During dinner the Emperor alluded to his immense reading in his youth; and he found, from all the books he had perused relative to Egypt, that he had scarcely any thing to correct in what he had dictated on Egypt: he had stated many facts which he had not read, but which, on reference to these books, he found to be correct.
The conversation turned on the subject of memory. The Emperor remarked that a head without memory was like a garrison without fortifications. His he said was a useful kind of memory. It was not general and absolute; but relative, faithful, and only retentive of what was necessary. Some one present observed that his own memory was like his sight, that it became confused by the distance of places and objects, as he removed from one situation to another; upon which the Emperor replied that, for his part, his memory was like his heart, that it preserved a faithful impression of all that ever had been dear to him.
A-propos of good memory and fond recollections, I must here note down a remark of the Emperor’s, which I omitted to mention at the time it was made. One day at dinner, while describing one of his engagements in Egypt, he named numerically the eight or ten demi-brigades which had been engaged. On hearing this, Madame Bertrand could not refrain from asking how, after so long a time, he could possibly recollect all these numbers. "Madame, this is a lover’s recollection of his former mistresses," was Napoleon’s reply.
After dinner, the Emperor ordered my Atlas to be brought to him, for the purpose of verifying the particulars which he had collected in his books on Africa, and he was astonished to find every thing correspond so accurately.
He then began to converse on trade, and the principles and systems which he had introduced. He opposed the principles of economists, which he said were correct in theory, though erroneous in their application. The political constitution of different states, continued he, must render these principles defective; local circumstances continually call for deviations from their uniformity. Duties, he said, which were so severely condemned by political economists, should not, it is true, be an object to the exchequer: they should be the guarantee and protection of a nation, and should correspond with the nature and the objects of its trade. Holland, which is destitute of productions and manufactures, and which has a trade only of transit and commission, should be free from all fetters and barriers. France, on the contrary, which is rich in every sort of production and manufactures, should incessantly guard against the importations of a rival, who might still continue superior to her, and also against the cupidity, egotism, and indifference of mere brokers.
“I have not fallen into the error of modern systematizers,” said the Emperor, "who imagine that all the wisdom of nations is centered in themselves. Experience is the true wisdom of nations. And what does all the reasoning of economists amount to? They incessantly extol the prosperity of England, and hold her up as our model; but the Custom-House system is more burthensome and arbitrary in England than in any other country. They also condemn prohibitions; yet it was England that set the example of prohibitions, and they are in fact necessary with regard to certain objects. Duties cannot adequately supply the place of prohibitions: there will always be found means to defeat the object of the legislator. In France we are still very far behind on these delicate points, which are still unperceived or ill-understood by the mass of society. Yet what advancement have we not made! What correctness of ideas has been introduced by my gradual classification of agriculture, industry, and trade; objects so distinct in themselves, and which present so great and positive a graduation!
"1st.—Agriculture; the soul, the first basis of the empire.
"2nd.—Industry; the comfort and happiness of the population.
"3rd.—Foreign trade; the superabundance, the proper application of the surplus of agriculture and industry.
"Agriculture was continually improving during the whole course of the Revolution. Foreigners thought it ruined in France. In 1814, however, the English were compelled to admit that we had little or nothing to learn from them.