a little surprised at this, and could not help reminding him of the different way in which he had spoken of those who opposed his accession to the Consulate.  “There is nothing extraordinary in that,” said he.  “Worthy men may be attached to the Republic as I have made it.  It is a mere question of form.  I have nothing to say against that; but at the time of my accession to the Consulate it was very different.  Then, none but Jacobins, terrorists, and rogues resisted my endeavours to rescue France from the infamy into which the Directory had plunged her.  But now I cherish no ill-will against those who have opposed me.”

During the intervals between the acts of the different bodies of the State, and the collection of the votes, Lucien renewed his intrigues, or rather prosecuted them with renewed activity, for the purpose of getting the question of hereditary succession included in the votes.  Many prefects transmitted to M. Chaptal anonymous circulars which had been sent to them:  all stated the ill effect produced by these circulars, which had been addressed to the principal individuals of their departments.  Lucien was the originator of all this, though I cannot positively say whether his brother connived with him, as in the case of the pamphlet to which I have already alluded.  I believe, however, that Bonaparte was not entirely a stranger to the business; for the circulars were written by Raederer at the instigation of Lucien, and Raederer was at that time in favour at the Tuileries.  I recollect Bonaparte speaking to me one day very angrily about a pamphlet which had just, been published by Camille Jordan on the subject of the national vote on the Consulate for life.  Camille Jordan did not withhold his vote, but gave it in favour of the First Consul; and instead of requiring preliminary conditions, he contented himself, like the Tribunate, with enumerating all the guarantees which he expected the honour of the First Consul would grant.  Among these guarantees were the cessation of arbitrary imprisonments, the responsibility of the agents of Government, and the independence of the judges.  But all these demands were mere peccadilloes in comparison with Camille Jordan’s great crime of demanding the liberty of the press.

The First Consul had looked through the fatal pamphlet, and lavished invectives upon its author.  “How!” exclaimed he, “am I never to have done with these fire brands?—­These babblers, who think that politics may be shown on a printed page like the world on a map?  Truly, I know not what things will come to if I let this go on.  Camille Jordan, whom I received so well at Lyons, to think that he should—­ask for the liberty of the press!

Were I to accede to this I might as well pack up at once and go and live on a farm a hundred leagues from Paris.”  Bonaparte’s first act in favour of the liberty of the press was to order the seizure of the pamphlet in which Camille Jordan had extolled the advantages of that measure.  Publicity, either by words or writing, was Bonaparte’s horror.  Hence his aversion to public speakers and writers.