Napoleon III, favoured by the immortal prestige of his glorious uncle, but far behind him in genius, though intellectually well gifted, as he proved it during his Presidential term of the second French Republic and during the first years he occupied the Imperial Throne of France, used the plebiscit to have his famous _coup d'Etat_ of the second day of December 1851, prepared with consummate skill and carried out with great energy, ratified by the nation by an overwhelming majority of several millions of votes. He lost no time in drawing the final result of this first great success and in reaching the term of his ambition. The tide of popular enthusiasm was all flowing his way, carrying him to the Throne elevated for his uncle who had lost it after the hurricane which exhausted its strength at Waterloo. On the second of December of the following year--1852--the second French Empire was proclaimed to the international world. Following the example and the precedent of the first Bonaparte, Napoleon III also decided to use the plebiscit to legitimate his Imperial power. He triumphantly carried the day by some seven millions of votes--almost the unanimous voice of the French people. Thus, in less than half a century, after having twice tried the Republican system of government, and, in both cases, having overdone by deplorable excesses the experiment of Political Liberty--more specially during the years of terrorism of the first Republic--France, by a regular reaction, went back to the other extreme, and reestablished arbitrary power not, in the two instances, upon the principle of the Divine Right of the ancient Monarchy, but on that of the Sovereignty of the people, as expressed by the certain will of the whole nation. But ABSOLUTISM, whether the outcome of Divine Right or of popular sovereignty, is always the same and steadily works against the true principles of Political Liberty. It is a great mistake to suppose that ABSOLUTISM is possible only under monarchical institutions. The terrorist republican epoch, in France, from 1792 to 1795, was ABSOLUTISM of the worst kind, really with a vengeance. As much can be said of the present political situation in Russia, which has substituted REVOLUTIONARY ABSOLUTISM to that of the decayed Imperial regime, suddenly brought to a tragic end by the pressure of events too strong for its crumbling fabric, shaken to its foundation by a most unwise reactionary movement which only precipitated its downfall, instead of averting it, as extravagantly expected by the Petrograd Court, which betrayed Russia in favour of Germany, and unconsciously opened the road which led the weak and unfortunate Czar to his lamentable fate. In my humble opinion, PLEBISCITARY CAESARISM is not compatible with a system of ministerial responsibility for all the official acts of the Sovereign.