III. The pains which he was obliged to take, and the trouble he underwent at the beginning of his new settlement at Paris, did not diminish his passion for literature. April 23, 1621, he informs Vossius that the irksomeness of his solitary manner of life was relieved by his daily conversations with men of the greatest abilities. He writes to Andrew Schot from Paris, July 8, 1621, that, delivered from public business which never leaves the mind at ease, and from that croud whose conversation is contagious, he spent the greatest part of his time in prayer, reading the Scriptures, and the ancient interpreters.

He enters into a detail of his studies in a letter to Vossius, September 29, 1621, "I persist, says he, in my respect for sacred antiquity: there are many people here of the same taste. My six books in Dutch will appear soon (this was his treatise on the Truth of the Christian Religion, in Dutch verse) perhaps I shall also publish the Disquisition On Pelagianism, with the precautions hinted to me by you and some other learned men. In the mean time, I am preparing an edition of Stobæus; and to render it more perfect I collate the Greek Manuscripts with the printed copies." He sometimes attended the courts of Justice to hear the Advocates plead, that he might judge of their talents and eloquence. To be applauded for eloquence at that time, says the Abbé D'Olivet, an Advocate was to say almost nothing of his cause; make continual allusions to the least-known passages of antiquity, and have the art of throwing a new kind of obscurity upon them, by, making his speech consist of a string of metaphors. This fault shocked Grotius much. He gives an account to his brother of the impression made upon him by the studied harangues which were delivered at Martinmas term 1622, by M. Servin and the First President: they were wholly taken from Greek and Latin authors. "Such, says Grotius, is the eloquence in fashion: it is much disliked by men of sound judgment." The celebrated Patru first attempted, and accomplished the reformation of this bad taste.

IV. Notwithstanding the inveterate enmity of the Dutch, which pursued him even to the French court, Grotius still preserved a sincere love to his Country. He wrote to his father and brother-in-law that he was continually soliciting all his friends in its favour; that no injuries should ever make him cease to love it; and that he stifled every thought of revenge as utterly repugnant to the precepts of the Gospel.

He did not however think this disposition ought to hinder him from labouring to manifest to the world the innocency of his conduct, and that of those who were condemned with him.

He had even collected when in prison some materials for his apology: the President Jeannin advised him to finish it while the facts were fresh in his memory, and he might print it at a favourable opportunity.

Grotius followed this advice, and his Apology in Dutch was finished in the beginning of the year 1622. If it had appeared only in that language it could not have been read out of Holland; but as he intended that wherever he was known, that is to say, throughout all Europe, every one might be enabled to judge of the regularity of his conduct, he translated it into Latin: He was also desirous of having it done into French, that it might be printed at the same time in the three languages: but he could not find a French translator. He expected that a work, which set in the clearest light the injustices and prevarications of men in place, would increase their hatred to him: but this consideration did not restrain him from publishing it, because he was persuaded the laws of God and of nature allowed every man unjustly accused to justify himself.

His Apology was soon translated into Latin, for it was published at Paris in the year 1622. In the dedication to the people of Holland and West Friesland the Author explains his reasons for so long delaying his vindication. During his nine months confinement at the Hague he could do nothing in it; when removed to Louvestein he wanted several necessary pieces; since his happy escape he was much busied; besides it required time to range the several parts of his defence in proper order. The work is divided into twenty Chapters: in the first he shews that each of the United Provinces is sovereign and independent of the States-General, whose authority is confined to the defence of the Provinces: in the second, that each Province is possessed of the Sovereignty in matters ecclesiastical, and that this sovereignty resides in the particular States of the Province: in the third and fourth, that the different opinions about Predestination ought to be tolerated: in the fifth, that the convocation of a Synod in the situation of affairs at that time must have been attended with great danger; that the assembling of the Synod of Dort was illegal, since it was done without consent of the Province of Holland: in the sixth, he sets forth the measures taken by the States of Holland to restore tranquillity; in the seventh, the reasonableness of the regulation of 1591 relating to the share which the Magistrates ought to have in the nomination of the Ministers of the Gospel; in the eighth, that the approbation of the majority ought to be looked upon as a decision: the excesses of the Contra-Remonstrants are particularised in the ninth: the tenth and eleventh justify the province of Holland in relation to the raising a new militia, which were called Attendants. The informality of his arrest is displayed in the thirteenth Chapter; Grotius there shews that he and the others arrested at the same time had only executed the orders of their Superiors and Sovereigns; that those who arrested him had no power to do it; that the States-General had no authority over the subjects of the Provinces; that they were a party in the dispute; that the persons arrested were members of the States of Holland, and were arrested in the Province of Holland, where the States-General had no jurisdiction. The fourteenth Chapter exposes the want of formality in the proceedings from the time of their arrest to the nomination of their judges. The fifteenth Chapter points out the want of formality in the nomination of the judges: and proves the extravagancy of making it a crime in them to maintain the rights of the States their Sovereigns, agreeable to the express orders they received. The sixteenth Chapter explains the informality committed after the Judges were nominated. The seventeenth displays the irregularity of the sentence passed upon them. The eighteenth gives a detail of the wrongs done to them after the Sentence. The nineteenth Chapter contains several remarks all tending to shew the irregularity of the sentence. The Author concludes this work, with a Prayer, imploring the Divine Goodness to pardon his enemies, and protect his Country. He farther prays that the Prince of Orange may merit the love of the People over whom he is governor; and that God may give himself grace to support with patience the persecution he suffers, that it may be meritorious to him in the other world.

The Apology was sent to Holland as soon as published: it incensed the States-General the more, as they could not give a reasonable answer to it. The approbation it met with throughout Europe would not suffer them to remain silent; this would have confirmed all the disagreeable truths which the necessity of a just defence obliged Grotius to advance: thus destitute of any good arguments, they had recourse to authority, and made themselves judges in their own cause. They proscribed the Apology, and condemned it as slanderous, and tending to asperse by falshoods the sovereign authority of the government of the Provinces, the person of the Prince of Orange, the States of the particular Provinces, and the towns themselves; and therefore forbad all persons to have it in their custody on pain of death. The Mercure François mentions this in the following terms. "The Apology is prohibited; and all persons of what quality soever are forbid to have it in their possession on pain of death; thus making Grotius as it were a prey to any person who shall apprehend him."

These menaces gave him uneasiness: he consulted the French Ministry, his friends and protectors, how to behave in this situation, and what was to be done to prevent the consequence which might result from the proscription: he had several conferences on this subject with the Chancellor de Silleri and the President Jeannin. The Chancellor, who was naturally irresolute, contented himself with blaming the rigour of the edict, and making general offers of service. The President Jeannin was of opinion he should write a letter to a friend, shewing the injustice of the proscription: others advised him to despise these vain threats, and publish a new edition of the Apology in which he might put the Authors of the Edict to confusion: some were of opinion he ought to complain to the States-General themselves; but others represented there would be danger in having recourse to this last expedient, as he might seem by it to acknowledge their authority. Against writing to the particular States of the Provinces there was one great objection, namely, the certainty of drawing upon himself a new proscription, because the power was in the hands of his greatest enemies. Those who wished to see him pass the rest of his days in France thought he should get himself naturalized a Frenchman, because the King by that would necessarily become his protector: they farther represented that this formality would qualify him to hold a place in France.

What kept him in suspense was to know whether he should put himself under the protection of the parliament, or ask a safe-conduct from the king. In the beginning of the year 1623[142] he seemed resolved to present a petition to the Parliament, and afterwards write to the States-General. He was in doubt whether to write to the Prince of Orange; at length he took the most proper step, which was to apply to the King. He presented a petition to his Majesty to be protected against the above-mentioned Edict, "which imported that he should be apprehended wherever found;" these are the terms of the Mercure François; "and his Majesty took him into his special protection, the letters for that purpose being issued at Paris, Feb. 26, 1623."

Although the greatest part of the Roman Catholics would have found nothing amiss in his Apology, yet many of them in the Low Countries were scandalized that he had not spoken of religion as they would have spoken: and it was condemned at Antwerp as dangerous to be read[143].

This work was never answered. Some years after its publication[144] a report being spread that a private person had written against the Apology without being employed by the States-General, Grotius desired his brother to enquire into it. It is probable this news was without foundation: at least we know nothing of that work. The malevolence of those who were then in place made no change in Grotius's affection to his country: in the height of the new persecution he wrote to his brother that he would still labour to promote the interest of Holland; and that if the United Provinces were desirous of entering into a closer union with France, he would assist them with all his credit: for the public interest was not to be sacrificed to the resentment of injuries received from a few[145].

V. Though the Prince of Orange had taken care to leave none in place but such as were entirely devoted to him, and consequently declared enemies of the Remonstrants, Grotius still preserved many faithful friends who ardently desired his return. He had scarce been a month at Paris when they wrote to him that there were some hopes of his being recalled: but he rightly judged that they were without foundation. He even writes to his brother-in-law, Reigersberg, that he looked on that rumour as an artifice of his enemies, who sought by it to engage him to silence, which they intended to take advantage of to propagate their calumnies. He was not duped by it, since, as we have just mentioned, it did not hinder him from writing his Defence, and publishing it to the world. Among those who preserved a friendship for him, there was one whom it would seem he had no reason to count upon: this was Prince Frederic Henry of Nassau, brother to the Prince of Orange, and who after the death of Maurice was himself Stadtholder. They maintained a correspondence by letters even at the time when the people of Holland were most exasperated against Grotius; and by a Letter from that Prince, which is still remaining, we may judge that Grotius did him good service at Paris; and that Frederic Henry was greatly disposed to serve him. This Letter deserves to be copied entire: it is dated August 4, 1622.

"Sir, I thank you for the good offices you have done me with some of the King's Council, and beg of you to continue them both with these, and with others, as you shall think proper; assuring you that I shall acknowledge your friendship on all occasions where I can serve you; being bound to it by the friendship which you have ever shewn to me. I have asked your brother-in-law Mr. Reigersberg to write to you particularly about an affair in which I should be glad to have your opinion: you will oblige me much by sending it, as you have already done by the memorial you remitted to me; for which I sincerely thank you. I could wish to be of use in your affairs in this Country, and would labour in them most chearfully: but you know the constitution of things is such, that neither I, nor your other friends, can serve you agreeably to our wishes. I would fain hope that time will bring about some change, and that I shall see you again here esteemed and honoured as your great qualities deserve; which will give me no less pleasure than I received from your regaining your liberty. In the mean time, I wish you, while at a distance from your country, all the satisfaction, prosperity, and happiness which you can desire. This I pray God to grant, and to me an opportunity of shewing by my actions that I am yours most affectionately to serve you, Henry de Nassau."

VI. The year after the publication of the Apology, that is to say, in 1623, Nicholas Buon printed at Paris Grotius's improvements and additions to Stobæus. This author, as is well known, extracted what he thought most important in the ancient Greek writers, and ranged it under different heads comprehending the principal points of Philosophy. His work is the more valuable as it has preserved several fragments of the Ancients found no where else. Grotius when very young purposed to extract from this author all the maxims of the poets, to translate them into Latin verse, and print the original with the translation. He began this when a boy; he was employed in it at the time of his arrest, and continued it as an amusement, whilst he had the use of books, in his prison at the Hague. He tells us that when he was deprived of pen and ink he was got to the forty-ninth title, which is an invective against tyranny, that had a great relation to what passed at that time in Holland. On his removal to Louvestein he resumed this work, and he finished it at Paris. He made several happy corrections in the text of Stobæus, some from his own conjectures or those of his friends, others on the authority of manuscripts in the king's library, which were very politely lent him by the learned Nicholas Rigaut, librarian to his Majesty.

Prefixed to this book are Prolegomena, in which the author shews that the works of the ancient Pagans are filled with maxims agreeable to the truths taught in Holy Writ. He intended to dedicate this book to the Chancellor Silleri: he had even written the dedication; but his friends, to whom he shewed it, thought he expressed himself with too much warmth against the censurers of his Apology. They advised him therefore to suppress it; and he yielded to their opinion. It may be observed in reading the royal privilege that the present title of the book is different from what it was to have had. To these extracts from the Greek Poets translated into Latin verse, Grotius annexed two pieces, one of Plutarch, the other of St. Basil, on the use of the Poets; giving the Greek text with a Latin translation. Fabricius informs us, that in the Library of the College of Leyden there is a copy of the Geneva edition of Stobæus, in the year 1609, with several notes in Grotius's own hand. Three years after the publication of his Stobæus, Grotius printed a work which may be looked upon as a continuation of it; being an extract of the Comedies and Tragedies of the Greeks: the text is translated into Latin verse. In this work he inserted only such maxims as he thought best worth preserving. He began it, as we have observed, when a prisoner at Louvestein. The learned Fabricius very judiciously remarks, that it is to be regretted he did not mention the places of the Ancients from whence he took these extracts.

VII. After having lived a year in the noise of Paris he was desirous of enjoying for some time the quiet of the country. The President de Meme offered him one of his seats, Balagni near Senlis. Grotius accepted it, and passed there the spring and summer of the year 1623. In this castle he began his great work[146] which singly would be sufficient to render its author's name immortal; I mean the treatise Of the rights of war and peace, of which we shall speak more fully elsewhere. He had with him his family and four friends; and was visited by the most distinguished men of learning, among others Salmasius and Rigaut. He had all the books he could desire: Francis de Thou the President's son, who succeeded to his father's library, one of the best in Europe, gave him the free use of it. Grotius, who knew the President de Meme to be a most zealous Roman Catholic, was careful to regulate his conduct in such a manner that the President might never repent his favouring him with the use of his house: he gave directions that while he was at Balagni no butchers meat should be brought to table on Fridays or Saturdays; he received none of the Dutch refugee Ministers there; no psalms nor hymns were sung; in fine, he would have no public nor even private exercise of the Protestant Religion performed; and would see only those whom he could not decently refuse. From Balagni he sometimes made excursions to St. Germain, where the court was, in order to cultivate the friendship of the ministry. Having learnt that the President de Meme wanted to reside himself at Balagni, he quitted it, and retired to Senlis in the beginning of August: in October he came back to Paris.

His wife's affairs obliging her to make a journey to Zealand, she set out for that province in the summer 1624. In her absence Grotius was seized with a violent dysentery. October 18th, 1624, he writes to his brother that he had been three weeks confined to his bed, and four times blooded. The news of his illness threw his wife into a fever. As soon as it was abated she set out for Paris without waiting the return of her strength. The pleasure of seeing her again and the care she took of him wrought a wonderful change in Grotius: in fine, after two months dangerous illness he began to mend, and in a little time was perfectly recovered, so that he was never in better health than in the beginning of the year 1625.

VIII. The Prince of Orange, Maurice de Nassau, falling ill in November, 1624, died after six months indisposition, at the age of fifty-eight, on the 23d of April, 1625. This event raised the hopes of Grotius's friends: they flattered themselves that his return to his Country would no longer meet with any obstacle. Prince Frederic Henry succeeded his brother as Stadtholder. He had not entered into the malevolent projects formed by Maurice against the Arminians. The Count D'Estrades has given us some anecdotes on this subject, which we shall relate on his authority. He assures us that, being one day tête à tête with Prince Henry Frederic in his coach, he heard him say that he had much to do to keep well with his brother Maurice, who suspected him of secretly favouring Barnevelt and the Arminians. "He told me (these are the Count D'Estrades words) that it was true he kept a correspondence with them to prevent their opposing his election in case his brother should die, but that as it imported him to be on good terms with his brother, and to efface the notion he had of his connection with the Arminians, he made use of Vandermyle, one of his particular friends and Barnevelt's son-in-law, to let the cabal know that it was necessary for him to accommodate himself to his brother, that he might be better able to serve them: which Barnevelt approved of."

Grotius's father, who knew his son was esteemed and even loved by the new Stadtholder, advised him to write to that Prince. He obeyed his father: but informed him that he was determined not to do a mean thing to procure his return. It was from mere complaisance that he wrote to the Prince, for he owns to his brother he had very little hopes of success from his letter: he was even desirous that his correspondence with the Prince might be kept a secret, lest its being publicly known should vex his Highness. The enemies of the Remonstrants would, no doubt, have been greatly offended with the Stadtholder, had they discovered that he was favourably inclined to the Arminians: and the Prince's authority was not yet sufficiently established to free him from the necessity of keeping measures with so powerful a party. Grotius's conjectures were but too true: and all that he and his friends could do to procure his return was absolutely fruitless.

IX. He was now at the height of his glory by the prodigious success of his admirable book Of the rights of war and peace, which a celebrated writer[147] justly styles a master-piece. He began it in 1623 at Balagni, and in 1625 it was published at Paris. It was the famous Nicholas Peyresc, the Mecænas of his age and the ornament of Provence, who engaged Grotius to handle this subject. He writes to that worthy magistrate, Jan. 11th, 1624. "I go on with my work Of the law of nations: if it may be of use to the world it is to you posterity will owe the obligation, since you made me undertake it, and assisted me in it." In the preliminary discourse he sets forth his motives for treating this subject. "Many strong reasons determined me to write at this time. I have observed in all parts of the Christian world such an unbridled licentiousness with regard to war as the most barbarous nations might blush at: they fly to arms without reason, or on frivolous pretexts; and when they have them once in their hands they trample on all laws human and divine, as if from that time they were authorised, and firmly resolved to stick at no crime." Thus it was from a principle of humanity that he composed this great work; and, as he writes to Crellius[148], to shew how unbecoming it was for a Christian and a reasonable man, to make war from caprice: which was too much practised. In the dedication of this book to the King the author observes, that Lewis XIII. like a propitious constellation, not satisfied with relieving the misfortunes of princes and protecting nations, had graciously supported him under his afflictions. He presented his book to the King and the principal nobility; who, he writes to his brother[149], received it very graciously, but made him no return. He imagined it was because he had handled in it several points of divinity: and the court would not shew any favour to heterodox works, in which such questions were discussed: but the favourable reception it met with from all Europe sufficiently made up this loss.

It will not be expected that we should make an analysis or enter into an examination of the treatise On the rights of war and peace: that would be a subject for a large work. We shall only observe that those who would study the law of nations cannot read this book too often: they will find in it the most agreeable learning joined to the strongest reasoning. The whole is not equally correct: but what large work is not liable to the same censure? Besides, we must consider that it has the glory of being original in its kind[150], and the first treatise that reduced into a system the most excellent and useful of all sciences.

It is divided into three books; to which is prefixed a preliminary discourse treating of the certainty of law in general, and containing a plan of the work.

The first book enquires into the origin of the rights of war and its different kinds, as also the extent of the power of Sovereigns: he explains in the second the nature and extent of those rights, whether public or private, whose violation authorises the taking up arms: in the third he treats of all that relates to the course of the war and the treaties of peace which put an end to it.

Though the Latin language was at that time more used than at present, the principal nations of Europe wanted to have this work in their mother tongue. Grotius, on examining the Dutch translation, found the translator often wilfully deviating from the true sense of the original. The Great Gustavus caused it to be translated into Swedish: a translation of it into English was preparing in the year 1639: Mr. Barbeyrac thinks it was not finished in Grotius's life-time, but there have been two English translations of it since his death. It was first translated into German in 1707 by Mr. Schutz. The Leipsick journalists speak of this translation as very correct. There are two in French; one by Mr. Courtin, which that of Barbeyrac has totally eclipsed, and most justly: for never did a great author meet with a translator more worthy of him. Mr. Barbeyrac possessed all the necessary qualifications for executing properly such a difficult translation as that of the treatise Of the rights of war and peace.

He ventured to advance, some time after Grotius's death, that a professor of Helmsted had undertaken to prove that every page of Grotius's book contained gross blunders; and he speaks it in such a manner as gives room to think he was of the same opinion. This Professor was called John de Felde; he published his notes against Grotius in 1653. Had the great Salmasius been still alive, I believe, says M. Barbeyrac, that with all his secret jealousy against the author censured, he would have found himself greatly disappointed in his expectations from John De Felde's project: never was any thing so wretched. One would be surprised a Mathematician could reason so ill, did not other much more signal examples clearly demonstrate that the knowledge of the Mathematics does not always produce justness of thought in matters foreign to that science. We find here a man who seeks only for censure, and knows not what he would have: he fights with his own shadow, and for the most part does not understand the thoughts of the author he attacks; and when he does understand them draws the most groundless consequences that ever were heard of. His gloomy and unhappily subtle mind cannot bear the light which Grotius presents to him. The embroiled ideas and distinctions of his Peripatetic philosophy form round him a thick cloud impenetrable by the strongest rays of truth. This is Barbeyrac's judgment of him. Felde met with some partisans of Grotius who confuted him: Theodorus Graswinckel, Advocate, his relation and friend, undertook his defence; and the redoubled efforts of the Helmsted Professor did not lessen his book in the esteem of the public. Not that the work is perfect; this, his admirers and those who were most disposed to do him justice, frankly own.

With regard to the law of nations, which he considers as an arbitrary law in itself, but acquiring the force of a law by the tacit consent of nations, Barbeyrac observes that in the sense he understands it, and has endeavoured to establish its obligation, it has been shewn to be insufficiently grounded: yet the questions which he builds upon it make a great part of his work.

It has been thought that his style is too concise; that he often expresses himself but by halves; that he supposes many things which require great study, passes over subjects of importance, and handles others which he might have omitted; such as questions relating rather to Divinity, than the science of Natural Law: in fine, it has been said that the desire of shewing his learning hurt him: and a very judicious Magistrate[151] justly observes, that by displaying less learning he would have appeared a greater Philosopher. Notwithstanding all these defects, it is universally acknowledged to be one of the finest works that ever was written.

When this book appeared at Paris, Cardinal Francis Barberin, who resided there as Legate from his uncle Pope Urbin VIII. hearing it much spoken of, was curious to see it; and read it with attention. It is said he was shocked at first that the author, in speaking of the Popes, did not give them the titles which they are wont to receive from Roman Catholic authors; but was otherwise well pleased with the book. The reading of it had been permitted at Rome two years, when on the 4th of February, 1627, it was put into the Index Expurgatorius, with his Apology and Poems[152].

X. In the mean time Grotius began to grow tired at Paris: his pension was ill paid, and his revenue insufficient to keep him decently with a wife and a numerous family. July 12, 1623, he writes to his brother, "Pensions are no longer paid here, which embarrasses me greatly. If any Prince, such as the King of Denmark or the Elector of Saxony, would employ me, and offer me a handsome salary, it would be worth my notice. At present nobody thinks of me, because they imagine I am employed by a great King. I have lost some powerful friends: those who are now in power wish me well; but they have too much business on their hands, and I don't love to importune."

In the mean time hopes were given him of his pension[153]: though no pensions were paid, the Keeper of the Seals promised that he would take particular care of him; and was in fact as good as his word: one of the first things he did was to speak to the King in favour of Grotius[154], and to obtain an order for the payment of the greatest part of the arrears owing to him. However he still pressed his father and brother to seek out a settlement for him[155]. Feb. 16, 1624, he wrote to them that he persisted in his resolution of going to some town of the Augsburg confession, where he might live cheap, and wait for better times. "The state of the kingdom, says he, makes me uneasy; and I have no prospect of a certainty for myself. These negotiations must be managed with precaution and secrecy, lest the knowledge of them should lessen the consideration in which I am held. It is sufficient that those who wish me well know that I am not so fixed here but I can come away if any thing better offers." In the mean time the Keeper of the Seals and the Ministry heaped civilities on him[156]; they spoke of him to the King, and at length he received three thousand Francs, part in money, and part in bills.

There were at that time Dutch Ambassadors in France, who carried their malice so far as to tell the King he could not be too much on his guard against Grotius, who carried on a private correspondence with the Spanish Ambassadors. He received information of this from one of his friends. The foul calumny stung him with indignation; and though he did not think it deserved to be confuted, he wrote of it to the Lord Keeper, and in a letter on this subject to Du Maurier he calls God to witness, that he had never seen any of the Spanish Ambassadors, and that there was not a man in the United Provinces who wished better to his Country.

He had an offer of being Professor of Law in Denmark[157], but the character of the Danes made him averse to that country: besides, he thought the places he had already filled did not permit him to become a Professor in a College; as to the Salary, he was satisfied with it. While he was in suspense what he should do, the King nominated Cardinal Richelieu Prime Minister. His Eminence had a mind to be particularly acquainted with Grotius, and asked him to come to his house at Limours: he was introduced by Marshal de Fiat. We are ignorant of what passed at this interview: all we know is that the Cardinal, purposing to restore the navy and trade of the nation, talked of these matters to Grotius; who acquainted his brother with his visit to the Cardinal in a letter dated May 21, 1626.

But there is room to imagine the proposals made to him by the Cardinal were inconsistent with his principles; and he was not a man to act against his conscience on any consideration. This sacrifice was the more praise-worthy as he really loved France: he mentioned it in confidence to Du Maurier. "I am extremely sorry, says he, that I can be of no use to France, where I have found a safe asylum: but I think it my duty to adhere to my former sentiments[158]."

Thus the Cardinal being displeased with Grotius's reservations, his pension was unpaid, either for that reason or on account of the bad state of the finances. Grotius was greatly perplexed: "A man must have lived at Paris at his own expence, as I have done for eighteen months (he writes to his brother, July 17, 1626) to know what it costs. I should be extremely glad that you would inform yourself at your conveniency, whether there be any hopes from the Hans towns, and particularly Hamburg or Rostock." Sept. 19, 1626, he opens his mind to Du Maurier: "This is the second year since they have ceased all regard for me, and put in practice whatever might serve to depress a man of the greatest steadiness." It was precisely since Cardinal Richelieu became the Arbiter of France that Grotius was thus treated. The disgrace of the Chancellor D'Aligre deprived him of all remains of hope: the Seals were given to Marillac, who professed an open enmity to all that was Protestant. Learning was no merit with him if joined to heterodoxy. He gave a public proof of his zeal[159] when the parliament of Dijon petitioned the King that Salmasius might be permitted to exercise the office of Counsellor, which his father offered to resign in his favour: the Keeper of the Seals warmly opposed it, declaring that he would never consent to a Huguenot's acquisition of the office of Counsellor in any parliament of France. Grotius was patient for some time longer; for he liked Paris, and there were many persons in that city whose conversation gave him infinite pleasure: He told the celebrated Peyresc[160], he was so strongly attached to France on his account, that he would not leave it till his patience was worn out; and he wrote to his great friend Du Maurier, that he was resolved never to quit France till it deserted him, that all the world might be forced to own he could not have acted otherwise.

In fine, having lost all hopes of pleasing the Ministry, he began to think in good earnest of retiring into some other Country. January 4, 1630, he writes to his brother, "I am wholly taken up with the thoughts of settling in some part where I may live more commodiously with my family." The first condition that he required was liberty of conscience. Some advised his going to Rome, because Pope Urbin VIII. was a great Poet, and loved men of learning[161]. He thought the proposal very ridiculous, and joked on it to his brother. December 27, 1630, he writes to him, "It is not reasonable that I should be always in suspense. I shall leave this country too late, but I shall certainly leave it soon." What heightened his embarrassment was his uncertainty where to go. He writes to his brother, April 4, 1631, "I must speedily come to a resolution: provisions become every day dearer, and the payment of my Pension more uncertain: would it be proper to return to my Country by stealth, and with so little hopes, after doing her so great service? My Countrymen have not the same sentiments for me that I have for them."