between
St. Paul and the Pythoness? Nothing of the kind can be maintained by
any reasonable argument.

A small volume was published at Paris, in 1732, by a new author, who
conceals himself under the two initials M. D.; it is entitled,
_Treatise on Magic, Witchcraft, Possessions, Obsessions and Charms; in
which their truth and reality are demonstrated_. He shows that he
believes there are magicians; he shows by Scripture, both in the Old
and New Testament, and by the authority of the ancient fathers, some
passages from whose works are cited in that of Father Debrio, entitled
_Disquisitiones Magicae_. He proves it by the rituals of all the
dioceses, and by the examinations which are found in the printed
"Hours," wherein they suppose the existence of sorcerers and
magicians.

The civil laws of the emperors, whether pagan or Christian, those of
the kings of France, both ancient and modern, jurisconsult,
physicians, historians both sacred and profane, concur in maintaining
this truth. In all kinds of writers we may remark an infinity of
stories of magic, spells and sorcery. The Parliaments of France, and
the tribunals of justice in other nations, have recognized magicians,
the pernicious effects of their art, and condemned them personally to
the most rigorous punishments.

He relates at full length[140] the remonstrances made to King Louis
XIV., in 1670, by the Parliament at Rouen, to prove to that monarch
that it was not only the Parliament of Rouen, but also all the other
Parliaments of the kingdom, which followed the same rules of
jurisprudence in what concerns magic and sorcery; that they
acknowledged the existence of such things and condemn them. This
author cites several facts, and several sentences given on this matter
in the Parliaments of Paris, Aix, Toulouse, Rennes, Dijon, &c. &c.;
and it was upon these remonstrances that the same king, in 1682, made
his declaration concerning the punishment of various crimes, and in
particular of sorcery, diviners or soothsayers, magicians, and similar
crimes.

He also cites the treaty of M. de la Marre, commissary at the
_chatelet_ of Paris, who speaks largely of magic, and proves its
reality, origin, progress, and effects. Would it be possible that the
sacred authors, laws divine and human, the greatest men of antiquity,
jurisconsults, the most enlightened historians, bishops in their
councils, the Church in her decisions, her practices and prayers,
should have conspire