parce que vous craindrez que le mouvement de cette grande machine ne
fasse sur vous l'effet de Gulliver, qui, lorsqu'il déplaçait sa jambe,
écrasait les Lilliputiens. Exhortez-vous, devancez le temps, agrandissez
votre imagination, regardez de loin, et vous verrez que ces grands
personnages que vous croyez violents, cruels, que sais-je? ne sont que
des politiques. Ils se connaissent, se jugent mieux que vous, et, quand
ils sont réellement habiles, ils savent se rendre maîtres de leurs
passions car ils vont jusqu'à en calculer les effets.' Even in his
carriage at Waterloo was found a French translation of _The Prince_
profusely annotated.

[Sidenote: The Defence.]

But from the first the defence was neither idle nor weak. The assault
was on the morals of the man: the fortress held for the ideas of the
thinker. He does not treat of morals, therefore he is immoral, cried the
plaintiff. Has he spoken truth or falsehood? Is his word the truth and
will his truth prevail? was the rejoinder. In Germany and Italy
especially and in France and England in less degree, philosophers and
critics have argued and written without stint and without cease. As
history has grown wider and more scientific so has the preponderance of
opinion leaned to the Florentine's favour.

It would be impossible to recapitulate the arguments or even to indicate
the varying points of view. And indeed the main hindrance in forming a
just idea of _The Prince_ is the constant treatment of a single side of
the book and the preconceived intent of the critic. Bacon has already
been mentioned. Among later names are Hobbes, Spinoza, Leibnitz. Herder
gives qualified approval, while Fichte frankly throws down the glove as
_The Prince's_ champion. 'Da man weiss dass politische Machtfragen nie,