The Sun.
London, England, 1821-06-20 00:00:00

[No. XXVI-.1 . • -
HISTORY of the LIFE and WRITINGS of J. J. ROUS-
SEAU; composed from authentic Documents, many of which
have recently been found ; to which are annexed several
Letters which have never before been published. Two Vols.
Bvo. Paris, 1821. •
It may perhaps be asked, whether any thing
more remains to be said respecting J. J. Rous-
seau, after his own GOnfessions, and the numerous
Memoirs and correspondences of Iris cotempo-
varies, which have been published ? The ques-
tion is easily answered. •
The author, M. de Mussey-Pathay, did he
possess-no other merit than that of having com-
pressed into two volumes what .could not before
he found without consultiug'tsiKo hundred, would
on that account alone be entitled to our thanks ;
but they are more especially due to him for hav-
ing enriched the stores-of literary history with a
number of pieces which have hitherto remained
unknown. These documents, and his arrange-
ment of them, added to the judicious criticism
which accompanies them, throw considerable
light bit many peculiarities in the life of J. J.
Rousseau, which hatred and envy have de-
lighted in misrepresenting. Those then who
flatter themselves they know well this writer,
will know him still better after having read the
work of M. de Mussey-Pathay, which is written
with a scrupulous regard for truth, and in which
nothing is advanced without proofs, and every
assertion-is supported by indisputable authorities.
The author does not give only the testimony
•which is favourable
,to his opinion, but also that
which is opposed to it ; thus generously furnish-
ing his adversaries with the means of combating
and' refuting his conclusions. Few biographers
in the present day, it must be admitted, have
shewn this good faith and impartiality, more
especially when the ashes of the hero whom they
Celebrate are in some measure raked up (as is
now the case in France with Rousseau) by the
passions of the moment and the spirit of party,
which are never very delicate in the choice of
their weapons.
The person of Rousseau, his correspondence,
his cotemporaries, and lastly, his works, form
the four divisions of this History, and each of
them is treated with the importance it deserves.
But; in my opinion, the :MOst interesting parts
are those where he passes in review the person-
ages with whom Rousseau was on terms of greater
or less intimacy, and the writers -who are men-
tioned in his works, or who have spoken of him
in theirs. This is the trap way of discsivering
his real enemies, an historical point which it is
peculiarly important to clear up, as certain wri-
ters in France are, now labouring strenuously to.
make us change our opinion in this respect, and
to mislead the public.
According to them, Rousseau was persecuted
by the Clergy and the Parliament. It is proper
to examine this charge of persecution. The
Clergy and the Parliament, it is true, condemned'
some of his writings ; but could they avoid doing
SO ? That their condemnation had the effect of
making the writings condemned more sought
after and read, is not here the question. All I
ask is, whether silence would not have been pro
ductive of greater mischief than the course they
adopted ? Ought the public authorities, civil
and religious, by a cowardly silence, which would
have degraded them, to have passed over, without
animadversion, doctrines the very reverse of those
which they were required to uphold ? And is it
not an act of injustice to brand with the odious
name of persecution the exercise of the most sa-
cred light, that which is authorized_ by all the
-principles of legitimate defence, and could not
be abandoned by any Government without com-
promising its honour and endangering its exist-
ence ? It seems to me 'that these questions ad-
mit but of one decision in the minds of all rea-
sonable men, whose judgments are unbiassed by
party spirit. .
The real, we ought • rather to say, the only
'enemies of Rousseau, were the philosophers of his
time. Others condemned his writings, but it Was
him whom the philosophers hated. M. de Mussey-
Pathay puts it beyond a doubt. All his accusa-
tions are proved to the very letter ; and most
times he takes, as it were, the delinquents in the
very-fact, making use of their own testimony to
convict them of the charge. •.
J. J. Rousseau never spoke of Voltaire, But in
terms of admiration. He called hint his master,
and was even simple enough to believe and to de-
clare, that he owed his talentS to him. Truly, the
homage was flattering. How was it paid ? Read
the Guerre de Geneve, and some other pamphlets,
sad testimonials of a rancourous animosity, the
cause of which cannot even at this day be divined,
and- you will soon be convinced. Voltaire and
Rousseau had never seen each other. The high
and- mighty Lord of- Ferney had never met the
humble copier of music, living in a fourth floor,
and reduced to such distress as to find " every
thing, even bread, dear at Paris." How different
their lot!. It seems to me that Rousseau might
have replied to Voltaire in these words ? What'
is there in common between you and me, great
Sir ; between you, whom literature. worships and
monarchs court, and the poor Rousseau who,
proscribed at Paris, proscribed at Geneva, ex-
pelled from Berne, stoned at Motiers-Travers,
abused in France and in England by all your
friends, knows not where -to lay his head ?"
Is it possible that the celebrity. of theme citizen of
Geneva can have occasioned.a moment's uneasi-
ness to the Patriarch of Ferney ? We may be
allowed to suspect it ; but at least we might, its
justice to Voltaire, to say that his blows were
never given in the dark'. He attacked his enemy
manfully and in the open face of day, leaving