[475] “Ses principes étaient directement contraires à ceux des illuminés; il n’était pas homme à placer ses espérances dans un intervalle de mille ans. Il n’a jamais pensé qu’un peuple pût devenir assez vertueux pour se passer de lois et de magistrats. Il a soutenu la vraie théorie de la balance des pouvoirs, et combattu le despotisme populaire, toutes les fois que l’amour de la célébrité et l’intérêt de son ambition ne le faisaient pas agir contre sa propre doctrine, et les illuminés n’auraient été capables, ni d’ajouter à ses lumières, ni de changer sa théorie, ni de corriger ses vices.” (Mounier, pp. 216 _et seq._) This judgment of a sensible and impartial critic of the French Revolution, first submitted to the public in 1801, is as valid now as then. [476] Without citing his authority, Forestier makes the statement that von dem Busche’s interest in the reform of the debased order of the _Philalèthes_ led him not only to accompany Bode but to offer to pay his expenses. _Cf._ Forestier, p. 666. [477] The theories and _séances_ of the empiric, Mesmer, were greatly agitating Paris at the time and attracting attention throughout Europe. [478] Mounier, pp. 212 _et seq._ _Cf._ Forestier, pp. 664 _et seq._ While Bode was in Paris he kept in close correspondence with his German friend, Frau Hess, of Hirschberg. Engel, who made an examination of this correspondence in the Royal Library at Dresden, was unable to discover the slightest intimation that Bode’s mind, while he was in Paris, was occupied with anything more revolutionary than the turning of the _Philalèthes_ away from their craze for alchemy, cabala, theosophy, and theurgy, or in Mesmer’s theories. _Cf._ Engel, pp. 409–415. When Bode returned to Germany it is undeniable that he carried with him an unfavorable opinion of French Masonry. _Cf._ Forestier, p. 668.