(37.) For some time a certain method has been in use for making the

most of oneʼs money,[773] which is still practised by some of our

gentlemanly people, though it has been condemned by our most eminent

divines.

(38.) In every commonwealth there are always some offices apparently

created for no other purpose but to enrich one man at the expense of

many; the property and the monies of private people flow continually

and uninterruptedly in his coffers,[774] and they hardly ever come

back, or if they do, it is after a long while. Each of these chests

is like an abyss, a sea, which receives the waters of many rivers but

disgorges none; or, if it does, it is imperceptibly, through secret

and subterranean channels, without in the least abating its size and

volume, and not till it has enjoyed these waters for a good while and

can keep them no longer.

(39.) To sink money in an annuity was formerly considered quite safe;

it was sure to be paid, and inalienable, but, now, through the fault

of administrators, it may be considered irretrievably lost.[775] What

other means are there for doubling an income or for hoarding? Shall I

trust my money to the farmers of the _huitième denier_, or to those

of the indirect taxes?[776] Shall I become a miser, a farmer of the

revenue,[777] or an administrator of a hospital?

(40.) You have a silver coin, or even a gold coin in your possession,

but that is not enough, for such coins only exercise their influence in

large quantities; collect, if you can, a goodly number of them, make a

heap of them, and then leave the rest to me. You are neither well-born,

intelligent, talented, nor experienced, but what does it matter? only

keep up your heap and I will take care to place you in such an eminent

position that you shall stand covered before your master, if you have

one; and he must be a very great man indeed, if, with the help of your

daily increasing coin, I do not make him stand bareheaded in your

presence.

(41.) Oranta has been at law these ten years to know in what court

her cause is to be tried; her pretensions are well founded, of great

importance, and her whole fortune is at stake. Perhaps about five years

hence she may know who her judges are to be, and in what court she is

to plead for the remaining years of her life.

(42.) The custom which has, of late, been adopted by our courts of

judicature, of interrupting barristers whilst speaking, of preventing

them from being eloquent and witty, of making them go back to the mere

facts of a case, and to the bare proofs on which their clients base

their rights, is very much approved of.[778] This harsh measure, which

makes orators regret they have to leave out the finest parts of their

speeches, banishes eloquence from the only spot where it is not out of

place, and will make of our Parliaments[779] mute judicial tribunals,

is founded on this sound and unanswerable argument, that it expedites

the dispatch of business. I also wish the clerks would not forget to

accelerate their business in the same way it is now done in court, and

that not only barristersʼ speeches but the reports in writing might be

curtailed.[780]

(43.) It is the duty of a judge to administer justice, but it is his

profession to delay it; some judges know their duty and practise their

profession.

(44.) Whenever a judge is solicited[781] it reflects no credit on him,

for either his knowledge or his honesty is considered doubtful, and an

attempt is made to prejudice him or to get him to commit an injustice.

(45.) With certain judges court favour, authority, friendship, and

family connections, damage a good cause, and an affectation of wishing

to appear incorruptible induces them to become unjust.

(46.) A magistrate who is either a dandy or a gallant has a far worse

influence than if he were a dissolute man, for the latter conceals his

behaviour and intrigues, so that often it is not known how to approach

him, whilst the former with many professed foibles may be influenced by

every woman he wishes to please.

(47.) Religion and justice are almost alike respected in a

commonwealth, and the character of a magistrate is considered nearly

as sacred as that of a priest. A legal dignitary can hardly dance at

a ball, be seen in a theatre, or doff his plain and modest apparel,

without bringing contempt upon himself; it is strange a law should be

necessary to regulate his outward appearance, and compel him to assume

a grave and highly respectable air.[782]

(48.) There exists no profession in which an apprenticeship is

not necessary; and in considering the various stations of men, it

is manifest that, from the highest to the lowest, some time has

been allowed to every person for qualifying himself by practice

and experience for his profession, when his errors have been of no

importance, but, on the contrary, led to perfection. War itself, which

seems to owe its origin to confusion and disorder, and to be fostered

by them, has its own rules; people do not destroy one another in the

open field, in platoons, and in bands, without having been taught it,

for killing is practised methodically. There is a school for military

men; then why should magistrates not have one? There are established

practices, laws, and customs, but no time is allowed, or at least not

sufficient time, for digesting and studying them. The first attempt and

apprenticeship of a youth who, fresh from school, dons red garments,

and has been made a judge on account of his money,[783] is to decide

arbitrarily of the lives and fortunes of men.[784]

(49.) The chief qualification of an orator is probity; without it he is

no more than a declaimer, and disguises or exaggerates matters of fact,

makes use of falsified quotations, slanders, adopts all the injustice

and malice of his client, and may be ranked among those advocates of

whom the proverb says, “that they are hired to insult people.”[785]

(50.) I have heard it said: “It is true I owe a certain sum to such and

such a person, and his claim is indisputable; but I wait to see if he

will execute a small matter of form, and if he omits it, he can never

retrieve his error; consequently he will then lose his debt, and his

claim will be undoubtedly superseded. Now, he is pretty sure to forget

it!” The man who utters such words has a real pettifoggerʼs conscience.

An excellent, useful, sensible, wise, and just maxim for all courts of

judicature would be the reverse of that which prefers form to equity.

(51.) Torture is an admirable invention, and infallibly destroys an

innocent man who has a weak constitution, whilst it saves a guilty man

who is hardy.[786]

(52.) The punishment of a villain is an example for his fellows; in the

condemnation of an innocent man all honest men are concerned.[787]

Speaking of myself, I would almost affirm never to become a thief or

murderer, but I would not be so bold as to infer that I might never be

punished as such.

Deplorable is the condition of an innocent person whose trial has been

hurried, and who is found guilty. Can even that of his judge be more

lamentable?

(53.) If I had been told that in former ages a _prévôt_, or one of

those magistrates appointed for the apprehension and destruction of

rogues and thieves, had been long acquainted with all such rascals,

knew their names and faces as well as the number and quantity of their

robberies, and all particulars about them; and had so far penetrated

all their actions and was so completely initiated in all their horrible

mysteries that, to prevent the clamour some great man was about to

raise for the loss of a jewel, stolen from him in a crowd when coming

from some party, he knew how to restore it to him, and that Parliament

interfered and had this magistrate tried; I should class such an event

with many others in history, which in the course of time have become

incredible. How, then, can I believe, what may be inferred from recent,

well-known, and clearly proved facts, that such a pernicious connivance

exists even at the present time, is made a jest of, and is looked upon

as a matter of course?[788]

(54.) There exists a large number of men, imperious towards the weak,

firm and inflexible when solicited by commoners, without any regard for

the inferior classes, rigid and severe in trifles, who will not accept

the smallest present, nor be persuaded by their dearest friends and

nearest relatives, and who only are to be bribed by women.[789]

(55.) It is not absolutely impossible for a man who is in high favour

to lose his suit.

(56.) A person who is dying may expect his last will to be listened to

as if it was an oracle; every man puts his own construction on it and

explains it as he pleases, or rather, as it will suit his inclination

or his interest.

(57.) There are some men of whom we may truly say that death does not

so much determine their last will as that it deprives them of life

as well as of their irresolution and restlessness: a fit of anger

moves them to make a will, whilst they are living, but when the fit

is over it is torn to pieces and burnt. They have as many wills in

their strong box as there are almanacs on their table, for every year

is sure to produce a new one; a second will is annulled by a third,

which is rendered void by another better drawn up, again invalidated by

a fifth and holographic will. Yet if a person who has an interest in

suppressing this last will has neither an opportunity, nor a desire,

nor the means of doing so, he must stand by its clauses and conditions;

for what can more clearly prove the intentions of a man, however

changeable, than a last deed, under his own hand, made so lately that

he had no time to change his mind?

(58.) If there were no wills to regulate the rights of lawful heirs,

I question whether men would need any tribunal to adjust their

differences; the functions of a judge would almost be reduced to the

sad necessity of sending thieves and incendiaries[790] to the gallows.

Whom do you see in the galleries[791] of the court, in the

waiting-rooms, at the doors or in the rooms of the magistrates? Not

heirs-at-law, for their rights are immutable; but legatees, going to

law about the meaning of a clause or an article; disinherited persons

who find fault with a will drawn up at leisure and with circumspection

by a grave, able, and conscientious man, and not without the aid of

a good lawyer; with a deed in which some cunning legal practitioner

has not omitted an iota of his professional cant and his ordinary

subtleties, signed by the testator and public witnesses, duly

initialled, and which, notwithstanding all this, is set aside by the

court and declared null and void.

(59.) Titius is present at the reading of a will; his eyes are red with

weeping, and he is overcome with grief for the loss of a friend whose

heir he expects to become. One clause of the will bequeaths him his

friendʼs official position, another his municipal bonds, by a third

he becomes master of an estate in the country, and a fourth gives him

a furnished house in the middle of town, with all its appurtenances.

His grief increases, his tears flow abundantly, and he cannot contain

himself; he already beholds himself in an official position,[792] with

a town and country house, both furnished in the same style; he intends

to keep a good table and a carriage. “Was there ever a more gentlemanly

or a better man than the deceased?” he asks. But a codicil is joined

to the will which must also be read, by which Mævius is appointed sole

heir, and Titius is sent back to the suburbs to trudge without money

or titles. Titius wipes away his tears, and it is now Mæviusʼ duty to

grieve.[793]

(60.) Does not the law, in forbidding to kill, include also stabbing,

poisoning, burning, drowning, lying in ambush, open violence, in a

word, and all means tending to homicide? Does the law, which restrains

husbands and wives from bequeathing property to one another, only refer

to direct and immediate ways of giving?[794] Has it made no provision

against those that are indirect? Was it the cause of the introduction

of trustees, and does it even tolerate them? When the dearest of wives

outlives her husband, does a man bequeath his estate to a trusty friend

as an acknowledgment of his friendship, or is it not rather a proof

of his complete confidence and reliance on that friend who will make

a right use of what has been intrusted to him? Will a man make over

his estate to anyone whom he even suspects of not restoring it to the

person for whom it is really intended? Is any speech or any letter

needed, and is a contract or an oath necessary for such a collusion?

Does not every man on such an occasion feel what he can expect from

another man? If, on the contrary, the property of such an estate is

vested in a trustee, why does he lose his reputation by retaining it?

What, then, is the reason of all these satires and lampoons?[795]

Why is he compared to a guardian who betrays his trust, to a servant

robbing his master of a sum of money he has to take somewhere? Such a

comparison is wrong. Is it considered infamous not to perform a piece

of liberality, and for a man to keep for his own use what is his own?

How strangely perplexed, how terribly burdened, must such a trustee

feel! If a man, out of respect for the laws, appropriates to himself a

trust, he can no longer be thought an honest man; if, out of love for a

deceased friend, he fulfils his intentions, and restores to the widow

what has been intrusted to him, he lends his name, and transgresses

the law. The law, then, does not harmonise with the opinions of men.

Perhaps so, but it does not suit me to say whether the law is wrong or

whether the people are mistaken.

(61.) I have been told that certain individuals or certain bodies of

men contest with one another for precedence, and that presidents of

Parliaments[796] and peers dispute as to who shall go first. In my

opinion either of the contending parties who avoids appearing when

Parliament meets, yields, is conscious of its own weakness, and decides

in favour of its competitors.

(62.) Typhon supplies a certain nobleman of high rank with horses,

dogs, and everything. On the strength of that lordʼs protection he

behaves most audaciously, and does what he likes in his own province,

without fear of being punished; he becomes a murderer, perjures

himself, sets fire to his neighboursʼ houses, and needs not look for a

refuge. At last the prince is obliged to punish him himself.[797]

(63.) “Stews, liqueurs, entrées, side dishes,” are words which

should be foreign and unintelligible to us; such words should not be

employed in times of peace, as they are only incentives to luxury and

gluttony; but how come they to be continually mentioned in times of

war, amidst public calamities, before an enemy, and on the very night

before a battle, or during a siege? Where do we find any mention made

of Scipioʼs or Mariusʼs table? Do we read anywhere that Miltiades,

Epaminondas, and Agesilaus were fond of good living? I should like no

general to be commended for the goodness, elegance, and sumptuousness

of his table, till everything that could be said about him had been

told, and people had expatiated on all the details of some victory

or the taking of some town. I should even be glad to see a general

desirous of avoiding such commendations.[798]

(64.) Hermippus[799] makes himself a slave to what he calls “his

little contrivances;” all habits, customs, fashions, decency itself,

must be sacrificed to them; he looks for them everywhere, discards

a lesser for a greater, and neglects none which is practicable; he

studies them, and there is not a day but what he discovers a fresh

one. Other men may take their dinners and suppers, but he objects to

the very name of them, eats when he feels hungry, and then only of

what he likes best. He must see his bed made, but no one is so skilful

or fortunate to make it in such a way that he can sleep as he likes.

He seldom leaves his house; he is partial to his own room, where he

is neither idle nor busy, where he does no work, but muddles about in

the garb of a man who has taken medicine. Other people are obliged to

wait the leisure of a locksmith or a joiner, whenever they want them;

but he has everything at hand: a file, if anything has to be filed: a

saw, if anything has to be cut off, and a pair of pincers to pull out.

You cannot mention any tools he has not got, and he fancies they are

much better and more convenient than these workmen use; he has some

new and unknown tools, without any name, of his own invention, and of

which he has almost forgotten the use. There exists not a man who can

be compared to him for performing in a short time and without much

difficulty some labour which is perfectly useless. He was compelled

to take ten steps to go from his bed to his lavatory; he has now so

contrived his room as to reduce these ten to nine, so he saves a

good many steps during the whole course of his life! Other people

turn a key, and push and pull before a door opens, but this is very

fatiguing and unnecessary, so he does without it. But he is not going

to reveal by what means. In fact, he understands the use of springs

and machinery, above all, of such machinery as the world can very well

spare. Daylight is not admitted in Hermippusʼ apartment through the

window, but in quite a different way; he has also discovered a secret

for going up and down the house otherwise than by the stairs, and is

now studying how to go in and out more conveniently than by the door.

(65.) Physicians have been attacked[800] for a long time, and yet every

one consults them; neither the sallies of the stage nor of satire

diminish their fees;[801] they give dowries to their daughters, have

sons magistrates and bishops;[802] and all this is paid for by the very

persons who make fun of them. People who are in good health fall ill

some day or other, and then they want a man whose trade it is to assure

them they shall not die. As long as men are liable to die, and are

desirous to live, a physician will be made fun of, but he will be well

paid.

(66.) A good physician is a man who employs specifics, or, if he has

not got any, allows those persons who have them to cure his patient

(67.) Quacks are rash, and therefore rarely successful; hence physic

and physicians are in vogue; the latter let you die, the former kill

you.

(68.) Carro Carri[803] lands in France with a recipe which he says

cures in a short time, and which, sometimes, is a slow poison; it has

been in the hands of his family for many years, but he has improved

it. It is a specific against the colic, yet he cures quartan ague,

pleurisy, dropsy, apoplexy, and epilepsy. Rack your memory a little,

and mention the first disease you can think of, let us say hemorrhage;

he can cure it. It is true he raises no one from the dead, and does

not restore men to life, but he keeps them, of course, till they are

decrepit, for it is by mere chance that his father and grandfather,

who were acquainted with the secret, both died very young. Physicians

receive for their visits the fees people give them, and some are even

satisfied with thanks; but Carro Carri is so certain of his remedy, and

of its effect, that he does not hesitate to take his fee beforehand,

and expects to receive before he has given anything. If the disease

be incurable, so much the better; it will be the more deserving of

his attention and his remedy.[804] Begin with putting into his hands

thousands of francs, make over to him some bonds,[805] and then you

have no longer any need to be more uneasy about your cure than he

himself is. The world is full of men with names ending in o and i, most

respectable names, who are all rivals of this man, and impose on the

patients and the disease. Fagon,[806] you will admit that neither your

physicians nor those of all the faculties in the world always cure or

are certain of their cure; but those who have inherited their empirical

medicine from their forefathers, and whose experience has come to them

in the same way, always promise, and even pledge themselves by oath,

to cure their patients. How sweet it is for men not to abandon hope

even when attacked by a mortal disease, and still to think they are

pretty well when expiring! Death is then an agreeable surprise, and

comes without striking terror beforehand; so that a man feels it before

he has thought of preparing for it and giving himself up to it. O

Esculapius Fagon! Establish throughout the world the reign of Peruvian

bark and of emetics;[807] carry to its perfection the science of those

plants which are given to man for prolonging life;[808] observe in your

practice, with more exactness and judgment than was ever done before,

the influence of climate and weather, the various symptoms and the

natural disposition of your patients; treat them in the only way which

suits them and by which they can be cured; eradicate the most obscure

and inveterate diseases from the human body, which has no secrets for

you; but do not attempt the diseases of the mind, for they can never be

cured, and leave, therefore, to Corinna, Lesbia, Canidia, Trimalcion,

and Carpus, the passion, or rather the mania, they have for quacks.

(69.) Astrologers and fortune-tellers, who practise palmistry and

calculate nativities, guess at things past by the motion of a sieve,

and show undimmed truth in a looking-glass or in a cup of water, are

publicly tolerated; such people are, indeed, not without their use;

they predict to men theyʼll make their fortune, to girls they shall

marry their sweethearts, console those children whose fathers are too

long dying, and calm the restlessness of young women married to old

men; in a word, they deceive, but not at a very high rate, those who

wish to be deceived.

(70.) What is to be thought of magic and sorcery? Its theory is very

obscure; its principles are vague, uncertain, and visionary, but

some facts have been produced which are perplexing, and certified by

serious-minded men who were present when they happened, or learned

them from other men as reliable as they themselves are. To admit or to

deny all these facts seems equally absurd, and I venture to say that

in this and in other extraordinary things which deviate from natureʼs

laws, a middle course has to be steered between mere credulity and

obstinate rejection.[809]

(71.) Children can scarcely know too many languages, and methinks, all

means should be taken to facilitate their acquiring them; there is no

condition of life in which they are not useful, for they clear the way

for the acquisition of solid learning, as well as for easy and pleasant

acquirements. If this somewhat difficult study is put off to that more

advanced age which is called youth, people have no longer the strength

of mind and the will to follow it up, and if they do, they find it

impossible to persevere; for in studying those languages they consume

that very time which should be applied in speaking them, and confine

themselves to mastering words when they wish to proceed beyond, and

require facts; and thus they lose the first and most valuable years of

their life. Such a grand foundation can never rightly be laid, unless

it be when the soul naturally receives everything, is deeply impressed

by it, and when the memory is fresh, quick, and steady; when the mind

and the heart are yet void of passions, cares, and desires, and when

those who have a right to dispose of us, induce us to labour for a

considerable time. I am convinced the small number of true scholars and

the great number of superficial ones is owing to the neglect of this

rule.[810]

The "Characters" of Jean de La Bruyère · 第 25 / 37 段