HELVETIUS. 
dulged the habits of a man of pleasure, but not with- 
out maintaining a degree of masterly prudence, which 
enabled him to manage his fortune without incurring 
‘inconvenience, and to give efficiency to the feelings of 
a noble humanity, by dev: iad of his in- 
come to benevolent acts, He assiduously sought out 
and rewarded talent and merit, and always observed a 
delicacy of manner which avoided the slightest wound 
to the pride of the most fastidious of those whom he 
served. Intent on the improvement of his own powers, 
he cultivated the society of Fontenelle, discussed alon 
with him the doctrines of Locke and of Hobbes, an 
with his aid successfully cultivated the talent of expres- 
sing his ideas with perspicuity. He also became ac- 
“quainted with Montesquieu and Voltaire, and profited 
in a similar manner by his intercourse with each of 
these eminent scholars. The earliest literary labour of 
Helvetius, was his poem on Happiness, in the compo- 
“sition of which Voltaire gave him t encouragement, 
and inculeated on him sane y phe himself had 
felt to be important, icularly on the indispensible 
necessity of truth of br and, regularity of lan- 
In the office of farmer-general, Helvetius was the 
uniform advocate of humanity, and exerted his influence © 
to obviate the hardships to which individuals were so 
often liable, from oe meee employed to collect the 
wevenue.- Here he. to contend with men long in- 
ured to an unfeeling system of procedure. In many of 
his remonstrances with the other farmers-general, his 
perseverance was rewarded with success: but his em- 
ployment was on the whole accompanied with much 
disgust, and. was further rendered unpleasant by the 
time which it occupied, and which he was desirous of 
devoting to philosophical studies. He therefore re- 
‘signed its advantages, and with a sum of money 
which he had saved, he purchased. an, estate in the 
country, to which he retired. He married Mademoi- 
selle Ligniville, after an acquaintance of 12 months, 
formed at the house of Madame Graffigni, the au- 
thoress of the Peruvian Letters.. In compliance with 
the wishes of his father, he still passed a few months 
annually in the metropolis, attended court, and ac- 
cepted of the situation of Maitre d’ Hotel to the Queen. 
He took as inmates of his house two persons who 
had been his secretaries, chiefly from motives of be- 
nevolence. One of these, an unhappy cross-tempered 
and sarcastic character of the name of Bandot, presum- 
ing on his knowledge of Helvetius in his infancy, habi- 
tually treated him as a harsh schoolmaster treats a child. 
This circumstance is worthy of mention, for the light 
which the indulgence given to him throws on the cha- 
xacter of Helvetius. Bandot’s great delight was to dis- 
cuss with his master the whole conduct, talents, cha- 
acter, and works of the latter; and the discussions 
uniformly ended with satirical abuse. Helvetius, after 
xetiring with his wife on such occasions, sometimes 
isaid, ‘* is it possible that I am so deficient as this 
man nts me? I do not believe it, but I la- 
bour under these defects to a certain degree; and if 
I did not keep Bandot, I should have no one to point 
them out.” 
. Inhis rural retreat, he composed his work De Esprit, 
or “ An Essay on the Mind and its Faculties,’’ which 
was published in 1758. In this work, he developed 
with much eloquence, and followed to some bold con- 
clusions, the principles which he had imbibed from 
Locke, that al thought is a modification of physical sen- 
sation. He makes this the foundation ofa system of 
ublic and private morals. This work had a power- 
fu political effect. It was written under an im- 
* 
707 
pression, that the numerous evils of society are the Helvetius. 
y protect. =v" 
them had 
offspring of corrupt institutions and 1 
ed prejudi pep pe soiree lla 
been concealed by the want of analytical views of hu- 
man nature and society. These fruits of his studies 
were presented to the world in a style and manner 
which were fitted to make a deep im ion. His 
mode of representing the subject was favourable to 
that rage for pleasure, and that tendency to licentious- 
ness in some points of morality which had long prevail- 
ed in France. The author, however, in ublishing it, 
ve a pledge of his sincerity, by risking all his honours, 
is property, and the whole peace of his life. His opi- 
nions were in some points wrong, and some of theit 
tendencies were injurious ; but we do not sce in his 
mode of stating them, marks of such haste or obsti- 
nacy as would have disinclined him to sacrifive any pas- 
sion which he found really hurtful, or from renouncing 
the eclat of a philosophical reformer, ‘if truth and con- 
sistency had been shown to lie on the opposite side. 
The points at issue between him and his adversaries 
were of equal importance to all, and the en of 
his writings can only be attributed to the love of power 
on the part of others, and a senseless dread of the con- 
sequences of free inquiry. ~ 
e was first attacked in some of the popular jour- 
nals, with criticisms which contained some truth and 
plausibility mingled with marks of the lowest supersti- 
tion and ignorance, and which were animated with the 
bitterest style of denunciation and invective. The 
doctors of the Sorbonne issued their censures against 
his heresies, which they enumerated in such concise 
propositions as the following: That physical sensibility 
note ae, our ideas; that pain and pleasure are the 
sources of thought and action ; that the desire of happi-~ 
ness is sufficient to conduct men to virtue; that mora- 
lity is, like physics, an experimental science ; that vices 
and virtues proceed from different modifications of the 
desire of happiness; that virtuous actions are those 
which are useful to the public; that it is by good laws 
that mankind are rendered virtuous ; and, the chief 
cause of all existing vice is the ignorance of legislators, 
who set the interests of individuals in opposition to that 
of the public. ; 
His first and most zealous enemies were the Jansen- 
ists, whose influence in the parliament of Paris procu- 
red from that body a condemnation of his work. Their 
rivals the Jesuits, who had been by Helvetius, 
ante with mee of whom he had cg a eye terms, 
made no public appearance against him ti upon 
by the general — and phere for the or: of 
their order. One of their number, a friend of Helve- 
tius, conceived the plan of procuring from him a re- 
tractation of his errors. To gratify this friend, Helve- 
tius subscribed a sort of apology, and afterwards ano- 
ther, which was ampler and more humiliating, with a 
view to save from persecution the public censor, who 
had suffered his work to pass the ordeal required by 
law. This, however, was not satisfactory: Helvetius 
was deprived of his situation at court; Tercier the 
public censor lost his office ; and the interference of the 
council was n to save both of them from further 
severities meditated by the Jansenists and the parlia- 
ment of Paris. 
The phi hical doctrines to which this author was 
attached, comprehend a subject too extensive to be dis- 
cussed in this article: (See Merapuysics.) But we 
find his opinions bated even by some liberal minds, 
along with those of some of his cotemporaries, as tend- 
ing to degrade human. nature, and destroy the dignity 
of moral truth. We do not apprehend, that such ten- 
