II

But perhaps Desplein's genius was answerable for his beliefs, and

for that reason mortal. To him the terrestrial atmosphere was a

generative envelope; he saw the earth as an egg within its shell;

and not being able to determine whether the egg or the hen first

was, he would not recognize either the cock or the egg. He

believed neither in the antecedent animal nor the surviving

spirit of man. Desplein had no doubts; he was positive. His bold

and unqualified atheism was like that of many scientific men, the

best men in the world, but invincible atheists--atheists such as

religious people declare to be impossible. This opinion could

scarcely exist otherwise in a man who was accustomed from his

youth to dissect the creature above all others--before, during,

and after life; to hunt through all his organs without ever

finding the individual soul, which is indispensable to religious

theory. When he detected a cerebral centre, a nervous centre, and

a centre for aerating the blood--the first two so perfectly

complementary that in the latter years of his life he came to a

conviction that the sense of hearing is not absolutely necessary

for hearing, nor the sense of sight for seeing, and that the

solar plexus could supply their place without any possibility of

doubt--Desplein, thus finding two souls in man, confirmed his

atheism by this fact, though it is no evidence against God. This

man died, it is said, in final impenitence, as do, unfortunately,

many noble geniuses, whom God may forgive.

The life of this man, great as he was, was marred by many

meannesses, to use the expression employed by his enemies, who

were anxious to diminish his glory, but which it would be more

proper to call apparent contradictions. Envious people and fools,

having no knowledge of the determinations by which superior

spirits are moved, seize at once on superficial inconsistencies,

to formulate an accusation and so to pass sentence on them. If,

subsequently, the proceedings thus attacked are crowned with

success, showing the correlations of the preliminaries and the

results, a few of the vanguard of calumnies always survive. In

our day, for instance, Napoleon was condemned by our

contemporaries when he spread his eagle's wings to alight in

England: only 1822 could explain 1804 and the flatboats at

Boulogne.