Amiens, Dec. 16, 1794.
The ſeventy-three Deputies who have been ſo long confined are now liberated, and have reſumed their ſeats. Jealouſy and fear for ſome time rendered the Convention averſe from the adoption of this meaſure; but the public opinion was ſo determined in favour of it, that farther reſiſtance might not have been prudent. The ſatiſfaction created by this event iſ general, though the ſame ſentiment is the reſult of various concluſions, which, however, all tend to one object—the re-eſtabliſhment of monarchy.
The idea moſt prevalent is, that theſe deputies, when arreſted, were royaliſts.*
* This opinion prevailed in many places where the proſcribed deputies took refuge. "The Normans (ſays Louvet) deceived by the imputations in the newſpapers, aſſiſted us, under the idea that we were royaliſts: but abandoned us when they found themſelveſ miſtaken." In the ſame manner, on the appearance of theſe Deputieſ in other departments, armies were collecting very faſt, but diſperſed when they perceived theſe men were actuated only by perſonal fear or perſonal ambition, and that no one talked of reſtoring the monarchy.
—By ſome it is thought, perſecution may have converted them; but the reflecting part of the nation look on the greater number as adherents of the Girondiſts, whom the fortunate violence of Robeſpierre excluded from participating in many of the paſt crimes of their colleagues, and who have, in that alone, a reaſon for not becoming accomplices in thoſe which may be attempted in future.
It is aſtoniſhing to ſee with what facility people daily take on truſt things which they have it in their power to aſcertain. The ſeventy-three owe a great part of the intereſt they have excited to a perſuaſion of their having voted either for a mild ſentence on the King, or an appeal to the nation: yet this is ſo far from being true, that many of them were unfavourable to him on every queſtion. But ſuppoſing it to have been otherwiſe, their merit is in reality little enhanced: they all voted him guilty, without examining whether he was ſo or not; and in affecting mercy while they refuſed juſtice, they only aimed at conciliating their preſent views with their future ſafety.
The whole claim of this party, who are now the Moderates of the Convention, is reducible to their having oppoſed the commiſſion of crimeſ which were intended to ſerve their adverſaries, rather than themſelves. To effect the dethronement of the King, and the deſtruction of thoſe obnoxious to them, they approved of popular inſurrections; but expected that the people whom they had rendered proficients in cruelty, ſhould become gentle and obedient when urged to reſiſt their own authority; yet they now come forth as victims of their patriotiſm, and call the heads of the faction who are fallen—martyrs to liberty! But if they are victims, it is to their folly or wickedneſs in becoming members of ſuch an aſſembly; and if their chiefs were martyrs, it was to the principles they inculcated.
The trial of the Briſſotins was juſtice, compared with that of the King. If the former were condemned without proof, their partizans ſhould remember, that the revolutionary jury pretended to be influenced by the ſame moral evidence they had themſelves urged as the ground on which they condemned the King; and if the people beheld with applauſe or indifference the execution of their once-popular idols, they only put in practice the barbarous leſſons which thoſe idols had taught them;—they were forbidden to lament the fate of their Sovereign, and they rejoiced in that of Briſſot and his confederates.—Theſe men, then, only found the juſt retribution of their own guilt; and though it may be politic to forget that their ſurvivors were alſo their accomplices, they are not objects of eſteem—and the contemporary popularity, which a long ſecluſion has obtained for them, will vaniſh, if their future conduct ſhould be directed by their original principles.*
* Louvet's pamphlet had not at this time appeared, and the ſubſequent events proved, that the intereſt taken in theſe Deputieſ was founded on a ſuppoſition they had changed their principles; for before the cloſe of the Convention they were as much objects of hatred and contempt as their colleagues.
Some of theſe Deputies were the hirelings of the Duke of Orleans, and moſt of them are individuals of no better reputation than the reſt of the Aſſembly. Lanjuinais has the merit of having acted with great courage in defence of himſelf and his party on the thirty-firſt of May 1792; but the following anecdote, recited by Gregoire* in the Convention a few days ago will ſufficiently explain both his character and Gregoire's, who are now, however, looked up to as royaliſts, and as men comparatively honeſt.
* Gregoire is one of the conſtitutional Clergy, and, from the habit of comparing bad with worſe, is more eſteemed than many of hiſ colleagues; yet, in his report on the progreſs of Vandaliſm, he expreſſes himſelf with ſanguinary indecency—"They have torn (ſayſ he) the prints which repreſented the execution of Charles the firſt, becauſe there were coats of arms on them. Ah, would to god we could behold, engraved in the ſame manner, the heads of all Kings, done from nature! We might then reconcile ourſelves to ſeeing a ridiculous embelliſhment of heraldry accompany them."
—"When I firſt arrived at Verſailles, (ſays Gregoire,) as member of the Conſtituent Aſſembly, (in 1789,) I met with Lanjuinais, and we took an oath in concert to dethrone the King and aboliſh Nobility." Now, thiſ was before the alledged provocations of the King and Nobility—before the conſtitution was framed—before the flight of the royal family to Varenneſ—and before the war. But almoſt daily confeſſions of this ſort eſcape, which at once juſtify the King, and eſtabliſh the infamy of the revolutioniſts.
Theſe are circumſtances not to be forgotten, did not the ſad ſcience of diſcriminating the ſhades of wickedneſs, in which (as I have before noticed) the French have been rendered ſuch adepts, oblige them at preſent to fix their hopeſ—not according to the degree of merit, but by that of guilt. They are reduced to diſtinguiſh between thoſe who ſanction murders, and thoſe who perpetrated them—between the ſacrificer of one thouſand victims, and that of ten—between thoſe who aſſaſſinate, and thoſe who only reward the aſſaſſin.*
* Tallien is ſuppoſed, as agent of the municipality of paris, to have paid a million and a half of livres to the Septembriſers or aſſaſſins of the priſonſ! I know not whether the ſum was in aſſignats or ſpecie.—If in the former, it was, according to the exchange then, about two and thirty thouſand pounds ſterling: but if eſtimated in proportion to what might be purchaſed with it, near fifty thouſand. Tallien has never denied the payment of the money— we may, therefore, conclude the charge to be true.
—Before the revolution, they would not have known how to ſelect, where all were objects of abhorrence; but now the moſt ignorant are caſuiſts in the gradations of turpitude, and prefer Tallien to Le Bon, and the Abbe Sieyes to Barrere.
The crimes of Carrier have been terminated, not puniſhed, by death. He met his fate with a courage which, when the effect of innocence, iſ glorious to the ſufferer, and conſoling to humanity; but a career like his, ſo ended, was only the confirmation of a brutal and ferocious mind.*
* When Carrier was arreſted, he attempted to ſhoot himſelf, and, on being prevented by the Gens-d'armes, he told them there were memberſ of the Convention who would not forgive their having prevented hiſ purpoſe—implying, that they apprehended the diſcoveries he might make on his trial. While he was dreſſing himſelf, (for they took him in bed,) he added, "Les Sceleratſ! (Meaning his more particular accomplices, who, he was told, had voted againſt him,) they deſerved that I ſhould be as daſtardly as themſelves." He reſted his defence entirely on the decrees of the Convention.
—Of thirty who were tried with him as his agents, and convicted of aſſiſting at the drownings, ſhootings, &c. two only were executed, the reſt were acquitted; becauſe, though the facts were proved, the moral latitude of the Revolutionary Jury* did not find the guilt of the intention—that is, the culprits were indiſputably the murderers of ſeveral thouſand people, but, according to the words of the verdict, they did not act with a counter-revolutionary intention.
* An Engliſh reader may be deceived by the name of Jury. The Revolutionary Jury was not only inſtituted, but even appointed by the Convention.—The following is a literal tranſlation of ſome of the verdicts given on this occaſion: "That O'Sulivan is author and accomplice of ſeveral noyadeſ (drownings) and unheard-of cruelties towards the victims delivered to the waves. "That Lefevre is proved to have ordered and cauſed to be executed a noyade of men, women, and children, and to have committed variouſ arbitrary acts. "That General Heron is proved to have aſſaſſinated children, and worn publicly in his hat the ear of a man he had murdered. That he alſo killed two children who were peaceably watching ſheep. "That Bachelier is author and accomplice of the operations at Nantes, in ſigning arbitrary mandates of arreſt, impoſing vexatiouſ taxes, and taking for himſelf plate, &c. found at the houſes of citizens arreſted on ſuſpicion. "That Joly is guilty, &c. in executing the arbitrary orders of the Revolutionary Committee, of tying together the victims deſtined to be drowned or ſhot." There are thirty-one articles conceived nearly in the ſame terms, and which conclude thuſ—"All convicted as above, but not having acted with criminal or counter-revolutionary intentions, the Tribunal acquits and ſets them at liberty." All France was indignant at thoſe verdicts, and the people of Pariſ were ſo enraged, that the Convention ordered the acquitted culpritſ to be arreſted again, perhaps rather for protection than puniſhment. They were ſent from Paris, and I never heard the reſult; but I have ſeen the name of General Heron as being at large.
The Convention were certainly deſirous that the atrocities of theſe men (all zealous republicans) ſhould be forgotten; for, independently of the diſgrace which their trial has brought on the cauſe, the ſacrifice of ſuch agents might create a dangerous timidity in future, and deprive the government of valuable partizans, who would fear to be the inſtruments of crimes for which, after ſuch a precedent, they might become reſponſible. But the evil, which was unavoidable, has been palliated by the tenderneſſ or gratitude of a jury choſen by the Convention, who, by ſacrificing two only of this maſs of monſters, and protecting the reſt, hope to conſecrate the uſeful principle of indulgence for every act, whatever itſ enormity, which has been the conſequence of zeal or obedience to the government.
It is among the dreadful ſingularities of the revolution, that the greateſt crimes which have been committed were all in ſtrict obſervance of the laws. Hence the Convention are perpetually embarraſſed by intereſt or ſhame, when it becomes neceſſary to puniſh them. We have only to compare the conduct of Carrier, le Bon, Maignet, &c. with the decrees under which they acted, to be convinced that their chief guilt lies in having been capable of obeying: and the convention, coldly iſſuing forth their reſcripts of extermination and conflagration, will not, in the opinion of the moraliſt, be favorably diſtinguiſhed from thoſe who carried theſe mandates into execution.