Читать книгу Knowledge for the Time - John Timbs - Страница 53

Table of Contents

Soon after the breaking-out of the French Revolution, in 1848, the Count d’Orsay called at the office of the Lady’s Newspaper, in the Strand, and besought the proprietor, Mr. Landells, to engrave in that journal a portrait which he (the Count) had sketched of Louis Napoleon. The proprietor hesitated, when the Count told him it was the Prince’s intention to go over to France; and he added, emphatically, “the English people do not understand him; but, take my word for it, if he once goes over to France, the French people will never get rid of him.” This prediction has been strictly verified: the assertion was equally correct, that the English people did not understand the Emperor.

Mr. B. Ferrey, in a communication to Notes and Queries, 3rd S., remarks:—“For a considerable time, Napoleon was held up to ridicule by the Press of England; yet there were some who then foretold his coming greatness, while the multitude charged him with folly and rashness. Mr. William Brockedon, author of Passes of the Alps, who was well acquainted with the Prince’s habits, used to say, at the period when the Prince, amidst much derision, was aspiring to become the President of the French Republic—‘Mark my words, that man is not the fool people take him for: he only waits an opportunity to show himself one of the most able men in Europe;’ justifying this prediction by relating a discussion he had heard at a public meeting, between the Prince and some civil engineers, respecting a projected railway across the Isthmus of Panama, in which the former displayed great ability, showing an amount of scientific knowledge which amazed everybody present; not only stating his case with clearness, but combating all objections in a most masterly way.”

The newspapers of London, with one “base exception,” condemned the French choice; and after Louis Napoleon had taken the first step towards the establishment of his rule, the journalists foretold his speedy failure: the “base exception,” the Morning Post, predicted the reverse, and maintained Louis Napoleon to be the only man capable of rescuing France from the throes of revolution. We happen to know that for another journal of very extensive circulation, chiefly among the influential classes, a leading article of similar tone and confidence to that of the Morning Post, was written by the Editor, but omitted by desire of the Proprietor, and an article of opposite tone substituted: the advocacy would have been too bold a step for the time.

The career of Louis Napoleon has been well described as a great revival in the fortunes of France, the accomplishment of which has been the result of a far-seeing estimate of the French character; thus sketched by a master hand:

“Louis Bonaparte seems to have had the key of the mystery. It may be that, as in the human subject, one part of the system acts upon another, so that a disorder of the brain may affect other seemingly unconnected organs, so political discontent, even though without any just cause, may deaden the enterprise of a people. How else could it be that France, with a citizen King, a philosophical Minister, and the alliance of a nation of shopkeepers, could not be made to feel that her greatness must henceforth be dependent on her mercantile enterprise? While she saw not only England and America, but the German States, making long strides to the attainment of wealth, she lagged behind, and encouraged among the rising generation the delusion that business was unworthy of a warlike and gifted people. That this generation has thoroughly unlearnt the doctrines which were fashionable in its youth, is certainly among the achievements of Napoleon III. If we look back to the days of Louis Philippe, when, though even Germany had its railways and its electric telegraph, we jolted out of Paris in the diligence and saw the old semaphores at work, we shall be able to appreciate the change which ten years of Imperialism have made.”—Times, Jan. 29, 1862.