The Deputy of Arcis [133]
it will have put an end to a distressing struggle, and the country will know to which of the two parties it can look for the development of its prosperity."
"And you think," said Sallenauve, "that in a well-balanced system of government that question is a useful one to raise?"
"Well," replied Rastignac, "we have not raised it. It is born perhaps of circumstances; a great deal, as I think, from the restlessness of certain ambitions, and also from the tactics of parties."
"So that, in your opinion, one of the combatants is not guilty and has absolutely nothing to reproach himself with?"
"You are a republican," said Rastignac, "and therefore, /a priori/, an enemy to the dynasty. I think I should lose my time in trying to change your ideas on the policy you complain of."
"You are mistaken," said the theoretical republican deputy; "I have no preconceived hatred to the reigning dynasty. I even think that in its past, /striped/, if I may say so, with royal affinities and revolutionary memories, it has all that is needed to respond to the liberal and monarchical instincts of the nation. But you will find it difficult to persuade me that in the present head of the dynasty we shall not find extreme ideas of personal influence, which in the long run will undermine and subvert the finest as well as the strongest institutions."
"Yes," said Rastignac, ironically, "and they are saved by the famous axiom of the deputy of Sancerre: 'The king reigns, but does not govern.'"
Whether he was tired of standing to converse, or whether he wished to prove his ease in releasing himself from the trap which had evidently been laid for him, Sallenauve, before replying, drew up a chair for his interlocutor, and, taking one himself, said,--
"Will you permit me to cite the example of another royal behavior?-- that of a prince who was not considered indifferent to his royal prerogative, and who was not ignorant of constitutional mechanism--"
"Louis XVIII.," said Rastignac, "or, as the newspapers used to call him, 'the illustrious author of the Charter'?"
"Precisely; and will you kindly tell me where he died?"
"/Parbleu/! at the Tuileries."
"And his successor?"
"In exile--Oh! I see what you are coming to."
"My conclusion is certainly not difficult to guess. But have you fully remarked the deduction to be drawn from that royal career?--for which I myself feel the greatest respect. Louis XVIII. was not a citizen king. He granted this Charter, but he never consented to it. Born nearer to the throne than the prince whose regrettable tendencies I mentioned just now, he might naturally share more deeply still the ideas, the prejudices, and the infatuations of the court; in person he was ridiculous (a serious princely defect in France); he bore the brunt of a new and untried regime; he succeeded a government which had intoxicated the people with that splendid gilded smoke called glory; and if he was not actually brought back to France by foreigners, at any rate he came as the result of the armed invasion of Europe. Now, shall I tell you why, in spite of all these defects and disadvantages, in spite, too, of the ceaseless conspiracy kept up against his government, it was given to him to die tranquilly in his bed at the Tuileries?"
"Because he had made himself a constitutional king," said Rastignac, with a slight shrug of his shoulders. "But do you mean to say that we are not that?"
"In the letter, yes; in the spirit, no. When Louis XVIII. gave his confidence to a minister, he gave it sincerely and wholly. He did not cheat him; he played honestly into his hand,--witness the famous ordinance of September 5, and the dissolution of the Chamber, which was more Royalist than himself,--a thing he had the wisdom not to desire. Later, a movement of public opinion shook the minister who had led him along that path; that minister was his favorite, his son, as he called him. No matter; yielding to the constitutional necessity, he bravely sent him to foreign parts, after loading him with crosses and titles,--in short, with everything
"And you think," said Sallenauve, "that in a well-balanced system of government that question is a useful one to raise?"
"Well," replied Rastignac, "we have not raised it. It is born perhaps of circumstances; a great deal, as I think, from the restlessness of certain ambitions, and also from the tactics of parties."
"So that, in your opinion, one of the combatants is not guilty and has absolutely nothing to reproach himself with?"
"You are a republican," said Rastignac, "and therefore, /a priori/, an enemy to the dynasty. I think I should lose my time in trying to change your ideas on the policy you complain of."
"You are mistaken," said the theoretical republican deputy; "I have no preconceived hatred to the reigning dynasty. I even think that in its past, /striped/, if I may say so, with royal affinities and revolutionary memories, it has all that is needed to respond to the liberal and monarchical instincts of the nation. But you will find it difficult to persuade me that in the present head of the dynasty we shall not find extreme ideas of personal influence, which in the long run will undermine and subvert the finest as well as the strongest institutions."
"Yes," said Rastignac, ironically, "and they are saved by the famous axiom of the deputy of Sancerre: 'The king reigns, but does not govern.'"
Whether he was tired of standing to converse, or whether he wished to prove his ease in releasing himself from the trap which had evidently been laid for him, Sallenauve, before replying, drew up a chair for his interlocutor, and, taking one himself, said,--
"Will you permit me to cite the example of another royal behavior?-- that of a prince who was not considered indifferent to his royal prerogative, and who was not ignorant of constitutional mechanism--"
"Louis XVIII.," said Rastignac, "or, as the newspapers used to call him, 'the illustrious author of the Charter'?"
"Precisely; and will you kindly tell me where he died?"
"/Parbleu/! at the Tuileries."
"And his successor?"
"In exile--Oh! I see what you are coming to."
"My conclusion is certainly not difficult to guess. But have you fully remarked the deduction to be drawn from that royal career?--for which I myself feel the greatest respect. Louis XVIII. was not a citizen king. He granted this Charter, but he never consented to it. Born nearer to the throne than the prince whose regrettable tendencies I mentioned just now, he might naturally share more deeply still the ideas, the prejudices, and the infatuations of the court; in person he was ridiculous (a serious princely defect in France); he bore the brunt of a new and untried regime; he succeeded a government which had intoxicated the people with that splendid gilded smoke called glory; and if he was not actually brought back to France by foreigners, at any rate he came as the result of the armed invasion of Europe. Now, shall I tell you why, in spite of all these defects and disadvantages, in spite, too, of the ceaseless conspiracy kept up against his government, it was given to him to die tranquilly in his bed at the Tuileries?"
"Because he had made himself a constitutional king," said Rastignac, with a slight shrug of his shoulders. "But do you mean to say that we are not that?"
"In the letter, yes; in the spirit, no. When Louis XVIII. gave his confidence to a minister, he gave it sincerely and wholly. He did not cheat him; he played honestly into his hand,--witness the famous ordinance of September 5, and the dissolution of the Chamber, which was more Royalist than himself,--a thing he had the wisdom not to desire. Later, a movement of public opinion shook the minister who had led him along that path; that minister was his favorite, his son, as he called him. No matter; yielding to the constitutional necessity, he bravely sent him to foreign parts, after loading him with crosses and titles,--in short, with everything