LITERARY NOTES.

Waikato Times, Volume XXIX, Issue 2361, 27 August 1887, Page 2 (Supplement)

LITERARY NOTES.

(FROM ODR OWN COKItKSL'ONDENX].

Paris, June 18. . ' In February, 1810, Napoleon discussed and decreed the establishment of a Censor Board to superintend printing and publishing in France. Booksellers could only obtain a license if their manners were irreproachable, and their conduct above suspicion with respect to patriot-' ism, but above all in attachment to the dynasty. Printers had to keep a diary of all the work they turned out, with name of author, &o. ; this diary was to he always open to the inspection of the police. The censor had the right to examine each work, indicate changes to be made, suspend the printing, seize (if necessary) the sheets struck off, and even break up the type. The latter attentions were paid: to Madame de Staels’ Allenuttjne. In addition, there were fines and imprisonment ; the former constituted the salary of the censors, so the more they condemned the more they gained. Society, said Napoleon, ought to consider death as the fitting punishment for those who aim at its destruction; tbit printing was an arsenal which ought 1 not to be at the disposal of everybody. It was not a' natural right, and no one should be accorded Vpatcnt to,print, unless enjoying the confidence of the Government, that isi was in harmony with its politics,. . Curiously enough, it was a Bull of ; Pius VI., then prisoner at Savona, which came first under the censorship. Napoleon sent Comte Portalis, the director of the board, at once into exile, for not stopping the publication of the Pontiff’s Manifesto. Two generals were next entrusted with the censorship of journals, books, theatrical pieces, &c. It became thus the reign of the sword, not of the scissors. Side by side with the “shearers” —as the censors were dubbed r-was a body of writers paid—“ a reptile fund ” —to manufacture public opinion. Barfere, the hideous victim-finder of the guillotine, was among the enrolled. Having passed his life denouncing politicians, he next considered it right to breakfast with the Prefect of Police, and accept a fee for denouncing litterateurs. The police became the real censors, and fearing not to do enough, did too much.

A report of the proceedings of the censors was presented weekly to Napoleon; and from being eight at commencement, the censors rapidly rose to eighty. Every work recalling souvenirs of ex-royalty was tabooed ; Iteuded to revive affection, and so wounded the interests of the state.

After the Pope and Madame de StaOl, Turgot was put in the imperial, “ Index.” In a history of Louis XVI, all that personally related to His Majesty, was emasculated. In,one Universal Biography, the articles on Charlotte Corday, Cromwell, and Chemier, were so scissored, that their authors would be justified in disowning such an affiliation. Dictionaries were pitlessly powdlerized. A trick was once, played off, when under, the term spoliator, “ Bonaparte,” was the sole definition given.

Flattery did not hit the mark always, for the Corsican Pietri having written, the emperor was worthy to overthrow kings, the censors added, he overthrew only his enemies. Another writer having eulogised the Russians, the censors considered, that in time of peace, there was no harm in praising a nation which his Majesty had the glorious habitude to heat in time of war. In a history of the cruelties of the Turks towards French prisoners the recital was struck out because in case France made against the Ottomans it would be necessary to utilise these atrocities to crack up the French army. The life of General Monk was suppressed: it was viewed as a knd of Banquo’s ghost. The memoirs of Madame Clarke were also prohibited because showing up royal mistresses, would degrade the dignity of kings by drawing attention to their human frailties. Dante’s Divine Comedy had also to undergo an operation; so had a volume of Christain Anecdotes as they exalted the Pope above the Emperor. It did not follow that a work having been officially disinfected would be allowed to be printed, and often when printed it was refused the permission to be sold. _ Poetry to wrap round eassaoks was not interdicted as it was an attempt to apply poesy to, sweetmeats. Madame de Genlis published a book on the Influence of Women in Literature : it was summarily suppressed because it added nothing new to what was already wellknown. Some works were even prohibited, from having no literary merit. Composers of' songs Were harshly dealt with, one writer was allowed to sign his own stanzas to afford him the advantage of being hissed. General Richer having been described as a rival to Adonis the author was reminded that the remark was untrue : the general might be as beautiful as Mars but not as Adonis. A guide to Versailles, Paris and London was objected to, the author was considered ignorant of orthography, and so perverse, as to be unable even to copy it correctly. One lady writer was accorded permission to to publish, her penmanship was so beautiful. The imperial censors were very severe for obscene publications, and when the empire disappeared the same men, who protested against the censorship, under Napoleon, were the first to demand its continuance against tho Press for the restored Bourhons. Among the inoonsistents were Guizot and de Sacy. When Napoleon returned from Elba, he, expelled the royalist censors. Louis XVIII reinstated them after Waterloo. Chateaubriand observed that a part of the task of the censors commenced after sunset, as there is some work that can. only be executed in the dark. Villemain, after being one of the most vigorous'of censors, became one of the warmest advocates of the liberty of' writing. '

M. Kern is 79 years of age, a Swiss, and was 45‘ years the diplomatist representative of his country, of which 25 years were passed at Paris. He quitted official life in 1882, and since then has been whittling at his Memoirs. He was the father of the diplomatic body in France, and the most interesting part of souvenirs is that relating to the siege of 1870-71. He believes that the war would have been averted had the French Chamber and the Foreign Minister not been so precipitate.' ' That is not the opinion, the verdict of history. The collision was inevitable. Both combatants desired it, as both aimed at supremacy in Europe. M. Kern failed to convince Bismarck of the necessity of the residue of the diplomatic body, , which chose to do the siege, being allowed a neutral letter bag once a week, he would consent if they sent all their despatches open. Another surprise was that in the early days of January,. 1887, the psychological moment, when the Parisians dreaming of once more enjoying hot rolls, cafe an (ait, and roast legs of mutton bombshells commenced to fizz through the streets like rockets. M. Kern at once sought his collective pen, and dashed off a Puffendorff essay on the rights of neutrals in general, and of diplomatists in particular, in a besieged city. The Prince replied good-humouredly: Kern bombardon him in the second treatise, but the Chancellor never relaxed shelling alike Parisians and diplomatists, till the capital surrendered.

Colonel de Ganay, commands the military division of Laghouat, in Algeria, which means, having the Sahara desert for suburbs. The Colonel is a Pilgrim Father: be resides permanently at his post, with his wife, daughter, and four sons. All work to solve the problem, if they can there live happily, while finding all the comforts of a Mother Country home., Thus Ur. Gilbert and his eight travelling companions believed they were in Paris, on partaking of a dinner of veal, roast beef, strawberries from the garden iii the Sahara, and ice without stint, and plenty of excellent native claret, to put it into. While European fruits succeed to perfection—as weir as vegetables—dates do not, The colonel’s

engineering efforts to create a watershed, planting- trees, and reservoiring the rainfall/ are worthy the attention of those requiring'similar wants to be taken in hand—Australia for example. The taste continues to develop for the works of Balzac. This is not surprising, as we are never weary of reading about or witnessing the representation of some act in that exhauslless play—world, society. Messrs .Cerfbev and Christophe have brought out a kind of handy guide, an alphabetical biography, of the 2000 characters Balzac has created—and all typical. Next to the wonderful work of creating these existences is the marvellous dexterity of the great novelist never to entangle any member of his prolific family with another. His thought may be often heavy, his style occassionally clumsy, but his Jupiter power not tho less remains intact. Balzac is at his best when neither chimerical nor romantic, but simply the lucid historian of the society of his day. He reveals us all its secrets; as if photographed we see besides the soldier of the Empire, the middle or bourgeois class, emerging from thedchris of the ancienregime. He does not frame—because never trying his portraits with the captivating charm of Jules Sandeau; but for their(holdness of relief, for their profundity of expression, Balzac has no equal. He possesses more than any , other writer the instinct of life, the sentiment of secret passions, and the knowledge of domestic interest. He has failed to seize the character of woman. The more he tries to analyse her, the more she escapes. That defect does not destroy his work, for they are the male persons who drag the Juggernaut of. his human comedy ; and Balzac’s romances are the more interesting as social documents,’because not based upon fact or historical personages. His characters are the unknown; that history disdains ; his heroet are nobody, and yet everyone. In accordance with true art, Balzac drags no historical celebrity into his world of imaginary actions ; his creations are the types, where poets can find their immortals.

Chases Vues, the posthumous work of Victor Hugo, introduces the poet’s Table Talk. His literary executors hesitated some time before deciding to publish Hugo’s commentary on current events from 1838 to 1875. The best “things seen,” are those in the first ten years of the chronicles. On 13th July, 1842, the Duke of Orleans, the heir apparent, was killed. Hugo took the accident to moralise on the finger of Providence in history —and be it said in passing, Hugo never abandoned his belief in God. He observed, that God did not appear to he very favourable to the kings, very Christian, of France. Since two centuries, their eldest sons have never reigned; Louis XIV was succeeded by his great-grand-son ; Louis XV. by’.his grand son; Louis XVl’s heir died in the Temple prison; Napoleon’s son, the King of Rome, expired in exile in Vienna ; Charles X’s grandson and heir, the Comte de Chambord, died too in exile ; Louis-Philippe’s heir, Duke of Orleans, was killed by a fall from his carriage; Napoleon Ill’s son, was speared in Zululaod, The Duke of Orleans fell on a paving stone and split his skull; had he fallen but eighteen inches farther on, he woul 1 have struck a heap of soft gutter, aud been saved. And to think Providence decided the destinies of France hy a paving stone instead of a muck heap, for the Crown Prince would have made an excellent king.

‘‘Vicomte”—That was his title in the Chamber of Peers -Ha ro, was the balm in Gilead, the physician of consolation, to Louis Philippe. The latter deplored ho was not a Louis XII., in order to make Thiers a cardinal, as he would have made an excellent instrument of Government. Once at an artistic dinner, the painter Ingres was present: he was so small, that his chin only reached the table, and his neck tie was mistaken for a napkin. The king complained of the inability to find real Ministers, good servants are ever rare; those he had quitted always a cabinet council with the relief and joy of scholars. On one occasion when ministers were defeated, Marshal Soult was sent for, on arrival, he met the Due de Broglie dancing in tho corridor for joy, with other sixministers, delighted at having got no more work to do. “You entered as wise men, and you retire like,fools,” observed the Marshal.

Madame de Genlis, was the governess of Louis Philippe, and his sister, Adelaide. It is commonly believed Madame do Genlis had children. She had none; her “ daughter,” Pamela, was an orphan she adopted on account of her beauty; Casimir, her “ son,” was the child of the house porter; she adopted the boy to save him from being- perpetually flogged by his father, the only exercise his progenitor indulged in. When Madame de Genlis and the Princess Adelaide sought refuge in London, during the|stormy days of the revolution, they had but 2,000 francs as their all this world’s goods. In London, they hired a two pair back, in the humblest quarter ot the city, and had not a dinner every day. Pamela was ths little tyrant, every tit bit of food was for her, and even the two beds the lodgers were only able to hire, with scanty bed clothing ; the sole blanket the Princess possessed was taken on cold nights to keep the pet Pamela still warmer; the royal lodger being stout, was told to count for warmth on her robustness.

Dr Bordier’s “ Life of Societies,” is a book to be read; the author takes man as a microscopic atom in society, dissects and classifies him socially, pathologically, and statistically.