Editing Jean-Jacques Rousseau (section)

====Quarrel with Hume====
On 3 April 1766 a daily newspaper published the letter constituting Horace Walpole's hoax on Rousseau—without mentioning Walpole as the actual author; that the editor of the publication was Hume's personal friend compounded Rousseau's grief. Gradually articles critical of Rousseau started appearing in the British press; Rousseau felt that Hume, as his host, ought to have defended him. Moreover, in Rousseau's estimate, some of the public criticism contained details to which only Hume was privy. Further, Rousseau was aggrieved to find that Hume had been lodging in London with François Tronchin, son of Rousseau's enemy in Geneva.{{sfn|Damrosch|2005|pp=419–421}}

About this time, Voltaire anonymously (as always) published his ''Letter to Dr. J.-J. Pansophe'' in which he gave extracts from many of Rousseau's prior statements which were critical of life in England; the most damaging portions of Voltaire's writeup were reprinted in a London periodical. Rousseau now decided that there was a conspiracy afoot to defame him.{{sfn|Damrosch|2005|p=421}} A further cause for Rousseau's displeasure was his concern that Hume might be tampering with his mail.{{sfn|Damrosch|2005|pp=418–419}} The misunderstanding had arisen because Rousseau tired of receiving voluminous correspondence whose postage he had to pay.{{NoteTag|In those days in Europe the recipient had to pay for the postage for any mail received.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2009-09-12 |title=The Postal Service in 18th Century Britain: Post Roads and Post-Boys |url=https://janeaustensworld.com/2009/09/12/the-postal-service-in-18th-century-britain-post-roads-and-post-boys/ |access-date=2024-06-14 |website=Jane Austen's World |language=en}}</ref>}} Hume offered to open Rousseau's mail himself and to forward the important letters to Rousseau; this offer was accepted. However, there is some evidence of Hume intercepting even Rousseau's outgoing mail.{{sfn|Damrosch|2005|p=431}}

After some correspondence with Rousseau, which included an eighteen-page letter from Rousseau describing the reasons for his resentment, Hume concluded that Rousseau was losing his mental balance. On learning that Rousseau had denounced him to his Parisian friends, Hume sent a copy of Rousseau's long letter to [[Marie Françoise Catherine de Beauvau-Craon|Madame de Boufflers]]. She replied stating that, in her estimate, Hume's alleged participation in the composition of Horace Walpole's ''faux'' letter was the reason for Rousseau's anger.{{sfn|Durant|Durant|1967|pp=213–214}}{{NoteTag|"Rousseau's letter is atrocious; it is to the last degree extravagant and inexcusable ... But do not believe him capable of any falsehood or artifice; nor imagine that he is either an impostor or a scoundrel. His anger has no just cause, but it is sincere; of that I feel no doubt. Here is what I imagine to be the cause of it. I have heard it said, and he has perhaps been told, that one of the best phrases in Mr Walpole's letter was by you, and that you had said in jest, speaking in the name of the King of Prussia, 'If you wish for persecutions, I am a king, and can procure them for you of any sort you like,' and that Mr Walpole ... had said you were its author. If this be true, and Rousseau knows of it, do you wonder that, sensitive, hot-headed, melancholy, and proud, ... he has become enraged?"—Madame de Boufflers's letter to David Hume, written in 1766.{{sfn|Durant|Durant|1967|pp=213–214}}}}

When Hume learnt that Rousseau was writing the ''[[Confessions (Rousseau)|Confessions]]'', he assumed that the present dispute would feature in the book. Adam Smith, Turgot, Marischal Keith, Horace Walpole, and Mme de Boufflers advised Hume not to make his quarrel with Rousseau public; however, many members of [[Holbach's Coterie|Holbach's coterie]]—particularly [[Jean le Rond D'Alembert|D'Alembert]]—urged him to reveal his version of the events. In October 1766 Hume's version of the quarrel was translated into French and published in France; in November it was published in England.{{sfn|Damrosch|2005|pp=426–427}} Grimm included it in his ''Correspondance littéraire''; ultimately:

{{Blockquote|...the quarrel resounded in Geneva, Amsterdam, Berlin, and St. Petersburg. A dozen pamphlets redoubled the ''bruit''. Walpole printed his version of the dispute; Boswell attacked Walpole; Mme. de La Tour's ''Precis sur M. Rousseau'' called Hume a traitor; Voltaire sent him additional material on Rousseau's faults and crimes, on his frequentation of "places of ill fame", and on his seditious activities in Switzerland. [[George III]] "followed the battle with intense curiosity".{{sfn|Durant|Durant|1967|p=214}}}}

After the dispute became public, due in part to comments from notable publishers like [[Andrew Millar]],<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.millar-project.ed.ac.uk/manuscripts/html_output/1.html |title=The manuscripts, Letter from Andrew Millar to Andrew Mitchell, 26 August 1766. Andrew Millar Project. University of Edinburgh. |website=www.millar-project.ed.ac.uk |access-date=2 June 2016 |archive-date=7 October 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161007144647/http://www.millar-project.ed.ac.uk/manuscripts/html_output/1.html |url-status=live}}</ref> Walpole told Hume that quarrels such as this only end up becoming a source of amusement for Europe. Diderot took a charitable view of the mess: "I knew these two philosophers well. I could write a play about them that would make you weep, and it would excuse them both."{{sfn|Damrosch|2005|p=427}} Amidst the controversy surrounding his quarrel with Hume, Rousseau maintained a public silence; but he resolved now to return to France. To encourage him to do so swiftly, Thérèse advised him that the servants at Wootton Hall sought to poison him. On 22 May 1767 Rousseau and Thérèse embarked from [[Dover]] for [[Calais]].{{sfn|Durant|Durant|1967|p=214}}