Conspiracy Book Inventory Liquidation Sale / Auction
FREE! Rare, Out-of-Print, Hard-to-Find Book Searches
Subscribers
Site--Access Back Issue of the A-albionic Quarterly Journal, the Project, and Much, Much More. . .
Chapter XIII:
Memoirs Illustrating the History of Jacobinism by Barruel
Of the Adept Princes and Princesses
CHAP. XIII.
Of the Adept Princes and Princejjfes.
r
:N the fecond clafs of protecting adepts, I fhall comprehend thofe perfons, who, without being on the throne, enjoy a power over the people, nearly equal to that of kings, and whofe authority and example, ad-, ding to the means of the confpirators, gave them rea- fon to hope that they had not fworn if* vain, the de- ftruction of the Chriftian religion.
Frederick In this clafs of protectors, Voltaire particularly men- Landgrave tions the Landgrave of Heffe Caflel. The care, with of Hefle which D'Alembert had chofen the profeflbr of hiftory Caflel. . . , , n i i t n
we have already mentioned, fhows how much the So-
phifter abufed his confidence. He was much impofed upon when he confided in the philofophy and the light* of Voltaire ; he permitted him in fome fort, to direct his ftudies, and it was difficult to fall into the hands'of a more perfidious tutor. A letter, in date of the 2jth Aug. 1766, will fuffice to mow in what fources the auguft pupil was dire£ted to feek leffons of wifdom. " Your Serene Highnefs has mown, the corruptor " writes, a defire of feeing fome new productions wor- " thy your attention. There is one which has juft made " its appearance, entitled Iheneceffary Colleftion. You " will find there, in particular, a work of Lord Bo- " lingbroke's, which appears to me one of the moft " forcible things ever written againft fuperftition. I " believe it is to be found at Frankfort -, but I have a " copy of it fewed, which I will fend to your High- " ncfs, if agreeable."
For a prince, who really was defirous of inftru£tion, what leffons he was to find in this collection ! The name of Bo'ingbroke does not fufficiently denote, how far they intended to pervert his religion ;'but we know that Voltaire often publifhed, under that name, works far more impious than thofe of the Englifh philofopher ; and that he was the author of feveral of thofe, which he particularly recommended in that collection.
Left to himfelf for the folution of doubts, nourifhed
. by fuch readings, and unfortunately prejudiced againft
thofe who might have folved them, he threw himfelf headlong into thofe ftudies, which he had miftaken for thofc of truth, and of the moft tranfcendent philofo- phy. When he could receive thefe'leflbns from Voltaire himfelf, the illufion was fo great, that his High- nefs would flatter himfelf, and really believe that he had found a means of fearing far above the vulgar. He would lament the abfence which deprived him of the lefTons of his mafter, and thinking himfelf under real obligations, he would fay to him, «< I left Ferney with the " greateft regret.-I am delighted to find you approve " of my way of thinking : I try as much as poffible to " diveft myfelf of all prejudices, and if in that, I differ " in opinion from the vulgar, it is to my converfation " with you, and to your works, that I am folely in- " debted for it."*
That he might adduce fome proof of his proficiency in the fchool of philofophifm, the illuftrious adept was wont to impart to his mafter, the new difcoveries he had made, and which he looked upon as unanswerable obje£tions againft the facred writ. " I have been ma- " king, would he write to his hero, for this fome time " paft, reflections on Mofes, and on fome of the hif- " torians of the New Teftament, to me apparently juft; " might not Mofes be a natural child of Pharoah's «« daughter, whom that princefs caufed to be brought " up ? It is not credible that the daughter of a king, " fhould have taken fuch care of an Hebrew childt " whofe nation was fo much abhorred by the Egyp- " tians."f VoltairecouldeafilyhaVefolved fuch a doubt, by making his pupil obferve that he was gratuitoufly flandering the fair fex, whofe benevolence and tender- hefs would readily lead them to take compaffion on a child, expofed to fuch a danger. Many would naturally do what Pharoah's daughter did, and would precifely fhow it greater care and attention, was the child expo- fed to national enmities. Had Voltaire wifhed to give his illuftrious pupil the rules of found criticifm, he would have hinted, that to deftroy a fact both fimple and natural, his Highnefs fuppofed one truly incredible. A princefs who wifhes to give her child a brilliant education, and begins by expofing it to be drowned, for the pleafure of going to feek it on the banks of the Nile, at a given time. An Egyptian princefs, who, loving
* oth Sept. 1766, f Let- W,
Vol. I. T
her child, and knowing how much the Egyptians, hatei the Ifraelites, caufes this child to be fuckled by an 1C- raelite, leaves it to believe, that it was born of that nation, which its mother detefts, and afterwards to render this child odious to theEgyptians, perfuades them of the fame. A myftery, ftill more fingular, is that the birth of an infant, who became the man, the moft tremendous to the Egyptians, has always remained a fecret. That the whole court of Pharoah, obftinately believed him to be anlfraelke, and that at a time when, to have declared Mofes an Egyptian, would have fuf- ficed to deftroy his power with the Ifraelites and to have faved Egypt. Such arguments might have been made ufe of by Voltaire, to make his Highnefs fenfible of the impropriety in found criticifm, of combating a fa£t both fimple and natural, by fuppofitions the moft diftant from probability. But fuch fuppofitions were confonant with that hatred which Voltaire bore to Mofes and the Sacred writ ; he was better pleafed to fee his difciples ignorantly launching into incredulity, than to fhow them the rules of found critieifm.
Voltaire again applauded his adept, when his Highnefs pretends that the brazen ferpent, ifolated on the mountain, did not a little rejemble the god Efculapius, in the temple of Epidaurus, holding a ftick in one hand and a ferpent in the other, with a dog at his feet. That the cherubims, difpl.iying their wings over the ark, were not unlike thefphinx with the woman's head, and the four claws, body, and tail of a lion. That the twelve oxenjlanding wider the brazen fea, and beating that enormous vefltl, twelve cubits in breadth and five in height, filled with water for the ablutions of the Ifraelites, bore a ftrong refemblance to the god Apis, or to the ox elevated on the altar and beholding all Egypt at its feet.*
His Highnefs concludes, that Mofes appeared to have introduced among the Jews, many ceremonies which he had taken from the Egyptians.f The hiftorian will . at leaft remark,-that it would have been eafy for the confpirators to have undeceived an adept who fought only to be inftructed. While we lament his Highnefs having been the dupe of fuch mafters, in juftice we are obliged to {how how frankly he fought the truth, when he continues, to Voltaire, " As to what regards the
* Let. 66. f Ibid.
w New Teftament, there are ftories in it, which I " /houldwijh to be better informed of. I cannot under- " ftand the maflacre of the innocents. How could " King Herod have ordered all thofe infants to be flain, " he not having had the power of life and death, as we «« fee in the hiftory of thePaffion, and that it was Pon- " tius Pilate, governor for the Romans, who condem- «« ned Jefus Chrift to death."*
Had he recurred to the proper foarces of hiftory, had he confulted any other but that profeflbr of hiftory which D'Alembert had given him, or any other mafters than thofe vain Sophifters, this prince, who wifhed for and deferved better information, would have feen this flight difficulty vanifh from before his eyes. He would have learned, that Herod of Afcalon, furnamed the Great, and who might have been more properly called the ferocious, he who ordered the maffacre of the Innocents, was king of all Judea and of Jerufalem, and is not the perfon mentioned in the Paffion. He would, moreover, have learned that the latter was Herod Anil- pas, who had only been able to obtain of the Romans one third part of his father's dominions, and being fim- ply Tetrarch of Galilea, he had not the fame power over the other provinces. Hence there can be little room for furprife at his not exercifing the power of life and death in Jerufalem, though we fee Pilate inviting him to exercife that right, by fending Jefus Chrift before him, as he had before judged and caufed to be beheaded St. John the Baptift.
As to the ferocious Herod of Afcalon, his Highnefs would have learned, that this prototype of Nero, had caufed the infants at Bethlehem to be flain, by the fame power with which he had murdered Ariftobulus and Hircanus, the one the brother, the other an odagena- rian and grand-father to the queen ; by the fame power did he put to death Marianne his queen and her two children ; Sohemus his confidant and numbers of his friends and nobles of his court, who had had the mif- fortune to difpleafe him. On reading of thefe numerous murders, of fuch unheard-of tyranny, and particularly when he learned that this Herod of Afcalon, on the point of death and fearing left the day of his de- ceafe mould prove a day of public rejoicing, had caufed all the chiefs of the Jews to be fhut up in the Circus, cpmmading they fhould be maflacred at the moment he
* Letter 6<.
himfelf expired; fuch lectures, I fay, could have left little doubt in the mind of the illuftrious adept, whether this Herod exercifed the right of life and death. He then would never have fufpecled the Evangelifls of forging a fa£t like that of the mafiacrc of the innocents, a fa£t fo recent, that many Jews then living had been witnefles to it. He would have reflected that impoftors would not expofe themfelves to be fo eafily difcovered and that in fo public a manner -, and all his objections againft this mafiacre of the innocents, would not have availed againtt his faith in the Gofpel.
But he was nurtured in the fame objections with his mafter, he ftudied the facred writ through the fame medium ; and Voltaire, who had fallen into thoufands of the grofieft errors on thofe facred writings, carefully avoided referring his difciples to thofe anfwers which he had received from the religious writers.*
Though we blend thefe flight difcufiions with our memoirs, we will not add to the bitternefs with which fo many princes, who have been feduced by thefe impious chiefs of the Sophifters, now reproach themfelves. We will not fay to them, « With what ftrange " blindnefs were you fmitten. It was your duty to " ftudy the facred writings, to learn how to become . «« better, and to render your fubjeCts more happy,
" and you have debafed yourfelves to entering the lifts " with the confpirators, that like them you may dif- «' pute againft Chrift and his prophets. If doubts arife " on religion, why appeal to thofe who have fworn its " ruin. The day will come when the God of the « Chriftians fhall raife doubts on your rights, and will f refer your fubjeCts to the Jacobins for their folution. " They are in your dominions, feated in your palaces " ready to applaud, as Voltaire did, at your objections " againft Chrift and his prophets. Anfwer to their « fword, the objections they make to your laws." Let us forbear thefe reflections, let us limply remark, as hiftory muft, how very unfortunate thefe princes muft have been, who feeking inftruftion had applied to men, whofe fole objeCt was to make them efficient to the deftru£tion of the altar, as the firfl ftcp towards the overthrow of their thrones.
Duke of In the number of the protecting adepts hiftory will k. find itlelf neceflitated to infert the names of many
* See the errors of Voltaire in the Letters of feme Pertuguefe
Jews.
princes, whofe ftates at this prefent moment feel the iweets of this new philofophy. In the account given by D'Alembert to Voltaire of thofe foreign princes who would not travel through France, without doing homage to the confpiring Sophifters, we fee him extol, the Duke tf Brunfwick as deferving the kindeft welcome, and particularly fo, when put in competition with the Prince of Deux Pents, who only protects Frerons 'and fucb like rabble, that is to fay religious authors.-)- The Jacobin army at this day proves which of thofe two princes was moft miftaken in his protection. It will be ftill better feen when in thefe memoirs, we fhall treat of the laft and deepeft confpiracy of the Jacobins.
To this prince we muft add Louis Eugene Duke of Louit Wirtemberg, and Louis Prince of Wirtemberg: both Eugene, equally gloried in the leffons they received from Voltaire. Lou^s'*^ The former writes to him, " When at Ferney I think prince of " myfelf a greater philofopher than Socrates himfelf."J wirtem- The latter, not content with encomiums on the premier ber& chief, petitions for the moft licentious and the moft impious work Voltaire had ever penned, I mean the poem of Joan D'Arc or the Maid of Orleans.
Charles Theodore, Elector Palatine, would one while Charlei folicit the impious Sophifter for the fame mafter-piece Theodore, of obfcenity, or for philofophic lectures; at another time he would prefs and conjure him to repair to Man- heim, that he might there receive his lectures anew.||
Even thofe adepts who through modefty, fhould have The fhrunk back at the very name of fuch a production, even the Princefs Anhalt-Zerbft, fends thanks to the author, who had been impudent enough to fend her a prefent more worthy the Aretino.J
The hiftorian cannot but remark the eagernefs of thefe mighty adepts for fo profligate a work. This is an awful example of what charms depravity of morals gave to the productions of the Sophifters ; the empire of the confpirators will caufe lefs fiirprife when we reflect how prevalent their fophifms became over the mind, when they had once tainted and perverted the heart. This is a reflection we reluctantly make, but it is too appofite to the hiftory of Philofophifm, and to the caufe |nd progrefs of the Antichriftian Confpiracy, to be fupprefled. We know the reverence due to great
f- zjd June, 1766. J ift February, 1766.
|| Letters of the ift May, 1754, and No. 38 anno 176*. j Letters of the Princefs Anhalt-Zerbft, 9th and 3910,
names, but we cannot, on that confideration, hide the truth. Let thofe look to it, whofe mifconduct is ex- pofed to view ; for to conceal it longer would be to betray at once their own intereft, and that of their people, the fafety of their thrones, and that of the altar.
Her Highnefs Wilhelmina, Margravine of Barieth, ranking among the protecting adepts, affords to the hiftorian the opportunity of laying open a new caufe of the progrefs of the Antichnftiau Sophifters, of the weight they acquired from the vanity of their fchool, and from their pretenfions to a fuperiority of light above the vulgar.
It is far from being the lot of all men to argue with equal fuccefs on religious or philofophical topics. Without being wanting in the refpect due to that precious half of mankind, we may obferve in general, I think, that women are not born with a mind fo congenial with philofophy, metaphyfics, or divinity, as men. Nature has compenfated this want of reiearch and meditation, by the gift of embelliUiing virtue, by that fweetnefs and vivacity of fentiment, which often proves a furer guide than all our reafonings. They do the good peculiarly allotted to them, better than we do. Their homes, their children, are their real empires, that of their leflbns lies in the charm of example, more efficacious than all our fyllogifms. But the philofophic woman, philofophizing like a man, is either a prodigy or a monfter, and the prodigies are not common. The daughter of Necker, the wife of Roland, as well as Mefdames du Deflant, D'Efpinaffe, Geofrin, and fuch like Parifian adepts, in fpite of all their pretenfions to wit, can lay no claim to the exception. If the reader is indignant when he finds the name of the Margravine of Barieth on the fame line, let his indignation turn againft the man who infpired her with fuch pretenfions. Let an opinion be formed of the mafters, by the tone fhe affumed with them to infure their approbation. Here is a fpecimen of the ftyle of this illuftrious adept, aping the principles and the jefts of Voltaire, in order to captivate his approbation, at theexpence of St. Paul.
" Sifter Guillemetta to Brother Voltaire, greeting. " I received your confoling epiftle. I can fwear by my " favorite oath, that it has edified me infinitely more " than that of St. Paul to Dame Elect. The latter " threw me into a certain drowfinefs that had the effect «( of opium, and hindered me from perceiving the " beauties of it. Yours had a contrary effe£t ; it drew " me from my lethargy, and put all my vital fpirits in " motion again."*
We have no knowledge of any^piftle of St. Paul to Dame Elect; but fifterGuillemetta, like Voltaire, bur- lefquing what fhe had, as well as what (he had not read, means no doubt to fpeak of St. John's Epiftle to Electa. This contains no other compliment but that of an apoftle applauding the piety of a mother, who rears her children in the way of life, exhorting her to charity, and guarding her againil the difcourfe and fchools of feducers. It is rather unfortunate that fuch leflbns fhould have been opium for the illuftrious adept. It is probable that Voltaire would have found a dofe in the following letter, had it come from any other hand but that of Sifter Guillemetta, We will however copy it, as making an epoch in the annals of philofophifm. We ftiall there fee the female adept attempting to give lef- fons to Voltaire himfelf, anticipating Helvetius by mere dint of genius, and without perceiving it copying Epicurus. Before fhe commences, Sifter Guillemetta af» fures Voltaire of the friendfliip of the Margrave, and had carefully invoked the Genius of Bayle.-\ One day fhe thought herfelf infpired with the whole of it, and immediately writes to brother Voltaire, " God, you fay " (in the Poem of the Law of nature,) has beftowed " on all men juftice and confcience to warn them, as he «' has given them all what is needful. As God has '* beftowed on man juftice and confcience, thefe two " virtues muft be innate in man, and become an at- «« tribute of his exiftence. Hence it neceflarily fol- «' lows, that man muft aft in confequence, and that he " cannot be juft or unjuft, or without remorfe, being " unable to combat an inftinft annexed to his eflence. " Experience proves the contrary. If juftice was an " attribute of our being, chicane would be baniftied. " Your counfellors in parliament would not loofe their " time as they do, in difturbing all France about a mor- " fel of bread given or not. The Jefuits and the Jan- " fenifts, would equally confefs their ignorance in point « of doctrine-Virtue is barely accidental-Averfion ff to pain and love of pleaf\;re, have induced men to " become juft-Diforder can beget nothing but pain- « Cniiet is the parent of pleafure, I have made the hu-
* ajth Dec. 1755. f i9;hjuly, 175?.
Frederick
William,
Prince of
Prultia.
" man heart my particular ftudy, and I draw my con- " clufions on what has been, from what I fee."*
There is extant a play intitled, Divinity dwindled »'«- to a Diftaff. This letter of her Highnefs the Margravine of Bareith, dwindled into Sifter Guillemetta, may perhaps furnifh the fame idea, for philofophy. But handing over the female Socrates to the Molieres of the day, the hiftorian will draw from the errors of this female adept, a more ferious leflbn on the progrefs of the Antichriflian Confpiracy. He will behold a new caufe in the mortifying limits of the human intellect, and the vanity of its pretenfions, which in certain adepts feem precifely to expand itfelf, in as much as nature had from the weaknefs of their underftanding, feemed naturally to iniinuate modefty and humility.
Sifter Guillemetta fears for liberty, if it be true that God has given to man a confcience, the neceflary fenfe of right and wrong. She was then ignorant that man, with the eyes that God has given him to fee and know his road, is neverthelefs free to go where he pleafes. She has made a particular ftudyof the human heart, and fhe has not yet learned, that man often fees what \9 beft, but will do the worft ! She thinks herfelf in the fchool of Socrates, and with Epicurus, fhe only fees the avtr/ton of pain and the love of pleafure, as the principle of juftice and virtue. She tell us, in fine, probably without even perceiving it, that if chicane is not ban- ifhcd, it is becaufe our attornies have not a fufficient averfion to indigence ; that if our veftals are not all cliafle, it is becaufe they do not fufficiently love pleaf- ure ; and after that, in prefence of her Highnefs, Parliaments, Jefuits, Janfenifts, and undoubtedly the whole Sorbonne, with the whole faculty of divinity, muft confefs their ignorance in point of doSlrine.
With more genius but lefs confidence in his own lights, Frederick William, Prince Royal of Pruffia, prefents us with quite another fpecies of adept. Indefatigable in the field of victory, he dares not anfwer for himfelf : he knows what he could wifh to believe, but not what he ought to believe ; he fears to lofe him- felf in reafoning. His foul repeats that he mud be immortal, he fears her voice mifleads him, and Voltaire is to decide for him ; when in the field of Mars, he has the confidence and activity of a hero ; but when he
* ift Nov. 1759.
is to reflect on futurity, he has all the modefty and the humility of a difciple, almoft the unconcern of a fcep- tic. The authority of his mafter is to fave him the trouble of refearch, and his mafter again is Voltaire. " Since I have taken the liberty of converfing with you, «« he refpectfully writes, fuffer me to afk for my own " inftru&ion only, whether as you advance in years, " you find no alteration to make in your ideas on the " nature of the foul. I don't like to bewilder myfelf «« in metaphyfical reafonings, but I could wifh not to " die entirely, and that fuch a genius as yours were not " annihilated."*
Like a man who can a flume every tone, Voltaire an- fwered, " The King of Pruffia's family is much in the " right, not to confent to the annihilation of his foul.- «« It is true that it is not well known what a foul is, as " nobody has ever feen one. All that we know is, " that the eternal Mafter of nature has endowed us with " the faculty of feeling and knowing virtue. That " this faculty furvives us after our death, is not demon- " ftrated ; but then the contrary is not better proved. «{ There are none but quacks who are certain, we know " nothing of the firft principles-Doubt is not an a- " greeable ftate, but certainty is a ridiculous one."f
I know not what effect this letter had on the fe- renc and refpe&ful difciple, but we fee the premier chief varying his means of power over his princely adepts, as much as he did over the citizens of Harlem. When the King, Frederick, wrote to him in fo refolute a tone, man once dead there is nothing left , he takes care not to reply, that certainty is a ridiculous Jtate, that quacks only are certain. No, Frederick, King of Pruffia, is always the firft of philosophic kings.J And a week after, Frederick, Prince Royal, only wifhes to be confirmed on the immortality of his foul, then it is, that notwithftanding all the troubles and difquietudes of fcep- ticifm, the doubts of the fceptic is the only rational ftate for the true philofopher. Such a ftate will fufEce, as he then beholds his adepts no longer belonging to the religion of Chrift, and that is fufficient for his plans. He will lead the king materialift, and refolute in his opinions, notwithftanding his own irrefolution and uncertainty, by encomiums and admiration. He leaves
* izth Nov. 1770. f *8th Nov. 1770.
J See their letters, loth Oct. and uft Nov. 1770,
Vol. I. f U
Eugene of Wirtemberg in aftonifhment at the mafter he coincides with in opinion. Wilhelmina of Bareith, more daring than her mafter, is permitted to argue. He cuts Hum, and threatens with ridicule and quackery, the humble adept who feeks to reclaim and allay the ire of his mafter. To onehe dictates his principles ; to another he peremptorily declares that man is condemned to the total ignorance of ihtfirjl principles. He is not the lefs the iJol of the aftonifhed princes. He docs not tlie lefs transform them into the protectors of bis fchool and of the confpirators ; and fuchis thefuc- cefs with which he flatters himfelf, that writing to his dear Count D'Argental, he fays, " At prefent there is " not a German prince who is not a philofopher."*- That is to fay, the philofopluft of impiety ! There are certainly exceptions to be made from fuch an aflertion, but it will prove at leaft how much thefe abettors of impiety flattered themfelves with the progrefs they were making among fovereigns and princes,'-and to whom impiety was one day to prove fo fatal!
* 26th Sept. 1766.
CHAP. XIV.
ITKird Clafs of protesting Adepts.-Minifters, Noblemen and Magijlrates.
IT was in France that philofophifm had taken all the -|- forms of a true confpiracy ; and it was in France alfo, that it had made its greateft ravages among the rich and powerful. It had not gained the throne of Bourbon as it had many of the northern thrones, but it would be vain for hiftory to diffimulate, that Lewis XV. without being of the confpiracy, powerfully helped the Antichriftian confpirators. He never had the misfortune of lofing his faith, he even loved religion ; but during the laft thirty-five years of his life, he fo little practifed it, the diflblutenefs of his morals and public triumph of his courtezans anfwered fo little to the title of his Moft Chriftian Majefty, that he might nearly as well have been a difciple of Mahomet.
Sovereigns are not fufficiently aware of the evils they draw on themfelves by fwerving from morality. Some have fupported religion only as a curb on their fubjccts ; but woe be to him who only views it in that light. In vain fhall they preferve its tenets in their hearts, it is their example that mud uphold it. Next to the example of the clergy, that of kings is the moft neceflary to reftrain the people. When religion is ufed only as a policy, the vileft of the populace will foon perceive it; they will look upon it as a weapon ufed againft them, and fooner or later they will break it, and your power Viinifhes. If without morals you pretend to religion, the people will alfo think themfelves religious in their profligacy ; and how often has it been repeated, that laws without morals are but a mere phantom. But the day will come when the people, thinking themfelves more confequential, will throw afide both morals and tenets, and then where fhall be your curb.
Such were the difcourfes often held by the Chriftian orators in prefence of Lewis XV. He without morals was foon furrounded by minifters deftitute of faith, who could have feldomer deceived him, had his love for religion been ftimulated by practice. After the death «f the Cardinal de Fleury fome are to be found, the
Mr. Ame- lot.
Duke de
Praflin.
Marquis D'Argenfon-
Duke de
Choifeul.
Marechal de Belleifle and Mr. de Berlin for example, who are not to be confounded in that clafs of adepts; but then we fucceflively find near his perfon Mr. Ame- lot in the foreign department, Mr. D'Argenfon in the fame; the Duke de Choifeul, de Praflin and Mr. de Malefherbes, alfo the Marquife de Pompadour as long as fhe lived, and all thefe were initiated and intimately connected with Voltiare and his confpiracy. We have feen him make application to Me. Amelot on the de- ftruflion of the clergy. This minifter had fufficient confidence in Voltaire to. mtruft him with a fecret and important miflion to the King of Pruffia, and Voltaire in return, does not conceal from him the ufe he had made of his miflion againft the church. He confided no lefs in that Duke de Praflin, to whom he had fent his memorial on the tythes, in hopes of depriving the clergy of the greateft part of their fuftenance.* This confidence from the premier chief fufficiently denotes the fentiments of thofe men to whom he fent his plans for execution.
A minifter whofe afliduity in correfponding with Voltaire, indicates more clearly their perfect coincidence with each other, was the Marquis D'Argenfon, whom we have already noticed, tracing the plan for the deftruftion of the religious orders. It was he who firft prote&ed Voltaire at court and with the Marquife de Pompadour; he was alfo one of the rooft impious of his difeiples, and to him it is, that Voltaire writes con- ftantly, as to one of the adepts with whom he was mod intimate. If any thing, he appears more refolute in his antireligious opinions than his mafter, his philofo- phifm coincided more with that of the King of Pruf- fia's, for he was alfo convinced that he was not twofold, and that he had nothing to fear or hope for, when once his body fhould reft in eternal fleep.f
More zealous and more aftive than the Marquis D'Argenfon for the reign of impiety, the Duke de Choifeul better knew and more powerfully feconded the fecrets of Voltaire. We have already feen him extolling this great prote&or in his quarrels with the Sor- bonne j we have already feen why this duke, adopting and preffing the execution of D'Argenfon's plans againft the religious orders, began by that of the Jefuits. It
* Letter to Count D'Argental, anno 1764- , "
f See in th« General Correfpondence, the letters of Mr. D'Argenfon.
would be ufelefs to infift on this minifter, his impiety is too well authenticated, and left he might be mi (taken for a Chriftian, he wifhed to refufe himfelf Chriftian burial, and to be buried, far from any religious monument, in the midft of his park where his cattle fed.
Thus did this feries of Antichriftian minifters, each Malefcer- . partially anticipate the Jacobins in the overthrow of >« before the altar. It was to the man, who was one day to fee 'I1' revolu- that very revolution in all its horrors, and at length fall a vi£tim to it, that thefe impious chiefs pay their great- eft homage*, it was to him they were chiefly indebted. And this protector of the confpiracy again ft his God, was Malelherbes ; this name, I am aware, will recal to mind many moral virtues, it will recal his benevolence when alleviating the rigor of the prifons, when remedying the abufe of the Lettses de Cachet; but France {hall, neverthelefs, demand of him her temples in ruin ; for it was he who above all other minifters abufed his authority to eftablifh the reign of impiety in France. D'Alembert, who knew him well, always vouches for his reliiftantly executing the fuperior orders iflued in favor of religion, and for his favoring philofophifm whenever circumftances would permit; and unfortunately he knew but too well how to avail himfelf of circumftances. By his office he particularly prefided over the laws relative to the prefs, but with a (ingle word he effaced all diftinftions in books, whether impious, religious or feditious, he declared them all to be a mere objeSt of commerce.
Let politicians of other nations argue on that objecT: Ljbertv<rf in confequence of what experience has taught them in the prefs their own countries; but it is an incontrovertible faft, dangerous that France owes the misfortunes of the revolution to m France- the great abufe of the prefs, and to that real inundation of bad books at firft only impious, but latterly both impious and feditious. There are alfo many rea- fons peculiar to France which rendered the abufe of the prefs more fatal than elfewhere.
Without pretending to raife the merit of the French writers, it may be obferved, and I have often heard foreigners repeat it, that there is a certain clearncfs, procefs and method peculiar to them, which by putting our French books more within the reach of the commonality of readers, makes them in fome fort more popular and thence more dangerous when bad.
Our frivoloufnefs may be a failing, but that failing made a book more fought for in France, than would the profoundeft meditations of an Englifhman. Neither truth nor error could pleafe a Frenchman when latent, he likes to fee clearly; epigram, farcafm, in fine all what may be called wit, is what he delights in. Even blafphemy, elegantly fpoken, will not difpleafe a nation, unhappily gifted with the talent of laughing on the moft ferious fubjects, and who will pardon every failing in him who can divert them. It was to this unfortunate tafte that the impious writings of Voltaire owed their chief fuccefs.
Whatever may be the reafon, the Englifh alfo have their books againft the Chriftian religion; they have their Collins, their Hobbes, their Woolftons, and many others, where in fubftance is to be found, all that our French Sophifters have only repeated after their way, that is to fay, with that art which adapts every thing to the moft vulgar minds. In England Hobbes and Collins are almoft forgotten or unknown. Bolingbroke, and other authors of the fame clafs, are little read, though of greater merit as literary men, by a people who knows how to occupy itfelf with other things. In France, from the idle marquis or countefs unto the attorney's clerk, or even to the petty citizen, who had far other occupations, thefe impious productions, and particularly Voltaire's were not only read, but each would have his opinion and criticife every new publication of the fort. The French, in general, were great readers, and every citizen would have his library. Thus in Paris a bookfeller was fure of felling as many copies of the moft pitiful performance, as are generally fold in London of a work of no fmall merit.
In France an author was as paffionately cried up as a
fafhion ; the Englifhman, who deigns to read his work, panes judgment on it and remains unconcerned. Can this arife from good fenfe or indifference,
or may it not be a mixture of both. Notwithftanding all the bene- factions received from the Englifh, I will not pronounce ; neither flattery nor
criticifm is within my fphere ; but an undoubted fact, and which ought to have taught Malefherbes, is that in France, ftill lefs than elfewhere, a
book either impious or feditious never could be looked upon as a mere article of commerce. The greater readers, arguers, and the more volatile thq
French people were, the more the minifter fuperintend-
Eugene of Wirtemberg in aftonifhment at the mafter he coincides with in opinion. Wilhelmina of Bareith, more daring than her mafter, is permitted to argue. He cuts Hum, and threatens with ridicule and quackery, the humble adept who feeks to reclaim and allay the ire of his mafter. To onehe dictates his principles ; to another he peremptorily declares that man is condemned to the total ignorance of ihtfirjl principles. He is not the lefs the iJol of the aftonifhed princes. He docs not tlie lefs transform them into the protectors of bis fchool and of the confpirators ; and fuchis thefuc- cefs with which he flatters himfelf, that writing to his dear Count D'Argental, he fays, " At prefent there is " not a German prince who is not a philofopher."*- That is to fay, the philofopluft of impiety ! There are certainly exceptions to be made from fuch an aflertion, but it will prove at leaft how much thefe abettors of impiety flattered themfelves with the progrefs they were making among fovereigns and princes,'-and to whom impiety was one day to prove fo fatal!
* 26th Sept. 1766.
CHAP. XIV.
ITKird Clafs of protesting Adepts.-Minifters, Noblemen and Magijlrates.
IT was in France that philofophifm had taken all the -|- forms of a true confpiracy ; and it was in France alfo, that it had made its greateft ravages among the rich and powerful. It had not gained the throne of Bourbon as it had many of the northern thrones, but it would be vain for hiftory to diffimulate, that Lewis XV. without being of the confpiracy, powerfully helped the Antichriftian confpirators. He never had the misfortune of lofing his faith, he even loved religion ; but during the laft thirty-five years of his life, he fo little practifed it, the diflblutenefs of his morals and public triumph of his courtezans anfwered fo little to the title of his Moft Chriftian Majefty, that he might nearly as well have been a difciple of Mahomet.
Sovereigns are not fufficiently aware of the evils they draw on themfelves by fwerving from morality. Some have fupported religion only as a curb on their fubjccts ; but woe be to him who only views it in that light. In vain fhall they preferve its tenets in their hearts, it is their example that mud uphold it. Next to the example of the clergy, that of kings is the moft neceflary to reftrain the people. When religion is ufed only as a policy, the vileft of the populace will foon perceive it; they will look upon it as a weapon ufed againft them, and fooner or later they will break it, and your power Viinifhes. If without morals you pretend to religion, the people will alfo think themfelves religious in their profligacy ; and how often has it been repeated, that laws without morals are but a mere phantom. But the day will come when the people, thinking themfelves more confequential, will throw afide both morals and tenets, and then where fhall be your curb.
Such were the difcourfes often held by the Chriftian orators in prefence of Lewis XV. He without morals was foon furrounded by minifters deftitute of faith, who could have feldomer deceived him, had his love for religion been ftimulated by practice. After the death «f the Cardinal de Fleury fome are to be found, the
Mr. Ame- lot.
Duke de
Praflin.
Marquis D'Argenfon-
Duke de
Choifeul.
Marechal de Belleifle and Mr. de Berlin for example, who are not to be confounded in that clafs of adepts; but then we fucceflively find near his perfon Mr. Ame- lot in the foreign department, Mr. D'Argenfon in the fame; the Duke de Choifeul, de Praflin and Mr. de Malefherbes, alfo the Marquife de Pompadour as long as fhe lived, and all thefe were initiated and intimately connected with Voltiare and his confpiracy. We have feen him make application to Me. Amelot on the de- ftruflion of the clergy. This minifter had fufficient confidence in Voltaire to. mtruft him with a fecret and important miflion to the King of Pruffia, and Voltaire in return, does not conceal from him the ufe he had made of his miflion againft the church. He confided no lefs in that Duke de Praflin, to whom he had fent his memorial on the tythes, in hopes of depriving the clergy of the greateft part of their fuftenance.* This confidence from the premier chief fufficiently denotes the fentiments of thofe men to whom he fent his plans for execution.
A minifter whofe afliduity in correfponding with Voltaire, indicates more clearly their perfect coincidence with each other, was the Marquis D'Argenfon, whom we have already noticed, tracing the plan for the deftruftion of the religious orders. It was he who firft prote&ed Voltaire at court and with the Marquife de Pompadour; he was alfo one of the rooft impious of his difeiples, and to him it is, that Voltaire writes con- ftantly, as to one of the adepts with whom he was mod intimate. If any thing, he appears more refolute in his antireligious opinions than his mafter, his philofo- phifm coincided more with that of the King of Pruf- fia's, for he was alfo convinced that he was not twofold, and that he had nothing to fear or hope for, when once his body fhould reft in eternal fleep.f
More zealous and more aftive than the Marquis D'Argenfon for the reign of impiety, the Duke de Choifeul better knew and more powerfully feconded the fecrets of Voltaire. We have already feen him extolling this great prote&or in his quarrels with the Sor- bonne j we have already feen why this duke, adopting and preffing the execution of D'Argenfon's plans againft the religious orders, began by that of the Jefuits. It
* Letter to Count D'Argental, anno 1764- , "
f See in th« General Correfpondence, the letters of Mr. D'Argenfon.
would be ufelefs to infift on this minifter, his impiety is too well authenticated, and left he might be mi (taken for a Chriftian, he wifhed to refufe himfelf Chriftian burial, and to be buried, far from any religious monument, in the midft of his park where his cattle fed.
Thus did this feries of Antichriftian minifters, each Malefcer- . partially anticipate the Jacobins in the overthrow of >« before the altar. It was to the man, who was one day to fee 'I1' revolu- that very revolution in all its horrors, and at length fall a vi£tim to it, that thefe impious chiefs pay their great- eft homage*, it was to him they were chiefly indebted. And this protector of the confpiracy again ft his God, was Malelherbes ; this name, I am aware, will recal to mind many moral virtues, it will recal his benevolence when alleviating the rigor of the prifons, when remedying the abufe of the Lettses de Cachet; but France {hall, neverthelefs, demand of him her temples in ruin ; for it was he who above all other minifters abufed his authority to eftablifh the reign of impiety in France. D'Alembert, who knew him well, always vouches for his reliiftantly executing the fuperior orders iflued in favor of religion, and for his favoring philofophifm whenever circumftances would permit; and unfortunately he knew but too well how to avail himfelf of circumftances. By his office he particularly prefided over the laws relative to the prefs, but with a (ingle word he effaced all diftinftions in books, whether impious, religious or feditious, he declared them all to be a mere objeSt of commerce.
Let politicians of other nations argue on that objecT: Ljbertv<rf in confequence of what experience has taught them in the prefs their own countries; but it is an incontrovertible faft, dangerous that France owes the misfortunes of the revolution to m France- the great abufe of the prefs, and to that real inundation of bad books at firft only impious, but latterly both impious and feditious. There are alfo many rea- fons peculiar to France which rendered the abufe of the prefs more fatal than elfewhere.
Without pretending to raife the merit of the French writers, it may be obferved, and I have often heard foreigners repeat it, that there is a certain clearncfs, procefs and method peculiar to them, which by putting our French books more within the reach of the commonality of readers, makes them in fome fort more popular and thence more dangerous when bad.
Our frivoloufnefs may be a failing, but that failing made a book more fought for in France, than would the profoundeft meditations of an Englifhman. Neither truth nor error could pleafe a Frenchman when latent, he likes to fee clearly; epigram, farcafm, in fine all what may be called wit, is what he delights in. Even blafphemy, elegantly fpoken, will not difpleafe a nation, unhappily gifted with the talent of laughing on the moft ferious fubjects, and who will pardon every failing in him who can divert them. It was to this unfortunate tafte that the impious writings of Voltaire owed their chief fuccefs.
Whatever may be the reafon, the Englifh alfo have their books againft the Chriftian religion; they have their Collins, their Hobbes, their Woolftons, and many others, where in fubftance is to be found, all that our French Sophifters have only repeated after their way, that is to fay, with that art which adapts every thing to the moft vulgar minds. In England Hobbes and Collins are almoft forgotten or unknown. Bolingbroke, and other authors of the fame clafs, are little read, though of greater merit as literary men, by a people who knows how to occupy itfelf with other things. In France, from the idle marquis or countefs unto the attorney's clerk, or even to the petty citizen, who had far other occupations, thefe impious productions, and particularly Voltaire's were not only read, but each would have his opinion and criticife every new publication of the fort. The French, in general, were great readers, and every citizen would have his library. Thus in Paris a bookfeller was fure of felling as many copies of the moft pitiful performance, as are generally fold in London of a work of no fmall merit.
In France an author was as paffionately cried up as a
fafhion ; the Englifhman, who deigns to read his work, panes judgment on it and remains unconcerned. Can this arife from good fenfe or
indifference, or may it not be a mixture of both. Notwithftanding all the bene- factions received from the Englifh, I will not pronounce ;
neither flattery nor criticifm is within my fphere ; but an undoubted fact, and which ought to have taught Malefherbes, is that in France,
ftill lefs than elfewhere, a book either impious or feditious never could be looked upon as a mere article of commerce. The greater readers,
arguers, and the more volatile thq French people were, the more the minifter fuperintend-
pable of (lopping a revolution, but he did not forward it. , He rather let others do the harm, than he did it him-
felf; but unfortunately that harm which he let others do, was great. Under his adminiftration philofophifm made a terrible progrefs. Nothing proves it better than the choice of that Turgot, whole nomination is celebrated by Voltaire as the beginning of a great revolutien.
The philanthropy of this man has been much extolled, Turgot. but ;t was fjlat Of a hypocrite, as the reader will be convinced of, by the following letter from D'Alembert to Voltaire : " You will foon receive another vifit, which « I announce to you. It is that of Mr. de Turgot, a « mafter of Requcfts, full of philofophy, a man of " great parts and learning, a great friend of mine, and " who wifhes to fee you in luck. I fay luck for propter tf metum Judaorum (for fear of the Jews ;) we mud " not brag of it too much, nor you neither."*
If at firft fight the fignification of the fear of the Jews is not underftood, D'Alembert will explain it in a feconcl portrait of his friend : " This Turgot, he writes, ** is a man of wit, great inftru&ion and very virtuous } «« in a word, he is a worthy Cacowc, but has good rea- «' fons for not {bowing it too much, for I have learned " to my coft, that the Cacouaquery (philofophifm) is not " the road to fortune, and he deferves to make his."f-
Voltaire had an interview with Turgot, and formed fo true a judgment of him, that he anfwers, " If you " have many licentiates of that ftamp in your fedt, I " fear for the wretch, /be is loft to good company. ":j:
To every man who underftands the encomiums of Voltaire or D'Alembert, this is as much as to fay, Turgot is a fecret adept, he is an ambitious hypocrite and will at once be a traitor to his God, his king and his country: but with us, we call him virtuous, he is a confpirator of the true ftamp, neceflary to compafs the overthrow of Chriftianity. Had Voltaire or D'Alembert fpoken of an ecclefiaftic, or a religious writer who had only the virtues of a Turgot, what a monfter we fiiould have feen arife from his pen. Let the impartial hiftorian examine, and lay afide thefe ufurped reputations of virtue, let him fay with truth, that Turgot, rich and above the common run of citizens, and fti'l aiming at dignities and further fortune, cannot be called a real philofopher. Turgot being the adept of the
* Letter 64, anno i;«o. | Letter 76. J Letter 77.
confpiring Sophifters and a mafter of requefts, is already perjured. He will be far more fo when he arrives at the miniftry. For by the flanding laws of the ftate, he could only enjoy thefe dignities, by affirming both by himfelf and others, his fidelity to the king, to religion and to the ftate. He had already betrayed religion and the ftate, he will foon betray his king. He belonged to that fect of CEconomifts who detefted the French monarchy, and only fuffered a king, in order to treat him as did the firft rebels of the revolution.
At length, carried to the miniftry, by the cabals of the fect, he ufes all his power to infpire the young king with his difguft for the monarchy, and with his principles on the authority of a throne, he had fworn to maintain as minifter. He would willingly have tranf- formed him into a Jacobin king. He firft infmuates thofe errors, which are one day to throw the fceptre into the hands of the people, and overturn the altar and the throne ; if thofe are the virtues of a ininifter, they are thofe of a treacherous one; if errors of the mind, they are of a mad-man. Nature had endowed him with the defire of relieving his fellow-creatures. He heard the declamations of the Sophifters againft the remains of the feudal fyftem, under which the people ftill labored, and what with the Sophifters, was a mere tool of their hatred for kings, he miftook for the cry of. compafiion. He was blind to what all the world faw, and that particularly on the Corvees. He would not hearken to the voice of hiftory, which told him that the flmckies of the feudal fyftem had as yet been only broken, by the wifdom and mature deliberation of the monarch, forefeeing the inconveniences and the means of covering the lofl'es of the fuppreffion. But he would, be hafty and he ruined every thing. The Sophifters thought his difmifllon too early, but alas I it was not early enough ; for he had already tainted the throne with thofe revolutionary ideas on the fovereignty of the people; he had then forgotten that this was making all power dej. tiling on 'heir caprice ; he pretended to make the poodle happy by placing arms in their hands, with which they deftroyed themfelves. He thought to re-eftablifh the laws in all their purity,. and he only taught rebellion; he miileads the youthful monarch, too unexperinced, to unravel the fophifms of the feet; the very goodnefs of his heart.leads him ftill more iftray. In the pretended rights of the people, he only
fees his own to be facrificed, and it is from Turgot, we are to trace that fatal error of his infurtnountable patience and fatal condefcenfion for that people, whole fovereignty led to the fcaiFold himfelf, his queen and his filler.
Turgot is the firft minifter who fhows that revolutionary fpirit, at once aniichriftiau and antimonarchial. Choifeul and Malefherbes were more impious than Turgot, Choifeul perhaps was even more wicked, but never before had a minifter been known, feeking to deftroy the principles of that authority, in the mind of the king, which he imparted to them. It was reported that Turgot had repented on feeing the fovereign mob threatening his perfon, on feeing them bnrfting open the magazines of corn, and throwing both corn and bread into the river and that under pretence of famine; it was* then, as reported, that feeing his errors, he had laid open to Lewis XVI. all the plans of the Sophif- ters, and that thefe latter ever after fought to deitroy the idol they had fet up. This anecdote, unfortunately for the honor of Turgot, is unfounded. Before his elevation to the miniftry, he was an idol of the con- fpirators, and fuch he remained, until his death.. Con- dorcet has alfo been his panegyrift and hiftorian, and he would not have been tolerant on the repentance of an adept.
Scourges have fallen fucceffively on France fince the revolution, but prior to it they had fucceaded each other in the perfons of Lewis XVIth's minifters. Necker appeared after Turgot, and Necker re-appears after Briennes. And his virtues were extolled by the So- phifters nearly as much as he extols them himfelf. This is another of rhofe reputations, which the hifto- lian muft judge by facts, not for the mere pleafure of detecting the confpiring hypocrite, but becaufe thefe vnmsrited reputations 'were a means employed for the con- fummation of the confpiracy-
Necker Necker, as yet a banker's clerk, was employed by
fome (peculators both as the confidant ai< thegent, in a bufmefs which was fuddenly and greatly to augment their fortunes. They had the fecret of an approaching peace, which was confiderably to enhance the value of the Canada Bills ; one of the conditions of the future peace being, the payment of thofe bills which had remained in England : they let Necker into the fccrct, on condition that for their common emolument, he would write to London to have a number of thefe bilfe bought up at the low price which the war had reduced them to. Necker engaged in the aflbciation, and through the credit of his mafter, the bills were monopolized. His aflbciates, returning to know the ftate of the bargain, he told them that the fpeculation had appeared fo hazardous and bad, that he had defifted from and countermanded the purchafe. Peace comes, and Necker is in pofleffion of thefe bills in his own account alone, and thefe make near three millions Tournois.- Such was the virtue of Necker when a clerk !
Now rich, he calls the Sophifters to his table ; his houfe becomes a weekly club, and the new Mecenas is well repaid for his good cheer by the encomiums and flattery of his guefts. D'Alembert, and the chiefs of the confpirators, punctually attended thefe aflemblies every Friday.* Necker hearing of nothing but philof- ophy, wouid be a philofopher, as fuddenly as he became a lord, and the intrigue and encomiums of the {eft would transform him into a Sully. At length Lewis XVI. hearing fo miich of the talents of this man in finance, called him to the miniftry as Comptroller General. Among the many means of the confpirators, the moft infallible was to introduce diforder in the finances. Necker fucceeded completely in this plan, by thofe exorbitant loans which nothing could have hidden from the public, but that blind confidence, and thofe encomiums perpetually thrown out by the feel. But let Necker have acted from the impulfe of confpir-' ators, like an ignorant minifter who knew not whither he was driven, or knowingly hollowed out the abyfs, k is not his pretended virtue that is to plead his defence. Is it not probable that the man, who, when recalled for the fecond time to the miniftry, could dare to ftanrc the people in the midft of plenty, in order to convulfc them into a revolution, could alfo attempt to ruin the finances to produce the fame convulfive ftate ? Such a virtue as his may be nearly clafled with the blacked guilt.
At the time when Necker was recalled to replace Briennes in the miniftry, at the time when his great generofity to the people was cried up, and that all France was ftunned with his great feats, at that very time was he, in concert with Philippe D'Orleans, ftar-
* Correfpondehce of Voltaire and D'Alembert, Let. 31, anno 1770.
ving the people into revolt againft their king, the nobles and the clergy.
This virtuous man had bought up all the corn, had ordered it to be ftiut up in ftore-houfes, or in barges fent it from one place to another,
forbidding the intendants to allow of the fale of any corn, until they had received his orders. The Magazines remained fhut. The boats
wandered from port to port. The people clamoroufly called for bread, but in vain ! The parliament of Rouen, concerned for the date to which
the province of Normandy was reduced, de fired its prefident to write to the minifter (Necker) to demand the fale of a great quantity of corn
which they knew to be then in the province. His letter was not anfwered'. The firft prefident received a fecond fummons from his body, to
expatiate in the^ tn'd'ft preffing manner on the wants of the people ; .at length Necker anfwers, that he has fent his orders
tothe.Intendant. His orders are executed, but the Intendant is obliged, for his ownjuf. tification, to lay them.before the parliament, and fo
f-.ir were they from what was expected, that they were barely an inllrucHon to put off the fale, and to invent divers pretexts andexcufes to
elude the demands of the magiftrates, and to rid him of their applications. Meanwhile the veflels laden with corny proceeded:from the ports
to the ocean, from the ocean, to the rivers, or fimply to the interior of the provinces. At the period when Necker was driven from the
miniftry for the feo ond time, the people were deftitute of bread. "The parliament had then obtained proof that the fame boats, laden
with the fame corn, had been from Rouen toPa- iis, and from Paris back again ; then embarked at Rouen for the Havre, and thence returned
again half rotten. The Attorney General profited of .this fecond difmrffion to fend circular orders to ftop thefe proceedings, .and
to give the people the liberty of buying this corn. At the expulfion.of this minifter, the populace of Paris, ftu- pidly fovereign, run to
arms, and demand their Necker, carying his buft through the ftreets with that of Phil- lippe D'Orleans, and never were two aflaffins
better coupled in their triumph. Tha populace would have its executioner, which it ftupidly ftiled its father ; and Necker, on his return,
ftarves it anew. Scarce had he heard of the orders which the Attorney General of the Parliament of Normandy had given, when the
revolutionary agents are fent from Paris, the people are ftir- red up againft the magiftrate, his manfion is forced and
pillaged, and a price is put upon his head ! - Such
the virtues of the adept Necker, when minifter and
protestor of the confpirators.
For the authenticity of thefe facts, the hiftorian will appeal to the chief magiftrates of the parliament of Rouen. If to ftiew the chief agent of fuch horrid deeds, I have been obliged to anticipate on the fecond part of this work ; it is becaufe Necker had confpired againft the throne, equally as againft the altar. It was through him the Sophifters were to draw the Calvinifts into their party, but pretending to the faith of Geneva he was really a Deift. Had not the Calvinifts been blind to conviction, they could have feen it in his writings or in his univerfal connections with the impious. For this empty and vain man aimed at every thing. From a Clerk he became Comptroller-General ; next a protecting Sophifter, and hence concluded he was a divine. He published his ideas on Religious Opinions, and this work was nothing lefs than deifm, and that is not judging feverely a work, which does not look upon the exiftence of God as proved ; for what can the religion of that man be, who doubts of the exiftence of a God ? This work obtained for its author an academic crown, as being the beft production of the day ; that is to fay, that could infmuate the molt impiety the leaft perceived.
After what has been faid of the minifter Briennes4 Briennei; the intimate friend of D'Alembert, after the wicked- nefs of this man has been fo public, I fhould not mention him had I not to difcover a plot, the like of which hiftory would blufh to fhow, and none but the annals of the modern Sophifters could produce. Under the name of CEconomifts, the confpirators held fecret meetings (which later we {hall lay open to the public,) and impatiently waited the death of Mr. de Beaumont, Archbifhop of Paris, to give him a fucceflor, who entering into their views, and, under the pretext of humanity, kindnefs and toleration, was as patiently to endure with Philofophifm, Janfenifm and all other fects, as Mr. de Beaumont had ftrenuoufly oppofed them. He was to be particularly indulgent as to the difcipline of the parifh clergy, even to let it decay in a few years. On tenets he was to be equally patient. He was to reprefs the zeal of thofe who appeared too active ; to interdict them, even to difplace them as men too ardent or even
Vol. I. X
turbulent. He was carefully to receive all accufations of this fort, and replace the over-zealous by men whom the Sophifters had prepared and would recommend, particularly for dignitaries. By this plan the parifh churches, as yet adminiftered by a moft edifying clergy, were foon to be overrun by the moft fcandalous. Sermons and catechiftical le£tures becoming daily lefs frequent ; in fine, all inftructions running in the philofo- phic ftrain, bad books daily multiplying; the people feeing in their parifhes none but a clergy fcandalous in their morals, and little zealous in their doctrine, were naturally to abandon the churches and theifr religion. The apoftacy of the capital was to Carry with it that of the moft effential diocefe ; and hence the evil was to fpread far around. Thus without violence, without being perceived, by the fole connivance of its chief paftor, religion was to be crufhed in the capital -, not but what Briennes might have given fome exterior figns of zeal, had the circumftances required.*
Nothing but the ambition of a Briennes, and the wickednefs of his heart, could have made him accept the archbifhopric on fuch conditions. The agreement made, the Sophifters put all their agents in motion. The court is befet ; an artful man, of the name of Ver- mon, who had been made reader to the queen by Choif- cul, on the recommendation of Briennes, fei zed oh this opportunity to make fome return to his protector. The queen recommended the protector of Vermon, and fhe thought fhe was doing well ; the king thought he did ftill better in nominating the man, whofe moderation, whofe prudence and whofe genius, were fo perpetual a topic, to the Archbifhopric of Paris: and during one day Briennes was really named. But no fooner was it known either at court or in Paris, than every Chriftian fhuddered at the news. The king's aunts and the Prin- cefs de Marfan in particular, immediately forefawthe fcandal with which France was threatened, and the king prevailed upon by their prayers, annulled what he had already done. The archbifhopric was given to a man whofe modefty, zeal and impartiality, would form the ftrongeft contraft, with the vices of Briennes. Unfortunately for France neither the king nor particularly the queen were fufficiently convinced, to loie all confidence in the pretended virtues of this man, nor did the
* See hereafter the declaration of Mr. le Roi.
confpirators lay all hopes afide of hereafter railing him to a more exalted (I at ion.
Like to the thunder-bolt hidden in the clouds, blackened by the temped and waiting the convulfion of the heavens to break forth, fo did Briennes, from the dark cloud which threatened France, convulfed during the Citing of the Notables, called by Calonne, burft fortji prime minifter. To (how his fubferviency to the So- phifters, he began by that famous edict which Voltaire had folicited twenty years before in behalf of the Huguenot;,, though he had looked upon them as mad and raving mad ,* by that «dicl: fo long wifhed for by D'A- lembert, as a means of duping the Proteftants, and of crujbing Chriftianity, without its even being perceived.^ Offspring of the tempeft, he is at length overpowered by thofe billows which carried Necker to the helm, and which Necker holds folely to immerfe his king, the nobility and the clergy into that fea of impious fophiftry and frantic rage, which the confpirators had created.- Briennes died covered with infamy, butwithout remorfe or giving figns of repentance.
By the fame intrigue that had carried Briennes to the . prime miniftry, Lamoignon, whofe anceftors had been non. an ornament to the magiflracy, obtained the feals. He was notorioufly like many other courtiers, an unbeliever, but he was alfo one of the confpirators. His name is to be found in their mod fecre't committees. On his difgrace which foon followed that of Briennes., he philofophically (hot himfelf.-Two fuch men at the: head of the miniftry! what means had they not, of countenancing and forwarding the Antichriftian Con- fpiracy \
Pofterity will find it difficult to conceive that a monarch fo religious as Lewis XVI. fhould have been furr manyim- rounded by fuch a fet of impious rninifters. Their pious min- furprife will be much leflened, when they confider that ifter8- the confpirators aimed moftly at the higher orders of fociety, and that they wifhed to deftroy religion in thofe chiefly who approached the perfon of the monarch.^ To the paffions of this privileged clafs, let the facility of fatisfying them be added, and we (hall eafily conceive with what facility Voltaire could attack a religiqii
* Letter to Marmontel, »ift Auguft 1767.
t Letter 4th of May 1764.
j Voltaire to Diderot, 25 th December 1762, to D'Alembert
and Damilavilla.
which fo much militated againft thofe paffions. Without doubt, eminent virtues and the moft diftinguifhed piety were to be found among the nobility and grandees of the court: for inftance, Madame Elizabeth, lifter to the king, Mefdames de France the king's aunts, the Princefles de Conti, Louife de Conde, de Marfan, the Due de Penthievre, the Marefchal de Mouchi, de Broglie, and many other diftinguifhed perfonages who would have done honor to the brighteft ages of Chrif- tianity. Among the minifters themfelves, hiftory will except Mr. de Vergennes and Mr. de St. Germain, and perhaps fome others who could not be challenged by impiety ; throughout the whole clafs of the nobility theie exceptions may be more frequent than might be fuppofed, but neverthelefs it is unfortunately true to fay, that Voltaire had made furprifing progrefs among the great, and that will eafily account for the moft unhappy choices Lewis XVI. had made; virtue feeks ob- fcurity and is little jealous of elevation. None but the ambitious were foremoft on the ranks, and the Sophif- ters would ftun the ill-fated monarch with the praifes of thofe whom they thought would beft fecond their views, and who had been initiated in their myfteries. Not only the throne, but the public itfelf was to be overpowered by the praifes which they lavifhed on the adept they wifhed to elevate to the miniftry. Their intrigues were more fecret and furpafled the art of courtiers themfelves ; befides, acting under the influence of public opinion, how could they not direct the choice of ia young prince whofe greateft failing was diffidence in his own judgment. By fuch arts were the Targets, the Neckers, the Lamoignons, the Briennes fucceffively forced into the councils of Lewis XVI. paffing over in filence thofe fubaltern minifters and firft clerks, importantly great, whofe fervices the confpiring Sophifters carefully fecured.
Thus protected, impiety foared above the laws nearly Jilenced. It was in vain for the clergy to reclaim the hand of power, for it connived at the confpirators ; their writings were circulated and their perfons fecure. Voltaire even writes to D'Alembert, " Thanks to a prieft «« about the court, I fhould have been undone had it not " been for the Chancellor, who at all times has fhown * me the greateft kindnefs.'1* This fhows how little
* Better ^33, anno 1774.
tny reclamations of the clergy could avail even againfl
the chief of the confpirators. This letter difcovers a
new protector of the Sophifters in the perfon of Mr. M- Meau-
de Meaupou; his ambition and his connection with pou°
the chief of the confpirators had always been hidden
under the mafk of religion.
In a letter written alfo to D'Alembert, we fee what immenfe ufe fuch protections were of, not only to Voltaire but alfo to the other adepts. He fpeaks of Choifeul. " I have the greateft obligations to him. " It is to him alone that I owe all the privileges I have *' on my eftate. Every favor that I have afked_/cr my " friends he has granted."*
Some of thefe protectors alfo aimed at being authors, and without Voltaire's talents fought to infpire the people with the fame principles. Of this number was the Due Duke D'Ufez who, to verify the expreflion of Voltaire D'ufezi that he was rtronger in mind than in body, had undertaken a work in favor of liberty and equality applied to our belief in matters of faith, without confulting either church or paflor. Voltaire only wifhed to fee it fin- ifhed to declare the work as ufeful to fociety as it was to the duke himfelf.f This work never appeared,^) we know not how to clafs the genius of the noble divine.
In Voltaire's letters we find many other great perfon- other ages who fwell the lift of adepts and protectors, many great per- names already famous in hiftory; fuch was the defcend- ">nages. ant of a Crillon or a Prince of Salme, both worthy of better days according to Voltaire ; but let not the reader miftake them, for the age of the Bayards and of thofe bold knights of former times ; no, it is of an age worthy of their modefty and their philofophic fcience. We fee Voltaire placing all his hopes in the prince of Ligne for the propagation of his fophifticated fcience throughout Brabant , and the Duke of Braganza, is as much extolled for the fimilarity of his fentiments.
Among the Marquifies, Counts and Chevaliers, we find the Marquis D'Argence de Derac, a brigadeer- general, zealous in the deftruftion of Chriftianity in the province of Angoumois, and modernizing his fellow-countrymen, with his philofophic ideas.-The Marquis de Rochefort, Colonel of a regiment, who through his philofophifm had gained the friendship of
* Letter no, anno 1762.
f Voltaire to the Due D'Ufez, i9th Nov. 1760.
Voltaire and D'Alembert.-The Chevalier Chattellux bold but more adroit in the war again ft Chriftianity. In fine, were we to credit Voltaire, nearly all thofe whom he was acquainted with in this clafs, were what he ftyles honeft men in a letter to Helvetius in 1763. " Believe me, he writes, that Europe is full of men of, " reafon, who are opening their eyes to the light. " Truly ihe number is prodigious. 1 have not feen for, M thefe ten years paft a fingit honejl man of whatever " country or religion he may have been, but what ab- " folutely thought as you de." It is probable, and it is to be hoped that Voltaire greatly exaggerated his fuccefs. It would be impoffible to conceive, that of the num-> bers of the nobility who went to contemplate the Grand Lama of the Sophifters at Ferney, the greateft part were not attracted by curiofity, rather than impiety. The fureft rule by which we may diftinguifh the true adept;, is by the confidence he placed in them, or whether he fent them the productions of his own pen or thofe of other confpirators. At that rate even the lift would greatly extend. Many duchefles and mar- ehionefles would be found, as philofophic as Sifte* Guillemetta. But let thqm be forgotten thofe adepts more dupes than wicked, more unfortunate are they ftill, if they are above being pitied.
Of thefe protectors, the Count D'Argental honorary counfellor of the parliament, is to be particularly d»f- tjugjiiftied. Nearly of the fame age as Voltaire, he always had been his bofom friend. All that Mr. de la Harpe fays of the amiability of this Count, may be true, but however amiable, it will alfo be tiue to fay, that both the Count and Countefs D'Argental were the dupes of their admiration and friendfhip for Voltaire. He correfponds as regularly with thefe two adepts :\s he did with D'Alembert, and as confidently exhorts them to crufh the wretch. He ftyles them his two angels. He employed the Count as general agent for all higher protections, that he might ftand in need of, and few agents were more devoted or more faithful, that is to fay more impious.*
! A name of greater importance, and that is not to be
Kochefou- overlooked among the protecting adepts, is that of the
c»ult. Due de la Rochefoucault. To him who knows how
much th« Duke muft have been miftuken in his own
* See General Correfppndence,
wit, it will be matter of little furprife to fee him fo fel- dom mentioned in Voltaire's correfpondence ; but facts fupply the place of written proofs. The Duke had been weak enough to allow himfelf to be perfuaded, that impiety and Philofophifm could alone give him a teputation. He protected the Sophifters, and even penfioned Condorcet. It would have been happy for him had he not waited for the murderers fent by Condorcet himfelf, to learn what were the real principles of this Philofophifm.
In foreign courts, many great perfonages thought to foar above the vulgar, by this fame Sophiftry. Voltaire could not fufficiently admire the zeal of Prince Gallitzin, in dedicating the moft impious of Helvetius's works to the Emprefs of Ruffia.* He was ftill more delighted with Count Schouwallow, the powerful pro- tector of the Sophifters at that Court, and with all thofe, by whofe intrigues D'Alembert had been nominated for the education of the heir to the Imperial diadem.
In Sweden, whence the Chamberlain Jennings, under the aufpices of the King and Queen, had gone to announce to the patriarch of Ferney, the great progrefs of Philofophifm in that country,f an adept was to be found far more extolled by the confpirators. This was the Count de Creutz, ambaflador in France, and afterwards in Spain. He had fo well blended his em- bafly with the apoftlefhip of impiety, that Voltaire, enraptured, was inconfolable at his departure from Paris. He writes to Madame Geofrin, " Had there been " an Emperor Julian on earth, the Count de Creutz " fhould have been fent on embafly to him, and not " to a country where Auto-da-fe's are made. The " fenate of Sweden muft have been mad, not to have " left fuch a man in France -, he would have been of " ufc there, and it is impoffible that he fhould do any " good in Spain.":):
But this Spain, fo much defpifed by Voltaire, could produce a D'Aranda, whom he ftyles the Favorite of Pbilofophy, and who daily went to ftimulate his zeal, in the company of D'Alembert, Marmontelle, and Mad- emoifelle D'Efpinafe, whofe club nearly equalled the French Academy.
* Let. 117, to D'Alembert.
f Let. to D'Alembert, 1910 Jan. 1769. % 2ift May, 1764-
Other dukes and grandees were to be found in Spain, equally admiring the French Sophiftry. In particular the Marquis de Mora and the Duke of Villa Hermofa.* In this fame country, fo much defpifed by the Sophif- ters, we find D'Alembert diftinguifhing the Duke of Alba. It is of him that he writes to Voltaire, " One " of the firft grandees of Spain, a man of great wit, " and the fame perfon who was ambaflador in France, " under the name of Duke of Huefcar, has juft fent " me twenty guineas towards your flatue ; condem- " ned, he fays, fecretly to cultivate my reafon, I joy- " fully feize this opportunity of publicly teftifying my " gratitude to the great man, who firft pointed out the " road for me."f
It was at the fight of fo numerous a lift of difciples, that Voltaire exclaimed, " Victory declares for us on " all fides ; I do aflure you that in a little time, noth- " ing but the rabble will follow the ftandard of our ene- " mies."J He did not fufficiently dive into futurity, or he would have feen that rabble mifled one day by the fame principles, and facrificing its mailers on the very altar they had raifed to impiety.
As to D'Alembert, he could not contain himfelf, when informed of the numerous admirers that flocked to Ferney. " What the devil, would he write, forty " guefts at table, of whom two mafters of requefts " and a counfellor of the grand chamber, without " counting the Duke of Villars and company."§ Dining at Voltaire's, to be fure, is not an abfolute proof of the philofophifm of the gueft, but it fhews, generally, men who admired the chief of that impiety which was one day to be their ruin.
It was not by chance that D'Alembert mentions the counfellor of the grand chamber. He was fully aware of what importance it was for the confpirators, to have protectors, or even admirers, in the higher orders of the magiftracy. Voltaire was of the fame opinion when he writes, " Luckily during thefe ten years paft, " that parliament (of Thouloufe) has been recruited by " young men of great wit, who have read, and who " think like you."|| This letter alone denotes how much the tribunals were relaxed, for many years preceding the revolution. They were vefted with all the author-
* Let. of Voltaire, iftMay 1768. f Let. 108, anno 1773. J Let. to Damilaville. § Let. 76, anno 1760. [I Let. u, anno 1769.
iry neceflary for flopping the circulation of thefc impious and feditious works, and of taking cognizance of their authors, but they had fo much neglected it, that in the latter times, a decree of the parliament was a means of enhancing the price, and extending the circulation of the work.
Voltaire, notwithftanding the numerous conquefls made in thefe temples of juftice, often complains of fomc of thofe refpcctable corps, as ftill containing magiftrates who loved religion. But in return he extols the philofophic zeal of thofe of the fouth. " There (he writes to D'Alembert) you go from a Mr. " Duche to a Mr. de Caftillon, Grenoble can boaft of " a Mr. Servan. It is impoffible that reafon and tol- " eration fhould not make the greateft progrefs under " fuch mafters."* This hope was the better founded) as thefe three magiftrates, here named by Voltaire, are precifely thofe, who by their functions of attorney or folicitor generals, were obliged to oppofe the progrefs of that reafon, fynonimous with impiety in the mouth of Voltaire ; and to uphold the power of the law agahiit thofe daily productions and their authors.
Mr. de la Chalotaix is of all others, the folicitor general who feems to have been in the clofeft intimacy with Voltaire. It is in their correfpondence, that we fee how much the confpirators were indebted and how grateful they were to him, on account of his zeal againft the Jefuits, and how much the deftruction of that order, was blended with that of all other religious, in, their plans for the total overthrow of all ecclefiaftical authority.f
But in fpite of all this Philofophifm, which had crept into the body of the magiftracy, we meet with men venerable, and whofe virtues were the ornament of the higheft tribunals ; particularly the grand chamber of the parliament of Paris, appeared fo oppofitc to his im-f piety, that he defpaired of ever philofophizing it. He even does it the honor of ranking it with that populace and thofe qffemblies of the clergy, that he defpaired of ever rendering rfafenable, or rather impious.:):
* Let. of the 5th Nov. 1770.
f- See their correfpondence, particularly Voltaire's letter to Mr. Chalotaix, i;th May 1762. 1 Let. to D'Akmbcrt, »3th Dec. 1763. Vol. J. Y
There even was a time, when he exprefles his h nation to Helvetius in the following terms. " I believe " that the French are defcended from the ceni.nirs, " who were half men and half pack-horfes. Thefe two " halves have been feparated, and there remained, " men like you and fame others, alfo horfes, who ha<itt " bought the offices of counfellor (in parliament,) or who " have made themfelves doctors of Sorbonne."*
It is an agreeable duty I fulfil, when I {how proof of this fpite of the Sophifters againft the firft corps of the French magiftracy. It is certain that at the time of the revolution, many magiftrates were yet to be found, who better informed of the intrigues of the Sophifters, would willingly have given greater vigour to the laws for the fupport of religion. But impiety had intruded even into the grand chamber. Terrey, as yet only known as a wicked minifter, is not fufficiently fo as a Sophifter.
Whatever may be the blacknefs of many facls men- Ju Ai°t- tioned in thefe memoirs, few are of a deeper hue than
the Abbe , r ,,
Terrey. the following one.
The bookfeller Le Jay was publicly felling one of thofe works, the impiety of which fometimes commanded the attention of the parliament. That fold by Le Jay was ordered to be publicly burnt and the author and fellers to be profecuted. Terrey offered himfelf to make the neceflary perquifitions, and was to report to parliament. He ordered Le Jay before him, and I will Jay before the reader the very words I heard the book- feller make ufe of, when he gave an account of what had paflecl on the occafion. As to the title of the work, I am not quite certain whether he mentioned it or not, but I perfectly remember what follows:-" Ordered be- " before Mr. Terrey, counfellor in parliament; I wait- " on him. He received me with an air of gravity, fat " clown on a couch, and queftioned me as follows :- " Is it you that fell this work comdemned by a decree of " the parliament ? I anfwered, Yes, my Lord. How " can you fell fuch dangerous works ? As many others " are fold.-Have you fold many of them ? Yes my " Lord.-Have you many left ? About fix hundred " copies.-Do you know the author of this bad work ? " Yes, my Lord.-Who is it ? You, my Lord !-How «* dare you fay fo ; how do you know that ? I know it,
* July ajd, 1761.
« my Lord, from the perfon of whom I bought your *' manufcript.-Since you know it all is over ; go, but «' be prudent."
It may be eafily conceived that this interrogatory was not reported to the parliament, and the reader will equally underftand what progrefs the Amichriftian Ccmfpiracy made in a country, where its adepts were feared in the very fan&uary of the laws.
