She has discovered the manuscript from which the
Memoires
were printed, and she has examined the original draft
of this manuscript, which had been unearthed some
years ago, but whose full import had been unaccountably
neglected by previous scholars. From these researches,
two facts have come to light. In the first place,
the manuscript differs in many respects from the printed
book, and, in particular, contains a conclusion of
two hundred sheets, which has never been printed at
all; the alterations were clearly made in order to
conceal the inaccuracies of the manuscript; and the
omitted conclusion is frankly and palpably a fiction.
And in the second place, the original draft of the
manuscript turns out to be the work of several hands;
it contains, especially in those portions which concern
Rousseau, many erasures, corrections, and notes, while
several pages have been altogether cut out; most of
the corrections were made by Madame d’Epinay
herself; but in nearly every case these corrections
carry out the instructions in the notes; and the notes
themselves are in the handwriting of Diderot and Grimm.
Mrs. Macdonald gives several facsimiles of pages in
the original draft, which amply support her description
of it; but it is to be hoped that before long she
will be able to produce a new and complete edition
of the
Memoires, with all the manuscript alterations
clearly indicated; for until then it will be difficult
to realise the exact condition of the text. However,
it is now beyond dispute both that Madame d’Epinay’s
narrative cannot be regarded as historically accurate,
and that its agreement with the statements of Grimm
and Diderot is by no means an independent confirmation
of its truth, for Grimm and Diderot themselves had
a hand in its compilation.
Thus far we are on firm ground. But what are
the conclusions which Mrs. Macdonald builds up from
these foundations? The account, she says, of
Rousseau’s conduct and character, as it appears
in the printed version, is hostile to him, but it
was not the account which Madame d’Epinay herself
originally wrote. The hostile narrative was, in
effect, composed by Grimm and Diderot, who induced
Madame d’Epinay to substitute it for her own
story; and thus her own story could not have agreed
with theirs. Madame d’Epinay knew the truth;
she knew that Rousseau’s conduct had been honourable
and wise; and so she had described it in her book;
until, falling completely under the influence of Grimm
and Diderot, she had allowed herself to become the
instrument for blackening the reputation of her old
friend. Mrs. Macdonald paints a lurid picture
of the conspirators at work—of Diderot
penning his false and malignant instructions, of Madame
d’Epinay’s half-unwilling hand putting
the last touches to the fraud, of Grimm, rushing back
to Paris at the time of the Revolution, and risking
his life in order to make quite certain that the result
of all these efforts should reach posterity. Well!