whom the conscript is
responsible.[3268] If such a bargain is made between them it is done
freely, knowing what they are about, and because each man finds the
exchange to his advantage; the State has no right to deprive either of
them uselessly of this advantage, and oppose an exchange by which it
does not suffer. So far from suffering it often gains by it. For, what
it needs is not this or that man, Peter or Paul, but a man as capable as
Peter or Paul of firing a gun, of marching long distances, of resisting
inclemencies, and such are the substitutes it accepts. They must all
be[3269] "of sound health and robust constitution," and sufficiently
tall; as a matter of fact, being poorer than those replaced, they are
more accustomed to privation and fatigue; most of them, having reached
maturity, are worth more for the service than youths who have been
recruited by anticipation and too young; some are old soldiers: and in
this case the substitute is worth twice as much as the new conscript
who has never donned the knapsack or bivouacked in the open air.
Consequently, those who are allowed to obtain substitutes are "the
drafted and conscripts of all classes,... unable to endure the fatigues
of war, and those who shall be recognized of greater use to the State
by continuing their labors and studies than in forming a part of the
army...."[3270]

Napoleon had too much sense to be led by the blind existences of
democratic formulae; his eyes, which penetrated beyond mere words, at
once perceived that the life of a simple soldier, for a young man well
brought up and a peasant or for day-laborer, is unequal. A tolerable
bed, sufficient clothing, good shoes, certainty of daily bread, a piece
of meat regularly, are novelties for the latter but not for the former,
and, consequently, enjoyments; that the promiscuity and odor of the
barrack chamber, the corporal's cursing and swearing and rude orders,
the mess-dish and camp-bread, physical hardships all day and every
other day, are for the former, but not for the latter, novelties
and, consequently, sufferings. From which it follows that, if literal
equality is applied, positive inequality is established, and that by
virtue even of the new creed, it is necessary, in the name of true
equality as in the name of true liberty, to allow the former, who would
suffer most, to treat fairly and squarely with the latter, who will
suffer less. And all the more because, by this arrangement, the ci