Dyer The Age of Napoleon

1. Auflage 2018
ISBN: 978-1-5312-8449-7
Verlag: Ozymandias Press
Format: EPUB
Kopierschutz: 6 - ePub Watermark

E-Book, Englisch, 848 Seiten

THE celebrated phrase of Louis XIV, 'I am the State', proclaimed the consummation of despotism. He asserted, and it was true, that the people, as a body politic, had been annulled by the Crown. Before a century had elapsed the maxim was reversed. The head of Louis's second successor fell upon the scaffold, and the revolutionary disciples of Rousseau established the principle that the real sovereign is the people itself. Hence it would appear that, for all practical purposes, the causes of the French Revolution may be sought between the reigns of Louis XIV and Louis XVI; or, in other words, that the inquiry may be limited to the nature of the institutions left by the former Monarch, and the causes which gradually led the people to desire their overthrow under the latter. Even within these limits the extent of the subject might demand a volume rather than a chapter. We can pretend only to indicate its principal heads, leaving the historical student to fill up the outline from his own researches and reflections.

Autoren/Hrsg.

Dyer, Thomas

Leseproben

PROGRESS OF THE FRENCH REVOLUTION

~

THE FIRST ACTS OF THE French tiers état, or Commons, after constituting themselves a National Assembly, were to declare the legislative power indivisible, and to annul all the existing taxes, on the ground that only those are lawful which have received the formal consent of the nation; but to obviate a dissolution of the Assembly, they decreed the continuance of the present taxes so long as their session should last. These vigorous proceedings filled the Court with dismay. To avert the danger, recourse was had to one of those false steps which ultimately caused the ruin of the Monarchy. It was resolved that the King, in a royal session, should endeavor to restore a good understanding between the different orders, and reduce their proceedings to some regularity. It was thought that, as in the ancient days of the Monarchy, the Assembly might be overawed by the King’s presence, and by a few words delivered in the accustomed tone of absolute authority. Such a step was in obvious contradiction to the very nature of the Assembly; for, if the King’s voice was to prevail, to what purpose had he summoned the representatives of the people?

Necker must share the blame of this measure, though not of the manner in which it was executed. That Minister still hoped to carry his favorite project of two Chambers, voting in common on general and financial matters, but separately in things that more particularly concerned the respective orders. His own scheme was not a very liberal one. Everything was to come from the King’s concession. Necker drew up a royal address in a tone of mildness and conciliation, in which the vote per capita was placed first, and the less palatable part of the scheme at the end. The Council, however, took the matter out of his hands, and altered his draft of the speech so materially, and, it must be allowed, so injudiciously, that Necker considered himself justified in absenting himself from the royal session.

The royal session, originally fixed for June 22nd, was postponed till the following day; meanwhile the Assembly was adjourned, the hall where they sat was ordered to be closed, and the deputies who presented themselves were brutally repulsed. But the leaders of the tiers état, particularly Bailly, assembled the larger part of that order in a neighboring tennis-court; where the Abbé Sieyes, perceiving their excited state, proposed that they should at once leave Versailles for Paris, and proceed to make decrees in the name of the nation. It was to avert this step that Mounier proposed the celebrated oath that they should not separate till they had established a constitution.

On the following day, the tennis-court having been hired by some of the princes in order to prevent these meetings, the deputies repaired to the church of St. Louis. Here, to their great joy, and to the consternation of the Court, they were joined by the Archbishops of Bordeaux and Vienne, the Bishops of Chartres and Rhodez, and 145 representatives of the clergy, besides all the nobles of Dauphine; in the states of which province it was customary for the three orders to sit together.

When the Chambers again assembled, on June 23rd, the King undoubtedly made some important concessions, and such as, under other circumstances, might probably have been satisfactory. He abolished the taille, vested solely in the States-General the power of levying taxes, submitted the public accounts to their examination, did away with corvées and several other vexatious and oppressive grievances. But these concessions were made to spring from the royal grace and favour, and not from constitutional right, thus giving no security for the continuance. The clergy were to have a special veto in all questions of religion. The equality of imposts would be sanctioned only if the clergy and nobles consented to renounce their pecuniary privileges. The admission of roturiers to commands in the army was expressly refused. All that the tiers état had hitherto done was annulled. Above all, the King willed that the three orders should remain distinct, and deliberate separately; though, if they wished to unite, he would permit it for this session alone, and that only for affairs of a general nature; and he concluded by ordering the members to separate immediately, and to meet next morning, each in the chamber appropriated to his order. This, as a modern historian remarks, was again to hand over France to the privileged classes. The speech was delivered in a tone of absolute authority, neither suitable to the present posture of affairs, nor to the natural temper of the King.

The nobles and part of the clergy followed the King when he retired. But the Commons, by the mouth of Mirabeau, when summoned to leave the hall by M. de Brézé, the master of the ceremonies, refused to do so, unless expelled by military force; and they proceeded to confirm their previous resolutions, which the King had annulled, and to declare the persons of the deputies inviolable; thus showing their determination to maintain the sovereignty which they had usurped. In short, the attempted coup d’étathad failed; while the applause with which Necker was everywhere greeted afforded a striking proof of the popular feeling. On the very same evening the King felt himself compelled to request that Minister to retain his portfolio; thus virtually condemning his own speech.

On the day after the royal session the majority of the clergy, composed of curés, who, from their constant intercourse with the people, were disposed to take the popular side, joined the Commons; and, on June 26th, the Bishops of Orange and Autun, and the Archbishop of Paris, did the same. The Bishop of Autun, Talleyrand Perigord, here gave the first proof of that unerring sagacity which, through all the eventful changes of the Revolution, enabled him to distinguish the winning side. The conduct of the Archbishop of Paris was the result of popular violence. A mob had stormed his palace, and, with threats of assassination, extorted his promise to join the Commons. The secession of the clergy was immediately followed by that of forty-seven of the nobles, chiefly the friends of Necker, and including the Duke of Orleans. The Court, alarmed by reports that extensive massacres were planning, that 100,000 rebels were in full march, and others of the like kind, now deemed it prudent to yield to the popular wish. The King addressed letters to the clergy and nobles, who remained out, requesting them to join the Commons without delay; these were backed by others from d’Artois, stating that the King’s life was in danger; and under these representations the union of the whole Assembly was effected, June 27th, amid the enthusiastic cheers of the tiers état.

One of the worst symptoms for the royal cause was the disaffection of the soldiery. There had been great abuses in the administration of the army. While forty-six million livres were allotted in the budget to the officers, only forty-four million were distributed among the men. The Comte de St. Germain, appointed Minister of War in 1775, had contributed to the disaffection of the troops by reforms and innovations in discipline, and especially by the introduction of corporal punishment. The army, corrupted by a long peace, had become almost a body of citizens, and had extensively imbibed the prevailing democratic opinions. This was more particularly the case with the Gardes Françaises, who, being quartered in Paris, mixed freely with the people. This regiment, when called out to defend the archbishop’s palace, had refused to fire upon the mob. Their colonel, M. de Chatelet, had imprisoned in the Abbaye eleven of his men, who had taken an oath not to obey any order at variance with the resolutions of the Assembly, but they were delivered and feted by the people; while the dragoons sent to disperse the mob had fraternized with them.

The Court, however, had not yet abandoned the project of carrying matters with a high hand. Large bodies of troops, consisting chiefly of German and Swiss regiments, who could be best relied on, were assembled in the neighborhood of Paris, and Marshal Broglie was summoned to Versailles to take the command of them. All this was done with too much display, if the intention was to act; and with too little, if the object was only to overawe and intimidate. The King was to appear in the Assembly, and compel it to accept the Declaration of June 23rd, of which 4,000 copies had been printed for circulation in the provinces; and the Assembly was then to be dissolved. The King suffered these preparations to be made, though it lay not in his character ever to employ them. When his advisers, comprising the more resolute or violent party of the Court, including the Queen, d’Artois, the Polignacs, the Baron de Breteuil, and others, thought themselves sufficiently strong, they persuaded him to dismiss Necker and three other Ministers, July 11th; another false step, which may be said to have put the seal to the Revolution.

At this time the aspect of Paris was alarming. Thousands of starving people had crowded thither from the provinces. The bakers’ doors were besieged; bread was upwards of four sous a pound, then a famine price, and very bad; a sort of camp of 20,000 mendicants had been formed at Montmartre. Thus all the materials for sedition and violence were collected, and the Palais Royal, belonging to the Duke of Orleans, was a centre for setting them in motion. No police officer could enter its privileged precincts, and, by the connivance of the Duke, its garden...