Memoirs of the Private Life, Return, and Reign of Napoleon in 1815, Vol. I | Page 8

edifice which the nation had erected during five and
twenty years of revolution. His confidents were those alone who,
instead of wishing to reveal to their sovereign the object of the projects
of the ministry, and of the faction which had rendered the ministry their
tools, had become the accomplices of ministerial guilt, joint
conspirators in the plot which was to destroy the royal charter.
The cabinet contained, however, some able and experienced statesmen.
They were convinced that instead of teasing the nation by holding out
the probability of the restoration of ancient privileges, it was the duty

of government to tranquillize the country by guaranteeing the stability
of the new system of polity. These ministers were aware of the
impolicy of attempting to re-establish the monarchy on its ancient
principles; because by such an attempt it would be deprived of the only
advantage which it possessed over the late government--that of being
liberal. And, lastly, they felt that if despotism and violence had been
the distinguishing characteristics of the government of Napoleon, it was
necessary that moderation and justice should be the attributes of the
government of a Bourbon.
But they had not sufficient authority or personal influence to enable
them to struggle against the emigrants, and the protectors of the
emigrant faction. In the council chamber their opinions, often well
concerted, and always benevolent, were sanctioned and approved. Out
of the council, each minister acted according to his own plans; and,
unfortunately, those departments which ramify most deeply into the
nation and its affairs were confided to men who seemed to think that
they were bound to irritate and sour the public mind.
General Dupont obtained the important office of minister of the war
department, as a reward due to his proscription. According to the
government party, the general had been proscribed by the Emperor. An
odious name was thus given to the lenient punishment which had been
inflicted upon Dupont, he who had shuffled off the allegiance which he
owed to his Emperor, and whose cowardice had surrendered into
captivity the legions intrusted to his command[6]. Weak, indolent,
irresolute, devoid of character and resources, he never had the wish or
the ability of becoming any thing else than the pliant functionary of the
court and the ruling courtiers.
[Footnote 6: When Dupont capitulated to the Spaniards, the insurgents
refused to acknowledge the Emperor. Dupont therefore only took the
title of general in the French service.]
Another, the Abbé de Montesquiou, received the "porte-feuille" of the
home department. When a member of the Constituent Assembly he had
been honourably distinguished by his soft and persuasive eloquence.
The temperance of his public conduct seemed to be insured by his

personal character; he was a servant of the altar, his health was delicate,
he had lived long in quiet retirement. But Montesquiou, meek, mild,
and timid as long as he was in the background, became scornful, angry,
and overbearing the instant that he stepped into power. He detested and
despised the revolution--I may almost say, he detested and despised the
nation. This sentiment was the principle which guided him.
Montesquiou never deigned to inquire whether any given portion of our
polity was sound or useful, whether it had been formed with difficulty,
whether it could be modified, or ameliorated, or fitted into existing
circumstances. He only inquired into the date of its institution--and the
date decided the question.
A third, Dambray, the chancellor, and the chief law officer of the nation,
had distinguished himself in his youth as a Judge of Parliament. His
credit arose from his prudence and his principles no less than from his
talents. He had been long since recalled to his country. During the reign
of Napoleon he fulfilled the duties of a citizen and a subject with zeal
and fidelity. We never doubted but that he would protect those
constitutional forms of government under which he had flourished in
peace and honour. Scarcely, however, was the Chancellor clothed in his
robe, when he became the oppressor of the magistracy, the antagonist
of our new system of jurisprudence, and the dull partisan of those
slavish forms and barbarous customs and oppressive edicts, which had
been long since annihilated by reason, liberty, and knowledge.
The trust reposed in this portion of the cabinet was a source of
unhappiness to the nation, but it was not the only one. Louis, according
to the promises held out on his restoration, was to reign in person; and
the more the French have ever been desirous to obey their sovereign
with cheerful alacrity, the greater is the repugnance which they feel to
submit to the orders of his minions. Dismay, therefore, prevailed
throughout the kingdom when we learnt that Louis, weakened by an
obstinate and painful disease, had entirely divested himself of his