[9] Gambetta's former assistant during the national defence after the first disasters; a brilliant organizer, but in general policy a _nolonté_, to use the term Gambetta coined about him on the basis of the word _volonté_. As Minister of Public Works he initiated at this period great improvements in the internal development of France, especially in the railways.
[10] Especially as to the unlimited revision of the constitution and the _immediate_ separation of Church and State.
[11] Gambetta's contempt for the parochialism of the elections by district was great. He felt that departmental tickets would favor the choice of better men. One must remember how large a proportion of the French Deputies are physicians to appreciate the scorn of Gambetta's saying that the _scrutin d'arrondissement_ produced a lot of _sous-vétérinaires_, that is, men who were not even decent "horse-doctors."
[12] M. Fallières took the place of Duclerc as President of the Council during the last days.
[13] The French claimed that a government official had been lured over the frontier and illegally arrested.
The successor of Jules Grévy was Sadi Carnot, in many ways the best choice. As has been seen, the transition was less easy than the two ballots of the National Assembly seemed to indicate (December 3, 1887). The intrigues of the so-called "nuits historiques" (November 28-30) had been an endeavor of the Radicals to keep Grévy, in order to ward off Jules Ferry as his successor. Finally, Carnot was a compromise candidate, or "dark horse," a Moderate acceptable to the Radicals still unwilling to endure the leading candidate Ferry.
President Carnot, hitherto known chiefly as a capable civil engineer and a successful Cabinet officer, was the heir to the name and traditions of a great republican family. His integrity was a guarantee of honesty in office, and his personal dignity was bound to heighten the prestige of the chief magistracy, somewhat weakened by his predecessor Grévy. On the other hand, Carnot's conception of the constitutional irresponsibility or neutrality of his office was an insufficient bulwark to the State against the intrigues of petty politicians and the inefficiencies of the parliamentary régime. Consequently his term of office saw the Republic exposed to two of the worst crises in its history, the Boulanger campaign and the Panama scandals, while the legislative history records the overthrow of successive cabinets. These followed each other without definite constructive policy, and aimed chiefly at keeping power by constant dickerings and playing off group against group.