Note 419 — VI. 1737-1755. The "Considérations"—The Plan of 1737—The Plan of 1755.

Perhaps one source of obscurity is d'Argenson's unhappy title. By "la démocratie" he means, not "democracy," but "the democratic element." He was early taken to task for this ambiguity of phrase. Bound up with one of the manuscripts in the Arsenal are half-a-dozen sheets of criticism returned to d'Argenson by St. Pierre in the spring of 1738. St. Pierre begins by saying that democracy is a form of government in which the final voice on public questions rests with the majority of the people, and that the author has really no right to speak of "democracy" in connection with his scheme. Attached to these sheets is a pretty little letter, which is interesting enough to reproduce.

"Mardi, 8 avril, 1738, au Palais Roial.

"M. de Fontenelle a lu plusieurs chapitres du manuscrit; il panse comme vous sur les elexions des officiers municipaux, et trouve que sans y panser vous parlez fort eloquemment et fortement, et souvent avec des alluzions très justes et très gracieuses.

"Pour moi, je panse aussi très souvent comme vous, et que vous pouvez aller loin si vous continuez à méditer et à écrire.

"Vous verrez dans le petit cahier (above referred to) les observations que j'ai faites en lizant vôtre manuscrit, que je vous invite à perfexionner de plus en plus; et surtout à l'accusation de notre extrême indolence sur la pernicieuse métode de la vénalité des emplois publics.

"M. de Fontenelle croit que M. d'Aube serait bien aize de lire vôtre manuscrit; il en est digne, et est de vos amis; il écrit aussi sur quelques matières de gouvernement.

"C'est à vous de juger de mes observations, at à les rectifier.

"L'ABÉ DE ST. PIERRE."

[420] Voltaire to d'Argenson, June 21, 1739 (Garnier). In speaking of this letter, M. de Broglie represents that Voltaire regarded d'Argenson's book merely as the lucubration of an influential fool, and that his congratulations and criticism were utterly insincere ("Marie Thérèse," I. pp. 187-90).

The origin of this, at first sight, astonishing suggestion is not very hard to discover. The historian happened to have read the "Considérations" in the edition of 1784. Unaware of the divergencies between the two editions, he of course assumed that it was the Plan published in 1784 in reference to which Voltaire was writing; and failing very naturally to understand how, in regard to it, Voltaire could have meant what he said, was driven to suggest that he said what he did not mean; that, in short, Voltaire thought d'Argenson a fool, and chose to flatter him for his own purposes.

This is a grave imputation upon both men; and the grounds for it disappear entirely when Voltaire's letters are read in connection with the Plan of 1764 (1737), of which he was actually writing. His meaning at once becomes natural and clear. D'Argenson had been arguing against over-centralisation, and had advocated the introduction of local government upon a very modest scale. Voltaire replies that a system not dissimilar in effect, was already at work in England; that there local affairs proceeded without the intervention of a Council of State; and that the law-abiding character of the English people was largely due to their habit of local self-government. The argument is quite clear, and is simply destroyed by equivocal interpretation.

Voltaire's feeling on receiving the book was one of keen surprise and warm admiration. For months afterwards his letters are witness to the impression it produced upon him. So cordial and frank are they that it was at first difficult to conceive by what process the idea of insincerity could have been fathered upon them.

Had Voltaire really written in such a spirit, not only his reputation as a critic but his honour as a man would have suffered very gravely. For months past d'Argenson had been straining every nerve to defend him from "the literary police;" and to have written to his protector as the historian suggests, would have been an act of black dishonour. It is true that there were men before whom Voltaire could abase and debase himself; but d'Argenson the philosophe, his old school friend, was not one of them. With the exception of Count d'Argental, there is not one of his correspondents to whom Voltaire writes with such openness and freedom.

[421] Voltaire to d'Argenson, May 8, 1739 (Garnier).

[422] "Ce Traité de Politique a esté composé à l'occasion de ceux de M. de Boulainvilliers, touchant l'ancien gouvernement féodal de la France, 1737" (title-page of manuscripts in the Bibliothèque de l'Arsenal).

[423] "Considérations," edition of 1764, article 41.

[424] See "Considérations," p. 189 (1764).

[425] Voltaire to d'Argenson, July 28, 1739 (Garnier).

[426] So far as is known to the writer, the only full account of it is that of M. de Broglie ("Marie Thérèse," I. pp. 187-90), which is open to grave objection. The scheme is not noticed by, or apparently known to, M. Martin ("Histoire de France"), who examines the Plan of 1764 (1737).

[427] This article portrays in brief the spirit of the whole scheme.

[428] I.e., each district receiver.

[429] De Broglie, "Marie Thérèse," I. chap. ii. § 2.

[430] See pp. 156-66.

[431] See p. 182-3.

[432] See Martin, "Histoire de France," XVI.

[433] See Plan (above), article XI. There were four from each of the Estates and they had no common organisation.

[434] The popular attacks (see Chap. V.) were directed against the person of the monarch and the ministers. The tradition of the monarchy survived the disasters of the Seven Years' War, and only began to crumble with the dismissal of Turgot. The danger to it threatened by the popular attacks was only understood by a few men like d'Argenson.

[435] And this wise man knew it. He writes in March, 1756:—

"Cependant le Roi est très mal conseillé; il se donne toujours tort et donne toujours raison au parlement. On le dégrade peu à peu, surtout dans le siécle lumineux et philosophique où nous vivons. Si Henri III. fut obligé de se mettre à la tête de la Ligue, Louis XV. devrait se mettre à la tête de la philosophie, de la justice et de la raison pour rétablir son pouvoir et son bonheur; qu'il se constitue hardiment le chef des réformateurs de l'État pour conduire mieux qu'eux les réparations que demande la situation de la France" (Journal, Rathery, IX. p. 222).

[436] See one of her thrice delightful letters to the Comtesse de Baschi ("Lettres de Madame de Pompadour," I. pp. 71-6. Owen. London, 1771).