| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 1 | 171 | 343 | 514 | 685 |
|
but "What a farce!" For after all they reflected; heinous crimes require
stature. Certain crimes are too lofty for certain hands. A man who would
achieve an 18th Brumaire must have Arcola in his past and Austerlitz in
his future. The art of becoming a great scoundrel is not accorded to the
first comer. People said to themselves, Who is this son of Hortense? He
has Strasbourg behind him instead of Arcola, and Boulogne in place of
Austerlitz. He is a Frenchman, born a Dutchman, and naturalized a Swiss;
he is a Bonaparte crossed with a Verhuell; he is only celebrated for the
ludicrousness of his imperial attitude, and he who would pluck a feather
from his eagle would risk finding a goose's quill in his hand. This
Bonaparte does not pass currency in the array, he is a counterfeit image
less of gold than of lead, and assuredly French soldiers will not give us
the change for this false Napoleon in rebellion, in atrocities, in
massacres, in outrages, in treason. If he should attempt roguery it would
miscarry. Not a regiment would stir. Besides, why should he make such an
attempt? Doubtless he has his suspicious side, but why suppose him an
absolute villain? Such extreme outrages are beyond him; he is incapable
of them physically, why judge him capable of them morally? Has he not
pledged honor? Has he not said, "No one in Europe doubts my word?" Let us
fear nothing. To this could be answered, Crimes are committed either on a
grand or on a mean scale. In the first category there is Caesar; in the
second there is Mandrin. Caesar passes the Rubicon, Mandrin bestrides the
gutter. But wise men interposed, "Are we not prejudiced by offensive
conjectures? This man has been exiled and unfortunate. Exile enlightens,
misfortune corrects."
For his part Louis Bonaparte protested energetically. Facts abounded in
his favor. Why should he not act in good faith? He had made remarkable
8
Page
Quick Jump
|