This lot is closed for bidding. Bidding ended on 5/29/2026
Interesting letter signed by Napoleon showcasing his tendency toward micro-management, dated 26 April 1806 from Saint-Cloud to his Minister of the Interior, Jean-Baptiste Nompere de Champagny. In this fastidious three page letter, Napoleon expresses displeasure with a local prefect who didn't follow his rules to the letter, somewhat at odds with his claim within that ''Civil subordination...allows arguments and observations, no matter what the rank of the authorities may be'' and that he ''does demand not demand blind obedience except in the military.''
At this time, French municipalities were adapting to Napoleon's new system of local governance, replacing uneven provincial laws with a uniform system, run under the direction of his appointed prefects and mayors. Letter translates from the French in full,
''Monsieur Champagny, The matter of the deputy mayor of Dijon has caught my attention. The prefect had no right to appoint a commissioner to administer the mayor's oath; he did not have the right, simply because he lacked the authority, to take an order and make it public, thus forcing a respectable magistrate to choose between being disgraced and taking rash action. By publicizing his order, the prefect called on the public, who had no business getting involved in this discussion. In this situation, he did not behave in the spirit of conciliation that I intend that my agents use among themselves. Civil subordination is not blind and absolute: it allows arguments and observations, no matter what the rank of the authorities may be; here, the authority who printed the first is the one at fault. What is the prefect's opinion, therefore, of the regards he owes the capital of the department he administers, since he could not be bothered to go to city hall to swear in its mayor, especially the city magistrate. The honors granted to the latter, during a solemn installation ceremony, are a mark of consideration for the city and a local celebration. I do not demand blind obedience except in the military: the deputy, in his order of April 1, declared that Mr. Durande was mayor; he declared it because it was in my decree, and my decree is enforceable from the moment it is countersigned by a minister. The prefect's attache was not only becoming useless, but could be dangerous. In the military order, which does not apply to civilian affairs, an order from me is nothing if it is not transmitted according to the chain of command; but a decree countersigned by my minister is automatically enforceable in civil matters. The prefects are only too inclined toward a harsh government, contrary to my principles''
Napoleon continues on the second page, ''and to and to the spirit of administrative organization. In his order of March 29, the prefect ordered the commissioner of the prefecture to swear in the mayor, but, in his order of April 1, the deputy stipulated nothing to the contrary. He acknowledged the mayor right away, except for the administration of the oath and without stipulating the place where this oath would be sworn. Everything could therefore be reconciled; Mr. Durande needed to be sworn in on April 2; then everything was finished. The prefect's order and the type of proclamation made by the mayor agreed. There is, in fact, something reprehensible and thoughtless about the deputy's protest order of the 5th, since, after his declaration, he no longer held the office of mayor. But was this protest printed or was it not? If it was not, it is merely an appeal to a higher authority, and it is quite obvious that it is merely a protest since it is said that it will be given to Mr. Piette, by asking him to attach the report when he comes to administer the mayor's oath in fulfillment of the prefect's order. This would be blatant insubordination if the deputy mayor objected to not carrying out this order, and yet, he would have been responsible for it unless he justified his behavior. I most certainly wouldn't blame him without having weighed his observations, because I would not receive blind obedience in civil matters: What is the result of all this? It is that, according to the deputy mayor's proclamation, which referred to my decree, and the prefect's order, my will would have been carried out on April 1, yet, because of the prefect's action, it was still not carried out on the 5th. All of this shows a lack of tact and of a true spirit of administration. Therefore I wish for you to convey my''
The last page reads, ''displeasure to the prefect for delaying the execution of my wish; for not showing toward the city of Dijon the consideration and graciousness that I intend for my prefects to display in their relations with the municipalities; that, without having the right; for delegating the obligation to receive the mayor's oath; for treating with disdain one of the finest and most pleasant duties, while a capable administrator would have taken advantage of this occasion to speak to local dignitaries, encourage their commitment to the State, and show respect to such important places. You will convey my displeasure to the deputy mayor that his protest was printed, if it actually was, because that is his real error. If it was not printed, you will still convey my displeasure that by his order of April 1, he indirectly rendered the oath pointless as prescribed by the prefect and showed little regard for this magistrate. The prefect is too guilty administratively; he conducted himself in a matter too contrary to my intentions, for me to be able to go any further. The authority of prefects is considerable. Abuse is more to fear than laxity, and, on this occasion, you will send the prefects a circular informing them that I will not hear of any order being printed against the municipal officers and their subordinates. It is you who are the judge of the administrations and not the city or the department, unless you want the people to deliberate and rule on matters between the prefect and the municipalities. I know full well that, in the past, challenges of this nature were a common occurrence, and this unfortunate situation was the result of the excessive complexity of the authorities and this spirit of indecision that prevented the government from accurately classifying them. But then these challenges were constantly an object of disorder and scandal. On the subject of this particular case, a firm rule must be established that a mayor appointed by me must be installed with solemnity in the city hall and be sworn in by the prefect or by the person granted the honorable distinction of administering the oath by my decree. May God keep you under his holy protection. Saint-Cloud, April 26, 1806./'' Signed by Napoleon at the conclusion.
Three page letter on bifolium stationery measures 7.25'' x 9.125''. Folds and minor soiling, overall very good to near fine condition.