. As such, she was the last Empress of Austria, Queen of Hungary and Croatia, and Queen of Bohemia.
Born as the seventeenth child of the dispossessed Robert I, Duke of Parma and his second wife Infanta Maria Antonia of Portugal, Zita married the then Archduke Charles of Austria in 1911. Charles became heir presumptive to the Emperor Franz Joseph I of Austria in 1914 after the assassination of his uncle Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria, and acceded to the throne in 1916 after the old emperor’s death.
After the end of World War I in 1918, the Habsburgs were deposed when the new countries of Austria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary and the State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs were formed. Charles and Zita left for exile in Switzerland and later Madeira, where Charles died in 1922. After her husband’s death, Zita and her son Otto served as the symbols of unity for the exiled dynasty. A devout Catholic, she raised a large family after being widowed at the age of 29, and never remarried.
Asteroid 689 Zita is named in her honour.
Robert I (Italian: Roberto I Carlo Luigi Maria di Borbone, Duca di Parma e Piacenza; 9 July 1848 – 16 November 1907) was the last sovereign Duke of Parma and Piacenza from 1854 to 1859, when the duchy was annexed to Sardinia-Piedmont during the unification of Italy. He was a member of the House of Bourbon, descended from Philip, Duke of Parma the third son of King Philip V of Spain and Elizabeth Farnese.
http://gw.geneanet.org/pierfit?lang=fr;p=adolphe;n=de+ghaisne+de+bourmont
Adolphe de GHAISNE de BOURMONT
(Philippe Auguste Adolphe de GHAISNE de BOURMONT)
Né le 1er novembre 1808
Décédé en 1883 , à l’âge de 75 ans
Officier d’état-major
Saint-Cyr : voir ses cousins de la même promotion “1824-1826”
Parents
Louis III de GHAISNE de BOURMONT , maréchal de France 1773-1846 (Ministre de la guerre, gentilhomme de la Chambre du roi)
Marie Madeleine Juliette de BECDELIÈVRE 1775-1840
Fratrie
Louis IV , Comte de Ghaisne de Bourmont 1801-1882
Juliette de GHAISNE de BOURMONT 1802-1868
Amédée de GHAISNE de BOURMONT , voir Mort pour la France 1803-1830
Charles de GHAISNE de BOURMONT , voir Ordre Royal et Militaire de Saint-Louis (Chevalier) 1807-
Adolphe de GHAISNE de BOURMONT 1808-1883
Ernestine de GHAISNE de BOURMONT 1809-1839
César de GHAISNE de BOURMONT 1814-1854
The Louisiana territory encompassed all or part of 15 present U.S. states and two Canadian provinces. The land purchased contained all of present-day Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Nebraska; parts of Minnesota that were west of the Mississippi River; most of North Dakota; most of South Dakota; northeastern New Mexico; northern Texas; the portions of Montana, Wyoming, and Colorado east of the Continental Divide; Louisiana west of the Mississippi River, including the city of New Orleans; and small portions of land that would eventually become part of the Canadian provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan.
The purchase of the territory of Louisiana took place during the presidency of Thomas Jefferson. At the time, the purchase faced domestic opposition because it was thought to be unconstitutional. Although he agreed that the U.S. Constitution did not contain provisions for acquiring territory, Jefferson decided to go ahead with the purchase anyway in order to remove France’s presence in the region and to protect both U.S. trade access to the port of New Orleans and free passage on the Mississippi River.
Although the purchase was thought of by some as unjust and unconstitutional, Jefferson believed there was no evidence of unconstitutional actions taking place during the purchase of what became fifteen states. In hindsight, the Louisiana Purchase could be considered one of Thomas Jefferson’s greatest contributions to the United States.[6] On April 18, 1802, Jefferson penned a letter to Robert Livingston. It was an intentional exhortation to make this supposedly mild diplomat strongly warn the French of their perilous course. The letter began:
While the sale of the territory by Spain back to France in 1800 went largely unnoticed, fear of an eventual French invasion spread nationwide when, in 1801, Napoleon sent a military force to secure New Orleans. Southerners feared that Napoleon would free all the slaves in Louisiana, which could trigger slave uprisings elsewhere.[8] Though Jefferson urged moderation, Federalists sought to use this against Jefferson and called for hostilities against France. Undercutting them, Jefferson took up the banner and threatened an alliance with Britain, although relations were uneasy in that direction.[8] In 1801 Jefferson supported France in its plan to take back Saint-Domingue, then under control of Toussaint Louverture after a slave rebellion.
Jefferson sent Livingston to Paris in 1801 after discovering the transfer of Louisiana from Spain to France under the Third Treaty of San Ildefonso. Livingston was authorized to purchase New Orleans.
In January 1802, France sent General LeClerc to Saint-Domingue to re-establish slavery, reduce the rights of free people of color and take back control of the island from slave rebels. This colony had been the wealthiest for France in the Caribbean, and Napoleon wanted its productivity restored. Alarmed about the French actions and its intention to re-establish empire in North America, Jefferson declared neutrality in relation to the Caribbean, refusing credit and other assistance to the French but allowing war contraband to get through to the rebels to prevent France from getting a foothold again.[9]
In November 1803, France withdrew its 7,000 surviving troops from Saint-Domingue (more than two-thirds of its troops died there) and gave up its ambitions in the western hemisphere.[10] In 1804 Haiti declared independence but, fearing a slave revolt at home, Jefferson and the US Congress refused to recognize the new republic, the second in the Western Hemisphere, and imposed a trade embargo against it. This made it difficult for the country to recover after the wars.[11]
Rosamond Press 
Reblogged this on rosamondpress.