The Ocala banner. (Ocala, Marion County, Fla.) 1883-194?, 1911-12-22
THE ARcHANGEL or WAR

! In his address at the meeting a few
evenings since held in New York
City, in the interest of the ratifica-
ton of the peace treaties, Mr.. Henry
Watterson spoke of Napoleon as fol-
lows:
The name, the specter of Napoleon
rises like some dread gent before the
mind-the very archangel of prosper
Gus battle-of whom we hear so
much and know so little.
He fought and half the world was
his.
He died without rood his own,
And borrowed of his enemies
Six feet of ground to lie upon"
Sometimes, looking down into that
splendid crypt under the gilded dome
by the banks of the Seine, have ask
ed myself: is it a sleeping devil?'
And a still, small voice has whisper
ed: No, just freak of frail human
ity waiting the judgment day
There is a picture out at Chan
tilly-in the Chateau-represent
young Bonaparte back from Italy,
eight and twenty-thoughtful almost
tender, having far-away look out
of the lonely eyes Nearby hangs a
vivid portrait of Talelyrand gazing
fox-like and scornful across at the
little adventurer as if foreknowing
what was to come. One cannot con-
template and contrast these two
counterfeit presentments, recalling
the story of each, without feeling that
whilst Talleyrand might have saved
Napoleon, Napoleon 10 Talleyrand
was as chance to destiny; the one a
master of intellectual divination, the
other victim of circumstance.
have never been able to bring myself
to the belief that Napoleon was any
part of great man. He was a dream
err, gambler; Talleyrand, a seer. He
was a hap-hazzard fatalist; Talley-
rand, practical philosopher. There
had come to Napoleon the inspiration
of action; to Talleyrand the inspira-
ton of thought; but whilst Napoleon
| taught his enemies his newly acquir-
ed art of war until they knew it as
we'll as he, and it recoiled upon him
self, sending him to chancery at five
|and forty, nobody ever discovered the
art of Talleyrand, who lived until he
was four score, and died in power.
! Il am not considering here either
merit or morals. We do not ascot
ate strength with Talleyrand, yet he
was all strength; Napoleon who seem
ed sometimes very strong, all weak
ness; else why the episode of 10
sephine? Why the Russian inva-
sion? Why Waterloo? Had Napo-
leon listened to Metternich, having
driven Talleyrand away, he could
have secured the confirmation of his
dynasty with lasting peace and a
larger France than he found. He need
not have put a crown on that Gre
ole's head, for he was not ignorant of
her infidelities. He may have been
something of an idealist, but mainly
he was a sentimentalist; most So
licitous son and brother. In that ia
nous separation he, not she, was the
actual sufferer. Her vanity only was
| touched, his affection. During the
ten months at Elba Josephine had
died. On his return to Paris-the
world trembling in the balance-Na-
poleon found time to drive out to
Mal-mansion. Hortense showed him
into the death chamber, and left him
there. He remained an hour and
came forth, his eyes red with weep
| ing. Call you him of blood and iron?
And this man-this waif out of the
dream-fold of Italy-was able to rob
the cradle and the grave for fuel to
light his path to glory He was able
to leftover, to depopulate-to degen-
crate France.
81 can never think of the little Cor
sican that the lines of a ragged
French poet do not sing into my ear
a kind of lullaby:
"Oh, if | were Queen of France,
| Or, still better, Pope of Rome,
I'd have no fighting men abroad,
| No weeping maids at home.
| All the world should be at peace;
And if kings must show their might,
| Let those that make the quarrels
| Be the only ones to fight"