FOREIGN ARTICLE.

Lettres de M. de Voltaire, &c. a Geneve, 1766. 8vo. pages 200, pr. 3s.

Letters of M. Voltaire to his friends of Parnaffus, with hiftorical and critical notes.

E learn by the advertisement prefixed to these letters,

WE that Mr. Voltaire hath difowned those which were pu

blifhed last year under the title of Lettres Secretes *,- whence the editor concludes, that he will probably do the fame by these ; but he is of opinion that they carry in themfelves a fufficient atteftation of their authenticity. Some of them indeed are not unworthy to be read; whilft, on the contrary, others among them are very trifling and infignificant. But, it may be asked, if M. Voltaire be not himself the editor, by what poffible means can we suppose, that so many letters, written to fo many different people, fhould fall into the hands of any individual? The answer may, perhaps, be this: They are little more than a bare collection of epiftolary fcraps which have heretofore appeared in print, chiefly, if we mistake not, in the foreign journals: in fome of which we remember to have feen feveral of these letters. The three first, were, in the opinion of the commentator, not written by M. Voltaire, but by the author of l'Esprit des loix. Of these take the following fpecimen :

Let. I. To the Chevalier de Bruant.

'I was not at the B— when your letter arrived. You embarrass me extremely, and I answer you with no other intention than to amuse myself a little with a person who is himself abundantly capable of refolving the queftions he has proposed. I differ from you in opinion concerning defpotifm. It appears to me monstrous and abfurd, that a whole people fhould be blindly fubject to the caprice of one man, even though he were an angel : I would not live a fingle day under him. This angel might poffibly become a blood-thirsty monster. Defpotifm is, in my opinion, the moft abominable and moft hateful of all bad forms of government, under which mankind are conftantly debafed and crufhed to death. Open every volume of ancient and modern history, and fee, whether you can find an inftance on the face of the earth, where defpotifm failed to abufe, to outrage human nature. Monarchy would doubtless be the best form of government, if it were poffible to have always fuch a monarch as Henry IV. the only king who merits the homage and veneration of the people of France. All kings ought, like that excellent prince, to be inftructed in the fchool of misfortune; for *See an account of thefe letters, in the appendix to our XXXI. Vol. p. 525.

fuch

fuch only are truly great; fuch only love mankind. To be fenfibly touched with the miferies of others, it is neceffary we fhould ourselves be acquainted with mifery. The fouls of most princes, on the contrary, hardened by profperity and corroded by pride, are inacceffible to pity and infenfible to true glory. I am not at all furprised that in monarchies, efpecially in ours, there have been fo few princes worthy of esteem. Surrounded conftantly by debauchery, hypocrify, and deceit, they learn to regard mankind with disdain, and esteem thofe only, who encourage their vices. Such is the lot of moft monarchs. Great men are every where fearce; but great kings are infinitely more fo. Thus the fplendour of a monarchy is tranfitory. The kingdom of France finks apace into mifery and contempt. Either this century will behold its annihilation, or it will become a facrifice to fome audacious conqueror.

The government of England has nothing more than a fpecious appearance, which feduces the people because they imagine themselves poffeffed of all the power. I know no country in which it is eafier to nourish diffentions ruinous to the ftate. A king of abilities and generofity, in the fpace of ten years might eafily render himself defpotic, and reign with more fecurity at London than in Mofkow. You remember Cromwell. Money alone is fufficient to corrupt the whole parliament. The nobility, always jealous and defirous of power, and conftantly devoted to fortune which furrounds the throne, will not fail to fecond the attempts of majefty. The Great once gained, the phantom liberty, which appears only at intervals in the convulfiveparoxifms of the commons, and then again hides her head, will be totally annihilated on the firft fignal from the prince.'

Having tranflated this letter, we make no fcruple to affirm that the original was neither written by M. Voltaire, Baron Montefquieu, or any other perfon remarkable for accuracy or elegance of compofition. The manifeft impropriety in the pointing of the original, is alone fufficient to betray the counterfeit.

We fhall now tranflate part of M. Voltaire's first letter, as it concerns in fome measure our own language. It is addreffed to Abbé d'Olivet. Speaking of his intended commentary on Corneille, There are, fays he, many curious anecdotes, and remarks on our language which may be agreeable to the public. I find, for example, feveral words which we have entirely forgotten, but which our neighbours the English have happily preferved. They have a term to fignify that pleafantry, that vis comica, that gaiety, that urbanity, thofe fallies which efcape as it were without intention; and this they exprefs by the word humour, which they pronounce yumor, and of which they believe. themfelves folely poffeffed, no other nation having a word to ex

prefs

6

prefs this character. Neverthelefs, it is an ancient word in our language, and ufed in the fame fenfe by Corneille in feveral of his comedies.The word partie is alfo to be found in the comedies of Corneille inftead of Efprit. Such a one a des parties. This is what the English call parts. This is an excellent word. We affign, we appoint a time, a rendezvous. The perfon who pun&tually keeps his appointment, not finding the perfon he expected, is defapteinté. We have no word at prefent to exprefs this fituation. A road, a ftreet, which has no outlet on one end was perfectly fignified by the words non-palje, impaffe, which the English have imitated, whilst we are reduced to the impertinent and low expreffion of cul-de-fac, which fo frequently occurs to the difgrace of the French language.'

We now turn to letter the fourth, addreffed to Lord Lyttleton, the author of the ingenious Dialogues of the Dead; in which, fays M. Voltaire, I find, that I am exiled, and that I am guilty of fome exceffes in my writings.' From the first of thefe afperfions, M. Voltaire found it very eafy to clear his reputation; and with regard to the fecond, he expreffes himfelf with equal spirit and modefty. But we need mention nothing farther concerning fo unimportant a fubject; efpecially as this very letter has already appeared in an English drefs; together with Lord Lyttleton's anfwer and were printed in the Gentleman's Magazine, about four years ago.

To the above letter the commentator has thought fit to add the following note, than which nothing can be a ftronger proof both of his impertinence, and his ignorance of the real character of this nation.

Lord Lyttleton hath ingenioully confeffed his error with regard to M. Voltaire, in a letter which was made public. Though the English in general are daily writing against every thing both good and bad which is done in France; though they cordially hate all the French, not becaufe they are their rivals, but becaufe they are not Englifhmen, and because these pretended Albion philofophers believe themflves fuperior to every people upon earth; there are nevertheless among thefe iflanders fome men who are true philofophers and friends to foreign merit.' What infolence! what falfehood!

We now proceed to letter XI. written by M. Voltaire in the name of Charles Gouju to his brethren the Jefuits. Thus it begins. I conjure not only my dear countrymen, but also all my dear brethren of Germany, of England, and even of Italy, to confider well with me, for their edification, the affairs which. are now tranfacting relative to the reverend fathers the Jefuits, thofe doers and preachers of good things. I am coufin to M.

Cazot,

Cazot, and attached to M. Lionci, whom the right reverend father La Valette, apoftolical prefect of commerce, hath totally ruined. God be merciful to his prefect! But I afk every man who is capable of reafoning, whether it be poffible that the reverend father La Valette, profeffing divinity for the space of two years, could poffibly believe in the Chriftian religion, when after making a vow of poverty, and knowing the gospel, he traded for above fix millions? Is it in human nature for a priest who believes in his religion, to proceed in the gaiety of his heart to work his own damnation, by doing that which his religion condemns as highly criminal? That a believer, hurried along by violent paffion, may commit a crime, and repent, is confiftent with human nature; but when our lords in Ifrael rob us whilft they are preaching to us and confeffing us; when they perfift in this manoeuvre for years together, I afk you my dear brethren, whether it be poffible they fhould ftill believe and still cheat? whether they can believe they hold their God in their hands at mafs, and yet can pillage their neighbours the moment they have quitted the holy table? It is proved by the confeffion of the confpirators at Lisbon, that the Jefuits, their confeffors, had affured them, they might with a fafe confcience affaffinate the king. Now I afk this fimple queftion, whether it be poffible that those who use a facrament to infpire parricide, could believe in that facrament?'. A man may believe in God, yet murder his father; but is it poffible he can believe in God, yet pafs his whole life in a series of premeditated crimes, an uninterrupted chain of frauds and impofture? At least he will repent upon his death-bed; but I defy you to produce a single inftance, from any hiftory, of a priest who confeffed his crimes in his laft moments. We have frequent examples among the laiety. of public confeffion and repentance; but I will engage to forfeit ten thousand crowns (which is all that father La Valette hath left me) if you can fhew me one inftance of a penitent ecclefiaftic.'

*

Letter XXII. To M. Rouffeau of Thouloufe.

"You wrote to me, Sir, fome time ago concerning a letter, as, abfurd as criminal, printed in the Monthly Review for June. I have already fignified to you my indignation and contempt for this low impofition; but as names the most respectable are comprehended in that letter, it is of importance to know its author, for the discovery therefore of whom, I do engage to pay the fum of 50 Louis.'

As the foregoing letter to our brother journalist of Thoulouse is printed without a date, we cannot difcover in what year the month of June, to which the letter-writer refers, belongs; for

• Conductor of the Journal Encyclopédique.

can

can we so much as guess at the very criminal paper about which he is fo mighty angry: although he does not fo much as vouchfafe to hint at the fubject of it. On the whole, we are fomewhat inclined to doubt whether fuch letter was ever inferted in any number of the Monthly Review whatever. We fhall not, therefore hefitate, in imitation of M. Voltaire, to offer a reward -of fifty farthings (a great deal of money, out of the pockets of poor authors!) to any perfon who fhall discover what paper it is, to which M. Voltaire refers, and in what volume or month of our Journal, it was inferted.

The foregoing extracts, we apprehend, will fuffice to give our Readers an idea of the nature and importance of thefe letters. With regard to their authenticity, we must confefs ourselves by no means fatisfied. There are, indeed, circumstances which might induce one to believe fome of them genuine; but on the other hand, there are many reasons, with regard to a confiderable number of them, which incline us to a contrary opinion: particularly in refpect of the language and ftyle, which are in general much inferior to that terfe, correct, and fpirited manner which usually characterises the writings of M. de Voltaire.

MONTHLY CATALOGUE, For APRIL, 1766. MISCELLANEOUS.

Art. 14. The Effufions of Friendship and Fancy. In feveral Letters to and from felect Friends. The fecond Edition; with large Additions and Improvements. Small 8vo. 2 Vols, 6s. Becket.

FROM

ROM the many alterations which these letters have undergone, in the fecond impreffion, they are entitled to the farther notice of the Reviewers. We gave an account of the firft edition, in our Twentyeighth Vol. p. 481; where the Reader will find a specimen taken from the ludicrous part of thefe Epiftles. Thofe lighter and gayer effufions of the Author's fancy, however, are all rejected in this fecond edition; and, in their ftead, we now find a proportionate number of more ferious papers, on more important fubjects: fo that, in this respect, these elegant little volumes have in reality received much improvement, as their title-pages juftly profefs; and the whole may indeed be confidered, in no fmall degree, as a new work.

As in our former article we made what we thought a diverting extract, we shall now felect a fpecimen of the Writer's more fericus manner, in a fhort letter, on, indeed, a very ferious subject it is taken from the new, additional epiftles.

Religion has always fuffered much from the folly or the treachery of her own profeffors; but furely a more daring, or a more infamous fet REV. April, 1766.

Y

of