1 in the fact of his having committed suicide. In the New Heloïsa he had thrown the conditions which justified self-destruction into a distinct formula. Fifteen years before, he declared that his own case fell within the conditions which he had prescribed, and that he was meditating action. Only seven years before, he had implied that a man had the right to deliver himself of the burden of his own life, if its miseries were intolerable and irremediable. This, however, counts for nothing in the absence of some kind of positive evidence, and of that there is just enough to leave the manner of his end a little doubtful.3 Once more, we cannot tell. By the serene moonrise of a summer night, his body was put under the ground on an island in the midst of a small lake, where poplars throw shadows over the still water, silently figuring the destiny of mortals. Here it remained for sixteen years. Then amid the roar of cannon, the crash of trumpet and drum, and the wild acclamations of a populace gone mad in exultation, terror, fury, it was ordered that the poor dust should be transported to the national temple of great men. 1 See above, vol. i. pp. 16, 17. 2 Corr., vi. 264. 3 The case stands thus :-(1) There was the certificate of five doctors, attesting that Rousseau had died of apoplexy. (2) The assertion of M. Girardin, in whose house he died, that there was no hole in his head, nor poison in the stomach or viscera, nor other sign of self-destruction. (3) The assertion of Theresa to the same effect. On the other hand, we have the assertion of Corancez, that on his journey to Ermenonville on the day of Rousseau's burial a horse-master on the road had said, “Who would have supposed that M. Rousseau would have destroyed himself !”—and a variety of inferences from the wording of the certificate, and of Theresa's letter. Musset-Pathay believes in the suicide, and argued very ingeniously against M. Girardin. But his arguments do not go far beyond verbal ingenuity, showing that suicide was possible, and was consistent with the language of the documents, rather than adducing positive testimony. See vol. i. of his History, pp. 268, etc. The con. troversy was resumed as late as 1861, between the Figaro and the Monde Illustré. See also M. Jal's Dict. Crit. de Biog. et d'Hist., p. 1091. INDEX. men, i. 182. ACADEMIES (French) local, i. 132. | Augustine (of Hippo), ii. 272, 303. writes essays for, i. 133 ; Sovereignty, ii. 162. Rousseau's Discourse, i. 150, n. in the eighteenth century, ii. in Rousseau's time, i. 322. sovereignty of the people, ii. 123, n. Barbier, ii. 26. 251. eighteenth century to Rous- Paris, mandate against Rous- seau issued by, ii. 83; argu- the old and the new, i. 234. Bernard, înaiden name of Rous- room at, i. 54; Rousseau's Bienne, Rousseau driven to take his account of, ii. 109-115. cal doctrine of law being the his definition of an aristocratic Bonaparte, Napoleon, ii. 102, n. Boswell, James, ii. 98 ; visits against, i, 208 ; St. Lambert urged by Rousseau to visit 108; seau, ii. 41. Brutus, how Rousseau came to Citizen, revolutionary use of word, derived from Rousseau, ii. 161. Civilisation, variety of the origin and process of, i. 176 ; defects of, ii. 102. Hume (on Rousseau), ii. 283, n. Collier, Jeremy, on the English Stage, i. 323. perfectibility, ii. 119; inspira- tion of, drawn from the school of Voltaire and Rousseau, ii. a legislator, ii. 131 ; and Serve- ment of humanity, ii. 246 ; tus, ii. 180; mentioned, ii. 181. grievous mistake of, ii. 247. be meant as a reply to him, for minute accuracy, i. 86, n. ; or for dates, i. 93 ; first part written 1766, ii. 301; their surreptitiously, ii. 324, n. ; seau's return to, i. 62, n. ; takes police, ii. 324. ence of, ii. 99; Rousseau in- Warens's residence, i. 73; pre- 102; bought by France, ii. 102. ii. 253 ; his delusions, ii. 301. Cynicism, Rousseau's assumption of, i. 206. D'AIGUILLON, ii. 72. on charge of endeavouring to staunchest henchman, i. 321 ; on Stage Plays, i. 326, n.; on Position of Women in Society, i. 335 ; on Rousseau's letter on i. 223 ; on Solitary Life, i. 232; his active life, i. 233; without relied on, not those of the Con- mentioned, i. 262, 269, 271; ii. 8; his relations with Rousseau, with a home at Wootton, ii. Goldoni's new play, i. 275 ; with Rousseau, i. 275, 276 ; lec- that of others, ii. 262-265 ; d'Epinay, i. 284 ; visits Rousseau i. 289; Rousseau's final breach jected by Rousseau, as too per- plays, ii. 34; his defects, ii. 34; thrown into prison, ii. 57 ; his 205 ; gives the Hermitage to pædists, ii. 57 ; his papers saved more dangerous than ness of learning and art, i. 141, ance, i. 144); the relation of like of his materialistic friends, i. 145 ; its one-sidedness and hollowness, i. 148 ; shown by Madame d'Epinay's jealousy of, side, i. 149, 150 ; second Dis. error |