e might
take her authoritatively and by virtue of his royalty, and one of them
even went and told this to the lady, who repeated it to her husband.
The advocate clearly perceived that he and his wife must needs quit
the kingdom, and that he would indeed find it hard to escape without
obeying. Finally the husband gave his wife leave to comply with the
King's desire, and in order that he might be no hindrance in the matter,
he pretended to have business in the country for eight or ten days;
during which time, however, he remained concealed in Paris, frequenting
the brothels and trying to contract a venereal disease in order to
give it to his wife, so that the King might catch it from her; and he
speedily found what he sought, and infected his wife and she the King,
who gave it to several other women, whom he kept, and could never get
thoroughly cured, for all the rest of his life he remained unhealthy,
sad, peevish and inaccessible."

Brantome, it may be mentioned, also speaks of the King contracting a
complaint through his gallantries, and declares that it shortened his
life, but he mentions no woman by name, and does not tell the story of
the advocate's wife. It will have been observed in the extract we have
quoted that Guyon de la Nauthe says that the advocate had left children
"in possession of high estate and good repute." Disome, however, had no
children either by his first or his second wife. The question therefore
arises whether La Nauthe is not referring to another advocate, for
instance Le Feron, husband of La belle Feronniere. These would appear to
have left posterity (see _Catalogue de tous les Conseillers du Parlement
de Paris_, pp. 120-2-3, and Blanchard's _les Presidents a mortier du
Parlement de Paris, etc_., 1647, 8vo). But it should be borne in mind
that the Feronniere intrigue is purely traditional. The modern writers
who speak of it content themselves with referring to Mezeray, a very
doubtful authority at most times, and who did not write, it should be
remembered, till the middle of the seventeenth century, his _Abrege
Chronologique_ being first published in 1667. Moreover, when we come
to consult him we find that he merely makes a passing allusion to La
Feronniere, and even this is of the most dubious kind. Here are his
words: "In 1538 the King had a long illness at Compiegne, caused by an
ulcer.... He was cured at the time, but died [of it?] nine years later.
_I have sometimes heard say_(!) that he