'But we shall soon put an end to it all, my lord. You have an emperor at your service on whom everything depends. Will they dare be wicked and rebellious in his presence?... Firstly, the emperor will replace them under your authority, as you and your ancestors had them.... Next, for their rebellion and the crimes they have committed, he will condemn them to be deprived of some privilege—of that which is most injurious to you. Finally, he will build for you, for your government, a castle or fortress in the city, in whatever part you like, and exact from the Genevans for the support of the garrison a tax to be paid every year. The city will thus be kept well in subjection. As for the bishops, the emperor will command them to pay you the respect which belongs to the holy empire, as being its representative; he will order them to obey you like himself, and will restore them to all obedience towards you ... considering also that _the time approaches_ for their _general reformation, as is but reasonable_. And if the said people of Geneva will not obey (as their unreason may incline them) the emperor will put them under the ban of the empire as rebels, and you shall seize them.... _You will make them your subjects entirely, confiscating all their privileges and possessions_; and thus you will be for ever established rightfully in Geneva.'[483] We should not perhaps have quoted the words of the Sieur de Bellegarde at such length, if the document from which they are extracted had not been hitherto unknown. His allegations were false. No presents had ever been made by the city of Geneva to the dukes of Savoy without a special act declaring that the liberality was spontaneous and without prejudice for the future. The vidamy was a fief conferred by the bishop, which made the holder of it an officer of the latter. Lastly, the dukes of Savoy were not vicars of the emperor. But if Bellegarde's allegations as to the past were false, his schemes as to the future were outrageous. A strong fortress shall be built in Geneva, the citizens shall pay the garrison, and a brutal serfdom shall withdraw them from that _perverse sect_ and keep them for ever in strict obedience under the yoke of their master! As for the bishops, they shall be compelled to obey the duke, especially as the time of _their general reformation_ approaches! It would appear, then, that in the sixteenth century already _reason_ (as Bellegarde says) demanded the abolition of the temporal power of ecclesiastical princes. Were they more advanced then than in our days? I think not. This rude policy aimed merely at substituting the despotism of princes for the despotism of bishops, as being stricter and more effectual. Lastly—the end crowns the work—if the Genevans resist, they shall be conquered, and all their power and property confiscated. In this manner, concludes the advocate of these revolutionary measures, the rights of his master will be for ever secured. This is what Geneva had