[307] Talleyrand was paid six million francs by the Neapolitan Bourbons for favouring their restoration. (Cf. Sainte-Beuve, Nouveaux Lundis, vol. XII.).—B.
[BOOK V]
The Hundred Days in Paris—Effect of the passage of the Legitimacy in France—Bonaparte's astonishment—He is obliged to capitulate to ideas which he thought smothered—His new system—Three enormous gamblers remain—Illusions of the Liberals—Clubs and Federates—Juggling away of the Republic: the Additional Act—Convocation of the Chamber of Representatives—A useless Champ de Mai—Cares and bitterness of Bonaparte—Resolution in Vienna—Movement in Paris—What we were doing at Ghent—M. de Blacas—The Battle of Waterloo—Confusion at Ghent—What the Battle of Waterloo was—Return of the Emperor—Reappearance of La Fayette—Renewed abdication of Bonaparte—Stormy scenes in the House of Peers—Threatening portents for the Second Restoration—The departure from Ghent—Arrival at Mons—I miss the first opportunity of fortune in my political career—M. de Talleyrand at Mons—His scene with the King—I stupidly interest myself on M. de Talleyrand's behalf—Mons to Gonesse—With M. le Comte Beugnot I oppose Fouché's nomination as minister: my reasons—The Duke of Wellington gains the day—Arnouville—Saint-Denis—Last conversation with the King.
I show you the wrong side of events which history does not display: history exhibits only the right side. Memoirs have the advantage of presenting both surfaces of the texture: in this respect they depict the whole complexion of humanity better, by exposing, as in the tragedies of Shakespeare, low and exalted scenes. There is everywhere a cottage beside a palace, a man who weeps beside a man who laughs, a ragman carrying his basket beside a king losing his throne: what was the fall of Darius[308] to the slave present at the Battle of Arbela?
Ghent, then, was only a tiring-room behind the slips of the spectacle opened in Paris. Some famous personages still remained in Europe. I had, in 1800, commenced my career with Alexander and Napoleon; why had I not followed those leading actors, my contemporaries, on the great stage? Why only at Ghent? Because Heaven casts you where it wills. From the "little Hundred Days" at Ghent let us pass to the "great Hundred Days" in Paris.
I have told you the reasons which ought to have stopped Bonaparte in Elba and the urgent reasons, or rather the necessity drawn from his nature, which compelled him to issue from exile. But the march from Cannes to Paris exhausted all that remained of the old man. In Paris, the talisman was shattered.
The few moments for which the reign of lawfulness had reappeared had sufficed to render impossible the re-establishment of arbitrariness. Despotism muzzles the masses and enfranchises individuals, within a certain limit; anarchy lets loose the masses and enslaves individual independence. Hence, despotism resembles liberty, when it follows after anarchy; it remains what it really is when it replaces liberty: Bonaparte, a liberator after the Constitution of the Directory, was an oppressor after the Charter. He felt this so well that he thought himself obliged to go further than Louis XVIII. and to return to the sources of national sovereignty. He, who had trodden the people under foot as its master, was reduced to create himself anew a tribune of the people, to court the favour of the suburbs, to parody the revolutionary infancy, to lisp an old language of liberty which forced his lips into a grimace, while each syllable angered his sword.
His destiny as a power was, in fact, so well accomplished that the genius of Napoleon was no longer recognised during the Hundred Days. That genius was the genius of success and order, not that of defeat and liberty: now he could do nothing through victory, which had betrayed him, nothing for order, since it existed without him. In his astonishment he said: