{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_13333/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_13333","id":"gutenberg_13333","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/13333","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Essays, Letters & Speeches","Category: History - European","Category: History - Modern (1750+)","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","France -- History -- Second Republic, 1848-1852","Senior, Nassau William, 1790-1864 -- Correspondence","Tocqueville, Alexis de, 1805-1859","Tocqueville, Alexis de, 1805-1859 -- Correspondence"],"text":"_CORRESPONDENCE & CONVERSATIONS OF_ ALEXIS DE TOCQUEVILLE\n\nWITH NASSAU WILLIAM SENIOR\n\nFROM 1834 TO 1859\n\n\nEDITED BY\n\nM.C.M. SIMPSON\n\n\n_IN TWO VOLUMES VOLUME II_\n\n\nLONDON: HENRY S. KING & Co., 65 CORNHILL 1872\n\n\n       *   *   *   *   *\n\nCONTENTS OF THE SECOND VOLUME\n\n_Journal_ 1851-2.\n\nThe army master of France\nComparison with the 18th Brumaire\nAggressive acts of the President\nCoup d'\u00c9tat planned for March 1852\nSocialism leads to despotism\nWar necessary to maintain Louis Napoleon\nState prisoners on December 2\nLouis Napoleon's devotion to the Pope\nLatent Bonapartism of the French\nPresident's reception at Notre Dame\nFrank hypocrites\nMischievous public men\nExtradition of Kossuth\nJanuary 29, 1849\nStunner's account of it contradicted\nThe Second Napoleon a copy of the First\nRelies on Russian support\nCompulsory voting\nLife of a cavalry officer\nVictims of the Coup d'\u00c9tat\n\n\n_Letters in_ 1852-3.\n\nEffect of the Orleans confiscation on the English\nFirmness of Prussia\nMr. Greg's writings\nCommunication from Schwartzenberg\nNew Reform Bill\nDemocracy or aristocracy\nReform Bill not wanted\nTwenty-five thousand men at Cherbourg\nEasier to understand Lord Derby than Lord John\nPreparations at Cherbourg a delusion\nConversation with King Leopold\nNo symptoms of aristocratic re-action in England\nEngland's democratic tendencies\nIdleness of young aristocrats\nDeath of Protection\nRevolutions leading to masquerades\nTory reforms\nImperial marriage\nNew Reform Bill a blunder\n\n_Journal in_ 1853.\n\nProsperity in Paris\nDangers incurred by overbuilding\nDischarged workmen effect Revolutions\nProbable monetary panic\nEmpire can be firmly established only by a successful war\nAgents undermining the Empire\nViolence and corruption of the Government\nGrowing unpopularity of Louis Napoleon\nConsequences of his death\nHe probably will try the resource of war\nConquest would establish his power\nWar must produce humiliation or slavery to France\nCorruption is destroying the army and navy\nEmperor cannot tolerate opposition\nWill try a plebiscite\n\n_Letters in_ 1853.\n\nBlackstone a mere lawyer\nFeudal institutions in France and England\nGentleman and Gentilhomme\nLife of seclusion\nInterference of police with letters\nMrs. Crete's conversations at St. Cyr\nGreat writers of the eighteenth century\nPolitical torpor unfavourable to intellectual product\nEnglish not fond of generalities\nCurious archives at Tours\nFrightful picture they present\nSufficient to account for the Revolution of 1789\nLa Marck's memoir of Mirabeau\nCourt would not trust Mirabeau\nThe elder Mirabeau influenced by Revolution\nRevolution could not have been averted\nWorks of David Hume\nEffect of intolerance of the press\nHonesty and shortsightedness of La Fayette\nLaws must be originated by philosophers\nCarried into effect by practical men\nNapoleon carried out laws\nToo fond of centralisation\nCountry life destroyed by it\nRoyer Collard\nDanton\nMadame Tallien\nTocqueville independent of society\nStudious and regular life\nInfluence of writers as compared with active politicians\n\n_Journal in_ 1854.\n\nCriticism of the Journals\nThe speakers generally recognised\nAware that they were being reported\nThe Legitimists\nNecessity of Crimean War\nProbable management of it\nEnglish view of the Fusion\nBourbons desire Constitutional Government\nSocialists would prefer the Empire\nThey rejoiced in the Orleans confiscation\nEmpire might be secured by liberal institutions\nPolicy of G.\nEnglish new Reform Bill\nDangers of universal suffrage\nBaraguay d'Hilliers and Randon\nLent in the Provinces\nChenonceaux\nMontalembert's speech\nCinq Mars\nAppearance of prosperity\n_Petite culture_ in Touraine\nTyranny more mischievous than civil war\nCentralisation of Louis XIV. a means of taxation\nUnder Louis Napoleon, centralisation more powerful than ever\nPower of the Pr\u00e9fet\nCourts of Law tools of the Executive\nPr\u00e9fet's candidate must succeed\nEmpire could not sustain a defeat\nLoss of aristocracy in France\nNapoleon estranged Legitimists by the murder of the Duc d'Enghien\nLouis Philippe attempted to govern through the middle classes\nTemporary restoration of aristocratic power under the republic\nOverthrown by the second Empire\nLegitimists inferior to their ancestors\nDulness of modern society and books\nEffects of competition\n\n_Letters in_ 1854-5.\n\nTocqueville attends the Academy\nProposed visit to Germany\nReturn to France\nEnglish adulation of Louis Napoleon\nMismanagement of Crimean War\nContinental disparagement of England\nNecessity for a conscription in England\nDisastrous effects of the war for English aristocracy\nPeace premature\n\n_Journals in_ 1855.\n\nEffects of the Emperor going to the Crimea\nPrince Napoleon\nDiscontent in England\nDisparagement of England\nAustria alone profited by Crimean War\nDespotism of Louis Napoleon consolidated by it\nCentralisation in Algeria\nCriticism of Mr. Senior's Article\nPlaces Louis Napoleon too high\nEnglish alliances not dependent on the Empire\nLouis Napoleon will covet the Rhine\nChildish admiration of Emperor by British public\nReal friends of England are the friends of her institutions\n\n\n_Extracts from Mr. Senior's Article_.\n\nDescription of political parties\nImperialists\nLegitimists\nOrleanists\nOrleanist-Fusionists form the bulk of the Royalists\nLegitimists unfit for public life\nRepublican party not to be despised\nParliamentarians\nDesire only free institutions\nNo public opinion expressed in the Provinces\nPower of Centralisation\nIncreased under Louis Philippe\nPower of the Pr\u00e9fet\nForeign policy of Louis Napoleon\nOf former French Sovereigns\nInvasion of Rome prepared in 1847\nEastern question, a legacy from Louis Philippe\nFault as an administrator\nMismanagement of the war\nHis Ministers mere clerks\nFree institutions may secure his throne\nEnglish Alliance\nRussian influence\nRevolutions followed by despotism\nLessons taught by history\n\n\n_Letters in_ 1855-6.\n\nTocqueville burns his letter\nConversation of May 28\nAmusing letters from the Army\nEnjoyment of home\nFall of Sebastopol\nCost of the war\nRussia dangerous to Europe\nHow to restrain her\nProgress in the East\nNo public excitement in France\n\n\n_Journal in 1856_.\n\nThe 'Ancien R\u00e9gime'\nMaster of Paris, Master of France\nOpposition to Suez Canal\nMischievous effect of English Opposition\nExpenditure under the Empire\nEffect of Opposition to the Suez Canal\nTripartite Treaty\n'Friponnerie' of the Government\nTripartite Treaty\nSuez Canal\nFrench floating batteries\nFortifications of Malta\nEmperor's orders to Canrobert\nA campaign must be managed on the spot\n\n\n_Letters in_ 1856-7.\n\nThe 'Ancien R\u00e9gime'\nKing 'Bomba'\nAmerican Rebellion\nLord Aberdeen on the Crimean War\nEccentricities of English public men\nRemedy for rise in house-rent\nThe rise produced by excessive public works\nDulness of Paris\nMr. Senior's Journal in Egypt\nChinese war\n\n\n_Journal in_ 1857.\n\nFlatness of society in Paris\nDexterity of Louis Napoleon\nIs maintained by the fear of the 'Rouges'\nDue de Nemours' letter\nTocqueville disapproves of contingent promises\nEmpire rests on the army and the people\nSlavery of the Press\nPublic speaking in France\nEnglish and French speakers\nAmerican speakers\nLength of speeches\nFrench public men\nLamartine\nFalloux\nForeign French\nNarvaez and Kossuth\nFrench conversers\nMontalembert\nMonsieur, Madame, and Mademoiselle\nTu and vous\nFeeling respecting heretics\nPrejudices of the Ancien R\u00e9gime\nFrench poetry\nFashion in Literature\nMontalembert's changes of opinion\nIncreasing population of Paris\nIts dangerous character\nNo right to relief\nSudden influx of workmen\nSoldiers likely to side with the people\nLamorici\u00e8re's heroism\nJune 1848\nFrench army\nNational characteristics\nChange in French only apparent\nMartin's History of France\nHe is a centraliser and an absolutist\nSecret police\n\n_Letters in_ 1857-8.\n\nReception in England\nIndian Mutiny\nFinancial question\nUnpopularity of England\nLaw of Public Safety\n\n_Journal in_ 1858.\n\nTalleyrand as a writer\nEnglish ignorance of French affairs\nChange of feeling respecting Louis Napoleon\n'Loi de suret\u00e9 publique'\nManner in which it has been carried out\nDeportation a slow death\nInfluence of 'hommes de lettres'\nFrench army\nRussian army\nFrench navy\nNapoleon indifferent to the navy\nMr. Senior's Athens journal\nOtho and Louis Napoleon\nQualities which obtain influence\nCharacter of Louis Napoleon\nTocqueville's comments on the above conversation\nTocqueville on Novels\nIntellectual and moral inferiority of the age\nEducation of French women\n'Messe d'une heure'\nInfluence of Madame R\u00e9camier\nDuchesse de Dino\n\n_Letters in_ 1858-9.\n\nFailing health\nMr. Senior's visit to Sir John Boileau\nPromise of Lord Stanley\nCharacter of Guizot\nSpectacle afforded by English Politics\nTocqueville at Cannes\nLouis Napoleon's loss of popularity\nDeath of Alexis de Tocqueville\nGrief it occasioned in England\n\n_Journal at Tocqueville in_ 1861.\n\nMadame de Tocqueville house at Valognes\nChateau de Tocqueville\nBeaumont on Italian affairs\nPiedmontese unpopular with the lower classes\nPopular with the higher classes in Naples\nInfluence of Orsini\nSubjection of the French\nEffect of Universal Suffrage\nCauses which may overthrow Louis Napoleon\nPopularity of a war with England\nCondition of the Roman people\nDifferent sorts of courage in different nations\nDestructiveness of war not found out at first\nEffect of service on conscript\nExpenditure of Louis Napoleon\nForebodings of the Empress\nPrince Napoleon\nAmp\u00e8re on Roman affairs\nInquisition\nInfidelity\nMortara affair\nTorpor of Roman Government\nInterference with marriages\nAmp\u00e8re expects Piedmont to take possession of Rome\nDoes not think that Naples will submit to Piedmont\nWishes of Naples only negative\nAmp\u00e8re's reading\nExecution of three generations\nFamiliarity with death in 1793\nSanson\nPublic executioners\nThe 'Chambre noire'\nViolation of correspondence\nToleration of Ennui\nPrisoners of State\nM. and Madame de La Fayette\nMirabeau and La Fayette\nLouis XVI. and Marie Antoinette\nEvils of Democratic despotism\nIgnorance and indolence of 'La jeune France'\nAlgeria a God-send\nFamily life in France\nMoral effect of Primogeniture\nDescent of Title\nShipwreck off Gatteville\nAmp\u00e8re reads 'Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme'\nThe modern Nouveau Riche\nSociety under the Republic\nMadame R\u00e9camier\nChateaubriand and Madame Mohl\nBallanche\nExtensiveness of French literature\nFrench and English poetry\nThe 'Misanthrope'\nTocqueville's political career\nUnder Louis Philippe in 1835\nIndependence\nIn 1839 and 1840\nOpposition to Guizot\nInaction of Louis Philippe\nTocqueville would not submit to be a minister without power\nMistaken independence of party\nCould not court popularity\nReform came too late\nFaults in the Constitution\nDefence of the Constitution\nTocqueville wished for a double election of the President\nCentralisation useful to a usurper\nEngland in the American War\nDefence of England\nPolitics of a farmer\nWages in Normandy\nEvils of Universal Suffrage\nInfluence of the clergy\nPrince Napoleon\nConstitutional monarchy preferable to a republic\nRepublic preferable to a despotism\nProbable gross faults of a republic\nEvils of socialist opinions\nMischievous effects of strikes\nMistaken tolerance of them in England\nTocqueville's tomb\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nAPPENDIX.\n\nMr. Senior's report of M. de Montalembert's speech in 1854\n\n\n\nTOCQUEVILLE DURING THE EMPIRE\n\nFROM DECEMBER 23, 1851 TO APRIL 20, 1858.\n\n\nCONVERSATIONS\n\nPARIS, 1851-2.\n\n[The _coup d'\u00e9tat_ took place on the 2nd, and Mr. Senior reached Paris on\nthe 21st of December.--ED.]\n\n\n_Paris, December_ 23, 1851.--I dined with Mrs. Grot and drank tea with\nthe Tocquevilles.\n\n[1]'This,' said Tocqueville, 'is a new phase in our history. Every\nprevious revolution has been made by a political party. This is the first\ntime that the army has seized France, bound and gagged her, and laid her\nat the feet of its ruler.'\n\n'Was not the 18th fructidor,' I said, 'almost a parallel case? Then, as\nnow, there was a quarrel between the executive and the legislature. The\nDirectory, like Louis Napoleon, dismissed the ministers, in whom the\nlegislature had confidence, and appointed its own tools in their places,\ndenounced the legislature to the country, and flattered and corrupted the\narmy. The legislature tried the usual tactics of parliamentary\nopposition, censured the Government, and refused the supplies. The\nDirectory prepared a _coup d'\u00e9tat._ The legislature tried to obtain a\nmilitary force, and failed; they planned an impeachment of the Directory,\nand found the existing law insufficient. They brought forward a new law\ndefining the responsibility of the executive, and the night after they\nhad begun to discuss it, their halls were occupied by a military force,\nand the members of the opposition were seized in the room in which they\nhad met to denounce the treason of the Directory.'\n\n'So far,' he answered, 'the two events resemble one another. Each was a\nmilitary attack on the legislature by the executive. But the Directors\nwere the representatives of a party. The Councils and the greater part of\nthe aristocracy, and the _bourgeoisie_, were Bonapartists; the lower\norders were Republican, the army was merely an instrument; it conquered,\nnot for itself, but for the Republican party.\n\n'The 18th brumaire was nearer to this--for that ended, as this has begun,\nin a military tyranny. But the 18th brumaire was almost as much a civil\nas a military revolution. A majority in the Councils was with Bonaparte.\nLouis Napoleon had not a real friend in the Assembly. All the educated\nclasses supported the 18th brumaire; all the educated classes repudiate\nthe 2nd of December. Bonaparte's Consular Chair was sustained by all the\n_\u00e9lite_ of France. This man cannot obtain a decent supporter.\nMontalembert, Baroche, and Fould--an Ultramontane, a country lawyer, and\na Jewish banker--are his most respectable associates. For a real parallel\nyou must go back 1,800 years.'\n\nI said that some persons, for whose judgment I had the highest respect,\nseemed to treat it as a contest between two conspirators, the Assembly\nand the President, and to think the difference between his conduct and\ntheirs to be that he struck first.\n\n'This,' said Tocqueville, 'I utterly deny. He, indeed, began to conspire\nfrom November 10, 1848. His direct instructions to Oudinot, and his\nletter to Ney, only a few months after his election, showed his\ndetermination not to submit to Parliamentary Government. Then followed\nhis dismissal of Ministry after Ministry, until he had degraded\nthe\u00b7office to a clerkship. Then came the semi-regal progress, then the\nreviews of Satory, the encouragement of treasonable cries, the selection\nfor all the high appointments in the army of Paris of men whose infamous\ncharacters fitted them to be tools. Then he publicly insulted the\nAssembly at Dijon, and at last, in October, we knew that his plans were\nlaid. It was then only that we began to think what were our means of\ndefence, but that was no more a conspiracy than it is a conspiracy in\ntravellers to look for their pistols when they see a band of robbers\nadvancing.\n\n'M. Baze's proposition was absurd only because it was impracticable. It\nwas a precaution against immediate danger, but if it had been voted, it\ncould not have been executed. The army had already been so corrupted,\nthat it would have disregarded the orders of the Assembly. I have often\ntalked over our situation with Lamorici\u00e8re and my other military friends.\nWe saw what was coming as clearly as we now look back to it; but we had\nno means of preventing it.'\n\n'But was not your intended law of responsibility,' I said, 'an attack on\nyour part?'\n\n'That law,' he said, 'was not ours. It was sent up to us by the _Conseil\nd'\u00c9tat_ which had been two years and a half employed on it, and ought to\nhave sent it to us much sooner. We thought it dangerous--that is to say,\nwe thought that, though quite right in itself, it would irritate the\nPresident, and that in our defenceless state it was unwise to do so. The\n_bureau_, therefore, to which it was referred refused to declare it\nurgent: a proof that it would not have passed with the clauses which,\nthough reasonable, the President thought fit to disapprove. Our\nconspiracy was that of the lambs against the wolf.\n\n'Though I have said,' he continued, 'that he has been conspiring ever\nsince his election, I do not believe that he intended to strike so soon.\nHis plan was to wait till next March when the fears of May 1852 would be\nmost intense. Two circumstances forced him on more rapidly. One was the\ncandidature of the Prince de Joinville. He thought him the only dangerous\ncompetitor. The other was an agitation set on foot by the Legitimists in\nthe _Conseils g\u00e9n\u00e9raux_ for the repeal of the law of May 31. That law was\nhis moral weapon against the Assembly, and he feared that if he delayed,\nit might be abolished without him.'\n\n'And how long,' I asked, 'will this tyranny last?'\n\n'It will last,' he answered, 'until it is unpopular with the mass of the\npeople. At present the disapprobation is confined to the educated\nclasses. We cannot bear to be deprived of the power of speaking or of\nwriting. We cannot bear that the fate of France should depend on the\nselfishness, or the vanity, or the fears, or the caprice of one man, a\nforeigner by race and by education, and of a set of military ruffians and\nof infamous civilians, fit only to have formed the staff and the privy\ncouncil of Catiline. We cannot bear that the people which carried the\ntorch of Liberty through Europe should now be employed in quenching all\nits lights. But these are not the feelings of the multitude. Their insane\nfear of Socialism throws them headlong into the arms of despotism. As in\nPrussia, as in Hungary, as in Austria, as in Italy, so in France, the\ndemocrats have served the cause of the absolutists. May 1852 was a\nspectre constantly swelling as it drew nearer. But now that the weakness\nof the Red party has been proved, now that 10,000 of those who are\nsupposed to be its most active members are to be sent to die of hunger\nand marsh fever in Cayenne, the people will regret the price at which\ntheir visionary enemy has been put down. Thirty-seven years of liberty\nhave made a free press and free parliamentary discussion necessaries to\nus. If Louis Napoleon refuses them, he will be execrated as a tyrant. If\nhe grants them, they must destroy him. We always criticise our rulers\nseverely, often unjustly. It is impossible that so rash and wrong-headed\na man surrounded, and always wishing to be surrounded, by men whose\ninfamous character is their recommendation to him, should not commit\nblunders and follies without end. They will be exposed, perhaps\nexaggerated by the press, and from the tribune. As soon as he is\ndiscredited the army will turn against him. It sympathises with the\npeople from which it has recently been separated and to which it is soon\nto return. It will never support an unpopular despot. I have no fears\ntherefore for the ultimate destinies of my country. It seems to me that\nthe Revolution of the 2nd of December is more dangerous to the rest of\nEurope than it is to us. That it ought to alarm England much more than\nFrance. _We_ shall get rid of Louis Napoleon in a few years, perhaps in a\nfew months, but there is no saying how much mischief he may do in those\nyears, or even in those months, to his neighbours.'\n\n'Surely,' said Madame de Tocqueville, 'he will wish to remain at peace\nwith England.'\n\n'I am not sure at all of that,' said Tocqueville. 'He cannot sit down a\nmere quiet administrator. He must do something to distract public\nattention; he must give us a substitute for the political excitement\nwhich has amused us during the last forty years. Great social\nimprovements are uncertain, difficult, and slow; but glory may be\nobtained in a week. A war with England, at its beginning, is always\npopular. How many thousand volunteers would he have for a \"pointe\" on\nLondon?\n\n'The best that can happen to you is to be excluded from the councils of\nthe great family of despots. Besides, what is to be done to amuse these\n400,000 bayonets, _his_ masters as well as ours? Crosses, promotions,\nhonours, gratuities, are already showered on the army of Paris. It has\nalready received a thing unheard of in our history--the honours and\nrecompenses of a campaign for the butchery on the Boulevards. Will not\nthe other armies demand their share of work and reward? As long as the\ncivil war in the Provinces lasts they may be employed there. But it will\nsoon be over. What is then to be done with them? Are they to be marched\non Switzerland, or on Piedmont, or on Belgium? And will England quietly\nlook on?'\n\nOur conversation was here interrupted by the entrance of the Abb\u00e9\nGioberti, and of Sieur Capponi, a Sicilian.\n\n_Paris, December_ 31, 1851.--I dined with the Tocquevilles and met Mrs.\nGrote, Rivet, and Corcelle.\n\n'The gayest time,' said Tocqueville, 'that I ever passed was in the Quai\nd'Orsay. The _\u00e9lite_ of France in education, in birth, and in talents,\nparticularly in the talents of society, was collected within the walls of\nthat barrack.\n\n'A long struggle was over, in which our part had not been timidly played;\nwe had done our duty, we had gone through some perils, and we had some to\nencounter, and we were all in the high spirits which excitement and\ndangers shared with others, when not too formidable, create. From the\ncourtyard in which we had been penned for a couple of hours, where the\nDuc de Broglie and I tore our chicken with our hands and teeth, we were\ntransferred to a long sort of gallery, or garret, running along through\nthe higher part of the building, a spare dormitory for the soldiers when\nthe better rooms are filled. Those who chose to take the trouble went\nbelow, hired palliasses from the soldiers, and carried them up for\nthemselves. I was too idle and lay on the floor in my cloak. Instead of\nsleeping we spent the night in shooting from palliasse to palliasse\nanecdotes, repartees, jokes, and pleasantries. \"C'\u00e9tait un feu roulant,\nune pluie de bons mots.\" Things amused us in that state of excitement\nwhich sound flat when repeated.\n\n'I remember Kerrel, a man of great humour, exciting shouts of laughter by\nexclaiming, with great solemnity, as he looked round on the floor,\nstrewed with mattresses and statesmen, and lighted by a couple of tallow\ncandles, \"Voil\u00e0 donc o\u00f9 en est r\u00e9duit ce fameux parti de l'ordre.\" Those\nwho were kept _au secret_, deprived of mutual support, were in a very\ndifferent state of mind; some were depressed, others were enraged. B\u00e9deau\nwas left alone for twenty-four hours; at last a man came and offered him\nsome sugar. He flew at his throat and the poor turnkey ran off, fancying\nhis prisoner was mad.'\n\nWe talked of Louis Napoleon's devotion to the Pope.\n\n'It is of recent date,' said Corcelle. 'In January and February 1849 he\nwas inclined to interfere in support of the Roman Republic against the\nAustrians. And when in April he resolved to move on Rome, it was not out\nof any love for the Pope. In fact, the Pope did not then wish for us. He\ntold Corcelle that he hoped to be restored by General Zucchi, who\ncommanded a body of Roman troops in the neighbourhood of Bologna. No\none at that time believed the Republican party in Rome to be capable of a\nserious defence. Probably they would not have made one if they had not\nadmitted Garibaldi and his band two days before we appeared before their\ngates.'\n\nI mentioned to Tocqueville Beaumont's opinion that France will again\nbecome a republic.\n\n'I will not venture,' he answered, 'to affirm, with respect to any form\nwhatever of government, that we shall never adopt it; but I own that I\nsee no prospect of a French republic within any assignable period. We\nare, indeed, less opposed to a republic now than we were in 1848. We have\nfound that it does not imply war, or bankruptcy, or tyranny; but we still\nfeel that it is not the government that suits us. This was apparent from\nthe beginning. Louis Napoleon had the merit, or the luck, to discover,\nwhat few suspected, the latent Bonapartism of the nation. The 10th of\nDecember showed that the memory of the Emperor, vague and indefinite, but\ntherefore the more imposing, still dwelt like an heroic legend in the\nimaginations of the peasantry. When Louis Napoleon's violence and folly\nhave destroyed the charm with which he has worked, all eyes will turn,\nnot towards a republic, but to Henri V.'\n\n'Was much money,' I asked, 'spent at his election?'\n\n'Very little,' answered Tocqueville. 'The ex-Duke of Brunswick lent him\n300,000 francs on a promise of assistance as soon as he should be able to\nafford it; and I suppose that we shall have to perform the promise, and\nto interfere to restore him to his duchy; but that was all that was\nspent. In fact he had no money of his own, and scarcely anyone, except\nthe Duke, thought well enough of his prospects to lend him any. He used\nto sit in the Assembly silent and alone, pitied by some members and\nneglected by all. Silence, indeed, was necessary to his success.\n\n_Paris, January 2nd_, 1852.--I dined with Mrs. Grote and drank tea with\nthe Tocquevilles.\n\n'What is your report,' they asked, 'of the President's reception in Notre\nDame. We hear that it was cold.'\n\n'So,' I answered, 'it seemed to me.'\n\n'I am told,' said Tocqueville, 'that it was still colder on his road. He\ndoes not shine in public exhibitions. He does not belong to the highest\nclass of hypocrites, who cheat by frankness and cordiality.'\n\n'Such,' I said, 'as Iago. It is a class of villains of which the\nspecimens are not common.'\n\n'They are common enough with us,' said Tocqueville. 'We call them _faux\nbonshommes_. H. was an instance. He had passed a longish life with the\ncharacter of a frank, open-hearted soldier. When he became Minister, the\nfacts which he stated from the tribune appeared often strange, but coming\nfrom so honest a man we accepted them. One falsehood, however, after\nanother was exposed, and at last we discovered that H. himself, with all\nhis military bluntness and sincerity, was a most intrepid, unscrupulous\nliar.\n\n'What is the explanation,' he continued, 'of Kossuth's reception in\nEngland? I can understand enthusiasm for a democrat in America, but what\nclaim had he to the sympathy of aristocratic England?'\n\n'Our aristocracy,' I answered, 'expressed no sympathy, and as to the\nmayors, and corporations, and public meetings, they looked upon him\nmerely as an oppressed man, the champion of an oppressed country.'\n\n'I think,' said Tocqueville, 'that he has been the most mischievous man\nin Europe.'\n\n'More so,' I said, 'than Mazzini? More so than Lamartine?'\n\nAt this instant Corcelle came in.\n\n'We are adjusting,' said Tocqueville, 'the palm of mischievousness.'\n\n'I am all for Lamartine,' answered Corcelle; 'without him the others\nwould have been powerless.'\n\n'But,' I said, 'if Lamartine had never existed, would not the revolution\nof 1848 still have occurred?'\n\n'It would have certainly occurred' said Tocqueville; 'that is to say, the\noligarchy of Louis Philippe would have come to an end, probably to a\nviolent one, but it would have been something to have delayed it; and it\ncannot be denied that Lamartine's eloquence and courage saved us from\ngreat dangers during the Provisional Government. Kossuth's influence was\npurely mischievous. But for him, Austria might now be a constitutional\nempire, with Hungary for its most powerful member, a barrier against\nRussia instead of her slave.'\n\n'I must put in a word,' said Corcelle,[2] 'for Lord Palmerston. If\nLamartine produced Kossuth, Lord Palmerston produced Lamartine and\nMazzini and Charles Albert--in short, all the incendiaries whose folly\nand wickedness have ended in producing Louis Napoleon.'\n\n'Notwithstanding,' I said, 'your disapprobation of Kossuth, you joined us\nin preventing his extradition.'\n\n'We did,' answered Tocqueville. 'It was owing to the influence of Lord\nNormanby over the President. It was a fine _succ\u00e8s de tribune_. It gave\nyour Government and ours an occasion to boast of their courage and of\ntheir generosity, but a more dangerous experiment was never made. You\nreckoned on the prudence and forbearance of Austria and Russia. Luckily,\nNicholas and Nesselrode are prudent men, and luckily the Turks sent to\nSt. Petersburg Fuad Effendi, an excellent diplomatist, a much better than\nLamorici\u00e8re or Lord Bloomfield. He refused to see either of them,\ndisclaimed their advice or assistance, and addressed himself solely to\nthe justice and generosity of the Emperor. He admitted that Russia was\npowerful enough to seize the refugees, but implored him not to set such\nan example, and--he committed nothing to paper. He left nothing, and took\naway nothing which could wound the pride of Nicholas; and thus he\nsucceeded.\n\n'Two days after, came a long remonstrance from Lord Palmerston, which\nLord Bloomfield was desired to read to Nesselrode, and leave with him. A\nman of the world, seeing that the thing was done, would have withheld an\nirritating document. But Bloomfield went with it to Nesselrode.\nNesselrode would have nothing to say to it. \"Mon Dieu!\" he said, \"we\nhave given up all our demands; why tease us by trying to prove that we\nought not to have made them?\" Bloomfield said that his orders were\nprecise. \"Lisez donc,\" cried Nesselrode, \"mais il sera tr\u00e8s-ennuyeux.\"\nBefore he had got half through Nesselrode interrupted him. \"I have heard\nall this,\" he said, \"from Lamorici\u00e8re, only in half the number of words.\nCannot you consider it as read?\" Bloomfield, however, was inexorable.'\n\nI recurred to a subject on which I had talked to both of them before--the\ntumult of January 29, 1849.\n\n'George Sumner,' I said, 'assures me that it was a plot, concocted by\nFaucher and the President, to force the Assembly to fix a day for its\ndissolution, instead of continuing to sit until it should have completed\nthe Constitution by framing the organic laws which, even on December 2\nlast, were incomplete. He affirms that it was the model which was\nfollowed on December 2; that during the night the Palais Bourbon was\nsurrounded by troops; that the members were allowed to enter, but were\ninformed, not publicly, but one by one, that they were not to be allowed\nto separate until they had fixed, or agreed to fix, the day of their\ndissolution; and that under the pressure of military intimidation, the\nmajority, which was opposed to such a dissolution, gave way and consented\nto the vote, which was actually carried two days after.'\n\n'No such proposition was made to me,' said Tocqueville, 'nor, as far as I\nknow, to anybody else; but I own that I never understood January 29. It\nis certain that the Palais Bourbon, or at least its avenues, were taken\npossession of during the night; that there was a vast display of military\nforce, and also of democratic force; that the two bodies remained _en\nface_ for some time, and that the crowd dispersed under the influence of\na cold rain.'\n\n'I too,' said Corcelle, 'disbelieve Sumner's story. The question as to\nthe time of dissolution depended on only a few votes, and though it is\ntrue that it was voted two days after, I never heard that the military\ndemonstration of January 29 accelerated the vote. The explanation which\nhas been made to me is one which I mentioned the other day, namely, that\nthe President complained to Changarnier, who at that time commanded the\narmy of Paris, that due weight seemed not to be given to his 6,000,000\nvotes, and that the Assembly appeared inclined to consider him a\nsubordinate power, instead of the _Chef d'\u00c9tat_, to whom, not to the\nAssembly, the nation had confided its destinies. In short, that the\nPresident indicated an intention to make a _coup d'etat_, and that the\ntroops were assembled by Changarnier for the purpose of resisting it, if\nattempted, and at all events of intimidating the President by showing him\nhow quickly a force could be collected for the defence of the Assembly.'\n\n_Sunday, January_ 4.--I dined with the Tocquevilles alone. The only\nguest, Mrs. Grote, who was to have accompanied me, being unwell.\n\n'So enormous,' said Tocqueville, 'are the advantages of Louis Napoleon's\nsituation, that he may defy any ordinary enemy. He has, however, a most\nformidable one in himself. He is essentially a copyist. He can originate\nnothing; his opinions, his theories, his maxims, even his plots, all are\nborrowed, and from the most dangerous of models--from a man who, though\nhe possessed genius and industry such as are not seen coupled, or indeed\nsingle, once in a thousand years, yet ruined himself by the extravagance\nof his attempts. It would be well for him if he would utterly forget all\nhis uncle's history. He might then trust to his own sense, and to that of\nhis advisers. It is true that neither the one nor the other would be a\ngood guide, but either would probably lead him into fewer dangers than a\nblind imitation of what was done fifty years ago by a man very unlike\nhimself, and in a state of society both in France and in the rest of\nEurope, very unlike that which now exists.'\n\nLanjuinais and Madame B., a relation of the family, came in.\n\nLanjuinais had been dining with Kissileff the Russian Minister. Louis\nNapoleon builds on Russian support, in consequence of the marriage of his\ncousin, the Prince de Lichtenstein, to the Emperor's daughter. He calls\nit an _alliance de famille_, and his organs the 'Constitutionnel' and the\n'Patrie' announced a fortnight ago that the Emperor had sent to him the\nOrder of St. Andrew, which is given only to members of the Imperial\nfamily, and an autograph letter of congratulation on the _coup d'\u00e9tat_.\n\nKissileff says that all this is false, that neither Order nor letter has\nbeen sent, but he has been trying in vain to get a newspaper to insert a\ndenial. It will be denied, he is told, when the proper moment comes.\n\n'It is charming,' said Madame de Tocqueville, 'to see the Emperor of\nRussia, like ourselves, forced to see his name usurped without redress.'\n\nMadame B. had just seen a friend who left his country-house, and came to\nParis without voting, and told those who consulted him that, in the\ndifficulties of the case, he thought abstaining was the safest course.\nImmediately after the poll was over the Prefect sent to arrest him for\n_malveillance_, and he congratulated himself upon being out of the way.\n\nOne of Edward de Tocqueville's sons came in soon after; his brother, who\nis about seventeen, does duty as a private, has no servant, and cleans\nhis own horse; and is delighted with his new life. That of our young\ncavalry officers is somewhat different. He did not hear of the _coup\nd'\u00e9tat_ till a week after it had happened.\n\n'Our regiments,' said Lanjuinais, 'are a kind of convents. The young men\nwho enter them are as dead to the world, as indifferent to the events\nwhich interest the society which they have left, as if they were monks.\nThis is what makes them such fit tools for a despot.'\n\n\n_Thursday, January 8, 1852_.--From Sir Henry Ellis's I went to\nTocqueville's.\n\n[3]'In this darkness,' he said, 'when no one dares to print, and few to\nspeak, though we know generally that atrocious acts of tyranny are\nperpetrated everyday, it is difficult to ascertain precise facts, so I\nwill give you one. A young man named Hypolite Magin, a gentleman by birth\nand education, the author of a tragedy eminently successful called\n\"Spartacus,\" was arrested on the 2nd of December. His friends were told\nnot to be alarmed, that no harm was intended to him, but rather a\nkindness; that as his liberal opinions were known, he was shut up to\nprevent his compromising himself by some rash expression. He was sent to\nFort Bic\u00eatre, where the casemates, miserable damp vaults, have been used\nas a prison, into which about 3,000 political prisoners have been\ncrammed. His friends became uneasy, not only at the sufferings which he\nmust undergo in five weeks of such an imprisonment in such weather as\nthis, but lest his health should be permanently injured. At length they\nfound that he was there no longer: and how do you suppose that his\nimprisonment has ended? He is at this instant at sea in a convict ship on\nhis way to Cayenne--untried, indeed unaccused--to die of fever, if he\nescape the horrors of the passage. Who can say how many similar cases\nthere may be in this wholesale transportation? How many of those who are\nmissing and are supposed to have died at the barricades, or on the\nBoulevards, may be among the transports, reserved for a more lingering\ndeath!'\n\nA proclamation to-day from the Prefect de Police orders all persons to\nerase from their houses the words 'Libert\u00e9,' '\u00cagalit\u00e9,' and 'Fraternit\u00e9'\non pain of being proceeded against _administrativement_.\n\n'There are,' said Tocqueville, 'now three forms of procedure:\n_judiciairement, militairement_ and _administrativement._ Under the first\na man is tried before a court of law, and, if his crime be grave, is\nsentenced to one or two years' imprisonment. Under the second he is tried\nbefore a drumhead court-martial, and shot. Under the third, without any\ntrial at all, he is transported to Cayenne or Algiers.'\n\nI left Paris next day.\n\n\n[Footnote 1: I was not able to resist retaining this conversation in the\n_Journals in France_.--ED.]\n\n[Footnote 2: It must be remembered that M. de Corcelle is an ardent Roman\nCatholic.--ED.]\n\n[Footnote 3: This conversation was also retained in the _Journals in\nFrance_.--ED.]\n\n\n\nCORRESPONDENCE.\n\n\n\nKensington, January 5, 1852.\n\nMy dear Tocqueville,--A private messenger has just offered himself to me,\na Mr. Esmeade, who will return in about a fortnight.\n\nThe debate on Tuesday night on the Palmerston question was very\nsatisfactory to the Government. Lord John's speech was very well\nreceived--Lord Palmerston's very ill; and though the constitution of the\npresent Ministry is so decidedly unhealthy that it is dangerous to\npredict any length of life to it, yet it looks healthier than people\nexpected. It may last out the Session.\n\nThe feeling with respect to Louis Napoleon is stronger, and it tends more\nto unanimity every day. The Orleans confiscation has, I think, almost too\nmuch weight given to it. After his other crimes the mere robbery of a\nsingle family, ruffian-like as it is, is a slight addition.\n\nI breakfasted with V. yesterday. He assures me that it is false that a\ndemand of twenty millions, or any other pecuniary demand whatever, has\nbeen made in Belgium. Nor has anything been said as to the demolition of\nany fortresses, except those which were agreed to be dismantled in 1832,\nand which are unimportant.\n\nThe feeling of the people in Belgium is excellent.\n\nMr. Banfield, who has just returned from the Prussian provinces, says the\nsame with respect to them--and Bunsen assures me that his Government will\nperish rather than give up a foot of ground. I feel better hopes of the\npreservation of peace.\n\nThiers and Duvergier de Hauranne are much _f\u00eat\u00e9s_, as will be the case\nwith all the exiles.\n\nI have been reading Fiquelmont. He is deeply steeped in all the _b\u00eatises_\nof the commercial, or rather the anti-commercial school; and holds that\nthe benefit of commerce consists not, as might have been supposed, in the\nthings which are imported, but in those which are exported.\n\nThese follies, however, are not worth reading; but his constitutional\ntheories--his belief, for instance, that Parliamentary Government is the\ncurse of Europe--are curious.\n\nThe last number of the 'Edinburgh Review' contains an article on Reform\nwell worth reading. It is by Greg. He wrote an admirable article in, I\nthink, the April number, on Alton Locke and the English Socialists, and\nhas also written a book, which I began to-day, on the Creed of\nChristendom. I have long been anxious to get somebody to do what I have\nnot time to do, to look impartially into the evidences of Christianity,\nand report the result. This book does it.\n\nLord Normanby does not return to Paris, as you probably know. No\nexplanation is given, but it is supposed to be in compliance with the\nPresident's wishes.\n\nI have just sent to the press for the 'Edinburgh Review,' an article on\nTronson du Coudray[1] and the 18th fructidor, which you will see in the\nApril number. The greater part of it was written this time last year at\nSorrento.\n\nGladstone has published a new Neapolitan pamphlet, which I will try to\nsend you. It is said to demolish King Ferdinand.\n\nKindest regards to Madame de Tocqueville. We hope that you will come to\nus as soon as it is safe.\n\nEver yours,\n\nN.W. SENIOR.\n\nP.S. and very private.--I have seen a communication from Schwartzenberg\nto Russia and Prussia, of the 19th December, the doctrine of which is\nthat Louis Napoleon has done a great service by putting down\nparliamentaryism. That in many respects he is less dangerous than the\nOrleans, or elder branch, because they have parliamentary leanings. That\nno alteration of the existing parties must be permitted--and that an\nattempt to assume an hereditary crown should be discouraged--but that\nwhile it shows no aggressive propensities the policy of the Continent\nought to be to countenance him, and _isoler_ l'Angleterre, as a _foyer_\nof constitutional, that is to say, anarchical, principles.\n\nBunsen tells me that in October his King was privately asked whether he\nwas ready to destroy the Prussian Constitution--and that he peremptorily\nrefused.\n\nLook at an article on the personal character of Louis Napoleon in the\n'Times' of Monday. It is by R----, much built out of my conversation and\nZ.'s letters.\n\nI have begged Mr. Esmeade to call on you--you will like him. He is a\nnephew of Sir John Moore.\n\n\n\n[2]Kensington, March 19, 1852.\n\nMy dear Tocqueville,--I was very glad to see your hand again--though\nthere is little in French affairs on which liberals can write with\npleasure.\n\nOurs are become very interesting. Lord John's declaration, at the meeting\nthe other day in Chesham Place, that he shall introduce a larger reform,\nand surround himself with more advanced adherents, and Lord Derby's, on\nMonday, that he is opposed to all democratic innovation, appear to me to\nhave changed the position of parties. The question at issue is no longer\nFree-trade or Protection. Protection is abandoned. It is dead, never to\nrevive. Instead of it we are to fight for Democracy, or Aristocracy. I\nown that my sympathies are with Aristocracy: I prefer it to either\nMonarchy or Democracy. I know that it is incident to an aristocratic\ngovernment that the highest places shall be filled by persons chosen not\nfor their fitness but for their birth and connections, but I am ready to\nsubmit to this inconvenience for the sake of its freedom and stability.\nI had rather have Malmesbury at the Foreign Office, and Lord Derby first\nLord of the Treasury, than Nesselrode or Metternich, appointed by a\nmonarch, or Cobden or Bright, whom I suppose we should have under a\nrepublic. But above all, I am for the winning horse. If Democracy is to\nprevail I shall join its ranks, in the hope of making its victory less\nmischievous.\n\nI wish, however, that the contest had not been forced on. We were very\nwell, before Lord John brought in his Reform Bill, which nobody called\nfor, and I am not at all sure that we shall be as well after it has\npassed.\n\nAs to the immediate prospects of the Ministry, the next three weeks may\nchange much, but it seems probable that they will be forced to dissolve\nin April, or the beginning of May, that the new Parliament will meet in\nJuly, and that they will be turned out about the end of August. And that\nthis time next year we shall be discussing Lord John's new Reform Bill.\n\nI doubt whether our fears of invasion are exaggerated. At this instant,\nwithout doubt, Louis Napoleon is thinking of nothing but the Empire; and\nis kind to Belgium, and pacific to Switzerland in the hope of our\nrecognition.\n\nBut I heard yesterday from Lord Hardinge that 25,000 men are at\nCherbourg, and that 25,000 more are going there--and that a large sum is\ndevoted to the navy. We know that he governs _en conspirateur_, and this\nis likely to extend to his foreign as well as his civil relations.\n\nI see a great deal of Thiers, who is very agreeable and very _triste_.\n'L'exil,' he says, 'est tr\u00e8s-dur.' R\u00e9musat seems to bear it more\npatiently. We hear that we are to have Cousin.\n\nWhat are your studies in the Biblioth\u00e8que Royale? I have begun to read\nBastide, and intend to make the publication of my lectures on Political\nEconomy my principal literary pursuit. I delivered the last on Monday.\n\nI shall pass the first fifteen days of April in Brussels, with my old\nfriend Count Arrivabene, 7 Boulevard du R\u00e9gent.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nEver yours,\n\nN.W. SENIOR.\n\n\n\nMarch 25, 1852.\n\nI send you, my dear Senior, an introduction to Lamorici\u00e8re. This letter\nwill be short: you know that I do not write at any length by the post.\n\nIt will contain nothing but thanks for your long and interesting letter\nbrought by Rivet, who returned delighted with the English in general, and\nwith you in particular.\n\nI see that the disturbed state of politics occasioned by Sir Robert\nPeel's policy, is passing away, and that your political world is again\ndividing itself into the two great sects, one of which tries to narrow,\nthe other to extend, the area of political power--one of which tries\nto lift you into aristocracy, the other to depress you into democracy.\n\nThe political game will be simpler. I can understand better the\nconservative policy of Lord Derby than the democratic one of Lord John\nRussell. As the friends of free-trade are more numerous than those of\ndemocracy, I think that it would have been easier to attack the\nGovernment on its commercial than on its political illiberality.\n\nThen in this great nation, called Europe, similar currents of opinions\nand feelings prevail, different as may be the institutions and characters\nof its different populations. We see over the whole continent so general\nand so irresistible a reaction against democracy, and even against\nliberty, that I cannot believe that it will stop short on our side of the\nChannel; and if the Whigs become Radical, I shall not be surprised at the\npermanence in England of a Tory Government allied to foreign despots.\n\nBut I ought not to talk on such matters, for I live at the bottom of a\nwell, seeing nothing, and regretting that it is not sufficiently closed\nabove to prevent my hearing anything. Your visions of 25,000 troops at\nCherbourg, to be followed by 25,000 more, are mere phantoms. There is\nnothing of the kind, and there will be nothing. I speak with knowledge,\nfor I come from Cherbourg. I have been attending an extraordinary meeting\nof our _Conseil g\u00e9n\u00e9ral_ on the subject of a projected railway. My\nreception touched and delighted me. I was unanimously, and certainly\nfreely, elected president.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nA. DE TOCQUEVILLE.\n\n\n\nFriday evening, April 17, 1852.\n\nMy dear Tocqueville,--My letter is not likely to be a very amusing one,\nfor I begin it on the dullest occasion and in the dullest of towns,\nnamely at Ostend, while waiting for the packet-boat which is to take me\nto London.\n\nA thousand thanks for your letter to Lamorici\u00e8re. He was very kind to me,\nand I hope hereafter, in Paris or in London, to improve the acquaintance.\n\nI saw no other French in Brussels. The most interesting conversation that\nI had was with the King.\n\nI found him convinced that the decree annexing Belgium to France had been\ndrawn up, and that it was the interference of Nicholas, and his\nexpression of a determination not to suffer the existing temporal limits\nto be altered, that had occasioned it to be withdrawn. I am happy,\nhowever, to think, as you also appear to think, that your great man is\nnow intent on peaceful triumphs.\n\nHe would scarcely have created such a mass of speculative activity in\nFrance if he intended suddenly to check it by war. I hope that by the\ntime Masters in Chancery are abolished, I shall find France intersected\nby a network of railroads and run from Paris to Marseilles in a day.\n\nI venture to differ from you as to the probable progress of reaction in\nEngland. I see no symptom of it; on the contrary, democracy seems to me\nto continue its triumphant march without a check. The Protectionists are\nin power, they take for their leader in the House of Commons a man\nwithout birth or connection, merely because he is a good speaker. This\ncould not have been done even ten years ago. They bow to the popular will\nas to free-trade, and acknowledge that, even if they have a majority in\nthe Houses of Lords and Commons, they will not venture to re-impose a\nCorn-law if the people do not ask for it. Never was such a homage paid to\nthe world 'without doors.'\n\nThen Lord John says that he objects to the Ballot, because those who have\nno votes have a right to know how those who have votes use them.\n\nThe example of the Continent will not affect us, or if it do affect us,\nwill rather strengthen our democracy. We are not accustomed to copy, and\nshall treat the reaction in France, Austria, and Prussia rather as a\nwarning than as a model.\n\nI suspect that Lord John, who, though not, I think, a very wise\nstatesman, is a clever tactician, takes the same view that I do, and has\nselected Reform for his platform, believing it to be a strong one.\n\nWe were delighted with Rivet, and hope that he will soon come again.\nLamorici\u00e8re tells me that he is going to take the waters of\n_Aix-la-Chapelle_, but, if his exile continues, will probably come to\nEngland next year.\n\nKindest regards to Madame de Tocqueville.\n\nEver yours,\n\nN.W. SENIOR.\n\n\n\nKensington, April 30, 1852.\n\nMy dear Tocqueville,--A thousand thanks for your letter.[3] I saw M. de\nLamorici\u00e8re three times, and had a glimpse of Madame de L. who seemed\nvery pleasing. I was delighted with his spirit and intelligence, but\nunderstand the criticism that he is _soldatesque_.\n\nI had a long and very interesting conversation with the King, and saw\nmuch of my excellent friends Arrivabene and Quetelet. But after all\nBrussels is not Paris. I was more than ever struck by the ugliness of the\ncountry and the provincialness of the society.\n\nI returned on April 18, sprained my ancle on the 19th, and have been on\nmy back ever since. I have spent the time in looking through Fonfr\u00e8de,\nwho is a remarkable writer, and makes some remarkable prophecies, in\nfinishing Grote's ninth and tenth volumes, in reading Kenrick's 'Ancient\nEgypt,' which is worth studying, and in reading through Horace, whom I\nfind that I understand much better after my Roman experience.\n\nI differ from you as to the chances of reaction in this country. I\nbelieve that we are still travelling the road which you have so well\nmapped out, which leads to democracy. Our extreme _gauche_, which we call\nthe Manchester School, employs its whole efforts in that direction. It\nhas great energy, activity, and combination. The duties of Parliament and\nof Government have become so onerous, and the facing our democratic\nconstituencies is so disagreeable, and an idle life of society,\nliterature, art, and travelling has become so pleasant, that our younger\naristocracy seem to be giving up politics, and hence you hear the\nuniversal complaint that there are no young men of promise in public\nlife.\n\nThe House of Commons is full of middle-aged lawyers, merchants,\nmanufacturers, and country-gentlemen, who take to politics late in life,\nwithout the early special training which fitted for it the last\ngeneration.\n\nI fear that the time may come when to be in the House of Commons may be\nthought a bore, a somewhat vulgar spouting club, like the Marylebone\nVestry, or the City of London Common Council.\n\nI do not know whether Lord Derby has gained much in the last four months,\nbut Lord John has certainly lost. His Reform Bill was a very crude\n_g\u00e2chis,_ without principle, and I think very mischievous. I ventured to\nsay nearly as much to Lord Lansdowne, who sat by my sofa for an hour on\nSunday, and he did not take up its defence. Then his opposition to the\npresent Ministry has been factious, and to punish him, he was left the\nother day in a minority of fifty per cent. People begin now to speculate\non the possibility of Lord Derby's reconstructing his minority on rather\na larger basis, and maintaining himself for three or four years; which,\nin these times, is a good old age for a Minister. One admirable result of\nthese changes is the death of Protection. Those who defended it in\nopposition are found to abandon it now they are in power. So it has not a\nfriend left.\n\nPray send me word, by yourself or by Mrs. Grote, when you leave Paris. My\nvacation begins on May 8, but I shall not move unless I recover the use\nof my legs, nor then I think, if I find that you will be absent.\n\nKindest regards to Madame de Tocqueville.\n\nEver yours,\n\nN.W. SENIOR.\n\n\n\nParis, November 13, 1852.\n\nI am unlucky, my dear Senior, about your letters of introduction. You\nknow how much I have wished and tried to make the acquaintance of Lord\nand Lady Ashburton, but without success. I should also, I am sure, have\nhad great pleasure in meeting Mr. Greg.\n\nThis time I was prevented by ill health.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nTwo or three months ago, I wrote to you from the country a letter which\nwas addressed to Kensington. Did you receive it? and if so, why have you\nnot answered it?\n\nI wrote upon politics, but especially I asked you about yourselves, your\noccupations and projects, some questions to which I was very anxious to\nhave answers. At any rate, do now what you ought to have done then--write\nto me.\n\nI do not now write about politics, because we do not talk, or at least\nwrite about them in France any more than in Naples; besides, such\nsubjects are not suitable to an invalid.\n\nI will only tell you, as important and authentic pieces of information,\nthat the new court ladies have taken to trains and little pages, and that\nthe new courtiers hunt the stag with their master in the Forest of\nFontainebleau in dresses of the time of Louis XIV. and cocked hats.\n\nGood-bye! Heaven preserve you from the mistakes which lead to\nrevolutions, and from the revolutions which lead to masquerades. A\nthousand kind regards.\n\nA. DE TOCQUEVILLE.\n\n\n\nLondon, December 4, 1852.\n\nMy dear Tocqueville,--Your letter of November 13 is, I think, the first\nthat I have received from you since March.\n\nThat which you addressed to me at Kensington, two months ago, did not\nreach me. I have written to you one or two; I do not know with what\nsuccess.\n\nI grieve to hear of rheumatism and pleurisy. You say nothing of Madame de\nTocqueville, whence I hope that I may infer that she, at least, is well.\n\nWe have all been flourishing. We passed the vacation in Wales and\nIreland, and brought back a curious journal,[4] which I hope to send or\nbring to you.\n\nI do not think that I shall venture to Paris at Christmas, though Ellice\nand Thiers are trying to persuade me. I have too vivid a recollection of\nthe fog, cold, and dirt of last year; but I fully resolve to be with you\nat Easter--that is, about March 24.\n\nThe present Government, with all its want of principle and truth, and\nwith all its want of experience, is doing much better than I expected.\n\nThe law reforms are far bolder than any that _my_ friends ever proposed,\nand the budget, which was brought forward last night, contains more that\nis good, and less that is bad, than was hoped or feared.\n\nIts worst portion is the abolition of half the malt tax, which leaves all\nthe expense of collection undiminished, besides being a removal of a tax\non a luxury which I do not wish to see cheaper. It is probable, however,\nthat the doubling of the house tax will be rejected, in which case\nDisraeli will probably retain the malt tax, and the budget will sink into\na commonplace one.\n\nThe removal of certain burdens on navigation and the change in the income\ntax are thought good, and generally the Government has gained by the\nbudget. I am now inclined to think that it may last for some months\nlonger--perhaps for some years.\n\nIn the meantime we are in a state of great prosperity: high wages, great\naccumulation of capital, low prices of consumable articles, and high\nprices of stocks and land.\n\nEver yours,\n\nN.W. SENIOR.\n\n\n\nFebruary 27, 1853.\n\nMy dear Tocqueville,--I profit by Sir H. Ellis's visit to write, not\nventuring to trust the post.\n\nWe are grieved to hear that both you and Madame de Tocqueville have been\nsuffering. _We_ have borne this disagreeable winter better than perhaps\nwe had a right to expect; but still we have suffered.\n\nMrs. Grote tells me that you rather complain that the English newspapers\napprove of the marriage;[5] a marriage which you all disapprove.\n\nThe fact is that we like the marriage precisely because you dislike it.\nWe are above all things desirous that the present tyranny should end as\nquickly as possible. It can end only by the general alienation of the\nFrench people from the tyrant; and every fault that he commits delights\nus, because it is a step towards his fall. To say the truth, I wonder\nthat you do not take the same view, and rejoice over his follies as\nleading to his destruction.\n\nOur new Government is going on well as yet. As the Opposition has turned\nlaw reformers, we expect law reform to go on as rapidly as is consistent\nwith the slowly-innovating temper of the English. Large measures\nrespecting charities, education, secondary punishments, and the transfer\nof land are in preparation, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer is at\nwork on the difficult--I suspect the insoluble--problem of an equitable\nincome tax. I foresee, however, a rock ahead.\n\nThis is reform of the constituencies. Lord John Russell, very sillily,\npromised two years ago a new Reform Bill.\n\nStill more sillily he introduced one last year, and was deservedly turned\nout for it.\n\nStill more sillily the present Government has accepted his\nresponsibility, and is pledged to bring in a measure of reform next year.\n\nI have been trying to persuade them to pave the way by a Commission of\nInquiry, being certain that the facts on which we ought to agitate are\nimperfectly known. But Lord John is unfavourable, and the other Ministers\ndo not venture to control the leader of the House of Commons. There will,\ntherefore, be no previous inquiry; at least only the indirect one which\nthe Government can make for itself. The measure will be concocted in\nsecrecy, will be found open to unforeseen objections; it will be thrown\nout in the House, and will excite no enthusiasm in the country. If the\nGovernment dissolve, the new Parliament will probably be still more\nopposed to it than the present Parliament will be; and the Government,\nbeing beaten again, will resign.\n\nSuch is my prophecy.\n\n_Prenez en acte_, and we will talk it over in May 1854.\n\nI hope to be in Paris either for the Easter or for the Whitsun\nvacation--that is, either about the 24th of March or the 5th of May\nnext--and I trust to find you and Madame de Tocqueville, if not quite\nflourishing, at least quite convalescent.\n\nEver yours,\n\nN.W. SENIOR.\n\n\n[Footnote 1: Republished in the _Biographical Sketches_. Longmans:\n1863.--ED.]\n\n\n[Footnote 2: The letter to which this is an answer is not to be\nfound,--ED.]\n\n[Footnote 3: This letter is not to be found.--ED.]\n\n[Footnote 4: Published in 1868.--ED.]\n\n[Footnote 5: That of the Emperor.--ED.]\n\n\n\n\nCONVERSATIONS.\n\n_Paris, May_ 9,1853.--I drank tea with the Tocquevilles. Neither of them\nis well.\n\nIn February they were caught, on their journey from Tocqueville to Paris,\nby the bitter weather of the beginning of that month. It produced\nrheumatism and then pleurisy with him, and inflammation of the bowels\nwith her; and both are still suffering from the effects either of the\ndisorder or of the remedies.\n\nIn the summer Paris will be too hot and Tocqueville too damp. So they\nhave taken a small house at St. Cyr, about a mile from Tours, where they\nhope for a tolerable climate, easy access to Paris, and the use of the\nfine library of the cathedral. He entered eagerly on the Eastern\nquestion, and agreed on all points with Faucher; admitted the folly and\nrashness of the French, but deplored the over-caution which had led us to\nrefuse interference, at least effectual interference, and to allow\nTurkey to sink into virtual subservience to Russia.\n\n_Paris, Tuesday, May_ 17.--Tocqueville and I stood on my balcony, and\nlooked along the Rue de Rivoli and the Place de la Concorde, swarming\nwith equipages, and on the well-dressed crowds in the gardens below. From\nthe height in which we were placed all those apparently small objects, in\nincessant movement, looked like a gigantic ant-hill disturbed.\n\n'I never,' said Tocqueville, 'have known Paris so animated or apparently\nso prosperous. Much is to be attributed to the saving of the four\nprevious years. The parsimony of the Parisians ended in 1850; but the\nparsimony of the provinces, always great, and in unsettled times carried\nto actual avarice, lasted during the whole of the Republic. Commercial\npersons tell me that the arrival of capital which comes up for investment\nfrom the provinces deranges all their calculations. It is like the sudden\nburst of vegetation which you have seen during the last week. We have\npassed suddenly from winter to summer.\n\n'I own,' he continued, 'that it fills me with alarm. Among the\ninnumerable schemes that are afloat, some must be ill-founded, some must\nbe swelled beyond their proper dimensions, and some may be mere swindles.\nThe city of Paris and the Government are spending 150,000,000_l_. in\nbuilding in Paris. This is almost as much as the fortifications cost. It\nhas always been said, and I believe with truth, that the revolutionary\narmy of 1848 was mainly recruited from the 40,000 additional workmen whom\nthe fortifications attracted from the country, and left without\nemployment when they were finished. When this enormous extra-expenditure\nis over, when the Louvre, and the new rue de Rivoli, and the Halles, and\nthe street that is to run from the H\u00f4tel de Ville to the northern\nboundary of Paris, are completed--that is to say, when a city has been\nbuilt out of public money in two or three years--what will become of the\nmass of discharged workmen?\n\n'What will become of those on the railways if they are suddenly stopped,\nas yours were in 1846? What will be the shock if the Cr\u00e9dit Foncier or\nthe Cr\u00e9dit Mobilier fail, after having borrowed each its milliard?\nEverything seems to me to be preparing for one of your panics, and the\nGovernment has so identified itself with the state of prosperity and\nstate of credit of the country that a panic must produce a revolution.\nThe Government claims the merit of all that is good, and of course is\nheld responsible for all that is bad. If we were to have a bad harvest,\nit would be laid to the charge of the Emperor.\n\n'Of course,' he continued, 'I do not desire the perpetuation of the\npresent tyranny. Its duration as a dynasty I believe to be absolutely\nimpossible, except in one improbable contingency--a successful war.\n\n'But though, I repeat, I do not desire or expect the permanence of the\nEmpire, I do not wish for its immediate destruction, before we are\nprepared with a substitute. The agents which are undermining it are\nsufficiently powerful and sufficiently active to occasion its fall quite\nas soon as we ought to wish for that fall.'\n\n'And what,' I said, 'are those agents?'\n\n'The principal agents,' he answered, 'are violence in the provinces and\ncorruption in Paris. Since the first outbreak there has not been much\nviolence in Paris. You must have observed that freedom of speech is\nuniversal. In every private society, and even in every _caf\u00e9_ hatred or\ncontempt of the Government are the main topics of conversation. We are\ntoo numerous to be attacked. But in the provinces you will find perfect\nsilence. Anyone who whispers a word against the Emperor may be\nimprisoned, or perhaps transported. The prefects are empowered by one of\nthe decrees made immediately after the _coup d'\u00e9tat_ to dissolve any\nConseil communal in which there is the least appearance of disaffection,\nand to nominate three persons to administer the commune. In many cases\nthis has been done, and I could point out to you several communes\ngoverned by the prefect's nominees who cannot read. In time, of course,\ntyranny will produce corruption; but it has not yet prevailed extensively\nin the country, and the cause which now tends to depopularise him _there_\nis arbitrary violence exercised against those whom his agents suppose to\nbe their enemies.\n\n'On the other hand, what is ruining him in Paris is not violence, but\ncorruption.\n\n'The French are not like the Americans; they have no sympathy with\nsmartness. Nothing so much excites their disgust as _friponnerie_. The\nmain cause that overthrew Louis Philippe was the belief that he and his\nwere _fripons_--that the representatives bought the electors, that the\nMinister bought the representatives, and that the King bought the\nMinister.\n\n'Now, no corruption that ever prevailed in the worst periods of Louis\nXV., nothing that was done by La Pompadour or the Du Barry resembles what\nis going on now. Duch\u00e2tel, whose organs are not over-acute, tells me that\nhe shudders at what is forced on his notice. The perfect absence of\npublicity, the silence of the press and of the tribune, and even of the\nbar--for no speeches, except on the most trivial subjects, are allowed to\nbe reported--give full room for conversational exaggeration. Bad as\nthings are, they are made still worse. Now this we cannot bear. It hurts\nour strongest passion--our vanity. We feel that we are _exploit\u00e9s_ by\nPersigny, Fould, and Abbattucci, and a swarm of other adventurers. The\ninjury might be tolerated, but not the disgrace.\n\n'Every Government in France has a tendency to become unpopular as it\ncontinues. If you were to go down into the street, and inquire into the\npolitics of the first hundred persons whom you met, you would find some\nSocialists, some Republicans, some Orleanists, &c., but you would find no\nLouis Napoleonists. Not a voice would utter his name without some\nexpression of contempt or detestation, but principally of contempt.\n\n'If then things take their course--if no accident, such as a fever or a\npistol-shot, cut him off--public indignation will spread from Paris to\nthe country, his unpopularity will extend from the people to the army,\nand then the first street riot will be enough to overthrow him.'\n\n'And what power,' I said, 'will start up in his place?'\n\n'I trust,' answered Tocqueville, 'that the reins will be seized by the\nSenate. Those who have accepted seats in it excuse themselves by saying,\n\"A time may come when we shall be wanted.\" Probably the Corps L\u00e9gislatif\nwill join them; and it seems to me clear that the course which such\nbodies will take must be the proclamation of Henri V.'\n\n'But what,' I said, 'would be the consequences of the pistol-shot or the\nfever?'\n\n'The immediate consequence,' answered Tocqueville, 'would be the\ninstallation of his successor. J\u00e9r\u00f4me would go to the Tuileries as easily\nas Charles X. did, but it would precipitate the end. We might bear Louis\nNapoleon for four or five years, or J\u00e9r\u00f4me for four or five months.'\n\n'It has been thought possible,' I said, 'that in the event of the J\u00e9r\u00f4me\ndynasty being overset by a military revolution, it might be followed by a\nmilitary usurpation; that Nero might be succeeded by Galba.'\n\n'That,' said Tocqueville, 'is one of the few things which I hold to be\nimpossible. Nero may be followed by another attempt at a Republic, but if\nany individual is to succeed him it must be a prince. _Mere_ personal\ndistinction, at least such as is within the bounds of real possibility,\nwill not give the sceptre of France. It will be seized by no one who\ncannot pretend to an hereditary claim.\n\n'What I fear,' continued Tocqueville, 'is that when this man feels the\nground crumbling under him, he will try the resource of war. It will be a\nmost dangerous experiment. Defeat, or even the alternation of success and\nfailure, which is the ordinary course of war, would be fatal to him; but\nbrilliant success might, as I have said before, establish him. It would\nbe playing double or quits. He is by nature a gambler. His\nself-confidence, his reliance, not only on himself, but on his fortune,\nexceeds even that of his uncle. He believes himself to have a great\nmilitary genius. He certainly planned war a year ago. I do not believe\nthat he has abandoned it now, though the general feeling of the country\nforces him to suspend it. That feeling, however, he might overcome; he\nmight so contrive as to appear to be forced into hostilities; and such is\nthe intoxicating effect of military glory, that the Government which\nwould give us _that_ would be pardoned, whatever were its defects or its\ncrimes.\n\n'It is your business, and that of Belgium, to put yourselves into such a\nstate of defence as to force him to make his spring on Italy. There he\ncan do you little harm. But to us Frenchmen the consequences of war\n_must_ be calamitous. If we fail, they are national loss and humiliation.\nIf we succeed, they are slavery.'\n\n'Of course,' I said, 'the corruption that infects the civil service must\nin time extend to the army, and make it less fit for service.\n\n'Of course it must,' answered Tocqueville. 'It will extend still sooner\nto the navy? The _mat\u00e9riel_ of a force is more easily injured by jobbing\nthan the _personnel_. And in the navy the _mat\u00e9riel_ is the principal.\n\n'Our naval strength has never been in proportion to our naval\nexpenditure, and is likely to be less and less so every year, at least\nduring every year of the _r\u00e8gne des fripons_.'\n\n_Tuesday, May_ 24.--I breakfasted with Sir Henry Ellis and then went to\nTocqueville's.\n\nI found there an elderly man, who did not remain long.\n\nWhen he went, Tocqueville said, 'That is one of our provincial prefects.\nHe has been describing to us the state of public feeling in the South.\nContempt for the present Government, he tells us, is spreading there from\nits headquarters, Paris.\n\n'If the Corps L\u00e9gislatif is dissolved, he expects the Opposition to\nobtain a majority in the new House.\n\n'This,' continued Tocqueville, 'is a state of things with which Louis\nNapoleon is not fit to cope. Opposition makes him furious, particularly\nParliamentary opposition. His first impulse will be to go a step further\nin imitation of his uncle, and abolish the Corps L\u00e9gislatif, as Napoleon\ndid the Tribunat.\n\n'But nearly half a century of Parliamentary life has made the French of\n1853 as different from those of 1803 as the nephew is from his uncle.\n\n'He will scarcely risk another _coup d'\u00e9tat_; and the only legal mode of\nabolishing, or even modifying, the Corps L\u00e9gislatif is by a pl\u00e9biscite\nsubmitted by ballot to universal suffrage.\n\n'Will he venture on this? And if he do venture, will he succeed? If he\nfail, will he not sink into a constitutional sovereign, controlled by an\nAssembly far more unmanageable than we deputies were, as the Ministers\nare excluded from it?'\n\n'Will he not rather,' I said, 'sink into an exile?'\n\n'That is my hope,' said Tocqueville, 'but I do not expect it quite so\nsoon as Thiers does,'\n\n\n\nCORRESPONDENCE.\n\nSt. Cyr, July 2, 1853.\n\nI am not going to talk to you, my dear Senior, about the Emperor, or the\nEmpress, or any of the august members of the Imperial Family; nor of the\nMinisters, nor of any other public functionaries, because I am a\nwell-disposed subject who does not wish that the perusal of his letters\nshould give pain to his Government. I shall write to you upon an\nhistorical problem, and discuss with you events which happened five\nhundred years ago. There could not be a more innocent subject.\n\nI have followed your advice, and I have read, or rather re-read,\nBlackstone. I studied him twenty years ago. Each time he has made upon me\nthe same impression. Now, as then, I have ventured to consider him (if\none may say so without blasphemy) an inferior writer, without liberality\nof mind or depth of judgment; in short, a commentator and a lawyer, not\nwhat _we_ understand by the words _jurisconsulte_ and _publiciste_. He\nhas, too, in a degree which is sometimes amusing, a mania for admiring\nall that was done in ancient times, and for attributing to them all that\nis good in his own. I am inclined to think that, if he had had to write,\nnot on the institutions, but on the products of England, he would have\ndiscovered that beer was first made from grapes, and that the hop is a\nfruit of the vine--rather a degenerate product, it is true, of the wisdom\nof our ancestors, but as such worthy of respect. It is impossible to\nimagine an excess more opposite to that of his contemporaries in France,\nfor whom it was enough that a thing was old for it to be bad. But enough\nof Blackstone; he must make way for what I really want to say to you.\n\nIn comparing the feudal institutions in England in the period immediately\nafter the conquest with those of France, you find between them, not only\nan analogy, but a perfect resemblance, much greater than Blackstone seems\nto think, or, at any rate, chooses to say. In reality, the system in the\ntwo countries is identical. In France, and over the whole Continent, this\nsystem produced a caste; in England, an aristocracy. How is it that the\nword _gentleman_, which in our language denotes a mere superiority of\nblood, with you is now used to express a certain social position, and\namount of education, independent of birth; so that in two countries the\nsame word, though the sound remains the same, has entirely changed its\nmeaning? When did this revolution take place? How, and through what\ntransitions? Have no books ever treated of this subject in England? Have\nnone of your great writers, philosophers, politicians, or historians,\never noticed this characteristic and pregnant fact, tried to account for\nit, and to explain it?\n\nIf I had the honour of a personal acquaintance with Mr. Macaulay, I\nshould venture to write to ask him these questions. In the excellent\nhistory which he is now publishing he alludes to this fact, but he does\nnot try to explain it. And yet, as I have said before, there is none more\npregnant, nor containing within it so good an explanation of the\ndifference between the history of England and that of the other feudal\nnations in Europe. If you should meet Mr. Macaulay, I beg you to ask him,\nwith much respect, to solve these questions for me. But tell me what you\nyourself think, and if any other eminent writers have treated this\nsubject.\n\nYou must think me, my dear friend, very tiresome with all these questions\nand dissertations; but of what else can I speak? I pass here the life of\na Benedictine monk, seeing absolutely no one, and writing whenever I am\nnot walking. I expect this cloistered life to do a great deal of good\nboth to my mind and body. Do not think that in my convent I forget my\nfriends. My wife and I constantly talk of them, and especially of you and\nof our dear Mrs. Grote. I am reading your MSS.,[1] which interest and\namuse me extremely. They are my relaxation. I have promised Beaumont to\nsend them to him as soon as I have finished them.\n\n\nSt. Cyr, December 8, 1853.\n\nI must absolutely write to you to-day, my dear Senior. I have long been\nwishing to do so, but have been deterred by the annoyance I feel at not\nbeing able to discuss with you a thousand subjects as interesting to you\nas they are to me, but which one cannot mention in a letter; for letters\nare now less secret than ever, and to insist upon writing politics to our\nfriends is equivalent to their not hearing from us at all. But I may, at\nany rate, without making the police uneasy, assure you of the great\npleasure with which we heard that you intended paying us a little visit\nnext month.\n\nThere is an excellent hotel at Tours, where you will find good\napartments; for the rest, I hope that you will make our house your inn.\nWe are near enough to Tours for me to walk there and back, and we\nregulate our clocks by the striking of theirs; so you see that it is\ndifficult to be nearer.\n\nI think that it is a capital idea of yours to visit French Africa. The\ncountry is curious in itself, also on account of the contrasts afforded\nby the different populations which spread over the land without ever\nmixing.\n\nYou will find them materials for some of those excellent and interesting\narticles which you write so well. When you come I shall be able to give\nyou some useful information, for I have devoted much attention to\nAlgiers. I have here a long report which I drew up for the Chamber in\n1846, which may give you some valuable ideas, though things have\nconsiderably changed since that time.\n\nKind remembrances, &c.,\n\nA. DE TOCQUEVILLE.\n\n\n\n[The following are some more of Mrs. Grote's interesting notes. She\npreceded Mr. Senior at St. Cyr.--ED.]\n\nThe notes relating to St. Cyr are memoranda of various conversations\nwhich I enjoyed during a stay of some ten days or so at Tours, in\nFebruary 1854, with Monsieur Alexis de Tocqueville. I occupied an\napartment in the hotel at Tours, and on almost every day passed some\nhours in the company of this interesting friend, who at this time lived\nat St. Cyr, in a commodious country-house having its garden, &c, which he\nrented. I drove out to dine there frequently, and M. de Tocqueville\nwalked over on the intervening days and stayed an hour or two at the\nhotel with me talking incessantly.--H.G.\n\n_St. Cyr, February_ 13, 1854,--The French allow no author to have a claim\nto the highest rank unless he joins the perfection of style with the\ninstructiveness of his matter. Only four first-rate writers in the\neighteenth century--_grands \u00e9crivains, comme grands penseurs originaux;_\nthese being Montesquieu, Voltaire, J.J. Rousseau, and Buffon. Helvetius\nnot _en premi\u00e8re ligne_, because his _forme_ was not up to the mark.\nAlexis himself is often hung up for days together, having the thoughts,\nyet not hitting off the 'phrases' in a way to satisfy his critical ear as\nto style.\n\nThinks that when a man is capable of originating a _belle pens\u00e9e_, he\nought to be also capable of clothing that thought in felicitous language.\n\nThinks that a torpid state of political life is unfavourable to\nintellectual product in general.\n\nI instanced the case of Louis XIV. as contradicting this. Not admitted by\nTocqueville. The civil wars of Louis XIV.'s reign had engendered\nconsiderable activity in the minds of the educated class. This activity\ngenerated speculation and scientific inquiry in all the departments of\nhuman thoughts. Abstract ideas became the field on which thinkers\noccupied themselves. No _practical_ outlet under despotism, but a certain\nsocial fermentation nevertheless existing, and the want of making itself\na vent impelled intellectual life and writings. I instanced Louis XV. 'At\nleast,' I said, 'the torpor of political life was become yet more a\nhabit,' 'Yes,' said Alexis, 'but then there was the principle of\ndiscontent very widely diffused, which was the germ of the revolution of\n1789. This restless, disaffected state of the national mind gave birth to\nsome new forms of intellectual product, tending to rather more distinct\npractical results, which filtered down among the middle classes, and\nbecame the objects of their desires and projects.' Rousseau and Voltaire\neminently serviceable in leading the public sentiment towards the middle\nof the eighteenth century.\n\nEnglish writers and statesmen having always enjoyed the power of applying\ntheir minds to actual circumstances, and of appealing through a free\npress and free speech also to the public of their day, have never\naddressed themselves, as French philosophers did, to the cultivation of\nabstract speculations and general theories. Here and there a writer has\nbeen thrown, by his individual tastes and turn of thought, upon the study\nof political philosophy; but the Englishman, taken as a public writer,\ncommonly addresses himself to practical legislation rather than to\nrecondite studies or logical analysis and investigation of the relations\nbetween mankind and their regulations under authorised powers. Since Lord\nBacon there have been few, excepting in our later times Mill, Bentham,\nand his disciples, who have explored the metaphysics of jurisprudence and\nmoral science in England. Hume dealt in the philosophic treatment of\npolitical subjects, but did not work them up into anything like a\ncoherent system. English are not fond of generalities, but get on by\ntheir instincts, bit by bit, as need arises.\n\nAlexis thinks that the writers of the period antecedent to the revolution\nof 1789 were quite as much _thrown up by_ the condition of public\nsentiment as they were the exciters of it. Nothing _comprehensive_, in\nmatters of social arrangement, can be effected under a state of things\nlike that of England; so easy there for a peculiar grievance to get\nheard, so easy for a local or class interest to obtain redress against\nany form of injustice, that legislation _must_ be 'patching.' Next to\nimpossible to reorganise a community without a revolution.\n\nAlexis has been at work for about a year in _rummaging_  amid archives,\npartly in those of the capital, partly in those of the Touraine. In this\nlast town a complete collection is contained of the records of the old\n'Intendance,' under which several provinces were governed. Nothing short\nof a continuous and laborious poring over the details of Government\nfurnished by these invaluable _paperasses_ could possibly enable a\nstudent of the past century to frame to himself any clear conception of\nthe working of the social relations and authorities in old France. There\nexists no such tableau. The manners of the higher classes and their daily\nlife and habits are well portrayed in heaps of memoirs, and even pretty\nwell understood by our contemporaries. But the whole structure of\nsociety, in its relations with the authorised agents of supreme power,\nincluding the pressure of those secondary obligations arising out of\n_coutumes du pays_, is so little understood as to be scarcely available\nto a general comprehension of the old French world before 1789.\n\nAlexis says that the reason why the great upheaving of that period has\nnever been to this day sufficiently appreciated, never sufficiently\nexplained, is because the actual living hideousness of the social details\nand relations of that period, seen from the points of view of a\npenetrating contemporary looker-on, has never yet been depicted in\ntrue colours and with minute particulars. After having dived into the\nsocial history of that century, as I have stated, his conviction is that\nit was impossible that the revolution of 1789 should _not_ burst out.\nCause and effect were never more irrevocably associated than in this\nterrible case. Nothing but the compulsory idleness and obscurity into\nwhich Alexis has been thrown since December 1851 would have put even him\nupon the researches in question. Few perhaps could have addressed\nthemselves to the task with such remarkable powers of interpretation, and\nwith such talents for exploring the connection between thought and action\nas he is endowed with. Also he is singularly exempt from aristocratical\nprejudices, and quite capable of sympathising with popular feeling,\nthough naturally not partial to democracy.\n\n_February_ 15.--De Tocqueville came down in close carriage and sat an\nhour and a half by fireside. Weather horrible. Talked of La Marck's book\non Mirabeau;[2] said that the line Mirabeau pursued was perfectly well\nknown to Frenchmen prior to the appearance of La Marck's book; but that\nthe actual details were of course a new revelation, and highly valued\naccordingly. Asked what we thought of it in England. I told him the\nleading impression made by the book was the clear perception of the\nimpossibility of effecting any good or coming to terms in any manner of\nway of the revolutionary leaders with such a Court. That we also had long\nsuspected Mirabeau of being what he was now proved to have been--a man\nwho, imbued though he was with the spirit of revolutionary action and the\nconviction of the rightfulness of demanding prodigious changes, yet who\nwould willingly have directed the monarch in a method of warding off the\nterrible consequences of the storm, and who would, if the Court had\nconfided to his hands the task of conciliating the popular feelings, have\nperhaps preserved the forms of monarchy while affording the requisite\nconcessions to the national demands. But the Court was so steeped in the\nold sentiment of divine right, and moreover so distrustful of Mirabeau's\nhonour and sagacity (the more so as he was insatiable in his pecuniary\nrequisitions), that they would never place their cause frankly in his\nhands, nor indeed in anyone else's who was capable of discerning their\nbest interests. Lafayette was regarded as an enemy almost (and was\n'jaloused' by Mirabeau as being so popular) on account of his popular\nsympathies. De Tocqueville said that so diffused was the spirit of\nrevolution at the period preceding the convocation of the \u00c9tats-g\u00e9n\u00e9raux,\nthat the elder Mirabeau, who was a very clever and original-minded man,\nthough strongly tinctured with the old feudal prejudices, nevertheless\nlet the fact be seen in the clearest manner in his own writings. He wrote\nmany tracts on public topics, and De Tocqueville says that the tone in\nwhich Mirabeau (_p\u00e8re_) handles these proves that he was perfectly\ncognisant of the universal spread of revolutionary opinions, and even in\nsome degree influenced by them in his own person. Mirabeau (the son) was\nso aware of the absolute necessity of proclaiming himself emancipated\nfrom the old feudalities, that, among other extravagances of his conduct,\nhe started as a shopkeeper at Marseilles for some time, by way of\nfraternizing with the _bourgeoisie; affich\u00e9ing_ his liberalism. De\nTocqueville quoted Napoleon as saying in one of his conversations at St.\nHelena that he had been a spectator _from a window_ of the scene at the\nTuileries, on the famous August 10, 1792, and that it was his conviction\n(Napoleon's) that, even at that stage, the revolution might have been\naverted--at least, the furious character of it might have been turned\naside--by judicious modes of negotiation on the part of the King's\nadvisers. De Tocqueville does not concur in Napoleon's opinion.\n'Cahiers,' published 1789, contain the whole body of instructions\nsupplied to their respective delegates by the _trois \u00e9tats (clerg\u00e9,\nnoblesse, et Tiers \u00c9tat_), on assembling in convocation. Of this entire\nand voluminous collection (which is deposited in the archives of France)\nthree volumes of extracts are to be bought which were a kind of _r\u00e9dig\u00e9_\nof the larger body of documents. In these three volumes De Tocqueville\nmentioned, one may trace the course of the public sentiment with perfect\nclearness. Each class demanded a large instalment of constitutional\nsecurities; the nobles perhaps demanded the largest amount of all the\nthree. Nothing could be more thoroughgoing than the requisitions which\nthe body of the _noblesse_ charged their delegates to enforce in the\nAssembly of the \u00c9tats-g\u00e9n\u00e9raux--'\u00e9galisations des charges (taxation),\nresponsabilit\u00e9 des ministres, ind\u00e9pendance des tribunaux, libert\u00e9 de la\npersonne, garantie de la propri\u00e9t\u00e9 contre la couronne,' a balance-sheet\nannually of the public expenses and public revenue, and, in fact, all the\nsalient privileges necessary in order to enfranchise a community weary of\ndespotism. The clergy asked for what they wanted with equal resolution,\nand the _bourgeoisie_ likewise; but what the nobles were instructed to\ndemand was the boldest of all. We talked of the letters of the writers of\nthe eighteenth century, and of the correspondence of various eminent men\nand women with David Hume, which Mr. Hill Burton has published in a\nsupplementary volume in addition to those comprised in his life of David\nHume, and which I have with me. I said that the works of Hume being\nfreely printed and circulated caused great pleasure to the French men of\nletters, mingled with envy at the facility enjoyed by the Englishman of\npublishing anything he chose; the French writers being debarred, owing to\nthe importunity of the clergy with Louis XV., from publishing freely\ntheir works in France, and only managing to get themselves printed by\nemploying printers at the Hague, Amsterdam, and other towns beyond the\nlimits of the kingdom. To my surprise, De Tocqueville replied that this\ndisability, so far from proving disadvantageous to the _esprits forts_ of\nthe period, and the encyclopaedic school, was a source of gain to them in\nevery respect. Every book or tract which bore the stamp of being printed\nat the Hague or elsewhere, _out of France_, was speedily caught up and\ndevoured. It was a passport to success. Everyone knowing that, since it\nwas printed there, it must be of a nature to give offence to the ruling\npowers, and especially to the priesthood, and as such, all who were\nimbued with the new opinions were sure to run after books bearing this\ncertificate of merit. De Tocqueville said that the _savans_ of 1760-1789\nwould not have printed in France, had they been free to do so, at the\nperiod immediately preceding the accession of Louis XVI.\n\nTalked of Lafayette: said he was as great as pure, good intentions and\nnoble instincts could make a man; but that he was _d'un esprit m\u00e9diocre_,\nand utterly at a loss how to turn affairs to profit at critical\njunctures--never knew what was coming, no political foresight. Mistake in\nputting Louis Philippe on the throne _sans garantie_ in 1830; misled by\nhis own disinterested character to think better of public men than he\nought to have done. Great personal integrity shown by Lafayette during\nthe Empire, and under the Restoration: not to be cajoled by any monarch.\n\n_February_ 16.--The current fallacy of Napoleon having made the important\nalterations in the laws of France. All the eminent new enactments\noriginated in the Constituent Assembly, only that they set to work in\nsuch sledgehammer fashion, that the carrying out their work became\nextremely troublesome and difficult. Too abstract in their notions to\nestimate difficulties of detail in changing the framework of\njurisprudence. De Tocqueville said philosophers must always originate\nlaws, but men used to active practical life ought to undertake to direct\nthe transition from old to new arrangements. The Constituent Assembly did\nprodigious things in the way of clearing the ground of past abominations.\nNapoleon had the talent of making their work take effect; understood\nadministrative science, but rendered the centralising principle far too\npredominant, in the view to consolidate his own power afterwards. France\nhas felt this, to her cost, ever since.\n\nHabit formerly (i.e. 300 years back) as prevalent in France as it is in\nEngland of gentlemen of moderate fortune residing wholly or by far the\ngreater part of the year on their estates. They ceased to do so from\nthe time when the sovereign took from them all local authority, from the\nfifteenth century or so. The French country-houses were excessively\nthickly dotted over the land even up to the year 1600; quantities pulled\ndown after that period. Country life becoming flat after the gentlemen\nceased to be of importance in their political relations with their\ndistricts, they gave up rural habits and took to living in the provincial\ntowns.\n\nDe Tocqueville had many conversations with M. Royer Collard respecting\nthe events of 1789. Difficult to get much out of men of our period\nrelative to their own early manhood. His own father (now 82) much less\ncapable of communicating details of former _r\u00e9gime_ than might have been\nsupposed. Because, says De Tocqueville, youths of eighteen to twenty\nhardly ever possess the faculty or the inclination to note social\npeculiarities. They accept what they find going, and scarcely give a\nthought to the contemplation of what is familiar to them and of every\nday's experience. Royer Collard was a man of superior mind: had a great\ndeal to relate. De Tocqueville used to pump him whenever an opportunity\noccurred. Knew Danton well, used to discuss political affairs with him.\nWhen revolution was fairly launched, saw him occasionally. Danton was\nvenal to the last degree; received money from the Court over and over\nagain; 'agitated,' and was again sopped by the agents of Marie\nAntoinette. When matters grew formidable (in 1791) Royer Collard was\nhimself induced to become an agent or go-between of the Court for buying\nup Danton. He sought an opportunity, and after some prefatory\nconversations Royer Collard led Danton to the point. 'No,' said Danton,\n'I cannot listen to any such suggestions now. Times are altered. It is\ntoo late. 'Nous le d\u00e9tr\u00f4nerons et puis nous le tuerons,' added he in an\nemphatic tone. Royer Collard of course gave up the hope of succeeding.\n\nDanton's passion for a young girl, whom he married, became his ruin.\nWhile he was honeymooning it by some river's margin, Robespierre got the\nupper hand in the Assembly, and caused him to be seized--_mis en\njugement_--and soon afterwards guillotined. The woman did not know, it is\naffirmed, that it was Danton who set the massacres of 1792 agoing; she\nthought him a good-hearted man. He set all his personal enemies free out\nof their prisons prior to the commencement of the massacres; wishing to\nbe able to boast of having spared his enemies, as a proof that he was\nactuated by no ignoble vengeance, but only by a patriotic impulse. He\nwas a low, mean-souled fanatic, who had no clear conception of what he\nwas aiming at, but who delighted in the horrid excitement prevailing\naround him. It was Tallien who had the chief share in the deposition of\nRobespierre and the transactions of the 9th thermidor. Madame Tallien was\nthen in prison, and going to be executed in a few days (she was not yet\nmarried to Tallien then). She wrote, by stealth of course, a few emphatic\nwords, with a toothpick and soot wetted, to Tallien which nerved him to\nthe conflict, and she was saved. Talleyrand told De Tocqueville she was\nbeyond everything captivating, beautiful, and interesting. She afterwards\nbecame the mistress of Barras, and finally married the Prince de Chimay.\n\nDe Tocqueville has been at Vor\u00e9, Helvetius' ch\u00e2teau in La Perche--a fine\nplace, and Helvetius lived _en seigneur_ there. A grand-daughter of\nHelvetius married M. de Rochambeau, uncle, by mother's side, of Alexis:\nso that the great-grandchildren are De Tocqueville's first cousins.\n\nIn the 'Souvenirs' of M. Berryer (_p\u00e8re_) he describes the scene of the\n9th thermidor, in which he was actively concerned in the interest of the\nConvention, and saw Robespierre borne past him with his shattered jaw\nalong the Quai Pelletier. Also went to the terrace of the Tuileries\ngardens to assure himself that Robespierre was really executed the next\nday; heard the execrations and shouts which attended his last moments,\nbut did not stay to witness them. Release of the Duchess of St. Aignan,\nunder sentence of death, by his father.\n\n_February_ 18.--A. de Tocqueville came to see me, and we walked out for\nhalf-an-hour. He said he had now spent over eight months in a seclusion\nsuch as he had never experienced in his whole life. That, partly his\nown debilitated health, partly the impaired state of his wife's general\npowers (nervous system inclusive), partly the extreme aversion he felt\nfor public affairs and the topics of the day connected with politics; all\nthese considerations had determined him upon withdrawing himself from\nsociety for a certain space, and _that_ to a considerable distance from\nall his friends and relations. A physician, also of widely extended fame\n(Dr. Brittonneau), happening to reside close to where they have lodged\nthemselves, formed an additional link in the chain of motives for\nsettling themselves at Tours. M. de Tocqueville had some misgivings at\nfirst as to whether, after passing twenty years in active public life,\nand in the frequent society of men who occupied the most distinguished\nposition in the political world, as well as of others not less eminent in\nthat of letters; whether, he said, the monotony and stillness of his new\nmode of life would not be too much for his spirits and render his mind\nindolent and depressed. 'But,' said he, 'I have been agreeably reassured.\nI have come to regard society as a thing which I can perfectly well do\nwithout. I desire nothing better than to occupy myself, as I have been\ndoing, with the composition of a work which I am in hopes will travel\nover somewhat other than beaten ground. I have found many materials for\nmy purpose in this spot, and the pursuit has got hold of me to a degree\nwhich renders intellectual labour a source of pleasure; and I prosecute\nit steadily, unless when my health is out of order; which, happily, does\nnot occur so frequently since the last three or four months. My wife's\ncompany serves to encourage me in my work, and to cheer me in every\nrespect, since an entire sympathy subsists between us, as you know; we\nseem to require no addition, and our lives revolve in the most inflexible\nroutine possible. I rise at half-past five, and work seriously till\nhalf-past nine; then dress for _d\u00e9je\u00fbner_ at ten. I commonly walk\nhalf-an-hour afterwards, and then set to on some other study--usually of\nlate in the German language--till two P.M., when I go out again and walk\nfor two hours, if weather allows. In the evenings I read to amuse myself,\noften reading aloud to Madame de Tocqueville, and go to bed at ten P.M.\nregularly every night.'\n\n'Sometimes,' said De Tocqueville, 'I reflect on the difference which may\nbe discerned between the amount of what a man can effect by even the most\nstrenuous and well-directed efforts, whether as a public servant or as a\nleading man in political life, and what a writer of impressive books has\nit in his power to effect. It is true that a man of talent and courage\nmay acquire a creditable position, may exercise great influence over\nother individuals engaged in the same career, and may enjoy a certain\nmeasure of triumphant success in cases where he can put out his strength.\nAt the same time it strikes me that the best of these exaggerates\nimmensely the amount of good which he has been able to effect. I look\nback upon prodigiously vivid passages in various public men's lives, in\nthis century, with a melancholy reflection of how little influence their\nmagnificent efforts have really exercised over the march of human\naffairs. A man is apt to believe he has done great things when his\nhearers and contemporaries are strongly affected, either by a powerful\nspeech, or an animated address, or an act of opportune courage, or the\nlike. But, if we investigate the positive amount of what the individual\nhas effected in the way of bettering or advancing the general interests\nof mankind, by personal exertion on the public stage, I regret to say I\ncan find hardly an instance of more than a transient, though beneficial,\nflash of excitement produced on the public mind. I do not here speak of\nmen invested with great power--princes, prime ministers, popes, generals\nand the like. Of course _they_ produce lasting traces of their _power_,\nwhether it be for good or evil; and, indeed, _individuals_ have on their\nside considerable power to work _mischief_, though not often to work\ngood. I begin to think that a man not invested with a considerable amount\nof political _power_ can do but little good by slaving at the oar of\nindependent political action. Now, on the contrary, what a vast effect a\n_writer_ can produce, when he possesses the requisite knowledge and\nendowments! In his cabinet, his thoughts collected, his ideas well\narranged, he may hope to imprint indelible traces on the line of human\nprogress. What orator, what brilliant patriot at the tribune, could ever\neffect the extensive fermentation in a whole nation's sentiments achieved\nby Voltaire and Jean Jacques?\n\n'I have certainly seen reason to change some of my views on social facts,\nas well as some reasonings founded on imperfect observation. But the\n_fond_ of my opinions can never undergo a change--certain irrevocable\nmaxims and propositions _must_ constitute the basis of thinking minds.\nHow such changes can come about as I have lived to see in some men's\nstates of opinion is to me incomprehensible. Lafayette was foolish enough\nto give his support to certain conspiracies--certainly to that of\nB\u00e9fort's, in Alsace. What folly! to seek to upset a despotism by the\nagency of the _soldiery_, in the nineteenth century!'\n\nH. GROTE.\n\n[Footnote 1: Mr. Senior's Journals.--ED.]\n\n[Footnote 2: See _Royal and Republican France_, by H. Reeve Esq. vol.\ni.--ED.]\n\n\n\nCONVERSATIONS WITH MR. SENIOR.\n\n_St. Cyr, Tuesday, February_ 21, 1854.[1]--On the 20th I left Paris for\nLe Tr\u00e9sorier, a country-house in the village of St. Cyr, near Tours,\nwhich the Tocquevilles have been inhabiting for some months. It stands in\na large enclosure of about fifteen acres, of which about ten are orchard\nand vineyard, and the remainder are occupied by the house, stables, and a\nlarge garden. The house has a great deal of accommodation, and they pay\nfor it, imperfectly furnished, 3,000 francs a year, and keep up the\ngarden, which costs about 500 francs more, being one man at one and\na-half francs a day.\n\nThis is considered dear; but the sheltered position of the house, looking\nsouth, and protected by a hill to the north-east, induced the\nTocquevilles to pay for it about 1,000 francs more than its market value.\n\nI will throw together the conversations of February 22 and 23. They began\nby my giving to him a general account of the opinions of my friends in\nParis.\n\n'I believe,' said Tocqueville, 'that I should have found out many of your\ninterlocutors without your naming them. I am sure that I should Thiers,\nDuvergier, Broglie, and Rivet; perhaps Faucher--certainly Cousin. I\ntranslate into French what you make them say, and hear them speak. I\nrecognise Dumon and Lavergne, but I should not have discovered them. The\nconversation of neither of them has the marked, peculiar flavour that\ndistinguishes that of the others. You must recollect, however, that some\nof your friends knew, and most of the others must have suspected, that\nyou were taking notes. Thiers speaks evidently for the purpose of being\nreported. To be sure that shows what are the opinions that men wish to be\nsupposed to entertain, and they often betray what they think that they\nconceal. Still it must be admitted that you had not always the natural\nman.' 'I am sorry,' he added, 'that you have not penetrated more into the\nsalons of the Legitimists. You have never got further than a Fusionist.\nThe Legitimists are not the Russians that Thiers describes them. Still\nless do they desire to see Henri V. restored by foreign intervention.\nThey and their cause have suffered too bitterly for having committed\nthat crime, or that fault, for them to be capable of repeating it. They\nare anti-national so far as not to rejoice in any victories obtained by\nFrance under this man's guidance. But I cannot believe that they would\nrejoice in her defeat. They have been so injured in their fortunes and\ntheir influence, have been so long an oppressed caste--excluded from\npower, and even from sympathy--that they have acquired the faults of\nslaves--have become timid and frivolous, or bitter.\n\n'They have ceased to be anxious about anything but to be let alone. But\nthey are a large, a rich, and comparatively well-educated body. Your\npicture is incomplete without them, _et il sera toujours tr\u00e8s-difficile\nde gouverner sans eux._[2]\n\nI quite agree,' he continued, 'with Thiers as to the necessity of this\nwar. Your interests may be more immediate and greater, but ours are very\ngreat. When I say ours, I mean those of France as a country that is\nresolved to enjoy constitutional government. I am not sure that if Russia\nwere to become mistress of the Continent she would not allow France to\ncontinue a quasi-independent despotism under her protectorate. But she\nwill never willingly allow us to lie powerful and free.\n\n'I sympathise, too, with Thiers's fears as to the result. I do not\nbelieve that Napoleon himself, with all his energy, and all his\ndiligence, and all his intelligence, would have thought it possible to\nconduct a great war to which his Minister of War was opposed. A man who\nhas no heart in his business will neglect it, or do it imperfectly. His\nfirst step would have been to dismiss St.-Arnaud. Then, look at the other\ntwo on whose skill and energy we have to depend. One is Ducos, Minister\nof Marine, a man of mere commonplace talents and character. The other is\nBinneau, Minister of Finance, somewhat inferior to Ducos. Binneau ought\nto provide resources. He ought to check the preposterous waste of the\nCourt. He has not intelligence enough to do the one, or courage enough to\nattempt the other. The real Prime Minister is without doubt Louis\nNapoleon himself. But he is not a man of business. He does not understand\ndetails. He may order certain things to be done, but he will not be able\nto ascertain whether the proper means have been taken. He does not know\nindeed what these means are. He does not trust those who do. A war which\nwould have tasked all the powers of Napoleon, and of Napoleon's Ministers\nand generals, is to be carried on without any master-mind to direct it,\nor any good instruments to execute it. I fear some great disaster.\n\n'Such a disaster might throw,' he continued, 'this man from the eminence\non which he is balanced, not rooted. It might produce a popular outbreak,\nof which the anarchical party might take advantage. Or, what is perhaps\nmore to be feared, it might frighten Louis Napoleon into a change of\npolicy. He is quite capable of turning short round--giving up\neverything--key of the Grotto, protectorate of the orthodox, even the\nDardanelles and the Bosphorus--to Nicholas, and asking to be repaid by\nthe Rhine.\n\n'I cannot escape from the _cauchemar_ that a couple of years hence France\nand England may be at war. Nicholas's expectations have been deceived,\nbut his plan was not unskilfully laid. He had a fair right to conjecture\nthat you would think the dangers of this alliance such as to be even\ngreater than those of allowing him to obtain his protectorate.\n\n'In deciding otherwise, you have taken the brave and the magnanimous\ncourse. I hope that it may prove the successful one.\n\n'I am sorry,' continued Tocqueville, 'to see the language of your\nnewspapers as to the fusion. I did not choose to take part in it. I hate\nto have anything to do with pretenders. But as a mere measure of\nprecaution it is a wise one. It decides what shall be the conduct of the\nRoyalist party in the event--not an improbable one--of France being\nsuddenly left without a ruler.\n\n'Your unmeasured praise of Louis Napoleon and your unmeasured abuse of\nthe Bourbons are, to a certain degree, the interference in our politics\nwhich you professedly disclaim. I admit the anti-English prejudices\nof the Bourbons, and I admit that they are not likely to be abated by\nyour alliance with a Bonaparte. But the opinions of a constitutional\nsovereign do not, like those of a despot, decide the conduct of his\ncountry. The country is anxious for peace, and, above all, peace with\nyou--for more than peace, for mutual good-feeling. The Bourbons cannot\nreturn except with a constitution. It has become the tradition of the\nfamily, it is their title to the throne. There is not a _vieille\nmarquise_ in the Faubourg St.-Germain who believes in divine right.\n\n'The higher classes in France are Bourbonists because they are\nConstitutionalists, because they believe that constitutional monarchy is\nthe government best suited to France, and that the Bourbons offer us the\nfairest chance of it.\n\n'Among the middle classes there is without doubt much inclination for the\nsocial equality of a Republic. But they are alarmed at its instability;\nthey have never known one live for more than a year or two, or die except\nin convulsions.\n\n'As for the lower classes, the country people think little about\npolitics, the sensible portion of the artizans care about nothing but\ncheap and regular work; the others are Socialists, and, next to the\ngovernment of a Rouge Assembly, wish for that of a Rouge despot.'\n\n'In London,' I said, 'a few weeks ago I came across a French Socialist,\nnot indeed of the lower orders--for he was a Professor of\nMathematics--but participating in their feelings. \"I prefer,\" he said, \"a\nBonaparte to a Bourbon--a Bonaparte must rely on the people, one can\nalways get something out of him.\" \"What have you got,\" I asked, \"from\nthis man?\" \"A great deal,\" he answered. \"We got the Orleans\nconfiscation--that was a great step. _Il portait attente \u00e0 la propri\u00e9t\u00e9_.\nThen he represents the power and majesty of the people. He is like the\npeople, above all law. _Les Bourbons nous chicanaient._\"'\n\n'That was the true faith of a Rouge,' said Tocqueville 'If this man,' he\nadded, 'had any self-control, if he would allow us a very moderate degree\nof liberty, he might enjoy a reign--probably found a dynasty. He had\neverything in his favour; the prestige of his name, the acquiescence of\nEurope, the dread of the Socialists, and the contempt felt for the\nRepublicans. We were tired of Louis Philippe. We remembered the _branche\na\u00een\u00e9e_ only to dislike it, and the Assembly only to despise it. We never\nshall be loyal subjects, but we might have been discontented ones, with\nas much moderation as is in our nature.'\n\n'What is the _nuance_,' I said, 'of G----?'\n\n'G----,' answered Tocqueville, 'is an honest man, uncorrupt and\npublic-spirited; he is a clear, logical, but bitter speaker; his words\nfall from the tribune like drops of gall. He has great perspicacity, but\nrather a narrow range. His vision is neither distant nor comprehensive.\nHe wears a pair of blinkers, which allow him to see only what he looks\nstraight at--and that is the English Constitution. For what is to the\nright and to the left he has no eyes, and unhappily what is to the right\nand to the left is France.\n\n'Then he has a strong will, perfect self-reliance, and the most restless\nactivity. All these qualities give him great influence. He led the\n_centre gauche_ into most of its errors. H---- used to say, \"If you\nwant to know what I shall do, ask G----.\"\n\n'Among the secondary causes of February 1848 he stands prominent. He\nplanned the banquets. Such demonstrations are safe in England. He\ninferred, according to his usual mode of reasoning, that they would not\nbe dangerous in France. He forgot that in England there is an aristocracy\nthat leads, and even controls, the people.\n\n'I am alarmed,' he continued, 'by your Reform Bill. Your new six-pound\nfranchise must, I suppose, double the constituencies; it is a further\nstep to universal suffrage, the most fatal and the least remediable of\ninstitutions.[3]\n\n'While you preserve your aristocracy, you will preserve your freedom; if\nthat goes, you will fall into the worst of tyrannies, that of a despot,\nappointed and controlled, so far as he is controlled at all, by a\nmob.'[4]\n\nMadame de Tocqueville asked me if I had seen the Empress.\n\n'No,' I said, 'but Mrs. Senior has, and thinks her beautiful.'\n\n'She is much more so,' said Madame de Tocqueville, 'than her portraits.\nHer face in perfect repose gets long, and there is a little drooping\nabout the corners of the mouth. This has a bad effect when she is\nserious, as everyone is when sitting for a picture, but disappears as\nsoon as she speaks. I remember dining in company with her at the\nPresident's--I sat next to him--she was nearly opposite, and close to her\na lady who was much admired. I said to the President, looking towards\nMademoiselle de Montigo, \"Really I think that she is far the prettier of\nthe two.\" He gazed at her for an instant, and said, \"I quite agree with\nyou; she is charming.\" It may be a _bon m\u00e9nage_'\n\n'To come back,' I said, 'to our Eastern question. What is Baraguay\nd'Hilliers?'\n\n'A _brouillon_,' said Tocqueville. 'He is the most impracticable man in\nFrance. His vanity, his ill-temper, and his jealousy make him quarrel\nwith everybody with whom he comes in contact. In the interest of our\nalliance you should get him recalled.'\n\n'What sort of man,' I asked, 'shall I find General Randon?'\n\n'Very intelligent,' said Tocqueville. 'He was to have had the command of\nthe Roman army when Oudinot gave it up; but, just as he was going, it was\ndiscovered that he was a Protestant. He was not so accommodating as one\nof our generals during the Restoration. He also was a Protestant. The Duc\nd'Angoul\u00eame one day said to him, \"Vous \u00eates protestant, g\u00e9n\u00e9ral?\" The\npoor man answered in some alarm, for he knew the Duke's\nultra-Catholicism, \"Tout ce que vous voulez, monseigneur.\"'\n\n\n\n[Footnote 1: My conversations with M. de Tocqueville during this visit\nwere written out after my return from Paris and sent to him. He returned\nthem with the remarks which I have inserted.--N.W. SENIOR.]\n\n[Footnote 2: Le portrait va plus loin que ma pens\u00e9e.--_A. de\nTocqueville_. The picture expresses more than my idea.]\n\n[Footnote 3: Cela va plus loin que ma pens\u00e9e. Je crois que le vote\nuniversel peut se concilier avec d'autres institutions, qui diminuerait\nle danger.--_A. de Tocqueville._\n\nThis goes farther than my idea. I think that universal suffrage may be\ncombined with other institutions, which would diminish the danger.]\n\n[Footnote 4: Cela aussi va plus loin que ma pens\u00e9e. Je crois\ntr\u00e8s-d\u00e9sirable le maintien des institutions aristocratiques en\nAngleterre. Mais je suis lo\u00edn de dire que leur abolition m\u00e8nerait\nn\u00e9cessairement au despotisme, surtout si elles s'affaiblissaient peu \u00e0\npeu et n'\u00e9taient pas renvers\u00e9es par une r\u00e9volution.--_A. de Tocqueville_.\n\nThis also goes farther than my idea. I think the maintenance in England\nof aristocratic institutions very desirable. But I am far from saying\nthat their abolition would necessarily lead to despotism, especially if\ntheir power were diminished gradually and without the shock of a\nrevolution.]\n\n\n\n\n_To N.W. Senior, Esq._\n\nSt. Cyr, March 18, 1854.\n\nYour letter was a real joy to us, my dear Senior. As you consent to be\nill lodged, we offer to you with all our hearts the bachelor's room which\nyou saw. You will find there only a bed, without curtains, and some very\nshabby furniture. But you will find hosts who will be charmed to have you\nand your MSS. I beg you not to forget the latter.\n\nMy wife, as housekeeper, desires me to give you an important piece of\nadvice. In the provinces, especially during Lent, it is difficult to get\ngood meat on Fridays and Saturdays, and though you are a great sinner,\nshe has no wish to force you to do penance, especially against your will,\nas that would take away all the merit. She advises you, therefore, to\narrange to spend with us Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and\nThursday, and to avoid Friday and Saturday, and especially the whole of\nthe Holy Week.\n\nNow you are provided with the necessary instructions. Choose your own\nday, and give us twenty-four hours' warning.\n\nA. DE TOCQUEVILLE.\n\n\n\nSt. Cyr, March 31, 1854.\n\nMy dear Senior,--As you are willing to encounter hard meat and river\nfish, I have no objection to your new plan. I see in it even this\nadvantage, that you will be able to tell us _de visu_ what went on in the\nCorps L\u00e9gislatif, which will greatly interest us.\n\nThe condemnation of Montalembert seems to me to be certain; but I am no\nless curious to know how that honourable assembly will contrive to\ncondemn a private letter which appeared in a foreign country, and which\nwas probably published without the authorisation and against the will of\nthe writer.\n\nIt is a servile trick, which I should like to see played.\n\nDo not hesitate to postpone your visit if the sitting of the Corps\nL\u00e9gislatif should not take place on Monday.\n\nA. DE TOCQUEVILLE.\n\n\n\nCONVERSATIONS.\n\nI passed the 3rd and 4th of April in the Corps L\u00e9gislatif listening to\nthe debate on the demand by the Government of permission to prosecute M.\nde Montalembert, a member of the Corps L\u00e9gislatif, for the publication of\na letter to M. Dupin, which it treated as libellous. As it was supposed\nthat M. de Montalembert's speech would be suppressed, I wrote as\nmuch of it as I could carry in my recollection; the only other\nvehicle--notes--not being allowed to be taken.[1] On the evening of the\n5th of April I left Paris for St. Cyr.\n\n[Footnote 1: See Appendix.]\n\n_St. Cyr, Thursday, April 6_, 1854.--I drove with Tocqueville to\nChenonceaux, a ch\u00e2teau of the sixteenth century, about sixteen miles from\nTours, on the Cher. I say _on_ the Cher, for such is literally its\nposition. It is a habitable bridge, stretching across the water.\n\nThe two first arches, which spring from the right bank of the river, and\nthe piers which form their abutments, are about one hundred feet wide,\nand support a considerable house. The others support merely a gallery,\ncalled by our guide the ballroom of Catherine de M\u00e9dicis, ending in a\nsmall theatre. The view from the windows of the river flowing through\nwooded meadows is beautiful and peculiar. Every window looks on the\nriver; many rooms, as is the case with the gallery, look both up and down\nit. It must be a charming summer residence. The rooms still retain the\nfurniture which was put into them by Diane de Poictiers and Catherine de\nM\u00e9dicis; very curious and very uncomfortable; high narrow chairs, short\nsofas, many-footed tables, and diminutive mirrors. The sculptured\npilasters, scrolls, bas-reliefs and tracery of the outside are not of\nfine workmanship, but are graceful and picturesque. The associations are\ninteresting, beginning with Francis I. and ending with Rousseau, who\nspent there the autumn of 1746, as the guest of Madame Dupin, and wrote a\ncomedy for its little theatre. The present proprietor, the Marquis de\nVilleneuve, is Madame Dupin's grandson.\n\nIn the evening we read my report of the debate on Montalembert.\n\n'It is difficult,' said Tocqueville, 'to wish that so great a speech had\nbeen suppressed. But I am inclined to think that Montalembert's wiser\ncourse was to remain silent. What good will his speech do? It will not be\npublished. Yours is probably the only report of it. So far as the public\nhears anything of it, the versions coming through an unfavourable medium\nwill be misrepresentations. In a letter which I received from Paris\nthis morning it is called virulent. It was of great importance that the\nminority against granting the consent should be large, and I have no\ndoubt that this speech diminished it by twenty or thirty. It must have\nwounded many, frightened many, and afforded a pretext to many. Perhaps,\nhowever, it was not in human nature for such a speaker as Montalembert to\nresist the last opportunity of uttering bold truths in a French\nAssembly.'\n\n_Friday, April_ 7.--We drove to-day along the Loire to Langrais, about\ntwelve miles below Tours.\n\nHere is a castle of the thirteenth century, consisting of two centre and\ntwo corner towers, and a curtain between them, terminating in a rocky\npromontory. Nothing can be more perfect than the masonry, or more elegant\nthan the few ornaments. The outside is covered with marks of bullets,\nwhich appear to have rattled against it with little effect.\n\nOn our return we visited the castles of Cinq Mars and Luynes. Langrais,\nCinq Mars, and Luynes were all the property of Effiat, Marquis of Cinq\nMars, who with De Thou conspired against Richelieu in the latter part of\nLouis XIII.'s reign, and was beheaded. The towers of Cinq Mars were, in\nthe words of his sentence, 'ras\u00e9es \u00e0 la hauteur de l'infamie,' and remain\nnow cut down to half their original height. Luynes stands finely,\ncrowning a knoll overlooking the Loire. It is square, with twelve towers,\ntwo on each side and four in the corners, and a vast ditch, and must have\nbeen strong. Nearly a mile from it are the remains of a Roman aqueduct,\nof which about thirty piers and six perfect arches remain. It is of\nstone, except the arches, which have a mixture of brick. The peasants, by\ndigging under the foundations, are rapidly destroying it. An old man told\nus that he had seen six or seven piers tumble. A little nearer to Tours\nis the Pile de Cinq Mars, a solid, nearly square tower of Roman brickwork\nmore than ninety feet high, and about twelve feet by fourteen feet thick.\nOn one side there appear to have been inscriptions or bas-reliefs. Amp\u00e8re\nbelieves it to have been a Roman tomb; but the antiquaries are divided\nand perplexed. Being absolutely solid, it could not have been built for\nany use.\n\nI am struck during my walks and drives by the appearance of prosperity.\nThe country about Tours is dotted with country-houses, quite as numerous\nas in any part of England. In St. Cyr alone there must be between twenty\nand thirty, and the houses of the peasants are far better than the best\ncottages of English labourers. Everyone seems to have attached to it a\nconsiderable piece of land, from ten acres to two, cultivated in vines,\nvegetables and fruit. These and green crops are nearly the only produce;\nthere is very little grain. All the persons whom I met appeared to be\nhealthy and well-clad. The soil and climate are good, and the proximity\nto Tours insures a market; but physical advantages are not enough to\ninsure prosperity. The neighbourhood of Cork enjoys a good climate, soil,\nand market, but the inhabitants are not prosperous.\n\nAfter some discussion Tocqueville agreed with me in attributing the\ncomfort of the Tourainese to the slowness with which population\nincreases. In the commune of Tocqueville the births are only three to a\nmarriage, but both Monsieur and Madame de Tocqueville think that the\nnumber of children here is still less. I scarcely meet any.\n\nMarriages are late, and very seldom take place until a house and a bit of\nground and some capital have been inherited or accumulated. Touraine is\nthe best specimen of the _petite culture_ that I have seen. The want of\nwood makes it objectionable as a summer residence.\n\nWe are now suffering from heat. After eight in the morning it is too hot\nto walk along the naked glaring roads, yet this is only the first week in\nApril.\n\n_Saturday, April_ 8.--The sun has been so scorching during our two last\ndrives that we have given ourselves a holiday to-day, and only dawdled\nabout Tours.\n\nWe went first to the cathedral, which I never see without increased\npleasure. Though nearly four hundred years passed from its commencement\nin the twelfth century to its completion in the fifteenth, the whole\ninterior is as harmonious as if it had been finished by the artist who\nbegan it. I know nothing in Gothic architecture superior to the grandeur,\nrichness, and yet lightness of the choir and eastern apse. Thence we\nwent to St. Julien's, a fine old church of the thirteenth century,\ndesecrated in the Revolution, but now under restoration.\n\nThence to the H\u00f4tel Gouin, a specimen of the purely domestic architecture\nof the fifteenth century, covered with elegant tracery and scroll-work in\nwhite marble. We ended with Plessis-les-Tours, Louis XI.'s castle, which\nstands on a flat, somewhat marshy, tongue of land stretching between the\nLoire and the Cher. All that remains is a small portion of one of the\ninner courts, probably a guard-room, and a cellar pointed out to us as\nthe prison in which Louis XI kept Cardinal de la Balue for several years.\nThe cellar itself is not bad for a prison of those days, but he is said\nto have passed his first year or two in a grated vault under the\nstaircase, in which he could neither stand up nor lie at full length.\n\n'It is remarkable,' said Tocqueville, 'that the glorious reigns in French\nhistory, such as those of Louis Onze, Louis Quatorze, and Napoleon ended\nin the utmost misery and exhaustion, while the periods at which we are\naccustomed to look as those of disturbance and insecurity were those of\ncomparative prosperity and progress. It seems as if tyranny were worse\nthan civil war.'\n\n'And yet,' I said, 'the amount of revenue which these despots managed to\nsqueeze out of France was never large. The taxation under Napoleon was\nmuch less than under Louis Philippe.'\n\n'Yes,' said Tocqueville, 'but it was the want of power to tax avowedly\nthat led them into indirect modes of raising money, which were far more\nmischievous; just as our servants put us to more expense by their jobs\nthan they would do if they simply robbed us to twice the amount of their\nindirect gains.\n\n'Louis XIV. destroyed all the municipal franchises of France, and paved\nthe way for this centralized tyranny, not from any dislike of municipal\nelections, but merely in order to be able himself to sell the places\nwhich the citizens had been accustomed to grant.'\n\n_Sunday, April_ 9.--Another sultry day. I waited till the sun was low,\nand then sauntered by the side of the river with Tocqueville.\n\n'The worst faults of this Government,' said Tocqueville, 'are those which\ndo not alarm the public.\n\n'It is depriving us of the local franchises and local self-government\nwhich we have extorted from the central power in a struggle of forty\nyears. The Restoration and the Government of July were as absolute\ncentralizers as Napoleon himself. The local power which they were forced\nto surrender they made over to the narrow pays l\u00e9gal, the privileged\nten-pounders, who were then attempting to govern France. The Republic\ngave the name of Conseils-g\u00e9n\u00e9raux to the people, and thus dethroned the\nnotaires who had governed those assemblies when they represented only the\n_bourgeoisie_. The Republic made the maires elective. The Republic placed\neducation in the hands of local authorities. Under its influence, the\ncommunes, the cantons, and the departments were becoming real\nadministrative bodies. They are now mere geographical divisions. The\npr\u00e9fet appoints the maires. The pr\u00e9fet appoints in every canton a\ncommissaire de police--seldom a respectable man, as the office is not\nhonourable. The gardes champ\u00eatres, who are our local police, are put\nunder his control. The recteur, who was a sort of local Minister of\nEducation in every department, is suppressed. His powers are transferred\nto the pr\u00e9fet. The pr\u00e9fet appoints, promotes, and dismisses all the\nmasters of the _\u00e9coles primaires._ He has the power to convert the\ncommune into a mere unorganised aggregation of individuals, by dismissing\nevery communal functionary, and placing its concerns in the hands of his\nown nominees. There are many hundreds of communes that have been thus\ntreated, and whose masters now are uneducated peasants. The pr\u00e9fet can\ndissolve the Conseil-g\u00e9n\u00e9ral of his department and, although he cannot\ndirectly name its successors, he does so virtually.\n\n'No candidate for an elective office can succeed unless he is supported\nby the Government. The pr\u00e9fet can destroy the prosperity of every commune\nthat displeases him. He can dismiss its functionaries, close its schools,\nobstruct its improvements, and withhold the assistance in money which the\nGovernment habitually gives to forward the public purposes of a commune.\n\n'The Courts of Law, both criminal and civil, are the tools of the\nExecutive. The Government appoints the judges, the pr\u00e9fet provides the\njury, and _la haute police_  acts without either.\n\n'All power of combination, even of mutual communication, except from\nmouth to mouth, is gone. The newspapers are suppressed or intimidated,\nthe printers are the slaves of the pr\u00e9fet, as they lose their privilege\nif they offend; the secrecy of the post is habitually and avowedly\nviolated; there are spies to watch and report conversation.\n\n'Every individual stands defenceless and insulated in the face of this\nunscrupulous Executive with its thousands of armed hands and its\nthousands of watching eyes. The only opposition that is ventured is the\nabstaining from voting. Whatever be the office, whatever be the man, the\ncandidate of the pr\u00e9fet comes in; but if he is a man who would have been\nuniversally rejected in a state of freedom, the bolder electors show\ntheir indignation by their absence. I do not believe that, even with\npeace, and with the prosperity which usually accompanies peace, such a\nGovernment could long keep down such a country as France. Whether its\nexistence would be prolonged by a successful war I will not decide.\nPerhaps it might be.\n\n'That it cannot carry on a war only moderately successful, or a war which\nfrom its difficulties and its distance may be generally believed to be\nill managed, still less a war stained by some real disaster, seems to me\ncertain--if anything in the future of France can be called certain.\n\n'The vast democratic sea on which the Empire floats is governed by\ncurrents and agitated by ground-swells, which the Government discovers\nonly by their effects. It knows nothing of the passions which influence\nthese great, apparently slumbering, masses; indeed it takes care, by\nstifling their expression, to prevent their being known. Universal\nsuffrage is a detestable element of government, but it is a powerful\nrevolutionary instrument'\n\n'But,' I said, 'the people will not have an opportunity of using that\ninstrument. All the great elective bodies have some years before them.'\n\n'That is true,' said Tocqueville, 'and therefore their rage will break\nout in a more direct, and perhaps more formidable, form. Depend on it,\nthis Government can exist, even for a time, only on the condition of\nbrilliant, successful war, or prosperous peace. It is bound to be rapidly\nand clearly victorious. If it fail in this, it will sink--or perhaps, in\nits terrors and its struggles, it will catch at the other alternative,\npeace.\n\n'The French public is too ignorant to care much about Russian\naggrandisement. So far as it fancies that the strength of Russia is the\nweakness of England, it is pleased with it. I am not sure that the most\ndishonourable peace with Nicholas would not give to Louis Napoleon an\nimmediate popularity. I am sure that it would, if it were accompanied by\nany baits to the national vanity and cupidity; by the offer of Savoy for\ninstance, or the Balearic Islands. And if you were to quarrel with us for\naccepting them, it would be easy to turn against you our old feelings of\njealousy and hatred.'\n\nWe saw vast columns of smoke on the other side of the river. Those whom\nwe questioned believed them to arise from an intentional fire. Such fires\nare symptoms of popular discontent. They preceded the revolution of 1830.\nThey have become frequent of late in this country.\n\n_Monday, April_ 10.--Tocqueville and I drove this morning to\nAzy-le-Rideau, another Francis I. ch\u00e2teau, on an island formed by the\nIndre. It is less beautifully situated than Chenonceaux; the river Indre\nis smaller and more sluggish than the Cher; the site of the castle is in\na hollow, and the trees round it approach too near, and are the tall and\nclosely planted poles which the French seem to admire. But the\narchitecture, both in its outlines and in its details, is charming.\nIt is of white stone, in this form, with two curtains and four\ntowers. The whole outside and the ceilings and cornices within are\ncovered with delicate arabesques.\n\n     O ______________ 0\n    | |______________| |\n     0            \\  | |\n                   \\ | |\n                    \\| |\n                     | |\n                      0\n\nLike Chenonceaux, it escaped the revolution, and is now, with its\nfurniture of the sixteenth century, the residence of the Marquis de\nBiancourt, descended from its ancient proprietors.\n\nAs we sauntered over the gardens, our conversation turned on the old\naristocracy of France.\n\n'The loss of our aristocracy,' said Tocqueville, 'is a misfortune from\nwhich we have not even begun to recover. The Legitimists are their\nterritorial successors; they are the successors in their manners, in\ntheir loyalty, and in their prejudices of _caste_; but they are not their\nsuccessors in cultivation, or intelligence, or energy, or, therefore, in\ninfluence. Between them and the _bourgeoisie_ is a chasm, which shows no\ntendency to close. Nothing but a common interest and a common pursuit\nwill bring them together.\n\n'If the murder of the Duc d'Enghien had not made them recoil in terror\nand disgust from Napoleon, they might have perhaps been welded into one\nmass with his new aristocracy of services, talents, and wealth. They were\nready to adhere to him during the Consulate. During the Restoration they\nwere always at war with the _bourgeoisie_, and therefore with the\nconstitution, on which the power of their enemies depended. When the\nresult of that war was the defeat and expulsion of their leader, Charles\nX., their hostility extended from the _bourgeoisie_ and the constitution\nup to the Crown. Louis Philippe tried to govern by means of the middle\nclasses alone. Perhaps it was inevitable that he should make the attempt.\nIt certainly was inevitable that he should fail. The higher classes, and\nthe lower classes, all equally offended, combined to overthrow him. Under\nthe Republic they again took, to a certain extent, their place in the\nState. They led the country people, who came to the assistance of the\nAssembly in June 1848. The Republic was wise enough to impose no oaths.\nIt did not require those who were willing to serve it to begin by openly\ndisavowing their traditionary opinions and principles. The Legitimists\ntook their places in the Conseils-g\u00e9n\u00e9raux. They joined with the\n_bourgeoisie_ in local administration, the only means by which men of\ndifferent classes can coalesce.\n\n'The socialist tendencies which are imputed to this Second Empire, the\noath which it most imprudently imposes, its pretensions to form a dynasty\nand its assertion of the principle most abhorrent to them, elective\nmonarchy, have thrown them back into disaffection. And I believe their\ndisaffection to be one of our great dangers--a danger certainly increased\nby the Fusion. The principal object of the Fusion is to influence the\narmy. The great terror of the army is division in itself. It will accept\nanything, give up anything, dare anything, to avoid civil war. Rather\nthan be divided between the two branches, it would have adhered to the\nEmpire. Now it can throw off the Bonapartes without occasioning a\ndisputed succession.'\n\n'When you say,' I asked, 'that the Legitimists are not the successors of\nthe old aristocracy in cultivation, intelligence, or energy, do you mean\nto ascribe to them positive or relative inferiority in these qualities?'\n\n'In energy,' answered Tocqueville, 'their deficiency is positive. They\nare ready to suffer for their cause, they are not ready to exert\nthemselves for it. In intelligence and cultivation they are superior to\nany other class in France; but they are inferior to the English\naristocracy, and they are inferior, as I said before, to their ancestors\nof the eighteenth century. There existed in the highest Parisian society\ntowards the end of that century a comprehensiveness of curiosity and\ninquiry, a freedom of opinion, an independence, and soundness of\njudgment, never seen before or since. Its pursuits, its pleasures, its\nadmirations, its vanities, were all intellectual. Look at the success of\nHume. His manners were awkward; he was a heavy, though an instructive,\nconverser; he spoke bad French; he would pass now for an intelligent\nbore. But such was the worship then paid to talents and\nknowledge--especially to knowledge, and talents employed on the\ndestruction of prejudices--that Hume was, for years, the lion of all the\nsalons of Paris. The fashionable beauties quarrelled for the fat\nphilosopher. Nor was their admiration or affection put on, or even\ntransitory. He retained some of them as intimate friends for life.\nIf the brilliant talkers and writers of that time were to return to life,\nI do not believe that gas, or steam, or chloroform, or the electric\ntelegraph, would so much astonish them as the dulness of modern society,\nand the mediocrity of modern books.'\n\nIn the evening we discussed the new scheme of throwing open the service\nof India and of the Government offices to public competition.\n\n'We have followed,' said Tocqueville, 'that system to a great extent for\nmany years. Our object was twofold. One was to depress the aristocracy of\nwealth, birth, and connexions. In this we have succeeded.\n\nThe \u00c9cole Polytechnique, and the other schools in which the vacancies are\ngiven to those who pass the best examinations, are filled by youths\nbelonging to the middle classes, who, undistracted by society, or\namusement, or by any literary or scientific pursuits, except those\nimmediately bearing on their examinations, beat their better-born\ncompetitors, who will not degrade themselves into the mere slaves of\nsuccess in the _concours_. Our other object was to obtain the best public\nservants. In that we have failed. We have brought knowledge and ability\nto an average; diminished the number of incompetent _employ\u00e9s_, and\nreduced, almost to nothing, the number of distinguished ones. Continued\napplication to a small number of subjects, and those always the same, not\nselected by the student, but imposed on him by the inflexible rule of the\nestablishment, without reference to his tastes or to his powers, is as\nbad for the mind as the constant exercise of one set of muscles would be\nfor the body.\n\n'We have a name for those who have been thus educated. They are called\n\"polytechnis\u00e9s.\" If you follow our example, you will increase your\nsecond-rates, and extinguish your first-rates; and what is perhaps a more\nimportant result, whether you consider it a good or an evil, you will\nmake a large stride in the direction in which you have lately made so\nmany--the removing the government and the administration of England from\nthe hands of the higher classes into those of the middle and lower ones.'\n\n\n\n\nCORRESPONDENCE.\n\n\nParis, Sunday, May 14, 1854.\n\nMy dear Tocqueville,--I write to you _in meditatione fug\u00e6_. We start for\nEngland in an hour's time. The last news that I heard of you was the day\nbefore yesterday from Cousin. He read me your letter, which sounded to me\nlike that of a man in not very bad health or hopes. I trust that the\nattack of which Madame de Tocqueville wrote to us has quite passed off.\n\nThiers, who asked very anxiously after you to-day, is earnest that you\nshould be present at the election on the 18th. The Academy, he said, is\nvery jealous. _Vous serez tr\u00e8s-mal vu_, if you do not come.\n\nYou are at last going seriously to work in the war. By the end of the\nyear you will have, military and naval, 700,000 men in arms.\n\nI wish that they were nearer to the enemy.\n\nPray remember us most kindly to Madame de Tocqueville, and let us know\nwhere you go as soon as you are decided.\n\nEver yours,\n\nN.W. Senior.\n\n\nSt. Cyr, May 21, 1854.\n\nI followed the advice which you were commissioned to give me, my dear\nSenior. I have just been to Paris, but as I stayed there only twenty-four\nhours I have not brought back any distinct impressions.\n\nI saw only Academicians who talked about the Academy, and--who knew\nnothing of politics. It is true that such is now the case with everyone.\nPolitics, which used to be transacted in open day, have now become a\nsecret process into which none can penetrate except the two or three\nalchemists who are engaged in its preparation.\n\nYou heard of course that after your little visit, which we enjoyed so\nmuch, I became very unwell, and my mind was only less affected than my\nbody. I spent a month very much out of spirits and very much tired of\nmyself. During the last eight or ten days I have felt much better. My\nvisit to our friends the Beaumonts did me a great deal of good, and I owe\na grudge to the Academy for forcing me to shorten it.\n\nI still intend to visit Germany, but the plan depends on the state of my\nhealth. When it is bad I am inclined to give up the journey, when I am\nbetter I take it up again and look forward to it with pleasure. On the\nwhole I think that I shall go. But it is impossible for me to settle my\nroute beforehand. Even if I were stronger it would be difficult, for such\nan expedition must always be uncertain.\n\nI am not going to Germany to see any place in particular, but intend to\ngo hither and thither wherever I can find certain documents and people.\n\nI received yesterday a letter from our friend Amp\u00e8re. He is still in\nRome, still more and more enchanted with the place, and using every\nargument to induce us to spend there with him the winter of 1856. His\ndescriptions are so attractive that we may very likely be persuaded,\nespecially if we had any chance of meeting you there, for you are one of\nthe people whose society always increases the happiness of life. However,\nwe have plenty of time for talking over this plan.\n\nAdieu, dear Senior.\n\nA. DE TOCQUEVILLE.\n\n\nWildbad, September 19, 1854.\n\nYou gave me great pleasure, my dear Senior, by making me acquainted with\nSir George and Lady Theresa Lewis.\n\nI must really thank you sincerely for it, for the time passed with them\nhas been the most agreeable part of our journey.\n\nYou have no doubt heard of the mischance which has put a stop to our\nperegrinations: my wife was seized two months ago at Bonn by a violent\nattack of rheumatism. The waters of Wildbad were recommended to her, and\nshe has been taking them for more than twenty-five days without\nexperiencing any relief. We are promised that the effects will be felt\nafterwards; but these fine promises only half reassure us, and we shall\nset out again on our travels in very bad spirits.\n\nOur original intention was to spend the autumn in the North of Germany,\nbut in Madame de Tocqueville's condition it is evident that there is\nnothing else to be done but to return home as fast as we can.\n\nWe are somewhat consoled by the arrival of our common friend Amp\u00e8re. He\nwas returning from Italy, through Germany, and, hearing of our\nmisfortune, he has come to look after us in these wild mountains of the\nBlack Forest amidst which Wildbad is situated. He has been with us a\nweek, and I hope that he will accompany us home.\n\nOur intention is to spend a month or six weeks with my father near\nCompi\u00e8gne. Towards the first week in November we shall establish\nourselves in Paris for the winter. We hope to see you there at the end of\nthis year or the beginning of next.\n\nAmp\u00e8re, my wife, and I constantly talk of you. If you could overhear us I\nthink you would not be very much dissatisfied. They insist upon being\nvery particularly remembered to you, and as for me I beg you to believe\nin my most sincere attachment.\n\nA. DE TOCQUEVILLE.\n\n\nCompi\u00e8gne, January 22, 1855.\n\nIt was a long time since I had seen your handwriting, my dear Senior, and\nI was beginning to complain of you; your letter therefore was a double\npleasure.\n\nI see that you have resumed your intention of visiting Algiers, and I am\nanxious that you should carry it into effect.\n\nI hope that we shall be in Paris when you pass through. We put off our\ndeparture from day to day; not that we are kept by the charms of our\npresent abode; the house is too small for us and scantily furnished, but\nI find it such a favourable retreat for study, that I have great\ndifficulty in tearing myself away from it.\n\nI hear, as you do, with great satisfaction of the mutual good feeling of\nour armies in the Crimea. It far exceeds my expectations.\n\nBut I am not equally pleased with your management of the war. The English\nought to know that what has passed and is passing there has sensibly\ndiminished their moral force in Europe. It is an unpleasant truth, but I\nought not to conceal it from you. I see proofs of it every day, and I\nhave been struck by it peculiarly in a late visit to Paris, where I saw\npersons of every rank and of every shade of political opinion. The heroic\ncourage of your soldiers was everywhere and unreservedly praised, but I\nfound also a general belief that the importance of England as a military\nPower had been greatly exaggerated; that she is utterly devoid of\nmilitary talent, which is shown as much in administration as in fighting;\nand that even in the most pressing circumstances she cannot raise a large\narmy.\n\nSince I was a child I never heard such language. You are believed to be\nabsolutely dependent on us; and in the midst of our intimacy I see rising\na friendly contempt for you, which if our Governments quarrel, will make\na war with you much easier than it has been since the fall of Napoleon.\n\nI grieve at all this, not only as endangering the English alliance,\nwhich, as you well know, I cherish, but as injuring the cause of liberty.\n\nI can pardon you for discrediting it by your adulation of our despotism,\nbut I wish that you would not serve despotism more efficaciously by your\nown faults, and by the comparisons which they suggest.\n\nIt seems also difficult to say what may not be the results of your long\nintimacy with such a Government as ours, and of the contact of the two\narmies. I doubt whether they will be useful to your aristocracy.\n\nRemember me to Lord Lansdowne and to the Lewises, who added such pleasure\nto our German tour.\n\n\n\nCompi\u00e8gne, February 15, 1855.\n\nI conclude that this frightful weather is still keeping you in London, my\ndear Senior. I am comforted by the fact that I myself shall not reach\nParis before the 28th.\n\nI do not wish to act the part of the pedagogue in the fable who preaches\nto people when his sermon can no longer be of any possible use, but I\ncannot help telling you that it is a great imprudence on your part to\nallow yourself to be caught in this way by the winter in England. What\nyou now suffer from is only a trifling malady, but it may become a real\nillness if you persist in preferring pleasure to health. Pray think of\nthis in the future and do not tempt the devil.\n\nI have not read the article to which you refer.[1]\n\nI can perfectly understand the reserve which was imposed upon you, and\nwhich you were forced to impose on yourself.\n\nI confess that I saw with great grief the sudden change in the\nexpressions of the majority of the English, a year ago, respecting our\nGovernment. It was then ill consolidated, and in want of the splendid\nalliance which you offered to it. It was unnecessary that you should\npraise it, in order to keep it your friend. By doing so you sacrificed\nhonourable opinions and tastes without a motive.\n\nNow things are changed. After you have lost your only army, and our\nmaster has made an alliance with Austria, which suits his feelings much\nbetter than yours did, he does not depend on you; you, to a certain\nextent, depend on him. Such being now the case, I can understand the\nEnglish thinking it their duty to their country to say nothing that can\noffend the master of France. I can understand even their praising him; I\nreproach them only for having done so too soon, before it was necessary.\n\nI agree with you that England ought to be satisfied with being the\ngreatest maritime Power, and ought not to aim at being also one of the\ngreatest military Powers.\n\nBut the feelings which I described to you as prevalent in France and in\nGermany, arose not from your want of an army of 500,000 men. They were\nexcited by these two facts.\n\nFirst, by what was supposed (perhaps falsely) to be the bad military\nadministration of your only army. Secondly, and much more, by your\napparent inability to raise another army.\n\nAccording to continental notions, a nation which cannot raise as many\ntroops as its wants require, loses our respect. It ceases, according to\nour notions, to be great or even to be patriotic. And I must confess\nthat, considering how difficult it is to procure soldiers by voluntary\nenlistment, and how easily every nation can obtain them by other means, I\ndo not see how you will be able to hold your high rank, unless your\npeople will consent to something resembling a conscription.\n\nDangerous as it is to speak of a foreign country, I venture to say that\nEngland is mistaken if she thinks that she can continue separated from\nthe rest of the world, and preserve all her peculiar institutions\nuninfluenced by those which prevail over the whole of the Continent.\n\nIn the period in which we live, and, still more, in the period which is\napproaching, no European nation can long remain absolutely dissimilar to\nall the others. I believe that a law existing over the whole Continent\nmust in time influence the laws of Great Britain, notwithstanding the\nsea, and notwithstanding the habits and institutions, which, still more\nthan the sea, have separated you from us, up to the present time.\n\nMy prophecies may not be accomplished in our time; but I should not be\nsorry to deposit this letter with a notary, to be opened, and their truth\nor falsehood proved, fifty years hence.\n\n\n\nCompi\u00e8gne, February 23, 1855.\n\n ... My object in my last letter was not by any means, as you seem to\nthink, to accuse _your aristocracy_ of having mismanaged the Crimean war.\nIt has certainly been mismanaged, but who has been in fault?\n\nIndeed I know not, and if I did I should think at the same time that it\nwould not be becoming in a foreigner to set himself up as a judge of the\nblunders of any other Government than his own.\n\nI thought that I had expressed myself clearly. At any rate what I wanted\nto say, if I did not say it, is, that the present events created in my\nopinion a new and great danger for your aristocracy, and that it will\nsuffer severely from the rebound, if it does not make enormous efforts to\nshow itself capable of repairing the past; and that it would be wrong to\nsuppose that by fighting bravely on the field of battle it could retain\nthe direction of the Government.\n\nI did not intend to say more than this.\n\nI will now add that if it persuades itself that it will easily get out of\nthe difficulty by making peace, I think that it will find itself\nmistaken.\n\nPeace, after what has happened, may be a good thing for England in\ngeneral, and useful to us, but I doubt whether it will be a gain for your\naristocracy. I think that if Chatham could return to life he would agree\nwith me, and would say that under the circumstances the remedy would not\nbe peace but a more successful war.\n\nKind regards, &c.\n\nA. DE TOCQUEVILLE.\n\n\n[Footnote 1: An article in the _North British Review_, see p. 107.--ED.]\n\n\n\nCONVERSATIONS.\n\n_Paris, H\u00f4tel Bedford.--Friday, March_ 2, 1855.--We slept on the 27th at\nCalais, on the 28th at Amiens, and reached this place last night.\n\nTocqueville called on us this morning. We talked of the probability of\nLouis Napoleon's going to the Crimea.\n\nI said, 'that the report made by Lord John Russell, who talked the matter\nover with him, was, that he certainly had once intended to go, and had\nnot given it up.'\n\n'I do not value,' said Tocqueville, 'Lord John's inferences from anything\nthat he heard or saw in his audiences. All Louis Napoleon's words and\nlooks, are, whether intentionally or not, misleading. Now that his having\ndirect issue seems out of the question, and that the deeper and deeper\ndiscredit into which the heir presumptive is falling, seems to put _him_\nout of the question too, we are looking to this journey with great alarm.\nWe feel that, for the present, his life is necessary to us, and we feel\nthat it would be exposed to many hazards. He ought to incur some military\nrisks, if he is present at a battle or an assault, and his courage and\nhis fatalism, will lead him to many which he ought to avoid. But it is\ndisease rather than bullets that we fear. He will have to travel hard,\nand to be exposed, under exciting circumstances, to a climate which is\nnot a safe one even to the strong.'\n\n'But,' I said, 'he will not be exposed to it long. I have heard thirty,\nor at most forty, days proposed as the length of his absence.'\n\n'Who can say that?' answered Tocqueville. 'If he goes there, he must stay\nthere until Sebastopol falls. It will not do for him to leave Paris in\norder merely to look at the works, pat the generals on the back,\ncompliment the army, and leave it in the trenches. Unless his journey\nproduces some great success--in short, unless it gives us Sebastopol--it\nwill be considered a failure; and a failure he cannot afford. I repeat\nthat he must stay there till Sebastopol falls. But that may be months.\nAnd what may months bring forth in such a country as France? In such a\ncity as Paris? In such times as these? Then he cannot safely leave his\ncousin--J\u00e9r\u00f4me Plon swears that he will not go, and I do not see how he\ncan be taken by force.'\n\n'I do not understand,' I said, 'Jer\u00f4me's conduct. It seemed as if he had\nthe ball at his feet. The _r\u00f4le_ of an heir is the easiest in the world.\nHe has only to behave decently in order to be popular.'\n\n'J\u00e9r\u00f4me's chances,' answered Tocqueville, 'of the popularity which is to\nbe obtained by decent behaviour were over long before he became an heir.\nHis talents are considerable, but he has no principles, and no good\nsense. He is Corsican to the bone. I watched him among his Montagnards in\nthe Constituent.\n\n'Nothing could be more perverse than his votes, nor more offensive than\nhis speeches. He is unfit to conciliate the sensible portion of society,\nand naturally throws himself into the arms of those who are waiting to\nreceive him--the violent, the rapacious, and the anarchical: this gives\nhim at least some adherents.'\n\n'What do you hear,' I asked, 'of his conduct in the East?'\n\n'I hear,' said Tocqueville, 'that he showed want, not so much of courage,\nas of temper and of subordination. He would not obey orders; he would not\neven transmit them, so that Canrobert was forced to communicate directly\nwith the officers of Napoleon's division, and at last required him to\ntake sick leave, or to submit to a court-martial.'\n\n'I thought,' I said, 'that he was really ill.'\n\n'That is not the general opinion,' said Tocqueville. 'He showed himself\nat a ball directly after his return, with no outward symptoms of ill\nhealth.'\n\nThe conversation turned on English politics.\n\n'So many of my friendships,' said Tocqueville, 'and so many of my\nsympathies, are English, that what is passing _in_ your country, and\n_respecting_ your country, gives me great pain, and greater anxiety. To\nus, whom unhappily experience has rendered sensitive of approaching\nstorms, your last six months have a frightfully revolutionary appearance.\n\n'There is with you, as there was with us in 1847, a general _malaise_ in\nthe midst of general prosperity. Your people seem, as was the case with\nours, to have become tired of their public men, and to be losing faith in\ntheir institutions. What else do these complaints of what is called \"the\nsystem\" mean? When you complain that the Government patronage is bartered\nfor political support, that the dunces of a family are selected for the\npublic service, and selected expressly because they could not get on in\nan open profession; that as their places are a sort of property, they are\npromoted only by seniority, and never dismissed for any, except for some\nmoral, delinquency; that therefore the seniors in all your departments\nare old men, whose original dulness has been cherished by a life without\nthe stimulus of hope or fear, you describe a vessel which seems to have\nbecome too crazy to endure anything but the calmest sea and the most\nfavourable winds. You have tried its sea-worthiness in one department,\nyour military organisation, and you find that it literally falls to\npieces. You are incapable of managing a line of operations extending only\nseven miles from its base. The next storm may attack your Colonial\nAdministration. Will that stand any better? Altogether your machinery\nseems throughout out of gear. If you set to work actively and fearlessly,\nwithout reference to private interests, or to private expectations, or to\nprivate feelings, to repair, remove and replace, you may escape our\nmisfortunes; but I see no proofs that you are sufficiently bold, or\nindeed that you are sufficiently alarmed. Then as to what is passing\nhere. A year ago we probably overrated your military power. I believe\nthat now we most mischievously underrate it. A year ago nothing alarmed\nus more than a whisper of the chance of a war with England. We talk of\none now with great composure. We believe that it would not be difficult\nto throw 100,000 men upon your shores, and we believe that half that\nnumber would walk over England or Ireland. You are mistaken if you think\nthat these opinions will die away of themselves, or will be eradicated by\nanything but some decisive military success. I do not agree with those\nwho think that it is your interest that Russia should submit while\nSebastopol stands. You might save money and men by a speedy peace, but\nyou would not regain your reputation. If you are caught by a peace before\nyou have an opportunity of doing so, I advise you to let it be on your\npart an armed peace. Prepare yourselves for a new struggle with a new\nenemy, and let your preparations be, not only as effective as you can\nmake them, but also as notorious.'[1]\n\n[Footnote 1: Note inserted by M de Tocqueville in my Journal, after\nreading the preceding conversation.\n\n'J'ai entendu universellement louer sans restriction le courage h\u00e9ro\u00efque\nde vos soldats, mais en m\u00eame temps j'ai trouv\u00e9 r\u00e9pandu cette croyance,\nqu'on s'\u00e9tait tromp\u00e9 de l'importance de l'Angleterre dans le monde, comme\npuissance militaire proprement dite, qui consiste autant \u00e0 _administrer_\nla guerre qu'\u00e0 combattre, et surtout qu'il lui \u00e9tait impossible, ce qu'on\nne croyait pas jusque l\u00e0, d'\u00e9lever de grandes arm\u00e9es, m\u00eame dans les cas\nles plus pressants. Je n'avais rien entendu de pareil depuis mon enfance.\nOn vous croit absolument dans notre d\u00e9pendance, et du sein de la grande\ninimit\u00e9 qui r\u00e8gne entre les deux peuples, je vois na\u00eetre des id\u00e9es qui,\nle jour o\u00f9 nos deux gouvernements cesseront d'\u00eatre d'accord, nous\npr\u00e9cipiteront dans la guerre contre vous, beaucoup plus facilement que\ncela n'eut pu avoir lieu depuis la chute du premier Empire. Cela\nm'afflige, et pour l'avenir de Alliance anglaise (dont vous savez que j'ai\ntoujours \u00e9t\u00e9 un grand partisan), et non moins aussi, je l'avoue, pour la\ncause de vos institutions libres. Ce qui se passe n'est pas de nature \u00e0\nla relever dans notre esprit. Je vous pardonnerais de d\u00e9consid\u00e9rer vos\nprincipes par les louanges dont vous accablez le gouvernement absolu qui\nr\u00e8gne en France, mais je voudrais du moins que vous ne le fissiez pas\nd'une mani\u00e8re encore plus efficace par vos propres fautes, et par la\ncomparaison qu'elles sugg\u00e8rent. Il me semble, du reste, bien difficile\nde dire ce qui r\u00e9sultera pour vous m\u00eame du contact intime et prolong\u00e9\navec notre gouvernement, et surtout de l'action commune et du m\u00e9lange\ndes deux arm\u00e9es. J'en doute, je vous l'avouerai, que l'aristocratie\nanglaise s'en trouve bien, et quoique A B ait entonn\u00e9 l'autre jour une\nv\u00e9ritable hymne en l'honneur de celle ci, je ne crois pas que ce qui\npasse soit de nature \u00e0 rendre ces chances plus grandes dans l'avenir'--_A\nde Tocqueville_.\n\n'I heard universal and unqualified praise of the heroic courage of your\nsoldiers, but at the same time I found spread abroad the persuasion that\nthe importance of England had been overrated as a military Power properly\nso called--a Power which consists in administering as much as in\nfighting; and above all, that it was impossible (and this had never\nbefore been believed), for her to raise large armies, even under the most\npressing circumstances. I never heard anything like it since my\nchildhood. You are supposed to be entirely dependent upon us, and from\nthe midst of the great intimacy which subsists between the two countries,\nI see springing up ideas which, on the day when our two Governments cease\nto be of one mind, will precipitate our country into a war against you,\nmuch more easily than has been possible since the fall of the first\nEmpire. This grieves me, both on account of the duration of the English\nAlliance (of which you know that I have always been a great partisan),\nand no less, I own, for the sake of your free institutions. Passing\nevents are not calculated to raise them in our estimation. I forgive you\nfor discrediting your principles by the praise which you lavish on the\nabsolute government which reigns in France, but I would have you at least\nnot to do so in a still more efficacious manner by your own blunders and\nby the comparisons which they suggest. It seems to me, however, very\ndifficult to predict the result to yourselves of the long and intimate\ncontact with, our Government, and, above all, of the united action and\namalgamation of the two armies. I own that I doubt its having a good\neffect on the future of the English aristocracy, and although A.B. struck\nup the other day a real hymn in its praise, I do not think that present\nevents are of a nature to increase its chance in the future.']\n\n\n\n_Paris, Saturday, March_ 3.--Tocqueville called on us soon after\nbreakfast.\n\nWe talked of the loss and gain of Europe by the war. We agreed that\nRussia and England have both lost by it. Russia probably the most in\npower, England in reputation. That Prussia, though commercially a gainer,\nis humiliated and irritated by the superiority claimed by Austria and\nconceded to her.\n\n'You cannot,' said Tocqueville, 'estimate the opinions of Germany without\ngoing there. There is a general feeling among the smaller Powers of\ninternal insecurity and external weakness, and Austria is looked up to as\nthe supporter of order against the revolutionists, and of Germany against\nRussia. Austria alone has profited by the general calamities. Without\nactually drawing the sword she has possession of the Principalities, she\nhas thrust down Prussia into the second rank, she has emancipated herself\nfrom Russia, she has become the ally of France and of England, and even\nof her old enemy Piedmont, she is safe in Italy. Poland and Hungary are\nstill her difficulties, and very great ones, but as her general strength\nincreases, she can better deal with them.'\n\n'Has not France, I said, 'been also a gainer, by becoming head of the\ncoalition against Russia?'\n\n'Whatever we have gained,' answered Tocqueville, 'has been dearly\npurchased, so far as it has consolidated this despotism. For a whole year\nwe have felt that the life, and even the reign, of Louis Napoleon was\nnecessary to us. They will continue necessary to us during the remainder\nof the war. We are acquiring habits of obedience, almost of resignation.\nHis popularity has not increased. He and his court are as much shunned by\nthe educated classes as they were three years ago; we still repeat \"que\n\u00e7a ne peut pas durer,\" but we repeat it with less conviction.'\n\nWe passed the spring in Algeria, and returned to Paris the latter part of\nMay.\n\n_Paris, May 26,_1855.--After breakfast I went to the Institut.\n\nM. Passy read to us a long paper on the Art of Government. He spoke so\nlow and so monotonously that no one attended. I sat next to Tocqueville,\nand, as it was not decent to talk, we conversed a little in writing. He\nhad been reading my Algiers Journal, and thus commented upon it:--\n\n'Il y a tout un c\u00f4t\u00e9, particuli\u00e8rement curieux, de l'Alg\u00e9rie, qui vous a\n\u00e9chapp\u00e9 parce que vous n'avez pu ou voulu vous imposer l'ennui de causer\nsouvent avec les colons, et que ce c\u00f4t\u00e9-l\u00e0 ne se voit pas en parlant\navec les gouvernants; c'est l'abus de la centralisation. L'Afrique peut\n\u00eatre consid\u00e9r\u00e9e comme le tableau le plus complet et le plus\nextraordinaire des vices de ce syst\u00e8me.\n\n'Je suis convaincu que seul, sans les Arabes, le soleil, le d\u00e9sert, et la\nfi\u00e8vre, il suffirait pour nous emp\u00eacher de coloniser. Tout ce que la\ncentralisation laisse entrevoir de d\u00e9fauts, de ridicules et absurdit\u00e9s,\nd'oppression, de paperasseries en France, est grossi en Afrique au\ncentuple. C'est comme un pou vu dans un microscope.'\n\n'J'ai caus\u00e9,' I answered, 'avec Vialar et avec mon h\u00f4te aux eaux\nferrugineuses. Mais ils ne se sont pas plaints de la centralisation.'\n\n'Ils ne se sont pas plaints,' he answered, 'du mot que, peut-\u00eatre, ils ne\nconnaissaient pas. Mais si vous les aviez fait entrer dans les d\u00e9tails de\nl'administration publique, ou m\u00eame de leurs affaires priv\u00e9es, vous auriez\nvu que le colon est plus g\u00ean\u00e9 dans tous ses mouvements, et plus _gouvern\u00e9\npour son plus grand bien_ que vous ne l'avez \u00e9t\u00e9 quand il s'est agi de\nvotre passeport.\n\n'Violar faisait allusion \u00e0 cela quand il vous a dit que les chemins\nmanquaient parce que le Gouvernement ne voulait pas laisser les gouvern\u00e9s\ns'en m\u00ealer.'[1]\n\n[Footnote 1: 'One whole side, and that a very curious one, of Algeria,\nhas escaped you, because you could not, or would not, inflict on yourself\nthe bore of talking frequently with the colonists, and this side cannot\nbe seen in conversing with officials--it is the abuse of centralisation.\nAfrica may be considered as the most complete and most extraordinary\npicture of the vices of this system. I am convinced that it alone,\nwithout the Arabs, the sun, the desert and the fever, would be enough to\nprevent us from colonising. All the defects of centralisation, its\noppressions, its faults, its absurdities, its endless documents, which\nare dimly perceived in France, become one hundred times bigger in Africa.\nIt is like a louse in a microscope.'\n\n'I conversed,' I answered, 'with Violar and with my landlord at the\nmineral waters, and they did not complain of centralisation.' 'They did\nnot complain,' he answered, 'of the word, which perhaps is unknown to\nthem. But if you had made them enter into the details of the public\nadministration, or even of their own private affairs, you would have seen\nthat the colonist is more confined in all his movements, and more\n_governed, for his good_, than you were with regard to your passport.\n\n'This is what Violar meant when he told you that roads were wanting,\nbecause the Government would not permit its subjects to interfere in\nmaking them.']\n\n\n\n_Monday, May_ 28.--Tocqueville called on me.\n\nI asked him for criticisms on my article on the State of the Continent in\nthe 'North British Review' of February 1855.[1]\n\n[Footnote 1: See p. 107.]\n\n'Of course,' I said, 'it must be full of blunders. No one who writes on\nthe politics of a foreign country can avoid them. I want your help to\ncorrect a few of them.'\n\n'Since you ask me,' he answered, 'for a candid criticism, I will give you\none. I accuse you rather of misappreciation than of misstatement. First\nwith respect to Louis Napoleon. After having described accurately, in the\nbeginning of your paper, his unscrupulous, systematic oppression, you end\nby saying that, after all, you place him high among our sovereigns.'\n\n'You must recollect,' I answered, 'that the article was written for the\n\"Edinburgh Review,\" the organ of our Government, edited by Lord\nClarendon's brother-in-law--and that the editor thought its criticisms of\nLouis Napoleon so severe, that after having printed it, he was afraid to\npublish it. I went quite as far as I prudently could. I accused him, as\nyou admit, of unscrupulous oppression, of ignorance of the feelings of\nthe people, of being an idle administrator, of being unacquainted with\nbusiness himself, and not employing those who understand it, of being\nimpatient of contradiction, of refusing advice and punishing censure--in\nshort, I have praised nothing but his foreign policy--and I have\nmentioned two errors in that.'\n\n'But I have a graver accusation to bring against you,' replied\nTocqueville. 'You couple as events mutually dependent the continuance of\nthe Imperial Government and the continuance of the Anglo-Gallic Alliance.\nI believe this opinion not only to be untrue, but to be the reverse of\nthe truth. I believe the Empire and the Alliance to be not merely, not\nmutually dependent, but to be incompatible, except upon terms which you\nare resolved never to grant The Empire is essentially warlike--and war in\nthe mind of a Bonaparte, and of the friends of a Bonaparte, means the\nRhine. This war is merely a stepping stone. It is carried on for purposes\nin which the mass of the people of France take no interest. Up to the\npresent time its burthens have been little felt, as it has been supported\nby loans, and the limits of the legal conscription have not been\nexceeded. But when the necessity comes for increased taxation and\nanticipated conscriptions, Louis Napoleon must have recourse to the real\npassions of the French _bourgeoisie_ and peasantry--the love of conquest,\n_et la haine de l'Anglais_. Don't fancy that such feelings are dead, they\nare scarcely asleep. They might be roused in a week, in a day, and they\n_will_ be roused as soon as he thinks that they are wanted.\n\n'What do you suppose was the effect in France of Louis Napoleon's triumph\nin England?\n\n'Those who know England attributed it to the ignorance and childishness\nof the multitude. Those who thought that the shouts of the mob had any\nreal meaning either hung down their heads in shame at the\nself-degradation of a great nation, or attributed them to fear. The\nlatter was the general feeling. \"Il faut,\" said all our lower classes,\n\"que ces gens-l\u00e0 aient grande peur de nous.\"\n\n'You accuse, in the second place, all the Royalist parties of dislike of\nEngland.\n\n'Do you suppose that you are more popular with the others? That the\nRepublicans love your aristocracy, or the Imperialists your freedom? The\nreal friends of England are the friends of her institutions. They are\nthe body, small perhaps numerically, and now beaten down, of those who\nadore Constitutional Liberty. They have maintained the mutual good\nfeeling between France and England against the passions of the\nRepublicans and the prejudices of the Legitimists. I trust, as you trust,\nthat this good feeling is to continue, but it is on precisely opposite\ngrounds. My hopes are founded, not on the permanence, but on the want of\npermanence, of the Empire. I do not believe that a great nation will be\nlong led by its tail instead of by its head. My only fear is, that the\noverthrow of this tyranny may not take place early enough to save us from\nwar with England, which I believe to be the inevitable consequence of its\nduration.'\n\nWe left Paris soon after this conversation.\n\n[The following are a few extracts from the article in the 'North British\nReview.'--ED.]\n\n'The principal parties into which the educated society of Paris is\ndivided, are the Imperialists, Royalists, Republicans, and\nParliamentarians.\n\n'The Royalists maybe again subdivided into Orleanists, Legitimists, and\nFusionists; and the Fusionists into Orleanist-Fusionists, and\nLegitimist-Fusionists.\n\n'The Imperialists do not require to be described. They form a small party\nin the salons of Paris, and much the largest party in the provinces.\n\n'Those who are Royalists without being Fusionists are also comparatively\ninsignificant in numbers. There are a very few Legitimists who pay to the\nelder branch the unreasoning worship of superstition; who adore Henri\nV. not as a means but as an end; who pray for his reign, not for their\nown interests, not for the interests of France, but for his own sake; who\nbelieve that he derives his title from God, and that when the proper time\ncomes God will restore him; and that to subject his claims to the\nsmallest compromise--to admit, for instance, as the Fusionists do, that\nLouis Philippe was really a king, and that the reign of Henri V. did not\nbegin the instant that Charles X. expired--would be a sinful contempt\nof Divine right, which might deprive his cause of Divine assistance.\n\n'There are also a very few Orleanists who, with a strange confusion of\nideas, do not perceive that a title founded solely on a revolution was\ndestroyed by a revolution; that if the will of the people was sufficient\nto exclude the descendants of Charles X., it also could exclude the\ndescendants of Louis Philippe; and that the hereditary claims of the\nComte de Paris cannot be urged except on the condition of admitting the\npreferable claims of the Comte de Chambord.\n\n'The bulk, then, of the Royalists are Fusionists; but though all the\nFusionists agree in believing that the only government that can be\npermanent in France is a monarchy, and that the only monarchy that can be\npermanent is one depending on hereditary succession; though they agree in\nbelieving that neither of the Bourbon branches is strong enough to seize\nthe throne, and that each of them is strong enough to exclude the other,\nyet between the Orleanist-Fusionists and the Legitimist-Fusionists the\nseparation is as marked and the mutual hatred as bitter, as those which\ndivide the most hostile parties in England.\n\n'The Orleanist-Fusionists are generally _roturiers_. They feel towards\nthe _noblesse_ the hatred which has accumulated during twelve centuries\nof past oppression and the resentment excited by present insolence. Of\nall the noble families of France the most noble is that of Bourbon. The\nhead of that house has always called himself _le premier gentilhomme de\nFrance_. The Bourbons therefore suffer, and in an exaggerated degree,\nthe odium which weighs down the caste to which they belong. It was this\nodium, this detestation of privilege and precedence and exclusiveness,\nor, as it is sometimes called, this love of equality, which raised the\nbarricades of 1830. It was to flatter these feelings that Louis Philippe\nsent his sons to the public schools and to the National Guard, and tried\nto establish his Government on the narrow foundation of the\n_bourgeoisie_. Louis Philippe and one or two of the members of his\nfamily, succeeded in obtaining some personal popularity, but it was only\nin the comparatively small class, the _pays l\u00e9gal_, with which they\nshared the emoluments of Government, and it was not sufficient to raise a\nsingle hand in their defence when the masses, whom the Court could not\nbribe or caress, rose against it. The Orleanist-Fusionists are\nBourbonists only from calculation. They wish for the Comte de Paris for\ntheir king, not from any affection for him or for his family, but because\nthey think that such an arrangement offers to France the best chance of\na stable Government in some degree under popular control: and they are\nready to tolerate the intermediate reign of Henri V. as an evil, but one\nwhich must be endured as a means of obtaining something else, not very\ngood in itself but less objectionable to them than a Bonapartist dynasty\nor a Republic.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n'The Legitimists have been so injured in fortune and in influence, they\nhave been so long an oppressed caste, excluded from power, and even from\nsympathy, that they have acquired the faults of slaves, have become\ntimid, or frivolous, or bitter. Their long retirement from public life\nhas made them unfit for it. The older members of the party have forgotten\nits habits and its duties, the younger ones have never learnt them. Their\nlong absence from the Chambers and from the departmental and municipal\ncouncils, from the central and from the local government of France, has\ndeprived them of all aptitude for business. The bulk of them are\nworshippers of wealth, or ease, or pleasure, or safety. The only\nunselfish feeling which they cherish is attachment to their hereditary\nsovereign. They revere Henri V. as the ruler pointed out to them by\nProvidence: they love him as the representative of Charles X. the\nchampion of their order, who died in exile for having attempted to\nrestore to them the Government of France. They hope that on his\nrestoration the _canaille_ of lawyers, and _litt\u00e9rateurs_, and\nadventurers, who have trampled on the _gentilshommes_ ever since 1830,\nwill be turned down to their proper places, and that ancient descent will\nagain be the passport to the high offices of the State and to the society\nof the Sovereign. The advent of Henri V., which to the Orleanist branch\nof the Fusionists is a painful means, is to the Legitimist branch a\ndesirable end. The succession of the Comte de Paris, to which the\nOrleanists look with hope, is foreseen by the Legitimists with\nmisgivings. The Fusionist party is in fact kept together not by common\nsympathies but by common antipathies; each branch of it hates or\ndistrusts the idol of the other, but they co-operate because each\nbranch hates still more bitterly, and distrusts still more deeply, the\nImperialists and the Republicans.\n\n'Among the educated classes there are few Republicans, using that word to\ndesignate those who actually wish to see France a republic. There are\nindeed, many who regret the social equality of the republic, the times\nwhen plebeian birth was an aid in the struggle for power, and a\njourneyman mason could be a serious candidate for the Presidentship, but\nthey are alarmed at its instability. They have never known a republic\nlive for more than a few years, or die except in convulsions. The\nRepublican party, however, though small, is not to be despised. It is\nskilful, determined, and united. And the Socialists and the Communists,\nwhom we have omitted in our enumeration as not belonging to the educated\nclasses, would supply the Republican leaders with an army which has more\nthan once become master of Paris.\n\n'The only party that remains to be described is that to which we have\ngiven the name of Parliamentarians. Under this designation--a designation\nthat we must admit that we have invented ourselves--we include those who\nare distinguished from the Imperialists by their desire for a\nparliamentary form of government; and from the Republicans, by their\nwillingness that that government should be regal; and from the Royalists,\nby their willingness that it should be republican. In this class are\nincluded many of the wisest and of the honestest men in France. The only\nspecies of rule to which they are irreconcilably opposed is despotism. No\nconduct on the part of Louis Napoleon would conciliate a sincere\nOrleanist, or Legitimist, or Fusionist, or Republican. The anti-regal\nprejudices of the last, and the loyalty of the other three, must force\nthem to oppose a Bonapartist dynasty, whatever might be the conduct of\nthe reigning emperor. But if Louis Napoleon should ever think the time,\nto which he professes to look forward, arrived--if he should ever grant\nto France, or accept from her, institutions really constitutional;\ninstitutions, under which the will of the nation, freely expressed by a\nfree press and by freely chosen representatives, should control and\ndirect the conduct of her governor--the Parliamentarians would eagerly\nrally round him. On the same conditions they would support with equal\nreadiness Henri V. or the Comte de Paris, a president elected by the\npeople, or a president nominated by an Assembly. They are the friends of\nliberty, whatever be the form in which she may present herself.'\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n'Although our author visits the Provinces, his work contains no report of\ntheir political feelings. The explanation probably is, that he found no\nexpression of it The despotism under which France is now suffering is\nlittle felt in the capital. It shows itself principally in the subdued\ntone of the debates, if debates they can be called, of the Corps\nL\u00e9gislatif, and the inanity of the newspapers. Conversation is as free in\nParis as it was under the Republic. Public opinion would not support the\nGovernment in an attempt to silence the salons of Paris. But Paris\npossesses a public opinion, because it possesses one or two thousand\nhighly educated men whose great amusement, we might say whose great\nbusiness, is to converse, to criticise the acts of their rulers, and to\npronounce decisions which float from circle to circle, till they reach\nthe workshop, and even the barrack. In the provinces there are no such\ncentres of intelligence and discussion, and, therefore, on political\nsubjects, there is no public opinion. The consequence is, that the action\nof the Government is there really despotic; and it employs its\nirresistible power in tearing from the departmental and communal\nauthorities all the local franchises and local self-government which they\nhad extorted from the central power in a struggle of forty years.\n\n'Centralisation, though it is generally disclaimed by every party that is\nin opposition, is so powerful an instrument that every Monarchical\nGovernment which has ruled France since 1789 has maintained, and even\ntried to extend it.\n\n'The Restoration, and the Government of July, were as absolute\ncentralisers as Napoleon himself. The local power which they were forced\nto surrender they made over to the narrow _pays l\u00e9gal_, the privileged\nten-pounders, who were then attempting to govern France. The Republic\ngave the election of the _Conseils g\u00e9n\u00e9raux_ to the people, and thus\ndethroned the notaries who governed those assemblies when they\nrepresented only the _bourgeoisie_. The Republic made the Maires\nelective; the Republic placed education in the hands of the local\nauthorities. Under its influence the communes, the cantons, and the\ndepartments were becoming real administrative bodies. They are now\ngeographical divisions. The Pr\u00e9fet appoints the Maires; the Pr\u00e9fet\nappoints in every canton a Commissaire de Police, seldom a respectable\nman, as the office is not honourable; the Gardes champ\u00eatres, who are the\nlocal police, are put under his control; the Recteur, who was a sort of\nlocal Minister of Education in every department, is suppressed; his\npowers are transferred to the Pr\u00e9fet; the Pr\u00e9fet appoints, promotes, and\ndismisses all the masters of the _\u00e9coles primaires_. The Pr\u00e9fet can\ndestroy the prosperity of every commune that displeases him. He can\ndisplace the functionaries, close its schools, obstruct its public works,\nand withhold the money which the Government habitually gives in aid of\nlocal improvement. He can convert it, indeed, into a mere unorganised\naggregation of individuals, by dismissing every communal functionary, and\nplacing its concerns in the hands of his own nominees. There are many\nhundreds of communes that have been thus treated, and whose masters are\nnow uneducated peasants. The Pr\u00e9fet can dissolve the _Conseil g\u00e9n\u00e9ral_ of\nhis department, and although he cannot actually name their successors, he\ndoes so virtually. No candidate for an elective office can succeed unless\nhe is supported by the Government. The Courts of law, criminal and civil,\nare the tools of the executive. The Government appoints the judges, the\nPr\u00e9fet provides the jury, and _la Haute Police_ acts without either. All\npower of combination, even of mutual communication, except from mouth to\nmouth, is gone. The newspapers are suppressed or intimidated, the\nprinters are the slaves of the Pr\u00e9fet, as they lose their privilege if\nthey offend; the secrecy of the post is habitually and avowedly violated;\nthere are spies in every country town to watch and report conversation;\nevery individual stands defenceless and insulated, in the face of this\nunscrupulous executive, with its thousands of armed hands and its\nthousands of watching eyes. The only opposition that is ventured is the\nabstaining from voting. Whatever be the office, and whatever be the man,\nthe candidate of the Pr\u00e9fet comes in; but if he is a man who would have\nbeen unanimously rejected in a state of freedom, the bolder electors show\ntheir indignation by their absence.\n\n'In such a state of society the traveller can learn little. Even those\nwho rule it, know little of the feelings of their subjects. The vast\ndemocratic sea on which the Empire floats is influenced by currents, and\nagitated by ground swells which the Government discovers only by their\neffects. It knows nothing of the passions which influence these great\napparently slumbering masses. Indeed, it takes care, by stifling their\nexpression, to prevent their being known.\n\n'We disapprove in many respects of the manner in which Louis Napoleon\nemploys his power, as we disapprove in all respects of the means by which\nhe seized it; but, on the whole, we place him high among the sovereigns\nof France. As respects his foreign policy we put him at the very top. The\nforeign policy of the rulers of mankind, whether they be kings, or\nministers, or senates, or demagogues, is generally so hateful, and at the\nsame time so contemptible, so grasping, so irritable, so unscrupulous,\nand so oppressive--so much dictated by ambition, by antipathy and by\nvanity, so selfish, often so petty in its objects, and so regardless of\nhuman misery in its means, that a sovereign who behaves to other nations\nwith merely the honesty and justice and forbearance which are usual\nbetween man and man, deserves the praise of exalted virtue. The\nsovereigns of France have probably been as good as the average of\nsovereigns. Placed indeed at the head of the first nation of the\nContinent, they have probably been better; but how atrocious has been\ntheir conduct towards their neighbour! If we go back no further than to\nthe Restoration, we find Louis XVIII. forming the Holy Alliance, and\nattacking Spain without a shadow of provocation, for the avowed purpose\nof crushing her liberties and giving absolute power to the most\ndetestable of modern tyrants. We find Charles X. invading a dependence\nof his ally, the Sultan, and confiscating a province to revenge a tap on\nthe face given by the Bey of Algiers to a French consul. We find Louis\nPhilippe breaking the most solemn engagements with almost wanton\nfaithlessness; renouncing all extension of territory in Africa and then\nconquering a country larger than France--a country occupied by tribes who\nnever were the subjects of the Sultan or of the Bey, and who could be\nrobbed of their independence only by wholesale and systematic massacre;\nwe find him joining England, Spain, and Portugal in the Quadruple\nAlliance, and deserting them as soon as the time of action had arrived;\njoining Russia, Prussia, Austria and England, in the arrangement of the\nEastern question, on the avowed basis that the integrity of the Ottoman\nempire should be preserved, and then attempting to rob it of Egypt. We\nfind him running the risk of a war with America, because she demanded,\ntoo unceremoniously, the payment of a just debt, and with England because\nshe complained of the ill-treatment of a missionary. We find him trying\nto ruin the commerce of Switzerland because the Diet arrested a French\nspy, and deposing Queen Pomare because she interfered with the sale of\nFrench brandies; and, as his last act, eluding an express promise by a\nmiserable verbal equivocation, and sowing the seeds of a future war of\nsuccession in order to get for one of his sons an advantageous\nestablishment in Spain.\n\n'The greatest blot in the foreign policy of Louis Napoleon is the\ninvasion of Rome, and for that he is scarcely responsible. It was\noriginally planned by Louis Philippe and Rossi. The expedition which\nsailed from Toulon in 1849 was prepared in 1847. It was despatched in the\nfirst six months of his presidency, in obedience to a vote of the\nAssembly, when the Assembly was still the ruler of France; and Louis\nNapoleon's celebrated letter to Ney was an attempt, not, perhaps\nconstitutional or prudent, but well-intentioned, to obtain for the Roman\npeople liberal and secular institutions instead of ecclesiastical\ntyranny.\n\n'His other mistake was the attempt to enforce on Turkey the capitulations\nof 1740, and to revive pretentions of the Latins in Jerusalem which had\nslept for more than a century. This, again, was a legacy from Louis\nPhilippe. It was Louis Philippe who claimed a right to restore the dome,\nor the portico, we forget which, of the Holy Sepulchre, and to insult the\nGreeks by rebuilding it in the Latin instead of the Byzantine form. Louis\nNapoleon has the merit, rare in private life, and almost unknown among\nprinces, of having frankly and unreservedly withdrawn his demands, though\nsupported by treaty, as soon as he found that they could not be conceded\nwithout danger to the conceding party.\n\n'With these exceptions, his management of the foreign relations of France\nhas been faultless. To England he has been honest and confiding, to\nRussia conciliatory but firm, to Austria kind and forbearing, and he has\ntreated Prussia with, perhaps, more consideration than that semi-Russian\nCourt and childishly false and cunning king deserved. He has been\nassailed by every form of temptation, through his hopes and through his\nfears, and has remained faithful and disinterested. Such conduct deserves\nthe admiration with which England has repaid it.\n\n'We cannot praise him as an administrator. He is indolent and\nprocrastinating. He hates details, and therefore does not understand\nthem. When he has given an order he does not see to its execution;\nindeed, he cannot, for he does not know how it ought to be executed. He\ndirected a fleet to be prepared to co-operate with us in the Baltic in\nthe spring. Ducos, his Minister of Marine, assured him that it was ready.\nThe time came, and not a ship was rigged or manned. He asked us to\nsuspend the expedition for a couple of months. We refused, and sailed\nwithout the French squadron. If the Russians had ventured out, and we\neither had beaten them single-handed, or been repulsed for want of the\npromised assistance, the effect on France would have been frightful. We\nhave reason to believe that it was only in the middle of February that he\nmade up his mind to send an army to Bulgaria. They arrived by driblets,\nwithout any plan of operations, and it was not until August that their\nbattering train left Toulon. It ought to have reached Sebastopol in May.\nIn time, however, he must see the necessity of either becoming an active\nman of business himself, or of ministering, like other sovereigns,\nthrough his Ministers. Up to the present time many causes have concurred\nto occasion him to endeavour to be his own Minister, and to treat those\nto whom he gives that name as mere clerks. He is jealous and suspicious,\nfond of power, and impatient of contradiction. With the exception of\nDrouyn de l'Huys, the eminent men of France, her statesmen and her\ngenerals, stand aloof from him. Those who are not in exile have retired\nfrom public life, and offer neither assistance nor advice. Advice,\nindeed, he refuses, and, what is still more useful than advice, censure,\nhe punishes.\n\n'But the war, though it must last longer, and cost, more in men and in\nmoney than it would have done if it were managed with more intelligence\nand activity, must end favourably. Ill managed as it has been by\nFrance, it has been worse managed by Russia. It is impossible that that\nsemi-barbarous empire, with its scarcely sane autocrat, its corrupt\nadministration, its disordered finances, and its heterogeneous\npopulations, should ultimately triumph over the two most powerful nations\nof Europe, flanked by Austria, and disposing of the fanatical valour of\nTurkey. If Louis Napoleon pleases the vanity of France by military glory,\nand rewards her exertions by a triumphant peace; if he employs his\nabsolute power in promoting her prosperity by further relaxing the\nfetters which encumber her industry; if he takes advantage of the\npopularity which a successful war, an honourable peace, and internal\nprosperity must confer on him, to give to her a little real liberty and a\nlittle real self-government; if he gradually subsides from a [Greek:\n_T\u00fdrannos_] to a [Greek: _Basile\u00fas_]; if he allows some liberty of the\npress, some liberty of election, some liberty of discussion, and some\nliberty of decision; he may pass the remainder of his agitated life in\nthe tranquil exercise of limited, but great and secure power, the ally of\nEngland, and the benefactor of France.\n\n'If this expectation should be realised--and we repeat, that among many\ncontingencies it appears to us to be the least improbable--it affords to\nEurope the best hope of undisturbed peace and progressive civilisation\nand prosperity. An alliance with England was one of the favourite dreams\nof the first Napoleon. He believed, and with reason, that England and\nFrance united could dictate to all Europe. But in this respect, as indeed\nin all others, his purposes were selfish. Being master of France, he\nwished France to be mistress of the world. All that he gave to France was\npower, all that he required from Europe was submission. The objects for\nwhich he desired our co-operation were precisely those which we wished to\ndefeat. The friendship from which we recoiled in disgust, almost in\nterror, was turned into unrelenting hatred; and in the long struggle\nwhich followed, each party felt that its safety depended on the total\nruin of the other.\n\n'The alliance which the uncle desired as a means of oppressing Europe,\nthe nephew seeks for the purpose of setting her free. The heavy continued\nweight of Russia has, ever since the death of Alexander, kept down all\nenergy and independence of action, and even of thought, on the Continent.\nShe has been the patron of every tyrant, the protector of every abuse,\nthe enemy of every improvement. It was at her instigation that the\nCongress of Verona decreed the enslavement of Spain, and that in the\nconferences of Leybach it was determined to stifle liberty in Italy.\nEvery court on the Continent is cursed with a Russian party; and woe be\nto the Sovereign and to the Minister who is not at its head: all the\nresources of Russian influence and of Russian corruption are lavished to\nrender his people rebellious and his administration unsuccessful. From\nthis _peine forte et dure_ we believe that Europe will now be relieved;\nand if the people or the sovereigns of the Continent, particularly those\nof Germany and Italy, make a tolerable use of the freedom from foreign\ndictation which the weakness of Russia will give to them, we look forward\nto an indefinite course of prosperity and improvement. Unhappily,\nexperience, however, forbids us to be sanguine. Forty years ago, an\nevent, such as we are now contemplating, occurred. A Power which had\ndeprived the Continent of the power of independent action fell, and for\nseveral years had no successor. Germany and Italy recalled or\nre-established their sovereigns, and entrusted them with power such as\nthey had never possessed before. How they used it may be inferred from\nthe general outbreak of 1848. A popular indignation, such as could have\nbeen excited only by long years of folly, stupidity, and tyranny, swept\naway or shook every throne from Berlin to Palermo. The people was\neverywhere for some months triumphant; and its abuse of power produced a\nreaction which restored or introduced despotism in every kingdom except\nPrussia and Piedmont, and even in Prussia gave to the King power\nsufficient to enable him, up to the present moment, to maintain a policy,\nmischievous to the interests, disgusting to the sympathies, and injurious\nto the honour of his people. But while the Anglo-Gallic alliance\ncontinues, the Continent will be defended from the worst of all evils,\nthe prevention of domestic improvement, and the aggravation of domestic\ndisturbance, by foreign intervention. That alliance has already preserved\nthe liberty of Piedmont. If it had been established sooner, it might have\npreserved that of Hesse, and have saved Europe from the revolting\nspectacle of the constitutional resistance of a whole people against an\nusurping tyrant and a profligate minister crushed by brutal, undisguised\nviolence.\n\n'We repeat that we are not sanguine, that we do not expect the tranquil,\nuninterrupted progress which would be the result of the timely concession\non the part of the sovereigns, and of the forbearance and moderation on\nthe part of their subjects, which, if they could profit by the lessons of\nhistory, would be adopted by both parties. The only lesson, indeed, which\nhistory teaches is, that she teaches none either to subjects or to\nsovereigns. But we do trust that when the ruler and his people are\nallowed to settle their own affairs between one another, they will come\nfrom time to time to coarse and imperfect, but useful arrangements of\ntheir differences. Rational liberty may advance slowly and unequally; it\nmay sometimes be arrested, it may sometimes be forced back, but its march\nin every decennial period will be perceptible. Like an oak which has\ngrown up among storms, its durability will be in proportion to the\nslowness of its progress.'\n\n\n\nCORRESPONDENCE.\n\nTocqueville, June 30, 1855.\n\nI have only just arrived here, my dear Senior, after wandering for nearly\na month from friend to friend all through the Touraine and the Maine. As\nyou may think, I am, on returning home after so long an absence,\noverpowered with trifling business. I cannot, therefore, comply to-day\nwith your request and write to you the letter you ask for: I will write\nit after much thought and at length. The subject is well worthy of the\ntrouble. Shall I at the same time send back to you the conversation which\nI have corrected, and in what way? The post would be very unsafe and\nexpensive. Give me, therefore, your instructions on this point. But above\nall, give us news of yourselves and of all our friends.\n\nMy wife has borne the journey better than I expected, and the delight we\nfeel in finding ourselves here once more will completely restore her.\n\nThis delight is really very great and in proportion to the annoyance of\nwandering about as we have done for three years without ever finding a\nplace which entirely suited us.\n\nAs to public news, I have heard none since I left Paris. The only spot\nwhich a single ray of light can ever reach is Paris. All the rest is in\nprofound darkness. If you hear anything important, pray tell me.\n\nAdieu, dear Senior. Remember me to Mrs. and Miss Senior, and believe in\nour long and very sincere affection,\n\nA. DE TOCQUEVILLE.\n\n\nTocqueville, July 25, 1855.\n\nI wrote to you yesterday, my dear Senior, a long letter according to my\npromise.\n\nBut when I read it over I felt that it was absurd to send such a letter\nby the post, especially to a foreigner, and I burnt it.\n\nSince the assault of the 18th,[1] the interference of the police in\nprivate correspondence has become more active. Many of my friends as well\nas I myself have perceived it. More letters have been kept back and more\nhave been stopped. Two of mine have been lost. You may remember that two\nletters from me failed to reach you, three years ago. The danger is\ngreater in the country, where handwritings are known, than in Paris. You\nadvise me to put my letters into a cover directed to your Embassy, which\nwill forward them. But this is no security. If a letter be suspected, it\nis easy to open and re-seal it, and still easier simply to suppress it.\n\nAnd, in fact, after all, you have lost little. I wrote to you only what I\nhave a hundred times said to you. We have lived so much together, and\nwith such perfect mutual confidence, that it is difficult for either of\nus to say anything new to the other.\n\nBesides, on reading over again, with attention, your note of our last\nconversation,[2] I have nothing to alter. All that I could do would be to\ndevelope a little more my opinions, and to support them by additional\narguments. I feel more and more their truth, and that the progress\nof events will confirm them much more than any reasonings of mine can do.\n\nWe are annoyed and disturbed, having the house full of workmen. I am\ntrying to warm it by hot air, and am forced to bore through very old and\nvery thick walls; but we shall be repaid by being able to live here\nduring the winter.\n\nI am amusing myself with the letters which our young soldiers in the\nEast, peasants from this parish, write home to their families, and which\nare brought to me. This correspondence should be read in order to\nunderstand the singular character of the French peasant. It is strange to\nsee the ease with which these men become accustomed to the risks of\nmilitary life, to danger and to death, and yet how their hearts cling to\ntheir fields and to the occupations of country life. The horrors of war\nare described with simplicity, and almost with enjoyment. But in the\nmidst of these accounts one finds such phrases as these: \"What crop do\nyou intend to sow in such a field next year?\" \"How is the mare?\" \"Has\nthe cow a fine calf?\" &c. No minds can be more versatile, and at the same\ntime more constant. I have always thought that, after all, the peasantry\nwere superior to all other classes in France. But these men are\ndeplorably in want of knowledge and education, or rather the education to\nwhich they have been subjected for centuries past has taught them to make\na bad use of their natural good qualities.\n\nIt seems to me that Lord John's resignation will enable your Cabinet to\nstand, at least for some time. All that has passed in England since the\nbeginning of the war grieves me deeply. Seen from a distance, your\nConstitution appears to me an admirable machine which is getting out of\norder, partly from the wearing out of its works, partly from the\nunskilfulness of its workers. Such a spectacle is useful to our\nGovernment.\n\nI asked you some questions, which you have not answered. Is Mrs. Grote\nreturned from Germany? Is she well? Has she received my letter addressed\nto her at Heidelberg? The last question is always doubtful when one\nwrites from France.\n\nI send you a letter from the Count de F\u00e9nelon, which I think will\ninterest you. You will give it me back when we meet.\n\nI am very curious to know what you will think of Egypt; and I hope that\nwe shall be established in Paris when you return.\n\nA. DE TOCQUEVILLE.\n\n\n[Footnote 1: On the 18th June, 1855, the French and English made an\nunsuccessful assault on Sebastopol.--ED.]\n\n[Footnote 2: That of the 28th May, 1855.--ED.]\n\n\n\nTocqueville, September 19, 1855.\n\n\nYour letter, my dear Senior, of the 26th of August, has much interested\nme. I see that you are resolved on your great journey. I could say like\nAlexander, if the comparison were not too ambitious, that I should wish\nto be in your place if I were not in my own; but I cannot get satiated\nwith the pleasure of being at home after so long an absence. Everything\nis pleasure in this country life, among my own fields. Even the solitude\nis charming; but were I anywhere else, I should envy you your tour.\n\nEverything in Egypt is curious: the past, the present, and the future. I\nhope to learn much from your Journal, which I trust that I shall have. We\nshall certainly meet you in Paris.\n\nThe noise made by the fall of Sebastopol has echoed even to this distant\ncorner of France. It is a glorious event, and has delighted every\nFrenchman of every party and of every opinion, for in these matters we\nare one man.\n\nI fear that the victory has been bought dearly. There is not a\nneighbouring village to which the war has not cost some of its children.\nBut they bear it admirably. You know, that in war we show the best side\nof our character. If our civilians resembled our soldiers we should long\nago have been masters of Europe.\n\nThis war has never been popular, nor is it popular, yet we bear all its\ncost with a cheerfulness admirable when you consider the sorrows which it\noccasions, aggravated by the distress produced by the dearness of bread.\nIf, instead of the Crimea, the seat of war had been the Rhine, with a\ndefinite purpose, the whole nation would have risen, as it has done\nbefore.\n\nBut the object of the war is unintelligible to the people. They only know\nthat France is at war, and must be made, at any price, to triumph.\n\nI must confess, that I myself, who understand the object for which all\nthis blood is shed, and who approve that object, do not feel the interest\nwhich such great events ought to excite; for I do not expect a result\nequal to the sacrifice.\n\nI think, with you, that Russia is a great danger to Europe. I think so\nmore strongly, because I have had peculiar opportunities of studying the\nreal sources of her power, and because I believe these sources to be\npermanent, and entirely beyond the reach of foreign attack. (I have not\ntime now to tell you why.) But I am deeply convinced that it is not by\ntaking from her a town, or even a province, nor by diplomatic\nprecautions, still less by placing sentinels along her frontier, that the\nWestern Powers will permanently stop her progress.\n\nA temporary bulwark may be raised against her, but a mere accident may\ndestroy it, or a change of alliances or a domestic policy may render it\nuseless.\n\nI am convinced that Russia can be stopped only by raising before her\npowers created by the hatred which she inspires, whose vital and constant\ninterest it shall be to keep themselves united and to keep her in. In\nother words, by the resurrection of Poland, and by the re-animation of\nTurkey.\n\nI do not believe that either of these means can now be adopted. The\ndetestable jealousies and ambitions of the European nations resemble, as\nyou say in your letter, nothing better than the quarrels of the Greeks in\nthe face of Philip. Not one will sacrifice her passions or her objects.\n\nAbout a month ago I read some remarkable articles, which you perhaps have\nseen, in the German papers, on the progress which Russia is making in the\nextreme East. The writer seems to be a man of sense and well informed.\n\nIt appears that during the last five years, Russia, profiting by the\nChinese disturbances, has seized, not only the mouth of the Amoor, but a\nlarge territory in Mongolia, and has also gained a considerable portion\nof the tribes which inhabit it. You know that these tribes once overran\nall Asia, and have twice conquered China. The means have always been the\nsame--some accident which, for an instant, has united these tribes in\nsubmission to the will of one man. Now, says the writer, very plausibly,\nthe Czar may bring this about, and do what has been done by Genghis Khan,\nand, indeed, by others.\n\nIf these designs are carried out, all Upper Asia will be at the mercy of\na man, who, though the seat of his power be in Europe, can unite and\nclose on one point the Mongols.\n\nI know more about Sir G. Lewis's book[1] than you do. I have read it\nthrough, and I do not say, as you do, that it must be a good book, but\nthat it _is_ a good book. Pray say as much to Sir George when you see\nhim, as a letter of mine to Lady Theresa on the subject may have\nmiscarried.\n\nIt is as necessary now for friends to write in duplicate from town to\ntown, as it is if they are separated by the ocean and fear that the ship\nwhich carries their letters may be lost. I hear that our friend John Mill\nhas lately published an excellent book. Is it true? at all events\nremember me to him.\n\nAdieu, my dear Senior. Do not forget us any more than we forget you.\nKindest regards to Mrs. Senior, and Miss Senior, and Mrs. Grote.\n\nA. DE TOCQUEVILLE.\n\n\n[Footnote 1: The work referred to was probably that on the _Early History\nof Rome_.--ED.]\n\n\n\nParis, April 1, 1856.\n\nI write a few lines to you at Marseilles, my dear Senior, as you\nwished.[1] I hope that you will terminate your great journey as\nfelicitously as you seem to me to have carried it on from the beginning.\nThe undertaking appears to have been a complete success. I wish that it\nmight induce you next year to cross over the ocean to America. I should\nbe much interested in hearing and reading your remarks upon that society.\nBut perhaps Mrs. Senior will not be so ready to start off again; so, that\nI may not involve myself in a quarrel with her, I will say no more on the\nsubject.\n\nI am longing to see you, for beside our old and intimate friendship I\nshall be delighted to talk with such an interesting converser, and, above\nall, to find myself again in the company of (as Mrs. Grote calls you)\n'the boy.' You will find me, however, in all the vexations of correcting\nproofs and the other worries connected with bringing out a book.[2] It\nwill not appear till the end of this month.\n\nI can tell you no more about politics than you may learn from the\nnewspapers. Peace, though much desired has caused no public excitement\nThe truth is that just now we are not _excitable_. As long as she remains\nin this condition France will not strike one of those blows by which she\nsometimes shakes Europe and overturns herself.\n\nReeve has been and Milnes still is here. We have talked much of you with\nthese two old friends. Good bye, or rather, thank God, _\u00e0 bient\u00f4t_.\n\nA thousand kind remembrances to Mrs. Senior.\n\nA. DE TOCQUEVILLE.\n\n[Footnote 1:  Mr. Senior was on his return from Egypt.--ED.]\n\n[Footnote 2:  The _Ancien R\u00e9gime_.]\n\n\n\nCONVERSATIONS.\n\n_Paris, May_ 16.--M. de Tocqueville has scarcely been visible since my\nreturn to Paris. Madame de Tocqueville has been absent. She returned\nyesterday, and they spent this evening with us.\n\nTocqueville is full of his book, which is to appear in about a week. His\ndays and nights are devoted to correcting the press and to writing\nnotes--which he thought would be trifling, but which grow in length and\nimportance.\n\nThe object of the work is to account for the rapid progress of the\nRevolution, to point out the principal causes which enabled a few\ncomparatively obscure men to overthrow in six weeks a Monarchy of many\ncenturies.\n\n'I am inclined,' I said, 'to attribute the rapidity with which the old\ninstitutions of France fell, to the fact that there was no _lex loci_ in\nFrance. That the laws, or rather the customs, of the different provinces\nwere dissimilar, and that nothing was defined. That as soon as the\nfoundations or the limits of any power were examined, it crumbled to\npieces; so that the Assembly became omnipotent in the absence of any\nauthority with ascertained rights and jurisdiction.'\n\n'There is much truth in that,' answered Tocqueville, 'but there is also\nmuch truth in what looks like an opposite theory--namely, that the\nMonarchy fell because its power was too extensive and too absolute.\nNothing is so favourable to revolution as centralisation, because whoever\ncan seize the central point is obeyed down to the extremities. Now the\ncentralisation of France under the old Monarchy, though not so complete\nas its Democratic and Imperial tyrants afterwards made it, was great.\nPower was concentrated in Paris and in the provincial capitals. The\nsmaller towns and the agricultural population were unorganised and\ndefenceless. The 14th of July revealed the terrible secret that the\nMaster of Paris is the Master of France.'\n\n_Paris, May_ 18.--I spent the day at Athy, the country-seat of M.\nLafosse,[1] who had been my companion in our Egyptian journey.\n\n'What do you hear,' I asked, 'of the Empress?'\n\n'Nothing,' he answered, 'but what is favourable; all her instincts and\nprejudices are good. Lesseps, who is nearly related to her, has many of\nher letters, written during the courtship, in which she speaks of her\ndear Louis with the utmost affection, and dwells on the hope that if ever\nshe should become his wife, she may be able to induce him to liberalise\nhis Government.'\n\n'And now,' he said, 'tell me what you heard in England about our Canal?'\n\n'I heard nothing,' I answered, 'except from Maclean. He told me that he\nthought that the Maritime Canal, if supplied from the sea, would become\nstagnant and unwholesome, and gradually fill. That that plan was formed\nwhen the levels of the two seas were supposed to differ, so that there\nwould be a constant current.\n\n'\"Now that the equality of their levels has been ascertained,\" he said to\nme, \"the only mode of obtaining a current is to employ the Nile instead\nof the sea.\" \"But can the Nile spare the water?\" I asked. \"Certainly,\"\nhe answered. \"An hour a day of the water from the Nile, even when at its\nlowest, would be ample.\" \"And what do the other engineers say?\" I asked.\n\"Randall,\" he replied, \"agrees with me. The others are at present for the\nsalt water. But we are to meet in time and discuss it thoroughly.\"'\n\n'It is not the opinion of the engineers,' answered Lafosse, 'that I want,\nbut that of the politicians.\n\n'We are told that Lord Palmerston threatens to prevent it as long as he\nis Minister. This makes us very angry. We think that we perceive in his\nopposition his old hatred of France and of everything that France\nsupports or even favours--feelings which we hoped the Alliance had cured.\n\n'The matter,' he continued, 'was to have been brought before the\nCongress. Buol had promised to Nigrelli to do so, and Cavour to Lesseps\nand Paleocapa. But after the occupation of Italy, and the Belgian press,\nand the rights of Neutrals had been introduced, the Congress got\nimpatient, and it was thought inexpedient to ask them to attend to\nanother episodical matter. The Emperor, however, did something. He asked\nAli Pasha, the Turkish Minister, what were the Sultan's views. \"They\nwill be governed,\" said Ali Pasha, \"in a great measure by those of his\nallies.\" \"As one of them,\" said the Emperor, \"I am most anxious for its\nsuccess.\" \"In that case,\" replied Ali Pasha, \"the Sultan can have no\nobjection to it in principle, though he may wish to annex to his firman\nsome conditions--for instance, as to the occupation of the forts at each\nend by a mixed garrison of Turks and Egyptians.\" The Emperor then turned\nto Lord Clarendon. \"What are your views,\" he asked, \"as to the Suez\nCanal?\" \"It is a grave matter,\" answered Lord Clarendon, \"and one on\nwhich I have no instructions. But I believe it to be impracticable.\"\n\"Well,\" replied the Emperor, \"but supposing for the sake of the argument,\nthat it is practicable, what are your intentions?\" \"I cannot but think,\"\nanswered Lord Clarendon, \"that any new channel of commerce must be\nbeneficial to England. The real difficulty is the influence which the\nCanal may have in the relations of Egypt and Turkey.\" \"If that be the\nonly obstacle,\" replied the Emperor, \"there is not much in it, for Ali\nPasha has just told me that if _we_ make no objection the Sultan makes\nnone. We cannot be more Turkish than the Turk.\"'\n\n'I am most anxious,' added Lafosse, 'that this stupid opposition of yours\nshould come to an end. Trifling as the matter may seem, it endangers the\ncordiality of the Alliance. The people of England, who do not know how\njealous and _passionn\u00e9s_ we are, cannot estimate the mistrust and the\nirritation which it excites. That an enterprise on which the French,\nwisely or foolishly, have set their hearts, should be stopped by the\ncaprice of a wrong-headed Englishman, hurts our vanity; and everything\nthat hurts our vanity offends us much more than what injures our serious\ninterests.\n\n'If the engineers and the capitalists decide in favour of the scheme, you\nwill have to yield at last. You had much better do so now, when you can\ndo it with a good grace. Do not let your acquiescence be extorted.'\n\n\n[Footnote 1: M. Lafosse died many years ago. He was a friend of M. de\nLesseps, by whom he and Mr. Senior were invited to join the expedition to\nEgypt--ED.]\n\n\n_Paris, May_ 19.--After breakfast I spent a couple of hours with Cousin.\n\n'You have been in England,' he said, 'since you left Egypt. What is the\nnews as to our Canal? Will Palmerston let us have it? You must stay a few\nweeks in Paris to estimate the effect of your opposition to it. We\nconsider Palmerston's conduct as a proof that his hatred of France is\nunabated, and the acquiescence of the rest of your Cabinet as a proof\nthat, now we are no longer necessary to you, now that we have destroyed\nfor you the maritime power of Russia, you are indifferent to our\nfriendship.\n\n'I know nothing myself as to the merits of the Canal. I distrust Lesseps\nand everything that he undertakes. He has much talent and too much\nactivity, but they only lead him and his friends into scrapes. I daresay\nthat the Canal is one, and that it will ruin its shareholders; but as I\nam anxious we should not quarrel with England, I am most anxious that\nthis silly subject of dispute should be removed.'\n\n'Louis Napoleon,' he continued, 'professed to wish that you should allow\nthe Sultan to give his consent; but I doubt whether he is sincere. I am\nnot sure that he is not pleased at seeing the Parisians occupied by\nsomething besides his own doings, especially as it promotes the national\ndislike of England. Now that the war is over we want an object. He tries\nto give us one by launching us into enormous speculations. He is trying\nto make us English; to give us a taste for great and hazardous\nundertakings, leading to great gains, great losses, profuse expenditure,\nand sudden fortunes and failures. Such things suit _you_; they do not\nsuit _us_. Our habits are economical and prudent, perhaps timid. We like\nthe petty commerce of commission and detail, we prefer domestic\nmanufactures to factories, we like to grow moderately rich by small\nprofits, small expenditure, and constant accumulation. We hate the\n_nouveaux riches_, and scarcely wish to be among them. The progress for\nwhich we wish is political progress--not within, for there we are\nsatisfied to oscillate, and shall be most happy if in 1860 we find\nourselves where we were in 1820--but without. I believe that our master's\n_sortie_ against Belgium was a pilot balloon. He wished to see what\namount of opposition he had to fear from you, and from Belgium, and how\nfar we should support him. He has found the two former greater than he\nexpected. I am not sure that he is dissatisfied with the last.'\n\nI spent the morning at H.'s. He too attacked me about the Canal.\n\n'Do entreat,' he said, 'your public men to overrule their ill-conditioned\ncolleague. I told you a year ago, the mischief that you were doing, but I\ndo not think that you believed me. You may find too late that I was\nright.'\n\nI repeated to him Ellice's opinion that the commerce of England would not\nuse the canal.\n\n'I have heard that,' he said, 'from Ellice himself, but I differ from\nhim. I agree with him, indeed, that your sailing vessels will not use the\ncanal, but I believe that a few years hence you will have no purely\nsailing vessels, except for the small coasting trade. Every large ship\nwill have a propeller; and with propellers, to be employed occasionally,\nand sails for ordinary use, the Mediterranean and the Red Sea are very\nmanageable. I believe that the canal will be useful, and particularly\nto you. But whatever be the real merits of the scheme, for God's sake let\nit be tried. Do not treat us like children, and say, \"We know better what\nis good for you than you do yourselves. You shall not make your canal\nbecause you would lose money by it.\"'\n\n'What did you hear,' I said, 'about the Congress?'\n\n'I heard,' he answered, 'that Clarendon was very good, and was the best,\nand that Walewski was very bad, and was the worst.'\n\n'Can you tell me,' I said, 'the real history of the Tripartite Treaty?'\n\n'I can,' he answered. 'There was an old engagement between the three\nPowers, entered into last spring, that if they succeeded in the war, they\nwould unite to force Russia to perform any conditions to which she might\nsubmit.\n\n'This engagement had been allowed to sleep; I will not say that it was\nforgotten, but no one seemed disposed to revert to it. But after the\ntwenty-second Protocol, when Piedmont was allowed to threaten Austria,\nand neither England nor France defended her, Buol got alarmed. He feared\nthat Austria might be left exposed to the vengeance of Russia on the\nnorth and east, and to that of the Italian Liberals on the South. An\nalliance with France and England, though only for a specified purpose, at\nleast would relieve Austria from the appearance of insulation. She would\nbe able to talk of the two greatest Powers in Europe as her allies, and\nwould thus acquire a moral force which might save her from attack. He\nrecalled, therefore, the old engagement to the recollection of Clarendon\nand Louis Napoleon, and summoned them to fulfil it. I do not believe that\neither of them was pleased. But the engagement was formal, and its\nperformance, though open to misconstruction, and intended by Austria to\nbe misconstrued, was attended by some advantages, though different ones,\nto France and to England. So both your Government and ours complied.'\n\n_Tuesday, May 20_.--The Tocquevilles and Rivet drank tea with us.\n\nI mentioned to Tocqueville the subject of my conversations with Cousin\nand H.\n\n'I agree with Cousin,' he said. 'The attempt to turn our national\nactivity into speculation and commerce has often been made, but has never\nhad any permanent success. The men who make these sudden fortunes are not\nhappy, for they are always suspected of _friponnerie_, and the Government\nto which they belong is suspected of _friponnerie_. Still less happy are\nthose who have attempted to make them, and have failed. And those who\nhave not been able even to make the attempt are envious and sulky. So\nthat the whole world becomes suspicious and dissatisfied.\n\n'And even if it were universal, mere material prosperity is not enough\nfor us. Our Government must give us something more: must gratify our\nambition, or, at least, our vanity.'\n\n'The Government,' said Rivet, 'has been making a desperate plunge in\norder to escape from the accusation of _friponnerie_. It has denounced in\nthe \"Moniteur\" the _faiseurs_; it has dismissed a poor _aide-de-camp_ of\nJ\u00e9r\u00f4me's for doing what everybody has been doing ever since the _coup\nd'\u00e9tat_. When Ponsard's comedy, which was known to be a furious satire on\nthe _agioteurs_, was first played, Louis Napoleon took the whole\norchestra and pit stalls, and filled them with people instructed to\napplaud every allusion to the _faiseurs_. And he himself stood in his\nbox, his body almost out of it, clapping most energetically every attack\non them.'\n\n'At the same time,' I said, 'has he not forced the Orleans Company and\nthe Lyons Company to buy the Grand Central at much more than its worth?\nAnd was not that done in order to enable certain _faiseurs_ to realise\ntheir gains?'\n\n'He has forced the Orleans Company,' said Rivet, 'to buy up, or rather to\namalgamate the Grand Central; but I will not say at more than its value.\nThe amount to be paid is to depend on the comparative earnings of the\ndifferent lines, for two years before and two years after the purchase.'\n\n'But,' I said, 'is it not true, first, that the Orleans Company was\nunwilling to make the purchase? and, secondly, that thereupon the Grand\nCentral shares rose much in the market?'\n\n'Both these facts,' answered Rivet, 'are true.'\n\n'Do you believe,' I said to Tocqueville, 'H.'s history of the Tripartite\nTreaty?'\n\n'I do,' he answered. 'I do not think that at the time when it was made we\nliked it. It suited you, who wish to preserve the _statu quo_ in Europe,\nwhich keeps us your inferiors, or, at least, not your superiors. _You_\nhave nothing to gain by a change. We have. The _statu quo_ does not suit\nus. The Tripartite Treaty is a sort of chain--not a heavy one, or a\nstrong one--but one which we should not have put on if we could have\navoided it.'\n\n'Do you agree,' I asked Tocqueville, 'with Lafosse, Cousin, and H. as to\nthe effect in Paris of our opposition to the Suez Canal?'\n\n'I agree,' he answered, 'in every word that they have said. There is\nnothing that has done you so much mischief in France, and indeed in\nEurope.\n\n'I am no engineer; I should be sorry to pronounce a decided opinion as to\nthe feasibility or the utility of the canal; but your opposition makes us\nbelieve that it is practicable.'\n\n'Those among us,' I answered, 'who fear it, sometimes found their fear on\ngrounds unconnected with its practicability. They say that it is a\npolitical, not a commercial, scheme. That the object is to give to French\nengineers and French shareholders a strip of land separating Egypt from\nSyria, and increasing the French interest in Egypt.'\n\n'What is the value,' answered Tocqueville, 'of a strip of land in the\ndesert where no one can live? And why are the shareholders to be French?\nThe Greeks, the Syrians, the Dalmatians, the Italians, and the Sicilians\nare the people who will use the canal, if anybody uses it. They will form\nthe bulk of the shareholders, if shareholders there are.\n\n'My strong suspicion is, that if you had not opposed it, there never\nwould have been any shareholders, and that if you now withdraw your\nopposition, and let the scheme go on until calls are made, the\nsubscribers, who are ready enough with their names as patriotic\nmanifestations against you as long as no money is to be paid, will\nwithdraw _en masse_ from an undertaking which, at the very best, is a\nmost hazardous one.\n\n'As to our influence in Egypt, your journal shows that it is a pet\nproject of the Viceroy. He hopes to get money and fame from it. You\n_imitate_ both his covetousness and his vanity, and throw him for support\nupon us.'\n\n\n_Paris, May_ 21--The Tocquevilles and Chrzanowski[1] drank tea with us.\n\nWe talked of the French iron floating batteries.\n\n'I saw one at Cherbourg,' said Tocqueville, 'and talked much with her\ncommander. He was not in good spirits about his vessel, and feared some\ngreat disaster. However, she did well at Kinburn.'\n\n'She suffered little at Kinburn,' said Chrzanowski, 'because she ventured\nlittle. She did not approach the batteries nearer than 600 metres. At\nthat distance there is little risk and little service. To knock down a\nwall two metres thick from a distance of 600 metres would require at\nleast 300 blows. How far her own iron sides would have withstood at that\ndistance the fire of heavy guns I will not attempt to say, as I never saw\nher. The best material to resist shot is lead. It contracts over the ball\nand crushes it.'\n\n'Kinburn, however,' said Tocqueville, 'surrendered to our floating\nbatteries.'\n\n'Kinburn surrendered,' said Chrzanowski, 'because you landed 10,000 men,\nand occupied the isthmus which connects Kinburn with the main land. The\ngarrison saw that they were invested, and had no hope of relief. They\nwere not Quixotic enough, or heroic enough, to prolong a hopeless\nresistance. Scarcely any garrison does so.'\n\nWe talked of Malta; and I said that Malta was the only great\nfortification which I had seen totally unprovided with earth-works.\n\n'The stone,' said Chrzanowski, 'is soft and will not splinter.'\n\n'I was struck,' I said, 'with the lightness of the armament; the largest\nguns that I saw, except some recently placed in Fort St. Elmo, were\ntwenty-four pounders.'\n\n'For land defence,' he answered, 'twenty-four pounders are serviceable\nguns. They are manageable and act with great effect within the short\ndistance within which they are generally used. It is against ships that\nlarge guns are wanted. A very large ball or shell is wasted on the\ntrenches, but may sink a ship. The great strength of the land defences of\nMalta arises from the nature of the ground on which Valetta and Floriana\nare built, indeed of which the whole island consists. It is a rock\ngenerally bare or covered with only a few inches of earth. Approaches\ncould not be dug in it. It would be necessary to bring earth or sand in\nships, and to make the trenches with sand-bags or gabions.'\n\nI asked him if he had read Louis Napoleon's orders to Canrobert,\npublished in Bazancourt's book?\n\n'I have,' he answered. 'They show a depth of ignorance and a depth of\nconceit, compared to which even Thiers is modest and skilful. Canrobert\nis not a great general, but he is not a man to whom a civilian, who\nnever saw a shot fired, ought to give lectures on what he calls \"the\ngreat principles\" or \"the absolute principles of war.\" He seems to have\ntaken the correspondence between Napoleon and Joseph for his model,\nforgetting that Canrobert is to him what Napoleon was to Joseph. Then he\napplies his principles as absurdly as he enunciates them. Thus he orders\nCanrobert to send a fleet carrying 25,000 men to the breach at Aboutcha,\nto land 3,000 of them, to send them three leagues up the country, and not\nto land any more, until those first sent have established themselves\nbeyond the defile of Agen. Of course those 3,000 men would be useless if\nthe enemy were _not_ in force, or destroyed if they _were_ in force. To\nsend on a small body and not to support them is the grossest of faults.\nIt is the fault which you committed at the Redan, when the men who had\ngot on to the works were left by you for an hour unsupported, instead of\nreinforcements being poured in after them as quickly as they could be\nsent.\n\n'In fact,' he continued, 'the horrible and mutual blunders of that\ncampaign arose from its being managed by the two Emperors from Paris and\nfrom St. Petersburg, Nicholas and Alexander were our best friends. Louis\nNapoleon was our worst enemy.\n\n'There is nothing which ought to be so much left to the discretion of\nthose on the spot as war. Even a commander-in-chief actually present in a\nfield of battle can do little after the action, if it be really a great\none, has once begun.\n\n'If we suppose 80,000 men to be engaged on each side, each line will\nextend at least three miles. Supposing the general to be in the centre,\nit will take an _aide-de-camp_ ten minutes to gallop to him from one of\nthe wings, and ten minutes to gallop back. But in twenty minutes all may\nbe altered.'\n\n\n[Footnote 1: 'Chrzanowski has passed thirty years fighting against or for\nthe Russians. He began military life in 1811 as a sous lieutenant of\nartillery in the Polish corps which was attached to the French army. With\nthat army he served during the march to Moscow, and the retreat. At the\npeace, what remained of his corps became a part of the army of the\nkingdom of Poland. He had attained the rank of major in that army when\nthe insurrection on the accession of Nicholas broke out. About one\nhundred officers belonging to the staff of the properly Russian army were\nimplicated, or supposed to be implicated, in that insurrection, and were\ndismissed, and their places were supplied from the army of the kingdom of\nPoland. Among those so transferred to the Russian army was Chrzanowski.\nHe was attached to the staff of Wittgenstein, and afterwards of Marshal\nDiebitsch, in the Turkish campaigns of 1828 and 1829. In 1830 he took\npart with his countrymen in the insurrection against the Muscovites, and\nquitted Poland when it was finally absorbed in the Russian Empire. A few\nyears after a quarrel was brewing between England and Russia. Muscovite\nagents were stirring up Persia and Affghanistan against us, and it was\nthought that we might have to oppose them on the shores of the Black Sea.\nChrzanowski was attached to the British Embassy at Constantinople and was\nemployed for some years in ascertaining what assistance Turkey, both in\nEurope and in Asia, could afford to us. In 1849 he was selected by\nCharles Albert to command the army of the kingdom of Sardinia.\n\n'That army was constituted on the Prussian system, which makes every man\nserve, and no man a soldier. It was, in fact, a militia. The men were\nenlisted for only fourteen months, at the end of that time they were sent\nhome, and were recalled when they were wanted, having forgotten their\nmilitary training and acquired the habits of cottiers and artisans. They\nhad scarcely any officers, or even _sous_ officers, that knew anything of\ntheir business. The drill sergeants required to be drilled. The generals,\nand indeed the greater part of the officers, were divided into hostile\nfactions--Absolutists, Rouges, Constitutional Liberals, and even\nAustrians--for at that time, in the exaggerated terror occasioned by the\nrevolutions of 1848, Austria and Russia were looked up to by the greater\npart of the noblesse of the Continent as the supporters of order against\nMazzini, Kossuth, Ledru Rollin, and Palmerston. The Absolutists and the\nAustrians made common cause, whereas the Rouges or Mazzinists were\nbitterest against the Constitutional Liberals. Such an army, even if\nthere had been no treason, could not have withstood a disciplined enemy.\nWhen it fell a victim to its own defects, and to the treachery of\nRamorino, Chrzanowski retired to Paris.'--(_Extracted from Mr. Senior's\narticle in the 'North British  Review.'_)\n\nChrzanowski died several years ago.--ED.]\n\n\n\nCORRESPONDENCE.\n\nKensington, August 20, 1856.\n\nMy dear Tocqueville,--A few weeks after my return to London your book\nreached me--of course from the time that I got it, I employed all my\nleisure in reading it.\n\nNothing, even of yours, has, I think, so much instructed and delighted\nme. Much of it, perhaps, was not quite so new to me as to many others; as\nI had had the privilege of hearing it from you--but even the views which\nwere familiar to me in their outline were made almost new by their\ndetails.\n\nIt is painful to think how difficult it is to create a Constitutional\nGovernment, and how difficult to preserve one, and, what is the same, how\neasy to destroy one.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nMrs. Senior is going to Wales and to Ireland, where I join her, after\nhaving paid a long-promised visit to Lord Aberdeen.\n\nI like the conversation of retired statesmen, and he is one of our\nwisest. Thiers has just left us. I spent two evenings with him, but on\nthe first he was engrossed by Lord Clarendon, and on the second by the\nDuc d'Aumale and by Lord Palmerston. They were curious _rapprochements_,\nat least the first and third. It was the first meeting of Palmerston and\nDuc d'Aumale. I am very much pleased with the latter. He is sensible,\nwell informed, and unaffected.\n\nKindest regards, &c.\n\nA.W. SENIOR.\n\n\nTocqueville, September 4, 1856.\n\nI have read, my dear Senior, your letter with great pleasure. Your\ncriticism delights me, for I rely on your judgment and on your sincerity.\nI am charmed that you have found in my book more than you had learned\nfrom our conversations, on my view of our history. We have known one\nanother so long, we have conversed so much and so unreservedly, that it\nis difficult for either of us to write anything that the other will think\nnew. I was afraid that what may appear original to the public might seem\ntrite to you.\n\nThe Reeves have been with us; we have passed together an agreeable\nfortnight. I had charged Reeve to bring you, whether you would or not.\nDid he make the attempt? I am sure that you would have enjoyed your\nvisit, and we should have rejoiced to have under our roof two such old\nfriends as you and Reeve.\n\nI am glad that you have printed your article; pray try to send it to me.\n\nIt seems that you intend this winter to anchor in Rome. It increases my\nregret that I cannot be there. It is out of the question. My wife's\nhealth and mine are so much improved that the journey is not necessary,\nand business of all kinds keeps us at home. If you push on to Naples, you\nwill, perhaps, enjoy the absence of the rascally king whom you and I\nfound there five years ago. I applaud the virtuous indignation of the\nEnglish against this little despot, and their sympathy with the unhappy\nwretches whom he detains arbitrarily to die slowly in his prisons, which,\nthough not placed in the African deserts or the marshes of Cayenne, are\nbad enough. The interest which your great nation takes in the cause of\nhumanity and liberty, even when that cause suffers in another country,\ndelights me. What I regret is that your generous indignation is directed\nagainst so petty a tyrant.\n\nI must say that America is a _puer robustus_. Yet I cannot desire, as\nmany persons do, its dismemberment. Such an event would inflict a great\nwound on the whole human race; for it would introduce war into a great\ncontinent from whence it has been banished for more than a century.\n\nThe breaking up of the American Union will be a solemn moment in the\nhistory of the world. I never met an American who did not feel this, and\nI believe that it will not be rashly or easily undertaken. There will,\nbefore actual rupture, be always a last interval, in which one or both\nparties will draw back. Has not this occurred twice?\n\nAdieu, dear Senior. Do not be long without letting us hear from you, and\nremember us affectionately to Mrs. Senior and to your daughter.\n\n\n\nAshton House, near Phoenix Park, Dublin, September 26, 1856.\n\nMy dear Tocqueville,--Your letter found me at Haddo House, Aberdeenshire,\nwhere we have been spending a fortnight with Lord Aberdeen.\n\nIt has been very interesting. Lord Aberdeen is one of our wisest\nstatesmen.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nI found Lord Aberdeen deprecating the war, notwithstanding its success,\nutterly incredulous as to the aggressive intentions attributed to\nNicholas, and in fact throwing the blame of the war on Lord Stratford\nand, to a certain degree, on Louis Napoleon.\n\nI found him also much disturbed by our Naples demonstration, believing it\nto be an unwarranted interference with an independent Government.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nEver yours,\n\nA.W. SENIOR.\n\n\nTocqueville, November 2, 1856.\n\nI am grateful to you, my dear Senior, for your kindness in telling me\nwhat I most wished to hear. The judgments of such men as those with whom\nyou have been living, while they delight me, impose on me the duty of\nunrelaxed efforts.\n\nYour fortnight at Lord Aberdeen's amused me exceedingly, and not the\nleast amusing part were the eccentricities of A.B.\n\nThere is one point in which the English seem to me to differ from\nourselves, and, indeed, from all other nations, so widely that they form\nalmost a distinct species of men. There is often scarcely any connection\nbetween what they say and what they do.\n\nNo people carry so far, especially when speaking in public, violence of\nlanguage, outrageousness of theories, and extravagance in the inference\ndrawn from those theories. Thus your A.B. says that the Irish have not\nshot half enough landlords. Yet no people act with more moderation. A\nquarter of what is said in England at a public meeting, or even round a\ndinner-table, without anything being done or intended to be done, would\nin France announce violence, which would almost always be more furious\nthan the language had been.\n\nWe Frenchmen are not so different from our antipodes as we are from a\nnation, partly our own progeny, which is separated from us by only a\nlarge ditch.\n\nI wonder whether you have heard how our illustrious master is relieving\nthe working-people from the constant rise of house-rent. When they are\nturned out of their lodgings he re-establishes them by force; if they are\ndistrained on for non-payment of rent, he will not allow the tribunals to\ntreat the distress as legal. What think you, as a political economist, of\nthis form of outdoor relief?\n\nWhat makes the thing amusing is, that the Government which uses this\nviolent mode of lodging the working classes, is the very same Government\nwhich, by its mad public works, by drawing to Paris suddenly a hundred\nthousand workmen, and by destroying suddenly ten thousand houses, has\ncreated the deficiency of habitations. It seems, however, that the\nsystematic intimidation and oppression of the rich in favour of the poor,\nis every day becoming more and more one of the principles of our\nGovernment.\n\nI read yesterday a circular from the prefect of La Sarthe, a public\ndocument, stuck up on the church-doors and in the market-places, which,\nafter urging the landed proprietors of the department to assess\nthemselves for the relief of the poor, adds, that their insensibility\nbecomes more odious when it is remembered that for many years they have\nbeen growing rich by the rise of prices, which is spreading misery among\nthe lower orders.\n\nThe real character of our Government, its frightful mixture of socialism\nand despotism, was never better shown.\n\nI have said enough to prevent your getting my letter. If it _should_\nescape the rogue who manages our post-office, let me know as soon as you\ncan.\n\nKindest remembrances,\n\nA. DE. TOCQUEVILLE.\n\n\nTocqueville, February 11, 1857.\n\nI must ask you, my dear Senior, to tell me yourself how you have borne\nthis long winter. I suppose that it has been the same in England as in\nNormandy, for the two climates are alike.\n\nHere we have been buried for ten or twelve days under a foot of snow, and\nit froze hard during the whole time. How has your larynx endured this\ntrial? I assure you that we take great interest in that larynx of yours.\nGive us therefore some news of it.\n\nYour letter gave us fresh pleasure by announcing your intention of\npassing April and May in Paris. We shall certainly be there at the same\ntime, and perhaps before. I hope that we shall see you continually. We\nare, you know, among the very many people who delight in your society;\nbesides, we have an excellent right to your friendship.\n\nI am looking forward with great pleasure to your Egypt. What I already\nknow of that country leads me to think that of all your reminiscences it\nwill afford the most novelty and interest.\n\nI do not think that your visit to Paris will be a very valuable addition\nto your journals. If I may judge by the letters which I receive thence,\nsociety there has never been flatter, nor more insipid, nor more entirely\nwithout any dominant idea. I need not tell you that your opinion of our\nstatesmen is the same as that which prevails in Paris, but it is of such\nan ancient date, and is so obvious, that it cannot give rise to\ninteresting discussions.\n\nA-propos of statesmen, we cannot understand how a man who made, _inter\npocula_, the speech of ---- on his travels can remain in a government. I\nthink that even ours, though so long-suffering towards its agents, could\nnot tolerate anything similar even if it should secretly approve.\nAbsolute power has its limits. The Prince de Ligne, in a discourse which\nyou have doubtless read, seems to me to have described it in one word by\nsaying that it was the speech of a _gamin_.\n\nI am, however, ungrateful to criticise it, for I own that it amused me\nextremely, and that I thought that Morny especially was drawn from life;\nbut I think that if I had the honour of being Her Britannic Majesty's\nPrime Minister, I should not have laughed so heartily. How could so\nclever a man be guilty of such eccentricities?\n\nIn my last letter to our excellent friend Mrs. Grote, I ventured to say\nthat there was one person who wrote even worse than I did, and that it\nwas you. Your last letter has filled me with remorse, for I could\nactually read it, and even without trouble. I beg, therefore, to make an\n_amende honorable_, and envy you your power of advancing towards\nperfection.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nI still think of paying a little visit to England in June. Adieu, dear\nSenior. Do not be angry with me for not writing on politics. Indeed I\ncould tell you nothing, for I know nothing, and besides, just now\npolitics are not to be treated by Frenchmen, _in letters_.\n\nA. DE TOCQUEVILLE.\n\n\n\nTocqueville, March 8, 1857.\n\nI still write to you, my dear Senior, from hence. We cannot tear\nourselves away from the charms of our retreat, or from a thousand little\nemployments. We shall scarcely reach Paris, therefore, before you. You\nwill, therefore, yourself bring me the remainder of your curious journal.\nWhat I have already seen makes me most anxious to read the rest. I have\nnever read anything which gave me more valuable information on Egypt\nand Oriental politics in general. As soon as I possibly can, I look\nforward to continuing its perusal.\n\nThe papers tell us that your Ministry has been beaten on the Chinese War.\nIt seems to me to have been an ill-chosen battle-field. The war was,\nperhaps, somewhat wantonly begun, and very roughly managed; but the\nfault lay with distant and subordinate agents. Now that it has begun, no\nCabinet can avoid carrying it on vigorously. The existing Ministry will\ndo as well for this as any other. As there is no line of policy to be\nchanged, the upsetting is merely to put in the people who are now\nout.\n\nIf the Ministry falls, the man least to be pitied will be our friend\nLewis. He will go out after having obtained a brilliant triumph on his\nown ground, and he will enjoy the good fortune, rare to public men, of\nquitting power greater than he was when he took it, and with the enviable\nreputation of owing his greatness, not merely to his talents, but also to\nthe respect and the confidence which he has universally inspired.\n\nAll this delights me; for I feel towards him, and towards all his family,\na true friendship.\n\nTo return to China.\n\nIt seems to me that the relations between that country and Europe are\nchanged, and dangerously changed.\n\nTill now, Europe has had to deal only with a Chinese government--the most\nwretched of governments. Now you will find opposed to you a people; and a\npeople, however miserable and corrupt, is invincible on its own\nterritory, if it be supported and impelled by common and violent\npassions.\n\nYet I should be sorry to die before I have seen China open to the eyes as\nwell as to the arms of Europe.\n\nDo you believe in a dissolution? If so, when?\n\nA thousand regards to Mrs. Grote, to the great historian, to the Reeves,\nand generally to all who are kind enough to remember my existence.\n\nI delight in the prospect of meeting you in Paris; yet I fear that you\nwill find it dull. All that I hear from the great town shows me that\nnever, at least during the last two hundred years, has intellectual life\nbeen less active.\n\nIf there be talent in the official circles, it is not the talent of\nconversation, and among those who formerly possessed that talent, there\nis so much torpidity, such want of interest on public affairs, such\nignorance as to what is passing, and so little wish to hear about it,\nthat no one, I am told, knows what to talk about or to take interest in.\nYour conversation, however, is so agreeable and stimulating that it is\ncapable of reanimating the dead. Come and try to work this miracle.\n\nA thousand remembrances.\n\nA. DE TOCQUEVILLE.\n\n\n\n\n\nCONVERSATIONS.\n\n\n_Paris, Hotel Bedford, April_ 9, 1857.--We reached this place last night.\n\nThe Tocquevilles are in our hotel. I went to them in the evening.\n\nTocqueville asked me how long I intended to remain.\n\n'Four weeks,' I answered.\n\n'I do not think,' he replied, 'that you will be able to do so. Paris has\nbecome so dull that no one will voluntarily spend a month here. The\nchange which five years have produced is marvellous.\n\n'We have lost our interest not only in public affairs, but in all serious\nmatters.'\n\n'You will return then to the social habits of Louis Quinze,' I said. 'You\nwere as despotically governed then as you are now; and yet the _salons_\nof Madame Geoffrin were amusing.'\n\n'We may do so in time,' he answered, 'but that time is to come. At\npresent we talk of nothing but the Bourse. The conversation of our\n_salons_ resembles more that of the time of Law, than that of the time of\nMarmontel.'\n\nI spent the evening at Lamartine's. There were few people there, and the\nconversation was certainly dull enough to justify Tocqueville's fears.\n\n\n_April_ 10.--Tocqueville drank tea with us.\n\nWe talked of the Empress, and of the possibility of her being Regent of\nFrance.\n\n'That supposes,' I said, 'first, that _Celui-ci_ holds his power until\nhis death; and, secondly, that his son will succeed him.'\n\n'I expect both events,' answered Tocqueville. 'It is impossible to deny\nthat Louis Napoleon has shown great dexterity and tact. His system of\ngovernment is detestable if we suppose the welfare of France to be his\nobject; but skilful if its aim be merely the preservation of his own\npower.\n\n'Such being his purpose, he has committed no great faults. Wonderful,\nalmost incredible, as his elevation is, it has not intoxicated him.'\n\n'It has not intoxicated him,' I answered, 'because he was prepared for\nit--he always expected it.'\n\n'He could scarcely,' replied Tocqueville, 'have really and soberly\nexpected it until 1848.\n\n'Boulogne and Strasbourg were the struggles of a desperate man, who\nstaked merely a life of poverty, obscurity, and exile. Even if either of\nthem had succeeded, the success could not have been permanent. A\nsurprise, if it had thrown him upon the throne, could not have kept him\nthere. Even after 1848, though the Bourbons were discredited, we should\nnot have tolerated a Bonaparte if we had not lost all our self-possession\nin our terror of the Rouges. That terror created him, that terror\nsupports him; and habit, and the dread of the bloodshed and distress, and\nthe unknown chances of a revolution, will, I think, maintain him during\nhis life.\n\n'The same feelings will give the succession to his heir. Whether the heir\nwill keep it, is a different question.'\n\n_Sunday, April_ 12.--Tocqueville drank tea with us. I asked him if he had\nseen the Due de Nemours' letter.\n\n'I have not seen it,' he answered. 'In fact, I have not wished to see it.\nI disapprove of the Fusionists, and the anti-Fusionists, and the\nLegitimists, and the Orleanists-in short, of all the parties who are\nforming plans of action in events which may not happen, or may not\nhappen in my time, or may be accompanied by circumstances rendering those\nplans absurd, or mischievous, or impracticable,'\n\n'But though you have not read the letter,' I said, 'you know generally\nwhat are its contents.'\n\n'Of course I do,' he replied. 'And I cannot blame the Comte de Chambord\nfor doing what I do myself--for refusing to bind himself in\ncontingencies, and to disgust his friends in the hope of conciliating his\nenemies.'\n\n'Do you believe,' I asked, 'that the mere promise of a Constitution would\noffend the Legitimists?'\n\n'I do not think,' he answered, 'that they would object to a Constitution\ngiving them what they would consider their fair share of power and\ninfluence.\n\n'Under Louis Philippe they had neither, but it was in a great measure\ntheir own fault.\n\n'They have neither under this Government, for its principle is to rest on\nthe army and on the people, and to ignore the existence of the educated\nclasses.\n\n'You see _that_ in its management of the press. 'Montalembert, or Guizot,\nor Falloux, or I may publish what we like. We are not read by the soldier\nor by the _proletaire_.[1] But the newspaper press is subject to a\nslavery to which it was never reduced before. The system was first\nelaborated in Austria, and I daresay will be copied by all the\nContinental autocrats, for no inventions travel so quickly as despotic\nones.\n\n'The public _avertissements_ are comparatively unimportant. Before a\njournal gets one of those its suppression has probably been decided on.\nEvery day there are communications between the literary police and the\ndifferent editors. Such or such a line of argument is altogether\nforbidden, another is allowed to be used to a certain extent. Some\nsubjects are tabooed, others are to be treated partially.\n\n'As the mental food of the lower orders is supplied by the newspapers,\nthis paternal Government takes care that it shall not be too exciting.'\n\n[Footnote 1: The lowest class.--ED.]\n\n\n_Paris, Monday, April_ 13.--Tocqueville, Jobez, Marcet, St.-Hilaire,[1]\nCharles Sumner, and Lord Granville breakfasted with us.\n\nThe conversation turned on public speaking.\n\n'Very few indeed of our speakers,' said Tocqueville, 'have ever ventured\nto improvise: Barrot could do it. We have told him sometimes that a\nspeech must be answered immediately; and when he objected that he had\nnothing to say, we used to insist, and to assure him that as soon as he\nwas in the tribune, the ideas and the words would come; and so they did.\nI have known him go on under such circumstances for an hour; of course\nneither the matter nor the form could be first rate, but they were\nsufficient.'\n\n'In fact,' said Lord Granville, 'much of what is called improvisation is\nmere recollection. A man who has to speak night after night, gets on most\nsubjects a set of thoughts, and even of expressions, which naturally pour\nin on him as soon as his argument touches the train which leads to them.\n\n'One of our eminent speakers,' he continued, 'Lord Grey, is perhaps best\nwhen he has not had time to prepare himself. He is so full of knowledge\nand of inferences, that he has always enough ready to make an excellent\nspeech. When he prepares himself, there is _too_ much; he gives the House\nmore facts and more deductions than it can digest.'\n\n'Do you agree with me,' I asked, 'in thinking that Lord Melbourne was\nbest when he improvised?'\n\n'I agree with you,' answered Lord Granville, 'that his set speeches were\ncold and affected. He was natural only when he was quite careless, or\nwhen he was much excited, and then he was admirable.'\n\n'Did not Thiers improvise?' I asked.\n\n'Never,' answered Tocqueville. 'He prepared himself most carefully. So\ndid Guizot. We see from the \"Revue r\u00e9trospective\" that he even prepared\nhis replies. His long experience enabled him to foresee what he should\nhave to answer. Pasquier used to bring his speech ready written. It lay\non the desk before him, but he never looked at it.'\n\n'That seems to me,' I said, 'very difficult. It is like swimming with\ncorks. One would be always tempted to look down on the paper.'\n\n'It is almost equally difficult,' said Tocqueville, 'to make a speech of\nwhich the words are prepared. There is a struggle between the invention\nand the memory. You trust thoroughly to neither, and therefore are not\nserved thoroughly by either.'\n\n'Yet that,' said Marcet, 'is what our Swiss pastors are required to do.\nThey are forbidden to read, and forbidden to extemporise, and by practice\nthey speak from memory--some well, all tolerably.'\n\n'Brougham,' said Lord Granville, 'used to introduce his most elaborately\nprepared passages by a slight hesitation. When he seemed to pause in\nsearch of thoughts, or of words, we knew that he had a sentence ready cut\nand dried.'\n\n'Who,' I asked Sumner, 'are your best speakers in America?'\n\n'The best,' he said, 'is Seward; after him perhaps comes Winthrop.'\n\n'I should have thought it difficult,' I said, 'to speak well in the\nSenate, to only fifty or at most sixty members.'\n\n'You do not speak,' answered Sumner, 'to the Senators. You do not think\nof them. You know that their minds are made up. Except as to mere\nexecutive questions, such as the approval of a public functionary, or the\nacceptance or modification of a treaty, every senator comes in pledged to\na given, or to an assumed, set of opinions and measures. You speak to the\npublic. You speak in order that 500,000 copies of what you say, as was\nthe case with my last speech, may be scattered over the whole Union.'\n\n'That,' I said, 'must much affect the character of your oratory. A speech\nmeant to be read must be a different thing from one meant to be heard.\nYour speeches must in fact be pamphlets, and that I suppose accounts for\ntheir length.'\n\n'That is true,' replied Sumner. 'But when you hear that we speak for a\nday, or for two days, or, as I have sometimes done, for three days, you\nmust remember that our days are days of only three hours each.'\n\n'How long,' I asked, 'was your last speech?'\n\n'About five hours,' he answered. 'Three hours the first day and two hours\nthe second.'\n\n'That,' I said, 'is not beyond our remotest limit. Brougham indeed, on\nthe amendment of the law, spoke for six hours, during the greater part of\nthe time to an audience of three. The House was filled with fog, and\nthere is an H.B. which represents him gesticulating in the obscurity and\nthe solitude.'\n\n'He,' said Lord Granville, 'put his speech on the Reform Bill at the\ntop.'\n\n'The speech,' I said, 'at the end of which he knelt to implore the Peers\nto pass the bill, and found it difficult to rise.'\n\n[Footnote 1: Barth\u00e9lemy de St-Hilaire is now Thiers' private secretary\nand right hand.--ED.]\n\n\n_Tuesday, April_ 14.--Z., Sumner, Lord Granville, Tocqueville, M.\nCircourt, St.-Hilaire, and Corcelle breakfasted with us.\n\nThe conversation took the same turn as yesterday.\n\n'May I venture,' said Lord Granville to Z., 'to ask whom of your\nopponents you feared the most?'\n\n'Beyond all comparison,' answered Z., 'Thiers.'\n\n'Was not D.' I asked, 'very formidable?'\n\n'Certainly,' said Z. 'But he had not the wit, or the _entra\u00eenement_ of\nThiers. His sentences were like his action. He had only one gesture,\nraising and sinking his right arm, and every time that right arm fell, it\naccompanied a sentence adding a link to a chain of argument, massive and\nwell tempered, without a particle of dross, which coiled round his\nadversary like a boa constrictor.'\n\n'And yet,' said M., 'he was always languid and embarrassed at starting;\nit took him ten minutes to get _en train_.'\n\n'That defect,' said Lord Granville, 'belonged to many of our good\nspeakers--to Charles Fox--to Lord Holland. Indeed Fox required the\nexcitement of serious business to become fluent. He never made a\ntolerable after-dinner speech.'\n\n'Among the peculiarities of D.,' said M., 'are his perfect tact and\ndiscretion in the tribune, and his awkwardness in ordinary life. In\npublic and in private he is two different men.'\n\n'It is impossible,' said Tocqueville, 'to deny that D. was great in a\ndeliberative body, but his real scene of action is the bar. He was only\n_among_ the best speakers in the Constituent Assembly. He is _the_\ngreatest advocate at the bar.'\n\n'Although,' said M----, 'at the bar, where he represents only his client,\none of the elements of his parliamentary success, his high moral\ncharacter, does not assist him. Do you remember how, on the debate of\nthe Roman expedition, he annihilated by one sentence Jules Favre who had\nventured to assail him? \"Les injures,\" he said, \"sont comme les corps\npesants, dont la force d\u00e9pend de la hauteur d'o\u00f9 ils tombent.\"'\n\n'One man,' said Z., 'who enjoys a great European reputation, I could\nnever think of as a serious adversary, that is Lamartine.\n\n'He appeared to me to treat the sad realities of political life as\nmaterials out of which he could compose strange and picturesque scenes,\nor draw food for his imagination and his vanity. He seemed always to be\nsaying to himself: \"How will the future dramatist or poet, or painter,\nrepresent this event, and what will be my part in the picture, or in the\npoem, or on the stage?\"\n\n'_Il cherchait toujours \u00e0 poser_.--He could give pleasure, he could give\npain--he could amuse, and he could irritate,--but he seldom could\npersuade, and he never could convince. Even before the gate of the H\u00f4tel\nde Ville, the most brilliant hour of his life, he owed his success rather\nto his tall figure, his fine features, attractive as well as commanding,\nhis voice, his action--in short, to the assemblage of qualities which the\nGreeks called [Greek: hupokrisis] than to his eloquence.'\n\n'Was not,' I said, 'his contrast between the red flag and the tricolor\neloquent?'\n\n'It was a fine bit of imagery,' said Z., 'and admirably adapted to the\noccasion. I do not deny to him the power of saying fine things--perhaps\nfine speeches, but he never made a _good_ speech--a speech which it was\ndifficult to answer.'\n\n'If anyone,' he continued, 'ever takes the trouble to look into our\nParliamentary debates, Lamartine will hold a higher comparative rank than\nhe is really entitled to. Most of us were too busy to correct the reports\nfor the \"Moniteur.\" Lamartine not only corrected them but inserted whole\npassages.'\n\n'He inserted,' said M, 'not only passages but facts. Such as\n\"_applaudissements_,\" \"_vive \u00e9motion,\" \"hilarit\u00e9_,\" often when the speech\nhad been received in silence, or unattended to.'\n\n'I remember,' said Corcelle, 'an insertion of that kind in the report of\na speech which was never delivered. It was during the Restoration, when\nwritten speeches were read, and sometimes were sent to the \"Moniteur\" in\nanticipation of their being read. Such had been the case with respect to\nthe speech in question. The intended orator had inserted, like Lamartine,\n\"_vifs applaudissements,\" \"profonde sensation_,\" and other notices of the\neffect of his speech. The House adjourned unexpectedly before it was\ndelivered, and he forgot to withdraw the report.'\n\n'Could a man like Lord Althorp,' I asked, 'whom it was painful to hear,\nhold his place as leader of a French Assembly?'\n\n'Impossible,' said Tocqueville, 'unless he were a soldier. We tolerate\nfrom a man who has almost necessarily been deprived of a careful\neducation much clumsiness and awkwardness of elocution. Soult did not\nspeak much better than the Duke of Wellington, but he was listened to. He\nhad, like the Duke, an air of command which imposed.'\n\n'Was there,' I said, 'any personal quarrel between Soult and Thiers?'\n\n'Certainly there was,' said Z., 'a little one. I will not say that Soult\nwas in Spain a successful commander, or an agreeable colleague, or an\nobedient subordinate, but whenever things went wrong there, Soult was the\nman whom the Emperor sent thither to put them to rights. Great as Thiers\nmay be as a military critic, I venture to put him below Napoleon.'\n\n'I have been reading,' I said, 'Falloux's reception speech, and was\ndisappointed by it.'\n\n'In his speech and Brifault's,' said Circourt, 'you may compare the\npresent declamatory style and that of thirty years ago. Brifault has, or\nattempts to have, the _l\u00e9g\u00e8ret\u00e9_ and the prettiness of the Restoration.\nFalloux is _grandiose_ and emphatic, as we all are now.'\n\n'Falloux,' said Z., 'made an excellent speech the first time that he\naddressed the Chamber of Deputies. The next time he was not so\nsuccessful, and after that he ceased to be listened to.\n\n'But in the Constituent Assembly, and indeed in the Legislative, he\nacquired an ascendency. In those Assemblies, great moral qualities and a\nhigh social position were rarer than they were among the Deputies, and in\nthe dangers of the country they were more wanted. Falloux possesses them\nall. He is honest and brave, and in his province employs liberally and\nusefully a large fortune.'\n\n'Were those the merits,' I asked, 'which opened to him the doors of the\nAcademy?'\n\n'Certainly,' answered Z. 'As a man of letters he is nothing, as a\nstatesman not much. We elected him in honour of his courage and his\nhonesty, and perhaps with some regard to his fortune. We are the only\nindependent body left, and we value in a candidate no quality more than\nindependence.'\n\n'I am told,' I said, 'that Falloux is now an ultra-Legitimist.'\n\n'That is not true,' said Z. 'He is a Legitimist, but a liberal one. He\nwould tolerate no Government, whatever were its other claims, that was\nnot constitutional.'\n\n'Your Academic ceremonies,' I said 'seem to me not very well imagined.\nThere is something _fade_,  almost ridiculous, in the literary minuet in\nwhich the _r\u00e9cipiendaire_ and the receiver are trotted out to show their\npaces to each other and to the Academy. The new member extolling the\npredecessor of whom he is the unworthy successor, the old member lauding\nhis new colleague to his face, and assuring him that he, too, is one of\nthe ornaments of the Society.'\n\n'Particularly,' said ----, 'when, as was the case the other day, it is\nnotorious that neither of them has any real respect for the idol which he\nis forced to crown. Then the political innuendoes, the under-currents of\ncensure of the present conveyed in praise of the past, become tiresome\nafter we have listened to them for five years. We long to hear people\ntalk frankly and directly, instead of saying one thing for the mere\npurpose of showing that they are thinking of another thing. The Emperor\nrevenged himself on Falloux by his antithesis: \"_que le d\u00e9sordre les\navait uni, et que l'ordre les avait s\u00e9par\u00e9_.'\"\n\n'How did Falloux reply to it?' I asked.\n\n'Feebly,' said ----. 'He muttered something about _l'ordre_ having no\nfirmer adherent than himself. In these formal audiences our great man has\nthe advantage. He has his _mot_ ready prepared, and you cannot discuss\nwith him.'\n\nWe talked of the French spoken by foreigners. 'The best,' said Circourt,\n'is that of the Swedes and Russians, the worst that of the Germans.'\n\n'Louis Philippe,' said Z., 'used to maintain that the best test of a\nman's general talents was his power of speaking foreign languages. It was\nan opinion that flattered his vanity, for he spoke like a native French,\nItalian, English, and German.'\n\n'It is scarcely possible,' said Tocqueville, 'for a man to be original in\nany language but his own; in all others he is forced to say what he can,\nand that is generally something that he recollects.'\n\n'I was much struck by that,' said Z., 'when conversing with Narvaez. He\nhad been talking sensibly but rather dully in French, I begged him to\ntalk Spanish, which I understand though I cannot speak. The whole man was\nchanged. It was as if a curtain had been drawn up from between us.\nInstead of hammering at commonplaces, he became pointed, and spirited,\nand eloquent.'\n\n'Is he an educated man?' I asked.\n\n'For a Spaniard,' answered Z., 'yes. He has the quickness, the finesse,\nand the elegance of mind and of manner which belong to the South. The\nwant of book-learning contributes to his originality.'\n\n'The most wonderful speaker in a foreign language,' said Sumner, 'was\nKossuth. He must have been between forty and fifty before he heard an\nEnglish word. Yet he spoke it fluently, eloquently, and even\nidiomatically. He would have made his fortune among us as a stump-orator.'\n\n\n\n_Tuesday, April_ 28.--Tocqueville drank tea with us.\n\nWe talked rather of people than of things.\n\n'Circourt,' said Tocqueville, 'is my dictionary. When I wish to know what\nhas been done or what has been said on any occasion, I go to Circourt. He\ndraws out one of the drawers in his capacious head, and finds there all\nthat I want arranged and ticketed.\n\n'One of the merits of his talk, as it is of his character, is its\nconscientiousness. He has the truthfulness of a thorough gentleman, and\nhis affections are as strong as his hatreds. I do not believe he would\nsacrifice a friend even to a good story, and where is there another man\nof whom that can be said?'\n\n'What think you of Mrs. T-----?' I inquired.\n\n'I like her too,' he replied, 'but less than I do Circourt. She has\nconsiderable talent, but she thinks and reads only to converse. She has\nno originality, no convictions. She says what she thinks that she can say\nwell; like a person writing a dialogue or an exercise. Whether the\nopinion which she expresses be right or wrong, or the story that she\ntells be true or false, is no concern of hers, provided it be _bien\ndit_.'\n\n'The fault of her conversation,' I said, 'seems to me to be, that while\nshe is repeating one sentence she is thinking of the next, and that while\nyou are speaking to her, she is considering what is to be her next topic.\nI have noticed this fault in other very fluent conversers. They are so\nintent on the future that they neglect the present.'\n\n'It is rather a French than an English fault,' said Tocqueville. 'The\nEnglish have more curiosity and less vanity, than we have; more desire to\nhear and less anxiety to shine. They are often, therefore, better\n_causeurs_ than we are. _Le grand talent pour le silence_, or, in other\nwords, the power of listening which has been imputed to them, is a great\nconversational virtue. I do not believe that it was said ironically or\nepigrammatically. The man who bestowed that praise knew how rare a merit\nsilence is.'\n\n'May we not owe that merit,' I asked, 'to our bad French? We shine most\nwhen we listen.'\n\n'A great talker,' I continued, 'Montalembert, is to breakfast with us.\nWhom shall I ask to meet him?'\n\n'Not me,' said Tocqueville, 'unless you will accept me as one of the\nchorus. I will not take a _premier r\u00f4le_, or any prominent _r\u00f4le_, in a\npiece in which he is to act. I like his society; that is, I like to sit\nsilent and hear him talk, and I admire his talents; and we have the\nstrong bond of common hatreds, though perhaps we hate on different, or\neven opposite grounds, and I do not wish for a dispute with him, of\nwhich, if I say anything, I shall be in danger. If we differed on only\none subject, instead of differing, as we do, on all but one, he would\npick out that single subject to attack me on. I am not sure that even as\nhost you will be safe. He is more acute in detecting points of opposition\nthan most men are in finding subjects of agreement. He avoids meeting you\non friendly or even on neutral ground. He chooses to have a combat _en\nchamp clos_.\n\n'Take care,' he added, 'and do not have too many _sommit\u00e9s._ They watch\none another, are conscious that they are watched, and a coldness creeps\nover the table.'\n\n'We had two pleasant breakfasts,' I said, 'a fortnight ago. You were\nleader of the band at one, Z. at the other, and the rest left the stage\nfree to the great actor.'\n\n'As for me,' he answered, 'I often shut myself up, particularly after\ndinner, or during dinner if it be long. The process of digestion, little,\nas I can eat, seems to oppress me.\n\n'Z. is always charming. He has an _aplomb_, an ease, a _verve_ arising\nfrom his security that whatever he says will interest and amuse. He is a\nperfect specimen of an ex-statesman, _homme de lettres_, and _p\u00e8re de\nfamille_, falling back on literature and the domestic affections. As for\nme, I have intervals of _sauvagerie_, or rather the times when I am not\n_sauvage_ are the intervals. I have many, perhaps too many, acquaintances\nwhom I like, and a very few friends whom I love, and a host of relations.\nI easily tire of Paris, and long to fly to the fields and woods and\nseashore of my province.'\n\nWe passed to the language of conversation.\n\n'There are three words,' said Tocqueville, 'which you have lost, and\nwhich I wonder how you do without,--Monsieur, Madame, and Mademoiselle.\nYou are forced always to substitute the name. They are so mixed in all\nour forms that half of what we say would appear abrupt or blunt without\nthem.\n\n'Then the _tutoyer_ is a _nuance_ that you want. When husband and wife\nare talking together they pass insensibly, twenty times perhaps in an\nhour, from the _vous_ to the _tu_. When matters of business or of serious\ndiscussion are introduced, indeed whenever the affections are not\nconcerned, it is _vous_. With the least _soup\u00e7on_ of tenderness the _tu_\nreturns.'\n\n'Yet,' I said, 'you never use the _tu_ before a third person.'\n\n'Never,' he answered, 'in good company. Among the _bourgeoisie_ always.\nIt is odd that an aristocratic form, so easily learned, should not have\nbeen adopted by all who pretend to be gentry. I remember being present\nwhen an Englishman and his wife, much accustomed to good French society,\nbut unacquainted with this _nuance_, were laboriously _tutoyering_ each\nother. I relieved them much by assuring them that it was not merely\nunnecessary, but objectionable.'\n\n\n_May_ 2.--Tocqueville dined with us.\n\nA lady at the _table d'h\u00f4te_ was full of a sermon which she had heard at\nthe Madeleine. The preacher said, sinking his voice to an audible\nwhisper, 'I will tell you a secret, but it must go no farther. There is\nmore religion among the Protestants than with us, they are better\nacquainted with the Bible, and make more use of their reading: we have\nmuch to learn from them.'\n\nI asked Tocqueville, when we were in our own room, as to the feelings of\nthe religious world in France with respect to heretics.\n\n'The religious laity,' he answered, 'have probably little opinion on the\nsubject. They suppose the heretic to be less favourably situated than\nthemselves, but do not waste much thought upon him. The ignorant priests\nof course consign him to perdition. The better instructed think, like\nProtestants, that error is dangerous only so far as it influences\npractice.\n\n'Dr. Bretonneau, at Tours, was one of the best men that I have known, but\nan unbeliever. The archbishop tried in his last illness to reconcile him\nto the Church: Bretonneau died as he had lived. But the archbishop, when\nlamenting to me his death, expressed his own conviction that so excellent\na soul could not perish.\n\n'You recollect the duchesse in St.-Simon, who, on the death of a sinner\nof illustrious race, said, \"On me dira ce qu'on voudra, on ne me\npersuadera pas que Dieu n'y regarde deux fois avant de damner un homme de\nsa qualit\u00e9.\" The archbishop's feeling was the same, only changing\n_qualit\u00e9_ into virtue.\n\n'There is something amusing,' he continued, 'when, separated as we are\nfrom it by such a chasm, we look back on the prejudices of the _Ancien\nR\u00e9gime_. An old lady once said to me, \"I have been reading with great\nsatisfaction the genealogies which prove that Jesus Christ descended from\nDavid. \u00c7a montre que notre Seigneur \u00e9tait Gentilhomme.\"'\n\n'We are somewhat ashamed,' I said, 'in general of Jewish blood, yet the\nL\u00e9vis boast of their descent from the Hebrew Levi.'\n\n'They are proud of it,' said Tocqueville, 'because they make themselves\nout to be cousins of the Blessed Virgin. They have a picture in which a\nDuc de L\u00e9vi stands bareheaded before the Virgin. \"Couvrez-vous donc, mon\ncousin,\" she says. \"C'est pour ma commodit\u00e9,\" he answers.'\n\nThe conversation passed to literature.\n\n'I am glad,' said Tocqueville, 'to find that, imperfect as my knowledge\nof English is, I can feel the difference in styles.'\n\n'I feel strongly,' I said, 'the difference in French styles in prose, but\nlittle in poetry.'\n\n'The fact is,' said Tocqueville, 'that the only French poetry, except\nthat of Racine, that is worth reading is the light poetry. I do not think\nthat I could now read Lamartine, though thirty years ago he delighted\nme.'\n\n'The French taste,' I said, 'in English poetry differs from ours. You\nread Ossian and the \"Night Thoughts.\"'\n\n'As for Ossian,' he answered, 'he does not seem to have been ever popular\nin England. But the frequent reference to the \"Night Thoughts,\" in the\nbooks and letters of the last century, shows that the poem was then in\neverybody's memory. Foreigners are in fact provincials. They take up\nfashions of literature as country people do fashions of dress, when the\ncapital has left them off. When I was young you probably had ceased to be\nfamiliar with Richardson. We knew him by heart. We used to weep over the\nLady Clementina, whom I dare say Miss Senior never heard of.\n\n'During the first Empire, we of the old _r\u00e9gime_  abandoned Paris, as we\ndo now, and for the same reasons. We used to live in our ch\u00e2teaux, where\nI remember as a boy hearing Sir Charles Grandison and Fielding read\naloud. A new novel was then an event. Madame Cottin was much more\ncelebrated than George Sand is now. For all her books were read, and by\neverybody. Notwithstanding the great merits of George Sand's style, her\nplots and her characters are so exaggerated and so unnatural, and her\nmorality is so perverted, that we have ceased to read her.'\n\nWe talked of Montalembert, and I mentioned his _sortie_ the other day\nagainst the clergy.\n\n'I can guess pretty well,' said Tocqueville, 'what he said to you, for it\nprobably was a _r\u00e9sum\u00e9_ of his article in the \"Correspondant.\" Like most\nmen accustomed to public speaking, he repeats himself. He is as honest\nperhaps as a man who is very _passionn\u00e9_ can be; but his oscillations are\nfrom one extreme to another. Immediately after the _coup d'\u00e9tat,_ when he\nbelieved Louis Napoleon to be Ultramontane, he was as servile as his\ngreat enemy the \"Univers\" is now. \"Ce sont les nuances qui se querellent,\nnon les couleurs;\" and between him and the \"Univers\" there is only a\n_nuance_. The Bishop of Agen has oscillated like him, but began at the\nother end. The other day the Bishop made a most servile address to the\nEmperor. He had formerly been a furious anti-Bonapartist. \"How is it\npossible,\" said Montalembert, \"that a man can rush so completely from one\nopinion to another? On the 4th of December in 1851 this same Bishop\ndenounced the _coup d'\u00e9tat_ with such violence that the President sent me\nto the Nuncio to request his interference. Now he is on his knees before\nhim. Such changes can scarcely be honest.\" Montalembert does not see that\nthe only difference between them is that they have trod in opposite\ndirections the very same path.'\n\n\n_Thursday, May_ 5.--Tocqueville and I dined with M. and Madame de Bourke,\nand met there General Dumas and Ary Scheffer.\n\nWe talked of Delaroche's pictures, and Scheffer agreed with me in\npreferring the smaller ones. He thought that Delaroche improved up to the\ntime of his death, and preferred his Moses, and Drowned Martyr, painted\nin 1853 and 1855, to the other large ones, and his Girondins, finished in\n1856, to the earlier small ones.\n\nWe passed on to the increased and increasing population of Paris.\n\n'The population of Paris,' I said, 'is only half that of London, while\nthat of the British Islands is not three-fourths that of France. If you\nwere to double the population of Paris, therefore, it would still be\nproportionally less than that of London.'\n\n'That is true,' said Tocqueville, 'but yet there are many circumstances\nconnected with the Parisian population each of which renders it more\ndangerous than the London one. In the first place, there is the absence\nof any right to relief. The English workman knows that neither he nor his\nfamily can starve. The Frenchman becomes anxious as soon as his\nemployment is irregular, and desperate when it fails. The English workmen\nare unacquainted with arms, and have no leaders with military experience.\nThe bulk of the Frenchmen have served, many of them are veterans in civil\nwar, and they have commanders skilled in street-fighting. The English\nworkmen have been gradually attracted to London by a real and permanent\ndemand for their labour. They have wives and children. At least 100,000\nmen have been added to the working population of Paris since the _coup\nd'\u00e9tat._ They are young men in the vigour of their strength and passions,\nunrestrained by wives or families. They have been drawn hither suddenly\nand artificially by the demolition and reconstruction of half the town,\nby the enormous local expenditure of the Government, and by the fifty\nmillions spent in keeping the price of bread in Paris unnaturally low.\nThe 40,000 men collected in Paris by the construction of the\nfortifications are supposed to have mainly contributed to the revolution\nof 1848. What is to be expected from this addition of 100,000? Then the\nrepressive force is differently constituted and differently animated. In\nEngland you have an army which has chosen arms as a profession, which\nnever thinks of any other employment, and indeed is fit for no other, and\nnever expects any provision except its pay and its pension. The French\nsoldier, ever since 1789, is a citizen. He serves his six years because\nthe law and the colonel force him to do so, but he counts the days until\nhe can return to his province, his cottage, and his field. He sympathises\nwith the passions of the people. In the terrible days of June, the army\nwithstood the cries, the blessings, the imprecations and the seductions\nof the mob, only because they had the National Guards by their side.\nTheir presence was a guarantee that the cause was just. The National\nGuards never fought before as they did in those days. Yet at the Ch\u00e2teau\nd'Eau, the miraculous heroism and the miraculous good luck of Lamorici\u00e8re\nwere necessary to keep them together. If he had not exposed himself as no\nman ever did, and escaped as no man ever did, they would have been\nbroken.'\n\n'I was there,' said Scheffer, 'when his fourth horse was killed under\nhim. As the horse was sinking he drew his feet out of the stirrups and\ncame to the ground without falling; but his cigar dropped from his mouth.\nHe picked it up, and went on with the order which he was giving to an\n_aide-de-camp._\n\n'I saw that,' said Tocqueville. 'He had placed himself immediately behind\na cannon in front of the Ch\u00e2teau d'Eau which fired down the Boulevard du\nTemple. A murderous fire from the windows in a corner of the Rue du\nTemple killed all the artillerymen. The instant that Lamorici\u00e8re placed\nhimself behind it, I thought that I saw what would happen. I implored him\nto get behind some shelter, or at least not to pose as a mark.\n\"Recollect,\" I said, \"that if you go on in this way you must be killed\nbefore the day is over-and where shall we all be?\"'\n\n'\"I see the danger of what I am doing,\" he answered, \"and I dislike it as\nmuch as you can do; but it is necessary. The National Guards are shaking;\nif they break, the Line follows. I must set an example that everyone can\nsee and can understand. This is not a time for taking precautions. If _I_\nwere to shelter myself, _they_ would run.\"'\n\n'How does Lamorici\u00e8re,' I asked, 'bear exile and inactivity in Brussels?'\n\n'Very ill,' said Scheffer. 'He feels that he has compromised the\nhappiness of his wife, whom he married not long before the _coup\nd'\u00e9tat._'\n\n'Changarnier at Malins, who lives alone and has only himself to care for,\nsupports it much better.'\n\nTocqueville and I walked home together.\n\n'Scheffer,' he said, 'did not tell all that happened at the Ch\u00e2teau\nd'Eau. Men seldom do when they fight over their battles.'\n\n'The insurgents by burrowing through walls had got into a house in the\nrear of our position. They manned the windows, and suddenly fired down on\nus from a point whence no danger had been feared. This caused a panic\namong the National Guards, a force of course peculiarly subject to\npanics. They turned and ran back 250 yards along the Boulevard St.\nMartin, carrying with them the Line and Lamorici\u00e8re himself. He\nendeavoured to stop them by outcries, and by gesticulations, and indeed\nby force. He gave to one man who was trying to run by him a blow with his\nfist, so well meant and well directed that it broke his collar bone.'\n\n'At length he stopped them, re-formed them, and said: \"Now you shall\nmarch, I at your head, and the drummer beating the charge, as if you were\non parade, up to that house.\" They did so. After a few discharges, which\nmiraculously missed Lamorici\u00e8re, the men in the house deserted it.'\n\n'What were you doing at the Ch\u00e2teau d'Eau?' I asked.\n\n'We were marching,' he said, 'with infantry and artillery on the\nBoulevard du Temple, across which there was a succession of barricades,\nwhich it was necessary to take one by one.\n\n'As we advanced in the middle, our sappers and miners got into the houses\non each side, broke through the party walls, and killed the men at the\nwindows.'\n\n'Those three days,' he continued, 'impress strongly on my mind the\ndangers of our present state.'\n\n'It is of no use to take up pavements and straighten streets, and pierce\nParis by long military roads, and loop-hole the barracks, if the\nExecutive cannot depend on the army. Ditches and bastions are of no use\nif the garrison will not man them.'\n\n'The new law of recruitment, however, may produce a great change. Instead\nof 80,000 conscripts, 120,000 are to be taken each year. This is about\nall that are fit for service. They are required to serve for only two\nyears. If the change ended there our army would be still more a militia\nthan it is now. It would be the Prussian Landwehr. But those entitled to\ntheir discharge are to be enticed by higher pay, promotions, bounties,\nand retiring pensions--in short, by all means of seduction, to re-enter\nfor long periods, for ten, or fifteen, or perhaps twenty years. It is\nhoped that thus a permanent regular army may be formed, with an _esprit\nde corps_ of its own, unsympathising with the people, and ready to keep\nit down; and such will, I believe, be the result. But it will take nine\nor ten years to produce such an army--and the dangers that I fear are\nimmediate.'\n\n'What are the motives,' I asked, 'for the changes as to the conscription,\nthe increase of numbers, and the diminution of the time of service?'\n\n'They are parts,' he answered, 'of the system. The French peasant, and\nindeed the _ouvrier_, dislikes the service. The proportion of conscripts\nwho will re-enlist is small. Therefore the whole number must be large.\nThe country must be bribed to submit to this by the shortness of the\nterm. The conscript army will be sacrificed to what is to be the regular\narmy. It will be young and ill-trained.'\n\n'But your new regular army,' I said, 'will be more formidable to the\nenemy than your present force.'\n\n'I am not sure of that,' he answered. 'The merit of the French army was\nthe impetuosity of its attack, the \"furia Francese,\" as the Italians\ncalled it. Young troops have more of this quality than veterans. The\nMaison du Roi, whose charge at Steenkirk Macaulay has so well described,\nconsisted of boys of eighteen.'\n\n'I am re-editing,' I said, 'my old articles. Among them is one written in\n1841 on the National Character of France, England, and America,[1] as\ndisplayed towards foreign nations. I have not much to change in what I\nhave said of England or of America. As they have increased in strength\nthey have both become still more arrogant, unjust, and shameless.\n\n'England has perhaps become a little more prudent America a little less\nso. But France seems to me to be altered. I described her as a soldier\nwith all the faults of that unsocial character. As ambitious, rapacious,\neager for nothing but military glory and territorial aggrandisement. She\nseems now to have become moderate and pacific, and to be devoted rather\nto the arts of peace than to those of war.'\n\n'France _is_ changed,' answered Tocqueville, 'and when compared with the\nFrance of Louis XIV., or of Napoleon, was already changed when you wrote,\nthough the war-cry raised for political purposes in 1840 deceived\nyou. At the same time, I will not deny that military glory would, more\nthan any other merit, even _now_ strengthen a Government, and that\nmilitary humiliation would inevitably destroy one. Nor must you overrate\nthe unpopularity of the last war. Only a few even of the higher classes\nunderstood its motives. \"Que diable veut cette guerre?\" said my country\nneighbour to me; \"si c'\u00e9tait contre les Anglais--mais _avec_ les Anglais,\net pour le Grand Turc, qu'est-ce que cela peut signifier?\" But when they\nsaw that it cost only men, that they were not invaded or overtaxed, and\nthat prices rose, they got reconciled to it.\n\n'It was only the speculators of Paris that were tired of it. And if,\ninstead of the Crimea, we had fought near our own frontiers, or for some\nvisible purpose, all our military passions, bad and good, would have\nbroken out.'\n\n[Footnote 1: This article is republished in the _Historical and\nPhilosophical Essays_. Longmans: 1865.--ED.]\n\n\n_Wednesday, May_ 13.--Tocqueville came in after breakfast, and I walked\nwith him in the shade of the green walls or arcades of the Tuileries\nchestnuts.\n\nWe talked of the Montijos, which led our conversation to M\u00e9rim\u00e9e and V.\n\n'Both of them,' said Tocqueville, 'were the friends of\nCountess Montijo, the mother.\n\n'V. was among the last persons who knew Eug\u00e9nie as Countess Th\u00e9ba. He\nescorted her to the Tuileries the very evening of her marriage. There he\ntook his leave of her. \"You are now,\" he said, \"placed so high that I can\nonly admire you from below.\" And I do not believe that they have met\nsince.\n\n'M\u00e9rim\u00e9e took a less sentimental view of the change. He acknowledged his\nEmpress in his former plaything, subsided from a sort of stepfather into\na courtier, and so rose to honour and wealth, while V. is satisfied to\nremain an ex-professor and _un homme de lettres_.'\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nWe met Henri Martin, and I asked Tocqueville what he thought of his\nHistory.\n\n'It has the merit of selling,' he said, 'which cannot be said of any\nother History of France. Martin is laborious and conscientious, and does\nnot tell a story ill; but he is a partisan and is always biassed by his\nown likings and dislikings. He belongs to the class of theorists,\nunfortunately not a small one, whose political _beau id\u00e9al_ is the\nabsence of all control over the will of the people-who are opposed\ntherefore to an hereditary monarchy-to a permanent President--to a\npermanent magistracy-to an established Church--in short, to all\nprivileged classes, bodies, or institutions. Equality, not liberty or\nsecurity, is their object. They are centralisers and absolutists. A\ndespotic Assembly elected by universal suffrage, sitting at most for a\nyear, governing, like the Convention, through its committees, or a single\ndespot, appointed for a week, and not re-eligible, is the sort of ruler\nthat they would prefer. The last five years have perhaps disgusted Martin\nwith his Asiatic democracy, but his earlier volumes are coloured\nthroughout by his prejudices against all systems implying a division of\npower, and independent authorities controlling and balancing one\nanother.'\n\nWe talked of the Secret Police.\n\n'It has lately,' said Tocqueville, 'been unusually troublesome, or rather\nit has been troublesome to a class of persons whom it seldom ventures to\nmolest. A friend of mine, M. Sauvaire Barth\u00e9lemy, one of Louis Philippe's\npeers, was standing at the door of his hotel reading a letter. A\ngentleman in plain clothes addressed him, announced himself as an _agent\nde police_, and asked him if the letter which he was reading was\npolitical. \"No,\" said Barth\u00e9lemy, \"you may see it. It is a _billet de\nmariage.\" \"I am directed,\" said the agent, \"to request you to get into\nthis carriage.\" They got in and drove to Mazas. There Barth\u00e9lemy was\nshown into a neat room with iron bars to the windows, and ordered to\nwait. After some time Louis Pietri, the Pr\u00e9fet de Police, arrived.\n\n'\"I am grieved,\" he said, \"at giving you so much trouble, but I have been\ncommanded to see you in this place, and to inform you that the Emperor\ncannot bear that a man in your high position should systematically\nmisrepresent him.\n\n'\"L'Empereur fait tout ce qu'il peut pour le bonheur de la France, et il\nn'entend pas supporter une opposition aussi constante et aussi violente.\nEffectivement il ne veut pas d'opposition. Voulez-vous le tenir pour\ndit, Monsieur, et recevoir de nouveau mes excuses du d\u00e9rangement que j'ai\nd\u00fb vous causer? Pour le pr\u00e9sent vous \u00eates libre.\"'\n\n\n[Mr. Senior left Paris on the next day.\n\nM. de Tocqueville paid his promised visit to England in June, and was\nreceived with a perfect ovation.--ED.]\n\n\n\nCORRESPONDENCE.\n\nLondon, July 10, 1857.\n\nI was too ill, my dear friend, to go to you yesterday. Dr. Ferguson tells\nme that I have been doing too much, and prescribes perfect rest.\n\nI have already read half your journal of 1857. It is very curious; but I\nam glad that you have disguised me.\n\nIt is terrible to be in London, and to see so little of you; but the\nforce of circumstances is greater than the force of wishes.\n\nEver yours,\n\nA. DE TOCQUEVILLE.\n\n\nTocqueville, August 6, 1857.\n\nYou may already have had news of me through some of our common friends,\nmy dear Senior, but I wish, besides, to give you some myself, and to\nthank you again for the kind welcome I received from you and in your\nhouse during my stay in London.\n\nI regret only that I was unable to be more with you, and that, in spite\nof myself, I was drawn into a whirlpool which carried me away and\nprevented me from following my inclinations.\n\nI have returned, however, full of gratitude for the marks of\nconsideration and affection showered upon me in England. I shall never\nforget them.\n\nI found my wife already installed here, and in good health; and I have\nresumed my busy and peaceful life with a delight which does honour to my\nwisdom. For I had been so spoiled in England that I might have been\nafraid of finding my retreat too much out of the way and too quiet. But\nnothing of the sort has happened. The excitement of the past month\nappears to have added charms to the present.\n\nNevertheless, I have not yet set to work again, but I am full of good\nresolutions, which I hope to execute as soon as I have completely\nreturned to my usual habits. These first days have been devoted to\nputting everything into its regular order.\n\nIn France we are almost as much interested as you in England in the\naffairs of India. Everyone, even in the country, asks me for news of what\nis going on there.\n\nThere is a natural disposition to exaggerate the evil and to believe that\nyour dominion is overturned. For my part, I am waiting with the utmost\nand most painful anxiety for the development of the drama, for no good\ncan possibly result from it; and there is not one civilised nation in the\nworld that ought to rejoice in seeing India escape from the hands of\nEuropeans in order to fall back into a state of anarchy and barbarism\nworse than before its conquest.\n\nI am quite sure that you will conquer. But it is a serious business.\n\nA military insurrection is the worst of all insurrections, at least in\nthe beginning. You have to deal with barbarians, but they possess the\narms of civilised people given to them by yourselves.\n\nMy wife, who has preserved her English heart, is particularly affected by\nthe spectacle which Bengal at present affords.\n\nIf you have any more particular news than is to be found in the\nnewspapers, you will give us great pleasure by communicating them.\n\nRemember me to Mrs. and Miss Senior, and to your daughter-in-law.\n\nMy wife sends many kind regards to them, as well as to you.\n\nAdieu, dear Senior. Believe in my sincere affection.\n\nA. DE TOCQUEVILLE.\n\nP.S.--I fancy that the first effect of the Indian affair will be to draw\nstill closer the alliance between England and France.\n\n\nTocqueville, November 15, 1857.\n\nI am somewhat angry with you, my dear Senior, for not having yet given us\nyour news.[1] It is treating our friendship unfairly, I have not written\nto you because I doubted your following exactly your intended route, but\nI will write to you at Athens, as I think that you must now be there. If\nyou have followed your itinerary your travels must have been most\ninteresting to you, and they will be equally curious to us. I conclude\nthat you only passed quickly through the Principalities in following the\ncourse of the Danube. I, however, had depended on you for furnishing me\nwith clear ideas of a country which is at present so interesting to\nEurope, and which I think is destined to play an important part in the\nfuture. And what say you of our friends the Turks? Was it worth while to\nspend so much money and to shed so much blood in order to retain in\nEurope savages who are ill disguised as civilised men? I am impatient to\ntalk to you, and almost equally so to read you.\n\nI shall have little to tell you. I have not stirred from home since I\nleft England, and am leading the life of a gentleman-farmer; a life which\npleases me more and more every day, and would really make me happy, if my\nwife were not suffering from an obstinate neuralgic affection in the\nface. I fear that she may have to go to some mineral waters, which she\nwould be sorry to do; for, as you know, she hates travelling, and does no\njustice to the reputation for wandering possessed by the English race.\n\nI can tell you nothing on politics which you will not find in the\nnewspapers. The great question at present for all civilised Governments\nseems to be the financial. The crisis from which America and England are\nsuffering will probably extend everywhere. As for India, you are out, not\nperhaps of your difficulties, but of your greatest dangers. This affair,\nand that of the Crimea, show how little sympathy there is for England\nabroad. There was everything to interest us in your success--similarity\nof race, of religion, and of civilisation. Your loss of India could have\nserved no cause but that of barbarism. Yet I venture to affirm that the\nwhole Continent, though it detested the cruelties of your enemies, did\nnot wish you to triumph.\n\nMuch of this is, without doubt, to be attributed to the evil passions\nwhich make men always desire the fall of the prosperous and the strong.\nBut much belongs to a less dishonourable cause--to the conviction of all\nnations that England considers them only with reference to her own\ngreatness; that she has less sympathy than any other modern nation; that\nshe never notices what passes among foreigners, what they think, feel,\nsuffer, or do, but with relation to the use which England can make of\ntheir actions, their sufferings, their feelings, or their thoughts; and\nthat when she seems most to care for them she really cares only for\nherself. All this is exaggerated, but not without truth.\n\nKindest regards from us both to you and to Mrs. Senior.\n\nA. DE TOCQUEVILLE.\n\n[Footnote 1: Mr. Senior was at this time in the East.--ED.]\n\n\n\nTocqueville, February 10, 1858.\n\nI was delighted, my dear Senior, to receive a letter from you dated\nMarseilles. You are right in remaining till the spring in the South. We\ntrust to meet you in Paris in March.\n\nI say no more, for I cannot write to you on what would most interest\nyou--French politics. Much is to be said on them; but you will understand\nmy silence if you study our new Law of Public Safety, and remember who is\nthe new Home Minister.[1] For the first time in French history has such a\npost been filled by a general--and what a general!\n\nI defer, therefore, until we meet, the expression of feelings and\nopinions which cannot be safely transmitted through the post, and only\nrepeat how eager I am for our meeting.\n\nKind regards to Mrs. Senior.\n\nA. DE TOCQUEVILLE.\n\n[Footnote 1: General Espinasse.]\n\n\nTocqueville, February 21, 1858.\n\nI received your letters with great pleasure, my dear Senior, and I think\nwith still greater satisfaction that I shall soon be able to see you.\n\nI shall probably arrive in Paris, with my wife, at about the same time as\nyou will, that is to say, about the 19th of next month. I should have\ngone earlier if I were not occupied in planting and sowing, for I am\ndoing a little farming to my great amusement.\n\nI am delighted that you intend again to take up your quarters at the\nH\u00f4tel Bedford, as I intend also to stay there if I can find apartments.\n\nI hope that we shall be good neighbours and see each other as frequently\nas such old friends ought to do. _A bient\u00f4t!_\n\nA. DE TOCQUEVILLE.\n\n[Mr. Senior ran over to England for a few weeks instead of remaining in\nParis. The meeting between the two friends did not, therefore, take place\ntill April.--ED.]\n\n\n\nCONVERSATIONS.\n\n_Paris, Saturday, April_ 17, 1858.--We had a discussion at the Institut\nto-day as to a bust to fill a niche in the anteroom. Rossi was proposed.\nHis political merits were admitted, but he was placed low as to his\nliterary claims as an economist and a jurist. Dupin suggested Talleyrand,\nwhich was received with a universal groan, and failed for want of a\nseconder. Ultimately the choice fell on Dumont.\n\n'Nothing that is published of Talleyrand's,' said Tocqueville to me as we\nwalked home, 'has very great merit, nor indeed is much of it his own. He\nhated writing, let his reports and other state papers be drawn up by\nothers, and merely retouched them. But in the archives of the _Affaires\n\u00e9trang\u00e8res_ there is a large quarto volume containing his correspondence\nwith Louis XVIII during the Congress of Vienna. Nothing can be more\ncharming. The great European questions which were then in debate, the\ndiplomatic and social gossip of Vienna, the contemporary literature--in\nshort, all that one clever _homme du monde_ could find to interest and\namuse another, are treated with wit, brilliancy, and gaiety, supported by\nprofound good sense. When that volume is published his bust will be\nplaced here by acclamation.'\n\n_Monday, April_ 19.--I dined with Lanjuinais, and met Tocqueville, Rivet,\nDufaure, Corcelle, Freslon, and one or two others.\n\nThey attacked me about the change of sentiment in England with respect to\nLouis Napoleon.\n\n'While he was useful to you,' they said, 'you steadily refused to admit\nthat he was a tyrant, or even an usurper. You chose to disbelieve in the\n3,000 men, women, and children massacred on the Boulevards of Paris--in\nthe 20,000 poisoned by jungle fever in Cayenne--in  the 25,000 who have\ndied of malaria, exposure, and bad food, working in gangs on the roads\nand in the marshes of the Metidja and Lambressa.'\n\n'We did not _choose_', I answered, 'to disbelieve any thing. We were\nsimply ignorant. _I_ knew all these facts, because I have passed a part\nof every year since 1847 in Paris; because I walked along the Boulevards\non the 20th of December 1851, and saw the walls of every house, from the\nBastille to the Madeleine, covered with the marks of musket-balls;\nbecause I heard in every society of the thousands who had been massacred,\nand of the tens of thousands who had been _d\u00e9port\u00e9s_; but the untravelled\nEnglish, and even the travelled English, except the few who live in\nFrance among the French, knew nothing of all this. Your press tells\nnothing. The nine millions of votes given to Louis Napoleon seemed to\nprove his popularity, and therefore the improbability of the tyranny of\nwhich he was accused by his enemies. _I_ knew that those nine millions of\nvotes were extorted, or stolen by violence or fraud. But the English\npeople did not know it. They accepted his election as the will of the\nnation, and though they might wonder at your choice, did not presume to\nblame it.'\n\n'The time,' they answered, 'at which light broke in upon you is\nsuspicious. Up to the 14th of January 1858 the oppression under which\nthirty-four millions of people within twenty-four miles of your coast,\nwith whom you are in constant intercourse, was unknown to you. Their\nruler insults you, and you instantly discover that he is an usurper and a\ntyrant. This looks as if the insult, and the insult alone, opened your\neyes.'\n\n'What opened our eyes,' I answered, 'was not the insult but the _loi de\ns\u00fbret\u00e9 publique_. It was the first public act which showed to England the\nnature of your Government.\n\n'When we found, erected in every department, a revolutionary tribunal,\nempowered to banish and transport without trial; when we found a rude\nsoldier made Home Minister, and the country divided into five districts\nto be each governed by a marshal, we saw at once that France was under a\nviolent military despotism. Until that law was passed the surface was\nsmooth. There was nothing in the appearance of France to show to a\nstranger that she was not governed by a Monarch, practically, indeed,\nabsolute, but governing as many absolute Monarchs have done, mildly and\nusefully.\n\n'Of course we might have found out the truth sooner if we had inquired.\nAnd perhaps we ought to have inquired. We busy ourselves about our own\naffairs, and neglect too much those of other countries. In that sense\nyou have a right to say that we chose to be ignorant, since our conduct\nwas such as necessarily to make us ignorant. But it was not because Louis\nNapoleon was our ally that we chose to be ignorant, but because we\nhabitually turn our eyes from the domestic affairs of the Continent, as\nthings in which we have seldom a right to interfere, and in which, when\nwe do interfere, we do more harm than good.'\n\nWe talked of the manner in which the _loi de s\u00fbret\u00e9 publique_ has been\ncarried out. And I mentioned 600 as the number of those who had suffered\nunder it, as acknowledged to me by Blanchard in the beginning of March.\n\n'It is much greater now,' said Lanjuinais. 'Berryer on his return from\nItaly, a week ago, slept in Marseilles. He was informed that more than\n900 persons had passed through Marseilles, _d\u00e9port\u00e9s_ under the new law\nto Algeria. They were of all classes: artisans and labourers mixed with\nmen of the higher and middle classes. To these must be added those\ntransported to Cayenne, who were sent by way of Havre. As for the number\n_expuls\u00e9s_ and _intern\u00e9s_ there are no data.'\n\n'In the Department of Var, a man was found guilty in 1848 of joining in\none of the revolutionary movements of that time. His complete innocence\nwas soon proved; he was released, and has lived quietly on his little\nestate ever since. He was arrested under the new law and ordered to be\n_d\u00e9port\u00e9_ to Algeria. His friends, in fact all his neighbours,\nremonstrated, and sent to Paris the proof that the original conviction\nwas a mistake. \"Qu'il aille tout de m\u00eame,\" was Espinasse's answer.\n\n'In Calvados the Pr\u00e9fet, finding no one whom he could conscientiously\narrest, took hold of one of the most respectable men in the department.\n\"If,\" he said, \"I had arrested a man against whom there was plausible\nground for suspicion, he might have been transported. This man _must_ be\nreleased.\"'\n\n'Has he been released?' I asked.\n\n'I have not heard,' was the answer. 'In all probability he has been.'\n\n'In my department,' said Tocqueville, 'the _sous-pr\u00e9fet_, ordered by the\nPr\u00e9fet to arrest somebody in the arrondissement, was in the same\nperplexity as the Pr\u00e9fet of Calvados. \"I can find no fit person,\" he said\nto me. I believe that he reported the difficulty to the Pr\u00e9fet, and that\nthe vacancy was supplied from some other arrondissement.\n\n'What makes this frightful,' he added, 'is that we now know that\ndeportation is merely a slow death. Scarcely any of the victims of 1851\nand 1852 are living.'\n\n'I foretold that,' I said, 'at the time, as you will find if you look at\nmy article on Lamartine, published in the \"Edinburgh Review.\"'[1]\n\n[Footnote 1:  See _Journals in France and Italy_.--ED.]\n\n\n_April_ 20.--We talked of the political influence in France of the\n_hommes de lettres_.\n\n'It began,' said Tocqueville, 'with the Restoration. Until that time we\nhad sometimes, though very rarely, statesmen who became writers, but\nnever writers who became statesmen,'\n\n'You had _hommes de lettres_,' I said, 'in the early Revolutionary\nAssemblies--Mirabeau for instance.'\n\n'Mirabeau,' he answered, 'is your best example, for Mirabeau, until he\nbecame a statesman, lived by his pen. Still I should scarcely call a man\nof his high birth and great expectations _un homme de lettres_. That\nappellation seems to belong to a man who owes his position in early life\nto literature. Such a man is Thiers, or Guizot, as opposed to such men as\nGladstone, Lord John Russell, or Montalembert.'\n\n\n_Wednesday, April_ 21.--I dined with D. and met, among several others,\nAdmiral Matthieu the Imperial Hydrographer, and a general whose name I\ndid not catch. I talked to the general about the army.\n\n'We are increasing it,' he said, 'but not very materially. We are rather\ngiving ourselves the means of a future rapid increase, than making an\nimmediate augmentation. We are raising the number of men from 354,000 to\n392,400, in round numbers to 400,000; but the principal increase is in\nthe _cadres_, the officers attached to each battalion. We have increased\nthem by more than one third. So that if a war should break out we can\ninstantly--that is to say in three months, increase our army to 600,000\nor even 700,000 men. Soldiers are never wanting in France, the difficulty\nalways is to find officers.'\n\n'I hear,' I said, 'that you are making great improvements in your\nartillery.'\n\n'We are,' he answered. 'We are applying to it the principle of the Mini\u00e9\nmusket, and we are improving the material. We hope to make our guns as\ncapable of resisting rapid and continued firing as well and as long as\nthe English and the Swedish guns, which are the best in Europe, can do.\nAnd we find that we can throw a ball on the Mini\u00e9 principle with equal\nprecision twice as far. This will double the force of all our batteries.'\n\n'Are _you_,' he asked me, 'among those who have taken shares in the\nRussian railways?'\n\n'No,' I said. 'They are the last that I wish to encourage.'\n\n'Englishmen or Frenchmen,' he answered, 'who help Russia to make\nrailways, put me in mind of the Dutch who sold powder to their besiegers.\n\n'The thinness of her population--that is, the vast space over which it is\nscattered--alone prevents Russia from being the mistress of Europe. If\nher 64,000,000 were as concentrated as our 34,000,000 are, she would be\nirresistible. She loses always far more men in marching than in\nfighting.'\n\n'The events of the war,' I said, 'lead me to believe that the goodness of\nthe Russian soldier is exaggerated. They were always beaten, often by\ninferior numbers.'\n\n'In the first place,' he answered, 'those who were beaten at Sebastopol\nwere not the best Russian soldiers. They were short small men, generally\ndrawn from the neighbouring provinces. The Russian Imperial Guards and\nthe Russian Army in Poland are far superior to any that we encountered in\nthe Crimea. In the second place, they were ill commanded. The\nimprovements of weapons, of science and of discipline, have raised the\nprivates of all the great military nations to about the same level.\nSuccess now depends on numbers and on generalship. With railways Russia\nwill be able to bring quickly a preponderating force to any point on her\nfrontier. Her officers are already good, and for money she can import the\nbest generals; indeed, I do not see why she should not breed them. Russia\nis civilised enough to produce men of the highest military qualities.'\n\nI asked Admiral Matthieu about the naval preparations of France.\n\n'The \"Moniteur,\"' I said, 'denies that you are making any.'\n\n'The \"Moniteur,\"' he answered, 'does not tell the truth. We are\naugmenting largely, both the number and the efficacy of our fleet.\n\n'Four years ago, at the beginning of the Russian war, we resolved to\nbuild a steam fleet of 150 steam ships of different sizes for fighting,\nand 74 steam ships for the transfer service, and to carry fuel and\nstores. Though we set about this in the beginning, as we thought, of a\nlong war, we have not allowed the peace to interrupt it. We are devoting\nto it sixty-five millions a year (2,600,000_l_.) of which from fifteen to\nseventeen millions are employed every year in building new ships, and\nfrom forty to forty-two in adding steam power to the old ones. We hope to\nfinish this great work in fourteen years.'\n\n'What,' I asked, 'is the amount of your present fleet of steamers?'\n\n'We have thirty-three screws,' he answered, 'fifty-seven paddles, and\nsixty-two sailing vessels in commission, and seventy-three, mostly\nsteamers, _en r\u00e9serve_, as you would say, in ordinary.'\n\n'Manned by how many men?' I asked.\n\n'By twenty-five thousand sailors,' he answered, 'and eleven thousand\nmarines. But our _inscription maritime_ would give us in a few months or\nless one hundred thousand more. Since the times of Louis XVI. the French\nNavy has never been so formidable, positively or relatively.'\n\n'How,' I asked, 'has your \"Napoleon\" succeeded?'\n\n'Admirably,' he answered. 'I have not seen the \"Wellington,\" but she is a\nmuch finer ship than the Agamemnon. Her speed is wonderful. A month ago\nshe left Toulon at seven in the morning, and reached Ajaccio by four in\nthe evening. But the great improvement is in our men. Napoleon knew\nnothing and cared nothing about sailors. He took no care about their\ntraining, and often wasted them in land operations, for which landsmen\nwould have done as well.\n\n'In 1814 he left Toulon absolutely unguarded, and sent all the sailors to\njoin Augereau. You might have walked into it.\n\n'In 1810 or 1811 I was on board a French corvette which fought an action\nwith an English vessel, the \"Lively.\" We passed three times under her\nstern, and raked her each time. We ought to have cleared her decks. Not a\nshot touched her. The other day at Cherbourg I saw a broadside fired at a\nfloating mark three cables off, the usual distance at which ships engage.\nTen balls hit it, and we could see that all the others passed near enough\nto shake it by their wind.\n\n'A ship of eighty guns has now forty _canonniers_ and forty _ma\u00eetres de\npi\u00e8ces_. All practical artillerymen, and even the able seamen, can point\na gun. Nelson's manoeuvre of breaking the line could not be used against\na French fleet, such as a French fleet is now. The leading ships would be\ndestroyed one after another, by the concentrated fire. Formerly our\nofficers dreaded a maritime war. They knew that defeat awaited them,\npossibly death. Now they are confident, and eager to try their hands.'\n\nIn the evening L. took me into a corner, and we had a long conversation.\n\nHe had been reading my 'Athens Journal.'\n\n'What struck me,' he said, 'in every page of it, was the resemblance of\nKing Otho to Louis Napoleon.'\n\n'I see the resemblance,' I answered, 'but it is the resemblance of a\ndwarf to a giant.'\n\n'No,' he replied. 'Of a man five feet seven inches high to one five feet\neleven inches. There are not more than four inches between them. There is\nthe same cunning, the same coldness, the same vindictiveness, the same\nsilence, the same perseverance, the same unscrupulousness, the same\nselfishness, the same anxiety to appear to do everything that is done,\nand above all, the same determination to destroy, or to seduce by\ncorruption or by violence, every man and every institution favourable to\nliberty, independence, or self-government. In one respect Otho had the\nmore difficult task. He found himself, in 1843, subject to a Constitution\ncarefully framed under the advice of England for the express purpose of\ncontrolling him. He did not attempt to get rid of it by a _coup d'\u00e9tat_,\nor even to alter it, but cunningly and skilfully perverted it into an\ninstrument of despotism. Louis Napoleon destroyed the Constitution which\nhe found, and made a new one, copied from that which had been gradually\nelaborated by his uncle, which as a restraint is intentionally powerless\nand fraudulent.\n\n'A man,' he continued, 'may acquire influence either by possessing in a\nhigher degree the qualities which belong to his country and to his time,\nor by possessing those in which they are deficient.\n\n'Wellington is an example of this first sort. His excellences were those\nof an Englishman carried almost to perfection.\n\n'Louis Napoleon belongs to the second. If his merits had been impetuous\ncourage, rapidity of ideas, quickness of decision, frankness, versatility\nand resource, he would have been surrounded by his equals or his\nsuperiors. He predominated over those with whom he came in contact\nbecause he differed from them. Because he was calm, slow, reserved,\nsilent, and persevering. Because he is a Dutchman, not a Frenchman.'\n\n'He seems,' I said, 'to have lost his calmness.'\n\n'Yes,' answered L. 'But under what a shock! And observe that though the\ngreatest risk was encountered by _him_, the terror was greatest among his\n_entourage_. I do not believe that if he had been left to himself he\nwould have lost his prudence or his self-possession. He did not for the\nfirst day. Passions are contagious. Everyone who approached him was\nagitated by terror and anger. His intrepidity and self-reliance, great as\nthey are, were disturbed by the hubbub all round him. His great defects\nare three. First, his habit of self-contemplation. He belongs to the men\nwhom the Germans call subjective, whose eye is always turned inwardly;\nwho think only of themselves, of their own character, and of their own\nfortunes. Secondly, his jealousy of able men. He wishes to be what you\ncalled him, a giant, and as Nature has not made him positively tall, he\ntries to be comparatively so, by surrounding himself with dwarfs. His\nthird defect is the disproportion of his wishes to his means. His desires\nare enormous. No power, no wealth, no expenditure would satisfy them.\nEven if he had his uncle's genius and his uncle's indefatigability, he\nwould sink, as his uncle did, under the exorbitance of his attempts. As\nhe is not a man of genius, or even a man of remarkable ability, as he is\nignorant, uninventive and idle, you will see him flounder and fall from\none failure to another.\n\n'During the three years that Drouyn de L'Huys was his minister he was\nintent on home affairs--on his marriage, on the Louvre, on the artillery,\non his _bonnes fortunes_, and on the new delights of unbounded\nexpenditure. He left foreign affairs altogether to his minister. When\nDrouyn de L'Huys left him, the road before him was plain--he had only to\ncarry on the war. But when the war was over, the road ended; neither\nhe nor Walewski nor any of his _entourage_ know anything of the country\nin which they are travelling. You see them wandering at hazard. Sometimes\ntrying to find their way to Russia, sometimes to England. Making a treaty\nwith Austria, then attempting to injure her, and failing; attempting to\ninjure Turkey, and failing; bullying Naples, and failing; threatening\nSwitzerland, threatening Belgium, and at last demanding from England an\nAlien Bill, which they ought to know to be incompatible with the laws and\nhateful to the feelings of the people.\n\n'He is not satisfied with seeing the country prosperous and respected\nabroad. He wants to dazzle. His policy, domestic and foreign, is a policy\nof vanity and ostentation--motives which mislead everyone both in private\nand in public life.\n\n'His great moral merits are kindness and sympathy. He is a faithful\nattached friend, and wishes to serve all who come near him.\n\n'His greatest moral fault is his ignorance of the difference between\nright and wrong; perhaps his natural insensibility to it, his want of the\norgans by which that difference is perceived--a defect which he inherits\nfrom his uncle.'\n\n'The uncle,' I said, 'had at least one moral sense--he could understand\nthe difference between pecuniary honesty and dishonesty, a difference\nwhich this man seems not to see, or not to value.'\n\n'I agree with you,' said L. 'He cannot value it, or he would not look\ncomplacently on the peculation which surrounds him. Every six months some\nmagnificent hotel rises in the Champs \u00c9lys\u00e9es, built by a man who had\nnothing, and has been a minister for a year or two.'\n\nOn my return I found Tocqueville with the ladies. I gave him an outline\nof what L. had said.\n\n'No one,' he said, 'knows Louis Napoleon better than L.'\n\n'My opportunities of judging him have been much fewer, but as far as they\nhave gone, they lead to the same conclusions. L. perhaps has not dwelt\nenough on his indolence. Probably as he grows older, and the effects of\nhis early habits tell on him, it increases. I am told that it is\ndifficult to make him attend to business, that he prolongs audiences\napparently to kill time.\n\n'One of the few of my acquaintances who go near him, was detained by him\nfor an hour to answer questions about the members of the _Corps\nl\u00e9gislatif_. Louis Napoleon inquired about their families, their\nfortunes, their previous histories. Nothing about their personal\nqualities. These are things that do not interest him. He supposes that\nmen differ only in externals. \"That the _fond_ is the same in everyone.\"'\n\n\n_April 26_.--Tocqueville spent the evening with us.\n\nWe talked of Novels.\n\n'I read none,' he said, 'that end ill. Why should one voluntarily subject\noneself to painful emotions? To emotions created by an imaginary cause\nand therefore impelling you to no action. I like vivid emotions, but I\nseek them in real life, in society, in travelling, in business, but above\nall in political business. There is no happiness comparable to political\nsuccess, when your own excitement is justified by the magnitude of the\nquestions at issue, and is doubled and redoubled by the sympathy of your\nsupporters. Having enjoyed that, I am ashamed of being excited by the\nvisionary sorrows of heroes and heroines.\n\n'I had a friend,' he continued, 'a Benedictine, who is now ninety-seven.\nHe was, therefore, about thirteen when Louis XVI. began to reign. He is a\nman of talents and knowledge, has always lived in the world, has attended\nto all that he has seen and heard, and is still unimpaired in mind, and\nso strong in body that when I leave him he goes down to embrace me, after\nthe fashion of the eighteenth century, at the bottom of his staircase.'\n\n'And what effect,' I asked, 'has the contemplation of seventy years of\nrevolution produced in him? Does he look back, like Talleyrand, to the\n_ancien r\u00e9gime_ as a golden age?'\n\n'He admits,' said Tocqueville, 'the material superiority of our own age,\nbut he believes that, intellectually and morally, we are far inferior to\nour grandfathers. And I agree with him. Those seventy years of revolution\nhave destroyed our courage, our hopefulness, our self-reliance, our\npublic spirit, and, as respects by far the majority of the higher\nclasses, our passions, except the vulgarest and most selfish ones--vanity\nand covetousness. Even ambition seems extinct. The men who seek power,\nseek it not for itself, not as the means of doing good to their country,\nbut as a means of getting money and flatterers.\n\n'It is remarkable,' he continued, 'that women whose influence is\ngenerally greatest under despotisms, have none now. They have lost it,\npartly in consequence of the gross vulgarity of our dominant passions,\nand partly from their own nullity. They are like London houses, all built\nand furnished on exactly the same model, and that a most uninteresting\none. Whether a girl is bred up at home or in a convent, she has the same\nmasters, gets a smattering of the same accomplishments, reads the same\ndull books, and contributes to society the same little contingent of\nsuperficial information.\n\n'When a young lady comes out I know beforehand how her mother and her\naunts will describe her. \"Elle a les go\u00fbts simples. Elle est pieuse. Elle\naime la campagne. Elle aime la lecture. Elle n'aime pas le bal. Elle\nn'aime pas le monde, elle y ira seulement pour plaire \u00e0 sa m\u00e8re.\" I try\nsometimes to escape from these generalities, but there is nothing behind\nthem.'\n\n'And how long,' I asked, 'does this simple, pious, retiring character\nlast?'\n\n'Till the orange flowers of her wedding chaplet are withered,' he\nanswered. 'In three months she goes to the _messe d'une heure_.'\n\n'What is the \"messe d'une heure?\"' I asked.\n\n'A priest,' he answered, 'must celebrate Mass fasting; and in strictness\nought to do so before noon. But to accommodate fashionable ladies who\ncannot rise by noon, priests are found who will starve all the morning,\nand say Mass in the afternoon. It is an irregular proceeding, though\nwinked at by the ecclesiastical authorities. Still to attend it is rather\ndiscreditable; it is a middle term between the highly meritorious\npractice of going to early Mass, and the scandalous one of never going at\nall.'\n\n'What was the education,' I asked, 'of women under the _ancien r\u00e9gime_?'\n\n'The convent,' he answered.\n\n'It must have been better,' I said, 'than the present education, since\nthe women of that time were superior to ours.'\n\n'It was so far better,' he answered, 'that it did no harm. A girl at that\ntime was taught nothing. She came from the convent a sheet of white\npaper. _Now_ her mind is a paper scribbled over with trash. The women of\nthat time were thrown into a world far superior to ours, and with the\nsagacity, curiosity, and flexibility of French women, caught knowledge\nand tact and expression from the men.\n\n'I knew well,' he continued, 'Madame R\u00e9camier. Few traces of her former\nbeauty then remained, but we were all her lovers and her slaves. The\ntalent, labour, and skill which she wasted in her _salon_, would have\ngained and governed an empire. She was virtuous, if it be virtuous to\npersuade every one of a dozen men that you wish to favour him, though\nsome circumstance always occurs to prevent your doing so. Every friend\nthought himself preferred. She governed us by little distinctions, by\nletting one man come five minutes before the others, or stay five minutes\nafter. Just as Louis XIV. raised one courtier to the seventh heaven by\ngiving him the _bougeoir_, and another by leaning on his arm, or taking\nhis shirt from him.\n\n'She said little, but knew what each man's _fort_ was, and placed from\ntime to time a _mot_ which led him to it. If anything were peculiarly\nwell said, her face brightened. You saw that her attention was always\nactive and always intelligent.\n\n'And yet I doubt whether she really enjoyed conversation. _Tenir salon_\nwas to her a game, which she played well, and almost always successfully,\nbut she must sometimes have been exhausted by the effort. Her _salon_ was\nperhaps pleasanter to us than it was to herself.\n\n'One of the last,' he continued, 'of that class of potentates was the\nDuchesse de Dino. Her early married life was active and brilliant, but\nnot intellectually. It was not till about forty, when she had exhausted\nother excitements, that she took to _bel esprit._ But she performed her\npart as if she had been bred to it.'\n\nThis was our last conversation. I left Paris the next day, and we never\nmet again.\n\n\n\n\nCORRESPONDENCE.\n\nTocqueville, June 30, 1858.\n\nI must complain, a little of your silence, my dear Senior. I hear that\nbefore you left Paris you suffered a great deal from your throat. Is it\ntrue, or have you recovered?\n\nI have not either much to boast of on the score of health since we\nparted. The illness which I had in Paris became still worse, and when I\ngot a little better in that way I had a violent bronchial attack. I even\nbegan to spit blood, which had not happened to me for many years, and I\nam still almost reduced to silence. Still I am beginning to mend, and I\nhope, please God, to be able to _speak_ to my friends when they visit me.\n\nYou are aware that I wished to induce my wife to accompany me to the\nSouth; but the length of the journey, the difficulties of transport, the\nheat, and indeed the state of my health, were reasons which she brought\nforward with so much force that we have remained here, and shall not\nleave till the end of September. We still hope that you and Miss Senior\nwill join us the first week in that month. We shall be very happy to have\nyou both with us. This is no compliment ... I hope soon to be able to\nenjoy more frequent communication with my English friends. A steamboat is\nabout to run from Cherbourg to the coast of England. We shall then be\nable to visit each other as neighbours (_voisiner_).\n\nBetween ourselves, I do not think that the events in England during the\nlast six months are of a nature to raise the reputation of Parliamentary\nGovernment in the rest of the world. _A bient\u00f4t!_\n\nA. DE TOCQUEVILLE.\n\n\nKensington, July 5, 1858.\n\nMy dear Tocqueville,--If I had written to you three days ago, I should\nhave talked of the pleasure which my daughter and I expected from our\nvisit to Tocqueville. But our plans are changed. Edward Ellice is going\nto pay a last visit to America, and has begged me to accompany him. He is\na great proprietor in both America and Canada--knows everybody in both\ncountries, and is besides a most able and interesting companion. So I\nhave accepted the proposal, and start on the 30th of this month for\nBoston. We shall return in the beginning of November.\n\nI am _very_ sorry to lose the visit to Normandy, but I trust that it is\nonly deferred.\n\nWe are grieved to hear that neither you nor Madame de Tocqueville are as\nwell as your friends could wish you to be.\n\nMy _grippe_, after lasting for three months, has gradually subsided, and\nI look to the voyage to America as a cure for all remains of it.\n\nI have most punctually carried your remembrances to all the persons\nhonoured by being inscribed on your card.\n\nThough I have often seen Gladstone, it has always been among many other\npersons, and he has been so full of talk, that I have never been able to\nallude to your subject. I mentioned it to Mrs. Gladstone on Saturday\nlast: she said that there was not a person in all France whom her husband\nso much admired and venerated as you--therefore, if there was any\nappearance of neglect, it could have arisen only from hurry or mistake. I\nshall see him again on Thursday, when we are going all together to a\nrehearsal of Ristori's, and I will talk to him: we shall there be quiet.\n\nThings here are in a very odd state. The Government is supported by the\nTories because it calls itself Tory, and by the Whigs and Radicals\nbecause it obeys them. On such terms it may last for an indefinite time.\n\nKindest regards from us all to you both.\n\nEver yours,\n\nN.W. SENIOR.\n\n\n9 Hyde Park Gate, Kensington, August 2, 1858.\n\nMy dear Tocqueville,--I ought, as you know, to be on the Atlantic by this\ntime; but I was attacked, ten days ago, with lumbar neuralgia, which they\nare trying, literally, to rub away. If I am quite well on the 13th, I\nshall go on the 14th to America.\n\nI was attacked at Sir John Boileau's, where I spent some days with the\nGuizots, Mrs. Austin, and Stanley and Lord John Russell.\n\nGuizot is in excellent spirits, and, what is rare in an ex-premier,\ndwells more on the present and the future than on the past. Mrs. Austin\nis placid and discursive.\n\nLord John seems to me well pleased with the present state of\naffairs--which he thinks, I believe with reason, will bring him back to\npower. He thinks that Malmesbury and Disraeli are doing well, and praises\nmuch the subordinates of the Government. Considering that no one believes\nLord Derby to be wise, or Disraeli to be either wise or honest, it is\nmarvellous that they get on as well as they do. The man who has risen\nmost is Lord Stanley, and, as he has the inestimable advantage of youth,\nI believe him to be predestined to influence our fortunes long.\n\nThe world, I think, is gradually coming over to an opinion, which, when I\nmaintained it thirty years ago, was treated as a ridiculous paradox--that\nIndia is and always has been a great misfortune to us; and, that if it\nwere possible to get quit of it, we should be richer and stronger.\n\nBut it is clear that we are to keep it, at least for my life.\n\nKindest regards from us all to you and Madame de Tocqueville.\n\nEver yours,\n\nN.W. SENIOR.\n\n\nTocqueville, August 21, 1858.\n\nMy dear Senior,--I hear indirectly that you are extremely ill. Your\nletter told me only that you were suffering from neuralgia which you\nhoped to be rid of in a few days, but Mrs. Grote informs me that the\nmalady continues and has even assumed a more serious character.\n\nIf you could write or dictate a few lines to me, you would please me\nmuch.\n\nI am inconsolable for the failure of your American journey. I expected\nthe most curious results from it I hoped that your journal would enable\nme once more to understand the present state of a country which has\nso changed since I saw it that I feel that I now know nothing of it. What\na blessing, however, that you had not started! What would have become of\nyou if the painful attack from which you are suffering had seized you\n2,000 miles away from home, and in the midst of that agitated society\nwhere no one has time to be ill or to think of those who are ill? It must\nbe owned that Fortune has favoured you by sending you this illness just\nat the moment of your departure instead of ten days later.\n\nI have been much interested by your visit to Sir John Boileau. You saw\nthere M. Guizot in one of his best lights. The energy with which he\nstands up under the pressure of age and of ill-fortune, and is not only\nresigned in his new situation, but as vigorous, as animated, and as\ncheerful as ever, shows a character admirably tempered and a pride which\nnothing will bend.\n\nI do not so well understand the cheerfulness of Lord John Russell. For\nthe spectacle now exhibited by England, in which a party finds no\ndifficulty in maintaining itself in power by carrying into practice ideas\nwhich it has always opposed, and by relying for support on its natural\nenemies, is not of a nature to raise the reputation of your institutions,\nor of your public men. I should have a great deal more to say to you on\nthis and other subjects if I were not afraid of tiring you. I leave off,\ntherefore, by assuring you that we are longing to hear of your recovery.\nRemembrances, &c.\n\nA. DE TOCQUEVILLE.\n\n\n\nCannes, December 12, 1858.\n\nI wish, my dear friend, to reassure you myself on the false reports which\nhave been spread regarding my health. Far from finding myself worse than\nwhen we arrived, I am already much better.\n\nI am just now an invalid who takes his daily walks of two hours in the\nmountains after eating an excellent breakfast. I am not, however, well.\nIf I were I should not long remain a citizen of Cannes.\n\nI have almost renounced the use of speech, and consequently the society\nof human beings; which is all the more sad as my wife, my sole companion,\nis herself very unwell, not dangerously, but enough to make me\nanxious. When I say my sole companion, I am wrong, for my eldest brother\nhas had the kindness to shut himself up with us for a month.\n\nAdieu, dear Senior. A thousand kind remembrances from us to all your\nparty.\n\nA. DE TOCQUEVILLE.\n\n\n\nCannes, March 15, 1859.\n\nYou say, my dear Senior, in the letter which I have just received, that I\nlike to hear from my friends, not to write to them. It is true that I\ndelight in the letters of my friends, especially of my English friends;\nbut it is a calumny to say that I do not like to answer them. It is true\nthat I am in your debt: one great cause is, that a man who lives at\nCannes knows nothing of what is passing. My solitary confinement, which\nis bad enough in every way, makes me a bad correspondent, by depressing\nmy spirits and rendering every exertion painful.\n\nMrs. Grote, in a very kind and interesting letter, which I received from\nher yesterday, says, that Lord Brougham, on his late arrival in London,\ngave a lamentable description of my health. If he confined himself to\nJanuary, he was right. It is impossible to exaggerate my sufferings\nduring that month. But, since that time, all has changed, as if from day\nto night, or rather from night to day. To talk now of what I was in\nJanuary is like making a speech about the Spanish marriages.\n\nI am grieved to find that you have suffered so much this year from\nbronchitis. I fear that your larynx can scarcely endure an English\nwinter. But it is very hard to be obliged to expatriate oneself every\nyear. I fear, however, that such must be my fate for some winters to\ncome, and the pain with which I anticipate it makes me sympathise more\nacutely with you.\n\nWe know not, as yet, whether we are to have peace or war. Whichever it\nbe, a mortal blow has struck the popularity of Louis Napoleon. What\nmaintained him was the belief that he was the protector of our material\ninterests: interests to which we now sacrifice all others. The events of\nthe last month show, with the utmost vividness, that these very interests\nmay be endangered by the arbitrary and irrational will of a despot. The\nfeelings, therefore, which were his real support are now bitterly hostile\nto him.\n\nI feel, in short, that a considerable change in our Government is\napproaching.\n\nEven our poor _Corps l\u00e9gislatif_, a week ago, refused to take into\nconsideration the Budget, until it was informed whether it were to be a\nwar budget or a peace budget. Great was the fury of those who represented\nthe Government. They exclaimed that the Chamber misapprehended its\njurisdiction, and that it had nothing to do with political questions. The\nChamber, however, or rather its committee on the Budget, held its ground,\nand extorted from the Government some explanations.\n\nAdieu, my dear Senior. Say everything that is kind to the Grotes, the\nReeves, the Lewises--in short, to all our common friends, and believe in\nthe sincerity of my friendship.\n\nA. DE TOCQUEVILLE.\n\n[This was M. de Tocqueville's last letter to Mr. Senior. He died on the\n16th of April.--ED.]\n\n\n\nHotel Westminster, Rue de la Paix, April 25, 1859.\n\nMy dear Madame de Tocqueville,--I was in the country, and it was only\nlast Friday, as I was passing through London on my way to Paris, that I\nheard of the irreparable loss that we, indeed that France and Europe,\nhave suffered.\n\nIt cannot alleviate your distress to be told how universal and deep is\nthe sympathy with it--quite as much in England as in France.\n\nIt has thrown a gloom over society, not only over that portion which had\nthe happiness and the honour of intimacy with M.A. de Tocqueville, but\neven of his acquaintances, and of those too whose acquaintance was only\nwith his works.\n\nI have, as you know, been for about a year, the depositary of a large\npacket confided to me by M. de Tocqueville last spring. About six months\nago he begged me to return it to him, in Paris, when I had a safe\nopportunity. No such opportunity offered itself, so that the packet\nremains in my library awaiting your orders.\n\nSince I began this letter I have been informed by M. de Corcelle that you\nare likely to be soon in Paris. I shall not venture to send it by the\npost, lest it should cross you on the road.\n\nI shall anxiously inquire as to your arrival, in the hope that you will\nallow one who most sincerely loved and admired your husband, morally and\nintellectually, to see you as soon as you feel yourself equal to it.\n\nBelieve me, my dear Madame de Tocqueville, with the truest sympathy,\nyours most truly,\n\nNASSAU W. SENIOR.\n\n[Mr. Senior continued an active correspondence with Madame de\nTocqueville, and we saw her whenever we were in Paris. Our long-promised\nvisit to Tocqueville took place in 1861.--ED.]\n\n\n\n\n\nJOURNAL.\n\n_Tocqueville, Sunday, August_ 11, 1861.--We left Paris on Saturday\nevening, got to Valognes by the Cherbourg railway by six the next\nmorning, and were furnished there with a good carriage and horses, which\ntook us, and our servants and luggage, in three hours to Tocqueville.\n\nValognes has been immortalised by Le Sage in Turcaret. It is a town of\nabout 6,000 inhabitants, built of granite, and therefore little altered\nfrom what it was 200 years ago. Over many of the doors are the armorial\nbearings of the provincial nobility who made it a small winter capital:\nthe practice is not wholly extinct. I asked who was the inhabitant of an\nimposing old house. 'M. de N\u00e9ridoze,' answered our landlady, 'd'une\ntr\u00e8s-haute noblesse.' I went over one in which Madame de Tocqueville\nthinks of passing the winter. It is of two stories. The ground floor\ngiven up to kitchen, laundry, and damp-looking servants' rooms; the first\nfloor in this form:--\n\n[Illustration:]\n\n                                                 Bedroom.\n                                   Door\n                                         Stairs  Bedroom.\n\nBedroom.  Drawing-room.  Dining-room.    Hall.   Bedroom.\n\n\nThe longer side looks into the street, the shorter, which is to be Madame\nde Tocqueville's bedroom, into a small garden.\n\n_August_ 11.--At Tocqueville we find M. and Madame de Beaumont, their\nsecond son--a charming boy of ten years old, and Amp\u00e8re.\n\nIt is eleven years since I was here. Nothing has been done to the\ninterior of the house. This is about the plan of ground floor.\n\n[Illustration:]\n\n                                                 Offices\n                                 Tower\n                                staircase                   Offices.\n\nDrawing-room.  Billiard-room.                  Dining-room.\n                                  Hall.\n                                                                Tower\n\nThe first floor corresponds to the ground floor, except that on the\nwestern sides a passage runs, into which the library, which is over the\ndrawing-room, and the bedrooms open. The second consists of garrets. My\nroom is on the first floor of the eastern tower, with deep windows\nlooking south and east. The room dedicated by Tocqueville to Amp\u00e8re is\nabove me. Creepers in great luxuriance cover the walls up to the first\nfloor windows. The little park consists of from thirty to forty acres,\nwell wooded and traversed by an avenue in this form, leading from the\nroad to the front of the house.\n\n\n*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *\n\n*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *\n\n                            *   *\n\n                            *   *\n\n                            *   *\n\n                            *   *\n\nTo the west the ground rises to a wild common commanding the sea, the\nlighthouses of Gatteville, Barfleur, La Hogue, and a green plain covered\nwith woods and hedgerow trees, and studded with church towers and spires\nof the picturesque forms of the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth\ncenturies. It has no grand features, except the sea and the rocky coast\nof the Cherbourg peninsula, but it is full of variety and beauty. I can\nunderstand Tocqueville's delight in the house and in the country. The\nweather is perfect; the thermometer in my bedroom, the walls of which are\nabout six feet thick, is 71\u00b0, in the sun it is 80\u00b0; but there is a strong\nbreeze.\n\n_August 12th._--Madame de Beaumont, my daughter, and Amp\u00e8re drove, and\nBeaumont and I walked, to the coast about three miles and a half off. Our\nroad ran through the gay wooded plain which I have described.\n\nWe talked of Italian affairs.\n\n'Up to the annexation of Tuscany,' said Beaumont, 'I fully approve of all\nthat has been done. Parma, Modena, and Tuscany were eager to join\nPiedmont. During the anxious interval of six months, while the decision\nof Louis Napoleon was doubtful, the conduct of the Tuscans was above all\npraise. Perhaps the general wish of the people of Romagna justified the\nPiedmontese in seizing it. Though there the difficult question as to the\nexpediency of stripping the Pope of his temporal power rises.\n\n'Perhaps, too, the facility with which Sicily submitted was a\njustification. But I cannot pardon the seizure of Naples. It is clear to\nme that if the Neapolitans had been left to themselves they would have\ndriven out the Garibaldians. Garibaldi himself felt this: nothing but a\nconviction of its necessity would have induced him to call for the\nassistance of the Piedmontese. I do not believe that in defiance of all\ninternational law-indeed in defiance of all international\nmorality--Cavour would have given that assistance if the public opinion\nof Piedmont had allowed him to refuse it. And what is the consequence? A\ncivil war which is laying waste the country. The Piedmontese call their\nadversaries brigands. There are without doubt among them men whose motive\nis plunder, but the great majority are in arms in defence of the\nindependence of their country. They are no more brigands now than they\nwere when they resisted King Joseph. The Piedmontese are as much\nforeigners to them as the French were: as much hated and as lawfully\nresisted. They may be conquered, they probably will be conquered. An\nignorant corrupt population, inhabiting a small country, unsupported by\nits higher classes--its fleet, its fortresses, and all the machinery of\nits government, in the hands of its enemies--cannot permanently resist;\nbut the war will be atrocious, and the more cruel on the part of Piedmont\nbecause it is unjust.'\n\n'You admit,' I said, 'that the higher classes side with Piedmont?'\n\n'I admit that,' he answered; 'but you must recollect how few they are in\nnumber, and how small is the influence which they exercise. In general, I\ndetest universal suffrage, I detest democracy and everything belonging to\nit, but if it were possible to obtain honestly and truly the opinion of\nthe people, I would ask it and obey it. I believe that it would be better\nto allow the Neapolitans, ignorant and debased as they are, to choose\ntheir own sovereign and their own form of government, than to let them be\nforced by years of violence to become the unwilling subjects of\nPiedmont.'\n\n'Do you believe,' I said, 'that it is possible to obtain through\nuniversal suffrage the honest and true opinion of a people?'\n\n'Not,' he answered, 'if the Government interferes. I believe that in\nSavoy not one person in fifty was in favour of annexation to France. But\nthis is an extreme case.\n\n'The Bourbons are deservedly hated and despised by the Neapolitans, the\nPiedmontese are not despised, but are hated still more intensely. There\nis no native royal stock. The people are obviously unfit for a Republic.\nIt would be as well, I think, to let them select a King as to impose one\non them. The King whom Piedmont, without a shadow of right, is imposing\non them is the one whom they most detest.'\n\n'If I go to Rome,' I asked, 'in the winter, whom shall I find there?'\n\n'I think,' he answered, 'that it will be the Piedmontese. The present\nstate of things is full of personal danger to Louis Napoleon. As his\npolicy is purely selfish, he will, at any sacrifice, put an end to it.\nThat sacrifice may be the unity of Catholicism. The Pope, no longer a\nsovereign, will be under the influence of the Government in whose\nterritory he resides, and the other Catholic Powers may follow the\nexample of Greece and of Russia, and create each an independent Spiritual\nGovernment. It would be a new excitement for _Celui-ci_ to make himself\nHead of the Church.'\n\n'Assassinations,' I said, 'even when successful have seldom produced\nimportant and permanent effects, but Orsini's failure has influenced and\nis influencing the destinies of Europe.'\n\n'If I were an Italian liberal,' said Beaumont, 'I would erect a statue to\nhim. The policy and almost the disposition of Louis Napoleon have been\nchanged by the _attentat_. He has become as timid as he once was\nintrepid. He began by courting the Pope and the clergy. He despised the\nFrench assassins, who were few in number and unconnected, and who had\nproved their unskilfulness on Louis Philippe; but Orsini showed him that\nhe had to elect between the Pope and the Austrians on one side, and the\nCarbonari on the other. He has chosen the alliance of the Carbonari. He\nhas made himself their tool, and will continue to do so.\n\n'They are the only enemies whom he fears, at least for the present.\n\n'France is absolutely passive. The uneducated masses from whom he holds\nhis power are utterly indifferent to liberty, and he has too much sense\nto irritate them by wanton oppression. They do not know that he is\ndegrading the French character, they do not even feel that he is wasting\nthe capital of France, they do not know that he is adding twenty millions\nevery year to the national debt. They think of his loans merely as\ninvestments, and the more profligately extravagant are the terms and the\namount, the better they like them.'\n\n'Ten years ago,' I said, 'the cry that I heard was, \"\u00c7a ne durera pas.\"'\n\n'That was my opinion,' he answered; 'indeed, it was the opinion of\neverybody. I thought the Duc de Broglie desponding when he gave it three\nyears. We none of us believed that the love of liberty was dead in\nFrance.'\n\n'It is not,' I said, 'dead, for among the higher classes it still lives,\nand among the lower it never existed.'\n\n'Perhaps,' he answered, 'our great mistakes were that we miscalculated\nthe courage of the educated classes, and the degree in which universal\nsuffrage would throw power into the hands of the uneducated. Not a human\nbeing in my commune reads a newspaper or indeed reads anything: yet it\ncontains 300 electors. In the towns there is some knowledge and some\npolitical feeling, but for political purposes they are carefully swamped\nby being joined to uneducated agricultural districts.\n\n'Still I think I might enter the _Corps l\u00e9gislatif_ for our capital Le\nMans. Perhaps at a general election twenty liberals might come in. But\nwhat good could they do? The opposition in the last session strengthened\nLouis Napoleon. It gave him the prestige of liberality and success.'\n\n'You think him, then,' I said, 'safe for the rest of his life?'\n\n'Nothing,' he answered, 'is safe in France, and the thing most unsafe is\na Government. Our caprices are as violent as they are sudden. They\nresemble those of a half-tamed beast of prey, which licks its keeper's\nhand to-day, and may tear him to-morrow. But if his life be not so long\nas to enable the fruits of his follies to show themselves in their\nnatural consequences--unsuccessful war, or defeated diplomacy, or\nbankruptcy, or heavily increased taxation--he may die in the Tuileries.\n\n'But I infer from his conduct that he thinks an insurrection against his\ntyranny possible, and that he is preparing to meet it by a popular war--\nthat is to say, by a war with England.\n\n'I found my opinion not so much on the enormous maritime preparations, as\non the long-continued systematic attempts to raise against England our\nold national enmity. All the provincial papers are in the hands of the\nGovernment. The constantly recurring topic of every one of them is, the\nperfidy and the malignity of England. She is described as opposing all\nour diplomacy, as resisting all our aggrandisement, as snarling and\ngrowling at our acquisition of Savoy, as threatening us if we accept\nSardinia, as trying to drive the Pope from Rome because we protect him,\nas trying to separate the Danubian provinces because we wish to unite\nthem, as preventing the Suez Canal because we proposed it--in short, on\nevery occasion and in every part of the world as putting herself in our\nway. To these complaints, which are not without foundation, are added\nothers of which our ignorant people do not see the absurdity. They are\ntold that the enormous conscription, and the great naval expenditure, are\nrendered necessary by the aggressive armaments of England. That you are\npreparing to lay waste all our coasts, to burn our arsenals, to subsidise\nagainst us a new Coalition, and perhaps lead its armies again to Paris.\n\n'The Emperor's moderation, his love of England, and his love of peace,\nare said to be the only obstacles to, a violent rupture. But they are\nprepared for these obstacles at length giving way. \"The Emperor,\" they\nare told, \"is getting tired of his insolent, and hostile, and quarrelsome\nallies. He is getting tired of a peace which is more expensive than a\nwar. Some day the cup will flow over. 'Il en finira avec eux,' will\ndictate a peace in London, will free the oppressed Irish nationality,\nwill make England pay the expense of the war, and then having conquered\nthe only enemy that France can fear, will let her enjoy, for the first\ntime, real peace, a reduced conscription, and low taxation.\"\n\n'Such is the language of all the provincial papers and of all the\nprovincial authorities, and it has its effect. There never was a time\nwhen a war with England would be so popular. He does not wish for one, he\nknows that it would be extremely dangerous, but he is accustomed to play\nfor great stakes, and if submitting to any loss of his popularity, or to\nany limitation of his power is the alternative, he will run the risk. He\nkeeps it, as his last card, in reserve, to be played only in extremity,\nbut to be ready when that extremity has arrived.'\n\n_Tuesday, August_ 13.--We drove to La Prenelle, a church at the point of\na high table-land running from Tocqueville towards the bay of La Hogue,\nand commanding nearly all the Cherbourg peninsula. On three sides of us\nwas the sea, separated from us by a wooded, well-inhabited plain, whose\nchurches rose among the trees, and containing the towns and lofty\nlighthouses of Gatteville, Barfleur, Vast, and La Hogue. We sat on the\npoint from whence James II. saw the battle of La Hogue, and admired the\ncourage of his English rebels.\n\nAmp\u00e8re has spent much of his life in Rome, and is engaged on a work in\nwhich its history is to be illustrated by its monuments.\n\nWe talked of the Roman people.\n\n'Nothing,' said Amp\u00e8re, 'can be more degraded than the higher classes.\nWith the exception of Antonelli, who is charming, full of knowledge,\nintelligence, and grace, and of the Duke of Sermoneta, who is almost\nequally distinguished, there is scarcely a noble of my acquaintance who\nhas any merits, moral or intellectual.\n\n'They are surrounded by the finest ancient and modern art, and care\nnothing for it. The eminent men of every country visit Rome--the Romans\navoid them for they have nothing to talk to them about.\n\n'Politics are of course unsafe, literature they have none. They never\nread. A cardinal told me something which I doubted, and I asked him where\nhe had found it. \"In certi libri,\" he answered.\n\n'Another, who has a fine old library, begged me to use it. \"You will do\nthe room good,\" he said. \"No one has been there for years.\" Even scandal\nand gossip must be avoided under an Ecclesiastical Government.\n\n'They never ride, they never shoot, they never visit their estates, they\ngive no parties; if it were not for the theatre and for their lawsuits\nthey would sink into vegetable life.'\n\n'Sermoneta,' I said, 'told me that many of his lawsuits were hereditary,\nand would probably descend to his son.'\n\n'If Sermoneta,' said Amp\u00e8re, 'with his positive intelligence and his\ncomparative vigour, cannot get through them, what is to be expected from\nothers? They have, however, one merit, one point of contact with the rest\nof the world--their hatred of their Government. They seem to perceive,\nnot clearly, for they perceive nothing clearly, but they dimly see, that\nthe want of liberty is a still greater misfortune to the higher classes\nthan to the lower.\n\n'But the people are a fine race. Well led they will make excellent\nsoldiers. They have the cruelty of their ancestors, perhaps I ought to\nsay of their predecessors, but they have also their courage.'\n\n'They showed,' said Beaumont, 'courage in the defence of Rome, but\ncourage behind walls is the commonest of all courages. No training could\nmake the Spaniards stand against us in the open field, but they were\nheroes in Saragossa. The caprices of courage and cowardice are\ninnumerable. The French have no moral courage, they cannot stand\nridicule, they cannot encounter disapprobation, they bow before\noppression; a French soldier condemned by a court-martial cries for mercy\nlike a child. The same man in battle appears indifferent to death. The\nSpaniard runs away without shame, but submits to death when it is\ninevitable without terror. None of the prisoners taken on either side in\nthe Spanish civil war asked for pardon.'\n\n'Indifference to life,' I said, 'and indifference to danger have little\nin common. General F\u00e9nelon told me that in Algeria he had more than once\nto preside at an execution. No Arab showed any fear. Once there were two\nmen, one of whom was to be flogged, the other to be shot. A mistake was\nmade and they were going to shoot the wrong man. It was found out in\ntime, but neither of the men seemed to care about it; yet they\nwould probably have run away in battle. The Chinese are not brave, but\nyou can hire a man to be beheaded in your place.'\n\n'So,' said Amp\u00e8re, 'you could always hire a substitute in our most\nmurderous wars, when in the course of a year a regiment was killed twice\nover. It was hiring a man, not indeed to be beheaded, but to be shot for\nyou.'\n\n'The destructiveness,' said Beaumont, 'of a war is only gradually known.\nIt is found out soonest in the villages when the deaths of the conscripts\nare heard of, or are suspected from their never returning; but in the\ntowns, from which the substitutes chiefly come, it may be long\nundiscovered. Nothing is known but what is officially published, and the\nGovernment lies with an audacity which seems always to succeed. If it\nstated the loss of men in a battle at one half of the real number, people\nwould fancy that it ought to be doubled, and so come near to the truth;\nbut it avows only one-tenth or only one-twentieth, and then the amount of\nfalsehood is underestimated.'\n\n'Marshal Randon,' I said, 'told me that the whole loss in the Italian\ncampaign was under 7,000 men.'\n\n'That is a good instance,' said Beaumont. 'It certainly was 50,000,\nperhaps 70,000. But I am guilty of a _d\u00e9lit_ in saying so, and you will\nbe guilty of a _d\u00e9lit_ if you repeat what I have said. I remember the\ncase of a man in a barber's shop in Tours, to whom the barber said that\nthe harvest was bad. He repeated the information, and was punished by\nfine and imprisonment for having spread _des nouvelles alarmantes_. Truth\nis no excuse; in fact it is an aggravation, for the truer the news the\nmore alarming.'\n\n'In time of peace,' I asked, 'what proportion of the conscripts return\nafter their six years of service?'\n\n'About three-quarters,' answered Beaumont.\n\n'Then,' I said, 'as you take 100,000 conscripts every year even in peace,\nyou lose 25,000 of your best young men every year?'\n\n'Certainly,' said Beaumont.\n\n'And are the 75,000 who return improved or deteriorated?' I asked.\n\n'Improved,' said Amp\u00e8re; 'they are _d\u00e9gourdis_, they are educated, they\nsubmit to authority, they know how to shift for themselves.'\n\n'Deteriorated,' said Beaumont. 'A garrison life destroys the habits of\nsteady industry, it impairs skill. The returned conscript is more vicious\nand less honest than the peasant who has not left his village.'\n\n'And what was the loss,' I asked, 'in the late war?'\n\n'At least twice as great,' said Beaumont, 'as it is in peace. Half of\nthose who were taken perished. The country would not have borne the\nprolongation of the Crimean War.'\n\n'These wars,' I said, 'were short and successful. A war with England can\nscarcely be short, and yet you think that he plans one?'\n\n'I think,' said Beaumont, 'that he plans one, but only in the event of\nhis encountering any serious difficulty at home. You must not infer from\nthe magnitude of his naval expenditure that he expects one.\n\n'You look at the expense of those preparations, and suppose that so great\na sacrifice would not be made in order to meet an improbable emergency.\nBut expense is no sacrifice to him. He likes it. He has the morbid\ntaste for it which some tyrants have had for blood, which his uncle had\nfor war. Then he is incapable of counting. When he lived at Arenenburg he\nused to give every old soldier who visited him an order on Viellard his\ntreasurer for money. In general the chest was empty. Viellard used to\nremonstrate but without effect. The day perhaps after his orders had been\ndishonoured he gave new ones.'\n\n'Is it true,' I asked, 'that the civil list is a couple of years' income\nin debt?'\n\nI know nothing about it,' said Beaumont; 'in fact, nobody knows anything\nabout anything, but it is highly probable. Everybody who asks for\nanything gets  it, everybody is allowed to waste, everybody is allowed to\nrob, every folly of the Empress is complied with. Fould raised\nobjections, and was dismissed.\n\n'She is said to have a room full of revolutionary relics: there is the\nbust of Marie Antoinette, the nose broken at one of the sacks of the\nTuileries. There is a picture of Simon beating Louis XVII. Her poor child\nhas been frightened by it, and she is always dwelling on the dangers of\nher position.'\n\n'So,' I said, 'did Queen Adelaide--William IV.'s Queen. From the passing\nof the Reform Bill she fully expected to die on the scaffold.'\n\n'There is more reason,' he answered, 'for the Empress's fears.'\n\n'Not,' I said, 'if she fears the scaffold. Judicial murder, at least in\nthat form, is out of fashion. Cayenne and Lambressa are your guillotines,\nand the Empress is safe from them.'\n\n'But there are other modes of violent death,' he answered; 'from one of\nwhich she escaped almost by miracle.'\n\n'How did she behave,' I asked, 'at the _attentat?_'\n\n'Little is known,' he answered, 'except that the Emperor said to her, as\nhe led her upstairs to her box: \"Allons, il faut faire notre m\u00e9tier.\"'\n\n'Then she is disturbed by religious fears. The little prince has been\ntaught to say to his father every morning: \"Papa, ne faites pas de mal \u00e0\nmon parrain.\" The Pope was his godfather.'\n\n'If the Emperor dies, the real power will pass into the hands of Prince\nNapoleon. And very dangerous hands they will be. He has more talent than\nthe Emperor, and longer views. Louis Napoleon is a revolutionist from\nselfishness. Prince Napoleon is selfish enough, but he has also passion.\nHe detests everything that is venerable, everything that is established\nor legal.\n\n'There is little value now for property or for law, though the Government\nprofesses to respect them. What, will it be when the Government professes\nto hate them?'\n\n_Wednesday, August_ 14.--We talked at breakfast of Rome.\n\n'Is there,' said Beaumont to Amp\u00e8re, 'still an Inquisition at Rome?'\n\n'There is,' said Amp\u00e8re, 'but it is torpid. It punishes bad priests, but\ndoes little else.'\n\n'If a Roman,' I asked, 'were an avowed infidel, would it take notice of\nhim?'\n\n'Probably not,' said Amp\u00e8re, 'but his _cur\u00e9_ might--not for his\ninfidelity, but for his avowing it. The _cur\u00e9_ who has always the powers\nof a _commissaire de police,_ might put him in prison if he went into a\n_caf\u00e9_ and publicly denied the Immaculate Conception, or if he neglected\ngoing to church or to confession: but the Inquisition no longer cares\nabout opinions.'\n\n'Is there much infidelity,' I asked, 'in Rome?'\n\n'Much,' said Amp\u00e8re, 'among the laity. The clergy do not actively\ndisbelieve. They go through their functions without ever seriously\ninquiring whether what they have to teach be true or false. No persons\nwere more annoyed by the Mortara[1] business than the clergy, with the\nexception of Antonelli. He hates and fears the man who set it on foot,\nthe Archbishop of Bologna, and therefore was glad to see him expose\nhimself, and lose all hope of the Secretaryship, but he took care to\nprevent the recurrence of such a scandal. He revived an old law\nprohibiting Jews from keeping Christian nurses. But he could scarcely\norder restitution. According to the Church it would have been giving the\nchild to the Devil, and, what is worse, robbing God of him. The Pope's\npiety is selfish. His great object is his own salvation. He would not\nendanger that, to confer any benefit upon, or to avert any evil from\nRome; or indeed from the whole world. This makes him difficult to\nnegotiate with. If anything is proposed to him which his confessor\naffirms to be dangerous to his soul, he listens to no arguments. As for\nMortara himself, he is a poor creature. A friend of mine went to see him\nin his convent. All that he could get from him was:\n\n'\"Sono venuti i Carabinieri.\"\n\n'\"And what did they do to you?\"\n\n'\"M' hanno portato qu\u00ec.\"\n\n'\"What more?\"\n\n'\"M' hanno dato pasticci; erano molto buoni.\"\n\n'What is most teasing,' continued Amp\u00e8re, 'in the Roman Government is not\nso much its active oppression as its torpidity. It hates to act. An\nEnglishman had with great difficulty obtained permission to light Rome\nwith gas. He went to the Government in December, and told them that\neverything was ready, and that the gas would be lighted on the 1st of\nJanuary.\n\n'\"Could you not,\" they answered, \"put it off till April?\"\n\n'\"But it is in winter,\" he replied; \"that it is wanted. Every thing is\nready. Why should we wait?\"\n\n'\"It is a new thing,\" they replied; \"people will be frightened. It may\nhave consequences. At least put it off till March.\"\n\n'\"But they will be as much frightened in March,\" he replied.\n\n'\"If it must be done,\" they said, \"as a kindness to His Holiness and to\nus put it off till February.\"\n\n'There is, however, one sort of oppression which even we should find it\ndifficult to tolerate.\n\n'A Monsignore has a young friend without money, but an excellent Catholic\nand an excellent politician, a fervid believer in the Immaculate\nConception and in the excellence of the Papal Government. He wishes to\nreward such admirable opinions: but the Pope has little to give.\nMonsignore looks out for some young heiress, sends for her father,\ndescribes his pious and loyal _prot\u00e9g\u00e9_, and proposes marriage. Her\nfather objects--says that his daughter cannot afford to marry a poor man,\nor that she does not wish to marry at all--or that he or she has some\nother preference.\n\n'Monsignore insists. He assures the father that what he is proposing is\nmost favourable to the salvation of his daughter, that he suggests it\nprincipally for the benefit of her soul, and that the father's objections\nare inspired by the Evil One. The father breaks off the conversation and\ngoes home. He finds that his daughter has disappeared. He returns furious\nto Monsignore, is received with the utmost politeness and is informed\nthat his daughter is perfectly safe under the protection of a cardinal\nwho himself did her the honour of fetching her in his gilded coach. \"You\nhave only,\" the Monsignore says, \"to be reasonable, and she shall be\nreturned to you.\"\n\n'The father flies to the cardinal.\n\n'The same politeness and the same answer.\n\n'\"Do not oppose,\" he is told, \"the will of the Pope, who, in this matter,\nseeks only your daughter's happiness here and hereafter. She is now with\nme. If you will give up your sinful obstinacy she shall be restored to\nyou to-day. If not, it will be our duty to place her in a convent, where\nshe will be taken the utmost care of, but she will not leave it except to\nmarry the person whom His Holiness thinks most fitted to promote the\nwelfare of her soul.\"\n\n'I have known several cases in which this attempt has been made. With\nsuch timid slaves as the Roman nobility it always succeeds.'\n\n[Footnote 1: The Jewish child who was taken away from his parents and\nconverted.--ED.]\n\n\n_Thursday, August_ 15.--This is the f\u00eate of St. Louis--the great f\u00eate of\nTocqueville. Madame de Tocqueville and Madame de Beaumont spent much of\nthe morning in church.\n\nBeaumont and his son walked to the coast to bathe. Minnie, Amp\u00e8re, and I\nstrolled among the deep shady lanes of the plateau above the castle.\nThroughout Normandy the fields are small and are divided by mounds\nplanted with trees. The farmhouses, and even the cottages, are built of\nprimitive rock, granite, or old red sandstone. At a distance, peeping out\nof the trees that surround them, they look pretty, but they, have more\nthan the usual French untidiness. The outhouses are roofless, the\nfarmyards are full of pools and dung heaps, which often extend into the\nroad; and the byroads themselves are quagmires when they do not consist\nof pointed stones. I was struck by the paucity of the children and the\nabsence of new houses. The population of Normandy is diminishing.\n\nWe conversed on the subject of Italy.\n\n'If we are in Rome next winter,' I asked, 'shall we find the French\nthere?'\n\n'I think not,' said Amp\u00e8re; 'I think that you will find only the\nPiedmontese.\n\n'Every day that Louis Napoleon holds Rome is a day of danger to him, a\ndanger slight perhaps now, but serious if the occupation be prolonged.\nThe Anti-papal party, and it includes almost all that are liberal and all\nthat are energetic, are willing to give him time, but not an indefinite\ntime. They are quiet only because they trust him. He is a magician who\nhas sold himself to the Devil. The Devil is patient, but he will not be\ncheated. The Carbonari will support Louis Napoleon as long as he is doing\ntheir work, and will allow him to do it in his own way and to take his\nown time, as long as they believe he is doing it. But woe to him if they\nbelieve that he is deceiving them. I suspect that they are becoming\nimpatient, and I suspect too, that he is becoming impatient. This quarrel\nbetween M\u00e9rode and Goyon is significative. I do not believe that Goyon\nused the words imputed to him. We shall probably keep Civita Vecchia, but\nwe shall give up Rome to the Piedmontese.'\n\n'And will the Pope,' I asked, 'remain?'\n\n'Not this Pope,' said Amp\u00e8re, 'but his successor. Nor do I see the great\nevil of the absence of the Pope from Rome. Popes have often been absent\nbefore, sometimes for long periods.'\n\n'Most of my French friends,' I said, 'are opposed to Italian Unity as\nmischievous to France.'\n\n'I do not believe,' he answered, 'in the submission of Naples to this\nPiedmontese dynasty, but I shall be delighted to see all Italy north of\nthe Neapolitan territory united.\n\n'I do not think that we have anything to fear from the kingdom of Italy.\nIt is as likely to be our friend as to be our enemy. But the Neapolitans,\neven if left to themselves, would not willingly give up their\nindependence, and _Celui-ci_ is trying to prevent their doing so.'\n\n'What do _they_ wish,' I asked, 'and what does _he_ wish?'\n\n'I believe,' he answered, 'that _their_ wishes are only negative.\n\n'They do not wish to recall the Bourbons, and they are resolved not to\nkeep the Piedmontese. _His_ wish I believe to be to put his cousin there.\nPrince Napoleon himself refused Tuscany. It is too small, but he would\nlike Naples, and Louis Napoleon would be glad to get rid of him. What\nwould England say?'\n\n'If we believed,' I said, 'in the duration of a Bonaparte dynasty in\nFrance, we should, of course, object to the creation of one in Naples.\nBut if, as we think it probable, the Bonapartists have to quit France, I\ndo not see few we should be injured by their occupying the throne of\nNaples.\n\n'I should object to them if I were a Neapolitan. All their instincts are\ndespotic, democratic, and revolutionary. But even they are better than\nthe late king was. What chance have the Murats?'\n\n'None,' said Amp\u00e8re. 'They have spoiled their game, if they had a game,\nby their precipitation. The Emperor has disavowed them, the Neapolitans\ndo not care for them. The Prince de Leuchtenberg, grandson of Eug\u00e8ne\nBeauharnais, has been talked of. He is well connected, related to many of\nthe reigning families of the Continent, and is said to be intelligent and\nwell educated.'\n\n'If Naples,' I said, 'is to be detached from the kingdom of Italy, Sicily\nought to be detached from Naples. There is quite as much mutual\nantipathy.'\n\n'Would you like to take it?' he asked.\n\n'Heaven forbid!' I answered. 'It would be another Corfu on a larger\nscale. The better we governed them, the more they would hate us. The only\nchance for them is to have a king of their own.'\n\n_August_ 15.--In the evening Amp\u00e8re read to us a comedy called 'Beatrix,'\nby a writer of some reputation, and a member of the Institut.\n\nIt was very bad, full of exaggerated sentiments, forced situations, and\nthe cant of philanthropic despotism.\n\nAn actress visits the court of a German grand duke. He is absent. His\nmother, the duchess, receives her as an equal. The second son falls in\nlove with her at first sight and wishes to marry her. She is inclined to\nconsent, when another duchy falls in, the elder duke resigns to his\nbrother, he becomes king, presses their marriage, his mother does not\noppose, and thereupon Beatrix makes a speech, orders her horses, and\ndrives off to act somewhere else.\n\nAmp\u00e8re reads admirably, but no excellence of reading could make such\nabsurdities endurable. It was written for Ristori, who acted Beatrix in\nFrench with success.\n\n\n_Friday, August_ 16.--We talked at breakfast of 1793.\n\n'It is difficult,' said Madame de Beaumont, 'to believe that the French\nof that day were our ancestors.'\n\n'They resembled you,' I said, 'only in two things: in military courage,\nand in political cowardice.'\n\n'They had,' she replied, 'perhaps more passive courage than we have.[1]\nMy great-great-grandmother, my great-grandmother, and my great-aunt, were\nguillotined on the same day. My great-great-grandmother was ninety years\nold. When interrogated, she begged them to speak loud, as she was deaf.\n'\u00c9crivez,' said Fouquier Tinville, 'que la citoyenne Noailles a conspir\u00e9\nsourdement contre la R\u00e9publique.' They were dragged to the Place de la\nR\u00e9publique in the same _tombereau_, and sat waiting their turn on the\nsame bench.\n\n'My great-aunt was young and beautiful. The executioner, while fastening\nher to the plank, had a rose in his mouth. The Abb\u00e9 de Noailles, who was\nbelow the scaffold, disguised, to give them, at the risk of his life, a\nsign of benediction, was asked how they looked.\n\n'\"Comme si,' he said, 'elles allaient \u00e0 la messe.\"'\n\n'The habit,' said Amp\u00e8re, 'of seeing people die produces indifference\neven to one's own death. You see that among soldiers. You see it in\nepidemics. But this indifference, or, to use a more proper word, this\nresignation, helped to prolong the Reign of Terror. If the victims had\nresisted, if, like Madame du Barry, they had struggled with the\nexecutioner, it would have excited horror.'\n\n'The cries of even a pig,' said Madame de Beaumont, 'make it disagreeable\nto kill it.'\n\n'Sanson,' I said, 'long survived the Revolution; he made a fortune and\nlived in retirement at Versailles. A lady was run away with between\nVersailles and Paris. An elderly man, at considerable risk, stopped her\nhorse. She was very grateful, but could not get from him his name. At\nlast she traced him, and found that it was Sanson.'\n\n'Sanson,' said Beaumont, 'may have been an honest man. Whenever a place\nof _bourreau_ is vacant, there are thirty or forty candidates, and they\nalways produce certificates of their extraordinary kindness and humanity.\nIt seems to be the post most coveted by men eminent for their\nbenevolence.'\n\n'How many have you?' I asked.\n\n'Eighty-six,' he answered. 'One for each department.'\n\n'And how many executions?'\n\n'About one hundred a year in all France.'\n\n'And what is the salary?'\n\n'Perhaps a couple of thousand francs a year.'\n\n'Really,' said Amp\u00e8re, 'it is one of the best parts of the patronage of\nthe Minister of the Interior. _M. le Bourreau_ gets more than a thousand\nfrancs for each operation.'\n\n'We pay by the piece,' I said, 'and find one operator enough for all\nEngland.'\n\n'A friend of mine,' said Beaumont, had a remarkably good Swiss servant.\nHis education was far above his station, and we could not find what had\nbeen his birth or his canton.\n\n'Suddenly he became agitated and melancholy, and at last told my friend\nthat he must leave him, and why. His father was the hereditary _bourreau_\nof a Swiss canton. To the office was attached an estate, to be forfeited\nif the office were refused. He had resolved to take neither, and, to\navoid being solicited, had left his country and changed his name. But his\nfamily had traced him, had informed him of his father's death, and had\nimplored him to accept the succession. He was the only son, and his\nmother and sisters would be ruined, if he allowed it to pass to the next\nin order of inheritance, a distant cousin. He had not been able to\npersist in his refusal.'\n\n'The husband of an acquaintance of mine,' said Madame de Beaumont, 'used\nto disappear for two or three hours every day. He would not tell her for\nwhat purpose. At last she found out that he was employed in the _chambre\nnoire_, the department of the police by which letters passing through the\npost are opened. The duties were well paid, and she could not persuade\nhim to give them up. They were on uneasy terms, when an accident threw a\nlist of all the names of the _employ\u00e9s_ in the _chambre noire_, into the\nhands of an opposition editor, who published them in his newspaper.\n\n'She then separated from him.'\n\n'If the Post-office,' I said, 'were not a Government monopoly, if\neveryone had a right to send his letters in the way that he liked best,\nthere would be some excuse. But the State compels you, under severe\npenalties, to use its couriers, undertaking, not tacitly but expressly,\nto respect the secrecy of your correspondence, and then systematically\nviolates it.'\n\n'I should have said,' answered Amp\u00e8re, 'not expressly but tacitly.'\n\n'No,' I replied; 'expressly. Guizot, when Minister for Foreign Affairs,\nproclaimed from the tribune, that in France the secrecy of correspondence\nwas, under all circumstances, inviolable. This has never been officially\ncontradicted.\n\n'The English Post-office enters into no such engagements. Any letters may\nbe legally opened, under an order from a Secretary of State.'\n\n'Are prisoners in England,' asked Beaumont, 'allowed to correspond with\ntheir friends?'\n\n'I believe,' I answered, 'that their letters pass through the Governor's\nhands, and that he opens them, or not, at his discretion.'\n\n'Among the tortures,' said Amp\u00e8re, 'which Continental despots delight to\ninflict on their state prisoners the privation of correspondence is one.'\n\n'In ordinary life,' I said, 'the educated endure inaction worse than the\nignorant. A coachman sits for hours on his box without feeling _ennui_.\nIf his master had to sit quiet all that time, inside the carriage, he\nwould tear his hair from impatience.\n\n'But the educated seem to tolerate the inactivity of imprisonment better\nthan their inferiors. We find that our ordinary malefactors cannot endure\nsolitary imprisonment for more than a year--seldom indeed so long. The\nItalian prisoners whom I have known, Zucchi, Borsieri, Poerio,\nGonfalonieri, and Pellico, endured imprisonment lasting from ten to\nseventeen years without much injury to mind or body.'\n\n'The spirit of Pellico,' said Madame de Beaumont, 'was broken. When\nreleased, he gave himself up to devotion and works of charity. Perhaps\nthe humility, resignation, and submission of his book made it still\nmore mischievous to the Austrian Government. The reader's indignation\nagainst those who could so trample on so unresisting a victim becomes\nfierce.'\n\n'If the Austrians,' I said, 'had been wise, they would have shot instead\nof imprisoning them. Their deaths would have been forgotten--their\nimprisonment has contributed much to the general odium which is\ndestroying the Austrian Empire.'\n\n'It would have been wiser,' said Beaumont, 'but it would have been more\nmerciful, and therefore it was not done. But you talk of all these men as\nsolitarily imprisoned. Some of them had companions.'\n\n'Yes,' I said, 'but they complained that one permanent companion was\nworse than solitude. Gonfalonieri said, that one could not be in the same\nroom, with the same man, a year without hating him.\n\n'One of the Neapolitan prisoners was chained for some time to a brigand.\nAfterwards the brigand was replaced by a gentleman. He complained\nbitterly of the change.\n\n'The brigand,' said Minnie, 'was his slave, the gentleman had a will of\nhis own.'\n\n'How did M. de La Fayette,'[2] I asked Madame de Beaumont, 'bear his five\nyears' imprisonment at Olmutz?'\n\n'His health,' said Madame de Beaumont, 'was good, but the miseries of his\ncountry and the sufferings of his wife made him very unhappy. When my\ngrandmother came to him, it was two days before she had strength to tell\nhim that all his and her family had perished. I was once at Olmutz, and\nsaw the one room which they had inhabited. It was damp and dark. She\nasked to be allowed to leave it for a time for better medical treatment\nand change of air. It was granted only on the condition that she should\nnever return. She refused. The rheumatic attacks which the state of the\nprison had produced, continued and increased: she was hopelessly ill when\nthey were released--and died soon afterwards. The sense of wrong\naggravated their sufferings, for their imprisonment was a gross and\nwanton violation of all law, international and municipal. My grandfather\nwas not an Austrian subject; he had committed no offence against Austria.\nShe seized him simply because he was a liberal, because his principles\nhad made him the enemy of tyranny in America and in France; and because\nhis birth and talents and reputation gave him influence. It was one of\nthe brutal stupid acts of individual cruelty which characterise the\nAustrian despotism, and have done more to ruin it than a wider\noppression--such a one, for instance, as ours, more mischievous, but more\nintelligent,--would have done.'\n\n'Freedom,' said Amp\u00e8re, 'was offered to him on the mere condition of his\nnot serving in the French army. At that time the Jacobins would have\nguillotined him, the Royalists would have forced duel after duel on him\ntill they had killed him. It seemed impossible that he should ever be\nable to draw his sword for France. In fact he never _was_ able. America\noffered him an asylum, honours, land, everything that could console an\nexile. But he refused to give up the chance, remote as it was, of being\nuseful to his country, and remained a prisoner till he was delivered by\nNapoleon.'\n\n'He firmly believed,' said Madame de Beaumont, 'that if the Royal Family\nwould have taken refuge with his army in 1791 he could have saved them,\nand probably the Monarchy. His army was then in his hands, a few months\nafter the Jacobins had corrupted it.'\n\n'Two men,' said Amp\u00e8re, 'Mirabeau and La Fayette, could have saved the\nMonarchy, and were anxious to do so. But neither the King nor the Queen\nwould trust them.\n\n'Louis XVI. and Marie Antoinette are among the historical personages who\nhave most influenced the destinies of the world. His dulness, torpidity\nand indecision, and her frivolity, narrow-minded prejudices and\nsuspiciousness, are among the causes of our present calamities. They are\namong the causes of a state of things which has inflicted on\nus, and threatens to inflict on all Europe, the worst of all\nGovernments--democratic despotism. A Government in which two wills only\nprevail--that of the ignorant, envious, ambitious, aggressive multitude,\nand that of the despot who, whatever be his natural disposition, is soon\nturned, by the intoxication of flattery and of universal power, into a\ncapricious, fantastic, selfish participator in the worst passions of the\nworst portion of his subjects.'\n\n'Such a Government,' I said, 'may be called an anti-aristocracy. It\nexcludes from power all those who are fit to exercise it.'\n\n'The consequence,' said Beaumont, 'is, that the qualities which fit men\nfor power not being demanded, are not supplied. Our young men have no\npolitical knowledge or public spirit. Those who have a taste for the\nsciences cultivated in the military schools enter the army. The rest\nlearn nothing.'\n\n'What do they do?' I asked.\n\n'How they pass their time,' said Madame de Beaumont, 'is a puzzle to me.\nThey do not read, they do not go into society--I believe that they smoke\nand play at dominos, and ride and bet at steeple-chases.\n\n'Those who are on home service in the army are not much better. The time\nnot spent in the routine of their profession is sluggishly and viciously\nwasted. Algeria has been a God-send to us. There our young men have real\nduties to perform, and real dangers to provide against and to encounter.\nMy son, who left St. Cyr only eighteen months ago, is stationed at\nThebessa, 300 miles in the interior. He belongs to a _bureau arabe_,\nconsisting of a captain, a lieutenant, and himself, and about forty\nspahis. He has to act as a judge, as an engineer, to settle the frontier\nbetween the province of Constantine and Tunis--in short, to be one of a\nsmall ruling aristocracy. This is the school which has furnished, and is\nfurnishing, our best generals and administrators.'\n\nWe talked of the interior of French families.\n\n'The ties of relationship,' I said, 'seem to be stronger with you than\nthey are with us. Cousinship with you is a strong bond, with us it is a\nweak one.'\n\n'The habit of living together,' said Beaumont, 'has perhaps much to do\nwith the strength of our feelings of consanguinity. Our life is\npatriarchal. Grandfather, father, and grandson are often under the same\nroof. At the Grange[3] thirty of the family were sometimes assembled at\ndinner. With you, the sons go off, form separate establishments, see\nlittle of their parents, still less of their cousins, and become\ncomparatively indifferent to them.'\n\n'I remember,' I said, 'the case of an heir apparent of seventy; his\nfather was ninety-five. One day the young man was very grumpy. They tried\nto find out what was the matter with him; at last he broke out,\n\"Everybody's father dies except mine.\"'\n\n'An acquaintance of mine,' said Beaumont, 'not a son, but a son-in-law,\ncomplained equally of the pertinacious longevity of his father-in-law.\n\"Je n'ai pas cru,\" he said, \"en me mariant, que j'\u00e9pousais la fille du\nP\u00e8re \u00c9ternel.\" Your primogeniture,' he continued, 'must be a great source\nof unfilial feelings. The eldest son of one of your great families is in\nthe position of the heir apparent to a throne. His father's death is to\ngive him suddenly rank, power, and wealth; and we know that royal heirs\napparent are seldom affectionate sons. With us the fortunes are much\nsmaller, they are equally divided, and the rank that descends to the son\nis nothing.'\n\n'What regulates,' I asked, 'the descent of titles?'\n\n'It is ill regulated,' said Beaumont 'Titles are now of such little value\nthat scarcely anyone troubles himself to lay down rules about them.\n\n'In general, however, it is said, that all the sons of dukes and of\nmarquises are counts. The sons of counts in some families all take the\ntitle of Count. There are, perhaps, thirty Beaumonts. Some call\nthemselves marquises, some counts, some barons. I am, I believe, the only\none of the family who has assumed no title. Alexis de Tocqueville took\nnone, but his elder brother, during his father's life, called himself\nvicomte and his younger brother baron. Probably Alexis ought then to have\ncalled himself chevalier, and, on his father's death, baron. But, I\nrepeat, the matter is too unimportant to be subject to any settled rules.\nAncient descent is, with us, of great value, of far more than it is with\nyou, but titles are worth nothing.'\n\n[Footnote 1: This incident is described in a little book published last\nyear, the _Memoirs of Madame de Montaign_.--ED.]\n\n[Footnote 2: M. de La Fayette was Madame de Beaumont's grandfather.--ED.]\n\n[Footnote 3: The ch\u00e2teau of M. de La Fayette.--ED.]\n\n\n_Saturday, August_ 17.--We drove to the coast and ascended the lighthouse\nof Gatteville, 85 metres, or about 280 feet high. It stands in the middle\nof a coast fringed with frightful reefs, just enough under water to\ncreate no breakers, and a flat plain a couple of miles wide behind, so\nthat the coast is not seen till you come close to it. In spite of many\nlighthouses and buoys, wrecks are frequent. A mysterious one occurred\nlast February: the lighthouse watchman showed us the spot--a reef just\nbelow the lighthouse about two hundred yards from the shore.\n\nIt was at noon--there was a heavy sea, but not a gale. He saw a large\nship steer full on the reef. She struck, fell over on one side till her\nyards were in the water, righted herself, fell over on the other, parted\nin the middle, and broke up. It did not take five minutes, but during\nthose five minutes there was the appearance of a violent struggle on\nboard, and several shots were fired. From the papers which were washed\nashore it appeared that she was from New York, bound for Havre, with a\nlarge cargo and eighty-seven passengers, principally returning emigrants.\nNo passenger escaped, and only two of the crew: one was an Italian\nspeaking no French, from whom they could get nothing; the other was an\nEnglishman from Cardiff, speaking French, but almost obstinately\nuncommunicative. He said that he was below when the ship struck, that the\ncaptain had locked the passengers in the cabin, and that he knew nothing\nof the causes which had led the ship to go out of her course to run on\nthis rock.\n\nThe captain may have been drunk or mad. Or there may have been a mutiny\non board, and those who got possession of the ship may have driven her on\nthe coast, supposing that they could beach her, and ignorant of the\ninterposed reefs, which, as I have said, are not betrayed by breakers.\n\nOur informant accounted for the loss of all, except two persons, by the\nheavy sea, the sharp reefs, and the blows received by those who tried to\nswim from the floating cargo. The two who escaped were much bruised.\n\nA man and woman were found tied to one another and tied to a spar. They\nseemed to have been killed by blows received from the rocks or from the\nfloating wreck.\n\nIn the evening Amp\u00e8re read to us the 'Bourgeois Gentilhomme.' His reading\nis equal to any acting. It kept us all, for the first two acts, which are\nthe most comic, in one constant roar of laughter.\n\n'The modern _nouveau riche,_ said Beaumont, 'has little resemblance to M.\nJourdain. He talks of his horses and his carriages, builds a great hotel,\nand buys pictures. I have a neighbour of this kind; he drives\nfour-in-hand over the bad roads of La Sarthe, visits with one carriage\none day, and another the next. His jockey stands behind his cabriolet in\ntop-boots, and his coachman wears a grand fur coat in summer. His own\nclothes are always new, sometimes in the most accurate type of a groom,\nsometimes in that of a dandy. His talk is of steeple-chases.'\n\n'And does he get on?' I asked.\n\n'Not in the least,' answered Beaumont. 'In England a _nouveau riche_ can\nget into Parliament, or help somebody else to get in, and political power\nlevels all distinctions. Here, wealth gives no power: nothing, indeed,\nbut office gives power. The only great men in the provinces are the\n_pr\u00e9fet_, the _sous-pr\u00e9fet_, and the _maire_. The only great man in Paris\nis a minister or a general. Wealth, therefore, unless accompanied by the\nsocial talents, which those who have made their fortunes have seldom had\nthe leisure or the opportunity to acquire, leads to nothing. The women,\ntoo, of the _parvenus_ always drag them down. They seem to acquire\nthe _tournure_ of society less easily than the men. Bastide, when\nMinister, did pretty well, but his wife used to sign her invitations\n\"Femme Bastide.\"\n\n'Society,' he continued, 'under the Republic was animated. We had great\ninterests to discuss, and strong feelings to express, but perhaps the\nexcitement was too great. People seemed to be almost ashamed to amuse\nor to be amused when the welfare of France, her glory or her degradation,\nher freedom or her slavery, were, as the event has proved, at stake.'\n\n'I suppose,' I said to Amp\u00e8re, 'that nothing has ever been better than\nthe _salon_ of Madame R\u00e9camier?'\n\n'We must distinguish,' said Amp\u00e8re. 'As great painters have many manners,\nso Madame R\u00e9camier had many _salons_. When I first knew her, in 1820, her\nhabitual dinner-party consisted of her father, her husband, Ballanche,\nand myself. Both her father, M. Bernard, and her husband were agreeable\nmen. Ballanche was charming.'\n\n'You believe,' I said, 'that Bernard was her father?' 'Certainly I do,'\nhe replied. 'The suspicion that R\u00e9camier might be was founded chiefly on\nthe strangeness of their conjugal relations. To this, I oppose her\napparent love for M. Bernard, and I explain R\u00e9camier's conduct by his\ntastes. They were coarse, though he was a man of good manners. He never\nspent his evenings at home. He went where he could find more license.\n\n'Perhaps the most agreeable period was at that time of Chateaubriand's\nreign when he had ceased to exact a _t\u00eate-\u00e0-t\u00eate_, and Ballanche and I\nwere admitted at four o'clock. The most illustrious of the _partie\ncarr\u00e9e_ was Chateaubriand, the most amusing Ballanche. My merit was that\nI was the youngest. Later in the evening Madame Mohl, Miss Clarke as she\nthen was, was a great resource. She is a charming mixture of French\nvivacity and English originality, but I think that the French element\npredominates. Chateaubriand, always subject to _ennui_, delighted in her.\nHe has adopted in his books some of the words which she coined. Her\nFrench is as original as the character of her mind, very good, but more\nof the last than of the present century.'\n\n'Was Chateaubriand himself,' I said, 'agreeable?'\n\n'Delightful,' said Amp\u00e8re; 'tr\u00e8s-entrain, tr\u00e8s-facile \u00e0 vivre, beaucoup\nd'imagination et de connaissances.'\n\n'Facile \u00e0 vivre?' I said. 'I thought that his vanity had been _difficile\net exigeante?_'\n\n'As a public man,' said Amp\u00e8re, 'yes; and to a certain degree in general\nsociety. But in intimate society, when he was no longer \"posing,\" he was\ncharming. The charm, however, was rather intellectual than moral.\n\n'I remember his reading to us a part of his memoirs, in which he\ndescribes his early attachment to an English girl, his separation from\nher, and their meeting many years after when she asked his protection for\nher son. Miss Clarke was absorbed by the story. She wanted to know what\nbecame of the young man, what Chateaubriand had been able to do for him.\nChateaubriand could answer only in generals: that he had done all that he\ncould, that he had spoken to the Minister, and that he had no doubt that\nthe young man got what he wanted. But it was evident that even if he had\nreally attempted to do anything for the son of his old love, he had\ntotally forgotten the result. I do not think that he was pleased at Miss\nClarke's attention and sympathy being diverted from himself. Later still\nin Madame R\u00e9camier's life, when she had become blind, and Chateaubriand\ndeaf, and Ballanche very infirm, the evenings were sad. I had to try to\namuse persons who had become almost unamusable.'\n\n'How did Madame de Chateaubriand,' I asked, 'take the devotion of her\nhusband to Madame R\u00e9camier?'\n\n'Philosophically,' answered Amp\u00e8re. 'He would not have spent with her the\nhours that he passed at the Abbaye au bois. She was glad, probably, to\nknow that they were not more dangerously employed.'\n\n'Could I read Chateaubriand?' I asked.\n\n'I doubt it,' said Amp\u00e8re. 'His taste is not English.'\n\n'I _have_ read,' I said, 'and liked, his narrative of the manner in which\nhe forced on the Spanish war of 1822. I thought it well written.'\n\n'It is, perhaps,' said Amp\u00e8re, 'the best thing which he has written, as\nthe intervention to restore Ferdinand, which he effected in spite of\nalmost everybody, was perhaps the most important passage in his political\nlife.\n\n'There is something revolting in an interference to crush the liberties\nof a foreign nation. But the expedition tended to maintain the Bourbons\non the French throne, and, according to Chateaubriand's ideas, it was\nmore important to support the principle of legitimacy than that of\nliberty. He expected, too, sillily enough, that Ferdinand would give a\nConstitution. It is certain, that, bad as the effects of that expedition\nwere, Chateaubriand was always proud of it.'\n\n'What has Ballanche written?' I asked.\n\n'A dozen volumes,' he answered. 'Poetry, metaphysics, on all sorts of\nsubjects, with pages of remarkable vigour and _finesse_, containing some\nof the best writing in the language, but too unequal and too desultory to\nbe worth going through.'\n\n'How wonderfully extensive,' I said, 'is French literature! Here is a\nvoluminous author, some of whose writings, you say, are among the best in\nthe French language, yet his name, at least as an author, is scarcely\nknown. He shines only by reflected light, and will live only because he\nattached himself to a remarkable man and to a remarkable woman.'\n\n'French literature,' said Amp\u00e8re, 'is extensive, but yet inferior to\nyours. If I were forced to select a single literature and to read nothing\nelse, I would take the English. In one of the most important departments,\nthe only one which cannot be re-produced by translation--poetry--you\nbeat us hollow. We are great only in the drama, and even there you are\nperhaps our superiors. We have no short poems comparable to the \"Allegro\"\nor to the \"Penseroso,\" or to the \"Country Churchyard.\"'\n\n'Tocqueville,' I said, 'told me that he did not think that he could\nnow read Lamartine.'\n\n'Tocqueville,' said Amp\u00e8re, 'could taste, like every man of genius, the\nvery finest poetry, but he was not a lover of poetry. He could not read a\nhundred bad lines and think himself repaid by finding mixed with them ten\ngood ones.'\n\n'Ingres,' said Beaumont, 'perhaps our greatest living painter, is one of\nthe clever cultivated men who do not read. Somebody put the \"Misanthrope\"\ninto his hands, \"It is wonderfully clever,\" he said, when he returned it;\n\"how odd it is that it should be so totally unknown.\"'\n\n'Let us read it to-night,' I said.\n\n'By all means,' said Madame de Tocqueville; 'though we know it by heart\nit will be new when read by M. Amp\u00e8re.' Accordingly Amp\u00e8re read it to us\nafter dinner.\n\n'The tradition of the stage,' he said, 'is that C\u00e9lim\u00e8ne was Moli\u00e8re's\nwife.'\n\n'She is made too young,' said Minnie. 'A girl of twenty has not her wit,\nor her knowledge of the world.'\n\n'The change of a word,' said Amp\u00e8re, 'in two or three places would alter\nthat. The feeblest characters are as usual the good ones. Philinte and\nEliante.\n\n'Alceste is a grand mixture, perhaps the only one on the French stage, of\nthe comic and the tragic; for in many of the scenes he rises far above\ncomedy. His love is real impetuous passion. Talma delighted in playing\nhim.'\n\n'The desert,' I said, 'into which he retires, was, I suppose, a distant\ncountry-house. Just such a place as Tocqueville.'\n\n'As Tocqueville,' said Beaumont, 'fifty years ago, without roads, ten\ndays' journey from Paris, and depending for society on Valognes.'\n\n'As Tocqueville,' said Madame de Tocqueville, 'when my mother-in-law\nfirst married. She spent in it a month and could never be induced to see\nit again.'\n\n'Whom,' I asked, 'did C\u00e9lim\u00e8ne marry?'\n\n'Of course,' said Amp\u00e8re, 'Alceste. Probably five years afterwards. By\nthat time he must have got tired of his desert and she of her coquetry.'\n\n'We know,' I said, 'that Moli\u00e8re was always in love with his wife,\nnotwithstanding her _l\u00e9g\u00e8r\u00e9t\u00e9_. What makes me think the tradition that\nC\u00e9lim\u00e8ne was Mademoiselle[1] Moli\u00e8re true, is that Moli\u00e8re was certainly\nin love with C\u00e9lim\u00e8ne. She is made as engaging as possible, and her worst\nfaults do not rise above foibles. Her satire is good-natured. Arsino\u00e9 is\nher foil, introduced to show what real evil-speaking is.'\n\n'All the women,' said Amp\u00e8re, 'are in love with Alceste, and they care\nabout no one else. C\u00e9lim\u00e8ne's satire of the others is scarcely\ngood-natured. It is clear, at least, that they did not think so.'\n\n'If C\u00e9lim\u00e8ne,' said Minnie, 'became Madame Alceste, he probably made her\nlife a burthen with his jealousy.'\n\n'Of course he was jealous,' said Madame de Beaumont, 'for he was\nviolently in love. There can scarcely be violent love without jealousy.'\n\n'At least,' said Madame de Tocqueville, 'till people are married.\n\n'If a lover is cool enough to be without jealousy, he ought to pretend\nit.'\n\n\n[Footnote 1: Under the _ancien r\u00e9gime_ even the married actresses were\ncalled Mademoiselle.--ED.]\n\n\n_Sunday, August_ 18.--After breakfast when the ladies were gone to\nchurch, I talked over with Amp\u00e8re and Beaumont Tocqueville's political\ncareer.\n\n'Why,' I asked, 'did he refuse the support of M. Mol\u00e9 in 1835? Why would\nhe never take office under Louis Philippe? Why did he associate himself\nwith the Gauche whom he despised, and oppose the Droit with whom he\nsympathised? Is the answer given by M. Guizot to a friend of mine who\nasked a nearly similar question, \"Parce qu'il voulait \u00eatre o\u00f9 je suis,\"\nthe true one?'\n\n'The answers to your first question,' said Beaumont, 'are two. In 1835\nTocqueville was young and inexperienced. Like most young politicians, he\nthought that he ought to be an independent member, and to vote, on every\noccasion, according to his conscience, untrammelled by party connections.\nHe afterwards found his mistake.\n\n'And, secondly, if he had chosen to submit to a leader, it would not have\nbeen Mol\u00e9.\n\n'Mol\u00e9 represented a principle to which Guizot was then vehemently\nopposed, though he was afterwards its incarnation--the subservience of\nthe Ministry and of the Parliament to the King. In that house of 450\nmembers, there were 220 placemen; 200 were the slaves of the King. They\nreceived from him their orders; from time to time, in obedience to those\norders, they even opposed his Ministers.\n\n'This, however, seldom occurred, for the King contrived always to have a\ndevoted majority in his Cabinet.\n\n'It was this that drove the Duc de Broglie from the Government and\nprevented his ever resuming office.\n\n'\"I could not bear,\" he said to me, \"to hear Sebastiani repeat, in every\ncouncil and on every occasion, 'Ce que le Roi vient de dire est\nparfaitement juste.'\" The only Ministers that ventured to have an opinion\nof their own were those of the 12th of May 1839, of which Dufaure,\nVillemain, and Passy were members, and that of the 1st of March 1840, of\nwhich Thiers was the leader; and Tocqueville supported them both.\n\n'When Guizot, who had maintained the principle of Ministerial and\nParliamentary, in opposition to that of Monarchical Governments, with\nunequalled eloquence, vigour, and I may add violence, suddenly turned\nround and became the most servile member of the King's servile majority,\nTocqueville fell back into opposition.\n\n'In general it is difficult to act with an opposition systematically and,\nat the same time, honestly. For the measures proposed by a Government\nare, for the most part, good. But, during the latter part of Louis\nPhilippe's reign, it was easy, for the Government proposed merely to do\nnothing--either abroad or at home. I do not complain of the essence of M.\nGuizot's foreign policy, though there was a want of dignity in its forms.\n\n'There was nothing useful to be done, and, under such circumstances, all\naction would have been mischievous.\n\n'But at home _every_ thing was to be done. Our code required to be\namended, our commerce and our industry, and our agriculture required to\nbe freed, our municipal and commercial institutions were to be created,\nour taxation was to be revised, and, above all, our parliamentary\nsystem--under which, out of 36,000,000 of French, only 200,000 had votes,\nunder which the Deputies bought a majority of the 200,000 electors, and\nthe King bought a majority of the 450 deputies--required absolute\nreconstruction.\n\n'Louis Philippe would allow nothing to be done. If he could have\nprevented it we should not have had a railroad. He would not allow the\nmost important of all, that to Marseilles, to be finished. He would not\nallow our monstrous centralisation, or our monstrous protective system,\nto be touched. The owners of forests were permitted to deprive us of\ncheap fuel, the owners of forges of cheap iron, the owners of factories\nof cheap clothing.\n\n'In some of this stupid inaction Guizot supported him conscientiously,\nfor, like Thiers, he is ignorant of the first principles of political\neconomy, but he knows too much the philosophy of Government not to have\nfelt, on every other point, that the King was wrong.\n\n'If he supposed that Tocqueville wished to be in his place, on the\nconditions on which he held office, he was utterly mistaken.\n\n'Tocqueville was ambitious; he wished for power. So did I. We would\ngladly have been real Ministers, but nothing would have tempted us to be\nthe slaves of the _pens\u00e9e immuable_, or to sit in a Cabinet in which we\nwere constantly out-voted, or to defend, as Guizot had to do in the\nChamber, conduct which we had disapproved in the Council.\n\n'You ask why Tocqueville joined the Gauche whom he despised, against the\nDroit with whom he sympathised?\n\n'He voted with the Gauche only where he thought their votes right. Where\nhe thought them wrong, as, for instance, in all that respected Algeria,\nhe left them. They would have abandoned the country, and, when that\ncould not be obtained, they tried to prevent the creation of the port.\n\n'Very early, however, in his parliamentary life, he had found that an\nindependent member--a member who supporting no party is supported by no\nparty---is useless. He allowed himself therefore to be considered a\nmember of the Gauche; but I never could persuade him to be tolerably\ncivil to them. Once, after I had been abusing him for his coldness to\nthem, he shook hands with Romorantin, then looked towards me for my\napplause, but I doubt whether he ever shook hands with him again. In\nfact almost his only point of contact with them was their disapprobation\nof the inactivity of Louis Philippe. Many of them were Bonapartists like\nAbbatucci and Romorantin. Some were Socialists, some were Republicans;\nthe majority of them wished to overthrow the Monarchy, and the minority\nlooked forward with indifference to its fall.\n\n'They hated him as much as he did them, much more indeed, for his mind\nwas not formed for hatred. They excluded him from almost all committees.'\n\n'Would it not have been wise in him,' I asked, 'to retire from the\nChamber during the King's life, or at least until it contained a party\nwith whom he could cordially act?'\n\n'Perhaps,' said Beaumont, 'that would have been the wisest course for\nhim--and indeed for me. I entered the Chamber reluctantly. All my family\nwere convinced that a political man not in the Chamber was nothing. So\nI let myself be persuaded. Tocqueville required no persuasion, he was\nanxious to get in, and when in it was difficult to persuade oneself to go\nout. We always hoped for a change. The King might die, or he might be\nforced--as he had been forced before--to submit to a liberal Ministry\nwhich might have been a temporary cure, or even to a Parliamentary reform\nwhich might have been a complete cure. Duch\u00e2tel, who is a better\npolitician than Guizot, was superseding him in the confidence of the King\nand of the Chamber.\n\n'In fact, the liberal Ministry and Parliamentary reform did come at last,\nthough not until it was too late to save the Monarchy.\n\n'If Tocqueville had retired in disgust from the Chamber of Deputies, he\nmight not have been a member of the Constituent, or of the Legislative\nAssembly. This would have been a misfortune--though the shortness of the\nduration of the first, and the hostility of the President during the\nsecond, and also the state of his health, prevented his influencing the\ndestinies of the Republic as much as his friends expected him to do, and\nindeed as he expected himself.'\n\n'I have often,' I said, 'wondered how you and Tocqueville, and the other\neminent men who composed the committee for preparing the Constitution,\ncould have made one incapable of duration, and also incapable of change.'\n\n'What,' he asked, 'are the principal faults which you find in the\nConstitution?'\n\n'First,' I said, 'that you gave to your President absolute authority over\nthe army, the whole patronage of the most centralised and the most\nplace-hunting country in the world, so that there was not one of your\npopulation of 36,000,000 whose interests he could not seriously affect;\nand, having thus armed him with irresistible power, you gave him the\nstrongest possible motives to employ it against the Constitution by\nturning him out at the end of his four years, incapable of re-election,\nunpensioned and unprovided for, so that he must have gone from the \u00c9lys\u00e9e\nBourbon to a debtor's prison.\n\n'Next, that, intending your President to be the subordinate Minister of\nthe Assembly, you gave him the same origin, and enabled him to say, \"I\nrepresent the people as much as you do, indeed much more. They _all_\nvoted for me, only a fraction of them voted for any one of you.\" Then\nthat origin was the very worst that could possibly be selected, the votes\nof the uneducated multitude; you must have foreseen that they would give\nyou a demagogue or a charlatan. The absence of a second Chamber, and the\nabsence of a power of dissolution, are minor faults, but still serious\nones. When the President and the Assembly differed, they were shut up\ntogether to fight it out without an umpire.'\n\n'That we gave the President too much power,' said Beaumont, 'the event\nhas proved. But I do not see how, in the existing state of feeling in\nFrance, we could have given him less. The French have no self-reliance.\nThey depend for everything on their administrators. The first revolution\nand the first empire destroyed all their local authorities and also their\naristocracy. Local authorities may be gradually re-created, and an\naristocracy may gradually arise, but till these things have been done the\nExecutive must be strong.\n\n'If he had been re-eligible, our first President would virtually have\nbeen President for life. Having decided that his office should be\ntemporary, we were forced to forbid his immediate re-election.\n\n'With respect to his being left unprovided for, no man who had filled the\noffice decently would have been refused an ample provision on quitting\nit. As for this man, no provision that we could have made for him, if we\nhad given him three or four millions a year, would have induced him to\ngive up what he considered a throne which was his by descent. He swore to\nthe Constitution with an _id\u00e9e fixe _to destroy it. He attempted to do so\non the 29th of January 1849, not two months after his election.\n\n'I agree with you that the fault of the Constitution was that it allowed\nthe President to be chosen by universal suffrage; and that the fault of\nthe people was that they elected a pretender to the throne, whose\nambition, rashness, and faithlessness had been proved.\n\n'No new Constitution can work if the Executive conspires against it. But\ndeliberating and acting in the midst of _\u00e9meutes_, with a Chamber and a\npopulation divided into half a dozen hostile factions, the two Royalist\nparties hating one another, the Bonapartists bent on destroying all\nfreedom, and the Socialists all individual property, what could we do? My\nwish and Tocqueville's was to give the election to the Chamber. We found\nthat out of 650 members we could not hope that our proposition would be\nsupported by more than 200. You think that we ought to have proposed two\nChambers. The great use of two Chambers is to strengthen the Executive\nby enabling it to play one against the other; but we felt that our\nExecutive was dangerously strong, and we believed, I think truly, that a\nsingle Chamber would resist him better than two could do. The provision\nwhich required more than a bare majority for the revision of the\nConstitution was one of those which we borrowed from America. It had\nworked well there. In the general instability we wished to have one\nanchor, one mooring ring fixed. We did not choose that the whole\nframework of our Government should be capable of being suddenly destroyed\nby a majority of one, in a moment of excitement and perhaps by a\nparliamentary surprise.\n\n'With respect to your complaint that, there being no power of\ndissolution, there was no means of taking the opinion of the people, the\nanswer is, that to give the President power of dissolution would have\nbeen to invite him to a _coup d'\u00e9tat._ With no Chamber to watch him, he\nwould have been omnipotent.\n\n'I agree with you that the Constitution was a detestable one. But even\nnow, looking back to the times, and to the conditions under which we made\nit, I do not think that it was in our power to make a good one.'\n\n'Tocqueville,' I said, 'told me that Cormenin was your Solon, that he\nbrought a bit of constitution to you every morning, and that it was\nusually adopted.'[1]\n\n'Tocqueville's memory,' answered Beaumont, 'deceived him. Cormenin was\nour president. It is true that he brought a bit of constitution every\nmorning. But it scarcely ever was adopted or capable of being adopted.\nIt was in general bad in itself, or certain to be rejected by the\nAssembly. He wished to make the President a puppet. But he exercised over\nus a mischievous influence. He tried to revenge himself for our refusal\nof all his proposals by rendering our deliberations fruitless. And as\nthe power of a president over a deliberative body is great, he often\nsucceeded.\n\n'Many of our members were unaccustomed to public business and lost their\ntempers or their courage when opposed. The Abb\u00e9 Lamennais proposed a\ndouble election of the president. But of thirty members, only four, among\nwhom were Tocqueville and I, supported him. He left the committee and\nnever returned to it. Tocqueville and I were anxious to introduce double\nelection everywhere. It is the best palliative of universal suffrage.'\n\n'The double election,' I said, 'of the American President is nugatory.\nEvery elector is chosen under a pledge to nominate a specified\ncandidate.'\n\n'That is true,' said Beaumont, 'as to the President, but not as to the\nother functionaries thus elected. The senators chosen by double election\nare far superior to the representatives chosen by direct voting.\n\n'We proposed, too, to begin by establishing municipal institutions. We\nwere utterly defeated. The love of centralisation is almost inherent in\nFrench politicians. They see the evil of local government--its stupidity,\nits corruption, its jobbing. They see the convenience of\ncentralisation--the ease with which a centralised administration works.\nFeelings which are really democratic have reached those who fancy\nthemselves aristocrats. We had scarcely a supporter.\n\n'We should perhaps have a few now, when experience has shown that\ncentralisation is still more useful to an usurper than it is to a regular\nGovernment.'\n\n[Footnote 1: See Vol. I. p. 212.--ED.]\n\n\n_August_ 18.--We drove in the afternoon to the coast, and sat in the\nshade of the little ricks of sea-weed, gazing on an open sea as blue as\nthe Mediterranean.\n\nWe talked of America.\n\n'I can understand,' said Madame de Tocqueville, 'the indignation of the\nNorth against you. It is, of course, excessive, but they had a right to\nexpect you to be on their side in an anti-slavery war.'\n\n'They had no right,' I said, 'to expect from our Government anything but\nabsolute neutrality.'\n\n'But you need not,' she replied, 'have been so eager to put the South on\nthe footing of belligerents.'\n\n'On what other footing,' I asked, 'could we put them? On what other\nfooting does the North put them? Have they ventured, or will they\nventure, to hang a single seceder?'\n\n'At least,' she said, 'you might have expressed more sympathy with the\nNorth?'\n\n'I think,' I answered, 'that we have expressed as much sympathy as it was\npossible to feel. We deplore the combat, we hold the South responsible\nfor it, we think their capricious separation one of the most foolish and\none of the most wicked acts that have ever been committed; we hope that\nthe North will beat them, and we should bitterly regret their forcing\nthemselves back into the Union on terms making slavery worse, if\npossible, than it is now. We wish the contest to end as quickly as\npossible: but we do not think that it can end by the North subjugating\nthe Southerns and forcing them to be its subjects.\n\n'The best termination to which we look forward as possible, is that the\nNorth should beat the South, and then dictate its own terms of\nseparation.\n\n'If they wish to go farther than this, if they wish us to love or to\nadmire our Northern cousins in their political capacity, they wish for\nwhat is impossible.\n\n'We cannot forget that the Abolitionists have been always a small and\ndiscredited party; that the Cuba slave trade is mainly carried on from\nNew York; that they have neglected the obligations formally entered\ninto by them with us to co-operate in the suppression of the slave trade;\nthat they have pertinaciously refused to allow us even to inquire into\nthe right of slavers to use the American flag; that it is the capital of\nthe North which feeds the slavery of the South; that the first act of the\nNorth, as soon as the secession of the South from Congress allowed it to\ndo what it liked, was to enact a selfish protective tariff; that their\ntreatment of us, from the time that they have felt strong enough to\ninsult us, has been one unvaried series of threats, bullying, and injury;\nthat they have refused to submit their claims on us to arbitration,\ndriven out our ambassadors, seized by force on disputed territory, and\nthreatened war on every pretence.'\n\n'It is true,' said Beaumont, 'that during the last twenty years American\ndiplomacy has not been such as to inspire affection or respect But you\nmust recollect that during all that time America has been governed by the\nSouth.'\n\n'It is true,' I said, 'that the presidents have generally been Southerns,\nbut I am not aware that the North has ever disavowed their treatment of\nus. This is certain, that throughout the Union, insolence to England has\nbeen an American statesman's road to popularity.'\n\n\n_Monday., August _19.--We walked in the afternoon over the commons\noverlooking the sea, and among the shady lanes of this well-wooded\ncountry.\n\nWe came on a group of about twelve or thirteen reapers taking their\nevening meal of enormous loaves of brown bread, basins of butter, and\nkegs of cider.\n\nM. Roussell, the farmer in whose service they were, was sitting among\nthem. He was an old friend and constituent of Tocqueville, and for thirty\nyears was Maire of Tocqueville. He has recently resigned. He rose and\nwalked with us to his house.\n\n'I was required,' he said, 'to support the prefect's candidate for the\n_Conseil g\u00e9n\u00e9ral_. No such proposition was ever made to me before. I\ncould not submit to it. The prefect has been unusually busy of late. The\nschoolmaster has been required to send in a list of the peasants whose\nchildren, on the plea of poverty, receive gratuitous education. The\nchildren of those who do not vote with the prefect are to have it no\nlonger.'\n\nI asked what were the wages of labour.\n\n'Three francs and half a day,' he said, 'during the harvest, with\nfood--which includes cider. In ordinary times one franc a day with food,\nor a franc and a half without food.'\n\n'It seems then,' I said, 'that you can feed a man for half a franc a\nday?'\n\n'He can feed himself,' said M. Roussell, 'for that, but I cannot, or for\ndouble that money.'\n\nThe day labourer is generally hired only for one day. A new bargain is\nmade every day.\n\nThe house was not uncomfortable, but very untidy. There are no ricks,\neverything is stored in large barns, where it is safe from weather, but\nterribly exposed to vermin.\n\nA bright-complexioned servant-girl was in the kitchen preparing an\nenormous bowl of soup, of which bread, potatoes, and onions were the\nchief solid ingredients.\n\n'Roussell,' said Beaumont, 'is superior to his class. In general they are\nbad politicians. It is seldom difficult to get their votes for the\nnominee of the prefect. They dislike to vote for anyone whom they know,\nespecially if he be a gentleman, or be supported by the gentry. Such a\ncandidate excites their democratic envy and suspicion. But the prefect is\nan abstraction. They have never seen him, they have seldom heard of his\nname or of that of his candidate, and therefore they vote for him.\n\n'Lately, however, in some of my communes, the peasants have adapted a new\npractice, that of electing peasants. I suspect that the Government is not\ndispleased.\n\n'The presence of such members will throw discredit on the _Conseils\ng\u00e9n\u00e9raux_, and, if they get there, on the _Corps l\u00e9gislatif,_ much to the\npleasure of our democratic master, and they will be easily bribed or\nfrightened. Besides which the fifteen francs a day will be a fortune to\nthem, and they will be terrified by the threat of a dissolution. I do not\nthink that even yet we have seen the worst of universal suffrage.'\n\n'What influence,' I asked, 'have the priests?'\n\n'In some parts of France,' said Beaumont, 'where the people are\nreligious, as is the case here, much. Not much in the north-east, where\nthere is little religion; and in the towns, where there is generally no\nreligion, their patronage of a candidate would ruin him. I believe that\nnothing has so much contributed to Louis Napoleon's popularity with the\n_ouvriers_ as his quarrel with the Pope. You may infer the feelings of\nthe lower classes in Paris from his cousin's conduct.'\n\n'I study Prince Napoleon,' said Amp\u00e8re, 'with interest, for I believe\nthat he will be the successor.'\n\n'If Louis Napoleon,' I said, 'were to be shot tomorrow, would not the\nlittle prince be proclaimed?'\n\n'Probably,' said Ampere, 'but with J\u00e9r\u00f4me for regent, and I doubt whether\nthe regency would end by the little Napoleon IV. assuming the sceptre.\n\n'Louis Napoleon himself does not expect it. He often says that, in\nFrance, it is more than two hundred years since a sovereign has been\nsucceeded by his son.\n\n'On the whole,' continued Amp\u00e8re, 'I had rather have J\u00e9r\u00f4me than Louis\nNapoleon. He has more talent and less prudence. He would bring on the\ncrisis sooner.\n\n'On the 31st of October, 1849,' said Madame de Tocqueville, 'I was in\nLouis Napoleon's company, and he mentioned some matter on which he wished\nto know my husband's opinion. I could not give it. \"It does not much\nsignify,\" he answered, \"for as I see M. de Tocqueville every day, I will\ntalk to him about it myself.\" At that very time, the _ordonnance_\ndismissing M. de Tocqueville had been signed, and Louis Napoleon knew\nthat he would probably never see him again.'\n\n'I do not,' said Ampere, 'give up the chance of a republic. I do not wish\nfor one. It must be a very bad constitutional monarchy which I should not\nprefer to the best republic. My democratic illusions are gone. France and\nAmerica have dispelled them: but it must be a very bad republic which I\nshould not prefer to the best despotism. A republic is like a fever,\nviolent and frightful, but not necessarily productive of organic\nmischief. A despotism is a consumption: it degrades and weakens, and\nperverts all the vital functions.\n\n'What is there now in France worth living for? I find people proud of our\nItalian campaign. Why should the French be proud that their master's\nsoldiers have been successful in a war as to which they were not\nconsulted; which, in fact, they disapproved, which was not made for their\nbenefit, which was the most glaring proof of their servility and\ndegradation? We knew before that our troops were better than the\nAustrians. What have we gained by the additional example of their\nsuperiority?\n\n'I fear,' I said, 'that a republic, at least such a republic as you are\nlikely to have, would begin by some gross economical enormities--by the\n_droit au travail_, by the _imp\u00f4t progressif sur la fortune pr\u00e9sumt\u00e9e_,\nby a paper currency made a legal tender without limitation of its\namount.'\n\n'The last republic,' said Ampere, 'did some of these things, but very\ntimidly and moderately. It gave to its paper a forced currency, but was\nso cautious in its issue, that it was not depreciated. It created the\n_ateliers nationaux,_ but it soon dissolved them, though at the expense\nof a civil war. Its worst fault was more political than economical: it\nwas the 45 centimes, that is to say, the sudden increase by 45 per cent,\nof the direct taxes. It never recovered that blow. Of all its acts it\nis the one which is best recollected. The Provisional Government is known\nin the provinces as \"ces gredins des quarante-cinq centimes.\" The\nbusiness of a revolutionary government is to be popular. It ought to\nreduce taxation, meet its expenditure by loans, abolish octrois and\nprohibitions, and defer taxation until it has lasted long enough to be\nsubmitted to as a _fait accompli_.'\n\n'I fear,' said Madame de Tocqueville, 'that our working classes are in a\nmuch worse frame of mind than they were in 1848. Socialist opinions--the\ndoctrine that the profits of capitalists are so much taken fraudulently\nor oppressively from the wages of labourers, and that it is unjust that\none man should have more of the means of happiness than another--are\nextending every day. The workpeople believe that the rich are their\nenemies and that the Emperor is their friend, and that he will join them\nin an attempt to get their fair share, that is, an equal share, of the\nproperty of the country--and I am not sure that they are mistaken.'\n\n'Nor am I,' said Beaumont '_Celui-ci_ fully sympathises with their\nfeelings, and I do not think that he has intelligence enough to see the\nabsurdity of their theories.'\n\n'You do not deny him,' I said, 'intelligence?'\n\n'Not,' said Beaumont, 'for some purposes, and to some extent, practical\nintelligence. His ends are bad, but he is often skilful in inventing and\npertinacious in employing means for effecting those bad ends. But I\ndeny him theoretic intelligence. I do not think that he has comprehension\nor patience to work out, or even to follow, a long train of reasoning;\nsuch a train as that by which economical errors and fallacies are\ndetected.'\n\n'Are there strikes,' I asked, 'among your workmen?'\n\n'They are beginning,' said  Beaumont. 'We have had one near us, and the\nauthorities were afraid to interfere.'\n\n'I suppose,' I said, that they are illegal?'\n\n'They are illegal,' he answered, 'and I think that they ought to be so.\nThey are always oppressive and tyrannical. The workman who does not join\nin a strike is made miserable. They are generally mischievous to\nthe combined workmen themselves, and always to those of other trades.\nYour toleration of them appears to me one of the worst symptoms of your\npolitical state of health. It shows among your public men an ignorance or\na cowardice, or a desire of ill-earned popularity, which is generally a\nprecursor of a democratic revolution.'\n\n'It is certain,' said Amp\u00e8re, 'that the masters are becoming afraid of\ntheir workmen. P\u00e9reire brings his from their residences to the Barri\u00e8re\nMalesherbes in carriages. You are not actually insulted in the streets\nof Paris, but you are treated with rude neglect. A _fiacre_ likes to\nsplash you, a _paveur_ to scatter you with mud. Louis Napoleon began with\nChauvinism. He excited all the bad international passions of the\nmultitude. He has now taken up Sansculotteism. Repulsed with scorn and\ndisgust by the rich and the educated, he has thrown himself on the poor\nand ignorant The passions with which he likes to work are envy,\nmalignity, and rapacity.\n\n'I do not believe that he feels them. He is what is called a good-natured\nman. That is to say, he likes to please everyone that he sees. But his\nselfishness is indescribable.\n\n'No public interest stands in the way of his slightest caprice. He often\nputs me in mind of Nero. With the same indifference to the welfare of\nothers with which Nero amused himself by burning down Rome, he is amusing\nhimself by pulling down Paris.'\n\nN.W. SENIOR.\n\n\n                *   *   *   *   *   *\n\n[We left Tocqueville on the following day with great regret The same\nparty was never to meet again--the only survivors are Madame de Beaumont\nand myself and the Beaumonts' son, then a very intelligent boy of ten\nyears old.\n\nOne day my father and I visited the little green churchyard on a cliff\nnear the sea where Tocqueville is buried. The tomb is a plain grey stone\nslab--on it a cross is cut in bas-relief, with these words only:--\n\nICI REPOSE\n\nALEXIS DE TOCQUEVILLE.\n\nN\u00c9 24 FEVRIER 1805. MORT 16 AVRIL 1859.\n\nMy father laid a wreath of _immortelles_ on the tomb.--ED.]\n\n\nAPPENDIX.\n\nMONTALEMBERT'S speech was afterwards published in the _Moniteur_ but with\nconsiderable alterations. In Mr. Senior's journal in 1854 (which has not\nbeen published), he says, under the date of April 26, I called on\nMontalembert and took him my report of his speech. He has promised to add\nto it any notes that it may require. \"The printed report,\" he said, \"is\nintentionally falsified. Before it was struck off I asked to see the\nproofs. I was told that, as such an application was new, the President of\nthe Bureau would meet and decide on its admissibility. They decided that\nit could not be granted.\"'\n\n[The following is Mr. Senior's report, with M. de Montalembert's own\ncorrections and additions in French.--ED.]\n\nAt length Montalembert rose. He stood near the extreme right, with his\nside towards the tribune, and his face towards the centre gallery, in\nwhich I sat. His voice and delivery are so good, and the house was so\nsilent, that I did not lose a word. I believe that the following report\nis a tolerably accurate abridgment of his speech.\n\n'Gentlemen, I must begin by expressing to you my deep gratitude for the\nattention which you have paid to this unhappy business. I am grieved at\nhaving occasioned the waste of so much public time. I am still more\ngrieved at having been the occasion of division among my colleagues.'\n\n[_Note by Montalember_.--'J'aurais voulu faire plus qu'exprimer le\nregret: j'aurais voulu me pr\u00eater \u00e0 tous les arrangements qui m'ont \u00e9t\u00e9\nsugg\u00e9r\u00e9s par des voix amies pour mettre un terme \u00e0 cette discussion. Je\nn'aurais recul\u00e9 devant aucun sacrifice qui e\u00fbt \u00e9t\u00e9 compatible avec\nl'honneur. Mais vous comprenez tous que sous le coup d'une poursuite,\nd'un danger, je ne puis rien d\u00e9savouer, rien r\u00e9tracter, rien retirer de\nce que j'ai \u00e9crit, de ce que j'ai pens\u00e9. Si j'agissais autrement il vous\nresterait un coll\u00e8gue absous, mais d\u00e9shonor\u00e9 et dont vous ne sauriez que\nfaire.']\n\n'More than all I am grieved when I think of the time at which this has\noccurred. A time when we are engaged in an honourable and serious war--a\nwar in which, with the great and faithful ally whom I have always\ndesired, and the sympathy of all Europe, we are defending civilisation\nagainst an enemy, barbarous indeed, but so formidable as to require our\nundivided energy and our undivided attention.\n\nBut you must recollect _when_ that letter was written. It was in last\nSeptember, in profound peace, when our whole thoughts were employed, and\nwere properly employed, on our internal affairs.\n\n'Aujourd'hui il en est autrement; l'\u00e9tat de guerre impose \u00e0 tous les\ncitoyens des devoirs sp\u00e9ciaux: il doit aussi imposer un certain frein \u00e0\nl'esprit de critique. Aucun Fran\u00e7ais, quel que soit sa foi politique, ne\npeut vouloir discr\u00e9diter le pouvoir des dissidents, des m\u00e9contents, mais\nil n'y a plus d'\u00e9migr\u00e9s, ni \u00e0 l'int\u00e9rieur, ni \u00e0 l'ext\u00e9rieur.'\n\n[_Note by N.W. Senior._--This seems to be an allusion to a passage in\nThiers's celebrated speech of the 17th of February, 1851. 'I1 ne faut\n\u00e9migrer, ni au dehors, ni au dedans.']\n\n['J'aurais su contenir les sentiments les plus passion\u00e9s de mon \u00e2me,\nplut\u00f4t que de para\u00eetre affaiblir en quoi que ce soit la main qui porte\nl'\u00e9p\u00e9e et le drapeau de la France. Ce n'est pas toutefois que j'admette\nque toute libert\u00e9 de parole ou de presse soit incompatible avec l'\u00e9tat de\nguerre. L'Angleterre a conserv\u00e9 toutes ses libert\u00e9s en faisant la guerre\naux plus redoutables ennemis: aujourd'hui encore l'opposition, d'accord\navec le gouvernement sur la question ext\u00e9rieure, maintient les\nr\u00e9sistances et les critiques \u00e0 l'int\u00e9rieur. Et certes personne ne dira\nque l'Angleterre, pour avoir conserv\u00e9 la libert\u00e9 de discussion la plus\nenti\u00e8re, n'ait pas d\u00e9ploy\u00e9 pour le moins autant de pr\u00e9voyance et\nd'\u00e9nergie que nous dans la conduite de la guerre o\u00f9 nous entrons. Il n'y\na que les nations o\u00f9 la vie publique circule dans toutes les veines du\ncorps social, qui sachent r\u00e9sister aux \u00e9preuves et aux chances d'une\nguerre prolong\u00e9e. La libert\u00e9 de la contradiction centuple le prix d'une\nlibre adh\u00e9sion; et \u00e0 force de mettre une sourdine \u00e0 toutes les \u00e9motions\ndu pays, il faut prendre garde qu'on ne se trouve un jour dans\nl'impossibilit\u00e9 de faire vibrer les cordes les plus essentielles quand le\nmoment des dangers et des sacrifices sera arriv\u00e9.']\n\n'I deeply regret the publication of that letter. But with that\npublication I repeat that I am utterly unconnected. I never sanctioned\nit, I never wished for it, I never even thought it possible. There are\npassages in the letter itself which I might modify if I were to re-write\nit, but it would rather be by adding to them than by taking from them.\nTwo accusations have been directed against its substance. One that it is\nhostile to the Emperor; the other that it is hostile to this assembly. No\none who knows my character, and knows my history, will believe that I can\nhave intended to injure the Emperor. Our relations have been such as to\nmake it impossible.\n\n['J'ai eu l'occasion de d\u00e9fendre le chef actuel de l'\u00c9tat dans des\ncirconstances infiniment difficiles, et o\u00f9 rien n'\u00e9tait plus douteux que\nle succ\u00e8s. Je ne pr\u00e9tends pas l'avoir constitu\u00e9 par cela mon d\u00e9biteur,\ncar en le d\u00e9fendant, je ne voulais servir, comme toujours, que la\njustice, l'int\u00e9r\u00eat du pays, la libert\u00e9 mod\u00e9r\u00e9e qui se personnifiaient en\nlui \u00e0 mes yeux, mais enfin, aux yeux du public il est mon oblig\u00e9, et je\nne suis pas le sien. Si j'avais eu la pens\u00e9e d'offenser publiquement\nl'Empereur, et si j'y avais c\u00e9d\u00e9, nous serions _quittes_. Or, je tiens\nbeaucoup \u00e0 ce que nous ne le soyons pas. Il n'y aurait pour moi ni\nhonneur ni avantage \u00e0 ce changement de position. Tous les hommes de bon\ngo\u00fbt, tous les coeurs d\u00e9licats, me comprendront.']\n\n'It is equally impossible that I should have wished to offend this\nassembly. It contains men by whose sides I have fought the great battles\nof property and law. I love many of its members. I respect almost all. If\nI have offended any, it was done unconsciously. Again, it is said that\nthe tone of my letter is violent. Expressions may be called violent by\nsome which would be only called _passionn\u00e9s_ by others. Now I admit that\nI am _passionn\u00e9_. It is in my nature. I owe to that quality much of my\nmerit, whatever that merit may be. Were I not _passionn\u00e9_, I should not\nhave been, during all my life, _la sentinelle perdue de la libert\u00e9_. I\nshould not have thrown myself into every breach: sometimes braving the\nattacks of anarchy, sometimes heading the assault on tyranny, and\nsometimes fighting against the worst of all despotisms, the despotism\nthat is based on democracy.'\n\n['Allons plus au fond, et vous reconna\u00eetrez que les opinions \u00e9nonc\u00e9es\ndans la lettre ne sont autres que celles toujours profess\u00e9es par moi.\nElles peuvent toutes se ramener \u00e0 une seule, \u00e0 mon \u00e9loignement pour le\npouvoir absolu. Je ne l'aime pas: je ne l'ai jamais aim\u00e9. Si j'ai tant\ncombattu l'anarchie avant et apr\u00e8s 1848, si j'ai suscit\u00e9 contre moi dans\nle parti d\u00e9magogique ces haines virulentes qui durent encore et qui ne\nperdent jamais une occasion d'\u00e9clater contre moi, c'est parce que j'ai\ncompris de bonne heure les affinit\u00e9s naturelles du despotisme et de la\nd\u00e9mocratie; c'est parce que j'ai pr\u00e9vu et pr\u00e9dit que la d\u00e9mocratie nous\nconduirait au pouvoir absolu. Oui, je crois, comme je l'ai dit, que le\ndespotisme abaisse les caract\u00e8res, les intelligences, les consciences.\nOui, je d\u00e9plore le syst\u00e8me qui rend un seul homme tout-puissant et seul\nresponsable des destin\u00e9es d'une nation de 36 millions d'hommes; et trouve\nque cela ressemble trop au gouvernement russe, contre lequel nous allons\nen guerre, et trop peu au gouvernement anglais, dont nous prisons si haut\nl'alliance.']\n\n'I am told again, and the accusation is sanctioned by the _r\u00e9quisitoire_\nof the Procureur-G\u00e9n\u00e9ral, that my letter is inconsistent with the\nfidelity which I have sworn to the Emperor and to the constitution. When\na man swears fidelity to a sovereign and to a constitution, his oath\nengages him only as to matters within his own power. He swears not to\nconspire against them. He swears not to attempt to subvert them. He\ncannot swear to approve the acts of the sovereign, or the working of the\nconstitution, for he cannot foresee what either of them will be. I have\nkept, and I shall keep, my oath to the Emperor and my oath to the\nconstitution. I have not attempted, and I shall not attempt, to overthrow\neither of them. But my approbation of either of them does not depend on\nme. I accepted the _coup d'\u00e9tat_, comme vous l'avez tous fait, comme\nnotre seule chance de salut dans les circonstances d'alors. I expected\na Government _honn\u00eate et mod\u00e9r\u00e9_. I have been disappointed.'\n\nHere a violent exclamation ran through the assembly. Baroche rose and\ncried out, 'You hear him, gentlemen. He says that he expected honesty and\nmoderation from the Government, and that he has been disappointed. I\nappeal to you, Mr. President, to decide whether we are to sit and listen\nto such infamies.'\n\n[Voix diverses:--'Expliquez vos paroles.' 'Retirez vos paroles.' M. de\nMontalembert.--'Je les maintiens et je les explique.']\n\n'I expected _un gouvernement honn\u00eate et mod\u00e9r\u00e9_. I have been\ndisappointed. Its _honn\u00eat\u00e9_ may be judged by the confiscation of the\nOrleans property.'\n\nHere was another hubbub, and another protest of Baroche's.\n\n'What is going on before you,' continued Montalembert, 'is a sample of\nits moderation. It is now attempting in my person to introduce into our\ncriminal law a new _d\u00e9lit_, \"communication.\" Until now it was supposed\nthat nothing was criminal until it was published. It was believed that a\nman might write his opinions and his reflections, and might exchange them\nwith his friends; that nothing was libellous that was confidential. _Now_\nthis Government holds a man responsible for every thought that an\nindiscreet or an incautious friend, or a concealed enemy, or a tool of\npower reveals. If it succeeds in this attempt, it will not rest satisfied\nwith this victory over the remnant of our freedom. It is not in the\nnature of things that it should. A Government that will not tolerate\ncensure must forbid discussion. You are now asked to put down writing.\nWhen that has been done, conversation will be attacked. Paris will\nresemble Rome under the successors of Augustus. Already this prosecution\nhas produced a _malaise_ which I never felt or observed before. What will\nbe the feelings of the nation when all that is around it is concealed,\nwhen every avenue by which light could penetrate is stopped; when we are\nexposed to all the undefined terrors and exaggerated dangers that\naccompany utter darkness? The misfortune of France, a national defect\nwhich makes the happiness enjoyed by England unattainable by us, is, that\nshe is always oscillating between extremes; that she is constantly\nswinging from universal conquest to _la paix \u00e0 tout prix_, from the\ndesire of nothing but glory to the desire of nothing but wealth, from the\nwildest democracy to the most abject servility. Every new Government\nstarts with a new principle. Every Government in a few years perishes by\ncarrying that principle to an extreme. The First Republic was destroyed\nby the intemperance with which it trampled on every sort of tradition and\nauthority, the First Empire by its abuse of victory and war, the\nRestoration by its exaggerated belief in divine right and legitimacy, the\nRoyalty of July by its exaggerated reliance on purchased voters and\nParliamentary majorities, the Second Republic by the conduct of its own\nRepublicans. The danger to the Second Empire--its only internal danger,\nbut I fear a fatal one--is its abuse of authority. With every phase of\nour sixty years' long revolution, we have a new superstition, a new\n_culte_. We are now required to become the worshippers of authority. I\nlament that with the new religion we have not new priests. Our public men\nwould not be discredited by instantaneous apostasy from one political\nfaith to another. I am grieved, gentlemen, if I offend you; though many\nof you are older in years than I am, not one probably is so old in public\nlife. I may be addressing you for the last time, and I feel that my last\nwords ought to contain all the warnings that I think will be useful to\nyou. This assembly will soon end, as all its predecessors have ended. Its\nacts, its legislation, may perish with it, but its reputation, its fame,\nfor good or for evil, will survive. Within a few minutes you will do an\nact by which that reputation will be seriously affected; by which it may\nbe raised, by which it may be deeply, perhaps irrevocably, sunk. Your\nvote to-night will show whether you possess freedom, and whether you\ndeserve it. As for myself, I care but little. A few months, or even\nyears, of imprisonment are among the risks which every public man who\ndoes his duty in revolutionary times must encounter, and which the first\nmen of the country have incurred, _soit en sortant des affaires, soit\navant d'y entrer_. But whatever may be the effect of your vote on _my_\nperson, whatever it may be on _your_ reputation, I trust that it is not\nin your power to inflict permanent injury on my country. Among you are\nsome who lived through the Empire. They must remember that the soldiers\nof our glorious army cherished as fondly the recollection of its defeats\nas of its victories. They must see that the lessons which those defeats\ntaught, and the feelings which they inspired, are now among the sources\nof our military strength. Your Emperor himself, in one of his earlier\naddresses, talked hopefully of the period when France would be capable of\nmore liberty than he now thinks good for her, \"Un jour,\" he exclaimed,\n\"mon oeuvre sera couronn\u00e9e par la libert\u00e9.\" I join in that hope. I look\nsanguinely towards the time when she will be worthy of the English\nconstitution, and she will obtain it. Vous tenez le corps de la France,\nmais vous ne tenez pas son \u00e2me. Cette \u00e2me, aujourd'hui effray\u00e9e,\nengourdie, endormie, cette \u00e2me c'est la libert\u00e9. Elle se r\u00e9veillera un\njour et vous \u00e9chappera. La certitude de ce r\u00e9veil suffit pour consoler et\nfortifier ses vieux et fid\u00e8les soldats \u00e0 traverser la nuit de l'\u00e9preuve.\nCette libert\u00e9 honn\u00eate et mod\u00e9r\u00e9e, sage et sainte, j'y ai toujours cru, et\nj'y crois encore. Je l'ai toujours servie, toujours aim\u00e9e, toujours\ninvoqu\u00e9e, tant\u00f4t pour la religion, tant\u00f4t pour le pays; hier contre le\nsocialisme, aujourd'hui contre un commencement de despotisme; et, quelle\nque soit votre d\u00e9cision, je me f\u00e9liciterai toujours d'avoir eu cette\noccasion solennelle de la confesser encore une fois devant vous, et, s'il\nle faut, de souffrir un peu pour elle.'\n\nThese concluding words were drowned in universal murmurs.\n\nN.W. SENIOR.","title":"Correspondence & Conversations of Alexis de Tocqueville with Nassau William Senior from 1834 to 1859, Volume 2","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":75708}