Correspondence Conversations of Alexis de Tocqueville with Nassau William Senior from 1834 to | Page 6

not the government that suits us. This was
apparent from the beginning. Louis Napoleon had the merit, or the luck,
to discover, what few suspected, the latent Bonapartism of the nation.
The 10th of December showed that the memory of the Emperor, vague
and indefinite, but therefore the more imposing, still dwelt like an
heroic legend in the imaginations of the peasantry. When Louis
Napoleon's violence and folly have destroyed the charm with which he
has worked, all eyes will turn, not towards a republic, but to Henri V.'
'Was much money,' I asked, 'spent at his election?'
'Very little,' answered Tocqueville. 'The ex-Duke of Brunswick lent
him 300,000 francs on a promise of assistance as soon as he should be
able to afford it; and I suppose that we shall have to perform the
promise, and to interfere to restore him to his duchy; but that was all
that was spent. In fact he had no money of his own, and scarcely
anyone, except the Duke, thought well enough of his prospects to lend
him any. He used to sit in the Assembly silent and alone, pitied by
some members and neglected by all. Silence, indeed, was necessary to
his success.
_Paris, January 2nd_, 1852.--I dined with Mrs. Grote and drank tea
with the Tocquevilles.
'What is your report,' they asked, 'of the President's reception in Notre

Dame. We hear that it was cold.'
'So,' I answered, 'it seemed to me.'
'I am told,' said Tocqueville, 'that it was still colder on his road. He
does not shine in public exhibitions. He does not belong to the highest
class of hypocrites, who cheat by frankness and cordiality.'
'Such,' I said, 'as Iago. It is a class of villains of which the specimens
are not common.'
'They are common enough with us,' said Tocqueville. 'We call them
faux bonshommes. H. was an instance. He had passed a longish life
with the character of a frank, open-hearted soldier. When he became
Minister, the facts which he stated from the tribune appeared often
strange, but coming from so honest a man we accepted them. One
falsehood, however, after another was exposed, and at last we
discovered that H. himself, with all his military bluntness and sincerity,
was a most intrepid, unscrupulous liar.
'What is the explanation,' he continued, 'of Kossuth's reception in
England? I can understand enthusiasm for a democrat in America, but
what claim had he to the sympathy of aristocratic England?'
'Our aristocracy,' I answered, 'expressed no sympathy, and as to the
mayors, and corporations, and public meetings, they looked upon him
merely as an oppressed man, the champion of an oppressed country.'
'I think,' said Tocqueville, 'that he has been the most mischievous man
in Europe.'
'More so,' I said, 'than Mazzini? More so than Lamartine?'
At this instant Corcelle came in.
'We are adjusting,' said Tocqueville, 'the palm of mischievousness.'
'I am all for Lamartine,' answered Corcelle; 'without him the others
would have been powerless.'
'But,' I said, 'if Lamartine had never existed, would not the revolution
of 1848 still have occurred?'
'It would have certainly occurred' said Tocqueville; 'that is to say, the
oligarchy of Louis Philippe would have come to an end, probably to a
violent one, but it would have been something to have delayed it; and it
cannot be denied that Lamartine's eloquence and courage saved us from
great dangers during the Provisional Government. Kossuth's influence
was purely mischievous. But for him, Austria might now be a
constitutional empire, with Hungary for its most powerful member, a

barrier against Russia instead of her slave.'
'I must put in a word,' said Corcelle,[2] 'for Lord Palmerston. If
Lamartine produced Kossuth, Lord Palmerston produced Lamartine
and Mazzini and Charles Albert--in short, all the incendiaries whose
folly and wickedness have ended in producing Louis Napoleon.'
'Notwithstanding,' I said, 'your disapprobation of Kossuth, you joined
us in preventing his extradition.'
'We did,' answered Tocqueville. 'It was owing to the influence of Lord
Normanby over the President. It was a fine _succès de tribune_. It gave
your Government and ours an occasion to boast of their courage and of
their generosity, but a more dangerous experiment was never made.
You reckoned on the prudence and forbearance of Austria and Russia.
Luckily, Nicholas and Nesselrode are prudent men, and luckily the
Turks sent to St. Petersburg Fuad Effendi, an excellent diplomatist, a
much better than Lamoricière or Lord Bloomfield. He refused to see
either of them, disclaimed their advice or assistance, and addressed
himself solely to the justice and generosity of the Emperor. He
admitted that Russia was powerful enough to seize the refugees, but
implored him not to set such an example, and--he committed nothing to
paper. He left nothing, and took away nothing which could wound the
pride of Nicholas;