These things alone would have made the administration of Richelieu a great epoch in the history of European civilization. For, his government affords the first example of an eminent Catholic statesman systematically disregarding ecclesiastical interests, and showing that disregard in the whole scheme of his foreign, as well as of his domestic, policy. Some instances, indeed, approaching to this, may be found, at an earlier period, among the petty rulers of Italian states; but, even there, such attempts had never been successful; they had never been continued for any length of time, nor had they been carried out on a scale large enough to raise them to the dignity of international precedents. The peculiar glory of Richelieu is, that his foreign policy was, not occasionally, but invariably, governed by temporal considerations; nor do I believe that, during the long tenure of his power, there is to be found the least proof of his regard for those theological interests, the promotion of which had long been looked upon as a matter of paramount importance. By thus steadily subordinating the church to the state; by enforcing the principle of this subordination, on a large scale, with great ability, and with unvarying success, he laid the foundation of that purely secular polity, the consolidation of which has, since his death, been the aim of all the best European diplomatists. The result was a most salutary change; which had been for some time preparing, but which, under him, was first completed. For, by the introduction of this system, an end was put to religious wars; and the chances of peace were increased, by thus removing one of the causes to which the interruption of peace had often been owing. At the same time, there was pre

109 This change may be illustrated by comparing the work of Grotius with that of Vattel. These two eminent men are still respected, as the most authoritative expounders of international law; but there is this important difference between them, that Vattel wrote more than a century after Grotius, and when the secular principles enforced by Richelieu had penetrated the minds even of common politicians. Therefore, Vattel says, (Le Droit des Gens, vol. i. pp. 379, 380): “On demande s'il est permis de faire alliance avec une nation qui ne professe pas la même religion? Si les traités faits avec les ennemis de la foi sont valides? Grotius a traité la question assez au long. Cette discussion pouvait être nécessaire dans un temps où la

pared the way for that final separation of theology from politics, which it will be the business of future generations fully to achieve. How great a step had been taken in this direction, appears from the facility with which the operations of Richelieu were continued by men every way his inferiors. Less than two years after his death, there was assembled the Congress of Westphalia;109 the members of which concluded that celebrated peace, which is remarkable, as being the first comprehensive attempt to adjust the conflicting interests of the leading European countries.110 In this important treaty, ecclesiastical interests were altogether disregarded ; and the contracting parties, instead of, as heretofore, depriving each other of their possessions, took the bolder course of indemnifying themselves at the expense of the church, and did not hesitate to seize her revenues, and secularize several of her bishoprics.112 From this grievous insult, which became a fureur des partis obscurcissait encore des principes qu'elle avait long-temps fait oublier, osons croire qu'elle serait superflue dans notre siècle. La loi naturelle seule régit les traités des nations; la différence de religion y est absolument étrangère." See also p. 318, and vol. ii. p. 151. On the other hand, Grotius opposes alliances between nations of different religion, and says, that nothing can justify them except une extrême nécessité.

.111

Car il faut chercher premièrement le règne céleste, c'est à dire penser avant toutes choses à la propagation de l'évangile." And he further recommends that princes should follow the advice given on this subject by Foulques, Archbishop of Rheims! Grotius, le Droit de la Guerre et de la Paix, livre ii. chap. xv. sec. xi. vol. i. pp. 485, 486, edit. Barbeyrac, Amsterdam, 1724, 4to; a passage the more instructive, because Grotius was a man of great genius and great humanity. On religious wars, as naturally recognized in barbarous times, see the curious and important work, Institutes of Timour, pp. 141, 333, 335.

109 "Le Congrès de Westphalie s'ouvrit le 10 avril 1643." Lavallée, Hist. des Français, vol. iii. p. 156. Its two great divisions at Munster and Osnabruck, were formed in March 1644. Flassan, Hist. de la Diplomatie, vol. iii. p. 110. Richelieu died in December 1642. Biog. Univ. vol. xxxviii. p. 28.

110 Les règnes de Charles-Quint et de Henri IV font époque pour certaines parties du droit international; mais le point de départ le plus saillant, c'est la paix de Westphalie." Eschbach, Introduc. à l'Etude du Droit, Paris, 1846, p. 92. Compare the remarks on Mably, in Biog. Univ. vol. xxvi. p. 7, and Sismondi, Hist. des Français, vol. xxiv. p. 179:""base au droit public de l'Europe."

Compare the indignation of the pope at this treaty (Vattel, le Droit des Gens, vol. ii. p. 28), with Ranke's Päpste, vol. ii. p. 576: “Das religiöse Element ist zurückgetreten; die politischen Rücksichten beherrschen die Welt:" a summary of the general state of affairs.

112 La France obtint, par ce traité, en indemnité la souveraineté des

precedent in the public law of Europe, the spiritual power has never recovered: and it is remarked by a very competent authority, that, since that period, diplomatists have, in their official acts, neglected religious interests, and have preferred the advocacy of matters relating to the commerce and colonies of their respective countries.113 The truth of this observation is confirmed by the interesting fact, that the Thirty Years' War, to which this same treaty put an end, is the last great religious war which has ever been waged;114 no civilized people, during two centuries, having thought it worth while to peril their own safety in order to disturb the belief of their neighbours. This, indeed, is but a part of that vast secular movement, by which superstition has been weakened, and the civilization of Europe secured. Without, however, discussing that subject, I will now endeavour to show how the policy of Richelieu, in regard to the French Protestant church, corresponded with his policy in regard to the French Catholic church; so that, in both departments, this great statesman, aided by that progress of knowledge for which his age was remarkable, was able to struggle with prejudices from which men, slowly, and with infinite difficulty, were attempting to emerge.

The treatment of the French Protestants by Richelieu is, undoubtedly, one of the most honourable parts of his system; and in it, as in other liberal measures, he was

trois évêchés, Metz, Toul et Verdun, ainsi que celle d'Alsace. La satisfaction ou indemnité des autres parties intéressées fut convenue, en grande partie, aux dépens de l'église, et moyennant la sécularisation de plusieurs évêchés et bénéfices ecclésiastiques." Koch, Tableau des Révolutions, vol. i. p. 328.

113 Dr. Vaughan (Protectorate of Cromwell, vol. i. p. civ.) says: "It is a leading fact, also, in the history of modern Europe, that, from the peace of Westphalia, in 1648, religion, as the great object of negotiation, began every where to give place to questions relating to colonies and commerce." Charles Butler observed, that this treaty "considerably lessened the influence of religion on politics." Butler's Reminiscences, vol. i. p. 181.

The fact of the Thirty Years' War being a religious contest, formed the basis of one of the charges which the church-party brought against Richelieu; and an author, who wrote in 1634, "montroit bien au long que l'alliance du roy de France avec les protestants étoit contraire aux intérêts de la religion catholique; parce que la guerre des Provinces Unies, et celle d'Allemagne étoient des guerres de religion." Benoist, Hist. de l'Edit de Nantes, vol. ii. p. 536.

assisted by the course of preceding events. His administration, taken in connexion with that of Henry IV. and the queen-regent, presents the noble spectacle of a toleration far more complete than any which had then been seen in Catholic Europe. While in other Christian countries, men were being incessantly persecuted, simply because they held opinions different from those professed by the established clergy, France refused to follow the general example, and protected those heretics whom the church was eager to punish. Indeed, not only were they protected, but, when they possessed abilities, they were openly rewarded. In addition to their appointments to civil offices, many of them were advanced to high military posts; and Europe beheld, with astonishment, the armies of the king of France led by heretical generals. Rohan, Lesdiguières, Chatillon, La Force, Bernard de Weimar, were among the most celebrated of the military leaders employed by Louis XIII.; and all of them were Protestants, as also were some younger, but distinguished, officers, such as Gassion, Rantzau, Schomberg, and Turenne. For now, nothing was beyond the reach of men who, half a century earlier, would, on account of their heresies, have been persecuted to the death. Shortly before the accession of Louis XIII., Lesdiguières, the ablest general among the French Protestants, was made marshal of France.115 Fourteen years later, the same high dignity was conferred upon two other Protestants, Chatillon and La Force; the former of whom is said to have been the most influential of the schismatics.116 Both these appointments were in 1622;117 and, in 1634, still greater scandal was caused by the elevation

115 According to a contemporary, he received this appointment without having asked for it: "sans être à la cour ni l'avoir demandé." Mém. de Fontenay Mareuil, vol. i. p. 70. In 1622, even the lieutenants of Lesdiguières were Protestants: ses lieutenants, qui estant tous huguenots." Ibid. vol. i. p. 538. These memoirs are very valuable in regard to political and military matters; their author having played a conspicuous part in the transactions which he describes.

116"Il n'y avoit personne dans le parti huguenot si considérable Tallemant des Réaux, Historiettes, vol. v. p. 204.

117

p. 400.

que lui."

Biog. Univ. vol. xv. p. 247; Benoist, Hist. de l'Edit de Nantes, vol. ii.

of Sully, who, notwithstanding his notorious heresy, also received the staff of marshal of France.118 This was the work of Richelieu, and it gave serious offence to the friends of the church; but the great statesman paid so little attention to their clamour, that, after the civil war was concluded, he took another step equally obnoxious. The Duke de Rohan was the most active of all the enemies of the established church, and was looked up to by the Protestants as the main support of their party. He had taken up arms in their favour, and, declining to abandon his religion, had, by the fate of war, been driven from France. But Richelieu, who was acquainted with his ability, cared little about his opinions. He, therefore, recalled him from exile, employed him in a negotiation with Switzerland, and sent him on foreign service, as commander of one of the armies of the king of France.119

Such were the tendencies which characterized this new state of things. It is hardly necessary to observe how beneficial this great change must have been; since, by it, men were encouraged to look to their country as the first consideration, and, discarding their old disputes, Catholic soldiers were taught to obey heretical generals, and follow their standards to victory. In addition to this, the mere social amalgamation, arising from the professors of different creeds mixing in the same camp, and fighting under the same banner, must have still further aided to disarm the mind, partly by merging theological feuds in a common, and yet a temporal, object, and partly by showing to each sect, that their religious opponents were not entirely bereft of human virtue; that they still retained some of the qualities of men; and that it was even possible to combine the errors of heresy with all the capabilities of a good and competent citizen.120

118 Additions to Sully, Economies Royales, vol. viii. p. 496; Smedley's Hist. of the Reformed Religion in France, vol. iii. p. 204.

119 Capefigue's Richelieu, vol. ii. p. 57; Mém. de Rohan, vol. i. pp. 66, 69 ; Mém. de Bassompierre, vol. iii. pp. 324, 348; Mem. de Montglat, vol. i. p. 86; Le Vassor, Hist. de Louis XIII, vol. vii. p. 157, vol. viii. p. 284. This great rise in the fortunes of Rohan took place at different times between 1632 and 1635.

120 Late in the sixteenth century, Duplessis Mornay had to state, what