Page:Supplement to the fourth, fifth, and sixth editions of the Encyclopaedia Britannica - with preliminary dissertations on the history of the sciences - illustrated by engravings (IA gri 33125011196181).pdf/89

Rh rather than light, because their deeds are evil;” well knowing (if I may borrow the words of Bacon), “that the open day-light doth not shew the masks and mummeries, and triumphs of the world, half so stately as candle-light.” The philosopher, on the other hand, who is duly impressed with the latter, may be compared to the oculist, who, after removing the cataract of his patient, prepares the still irritable eye, by the glimmering dawn of a darkened apartment, for enjoying in safety the light of day. How strange is the following misrepresentation of Fontenelle’s fine and deep saying, by the comparatively coarse hand of the Baron de Grimm! “Il disoit, que s’il êut tenu la vérité dans ses mains comme un oiseau, il l’auroit etouffée, tant il regardoit le plus beau présent du ciel inutile et dangereux pour le genre humain.” (Mémoires Historiques, &c. par le Baron de Grimm. Londres, 1814. Tome I. p. 340.) Of the complete inconsistency of this statement, not only with the testimony of his most authentic biographers, but with the general tenor both of his life and writings, a judgment may be formed from an expression of D’Alembert, in his very ingenious and philosophical parallel between Fontenelle and La Motte. “Tous deux ont porté trop loin leur revolte décidée, quoique douce en apparence, contre les dieux et les lois du Parnasse; mais la liberté des opinions de la Motte semble tenir plus intimement à l’intérêt personnel qu’il avoit de les soutenir; et la liberté des opinions de Fontenelle à l’intérêt général, peut être quelquefois mal entendu, qu’il prenoit au progrès de la raison dans tous les genres.” What follows may be regarded in the light of a comment on the maxim above quoted: “La finesse de la Motte est plus développée, celle de Fontenelle laisse plus à deviner à son lecteur. La Motte, sans jamais en trop dire, n’oublie rien de ce que son sujet lui présente, met habilement tout en œuvre, et semble craindre perdre par des réticences trop subtiles quelqu’un de ses avantages; Fontenelle, sans jamais être obscur, excepté pour ceux qui ne meritent pas même qu’on soit clair, se menage à la fois et le plaisir de sous-entendre, et celui d’espérer qu’il sera pleinement entendu par ceux qui en sont dignes.” Eloge de la Motte.

Machiavel is well known to have been, at bottom, no friend to the priesthood; and his character has been stigmatized by many of the order with the most opprobrious epithets. It is nevertheless certain, that to his maxims the royal defenders of the catholic faith have been indebted for the spirit of that policy which they have uniformly opposed to the innovations of the Reformers. The Prince was a favourite book of the Emperor Charles V.; and was called the Bible of Catharine of Medicis. At the court of the latter, while Regent of France, those who approached her are said to have professed openly its most atrocious maxims; particularly that which recommends to sovereigns not to commit crimes by halves. The Italian cardinals, who are supposed to have been the secret instigators of the massacre of St Bartholomew, were bred in the same school.

It is observed by Mr Hume, that “there is scarcely any maxim in the Prince, which subsequent experience has not entirely refuted.” “Machiavel,” says the same writer, “was certainly a great genius; but having confined his study to the furious and tyrannical governments of ancient times, or to the little disorderly principalities of Italy, his reasonings,