ederic Masson and other
authorities--that Bonaparte was a lover and a collector of books, and
that he contributed largely to the dignity and the glorification of
literature by publishing a large number of volumes in the highest style
of the art.

The one department of literature for which he seems to have had no
liking was fiction. Novels of all kinds he was in the habit of tossing
into the fire. He was a prodigious buyer of books, and those which he
read were invariably stamped on the outer cover with the imperial
arms; at St. Helena his library stamp was merely a seal upon which ink
was smeared.

Napoleon cared little for fine bindings, yet he knew their value, and
whenever a presentation copy was to be bound he required that it be
bound handsomely. The books in his own library were invariably bound
"in calf of indifferent quality," and he was wont, while reading a
book, to fill the margin with comments in pencil. Wherever he went he
took a library of books with him, and these volumes he had deprived of
all superfluous margin, so as to save weight and space. Not
infrequently when hampered by the rapid growth of this travelling
library he would toss the "overflow" of books out of his carriage
window, and it was his custom (I shudder to record it!) to separate the
leaves of pamphlets, magazines, and volumes by running his finger
between them, thereby invariably tearing the pages in shocking wise.

In the arrangement of his library Napoleon observed that exacting
method which was characteristic of him in other employments and
avocations. Each book had its particular place in a special case, and
Napoleon knew his library so well that he could at any moment place his
hand upon any volume he desired. The libraries at his palaces he had
arranged exactly as the library at Malmaison was, and never was one
book borrowed from one to serve in another. It is narrated of him that
if ever a volume was missing Napoleon would describe its size and the
color of its binding to the librarian, and would point out the place
where it might have been wrongly put and the case where it properly
belonged.

If any one question the greatness of this man let him explain if he can
why civilization's interest in Napoleon increases as time rolls on.
Why is it that we are curious to know all about him--that we have
gratification in hearing tell of his minutest habits, his moods, his
whims, his practices, his prejudices? Why is it that