Page:Once a Week Volume V.djvu/311

 304 placed in the Bastille, after he had refused the means of flight offered him, and the sentence, passed on May 8, 1786, condemned him to be banished from France. During the trial his adherents sent to Parliament an apology for him, splendidly printed and adorned with the portrait of Cagliostro—a memoir, in drawing up which Espremenil himself had a share, and which was presented to the judges by men of the highest rank. It states, “That Cagliostro is the son of a Grand Master of Malta; that he was mysteriously educated at Mecca and Medina; after journeys undertaken in his earliest youth, he was initiated in the secret sciences of the East in the Pyramids of Egypt; his instructor, the sage Althotas, to whom he owed all he knew, was a Christian and Knight of Malta, but was accustomed to wear and make his pupil wear the Mussulman costume; that on reaching the full maturity of his intellect and genius Cagliostro began traversing Europe as a physician and prophet; endowed with the power of raising the dead and exorcising spirits, he had everywhere shown himself the ‘friend of humanity,’ a title which public gratitude had justly conferred on him.” It makes one ashamed of humanity to think that there were men, not more than eighty years back, who believed in such absurdities.

When Cagliostro was restored to liberty, his adherents illuminated their houses, and celebrated his acquittal by magnificent fêtes. A number of distinguished men accompanied him to St. Dénis: and when he embarked at Boulogne, thousands of persons lined the shore, and asked his blessing.

He went across to England, and at once published a pamphlet, in which he accused the governor of the Bastille, the Marquis de Launay, and the Chevalier Chenon, of having robbed him of his most valuable articles. Fortunately for them, these gentlemen were enabled to prove in the most positive manner the falsehood of this accusation. Cagliostro also produced a Manifesto to the French Nation, dated February 20, 1786, in which he produced, under the form of prophecies, the very natural wishes of a man who has just left the Bastille; for instance, the destruction of that state prison, and the abolition of lettres de cachet. The publication of this Manifesto furnished him at a later date with an excuse for addressing the National Assembly from Rome, and asking permission to return to France, in consideration of the signal services he had rendered to the cause of liberty.

It appears that during his stay in London, after his escape from the Bastille, he formed a connection with a fanatic of a very different stamp—Lord George Gordon, with whom “Barnaby Rudge” has made us all so thoroughly acquainted. It is a curious fact, when we remember Cagliostro’s liking for Judaism, that Lord Gordon became a Hebrew in his later years. At the same period, Cagliostro also entered into relations with the Theological Society of the Swedenborgians. Per contrà, he found a rude adversary in Morand, the editor of the “Courrier de l’Europe,” who so pursued him with his biting sarcasms, while proving the truth of his statements, that the great Kofi could not prolong his stay in England. In Germany he had lost all credit. through the frankness with which Eliza von der Recke revealed Cagliostro’s nullity and her own weakness; and also, it must be conceded, through the false charge brought against him at Berlin, of being an agent of the Jesuits.

One illusion is, in truth, more easily destroyed by another illusion, than by the simple truth. Still Cagliostro succeeded in establishing a mother-lodge of Freemasons for Switzerland at Basle; but at Biel, the local authorities took umbrage at his performances, and his wife was obliged to declare on oath, in the presence of the magistrates, that her husband had always lived as an honest man and good Catholic; and the information collected by the authorities was, consequently, false. At Turin, the Sardinian government ordered him to leave the kingdom immediately: Joseph II. had him driven out of Roveredo, and that prince also had him expelled from Trent, where he had contrived to gain the good will of the archbishop by affecting a deep penitence and going frequently to mass. He proceeded thence to Rome, where his adventurous career was destined to end. His possible object was to employ, in his fashion, certain letters of recommendation given him by the archbishop, or he may have merely yielded to the entreaties of his wife, who wished to see her parents again. He lived there at first in great seclusion: but presently, impelled by necessity, as he declared, he crept into the Masonic body “for the meeting of sincere brethren,” and tried to propagate there the ideas of Egyptian Freemasonry. He must have felt, however, that the ground trembled under his feet, for he drew up an address to all the Roman lodges, urging them to liberate him, in the event of his being arrested, and, if necessary, to force the prison. Still it does not appear that he destroyed any of his papers, for an immense quantity was found at his lodgings. Betrayed by one of his adepts, he was arrested and taken to the Castle of St. Angelo, on November 27, 1789.

The Roman Inquisition carried on his trial with a patience and moderation that was not to be expected from such a tribunal, and gave it a laudable publicity. But, in conformity with its instructions, it paid less attention to Cagliostro’s trickery and schemes, than to his religious opinions. He at length confessed his irreligious principles and heresies: whereupon he was condemned to death. In 1791, Pius VI. commuted that sentence to imprisonment for life, and if he evinced a sincere repentance, the ecclesiastical penalties and censure would be remitted. Lorenza was shut up in a convent. It has been asserted that Cagliostro tried one day to strangle his confessor, in order to escape in his gown, and that in 1797, on the approach of the French troops, he was found dead in his cell, a victim to the Inquisition: but these reports seem to be false. His time had passed by: besides, he never had any great political importance, and even what he had was of no value, since politics had passed from the hands of intriguers into those of revolutionists and violent men.

Cagliostro’s person is described by some as repulsive, and even disgusting, while others judge it more favourably. He was of short stature, and