Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1901-12-03

The strong contrast they presented
would at once have struck the most
superficial observer, but physiogno-
mist, regarding them more closely,
would have defined their particular
characteristics by saying that If the
Frenchman was "all eyes," the Eng
lishman was 'all ears"
In fact, the visual apparatus Of the
one had been singularly perfected by
practice. The sensibility Of its retina
must have been as instantaneous as
that of those conjurers who recognize
a card merely by rapid movement in
cutting the pack or by the arrangement
only Of marks invisible to others. The
Frenchman, indeed, possessed in the
highest degree what may be called 1.-THE
memory Of the eye"
Tile Engiisliman, on the contrary, ap'
peared especially organized to listen
and to hear When his aural appara-
tus had bee 1 once struck by the sound
Of q voice. he could not forget 1t, and
after ten or even twenty years he
would have recognized it among a
thousand. His ears, to be sure, had
not the power of moving as freely as
those of animals who are provided with
large auditory flaps; but, since scien-
tific men know that human ears pos
sess, in fact, very limited power OF
movement. we should not be far wrong
in affirming that those Of the said
Englishman became erect and turned
in all directions while endeavoring to
gather in the sounds in manner ap-
parent only to the naturalist. 1t must
be observed that this perfection Of
sight and hearing was of wonderful
assistance to these two men In their
vocation, for the Englishman acted as
correspondent for The Daily Telegraph
and the Frenchman as correspondent
Of the-of what newspaper or Of what
newspapers he did not say, and when
asked he replied in jocular manner
that he corresponded with 'his cousin
Madeleine" This Frenchman, however,
beneath his careless surface was won
derfully shrewd and sagacious. Even
while speaking at random, perhaps the
better to hide his desire to learn, he
never forgot himself. His loquacity
even helped him to conceal his thoughts,
and he was perhaps even more discreet
than his confrere of The Daily Tele-
graph.
1t Is needless to say that these two
men were devoted to their mission In
the world-that they delighted to throw
themselves in the track of the most un-
expected intelligence; that nothing ter
rified or discouraged them from sue
ceeding; that they possessed the i'm
perturbable sang froid and the genuine
intrepidIty Of men Of their calling. En-
thusiastic jockeys in this steeplechase.
this hunt after information, they leap
ed hedges, crossed rivers, sprang over
fences with the ardOr Of pure blooded
racers who will run "a good first" or
die.
Their journals did not restrict them
with regard to money, the surest. the
most rapid, the most perfect element
of information known to this day. 1t
must also be added, to their honor. that
neither the one nor the other ever look
ed or listened at the walls Of private
life and that they only exercised their
vocation when political or social inter
ests were at stake. In word, they
made what has been for some years
called "the great political and military
reports"
1t will be seen in following them that
they had generally an independent
mode of viewing events and, above ALL
their consequences, each having his
own way Of observing and appreciat-
ing. The object to be obtained being
of adequate value. they never failed to
expend the money required.
The French correspondent was nam
ed Alcide Jolivet. Harry Blount was
the name Of the Englishman. The dis
similarity of their characters. added to
certain amount Of jealousy, which
generally exists between rivals in the
same calling, might have rendered
them but little sympathetic. However.
they did not avoid one another, but ell
deavored rather to exchange with each
other the news Of the day. They were
two sportsmen. after all, hunting on
the same grounds, in the same pre-