The Deputy of Arcis

XVII

MARIE-GASTON TO MADAME LA COMTESSE DE L’ESTORADE

Arcis-sur-Aube, May 16, 1839.

Madame,—­Last evening the preparatory meeting took place,—­a ridiculous ceremony, very annoying to the candidates, which cannot, however, be avoided.

Perhaps it is natural that before pledging themselves to a man who is to represent them for four or five years, voters should want to question him, and discover, if possible, what he really is.  Is he a man of intelligence?  Does he really sustain the ideas put forth about him?  Will he be cordial and affable to the various interests which may claim his support?  Is he firm in character?  Can he defend his ideas —­if he has any?  In a word, will the constituency be worthily, faithfully, and honestly represented?  That is the serious and respectable aspect of this institution, which, not being a part of the law, must, in order to be so firmly fixed in our customs, have a sound reason for its existence.

But every medal has its reverse; as may be seen in these meetings of candidates with electors puffed up by their own self-importance, eager to exercise for a moment the sovereignty they are about to delegate to their deputy, and selling it as dearly as they can to him.  Considering the impertinence of certain questions addressed to a candidate, it would really seem as if the latter were a serf over whom each elector had rights of life and death.  Not a corner of his private life where the unhappy man is safe from prying curiosity.  All things are possible in the line of preposterous questioning; for instance:  Why does the candidate prefer the wine of Champagne to the wine of Bordeaux?  At Bordeaux, where wine is a religion, this preference implies an idea of non-patriotism and may seriously affect the election.  Many voters go to these meetings solely to enjoy the embarrassment of the candidates.  Holding them as it were in the pillory, they play with them like a child with a beetle, an old judge with the criminal he examines, or a young surgeon at an autopsy.

Others have not such elevated tastes; they come merely to enjoy the racket, the confusion of tongues which is certain to take place on such occasions.  Some see their opportunity to exhibit a choice talent; for (as they say in the reports of the Chamber) when “the tumult is at its height,” a cock is heard to crow or a dog to howl as if his paw were trodden upon,—­noises that are imitated with marvellous accuracy.  But truly, are not fools and stupid beings a majority in the world, and ought they not to have their representative?

The meeting took place in a large dance-hall, the loft for the orchestra forming a sort of private box to which non-voters were admitted, I among the number.  Some ladies had already taken the front seats; Madame Marion, aunt of Simon Giguet, the Left centre candidate; Madame and Mademoiselle Mollot, wife and daughter of the clerk of the court, and some others whose names and position I did not catch.  Madame and Mademoiselle Beauvisage shone conspicuously, like Brutus and Cassius, by their absence.

Before the candidacy of Monsieur Beauvisage was brought forward on the ministerial side after the death of Charles Keller, that of Monsieur Simon Giguet was thought to be certain of success.  Now, in consequence of that of our friend Sallenauve, who has in turn distanced Beauvisage, Giguet has fallen a step lower still.  His father, a former colonel of the Empire, is greatly respected throughout this region.  As an expression of regret for not electing his son (according to all probabilities), the electors made him, by acclamation, chairman of the meeting.

The first candidate who was called upon to speak was Simon Giguet; he made a long-winded address, full of commonplaces.  Few questions were asked him which deserve a place in the present report.  The audience felt that the tug of war was elsewhere.

Monsieur Beauvisage was then summoned; whereupon Maitre Achille Pigoult the notary rose, and asked leave to make a statement.

“Monsieur le maire,” he said, “has, since yesterday, been attacked by—­”

“Ha! ha!” derisive laughter on the part of the electors.

Colonel Giguet rang his bell repeatedly, without being able to enforce silence.  At the first lull Maitre Pigoult resumed,—­

“I have the honor to inform you, gentlemen, that, attacked by an indisposition which, not serious in itself—­”

Fresh interruption, noisier than the first.

Like all military men, Colonel Giguet is not patient nor parliamentary; he therefore rose and called out vehemently,—­

“Messieurs, we are not at a circus.  I request you to behave in a more seemly manner; if not, I leave the chair.”

It is to be supposed that men in masses like to be handled roughly; for this lesson was greeted with merry applause, after which silence appeared to be firmly re-established.

“I regret to inform you,” began Maitre Achille Pigoult, varying his formula for the third time, “that, attacked by an indisposition happily not serious, which may confine him to his chamber—­”

“Throat trouble,” suggested a voice.

“—­our venerable and excellent mayor,” continued Achille Pigoult, taking no notice of the interruption, “is unable to be present at this meeting.  Madame Beauvisage, with whom I have just had the honor of an interview, requests me to inform you that, for the present, Monsieur Beauvisage renounces the honor of receiving your suffrages, and requests those of you who have given him your intelligent sympathy to transfer your votes to Monsieur Simon Giguet.”

This Achille Pigoult is a malicious fellow, who intentionally brought in the name of Madame Beauvisage to exhibit her conjugal sovereignty.  But the assembly was really too provincial to catch the meaning of that little bit of treachery.  Besides, in the provinces, women take part in the most virile affairs of the men.  The well-known saying of the vicar’s old housekeeper, “We don’t say masses at that price,” would pass without comment in Champagne.

At last came Sallenauve.  I was struck with the ease and quiet dignity of his manner.  That is a very reassuring pledge, madame, of his conduct under more trying circumstances; for when a man rises to speak it makes but little difference who and what his audience are.  To an orator goaded by fear, great lords and porters are precisely the same thing.  They are eyes that look at you, ears that hear you.  Individuals are not there, only one huge being,—­an assembly, felt as a mass, without analyzing the elements.

After enumerating briefly the ties which connected him with this region, slipping in as he did so an adroit and dignified allusion to his birth which “was not like that of others,” Sallenauve stated clearly his political ideas.  A Republic he thought the finest of all governments; but he did not believe it possible to establish one in France; consequently, he did not desire it.  He thought that a truly parliamentary government, in which court influence should be so vigorously muzzled that nothing need be feared from its tendency to interference and caballing would best conduce to the dignity and the welfare of the nation.  Liberty and equality, the two great principles that triumphed in ’89, would obtain from such a government the strongest guarantees.  As to the manoeuvring of the royal power against those principles, it was not for institutions to check it, but for men,—­customs, public opinion, rather than laws; and for himself, Sallenauve, he should ever stand in the breach as a living obstacle.  He declared himself a warm partisan of free education; believed that greater economy might be exercised in the budget; that too many functionaries were attached to the government; and, above all, that the court was too largely represented in the Chamber.  To maintain his independence he was firmly resolved to accept no post and no favors from the government.  Neither ought those who might elect him to expect that he would ever take steps on their behalf which were not warranted by reason and by justice.  It was said that the word impossible was not French.  Yet there was an impossibility by which he took pride in being stopped—­that of injustice, and that of disloyalty, even the faintest, to the Right. [Loud applause.]

Silence being once more restored,—­

“Monsieur,” said one of the electors, after obtaining the floor from the chairman, “you say that you will accept no post under government.  Does not that imply reproach to public functionaries?  My name is Godivet; I am registrar of the archives, but I do not consider that a reason why I should incur the contempt of my fellow-citizens.”

Sallenauve replied,—­

“I am happy, monsieur, to learn that the government has invested a man like you with functions which you fulfil, I am sure, with perfect uprightness and great ability; but I venture to ask if you rose to your present position at one jump?”

“Certainly not, monsieur; I began by being a supernumerary for three years; after that I passed through all the grades; and I can show that favor had nothing to do with my promotion.”

“Then, monsieur, what would you say if with my rank as deputy (supposing that I obtain the suffrages of this arrondissement) I, who have never been a supernumerary and never passed through any grades, and whose only claim upon the administration is that of having voted for it,—­what would you say if I were suddenly appointed over your head as the director-general of your department?”

“I should say—­I should say, monsieur, that the choice was a good one, because the king himself would have made it.”

“No, monsieur, you would not say it, or if you said it aloud, which I scarcely think possible, you would think in your heart that the choice was ridiculous and unjust.  ‘How the devil,’ you would say to yourself, ’could this man, this sculptor, know anything about the intricate business of registering archives?’ And you would be right in condemning such royal caprice; for what becomes of long and honorable services, justly acquired rights, and steady promotion under such a system of arbitrary choice?  It is that I may not be the accomplice of this crying abuse, because I think it neither just nor honest nor useful to obtain in this way important public functions, that I denounce the system and bind myself to accept no office.  Is this, monsieur, pouring contempt on public functions?  Is it not rather lifting them to higher honor?”

Monsieur Godivet declared himself satisfied, and said no more.

“Ah ca! monsieur,” cried another elector, after demanding the floor in the rather tipsy voice, “you say you will ask no favors for your constituents; then what good will you be to us?”

“My friend, I did not say I would ask nothing for my constituents.  I said I would ask nothing but what was just; but that, I may add, I shall ask with energy and perseverance, for that is how justice should be followed up.”

“But,” persisted the voter, “there are various ways of doing justice; witness the suit I was made to lose against Jean Remy, with whom I had trouble about a boundary—­”

Colonel Giguet, interrupting,—­

“Come, come, you are not going, I hope to talk about your private affairs, and speak disrespectfully of magistrates?”

The voter resumed,—­

“Magistrates, colonel, I respect, for I was one myself for six months in ’93, and I know the law.  But, returning to my point, I ask monsieur, who is here to answer questions, to me as well as to others, what he thinks about tobacco licenses.”

“My opinion on tobacco licenses!  That is rather difficult to formulate; I can, however, say that, if my information is correct, they are usually very well distributed.”

“Hey! hey! you’re a man, you!” cried the inebriate elector, “and I’ll vote for you, for they can’t fool you,—­no!  But they do give those licenses all wrong!  Look at that daughter of Jean Remy.  Bad neighbor.  Never owned anything but his cart, and fights every day with his wife—­”

“But, my good fellow,” said the chairman, interposing, “you are abusing the patience of this assembly.”

“No, no! let him talk!” cried voices from all parts of the room.

The voter was amusing, and Sallenauve himself seemed to let the chairman know he would like to see what the man was driving at.

The elector, being allowed to continue, went on:—­

“I was going to say, with due respect to you, colonel, about that daughter of Jean Remy’s,—­a man I’ll pursue to hell, for my bounds were in their right place, and them experts was all wrong.  Well! what did that slut do?  Left her father and mother and went to Paris!  What did she do there?  I didn’t go to see, but I’m told she made acquaintance with a deputy, and has got the tobacco license for the rue Mouffetard, the longest street in Paris.  But I’d like to see my wife, widow of an honest man, doubled up with rheumatism for having slept in the woods during that terror in 1815,—­I’d like to see my poor widow get a license!”

“But you are not dead yet,” they shouted to him from all parts of the room.  The colonel, meantime, to put an end to the burlesque scene, nodded to a little confectioner who was waiting for the floor, a well-known Republican.  The new questioner, in a falsetto voice, put the following insidious question to the candidate,—­a question which might, by the way, be called national in Arcis,—­

“What does Monsieur think of Danton?”

“Monsieur Dauphin,” said the chairman, “I have the honor to remind you that Danton belongs to history.”

“To the Pantheon of history, monsieur; that is the proper expression.”

“Well, history, or the Pantheon of history, as you please; but Danton is irrelevant here.”

“Permit me, Mr. Chairman,” said Sallenauve, “though the question does not seem to have much purpose on the bearing of this meeting, I cannot forego the opportunity thus given me to give proof of the impartiality and independence with which I can judge that great memory, the fame of which still echoes in this town.”

“Hear! hear!” cried the assembly, almost unanimously.

“I am firmly convinced,” resumed Sallenauve, “that if Danton had been born in a calm and peaceful epoch like our own, he would have shown himself, what in fact he was, a good father, a good husband, a warm and faithful friend, a man of kindly temper, who, by the force of his great talents, would have risen to some eminent place in the State and in society.”

“Yes, yes! bravo! very good!”

“Born, on the contrary, in troublesome times, and amid the storm of unchained passions, Danton was better constituted than others to kindle the flame of that atmosphere of fire.  Danton was the torch that fired; his scarlet glare lent itself only too readily to scenes of blood and horror which I must not recall.  But, they said, the national independence was at stake, traitors and dissemblers must be awed,—­in a word, a cruel and awful sacrifice was necessary for the public weal.  Messieurs, I do not accept that theory.  To kill, without the necessity demonstrated a score of times of legitimate defence, to kill women, children, prisoners, unarmed men, was a crime,—­a crime, look at it how you will, that was execrable; those who ordered it, those who consented to it, those who executed it are, to my mind, deserving of the same reprobation.”

I wish I could give you an idea, madame, of the tone and expression of Sallenauve as he uttered this anathema.  You know how his face is transfigured when an ardent thought comes into his mind.  The assemblage was mute and gloomy.  Evidently he had wounded their sensibilities; but, under the curb of his powerful hand, it dared not throw up its head.

“But,” he continued, “to all consummated and irreparable crimes there are two issues,—­repentance and expiation.  His repentance Danton did not utter,—­he was too proud a man,—­but he acted it.  He was the first, to the sound of that axe falling without pity and without respite,—­the first, at the risk of his own head being the next victim,—­to call for a ‘committee of mercy.’  It was the sure, the infallible means of bringing him to expiation; and you all know whether, when that day of expiation came, he quailed before it.  Passing through death,—­won by his courageous effort to stop the effusion of blood,—­it may be truly said that the face and the memory of Danton have washed off the bloody stain which September put upon them.  Committed, at the age of thirty-five, to the judgment of posterity, Danton has left us the memory of a great intellect, a strong and powerful character, noble private qualities, more than one generous action,—­all derived from his own being; whereas the bloody errors he committed were the contagion of his epoch.  In a word, with men of his quality, unjust would be the justice which does not temper itself with mercy.  And here, messieurs, you have in your midst—­better than you, better than I, better than all orators and historians—­a woman who has weighed and understood Danton, and who says to the pitiless, with the impulse of her charity, ’He has gone to God; let us pray for him.’”

The trap thus avoided by this happy allusion to Mother Marie-des-Anges, and the assembly evidently satisfied, it might be supposed that the candidate had come to the end of his baiting.  The colonel was even preparing to pass to the vote, when several electors sprang up, declaring that two important explanations were still required from the candidate.  He had said that he should ever be found an obstacle to all attempts of the royal power to subvert our institutions.  What did he mean by such resistance?  Was it armed resistance, the resistance of riots and barricades?

“Barricades,” replied Sallenauve, “have nearly always seemed to me machines which turned of themselves and crushed the men who raised them.  We must believe that in the nature of riots there is something which serves the interests of the government, for I have invariably heard the police accused of inciting them.  My resistance, that which I spoke of, will ever be a legal resistance, pursued by legal means, by the press, by the tribune, and with patience,—­that great force granted to the oppressed and to the vanquished.”

If you knew Latin, madame, I should say to you, In cauda venenum; which means, “In the tail of the serpent is its venom,”—­a remark of antiquity which modern science does not admit.  Monsieur de l’Estorade was not mistaken; Sallenauve’s private life was destined to be ransacked, and, no doubt under the inspiration of the virtuous Maxime de Trailles, the second question put to our friend was about the handsome Italian woman said to be hidden by him in his house in Paris.

Sallenauve showed no embarrassment at being thus interpellated.  He merely asked whether the assembly would think proper to spend its time in listening to a romantic story in which there was no scandal.

But here comes Sallenauve himself; he tells me that the electoral college is formed in a manner that leaves little doubt of his election.  I leave my pen to him, to tell you the romantic tale, already, I believe, interrupted on several occasions.  He will close this letter.