The material is distributed under a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 4.0 license. From Mariano Tomatis.
The Commission identifies in the first eleven the invoices relating to the church and the garden of Calvary: in doing so, it excludes more than 2600 francs from the successive invoices referring to the same works. In cataloging them, several other mistakes are made:
# | Heading (date) | Actual | Considered |
1 | Pascal Faraco (1897) | 317 | 317 |
2 | Pascal Faraco (1901) | 170 | 170 |
3 | H.Daban (1897) | 359.5 | 350 |
4 | Charles Denarnaud (1897) | 147 | 147 |
5 | Manufacture Giscard (1891) | 915 | 915 |
6 | Manufacture Giscard (1897) | 2920 | 2310 |
7 | F.D.Monna (1887) | 700 | 700 |
8 | Mathieu Mestre (1893) | 700 | 700 |
9 | Mathieu Mestre (1897) | 1050 | 1050 |
10 | Mathieu Mestre (1898) | 400 | 400 |
11 | Henri Feur (1887) | 1350 | 1350 |
8409 |
Invoice 3 is reported as 350 F instead of 359.5 F. Invoice 4 is counted despite its sum already being included in invoice 47. Of invoice 6, only the first facade is considered, which shows the sum of 2310 F against the real 2920 F. The Commission therefore receives a sum of a total of 8409 francs for the work of the Church.1
All other 50 invoices are divided into two groups: the 25 paid and the 25 still to be paid.
# | Heading (date) | Actual | Considered |
12 | Ciments Berhelot (1904) | 109 | 109 |
13 | L. Duchesne (1905) | 403.45 | 403.45 |
14 | L. Duchesne (1906) | 11,25 | 11,25 |
16 | Ciments Berhelot (1904) | 191.8 | 191.8 |
18 | Georges Castex (1897) | 976.4 | 665 |
19 | Paul Taillefer (1905) | 31.2 | 31.2 |
20 | Paul Taillefer (1901) | 114 | 114 |
21 | Paul Taillefer (1902) | 352.8 | 352.8 |
22 | Paul Taillefer (1905) | 74 | 74 |
23 | Paul Taillefer (1905) | 24 | 24 |
24 | Paul Taillefer (1905) | 6 | 6 |
25 | Paul Taillefer (1906) | 6,5 | 6,5 |
26 | Paul Taillefer (1905) | 6 | 6 |
29 | Oscar Vila (1906) | 25,9 | 25,9 |
30 | Oscar Vila (1902) | 70 | 70 |
36 | Oscar Vila (1897) | 60 | 60 |
37 | Oscar Vila (1906) | 478.9 | 478.9 |
43 | Elie Bot (1906) | 10305.61 | 9100 |
49 | Charles Denarnaud (1900) | 217.45 | 217.45 |
56 | Jn Idrac (1898) | 245 | 245 |
57 | Societé des Ciments... (1905) | 1935,1 | 1786.1 |
58 | Joseph Fabre (1902) | 412.5 | 412.5 |
59 | Tisseyre (1903) | 1148.47 | 1148.47 |
60 | Tisseyre (1903) | 489.61 | 450 |
61 | Tiburce Caminade (1904) | 2800 | 2800 |
18789.32 |
The count of invoices already paid is also distorted by some mistakes.
Invoice 18 is written on both the front and back. At the bottom of the first page is the partial sum of 278 francs, shown at the top of the page on the back. In calculating the total of invoice 18, actually 905.7 francs, the Commission adds up the figure of 278 twice, not realizing that in one case it is the partial sum and in the other of the carry-over. So the new total reported is 905.7 + 278 = 1254.40 francs. Since a note on the invoice indicates only the figure of 665 francs as "paid", this is what will contribute to the overall calculation. Invoice 24 is the first of three, followed by 26 and 25: all refer to the same sum of 6 francs, solicited on two occasions and increased by 50 cents on the last (invoice 25), which will then be paid. The correct figure to be accounted for would have been F 6.50 but the Commission will not distinguish between the three and will add them all. Of the invoice 43, only the 9100 francs actually paid (as indicated at the bottom of the same) and not the total sum are considered. The sums of the figures that appear in invoices 57 and 60 are both wrong. The Commission receives a sum of CHF18789.32 actually paid for the construction of Villa Bethania. The remaining twenty-five invoices (plus 18 which is partially paid) are added up to evaluate the amount still to be paid:
# | Heading (date) | Actual | Considered |
15 | L. Duchesne (1905) | 20 | 20 |
17 | Georges Castex (1905) | 32.5 | 32.5 |
18 | Georges Castex (1897) | 976.4 | 589.4 |
27 | V. Laffon (1905) | 941.19 | 941.10 |
28 | Oscar Vila (1903) | 229.6 | 229.6 |
31 | Oscar Vila (1905) | 34.9 | 34.9 |
32 | Oscar Vila (1905) | 231 | 231 |
33 | Oscar Vila (1904) | 645.25 | 645.25 |
34 | Oscar Vila (1904) | 50 | |
35 | Oscar Vila (1904) | 525.35 | 561 |
38 | Oscar Vila (1906) | 97.5 | 97.5 |
39 | Oscar Vila (1906) | 44.9 | 44.9 |
40 | Oscar Vila (1906) | 270.5 | 270.5 |
41 | Oscar Vila (1906) | 47.8 | 47.8 |
42 | Jn Idrac (1898) | 245 | 245 |
44 | Elie Bot (1906) | 520.25 | 520.25 |
45 | Charles Denarnaud (1900) | 1822.6 | 1822.6 |
46 | Charles Denarnaud (1897) | 217.4 | 217.4 |
47 | Charles Denarnaud (1897) | 425.56 | 425.56 |
48 | Charles Denarnaud (1897) | 41.16 | 41,15 |
50 | Charles Denarnaud (1903) | 142.3 | 142.3 |
51 | Charles Denarnaud (1905) | 290 | 290 |
52 | Charles Denarnaud (1905) | 216.65 | 216.65 |
53 | Charles Denarnaud (1904) | 161 | 161 |
54 | Charles Denarnaud (1895) | 937.38 | 937.38 |
55 | Charles Denarnaud (1905) | 259.3 | 259.3 |
8806.64 |
Invoice 18 is accounted for again, but only for the 589.4 francs still to be paid: added to the 665 considered among the expenses, the 1254.4 above are obtained. When adding up invoice 35, the Commission does not take into account some of the notes amending the amount and mistakenly records CHF 561. The invoice 34, reported to the left on the note of the commission, is excluded from the calculation of the total amount. Invoice 46 is also excluded from the sum: this is the only correct exclusion made by the Commission. Two slight roundings are also made in two invoices: 27 and 48 for a total of 10 cents.3 The Commission concludes that the sums still to be paid amount to CHF 8806.64.4
1. Exactly reproduced in Jacques Rivière, Le fabuleux trésor de Rennes-le-Château, Bélisane, Nice 1983, p. 140.
2. Exactly reproduced in Rivière 1983, p. 174.
3. Two slight roundings are also made in two invoices: 27 and 48 for a total of 10 cents.
4. Exactly reproduced in Rivière 1983, p. 174.