(A.D. 1655 to A.D. 1660.)
The treaty of Pignerol could not all at once diffuse the tranquillity of a regular and peaceful government, over a country so torn by extraordinary troubles. The conditions of the treaty were far from being satisfactory to the parties concerned. Hastily concluded by the plenipotentiaries of France and Piedmont, to escape the influence of the ambassadors of Holland and England,[2] whose arrival was not waited for,[3] they left modifications to be desired, which all subsequent efforts[4] were ineffectual to obtain. On the one hand, however, the Propaganda found the concessions too great; on the other, the Vaudois judged them insufficient, and ere long were forced to complain that they were not carried into effect.
The fort of La Tour, which Charles Emmanuel I had caused to be demolished in 1603, and whose walls had begun to be rebuilt during the late war, became one of the first subjects of discontentment. A recollection of the base conduct of Castrocaro, Gallina, and other persecutors of the Vaudois, was sufficient to excite distrust in the bosoms of the persecuted. In the conferences preparatory to the treaty of Pignerol, it had been agreed that that citadel should be demolished. The Swiss negotiators even wished that this demolition should be guaranteed by a special article. The Sardinian delegates replied, that the Duke of Savoy could not consent in this way to seem to disarm himself before his own subjects, but that he wanted no other fortress than grateful hearts, and that the fortifications of La Tour would be razed immediately after the signature of the treaty.[5] "What would be the use," they said also, "of introducing into the treaty a clause which would be humiliating to the sovereign, and which would be without an object after the lapse of a few days?"
The patents of Pignerol were therefore silent on this point, and the enemies of the Vaudois congratulated themselves upon it; but Jesuitism aimed at still more, and sought to introduce into this charter provisions altogether opposed to these positive promises. The charter was signed; but in the space between the text and the signatures was inserted a new paragraph, bearing that "His royal highness accorded to the Vaudois the right of addressing petitions to him for the demolition of the citadel of La Tour, or its reconstruction in another place."[6] This implied the right of refusal; it was to bring again into question all that had already been agreed; it was to commit a forgery; and when it was complained of, the reply made was that this interpolation was owing to the negligence of a clerk.[7]
The Vaudois, sent up the petitions, the vain right of sending which had, with so deceitful an intention, been thus granted them. The duke replied, with much apparent kindness, that he was happy to have it in his power to give them a new proof of his good-will, and that he would destroy as much of the fort of La Tour as was not necessary for the defence of his dominions. He did, indeed, cause a little useless fort to be demolished which stood in the plain of La Tour, but at the same time he redoubled his activity in the construction of the citadel situated on the height. The works were so vigorously carried on that the building was terminated in the course of the same year, and a garrison was placed in it in the year following. Thus the honeyed duplicity of a cruel political expediency trifled with the good faith of the people, and laboured to oppress them whilst affecting to establish a claim to their gratitude.
However, the French authorities saw with dislike a fortress of such strength constructed so near their frontiers. The governor of Dauphiny[8] and the commandant of Pignerol[9] expressed their disapprobation of it;[10] and Louis XIV then offered to the Vaudois to become guarantee for the full execution of the treaty of Pignerol concluded under his auspices.[11] A synod was held at La Tour to deliberate upon this offer.[12] The Vaudois thanked the monarch for his protection, which they entreated him to continue,[13] and put into the hands of his envoy a memorial,[14] setting forth all the grievances of which they thought they had cause to complain, since the signing of the Patents of Grace. These patents, said they, have not been carried into effect;[15] the release of our prisoners is refused,[16] our children are still carried off,[17] and the soldiers who garrison the fort of La Tour commit with impunity the gravest crimes against our persons and properties.[18]
Thus pillage and assassination, rape and violence, continued the Catholic work of faith. The Propaganda had not renounced their design--the extirpation of heresy. Did they not proclaim the lawfulness of all treachery against heretics? Did they not brand all those as heretics who rested on the authority of the Bible? Was it not therefore their duty, at all hazards, to destroy the Vaudois?[19] Thus the report spread far that new conflicts were about to arise in these afflicted valleys.[20] And meanwhile an attempt was made to create division amongst their inhabitants by the vilest insinuations. Some Jesuits, who had introduced themselves by pretending to be Protestant refugees from Languedoc, excited the poor people to distrust of their pastors, propagating, with perfidious ingenuity, reports of malversation against those of them who had been intrusted with the distribution of the considerable sums collected in foreign countries.[21] The calumnies most ready to be credited are those which concern the meanest interests; the unfortunate, moreover, are more easily moved to suspicion, and ignorance favours such an attempt. The Vaudois, accordingly, soon presented the melancholy spectacle of intestine divisions and recriminations about pecuniary affairs, whilst yet they had scarcely well escaped from their greatest calamities.[22]
New trials very soon came upon them to re-unite them again against a common danger. The auditor Gastaldo, who had been made governor of the valleys, without ceasing to be a member of that body so hostile to the Vaudois--the Propaganda, issued, on the 15th of June, 1657, a decree, by which he prohibited them from setting up any kind of worship at St. John, under pain of a fine of l000 crowns of gold for the minister conducting it, and of 200 for every one of his hearers. At the same time new Popish missions were founded in the valleys; the Jesuits got a footing in them everywhere; exemptions from taxation, and other indulgences, were granted to the Catholics and those who had become Catholics, whilst an extreme rigour was shown in the execution of all measures burdensome to the Protestants. The latter were not left: however, without the comfort of receiving lively proofs of the interest with which they were regarded by others. The synod of Dauphiny gave the Vaudois churches marks of its fraternal sympathy by sending them several pastors, but the Piedmontese government took advantage of their foreign origin to expel them from the country.[23]
In a letter addressed to the Swiss ambassadors who had negotiated the treaty of Pignerol, the Vaudois complained of the increasing annoyances to which they were subjected; and the ambassadors wrote in their tum to Piedmont to complain of the infractions of the treaty.[24] After mention of the promises relative to the demolition of the fort of La Tour, and the excesses of which the soldiers of that fort were then daily guilty, they said concerning the Vaudois. "What liberty of conscience, then, have they obtained, if the pastors of their churches, for the simple reason of their being foreigners by birth, are compelled to leave them--if all religions service is prohibited where only the right of private worship is demanded--if the Protestants are forbidden to make proselytes, and at the same time are exposed to all the proselytizing endeavours of their adversaries? Finally," they add, "whilst the Vaudois are forbidden to acquire, or even to rent, any property without the limits which are fixed for them, the Catholics are forbidden to sell them those which they possess within these same limits. Now all these things," say they, reminding the Piedmontese government of the treaty of Pignerol, "touch our hearts so much the more sensibly, because we took part, in the name of our lords and superiors, in the framing of that treaty, and are parties interested therein."
The President Truchis replied with much ability, to show that the stipulations granted to the Vaudois had not been violated, but that, on the contrary, they themselves had been guilty of not observing them.
The synod of the Vaudois valleys then drew up a statement of the violations of the treaty which they had to complain of adding evidence in support of them. This memorial was printed at Haarlem in 1662, and reprinted in the same town, with new particulars, in 1663. But the Piedmontese government was deaf to all these complaints, and seemed only, on the contrary, desirous of giving every day new cause for complaints yet louder.
In virtue of the sixth article of the Patents of 18th August, 1655, the people of the valleys were to be exempted from paying the outstanding public burdens of that sad year, in which all the crops and every fortune and every family had suffered so deplorably throughout that afflicted country; yet, in spite of their profound misery, which the product of foreign collections could but very incompletely relieve, these public burdens were rigorously exacted from the Vaudois. Moreover, as if on purpose to render this exaction more flagrantly offensive, an exemption from these very charges was at the same time granted to the Catholics of the valley of St. Martin, "in order," says the decree, "that they may be able to repair the loss which the Protestants have caused them."[25]
It was not, however, with a view of clearing themselves from these heavy taxes, that the Vaudois at this time made the most urgent applications to the government. A money wound is not a mortal one, said the popular good sense: that only is deadly of which there is no healing; and the prohibition of religious exercises in, the parish of St. John was, in their estimation, that mortal wound, from which, therefore, they wished to secure themselves. By this arbitrary prohibition all their churches were menaced at once. The edict of Cavour (1561) guaranteed the free exercise of their worship in all places in which it was then established; St. John was of the number--the patents of Pignerol had neither restricted nor enlarged these limits. (Art. VII.) If one of their parishes could he attacked, what security could remain for the rest? It is true that public preaching had been forbidden at St. John since the year 1620, in which the church of Les Malanots was shut up; but private meetings, the instruction of catechumens, and the discharge of the other pastoral functions had been always continued there.
A general synod was held in the month of March, 1658, with reference to this grave question. It decided upon making application to the sovereign, and that, in the meantime, the pastor of St. John (Léger the historian) should continue to exercise his function until the question submitted to the judgment of the duke should be decided.
This decision of the synod caused great irritation at the court of Turin. "The first duty of subjects," it was said, "is to obey their prince: in resisting his orders the Vaudois make themselves guilty of rebellion--they must be treated as rebels and guilty of high treason." The Protestant powers[26] to which the synod had written to obtain their intercession in this matter, having addressed the court of Turin with this view, received only a reply expressing still greater inflexibility. "You do not know the people on whose behalf you interest yourself, they are rebels, unworthy of any regard."
It may readily he supposed that the Propaganda and the Catholic clergy would seek to irritate men's minds rather than to tranquillize them. The particular object of this irritation was Léger, that powerful supporter of the valleys, and courageous pastor who remained at his post in spite of menaces and dangers. Already twice condemned to death,[27] he braved it still, and his enemies no doubt hoped that this time would be the last. They sent him a citation to appear at Turin; the citation bore no cause assigned, and Léger paid no attention to it. A second summons was not more effectual. The Count of Saluces, who seemed to take a real interest in the Vaudois,[28] then sought out the minister, and said to him, "You have entered on a wrong course; why do you not obey this summons? This is to make men believe that you are guilty. A legal order has forbidden public worship in your parish; why do you not comply with it until it be revoked?" "I cannot suspend my pastoral functions in expectation of that revocation," replied the pastor. "The way to obtain it soonest," said his adviser, "would be to plead your cause at Turin." But Léger refused to go. "At least," said the count, "suspend the public services of your religion till a new order be issued." Léger still refused. "Will you," added the count, "contend with a high hand against your sovereign, and do you think he will permit you to prevail against him?" "I contend only in the way of right and duty," said Léger. "It is my duty to minister in our congregations; and it is a right which they exercise when they maintain their worship." Thus war was declared; Léger was to be defeated.
On the 3d of May, 1658, he received a third citation, requiring him to appear under pain of banishment and confiscation of goods. The pastor of St. John thought it proper to consult his brethren against twenty-nine inhabitants of the valleys, of whom Léger was one. The edict charged them with having assembled illegally, and with conspiracy in that meeting. (They had only sought, in concert, the moans of defending their country.) This condemnation was annulled by the first article of the Patents of Pignerol.
The second condemnation was pronounced against Léger personally, on the information of an assassin, of whom we have already spoken, and who, to obtain his own pardon, declared that Léger had engaged him to execute the murder which he had committed. The assassin was set at liberty, and Léger was cited to appear before the podestat of Lucerna, in July, 1655. It was at the hottest time of the war; the citation never came to his hands, and he was condemned for contumacy. A month after, having come to Pignerol during the negotiations which put an end to the war, he was informed of this condemnation. He immediately demanded to be confronted with his accuser; but it was replied that the accuser had been released, and that it was not known where he was to be found. The Vaudois pastor was, however, hastily freed from the sentence under which he lay, and that with as little formality as had attended the pronouncing of it.
Meanwhile, the Vaudois themselves seized the murderer with whom the accusation had originated, and conducted him to Pignerol; but the authorities still refused to confront him with Léger, saying to the latter that it was enough for him to be relieved from his condemnation. From this example we may judge what sort of protection, or even of equity, the Vaudois had to expect from the pretended justice of their adversaries.
...as to the course which he should pursue. A meeting was held for this purpose in Pinache, a town at that time belonging to France, where it was decided that a petition should be presented to Charles Emmanuel to preserve Léger in his congregation. This should have been done at the first; but it was too late to hope that this petition would be granted now. It was not. Three years were spent in fruitless negotiations; and on the 12th of January, 1661, a decree of the senate of Turin condemned Léger to death, and those who were accused along with him to ten years of the galleys.[29]
No longer able to remain in his native country, Léger withdrew from it to continue his labours in its service; but new trials were reserved for him in foreign lands. In 1659, he had been sent to England to receive the collections made on behalf of the Vaudois. During his absence, the Jesuits, who had made their way into the valleys, under the guise of Protestant refugees, spread the report that the Vaudois pastors in general, and Léger in particular, had appropriated a great part of this money. The synod of the valleys exposed these impostures; but the calumniators, not owning themselves defeated, carried their accusations before the synod of Dauphiny[30] which named a commission to investigate them. This commission proceeded to the valleys in name of the churches of France, which, having contributed to the collections, were entitled to be informed as to the use made of them. A detailed report was presented next year to the synod of Veynes, and by this report the proceedings of the Vaudois pastors were fully justified.
The complaints were then carried to Geneva, where they were no better received. But the dissatisfaction to which they had given rise in the valleys, amongst the worst-informed persons, having been carefully fomented by the enemies of the Vaudois, some of the latter thought fit to address a petition upon the subject to their sovereign. Thirty-seven persons, drawn from the least enlightened ranks of the population (for more than one-third of them could not write), signed[31] an accusation of peculation, which was thus brought by the Vaudois against their own pastors. They requested that a government officer might be named to inquire into the real amount of the collections, and to take charge of their distribution.
The government affected to regard this paper as the expression of the general sentiment of the valleys, and Charles Emmanuel immediately named the Count of Lucerna to attend to the complaint. The senator Perrachino, intendant-general of the court of justice, summoned the Vaudois pastors to give in their accounts to him. It cannot be denied that the distributions were not wholly such as might have been desired;[32] but certainly it was not for the persecuted thus to submit to the control of their persecutors, and the pastors being assembled in synod, replied with dignity that the employment of all the money which had passed through their hands would be found to be justified by exact accounts, and that they were ready to produce regular receipts, when and where they might be required.
Meanwhile Léger, accompanied by two other delegates of the valleys, pursued his labours in England. The period was one of great agitation in Great Britain, where the sceptre had just passed into the feeble and inexperienced hands of Cromwell's son. The Vaudois deputies were witnesses of his fall, and of the return of Charles II, recalled after twelve years of exile, by the voice of a new parliament, the convocation of which was owing to the devoted exertions of the famous General Monk.
It was to this young sovereign that the Vaudois had to address themselves, to obtain the first annual payment from the considerable sums which Cromwell had collected on their behalf, and converted into an annuity on national security.[33] These sums amounted to more than £16,000 sterling; but the new prince refused to account for them, declaring that he would not pay the debts of an usurper. This, however, was not a debt, but a trust; this money had not been furnished by Cromwell, but by the English Church, and Charles II, in seizing these offerings, was guilty of an usurpation less glorious than that with which he reproached his predecessor, but as real. The commissioners of the valleys could, therefore, only recover certain small sums which had been deposited in the hands of private parties.[34]
The bad success of this negotiation was shortly followed, in Léger's case, by a blow still more severe. Libels were published against him.[35] He was cited to appear at Turin;[36] and on the pretext that he had travelled to foreign countries to foment bad feeling against the Duke of Savoy, he was again condemned to death for the crime of high-treason. Hereupon he retired to Geneva, and thence to Leyden, where he wrote his General History of the Vaudois Churches, which is simply a collection of papers relative to the events of the year 1655. The church of Leyden received him as one of its pastors; he lived there for a number of years, contracted a second marriage in 1665, and ended his days there.[37]
Notes: