deficiency of talent or of indiscreet conduct; his personal habits
were watched--it was ascertained that he engaged in financial
speculations. An imputation could easily be founded on this
circumstance. Peculation was accordingly laid to his charge.

This was touching the most tender ground, for the First Consul held
nothing in greater abhorrence than unlawful gains. A solitary
voice, however, would have failed in an attempt to defame the
character of a man for whom he had so long felt esteem and
affection; other voices, therefore, were brought to bear against
him. Whether the accusations were well founded or otherwise, it is
beyond a doubt that all means were resorted to for bringing them to
the knowledge of the First Consul.

The most effectual course that suggested itself was the opening a
correspondence either with the accused party direct, or with those
with whom it was felt indispensable to bring him into contact; this
correspondence was carried on in a mysterious manner, and related to
the financial operations that had formed the grounds of a charge
against him.--Thus it is that, on more than one occasion, the very
channels intended for conveying truth to the knowledge of a
sovereign have been made available to the purpose of communicating
false intelligence to him. To give an instance.

Under the reign of Louis XV., and even under the Regency, the Post
Office was organized into a system of minute inspection, which did
not indeed extend to every letter, but was exercised over all such
as afforded grounds for suspicion. They were opened, and, when it
was not deemed safe to suppress them, copies were taken, and they
were returned to their proper channel without the least delay. Any
individual denouncing another may, by the help of such an
establishment, give great weight to his denunciation. It is
sufficient for his purpose that he should throw into the Post Office
any letter so worded as to confirm the impression which it is his
object to convey. The worthiest man may thus be committed by a
letter which he has never read, or the purport of which is wholly
unintelligible to him.

I am speaking from personal experience. It once happened that a
letter addressed to myself, relating to an alleged fact which had
never occurred, was opened. A copy of the letter so opened was also
forwarded to me, as it c