ed billets of confession, which each person was obliged to take out from an orthodox ecclesiastic, swearing, at the same time, belief and submission to the bull Unigenitus. The archbishop ordered that no person unprovided with one of those billets of confession, should receive the sacraments or consolations of religion, or should be entitled to Christian burial. The consequence was, that some of the most pious inhabitants of the capital died without communicating, and were refused burial. Amongst them was the duke of Orleans, the devout son of the regent. His rank procured him burial, and previous absolution; but the almoner who was thus guilty of disobedience was excommunicated. These facts, that one might imagine to be taken from an ironical tale of Swift, are actual events of the eighteenth century. The parliament intervened in behalf of common-sense and justice, and decreed that the bull Unigenitus was no article of faith. The archbishop was obstinate. The priests resisted; and the altar, with the Lord's supper, awaiting communicants, was become universally the scene of scandal, of quarrel, of anathema, opposition, and abuse. These scenes were repeated through the whole kingdom; the dead remaining unburied, the mysteries of religion profaned; whilst the Jesuits, in addition to these acts of violence, recurred also to the weapons of the impious, and represented the Jansenists in farces and in caricatures.

At length the quarrel between the ecclesiastical and judicial powers reached a point at which one or other must succumb. The trick of a minister, D'Argenson, turned the court against the parliaments. A sick nun was refused the sacraments by a curate. The parliament condemned the latter. The archbishop interfered, and was condemned too. D'Argenson then came, and carried off the Jansenist nun, who was still alive, by a lettre de cachet. The parliament was incensed at this, turned its resentment from the clergy to the ministry, and made remonstrances against illegal imprisonment and lettres de cachet. This threw the royal power instantly into the scale of the Jesuits. Hitherto the court was inclined against the clergy. "The king is ennuied like every one else," wrote madame de Pompadour; "the quarrels of parliament and clergy torment him. The administration does every thing to bring them to an agreement, but the clergy refuse to retreat a single step. Yet I cannot think their billets of confession so necessary, or that the soul of an honest man would be driven from the divine presence for want of one. On the contrary,.

I think this priesthood for the most part to be composed of vain, ambitious men, bad subjects of the king, and worse servants of God. But their credit is unfortunately so great, tha

1754.

DISORDER OF THE I NANCES.

181

we must respect them. The king feels that the parliament is supporting the rights of his crown against the clergy; nevertheless he is compelled to punish his friends and caress his enemies." According to this policy, the chiefs of the parliament were taken and sent to different prisons. This, however, was not decided without a struggle in the ministry. Machault, the finance-minister, was for the parliament, as D'Argenson was for the clergy. The opinions of the latter prevailed, through means of the manœuvre mentioned; but he was unable to complete his plan. This was, to substitute a new court for that consisting of the imprisoned members; but no suitor nor advocate would plead. The remaining courts would not admit of such a menacing usurpation. The châtelet, or police-court, intrusted with the execution of condemnation, refused to act, or even to execute a criminal. An accommodation became indispensable. The imprisoned members were allowed to return; silence was imposed upon the clergy as to these disputed matters of faith; and the only point which they gained was the transferring of their enemy, Machault, from the department of finance, in which they had most dread of him, to that of marine affairs. This kind of treaty took place in 1754, on the occasion of the dauphiness being confined of her second son. This child was afterwards Louis XVI.

Such were the public events that filled up the interval of peace betwixt 1748 and 1755. Feats still more important than these took place in the publication of the first volumes of the "Encyclopédie," and of the "Esprit des Lois." The intellect of the middle classes began to flourish, and to cover, like the ivy, with its verdant honors, the walls and buttresses of the social edifice, whilst the high towers and battlements were falling to decay. The finances were in a state of disorder of which no description can convey an adequate notion. Louis XV., in drawing on the treasury for those infamous pleasures, supposed to have cost a hundred millions of livres, blushed to specify the name or the deed; and he established the pernicious custom of drawing for sums without any mention of the purpose to which they were to be applied. This suited but too well the prodigal greediness of the mistress and the courtiers. The treasury was drained in peace more recklessly than even in war; and the finance-minister could only discover the amount of expenditure, without any knowedge of its items and subdivisions. Madame Pompadour in vain thought to compensate for her profusion, by what she considered useful establishments, such as manufactories and public buildings to encourage art. Some laudable efforts, too,

were made to correct flagrant abuses. The edict of mainmorte was one; another, allowing a free trade in grain, shows the influence already acquired by the economists.

War now came to distract attention from the internal state and administration of the kingdom. It may be said, that the governments of Europe were of pacific inclinations, whilst the people of each nation showed on the contrary a warlike spirit. The French especially betrayed an impatience of what they esteemed the pusillanimity of their government. The peace of Aix-la-Chapelle was universally stigmatized as inglorious, because it did not add new territories to France. Those in power, however, had ample materials for judging how dearly Louis XIV. had paid for his conquests, and they were prepared to make great sacrifices to preserve peace. In England the court party entertained the same peaceful senti ments, so wise in their principle. But the opposition, headed by Pitt, and supported by popular clamor, demanded the ex citement of war, the glories of triumphs and trophies. The great and ignominious sacrifice which France had made to English friendship, the arresting and expelling the pretender from her dominions, was forgotten. The instances of national collision now taking place abroad, were exaggerated with premeditated hostility. Each country accuses its antagonist as the aggressor.

In the East Indies, the rivalry of France and England dated from the preceding war. Dupleix, governor of Pondicherry, an ambitious, turbulent, ostentatious man, never ceased to intrigue with the native powers, and with the court of the Mogul, to extend his country's territories and influence. The English naturally intrigued and armed against him; and war was carried on betwixt him and Clive, whilst the respective nations remained at peace at home. In this instance the French government displayed a spirit of fairness and even backwardness. They disowned and recalled Dupleix, to the indignation of their countrymen, and even of their historians, who flatter themselves that, despite their naval inferiority, they might yet have disputed the empire of the East.

In North America arose a more serious cause of quarrel. The French possessed Canada and Louisiana, one commanding the mouth of the St. Lawrence, the other that of the Mississippi. The intervening territory was occupied by the English colonists. The French aimed at possessing themselves of the whole course of those rivers and of the Ohio, which almost joins them; thus inclosing British America within a long frontier line of posts, and, consequently, excluding her from the rest of the continent. Such pretensions

1755.

APPROACH OF WAR.

183

were untenable from the nature of things, even if treaties favored them, which they did not. To draw thus a narrow line across the whole extent of a continent, that line itself unoccupied except by stray forts, and these too, for the most part, in embryo, not in being; to draw this around a vast and peopled region, can only be compared in arrogance to the act of the Roman ambassador, marking around the foreign poten tate a line in the sand, and daring him to step beyond its magic circle. The only surprise is, to see the French ministry, so forbearing in Europe, risking war upon such unsupportable claims in America. But the science of political geography was not well understood in these days.

The limits betwixt Canada and Nova Scotia, the latter having been ceded to England by the last treaty, were not accurately defined. The officers of each nation, participating little in the moderation of their governments, proceeded to extremities. A French captain was slain. Reprisals followed. Braddock attacked Fort Du Quesne on the Ohio, but was defeated by the French and the Indians,* whose alliance they had hired. England, on her side, declared war by capturing all the merchant vessels of her rival. Whilst hostilities thus commenced in 1755 betwixt France and England, Europe was astounded by the dreadful earthquake at Lisbon. Twenty thousand inhabitants of that town are said to have fallen victims to the catastrophe.

Such were now the bonds of interest and alliance of the different states, that the quarrel betwixt any led inevitably to a general war. Maria Theresa was still dissatisfied with the loss of Silesia. Naught could reconcile her to the king of Prussia. In this hatred she not only forgot the ancient enmity of the house of Austria against France, but also the deep obligations of that house to England, which had more than once saved it from destruction. England esteemed the empress fortunate to have inherited her wide dominions at the price of a single province. This province, Silesia, she could never hope to recover by the aid of England. She therefore turned towards France, and, both by her own letter and the exertions of her ambassador Kaunitz, endeavored to knit the bonds of friendship and alliance betwixt France and Austria. She urged, that the great states of Europe ought to unite to keep down the lesser ones. Shall an elector of Hanover, of Bran denburg, or a duke of Savoy, thwart and despoil us, the rulers

* Madame de Pompadour expresses herself with delight at the alliance with the Indians. "Quoique je n'approuve pas qu'on mange les morts cependant il ne faut pas se quereller avec ces honnêtes gens pour des baga telles."

of the most ancient monarchies? Maria Theresa even stooped to address madame de Pompadour as a dear friend and cousin. Louis XV. was not ill inclined to Austria. He had a jealous feeling towards Frederick, personal as well as political. The rhymes and sarcasms of the royal wit of Sans Souci galled the French monarch and his mistress; whilst his abandonment of France twice during the war gave them more legitimate cause of dissatisfaction. Frederick, in the mean time, alarmed, and well aware of the storm which menaced, concluded a defensive alliance with England. England sought in this alliance the security of Hanover: Frederick aimed at neutralizing the power of Russia, then linked to England. Austria and France, learning this, hesitated no longer, and the treaty was signed betwixt them in May, 1756.

The French commenced the war by an expedition against the island of Minorca, then in possession of the English. The duc de Richelieu was the commander. He effected a landing, and soon inclosed the English, whose force was very insufficient for defence, in Fort St. Philip. The British fleet soon arrived under admiral Byng. La Galissonière, the French admiral, had a squadron somewhat superior. In a partial action that took place betwixt them, the hesitation or incapacity of Byng would not allow him to conquer. He retreated, or was driven from those seas; an abandonment which the unfortunate admiral paid with his life. Richelieu, unmolested, pressed the siege of fort St. Philip with increased vigor Given to intemperance himself, he found it difficult to preserve his soldiers from the same excess, until he ordered that none should have the honor of mounting the breach that transgressed the rules of sobriety. This delicate appeal to the soldier's honor had effect. None were found for the future guilty of excess. The fort surrendered; and the French were in raptures at their conquest of the important island, and their advantage over a British fleet.

The king of Prussia, however, was the most menaced. He had appeased the enmity of Russia by an alliance with England. That power was preparing an army on his eastern frontier, whilst Austria, from the south, had gathered all her strength on the borders of Silesia and Bohemia. Saxony, too, was secretly in the league against him. Frederick, resolving to anticipate rather than await his enemies, entered Saxony in the autumn. The army of the elector, who was also king of Poland, unable to maintain the open field, kept in a strongly intrenched camp at Pirna, on the Elbe. The king of Prussia after having taken possession of Dresden, invested this camp defeated the Austrians inder Brown who marched to its relief