to him, for having been the first who knew how to assume it among people of equality. But like many other advocates of equality, he loved it among his superiors, and practised it less among his equals. He treated Piron with hauteur and disdain. Piron, who had the gift of repartee,* availed himself of it to defend himself; he even knew how to put the laugh on his side, which made Voltaire avoid meeting him ever afterwards. But the recollection of the little triumphs which he gained over Voltaire, induced him to make a bad use of his superiority. It is thus that, after the failure of his Ferdinand Cortez, the comedians urged him to make corrections, and citing to him the example of Voltaire, who corrected and even altered sometimes entire acts: "Parbleu, sirs, I have no doubt of it," says Piron, "he works in plaster; I cast in bronze."

In addition to this rivalry with Voltaire, we may add the difference of parties. Voltaire was at the head of the Encyclopedist party; Piron detested the Encyclopedists. Piron belongs to the school of the eighteenth century, which we endeavored to describe in speaking of Collé; he was a jester and not an innovator; literature in his eyes was intended rather to amuse society, than to instruct and govern it. He is only a man of letters, and moreover he retained the old familiar manners. We will observe in passing, these two

traits of the character of Piron.

His father was celebrated for the charming Christmas songs which he composed in the vulgar patois. The young Piron, educated with a taste for letters, began to write verses at an early period, and inspired brilliant hopes in the good opinion of the poets. He himself relates in a spirited manner, in the preface of his Metromania, that one of his classmates, an amiable and good-looking young man, having his imagination excited by reading the Iliad, the Æneid, and our marvellous romancers, enrolled himself at the age of fifteen

* We will cite one of the thousand of Piron's repartees. In returning from the rehearsal of his Metromanià, Piron, as was his custom, entered the Café Procope. He had on a magnificent laced coat. It was not usual to see him so splendidly attired. Every body pressed around him and complimented him. The Abbé Desfontaines was present. He wished to excite a laugh against Piron, and raising with affected curiosity and feigned admiration, the skirt of his coat, "What a dress," he exclaimed, "for such a man;" to which Piron immediately replied, in lifting the Abbé's surplice, " And what a man for such a dress."

years, in a company of dragoons. "I had only twelve or thirteen years," continues Piron, "and I was yet in my first enthusiasm, when this young man was yet full of his own.'Adieu, my friend,' said he to me, with the air of an Artaban. 'I will lose my life, or I will make you see how high a young soldier can rise.' He was certain that he already held

his sword and the baton of Marshal Fabert in the same scabbard. 'Courage,' replied I, with the same tone. I too will lose my Latin, or I will reap as fine laurels as you. Return an Achilles, and be sure of finding in me a Homer who will celebrate your glory as it deserves.' Such were our heroic adieus. We parted, and afterwards both of us nearly attained our object: the poor lad with forty years more and one arm less, died in the Hospital of the Invalids."

Piron composed his Metromania, when he described in beautiful verses, the charm of those literary illusions which he knew to be false, and which nevertheless he always loved. Never was a subject better adapted to the taste of Piron, than Metromania; for in taking the Metromaniac for his hero, he was relating his own history, and told it with the happiest mixture of enthusiasm and experience; the enthusiasm which he formerly felt for literature, and the remembrance of which still inspired him, and the experience which he acquired by forty years of literary life.

The second trait of the character of Piron, which we propose to show, is this taste for the ancient manners and the old household virtues, which he always preserved, without, unfortunately, ever practising them himself; and which we admire so much the more in him, as they proceeded from the pious affection which he entertained for his parents. He speaks of them and of their virtues with touching emotion.*

Piron, in this respect, was then worthy to take in hand the cause of fathers who were outraged by their children, and the subject of ungrateful children was congenial with his disposition. Unfortunately, he did not know how to make his subject interesting by meditation. He was particularly distinguished for his impromptus, and was always more of an

* " They were those good old French people, who, if any of them still exist, are the laughing stock of the polite world; we mean those good souls, who, become as rare as they are ridiculous, are a hundred times more occupied with their salvation and that of their family, than everything which is here below called by the name of glory and fortune.”

improvisator than a poet; for labor added nothing to his thoughts, and his first impulse was always the best. His comedies were therefore insipid and commonplace. His fathers interest but little, and his sons are displeasing; they do not go so far as to become odious, which would place them out of the sphere of comedy; but they are ridiculous only on account of their silliness, while they ought to be so for their ingratitude. Let us justify this judgment by a short analysis of the piece of Piron.

The three sons of Geronte, spoiled by him when they were young, and invested with all his property as soon as they had attained manhood, neglect and despise their father and benefactor. Piron explains very well why Geronte has lost the respect of his sons: he has, says Chrysalde, in verses, not so good as the thoughts which they express, he has changed,

by a pitiable weakness, Paternal love into puerile friendship;

Act i. scene 1.

a great error, which for a long while obtained credence in the world. How often have we heard it said, that a father ought to be the companion of his son! This maxim, which passed for wise and sentimental, was by this double title rendered dear to the philosophy of the eighteenth century. In our opinion, paternal and filial love are sentiments which gain nothing by changing their name, and especially their nature: friendship cannot be substituted for the affection which binds together the father and his children, for it is the nature of this affection to exclude equality, which is the basis and the foundation of friendship. The father who endeavors to become the companion of his son, lowers the dignity of his character, and that, without any advantage to himself: for he in vain attempts to affect youthfulness when he is old; he in vain affects familiarity when he is a father and feels his authority; his age and his authority appear through his feigned familiarity; and the son is soon tired of a companion, who has neither the tastes nor the natural sympathies of youth he could support paternal gravity; but the mask which he has assumed, in order to succeed, has discredited him. Let fathers aim at being loved as fathers, and not as companions; let them conduct themselves in conformity with

the order of nature, and not endeavor to correct it by the light of a false philosophy; let them not endeavor to make themselves young against their will, or to make their sons old prematurely, for this kind of dissembling is still worse. The father who makes himself young to please his son, is only ridiculous; but the son who makes himself old, becomes hypocritical.

The habits of the life of old men do not suit young people. We have often seen those sons, who lived, they said, as friends, separate in irreconcilable enmity. The idyll ended with a suit.

The sons of Geronte do not bring a suit against their father, for they have taken every thing from him; they live in affluence, while he lives in great poverty, which, above all, displeases his valet Pasquin. Pasquin, therefore, with his father Gregoire, the farmer of Geronte, one of those morose, cunning peasants, who preserve their simplicity for the purpose of deceiving country folks, (and Piron deserved to be considered one of the first who introduced this kind of character on the stage,) Pasquin contrives a trick to deceive the three ungrateful sons, and to make them restore to their father the property which he had given them. This trick is the same as that of the fabliau; with a bag of silver, which he carries to Geronte, Gregoire induces the three sons to believe that their father has still a hundred thousand livres to divide among them but it is required that they should prove their affection for him, and he persuades them, by degrees, to return to their father the property which they obtained from him.

The folly of the three sons of Geronte, who are puppets rather than characters, is the principal fault of Piron's piece. The action revolves around them, but they do not create it; and we are astonished in reading this comedy, entitled The Ungrateful Sons, to see that the chief personages are, the valet Pasquin, the farmer Gregoire, and the waitingmaid Nerine. They are those secondary or subordinate personages who fill up the scene. The accessory covers the principal, and we have, so to speak, a comedy of convention, rather than a comedy of character.

The weakness of fathers, rather than the ingratitude of children, is the true subject of Piron's piece; and Piron gave to his work a more appropriate title, when, in the second edition, he called it The School of Fathers. In fact, the

A

ungrateful sons are disgraced by their indulgent father. father ought never to give all of his property to his children, because they despise him as soon as they have nothing more to expect from him: such is the morality of the old fabliau, and it is also the instructive lesson which the ancient story teaches. It is addressed more to fathers than to children, rather to the discretion of parents than to the ingratitude of children.

The morality of the old fabliau is also perceived in the Two Sons-in-law of Etienne; but the author has endeavored to correct it. Dupré, like Geronte, has disposed of his property to his two sons-in-law; but he repents of this weakness, and extenuates his folly by apologizing to his old friend Frémont. He does not possess the gentleness of Geronte, who is obstinate in believing in the virtues of his children. It is true that it is more easy, we confess, to be angry with sons-in-law than with sons. The majesty of the paternal character, which Piron had degraded in his Ungrateful Sons, is redeemed in the Two Sons-in-law, and retrieved without exhibiting any foolish pride. Dupré has the principal character: for he is neither weak, nor a dupe: and even in the denouement, the spectator laughs heartily at the disappointment of the two sons-in-law, when, having restored to their father-in-law his donations, with a secret hope that he would not accept them, the latter says to them: "I wish in my turn, to show myself generous: it is not my property which will render me happy; with an indifferent eye, alas! I regard it; but you return it to me, my children: I will keep it, and henceforth, I only wish to control the use of it. I will live with you, and you will lodge with me."

Another merit of Etienne lies in his having caused the interest of his piece to arise from the character of the two sons-in-law, rather than from the conduct of the subordinate personages, as in the Ungrateful Sons of Piron.

The two sons-in-law of Dupré, Dervière and Dalainville, aim at the same object by different means; they wish to obtain consideration and credit, in order to acquire honor and emoluments. One becomes a philanthropist, and the other a statesman, or rather a great administrator: for under the Empire, there was scarcely any career for the ambition of statesmen; but they aimed at obtaining the reputation of great men of business, and in order to get this name,