midst of the speech on which his fate depends, catches sight of his old
mother's face and forbears to clear himself of calumny at the expense of
his wretched elder brother. The situation may not bear close analysis,
but who wishes to analyze? Or who, indeed, wishes to indulge in further
comment after the scene has risen to his mind?

_The Nabob_ was followed by _Kings in Exile_; then came _Numa Roumestan_
and _The Evangelist_; then, on the eve of Daudet's breakdown, _Sapho_;
and the greatest of his humorous masterpieces, _Tartarin in the Alps_.
It is not yet certain what rank is to be given to these books. Perhaps
the adventures of the mountain-climbing hero of the Midi, combined
with his previous exploits as a slayer of lions--his experiences as a
colonist in _Port-Tarascon_ need scarcely be considered--will prove, in
the lapse of years, to be the most solid foundation of that fame which
even envious Time will hardly begrudge Daudet. As for _Kings in Exile_,
it is difficult to see how even the art with which the tragedy of Queen
Frederique's life is unfolded or the growing power of characterization
displayed in her, in the loyal Merault, in the facile, decadent
Christian, can make up for the lack of broadly human appeal in the
general subject-matter of a book which was so sympathetically written
as to appeal alike to Legitimists and to Republicans. Good as _Kings
in Exile_ is, it is not so effective a book as _The Nabob_, nor such
a unique and marvellous work of art as _Numa Roumestan_, due allowance
being made for the intrusion of sentimentality into the latter. Daudet
thought _Numa_ the "least incomplete" of his works; it is certainly
inclusive enough, since some critics are struck by the tragic relations
subsisting between the virtuous discreet Northern wife and the peccable,
expansive Southern husband, while others see in the latter the hero of
a comedy of manners almost worthy of Moliere. If _Numa_ represents the
highest achievement of Daudet in dramatic fiction or else in the art