Voltaire writes that odious tactics were used on both sides, with one M. Joly [Jean François Joly de Fleury de La Valette] conspiring to cut his arm and be shot in his carriage to make the public believe that the Court had wanted to murder him. A few days later, shots were fired in the Prince of Condé’s carriages, killing one servant. Cardinal de Retz, the Duke of Beaufort, and [Pierre] Broussel were all accused in parliament and justified. Voltaire then writes that every important man, or every man who wanted to be important, claimed to be acting in the interests of the public good and wanted to get as close to the Crown as possible. The text includes some passages not featured in the printed edition.

F.1 is a draft of the Siécle de Louis XIV in the hand of Wagnière. recounting the low and odious means employed by all factions at the royal court. The text is interrupted by Voltaire’s symbol at the end of the sentence reading: ‘Condé ne les aimait ni tres les estimait’. The text to be inserted at this point is introduced on f.2 and 3 by the same symbol, beginning: ‘le coadjuteur de larcheveché de paris voulait etre cardinal par la nomination de la Reine et il se devouait alors a elle pour obtenir cette dignité etrangere qui ne donnait aucune autorité mais un grand relief.’ F.3 ends with the phrase: ‘le prince de condé eut pu gouverner.’ The remaining text on fol.1v is split into three sections. The first section, in Wagnière’s hand, continues the text from the recto side which appears to have been cut by Voltaire from the printed edition. The second section, also in Wagnière’s hand beginning ‘ce qui montre encore combien les évênements trompent les hommes, c’est que cette prison des trois princes qui semblait devoir assoupir toutes les factions, fut ce qui les releva’, provides a section that was eventually added to ch.4 of the Siècle (OCV, vol.13A, pp.74-5, ll.495-510). The final section in Collini’s hand, beginning ‘Toute la France redemandait le grand condé’ continues the second section of text on f.1v.

Voltaire discusses Candide as if he is not the author of it. Voltaire begins by acknowledging receipt of Thiériot’s letter, as well as some brochures, and a further letter from Mme. Bellot. He asks Thiériot for Mme. Bellot’s address as she has not dated her letter and so he neither knows when it was sent nor where she now lives. Voltaire notes that he will repay the ‘small advances’ Thiériot had given him to ‘decorate’ his mind. He then turns to Candide and writes that he has read the text and that it amuses him more than Histoire générale des Huns, des Turcs… by Guignes and all of Thiériot’s essays on trade and finance. Voltaire recounts that two young people from Paris told him that they look like Candide and Voltaire adds that he thinks he resembles Mr. Pococurante, but that God saves him ‘from having the slightest part in this work.’ He concludes that it is likely that Mr. Joly de Fleury will convince the assembled chambers that Candide is a book against morals, laws, and religion and thus that it would be better to live in the land of Oreillons than in Paris. He quips that Parisians used to be like monkeys who frolic but now want to be roaring oxen, something Voltaire does not feel suits them. Voltaire ends the letter with a latin phrase reading: ‘si quid novi, scribe, et cum otiosus eris, veni, et vale.’

Jean François Joly de Fleury writes that he is sending back two memoirs given to Daniel Charles de Trudaine by the General Farm concerning the union made between Chezery and Ballon by the Treaty of Turin. He says that he has visited these regions so that he is in a position to give his opinion—with full knowledge of the facts—on all questions that may arise from the execution of the treaty. Joly de Fleury claims that the Treaty will prevent smuggling, and this was evidenced to him when, a few days before his visit to Seyssel, they chastised an employee who boarded a boat. The remaining question, he notes, is whether the valley of Chezery should be united with Ballon [Ballon d’Alsace] or the Pays de Gex, a matter which has already given rise to numerous memoirs. Joly de Fleury has begun the letter halfway down p.1, indicating his respect for Daniel Charles de Trudaine.

A letter from Jean François Joly de Fleury de La Valette to Daniel Charles de Trudaine about a draft judgement which had been sent to him on the 18th of November 1760 for a meeting at Bugey. Joly de Fleury points out some small errors in the draft, such as Chezery being called a town rather than a valley, then advocates for the inclusion of the lands of Ballon [Ballon d’Alsace], seeing as it is four or five times larger than the valley of Chezery. Joly de Fleury asks not to speak of laws and customs because he lacks sufficient knowledge of them but concedes that it is necessary to discuss the reunion of territories and obtain the proper letters and patents. He says that he thinks it would be commendable to include in the preamble the memoirs and representations that have been produced for Burgey and Gex. Joly de Fleury writes then that he has attached a revised draft of the declaration and that he thinks it would be appropriate to unite the valley of Chezery with Nantua and Ballon with Seyssel. He has begun the letter halfway down p.1 indicating his respect for Daniel Charles de Trudaine.