XIV. The United Provinces still bravely maintained their liberty against the efforts of Spain, who since the peace of Vervins had collected her whole force against them. The glory they acquired by this illustrious defence determined them to make choice of an Historian who might transmit with dignity to after-ages the signal exploits of this memorable war. Several learned men made great interest for the place; among others Baudius, the famous Professor of Eloquence in the university of Leyden: but the States thought young Grotius (who had taken no step to obtain it) deserved the preference: and what is still more singular, Baudius himself did not find fault with their choice, because he looked upon Grotius to be already a very great man.

XV. His high reputation was on the point of procuring him, about the same time, a very honourable settlement in France. King Henry IV. sensible that he ought to have a man of the greatest merit at the head of his Library, had, at the recommendation of M. de Villeroi, while Gosselin his librarian was yet living, fixed upon Casaubon, who at that time had the greatest name for literature. This affair was carried on mysteriously: The King desired to see Casaubon in private: he told him, that he intended to make him his librarian; and that Gosselin could not live above a year; adding, with the frank and noble air which so well became that great Prince: "You shall see my fine books, and tell me what they contain; for I don't understand them myself."

Gosselin lived three years after this conversation, till 1603. The Jesuits being informed Casaubon was to be set over the King's Library, represented to his majesty the inconveniences of confiding a treasure of that nature to the most obstinate of all heretics. This made some impression on the king: nevertheless he was afraid of a clamour were it known that he refused an employment promised to a Protestant on account of his religion. He consulted with some persons; and they advised him to send to Holland for Grotius, whom he knew, and appoint him his librarian; which would make the Public ascribe the change to some private discontent, and not to religion. Casaubon, apprised of what was doing, remained perfectly quiet: but the President de Thou, thinking the King's honour concerned in keeping his word, warmly solicited in his favour, and, after the affair had been suspended some weeks, Casaubon was at length nominated. Grotius had had no part in this whole proceeding: accordingly Casaubon was so far from being offended with him, that, writing to Daniel Heinsius, December 29, 1603, he assures him if the place could have made Grotius's fortune, he wished he had got it, because he loved him, and admired his prodigious genius.

XVI. Grotius was at that time principally employed as an Advocate. He tells us that to make himself master of the forms of law, he carefully studied the practical part, transcribing precedents of Petitions, Prosecutions, and Defences. He pleaded his first cause when he was but seventeen, with universal applause, which he maintained whilst he continued at the Bar. We learn the method he followed in his pleadings from a letter to his son Peter advising him to imitate it. "That you may not, says he, be embarrassed by the little order observed by those against whom you speak, mind one thing, of which I have found the advantage. Distribute all that can be said on both sides under certain heads, which imprint strongly in your memory; and whatever your adversary says, refer it to your own division, and not to his[50]." Grotius's great attention was to avoid prolixity and confusion in his pleadings[51].

The employment of an advocate, though he acquired infinite honour by it, did not however please him. The reasons of his dislike we have in a letter to Daniel Heinsius, dated July 21, 1603. "Besides that law-suits are improper for a peaceable man, what doth he derive from them? They procure him hatred from those against whom he pleads, small acknowledgments from his clients, and not much honour with the Public. Add to this, that the time spent in things so little agreeable, might be employed in acquiring others much more useful. I should have been a better philosopher, more master of the Greek, better acquainted with the manners of the Ancients, with the Poets, and Philologists, if I had practiced less as an Advocate."

XVII. His brilliant success at the Bar, which he treats as ungrateful, procured him, however, a very considerable promotion. The place of Advocate-general of the Fisc for Holland and Zealand becoming vacant, it was unanimously conferred on Grotius. This is an employment of great distinction and authority, the person invested with it being charged with the preservation of the public peace and the prosecution of offenders. It was in 1607 he took possession of this important office, which he filled with so much reputation, the States augmented his salary, and promised him a seat in the Court of Holland.

XVIII. John Grotius, on his son's being made Advocate-general, began to think of a wife for him; and fixed upon Mary Reigersberg, of one of the first families in Zealand, whose father had been Burgomaster of Veer: the marriage was solemnised in July, 1608. The greatest encomium of the new-married lady is, that she was worthy such a husband as Grotius. The most perfect harmony subsisted between them, and Grotius held her in the highest esteem[52]. This alliance gave occasion to a number of poems. John Grotius wrote his son's Epithalamium; Daniel Heinsius composed a Poem on that subject, which, in the opinion of Grotius, was the best of the kind that ever had been written. Grotius himself celebrated his nuptials in some Latin verses, approved of by Scaliger, and translated them into Dutch: he also wrote some in French on that occasion.

XIX. At the time of his marriage he was employed in a work of great importance, which was not published till the year following. This was his Freedom of the Ocean, or the Right of the Dutch to trade to the Indies; dedicated to all the free nations of Christendom, and divided into thirteen Chapters. The author shews in the first, that by the law of Nations navigation is free to all the world: In the second, that the Portuguese never possessed the sovereignty of the countries in the East-Indies with which the Dutch carry on a trade: In the third, that the donation of Pope Alexander VI. gave the Portuguese no right to the Indies: In the fourth, that the Portuguese had not acquired by the law of arms the sovereignty of the States to which the Dutch trade: He shews in the fifth, that the ocean is immense and common to all; that it is absurd to imagine that those who first navigate a sea ought to be judged to have taken possession of it; that a vessel which cuts the waves of a sea, gives no more right to that sea, than she leaves marks of her way in it; that, besides, the Portuguese are not the first who sailed in the Indian sea, since there are facts which demonstrate it was neither unknown to the Ancients, to the Spaniards, nor to the Carthaginians, nor even to the Romans. The sixth chapter proves, that the right of navigation in that sea cannot belong exclusively to the Portuguese by virtue of Alexander VI's donation, because donation cannot take place in things which enter not into trade; and that, besides, the Pope is not master of the sea. In the seventh chapter it is shewn, that the Eastern sea, or the right of navigation in it, cannot belong to the Portuguese by prescription, since prescription being only by the civil law it cannot operate against the law of nature, by virtue of which, navigation in that sea is free to all the world; that, moreover, prescription doth not take place in things that cannot be alienated, such as the sea, the use of the sea, and things common to all men: add to this, that the opposition of other nations, and their navigation in that sea would have hindered the prescription. It is proved in the eighth, that by the law of nations the commerce between nations is free, and cannot be prohibited without injustice. In the ninth it is shewn that the trade to the Indies doth not belong to the Portuguese, exclusive of other kingdoms, because they first took possession of it, since the title of first occupant takes place only in that which is corporeal. The tenth proves, that the Pope could not grant the Portuguese an exclusive trade to the Indies: the eleventh, that this trade does not belong to them by prescription: the twelfth, that nothing is more unjust than the claim to an exclusive trade set up by the Portuguese. The author concludes his work with the thirteenth chapter, exhorting the Dutch to continue their trade to the Indies in time of war, of truce, or of peace.

This work was printed without Grotius's knowledge, and published without his consent. He appears not to have been quite satisfied with it: "My intention (says he in a letter to Camerarius, May 20th, 1637) was good; but the work favours too much of my want of years." They wrote against him in Spain: "I know (he writes his brother, April 1, 1640) that a treatise was written some time ago, at Salamanca, against mine Of the Freedom of the Ocean, but it was suppressed by the King of Spain." Another appeared, in 1625, at Valladolid, entitled, De justo imperio Lusitanorum Asiatico, by one Francis Seraphin de Freiras. The Freedom of the Ocean was refuted in England by the famous Selden in his work entitled Mare clausum, seu de dominio maris. Grotius thought the Spanish author's book not ill done, and deserving of an answer[53]; and was pleased with the politeness shewn him by Selden[54]. But at the time these Answers appeared Grotius was so dissatisfied with the Dutch, he did not think himself obliged to employ his time for people void of gratitude. "Let them seek among my Judges (said he by way of irony on their ignorance) for one to answer the Spaniard[55]." As to Selden's book, Grotius seemed not to mind it; he looked on himself as no longer concerned in the controversy. "I wholly forget what I have been, says he, when I see those to whom I have done so great services, remember me only to hurt me." These sentiments of an indifference bordering on hatred he did not entertain till after the Dutch had done every thing to make him uneasy, as we shall see in the sequel.

XX. The year after the publication of the treatise Of the Freedom of the Ocean, Grotius printed his work De antiquitate reipublicæ Batavæ, divided into seven chapters. In the first the author shews what is an aristocratical government: In the second he gives the history of the ancient Batavi, whose government, he says, was aristocratical, under the command of a head, who was sometimes styled King. He explains, in the third, the state of the Republic of the Batavi in the time of the Roman empire; and building on a passage of Tacitus he pretends they were allies, and not subjects of the Romans. In the fourth he enquires into the government of the Batavi after the fall of the Roman empire; from which æra till the establishment of the Counts of Holland we know very little of that nation. The author treats, in the fifth chapter, of the government of Holland in the time of the Counts. The first elected to that dignity was named Diederic, of Friesland, and was Count of the whole nation: He was not a vassal of the Empire, and, as Philip of Leyden observes, he was Emperor in his County. He was not so absolute as a Monarch, and though the Dutch in chusing their Counts generally followed the order of primogeniture, they never set up a Prince without first requiring of him an oath, to conform to the laws: so that he reigned rather by the consent of the people, than by right of succession. The power of the Counts was limited by law; and the taxes were always imposed by the States. In the sixth chapter the author shews that Philip II. King of Spain, endeavouring to change their form of government, occasioned the grand war which procured Holland her liberty. Grotius explains, in his seventh and last chapter, the form of government established in Holland after the Dutch threw off the Spanish yoke. The work is dedicated to the States of Holland and West-Friesland, March 16, 1610.

The States were extremely pleased with it: they returned their thanks to the author, and made him a present[56]. He afterwards added notes, serving for proofs of the several facts: these were carried away with his other papers at the time of his arrest; but the Elzevirs, intending to publish a new edition of it, acquainted Grotius, who was at pains to get the notes returned; and they are now printed at the end of the Elzevir edition. His love to his country led him to advance several things in this work, which he afterwards owned to be mistakes[57]; in particular, that the Batavi had always been free, and not subject to the ancient Franks[58].

While this book was in the press, Grotius, and his father, who commonly assisted him in his writings, translated it into Dutch[59].

XXI. Elias Oldenbarnevelt, Pensionary of Rotterdam, and brother to the Grand Pensionary of Holland, dying in 1613, the city of Rotterdam offered that important place to Grotius, whose name was so famous, foreigners sought to draw him to them by offers of honours and lucrative posts, which love to his Country made him constantly reject. It was some time before he yielded to the desires of Rotterdam. By the ferment of mens minds he foresaw that very great commotions would speedily shake the Republic; this made him insist with the gentlemen of Rotterdam that he should never be turned out of his place of Pensionary: and on their promising accordingly, he accepted the employment, which gave him a seat in the assembly of the States of Holland, and afterwards in that of the States General.

Hitherto Grotius had had very little connection with the Grand Pensionary; but from this time contracted an intimate friendship with him, which gave him the greater pleasure as he was most desirous of the counsels of a man of so much experience, who had been himself nine years Pensionary of Rotterdam, and above thirty years Grand Pensionary of Holland (in which employment he had done his Country most essential services) and who was famous not only in Holland, but in foreign countries, for his many embassies, and acknowledged prudence and abilities.

The great intimacy between them gave rise to a report, that the Grand Pensionary, who was sensible of Grotius's great merit, and who loved him, designed to have him made Grand Pensionary. We have this particular from Grotius himself[60], who assures us he never desired that high office, the rather as his health would not then permit him to discharge the many functions belonging to it. For by the Grand Pensionary the States see, hear, and act; and though he has no deliberative voice, and is the lowest in rank, his influence is the greatest. He manages Prosecutions, receives Dispatches, and answers them, and is as it were Attorney-General of the States: before he be called to be Grand-Pensionary, he is nominated Advocate of the States.

XXII. There was at that time a high dispute between the English and Dutch concerning the right of fishing in the northern seas. Two vessels had sailed from Amsterdam to Greenland to kill walrus, a sea-animal, larger than an ox, with the muzzle of a lion, the skin covered with hair, four feet, and two large teeth in the upper jaw, flat, hard, and so white that in colour and value they equal those of the elephant: some even give them the preference, because, besides their exceeding whiteness, they are not subject to grow yellow. These two vessels having caught twenty-two walrus, were met by some English vessels bound to Russia, who hail'd them, and demanded whether they had pasports from the King of Great Britain to fish at Greenland? The Dutchmen answered, that the Sea was free, and they had pasports from Count Maurice their Stadtholder. "That is not enough, said the English[61]: and to let you know that that sea belongs to the King our master, if you will not give us instantly the walrus you have taken, with your boats, nets, and instruments for killing them, we'll send you to the bottom." The two Dutch vessels, unable to resist, were obliged to obey. Returning to Holland, they made their complaint; and the affair being laid before the States, it was resolved that Grotius, who had written on the subject and was more master of it than any one, should be sent to England to demand justice: But, says the Mercure François, he found the old proverb true: The strongest are masters of the sea, and such never care to make restitution: so that he could obtain no satisfaction.

This denial of justice from the English determined the Dutch not to go to Greenland for the future without a force sufficient to revenge themselves on the English, or to have nothing to fear from them.

The dispute growing serious, to prevent any acts of hostility, and to know on what grounds they went, a conference was held in 1615 between the Commissaries of England and Holland, in which the debate turned chiefly on the whale-fishery. Grotius, who was one of the Commissaries from the Province of Holland, gives the history of this conference in a Letter to Du Maurier, dated at Rotterdam, June 5, 1615. The Dutch Commissaries put the English to silence, by demonstrating, that neither the land nor the sea of Greenland belonged to them, and that they had no right to hinder the Dutch to navigate and catch whales in that sea, of which none could claim the property. That the land did not belong to them, because till the year 1596 no mortal had set foot on it; that the Dutch discovered it the year before, and gave it the name it still retains, as may be seen in all the modern geographers, on the globes, and carts. The English wanted to reply that Hugh Willoughby discovered it in 1553: but the Dutch shewed even by the Journal of his voyage, that setting out from Finland he landed on the Island which bears his name, at a great distance from Greenland; that he died of hunger and cold, with all his companions, on the coast of Lapland, where the Laplanders found him, next summer, and from whence his Journals were sent to England. The English, not knowing what to answer, said, it was a high indignity to their master, to dispute a right of which he had hitherto been in peaceable possession; and that their instructions imported, they should break off the conference unless the Dutch would acknowledge England's claim to Greenland. What was still more diverting (continued Grotius) they added, that they had not then their titles, but would shew them to Caron, the Dutch Agent in England, and, they flattered themselves, on seeing them, he would yield the point. They like better (adds he in the conclusion) to deal with him, than dispute with us, because they will take his silence, as they have done already, for submission.

XXIII. If Grotius had ground to be dissatisfied with the disingenuousness and injustice of the English Ministry in his negotiation concerning the Fishery, he had at least reason to be pleased with the politeness of King James, who, Casaubon informs us, gave Grotius a most gracious reception, and was charmed with his conversation. But the greatest pleasure he received by this voyage was the intimate friendship he contracted with Casaubon. They knew one another before by character, and highly esteemed each other. They were made to be intimate friends: in both the most profound erudition was joined with the most perfect probity. They had still another sympathy to knit faster the band of this union: both ardently wished to see all Christians united in one faith and desired nothing more, than to be employed in that great work. They have left behind them testimonies of the satisfaction they found in each other's acquaintance. "For my part, says Grotius in a letter to John Frederic Gronovius[62], I reckon it one of the greatest felicities of my whole life to have been loved by a man as illustrious for his piety, his probity, and his candor, as for his extensive learning. It was by his counsels or those of persons he approved that I conducted myself in the most difficult times."

"I respect no less, says he in another letter, his frankness and his probity, than his uncommon erudition. His letters sufficiently prove what great friendship he had for me."

We find in fact that they contain evidences of the highest esteem for Grotius. To Daniel Heinsius he writes, April 13, 1613, "I am very well; and cannot say enough of my felicity in enjoying the friendship of such a great man as Grotius. O that incomparable man! I knew him before: but fully to comprehend the excellency of his divine genius, one must see him, and hear him converse. His countenance speaks probity, and his discourse discovers the deepest learning and the most sincere piety. Think not that I only am his admirer; all learned and good men entertain the same sentiments for him, particularly the King."

Casaubon writes to the President de Thou, April 20, 1613, to acquaint him what pleasure he had received by seeing Grotius. "I must let you know, says he, that I have seen here Hugo Grotius. He is a man of admirable probity and learning[63]."

They had long conversations together on religion. Casaubon ardently desired a reunion of the Protestants with the Roman Catholics:[64] and would have set about it, had he staid longer in France, as he informed Descordes, who repeated it to Grotius. He greatly respected the opinions of the ancient church[65], and was persuaded its sentiments were more sound than those of the Ministers of Charenton. Grotius and he had imparted their thoughts to each other before the voyage to England: for Casaubon congratulates him, January 8, 1612, on his desiring nothing but peace and a coalition; and communicated Grotius' sentiments to King James; who approved of them. This shews that Grotius thought it was wrong to depart from the discipline and forms of the ancient church: Casaubon was of the same mind; and his Letter to M. de Thou is a demonstrative proof that these two excellent men did not differ in matters of Religion. "I esteem him highly, says he[66], on account of his other great qualities; for he judges of the modern subjects of religious controversy like a learned and good man; and in his veneration for antiquity agrees with the wisest."

The last Letter which we have from Casaubon to Grotius comprehends all these sentiments in few words[67]: "I heartily pray God to preserve you ever: and as long as I live, I shall hold you in the highest esteem, so much am I taken with your piety, your probity, and your admirable learning."

XXIV. After his return from England, Grotius happened to be one day at the Assembly of the States of Holland and West-Friesland when an affair of consequence was under consideration. The States had granted commissions to several Privateers, some of which made depredations on the friends of the Republic, and, afterwards quitting the country, scowered the seas, refusing to return though summoned. Some people of Pomerania who had been ill used by these Corsairs, applied to the States for redress. The Question therefore was, Whether the States were answerable for the act of those privateers, either as having employed bad men in their service, or neglected to require security from them on giving them commissions. Grotius' advice being asked, his opinion was, that the States were only bound to punish the offenders, or deliver them up, if taken; and, for the rest, to make satisfaction to the sufferers out of the effects of the pirates. We learn from himself on what he grounded his opinion[68]. The States, said he, were not the cause of those unjust practices, nor had any part in them: so far from it they have prohibited, by express ordonnances, the injuring of our friends. They were not obliged to ask security from the privateers, since, without granting formal commissions, they might permit all their subjects to plunder the enemy, as was formerly practised; and the permission they granted to those privateers was not the cause of the damage they did to our allies, since any private person may, without such permission, fit out vessels, and sail on a cruize. Besides, it was impossible to foresee that these privateers would turn out wicked; and there is no taking such precautions as to employ only honest men. When a prince's troops, whether by sea or land, contrary to his order, injure his friends, he is not responsable for it; as appears from what has been acknowledged by France and England. To make one answerable for the acts of those who are in his service, even when no fault of his gave any occasion to them, would be to decide the question not by the law of nations, but by the civil law; and even the rule is not general in the civil law.

The States were determined by this opinion.

XXV. The multitude of affairs with which Grotius was oppressed, and the continual journeys he was obliged to make, left him no time for cultivating Polite Literature. In the midst of his occupations Du Maurier, the French Ambassador in Holland, and his particular friend, having resolved to begin a course of study, applied to Grotius for directions. We shall here give an extract from his answer[69], because it may be of use to grown persons desirous of acquiring literary accomplishments.

He shortened his method as much as he could out of regard to Du Maurier's age, dignity, and affairs. He advises him to begin with Logic, not that of Aristotle, which is too long, and contains many things of no great use: an abridgment was sufficient, such as Du Moulin's, the most esteemed at that time. "But your assistant, says he, must read the best that has been written on the subject, and communicate to you what is most remarkable: much may be learnt in an hour or two spent in this manner." The same method he would have observed in the other sciences, and even with regard to books; that is to say, the person under whom Du Maurier studies must read the best writers on every subject; and extract what is most essential, to be repeated to him. After Logic he directs him to the study of Physics, which he would not have carried too far; and recommends some plain and short abridgement: he could think of none at that time but Jacchæus. He is of opinion, that as in Logic the rules of syllogism are chiefly to be attended to, so in Physics the enquiry into the nature and functions of the soul is of most importance. After Physics he advises him to proceed to Metaphysics, of which he might get some notion from Timplerus' book, which is neither long nor obscure. The study of Moral Philosophy is to be begun with Aristotle, whose books to Nicomachus are the best. "Your reader, says he, must give you in a small compass what the ablest interpreters have said. It is also necessary to be acquainted with the sentiments of the different sects of Philosophers; for without that knowledge you will be much at a loss in reading the Ancients, and profit little by them." To unbend after this serious study, some other short and agreeable books that have a relation to it may be read: such as Ecclesiasticus, the Wisdom of Solomon, Theognis, Phocilides, the Golden Verses ascribed to Pythagoras, Epictetus's Enchiridion, Hierocles, and the Commentaries of Arrian; not omitting the Characters of Theophrastus. What the Poets have written on Morality may also be perused; with some select Tragedies of Euripides, Terence's Comedies, and Horace's Epistles. Young people and grown persons admire different things in these writings: the beauty of the style pleases the first: the others learn by them to know men. To these works may be added Cicero's Offices, a piece not enough esteemed, purely because it is in the hands of every one; some of Seneca's Epistles, the Tragedies that go under his name; and the best of Plutarch's smaller pieces. After having gone through Aristotle's Politics, the excellent extract by Polybius of Republics is to be read; with the Harangues of Mecænas and Agrippa to Augustus, in Dion; and Sallust's Letter to Cæsar. Plutarch's Lives of Pericles, Cato, the Gracchi, Demosthenes, and Cicero, must not be omitted: much may be learned too from Cicero's Letters to Atticus, if they were translated by one well acquainted with the Roman History of that period.

After this would be the proper time for reading Aristotle's Rhetoric: for, as is well remark'd by that great man, who possessed all the arts and sciences in an eminent degree, from Morals and Politics must the arguments be drawn that are to convince mens understandings; that is to say, it is impossible to be truly eloquent without extensive knowledge. The better to perceive the use of the precepts it would be proper to read with attention some Orations of Demosthenes and Cicero, particularly those which relate to public Affairs, such as the Philippics, the Olinthiacs, the Oration pro lege Manilia, that against the Agrarian Law, and some others. The next thing, to be applied to is Jus publicum, that is to say, the knowledge of the different forms of government, the Conventions between Nations, and, in fine, whatever regards Peace and War. The treatises of Plato and Cicero On Laws shew in what manner the principles of this law are to be deduced from morality. It will not be unprofitable to read likewise, or at least to run over the second book of St. Thomas Aquinas, especially what he says of Justice and Laws: The Pandecta, particularly the first and last book, the first and the three last books of Justinian's Codex, point out the use to be made of those principles. The Lawyers who have best handled the questions relating to the Law of Nations and Jus publicum, are Vasquès, Hotoman, and Gentilis. After the acquisition of these several branches of knowledge, the study of History will be extremely useful, by the application which may be made of the examples to the precepts. History is to be begun with an abridgement of universal history; such as Justin, Florus, and the abridgement of Livy. But in reading History a man ought to please his own taste: for they all contain many useful things: and we retain best those we read with pleasure. In general, we ought not to begin with the most ancient, but with such as, being nearer our own times, have greater relation with what we know already: we may afterwards go back to what is more distant. It is proper to observe, that there is more advantage to be reaped from reading the Greek historians who have written the history of Rome, than the Latin, who have treated the same subject; because Foreigners give more attention to the public manners and customs, than the Natives.

M. du Maurier received this Letter with the highest satisfaction; he permitted several copies to be taken of it, and it was printed by the Elzevirs in 1637, in a collection of several Methods of Study, under the title of De omni genere studiorum recte instituendo.

Grotius acquaints us[70] that it was published with out his consent.

BOOK II.

I. In the year 1608, while the truce between the Spaniards and the United Provinces was negotiating, Arminius, an eminent Professor in the University of Leyden, departing from the rigid sentiments of Calvin, publickly taught, that God, foreseeing Adam's sin, had resolved to send his only Son into the world to redeem mankind; that he had ordained Grace to all to whom the Law should be preached, by which they might believe if they would, and persevere; that this grace offered to all men was of such a nature, that not only it might be resisted, but men actually did often resist it; and that God had only chosen or reprobated those, who, he foresaw, would embrace or reject the grace offered them.

The dispute still continuing with much bitterness, in 1611 the States of Holland ordered the principal Ministers of the two parties to appear before them: Twelve accordingly attended, six Arminians and six Gomarists, and disputed in presence of the States on Predestination, the Death of Christ, the necessity and nature of Grace and Perseverance. The States heard them, but would determine nothing, only recommended to them to live in peace. But the consequence of this conference was like that of all other disputes, especially in matters of religion, mens minds were the more inflamed and provoked.

II. The partisans of Arminius, desirous to efface the bad impressions which Gomar's discourses and those of his adherents had made on the minds of the public, met privately, and drew up a Remonstrance, dated January 14, 1610, which they addressed to the States of Holland, setting forth, that they did not believe, like their adversaries.

1. "That God, by an eternal and irreversible decree, had predestinated men, whom he did not consider as created, and still less as culpable, some to everlasting life, and others to everlasting death, without regard to their good or evil actions, from his mere good pleasure, for the praise of his Mercy, or his Justice, or, as others say, to manifest his saving grace, his wisdom, and his absolute power: And that God has also, by an eternal and immutable decree, preordained the proper methods of executing his will, by which those who are predestinated to salvation are saved in a necessary and inevitable manner, so that it is impossible they should perish; and such as are predestinated to eternal death (who are the greater part of mankind) are necessarily and inevitably damned, so that they cannot be saved.

4. "That in consequence of this the Spirit of God and of Christ works so efficaciously in the Elect, that they cannot resist it; but must be converted, believe, and be necessarily saved: That this irresistible grace and strength is given to the Elect alone, and not to the Reprobate, to whom God not only refuses this irresistible grace, but even denies them necessary and sufficient grace for their conversion and salvation, though they be called and solicited to accept it, without compulsion, externally, by the revealed will of God; but the inward strength necessary to conversion and faith is nevertheless denied them, by the secret will of God.

2. "That accordingly Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world, died for all and every man; and by his death on the cross has merited for all reconciliation with God, and remission of sin; in such manner, nevertheless, that no one can partake of them but Believers, according to the words of Jesus, St. John iii. 16. 1 St. John ii. 2.

5. "That those who by a lively faith are engrafted into Christ, and consequently made partakers of his quickening spirit, are furnished with sufficient strength to be able to combat and even overcome Satan, sin, the world, and their own lusts; and all this, as is carefully to be observed, by the assistance of the grace of the Holy Spirit; and that Jesus Christ succours them by his Spirit in all temptations, reaches to them his hand (provided they be willing to engage, ask his assistance, and are not wanting to themselves) supports and strengthens them so, that they cannot be led away by any wile or violence of Satan, or snatched out of Christ's hands, as he says himself, St. John x. My sheep shall no man pluck out of my hands. For the rest, if it be asked whether these may not, through negligence, let go the confidence which they had from the beginning, Heb. iii. 6, cleave again to the present world, depart from the holy doctrine which was delivered, make shipwreck of a good conscience? (2 Pet. i. 10. Jude iii. 1. Tim. i. 19. Heb. xii. 15.) This must be previously examined, with more care, by the Scriptures, to be able to teach it with full assurance to others."

To resume in few words the doctrine of the Arminians, we shall say with Bossuet[71], their principles were, That there is no absolute election, nor gratuitous preference, by which God prepares for certain chosen persons, and for them alone, the infallible means of bringing them to glory; but that God offers to all men, and especially to those to whom the gospel is preached, sufficient means to convert themselves; which some make use of; and others not, without employing any other for the Elect, than for the Reprobate: so that election is always conditional, and a man may come short of it by failing in the condition: from whence they conclude, first, that justifying grace may be lost totally, that is, without any degree of it being left; and lost finally, that is, without its ever being recovered: secondly, that there can be no assurance of salvation.