In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

[123] On Franklin (1800) Louis Lefebvre de La Roche Louis Lefebvre de La Roche (1738–1806) is remembered nowadays, if at all, as the editor of Helvétius’s and Montesquieu’s complete works, published in 1795. Helvétius had left him all his papers, an index of his trust and friendship , but Lefebvre de La Roche did not serve him well, as he shortened some of the works, and even forged some letters of Helvétius to Montesquieu. The son of a farmer, he became a Benedictine monk because that was the best way to cultivate his intellectual inclinations; he was ordained in 1764, becoming a secular priest in 1769, thanks to connections of Helvétius’s in Rome. Some verses which he wrote as a young man make it clear he was an unbeliever and bored by all things religious. He was happy to give up the priesthood in 1790, describing religion as “superstition” to the Revolutionary Committee that interviewed him. He moved into Mme. Helvétius’s house in 1775 at the latest, having often stayed with the Helvétiuses since becoming acquainted with M. Helvetius around 1769. M. Helvétius left him a life annuity, to which were added his emoluments as chaplain to the Comte d’Artois at his mansion at Maisons. At Auteuil he undertook to prepare Helvétius’s manuscripts for publication. He became mayor of Auteuil in 1791, but withdrew from political life in 1793, after the defeat to the Girondins, who were moderate republicans. He was then arrested and released only after the fall of Robespierre in July 1794. He later became a supporter of Bonaparte. During Franklin’s stay in Passy, Lefebvre de La Roche would often correct what he wrote in French; after Franklin’s return to America, they corresponded until Franklin’s death. Lefebvre de La Roche wrote the following essay as a letter to the printer Pierre Didot, who was considering a selected edition of Franklin’s works, to which he planned to append some of Franklin’s characteristic anecdotes. Didot’s edition never materialized, and Lefebvre de La Roche’s essay remained in manuscript until 1950, when Gilbert Chinard published it in a contribution to the Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society. It appears in English for the first time here. franklin in his own time [124] you propose, dear friend, to print a selection of moral pamphlets by Franklin, with the addition of those episodes of his life best able to characterize his personality and his genius. His printed Memoirs, and his Eulogy delivered by Condorcet at the Académie des Sciences would provide a great many such episodes. But you believe that my connection with this great man during his stay in France may have enabled me to become privy to certain facts which, though apparently slight, have had, from his own admission, the deepest influence on his personality and on the conduct of his life. The most trivial facts in the history of a famous man become most interesting when they trigger new ideas which, all of a sudden, change the course of his will. Those slight events deserve examination. They often make up the first steps in our education. They would remain ignored if, from the eminence one reaches, one did not look back reflectively on the obscure point from which one started. I will not say much about what one has already read or may read elsewhere . I will only advert to those facts which may give the thoughtful occasion to reflect on the nature of those inconsiderable causes which, even from childhood, help to shape the personality of an extraordinary man. Those people will enjoy understanding what brought about in Franklin the concatenation of thoughts and actions, the willpower, which enabled him to overcome the obstacles to the growth of his physical and moral faculties. He was born from needy parents in a new country where the demands of everyday life made manual work a necessity, leaving little time for the cultivation of the mind. Boston, his native town, was then only the meetingplace of a few seamen and adventurers from Europe. Some of the useful arts had barely appeared there. There was no library nor any public seminaries of education. Religious quacks preached absurd dogmas and a fanatical morality, and all the vices of superstitious ignorance were obstacles to the progress of enlightenment. In this eclipse of reason, much resolution is required, when all means are lacking both to...

Share