the punishments which the laws inflict; finally, he can fear himself; he can be afraid of the remorse that all those experience whose conscience reproaches them for having deserved the hatred of their fellow-beings.  Conscience is the inward testimony which we render to ourselves for having acted in such a manner as to deserve the esteem or the censure of those with whom we associate.  This conscience is based upon the knowledge which we have of men, and of the sentiments which our actions must awaken in them.  A religious person’s conscience persuades him that he has pleased or displeased his God, of whom he has no idea, and whose obscure and doubtful intentions are explained to him only by suspicious men, who know no more of the essence of Divinity than he does, and who do not agree upon what can please or displease God.  In a word, the conscience of a credulous man is guided by men whose own conscience is in error, or whose interest extinguishes intelligence.

Can an atheist have conscience?  What are his motives for abstaining from secret vices and crimes of which other men are ignorant, and which are beyond the reach of laws?  He can be assured by constant experience that there is no vice which, in the nature of things, does not bring its own punishment.  If he wishes to preserve himself, he will avoid all those excesses which can be injurious to his health; he would not desire to live and linger, thus becoming a burden to himself and others.  In regard to secret crimes, he would avoid them through fear of being ashamed of himself, from whom he can not hide.  If he has reason, he will know the price of the esteem that an honest man should have for himself.  He will know, besides, that unexpected circumstances can unveil to the eyes of others the conduct which he feels interested in concealing.  The other world gives no motive for doing well to him who finds no motive for it here.

CLXXIX.—­AN ATHEISTICAL KING WOULD BE PREFERABLE TO ONE WHO IS RELIGIOUS AND WICKED, AS WE OFTEN SEE THEM.

The speculating atheist, the theist will tell us, may be an honest man, but his writings will cause atheism in politics.  Princes and ministers, being no longer restrained by the fear of God, will give themselves up without scruple to the most frightful excesses.  But no matter what we can suppose of the depravity of an atheist on a throne, can it ever be any greater or more injurious than that of so many conquerors, tyrants, persecutors, of ambitious and perverse courtiers, who, without being atheists, but who, being very often religious, do not cease to make humanity groan under the weight of their crimes?  Can an atheistical king inflict more evil on the world than a Louis XI., a Philip II., a Richelieu, who have all allied religion with crime?  Nothing is rarer than atheistical princes, and nothing more common than very bad and very religious tyrants.

CLXXX.—­THE MORALITY ACQUIRED BY PHILOSOPHY IS SUFFICIENT TO VIRTUE.