real estimation; but men of letters, properly so called, were considered
by him merely as a sprig in his Imperial crown.

The marriage of the Emperor with an Archduchess of Austria had set all
the Court poets to work, and in this contest of praise and flattery it
must be confessed that the false gods were vanquished by the true God;
for, in spite of their fulsome verses, not one of the disciples of Apollo
could exceed the extravagance of the Bishops in their pastoral letters.
At a time when so many were striving to force themselves into notice
there still existed a feeling of esteem in the public mind for men of
superior talent who remained independent amidst the general corruption;
such was M. Lemercier, such was M. de Chateaubriand. I was in Paris in
the spring of 1811, at the period of Chenier's death, when the numerous
friends whom Chateaubriand possessed in the second class of the Institute
looked to him as the successor of Chenier. This was more than a mere
literary question, not only on account of the high literary reputation
M. de Chateaubriand already possessed, but of the recollection of his
noble conduct at the period of Duc d'Enghien's death, which was yet fresh
in the memory of every one; and, besides, no person could be ignorant of
the immeasurable difference of opinion between Chenier and M. de
Chateaubriand.

M. de Chateaubriand obtained a great majority of votes, and was elected a
Member of the Institute. This opened a wide field for conjecture in
Paris. Every one was anxious to see how the author of the Genie du
Christianisme, the faithful defender of the Bourbons, would bend his
eloquence to pronounce the eulogium of a regicide. The time for the
admission of the new Member of the Institute arrived, but in his
discourse, copies of which were circulated in Paris, he had ventured to
allude to the death of Louis XVI., and to raise his voice against the