New-York tribune., 1903-01-11

felt was first hand and practical renovation n
| the sphere OF everyday life Court and peoph
| misunderstood one another. and the politicians
| that swarmed abroad did nothing TO develop q
| workable scheme. suited to the needs and pas
sions of both parties. The old order pass
ing and he knew it. cit Is as impossible" he
wrote to De Pradt. "to reconstruct the ancten
regime as 1t would be to build St Peters with
the dust from the roads" But IL he deprecated
the reactionary proposal Of the Grass rOyalists.
he was equally disgusted with the growing
vogue Of Jacobin charIatanry. and he did hs
best as a pubicist to steer middle course. he
steered it only too WELL bringing down upon hs
head the disapproval Of many Of the kings
supporters and as time went on. fncurring the
displeasure of the Revolutionists- Ultimately
he too, was obliged to seek exile, and he died
in England. All along his merit had been that
he had observed public affairs with intel
Iigence and impartiality. and had discussed
them with statesmanlike Judgment His BIZ
ography is rich in evidences Of the high regard
in which he was held by European rulers and
officials and some few British statesmen, who
obtained from the correspondence which he was
in some cases regularly paid to supply 1nforu1a-
ton and ideas for which they were grateful
But he exerted no practical or lasting influence,
for the reason that he never had the oppor-
tunity to play really constructive part in poll
tics. 1t is doubtful if he would have played such
a part with success if he had had the chance.
In the first place. though it would De unfair
to call him an opportunist, since his writings
were controlled from first to last by more or
less clearly defined ideas Of the public welfare
and of systernatized government, he gives the
impression of man uncertain as to just when
to act One cannot blame him He lived in
chaos The times were out of joint, and the
task of setting them right was one requiring
the kind of portent that arose in Napoleon
But where, for example, a certain rough sense
Of organizing authority makes itself felt In
Danton or a certain fierce grip upon the po-
ntical fabric is disclosed within all the dubious
complexities of character like Mirabeau's. the
arguments of MaIet du Pan are colored. II not
enfeebled by his want OF the audacity which
was needed in those days, leading man 10
make his throw and abide upon the issue he
wanted to serve the king, and he wanted 70
serve the country. First doubtful of Napoleons
good faith and ability. he came in time TO
look with impartiality upon the First ConsUIs
restoration of settled government. though, as
his biographer says, "Mallet du Pan Of all men
could not have become a convert to the new
Caesarism" He was too honest man But
his indispostion ever to throw in his fortunes,
for good or for i'll. with one party or the otner'
cannot be denied. His independence OF all par
ties even including that formed of the Liberal
Royalists with whom he was always, TO a GER
tain extent, identified, constituted his strength
and his weakness. 1t weakened him as prac-
teal contributor to the rehabilitation OF France
1t strengthened him as authority for the stu
dents of later generations. He is a perfect type
Of the Revolutionary class which escaped the
direst perils and achieved no great deeds. that
shared in the general excitement but preserved
something OF the detachment and balance OF
the disnterested onlooker. He saw things clear
ly, and he gave a report Of them that we can
trust For this reason he is Of interest to-day.
and his biography is to be preserved as a minor
but authentic document in the history of the
Revolution.