, a
courtesy greater even than our own. It will therefore be unanimously
thought that it ill became Prince Napoleon to address M. Taine in a tone
which M. Taine would decline to use in his answer, out of respect for
the very name which he is accused of _slandering_. It will be thought
also that it ill became him, when speaking of Miot de Melito, for
instance, or of many other servants of the imperial government, to seem
to ignore that princes also are under an obligation to those who have
served them well. Perhaps even it may be thought that it poorly became
him, when discussing or contradicting the 'Memoirs of Madame de
Remusat,' to forget under what auspices the remains of his uncle, the
Emperor, were years ago carried in his city of Paris. But what will be
thought especially is, that he had something else to do than to split
hairs in discussion of evidences; that he had something far better to
say, more peremptory and to the point, and more literary besides, than
to call M. Taine names, to hurl at him the epithets of "Entomologist,
Materialist, Pessimist, Destroyer of Reputations, Iconoclast," and to
class him as a "deboulonneur" among those who, in 1871, pulled down the
Colonne Vendome.

Not, undoubtedly, that M. Taine--and we said so ourselves more than once
with perfect freedom--if spending much patience and conscientiousness in
his search for documents, has always displayed as much critical spirit
and discrimination in the use he made of them. We cannot understand why
in his 'Napoleon' he accepted the testimony of Bourrienne, for instance,
any more than recently, in his 'Revolution,' that of George Duval, or
again, in his 'Ancien Regime,' that of the notorious Soulavic. M.
Taine's documents as a rule are not used by him as a foundation for his
argument; no, he first takes his position, and then he consults his
library, or he goes to the original records, with the hope of finding
those documents that will support his reasoning. But granting that, we
must own that though different from M. Taine's, Prince Napoleon's
historical method is not much better; that though in a different manner
and in a different direction, it is neither less partial nor less
passionate: and here is a proof of it.

Prince Napoleon blames M. Taine for quoting "eight times" 'Bourrienne's
Memoirs,' and then, letting his feelings loose, he takes advantage of
the occasion and cruelly besmirches Bourrienne's name. Does he tell the
truth or not?