[262] Aulard, Hist. polit. de la révol. p. 24. [↑]
[263] This is the sufficient comment on a perplexing page of Lord Morley’s second monograph on Burke (pp. 110–11), which I have never been able to reconcile with the rest of his writing. [↑]
[264] Lecky, Hist. of England in the Eighteenth Century, small ed. vi, 263. [↑]
[265] D’Argenson notes this repeatedly, though in one passage he praises the Parlement as having alone made head against absolutism (déc. 1752; ed. cited, iv, 116). [↑]
[266] Maximes et Pensées, ed. 1856, p. 72. [↑]
[268] Chamfort in another passage maintains against Soulavie that the Academy did much to develop the spirit of freedom in thought and politics. Id. p. 107. And this too is arguable, as we have seen. [↑]
[269] On this complicated issue, which cannot be here handled at any further length, see Prof. P. A. Wadia’s essay The Philosophers and the French Revolution (Social Science Series, 1904), which, however, needs revision; and compare the argument of Nourrisson, J.-J. Rousseau et le Rousseauisme, 1903, ch. xx. [↑]
[270] Correspondance de Grimm, ed. cited, xiv, 5–6. Lettre de janv. 1788. [↑]