in my being so on this, and from the time of which I speak, was so
enveloped in profound darkness that it was impossible for me to come at
any kind of truth.

M. Vernes bore the imputation with a moderation more than astonishing in
a man who was supposed not to have deserved it, and after the fury with
which he was seized on former occasions. He wrote me two or three
letters in very guarded terms, with a view, as it appeared to me,
to endeavor by my answers to discover how far I was certain of his being
the author of the paper, and whether or not I had any proofs against him.
I wrote him two short answers, severe in the sense, but politely
expressed, and with which he was not displeased. To his third letter,
perceiving he wished to form with me a kind of correspondence, I returned
no answer, and he got D'Ivernois to speak to me. Madam Cramer wrote to
Du Peyrou, telling him she was certain the libel was not by Vernes. This
however, did not make me change my opinion. But as it was possible I
might be deceived, and as it is certain that if I were, I owed Vernes an
explicit reparation, I sent him word by D'Ivernois that I would make him
such a one as he should think proper, provided he would name to me the
real author of the libel, or at least prove that he himself was not so.
I went further: feeling that, after all, were he not culpable, I had no
right to call upon him for proofs of any kind, I stated in a memoir of
considerable length, the reasons whence I had inferred my conclusion, and
determined to submit them to the judgment of an arbitrator, against whom
Vernes could not except. But few people would guess the arbitrator of
whom I made choice. I declared at the end of the memoir, that if, after
having examined it, and made such inquiries as should seem necessary, the
council pronounced M. Vernes not to be the author of the libel, from that
moment I should be fully persuaded he was not, and would immediately go
and throw myself at his feet, and ask his pardon until I had obtained it.