voltaire and the jew.—letter from frederick to d’arget.—letter to wilhelmina.—caustic letters to voltaire.—partial reconciliation.—frederick’s brilliant conversational powers.—his neglect of his wife.—all females excluded from his court.—maupertuis and the academy.—voltaire’s malignity.—frederick’s anger.—correspondence between voltaire and maupertuis.—menaces of war.—catt and the king.
the king and voltaire soon became involved in a very serious quarrel. voltaire had employed a jew, by the name of hirsch, to engage fraudulently in speculating in the funds. the transaction was so complicated that few of our readers would have the patience to follow an attempt at its disentanglement. voltaire and his agent quarreled. the contention rang through all the court circles, as other conspicuous names were involved in the meshes of the intrigue. a lawsuit ensued, which created excitement almost inconceivable. the recent law reform caused the process to be pushed very rapidly to its conclusion. voltaire emerged from the suit with his character sadly maimed. he was clearly convicted of both falsehood and forgery. the king, annoyed by the clamor, retired from berlin to sans souci. voltaire was not invited to accompany him, but was left in the berlin palace. in a letter which frederick wrote to d’arget, dated april, 1752, he says:
“voltaire has conducted himself like a blackguard and a consummate rascal. i have talked to him as he deserved. he is a sad fellow. i am quite ashamed for human abilities that a man who has so much of them should be so full of wickedness. i am not surprised that people talk at paris of the quarrel of our beaux esprits. voltaire is the most mischievous madman i ever knew. he is only good to read. it is impossible for you to388 imagine the duplicities, the impositions, the infamies he practiced here. i am quite indignant that so much talent and acquirement do not make men better. i took the part of maupertuis because he is a good sort of man, and the other had determined upon ruining him. a little too much vanity had rendered him too sensitive to the man?uvres of this monkey, whom he ought to have despised after having castigated him.”95
frederick wrote to wilhelmina: “voltaire picks jews’ pockets, but he will get out of it by some somersault.”
voltaire fell sick. he had already quarreled with many persons, and had constrained the king in many cases, very reluctantly, to take his part. he now wrote to frederick, begging permission to join him in the quietude of sans souci. the following extracts from the reply of his majesty will be read with interest:
“potsdam, february 24, 1751.
“i was glad to receive you in my house. i esteemed your genius, your talents, and your acquirements. i had reason to think that a man of your age, weary of fencing against authors, and exposing himself to the storm, came hither to take refuge, as in a safe harbor.”
after briefly alluding to the many quarrels in which voltaire had been involved, the king adds:
“you have had the most villainous affair with a jew. it has made a frightful scandal all over town. for my own part, i have preserved peace in my house until your arrival; and i warn you that, if you have the passion of intriguing and cabaling, you have applied to the wrong person. i like peaceable, quiet people, who do not put into their conduct the violent passions of tragedy. in case you can resolve to live like a philosopher, i shall be glad to see you. but if you abandon yourself to all the violence of your passions, and get into quarrels with all the world, you will do me no good by coming hither, and you may as well stay in berlin.”
four days after this frederick wrote again, in answer to additional applications from voltaire.
“if you wish to come hither you can. i hear nothing of lawsuits, not even of yours. since you have gained it i congratulate389 you, and i am glad that this scurvy affair is done.96 i hope you will have no more quarrels, either with the old or the new testament. such contentions leave their mark upon a man. even with the talents of the finest genius in france, you will not cover the stains which this conduct will fasten on your reputation in the long run. i write this letter with the rough common sense of a german, without employing equivocal terms which disfigure the truth. it is for you to profit by it.”
voltaire’s visit lasted about thirty-two months. he was, however, during all this time, fast losing favor with the king. instead of being received as an inmate at sans souci, he was assigned to a small country house in the vicinity, called the marquisat. his wants were, however, all abundantly provided for at the expense of the king. it is evident from his letters that he was a very unhappy man. he was infirm in health, irascible, discontented, crabbed; suspecting every one of being his enemy, jealous of his companions, and with a diseased mind, crowded with superstitious fears.
on one occasion, when the king had sent him a manuscript to revise, he sarcastically exclaimed to the royal messenger, “when will his majesty be done with sending me his dirty linen to wash?” this speech was repeated to the king. he did not lose his revenge.
frederick was endowed with brilliant powers of conversation. he was fond of society, where he could exercise and display these gifts and accomplishments. frequent suppers were given at sans souci, which lasted from half past eight till midnight. gentlemen only—learned men—were invited to these entertainments. frederick was not an amiable man. he took pleasure in inflicting the keenest pain possible with his satirical tongue. no friend was spared. the more deeply he could strike the lash into the quivering nerves of sensibility, the better he seemed pleased with himself.
he could not but respect his wife. her character was beyond all possible reproach. she never uttered a complaint, was cheerful and faithful in every duty. she had rooms assigned her on the second floor of the berlin palace, where she was comfortably390 lodged and fed, and had modest receptions every thursday, which were always closed at nine o’clock. a gentleman writes from berlin at this time:
“the king esteems his wife, and can not endure her. it was but a few days ago she handed him a letter petitioning for some things of which she had the most pressing want. frederick took the letter with that most smiling, gracious air, which he assumes at pleasure, and, without breaking the seal, tore it up before her face, made her a profound bow, and turned his back on her.”
“the king respects his mother,” the same writer adds. “she is the only female to whom he pays any sort of attention. she is a good, fat woman, who moves about in her own way.”
it was a peculiarity quite inexplicable which led frederick to exclude females from his court. his favorites were all men—men of some peculiar intellectual ability. he sought their society only. with the exception of his sister, and occasionally some foreign princess, ladies were seldom admitted to companionship with him. he was a cold, solitary man, so self-reliant that he seldom asked or took advice.
voltaire hated m. maupertuis. he was the president of the berlin academy, and was regarded by voltaire as a formidable rival. this hatred gave rise to a quarrel between frederick and voltaire, which was so virulent that europe was filled with the noise of their bickerings. m. maupertuis had published a pamphlet, in which he assumed to have made some important discovery upon the law of action. m. k?nig, a member of the academy, reviewed the pamphlet, asserting not only that the proclaimed law was false, but that it had been promulgated half a century before. in support of his position he quoted from a letter of leibnitz. the original of the letter could not be produced. m. k?nig was accused of having forged the extract. m. maupertuis, a very jealous, irritable man, by his powerful influence as president, caused m. k?nig to be expelled from the academy.
frederick regarded the academy as his pet institution, and was very jealous of the illustrious philosopher, whom he had invited to berlin to preside over its deliberations. voltaire, knowing this very well, and fully aware that to strike the academy391 in the person of its president was to strike frederick, wrote an anonymous communication to a review published in paris, in which he accused m. maupertuis—first, of plagiarism, in appropriating to himself a discovery made by another; secondly, of a ridiculous blunder in assuming that said discovery was a philosophical principle, and not an absurdity; and thirdly, that he had abused his position as president of the academy in suppressing free discussion, by expelling from the institution a member merely for not agreeing with him in opinion. these statements were probably true, and on that account the more damaging.
the authorship of the article could not be concealed. frederick was indignant. he angrily seized his pen, and wrote a reply, which, though anonymous, was known by all to have been written by the king. in this reply he accused the writer of the article, whom he well knew to be voltaire, of being a “manifest retailer of lies,” “a concocter of stupid libels,” and as “guilty of conduct more malicious, more dastardly, more infamous” than he had ever known before.
this roused voltaire. he did not venture to attack the king, but he assailed m. maupertuis again, anonymously, but with greatly increased venom. a brief pamphlet appeared, entitled, “the diatribe of doctor akakia, physician to the pope.” it was a merciless satire against m. maupertuis. voltaire was entirely unscrupulous, and was perfect master of the language of sarcasm. no moral principle restrained him from exaggerating, misrepresenting, or fabricating any falsehoods which would subserve his purpose. m. maupertuis was utterly overwhelmed with ridicule. the satire was so keen that few could read it without roars of laughter. voltaire, the king’s guest, was thus exposing to the contempt of all europe the president of the berlin academy, the reputation of which academy was dear to the king above almost every thing else. an edition of the pamphlet was printed in holland, and copies were scattered all over berlin. another edition was published in paris, where thirty thousand copies were eagerly purchased.
frederick was in a towering passion. voltaire was alarmed at the commotion he had created. he wrote a letter to the king, in which he declared most solemnly that he had not intended to392 have the pamphlet published; that a copy had been obtained by treachery, and had been printed without his consent or knowledge. but the king wrote back:
“your effrontery astonishes me. what you have done is clear as the day; and yet, instead of confessing your culpability, you persist in denying it. do you think you can make people believe that black is white? all shall be made public. then it will be seen whether, if your words deserve statues, your conduct does not deserve chains.”
the king, in his anger, ordered all the pamphlets in berlin to be collected and burned by the common hangman, in front of voltaire’s windows. three months passed away, during which the parties remained in this deplorable state of antagonism. voltaire was wretched, often confined to his bed, and looked like a skeleton. he was anxious to leave berlin, but feared that the king would not grant him leave. he wrote to frederick, stating that he was very sick, and wished to retire to the springs of plombières for his health. the king curtly replied,
“there was no need of that pretext about the waters of plombières in demanding your leave. you can quit my service when you like. but, before going, be so good as to return me the key, the cross, and the volume of verses which i confided to you.
“i wish that my works, and only they, had been what k?nig attacked. i could sacrifice them with a great deal of willingness to persons who think of increasing their own reputation by lessening that of others. i have not the folly nor vanity of certain authors. the cabals of literary people seem to me the disgrace of literature. i do not the less esteem the honorable cultivators of literature. it is the cabalers and their leaders that are degraded in my eyes.”
for some unexplained reason, soon after this, the king partially relented, and invited voltaire to potsdam. he allowed him to retain his cross and key, and said nothing about the return of the volume of poetry. this was a volume of which twelve copies only had been printed. on the 25th of march, 1753, voltaire left potsdam for dresden.
in the following terms thiebault describes their parting: the final interview between frederick and voltaire took place on the parade at potsdam, where the king was then occupied with393 his soldiers. one of the attendants announced voltaire to his majesty with these words:
“sire, here is monsieur de voltaire, who is come to receive the orders of your majesty.”
frederick turned to voltaire and said, “monsieur de voltaire, are you still determined upon going?”
“sire, affairs which i can not neglect, and, above all, the state of my health, oblige me to it.”
“in that case, sir,” replied the king, “i wish you a good journey.”
thus parted these remarkable men, who were never destined to meet again.
voltaire, being safe out of prussia, in the territory of the king of poland, instead of hastening to plombières, tarried in dresden, and then in leipsic. from those places he began shooting, through magazines, newspapers, and various other instrumentalities, his poisoned darts at m. maupertuis. though these malignant assaults, rapidly following each other, were anonymous, no one could doubt their authorship. m. maupertuis, exasperated, wrote to him from berlin on the 7th of april:
“if it be true that you design to attack me again, i declare to you that i have still health enough to find you, wherever you are, and to take the most signal vengeance upon you. thank the respect and obedience which have hitherto restrained my arm, and saved you from the worst adventure you have ever had.
maupertuis.”
voltaire replied from leipsic:
“m. le president,—i have had the honor to receive your letter. you inform me that you are well, and that, if i publish la beaumelle’s letter,97 you will come and assassinate me. what ingratitude to your poor doctor akakia! if you exalt your soul so as to discern futurity, you will see that, if you come on that errand to leipsic, where you are no better liked than in other places, you will run some risk of being hanged. poor me, indeed, you will find in bed. but, as soon as i have gained a little strength, i will have my pistols charged, and, multiplying the394 mass by the square of velocity, so as to reduce the action and you to zero, i will put some lead into your head. it appears that you have need of it. adieu, my president.
akakia.”
there were some gross vulgarities in voltaire’s letter which we refrain from quoting. both of these communications were printed and widely circulated, exciting throughout europe contempt and derision. voltaire had still the copy of the king’s private poems. frederick, quite irritated, and not knowing what infamous use voltaire might make of the volume, which contained some very severe satires against prominent persons, and particularly against his uncle, the king of england, determined, at all hazards, to recover the book. he knew it would be of no avail to write to voltaire to return it.
voltaire, on his journey to paris, would pass through frankfort. frederick secretly employed a prussian officer to obtain from the authorities there the necessary powers, and to arrest him, and take from him the cross of merit, the gold key of the chamberlain, and especially the volume of poems. the officer, m. freytag, kept himself minutely informed of voltaire’s movements. at eight o’clock in the evening of the 31st of may the illustrious philosopher arrived, with a small suite, traveling in considerable state, and stopped at the “golden lion.” m. freytag was on the spot. he was a man of distinction. he called upon voltaire, and, after the interchange of the customary civilities, informed the poet that he was under the necessity of arresting him in the name of the king of prussia, and detaining him until he should surrender the cross, the key, and the volume of poems. voltaire was greatly annoyed. he professed warm friendship for the king of prussia. very reluctantly, and not until after several hours of altercation, he surrendered the key and the cross. the volume of poems he was very anxious indeed to retain, and affirmed that they were, he knew not where, with luggage he had left behind him in leipsic or dresden. he was informed that he would be detained as a prisoner until the volume was produced.
in a state of great exasperation, voltaire wrote for a large trunk to be sent to him which contained the book. to save himself from the humiliation of being guarded as a prisoner, he gave his395 parole d’honneur that he would not go beyond the garden of the inn. after a delay of three weeks, voltaire decided, notwithstanding his parole, to attempt his escape. his reputation was such that m. freytag had no confidence in his word, and employed spies to watch his every movement.
on the 20th of june, voltaire dressed himself in disguise, and, with a companion, m. coligny, entered a hackney-coach, and ordered the driver to leave the city by the main gate. m. freytag was immediately informed of this by his spies. with mounted men he commenced the pursuit, overtook the carriage as it was delayed a moment at the gate, and arrested the fugitive in the king’s name. voltaire’s eyes sparkled with fury, and he raved insanely. the scene gathered a crowd, and voltaire was taken by a guard of soldiers to another inn, “the billy-goat,” as the landlord of the “golden lion” refused any longer to entertain so troublesome a guest.
all frankfort was excited by these events. the renown of voltaire as a philosopher, a poet, and as the friend of frederick, filled europe. his eccentricities were the subject of general remark. the most distinguished men, by birth and culture, had paid him marked attention during his brief compulsory sojourn in frankfort. having arrived at “the billy-goat,” his conduct, according to the report of m. freytag, was that of a madman, in which attempted flight, feigned vomitings, and a cocked pistol took part. the account which voltaire gave of these events is now universally pronounced to be grossly inaccurate.
on the 6th of july, the trunk having arrived, the volume of poems was recovered and voltaire was allowed to go on his way. his pen, dipped in gall, was an instrument which even a monarch might fear. it inflicted wounds upon the reputation of frederick which will probably never be healed. four years passed away, during which voltaire and frederick were almost entirely strangers to each other.
the merciless satires of voltaire, exposing maupertuis to the ridicule of all europe, proved death-blows to the sensitive philosopher. he was thrown into a state of great dejection, which induced disease, of which he died in 1759. maupertuis needed this discipline. in the proud days of prosperity he had rejected christianity. in these hours of adversity, oppressed by humiliation396 and pain, and with the grave opening before him, he felt the need of the consolations of religion. christian faith cheered the sadness of his dying hours.98
the marquis d’argens, another of frederick’s infidel companions, one whom voltaire described as “the most frank atheist in europe,” after a very ignoble life of sin and shame, having quarreled with the king, found himself aged, poor, friendless, and infirm. he then, experiencing need of different support from any which infidelity could give, became penitent and prayerful. renouncing his unbelief, he became an openly avowed disciple of jesus.99
what effect was produced upon the mind of frederick as he saw one after another of his boon companions in infidelity, in their hours of sickness and approaching death, seeking the consolations of religion, we do not know. the proud king kept his lips hermetically sealed upon that subject. voltaire, describing the suppers of the gay revelers at sans souci, writes:
“never was there a place in the world where liberty of speech was so fully indulged, or where the various superstitions of men were treated with so much ridicule and contempt. god was respected. but those who, in his name, had imposed on mankind, were not spared. neither women nor priests ever entered the palace. in a word, frederick lived without a court, without a council, and without a religion.”
prussia had enjoyed eight years of peace. but frederick was not a popular man excepting with his own subjects. they idolized him. innumerable are the anecdotes related illustrative of his kindness to them. he seemed to be earnestly seeking their welfare. but foreign courts feared him. many hated him. he was unscrupulous and grasping, and had but very little sense of moral integrity. he was ambitious of literary renown; of reputation as a keen satirist. with both pen and tongue he was prone to lash without mercy his brother sovereigns, and even the courtiers who surrounded him. there were no ties of friendship which could exempt any one from his sarcasm. other sovereigns felt that he was continually on the watch to enlarge his realms, by invading their territories, as he had robbed maria theresa of the province of silesia.
397 some years before this time frederick had taken possession of east friesland, and had made emden a port of entry. it was a very important acquisition, as it opened to prussia a convenient avenue for maritime commerce. with great vigor and sagacity frederick was encouraging this commerce, thus strengthening his kingdom and enriching his subjects. england, mistress of the seas, and then, as usual, at war with france, was covering all the adjacent waters with her war-ships and privateers. frederick had inquired of the english court, through his embassador at london, whether hemp, flax, or timber were deemed contraband. “no,” was the official response. freighted with such merchandise, the prussian ships freely sailed in all directions. but soon an english privateer seized several of them, upon the assumption that the planks with which they were loaded were contraband.
it was an outrage to which frederick was not disposed to submit. he entered his remonstrances. the question was referred to the british court of admiralty. month after month the decision was delayed. frederick lost all patience. english capitalists held silesian bonds to the amount of about one million two hundred and fifty thousand dollars.
“i must have my ships back again,” said frederick to the british court. “the law’s delay in england is, i perceive, very considerable. my people, who have had their property thus wrested from them, can not conveniently wait. i shall indemnify them from the money due on the silesian bonds, and shall give england credit for the same. until restitution is made, i shall not pay either principle or interest on those bonds.”
the british court was frantic with rage. frederick had a strong army on the frontiers of hanover. the first hostile gun fired would be the signal for the invasion of that province, and it would inevitably be wrested from the british crown. the lion roared, but did not venture to use either teeth or claws. england was promptly brought to terms. it was grandly done of frederick. there was something truly sublime in the quiet, noiseless, apparently almost indifferent air with which frederick accomplished his purpose.
maria theresa was more and more unreconciled to the loss of silesia. never for an hour did she relinquish the idea of eventually398 regaining the province. the various treaties into which she had been compelled to enter she regarded as merely temporary arrangements. between the years 1752 and 1755 the energetic and persistent queen was making secret arrangements for the renewal of the silesian war.
the king of poland, who was also elector of saxony, had strong feelings of personal hostility to frederick. his prime minister, count von brühl, even surpassed his royal master in the bitter antagonism with which he regarded the prussian monarch. frederick, whose eagle eye was ever open, and whose restless mind was always on the alert, suspected that a coalition was about to be formed against him. he had false keys made to the royal archives at dresden; bribed one of the officials there, m. menzel, stealthily to enter the chamber of the archives, and copy for him such extracts as would throw any light upon the designs of the court. among other items of intelligence, he found that austria, russia, and poland were deliberating upon the terms of a coalition against him.
on the 15th of may, 1753, the russian senate had passed the resolution that it should henceforth be the policy of russia not only to resist all further encroachments on the part of prussia, but to seize the first opportunity to force the prussian monarch back to the possession of simply his original boundary of brandenburg. it was also agreed that, should prussia attack any of the allies of russia, or be attacked by any of them, the armies of the czar should immediately array themselves against the armies of frederick. there were many other papers, more or less obscure, which rendered it very certain that maria theresa would ere long make a new attempt to regain silesia, and that in that attempt she would be aided both by russia and poland. frederick also knew full well that nothing would better please his uncle george ii. of england than to see prussia crowded back to her smallest limits. to add to frederick’s embarrassment, france was hopelessly alienated from him.
many bitter words had already passed between louis xv. and frederick. but recently a new element of discord had appeared. the duchess of pompadour, the guilty favorite of louis xv., beautiful, fascinating, and wicked, had become a power in europe, notwithstanding the ignoble position she occupied.399 this artful and enchanting woman, having the weak king completely under her control, was in reality the ruler of france. the proudest nobles and the highest ecclesiastics bowed submissively at her shrine. even the immaculate maria theresa, constrained by state policy, wrote flattering notes to her, addressing her as “my cousin,” “princess and cousin,” “madame, my dearest sister.”
the pampered duchess sent by the french minister to berlin a complimentary message to frederick. he disdainfully replied: “the duchess of pompadour! who is she? i do not know her.” this was an offense never to be forgiven.
frederick was now in imminent danger of being assailed by a coalition of austria, russia, poland, and england. indeed, it was by no means certain that france might not also join the alliance. all this was the result of frederick’s great crime in wresting silesia from austria. such was the posture of affairs when, in the summer of 1755, frederick decided to take a trip into holland incognito. he disguised himself with a black wig, and assumed the character of a musician of the king of poland. at amsterdam he embarked for utrecht in the common passage-boat. the king mingled with the other passengers without any one suspecting his rank. there chanced to be in the boat a young swiss gentleman, henry de catt, twenty-seven years of age. he was a teacher, taking a short tour for recreation. he gives the following account of his interview with the king, whom, at the time, he had no reason to suppose was other than an ordinary passenger. we give the narrative in his own words:
“as i could not get into the cabin, because it was all engaged, i staid with the other passengers in the steerage, and the weather being fine, came upon deck. after some time there stepped out of the cabin a man in cinnamon-colored coat with gold buttons; in black wig; face and coat considerably dusted with spanish snuff. he looked at me fixedly for a while, and then said, without farther preface, ‘who are you, sir?’ this cavalier tone from an unknown person, whose exterior indicated nothing very important, did not please me, and i declined satisfying his curiosity. he was silent. but some time after he assumed a more courteous tone, and said, ‘come in here to me, sir. you will be better here than in the steerage amidst the tobacco-smoke.’
400 “this polite address put an end to all anger; and, as the singular manner of the man excited my curiosity, i took advantage of the invitation. we sat down and began to speak confidentially with one another.
“‘do you see the man in the garden yonder, sitting, smoking his pipe?’ said he to me. ‘that man, you may depend upon it, is not happy.’
“‘i know not,’ i answered; ‘but it seems to me, until one knows a man, and is completely acquainted with his situation and his way of thought, one can not possibly determine whether he is happy or unhappy.’
“my gentleman admitted this, and led the conversation on to the dutch government. he criticised it—probably to bring me to speak. i did speak, and gave him frankly to know that he was not perfectly instructed in the thing he was criticising.
“‘you are right,’ answered he; ‘one can only criticise what one is thoroughly acquainted with.’
“he now began to speak of religion; and, with eloquent tongue, to recount what mischiefs scholastic philosophy had brought upon the world; then tried to prove that creation was impossible.
“at this last point i stood out in opposition. ‘but how can one create something out of nothing?’ said he.
“‘that is not the question,’ i answered. ‘the question is, whether such a being as god can, or can not, give existence to what, as yet, has none.’
“he seemed embarrassed, and added, ‘but the universe is eternal.’
“‘you are in a circle,’ said i. ‘how will you get out of it?’
“‘i skip over it,’ he replied, laughing; and then began to talk of other things. he inquired,
“‘what form of government do you reckon the best?’
“‘the monarchic, if the king is just and enlightened.’
“‘very well,’ said he; ‘but where will you find kings of that sort?’ and thereupon went into such a sally as could not in the least lead me to suppose that he was one. in the end, he expressed pity for them, that they could not know the sweets of friendship, and cited on the occasion these verses—his own, i suppose:
401
“‘amitié, plaisir des grandes ames; amitié, que les rois, ces illustres ingrats sont assez malheureux de ne conna?tre pas!’
“‘i have not the honor to be acquainted with kings,’ said i; ‘but, to judge from what one has read in history of several of them, i should believe, sir, on the whole, that you are right.’
“‘ah! yes, yes,’ he added, ‘i’m right. i know the gentlemen.’
“a droll incident happened during our dialogue. my gentleman wanted to let down a little sash window, and could not manage it. ‘you do not understand that,’ said i; ‘let me do it.’ i tried to get it down, but succeeded no better than he.
“‘sir,’ said he, ‘allow me to remark, on my side, that you understand as little of it as i.’
“‘that is true,’ i replied, ‘and i beg your pardon. i was too rash in accusing you of a want of expertness.’
“‘were you ever in germany?’ he now asked me.
“‘no,’ i answered; ‘but i should like to make that journey. i am very curious to see the prussian states and their king, of whom one hears so much.’ and now i began to launch out on frederick’s actions.
“but he interrupted me hastily with the word, ‘nothing more of kings, sir—nothing more. what have we to do with them? we will spend the rest of our voyage on more agreeable and cheering objects.’ and now he spoke of the best of all possible worlds, and maintained that in our planet, earth, there was more evil than good. i maintained the contrary, and this discussion brought us to the end of the voyage.
“on quitting me he said, ‘i hope, sir, you will leave me your name. i am very glad to have made your acquaintance. perhaps we shall see one another again.’ i replied as was fitting to the compliment, and begged him to excuse me for having contradicted him a little. i then told him my name, and we parted.”
how soon henry learned that he had been conversing with the king of prussia we do not know. it is evident that frederick was pleased with the interview. he soon after invited henry de catt to his court, and appointed him reader to the king. in this capacity he served his prussian majesty for about twenty years. he left a note-book in the royal archives of berlin from which the above extracts are taken.
