second journey, was more early than common. I heard but little there of
my new books, notwithstanding the noise they made in Paris; neither the
marechal nor his lady said a single word to me on the subject. However,
one morning, when M. de Luxembourg and I were together, he asked me if,
in the 'Social Contract', I had spoken ill of M. de Choiseul. "I?" said
I, retreating a few steps with surprise; "no, I swear to you I have not;
but on the contrary, I have made on him, and with a pen not given to
praise, the finest eulogium a minister ever received." I then showed him
the passage. "And in Emilius?" replied he. "Not a word," said I;
"there is not in it a single word which relates to him."--"Ah!" said he,
with more vivacity than was common to him, "you should have taken the
same care in the other book, or have expressed yourself more clearly!"
"I thought," replied I, "what I wrote could not be misconstrued; my
esteem for him was such as to make me extremely cautious not to be
equivocal."

He was again going to speak; I perceived him ready to open his mind: he
stopped short and held his tongue. Wretched policy of a courtier, which
in the best of hearts, subjugates friendship itself!

This conversation although short, explained to me my situation, at least
in certain respects, and gave me to understand that it was against myself
the anger of administration was raised. The unheard of fatality, which
turned to my prejudice all the good I did and wrote, afflicted my heart.
Yet, feeling myself shielded in this affair by Madam de Luxembourg and M.
de Malesherbes, I did not perceive in what my persecutors could deprive
me of their protection. However, I, from that moment was convinced
equity and judgment were no longer in question, and that no pains would
be spared in examining whether or not I was culpable. The storm became
still more menacing. Neaulme himself expressed to me, in the excess of