He saw farther, that by the operation proposed, the whole debt of the King would be transferred upon the company. He saw that these debts, being turned into bank notes, would not be sufficient to buy above 200,000 actions, at the value they then sold for. He knew that the Regent, who had bought 400,000 of these actions at 5000 livres apiece, that is, at half price, would remain in possession of 200,000 actions, after selling enough to draw back the whole of the bank notes issued for the payment of the debts; and he saw that the company of the Indies had a yearly income of above 80 millions to enable them to make good their engagements: besides, he saw a power in the King to raise the denominations of the coin at will, without shocking the ideas of his people, by which means he might have paid the 2000 millions with one louis d’or. Put all these circumstances together, and I can imagine that Law’s brain was turned; that he had lost sight of all his principles; and that he might believe that his former common sense, was, at that time, become absolute nonsense _in France_. That common sense may become nonsense, is a thing by no means peculiar to France, but quite peculiar to _man_. I shall offer but one argument more, to prove that the Duke of Orleans, and Law, could have no premeditated design of defrauding the public, by these wonderful operations; which is, that admitting the contrary, would be allowing them an infinite superiority of understanding over all the rest of Europe. Until the bubble burst, no body _could_ know where it was to end: every thing appeared very extraordinary indeed; and the fatal catastrophe might have been expected from the greatness of the undertaking, merely. But if there had been any roguery in the plan itself, it must have appeared palpable long before; because the whole of the operations in which only _it could_ consist, were public. All the notes were created by public act of council; so were the actions: the loan of 1600 millions to the King, by the company, was a public deed; so was the alienation in their favour, of 48 millions for the interest of that sum. Notes were avowedly coined in order to purchase actions, (Dutot, Vol. I. p. 144.) the creditors were avowedly paid with bank notes, at a time when it was forbid to have 500 livres in coin in any person’s custody; consequently, it was also forbid to demand coin for bank notes. Now all this was going on in the months of February, March, April, and the beginning of May 1720; and no suspicion of any failure of credit. The coin also was sometimes raised, sometimes diminished in its value, and still the fabric stood firm. Under these circumstances, to say there was knavery, is to say that all the world were absolutely blockheads, except the Regent and John Law: and to that opinion I never can subscribe.