Funding from Library of
Congress/Ameritech National Digital
Library Competition
supported the electronic publication
of this title.
Text scanned (OCR) by
Jordan Davis
Images scanned by
Jill Kuhn
Text encoded by
Carlene Hempel and Natalia Smith
First edition,
1998
ca. 450K
Academic Affairs Library, UNC-CH
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,
1998.
© This work is
the property of the
University of North Carolina
at Chapel Hill. It may be used freely by individuals for research,
teaching and personal use as long as this statement of availability
is included in the text.
The electronic edition is a part of the UNC-CH
digitization project,
Documenting the
American South, Beginnings to 1920.
Library of Congress Subject Headings,
21st edition, 1998
Any hyphens occurring
in line breaks have been
removed, and the trailing part of a word has been joined to
the preceding line.
All quotation marks
and ampersand have been transcribed as
entity references.
All double right and
left quotation marks are encoded as " and "
respectively.
All single right and
left quotation marks are encoded as '
and ' respectively.
Indentation in lines
has not been preserved.
Running titles have
not been preserved.
Spell-check and
verification made against printed text using
Author/Editor (SoftQuad) and Microsoft Word spell check programs.
LC Subject Headings:
By
VOLUME II
Illustrated
COPYRIGHT, 1919,
SWIFT'S definition of "conversation" did not
preside over or direct the daily intercourse
between Charles Sumner, Charles Eames and
Robert J. Walker in the old days in the National
Capital. They did not converse. They discoursed.
They talked sententiously in portentous essays and
learned dissertations. I used to think it great,
though I nursed no little dislike of Sumner.
Charles Eames was at the outset of his career a
ne'er-do-well New Englander - a Yankee
Jack-of-all-trades - kept at the front by an exceedingly
clever wife. Through the favor she enjoyed at
court he received from Pierce and Buchanan
unimportant diplomatic appointments. During their
sojourns in Washington their home was a kind of
political and literary headquarters. Mrs. Eames
had established a salon - the first attempt of the
kind made there; and it was altogether a success.
Her Sundays evenings were notable, indeed.
Whoever was worth seeing, if in town, might usually be
found there. Charles Sumner led the procession.
He was a most imposing person. Both handsome
and distinguished in appearance, he possessed in an
eminent degree the Harvard pragmatism - or, shall
I say, affectation? - and seemed never happy
except on exhibition. He had made a profitable
political and personal issue of the Preston Brooks
attack. Brooks was an exceeding light weight, but
he did for Sumner more than Sumner could ever
have done for himself.
In the Charles Eames days Sumner was exceedingly
disagreeable to me. Many people, indeed,
thought him so. Many years later, in the Greeley
campaign of 1872, Schurz brought us together -
they had become as very brothers in the Senate -
and I found him the reverse of my boyish ill
conceptions.
He was a great old man. He was a delightful
old man, every inch a statesman, much of a scholar,
and something of a hero. I grew in time to be
actually fond of him, passed with him entire afternoons
and evenings in his library, mourned sincerely
when he died, and went with Schurz to Boston,
on the occasion when that great German-American
delivered the memorial address in honor of the dead
Abolitionist.
Of all the public men of that period Carl Schurz
most captivated me. When we first came into
personal relations, at the Liberal Convention, which
assembled at Cincinnati and nominated Greeley
and Brown as a presidential ticket, he was just
turned forty-three; I, two and thirty. The closest
intimacy followed. Our tastes were much alike.
Both of us had been educated in music. He played
the piano with intelligence and feeling - especially
Schumann, Brahms and Mendelssohn, neither of
us ever having quite reached the "high jinks" of
Wagner.
To me his oratory was wonderful. He spoke to
an audience of five or ten thousand as he would
have talked to a party of three or six. His style
was simple, natural, unstrained; the lucid statement
and cogent argument now and again irradiated
by a salient passage of satire or a burst of not
too eloquent rhetoric.
He was quite knocked out by the nomination of
Horace Greeley. For a long time he could not
reconcile himself to support the ticket. Horace
White and I addressed ourselves to the task of
"fetching him into camp" - there being in point of
fact nowhere else for him to go - though we had to
get up what was called The Fifth Avenue
Conference to make a bridge.
Truth to say, Schurz never wholly adjusted himself
to political conditions in the United States. He
once said to me in one of the querulous moods that
sometimes overcame him: "If I should live a hundred
years my enemies would still call me a -
Dutchman!"
It was Schurz, as I have said, who brought
Lamar and me together. The Mississippian had
been a Secession Member of Congress when I was
a Unionist scribe in the reporters' gallery. I was
a furious partisan in those days and disliked the
Secessionists intensely. Of them, Lamar was most
aggressive. I later learned that he was very many-sided
and accomplished, the most interesting and
lovable of men. He and Schurz "froze together,"
as, brought together by Schurz, he and I "froze
together." On one side he was a sentimentalist and
on the other a philosopher, but on all sides a fighter.
They called him a dreamer. He sprang from a
race of chevaliers and scholars. Oddly enough,
albeit in his moods a recluse, he was a man of the
world; a favorite in society; very much at home in
European courts, especially in that of England;
the friend of Thackeray, at whose house, when in
London, he made his abode. Lady Ritchie - Anne
Thackeray - told me many amusing stories of his
whimsies. He was a man among brainy men and
a lion among clever women.
We had already come to be good friends and
constant comrades when the whirligig of time threw
us together for a little while in the lower house of
Congress. One day he beckoned me over to his
seat. He was leaning backward with his hands
crossed behind his head.
As I stood in front of him he said: "On the
eighth of February, 1858, Mrs. Gwin, of
California, gave a fancy dress ball. Mr. Lamar, of
Mississippi, a member of Congress, was there.
Also a glorious young woman - a vision of beauty
and grace - with whom the handsome and distinguished
young statesman danced - danced once,
twice, thrice, taking her likewise down to supper.
He went to bed, turned his face to the wall and
dreamed of her. That was twenty years ago.
To-day this same Mr. Lamar, after an obscure
interregnum, was with Mrs. Lamar looking over
Washington for an apartment. In quest of cheap
lodging they came to a mean house in a mean quarter,
where a poor, wizened, ill-clad woman showed them
through the meanly furnished rooms. Of course
they would not suffice.
"As they were coming away the great Mr. Lamar
said to the poor landlady, 'Madam, have you lived
long in Washington?' She said all her life.
'Madam,' he continued, 'were you at a fancy dress
ball given by Mrs. Senator Gwin of California, the
eighth of February, 1858?' She said she was. 'Do
you remember,' the statesman, soldier and orator
continued, 'a young and handsome Mississippian, a
member of Congress, by the name of Lamar?' She
said she didn't."
I rather think that Lamar was the biggest
brained of all the men I have met in Washington.
He possessed the courage of his convictions. A
doctrinaire, there was nothing of the typical
doctrinaire, or theorist, about him. He really believed
that cotton was king and would compel England to
espouse the cause of the South.
Despite his wealth of experience and travel he
was not overmuch of a raconteur, but he once told
me a good story about his friend Thackeray. The
two were driving to a banquet of the Literary
Fund, where Dickens was to preside. "Lamar,"
said Thackeray, "they say I can't speak. But if
I want to I can speak. I can speak every bit as
good as Dickens, and I am going to show you
to-night that I can speak almost as good as you."
When the moment arrived Thackeray said never a
word. Returning in the cab, both silent, Thackeray
suddenly broke forth. "Lamar," he exclaimed,
"don't you think you have heard the greatest speech
to-night that was never delivered?"
Holding office, especially going to Congress, had
never entered any wish or scheme of mine. Office
seemed to me ever a badge of bondage. I knew
too much of the national capital to be allured by
its evanescent and lightsome honors. When the
opportunity sought me out none of its illusions
appealed to me. But after a long uphill fight for
personal and political recognition in Kentucky an
election put a kind of seal upon the victory I had won
and enabled me in a way to triumph over my
enemies. I knew that if I accepted the nomination
offered me I would get a big popular vote - as I
did - and so, one full term, and half a term,
incident to the death of the sitting member for the
Louisville district being open to me, I took the short
term, refusing the long term.
Though it was midsummer and Congress was
about to adjourn I went to Washington and was
sworn in. A friend of mine, Col. Wake Holman,
had made a bet with one of our pals I would be
under arrest before I had been twenty-four hours
in town, and won it. It happened in this wise: The
night of the day when I took my seat there was an
all-night session. I knew too well what that meant,
and, just from a long tiresome journey, I went to
bed and slept soundly till sunrise. Just as I was
up and dressing for a stroll about the old, familiar,
dearly loved quarter of the town there came an
imperative rap upon the door and a voice said: "Get
up, colonel, quick! This is a sergeant at arms.
There has been a call of the House and I am after
you. Everybody is drunk, more or less, and they
are noisy to have some fun with you."
It was even as he said. Everybody, more or less,
was drunk - especially the provisional speaker
whom Mr. Randall had placed in the chair - and
when we arrived and I was led a prisoner down the
center aisle pandemonium broke loose.
They had all sorts of fun with me, such as it was.
It was moved that I be fined the full amount of my
mileage. Then a resolution was offered suspending
my membership and sending me under guard
to the old Capitol prison. Finally two or three of
my friends rescued me and business was allowed to
proceed. It was the last day of a very long session
and those who were not drunk were worn out.
When I returned home there was a celebration
in honor of the bet Wake Holman had won at my
expense. Wake was the most attractive and lovable
of men, by nature a hero, by profession a "filibuster"
and soldier of fortune. At two and twenty he
was a private in Col. Humphrey Marshall's Regiment
of Kentucky Riflemen, which reached the
scene of hostilities upon the Rio Grande in the
midsummer of 1846. He had enlisted from Owen
county - "Sweet Owen," as it used to be called -
and came of good stock, his father, Col. Harry Holman,
in the days of aboriginal fighting and journalism,
a frontier celebrity. Wake's company, out on
a scout, was picked off by the Mexicans, and the
distinction between United States soldiers and Texan
rebels not being yet clearly established, a drumhead
court-martial ordered "the decimation."
This was a decree that one of every ten of the
Yankee captives should be shot. There being a
hundred of Marshall's men, one hundred beans -
ninety white and ten black - were put in a hat.
Then the company was mustered as on dress
parade. Whoso drew a white bean was to be held
prisoner of war; whoso drew a black bean was to
die.
In the early part of the drawing Wake drew a
white bean. Toward the close the turn of a neighbor
and comrade from Owen county who had left
a wife and baby at home was called. He and Wake
were standing together, Holman brushed him
aside, walked out in his place and drew his bean. It
turned out to be a white one. Twice within the
half hour death had looked him in the eye and
found no blinking there.
I have seen quite a deal of hardihood, endurance,
suffering, in both women and men; splendid courage
on the field of action; perfect self-possession in
the face of danger; but I rather think that Wake
Holman's exploit that day - next to actually dying
for a friend, what can be nobler than being willing
to die for him? - is the bravest thing I know or have
ever been told of mortal man.
Wake Holman went to Cuba in the Lopez
Rebellion of 1851, and fought under Pickett at the
Battle of Cardenas. In 1855-56 he was in
Nicaragua, with Walker. He commanded a Kentucky
regiment of cavalry on the Union side in our War
of Sections. After the war he lived the life of a
hunter and fisher at his home in Kentucky; a
cheery, unambitious, big-brained and big-hearted
cherub, whom it would not do to "projeck" with,
albeit with entire safety you could pick his pocket;
the soul of simplicity and amiability.
To have known him was an education in primal
manhood. To sit at his hospitable board, with him
at the head of the table, was an inspiration in the
genius of life and the art of living. One of his
familiars started the joke that when Wake drew
the second white bean "he got a peep." He took it
kindly; though in my intimacy with him, extending
over thirty years, I never heard him refer to any
of his adventures as a soldier.
It was not possible that such a man should provide
for his old age. He had little forecast. He
knew not the value of money. He had humor,
affection and courage. I held him in real love and
honor. When the Mexican War Pension Act was
passed by Congress I took his papers to General
Black, the Commissioner of Pensions, and related
this story.
"I have promised Gen. Cerro Gordo Williams,"
said General Black, referring to the then senior
United States Senator from Kentucky, "that his
name shall go first on the roll of these Mexican
pensioners. But" - and the General looked beamingly
in my face, a bit tearful, and says he: "Wake
Holman's name shall come right after." And there
it is.
I was very carefully and for those times not
ignorantly taught in music. Schell, his name was,
and they called him "Professor." He lived over
in Georgetown, where he had organized a little
group of Prussian refugees into a German club,
and from my tenth to my fifteenth year - at first
regularly, and then in a desultory way as I came
back to Washington City from my school in
Philadelphia, be hammered Bach and Handel and
Mozart - nothing so modern as Mendelssohn - into my
not unwilling nor unreceptive mind, for my bent
was in the beginning to compose dramas, and in
the end operas.
Adelina Patti was among my child companions.
Once in the national capital, when I was 12 years
old and Adelina 9, we played together at a charity
concert. She had sung "The Last Rose of Summer,"
and I had played her brother-in-law's variation
upon "Home, Sweet Home." The audience
was enthusiastic. We were called out again and
again. Then we came on the stage together, and
the applause increasing I sat down at the keyboard
and played an accompaniment with my own
interpolations upon "Old Folks At Home," which I had
taught Adelina, and she sang the words. Then
they fairly took the roof off.
Once during a sojourn in Paris I was thrown
with Christine Nilsson. She was in the heyday of
her success at the Theater Lyrique under the
patronage of Madame Miolan-Carvalho. One day
I said to her: "The time may come when you will
be giving concerts." She was indignant. "Nevertheless,"
I continued, "let me teach you a sure encore."
I played her Stephen Foster's immortal
ditty. She was delighted. The sequel was that it
served her even a better turn than it had served
Adelina Patti.
I played and transposed for the piano most of
the melodies of Foster as they were published, they
being first produced in public by Christy's
Minstrels.
Stephen Foster was the ne'er-do-well of a good
Pennsylvania family. A sister of his had married
a brother of James Buchanan. There were two
daughters of this marriage, nieces of the President,
and when they were visiting the White House we
had - shall I dare write it? - high jinks with our
nigger-minstrel concerts on the sly.
Will S. Hays, the rival of Foster as a song writer
and one of my reporters on the Courier-Journal,
told me this story: "Foster," said he, "was a good
deal of what you might call a barroom loafer. He
possessed a sweet tenor voice before it was spoiled
by drink, and was fond of music, though technically
he knew nothing about it. He had a German friend
who when he died left him a musical scrapbook, of
all sorts of odds and ends of original text. There
is where Foster got his melodies. When the scrapbook
gave out he gave out."
I took it as merely the spleen of a rival composer.
But many years after in Vienna I heard a concert
given over exclusively to the performance of
certain posthumous manuscripts of Schubert. Among
the rest were selections from an unfinished opera -
"Rosemonde," I think it was called - in which the
whole rhythm and movements and parts of the
score of Old Folks at Home were the feature.
It was something to have grown up contemporary,
as it were, with these songs. Many of them
were written in the old Rowan homestead, just
outside of Bardstown, Ky., where Louis Philippe lived
and taught, and for a season Talleyrand made his
abode. The Rowans were notable people. John
Rowan, the elder, head of the house, was a famous
lawyer, who divided oratorical honors with Henry
Clay, and like Clay, was a Senator in Congress;
his son, "young John," as he was called, Stephen
Foster's pal, went as minister to Naples, and fought
duels, and was as Bob Acres wanted to be, "a devil
of a fellow." He once told me he had been intimate
with Thackeray when they were wild young men in
Paris, and that they had both of them known the
woman whom Thackeray had taken for the original
of Becky Sharp.
The Foster songs quite captivated my boyhood.
I could sing a little, as well as play, and learned
each of them - especially Old Folks at Home and
My Old Kentucky Home - as they appeared. Their
contemporary vogue was tremendous. Nothing has
since rivalled the popular impression they made,
except perhaps the Arthur Sullivan melodies.
Among my ambitions to be a great historian,
dramatist, soldier and writer of romance I desired
also to be a great musician, especially a great
pianist. The bone-felon did the business for this
later. But all my life I have been able to thumb
the keyboard at least for the children to dance, and
it has been a recourse and solace sometimes during
intervals of embittered journalism and unprosperous
statesmanship.
Theodore Thomas and I used to play duos together.
He was a master of the violin before he
took to orchestration. We remained the best of
friends to the end of his days.
On the slightest provocation, or none, we passed
entire nights together. Once after a concert he
suddenly exclaimed: "Don't you think Wagner was
a - fraud?"
A little surprised even by one of his outbreaks,
I said: "Wagner may have written some trick music
but I hardly think that he was a fraud."
He reflected a moment. "Well," he continued,
"it may not lie in my mouth to say it - and perhaps
I ought not to say it - I know I am most responsible
for the Wagner craze - but I consider him a
- fraud."
He had just come from a long "classic entertainment,"
was worn out with travel and worry, and
meant nothing of the sort.
After a very tiresome concert when he was railing
at the hard lines of a peripatetic musician I said:
"Come with me and I will give you a soothing quail
and as dry a glass of champagne as you ever had in
your life."
The wine was poured out and he took a sip.
"I don't call that dry wine," he crossly said, and
took another sip. "My God," without a pause he
continued, "isn't that great?"
Of course he was impulsive, even impetuous.
Beneath his seeming cold exterior and admirable
self-control - the discipline of the master artist - lay
the moods and tenses of the musical temperament.
He knew little or nothing outside of music and did
not care to learn. I tried to interest him in politics.
It was of no use. First he laughed my suggestions
to scorn and then swore like a trooper. German he
was, through and through. It was well that he
passed away before the world war. Pat Gilmore
- "Patrick Sarsfield," we always called him - was a
born politician, and if he had not been a musician
he would have been a statesman. I kept the peace
between him and Theodore Thomas by an ingenious
system of telling all kinds of kind things each
had said of the other, my "repetitions" being pure
inventions of my own.
I HAVE been of late reading The Education of
Henry Adams, and it recalls many persons
and incidents belonging to the period about which
I am now writing. I knew Henry Adams well;
first in London, then in Boston and finally throughout
his prolonged residence in Washington City.
He was an Adams; very definitely an Adams, but,
though his ghost may revisit the glimpses of the
moon and chide me for saying so, with an English
"cut to his jib."
No three brothers could be more unlike than
Charles Francis, John Quincy and Henry Adams.
Brooks Adams I did not know. They represented
the fourth generation of the brainiest pedigree -
that is in continuous line - known to our family
history. Henry thought he was a philosopher and
tried to be one. He thought he was a man of the
world and wanted to be one. He was, in spite of
himself, a provincial.
Provincialism is not necessarily rustic, even
suburban. There is no provincial quite so provincial
as he who has passed his life in great cities. The
Parisian boulevardier taken away from the asphalt,
the cockney a little off Clapham Common and the
Strand, is lost. Henry Adams knew his London
and his Paris, his Boston and his Quiney - we must
not forget Quincy - well. But he had been born,
and had grown up, between the lids of history, and
for all his learning and travel he never got very
far outside them.
In manner and manners, tone and cast of thought
he was English - delightfully English - though he
cultivated the cosmopolite. His house in the
national capital, facing the Executive Mansion across
Lafayette Square - especially during the life of his
wife, an adorable woman, who made up in sweetness
and tact for some of the qualities lacking in
her husband - was an intellectual and high-bred
center, a rendezvous for the best ton and the most
accepted people. The Adamses may be said to have
succeeded the Eameses as leaders in semi-social,
semi-literary and semi-political society.
There was a trio - I used to call them the Three
Musketeers of Culture - John Hay, Henry Cabot
Lodge and Henry Adams. They made an interesting
and inseparable trinity - Caleb Cushing, Robert
J. Walker and Charles Sumner not more so - and
it was worth while to let them have the floor and to
hear them talk; Lodge, cool and wary as a politician
should be; Hay, helterskelter, the real man of
the world crossed on a Western stock; and Adams,
something of a litératteur, a statesman and a cynic.
John Randolph Tucker, who when he was in Congress
often met Henry at dinners and the like, said
to him on the appearance of the early volumes of
his History of the United States: "I am not
disappointed, for how could an Adams be expected
to do justice to a Randolph?"
While he was writing this history Adams said to
me: "There is an old villain - next to Andrew
Jackson the greatest villain of his time - a
Kentuckian - don't say he was a kinsman of yours! -
whose papers, if he left any, I want to see."
"To whom are you referring?" I asked with mock
dignity.
"To John Adair," he answered.
"Well," said I, "John Adair married my grandmother's
sister and I can put you in the way of
getting whatever you require."
I have spoken of John Hay as Master of the
Revels in the old Sutherland-Delmonico days.
Even earlier than that - in London and Paris - an
intimacy had been established between us. He
married in Cleveland, Ohio, and many years passed
before I came up with him again. One day in Whitelaw
Reid's den in the Tribune Building he reappeared,
strangely changed - no longer the rosy-cheeked,
buoyant boy - an overserious, prematurely
old man. I was shocked, and when he had gone
Reid, observing this, said: "Oh, Hay will come
round all right. He is just now in one of his moods.
I picked him up in Piccadilly the other day and by
sheer force brought him over."
When we recall the story of Hay's life - one
weird tragedy after another, from the murder of
Lincoln to the murder of McKinley, including the
tragic end of two members of his immediate family
- there rises in spite of the grandeur that pursued
him a single exclamation: "The pity of it!"
This is accentuated by Henry Adams' Education.
Yet the silent courage with which Hay met
disaster after disaster must increase both the
sympathy and the respect of those who peruse the
melancholy pages of that vivid narrative. Toward
the end, meeting him on a public occasion, I said:
"You work too hard - you are not looking well."
"I am dying," said he.
"Yes," I replied in the way of banter, "you are
dying of fame and fortune."
But I went no further. He was in no mood for
the old verbal horseplay.
He looked wan and wizened. Yet there were
still several years before him. When he came from
Mannheim to Paris it was clear that the end was
nigh. I did not see him - he was too ill to see any
one - but Frank Mason kept me advised from day
to day, and when, a month or two later, having
reached home, the news came to us that he was dead
we were nowise surprised, and almost consoled by
the thought that rest had come at last.
Frank Mason and his wife - "the Masons," they
were commonly called, for Mrs. Mason made a
wondrous second to her husband - were from Cleveland,
Ohio, she a daughter of Judge Birchard -
Jennie Birchard - he a rising young journalist
caught in the late seventies by the glitter of a
foreign appointment. They ran the gamut of the
consular service, beginning with Basel and Marseilles
and ending with Frankfurt, Berlin and Paris.
Wherever they were their house was a very home
- a kind of Yankee shrine - of visiting Americans
and militant Americanism.
Years before he was made consul general - in
point of fact when he was plain consul at Marseilles
- he ran over to Paris for a lark. One day he said
to me, "A rich old hayseed uncle of mine has come
to town. He has money to burn and he wants to
meet you. I have arranged for us to dine with him
at the Anglaise to-night and we are to order the
dinner - carte blanche." The rich old uncle to whom
I was presented did not have the appearance of a
hayseed. On the contrary he was a most
distinguished-looking old gentleman. The dinner we
ordered was "stunning" - especially the wines.
When the bill was presented our host scanned it
carefully, scrutinizing each item and making his
own addition, altogether "like a thoroughbred."
Frank and I watched him not without a bit of
anxiety mixed with contrition. When he had paid
the score he said with a smile: "That was rather a
steep bill, but we have had rather a good dinner,
and now, if you boys know of as good a dance hall
we'll go there and I'll buy the outfit."
First and last I have lived much in the erstwhile
gay capital of France. It was gayest when the
Duke de Morny flourished as King of the Bourse.
He was reputed the Emperor's natural half-brother.
The breakdown of the Mexican adventure,
which was mostly his, contributed not a little
to the final Napoleonic fall. He died of dissipation
and disappointment, and under the pseudonym of
the Duke de Morra, Daudet celebrated him in
"The Nabob."
De Morny did not live to see the tumble of the
house of cards he had built. Next after I saw Paris
it was a pitiful wreck indeed; the Hotel de Ville and
the Tuileries in flames; the Column gone from the
Place Vendôme; but later the rise of the Third
Republic saw the revival of the unquenchable spirit
of the irrepressible French.
Nevertheless I should scarcely be taken for a
Parisian. Once, when wandering aimlessly, as one
so often does through the Paris streets, one of the
touts hanging round the Café de la Paix to catch
the unwary stranger being a little more importunate
than usual, I ordered him to go about his business.
"This is my business," he impudently answered.
"Get away, I tell you!" I thundered, "I am a
Parisian myself!"
He drew a little out of reach of the umbrella I
held in my hand, and with a drawl of supreme and
very American contempt, exclaimed, "Well, you
don't look it," and scampered off.
Paris, however, is not all of France. Sometimes
I have thought not the best part of it. There is the
south of France, with Avignon, the heart of Provence,
seat of the French papacy six hundred years
ago, the metropolis of Christendom before the Midi
was a region - Paris yet a village, and Rome struggling
out of the débris of the ages - with Arles and
Nîmes, and, above all, Tarascon, the home of the
immortal Tartarin, for next-door neighbors. They
are all hard by Marseilles. But Avignon ever most
caught my fancy, for there the nights seem peopled
with the ghosts of warriors and cardinals, and there
on festal mornings the spirits of Petrarch and his
Laura walk abroad, the ramparts, which bade
defiance to Goth and Vandal and Saracen hordes,
now giving shelter to bats and owls, but the
atmosphere laden with legend
". . . tasting of Flora and the country green,
Dance and Provençal song and sun-burnt mirth."
Something too much of this! Let me not yield
to the spell of the picturesque. To recur to matters
of fact and get down to prose and the times we
live in let us halt a moment on this southerly
journey and have a look in upon Lyons, the
industrial capital of France, which is directly on the
way.
The idiosyncrasy of Lyons is silk. There are two
schools of introduction in the art of silk weaving,
one of them free to any lad in the city, the other
requiring a trifle of matriculation. The first of these
witnesses the whole process of fabrication from the
reeling of threads to the finishing of dress goods,
and the loom painting of pictures. It is most
interesting of course, the painstaking its most obvious
feature, the individual weaver living with his
family upon a wage representing the cost of the
barest necessities of life. Again, and ever and ever
again, the inequalities of fortune! Where will it
end?
The world has tried revolution and it has tried
anarchy. Always the survival of the strong,
nicknamed by Spencer and his ilk the "fittest." Ten
thousand heads were chopped off during the Terror
in France to make room for whom? Not for the
many, but the few; though it must be allowed that
in some ways the conditions were improved.
Yet here after a hundred years, here in Lyons,
faithful, intelligent men struggle for sixty, for
forty cents a day, with never a hope beyond! What
is to be done about it? Suppose the wealth of the
universe were divided per capita, how long would
it remain out of the clutches of the Napoleons of
finance, only a percentage of whom find ultimately
their Waterloo, little to the profit of the poor who
spin and delve, who fight and die, in the Grand
Army of the Wretched!
We read a deal that is amusing about the
southerly Frenchman. He is indeed sui generis.
Some five and twenty years ago there appeared in
Louisville a dapper gentleman, who declared
himself a Marseillais, and who subsequently came to be
known variously as The Major and The Frenchman.
I shall not mention him otherwise in this
veracious chronicle, but, looking through the city
directory of Marseilles I found an entire page
devoted to his name, though all the entries may not
have been members of his family. There is no doubt
that he was a Marseillais.
Wandering through the streets of the old city,
now in a café of La Cannebièere and now along a
quay of the Old Port, his ghost has often crossed
my path and dogged my footsteps, though he has
lain in his grave this many a day. I grew to know
him very well, to be first amused by him, then to be
interested, and in the end to entertain an affection
for him.
The Major was a delightful composite of
Tartarin of Tarascon and the Brigadier Gerard, with
a dash of the Count of Monte Cristo; for when he
was flush - which by some odd coincidence happened
exactly four times a year - he was as liberal
a spendthrift as one could wish to meet anywhere
between the little principality of Monaco and the
headwaters of the Nile; transparent as a child;
idiosyncratic to a degree.
I understand Marseilles better and it has always
seemed nearer to me since he was born there and
lived there when a boy, and, I much fear me, was
driven away, the scapegrace of excellent and
wealthy people; not, I feel sure, for any offense
that touched the essential parts of his manhood. A
gentler, a more upright and harmless creature I
never knew in all my life.
I very well recall when he first arrived in the
Kentucky metropolis. His attire and raiment were
faultless. He wore a rose in his coat, he carried a
delicate cane, and a most beautiful woman hung
upon his arm. She was his wife. It was a circumstance
connected with this lady which led to the
after intimacy between him and me. She fell
dangerously ill. I had casually met her husband as an
all-round man-about-town, and by this token, seeking
sympathy on lines of least resistance, he came
to me with his sorrow.
I have never seen grief more real and fervid. He
swore, on his knees and with tears in his eyes, that
if she recovered, if God would give her back to him,
he would never again touch a card; for gambling
was his passion, and even among amateurs he would
have been accounted the softest of soft things. His
prayer was answered, she did recover, and he
proceeded to fulfill his vow.
But what was he to do? He had been taught,
or at least he had learned, to do nothing, not even
to play poker! I suggested that as running a
restaurant was a French prerogative and that as
he knew less about cooking than about anything else
- we had had a contest or two over the mysteries of
a pair of chafing dishes - and as there was not a
really good eating place in Louisville, he should set
up a restaurant. It was said rather in jest than in
earnest; but I was prepared to lend him the money.
The next thing I knew, and without asking for a
dollar, he had opened The Brunswick.
In those days I saw the Courier-Journal to press,
turning night into day, and during a dozen years I
took my twelve o'clock supper there. It was thus
and from these beginnings that the casual acquaintance
between us ripened into intimacy, and that I
gradually came into a knowledge of the reserves
behind The Major's buoyant optimism and occasional
gasconnade.
He ate and drank sparingly; but he was not proof
against the seduction of good company, and he had
plenty of it, from William Preston to Joseph
Jefferson, with such side lights as Stoddard Johnston,
Boyd Winchester, Isaac Caldwell and Proctor
Knott, of the Home Guard - very nearly all the
celebrities of the day among the outsiders - myself
the humble witness and chronicler. He secured an
excellent chef, and of course we lived exceedingly
well.
The Major's most obvious peculiarity was that
he knew everything and had been everywhere. If
pirates were mentioned he flowered out at once into
an adventure upon the sea; if bandits, on the land.
If it was Wall Street he had a reminiscence and a
scheme; if gambling, a hard-luck story and a
system. There was no quarter of the globe of which
he had not been an inhabitant.
Once the timbered riches of Africa being mentioned,
at once the Major gave us a most graphic
account of how "the old house" - for thus he
designated some commercial establishment, which either
had no existence or which he had some reason for
not more particularly indicating - had sent him in
charge of a rosewood saw mill on the Ganges, and,
after many ups and downs, of how the floods had
come and swept the plant away; and Rudolph Fink,
who was of the party, immediately said, "I can
attest the truth of The Major's story, because my
brother Albert and I were in charge of some fishing
camps at the mouth of the Ganges at the exact date
of the floods, and we caught many of those rosewood
logs in our nets as they floated out to sea."
Augustine's Terrapin came to be for a while the
rage in Philadelphia, and even got as far as New
York and Washington, and straightway, The Major
declared he could and would make Augustine
and his terrapin look "like a monkey." He
proposed to give a dinner.
There were great preparations and expectancy.
None of us ate much at luncheon that day. At the
appointed hour, we assembled at The Brunswick.
I will dismiss the decorations and the preludes
except to say that they were Parisian. After a while
in full regalia The Major appeared, a train of
servants following with a silver tureen. The lid was
lifted.
"Voilà!" says he.
The vision disclosed to our startled eyes was an
ocean that looked like bean soup flecked by a few
strands of black crape!
The explosion duly arrived from the assembled
gourmets, I, myself, I am sorry to say, leading the
rebellion.
"I put seeks terrapin in zat soup!" exclaimed
The Frenchman, quite losing his usual good English
in his excitement.
We reproached him. We denounced him. He
was driven from the field. But he bore us no malice.
Ten days later he invited us again, and this time
Sam Ward himself could have found no fault with
the terrapin.
Next afternoon, when I knew The Major was
asleep, I slipped back into the kitchen and said to
Louis Garnier, the chef: "Is there any of that
terrapin left over from last night?"
All unconscious of his treason Louis took me into
the pantry and triumphantly showed me three jars
bearing the Augustine label and the Philadelphia
express tags!
On another occasion a friend of The Major's,
passing The Brunswick and observing some
diamond-back shells in the window said, "Major, have
you any real live terrapins?"
"Live!" cried The Frenchman. "Only this morning
I open the ice box and they were all dancing
the cancan."
"Major," persisted the friend, "I'll go you a
bottle of Veuve Cliquot, you cannot show me an
actual living terrapin."
"What do you take me for - confidence man?"
The Major retorted. "How you expect an old
sport like me to bet upon a certainty?"
"Never mind your ethics. The wager is drink,
not money. In any event we shall have the wine."
"Oh, well," says The Frenchman, with a shrug
and a droll grimace, "if you insist on paying for a
bottle of wine come with me."
He took a lighted candle, and together they went
back to the ice box. It was literally filled with
diamond backs, and my friend thought he was gone
for sure.
"Là!" says The Major with triumph, rummaging
among the mass of shells with his cane as he
held the candle aloft.
"But," says my friend, ready to surrender, yet
taking a last chance, "you told me they were
dancing the cancan!"
The Major picked up a terrapin and turned it
over in his hand. Quite numb and frozen, the
animal within made no sign. Then he stirred the
shells about in the box with his cane. Still not a
show of life. Of a sudden he stopped, reflected a
moment, then looked at his watch.
"Ah," he murmured. "I quite forget. The terrapin,
they are asleep. It is ten-thirty, and the terrapin
he regularly go to sleep at ten o'clock by the
watch every night." And without another word he
reached for the Veuve Cliquot!
For all his volubility in matters of romance and
sentiment The Major was exceeding reticent about
his immediate self and his own affairs. His legends
referred to the distant of time and place. A certain
dignity could not be denied him, and, on occasion,
a proper reserve; be rarely mentioned his business
- though he worked like a slave, and could not have
been making much or any profit - so that there rose
the query how he contrived to make both ends meet.
Little by little I came into the knowledge that there
was a money supply from somewhere; finally, it
matters not how, that he had an annuity of forty
thousand francs, paid in quarterly installments of
ten thousand francs each.
Occasionally he mentioned "the Old House," and
in relating the famous Sophonisba, episode late at
night, and only in the very fastnesses of the wine
cellar, as it were, at the most lachrymose passage
he spoke of "l'Oncle Célestin," with the deepest
feeling.
"Did you ever hear The Frenchman tell that
story about Sophonisba?" Doctor Stoic, whom on
account of his affectation of insensibility we were
wont to call Old Adamant, once asked me. "Well,
sir, the other night he told it to me, and he was
drunk, and he cried, sir; and I was drunk, and I
cried too!"
I had known The Frenchman now ten or a dozen
years. That he came from Marseilles, that he had
served on the Confederate side in the Trans-Mississippi,
that he possessed an annuity, that he
must have been well-born and reared, that he was
simple, yet canny, and in his money dealings
scrupulously honest - was all I could be sure of. What
had he done to be ashamed about or wish to conceal?
In what was he a black sheep, for that he
had been one seemed certain? Had the beautiful
woman, his wife - a tireless church and charity
worker, who lived the life of a recluse and a saint -
had she reclaimed him from his former self? I
knew that she had been the immediate occasion of
his turning over a new leaf. But before her time
what had he been, what had he done?
Late one night, when the rain was falling and the
streets were empty, I entered The Brunswick. It
was empty too. In the farthest corner of the little
dining room The Major, his face buried in his
hands, laid upon the table in front of him, sat
silently weeping. He did not observe my entrance
and I seated myself on the opposite side of the
table. Presently he looked up, and seeing me, without
a word passed me a letter which, all blistered
with tears, had brought him to this distressful state.
It was a formal French burial summons, with its
long list of family names - his among the rest -
the envelope, addressed in a lady's hand - his
sister's, the wife of a nobleman in high military
command - the postmark "Lyon." Uncle Célestin was
dead.
Thereafter The Frenchman told me much which
I may not recall and must not repeat; for, included
in that funeral list were some of the best names in
France, Uncle Célestin himself not the least of
them.
At last he died, and as mysteriously as he had
come his body was taken away, nobody knew when,
nobody where, and with it went the beautiful
woman, his wife, of whom from that day to this I
have never heard a word.
EACH of the generations thinks itself
commonplace. Familiarity breeds equally
indifference and contempt. Yet no age of the world
has witnessed so much of the drama of life - of the
romantic and picturesque - as the age we live in.
The years betwixt Agincourt and Waterloo were
not more delightfully tragic than the years between
Serajevo and Senlis.
The gay capital of France remains the center of
the stage and retains the interest of the onlooking
universe. All roads lead to Paris as all roads led to
Rome. In Dickens' day "a tale of two cities" could
only mean London and Paris then, and ever so
unalike. To be brought to date the title would have
now to read "three," or even "four," cities, New
York and Chicago putting in their claims for
mundane recognition.
I have been not only something of a traveller, but
a diligent student of history and a voracious novel
reader, and, once-in-a-while, I get my history and
my fiction mixed. This has been especially the case
when the hum-drum of the Boulevards has driven
me from the fascinations of the Beau Quartier into
the by-ways of the Marais and the fastnesses of
what was once the Latin Quarter. More than fifty
years of intimacy have enabled me to learn many
things not commonly known, among them that
Paris is the most orderly and moral city in the
world, except when, on rare and brief occasions, it
has been stirred to its depths.
I have crossed the ocean many times - have lived,
not sojourned, on the banks of the Seine, and, as I
shall never see the other side again - do not want to
see it in its time of sorrow and garb of mourning -
I may be forgiven a retrospective pause in this
egotistic chronicle. Or, shall I not say, a word or
two of affectionate retrogression, though perchance
it leads me after the manner of Silas Wegg to drop
into poetry and take a turn with a few ghosts into
certain of their haunts, when you, dear sir, or
madame, or miss, as the case may be, and I were
living that "other life," whereof we remember so
little that we cannot recall who we were, or what
name we went by, howbeit now-and-then we get a
glimpse in dreams, or a "hunch" from the world of
spirits, or spirts-and-water, which makes us fancy
we might have been Julius Cæsar, or Cleopatra -
as maybe we were! - or at least Joan of Arc, or
Jean Valjean!
Let me repeat that upon no spot of earth has the
fable we call existence had so rare a setting and
rung up its curtain upon such a succession of
performances; has so concentrated human attention
upon mundane affairs; has called such a muster roll
of stage favorites; has contributed to romance so
many heroes and heroines, to history so many signal
episodes and personal exploits, to philosophy so
much to kindle the craving for vital knowledge, to
stir sympathy and to awaken reflection.
Greece and Rome seem but myths of an Age of
Fable. They live for us as pictures live, as statues
live. What was it I was saying about statues -
that they all look alike to me? There are too many
of them. They bring the ancients down to us in
marble and bronze, not in flesh and blood. We do
not really laugh with Terence and Horace, nor weep
with Æschylus and Homer. The very nomenclature
has a ticket air like tags on a collection of
curios in an auction room, droning the dull iteration
of a catalogue. There is as little to awaken and
inspire in the system of religion and ethics of the
pagan world they lived in as in the eyes of the stone
effigies that stare blankly upon us in the British
Museum, the Uffizi and the Louvre.
We walk the streets of the Eternal City with
wonderment, not with pity, the human side quite
lost in the archaic. What is Cæsar to us, or we to
Cæsar? Jove's thunder no longer terrifies, and we
look elsewhere than the Medici Venus for the lights
o' love.
Not so with Paris. There the unbroken line of
five hundred years - semi-modern years, marking a
longer period than we commonly ascribe to Athens
or Rome - beginning with the exit of this our own
world from the dark ages into the partial light of
the middle ages, and continuing thence through the
struggle of man toward achievement - tells us a tale
more consecutive and thrilling, more varied and
instructive, than may be found in all the pages of all
the chroniclers and poets of the civilizations which
vibrated between the Bosphorus and the Tiber, to
yield at last to triumphant Barbarism swooping
down from Tyrol crag and Alpine height, from the
fastnesses of the Rhine and the Rhone, to swallow
luxury and culture. Refinement had done its
perfect work. It had emasculated man and unsexed
woman and brought her to the front as a political
force, even as it is trying to do now.
The Paris of Balzac and Dumas, of De Musset
and Hugo - even of Thackeray - could still be seen
when I first went there. Though our age is as full
of all that makes for the future of poetry and
romance, it does not contemporaneously lend itself
to sentimental abstraction. Yet it is hard to
separate fact and fiction here; to decide between the
true and the false; to pluck from the haze with
which time has enveloped them, and to distinguish
the puppets of actual flesh and blood who lived and
moved and had their being, and the phantoms of
imagination called into life and given each its local
habitation and its name by the poet's pen working
its immemorial spell upon the reader's credulity.
To me D'Artagnan is rather more vital than
Richelieu. Hugo's imps and Balzac's bullies dance
down the stage and shut from the view the tax-collectors
and the court favorites. The mousquetaires
crowd the field marshals off the scene. There is
something real in Quasimodo, in Cæsar de Birotteau,
in Robert Macaire, something mythical in
Mazarin, in the Regent and in Jean Lass. Even
here, in faraway Kentucky, I can shut my eyes and
see the Lady of Dreams as plainly as if she were
coming out of the Bristol or the Ritz to step into
her automobile, while the Grande Mademoiselle is
merely a cloud of clothes and words that for me
mean nothing at all.
I once passed a week, day by day, roaming through
the Musée Carnavalet. Madame de Sévigné had
an apartment and held her salon there for nearly
twenty years. Hard by is the house where the
Marquise de Brinvilliers - a gentle, blue-eyed thing
they tell us - a poor, insane creature she must have
been - disseminated poison and death, and, just
across and beyond the Place des Vosges, the Hotel
de Sens, whither Queen Margot took her doll-rags
and did her spriting after she and Henri Quatre
had agreed no longer to slide down the same cellar
door. There is in the Museum a death-mask, colored
and exceeding life-like, taken the day after
Ravaillac delivered the finishing knife-thrust in the
Rue de Ferronnerie, which represents the Bèarnais
as anything but a tamer of hearts. He was a
fighter, however, from Wayback, and I dare say
Dumas' narrative is quite as authentic as any.
One can scarce wonder that men like Hugo, and
Balzac chose this quarter of the town to live in -
and Rachael, too! - it having given such frequent
shelter to so many of their fantastic creations,
having been the real abode of a train of gallants and
bravos, of saints and harlots from the days of Diane
de Poitiers to the days of Pompadour and du
Barry, and of statesmen and prelates likewise from
Sully to Necker, from Colbert to Turgot.
I speak of the Marais as I might speak of Madison
Square, or Hyde Park - as a well-known local
section - yet how few Americans who have gone to
Paris have ever heard of it. It is in the eastern
division of the town. One finds it a curious circumstance
that so many if not most of the great cities
somehow started with the rising, gradually to
migrate toward the setting sun.
When I first wandered about Paris there was little
west of the Arch of Stars except groves and
meadows. Neuilly and Passy were distant villages.
Auteuil was a safe retreat for lovers and debtors,
with comic opera villas nestled in high-walled
gardens. To Auteuil Armand Duval and his Camille
hied away for their short-lived idyl. In those days
there was a lovely lane called Marguerite Gautier,
with a dovecote pointed out as the very "rustic
dwelling" so pathetically sung in Verdi's tuneful
score and tenderly described in the original Dumas
text. The Boulevard Montmorenci long ago
plowed the shrines of romance out of the knowledge
of the living, and a part of the Longchamps racecourse
occupies the spot whither impecunious poets
and adventure-seeking wives repaired to escape the
insistence of cruel bailiffs and the spies of suspicious
and monotonous husbands.
Tempus fugit! I used to read Thackeray's Paris
Sketches with a kind of awe. The Thirties and the
Forties, reincarnated and inspired by his glowing
spirit, seemed clad in translucent garments, like the
figures in the Nibelungenlied, weird, remote, glorified.
I once lived in the street "for which no rhyme
our language yields," next door to a pastry shop
that claimed to have furnished the mise en scène
for the "Ballad of Bouillabaisse," and I often
followed the trail of Louis Dominic Cartouche "down
that lonely and crooked byway that, setting forth
from a palace yard, led finally to the rear gate of
a den of thieves." Ah, well-a-day! I have known
my Paris now twice as long as Thackeray knew his
Paris, and my Paris has been as interesting as his
Paris, for it includes the Empire, the Siege and the
Republic.
I knew and sat for months at table with Comtesse
Walewska, widow of the bastard son of Napoleon
Bonaparte. The Duke de Morny was rather a person
in his way and Gambetta was no slouch, as
Titmarsh would himself agree. I knew them both.
The Mexican scheme, which was going to make
every Frenchman rich, was even more picturesque
and tragical than the Mississippi bubble. There
were lively times round about the last of the Sixties
and the early Seventies. The Terror lasted longer,
but it was not much more lurid than the Commune;
the Hotel de Ville and the Tuileries in flames, the
column gone from the Place Vendôme, when I got
there just after the siege. The regions of the
beautiful Opera House and of the venerable Notre
Dame they told me had been but yesterday running
streams of blood. At the corner of the Rue
de la Paix and the Rue Daunou (they called it
then the Rue St. Augustine) thirty men, women,
and boys were one forenoon stood against the wall
and shot, volley upon volley, to death. In the
Sacristy of the Cathedral over against the Morgue
and the Hotel Dieu, they exhibit the gore-stained
vestments of three archbishops of Paris murdered
within as many decades.
Thackeray came to Paris when a very young
man. He was for painting pictures, not for writing
books, and he retained his artistic yearnings if
not ambitions long after he had become a great and
famous man of letters. It was in Paris that he
married his wife, and in Paris that the melancholy
finale came to pass; one of the most heartbreaking
chapters in literary history.
His little girls lived here with their grandparents.
The elder of them relates how she was once taken
up some flights of stairs by the Countess X to the
apartment of a frail young man to whom the Countess
was carrying a basket of fruit; and how the
frail young man insisted, against the protest of the
Countess, upon sitting at the piano and playing;
and of how they came out again, the eyes of the
Countess streaming with tears, and of her saying,
as they drove away, "Never, never forget, my child,
as long as you live, that you have heard Chopin
play." It was in one of the lubberly houses of
the Place Vendôme that the poet of the keyboard
died a few days later. Just around the corner, in
the Rue du Mont Thabor, died Alfred de Musset.
A brass plate marks the house.
May I not here transcribe that verse of the famous
"Ballad of Bouillabaisse," which I have never
been able to recite, or read aloud, and part of which
I may at length take to myself:
"Ah
me, how quick the days are flitting!
The writer of these lines a cynic! Nonsense.
When will the world learn to discriminate?
It is impossible to speak of Paris without giving
a foremost place in the memorial retrospect to the
Bois de Boulogne, the Parisian's Coney Island. I
recall that I passed the final Sunday of my last
Parisian sojourn just before the outbreak of the
World War with a beloved family party in the joyous
old Common. There is none like it in the world,
uniting the urban to the rural with such surpassing
grace as perpetually to convey a double sensation
of pleasure; primal in its simplicity, superb in its
setting; in the variety and brilliancy of the life
which, upon sunny afternoons, takes possession of
it and makes it a cross between a parade and a
paradise.
There was a time when, rather far away for foot
travel, the Bois might be considered a driving park
for the rich. It fairly blazed with the ostentatious
splendor of the Second Empire; the shoddy Duke
with his shady retinue, in gilded coach-and-four;
the world-famous courtesan, bedizened with costly
jewels and quite as well known as the Empress; the
favorites of the Tuileries, the Comédie Française,
the Opera, the Jardin Mabille, forming an unceasing
and dazzling line of many-sided frivolity from
the Port de Ville to the Port St. Cloud, circling
round La Bagatelle and ranging about the Café
Cascade, a human tiara of diamonds, a moving bouquet
of laces and rubies, of silks and satins and
emeralds and sapphires. Those were the days when
the Duc de Morny, half if not full brother of the
Emperor, ruled as king of the Bourse, and Cora
Pearl, a clever and not at all good-looking Irish
girl gone wrong, reigned as Queen of the Demimonde.
All this went by the board years ago. Everywhere,
more or less, electricity has obliterated distinctions
of rank and wealth. It has circumvented
lovers and annihilated romance. The Republic
ousted the bogus nobility. The subways and the
tram cars connect the Bois de Boulogne and the
Bois de Vincennes so closely that the poorest may
make himself at home in either or both.
The automobile, too, oddly enough, is proving a
very leveller. The crowd recognizes nobody amid
the hurly-burly of coupés, pony-carts, and taxicabs,
each trying to pass the other. The conglomeration
of personalities effaces the identity alike of the
statesman and the artist, the savant and the cyprian.
No six-inch rules hedge the shade of the trees and
limit the glory of the grass. The ouvrier can bring
his brood and his basket and have his picnic where
he pleases. The pastry cook and his chére amie, the
coiffeur and his grisette can spoon by the lake-side
as long as the moonlight lasts, and longer if they
list, with never a gendarme to say them nay, or a
rude voice out of the depths hoarsely to declaim,
"allez!" The Bois de Boulogne is literally and
absolutely a playground, the playground of the people,
and this last Sunday of mine, not fewer than
half a million of Parisians were making it their own.
Half of these encircled the Longchamps racecourse.
The other half were shared by the boats
upon the lagoons and the bosky dells under the
summer sky and the cafés and the restaurants with
which the Bois abounds. Our party, having
exhausted the humors of the drive, repaired to Pré
Catalan. Aside from the "two old brides" who are
always in evidence on such occasions, there was a
veritable "young couple," exceedingly pretty to
look at, and delightfully in love! That sort of thing
is not so uncommon in Paris as cynics affect to
think.
If it be true, as the witty Frenchman observes,
that "gambling is the recreation of gentlemen and
the passion of fools," it is equally true that love is
a game where every player wins if he sticks to it
and is loyal to it. Just as credit is the foundation
of business is love both the asset and the trade-mark
of happiness. To see it is to believe it, and - though
a little cash in hand is needful to both - where either
is wanting, look out for sheriffs and scandals.
Pré Catalan, once a pasture for cows with a
pretty kiosk for the sale of milk, has latterly had
a tea-room big enough to seat a thousand, not counting
the groves which I have seen grow up about it
thickly dotted with booths and tables, where some
thousands more may regale themselves. That
Sunday it was never so glowing with animation and
color. As it makes one happy to see others happy
it makes one adore his own land to witness that
which makes other lands great.
I have not loved Paris as a Parisian, but as an
American; perhaps it is a stretch of words to say
I love Paris at all. I used to love to go there
and to behold the majesty of France. I have
always liked to mark the startling contrasts of light
and shade. I have always known what all the world
now knows, that beneath the gayety of the French
there burns a patriotic and consuming fire, a high
sense of public honor; a fine spirit of self-sacrifice
along with the sometimes too aggressive spirit of
freedom. In 1873 I saw them two blocks long and
three files deep upon the Rue St. Honore press up
to the Bank of France, old women and old men
with their little all tied in handkerchiefs and stockings
to take up the tribute required by Bismarck
to rid the soil of the detested German. They did
it. Alone they did it - the French people - the
hard-working, frugal, loyal commonalty of France
- without asking the loan of a sou from the world
outside.
Writing of that last Sunday in the Bois de Boulogne,
I find by recurring to the record that I said:
"There is a deal more of good than bad in every
Nation. I take off my hat to the French. But,
I have had my fling and I am quite ready to go
home. Even amid the gayety and the glare, the
splendor of color and light, the Hungarian band
wafting to the greenery and the stars the strains
of the delicious waltz, La Veuve Joyeuse her very
self - yea, many of her - tapping the time at many
adjacent tables, the song that fills my heart is
'Hame, Hame, Hame! - Hame to my ain countree.'
Yet, to come again, d'ye mind? I should be loath
to say good-by forever to the Bois de Boulogne.
I want to come back to Paris. I always want to
come back to Paris. One needs not to make an
apology or give a reason.
"We turn rather sadly away from Pré Catalan
and the Café Cascade. We glide adown the
flower-bordered path and out from the clusters of Chinese
lanterns, and leave the twinkling groves to their
music and merry-making. Yonder behind us, like
a sentinel, rises Mont Valerien. Before us glimmer
the lamps of uncountable coaches, as our own, veering
toward the city, the moon just topping the tower
of St. Jacques de la Boucherie and silver-plating
the bronze figures upon the Arch of Stars.
"We enter the Port Maillot. We turn into the
Avenue du Bois. Presently we shall sweep with
the rest through the Champs Elysées and on to the
ocean of the infinite, the heart of the mystery we
call Life, nowhere so condensed, so palpable, so
appealing. Roll the screen away! The shades of
Clovis and Genevieve may be seen hand-in-hand
with the shades of Martel and Pepin, taking the
round of the ghost-walk between St. Denis and
St. Germain, now le Balafré and again Navarre,
now the assassins of the Ligue and now the
assassins of the Terror, to keep them company. Nor
yet quite all on murder bent, some on pleasure; the
Knights and Ladies of the Cloth of Gold and the
hosts of the Renaissance: Cyrano de Bergerac and
François Villon leading the ragamuffin procession;
the jades of the Fronde, Longueville, Chevreuse
and fair-haired Anne of Austria; and Ninon, too,
and Manon; and the never-to-be-forgotten Four,
'one for all and all for one;' Cagliostro and Monte
Cristo; on the side, Rabelais taking notes and
laughing under his cowl. Catherine de Medici and
Robespierre slinking away, poor, guilty things, into
the pale twilight of the Dawn!
"Names! Names! Only names? I am not just
so sure about that. In any event, what a roll call!
We are such stuff as dreams are made of, and our
little life is rounded by a sleep; the selfsame sleep
which these, our living dead men and women in
steel armor and gauzy muslins, in silken hose and
sock and buskin, epaulettes and top boots, brocades
and buff facings, have endured so long and know
so well!
"If I should die in Paris I should expect them
- or some of them - to meet me at the barriers and
to say, 'Behold, the wickedness that was done in the
world, the cruelty and the wrong, dwelt in the body,
not in the soul of man, which freed from its foul
incasement, purified and made eternal by the hand
of death, shall see both the glory and the hand of
God!' "
It was not to be. I shall not die in Paris. I
shall never come again. Neither shall I make
apology for this long quotation by myself from
myself, for am I not inditing an autobiography, so
called?
HAVING disported ourselves in and about
Paris, next in order comes a journey to the
South of France - that is to the Riviera - by geography
the main circle of the Mediterranean Sea, by
proclamation Cannes, Nice, and Mentone, by actual
fact and count, Monte Carlo - even the swells
adopting a certain hypocrisy as due to virtue.
Whilst Monte Carlo is chiefly, I might say
exclusively, identified in the general mind with
gambling, and was indeed at the outset but a gambling
resort, it long ago outgrew the limits of the Casino,
becoming a Mecca of the world of fashion as well as
the world of sport. Half the ruling sovereigns of
Europe and all the leaders of European swelldom,
the more prosperous of the demi-mondaines and no
end of the merely rich of every land, congregate
there and thereabouts. At the top of the season the
show of opulence and impudence is bewildering.
The little principality of Monaco is hardly
bigger than the Cabbage Patch of the renowned Mrs.
Wiggs. It is, however, more happily situate.
Nestled under the heights of La Condamine and Tête
de Chien and looking across a sheltered bay upon
the wide and blue Mediterranean, it has better
protection against the winds of the North than Nice,
or Cannes, or Mentone. It is an appanage - in
point of fact the only estate - remaining to the once
powerful Grimaldi family.
In the early days of land-piracy Old Man
Grimaldi held his own with Old Man Hohenzollern
and Old Man Hapsburg. The Savoys and the
Bourbons were kith and kin. But in the long run
of Freebooting the Grimaldis did not keep up with
the procession. How they retained even this remnant
of inherited brigandage and self-appointed
royalty, I do not know. They are here under leave
of the Powers and the especial protection, strange
to say, of the French Republic.
Something over fifty years ago, being hard-up
for cash, the Grimaldi of the period fell under the
wiles of an ingenious Alsatian gambler, Guerlac
by name, who foresaw that Baden-Baden and
Hombourg were approaching their finish and that
the sports must look elsewhere for their living, the
idle rich for their sport. This tiny "enclave" in
French territory presented many advantages over
the German Dukedoms. It was an independent
sovereignty issuing its own coins and postage
stamps. It was in proud possession of a half-dozen
policemen which it called its "army." It was
paradisaic in beauty and climate. Its "ruler" was as
poor as Job's turkey, but by no means as proud as
Lucifer.
The bargain was struck. The gambler smote the
rock of Monte Carlo as with a wand of enchantment
and a stream of plenty burst forth. The
mountain-side responded to the touch. It chortled
in its glee and blossomed as the rose.
The region known as the Riviera comprises, as
I have said, the whole land-circle of the Mediterranean
Sea. But, as generally written and understood,
it stands for the shoreline between Marseilles
and Genoa. The two cities are connected by the
Corniche Road, built by the First Napoleon, who
learned the need of it when he made his Italian
campaign, and the modern railway, the distance
260 miles, two-thirds of the way through France,
the residue through Italy, and all of it surpassing
fine.
The climate is very like that of Southern Florida.
But as in Florida they have the "Nor'westers"
and the "Nor'easters," on the Riviera they have
the "mistral." In Europe there is no perfect winter
weather north of Spain, as in the United States
none north of Cuba.
I have often thought that Havana might be made
a dangerous rival of Monte Carlo under the one-man
power, exercising its despotism with benignant
intelligence and spending its income honestly upon
the development of both the city and the island.
The motley populace would probably be none the
worse for it. The Government could upon a liberal
tariff collect not less than thirty-five millions
of annual revenue. Twenty-five of these millions
would suffice for its own support. Ten millions a
year laid out upon harbors, roadways and internal
improvements in general would within ten years
make the Queen of the Antilles the garden spot and
playground of Christendom. They would build a
Casino to outshine even the architectural miracles
of Charles Garnier. Then would Havana put
Cairo out of business and give the Prince of
Monaco a run for his money.
With the opening of every Monte Carlo season
the newspapers used to tell of the colossal winnings
of purely imaginary players. Sometimes the
favored child of chance was a Russian, sometimes
an Englishman, sometimes an American. He was
usually a myth, of course. As Mrs. Prig observed
to Mrs. Camp, "there never was no sich person."
Charles Garnier, the Parisian architect, came and
built the Casino, next to the Library of Congress
at Washington and the Grand Opera House at
Paris the most beautiful building in the world, with
incomparable gardens and commanding esplanades
to set it off and display it. Around it palatial hotels
and private mansions and villas sprang into existence.
Within it a gold-making wheel of fortune
fabricated the wherewithal. Old Man Grimaldi in
his wildest dreams of land-piracy - even Old Man
Hohenzollern, or Old Man Hapsburg - never
conceived the like.
There is no poverty, no want, no taxes - not any
sign of dilapidation or squalor anywhere in the
principality of Monaco. Yet the "people," so called,
have been known to lapse into a state of discontent.
They sometimes "yearned for freedom." Too well
fed and cared for, too rid of dirt and debt, too
flourishing, they "riz." Prosperity grew monotonous.
They even had the nerve to demand a "Constitution."
The reigning Prince was what Yellowplush
would call "a scientific gent." His son and heir,
however, had not his head in the clouds, being in
point of fact of the earth earthly, and, of
consequence, more popular than his father. He came
down from the Castle on the hill to the marketplace
in the town and says he: "What do you galoots
want, anyhow?"
First, their "rights." Then a change in the
commander-in-chief of the army, which had grown from
six to sixteen. Finally, a Board of Aldermen and
a Common Council.
"Is that all?" says his Royal Highness. They
said it was. "Then," says he, "take it, mes enfants,
and bless you!"
So, all went well again. The toy sovereignty
began to rattle around in its own conceit, the
"people" regarded themselves, and wished to be
regarded, as a chartered Democracy. The little
gimcrack economic system experienced the joys of
reform. A "New Nationalism" was established in
the brewery down by the railway station and a
reciprocity treaty was negotiated between the Casino
and Vanity Fair, witnessing the introduction of
two roulette tables and an extra brazier for cigar
stumps.
But the Prince of Monaco stood on one point.
He would have no Committee on Credentials.
He told me once that he had heard of Tom Reed
and Champ Clark and Uncle Joe Cannon, but that
be preferred Uncle Joe. He would, and he did,
name his own committees both in the Board of
Aldermen and the Common Council. Thus, for the
time being, "insurgency" was quelled. And once
more serenely sat the Castle on the hill hard by the
Cathedral. Calmly again flowed the waters in
the harbor. More and more the autos honked outside
the Casino. Within "the little ball ever goes
merrily round," and according to the croupiers and
the society reporters "the gentleman wins and the
poor gambler loses!"
To illustrate, I recall when on a certain season
the lucky sport of print and fancy was an Englishman.
In one of those farragos of stupidity and
inaccuracy which are syndicated and sent from
abroad to America, I found the following piece
with the stuff and nonsense habitually worked off
on the American press as "foreign correspondence":
"Now and then the newspapers report authentic
instances of large sums having been won at the
gaming tables at Monte Carlo. One of the most
fortunate players at Monte Carlo for a long time
past has been a Mr. Darnbrough, an Englishman,
whose remarkable run of luck had furnished the
morsels of gossip in the capitals of Continental
Europe recently.
"If reports are true, he left the place with the
snug sum of more than 1,000,000 francs to the good
as the result of a month's play. But this, I hear,
did not represent all of Mr. Darnbrough's
winnings. The story goes that on the opening day of
his play he staked 24,000 francs, winning all along
the line. Emboldened by his success, he continued
playing, winning again and again with marvelous
luck. At one period, it is said, his credit balance
amounted to no less than 1,850,000 francs; but from
that moment Dame Fortune ceased to smile upon
him. He lost steadily from 200,000 to 300,000
francs a day, until, recognizing that luck had turned
against him, he had sufficient strength of will to
turn his back on the tables and strike for home with
the very substantial winnings that still remained.
"On another occasion a well-known London
stock broker walked off with little short of £40,000.
This remarkable performance occasioned no small
amount of excitement in the gambling rooms, as
such an unusual incident does invariably.
"Bent on making a 'plunge,' he went from one
table to another, placing the maximum stake on
the same number. Strange to relate, at each table
the same number won, and it was his number.
Recognizing that this perhaps might be his lucky
day, the player wended his way to the
trente-et-quarante room and put the maximum on three of
the tables there. To his amazement, he discovered
that there also he had been so fortunate as to select
the winning number.
"The head croupier confided to a friend of the
writer who happened to be present that that day
had been the worst in the history of the Monaco
bank for years. He it was also who mentioned the
amount won by the fortunate Londoner, as given
above."
It is prudent of the space-writers to ascribe such
"information" as this to "the head croupier,"
because it is precisely the like that such an authority
would give out. People upon the spot know that
nothing of the kind happened, and that no person
of that name had appeared upon the scene. The
story on the face of it bears to the knowing its own
refutation, being absurd in every detail. As if
conscious of this, the author proceeds to quality it in
the following:
"It is a well-known fact that one of the most
successful players at the Monte Carlo tables was
Wells, who as the once popular music-hall song
put it, 'broke the bank' there. He was at the zenith
of his fame, about twenty years ago, when his
escapades - and winnings - were talked about widely
and envied in European sporting circles and among
the demi-monde.
"In ten days, it was said, he made upward of
£35,000 clear winnings at the tables after starting
with the modest capital of £400. It must not be
forgotten, however, that at his trial later Wells
denied this, stating that all he had made was £7,000
at four consecutive sittings. He made the statement
that, even so, he had been a loser in the end.
"The reader may take his choice of the two
statements, but among frequenters of the rooms at
Monte Carlo it is generally considered impossible
to amass large winnings without risking large
stakes. Even then the chances are 1,000 to 1 in
favor of the bank. Yet occasionally there are
winnings running into four or five figures, and to
human beings the possibility of chance constitutes
an irresistible fascination.
"Only a few years ago a young American was
credited with having risen from the tables $75,000
richer than when first he had sat down. It was his
first visit to Monte Carlo and he had not come with
any system to break the bank or with any 'get-rich-quick'
idea. For the novelty of the thing he risked
about $4,000, and lost it all in one fell swoop
without turning a hair. Then he 'plunged' with double
that amount, but the best part of that, too, went
the same way. Nothing daunted, he next ventured
$10,000. This time fickle fortune favored him. He
played on with growing confidence and when his
winnings amounted to the respectable sum of
$75,000 he had the good sense to quit and to leave the
place despite the temptation to continue."
The "man who broke the bank at Monte Carlo,"
and gave occasion for the song, was not named
"Wells" and he was not an Englishman. He was
an American. I knew him well and soon after the
event had from his own lips the whole story.
He came to Monte Carlo with a good deal of
money won at draw-poker in a club at Paris and
went away richer by some 100,000 francs (about
$20,000) than he came.
The catch-line of the song is misleading. There
is no such thing as "breaking the bank at Monte
Carlo." This particular player won so fast upon
two or three "spins" that the table at which he
played had to suspend until it could be replenished
by another "bank," perhaps ten minutes in point
of time. There used to be some twenty tables.
Just how one man could play at more than one of
them at one time a "foreign correspondent," but
only a "foreign correspondent," might explain to
the satisfaction of the horse-marines.
I very much doubt whether any player ever won
more than 100,000 francs at a single sitting. To
do even that he must plunge like a ship in a hurricane.
There is, of course, a saving limit set by the
Casino Company upon the play. It is to the
interest of the Casino to cultivate the idea, and the
letter writers are willing tools. Not only at Monte
Carlo, but everywhere, in dearth of news, gambling
stories come cheap and easy. And the cheaper the
story the bigger the play. "The Jedge raised him
two thousand dollars. The Colonel raised him back
ten thousand more. Both of 'em stood pat. The
Jedge bet him a hundred thousand. The Colonel
called. 'What you got?' says he. 'Ace high,' says
the Jedge; 'what you got?' 'Pair o' deuces,' says
the Colonel."
Assuredly the "play" in the Casino is entirely
fair. It could hardly be otherwise with such crowds
of players at the tables, often covering the whole
"layout." But there is no such thing as "honest
gambling." The "house" must have "the best of
it." A famous American gambler, when I had
referred to one of his guild, lately deceased, as "an
honest gambler," said to me: "What do you mean
by 'an honest gambler'?"
"A gambler who will not take unfair advantage!"
I answered.
"Well," said he, "the gambler must have his
advantage, because gambling is his livelihood. He
must fit himself for its profitable pursuit by learning
all the tricks of trade like other artists and
artificers. With him it is win or starve."
Among the variegate crowds that thronged the
highways and byways of Monte Carlo in those days
there was no single figure more observed and striking
than that of Leopold the Second, King of the
Belgians. He had a bungalow overlooking the sea
where he lived three months of the year like a country
gentleman. Although I have made it a rule to
avoid courts and courtiers, an event brought me
into acquaintance with this best abused man in
Europe, enabling me to form my own estimate of his
very interesting personality.
He was not at all what his enemies represented
him to be, a sot, a gambler and a roué. In appearance
a benignant burgomaster, tall and stalwart;
in manner and voice very gentle, he should be
described as first of all a man of business. His
weakness was rather for money than women. Speaking
of the most famous of the Parisian dancers with
whom his name had been scandalously associated,
he told me that he had never met her but once in
his life, and that after the newspaper gossips had
been busy for years with their alleged love affair.
"I kissed her hand," he related, "and bade her
adieu, saying, 'Ah, ma'mselle, you and I have
indeed reason to congratulate ourselves.' "
It was the Congo business that lay at the bottom
of the abuse of Leopold. Henry Stanley had put
him up to this. It turned out a gold mine, and then
two streams of defamation were let loose; one from
the covetous commercial standpoint and the other
from the humanitarian. Between them, seeking to
drive him out, they depicted him as a monster of
cruelty and depravity.
A King must be an anchorite to escape calumny,
and Leopold was not an anchorite. I asked him
why I never saw him in the Casino. "Play," he
answered, "does not interest me. Besides, I do not
enjoy being talked about. Nor do I think the
game they play there quite fair."
"In what way do you consider it unfair, your
Majesty?" I asked.
"In the zero," he replied. "At the Brussels
Casino I do not allow them to have a zero. Come
and see me and I will show you a perfectly equal
chance for your money, to win or lose."
Years after I was in Brussels. Leopold had
gone to his account and his nephew, Albert, had
come to the throne. There was not a roulette table
in the Casino, but there was one conveniently
adjacent thereto, managed by a clique of New York
gamblers, which had both a single "and a double
O," and, as appeared when the municipality made
a descent upon the place, was ingeniously wired
to throw the ball wherever the presiding coupier
wanted it to go.
I do not believe, however, that Leopold was a
party to this, or could have had any knowledge of
it. He was a skillful, not a dishonest, business man,
who showed his foresight when he listened to Stanley
and took him under his wing. If the Congo
had turned out worthless nobody would ever have
heard of the delinquencies of the King of the
Belgians.
I HAVE said that I knew the widow of Walewska,
the natural son of Napoleon Bonaparte
by the Polish countess he picked up in Warsaw,
who followed him to Paris; and thereby hangs
a tale which may not be without interest.
In each of our many sojourns in Paris my wife
and I had taken an apartment, living the while in
the restaurants, at first the cheaper, like the Café
de Progress and the Duval places; then the Boeuf
à la Mode, the Café Voisin and the Café Anglais,
with Champoux's, in the Place de la Bourse, for a
regular luncheon resort.
At length, the children something more than
half grown, I said: "We have never tried a Paris
pension."
So with a half dozen recommended addresses we
set out on a house hunt. We had not gone far
when our search was rewarded by a veritable find.
This was on the Avenue de Courcelles, not far from
the Parc Monceau; newly furnished; reasonable
charges; the lady manager a beautiful well-mannered
woman, half Scotch and half French.
We moved in. When dinner was called the
boarders assembled in the very elegant drawing-room.
Madame presented us to Baron - . Then
followed introductions to Madame la Duchesse and
Madame la Princesse and Madame la Comtesse.
Then the folding doors opened and dinner was
announced.
The baron sat at the center of the table. The
meal consisted of eight or ten courses, served as if
at a private house, and of surpassing quality. During
the three months that we remained there was
no evidence of a boarding house. It appeared an
aristocratic family into which we had been hospitably
admitted. The baron was a delightful person.
Madame la Duchesse was the mother of Madame
la Princesse, and both were charming. The
Comtesse, the Napoleonic widow, was at first a little
formal, but she came round after we had got
acquainted, and, when we took our departure, it
was like leaving a veritable domestic circle.
Years after we had the sequel. The baron, a
poor young nobleman, had come into a little money.
He thought to make it breed. He had an equally
poor Scotch cousin, who undertook to play hostess.
Both the Duchess and the Countess were his kinswomen.
How could such a ménage last?
He lost his all. What became of our fellow-lodgers
I never learned, but the venture coming to
naught, the last I heard of the beautiful high-bred
lady manager, she was serving as a stewardess on
an ocean liner. Nothing, however, could exceed the
luxury, the felicity and the good company of those
memorable three months chez l'Avenue de Courcelles,
Parc Monceau.
We never tried a pension again. We chose a delightful
hotel in the Rue de Castiglione off the Rue
de Rivoli, and remained there as fixtures until we
were reckoned the oldest inhabitants. But we never
deserted the dear old Boeuf à la Mode, which we
lived to see one of the most flourishing and popular
places in Paris.
In the old days there was a little hotel on the Rue
Dannou, midway between the Rue de la Paix and
what later along became the Avenue de l'Opéra,
called the Hôtel d'Orient. It was conducted by a
certain Madame Hougenin, whose family had held
the lease for more than a hundred years, and was
typical of what the comfort-seeking visitor, somewhat
initiate, might find before the modern tourist
onrush overflowed all bounds and effaced the
ancient landmarks - or should I say townmarks? -
making a resort instead of a home of the gay French
capital. The d'Orient was delightfully comfortable
and fabulously cheap.
The wayfarer entered a darksome passage that
led to an inner court. There were on the four sides
of this seven or eight stories pierced by many
windows. There was never a lift, or what we Americans
call an elevator. If you wanted to go up you
walked up; and after dark your single illuminant
was candlelight. The service could hardly be
recommended, but cleanliness herself could find no
fault with the beds and bedding; nor any queer
people about; changeless; as still and stationary as
a nook in the Rockies.
A young girl might dwell there year in and year
out in perfect safety - many young girls did so -
madame a kind of duenna. The food - for it was a
pension - was all a gourmet could desire. And the
wine!
I was lunching with an old Parisian friend.
"What do you think of this vintage?" says he.
"Very good," I answered. "Come and dine with
me to-morrow and I will give you the mate to it."
"What - at the d'Orient?"
"Yes, at the d'Orient."
"Preposterous!"
Nevertheless, he came. When the wine was
poured out he took a sip.
"By - !" he exclaimed. "That is good, isn't
it? I wonder where they got it? And how?"
During the week after we had it every day. Then
no more. The headwaiter, with many apologies,
explained that he had found those few bottles in
a forgotten bin, where they had lain for years, and
he begged a thousand pardons of monsieur, but we
had drunk them all - rien du plus - no more. I
might add that precisely the same thing happened
to me at the Hôtel Continental. Indeed, it is not
uncommon with the French caravansaries to keep a
little extra good wine in stock for those who can
distinguish between an ordinaire and a supérieur,
and are willing to pay the price.
"See Naples and die," say the Italians. "See
Paris and live," say the French. Old friends, who
have been over and back, have been of late telling
me that Paris, having woefully suffered, is nowise
the Paris it was, and as the provisional offspring
of four years of desolating war I can well believe
them. But a year or two of peace, and the city will
rise again, as after the Franco-Prussian War and
the Commune, which laid upon it a sufficiently
blighting hand. In spite of fickle fortune and its
many ups and downs it is, and will ever remain,
"Paris, the Changeless."
I never saw the town so much itself as just before
the beginning of the world war. I took my
departure in the early summer of that fateful year
and left all things booming - not a sign or trace
that there had ever been aught but boundless happiness
and prosperity. It is hard, the saying has it,
to keep a squirrel on the ground, and surely Paris
is the squirrel among cities. The season just ended
had been, everybody declared, uncommonly successful
from the standpoints alike of the hotels and
cafés, the shop folk and their patrons, not to
mention the purely pleasure-seeking throng. People
seemed loaded with money and giddy to spend it.
The headwaiter at Voisin's told me this: "Mr.
Barnes, of New York, ordered a dinner, carte
blanche, for twelve.
" 'Now,' says he, 'garcon, have everything bang
up, and here's seventy-five francs for a starter.'
"The dinner was bang up. Everybody hilarious.
Mr. Barnes immensely pleased. When he came to
pay his bill, which was a corker, he made no
objection.
" 'Garcon,' says he, 'if I ask you a question will
you tell me the truth?'
" 'Oui, monsieur; certainement.'
"Well, how much was the largest tip you ever
received?"
"Seventy-five francs, monsieur."
" 'Very well; here are 100 francs.'
"Then, after a pause for the waiter to digest his
joy and express a proper sense of gratitude and
wonder, Mr. Barnes came to time with: 'Do you
remember who was the idiot that paid you the
seventy-five francs?'
" 'Oh, yes, monsieur. It was you.' "
It has occurred to me that of late years - I mean
the years immediately before 1914 - Paris has been
rather more bent upon adapting itself to human
and moral as well as scientific progress. There has
certainly been less debauchery visible to the naked
eye. I was assured that the patronage had so fallen
away from the Moulin Rouge that they were
planning to turn it into a decent theater. Nor
during my sojourn did anybody in my hearing so
much as mention the Dead Rat. I doubt whether
it is still in existence.
The last time I was in Maxim's - quite a dozen
years ago now - a young woman sat next to me
whose story could be read in her face. She was a
pretty thing not five and twenty, still blooming,
with iron-gray hair. It had turned in a night, I
was told. She had recently come from Baltimore
and knew no more what she was doing or whither
she was drifting than a baby. The old, old story:
a comfortable home and a good husband; even a
child or two; a scoundrel, a scandal, an elopement,
and the inevitable desertion. Left without a dollar
in the streets of Paris. She was under convoy of
a noted procuress.
"A duke or the morgue," she whimpered, "in six
months."
Three months sufficed. They dragged all that
remained of her out of the Seine, and then the whole
of the pitiful disgrace and tragedy came out.
If ever I indite a volume to be entitled Adventures
in Paris it will contain not a line to feed any
prurient fancy, but will embrace the record of many
little journeys between the Coiffeur and the Marché
des Fleurs, with maybe an excursion among the
cemeteries and the restaurants.
Each city is as one makes it for himself. Paris
has contributed greatly to my appreciation, and
perhaps my knowledge, of history and literature
and art and life. I have seen it in all its aspects;
under the empire, when the Duc de Morny was
king of the Bourse and Mexico was to make every
Frenchman rich; after the commune and the siege,
when the Hôtel de Ville was in ruins, the palace of
the Tuileries still aflame, the column gone from
the Place Vendôme, and everything a blight and
waste; and I have marked it rise from its ashes,
grandly, proudly, and like a queen come to her own
again, resume its primacy as the only complete
metropolis in all the universe.
There is no denying it. No city can approach
Paris in structural unity and regality, in things
brilliant and beautiful, in buoyancy, variety, charm
and creature comfort. Drunkenness, of the kind
familiar to London and New York, is invisible to
Paris. The brandy and absinthe habit has been
greatly exaggerated. In truth, everywhere in
Europe the use of intoxicants is on the decline. They
are, for the first time in France, stimulated partly
by the alarming adulteration of French wines,
rigorously applying and enforcing the pure-food laws.
As a consequence, there is a palpable and decided
improvement of the vintage of the Garonne and the
Champagne country. One may get a good glass of
wine now without impoverishing himself. As men
drink wine, and as the wine is pure, they fall away
from stronger drink. I have always considered,
with Jefferson, the brewery in America an excellent
temperance society. That which works otherwise
is the dive which too often the brewery fathers.
They are drinking more beer in France - even making
a fairly good beer. And then -
But gracious, this is getting upon things controversial,
and if there is anything in this world that
I do hybominate, it is controversy!
Few of the wondrous changes which the Age of
Miracles has wrought in my day and generation
exceeded those of ocean travel. The modern liner
is but a moving palace. Between the ports of the
Old World and the ports of the new the transit is
so uneventful as to grow monotonous. There are
no more adventures on the high seas. The ocean
is a thoroughfare, the crossing a ferry. My experience
forty years ago upon one of the ancient tubs
which have been supplanted by these liners would
make queer reading to the latter-day tourist,
taking, let us say, any one of the steamers of any one
of the leading transatlantic companies. The difference
in the appointments of the William Penn of
1865 and the star boats of 1914 is indescribable. It
seems a fairy tale to think of a palm garden where
the ladies dress for dinner, a Hungarian band which
plays for them whilst they dine, and a sky parlor
where they go after dinner for their coffee and
what not; a tea-room for the five-o'clockers; and
except in excessive weather scarcely any motion at
all. It is this palm garden which most appeals to
a certain lady of my very intimate acquaintance
who had made many crossings and never gone to
her meals - sick from shore to shore - until the gods
ordained for her a watery, winery, flowery paradise
- where the billows ceased from troubling and a
woman could appear at her best. Since then she
has sailed many times, lodged à la Waldorf-Astoria
to eat her victuals and sip her wine with perfect
contentment. Coming ashore from our last crossing
a friend found her in the Red Room of that
hostel just as she had been sitting the evening
before on shipboard.
"Seems hardly any motion at all," she said, looking
about her and fancying herself still at sea, as
well she might.
WHAT may be called the Grover Cleveland
period of American politics began with the
election of that extraordinary person - another man
of destiny - to the governorship of New York.
Nominated, as it were, by chance, he carried the
State by an unprecedented majority. That was
not because of his popularity, but that an incredible
number of Republican voters refused to support
their party ticket and stayed away from the
polls. The Blaine-Conkling feud, inflamed by the
murder of Garfield, had rent the party of Lincoln
and Grant asunder. Arthur, a Conkling leader,
had succeeded to the presidency.
If any human agency could have sealed the
breach he might have done it. No man, however,
can achieve the impossible. The case was hopeless.
Arthur was a man of surpassing sweetness and
grace. As handsome as Pierce, as affable as
McKinley, he was a more experienced and dextrous
politician than either. He had been put on the
ticket with Garfield to placate Conkling. All sorts
of stories to his discredit were told during the
ensuing campaign. The Democrats made him out a
tricky and typical "New York politician." In
point of fact he was a many-sided, accomplished
man who had a taking way of adjusting all
conditions and adapting himself to all companies.
With a sister as charming and tactful as he for
head of his domestic fabric, the White House
bloomed again. He possessed the knack of
surrounding himself with all sorts of agreeable people.
Frederick Frelinghuysen was Secretary of State
and Robert Lincoln, continued from the Garfield
Cabinet, Secretary of War. Then there were three
irresistibles: Walter Gresham, Frank Hatton and
"Ben" Brewster. His home contingent - "Clint"
Wheeler, "Steve" French, and "Jake" Hess - pictured
as "ward heelers" - were, in reality, efficient
and all-around, companionable men, capable and
loyal.
I was sent by the Associated Press to Washington
on a fool's errand - that is, to get an act of
Congress extending copyright to the news of the
association - and, remaining the entire
"Marse Henry"
AN AUTOBIOGRAPHYHENRY WATTERSON
NEW YORK
GEORGE H. DORAN COMPANY
BY GEORGE H. DORAN COMPANY
COPYRIGHT, 1919, BY THE CURTIS PUBLISHING COMPANY
PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Page vCONTENTS
CHARLES EAMES AND CHARLES SUMNER - SCHURZ AND
LAMAR - I GO TO CONGRESS - A HEROIC
KENTUCKIAN - STEPHEN FOSTER AND HIS SONGS -
MUSIC AND THEODORE THOMAS . . . . . 15
HENRY ADAMS AND THE ADAMS FAMILY - JOHN HAY
AND FRANK MASON - THE THREE MOUSQUETAIRES
OF CULTURE - PARIS - "THE FRENCHMAN" - THE
SOUTH OF FRANCE . . . . . 33
STILL THE GAY CAPITAL OF FRANCE - ITS ENVIRONS
- WALEWSKA AND DE MORNY - THACKERY IN
PARIS - A PENSION ADVENTURE . . . . . 54
MONTE CARLO - THE EUROPEAN SHRINE OF SPORT
AND FASHION - APOCRYPHAL GAMBLING STORIES
- LEOPOLD, KING OF THE BELGIANS - AN ABLE
AND PICTURESEQUE MAN OF BUSINESS . . . . . 73
A PARISIAN PENSION - THE WIDOW OF WALEWSKA -
NAPOLEON'S DAUGHTER-IN-LAW - THE CHANGELESS
- A MORAL AND ORDERLY CITY . . . . . 90
Page vi
THE GROVER CLEVELAND PERIOD - PRESIDENT ARTHUR
AND MR. BLAINE - JOHN CHAMBERLIN - THE
DECREES OF DESTINY . . . . . 102
MR. CLEVELAND IN THE WHITE HOUSE - MR. BAYARD
IN THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE - QUEER APPOINTMENTS
TO OFFICE - THE ONE-PARTY POWER - THE
END OF NORTH AND SOUTH SECTIONALISM . . . . . 114
THE REAL GROVER CLEVELAND - TWO CLEVELANDS
BEFORE AND AFTER MARRIAGE - A CORRESPONDENCE
AND A BREAK OF PERSONAL RELATIONS . . . . . 132
STEPHEN FOSTER, THE SONG WRITER - A FRIEND
COMES TO THE RESCUE OF HIS ORIGINALITY -
"MY OLD KENTUCKY HOME" AND THE "OLD
FOLKS AT HOME" - GENERAL SHERMAN AND
"MARCHING THROUGH GEORGIA" . . . . . 146
THEODORE ROOSEVELT - HIS PROBLEMATIC CHARACTER
- HE OFFERS ME AN APPOINTMENT - HIS BONHOMIE
AND CHIVALRY - PROUD OF HIS REBEL KIN . . . . . 158
THE ACTOR AND THE JOURNALIST - THE NEWSPAPER
AND THE STATE - JOSEPH JEFFERSON - HIS PERSONAL
AND ARTISTIC CAREER - MODEST CHARACTER
AND RELIGIOUS BELIEF . . . . . 170
Page vii
THE WRITING OF MEMOIRS - SOME CHARACTERISTICS
OF CARL SCHURZ - SAM BOWLES - HORACE WHITE
AND THE MUGWUMPS . . . . . 187
EVERY TRADE HAS ITS TRICKS - I PLAY ONE ON
WILLIAM McKINLEY - FAR AWAY PARTY POLITICS
AND POLITICAL ISSUES . . . . . 198
A LIBEL ON MR. CLEVELAND - HIS FONDNESS FOR
CARDS - SOME POKER STORIES - THE "SENATE
GAME" - TOM OCHILTREE, SENATOR ALLISON AND
GENERAL SCHENCK . . . . . 209
THE PROFESSION OF JOURNALISM - NEWSPAPERS AND
EDITORS IN AMERICA - BENNETT, GREELEY AND
RAYMOND - FORNEY AND DANA - THE EDUCATION
OF A JOURNALIST . . . . . 224
BULLIES AND BRAGGARTS - SOME KENTUCKY ILLUSTRATIONS -
THE OLD GALT HOUSE - THE THROCKMORTONS -
A FAMOUS SURGEON - "OLD HELL'S
DELIGHT" . . . . . 240
ABOUT POLITICAL CONVENTIONS, STATE AND NATIONAL
- "OLD BEN BUTLER" - HIS APPEARANCE AS A
TROUBLE-MAKER IN THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL
CONVENTION OF 1892 - TARIFA AND THE TARIFF -
SPAIN AS A FRIGHTFUL EXAMPLE . . . . . 249
Page viii
THE MAKERS OF THE REPUBLIC - LINCOLN, JEFFERSON,
CLAY AND WEBSTER - THE PROPOSED LEAGUE OF
NATIONS - THE WILSONIAN INCERTITUDE - THE
"NEW FREEDOM" . . . . . 263
THE AGE OF MIRACLES - A STORY OF FRANKLIN
PIERCE - SIMON SUGGS AND BILLY SUNDAY -
JEFFERSON DAVIS AND AARON BURR - CERTAIN
CONSTITUTIONAL SHORTCOMINGS . . . . . 280
A WAR EPISODE - I MEET MY FATE - I MARRY AND
MAKE A HOME - THE UPS AND DOWNS OF LIFE
LEAD TO A HAPPY OLD AGE . . . . . 296
Page ixILLUSTRATIONS
Page 15"MARSE
HENRY"
CHAPTER THE THIRTEENTH
CHARLES EAMES AND CHARLES SUMNER - SCHURZ
AND LAMAR - I GO TO CONGRESS - A HEROIC
KENTUCKIAN - STEPHEN FOSTER AND HIS SONGS
- MUSIC AND THEODORE THOMAS
I
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21II
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26III
Page 27
Page 28IV
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31V
Page 32
Page 33CHAPTER THE FOURTEENTH
HENRY ADAMS AND THE ADAMS FAMILY - JOHN HAY
AND FRANK MASON - THE THREE MOUSQUTAIRES
OF CULTURE - PARIS - "THE FRENCHMAN"
- THE SOUTH OF FRANCE
I
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Page 37
Page 38
Page 39II
Page 40
Page 41
Page 42
Page 43III
Page 44
Page 45
Page 46
Page 47
Page 48
Page 49
Page 50
Page 51
Page 52
Page 53
Page 54CHAPTER THE FIFTEENTH
STILL THE GAY CAPITAL OF FRANCE - ITS ENVIRONS
- WALEWSKA AND DE MORNY - THACKERAY IN
PARIS - A "PENSION" ADVENTURE.
I
Page 55
Page 56II
Page 57
Page 58
Page 59
Page 60III
Page 61
Page 62
Page 63IV
Page 64
I
mind me of a time that's gone,
When
here I'd sit, as now I'm sitting
In
this same place - but not alone -
A
fair young form was nestled near me,
A
dear, dear face looked fondly up,
Page 65
And
sweetly spoke and smiled to hear me,
There's
no one now to share my cup."
V
Page 66
Page 67
Page 68
Page 69VI
Page 70
Page 71
Page 72
Page 73CHAPTER THE SIXTEENTH
MONTE CARLO - THE EUROPEAN SHRINE OF SPORT
AND FASHION - APOCHRYPHAL GAMBLING
STORIES - LEOPOLD, KING OF THE BELGIANS - AN
ABLE AND PICTURESQUE MAN OF BUSINESS
I
Page 74
Page 75II
Page 76
Page 77III
Page 78
Page 79
Page 80IV
Page 81
Page 82
Page 83
Page 84V
Page 85
Page 86
Page 87
Page 88
Page 89
Page 90CHAPTER THE SEVENTEENTH
A PARISIAN "PENSION" - THE WIDOW OF WALEWSKA,
NAPOLEON'S DAUGHTER-IN-LAW - THE
CHANGELESS - A MORAL AND ORDERLY CITY
I
Page 91
Page 92
Page 93II
Page 94
Page 95III
Page 96
Page 97IV
Page 98V
Page 99
Page 100
Page 101
Page 102CHAPTER THE EIGHTEENTH
THE GROVER CLEVELAND PERIOD - PRESIDENT
ARTHUR AND MR. BLAINE - JOHN CHAMBERLAIN
- THE DECREES OF DESTINY
I
Page 103
Page 104