The Anglo-French Entente In The Seventeenth Century Part 16

CHAPTER IX

A QUARREL IN SOHO (1682)

It is a comparatively easy task to find out how _Monsieur l'amba.s.sadeur_ of France or a distinguished foreign author lived in London. In both cases their dispatches, memoirs, and letters, and sometimes their friends'

letters, are extant. But how about the merchants who had seldom time to gossip about their private affairs; and the crowd of artisans, working-men, and servants who did not, nay could not, write? Fortunately others wrote for them, when actuated by some strong motive. Take, for instance, the following story preserved in an old pamphlet[281] and which, reprinted, needs no lengthy commentary to give insight into the life of the poorer Frenchmen whose lot it was to work and quarrel in and about Soho and Covent Garden under Charles II.:--

"About five weeks ago, the wife of _Monsieur de la Coste_, a _French_ Taylor, dwelling then at the upper end of _Bow Street_ in _Covent Garden_, lying upon her death-bed, sent for _Mr. Dumarest_ (here the unknown author of the pamphlet is wrong, he should have spelt the name _Du Marescq_, as any one may see who cares to consult Baron de Schickler's learned work on the French churches in London) that he might comfort and pray with her before she departed; which the aforesaid minister having accordingly done, and acquitted himself of the function of his ministry (this phrase sounds strangely un-English; maybe the writer who knows so much about the French colony in London is a Frenchman himself), the sick person caused the company to be desired to withdraw, for that she had something particular to say to her husband and the minister. The company being withdrawn, she desired her husband to take care of a daughter she had by a former marriage, who lived in the house of the widow of one _Reinbeau_, because that she was a Papist, and that she feared that after her death she would seduce her daughter. (The construction of the sentence is confusing at first, and very ungrammatical. By using the verb 'to seduce' with the meaning of 'to convert to Romanism,' the author betrays a French Protestant descent.) The husband promised to do what his wife desired; the dying person, not content with the promise of her husband, made the same request to the minister, who a.s.sured her that he would acquit himself of his duty (_s'acquitter de son devoir_ literally translated) in that respect.

[Ill.u.s.tration: THE FRENCH TAILOR

After Arnoult]

"The sick party died the day after, and the father-in-law sent immediately for the young maid, clothed her very handsomely, and told her the last will of her mother; the young maid made answer that she was born a Protestant, brought up as such, and that she would be very glad to be instructed in her religion, that she might resist and prevent falling into error. Her father-in-law finding her in that resolution, told her that it was requisite she should live in his house, to which she consented with a willing heart.

"Some days after, widow _Reinbeau_ caused Mr. _La Coste_ to be fetched before a Justice of the _Peace_ for detaining from her her apprentice ('an apprentice is a sort of slave,' wrote the French traveller Misson,[282] 'he can't marry, nor have any dealings on his own account; all he earns is his master's.' Apprentices were bound by deed for a term of years, sometimes sums of money were given with them, as a premium for their instruction. If they ran away, they might be compelled to serve out their time of absence within seven years after the expiration of their contract). He appeared there accordingly and said that his wife's daughter was not an apprentice, and that though she were so, he was not willing that she should be seduced, that he knew there was such a design, but the _Justice_, without having regard to this, redelivered the young maid into her pretended mistress's hands.

"The father-in-law complained hereof to his friends, and while they were contriving to remedy this business (imagine the excitement), the young maid went to Mr. Jehu (this is surely a misprint), a goldsmith dwelling in the house of the deceased (and no doubt an important member of the Protestant community), and weeping bitterly, desired him to use the means of having her instructed in her religion, and of getting her out of the hands of the Papists. He promised to use his endeavours for that purpose, and that he might perform his word, he went to Mr. _Dumarest_, a minister, and told him the business; who a.s.sured him of contributing all that lay in his power to his efforts; and they two together agreed that on Sunday, the Second of _June_, the young maid should go to the _Greek_ Church (in Hog Lane, now Crown Street, Soho, a kind of chapel-of-ease to the _Savoy_ Church), and that she should be there examined. Accordingly she went thither to that intent, but the minister being hastened to go to the _Savoy_ Church, bid the young maid follow him, that he would discourse her on the way, and that he would after that present her to the Consistory (otherwise: the elders); which the young maid agreeing to, followed the minister (we can trace their way on an old map through the dingy ill-paved lanes lined with squalid houses and almost hear the minister 'discourse' in loud French, thus attracting notice), but they were no sooner in Newport Street, than that widow _Reinbeau_, a niece of hers, three of her nephews, a vintner and other Papists stopped the maid and minister in the way; and the widow with an insolent tone asked the minister why he talked to that maid? The minister asked her by what authority she asked him that question?

To which she said that this maid was her apprentice: The minister told her that he was a.s.sured of the contrary, but that though she were so, he had a right to instruct her, and that it was only with that intent that he spoke to her and that she followed him, that it was _Sunday_, and that after she had been catechized, she should return unto her house (the widow's house, of course), until it was known if she was under any obligation to her or not, which after he had said, he bid the young maid continue her way with him. (We can see Du Marescq standing in wig and gown, vainly trying to pacify the irate widow, and the small crowd of her gesticulating relations and friends gathering round.)

"The widow seeing that the young maid followed, seized her with violence, swore that she should not go with the minister; at the same time three of her bullies surrounded the minister, and after he had told them that he was amazed they should commit such violence on the King's highway on a _Sunday_, when the business was only the instruction of one of his subjects, being in fear of the _Roman dagger_, he went to a Justice of Peace called Sir John Reresby, to inform him of the whole matter. (In this little tragi-comedy, Sir John Reresby, made Justice of the Peace for Middles.e.x and Westminster in Nov. 1684, plays the part of the upright judge; a time-saver he appears to have been, but then he was a strong anti-papist; at that moment he had just been superintending proceedings against Thynne's murderers and probably cared very little for the noisy Frenchmen.)

"The minister was no sooner gone than that Mr. _Jehu_ being desirous to get near the young maid and speak to the widow _Reinbeau_, this woman without hearing him, fell upon him, tore his peruke and shoulder-knot off, and she and her myrmidons began to cry out: _a French Papist_ (a scurvy trick!).

"This piece of malice had like to have cost the Protestant his life, for at the same time some of the _mobile_ who were crowded about him seized him by the throat; but the populace being undeceived, and having understood the _Popish_ trick, let go the Protestant, which the Papists perceiving, they ran into a house hard by, swearing they would cause the _French_ Protestant to be stabbed (just after the scare caused by the Popish Plot, there was not a loyal Protestant, either English or French, who did not believe every Papist had a knife up his sleeve and was scheming a new Bartholomew's Day).

"After they were got into that house, they immediately contrived how to secure their prey: for that purpose they sent for a chair and had her conveyed away (after the manner of the Catholics in France, as every one in England knew at the time).

"During that interval Mr. _Du Marest_ the minister having discoursed Sir _John Reresby_ upon this business, this worthy Justice of the Peace sent for a constable (_deus ex machina!_), and gave him a warrant. The constable performed his commission, brought the widow and her niece, but the other Papists prevented his seizing them by making their escape in the crowd.

"The Justice of the Peace examined them concerning the maid, they confessed that she was not an apprentice, but a maid they set to work, and to whom they gave twenty s.h.i.+llings a year; upon this, and the declaration which the young maid made, he discharged her ('apprentices to trades,' said Blackstone almost a hundred years later, 'may be discharged on reasonable cause, either at the request of themselves or masters, at the quarter sessions, or by one justice, with appeal to the sessions'), and recommended the care of her to the minister, and then proceeded to examine to the bottom ('au fond' is the French legal term which would naturally occur to the writer of this pamphlet) the violent action which the women had committed, and upon their confession, and the depositions of several witnesses, he bound them to the sessions (here should the story end, but the writer thinks it needs a moral, and so he proceeds).

"This conduct of the Papists would something startle me, if I did not daily hear of such-like violences. But when I am a.s.sured that a certain Papist called _Maistre Jacques_ (let us hope Sir John Reresby will have him hanged at next Middles.e.x a.s.sizes), upon a dispute of religion, did so wound a Protestant that he is since dead of it; when people of honour a.s.sure me, that they hear Papists call the ill.u.s.trious Queen _Elizabeth_ a wh.o.r.e, and beat those who oppose them upon this subject; when I hear that the Papists threatened some years since, that they would set the streets a-flowing with blood (the Popish Plot again!); when that I see people that are perverted every day, and who are taken from us by force; when I see that the Papists contemn the King's Proclamations, that, instead of withdrawing according to his pleasure to some distance from _London_, they crowd to that degree this City and its suburbs, that one would say they designed to make a garrison of it; I do not wonder at this last insolence, and I apprehend much greater if care be not taken."

Such a pamphlet could be the production only of a Frenchman, most probably of mean condition, certainly no scholar. The interest lies less in the narrative itself, than in the frame of mind which it reveals among the humbler Frenchmen then living in London. While the Protestant refugees are in fear for their safety, their Catholic fellow-countrymen exhibit a singular arrogance in so small a minority. No doubt the effects of the French King's policy were being felt even in England, some knowledge of the secret articles of the Treaty of Dover filtering down, through the medium of priests and monks, to the ranks of the working people: they now suspect Charles II. to be in the pay of Louis XIV., and hope that the King of England will soon proclaim his Catholic faith and call in the aid of the French dragoons to convert the reluctant heretics. In a similar manner are the private arrangements between Sultans and European Powers divined and commented on at the present time by the native population in Persia or Barbary. The slightest quarrel, the most commonplace street brawl are pretexts for rival factions to come out in battle array. Among men of the same race and blood, feelings of hatred and instances of perfidiousness are manifest. As is always the case in time of civil war, the aid of the foreigner, be he an hereditary enemy, is loudly called for and order is finally restored by constable, judge, and gaoler.

FOOTNOTES:

[281] _The Relation of an a.s.sault made by French Papists upon a Minister of the French Church, in Newport Street, near St. Martin's Lane_, 11th June 1682.

[282] _Memoires et observations faites en Angleterre_, La Haye, 1698.

CHAPTER X

THE COURTs.h.i.+P OF PIERRE COSTE AND OTHER LETTERS

Pierre Coste would be quite forgotten to-day if, by a singular piece of good luck, he had not translated Locke's _Essay_ into French. Born at Uzes, in Southern France, in 1668, Coste fled to Holland at the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes. Though accepted as a minister by the Synod of Amsterdam, he appears never to have fulfilled pastoral duties. He knew Latin, Greek, and Hebrew; he had studied divinity; so to earn a living, he became a proof reader. In spite of his precarious condition, he seems to have had friends in high places, Charles Drelincourt, for instance, professor of medicine at Leyden University, and physician in ordinary to William of Orange and Mary, and Jean Le Clerc, the author of the _Bibliotheque universelle_.

On the latter's advice, Coste learned enough English to translate Locke's _Thoughts concerning Education_. The favourable reception of the work induced him to undertake a translation of the _Essay on Human Understanding_: Locke heard of this and, in order to supervise the work, he invited Coste to come over to England. Locke was then living with Sir Francis Masham, at Oates, in England. Coste quite naturally became the tutor to the young Mashams, none being more qualified to apply the principles of the _Thoughts concerning Education_ than the translator.

Coste lived on at Oates till Locke's death in 1704. He subsequently became tutor to the son of the Earl of Shaftesbury, the author of the _Characteristics_. We can trace him to Paris, following the chequered career of a man of letters; thence he went to Montpellier and Rome, wandered about Germany and Holland, returned to England, and finally found his way back to Paris, where he died in 1747.

Like all the "Dutch journalists," with the exception of Bayle and Le Clerc, he was merely a compiler and translator. Besides Locke, he translated Newton, Shaftesbury, Lady Masham. He published editions of Montaigne and La Fontaine; he wrote a life of Conde. Original work he never sought to achieve. "I have no ambition," he writes, "if I had, I should be unable to satisfy it." He is no more than a good-tempered, careless Southerner. With nothing of the Camisard about him, he invincibly recalls one of those sunny, self-possessed sons of Provence. Surely it was an accident of birth that made him a native of the Cevennes, he should have come into the world a little lower down in the valley of the Rhone. Of course he is often insolvent, but when the duns clamour, a generous patron never fails to interfere. The great people he meets do not impress him; on the contrary he laughs at their foibles most indulgently. The background in which these eminent men live lends piquancy to Coste's letters; but the difficulty of understanding the allusions is somewhat irritating. The impression is that of a black void faintly illuminated by intermittent flashes of light. There is, however, some slight compensation in the recreating work of filling up the gaps with surmises.

Coste's correspondence we do not intend to publish in full. A selection must be made. All that concerns the relations between "Dutch journalists"

and English writers interests the history of comparative literature. The information about Locke and the spread of his philosophy in France, must be carefully treasured up. But there are also familiar letters which throw the most vivid light on the life of some French refugees in Amsterdam. Thanks to them we shall know something about the man as well as about his works.

I

COSTE AND THE ENGLISH WRITERS

One of the letters printed below tells how Coste came to know Locke.

"Speaking of that doctor (Drelincourt), I must say I have had the occasion to write to a famous English physician named Locke, of whom you have so often heard me speak. Yesterday I received a book with which he had been kind enough to present me. I shall thank him at the earliest opportunity."

It appears that the success attending the operation performed by Locke on the first Earl of Shaftesbury in 1668 was not to be eclipsed by the publication of the _Essay_. Contemporaries spoke in the same breath of Locke and Sydenham as great physicians.

Into Coste's life at Oates we can get only a few glimpses, just some recollections jotted down long after Locke's death. Thus, on 8th January 1740, Coste wrote to La Motte, the "Dutch journalist," to complain about the "cape" with which the engraver had adorned Locke's portrait, heading an edition of the _Traite de l'Education_. Locke, he said, had never been a physician. "He could not bear being called a doctor. King William gave him the t.i.tle and Mr. Locke begged an English lord to tell the King that the t.i.tle was not his."

The anecdote clears up the mystery contained in a letter of Bayle. In the first edition of the famous _Dictionary_ (1698) Bayle had mentioned "Doctor" Locke. For Bayle as for every one in Holland who remembered the first Earl of Shaftesbury, Locke was a celebrated physician. Locke corrected the mistake, probably through the medium of Coste; but Bayle failed to understand. "I am very sorry," he answered, "that he has taken so ill the granting of a t.i.tle which will do him no harm in any reader's mind."[283] Bayle was not aware that Locke had been denied in 1666 his doctors.h.i.+p by the hostile Oxford authorities. Locke's behaviour is a characteristic instance of hard-dying resentment.

In February 1705, there had appeared in the _Nouvelles de la Republique des Lettres_, an "eloge" or kind of obituary notice on Locke.[284] After a short account of the philosopher's life, followed some details on his character, among which it may be read that he was impatient of contradiction and easily roused to anger. "In general, it must be owned, he was naturally somewhat choleric. But his anger never lasted long. If he retained any resentment, it was against himself for having given way to so ridiculous a pa.s.sion; which, as he used to say, may do a great deal of harm, but never yet did the least good. He would often blame himself for this weakness." The following pa.s.sage in one of Coste's letters may serve to ill.u.s.trate that general statement: "I remember that conversing one day with Mr. Locke, the discourse happening to light upon innate ideas, I ventured this objection: what must we think of birds such as the goldfinch that, hatched in the parents' nest, will fly away at last into the open in quest of food without either parent taking the least care, and that, a year later, know very well where and how to find and select the material necessary for building a nest, which proves to be made and fitted up with as much or more art than the one in which they were hatched? Whence have come the ideas of those materials and the art of building a nest with them?

To which Mr. Locke bluntly replied: 'I did not write my book to explain the actions of dumb creatures!' The answer is very good and the t.i.tle of the book 'Philosophical Essay Concerning Human Understanding' shows it to be relevant." By the way, in alluding to the strange workings of heredity, Coste had come unawares upon the strongest argument in favour of innate ideas.

After Locke's death, a quarrel broke out among his friends. Anthony Collins, the free-thinker, loth to admit of a single objection to his master's theory such as he conceived it to be, thought that both Le Clerc and Coste were pursuing a deliberate plan of disparagement and resolved to denounce them publicly. In 1720, one of his dependents, the refugee Desmaizeaux, published a volume of Locke's posthumous works, prefaced with an attack on Coste. Le Clerc, whose explanation had been accepted, was spared.[285] "M. Coste," wrote Desmaizeaux, "in several writings, and in his common conversation throughout France, Holland, and England, has aspersed and blackened the memory of Mr. Locke, in those very respects wherein he was his panegyrist before."[286] No trace remains of the written strictures. A hitherto unpublished letter explains and justifies Collins' resentment. Reviewing a pamphlet of one Carroll against Locke, the Catholic _Journal de Trevoux_ happened to say: "Such is the idea entertained in England about Mr. Locke whom a _Letter written to Abbe Dauxi by Mr. De La Coste_ charges us with slandering. The printed letter has been circulated in Paris.... We are pleased to see English writers judge their countrymen in the same way as ourselves. Perhaps the exaggerated praise that M. Le Clerc heaps upon his friend Mr. Locke, is a more decisive proof that we have found out the latter's impiety."[287] On receiving the review, Coste indignantly denied having written the _Letter to Abbe Dauxi_. The att.i.tude of the Trevoux reviewers he failed to understand. "Their synopsis of the _Essay_ appeared to me very good, as far as I remember, and Mr.

Locke, to whom I read it, was pretty well satisfied."[288] To show that his feelings toward his patron were unchanged, Coste reprinted his "eloge" in the second edition of his translation of the _Essay_ (1729), adding these words: "If my voice is useless to the glory of Locke, it will serve at least to witness that having seen and admired his fine qualities, it was a pleasure for me to perpetuate their memory."

In Coste's papers information abounds on the corrections he made to the several editions of his translation of Locke. It would be an invidious task to transcribe the long lists of errata that he sends to faithful La Motte, who seems to supervise the work of the press, but it may prove interesting to know the names of great people on the Continent who are to receive presentation copies of the _Essay_. They are "the nuntio in Brussels, the d.u.c.h.esse du Maine, M. Remond in Paris, Abbe Salier, sub-librarian to the King."[289] In 1737, he mentions the success of the _Thoughts concerning Education_, reprinted in Rouen, upon the fourth Dutch edition. But the _Reasonableness of Christianity_ fell dead from the press, the Paris booksellers not having a single copy in 1739.

On the spread of Locke's ideas on the Continent, Coste's letters bear out the evidence to be gathered elsewhere, notably from the Desmaizeaux papers in the British Museum. While the _Thoughts concerning Education_ and the _Essay_ were eagerly read, no one seemed to care about the social compact theory, toleration, or lat.i.tudinarian theology. As early as August 1700, Bernard writes to Desmaizeaux from the Hague that "Mr. Locke's book in French sells marvellously well." In 1707, according to Mrs. Burnet, the Bishop of Salisbury's wife, the _Essay_ was extensively read in Brussels.[290] In 1721, Veissiere informed Desmaizeaux that he had presented the chancellor in Paris with "a miscellaneous collection of pieces of _Look_, in English," and received profuse thanks. The same year, another correspondent from Paris congratulated Desmaizeaux upon the publication of "_M. Look's_" posthumous works, and begged for information on the meaning of the words _gravitation_ and _attraction_, "the English language," he added, "not being quite unknown to me." This, of course, was before Voltaire had "discovered" either Locke or Newton and summed up for the benefit of his countrymen their respective contributions to the advancement of anti-clericalism and free thought.

But it must be borne in mind that Peter Coste was not entirely engrossed in translations of Locke. One day, he gave La Motte his appreciation on Richard c.u.mberland's _De legibus naturae disquisitio philosophica_ "written in so rude a style one does not know whether it be Latin or English....

Those defects," he added, "have disappeared from Barbeyrac's translation."

But an "English gentleman, a friend of Mr. Locke, with whom he studied in the same college at Oxford," has undertaken to publish an abridged edition "ampler than the original one and still less readable."

At another time, Coste was interested in a less serious book, Richardson's _Pamela_. The famous novel had just appeared unsigned. With Southern rashness, Coste met the difficulty of authors.h.i.+p with a wild guess. "I heard about _Pamela_ in Paris, but I never read even a word of the book."

However, he knows who wrote it, "'Tis M. Bernard, the son of our friend (the editor of the _Nouvelles de la Republique des Lettres_) and minister to a French Church in London. I know it as a fact. The success of the work caused no doubt the author to let out the secret, which he had kept at first by publis.h.i.+ng his work in English."[291] The eagerness with which these cosmopolitan writers seize upon any successful book, is both amusing and instructive.

To one of his correspondents Coste wrote about the same time: "I am, have been, and will remain all my life, to all appearances, in continual torment." It was a weary old man who talked on in that way. Fortune had ceased to smile. Now let us turn to another scene: Peter Coste, in all the confident strength of early manhood, is writing a series of letters of love which the author of _Pamela_ would have surely appreciated.

II

LETTERS OF COSTE TO MADEMOISELLE BRUN[292]

In 1694, one Brun, a native most probably of Languedoc, in partners.h.i.+p with a fellow-countryman of the name of Rouviere, established himself as a trader in Amsterdam. The two merchants took a house in the most busy part of the city, the Heer-Gracht. They were both married. Madame Rouviere being still young, speedily became a confidante for the daughters of her husband's partner. Three of these lived in Amsterdam, the fourth had married a refugee, her father's business agent in London. To make this home circle complete, another name must be mentioned, Mademoiselle Durand, destined to marry a gentleman, M. de Bruguiere, and according to the etiquette of old France to be henceforth styled "Madame."