—­[Bourrienne is certainly wrong as to Bonaparte having no thought of the navy.  In a letter of 1784 to the Minister of War his father says of Napoleon that, “following the advice of the Comte de Marbeuf, he has turned his studies towards the navy; and so well has he succeeded that he was intended by M. de Keralio for the school of Paris, and afterwards for the department of Toulon.  The retirement of the former professor (Keralio) has changed the fate of my son.”  It was only on the failure of his intention to get into the navy that his father, on 15th July 1784 applied for permission for him to enter the artillery; Napoleon having a horror of the infantry, where he said they did nothing.  It was on the success of this application that he was allowed to enter the school of Parts (Iung, tome i. pp. 91-103).  Oddly enough, in later years, on 30th August 1792, having just succeeded in getting himself reinstated as captain after his absence, overstaying leave, he applied to pass into the Artillerie de la Marine.  “The application was judged to be simply absurd, and was filed with this note, ‘S.  R.’ (’sans reponse’)” (Iung, tome ii. p. 201)]—­

In consequence of M. de Keralio’s report, Bonaparte was transferred to the Military College of Paris, along with mm.  Montarby de Dampierre, de Castres, de Comminges, and de Laugier de Bellecourt, who were all, like him, educated at the public expense, and all, at least, as favorably reported.

What could have induced Sir Walter Scott to say that Bonaparte was the pride of the college, that our mathematical master was exceedingly fond of him, and that the other professors in the different sciences had equal reason to be satisfied with him?  What I have above stated, together with the report of M. de Keralio, bear evidence of his backwardness in almost every branch of education except mathematics.  Neither was it, as Sir Walter affirms, his precocious progress in mathematics that occasioned him to be removed to Paris.  He had attained the proper age, and the report of him was favourable, therefore he was very naturally included among the number of the five who were chosen in 1784.

In a biographical account of Bonaparte I have read the following anecdote:—­When he was fourteen years of age he happened to be at a party where some one pronounced a high eulogium on Turenne; and a lady in the company observed that he certainly was a great man, but that she should like him better if he had not burned the Palatinate.  “What signifies that,” replied Bonaparte, “if it was necessary to the object he had in view?”

This is either an anachronism or a mere fabrication.  Bonaparte was fourteen in the year 1783.  He was then at Brienne, where certainly he did not go into company, and least of all the company of ladies.

CHAPTER II.

1784-1794.