On

the Cid, can alone counterbalance the influence of love. the stage, paternal selfishness ought, in our opinion, to be represented with much reserve, rather as a defect which appears, notwithstanding our efforts to conceal it, than as a legitimate sentiment which has a right to show itself; and this rule should be observed, more especially, in comedy, where the characters are not proposed as examples, than in tragedy, where the characters seek to interest us.

It is in this manner that Collé has represented it to us in the piece entitled Dupuis and Desronais. His selfish father seems to be ashamed of his fault; he dissembles it as much as he can, and the efforts which he makes to conquer or conceal his passion, because after all this passion is next to a good quality. The spectator at the same time excuses and censures this father, who loves his daughter so much that he does not wish to have a son-in-law, that is to say, any one whom his daughter will love as much as or more than himself. The mixture of hatred and interest which suit this character makes of this piece a particular kind of comedy which Collé in his Mémoires endeavors to define by saying, that it does not resemble the pieces of La Chaussée, which are dramas; nor those of Marivaux, although they resemble them very much; nor the pieces of Regnard and Du Fresny; and he modestly concluded that this kind of comedy is entirely new and original. Collé in thus speaking forgot the Misanthrope; for the misanthrope is also a character which the poet wished us to love and censure at the same time. Only in the Misanthrope, the comic tone is always dominant, and in that lies the great art of Moliere; while in Dupuis and Desronais, the dramatic tone appears every where, although Collé detested the drama.

Before examining the piece of Collé, let us say a word concerning the author.

Collé ought to have his place in the history of the literature of the eighteenth century. He does not belong to the school of the Encyclopædists, for he often ridicules them; he has nevertheless the ideas of the eighteenth century, and yields more than he is aware to the influence of the men whom he censures. It is even in this respect that Collé faithfully represents one side of the society of the eighteenth century. Whatever, indeed, at this epoch, was the ascendant of the philosophers, there was a considerable portion of society

which had a repugnance for this school, still more for its men than their ideas. Thus attached to the grand philosophic school of the eighteenth century was a numerous school of writers, who without being the adversaries of the Encyclodist party, censured its insolent pretensions and its religious intolerance; who loved liberty, but the reserved discreet liberty of private life, and not political liberty, with its rage for governing the world; not devotees, but on the contrary, they were a little skeptical, and censured severely pedantic or fanatical incredulity; men who attached themselves to the opposition; but only in songs, and never went so far as to publish pamphlets. In other respects they were good citizens, and accommodated themselves very well to the social hierarchy in which they were neither the first nor the last; employing themselves willingly in diverting princes, and endeavoring to enrich themselves with their assistance or at their expense, without renouncing the privilege of abusing them behind their backs.

Such was this school, which attached itself at a respectable distance to Montesquieu himself, who always knew how to keep himself apart from the sect of Encyclopædists, although he had written the Persian Letters; and to Duclos, who although a philosopher, censured the declamatory temerity of the apostles of impiety; a school which has for its principal representatives Lesage, the first among those freetalkers who did not wish to be freethinkers, Marivaux, Piron, Crebillon the younger, Panard and Collé; and who in our opinion faithfully represented the mind and character of what may be called the middle class of the society of the eighteenth century. In this class were united, as it often happens, contradictory opinions, which were tempered the one by the other: a little philosophy and a little religion; a little love of liberty and a little anxiety to be employed in the service of princes; a little impudence and a little complaisance. The Memoirs of Collé, entitled a Historical Journal, afford a singular evidence of this curious mixture of opposite opinions, which compose, we may say with propriety, the true wisdom of the public.

Collé at first wrote songs, burlesque scenes, and pieces of verse in pure bombast. But these songs and burlesques were not intended for the public; they were only written to amuse the society which Collé frequented. This society was

at first composed entirely of tradespeople, but of that portion of them who were allied to the nobility in matters of finance. It was in this way that Collé was afterwards enabled to enter into the society of the Count of Clermont and the Duke of Orleans, the grandfather of the present king,* all of whom loved comedy and enacted it. Collé made vaudevilles for the fêtes which these princes gave; for we must remark that in this age, which was captivated with literature, fêtes and amusements were nearly all literary at some point. Collé had some of his proverbs played at the theatre of the Duke of Orleans, which were not well adapted to the broad daylight of public representation. It was also at this theatre that The Hunting party of Henry the Fourth was represented, Collé's best piece, and the only one, with Dupuis and Desronais, which made him a literary man; but for that he would have been nothing more than a witty balladmonger of society.

Introduced by his ballads and burlesques into the society of princes, Collé endeavored to avail himself of their credit to make his fortune, and he obtained an interest in the fermes generales; but he did not accomplish this object without difficulties and vexations, which in fact made his solicitations a more diverting comedy than all his pieces and ballads. What makes his history so amusing is, that he wishes at the same time to preserve his dignity as a literary man and to keep his place; this makes of him, a Brutus acting the part of a beggar, the most laughable and the most amusing in the world; and as he wrote down every day what he thought, we follow in his Journal the amusing vicissitudes of his pride and his ambition. One day he is in a disdainful humor, speaking contemptuously of authors who permit themselves to be treated with indifference by great lords : is their fault," said he bitterly; "we only tread on reptiles which crawl." Some days after he relates with complaisance that the Count of Clermont had invited him to dine with him, and overwhelmed him with civilities; the Count of Clermont wished to consult him about a piece of his composition. Then as Collé is sincere and candid, he begins again to remark that there is a little vanity in his recital; he avows it, but soon after he qualifies this acknowledgment by this philosophical reflection; that "the idea

* Louis Philippe, now dethroned.

"It

which he always had that all men were equal, should remove the reproach of vanity to which he may have laid himself open, and that indeed he did not find the caresses of a prince of the blood as flattering to his self-love as we might imagine." In short, as if there were not enough of those natural contradictions in the heart of man, he adds in a note: "What the pretended modern philosophers have written upon the equality of man and of conditions has made me change my opinions upon this matter. Their vain and proud treatises upon this subject, instead of confirming me in my first opinion, have caused me to alter it. I now think, for reasons which it would be too long for me to detail, that the inequality of conditions is useful and necessary to men who live in society; but I always think and more than ever for his happiness, he must live with his equals, he must shun the great and avoid people of quality: this is the course which I have pursued myself."*

Such is Collé, or rather, such are we all. We love equality and we love distinctions; we act like philosophers by saying little of the pleasure which we experience in being caressed by princes of the blood, but we enjoy it the more, the less we speak of it; then at last, when age and experience come to show us that the inequality of conditions is useful to man, happy are those who, after having been at one time friendly to the people, and at other times, disposed to court the favor of the great, end like Collé, by becoming simply good citizens: that is to say, at once independent and respectful.

Nothing, nowadays, can give us any idea of the importance which the Theatre enjoyed in the eighteenth century. It was more than a place of amusement, it was a kind of public institution. It was there that the passions were exercised, not only on the stage, but in the playrooms. It was there that they got up parties for and against the actors and authors; it was the constant subject of their tracts and pamphlets. The Memoirs of Collé only speak of the Theatre; scarcely do they even mention, even casually, the political events of the reign of Louis XV. They enacted comedy in

*Note written in 1780.-He says elsewhere and with more justness: "That we ought to see the great and not associate with them. We ought to study them attentively for our own improvement, and in other respects make use of them for the increasing of our own fortunes."

society, and all the great world was a little author and actor. The Count of Clermont wrote comedies which Collé corrected; the Duke of Orleans played a part in the pieces of Collé, in the Theatre of Bagnolet; people of quality and financiers, played in their saloons; and as in these theatrical salôns, it was more difficult to hav actresses than actors, because the mistress of the house having a right to play the first character, her friends were not disposed to become her confidants, we see that the women's parts were performed by chambermaids and seamstresses of the ladies of quality, which explains and justifies the familiarity which exists between the waitingmaids and their mistresses in Marivaux. In short, what shows the influence which the Theatre had at this epoch, and how far it extended into the usages and even the laws of the people in 1765, these exhibitions at the Court were scarcely interrupted during the illness which carried off the Dauphin, which makes Collé say with a severity almost worthy of history: "The Dauphin died on Friday, the 20th of December, 1795. This cruel exhibition was the last of those which Marshal Richelieu gave at Fontainebleau."*

We might well be astonished that the author of the Libertine Proverbs, which they played at the theatres of princes, should have thought proper to have taken Dupuis and Desronais for the subject of his play. The profound analysis of paternal selfishness, this somewhat gloomy painting of one of the sentiments of the human heart, seems scarcely to harmonize with the fancy and gayety of a ballad-maker. But Collé had read the ancient novelettes, and in his Proverbs, he often borrows from the ancient ballads, their native freedom of manners; he only converted their simplicity into indecency, in order to please the good company which he frequented. It is in readings of this sort that he will find the novels of De Challes, his Illustrious Frenchmen, and among these novels, Dupuis and Desronais, or the selfish father.

*We will add, for the purpose of showing the inconstancy of the human heart, that in 1768, when the Queen died, the same Collé said in his journal: "Saturday, eve of Pentecost, the Queen received extreme-unction: prayers continued forty hours, while the exhibitions were interrupted. If our poor Queen does not languish and die, we will be compelled to stop the exhibitions for twenty-eight hours from the time of her death."