Once again Turgot, realising to the full the difficulties, the

impossibilities even, of his position, resolved to do what he could.

Within a few hours of his appointment he wrote a long letter to the

King, urging the absolute necessity of economy in every department,

denouncing bribes, privileges, exemptions, and pleading--daring to

plead--equality in the imposition of taxes. No bankruptcy, no increase

of taxation, no loans--this was to be the motto of his Controllership.

‘I feel all the perils to which I expose myself,’ he wrote. He was not

even religious in the sense--what a sense!--that officials were expected

to be religious. ‘You have given me a Controller who never goes to

Mass,’ grumbled Louis to Maurepas. ‘Sire,’ answered the Minister, very

happily, ‘Terrai always went.’

The new Controllership was still a nine days’ wonder when Turgot

restored throughout France what he had restored in Limoges--free trade

in grain. In 1770 he had written on the subject some famous ‘Letters’ in

answer to Terrai’s revocation of the edict and the witty ‘Dialogues’ of

Galiani which supported that revocation. Then, bolder still, he

suppressed an abominable piece of official jobbery, the _Pot de Vin_, or

bribe of 100,000 crowns which the Farmers-General had always presented

to the Controller when he signed a new edict. If the Farmers turned away

sulkily, angry with a generosity they were by no means prepared to

imitate, from the country came a long burst of passionate applause.

‘It is only M. Turgot and I who love the people,’ said the King. Well,

this poor Louis did love them, but his was not the love that could stand

firm by the man sent to save them. ‘Everything for the people, nothing

by them,’ was Turgot’s motto, and, perhaps, his mistake. The King was to

be the lever to raise his kingdom; and the weak tool broke in the

Minister’s hand.

The first disaster of Turgot’s Controllership was the disaster that

spoiled his Intendancy. In 1774-5 scarcity of bread made many distrust

his edict restoring to them free trade in grain. With his firm hand over

Louis’s shaking one he suppressed the bread riots of that winter, as it

was never given to a Bourbon to suppress anything. But he would not in

justice suppress, though he might have suppressed, Necker’s adverse

pamphlet on the question, called ‘The Legislation and Commerce of

Grain;’ though half the Encyclopædists, and many of Turgot’s personal

friends, were led thereby to adopt the opinions of the solid Genevan

banker.

In the January of 1775, Turgot presented his Budget. The deficit left by

Terrai was enormous. Let us pay then, said Turgot’s sound common-sense,

the legitimate contracts of Government, not by your dear old remedy,

taxation, for the ruined country can yield no more, but by limiting the

expenses of that Government and of the Court. Officials and courtiers

alike took as a judgment from Heaven the fact, that very shortly after

this monstrous proposal, the audacious proposer was sharply attacked by

the gout.

Turgot’s Controllership lasted in all twenty months, and for seven of

them he was very ill. When he was blamed once for overworking himself

and trying to force everybody’s hand, ‘Why, do you not know,’ he

answered simply, ‘in my family we die of gout at fifty?’ His present

illness kept him in his room many weeks, but did not prevent him from

dictating an enormous correspondence, and trying urgently to persuade

his master to begin his economical reforms by having his coming

coronation ceremonies performed cheaply at Paris, instead of expensively

at Rheims; and to make good his professions of tolerance by omitting

from the service the oath binding him to extirpate heretics. Of course

Louis was too weak for these drastic measures; he characteristically

contented himself by mumbling the oath, and the senseless expenses of

the coronation were as large as ever.

But Turgot, undaunted, went on working. In January 1776 he presented to

the King what have been justly called the Six Fatal Edicts--the first

for the suppression of _corvée_, four for the suppression of the offices

interfering with the provisioning of Paris, and the sixth for the

suppression of _jurandes_ or the government of privileged corporations.

The first and sixth were the real cause of battle, and embodied one of

the great aims of Turgot’s administration--to make the nobility and

clergy contribute to the taxes.

A shrill outcry of indignation rang through Versailles. Make us pay!

_Us!_ The Court had always scorned Turgot with his shy, quiet manner,

his gentle aloofness, and the reflection cast, in the most odious taste,

by the purity of his life on its own manner of living. But now it hated

him. Tax _us_! Curtail _our_ extravagances! Reduce _our_ expenditure!

What next? He has already abolished a number of our very best sinecures

and lessened the salaries attached to several enticing little offices

where we were enormously paid for doing nothing gracefully! He has given

posts to persons fitted for them instead of to our noble and incompetent

relations! If one of _us_ (even when one of us is the Duc d’Orléans

himself) wants to do something--well--illegal, he will not allow it! As

though the makers of law could not be its breakers if they chose! And

Versailles rustled indignantly in its unpaid-for silks, whispered,

murmured, connived at the fall of this quiet, strong person who had not

a thought in common with them--nor a thought of himself.

But he had a more dangerous enemy than the Court--the Queen.

Quick-witted, wilful, impetuous, with a husband whose slow, hesitating

intellect she must needs despise, clever enough to love to meddle with

great things, but not wise enough to meddle well--Marie Antoinette took

her first deep step down the stairway of ruin when she chose to be

Turgot’s enemy instead of Turgot’s friend. Could he have saved her too,

if she would have let him, as, but for her, men thought he might have

saved France? God knows. Marie Antoinette wanted to be amused, and her

particular amusement, gambling, was very expensive; she was infinitely

good-natured and impetuously in love at the moment with Madame de

Lamballe, and wanted for her the revival of the old post of

Superintendent of the Household, with its enormous emoluments. And at

her side stood Turgot, saying, ‘No.’ Maurepas had long since deserted

him. It was much easier, and safer for one’s own interest, to give the

Queen what she wanted and have done with it. As for Louis, he was, as

usual, weak with the weakness that brought him to the guillotine and

ended the French monarchy.

Turgot so far controlled him that the six Edicts were registered by the

unwilling Parliament of Paris. Then Monsieur, afterwards Louis the

Eighteenth, expressed in a pamphlet of very feeble wit the feelings of

the upper classes against this terrible reformer. That paltry skit had

already turned the King against his Minister, when Maurepas showed him a

sharp financial criticism on Turgot’s calculations as

Controller-General, and some forged letters purporting to come from

Turgot and containing expressions offensive to the Royal Family. Not man

enough to take them to Turgot and demand explanation, the wretched King

went on distrusting him and giving him feeble hints to resign.

But until there was a better man to occupy his place, Turgot would take

no hints. For the sake of France he would push those Edicts through, and

gain his principles before he lost his power.

Then another friend failed him. Malesherbes, the brave old hero, who was

hereafter to defend and to die for his King, but who, as Condorcet said,

found on every subject ‘many fors and againsts but never one to make

him decide,’ resigned his post in Turgot’s government. ‘You are

fortunate,’ says hapless Louis gloomily, ‘to be able to resign. I wish I

could.’ The storm was coming up fast. But the first man on whom it was

to fall remained calm and staunch.

On April 30, 1776, Turgot wrote to his King a note begging him not to

appoint Amelot as Malesherbes’ successor, and containing these ominous

words: ‘Do not forget, Sire, that it was weakness that brought the head

of Charles the First to the block.’ Louis made no answer. Finally, the

match was put to the tinder of the Queen’s wrath by Turgot’s dismissal

from office of her worthless protégé, de Guines; and the Minister, it

was whispered, had also declined to pay a debt she had incurred for

jewellery, as against the new rules he had himself made. Rules for a

Queen! This must certainly be the end of Queens or of Ministers! In this

case, it was the end of both; only Turgot’s fall came first.

As he was sitting writing, on May 12, 1776, Bertin arrived to announce

to him that he was no longer Controller-General. He had been drawing up

an edict; laying down his pen he observed quietly, ‘My successor will

finish it.’ His successor, it has been well said, was the National

Assembly.

Two days later, Marie Antoinette wrote exultantly to her mother of his

dismissal. What did she care for the just reproaches of the King and of

the whole nation, which that old kill-joy, Mercy Argenteau, declared

that this deed would bring on her head? She would have liked her enemy

turned out of office and sent to the Bastille the very day that de

Guines was made a Duke. Poor Queen! Her little triumph was so short, and

her bitter punishment so long!

On May 18, Turgot took farewell of his master in language nobly

dignified and touching. ‘My one desire,’ he said, ‘is that you may find

I have judged wrongly, that I have warned you of imaginary dangers.’

Clugny was appointed Controller-General; _corvée_ and _jurandes_ were

re-established; the edict establishing free trade in grain was revoked.

The Court rejoiced aloud; the Paris Parliament was delighted. Old

Voltaire at Ferney, indeed, wept and said that this was death before

death, that a thunderbolt had fallen on his head and his heart; and the

wise knew that nothing could save France now.

Turgot retired quietly into private life. That he was disappointed, not

for himself, but for his country, is very true. True, too, he was

angered at the backstairs policy which had dismissed him. But far

beyond this, there was so much he could have done, which now he could

never do! Faithful to his life-long principle of gathering up the

fragments that remain, he read and studied much, corresponded with Hume

and Adam Smith, often met and talked with Franklin, went to see Voltaire

when he came to Paris in 1778, made experiments in chemistry and

physics, and was active in private benevolence.

Was the brief evening of his life solitary? The one human affection

which, in its perfection, makes loneliness impossible, was not his; or

at best was his only as a dream or a memory. But in the great family of

earth’s toiling children he must have known there were many to love and

bless him, many he had saved from wrong or from sorrow, some whom he had

made from beasts into men. Another blessing was his--he did not long

survive his active labours. He died March 21, 1781, aged fifty-four.

A failure, this life? It may be so; but a failure beside which many a

success is paltry.

Turgot could not save France from her Revolution, but he gave her, and

all countries, practical, working theories on government, on the liberty

of the press, on the best means of helping the poor, on the use of

riches, on civil, political, and religious liberty, which are still

invaluable.

He has been justly said to have founded modern political economy; to

have bequeathed to future generations ‘the idea of the freedom of

industry;’ and to have made ready the way for the reforms which are the

glory of our own day.

Among Voltaire’s fellow-workers there are far more dazzling

personalities. But from their fiery words, exalted visions, and too

glorious hopes one turns with a certain sense of relief to this quiet,

strong, practical man, and understands why the people, whose instinct in

judging the character of their rulers seldom betrays them in the long

run, specially acclaimed Turgot as a friend.

IX

_BEAUMARCHAIS: THE PLAYWRIGHT_

Some men do great things incidentally and unintentionally. Pierre

Augustin Caron de Beaumarchais bothered his clever head scarcely at all

with schemes for the well-being of his country--was little concerned

with humanity and very much with one man--himself. Yet by a special

irony of destiny the author of ‘The Marriage of Figaro’ played one of

the chief parts in the prelude to the drama of the Revolution.

Born in Paris on January 24, 1732, the son of a watchmaker with a large

family, Pierre Augustin Caron early learnt his father’s trade, picked up

a little Latin at a technical school at Alfort and the rest of his

education from experience and from the world.

A lively, impudent, good-looking boy, young Caron was from the first

clever with that smart cleverness which is as distinct from genius or

from wisdom, as kindness is distinct from sympathy

[Illustration: PIERRE-AUGUSTIN-CARON DE BEAUMARCHAIS.

_From an Engraving, after Michon, in the Bibliothèque Nationale,

Paris._]

He was as sharp over his watchmaking as over everything he undertook in

life. He had his first lawsuit--the first of so many!--over a discovery

he made in his trade, and won it. But he was young, gay, musical, and

Parisian. His trade was only a part of his life. There were debts and

escapades. Then the watches took to disappearing mysteriously out of old

Caron’s shop; and finally old Caron turned his scapegrace out of doors,

till the mother pleaded, not in vain, for the prodigal’s return.

Then the prodigal made the loveliest and smallest of watches for Madame

de Pompadour’s ring. The King was pleased to desire one also, and the

King’s daughters, Mesdames, followed their father’s example; while the

courtiers could not, of course, be out of the fashion. Pierre Caron,

tall, handsome, audacious, was presented at Versailles, and made

watchmaker to his Majesty. In 1755, another piece of luck befell him.

(This Caron was one of the luckiest of human beings all through his

life.)

A pretty young married woman, who had noticed him admiringly at

Versailles, came to his shop to have her watch mended. Caron took it

back to her house in person. A few months later the charming person’s

elderly husband sold to Caron his post at Court, and on November 9,

1755, a patent was accorded to the watchmaker’s son declaring him ‘one

of the Clerk Controllers of the Pantry of our Household.’ An agreeable

little post, this of Pharaoh’s butler. Nothing to do, only be sure you

do it handsomely! Caron, looking exceedingly effective and magnificent,

preceded the King’s roast with a sword clanking at his side. At the end

of a few months his predecessor in this arduous occupation died, and

young Caron married the charming widow, Madame Francquet, who was

certainly older than himself, but not the less agreeable to a very young

man for that.

His marriage could not, at least, have been one of interest; or he was

so far disinterested that he neglected to complete the marriage

settlements, and when Madame Caron died, in ten months’ time, Caron

found himself penniless. She had, it is said, a very small property, but

it was apparently so small as to be invisible, for no one has ever

discovered its whereabouts. But it is memorable as having suggested to

Caron the name by which he now called himself, and has been ever since

known--Beaumarchais.

In a very short time the young widower (he was only twenty-five)

reappeared at Versailles, not as a watchmaker or butler, but as a

musician.

All the social talents had Caron--tact, impudence, a witty tongue, a

delightful voice, added to a real talent for the harp, which was the

fashionable instrument of the moment. Mesdames killed a great deal of

the too ample royal leisure with music; Madame Adelaide played every

instrument down to the horn and the comb. This delightful young

_parvenu_ is the very man to teach us the harp! He not only did that,

but he organised concerts, of which he was himself the bright,

particular star.

On one occasion the King was so impatient for him to begin to play, that

he pushed towards him his own armchair; while on another, Mesdames

declined the present of a fan on which the painter had portrayed their

concerts--without the figure of Beaumarchais. Of course the courtiers

were jealous. The beautiful insolence of his manners, the perfectly

good-natured conceit (surely one of the most exasperating of the minor

vices) naturally made him enemies. One scornful young noble handed this

new favourite, this royal instructor, his watch to look at.

‘Sir,’ says Beaumarchais, ‘since I have given up my trade I have become

very awkward in such matters.’

‘Do not refuse me, I beg.’

Beaumarchais takes the watch, pretends to examine it, and drops it.

‘Sir,’ says he, with a bow to the owner, ‘I warned you of my

clumsiness,’ and, turning on his heel, leaves the watch in fragments on

the floor.

The new courtier was at least a match for the old ones. ‘I was born to

be a courtier,’ says Figaro. ‘To accept, to take, and to ask; there is

the secret in three words.’ Figaro’s father had the secret already. Soon

he made friends with Paris-Duverney, financier and Court banker, ‘asked’

of him the art of making money, and ‘received’ so much of it that in

1761 he could buy himself a brevet of nobility. He would have bought

also the post of Master of Woods and Forests, but that the other Masters

objected so lustily to receiving such a _bourgeois_ into their order,

that even the patronage of Mesdames, and his own wit displayed in an

amusing pamphlet, could not gain the _bourgeois_ his point. So he bought

the post of Lieutenant-General of the King’s Preserves instead, and in

that capacity sat solemnly in a long robe once a week in judgment on the

poachers of the neighbourhood of Paris.

In 1764, he made a journey into Spain, where one of his sisters, who had

married a Spaniard, was living, and another had just been jilted with a

peculiar insolence and brutality by a man called Clavijo. Beaumarchais

brought Clavijo to book; the day of the wedding was fixed, when the

shifty suitor absconded a second time. Beaumarchais made the episode

famous in his account of the affair, which appeared in his Fourth Memoir

against Goezman in February 1774, and which naturally does not tend to

the discredit of M. Pierre Augustin Caron.

Besides protecting his sister and exposing her betrayer, this energetic

person was carrying out a secret mission from Duverney and recovering

bad debts of old Caron’s. Then, too, he was enormously enjoying Spanish

society, and writing love-letters to a pretty creole, Pauline, whom he

had left in Paris and whom he may magnificently condescend to marry if

her estates in St. Domingo really turn out to be worth consideration. He

was further corresponding with Voltaire, and, richest and most fruitful

of all his Spanish transactions, studying the Spanish stage.

He came home in 1765. After his return, he appeared, in 1767, as a

playwright, making his début in one of those heavy and tearful dramas in

the unfortunate style of Diderot’s ‘Natural Son.’ No one reads or acts

‘Eugénie’ now; but when the adaptable Caron had shortened and altered

it, it mildly pleased the playgoing Parisians for a few evenings.

In 1768, Beaumarchais married another widow, Madame Lévêque, having

abandoned Pauline, or having been abandoned by her on the score of his

mercenariness. Madame Lévêque was rich and young, and when she suddenly

died three years later there were not wanting envious enemies to accuse

this aspiring Caron of having poisoned both his wives. The fact that

their deaths left him the poorer might have exonerated him, if his own

character did not; but, as Voltaire said--Voltaire, who was watching his

rise in the world with a keen interest, and who rarely made a mistake in

judging human nature--‘A quick, impetuous, passionate man like

Beaumarchais gives a wife a blow, or even two wives two blows, but he

does not poison them.’

It may be noted, moreover, that all the women who touched his life

adored this Caron. He was so handsome and good-natured and successful! A

little selfish certainly; but some women seem to love that quality in a

man--it gives them so great a scope for denying themselves. And then he

was always so brave and gay!

His success now deserted him for a little while. He offended the King by

suggesting a _mot_ with a meaning--Figaro, it seems, was getting apt in

them already--which a duke gave forth at one of the little suppers of

Madame Dubarry and which displeased his Majesty, who, to be sure, had

reason to dread hidden meanings.

Then came the affair Goezman.

In 1770 Duverney died, and Beaumarchais immediately quarrelled with his

heir, the Comte de la Blache, and plunged into a lawsuit over a sum of

fifteen thousand francs. Beaumarchais won the first move in the game.

But unluckily he had more than one iron in the fire just then. He fell

out fiercely with the Duc de Chaulnes over a Mademoiselle Mesnard, with

the result that the Duke was clapped into a fortress, and Beaumarchais

into the prison of For-l’Évêque. La Blache seized his opportunity,

brought his lawsuit before the Parliament of Paris, represented dumb and

imprisoned Beaumarchais as the greatest scoundrel unhanged, won his

cause, seized Beaumarchais’ furniture, and entirely ruined him.

Beaumarchais seldom lost his coolness and courage, and he did not lose

them now. While in For-l’Évêque he had been let out on leave three or

four times. He had taken these chances to try to win over to his side

Goezman, who was Judge-Reporter in the lawsuit with la Blache, and a

most unfavourable judge to Beaumarchais. By the simple and time-honoured

expedient of handsome bribes to the wife, Beaumarchais attempted to gain

the husband’s good will. Madame Goezman perfectly understands that,

should Beaumarchais lose his cause, she is to return his gifts of a

watch set in diamonds, and of money. The cause _is_ lost. She returns

the watch and money, save only a certain fifteen louis, to which, for

some absurd _raisonnement de femme_, she considers herself entitled, and

with which she will by no means part. Then Councillor Goezman comes

forward and accuses M. de Beaumarchais of seeking to corrupt his

integrity.

This ridiculous situation Beaumarchais seized as a golden opportunity to

restore his credit before the world, to dazzle it with his wit, to

entice it with his audacity, and to make it own him the man of matchless

cleverness he was. He appealed to public opinion, nominally to judge

between himself and Goezman, in reality to judge between him, Goezman,

la Blache, the Paris Parliament, and all his enemies and rivals

whomsoever, in four famous Memoirs, which divided Paris into two hostile

camps and fixed on him the delighted attention of Europe.

Except by name, and for a brilliant quotation here and there, few people

know the Goezman Memoirs now. But in fire, wit, and irony, they are

little, if at all, inferior to the comedies by which Beaumarchais lives.

In both are the same gay surprises of situation, banter and mockery,

parry and thrust--every page as light and elusive as thistledown borne

on a summer breeze. Their cleverness gained him the admiration not only

of a senile King, but of Voltaire as well. Old Ferney declared he had

never been so much amused in his life. ‘What a man!’ he wrote to

d’Alembert. ‘He has all the qualities;’ and again, ‘Don’t tell _me_ he

has poisoned his wife, he is much too lively and amusing for that.’

Madame Dubarry had charades acted in her apartment, in which an

interview between Beaumarchais and Madame Goezman was represented on the

stage. The Memoirs were read aloud in the cafés. Of the Fourth, six

thousand copies were sold in a single day. Horace Walpole delighted in

them. Madame du Deffand gossiped of them. Bernardin de Saint-Pierre

prophesied for Beaumarchais the reputation of Molière.

The Friends of Voltaire · 第 12 / 16 段