112 BAILLY. 



nobleness." And Voltaire wrote, on the 1st of March, 

 " 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." 



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 w T iih 

 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, " 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.' : 



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 was not, uninfluential in the result of the compe- 

 tition. 



Bailly, if Perpetual Secretary of the Academy, would 



