112 BAILLY. 



nobleness. &quot; And Voltaire wrote, on the 1st of March, 

 &quot; I have read, while dying, the little book by M. de Con- 

 dorcet ; it is as good in its departments as the eloges by 

 Fontenelle. There is a more noble and more modest 

 philosophy in it, though bold.&quot; 



And excitement in words and action could not be legit 

 imately reproached in a man who had felt himself sup 

 ported by a conviction of such distinct and powerful 

 influence. 



Among the eloges by Bailly, there is one, that of the 

 Abbe de Lacaille, which not having been written for a 

 literary academy, shows no longer any trace of inflation 

 or declamation, and might, it seems to me, compete with 

 some of the best eloges by Condorcet. Yet, it is curi 

 ous, that this excellent biography contributed, perhaps 

 as much as D Alembert s opposition, to make Bailly s 

 claims fail. Vainly did the celebrated astronomer flatter 

 himself in his exordium, &quot; that M. de Fouchy, who, as 

 Secretary of the Academy, had already paid his tribute 

 to Lacaille, would not be displeased at his having fol 

 lowed him in the same career that he would not 



be blamed for repeating the praises due to an illustrious 

 man.&quot; 



Bailly, in fact, was not blamed aloud ; but when the 

 hour for retreat had sounded in M. de Fouchy s ear, with 

 out any fuss, without showing himself offended in his self- 

 love, remaining apparently modest, this learned man, in 

 asking for an assistant, selected one who had not under 

 taken to repeat his eloges ; who had not found his biog 

 raphies insufficient. This preference ought not to be, 

 and Avas not, uninfluential in the result of the compe 

 tition. 



Bailly, if Perpetual Secretary of the Academy, would 



