[VIII.] The Prince of Orange, Maurice de Nassau, falling ill in November, 1624, died after six months indisposition, at the age of fifty-eight, on the 23d of April, 1625. This event raised the hopes of Grotius's friends: they flattered themselves that his return to his Country would no longer meet with any obstacle. Prince Frederic Henry succeeded his brother as Stadtholder. He had not entered into the malevolent projects formed by Maurice against the Arminians. The Count D'Estrades has given us some anecdotes on this subject, which we shall relate on his authority. He assures us that, being one day tête à tête with Prince Henry Frederic in his coach, he heard him say that he had much to do to keep well with his brother Maurice, who suspected him of secretly favouring Barnevelt and the Arminians. "He told me (these are the Count D'Estrades words) that it was true he kept a correspondence with them to prevent their opposing his election in case his brother should die, but that as it imported him to be on good terms with his brother, and to efface the notion he had of his connection with the Arminians, he made use of Vandermyle, one of his particular friends and Barnevelt's son-in-law, to let the cabal know that it was necessary for him to accommodate himself to his brother, that he might be better able to serve them: which Barnevelt approved of."
Hoogerbetz's situation, who, as we have seen, was condemned with Grotius, received some alleviation by the change of the Stadtholder. Four months after the death of Prince Maurice he was allowed to come out of Louvestein, and to reside at a country-house, upon condition of not leaving the country on pain of forfeiting twenty thousand florins, for which his friends and children were bound. "It is asserted (says the author of the Mercure François) that this liberty was granted him without any acknowledgment of his fault, and without asking pardon." He did not enjoy it long, for he died three weeks after he was discharged.
Grotius's father, who knew his son was esteemed and even loved by the new Stadtholder, advised him to write to that Prince. He obeyed his father: but informed him that he was determined not to do a mean thing to procure his return. It was from mere complaisance that he wrote to the Prince, for he owns to his brother he had very little hopes of success from his letter: he was even desirous that his correspondence with the Prince might be kept a secret, lest its being publicly known should vex his Highness. The enemies of the Remonstrants would, no doubt, have been greatly offended with the Stadtholder, had they discovered that he was favourably inclined to the Arminians: and the Prince's authority was not yet sufficiently established to free him from the necessity of keeping measures with so powerful a party. Grotius's conjectures were but too true: and all that he and his friends could do to procure his return was absolutely fruitless.
[IX.] He was now at the height of his glory by the prodigious success of his admirable book Of the rights of war and peace, which a celebrated writer[147] justly styles a master-piece. He began it in 1623 at Balagni, and in 1625 it was published at Paris. It was the famous Nicholas Peyresc, the Mecænas of his age and the ornament of Provence, who engaged Grotius to handle this subject. He writes to that worthy magistrate, Jan. 11th, 1624. "I go on with my work Of the law of nations: if it may be of use to the world it is to you posterity will owe the obligation, since you made me undertake it, and assisted me in it." In the preliminary discourse he sets forth his motives for treating this subject. "Many strong reasons determined me to write at this time. I have observed in all parts of the Christian world such an unbridled licentiousness with regard to war as the most barbarous nations might blush at: they fly to arms without reason, or on frivolous pretexts; and when they have them once in their hands they trample on all laws human and divine, as if from that time they were authorised, and firmly resolved to stick at no crime." Thus it was from a principle of humanity that he composed this great work; and, as he writes to Crellius[148], to shew how unbecoming it was for a Christian and a reasonable man, to make war from caprice: which was too much practised. In the dedication of this book to the King the author observes, that Lewis XIII. like a propitious constellation, not satisfied with relieving the misfortunes of princes and protecting nations, had graciously supported him under his afflictions. He presented his book to the King and the principal nobility; who, he writes to his brother[149], received it very graciously, but made him no return. He imagined it was because he had handled in it several points of divinity: and the court would not shew any favour to heterodox works, in which such questions were discussed: but the favourable reception it met with from all Europe sufficiently made up this loss.
It will not be expected that we should make an analysis or enter into an examination of the treatise On the rights of war and peace: that would be a subject for a large work. We shall only observe that those who would study the law of nations cannot read this book too often: they will find in it the most agreeable learning joined to the strongest reasoning. The whole is not equally correct: but what large work is not liable to the same censure? Besides, we must consider that it has the glory of being original in its kind[150], and the first treatise that reduced into a system the most excellent and useful of all sciences.
It is divided into three books; to which is prefixed a preliminary discourse treating of the certainty of law in general, and containing a plan of the work.
The first book enquires into the origin of the rights of war and its different kinds, as also the extent of the power of Sovereigns: he explains in the second the nature and extent of those rights, whether public or private, whose violation authorises the taking up arms: in the third he treats of all that relates to the course of the war and the treaties of peace which put an end to it.
The celebrated translator of Grotius and Puffendorf assures us that Grotius took the hint of attempting a system of natural law from Lord Bacon's works; and certainly, he adds, none was more proper for such an undertaking. A clear head, an excellent judgment, profound meditation, universal learning, prodigious reading, continual application to study amidst many distractions and the duties of several considerable places, together with a sincere love to truth, are qualities which cannot be denied to that great man without wronging our own judgment and giving room to suspect us of black envy or gross ignorance. It is said that he designed at first to give his book the title, of The law of nature and of nations; but afterwards preferred that which it now bears, Of the rights of war and peace. Never book met with such universal approbation: Commentaries have been written upon it by many learned men, and it has been publicly read at Universities. Though M. Barbeyrac thinks Puffendorf's book much more useful, he is at the same time persuaded that if Grotius had not led the way, we should not yet have had any tolerable system of natural law: "and, he adds, if Puffendorf had been in Grotius's place, and Grotius in Puffendorf's, the treatise Of the rights of war and peace would in my opinion have been much more defective; and that Of the law of nature and nations much more perfect." Puffendorf himself owns that there remained few things to be said after Grotius.
Though the Latin language was at that time more used than at present, the principal nations of Europe wanted to have this work in their mother tongue. Grotius, on examining the Dutch translation, found the translator often wilfully deviating from the true sense of the original. The Great Gustavus caused it to be translated into Swedish: a translation of it into English was preparing in the year 1639: Mr. Barbeyrac thinks it was not finished in Grotius's life-time, but there have been two English translations of it since his death. It was first translated into German in 1707 by Mr. Schutz. The Leipsick journalists speak of this translation as very correct. There are two in French; one by Mr. Courtin, which that of Barbeyrac has totally eclipsed, and most justly: for never did a great author meet with a translator more worthy of him. Mr. Barbeyrac possessed all the necessary qualifications for executing properly such a difficult translation as that of the treatise Of the rights of war and peace.
This so excellent and highly esteemed work was however severely criticised by one of the most learned men of the last century. Salmasius, who had been Grotius's admirer, and who in the latter part of his life did all he could to destroy his reputation, never spoke of The rights of war and peace but with the greatest contempt: which was the more shocking; as, in his dispute with the English on the right of Kings, he every where copies Grotius, and when he departs from him is sure to blunder: with which Boëclerus has justly reproached him.