EXAMINATION OF THE AFFAIR OF HOCQUE, MAGICIAN.
Monsieur de St. Andre, consulting physician in ordinary to the king,
in his sixth letter[144] against magic, maintains that in the affair
of Hocque which has been mentioned, there was neither magic, nor
sorcery, nor any operation of the demon; that the venomous drug which
Hocque placed in the stables, and by means of which he caused the
death of the cattle stalled therein, was nothing but a poisonous
compound, which, by its smell and the diffusion of its particles,
poisoned the animals and caused their death; it required only for
these drugs to be taken away for the cattle to be safe, or else to
keep the cattle from the stable in which the poison was placed. The
difficulty laid in discovering where these poisonous drugs were
hidden; the shepherds, who were the authors of the mischief, taking
all sorts of precautions to conceal them, knowing that their lives
were in danger if they should be discovered.
He further remarks that these _gogues_ or poisoned drugs lose their
effects after a certain time, unless they are renewed or watered with
something to revive them and make them ferment again. If the devil had
any share in this mischief, the drug would always possess the same
virtue, and it would not be necessary to renew it and refresh it to
restore it to its pristine power.
In all this, M. de St. Andre supposes that if the demon had any power
to deprive animals of their lives, or to cause them fatal maladies, he
could do so independently of secondary causes; which will not be
easily granted him by those who hold that God alone can give life and
death by an absolute power, independently of all secondary causes and
of any natural agent. The demon might have revealed to Hocque the
composition of this fatal and poisonous drug--he might have taught him
its dangerous effects, after which the venom acts in a natural way; it
recovers and resumes its pristine strength when it is watered; it acts
only at a certain distance, and according to the reach of the
corpuscles which exhale from it. All these effects have nothing
supernatural in them, nor which ought to be attributed to the demon;
but it is credible enough that he inspired Hocque with the pernicious
design to make use of a dangerous drug, which the wretched man knew
how to make up, or the composition of which was revealed to him by the
evil spirit.
M. de St. Andre continues, and says that there is nothing in the death
of Hocque which ought to be attributed to the demon; it is, says he, a
purely natural effect, which can proceed from no other cause than the
venomous effluvia which came from the poisonous drug when it was taken
up, and which were carried towards the malefactor by those which
proceeded from his own body while he was preparing it, and placing it
in the ground, which remained there and were preserved in that spot,
so that none of them had been dissipated.
These effluvia proceeding from the person of Hocque, then finding
themselves liberated, returned to whence they originated, and drew
with them the most malignant and corrosive particles of the charge or
drug, which acted on the body of this shepherd as they did on those of
the animals who smelled them. He confirms what he has just said, by
the example of sympathetic powder which acts upon the body of a
wounded person, by the immersion of small particles of the blood, or
the pus of the wounded man upon whom it is applied, which particles
draw with them the spirit of the drugs of which it (the powder) is
composed, and carry them to the wound.
But the more I reflect on this pretended evaporation of the venomous
effluvia emanating from the poisoned drug, hidden at Passy en Brie,
six leagues from Paris, which are supposed to come straight to Hocque,
shut up at la Tournelle, borne by the animal effluvia proceeding from
this malefactor's body at the time he made up the poisonous drug and
put it in the ground, so long before the dangerous composition was
discovered; the more I reflect on the possibility of these
evaporations the less I am persuaded of them. I could wish to have
proofs of this system, and not instances of the very doubtful and very
uncertain effects of sympathetic powder, which can have no place in
the case in question. It is proving the obscure by the obscure, and
the uncertain by the uncertain; and even were we to admit generally
some effects of the sympathetic powder, they could not be applicable
here; the distance between the places is too great, and the time too
long; and what sympathy can be found between this shepherd's poisonous
drug and his person for it to be able to return to him who is
imprisoned at Paris, when the _gogue_ is discovered at Passy?
The account composed and printed on this event bears, that the fumes
of the wine which Hocque had drank having evaporated, and he
reflecting on what Beatrice had made him do, began to agitate himself,
howled, and complained most strangely, saying that Beatrice had taken
him by surprise, that it would occasion his death, and that he must
die the instant that _Bras-de-fer_--another shepherd, to whom Beatrice
had persuaded Hocque to write word to take off the poisoned drug which
he had scattered on the ground at Passy--should take away the dose. He
attacked Beatrice, whom he wanted to strangle; and even excited the
other felons who were with him in prison and condemned to the galleys,
to maltreat her, through the pity they felt for the despair of Hocque,
who, at the time the dose was taken off the land, had died in a
moment, in strange convulsions, and agitating himself like one
possessed.
M. de St. Andre would again explain all this by supposing Hocque's
imagination being struck with the idea of his dying, which he was
persuaded would happen at the time they carried away the poison, had a
great deal to do with his sufferings and death. How many people have
been known to die at the time they had fancied they should, when
struck with the idea of their approaching death. The despair and
agitation of Hocque had disturbed the mass of his blood, altered the
humors, deranged the motion of the effluvia, and rendered them much
susceptible of the actions of the vapors proceeding from the poisonous
composition.
M. de St. Andre adds that, if the devil had any share in this kind of
mischievous spell, it could only be in consequence of some compact,
either expressed or tacit, that as soon as the poison should be taken
up, he who had put it there should die immediately. Now, what
likelihood is there that the person who should make this compact with
the devil should have made use of such a stipulation, which would
expose him to a cruel and inevitable death?
1. We may reply that fright can cause death; but that it is not
possible for it to produce it at a given time, nor can he who falls
into a paroxysm of grief say that he shall die at such a moment; the
moment of death is not in the power of man in similar circumstances.
2. That so corrupt a character as Hocque, a man who, without
provocation, and to gratify his ill-will, kills an infinite number of
animals, and causes great damage to innocent persons, is capable of
the greatest excess, may give himself up to the evil spirit, by
implicated or explicit compacts, and engage, on pain of losing his
life, never to take off the charge he had thrown upon a village. He
believed he should risk nothing by this stipulation, since he was free
to take it away or to leave it, and it was not probable that he should
ever lightly thus expose himself to certain death. That the demon had
some share in this virtue of the poisonous composition is very likely,
when we consider the circumstances of its operations, and those of the
death and despair of Hocque. This death is the just penalty of his
crimes, and of his confidence in the exterminating angel to whom he
had yielded himself.
It is true that impostors, weak minds, heated imaginations, ignorant
and superstitious persons have been found who have taken for black
magic, and operations of the demon, what was quite natural, and the
effect of some subtilty of philosophy or mathematics, or even an
illusion of the senses, or a secret which deceives the eye and the
senses. But to conclude from thence that there is no magic at all, and
that all that is said about it is pure prejudice, ignorance, and
superstition, is to conclude what is general from what is particular,
and to deny what is true and certain, because it is not easy to
distinguish what is true from what is false, and because men will not
take the trouble to examine into causes. It is far easier to deny
everything than to enter upon a serious examination of facts and
circumstances.
Footnotes:
[144] M. de St. Andre, Letter VI. on the subject of Magic, &c.