HOUSSEAU.
143
d’Epinay, to say the least, was exceedingly annoyedthat her sister-in-law should thus expose herself to ca-lumny. We have two accounts of these unfortunateevents, one by Rousseau , the other from her pen.She passes rather slightly over them, but expresses evendisgust; she was aware, she says, of her sister’s inno Tcence, but pained by her imprudent conduct. Theresabecame violently jealous ; and while she tried to pacifyher, she blamed those who so needlessly excited herjealousy. Rousseau , on the contrary, accuses her of theutmost baseness ; of fostering remark; of writing toSaint Lambert a garbled and false statement of facts ;of exciting Theresa’s jealousy, and even, instigatingher to steal any letters she might find, and betraythem to her. There is, probably, exaggeration inthis; at the same time it is plain that the inter-course between Rousseau and madame d’Houdetot wasthe chief topic of conversation at the chateau of hersister-in-law ; that they were greatly blamed; and itis certain that Saint Lambert received an anonymousletter, informing him of what was going on. ProbablyTherese or her mother wrote it; we can hardly suspectmadame d’Epinay of so base and vulgar a proceeding.It is remarkable that these accounts not only differ ma-terially in circumstances, but that the notes of madamed’Epinay, as given by her, are written in quite anothertone from those quoted in the Confessions . As when-ever Rousseau ’s copies have been collated with the ori-ginals, they have been found faithful, we suspect thelady of falsifying hers. In fact, while Rousseau gainsour confidence, even while we perceive that he acted ahighly blameable part, there is a studied, though ap-parently negligent, glozing of facts in madame d’Epi-nay's which excites suspicion.
Saint Lambert did not suspect madame d’Houdetot;but he thought that Rousseau was highly blameable fordeclaring love for her; and that she was very unwisein listening to him. He interfered, though with kind-ness and consideration for his unhappy rival; the inter-