Martin’s first thought, while reading the placards of the coup d’etat, had been for the High Court.  M. Hardouin ushered M. Pataille into a room adjoining his study, and received Martin (of Strasbourg) as a man to whom he did not wish to speak before witnesses.  Being formally requested by Martin (of Strasbourg) to convene the High Court, he begged that he would leave him alone, declared that the High Court would “do its duty,” but that first he must “confer with his colleagues,” concluding with this expression, “It shall be done to-day or to-morrow.”  “To-day or to-morrow!” exclaimed Martin (of Strasbourg); “Mr. President, the safety of the Republic, the safety of the country, perhaps, depends on what the High Court will or will not do.  Your responsibility is great; bear that in mind.  The High Court of Justice does not do its duty to-day or to-morrow; it does it at once, at the moment, without losing a minute, without an instant’s hesitation.”

Martin (of Strasbourg) was right, Justice always belongs to To-day.

Martin (of Strasbourg) added, “If you want a man for active work, I am at your service.”  M. Hardouin declined the offer; declared that he would not lose a moment, and begged Martin (of Strasbourg) to leave him to “confer” with his colleague, M. Pataille.

In fact, he called together the High Court for eleven o’clock, and it was settled that the meeting should take place in the Hall of the Library.

The Judges were punctual.  At a quarter-past eleven they were all assembled.  M. Pataille arrived the last.

They sat at the end of the great green table.  They were alone in the Library.

There was no ceremonial.  President Hardouin thus opened the debate:  “Gentlemen, there is no need to explain the situation, we all know what it is.”

Article 68 of the Constitution was imperative.  It was necessary that the High Court should meet under penalty of high treason.  They gained time, they swore themselves in, they appointed as Recorder of the High Court M. Bernard, Recorder of the Court of Cassation, and they sent to fetch him, and while waiting requested the librarian, M. Denevers, to hold his pen in readiness.  They settled the time and place for an evening meeting.  They talked of the conduct of the Constituent Martin (of Strasbourg), with which they were offended, regarding it almost as a nudge of the elbow given by Politics to Justice.  They spoke a little of Socialism, of the Mountain, and of the Red Republic, and a little also of the judgment which they had to pronounce.  They chatted, they told stories, they found fault, they speculated, they spun out the time.

What were they waiting for?

We have related what the Commissary of police was doing for his part in his department.