the United States; and even his person is more English than French. The
hatred, of which M. de Lafayette is the object, has never embittered his
temper; and his gentleness of soul is complete: at the same time nothing
has ever modified his opinions; and his confidence in the triumph of
liberty, is the same as that of a pious man in a future life. These
sentiments, so contrary to the selfish calculations of most of the men who
have acted a part in France, may appear pitiable in the eyes of some
persons--"it is so silly" they think, "to prefer one's country to one's
self; not to change one's party when that party is worsted; in short, to
consider mankind, not as cards with which to play a winning game, but as
the sacred objects of unlimited sacrifices." If this is to form the charge
of silliness, would that it were but once merited by our men of talents!

"It is a singular phenomenon, that such a character as that of M. de
Lafayette, should have appeared in the foremost rank of the French
_noblesse_; but he can neither be censured nor exculpated with
impartiality, without being acknowledged to be such as I have described
him. It then becomes easy to understand the different contrasts which
naturally arose between his disposition and situation. Supporting monarchy
more from duty than attachment, he drew involuntarily towards the
principles of the democrats, whom he was obliged to resist; and a certain
kindness for the advocates of the republican form, was perceptible in him,
although his reflection forbade the admission of their system into France.
Since the departure of M. de Lafayette for America, now forty years ago, we
cannot quote a single action or a single word of his, which was not direct
and consistent. Personal interest never blended itself in the least with
his public conduct: success would have displayed such sentiments to
advantage; but they claim the attention of the historian in spite of
circumstances, and in spite of faults, which may serve as a handle to his
opponents."