We are struck with astonishment and admiration, when we read the different writings which he has composed, on subjects most deserving the attention and regard of mankind. What candour and what elevation do we perceive united in his discourses! What philanthropy! What superiority of reason! We can scarcely believe, that at the court of Louis XV, this was the language of a magistrate, born in one of the highest ranks of society, living in the midst of a class of men, for the most part fashioned to the yoke of slavish habits, and almost all of them occupied in miserable intrigues. How many words of liberty, of country, of rights of the people, so natural in the mouth of that respectable magistrate, must have appeared to them strange, if they did not find them ridiculous! But such is the irresistible power of the progress of knowledge, that kings themselves do not fear, at the present day, to render it homage. More enlightened than their indiscreet friends, the chiefs of nations know, that a just and candid application of the ideas attached to that word, is, in our days, the surest pledge of the strength and the stability of governments. On the question of the liberty of the press, Mr. de Malesherbes established since the middle of the last century, in favour of that liberty, the principles which since have been developed with so much lustre, by the most illustrious civilians. We may judge of this, from some maxims extracted from his memoirs, on that important part of our political rights.

'The liberty of the press,' says he, 'is necessary to make truth appear. Printing is a list, where every one has a right to enter. Each philosopher, each man of polite literature, ought to be considered as an advocate whom we must always hear. The nation at large is the judge. In time, it always judges right. Let us not consider the people, in our age, in the same light as they were regarded in past ages. An assembly of the states without the liberty of the press, will ever be nothing more than a faithless representation.'

Mr. de Malesherbes, in demanding that the press should be free, did not, doubtless, understand that impunity should be secured to authors who should abuse it: but he wished, that from that epoch, the offences which the press might cause to be committed, should be classed; and that they should be judged and punished by a specific legislation, and by an independent and impartial tribunal. Mr. Boissy d'Anglas, in examining this question, could scarcely fail to recollect the principles which he has himself, in an eloquent manner defended, at the national rostrum. He shows evidently, that the establishment of a jury to determine on offences resulting from the liberty of the press, is indispensable as a guaranty of that liberty.

،

But, it was the right of personal liberty, which was so cruelly trampled on, in the reign of Louis XV, which especially excited the generous obstinacy of Mr. de Malesherbes. It is remarkable, as his historian observes, that no one before him, had dared to oppose the arbitrary acts which violated that essential right. He had the honour of being the first who dared to inform kings, of the unjust use which their servants made of their power; and who ventured to tell them, that the time had arrived, when it was necessary to place that power under the control of the sacred and severe rules of justice.'

It is well known that the court of aids, of which Mr. de Malesherbes was president, was originally empowered to direct the collection and the application of the taxes. In the course of time, through the destruction of the liberties of the nation, that court retained none of its original powers, except the right of deciding on disputes, which might arise in the collection of the taxes. But our worthy magistrate evinced, that there is no employment, in which a virtuous man cannot do much good. We may be permitted to bring forward an instance, for the instruction of those, who, ignorant of what they are pleased to call the ancient constitution of France, are silly enough to regret the loss of its advantages. A certain Monnerat, an obscure citizen, was arrested as a smuggler. Although there existed no proof against him, the farmers of the public revenue did not hesitate, on that account, to have him thrown into one of the dungeons of the Bicêtre, where he remained twenty months. He would have died there without sentence, had not the court of aids obtained for him the restoration of his liberty. That court demanded the punishment of the oppressors of Monnerat; but its members received an order to proceed no further in that affair. This was the period,' says Mr. Boissy d'Anglas, 'when Mr. de Malesherbes made his eloquent, and I may be permitted to say, holy voice, to be heard from one end of France to the other. The environs of the throne resounded with the protest of one of the great bodies of the state, demanding justice, in favour of one of the least exalted individuals in the kingdom.'

Mr. de Malesherbes, after having exposed to the king, in a memoir which he had digested in the name of the court of aids, the vexations of which his client had been the object, gives a tremendous description of the subterranean dungeons of the Bicêtre. Your majesty would scarcely believe,' adds he, 'that a man merely suspected of fraud, could have been detained for more than a month, in that abode of horror. Yet it is said, that a prosecution for damages against the authors of a vexatious arrest, is to act in contempt of your authority. But, sire, your subjects still enjoy the remains of ancient liberty, of which it would be hard to deprive them.' He adds, in speaking of warrants of state; 'they were reserved, heretofore, for affairs of state; and then it was necessary to respect the secrecy of your administration. Now, they are thought necessary, whenever a plebeian has failed in the respect due to a person of rank, as if men in power had not advantages enough. This is, also, the common punishment of imprudent speeches, of which there is no other proof than information, evidence always doubtful, since an informer is ever a suspicious witness. The consequence is, sire, that not a single citizen within your kingdom, but is liable to have his liberty sacrificed to the vengeance of a superior; for no one is so great, as to be safe from the hatred of a minister, nor so humble as to be unworthy of that of a deputy of the revenue.'

Not long after this affair, happened the revolution wrought in the magistracy; a revolution which may be regarded as one of the causes of the great catastrophe, which was to overturn the throne. It is known what was the stroke of state policy which destroyed, in 1770, the authority of the parliaments, that solitary and feeble barrier which still resisted the despotic power of the minister, and of the king. But we cannot at present relate, in their full extent, the noble, but vain remonstrances which Mr. de Malesherbes penned, on behalf of the court of aids, in that memorable conjuncture. They obtained the greatest celebrity, throughout all Europe, and left upon the minds of men, in France, an impression which has never been obliterated. They must remain,' says the biographer of this virtuous magistrate, 'not only as models of eloquence and virtue, but, also, as a solemn protestation in favour of public liberty, at the moment when its destruction was compassed.'

The dispersion of the court of aids, and the exile of Mr. de Malesherbes, were the recompense of a devotedness, which, at that epoch of general degradation, had all the char acter of heroism.

One of the most important acts of justice, which marked the accession of Louis XVI, to the throne, was the recal of the parliaments, and of the other courts of magistracy. Mr. de Malesherbes reinstated, as it were in triumph, at the head of his court, delayed not to submit to the king, a list of the oppressive laws, the united operation of which overwhelmed the people; and he presented the remonstrances on the legislation of the taxes. 'I come,' says he, in that work, 'to defend the cause of the people, at the tribunal of their king; to show him the true situation of that people, of whom the spectacle of a stately court does not remind him.' In this memoir, are found these remarkable words; Justice is the true beneficence of kings. The nation has a right to demand that the king shall limit those bounties, which are conferred at its expense.

Mr. Boissy d'Anglas, after having quoted for the use of his children, many passages of these admirable remonstrances, remarks, at the close:

'That recital, so clear, and so exact, is the best answer that can be made to those, who are such bad Frenchmen, as to exhibit, as necessary to the repose of Europe, the restoration of that oppressive administration, a medley of errors, and of arbitrary power, of oppressions and of iniquities, which so long weighed upon us, and the effects and consequences of which, terminated so unhappily to the nation and to its king; an administration to which we could not return but by again crossing torrents of blood and of tears.'

Mr. de Malesherbes, so enlightened a philosopher, and the most humane and most generous of men, could not fail to raise his eloquent voice in favour of the freedom of worship. He hasted to publish many memoirs, in order to combat the hateful system of persecution, which the clergy solicited should be employed, with the untired obstinacy of fanaticism. It was the least that I could do,' said he to Mr. Boissy d'Anglas, 'to atone to the protestants, for the injuries which Mr. de Basville, my uncle, inflicted on them.'

Our biographer enters, on this subject, into some details as to the situation of the protestants in France, before the session of the national assembly. But we perceive, that he has refrained from exhibiting the whole truth, in relation to the persecutions of which they were the objects, the wanton punishments devised in order to convert them, in the name