Both these expedients he tried.  In 1869 he announced that he was about to grant France liberal institutions.  He put the empress forward whenever it was possible, and he made up his mind that as war with Germany was sure to come, the sooner it came, the better, that he might reap its fruits while some measure of life and strength was left him.  Long before, Prince Albert had assured him that his policy, which made his ministers mere heads of bureaux, which never called them together for common action as members of one cabinet, which compelled each to report only to his master, who took on trust the accuracy of the reports made to him, was a very dangerous mode of governing.  It was indeed very unlike his uncle’s practice, though it might have been theoretically his system.  Both uncle and nephew came into power by a coup d’etat,—­the one on the 18th Brumaire (Nov. 9, 1799), the other on Dec. 2, 1851.  Both were undoubtedly the real choice of the people; both really desired the prosperity of France:  but the younger man was more genuine, more kindly, more human than the elder one.  The uncle surrounded himself with “mighty men, men of renown,”—­great marshals, great diplomatists, great statesmen.  Louis Napoleon had not one man about him whom he could trust, either for honesty, ability, or personal devotion, unless, indeed, we except Count Walewski.  All his life he had cherished his early ideas of the liberation of Italy, which he accomplished; of the resurrection of Poland, which he never found himself in a position to attempt; of the rectification of the frontier of France, which he in part accomplished by the attainment of Nice and Savoy; and, finally, his dream included the restoration to France of self-government, with order reconciled to liberty.

As early as January, 1867, the emperor was consulting, not only his friends, but his political opponents as to his scheme of transforming despotism into a parliamentary government.  He wrote thus to M. Emile Ollivier, a leader of the liberal party in France:[1]—­

[Footnote 1:  Pierre di Lana.]

“Believe me, I am not pausing through indecision, nor through a vain infatuation as to my prerogatives; but my fear is of parting in this country, which is shaken by so many conflicting passions, with the means of re-establishing moral order, which is the essential basis of liberty.  My embarrassment on the subject of a law of the Press is not how to find the power of repression, but how to define in a law what deserves repression.  The most dangerous articles may escape repression, while the most insignificant may provoke prosecution.  This has always been the difficulty.  Nevertheless, in order to strike the public mind by decisive measures, I should like to effect at one stroke what has been called the crowning of the edifice.  I should like to do this at once and forever; for it is important to me, and it is above all important to the country....  I wish to advance firmly in a straight line, without oscillating to the right or left.  You see that I have spoken to you with perfect frankness.”