MONT BLANC 217 



news of Dr. Paccard's and his companion's success in their 

 private correspondence and in communications to the public 

 journals. It reached England, and de Saussure's old friend, 

 Lord Palmerston, wrote, ' I congratulate you on the conquest of 

 Mont Blanc. I wish you had been the first to set foot on the 

 summit, a distinction to which you are so well entitled. I am 

 convinced, however, that we must wait till you arrive there before 

 our curiosity will be satisfactorily gratified.' It was not long 

 before the officious Bourrit also appeared on the scene as a mis- 

 chief-maker. It was a bitter blow to him that anyone should 

 have anticipated him in reaching the mountain he had so often 

 attempted ; had the conqueror been de Saussure, he might have 

 borne it better, but that an old acquaintance, the village doctor, 

 should have won the race drove him to fury. His vanity, always 

 the predominant trait in his character, was unfortunately in this 

 instance linked with a jealousy which led him to very unworthy 

 action. His first instinct on hearing the news was to endeavour 

 to discredit it. In writing to de Saussure he insinuated that the 

 ascent might not have been complete, that there might well be a 

 higher crest invisible from Chamonix beyond that on which the 

 climbers had been seen. 1 Finding this argument untenable, he 

 set his busy pen to work with a double object to assert his own 

 claim to be the real explorer of Mont Blanc, and to disparage as 

 far as possible his rival by giving the whole credit for the ascent 

 to the guide Balmat. He wrote a pamphlet which he sent to 

 many of the leading journals of the time. In this he recounted 

 at length his own previous adventures, and went on to represent 

 Paccard as having been led, or rather forcibly dragged, to the 

 top of Mont Blanc by his companion, who, after having himself 

 reached the summit alone, had to return some distance to 

 fetch him. This pamphlet (probably while still in manuscript) 

 was brought to de Saussure's notice shortly after his return to 

 Geneva, and he at once wrote to remonstrate with its author. 

 Bourrit's rejoinder has been preserved, and exhibits a deplor- 

 able mixture of obsequiousness and self-assertion. He found 

 it expedient, however, to add a postscript to his pamphlet in 

 which he made a disingenuous apology for the terms in which 



1 Unpublished letter from Bourrit to de Saussure, written from Sallanches on 

 llth August 1786. 



