THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
THE
FRENCH REVOLUTION
A STUDY IN DEMOCRACY
BY
NESTA H. WEBSTER
(MRS. ARTHUR WEBSTER)
AUTHOR OF "THE CHEVALIER DE BOUFFLERS"
" La revolution populaire etait la surface ti'un volcan
de conjurations etrangeres." SAINT JUST.
LONDON
CONSTABLE AND COMPANY LTD.
1920
First published 1919
Second Edition 1919
Reprinted 1920
PREFACE
ASTROLOGERS tell us that the history of the world moves in
cycles ; that from time to time the same forces arise producing
eras that strangely resemble one another. Between these eras
a close affinity exists, and so it is that we, in looking back to
the past from the world crisis of to-day, realize that periods
which in times of peace have soothed or thrilled us have now
lost their meaning, that the principles which inspired them
have no place in our philosophy. The Renaissance is dead ;
the Reformation is dead ; even the great wars of bygone days
seem dwarfed by the immensity of the recent conflict. But
whilst the roar of battle dies down another sound is heard the
angry murmur that arose in 1789 and that, though momentarily
hushed, has never lost its force. Once more we are in the cycle
of revolution.
The French Revolution is no dead event ; in turning over
the contemporary records of those tremendous days we feel
that we are touching live things ; from the yellowed pages voices
call to us, voices that still vibrate with the passions that stirred
them more than a century ago here the desperate appeal for
liberty and justice, there the trumpet-call of " King and
Country " ; now the story told with tears of death faced gloriously,
now a maddened scream of rage against a fellow-man. When
in all the history of the world until the present day has human
nature shown itself so terrible and so sublime ? And is not the
fascination that amazing epoch has ever since exercised over the
minds of men owing to the fact that the problems it held are
still unsolved, that the same movements which originated with
it are still at work amongst us ? " What we learn to-day from
the study of the Great Revolution," the anarchist Prince
Kropotkin wrote in 1908, " is that it was the source and origin
of all the present communist, anarchist, and socialist conceptions."
vi THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
Indeed Kropotkin goes so far as to declare that " up till now,
modern socialism has added absolutely nothing to the ideas that
were circulating among the French people between 1789 and
1794, and which it was tried to put into practice in the year II.
of the Republic (i.e. in the Reign of Terror). Modern socialism
has only systematised those ideas and found arguments in their
favour," etc. Now since the French Revolution still remains
the one and only occasion in the history of the world when those
theories were put into practice on a large scale, and carried out to
their logical conclusion for the experiment in Russia is as yet
unfinished it is surely worth while to know the true facts about
that first upheaval. So far, in England, the truth is not known ;
we have not even been told what really happened. "As to a
real history of the French Revolution," Lord Cromer wrote
to me a few months before his death, " no such thing exists in
the English language, for Carlyle, besides being often very
inaccurate and prejudiced, produced merely a philosophical
rhapsody. It is well worth reading, but it is not history." Yet
it is undoubtedly on Carlyle's rhapsody that our national con-
ceptions of the Revolution are founded ; the great masterpiece
of Dickens was built up on this mythological basis, whilst the
old histories of Alison and Morse Stephens, and even the illumin-
ating Essays of Croker, lack the power to rouse the popular
imagination. 1 Thus the legend created by Carlyle has never
been dispelled.
During the last few years the French Revolution has become
less a subject for historical research than the theme of the
popular journalist who sees in that lurid period material to
be written up with profit. This being so, accuracy plays no
part in his scheme. For the art of successful journalism is not
1 No English writer was better acquainted with the dessous des cartes
of the French Revolution than John Wilson Croker. Born in 1780, he
talked with people who had taken part in the movement, and spent many
years in forming and studying the magnificent collections of revolutionary
pamphlets that he afterwards sold to the British Museum. In 1816 the
publisher, John Murray, offered him the sum of 2500 guineas to write the
complete history of the Revolution, but Croker never found time to do
this, and his Essays, reprinted from the Quarterly Review, are all that he
has left us of his stores of knowledge. These, though too controversial to
appeal to the general public, throw more light on the hidden causes of the
revolutionary movement than any book in the English language.
PREFACE vii
to illuminate the public mind but to reflect it, to tell it in even
stronger terms what it thinks already, and therefore to confirm
rather than to dispel popular delusions.
But if the Revolution is to be regarded as the supreme
experiment in democracy, if its principles are to be held up
for our admiration and its methods advocated as an example
to our own people, is it not time that some effort were made
to counteract that " conspiracy of history " that in France also,
as M. Gustave Bord points out, has hitherto concealed the real
facts concerning it ? Shall we not at last cease from rhapsody
and consider the matter calmly and scientifically in its effects
on the people ? This, after all, is the main issue how was the
experiment a success from the people's point of view ? Strangely
enough, though it was in their cause that the Revolution was
ostensibly made, the people are precisely the portion of the
nation that by Royalist and Revolutionary writers alike have
been most persistently overlooked the Royalists occupying
themselves mainly with the trials of the monarchy and aristo-
cracy, the Revolutionaries losing themselves in panegyrics on
the popular leaders. Thus Michelet was a Dantoniste, Louis
Blanc a Robespierriste ; Lamartine was a Girondiste ; Thiers and
Mignet were Orleanistes, not only as historians but as politicians,
for their exoneration of the Due d' Orleans was only a part of their
policy for placing his son Louis Philippe on the throne of France,
and consequently to all these men the people were a matter only
of secondary importance. So far no one has written the history of
the movement from the point of view of the people themselves.
In studying the Revolution as an experiment in democracy,
we must clear our minds of all predilections for certain individuals.
Just as the author of a treatise on the discovery of tuberculin
or on the antidote to hydrophobia devotes no space to recording
the sufferings of the unhappy guinea-pigs and rabbits sacrificed
in the cause of science, or in dilating on the virtuous private life
of Koch or Pasteur, but concerns himself solely with the exact
process adopted and the symptoms exhibited by the subjects
with a view to proving or disproving the efficacy of the serums
employed, so, if we would examine the Revolution as a scientific
experiment, King, noblesse, and revolutionary leaders alike must
be considered only in their relation to the cause of democracy ;
we must concern ourselves with the people only, with the ills
viii THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
from which they suffered, with the means employed for their
relief, with the part they themselves played in the great movement,
and finally the results that were achieved. By this means alone
we shaU do justice to that brave and brilliant people by whose
side we have fought to-day ; we shall come to understand that
they were not the blind unreasoning herd portrayed by Taine,
the enraged " hyenas " of Horace Walpole, nor yet, as revolu-
tionary writers would have us believe, a nation of slaves brought
by long years of oppression to a pitch of exasperation that found
a vent in the crimes and horrors of the Revolution.
It is on this last theory that popular opinion in England on
the Revolution is founded, and that might, I think, be epitomized
thus : " The French Revolution was in itself a purely beneficial
movement, inspired by the desire for liberty and justice : un-
happily it went too far and produced excesses which, though
deplorable, were nevertheless the unavoidable accompaniment
to the regeneration of the country." Now this statement is
as illogical as it is unjust ; how could a movement that was
purely beneficial " go too far " ? How could the desire of the
people for liberty and justice be carried to excess and produce
cruelty and bloodshed such as the civilized world had never
seen before ? If this were true, then the only opinion at which
a thinking human being could arrive would be that the French
Revolution was the reductio ad absurdum of the proposition
of democracy, a proposition that, once worked out to its tragic
and grotesque conclusion, should have proved for all time that
to give power into the hands of the people is to create a tyranny
more terrible than any despotism can produce. But it was not
so ; it was not the desire of the people for liberty and justice
that produced these horrors ; it was not the movement for reform
that " went too far " ; the crimes and excesses of the Revolution
sprang from totally distinct and extraneous causes that must
be understood if justice is to be done to the people of France.
It is by the revolutionary writers that the people have been
most maligned, for since, as I have pointed out, these writers
were not the advocates of the people but of certain revolutionary
leaders, their method is to absolve their heroes from all blame and
heap the whole responsibility upon the people. For this purpose
a legend has been woven around all the great outbreaks of the
Revolution and the r61e of the people persistently misrepresented.
PREFACE ix
Now if we study carefully the course of the revolutionary
movement we shall find that the r61e of the people is in the
main passive ; only on these great days of tumult do they play
an active part. Between these outbreaks the fire of revolution
smoulders, at moments almost flickers out, then suddenly for
no apparent reason bursts again into flame, and it is only by
long and patient search amongst contemporary documents that
we can begin to understand the causes of these conflagrations.
" The popular Revolution/' said St. Just, " was the surface of
a volcano of extraneous conspiracies/' and consequently the
actions of the people seen from the surface only can never be
understood. Thus the story of the Revolution, as it is usually
told us, with its pointless crimes, its unreasoning violence, and
its hideous waste of life, is simply unintelligible " a tale told
by an idiot, full of sound and fury and signifying nothing."
If, then, we would discover the truth about these great revolu-
tionary outbreaks, we must dig down far below the surface,
we must trace the connection between the mine and the ex-
plosion, between the actions of the people and the causes that
provoked them. 1 For, as Mr. Croker truly observed, "It is
doubtless a very remarkable though hitherto very little re-
marked feature of the whole Revolution, that not one, not a
single one, of the tumults which now had its successive stages,
from the Affaire Reveillon to the September massacres, had any
real connection with the pretext under which it was executed."
These great moments of crisis, five in number, are like the five
acts of a tremendous drama ; through them all we see the same
methods at work, the same actors under different disguises, the
same tangled threads of intrigue leading up to the tremendous
cataclysm of the Terror. The Siege of the Bastille the March on
1 Lord Acton in his Essays on the French Revolution apparently caught
a stray glimmer of this truth when he wrote these words : " The appalling
thing in the French Revolution is not the tumult but the design. Through
all the fire and smoke we perceive the evidence of calculating organization.
The managers remain studiously concealed and masked ; but there is no
doubt about their presence from the first. They had been active in the
riots of Paris, and they were again active in the provincial risings. ' ' Having
delivered himself, however, of this profound reflection, Lord Acton seems
to have lost it from sight, for he proceeds to describe all the tumults of
the Revolution without any further reference to organization or design
his chief concern being to absolve all the leaders from complicity.
x THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
Versailles the two Invasions of the Tuileries the Massacres of
September and finally the Reign of Terror these form the
history of the French people throughout the Revolution. The
object of this book is, therefore, to relate as accurately as con-
flicting evidence permits the true facts about each great crisis, to
explain the motives that inspired the crowds, the means employed
to rouse their passions, and thereby to throw a truer light on the
role of the people, and ultimately on the Revolution as the great
experiment in democracy.
AUTHORITIES CONSULTED
AN immense advantage offered to the historian by the modern
and popular way of writing history lies in the fact that he is
able to dispense with any reference to the authorities he has
consulted. Both public and critics object to notes and quota-
tions which interrupt the flow of the narrative ; therefore notes
and quotation marks have gone out of fashion. This convenient
plan not only facilitates enormously the author's task, since it
enables him to write down anything that comes into his head
without troubling to remember where he read it, but also pro-
vides the unscrupulous historian with unlimited scope for mis-
representation, for by pandering to this popular prejudice he is
able to propound theories absolutely at variance with fact, to
attribute to historical personages sentiments they never enter-
tained, and even words they never uttered, and so to present a
period in precisely the colours that best suit his purpose.
In this book, however, at the risk of giving to its pages a
ponderous appearance, I have reverted to the old-fashioned
system of notes, since my object is not to weave fanciful word-
pictures around the great scenes of the Revolution, but to tell
as simply and clearly as possible what really happened. Now
since the whole story of these great revolutionary days is a series
of disputed points, no book on the subject is of the slightest
historical value that does not give chapter and verse for every
controversial statement. Further, it is essential to indicate the
political faction to which the authorities quoted belonged, and
also the value of their evidence. For to condemn an individual
or a party on the word of their enemies, or to absolve them on
the testimony of their accomplices, is as absurd as if one were
to accept evidence at a trial without inquiring into the identities
of the witnesses. Criminology plays no small part in under-
standing the true causes of the revolutionary outbreaks, and for
this purpose contemporaries alone must be consulted, and the
identity of these contemporaries must be clearly denned. The
following resume will show the political standpoint of the authori-
ties quoted most frequently throughout the course of this book,
whilst the policy of those referred to on particular events will be
given in the context :
xi
xii THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
CONTEMPORARY AUTHORITIES (REVOLUTIONARY)
1 . Histoire de la Revolution par Deux A mis de la Liberte, in nineteen
volumes. The first six volumes, violently revolutionary in tone
and filled with grotesque fables current at the time, have been attri-
buted to the bookseller Clavelin, and to Kerverseau, but this surmise
rests on no evidence whatever (see Bibliographic de la Revolution, by
Maurice Tourneux, i. 3). Montjoie stated that the work was dictated
and paid for by the Due d'Orleans (Conjuration de d'Orleans, ii. 97),
and it is no doubt strongly Orleaniste in its point of view. After
the sixth volume, however, it makes a complete volte-face and
becomes moderate, even Royalist in opinion, and at the same time less
interesting. As an anonymous publication the history of the Deux
Amis carries none of the weight that attaches to signed work, but
since it was on the early part of the series that Carlyle mainly based
his account of the first stages of the Revolution, and also his accusa-
tions against the Old Regime, it should be read if one would realize
how flimsy was the evidence that Carlyle blindly accepted as the
truth.
2. The Moniteur, a journal edited by Panckoucke, first made its
appearance on November 24, 1789. The numbers relating to events
anterior to this date were written up afterwards, and the accounts
of the great revolutionary tumults in July 1 789 are copied verbatim
from the Deux Amis. Its policy throughout the Revolution is
always that of the dominating party at first Orleaniste, then
Girondiste, and finally Montagnard.
3. Prudhomme. The paper known as Revolutions de Paris,
published weekly throughout the whole course of the Revolution by
this indefatigable journalist, is the most genuinely democratic record
of the period, since it attaches itself to no political party, but identifies
itself with the revolutionary element amongst the people and
supports the demagogues only as representative of the popular cause.
Later on, however, Prudhomme realized that he had been duped
by these men, and in his Histoire impartiale des Crimes et des Erreurs
de la Revolution Fran$aise, published in 1797, completely gave away
his former associates and showed up the intrigues of the Revolution
more thoroughly than any Royalist has done. The former work
Les Revolutions de Paris is freely quoted by revolutionary
writers ; on the second Crimes de la Revolution they are strangely
silent.
4. The Histoire Parlementaire, by Buchez et Roux, contains
reports of the debates that took place in the Assembly (mainly
abbreviated from the Moniteur}, and also in the Jacobin Club,
besides reprints of various contemporary pamphlets, etc. But the
opinion of the authors, strongly biassed in favour of the revolution-
ary leaders rather than of the people, should be accepted with
caution.
AUTHORITIES CONSULTED xiii
CONTEMPORARY AUTHORITIES (ROYALIST)
1. Montjoie. Felix Christophe Louis Ventre de la Touloubre
(1756-1816), known as Galart de Montjoie (or Montjoye), was the
author of an Histoire de la Revolution de France et de I'Assemblee
Nationale which appeared in the Royalist journal L'Ami du Roi,
of a history of the Orleaniste conspiracy, Histoire de la Conjuration
de Louis Philippe Joseph d' Orleans (1796), and of an inferior work,
L' Histoire de la Conjuration de Maximilien Robespierre. Montjoie
as an eye-witness of the earlier revolutionary tumults is extremely
interesting, but owing to his violent animosity towards the Orleanistes
his accusations against them should not be accepted unless confirmed
by other contemporary evidence. In most instances, however, this
is forthcoming. Both by Taine and by Jules Flammermont, a
strongly revolutionary writer, Montjoie is regarded as an important
authority on the period. 1
2. Beaulieu. Claude Franois Beaulieu (1754-1827) edited
several papers during the Revolution, and, according to Dauban,
was the author of the Diurnal, of which Dauban reprinted a
large part in La Demagogic d Paris en 1793. But this is not
conclusively proved. In 1803 Beaulieu published his history of
the French Revolution in six volumes, entitled Essais historiques
sur les Causes et les Effets de la Revolution de France. This is un-
doubtedly the best contemporary work on the subject, and is quoted
by historians of every party. Although a Royalist, Beaulieu
displays the greatest impartiality ; he advances nothing without
proof. Personally acquainted with most of the leading Revolu-
tionaries, he speaks of what he himself saw and heard, and never
allows himself, like Montjoie, to be carried away by his feelings.
Beaulieu was arrested on the 29th of October 1793, and imprisoned
first at the Conciergerie, then at the Luxembourg, from which he
1 " Montjoie is a party man, but he dates and specifies, and his evidence,
when elsewhere confirmed, deserves to be admitted " (Taine, La Revolu-
tion, iii. 37). M. Flammermont draws an interesting comparison between
Montjoie and the Deux Amis de la Liberte, pointing out that the latter is
in reality a patchwork of current rumours, the authors "have no settled
system, they have not criticized each of the sources of which they have
made use ; on every point they content themselves with choosing the
version which seems to them most likely, thereby arriving at the strangest
contradictions. . . . En resume, this considerable work has no original
value, at any rate for the narrative of the I4th of July. In Galart de
Montjoye we meet at last a man who has the courage of his opinions, and
who signs his work, which was not without danger at the period when he
published it. Indeed, he loudly proclaims he is a Royalist, and takes up
his stand as a declared adversary of the Revolution, but at the same time
he is nearly always moderate in his language, and he takes pains to support
his opinions and his judgements by the most authoritative testimony "
(La Journee du 14 Juillet, p. cxxxvii). See also the opinion of the English
contemporary, John Adolphus, Biographical Memoirs of the French Revolu-
tion, ii. 205.
xiv THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
was released after the fall of Robespierre. Between 1813 and 1827
he collaborated with Michaud in compiling the great Biographic
Universelle, for which he wrote articles on several of the Revolu-
tionaries he had known.
3. Ferridres. The Memoires of the Marquis de Ferrieres, though
more frequently quoted by English writers than the Essais de
Beaulieu, are of far less original value, as they are largely composed
of quotations from the writings of other contemporaries. Ferrieres
was a disaffected noble, and, although a Royalist, does not err on the
side of over-indulgence for the Court, but as an ardent anti-Orleaniste
throws an interesting light on the intrigue at work behind the earlier
revolutionary movement.
The above are the authorities mainly consulted for the
purpose of this book ; the evidence of historians is only quoted
in the case of those who had access to the archives of France or
other contemporary documents not to be found in this country.
In this respect Taine, Granier de Cassagnac, Mortimer Ternaux,
Edmond Eire, Gustave Bord, Chassin, Dauban, Wallon, Cam-
pardon, and Adolphe Schmidt are particularly valuable. The
opinion of M. Louis Madelin is also occasionally referred to as
being founded on the most recent researches, and as representing
the last word in modern French thought on the vexed questions
of the Revolution.
CONTENTS
PAGE
PREFACE . . ..... v
AUTHORITIES CONSULTED ..... xi
PROLOGUE ....... i
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE . . . -37
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES . . . .109
THE INVASION OF THE TUILERIES . . . 173
THE SIEGE OF THE TUILERIES .... 243
THE MASSACRES OF SEPTEMBER . . . .287
THE REIGN OF TERROR . v . . . .353
EPILOGUE ....... 483
APPENDIX ....... 499
INDEX . . . . . . . 507
PLANS
THE BASTILLE . . . . To face 76
THE CHATEAU OF VERSAILLES . . . ,,154
THE TUILERIES . . . . . ,,224
XV
PROLOGUE
PROLOGUE
BEFORE attempting to describe the outbreaks of the Revolution,
it is necessary to indicate as briefly as possible the ills from which
the people were suffering, the reforms that they demanded, and,
on the other hand, the influences at work amongst them which
diverted the movement for reform into the channel of revolution.
THE PEOPLE BEFORE THE REVOLUTION
Nearly every author in embarking on the story of the Revolu-
tion has considered it de rigueur to enlarge on the progress of
philosophy that heralded the movement. The oppressions that
had prevailed during the reigns of Louis XIV. and Louis XV.
had, we are told, been endured in a spirit of dumb resignation
until the teaching of Rousseau, Diderot, and other social reformers
proclaimed to the nation that they need be endured no longer.
If we regard the Revolution from the point of view of the people,
this time-honoured preamble may, however, be dispensed with.
Doubtless the philosophers played an important part in preparing
the Revolution, but their direct influence was confined to the
aristocracy and the educated bourgeoisie ; to the peasant tilling
the soil, the Encyclopedic and the Control Social were of less
pressing interest than the condition of his crop and the profit of
his labour. How the abuses of the Old Regime affected him in
this tangible respect we can read in Arthur Young's Travels, in
Albert Babeau's Le Village sous I'Ancien Regime, or in the works
of Taine, where all the injustices of tailles, capitaineries, corvees,
gabelles, etc., are set forth categorically, and are too well known
to be enumerated here. Suffice it to say, these oppressions were
many and grievous, but they sprang less from intentional tyranny
than from an obsolete system that demanded readjustment.
Thus certain customs that originated in benevolence had, through
the progress of civilization, become oppressive the liberty to
grind at the seigneur's mill had become the obligation to grind
at the seigneur's mill, whilst many feudal exactions and personal
services were merely relics of the days when rent was paid in
3
4 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
kind or in labour. It is evident, moreover, that many of these
feudal oppressions that look so terrible on paper had fallen into
disuse ; thus, although the parchments enumerating the sei-
gneurial rights were still in existence, "the power of the seigneurs
over the persons of their vassals only existed in romances " at
the time of the Revolution. 1 In every ancient civilization
strange archaic laws might be discovered does not our own legal
code enact that a man may beat his wife with any weapon no
thicker than his thumb ? but so far the women of England have
not found it necessary to rise in revolt against this extraordinary
stipulation.
For the peasant of France the most real grievances were un-
doubtedly the inequality of taxation and the " capitaineries " or
game-laws, monstrous injustices that crippled his energies and
often made his labour vain. Yet were the peasants of old France
the wretched, down-trodden beings that certain historians have
described them? The strange thing is that no contemporary
evidence corroborates this theory ; in none of the letters or
memoirs written before the Revolution, even by such advanced
thinkers as Rousseau and Madame Roland, do we encounter the
starving scarecrows of the villages or the ragged spectres of the
Faubourg Saint-Antoine portrayed by Dickens ; on the contrary,
gaiety seems to have been the distinguishing characteristic of the
people. The dancing peasants of Watteau and Lancret were no
figments of an artist's brain, but very charming realities described
by every traveller. Arthur Young, who has been persistently
represented as the great opponent of the Ancien Regime, records
few actual instances of misery or oppression, and, as we shall see,
Young was later on led to reconstruct his views on the old govern-
ment of France in a pamphlet which has been carefully ignored
by writers who quote his earlier work in support of their theories.
But the most remarkable evidence on peasant life before the
Revolution is to be found in the letters of Dr. Rigby, who travelled
in France during the summer of 1789. This curious book,
published for the first time in 1880, aroused less attention in
England than in France, where it was regarded as an important
contribution to the history of the period. 2 The accounts it
1 Mtmoires du Chancelier Pasquier, p. 46.
See, for example, the opinion of the pro-revolutionary writer M Jules
Flammermont in his Journte du 14 Juillet : " Another witness of this sur-
prising revolution (the revolution of July 1789) is Dr. Rigby, whom the
chances of travel brought to France and kept in Paris during these glorious
His letters to his wife form valuable evidence of which neither the
ithenticity nor the impartiality can be disputed. . . . He was a practical
iltunst and at the same time a man of science, and his letters though
perhaps rather optimistic, make the counterpart to the criticisms of
Arthur Young, who saw the dark side of everything "
PROLOGUE 5
contains are so subversive of the accepted theories on peasant
misery current in this country, and have been so little quoted,
that a few extracts must be given here.
Between Calais and Lille " the most striking character of
the country " through which Dr. Rigby passed was its extra-
ordinary fertility : " We went through an extent of seventy miles,
and I will venture to say there was not a single acre but what was
in a state of the highest cultivation. The crops are beyond any
conception I could have had of them thousands and ten thou-
sands of acres of wheat superior to any which can be produced
in England. . . .
" The general appearance of the people is different to what
I expected ; they are strong and well-made. We saw many
agreeable scenes as we passed along in the evening before we came
to Lisle : little parties sitting at their doors, some of the men
smoking, some playing at cards in the open air, and others
spinning cotton. Everything we see bears the marks of industry,
and all the people look happy. We have indeed seen few signs of
opulence in individuals, for we do not see so many gentlemen's
seats as in England, but then we have seen few of the lower classes
in rags, idleness, and misery. What strange prejudices we are
apt to take regarding foreigners ! . . .
" What strikes me most in what I have seen is the wonderful
difference between this country and England . . . the difference
seems to be in favour of the former ; if they are not happy, they
look at least very like it. . . ." Throughout the whole course of
his journey across France Dr. Rigby continues in the same strain
of admiration an admiration that we might attribute to lack
of discernment were it not that it ceases abruptly on his entry
into Germany. Here he finds " a country to which Nature has
been equally kind as to France, for it has a fertile soil, but as
yet the inhabitants live under an oppressive government." At
Cologne he finds that " tyranny and oppression have taken up
their abode. . . . There was a gloom and an appearance of disease
in almost every man's face we saw ; their persons also look filthy.
The state of wretchedness in which they live seems to deprive
them of every power of exertion . . . the whole country is divided
between the Archbishop and the King of Prussia . . . the land is
uncultivated and depopulated. How every country and every
people we have seen since we left France sink in comparison with
that animated country ! " It is evident that, however rose-coloured
was Dr. Rigby's view of France, the French people had certainly
not reached that pitch of " exasperation " that according to
certain historians would account for the excesses of the Revolu-
tion. Lady Eastlake, Dr. Rigby's daughter, who edited these
letters from France, fearing apparently that her father will be
6 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
accredited with telling travellers' tales, attempts in the preface
to explain his remarks by quoting the observation of De Tocque-
ville : " One must not be deceived by the gaiety the Frenchman
displays in his greatest troubles, it only proves that, believing
his unhappy fate to be inevitable, he tries to distract himself by
not thinking about it it is not that he does not feel it." This
might possibly describe the attitude of the French people towards
their government during the centuries that preceded the Revolu-
tion, when, convinced of their impotence to revolt, they resigned
themselves to oppression ; but at the period Dr. Rigby describes
the work of reform had long since begun and they had therefore
no cause for hopelessness or despair. Louis XVI. had not waited
for the gathering of the revolutionary storm in order to redress
the evils from which the people suffered ; in the very first year
of his reign he had embarked on the work of reform with
the co-operation of Turgot and Malesherbes. In 1775 he had
attempted to introduce the free circulation of grain thereby en-
raging the monopolizers who in revenge stirred up the " Guerre
de Farines " ; in 1776 he had proposed the suppression of the
corvee which the opposition of the Parlements prevented; x
in 1779 he had abolished all forms of servitude in his domains,
inviting " all seigneurs of fiefs and communities to follow his
example " ; in 1780 he had abolished torture ; in 1784 he had
accorded liberty of conscience to the Protestants ; in 1787 he had
proposed the equality of territorial taxation, the suppression of
the gabelle or salt tax, and again urged the abolition of the
corvee and the free circulation of grain ; in 1787 and 1788 he
had proposed reforms in the administration of justice, the equal
admission of citizens of every rank to all forms of employment,
the abolition of lettres de cachet, and greater liberty of the
press. Meanwhile he had continued to reduce the expenses of
his household and had reformed the prisons and hospitals.
Finally on August 8, 1788, he had announced the assembling of
the States-General, at which he accorded double representation
to the Tiers tats.
In this spring of 1789 the French people had therefore every
reason to feel hopeful of the future and to believe that now at
last ail their wrongs would be redressed. Had not the King sent
out a proclamation to the whole nation saying, " His Majesty
has desired that in the extremities of his kingdom and in the
1 The Parlements, which played an active part in the revolutionary
movement, had proved continually obstructive to the King's schemes of
reform, and it was they, as well as the monopolizers, who had opposed the
free circulation of grain. " It must appear strange," wrote Arthur Young,
" in a government so despotic in some respects as that of France, to see the
parliaments in every part of the kingdom making laws without the King's
consent, and even in defiance of his authority " (Travels in France p. 321).
PROLOGUE 7
obscurest dwellings every man shall rest assured that his wishes
and requests shall be heard " ?
" All over the country/' says Taine, " the people are to
meet together to discuss abuses. . . . These confabulations are
authorized, provoked from above. In the early days of 1788
the provincial assemblies demand from the syndicate and from
the inhabitants of each parish that a local enquiry shall be held ;
they wish to know the details of their grievances, what part of
the revenue each tax removes, what the cultivator pays and
suffers. ... All these figures are printed . . . artisans and
countrymen discuss them on Sunday after mass or in the evening
in the great room at the inn. . . ."
The King has been bitterly reproached by Royalists for thus
taking the people into his confidence over schemes of reform ;
such changes in the government as were needed, they remark,
should have been effected by the royal authority unaided by
popular opinion. But the King doubtless argued that no one
knows better than the wearer where the shoe pinches ; and since
his great desire was to alleviate the sufferings of his people, it
seemed to his simple mind that the best way to do this was to
ask them for a list of their grievances before attempting to redress
them. Believers in despotism may deplore the error in judge-
ment, but the people of France did not mistake the good in-
tentions of the King, for in the cahiers de doleances or lists of
grievances that arrived from all parts of the country in response
to this appeal the people were unanimous in their respect and
loyalty to Louis XVI.
What, then, did the cahiers demand ? What were the true
desires of the people in the matter of government ? This all-
important point has been too often overlooked in histories of the
Revolution ; yet it must be clearly understood if we would realize
how far the Revolution as it took place was the result of the
people's will. Now the summarizing of the cahiers by the
National Assembly 1 revealed that the following principles of
government were laid down by the nation :
I. The French government is monarchic.
II. The person of the King is inviolable and sacred.
III. His crown is hereditary from male to male.
On these three points the cahiers were unanimous, and the great
majority were agreed on the following :
IV. The King is the depositary of the executive power.
V. The agents of authority are responsible.
VI. The royal sanction is necessary for the promulgation of
the laws.
1 Moniteur, i. 215.
8 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
VII. The nation makes the laws with the royal sanction.
VIII. The consent of the nation is necessary for loans and taxes.
IX. Taxes can only be imposed from one meeting of the States-
General to another.
X. Property is sacred.
XI. Individual liberty is sacred.
In the matter of reforms the cahiers asked first and foremost
for the equality of taxation, for the abolition of that monstrous
privilege by which the wealthier classes of the community were
enabled to avoid contributing their rightful share towards the ex-
penses of the State ; they asked for the free admission of citizens
of all ranks to civil and military employment, for revision of the
civil and criminal code, for the substitution of money payments
in the place of feudal and seigneurial dues, for the abolition
of gabelles, corvees, franc-fief, and arbitrary imprisonment.
In all these demands we shall find no element of sedition or
of disaffection towards the monarchy, but the response of a loyal
and spirited people to the King's proposals for reform. Such
animosity as they displayed was directed against the " privileged
orders," and, as we shall see, this sentiment was not wholly
spontaneous. Hua, a member of the Legislative Assembly, has
well described the attitude of the people in pages that may be
summarized thus :
The Ancien Regime had very real abuses, there was every
reason to attack it. The clergy and noblesse had lost their power
and their raison d'etre ; they were obliged to let the Third Estate
come into its own by giving up their privileges. Nothing could
have stopped this or ought to have stopped it. "It has been said
that the Revolution was made in public opinion before it was
realized by events ; this is true, but one must add that it was not
the Revolution such as we saw it ... it was not by the people that
the Revolution was made in France." And in confirmation of
this statement, with which, as I shall show, contemporaries of all
parties agree, Hua points out that " the voice of the nation cried
out for reform, for changes in the government, but all proclaimed
respect for religion, loyalty to the King, and desire for law and
order." x
What, then, was needed to kindle the flame of revolution ?
To understand this we must examine the intrigues at work
amongst the people ; these and these alone explain the gigantic
misunderstanding that arose between the King and his subjects,
and that plunged the country on the brink of regeneration into
the black abyss of anarchy.
1 Mtmoires de Hua, depute d I' Assemble Legislative, published by his
grandson Fra^ois Saint Maur in 1871.
PROLOGUE 9
At the beginning of the Revolution the principal intrigue, and
the one that paved the way for all the rest, was undoubtedly
THE ORLfiANISTE CONSPIRACY
Louis Philippe Joseph, fifth Due d' Orleans in direct descent
from the brother of Louis XIV., and therefore fourth cousin
once removed to Louis XVI., came into the world with a heredity
tainted from various sources. His great-grandfather Philippe,
Regent of France during the minority of Louis XV., had married
the daughter of Louis XIV. and Madame de Montespan. More
German than French for his mother was the Princess Elizabeth
of the Palatinate, whose memoirs are perhaps the most nauseous
reading of the period the Regent had introduced into the gay
gallantry of France the bestial forms of vice that prevailed
in those days at the courts of Germany. Amongst the most
dissolute frequenters of the Palais Royal during the Regency was
Louis Armand, Prince de Conti, a moral maniac of the Sadie
variety, and it was his daughter who, married to the fourth Due
d j Orleans, became the mother of Louis Philippe Joseph, later to
be known as Philippe galite. Of such elements was the man
composed if indeed he was the son of the duke and not as the
people of Paris believed, and as he himself afterwards declared
to the Commune of the duchess's coachman.
In appearance, certain contemporaries assure us, Philippe
was not unattractive, since he had blue eyes, good teeth, and a
fine white skin ; but when they proceed to relate that his face was
bloated and adorned with collections of red pimples, whilst his
portraits show him to us with a large fleshy nose, thick lips,
and a massive neck and chin, we find it difficult to understand
the charm he exercised over his intimes. Yet so fervent was their
admiration that when Philippe in time grew bald his boon
companions loyally shaved off their front hair in compliment.
The Anglomania which had increased his popularity amongst the
young bloods of the day disgusted Louis XVI., since it consisted
in no appreciation for the better qualities of the English, but in
adopting all their worst habits the betting, gambling, and heavy
drinking that prevailed in England at that date. As the leader
of this imported fashion, the Due d'Orleans affected English
dress of the sporting kind, appearing habitually in a cloth frock
coat, buckskin breeches, and top boots ; thus attired he rode to
race-meetings, or drove about the town in his English " whisky."
His two ruling passions, says the Due de Cars, were money, and
after money debauchery. Entirely indifferent to public opinion
he flaunted his vices in the eyes of all Paris ; arm-in-arm with
the Marquis de Sillery he might be seen on the steps of the
10 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
Coliseum in the Champs filysees, insolently accosting women who
had the misfortune to meet his eye ; at Longchamps he would
gallop ostentatiously beside the carriage of some notorious demi-
mondaine, whilst at the Palais Royal his entourage was composed
of the most worthless men and women of the day. The evil
reputation borne by society at the time of the Revolution is
attributable more to the Due d'Orleans and his set than to any
other cause, whilst as a climax of hypocrisy the severest strictures
on the morals of society emanated from the pens of the very men
and women who outraged them Laclos, Chamfort, and Madame
de Genlis. By the side of the Due d'Orleans and his boon com-
panions the follies of the Comte d'Artois and the Polignacs fade
into insignificance, and the games of " descamptivos," so luridly
described by Orleaniste writers as the favourite diversion at
Versailles, seem innocuous indeed compared with the ducal pas-
time of " collecting girls from the lowest quarters of Paris, and
thrusting them nude and inebriated into the park of Monceaux."
Yet this was the prince who, we are asked to believe, became
the idol of the Paris populace. It is only one of the many
calumnies directed against the people by so-called democratic
writers. The instincts of the people are not naturally perverse ;
they do not admire a bad master, a faithless husband, a man of
corrupt and vicious tastes. We have only to consult the records
written before the Revolution to find that the people of Paris
loathed and despised the Due d'Orleans. The duke returned
their aversion with contempt ; to the future bearer of the name
" figalite " the people were indeed less than the dust. In order
to keep up the " aristocratic " character of his garden at the
Palais Royal, he had issued an order that no admittance was to
be granted to " soldiers, men in livery, people in caps and shirts,
to dogs or workmen." 1
" The Due d'Orleans," a chronicler writes on April 5, 1787,
11 allowed himself to be so carried away by the ardour of the chase
that he followed the quarry he was hunting, with his train,
through the Faubourg Montmartre, the Place Vendome, and the
Rue Saint-Honore, as far as the Place Louis XV., not without
having overturned and wounded several people." Thereupon
the Parisians composed satirical verses on the duke, ending with
these lines :
. . . au sein de Paris, un grand, noble de race,
Sans respect pour les droits des gens,
Ecrase quelques habitants
Pour gouter en plein jour le plaisir de la chasse. 8
1 Journal d'un ttudiant, edited by M. Gaston Maugras, p. 9.
a Correspondance Secrete sur Louis XVI et Marie Antoinette, edited by
M. de Lescure, p. 126,
PROLOGUE n
It was certainly no easy task for the party who wished to
substitute the Due d' Orleans for Louis XVI. on the throne of
France to persuade the people that the man who treated them
with so much insolence had now become the champion of their
liberties. M. mile Dard in his interesting book, Le General
Choderlos de Laclos, declares that the Orleaniste conspiracy
originated with Brissot as early as 1787, and that in this year he
sketched out, in a letter to Ducrest, the brother of Madame de
Genlis, his plan for inaugurating a second Fronde with the Due
d'Orleans at its head. " His cause must be identified with that
of the people." If in the beginning the duke were to distinguish
himself by " striking acts of benevolence and patriotism," he
would soon become " the idol of the people." " Let him then
embrace the doctrines in vogue, disseminate them in writing, and
gain the leaders to his side."
Whether this scheme was adopted on the advice of Brissot
or not, it was precisely the one pursued by the duke and his
supporters. From the moment the States-General met, says
a democratic pamphlet of the day, " the seigneur who was the
hardest towards his vassals, the most exacting and the most
severe, especially in the matter of pecuniary rights, made a show
of moderation, generosity, and even lavishness." 1 It is a
common ruse of Orleaniste writers to represent the duke as an
amiable, weak, and irresponsible puppet, incapable of serious
designs. This was precisely the impression he intended to create ;
an affectation of irresponsibility is a time-honoured ruse of con-
spirators. At the same time it is probable that, left to himself,
the Due d'Orleans would have had neither the wit nor the energy
to form a conspiracy ; the genius of Laclos was needed to devise
and organize a vast and formidable intrigue.
Choderlos de Laclos belonged to a poor and recently ennobled
family of Spanish origin, and in 1788, at the age of forty-seven,
after leaving the army, he was introduced to the Palais Royal
by the Vicomte de Segur, who obtained for him the post of
secretaire des commandements to the Due d'Orleans. Laclos
had already made a name for himself as the author of the scan-
dalous Liaisons Dangereuses, a novel describing in the form of
letters from country-houses the depraved morals of society.
"A monster of immorality" himself, he revelled in depicting
the baser sides of human nature " according to him, good
people, if any such existed, would be simply lambs amongst a
herd of tigers, and he holds it better to be a tiger, since it is
better to devour than to be devoured." 2
1 " Grand Triomphe de M. le Due d'Orleans, ou Examen Impartial de
Conduite," p. 5, August 23, 1790.
a Montjoie, Conjuration de d' Orleans, i. 213.
12 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
To the cynical mind of Laclos there was something infinitely
diverting in the idea of placing the dissolute duke at the head
of the kingdom, and the very weakness and want of energy that
characterized his royal protege offered all the wider a field to
Laclos's own ambition.
In order to inspire the duke with the will to collaborate in
this scheme Laclos well knew, moreover, the vulnerable side from
which to approach him. Place and power had little attraction
for Philippe d' Orleans ; as king he would have access to no more
money and to less pleasure than fell to his share as " first prince
of the blood." " The Due d' Orleans," a wit had once remarked,
" would always be afraid to belong to any party where he would
not have the chorus-girls of the opera on his side." But if in-
capable of great ambitions, the duke possessed one characteristic
that lent not merely energy but fire to his otherwise sluggish
nature this was the spirit of revenge. If he could not devise,
if he could not scheme, if he could not strive to achieve some
settled purpose, he could hate. He was immeasurably and
unrelentingly vindictive. To revenge himself on any one who
had piqued his vanity or thwarted his designs, he would stick at
nothing, he would know no pity. And now for years all the
bitter rancour of which he was capable had been growing in
intensity towards one woman who had humiliated him the
Queen of France.
In a lesser degree he hated the King also : had not Louis XVI.
refused to make him grand admiral of the fleet, in consequence
of his conduct at the battle of Ouessant ? But it was Marie
Antoinette who had withheld her consent to the marriage of his
daughter with the Due d'Angouleme, it was to her he owed his
banishment from the Court, and it was her rejection of his in-
famous love-making that still rankled in his mind.
The Due d' Orleans was not the only member of the Palais
Royal set who had suffered a like rebuff. " The Queen," says
M. mile Dard, " was proud and coquette ; she held back with
disdain those that her charm attracted. The spite of men was
directed against her as cruelly as the jealousy of women. Under
a chaste king many courtiers had hoped that the reign of lovers
would succeed to that of mistresses. What a prospect for the
ambitions of the Court ! What glory and profit for roues like
Tilly, Biron, Bezenval, Segur, to record amongst their successful
ventures the Queen of France ! In how many calumnies did
self-interest and vanity find their vent ! " Biron, we know from
his insufferable memoirs, had actually made overtures to the
Queen, and we may safely accept the version of this incident
given by Madame Campan, who states that the interview ended
after a few moments with the words pronounced in indignant
PROLOGUE 13
tones by Marie Antoinette, " Sortez, monsieur ! " and the hasty
exit of Biron from her presence.
The advances of the Vicomte de Noailles met with no better
success, 1 and both these seducteurs became the bitterest enemies
of the Queen.
On such resentments was the animosity of the Palais Royal
roues for the Court founded. At the duke's country-house of
Monceaux all these malcontents collected, and it was here,
amidst the clinking of champagne glasses, that the foulest libels,
the most obscene verses on the Queen, were uttered and after-
wards circulated through the underworld of Paris.
The exile of the Due d'Orleans in 1787 provided his party
with a fresh cause de guerre. At the Seance Royale the King had
announced two fresh taxes the timbre and the subvention
territorial to be imposed on the " privileged classes "; where-
upon the duke at the instigation of Ducrest rose and declared
the royal decree to be " illegal." " Do not imagine," he said
afterwards to Brissot, " that if I made this stand against the King
it was in order to serve a people I despise, or a body of which I
make no account (the Parlement), but that I was indignant at a
man treating me with so much insolence." 2 The insolence, how-
ever, seems to have been entirely on the side of the duke. Louis
XVI. on his return to Versailles remarked that it was not the
declaration of the Due d'Orleans that had offended him, but the
threatening tone in which the words were pronounced, and the
way he had looked at him as he spoke. 3 On the advice of the
Queen he accordingly exiled the duke, stipulating that he should
not go as he wished for reasons we shall see later to England,
but to his property at Villers-Cotterets.
This edict admirably served the interests of the Orleanistes,
since the duke was now able to pose as the victim of despotism,
and it did much to inflame his fury against the King and Queen.
When two years later he was elected deputy in the States-General,
he cynically declared : "I laugh at the States-General, but I
wished to belong to them if only for the moment when individual
liberty should be discussed in order to vote for a law that will
enable me to go where I like, so that when I want to start for
London, Rome, or Pekin, I shall not be sent to Villers-Cotterets.
I laugh at all the rest." 4
Such were the motives that inspired the " democracy " of
the Palais Royal party. Directed by the genius of Laclos, and
financed by the millions of the Due d'Orleans, the vast organiza-
1 Memoires du Comte de Tilly, ii. no.
2 Le General Choderlos de Laclos, by fimile Dard, p. 153.
3 Montjoie, Conjuration de d'Orleans, i. 93.
* Les Fils de Philippe Egalite pendant la Terreur, by G. Lenotre, p. 12.
i 4 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
tion of the Orleaniste conspiracy took form and grew, until by
the spring of 1789 the plan of campaign was complete. Orleaniste
propaganda were circulated all over France in preparation for
the States-General ; models of cahiers drafted by Sieyes and
Laclos were distributed to different constituencies, and it was
undoubtedly by this means that the people's animosity towards
the noblesse was largely engineered, for in the upholders of the
Old Regime the Orleanistes saw the most serious obstacle to
their schemes.
But the crowning triumph of the Orleaniste conspiracy was
the acquisition of Mirabeau. This amazing man, whose striking
personality and thunderous oratory must have ensured the
success of any party to which he attached himself, was lost to
the royal cause mainly by the ineptness of the King's ministers.
It is almost certain that at this crisis Mirabeau needed only the
slightest encouragement to throw himself into the movement for
reform by peaceful methods, and in this he rightly saw that the
King was the real leader. Such rancour as he entertained against
the Old Regime was directed against the noblesse who had shunned
him on account of his irregularities ; the royal authority he was
prepared to defend. He alone of all the men who should have
advised the King on the assembling of the States-General fore-
saw the disasters impending from the unpreparedness of the
Government, and in a letter addressed to the King's minister
Montmorin in December 1788 he implored him to be advised
in time.
Alas, for the eternal weakness of Conservatism, the fatal
unresponsiveness that has driven many a would-be ally into the
enemy's camp ! To Montmorin, Mirabeau with his discreditable
past and his unscrupulous business transactions was a man to
distrust, and therefore to be rejected. He failed to realize the
truth of Gouverneur Morris's aphorism a maxim that should
surely be laid to heart by every one concerned in government :
" There are in the world men who are to be employed, not trusted."
Mirabeau was decidedly not to be trusted. " I was born to
be an adventurer ! " he once said gaily to Dumont and Duroverai.
But was that a reason not to employ him ? Were not some of the
greatest men who ever lived adventurers ? Was not France saved
ten years later by the great adventurer from Corsica ? Yet with
this term Conservatism too often brands the man whose dynamic
force is needed to counteract its own inertia. The letter of
Mirabeau was ignored, his memoir e never reached the King, and all
the disasters he had foreseen came to pass. So the man who
might have saved the monarchy, smarting at this rebuff, threw
himself into the opposite camp, and devoted all his force, his
eloquence, and his vast energy to overthrowing the Government
PROLOGUE 15
that had repulsed him. At the very moment that Montmorin
refused his services, the Orleanistes were making every effort to
secure him. It is evident that from the first the Due d'Orleans
inspired him with no sympathy, but he needed a field for his
talents, he needed a goal for his ambitions, and alas, he needed
also the wherewithal to satisfy his taste for luxury and pleasure !
Convinced that for the present he could hope for nothing from the
Court, Mirabeau therefore allowed himself against his inclination
to be drawn into the Orleaniste conspiracy. 1
With the annexation of Mirabeau the success of the conspiracy
seemed assured. The duke and a number of his supporters
the Due de Biron, the Marquis de Sillery (husband of the famous
Madame de Genlis), the Baron de Menou, the Vicomte de
Noailles, and the De Lameths had succeeded in securing election
to the States-General, and with Mirabeau at their head consti-
tuted a formidable faction. At Mont rouge, a little house near
Paris belonging to the Due de Biron, the conspirators met by
night and discussed their schemes, but " of those nocturnal
confabulations," remarks M. Dard, " nothing transpired either
for contemporaries or for posterity."
The amazing thoroughness with which the intrigue was carried
out has never been surpassed except by the pan-German plot of
our day. At the Palais Royal, Laclos, " like a spider in his web,"
wove the almost invisible network of intrigue that soon covered
France, and stretched out into other countries England, Holland,
1 That Mirabeau was definitely working in the interests of the Due
d'Orleans throughout the summer of 1789 is perfectly obvious from the
evidence of all contemporaries, even those who were his friends, such as
Dumont and La Marck, the latter only attempting very unconvincingly
to prove that Mirabeau was not paid by the duke. Weber, however,
declares that Mirabeau and the Due d'Or!6ans " troubled so little to conceal
their connection that notes signed by the Due d'Orleans in favour of Mira-
beau were seen publicly negotiated on the Paris Bourse " (Memoir es de
Weber, ii. 17). Perhaps the best summary of Mirabeau's policy at this
date is that given byJMounier : " I have seen him pass from the nocturnal
committees held by theTfiencTs of the Due d'Orleans to those of the enthusi-
astic republicans, and from these secret conferences to the cabinets of the
King's ministers ; but if from the first months (of the Revolution) the
ministers had consented to work with him he would have preferred to
uphold the royal authority rather than to ally himself with men he de-
spised. His principles must not be judged by the numerous contradictions
in his speeches and writings, where he said less what he thought than what
happened to suit his interests under such and such circumstances. He
often communicated his real opinions to me, and I have never known a
man of more enlightened intellect, of more judicious political doctrines,
of more venal character, and of a more corrupt heart" (De I' Influence
attribue aux Philosophes, Franc M aeons et Illumines, p. TOO). This passage
gives the key to the whole of Mirabeau's conduct during the early stages of
the Revolution. On the nocturnal meetings between Mirabeau and the
Due d'Orleans see also Carat's Conspiration de d'Orleans.
16 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
Germany. In Paris he had enlisted the services of various
unscrupulous agitators who stirred up the Faubourgs of Saint-
Antoine and Saint-Marceau ; pamphleteers in the pay of the duke
loaded the bookstalls with seditious pamphlets ; at the street
corners and in the garden of the Palais Royal mob orators
inflamed the minds of the people, and in the palace of Versailles
the spies of Orleans hovered round the Queen, gained access to her
correspondence, and sent copies of her letters to the councils of
Montrouge. 1
It is probable, however, that all these schemes would have
proved unavailing to produce a revolution had not the country
at this crisis been faced with famine. Hua, looking back on the
beginnings of the Revolution, was convinced that but for the
threatened famine the people would have remained indefinitely
submissive to the Old Regime. " Everywhere they know how to
endure, to expect from time improvements that often do not
come, but for which they continue to hope. They know only
present evils, and of these famine alone is intolerable to them.
Struck by this terrible scourge, it is not a change in the State
that they demand, it is bread. So the French people would long
have endured their accustomed burdens, they would have con-
tinued to pay taxes, tithes, to carry out feudal duties, to bend
beneath the corvee and the other miseries of vassaldom. I find
the proof of their patience in the means employed to make them
lose it." 2 It was here the conspirators saw their greatest
opportunity. " Bread," says Hua, " was the potent lever by
which the people were roused to action. What lies, what fables
were thrown to public credulity ! " It is evident from all accounts
that the famine was more fabulous than real. The people were
not starving, but haunted by the fear of starvation. And to this
fear was added exasperation, owing to the conviction that no real
scarcity of grain existed. It was true that a fearful hailstorm in
July of the previous year had destroyed many of the crops round
Paris, but had not the minister Necker declared that, in spite of
this disaster, " the stores of grain in the country were more than
sufficient to supply the needs of the nation until the next
harvest " ? The want of bread in itself is bad enough, but to
believe that bread is being wilfully withheld from one is enough
to stir the meekest to revolt. This was the " lever " employed
by the conspirators. When the peasants of France creeping to
their doors saw wagons laden with wheat winding their way
through the village street, voices were not lacking to whisper,
' There is corn in plenty, but it is not for you ; it is to be stored
for the Court, the aristocrats, the rich, who will feast in plenty
1 Histoire de la Revolution, by Louis Blanc, ii. 331 ; Essais de Beaulieu,
i- 302. z Mtmoires de Hua, p. 53.
PROLOGUE 17
while you go hungry." And forthwith the maddened people
would hurl themselves on to the sacks of corn and fling them
into the nearest river. 1 The fact that in many cases the corn
was destroyed and not appropriated by the people proves that
hunger was less the incentive to revolt than rage at the monopo-
lizers ; and if the name of a supposed monopolizer were but
whispered likewise, the unfortunate man fell a victim to the same
fate as the sacks of corn. It is, of course, impossible to defend
such excesses, yet if during a time of scarcity there were really
profiteers enriching themselves at the expense of the people, the
fury of the peasants is certainly justified. Their guilt must
therefore be measured by the facts on which their suspicions
were founded.
Was the scarcity of grain, then, imaginary or real ? Un-
doubtedly it was not to be entirely accounted for by the failure
of the crops. On this point contemporaries of all parties agree.
But the question of monopolizers is one on which pro-revolu-
tionary historians are strangely silent, since for their purpose
the glorification of the revolutionary leaders it does not bear
examination. The truth is probably that the monopolizers
were in league with the very men who were stirring up popular
fury against monopoly the leaders of the Orleaniste conspiracy.
Montjoie asserts that agents employed by the Due d'Orleans
deliberately bought up the grain, and either sent it out of the
country or concealed it in order to drive the people to revolt, and
in this accusation he is supported by innumerable contemporaries,
including the democrat Fantin - Desodoards, Mounier, whose
integrity is not to be doubted, the Liberal Malouet, Ferrieres,
and Madame de la Tour du Pin.
Beaulieu, however, one of the most reliable of contemporaries,
considers that the Orleanistes would have been unable to create
a famine by these means, but that they accomplished their
purpose by stirring up public feeling on the subject of monopo-
lizers, thereby inducing the people to pillage the grain. The
farmers and corn merchants, therefore, fearing that their supplies
would be destroyed in transit, were afraid to release them. By
this means a fictitious famine was created. 2
M. Gustave Bord, whose researches into the question of the
famine are perhaps the most complete of any French historian's,
believes that the farmers and bakers were not altogether guilt-
less, but that many had an interest in producing a scarcity in
1 Letter of Lord Dorset, March 19, 1789, in Dispatches from Paris,
ii. 175.
2 This was also the opinion of Arthur Young, who likewise believed that
the revolutionary leaders had an interest in keeping up the price of corn.
See Travels in France (edited by Miss Betham Edwards), p. 154.
C
18 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
order to raise the price of bread : " It is they who were the real
authors of the scarcity, and the Old Regime hunted them down
without mercy. In their r61e of exploiters of the people they were
the natural allies of the revolutionaries, who upheld them in
their calumnies. It was they who triumphed in 1789, and who
succeeded in deluding history by throwing the responsibility on
their enemies."
Yet against these enemies, that is to say " the Court," the
noblesse, the clergy, and the King's ministers, not a shred of
evidence was ever produced. The ridiculous legend of the
" Pacte de Famine," by which certain revolutionary writers have
sought to prove that Louis XV. speculated in grain, 1 has no
bearing on the question, since at this date Louis XV. had been
dead for fifteen years, and against Louis XVI. not even the most
rabid of revolutionary writers has ventured to raise such an
accusation. On the contrary, the King, the noblesse, and the
clergy 2 contributed immense sums towards the relief of the famine,
and the King's ministers, headed by Necker, were incessantly
occupied with the problem of ensuring corn supplies, and in
thwarting the designs of speculators.
All through the terrible winter of 1788-1789 the intendant
of Paris, Berthier de Sauvigny, travelled about the country
interviewing farmers to find out how much grain they had in
reserve, how much they required, and what surplus they could put
on the market ; when, however, in the spring, a shortage occurred,
and Berthier applied to these men for the grain they had promised
him, they immediately put up the price to a prohibitive figure,
and Montjoie declares that this price was paid by agents of the
1 On this point see the articles on the " Pacte de Famine " by M.
Gustave Bord, M. Leon Biollay,and M. Edmond Bir, which all demonstrate
that even Louis XV. was innocent of this crime, and that the " bleds du
roi " consisted in a benevolent scheme for keeping down the price of grain
by storing supplies, and releasing them in a time of scarcity at a lower
price than that demanded by the corn merchants and farmers.
2 On the immense liberality of the noblesse and clergy see Montjoie,
^Conjuration de d'Orleans, i. 202 ; Taine, La Revolution, i. 5. " The poor and
needy," says the English contemporary Playfair, " whom shame prevented
from seeking aid, were themselves sought after, and relief was forced upon
the poor starving family in their cold and hungry retreat by those same
clergymen and nobility who soon after were driven from their own abodes.
. . . These acts of charity were not the acts of a few, they were general,
and were done without ostentation or show, as such actions always ought
to be." The Due d'Orleans loudly proclaimed his charities in the press, but
these, says Montjoie, existed principally on paper, at any rate they did not
prevent him from investing, at this crisis, in a gorgeous new set of plate
which his friends and presumably not the hungry multitude were
invited to the Palais Royal to admire (Mtmoires of Madame de la Tour
' du Pin, i. 164). The Archbishop of Paris at the same moment sold all his
plate to feed the poor.
PROLOGUE 19
Due d'Orleans : " They did not bargain, they gave what was
asked. The farmers and monopolizers alone profited by this
manoeuvre ; the artisan, the labourer, the poor man could not
afford the price that the monopolizers offered, and it was onlyby
outbidding them that the Government succeeded in wresting
from these vampires a portion of their spoil."
Whether, then, the Orleanistes achieved their purpose by actu-
ally cornering supplies, or by terrorizing the farmers into holding
them up, there can be no doubt that the famine of 1789 was
deliberately engineered by the agents of the duke, and that by this
means the people were driven to the pitch of desperation necessary
to produce the Revolution.
The Orleanistes, however, did not constitute the only
revolutionary element in the country ; a second intrigue was at
work amongst the people, that of
THE SUBVERSIVES
These men desired no change of dynasty or in the govern-
ment ; their aim was purely destructive. Three years later, when
the monarchy was abolished, many of the revolutionary leaders
declared that they had all along been Republicans at heart, but
if we examine their earlier writings we shall find that at the
beginning of the Revolution none of them had formulated any
such political creed. " There were not ten of us Republicans in
1789," Camille Desmoulins wrote afterwards, and since Camille
at this date was one of the Due d'Orleans' most enthusiastic
admirers, the number may be reduced at least by one. With the
exception perhaps of Lafayette, whose experiences in the
American War of Independence inspired him with Republican
sympathies, those of the earlier revolutionaries who were not
Orleanistes had no definite theories of reconstruction their aim
was merely to clear the ground of all existing conditions. " All
memories of history," said Barrere, " all prejudices resulting
from community of interest ancT of origin, all must be renewed
in France ; we wish only to date from to-day." " To make the
people happy," said Rabaud de Saint-fitienne, " their ideas
must be reconstructed, laws must be changed, morals must be
changed, men must be changed, things must be changed, every-
thing, yes, everything must be destroyed, since everything must be
re-made." 1
1 Rabaud lived to see these theories carried into effect and to realize
too late their disastrous folly. " France," he wrote only a short time later,
" might have been likened to an immense chaos ; power was suspended,
authority disowned, and the wrecks of the feudal system were added to
the vast ruins." He repented still more bitterly when, in the reign of
20 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
These subversive theories emanated from certain secret
societies of which an English writer calling himself John Robison
described the aims in the title of his book, Proofs of a Conspiracy
i ' against all the Religions and Governments of Europe carried on in
the Secret Meetings of the Free-Masons, Illuminati, and Reading
Societies. Robison, who was himself a genuine Freemason, made
a tour of the Continental lodges, where he found that a new and
spurious form of masonry had sprung into existence. Both in
France and Germany " the lodges had become the haunts of many
projectors and fanatics, both in science, in religion, and in politics,
who had availed themselves of the secrecy and freedom of speech
maintained in these meetings. ... In their hands Freemasonry
became a thing totally unlike, and almost in direct opposition to,
the system imported from England, where the rule was observed
that nothing touching religion or government shall ever be
spoken of in the lodges. . . ." The Association, in fact, was " all
a cheat, and the leaders . . . disbelieved every word that they
uttered and every doctrine that they taught . . . their real
intention was to abolish all religion, overturn every government,
and make the world a general plunder and wreck."
A further development of German Freemasonry was the Order
of the Illuminati founded in 1776 by Dr. Adam Weishaupt, a
professor of the University of Ingoldstadt in Bavaria. Weis-
haupt, who had been educated by the Jesuits, succeeded in per-
suading two other ex- Jesuits to join him in organizing the new
Order, and it was no doubt this circumstance that gave rise to
the belief entertained by certain contemporaries that the Jesuits
were the secret directors of the sect. The truth is more probably
I that, as both Mirabeau and the Marquis de Luchet, in their
pamphlets on the Illuminati, asserted, Illuminism was founded on
the regime of the Jesuits, although their religious doctrines were
diametrically opposed. 1 Weishaupt, whom M. Louis Blanc de-
scribed as " one of the deepest conspirators that ever existed," had
adopted the name of Spartacus the leader of an insurrection of
slaves in ancient Rome and he aimed at nothing less than
world revolution. 2 Thus the Order of the Illuminati " abjured
Christianity, advocated sensual pleasures, believed in annihilation,
and called patriotism and loyalty narrow-minded prejudices
incompatible with universal benevolence"; further, "they ac-
counted all princes usurpers and tyrants, and all privileged orders
anarchy that followed, he was led to the scaffold. His wife killed herself
in despair.
* Confirmed by the Abbe Barruel, Mimoires sur le Jacobinisme,
iii. ii.
1 Ibid. p. 25 ; Histoire de la Revolution, by Louis Blanc, ii. 84, 85.
PROLOGUE 21
as their abettors ; they meant to abolish the laws which pro-
tected property accumulated by long-continued and successful
industry ; and to prevent for the future any such accumulation,
they intended to establish universal liberty and equality, the
imprescriptible rights of man, and as preparation for all this
they intended to root out all religion and ordinary morality, |
and even to break the bonds of domestic life, by destroying'
the veneration for marriage-vows, and by taking the education
of children out of the hands of the parents." *
These were precisely the principles followed by the Subver-
sives of France in 1793 and 1794, and the method by which this pro-
ject was carried out is directly traceable to Weishaupt's influence.
Amongst the Illuminati, says Robison, " nothing was so fre-
quently discoursed of as the propriety of employing, for a good
purpose, the means which the wicked employed for evil purposes ;
and it was taught that the preponderancy of good in the ultimate
result consecrated every means employed, and that wisdom and
virtue consisted in properly determining this balance. This
appeared big with danger, because it seemed evident that nothing
would be scrupled at, if it could be made appear that the Order
would derive advantage from it, because the great object of the
Order was held superior to every consideration." 2
It is this doctrine that provides the key to the whole policy
of the leading revolutionaries of France, and that, as we shall see
later, brought about the Reign of Terror.
Quintin Craufurd, the friend of Marie Antoinette, writing to
Pitt in 1794, remarked : " There is a great resemblance between
the maxims, as far as they are known, of the Illumines and the
early Jacobins, and I am persuaded that the seeds of many of
those extravagant but diabolical doctrines that spread with
such unparalleled luxuriance in the hotbeds of France were
carried from Germany." 3 The lodges of the German Freemasons
and Illuminati were thus the source whence emanated all those
anarchic schemes that culminated in the Terror, and it was at a
great meeting of the Freemasons in Frankfurt-am-Main, three
years before the French Revolution began, that the deaths of
Louis XVI. and Gustavus III. of Sweden were first planned. 4
The Orleanist leaders, quick to see the opportunity for ad-
1 Robison's Proofs of a Conspiracy, pp. 107 and 375.
2 Ibid. p. 107.
3 Craufurd here uses the word " Germany " as it was employed at
that date, i.e. as a name covering Austria as well as Prussia and the other
independent German states. Yet it was not in Austria, but in such
towns as Berlin, Frankfurt, Mainz, Gottingen, Brunswick, Gotha, Breslau,
etc., that Illuminism flourished most vigorously.
* See the evidence of two French Freemasons present at this meeting
published by Charles d'Hericault, La Revolution, p. 104. {/
22 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
vancing their own interests, joined the Freemasons, and the Due
d'Orleans succeeded in getting himself elected Grand Master of
the Order in France. A little later Mirabeau went to Berlin, and
whilst in Prussia attracted the attention of " Spartacus " and
his colleague " Philo," alias the Baron Knigge of Frankfurt-am-
Main, who through the influence of Mauvillon, a disciple of
Philo's, persuaded him to become an Illuminatus. On his return
to Paris Mirabeau, together with Talleyrand and the Due de
Lauzun, inaugurated a lodge of the Order, but none of the three
being as yet adepts they were obliged to apply to headquarters
for aid. Accordingly two Germans were sent to initiate them
further in the doctrines of the sect. Before long the Club Breton,
the first revolutionary club, later to be known as the Club des
Jacobins, became the centre of Illuminism and Freemasonry, for
all its members were also members of the two secret societies.
But though the leading Orleanistes were all Freemasons, all Free-
masons were not Orleanistes ; some were pure Subversives, and M.
Gustave Bord is no doubt right in stating that the duke was only
the visible head of the sect whose members used him as a cover
to their designs, whilst he and his supporters used them with
the same object. Thus Chamfort, though a member of the
Orleaniste conspiracy, was at heart a Subversive, as an illuminat-
ing conversation he once held with Marmontel at the beginning
of the Revolution testifies. Chamfort having remarked that it
would not be a bad thing to level all ranks and abolish the
existing order of things, Marmontel replied :
" Equality has always been the chimera of republics
and the bait that ambition offers to vanity. But this
levelling down is all the more impossible in a vast monarchy,
and in attempting to abolish everything it seems to me that
we should go further than the nation expects, and further
than it wishes."
" True," said Chamfort, " but does the nation know what it
wishes ? One can make it wish, and one can make it say what it
has never thought . . . the nation is a great herd that only
thinks of browsing, and with good sheepdogs the shepherds can
lead it as they please." He went on to explain that one must
help the people according to one's own lights, not according to
theirs, and spoke cheerfully of a Revolution that would make
a clean sweep of the Old Regime, a scheme he thought by no
means impossible to carry out, for though it might be difficult
to move the industrious citizens, there was always the class
that has nothing to lose and everything to gain which could
be stirred up by rumours of massacre, famine, and so forth.
The Due d'Orleans, he ended by remarking, must be made use of
for this purpose. When to this Marmontel suggested that the
PROLOGUE 23
duke had hardly the makings of a leader, Chamfort replied
imperturbably :
" You are right, and Mirabeau, who knows him well, says it
would be building on mud to count on him, but he has identified
himself with the popular cause, he bears an imposing name, he
has millions to distribute, he hates the King, he hates the Queen
still more."
Such, then, were the " democratic " principles of the Sub-
versives, and the methods described by Chamfort were, as we
shall see, precisely those employed to work up the people. The \
first item on their programme was the systematic dissemination
of class hatred and the promise of unlimited booty.
" Name me as your representative at the States-General,"
said Robespierre in his electioneering speeches, " and you will
be for ever exempt from those burdens which have so far been
required of you on the pretext of the needs of the State. . . .
This will not be the only benefit you will enjoy if I succeed in
becoming one of your representatives ; too long have the rich
been the sole possessors of happiness. It is time that their
possessions should pass into other hands. The castles will be
overthrown and all the lands belonging to them will be distributed
amongst you in equal portions." To the agricultural labourers
he promised the fields they cultivated, to the retainers of the
nobles he offered freedom from all duties. " Everything will
be changed, for masters will become servants, and you will be
served in your turn." *
It will be seen, therefore, that from the outset " equality,"
the great watchword of the Revolution, had no place in the minds
of the Subversives ; conditions were simply to be reversed,
wealth was to change hands, a process that was to be never-
ending, since that which was at the top was to be perpetually
thrust to the bottom, and that which was at the bottom raised
to the top.
Towards religion the Subversives displayed the same attitude
as towards government ; their animosity was not directed against
the Church of Rome more than against Protestantism ; it was
religion in itself they detested, and that they set out to destroy.
When we study the manner in which they carried out their design,
when we read of the frightful profanity that was inaugurated
during the Terror, the desecration of the churches, the blasphemies
against Christ and the Holy Virgin, and the worship of Marat, it
is almost impossible to disbelieve in demoniacal possession, to
doubt that these men, inflamed with hatred against all spiritual
influences working for good in the world, became indeed the
1 Montjoie, Histoire de la Conjuration de Maximilien Robespierre, pp. \/
36, 37-
24 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
vehicles for those other spirits, the powers of darkness, whose
cause they had made their own. And in their hideous deaths,
for nearly every one perished on the scaffold, were they not,
perhaps, like the Gadarene swine, victims of the demons that
drove them to destruction ?
PRUSSIA
Whilst the Illuminati of Germany strove to plunge France
and all the rest of the world into anarchy, the Government of
Prussia was engaged on another intrigue against the French
monarchy. Optimists who believe that the desire of modern
Germany to dominate the world was a form of temporary insanity
which originated with Nietzsche and Bernhardi, and may ter-
minate in a return to the " peaceful philosophy " of what they
fondly describe as " old Germany," would do well to study the
policy of that idol of the German people Frederick the Great.
No event had so seriously disturbed the serenity of Frederick
as the marriage of the Dauphin to Marie Antoinette in 1770, since
by this union of the royal families of France and Austria the
alliance between the two countries both the hated rivals of
Prussia was definitely sealed. It must be remembered that in
the eighteenth century France was the richest and most thickly
populated country on the Continent, whilst the Court of Versailles
far eclipsed in splendour that of any other kingdom, and in the
mind of Frederick the memory of the " Roi Soleil " lingered as
a constant source of irritation. Austria, on the other hand, as
the head of the German Empire, enjoyed a power and prestige
that reduced the little kingdom of Prussia to comparatively
small importance. Meanwhile the Rhine provinces, more French
than German in their sympathies, showed no anxiety to unite
with Prussia, thereby forming the Germanic Confederation that
was the dream of Frederick. To break the alliance between
France and Austria became therefore the great ambition of his
life, and the one on which he concentrated all his energies.
In Von der Goltz, his ambassador, who arrived at the Court
of Louis XV. in 1772, Frederick hoped to find an instrument to
carry out his design, which was not to consist in open warfare
but in a system of political mischief-making that would sow
discord between the Courts of Versailles and Vienna. At the
same time Von der Goltz was to act as a spy by getting information
out of Maurepas and sending it to the King of Prussia. In this
the ambassador at first proved successful, for the frivolous
Maurepas loved to be amused and Von der Goltz possessed a
merry wit, but the reports he forwarded to Berlin were far from
satisfying to his Prussian Majesty. The correspondence that
PROLOGUE 25
took place between Frederick and the luckless ambassador, whom
he treated with brutal sarcasm, is a revelation in Prussian
diplomacy. 1 Frederick, it appears, was in the habit of confiding
sums of money to his representatives at the various courts of
Europe which were to be employed in bribery and corruption.
Meanwhile their own personal expenses were but meagrely
defrayed. Accordingly Von der Goltz on arriving in France was
obliged to borrow money from Necker to pay the rent of his house,
which he eventually opened as"a gambling-saloon in order to meet
his creditors. Appeals to Frederick for financial assistance met
only with indignant replies : " You are a spendthrift ! . . . Did
you not fritter away at the Court of Petersbourg thousands of
ecus which I entrusted to you for corruptions ? " In France
Frederick is convinced that Von der Goltz is simply amusing
himself instead of obtaining information on affairs of state.
" You drive my patience to its limit," he writes on December 21,
1780, " by the clumsy way in which you fill your post. . . . One
might excuse it in a student who had just left the University, but
it is unpardonable in a man of your age who has been so long
employed in affairs of state. So if you do not bestir yourself
and bring more reflection to bear on them, I shall be obliged to
find you a successor in whatever corner of Europe I have to look
for him."
To these reproaches Von der Goltz replies with the utmost
meekness, even when Frederick goes so far as to accuse him of being
occupied with some " grosse Margot " instead of attending to his
affairs this suspicion, he makes answer, is unfounded, since
neither his health nor his finances permit of such diversions.
The point on which this extraordinary correspondence turns
is of course the Queen. As long as Marie Antoinette retains her
popularity Frederick realizes that there is little hope for the
success of Prussian intrigue. This point needs emphasizing, owing
to the curious confusion of thought that exists on the Queen's
policy. No reproach has been more often repeated against Marie
Antoinette than that of sympathizing with Austria ; undoubtedly
she sympathized with Austria and wished to cement the alliance
between the country of her birth and that of her adoption. This
was only natural, but the point so continually overlooked is that
sympathy with Austria at this date was precisely the opposite of
sympathy with Prussia, and this alliance that the Queen was so
anxious to maintain was the greatest safeguard France possessed
1 The correspondence from which all the following extracts are taken
is to be found in a work entitled Rapport swy /es Correspondences des Agents
Diplomatiques Strangers en France avant la Revolution conserves dans les
Archives de Berlin, Dresde, Geneve, Turin . . . G&nes . . . Londres, etc.,
by Jules Flammermont (Paris, Imprimerie Nationale, 1896).
26 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
against Prussian aggression. The cry of " I' Autrichienne ! " raised
against Marie Antoinette throughout the Revolution probably origin-
ated therefore in Prussia, and was foolishly taken up by the French
people with fatal blindness to their real interests.
No one rejoiced more heartily than Frederick the Great at
the estrangement that existed between Louis XVI. and Marie
Antoinette during the first seven years of their marriage, and in
1776 we find him writing to confide to Von der Goltz his fears that
the impending visit of the Emperor Joseph II. to the Court of
France may bring about a closer relationship between the husband
and wife. In a letter dated December 26, 1776, Frederick points
out to his ambassador that the best way to counteract the
Emperor's influence will be for Von der Goltz to repeat to the
royal family of France remarks the Emperor is supposed to have
made about them : "It will be a good thing if you can manage
by means of subterranean insinuations to increase the dissension
between the two Courts. With this object the ambitious views of
his Imperial Majesty on Italy, Bavaria, Silesia, Alsace, and even
Moldavia will open a vast field to your political career, and if to these
you add the sarcasms that prince permitted himself on the sub-
ject of his brothers-in-law when he said: 'I have three brothers-
in-law ; the one at Versailles is an imbecile, the one at Naples is
a lunatic, and the one at Parma is a fool,' it cannot fail to make
an impression and to prejudice the Court at which you are against
him in such a way that all further understanding will be extremely
difficult if not impossible. But this," Frederick adds, " must be
done cleverly " a feat of which Von der Goltz was apparently
incapable, for the Emperor's visit resulted in the reconciliation
Frederick was so anxious to avoid, and the birth of a princess
to the royal family of France destroyed his hopes for the future.
A further check to Prussian intrigue occurred in the dismissal
of Maurepas, for his successor Vergennes had no confidence in
Von der Goltz, and refused to discuss anything with him. Accord-
ingly in 1784 another ambassador was sent to France in the person
of Frederick's brother, Prince Henry of Prussia, who was in-
structed to effect an alliance between the Courts of Versailles and
Berlin. " The Prince," remarks M. de Croze Lemercier, " came
amongst us as a good Prussian ... he was charged by his brother
Frederick the Great to embroil us with Austria which he nearly
succeeded in doing and he only flattered our national vanity
in order the better to exploit it. ... Hatred of Austria was then
the fashion (in France), and public opinion was so blind as not to
see that we had enemies still more dangerous. The Prince became
popular for the same reason that made the unfortunate Marie
Antoinette hated."
Prince Henry certainly succeeded in exciting some degree of
PROLOGUE 27
sympathy with Prussia at the Court of France, but the Queen,
as before, remained the insuperable obstacle. When, three years
later, yet another envoy, the Baron von Alvensleben, was des-
patched by Frederick to report on the state of feeling at Versailles
he found the Queen still irreconcilable.
" The hatred of the Queen for everything that bears the name of
Prussian," he wrote to Frederick, "is so indisputable, that I
have, so to speak, the proofs under my hand."
This, then, was one of the great crimes of the unhappy Queen i
that she was anti-Prussian. Those amongst the French who still
revile her memory would do well to remember that she was the
first and greatest obstacle to those dreams of European domina-
tion that, originating with Frederick the Great, culminated in
the aggression of 1870 and 1914.
Marie Antoinette paid heavily for her aversion to Prussia.
There can be no doubt whatever that certain of the libels and
seditious pamphlets published against her before and during
the Revolution were circulated by Von der Goltz at the instigation
of the King of Prussia. In the course of this book we shall see
the further methods employed by Prussia to undermine the
monarchy of France and to overthrow the balance of power in
Europe by breaking the alliance between the two rivals to her
supremacy.
There was thus a double strain of German influence at work
behind the French Revolution the political and the philo-
sophical. The first, inspired by Frederick the Great and carried
out by Von der Goltz ; the second, inspired by Weishaupt and
conducted by Anacharsis Clootz, the Prussian sent to France for
the purpose.
ENGLAND
In the minds of certain contemporaries no doubt exists that
yet another intrigue at work behind the revolutionary movement
was that sinister influence " the gold of Pitt." England, they
declare, resentful of the help given by France to the American
insurgents, took advantage of the disturbed state of the country
to wreak her vengeance on the French Government by encourag-
ing and actually financing sedition. Montmorin told Gouverneur
Morris that he " had indisputable evidence of the intrigues of
Britain and Prussia that they gave money to the Prince de Conde
and the Due d'Orleans." Bezenval, describing the riots of July
1789, speaks of the brigands employed by the Due d'Orleans and
by England. According to Madame Campan, Marie Antoinette
herself shared the conviction of England's complicity, and re-
garded Pitt as the leader of the intrigue. " Do not go to Paris
28 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
to-day," she is said to have remarked, " the English have been
distributing money there ! " or again : " I cannot hear the name
of Pitt without feeling cold shivers down my back ! "
What was the explanation of these rumours ? Was the
Government of England really animated by a spirit of revenge ?
It is certainly probable that the intervention of France on behalf
of America appeared to Pitt as hostile an act as the sending of
the Kruger telegram appeared to our Government of 1896, yet
it must be remembered that Louis XVI. had entered reluctantly
into the war, whilst the leaders of the expedition to America
Lafayette, Lauzun, De Segur, and others were later on partisans
of the Revolution. If, therefore, Pitt desired revenge is it likely
that he would have sought to obtain it by joining forces with the
very men who had taken part against him ?
At the same time it is undeniable that a serious rivalry existed
between France and England. As the two principal monarchies
of Europe this was inevitable, nor in the past had it proved wholly
disastrous. The perpetually recurring wars between the two
rival powers had been conducted with gallantry and generosity
on both sides, and had left little bitterness in the mind of either
nation. But the reign of Louis XVI. introduced a more formid-
able menace to the power of England. For the first time in her
history she saw her most cherished possession, the dominion of
the seas, seriously threatened. Louis XVI. was an enthusiast for
the navy ; on the subject of shipbuilding he displayed surprising
knowledge, and his visit to the port of Cherbourg the con-
struction of which was the greatest triumph of his reign brought
him a popularity he had never before enjoyed. Across the sea
England watched and wondered. As a seafaring nation it was
perhaps the most anxious moment in her existence. In the
correspondence of English diplomatists at this date we find a
vague fear piercing, and with the outbreak of the Revolution an
undeniable breath of relief. "It is certainly possible," writes
Lord Dorset from Paris in September 1789, " that from this
chaos some creation may result, but I am satisfied that it must
be long before France returns to any state of existence which can
make her a subject of uneasiness to other nations." Earlier in
the year Hailes had expressed the same conviction.
Yet to show a certain degree of complacency at the spectacle
of a foreign power that had threatened aggression weakening
itself with internal dissensions is surely not to imply that one
has deliberately set out to organize these dissensions. George
III. throughout showed himself resolutely opposed to the Revolu-
tion, and Pitt, who consistently supported the King, could have
had no conceivable object in furthering a movement that shook
all the thrones of Europe. Far from sympathizing with the
PROLOGUE 29
revolutionary leaders Pitt invariably displayed a marked aver-
sion to the Orleanistes, whilst the Jacobins who were avowedly
" the natural enemies of England " were the last people with
whom he would be likely to ally himself. The hatred expressed
for Pitt by both these parties of revolutionaries is again surely
proof of his non-complicity if Pitt was helping to finance them,
why should they regard him as their enemy ? Why should
" Tor de Pitt " be mentioned by Jacobin writers with the same
indignation as by Royalists ? When, therefore, we find Pitt
suspected by Royalists of abetting the Revolution and accused
by Revolutionaries of aiding the Royalists, 1 we may surely con-
clude that his attitude was, as he professed, one of strict neutrality.
Moreover, as Madame de Stae'l points out, how could Pitt dispose
of the vast sums of money he was said to have scattered among
the rioters without accounting for them to Parliament ? Necker,
she says, made minute investigations during his ministry, but
" was never able to discover the faintest trace of complicity
between the popular party and the English Government," 2 and
M. Granier de Cassagnac adds that " historical documents have
since then confirmed this conviction of Necker's, for the official
accounts of the finances of the emigration at the Bibliotheque
Nationale prove that of all governments of Europe the English
Government is the only one that never contributed any sum of
money towards the divers enterprises of different parties during
the French Revolution." 3
Even Sorel, who misses no opportunity of denouncing the
aggressive policy of England, is obliged to admit the integrity of
Pitt:
" The ministry, that is to say William Pitt, was perfectly
pacific. The Revolution ridded him for a time of a formidable
rival ; it assured him of the peace he needed for his financial
reforms, and surrendered to England all the benefits of which the
crisis in public affairs deprived French industry and commerce.
In every market, as in every chancellery, England was free to
substitute herself for France. Pitt would have been careful not
to obstruct the development of a revolution so advantageous to
his designs. He also held that a king of France deprived of his
prestige, with his rights limited and his power contested, would
marvellously answer the convenience of England. But he was
not one of those greedy politicians blinded by jealousy, whose
covetousness leads them to take a brutal advantage of fortune.
1 See, for example, the 5th number of the Vieux Cordelier, in which
Camille Desmoulins accuses Pitt of being in league with Calonne, Malouet;
and Luchesini to create a " counter-revolution."
2 Considerations sur la Revolution Franpaise, i. 329, 331.
3 Histoire des Causes de la Revolution Franpaise, i. 59.
30 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
Certain of these, and notably Ms allies in Berlin, marvelled at his
not seizing this occasion to throw himself on France, to crush her
and take over her colonies. He was careful to refrain from this.
The natural elevation of his soul restrained him as much as the
foresight of his mind. Such perfidy was repugnant to him, and
he held it to be dangerous." 1
This testimony of a hostile critic, and at the same time of the
historian most versed in the politics of the eighteenth century, is
surely convincing. If, in the opinion of Sorel, Pitt was above
taking advantage of the Revolution to declare open war on France,
is it conceivable that he would have descended to the ignoble
policy of financing sedition, to the brutal expedient of scattering
gold amongst an enraged mob ? The thing is unthinkable, and
it is time that this gross calumny on our Government should
be finally demolished. Suleau, the Royalist pamphleteer, knew
better than many of his contemporaries when he wrote these
noble words :
" The English people have not degenerated from the magna-
nimity of their ancestors, and here wise policy is allied to gener-
osity, for it would not be difficult to prove that the splendour of
France will always be the surest guarantee for the prosperity of
Great Britain."
England, then, far from abetting the Revolution, regarded it
with undisguised aversion. Such liberal-minded men as Words-
worth and Arthur Young, who at first hailed it as the dawn
of liberty, lived to recognize their error. " In England," says
Cardonne, " the majority of the people, including almost all
those who belonged to the Government, the rich and noble
owners of property, had conceived such a horror for the principles
and acts of the French revolutionaries, and such a dread of seeing
them adopted in their country, that they were anxious to break
off all commerce between the two nations." As we shall see in
the course of this book, the " people " of England shared the
opinion of their rulers.
What, then, is the explanation of the belief in English co-
operation with the revolutionary movement ? Of the English
guineas found on the rioters ? Of Englishmen mingling in the
mobs of Paris during popular agitations ? Of the seditious
pamphlets printed in London ? Of the traffic in letters, messages,
and money maintained between England and the revolutionary
leaders ? Many of these leaders, moreover, were constantly in
England, both before and during the Revolution ; Marat lived
for years in Soho, whilst Danton, Brissot, Petion, St. Huruge,
Theroigne de Mericourt, and the ruffian Rotondo were all habitues
of London. These facts admit of no denial ; to suppose, how-
1 L' Europe et la Revolution Franpaise, ii. 29.
PROLOGUE 31
ever, any complicity on the part of the English Government is
illogical and absurd. The explanation seems to me to lie in a
perfectly different direction.
I have already referred to the Due d'Orleans' predilection
for visits to London a predilection that is not to be altogether
accounted for by the " anglomanie " he professed. " M.
d'Orleans," a contemporary shrewdly remarks, " often went to
England. . . . M. d'Orleans was very fond of England, though
not of the English. The wisdom of their laws mattered very
little to him, but the liberty of London mattered to him a great
deal. This apparent love of the Due d'Orleans for the English
was in the end the cause of all the calumnies against England
with which the leaders of the different factions influenced public
credulity, so as to throw on the policy of that nation the excesses
of which they alone were guilty." x
Here, then, is the key to a great part of the mystery ; the theory
of "1'or de Pitt " was a fable circulated by the duke himself to
shield his own manoeuvres, and such was the skill with which it
was disseminated that it was believed even by the Queen, who, as
we know, never fully realized the complicity of the duke with the
revolutionary outbreaks.
For ten years before his death, that is to say from 1783
onwards, the Due d'Orleans continually deposited sums of money
in London banks, and these sums, estimated at between ten to
twelve millions of francs, were not exhausted in I794- 2 Now
since countless witnesses testify that the revolutionary mobs
were financed by the duke, it is surely more than probable
that many of the guineas found on rioters were the Due
d'Orleans' money, 3 which with diabolical cunning he drew out in
English coin, and had sent over to France in order to throw
suspicion on the English. This may to a large extent account
for the sums distributed, but it does not entirely dispose of the
belief in English co-operation. A further light is thrown on the
matter by the following passage of Montjoie :
" During his visits to London the Due d'Orleans personally,
and by means of his agents in Holland, made fresh loans of
money in England. ... He attached to his interests . . . Milord
Stanhope and Dr. Price. These two men were the most important
members of a society calling itself ' The Revolution Society.'
. . . D'Orleans also knew how to interest all that party known
as the ' Opposition ' in his cause. Fox, one of the oracles of
1 Histoire des Factions de la Revolution Franpaise, by Joseph Lavall6e,
i. 25 (1816).
2 See letters from General Montesquieu and the Due de Chartres pub- /
lished at the end of the Me~moires de Mallet du Pan, edited by A. Sayous, ]/
p. 455. 3 Fantin Desodoards, Histoire Philosophique, ii. 436.
32 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
this party, was throughout attached to d' Orleans, and still is
to his family (1797) ; he is the declared protector of all the
Frenchmen who belong to the faction of this prince."
Is it not possible, then, that the duke, fearing that even his
vast fortune might prove inadequate to the demands made on it
during the course of nearly five years, for financing insurrection,
may have supplemented it by sums raised amongst his friends in
England ? In this case English gold did play a part in the
revolutionary movement, but it was provided not by the Govern-
ment, but by its opponents. The Opposition party in London
formed an exact counterpart to the duke's party in Paris ; headed
by the Prince of Wales, the roues of Carlton House formed a
Fronde against George III., such as the roues of the Palais
Royal formed against Louis XVI. In the House of Commons
Fox, the so-called " friend of the people," demanded that the
enormous debts of the Prince of Wales should be defrayed by
the nation. Thus in both countries it was the " democratic "
party, the revolutionaries of France and the Whigs of England,
who supported the follies and extravagances cf these two
dissolute princes, whilst in both countries the cause of order and
morality was represented by the sovereign whom the democrats
wished to dethrone. George III., like Louis XVI., was intensely
respectable ; the Due d'Orleans was therefore even less to his
taste than his own prodigal son, and he rightly discerned the de-
moralizing influence that the duke exercised over him. " George,
the Prince of Wales," says Ducoin, " had done the honours of the
brothels and gambling-houses of the old city, and in Paris the
Due d'Orleans had returned the hospitality shown him by the
Prince of Wales in the suppers and orgies of London. Like
Philippe, the Prince of Wales had adopted the Revolution, and
hailed the dawn of a new era." This era was apparently to
consist in placing George III. under restraint and proclaiming
the Prince of Wales Regent, a scheme in which the Prince's boon
companions, Fox, Sheridan, and others, heartily concurred.
Meanwhile the same process was to take place in France, the
regency in both countries being merely the preliminary to a
change of sovereigns. With these two merry monarchs, George
IV. and Philippe VII., on the thrones of England and France, an
era of liberty seemed assured for the bons vivants of Carlton
House and the Palais Royal, who found themselves perpetually
hampered by the exercise of the royal authority.
Under these circumstances it is not surprising that Louis XVI.
found it necessary to prohibit the Due d'Orleans from visiting
England too frequently. In the Correspondance Secrete we find
on April 9, 1788, the following significant entry :
"It is confirmed that one of the conditions that the Due
PROLOGUE 33
d'Orleans' exile should be cancelled is that this prince should
make a long journey to anywhere except England. To the well-
founded reasons the King may have for preventing him from
breathing British air there is, they say, to be added the entreaty
of George III., who, wishing to maintain the footsteps of the
Prince of Wales on the paths of order and morality, has begged
his most Christian Majesty not to allow his friends from Paris to
approach him."
This, then, was the reason why Louis XVI. stipulated that the
duke should not spend the term of his exile in England, a stipula-
tion that, as we have seen, contributed more than any other cause
to the duke's animosity towards the Court of France.
The prohibition to visit England was, of course, a serious
obstacle to the designs of the Due d'Orleans and^hodejlQS de
Laclos. These journeys, made ostensibly for pleasure, held a
cleeper purpose. Whilst the wine flowed freely, and George and
Philippe basked in the smiles of their various enchantresses, who
could suppose that plots of a serious nature were in progress, and
that anything more important than the pleasure of the hour
occupied the brains of the revellers ?
In England, as in France, however, the conspirators were
divided in their aims. Not all the English revolutionaries
belonged to the Prince of Wales's party ; many, like their French
counterparts, desired no change of sovereign but simple anarchy.
Throughout the history of our country subversive spirits have
from time to time arisen to advocate " equality " and the levelling
of all ranks to an indifferent public. " Pride," said the Prince
de Ligne, " disdains revolutions ; vanity produces them." The
British people, far more proud than vain, have always responded
with lukewarm interest to the instigators of class hatred ; per-
fectly satisfied with their own position in the social scheme they
care not who considers himself their superior. Liberty they
demand as a right ; equality they wisely recognize as impossible,
and dismiss from their calculations. But in England, as in France,
a minority has always existed, totally distinct from the people,
whose vanity is greater than its pride. To them obscurity is far
more intolerable than oppression. Usually members of the
middle class employed in sedentary occupations and deprived
of the mental balance that manual labour brings, or occasionally
of an aristocracy that has failed to show them the appreciation
they desire, they seek to avenge their own wrongs rather than to
redress those of the people. Like the Subversives of France they
have seldom any definite plans of reconstruction their aim is
only to destroy. Of such elements were the "Revolution
Societies " of England in 1789 composed. ,Dr. Robinet, who has
described them admiringly in his Danton Emigre, under the title
34 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
of " The English Jacobins," has given us illuminating details of
their conduct during the course of the Revolution. Like nearly
every French revolutionary, Dr. Robinet detests England, and his
comments on the attitude of the British people towards the
Revolution are very bitter there were in England, he says, " only
a respectable minority, a numerous elite," who sympathized with
the movement. This " respectable minority " consisted of the
Prince of Wales and his boon companions, and of the Revolu-
tionary Societies headed by the renegade Lord Stanhope, by
Dr. Price, Dr. Priestley, and the drunkard Thomas Paine. The
natural allies of their country's bitterest enemies, the Jacobins
of France, we shall find them throughout the Revolution, not
merely abetting the excesses committed abroad, but seeking to
create a kindred movement at home. It was they, as I shall show,
who subscribed towards the Revolution ; it was they who frater-
nized with the revolutionary agitators on their visits to London ;
it was they who committed the crimes that certain writers have
falsely attributed to our Government.
The complicity of these English Subversives with the revolu-
tionaries of France is a fact we should do well to realize, both in
justice to the French nation and also with a view to understanding
the potentialities of our own. The smug belief that none amongst
our fellow-countrymen would have been capable of the atrocities
committed in France is shattered at a blow when we read the
comments of English revolutionaries on these deeds of horror
deeds not to be attributed as we are accustomed to attribute
them to the excitability of the Latin temperament, but to
political passions, of all passions the most terrible and relentless
which men of our own race displayed at the same period without
the same provocation. In the course of this book we shall see
that the crimes committed by the lowest of the Paris rabble, and
execrated by the honest democrats of France, were applauded by
educated men and women in our country, and if England was not
plunged in the horrors of anarchy it was not because she did not
hold within her forces capable of producing them.
These, then, were the four great intrigues of the French Revolu-
tion. Their aims may be briefly recapitulated thus :
I. The intrigue of the Orleanistes to change the dynasty of
France.
II. The intrigue of the Subversives to destroy all religion and
all government.
III. The intrigue of Prussia to break the Franco-Austrian alliance.
IV. The intrigue of the English revolutionaries to overthrow
the governments both of France and England.
PROLOGUE
35
To these four organized intrigues must be added the in-
numerable people of all classes, belonging to no particular party,
but with private grievances of their own, and all ready to throw
themselves into any subversive movement Madame de la
Motte, who raged at her punishment in the affair of the necklace,
and to whom many of the libellous pamphlets against the Queen
are due ; courtiers who had failed to secure the favours they
solicited ; women who had been refused admittance to the Court,
or like Madame Roland, felt humiliated by its magnificence
all those people who, either by the misfortune of their cir-
cumstances or by a natural biliousness of temperament, resented
prosperity in others, and below them all that underworld of vice
and misery that in every old civilization sinks to the bottom
like the dregs in an old wine, and that any violent convulsion
brings to the surface with terrible effect. All through the Revolu-
tion we shall see these heterogeneous rebels, inflamed with
their own burning thirst for vengeance, mingling with the great
conspiracies, and the great conspiracies in their turn joining
forces with each other ; we shall see the agitators of the Palais
Royal fraternizing with the emissaries of Prussia, Madame de la
Motte circulating libels through the agents of the Due d'Orleans,
and English revolutionaries corresponding with the cut-throats of
September. All this confused and turbulent movement, formed
of such conflicting units, running concurrently with the genuine
movement for reform, succeeded so skilfully in blending with it
as to deceive not only contemporaries, but the greater part of
posterity. " They had," says Malouet, " the art and the wisdom to
appear in a mass, marching under one banner, the banner of
liberty, which floated over the heads of men whose secret aims
were widely divergent, thus presenting a united front to the
world." So, though all the revolutionary elements put together
formed but a small minority in the State, they were able, by means
of this union, to hold their own against the immense but disunited
majority that composed the Old Regime a king at variance with
his Court, a noblesse divided against itself, and a people who
for want of leaders in their own ranks allowed themselves to
be swayed by every breath of opinion. Before this rising tide
of insurrection the Government erected no barriers, to the
superb organization of the Orleaniste conspiracy provided no
counter-organization, and to seditious doctrines replied with no
corrective propaganda. " Will posterity believe," cried Arthur
Young, as he watched the engineering of the Revolution, " that
while the press has swarmed with inflammatory productions,
that tend to prove the blessings of theoretical confusion and
speculative licentiousness, not one writer of talent has been
employed to refute and confound the fashionable doctrines,
36 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
nor the least care taken to disseminate works of another
complexion ? "
Playfair, another English contemporary, was amazed by the
incredible inertia of the ruling classes : "In this state of things,
did the proprietors pay a single man of merit to plead their
cause ? No. If by chance a man of merit refuted their enemies,
did they make a small sacrifice to give publicity to his work ?
No. He who pleaded the cause of murder and plunder saw his
work distributed by thousands and hundreds of thousands, and
himself enriched ; while he who endeavoured to support the cause
of law, of order, and of the proprietor, had his bookseller to pay
and saw his labours converted into waste paper."
So at the outbreak of the Revolution all dynamic force, all
fire and energy, were to be found on the side of demolition,
whilst the Old Regime, resolutely blind to the coming danger,
allowed itself to be destroyed without striking a blow in self-
defence.
1 Playfair's History of Jacobinism, p. 108.
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE
37
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE
THE AFFAIRE RfiVEILLON
THE spring of 1789 found the citizens of Paris divided between
two great emotions, hope and fear hope verging on ecstasy
at the prospect of the States-General that were to regenerate the
kingdom, fear amounting to panic at the threatened famine and
the presence of mysterious strangers in their midst.
The immense charities of the King, noblesse, and clergy had
had the effect of attracting crowds of hungry peasants to Paris,
where they were employed at the King's expense in working at the
Butte Montmartre, and soon fell a prey to the Orleaniste leaders,
who enlisted many of them in their service for the purposes of
insurrection. But even this formidable addition to the under-
world of Paris formed but a small minority amongst the law-
abiding of the population, and a further measure was devised by
the leaders. Towards the end of April the peaceful citizens saw
with bewilderment bands of ragged men of horrible appearance,
armed with thick knotted sticks, flocking through the barriers into
the city. This sinister contingent is not, as certain historians
would have us believe, to be confounded with the former crowds
of peasants " they were neither workmen nor peasants," says
Madame Vigee le Bran, " they seemed to belong to no class unless
that of bandits, so terrifying were their faces," and Montjoie adds
that this aspect was intentional " they had been instructed
to disfigure their faces in a manner so hideous that they were
objects of horror to all the Parisians." Other contemporaries,
whose accounts exactly coincide with the foregoing, add that
these men were " foreigners " " they spoke a strange tongue " ;
Bouille states that " they were bandits from the South of France
and Italy," whilst Marmontel describes them as " Marseillais . . .
men of rapine and carnage, thirsting for blood and booty, who,
mingling with the people, inspired them with their own ferocity."
The Marseillais were therefore not called in for the first time
in 1792, as is generally supposed, and their aid was evidently
evoked at the later date in consequence of their successes at the
39
40 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
beginning of the Revolution. That brigands from the South
were deliberately enticed to Paris in 1789, employed and paid
by the revolutionary leaders, is a fact confirmed by authorities
too numerous to quote at length ; and the further fact that the
conspirators felt such a measure to be necessary is of immense
/ significance, for it shows that in their eyes the people of Paris were
not to be depended on to carry out a revolution. In other words,
the importation of the contingent of hired brigands conclusively
refutes the theory that the Revolution was an irrepressible rising
of the people ; it proves that, on the contrary, the movement was
deliberately and laboriously engineered. No one understood
human nature better than such men as Laclos, Chamfort, and the
other leaders of the Orleaniste conspiracy, and they doubtless
realized that in the past the irresponsible, pleasure-loving people
of Paris had shown little initiative in the matter of bloodshed,
but had needed always to be given the lead before they entered
into the spirit of the thing and played at killing. Thus at the
Massacre of Saint-Bartholomew had not the lead been given by
the German Behme and the Italian Catherine de Medicis before
the people of the city joined in the hue and cry after the flying
Huguenots ? Pitiless as they could be at moments, they were
prone to sudden revulsions of feeling that in an instant trans-
formed their victims into objects of admiration ; they lacked the
hot blood of the South that revels in cruelty and does not tire
of the spectacle. Just as the Anarchists of our own day have
always realized that it is amongst the descendants of the Roman
populace who gathered in the Coliseum to watch the brutal
sports of the arena that they must seek the assassin they needed
to track down their royal victim, so the conspirators of 1789
knew that it was to the South that they must look for that sombre
ferocity which the light-hearted Parisians lacked, and in the
sun-baked regions of Italy and Provence, where a dagger-thrust
is still but the everyday ending to a quarrel, they found the
terrible instruments that they required.
Thus side by side the work of reformation and the work of
revolution had gone forward, and whilst the deputies of the
people were assembling the leaders of insurrection were likewise
mustering their forces. It was a race between the two who
was to be first in the field ? those who desired to build up or
those who sought only to destroy ? Revolution won the day,
and on the 27th of April the first outbreak occurred in Paris.
The victim of this extraordinary riot was a certain wall-
paper manufacturer of the Faubourg Saint - Antoine named
Reveillon, who had recently been chosen elector for the Tiers
tat in opposition to the Orleaniste candidate. According to
certain historians " the rumour went round " that Reveillon had
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 41
spoken slightingly of working-men at the electoral assembly,
but Montjoie states that this accusation was definitely proclaimed
through the streets by a horde of the brigands dragging with
them an effigy of Reveillon, and calling out to the people
that he had said a workman could live quite well on fifteen
sous a day.
This device of inventing a phrase and placing it in the mouth
of any one they wished to offer up to popular fury was regularly
adopted by the agitators in all the earlier riots of the Revolution,
and often succeeded in completely deceiving the people. In the
case of Reveillon, however, the calumny was palpably absurd ;
the paper-maker was well known and respected in the Faubourg ;
he himself had started life as a working-man, and when he had
made his fortune resolved that his employes should never know
the hardships he had endured. Not one of his workmen was
paid less than twenty-five sous a day, and during the recent severe
winter he had kept them all on at full pay although unable to
give them work. The inhabitants of the Faubourg knew better,
therefore, than to believe the calumny against their benefactor,
and refused to riot. The agitators and their allies the brigands
were consequently obliged to resort to force in order to raise a
mob. Montjoie, who was an eye-witness of the whole affair, and
whose account is confirmed in nearly every point by other reliable
contemporaries, states that " these ruffians went into the factories
and workshops and compelled the workmen to follow them. This
method of swelling a mob of insurrection . . . was adopted through-
out the whole revolution. To begin with, about fifty rioters, men
or women, surround the first person they meet on their way, two
of the rioters hold him tightly under the arms and carry him off
against his will ... by this means, when the troop has arrived
on the battle-field, its numbers alarm those against whom it is
directed. On this occasion the horde of brigands was increased
by all the workmen they had enrolled against their wills." *
By this laborious method a disorderly mob was collected
who marched to Reveillon's house in the Rue de Montreuil,
which, on arrival, they found to be surrounded by a cordon of
troops. The street being thus rendered impassable the crowd
was held up, but at this opportune moment the Due d'Orleans
happened to drive past on his way to the race-meeting at Vincennes,
where his horses were running against those of the Comte d'Artois.
1 Bezenval, who was in command of the Swiss Guards, exactly corro-
borates this statement : " All the spies of the police agreed in saying that
the insurrection was caused by strange men who, in order to increase their
numbers, took by force those they met on their way ; they had even sent
three times to the Faubourg Saint-Marceau to raise recruits without being
able, to persuade any one to join them. These spies added that they saw
men inciting the tumult and even distributing money."
42 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
He stopped his carriage, got down, spoke a few words to the
rioters, and then drove on again. The duke afterwards admitted
his appearance on the scene, but explained it by saying that his
intention was merely to soothe the people, and that the words
he had spoken were " Allons, mes enfants, de la paix : nous
touchons au bonheur." The exhortation did not, however, have
the effect of dispersing the mob, which continued to besiege the
house of Reveillon until the evening, when the Duchesse d'Orleans
in returning from Vincennes passed by the Rue de Montreuil,
which was still barricaded by the troops. Out of respect for the
duchess whom no one associated with her husband's intrigues
the soldiers immediately opened a way for her, and thereupon the
mob, seeing their opportunity, burst through the same passage
and fell upon the house of Reveillon, which they proceeded to
pillage and destroy.
Three more regiments were now sent to the scene of action,
and the officers called upon the invaders to retire. The order
was repeated three times without effect, the rioters replying only
with a hail of stones and tiles that they hurled from the housetop
on the soldiers, killing several. Then by way of warning a few
shots were fired into the air by the troops, and this time the mob
retaliated with still more formidable missiles in the shape of roof-
beams and immense blocks of stone torn from the invaded
building. So at last the soldiers, finding pacific methods of no
avail, opened fire on the housetop, carrying death and destruc-
tion into the ranks of the rioters " the unhappy creatures fell
from the roofs, the walls dripped with blood, the pavement was
covered with mutilated limbs." The survivors took refuge inside
the house and prepared to carry on the siege, but the troops
entered with fixed bayonets, and by dint of hand-to-hand fighting
succeeded finally in clearing the premises and ending the riot.
Montjoie afterwards visited the wounded and questioned
them on the motives that had inspired their actions : " Unhappy
one, what were you doing there ? " And one and all made the
same reply, " What was I doing there ? I went, like you, like
every one else, just to see." But one poor wretch dying in agony
exclaimed, " Mon Dieu, mon Dieu, must one be treated in this way
for twelve miserable francs ? " He had, in fact, exactly twelve
francs in his pocket, and the same sum was found on many of
the other rioters. 1
Meanwhile Reveillon himself had succeeded in escaping during
the tumult and fled for refuge to the Bastille, where he remained
under the protection of the governor, De Launay, until he could
venture out again in safety. Compensation was made him by
the King for his ruined industry.
1 Montjoie, Conjuration de d'Orleans, i. 275.
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 43
Such was the Affaire Reveillon which historians are fond of
describing as mysterious and inexplicable. Yet contemporaries
of all parties admit that it was engineered by agitators ; the only
question on which they differ is, " By whom were these agitators
employed ? " The revolutionaries according to their usual
custom reply, "The Court." The Court and aristocracy, they
solemnly assure us, deliberately provoked the riot in order to find
an excuse for firing on the people \ Later on we shall find the
aristocrats accused of burning down their chateaux for the same
purpose. The suggestion is too ludicrous to be taken seriously.
Why should the Court wish to provoke a riot against itself ?
Why should a mob raised by aristocrats reproach Reveillon with
being a friend of aristocrats ? Why should the Court incite
popular fury against a law-abiding citizen and a loyal subject of
the King ? Above all, if the Court wished for an excuse to use force
against the people, why did they not hasten to use it ? Why was
every conciliatory method resorted to before force was employed ?
That the Affaire Reveillon was the work of the Orleaniste
conspiracy no one who brings an impartial mind to bear on
contemporary evidence can possibly doubt ; the presence of the
duke, and it is said also of Laclos, amongst the crowd, the fact
that the riot was carried on to the cry of " Vive le due d' Orleans ! "
and even " Vive notre roi d'Orleans ! " * is surely proof enough
of the influences at work. JTalleyrand who well knew the
intricacies of the Orleaniste intrigue definitely stated that it
was organized by Laclos, whilst Chamfort, himself a member of
the conspiracy, admitted to Marmontel that the movement was
financed by the duke. " Money," he said, " and the hope of
plunder are all-powerful with the people. We have just made
the experiment in the Faubourg Saint-Antoine, and you would
not believe how little it cost the Due d'Orleans to get them to
sack the manufactory of the honest Reveillon, who amidst these
same people was the means of livelihood for a hundred families.
Mirabeau cheerfully asserts that with 100 louis one can make
quite a good riot." 2
What was the Orleanistes' object in singling out Reveillon
1 See, for example, the letter from the English ambassador in Paris, the
Duke of Dorset, to the Duke of Leeds, April 30, 1789 : " The Due d'Orteans
has experienced repeated marks of popular favour lately, and particularly
on Tuesday last. As he was returning through the Faubourg Saint-
Antoine the people frequently called out ' Vive la maison d' Orleans ! ' "
Madame de la Tour du Pin, who drove through the Faubourg during the
riot with some of the Palais Royal party, relates that " the sight of the
livery of Orl6ans . . . stirred the enthusiasm of this riff-raff. They
stopped us a moment calling out, ' Long live our father, long live our
King Orleans !' " (Journal d'une Femme de Cinquante Ans, i. 177).
2 Memoires de Marmontel, iv. 82.
44 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
as a victim ? The defeat of their own candidate at the
elections was certainly disconcerting to their projects, but it
is evident that there was a still more definite reason for their
animosity. The Faubourg Saint-Antoine, where Reveillon's
manufactory was situated, had an entirely working-class popula-
tion, whilst the Faubourg Saint -Marceau was the centre of
destitution. These two poor and populous quarters of the city
were the strongholds of the agitators ; popular movements never
originated there, but were devised at Montrouge or the Club
Breton, worked up at the Palais Royal, whence they spread to
the Faubourgs and produced the desired explosion. By this
means the Faubourg Saint-Antoine became simply the echo of
the Palais Royal. But an influential agent was needed in the
district, and Montjoie asserts that Reveillon was therefore
approached by the Orleanistes with the view of enticing him into
the conspiracy. These overtures were met, however, with an
indignant refusal by the honest paper-maker, and the post was
offered to the rough and brutal brewer Santerre, who accepted
it with alacrity. From this moment " General Mousseux " as
Santerre was nicknamed by the people on account of the frothy
beer he manufactured became an intime of the Due d'Orleans,
driving about Paris with him in his cabriolet, dining with him at
cabarets, 1 and whilst referring to the people as " vile brigands and
rascally rabble," 2 scattering amongst them the gold with which
the duke provided him. It is easy, therefore, to understand that
Reveillon with his three to four hundred well-paid and contented
workmen, in the very quarter where the agitators were exerting
every effort to sow discontent, proved highly obnoxious to the
conspirators, and the destruction of the paper factory was hardly
less necessary to their designs than the destruction of that other
building in the same district the chateau of the Bastille. The
factory and the fortress must therefore both be destroyed before
the agitators could depend on the Faubourg to carry out their
designs unchecked.
The Affaire Reveillon thus served a double purpose, for it had
not only cleared the ground of one obstacle, but it had prepared
the way for the removal of the other ; it was, in fact, an admirable
rehearsal for the attack on the Bastille, it had enabled the con-
spirators to test the efficacy of their methods for assembling a
mob, and if it had ended in defeat they realized that they had
but to overcome the loyalty of the troops in order to ensure the
success of the further venture. As this book will show, every one
of the great popular tumults of the Revolution was preceded by
1 Montjoie, Conjuration de d'OrUans, i. 210, 211, confirmed by Maton de
la Varenne, Histoire Particulitre, etc.
2 Mtmoires de S6nart, edit, de Lescure, p. 27.
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 45
some such abortive rising the I4th of July by the 27th of April,
the 6th of October by the soth of August, and the loth of August
1792 by the 20th of June. On each of these occasions the agitators,
finding it impossible to rouse the people to the required pitch of
violence, were obliged to cast about for fresh methods to achieve
their ends.
It will be seen, therefore, that any account of the Siege of
the Bastille must begin with its prelude in the Affaire Reveillon.
From this moment the conspirators never relaxed their efforts
to corrupt the troops and to undermine the royal authority.
In order to understand how they accomplished their purpose
we must follow their movements not only in the city of Paris but
in the States-General that met at Versailles on the 5th of May,
a week after the Affaire Reveillon.
THE WORK OF REFORM
It is a common device of pro-revolutionary writers to repre-
sent the National Assembly (into which the States-General
were transformed on June 17) as divided into two opposing
camps formed by revolutionary leaders who desired reforms
and by reactionaries who opposed them. According to this
theory the delay in framing the Constitution was caused merely
by the recalcitrance of the noblesse and clergy in relinquishing
their privileges. But if we study the reports of the debates that
took place in the Assembly we shall find that the real obstruc-
tionists were the revolutionary deputies. For in the Assembly,
as in the city of Paris, two of the great conspiracies had their
representatives the OrUanistes led by Mirabeau and including
Barnave and the two Lameths, also the duke himself and his boon
companions the Due de Biron and the Marquis de Sillery, and the
Subversives who consisted in a herd of quarrelsome nonentities,
of which Robespierre was the typical representative. 1 These two
revolutionary factions, far from representing democracy, were
concerned solely in furthering their own designs. For since not
a single cahier had expressed dissatisfaction either with the
reigning dynasty or with the monarchy, the faction that wished
to replace Louis XVI. by the Due d'Orleans and the faction that
wished to destroy the monarchy were both equally opposed to
the people's wishes. The election of these members as repre-
1 Gouverneur Morris well described this faction under the name of the
" Enrages " : " These are the most numerous, and are of that class which
in America is known by the name of pettifogging lawyers, together with a
host of curates and many of those who, in all revolutions, throng to the
standard of change because they are not well " [sic] (Diary and Letters
of Gouverneur Morris, i. 277).
46 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
sentatives of the people had therefore been secured on false
pretences, and their attitude from the outset was necessarily one
of duplicity and imposture. Unable to avow their real policy
lest they should be disowned by their constituents, they adopted
a method which effectually delayed the work of reform that of
diverting attention from the real issues at stake by perpetual
quibbles over matters of no importance.
It was against these revolutionary obstructionists far more
than against the reactionary portion of the noblesse that the true
reformers had to contend. Now the party which advocated
true reform was represented by several very able and enlightened
men Jean Joseph Mounier, a magistrate from Dauphine, noted
for his integrity and love of justice, Pierre Victor Malouet, the
Comte de Virieu, the Comte de Lally Tollendal, and the Comte
de Clermont Tonnerre. This party, known as that of the ' ' Royalist
democrats " and later as the " Constitutionals," represented in
reality the cause of true democracy, and their royalism resulted
solely from the fact that in the person of Louis XVI. they saw,
as did the people, the surest guarantee of liberty and justice.
" The majority of the people," says Bouille, " were attached to
this party, as also all the municipalities of the kingdom and the
Gardes Nationales. The plan of the leaders was to establish
a democratic monarchy that they called ' a royal democracy.' '
If we refer again to the cahiers we shall find that this policy
was exactly in accord with the unanimous desires of the nation,
and we shall then recognize the fundamental error of regarding
the Revolution as the movement for reform carried to excess.
Reform and revolution were two totally distinct movements, and not
only distinct but directly opposed to each other.
Since, in all assemblies, those who make the most noise are
those that most readily obtain a hearing, the Tiers tat allowed
itself to be dominated by the two contentious factions, and the
voice of reform was drowned by floods of futile verbiage. So,
although revolutionary writers depict the people of France at
this crisis as on the verge of starvation and " groaning under
oppressions," we have only to consult the Moniteur to find that
during the first four weeks after the opening of the States-General
not one word was spoken in the hall of the Tiers Etat on the subject
of the famine or the sufferings of the people. When at last after
a month it was suggested, not by the Tiers ttat but by the clergy,
that the Assembly should turn its attention to the question of
the people's bread, the proposal was received with a howl of
execration by the revolutionary factions. " It was just like the
clergy ! " to try by these means to divert attention from the union
of the orders ! " The clergy should be denounced as seditious ! "
Robespierre in a violent diatribe demanded why the clergy, if
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 47
they were so concerned for the people's welfare, did not sell all
they possessed to supply their needs. 1 The speech was as sense-
less as it was unjust ; the liberality of the clergy in the matter of
relieving distress had been unbounded, and, as everybody knew,
the famine was not caused by lack of funds but by the difficulty
of obtaining and circulating grain. But this was the point of all
others on which the revolutionary factions were the most anxious
to avoid inquiry, and their complicity with the monopolizers is
evident from the debates that took place on the subject of
monopoly. Now, if ever, was their opportunity for publicly
denouncing the " aristocrats " they accused of cornering the
grain, but far from substantiating these charges their policy
was invariably to suppress all discussion of the question. Thus,
as M. Louis Blanc in a rare fit of candour admits, " the sacred
question of feeding the people was lost to sight," and " the
Assembly in a way passed over social misery and the hunger of
the people to other subjects." These subjects were, of course,
inevitably party quarrels in general, and the " Union of the
Orders " in particular.
This is not the place to discuss the vexed question of a single
chamber ; much was to be said for it, much against it. The true
democrats of the Assembly undoubtedly desired it on the ground
that no reforms could be effected if the noblesse and clergy were
enabled to obstruct them. Arthur Young considered this un-
reasonable. " Among such men, the common idea is that
anything tending towards a separate order, like our House of
Lords, is absolutely inconsistent with liberty ; all which seems
perfectly wild and unfounded."
Whether the union of the three orders was advisable or not,
one thing is certain that the revolutionary factions did every-
thing in their power to prevent it taking place by their aggressive
attitude towards the nobility and clergy. But the great objec-
tion to the union of the three orders lay in the fact that the Tiers
fitat insisted on admitting strangers indiscriminately to their
debates, with the result that the most frightful confusion pre-
vailed, and that the deputies, instead of expressing their real
convictions, were tempted to talk to the galleries in order to win
popularity. " Learn, sir," said the deputy Bouche to Malouet
in a speech on May 28, "that we are debating here in the
presence of our masters ! "
The revolutionary leaders took care to ensure support from
the galleries, and a great part of the audience was their own
claque, composed of Paris idlers and ruffians in their pay,
whom they sent for to intimidate their adversaries, and who,
before long, not content with applauding sedition, expressed
1 Souvenirs sur Mirabeau, by litienne Dumont, p. 44.
48 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
their disapproval by boos and hisses. What assembly, however
democratic, could continue to debate under such conditions ? l
So great was the confusion into which the revolutionary
factions succeeded in throwing the Assembly that Louis XVI.
finally resolved to intervene, and announced his intention of
holding a Seance Royale. For this purpose it was necessary
to make use of the hall of the Tiers fit at, the " Salle des Menus
Plaisirs," which, being the largest of the three, was the only one
capable of containing the deputies of all three orders, and had
therefore been used for the meeting of the States-General. Ac-
cordingly the Tiers were informed that the hall must be closed
to debates for two days only, 2 and in order to avert ill-feeling the
halls of the noblesse and clergy were closed likewise. The
announcement was received without a murmur by the " privileged
orders," but the Tiers, furious at the royal edict, repaired to the
" tennis court " close by and held an indignation meeting, where,
at the instigation of Mounier who afterwards bitterly repented
his action they swore not to separate until they had framed the
Constitution.
Regardless of this act of open insubordination Louis XVI.
appeared at the Seance Royale on June 23 3 and announced
his intentions to the Assembly. In dignified yet touching words
he besought the representatives of the people to carry on the
work of reform he had inaugurated ; he reminded them that the
1 See the evidence of Arthur Young, an eye-witness of these scenes :
" The spectators in the galleries are allowed to interfere in the debates
by clapping their hands, and other noisy expressions of approbation : this
is grossly indecent ; for if they are permitted to express approbation, they
are, by parity of reason, allowed expressions of dissent, and they may
hiss as well as clap, which it is said they have sometimes done : this would
be to overrule the debate and influence the deliberations. Another cir-
cumstance is the want of order among themselves ; more than once to-day
there were more than a hundred members on their legs at a time," etc.
(Travels in France, p. 165). Lord Dorset in a letter to the Duke of Leeds
on June 4, 1789, confirms this description : "I am told that the most
extravagant and disrespectful language against Government has been held,
and that upon all such occasions the greatest approbation is expressed by
the audience, by clapping of hands and other demonstrations of satisfac-
tion : in short, the encouragement is such as to have led some of the speakers
on to say things little short of treason. The Nobility, as may be supposed,
are roughly treated in these debates, and their conduct does not escape
being represented in the most odious light possible. The Clergy and
Nobility hold their meetings in separate chambers, and neither of them
admit strangers to be present at their deliberations " (Dispatches from
Paris , ii. 207).
* The Seance Royale was announced for Monday, June 22, and the hall
was closed on Saturday the 2oth. As the Assembly did not sit on Sundays,
this meant the Seance of Saturday only would be missed.
8 At the request of Necker the Seance Royale was afterwards post-
poned till Tuesday the 23rd.
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 49
States-General had been assembled for nearly two months, yet had
not been able to agree on the preliminaries of their work ; he
appealed to their love for their country, to their traditions as
Frenchmen, to cease from dissensions and work together for the
common good. " I owe it to myself to put an end to these
disastrous differences ; it is with this resolution that I have
gathered you around me as the father of all my subjects, as the
defender of the laws of my kingdom."
Since it was essential, without further delay, to meet the
demands of the people, the King proceeded to enumerate the
reforms that, acting on the royal prerogative, he proposed to
introduce. These were, above all, the equality of taxation and
abolition of the pecuniary privileges of the noblesse and clergy ;
further, the total abolition of the taille, of corvees, francs-
fiefs, lettres de cachet, mainmorte, and personal charges,
greater liberty of the press, the mitigation or even the abolition
of the gabelle, and the restriction of capitaineries or game-
laws.
Thus of his own accord the King had redressed the principal
grievances of the Old Regime ; he refused, however, to abolish
all the feudal rights of the noblesse and clergy, which he held
not to be his to do away with. This sacrifice was therefore left
to the two orders to make themselves, and they made it voluntarily
six weeks later. The King's speech ended with these significant
words :
" You have heard, messieurs, the result of my inclinations
and my views . . . and if by a fatality far from my thoughts
you abandon me in so great an enterprise, alone I will accomplish
the welfare of my people, alone I shall consider myself as their
true representative ; and knowing your cahiers, knowing the
perfect accord that exists between the general wishes of the nation
and my benevolent intentions ... I shall walk towards the
goal with all the courage and firmness that it inspires in me."
What could this mean ? One thing only. Those two
ominous phrases had made the King's intentions clear " alone
I will accomplish the welfare of my people, alone I shall consider
myself as their true representative." In other words, the King
intimated that if the Tiers Etat did not cease its quarrels and
" get to business," he would dissolve the States-General and carry
out the work of reform himself.
What wonder that the King's discourse was received in
gloomy silence by the Tiers ? What wonder that the factions
trembled in their seats ? What wonder that Orleanistes and
Subversives alike feared for those fortunes they had hoped to
build on public confusion ? What wonder that Mirabeau, seeing
the ministry he coveted vanishing into space, rose in wrath to
E
50 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
utter his famous " apostrophe " ? The King had left the hall,
and De Br6ze, the master of ceremonies, declared the sitting
ended, when Mirabeau, who exactly a week before in supporting
the royal veto had stated, " I could imagine nothing more
terrible than the sovereign aristocracy of 600 persons who
to-morrow might declare themselves immovable," now insolently
defied the King's order with the words, " We will only leave
our places by the force of the bayonet ! "
So ended this sitting that might have laid the foundations
of French liberty for ever. The thing that the revolutionary
factions dreaded more than any other threatened to occur the
regeneration of the kingdom was to be accomplished peacefully
and the monarchy established on a free and constitutional basis.
If any further proof were needed that the work of the revolu-
tionary factions was actively opposed to the work of reform, it
is to be found in this one undeniable fact that, throughout the
whole Revolution until the fall of the monarchy, every concession
made by the King to the desires of the people, every step in the work
of the reform, was the signal for a fresh outbreak of revolutionary
fury.
Accordingly the immense reforms of the Seance Royale, far
from bringing a peaceful settlement of the crisis, were followed
by renewed scenes of violence. Two days later the Archbishop
of Paris, beloved by all the true people for his benevolence and
the uprightness of his life, was attacked by a band of hired
rioters as he was leaving the Assembly, and only escaped with
his life owing to the speed of his horses and the courage and
presence of mind of his coachman.
The fact that four days after the Seance Royale the noblesse
and clergy, in obedience to the King's command, settled the
burning question of a single chamber by joining the Tiers tat,
did nothing to allay the fermentation the revolutionaries had
succeeded in creating. If, as the Tiers fitat had declared, the
refusal of the noblesse to concede this point had been the only
obstacle to the work of reform, why did this work not proceed
now that the obstacle had been removed ? On the contrary,
the Tiers, once they had the noblesse and clergy at their mercy,
showed themselves more aggressive than ever and in no way
disposed to discuss peaceably the regeneration of the kingdom.
True, a " committee of subsistences " was formed for dealing
with the question of the famine, but as it consisted almost entirely
of Orleanistes, including the Due d' Orleans himself, nothing was
done to relieve the distress of the people, and the famine con-
tinued its ravages.
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 51
THE HOTBED OF REVOLUTION
Whilst these scenes were taking place at Versailles the
agitators of Paris, in close touch with the revolutionary factions
of the Assembly, had been busy stirring up insurrection. Night
and day the dusty garden of the Palais Royal was filled to over-
flowing ; no longer merely a haunt of vice, it had now become
a political arena a sort of Trafalgar Square and Burlington
Arcade combined where every device was employed to play
upon the passions of men women, wine, the lust of gold, envy,
hatred, and revenge. At the little tables outside the cafes
idlers gathered in heated debate ; under the long arcades, where
the marchands de frivolites displayed their wares, painted women
of the town walked arm-in-arm attracting with bold glances
the soldiers who passed by ; in the gambling hells the rattle of
the dice and the clink of coin continued far into the night, and
under the trees cheap-jack politicians with rolling eyes and
furious gestures stirred the people to violence. With these
mob orators noise was of the first importance, and working them-
selves up into convulsions of revolutionary frenzy they shrieked
invectives against the aristocrats and the Court, or yelled foul
blasphemies on God and religion.
Most violent of all was the Marquis de St. Huruge, an ex-
convict, whose stentorian voice seemed indefatigable ; above
the heads of the crowd his white hat could be seen afar, a rally-
ing point for disorder, whilst with an immense cudgel, manipu-
lated like a conductor's baton, he roused or soothed the passions
of his auditors. Philippe d'Orleans, looking down on this scene
from his windows at the end of the long square, had reason to
congratulate himself on the vast machinery that the genius of
Choderlos de Laclos had set in motion. Recently a number of
new recruits had been added to the conspiracy, of which the
most important was a young journalist from Guise, Camille
Desmoulins discovered by Mirabeau who tempted the greed
of the populace with promises of booty to be wrested from the
nobility and clergy :
" The brute is in the trap, then kill it ! ... Never was
richer prey offered to the conqueror ! Forty thousand palaces,
hotels, and chateaux, two-fifths of the wealth of France, will be
the price of valour ! " 1
The services of several new agitators had also been enlisted
the comedian Grammont, a man of extraordinary ferocity,
with, as we shall see later, a literal " taste for blood " ; a convict
from San Domingo known as Fournier 1'Americain, Stanislas
1 La France Libre.
52 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
Maillard, a future director of the September massacres, and one
woman whose wit and daring was to prove an immense acquisi-
tion to the cause. 1
Anne Terwagne of Marcourt was a Belgian demi-mondaine
and an old friend of the Due d'Orleans when the Revolution
broke out. Several years before she had been introduced to
him in London by the Prince of Wales, and it was to the duke
she owed her rise to fortune, for on her return to Paris she became
a brilliant courtesan with jewels, carriages, and horses, and
under the name of " Comtesse de Campinados " travelled about
the Continent with various rich protectors. 2 The "Comtesse"
was in Rome when the States-General met, but the gathering
of the revolutionary storm brought her hurriedly back to Paris,
where, adopting " Theroigne de Mericourt " as her nom de guerre,
she threw herself into the cause of her old benefactor, the Due
d'Orleans. Theroigne was far from resembling the " unfortunate
female " burning to avenge her wrongs on a corrupt society,
who masqueraded under her name through the pages of Carlyle,
for it was with the most corrupt portion of society that she now
identified herself. Small and fragile, with brilliant black eyes,
an impertinent retrousse nose, and " a waist that a man could
encircle with his ten fingers," Theroigne at her salon in the
Rue de Bouloi reigned as a queen of the demi-monde, assembling
around her the leaders of the Orleaniste conspiracy, of which
the Abb6 Sieyes was her particular idol.
The role played by courtesans in the earlier stages of the
Revolution has never been properly estimated by historians ;
but for the co-operation of these women, from Theroigne de
Mericourt down to the humblest fille de joie, it is doubtful
whether the great scheme of the Orleanistes the defection of
the army could ever have been realized. The French Guards,
the gayest and most essentially Parisian regiment in the army,
were habitual frequenters of the Palais Royal, and thus became
the allies of the courtesans who lodged in the surrounding houses
and haunted the arcades ; in some cases the soldiers played
the part of souteneurs, sharing the incomes of the filles de
joie, and these incomes being now largely increased by the
bounty of the duke, both reaped the golden harvest sown by
the conspirators. By this means the French Guards, who had
stood firm at the Affaire Reveillon, were gradually turned from
their allegiance. Towards the end of June, the regiment having
been confined to barracks for insubordination, three hundred
broke loose and paraded the streets of Paris, finally presenting
1 Montjoie, Conjuration de d'Orleans, 1.221; Philippe d'Orleans galiU,
by Auguste Ducoin, p. 50.
2 Theroigne de Mericourt, by Marcellin Pellet, p.. 10.
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 53
t hemselves at the Palais Royal, where they received a rapturous
reception from the courtesans and were regaled with wine and
good cheer.
This open revolt at last spurred the authorities to action
and eleven of the ringleaders were imprisoned in the Abbaye.
Immediately a yell of indignation went up from the Palais Royal,
and an army of brigands, led by Jourdan, with Maillard as his
aide-de-camp and Theroigne de Mericourt as Amazon, set forth
to deliver the " victims of despotism." With clubs and hatchets
the doors of the Abbaye were broken down, and all the prisoners
not only the deserters but a number of criminals were let loose
in the streets. Once more the Palais Royal received the rebels,
a magnificent supper was spread, whilst bonfires and fireworks
turned night into day. Yet even after this outbreak the King
was persuaded to pardon the insurgents. It is the custom of
historians, whether Royalist or Revolutionary, to accuse Louis
XVI. of weakness. This charge, brought by those who believe
that a king should be the ruler and not the servant of his people,
is certainly consistent, but for believers in the sovereignty of
the people to accuse Louis XVI. of weakness is both unjust
and illogical. Louis XVI. carried out the principles of democracy
to their utmost conclusion ; he believed that he existed for his
people, not his people for him. " Despotism," says the demo-
cratic Bailly, " had no place in the King's character ; he never
desired anything but the happiness of his people ; this was the
only means that could be employed to influence him a less
kind-hearted king, cleverer ministers, and there would have
been no revolution." As long, therefore, as the mob orators
inveighed against the Court, and the agitators incited the people
to rise against his own authority, the King refused to put down
sedition by force ; only when the people turned on each other
he held it his duty to save them from themselves. When at
last the scenes of violence taking place at the Palais Royal had
reached such a pitch that no law-abiding citizen could venture
inside the garden, the King was placed in the frightful dilemma
of having to decide whether to bring out troops to restore order,
and, as at every crisis in the Revolution, he found himself torn
between conflicting counsels. On the one hand the so-called demo-
crats of the Assembly represented the iniquity of opposing the
" sovereign will of the people," on the other hand the noblesse
and clergy protested that it was " a cruel derision thus to con-
found the people it was necessary to restrain with those it was
necessary to protect," and therefore urged the King to order out
troops for the defence of the town. So great, indeed, was the
alarm of the citizens that by the end of June the commons of
Paris began to inaugurate a garde bourgeoise for protection against
54 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
the brigands. Since the assembling of the troops round Paris
has been habitually accepted as the principal reason for the
Revolution of July, this point is important to remember.
The King finally decided to employ the army for the defence
of the town ; and as it was essential to guard against further
defection, two regiments of Swiss and German auxiliaries were
included, partly because these men were especially amenable
to discipline, but mainly because their ignorance of the French
language rendered them less liable to corruption by the agents
of the Palais Royal. 1 The circumstance of their nationality,
however, afforded a fresh pretext for stirring up the crowd
" foreign legions to be employed against the nation ! " Yet
the revolutionaries did not hesitate to welcome these foreigners
into their own ranks when by their usual methods of women,
wine, and money they succeeded in seducing them from their
allegiance to the King. A German hussar mounted in the
ranks for the defence of French citizens was a " foreign mer-
cenary " ; the same hussar drinking with the courtesans of
the Palais Royal to the downfall of the French monarchy was
a man and a brother. This throughout the Revolution, as we
shall see, was the " patriotism " of the leaders.
The presence of any loyal troops, whether foreign or other-
wise, was naturally calculated to thwart the designs of the
conspirators, for, apart from the opposition they offered to in-
surrection, the troops acted as a guard to the convoys of grain
intended for the capital. The Marechal de Broglie, the Baron
de Bezenval, and the Prince de Lambesc had proved untiring
in their efforts to protect the wagons of corn from the on-
slaughts of the brigands that lay in wait round Paris, and for
this reason had become odious to the agitators. 2
The mob orators of the Palais Royal therefore set to work to
stir up a fresh panic. " Vast hordes of foreign soldiers were to
be marched against the capital to massacre the citizens the
Palais Royal would be given over to pillage the city was to be
bombarded with red-hot cannon-balls and everything put to
fire and sword. Meanwhile at Versailles the National Assembly
was to be blown up by mines laid beneath the floor." This
wild farrago of nonsense was believed not only by the ignorant
populace of Paris, but was seriously repeated by the deputies
themselves. Mirabeau at the Assembly, working on their alarms,
exerted all his energy to fan the flame of insurrection :
" When troops advance from all sides, when camps are formed
1 Marmontel, iv. 137; Dispatches from Paris, letter from Lord Dorset,
dated July 9, 1789.
2 Montjoie, Conjuration de d'OrMans, ii. 19; Memoires de Bezenval,
ii. 396.
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 55
around us, when the capital is besieged, we ask ourselves with
astonishment, ' Does the King doubt the fidelity of his people ?
What means this threatening display ? Where are the enemies
of the King and State that must be subdued ? Where are the
plotters that must be restrained ? '
This whilst the Palais Royal was a hotbed of sedition, when
" almost every day produced some act of violence/' 1 when the
citizens of Paris themselves were arming for purposes of self-
protection !
The tirade was a masterpiece of hypocrisy and cunning ; no
one knew better than Mirabeau the necessity for maintaining
order, no one realized more keenly the horrors of anarchy, and
no one was less truly democratic.
The King's reply to the demands of the deputies for the with-
drawal of the troops was brief and to the point :
" No one is ignorant of the disorders and scandalous scenes
that have taken place repeatedly in Paris and Versailles under
my eyes and those of the States-General. It is necessary that
I should employ all the means within my power to restore and
maintain order in the capital and its surroundings. It is one
of my principal duties to guard public safety. These are the
motives that led me to assemble troops round Paris, and you can
assure the States-General that they are intended only to repress
or rather to avert such-like disorders, to enforce the law, even
to assure and protect the Liberty that should reign in your de-
liberations. . . . Only evilly-disposed persons could mislead my
people as to the true motives for the precautionary measures
I have taken. I have invariably sought to do all that I could
to contribute to their happiness, and I have always had reason
to believe in their love and loyalty."
That the King was absolutely sincere in making these assur-
ances was afterwards proved by the trial of Bezenval, the com-
mander of the Swiss Guard. In January 1790 the Commune
of Paris, at the instigation of the Orleanistes, arraigned Bezenval
before the tribunal of the Chatelet for " having entered into a
conspiracy formed against the liberty of the French people, of
the National Assembly, and particularly of the city of Paris "
in the preceding July. No proof whatever of a conspiracy was
forthcoming; on the contrary, it was proved by documentary
evidence that the intentions of the Ministry and of M. de Bezenval
" were the most pacific and paternal " ; the letters produced
" manifested the plan of this officer for guarding the provision-
ment of Paris, for which purpose the troops were assembled, and
that, far from any design to destroy the citizens, they had been
assembled to protect them." They were necessary also " to
1 Dispatches from Paris, ii. 237, letter from Lord Dorset.
5 6 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
repress the brigands who had already caused disorders in Paris
and who might be plotting further disorders." These facts
having been proved Bezenval was acquitted, and, in spite of the
protests of Marat, the Moniteur itself recognized the justice of
the decision : " The information taken was immense, but nothing
criminal was discovered against the defendant and he was
acquitted. It would be necessary to have very strong proofs
to suspect a perfidious collusion between a respected municipality
and an esteemed tribunal only for the purpose of deceiving the
populace concerning pretended offences of which the most minute
investigation has been unable to prove the reality." * That the
troops were therefore intended for no aggressive purpose is
certain, and the necessity for assembling them is now recognized
by enlightened French historians. 2
The King's speech had the effect of allaying public anxiety,
and Mirabeau thereupon set immediately to work on a new
address that would stir up fresh discontent. 3
To Louis XVI. the situation now became completely be-
wildering. Content to do his duty according to his lights, he
could not understand why his actions were perpetually miscon-
strued by the people, he could not guess the existence of the
influences brought to bear on their minds by the agitators who
made it their business to avert popular satisfaction at every
concession to the people's desires.
Why did none of the Royalist democrats in the Assembly
enlighten the King on the true state of affairs ? That they
knew of the Orleaniste conspiracy is certain, for they afterwards
described the efforts made by the duke's supporters to secure
their co-operation overtures that were all indignantly repulsed.
Mounier and Bergasse were approached by Mirabeau, 4 Virieu
by Sillery, 6 and both conspirators met with almost identically
the same reply : " Understand, monsieur, that if any one here
were to dare to call M. le due d'Orleans to the throne in the place
of the King, I would stab him with my own hand ! " Lafayette,
whose first enthusiasm for the Revolution had raised hopes in
the minds of the conspirators, proved no less intractable, for if he
cared little for the King he detested Orleans, and to the sugges-
tion that a price having been set on his head and on that of the
duke by the Court he would do well to join forces with him,
1 Moniteur for Jan. 4, Feb. 4, and March 3, 1790.
2 For example, La Revolution, by M. Louis Madelin, p. 62, " It will be
understood that under these circumstances the ministry advanced troops
on Paris. The least reactionary government would have been forced to
do this."
3 Appel au Tribunal de V Opinion Publique, par Mounier. 1790.
* Ibid.
* Le Roman d'un Royaliste, par Costa de Beauregard.
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 57
Lafayette coldly replied that " the Due d'Orleans was nothing to
him, and that it was needless to form a party when one was
with the whole nation." 1
But instead of merely rejecting these advances, why did not
these men use their immense influence to quell the intrigue ?
We cannot believe that they lacked courage, since later on they
faced the full tide of revolution to support the tottering monarchy;
why then did they wait until it was too late ? The only explana-
tion seems to be that at this crisis they believed the Orleaniste
conspiracy to be incidental to the Revolution ; they recognized
its existence but failed to realize its extent, and feared that in
crushing it they might arrest the whole revolutionary movement
which they still held to be necessary to the regeneration of the
kingdom. In a word, they were visionaries, and at times of
national crisis visionaries are of all men the most dangerous ;
intent on the pursuit of unattainable ideals they shut their eyes
to realities, and instead of facing danger prefer to ignore it.
Most culpable of all was Necker Necker whom both the
King and Queen had trusted to steer the ship of state to safety.
From the beginning his only consideration had been popularity,
his only policy to temporize. His method of dealing with the
financial crisis had consisted in raising perpetual loans ; in the
matter of the famine Arthur Young declared that " his edicts
had operated more to raise the price of corn than all other causes
together," and though having made this initial mistake he
apparently did his best to repair it by untiring efforts to feed the
people, he shrank from taking the most effectual step towards
this end that of exposing the monopolizers.
The attitude of Necker admits only of two explanations
either he was in league with the Orleanistes or he was afraid of
them. In either case his conduct was contemptible, as con-
temporaries of all parties agree. It is a strange fact that, although
Necker is the only demagogue of the period who has never found
a panegyrist except in his own daughter, Mme. de Stae'l
it was the King's discovery of his incapacity, which all the world
now acknowledges, that has been accepted as an adequate pretext
for the Revolution of July.
By the beginning of this month Louis XVI. finally realized
that Necker must go and a strong ministry be formed if the
impending crisis was to be averted. Accordingly he dismissed
his ministers and nominated in their place De Breteuil, De Broglie,
La Galaiziere, and Foullon.
Joseph Fran$ois Foullon was an old commissary of '74 who
had 'grown grey in the service of the army. His large fortune,
attributed by the revolutionary leaders to speculation or monopoly
1 Mimoives de Lafayette, ii. 53.
58 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
in grain, resulted from the emoluments of his office and from his
marriage with a Dutch heiress. 1 It is evident that Foullon was
unpopular with the people, yet no proof is forthcoming that he
had ever treated them with harshness ; on the contrary, during
the preceding winter he had spent no less than 60,000 francs in
providing work for the peasants of his province, " not wishing
to humiliate them by charity." 2 A stern man, however, and a
believer in discipline, Foullon came forward at this juncture
to offer the King his advice on the situation in the form of two
alternative schemes by which he believed the Revolution might
be averted. In the first he expressed himself plainly on the
Orleaniste conspiracy ; he advised that the duke and his accom-
plices amongst the deputies of the Assembly should be arrested,
and that the King should not be parted from his army till order
was re-established ; in the second he suggested that the King
should identify himself with the Revolution before its final
explosion, that he should go to the Assembly, demand the cahiers
himself, and then make the greatest sacrifices in order to satisfy
the true desires of the people before the sedition-mongers could
turn them to the advantage of their criminal designs. 3
This proposal of the new minister throws an important light
on the Revolution of July, for according to Madame Campan
it reached tte ears of the Orleanistes by means of the Comte
Louis rle Nai bonne and Madame de Stael, and naturally explains
their fury at the change of ministry and also their animosity to
Foullon. Whichever of the two schemes were followed their
doom was equally certain, since a peaceful settlement of the crisis
would have proved no less fatal to their designs than the more
rigorous measure of their own arrest.
1 Biographie Michaud, article on Foullon ; Histoire de la Revolution
Franpaise, by Poujoulat, p. 121, quoting contemporary documents.
2 Ibid.
3 Mimoires de Mme. Campan, p. 242 ; Histoire du Regne de Louis XVI,
by Joseph Droz, p. 311. This story of Mme. Campan's is confirmed by a
contemporary manuscript in the possession of Berthier's descendants. See
La Conspiration Revolutionnaire de 1789, by Gustave Bord, p. 195. D'Espre-
mesnil had already given the King the same advice a few weeks earlier, for
just after the " Serment du Jeu de Paume " he had requested an audience
with the King, and urged him not only to arrest but to hang the Due
d'Orleans and his accomplices, to dissolve the Assembly, and to follow out
his plan of himself granting to the people the reforms they asked for in the
cahiers (Memoires Secrets d'Allonville, ii. 155). Strangely enough the
Duke's mistress, Mrs. Elliott, was of the same opinion with regard to the
treatment that should have been meted out to the royal conspirator :
" Had he (the King), when the nobles went over to the Tiers Etat, caused
the unfortunate Duke of Orleans, and about twenty others, to be arrested
and executed, Europe would have been saved from the calamities it has
since suffered ; and I should now dare to regret my poor friend the Duke "
(Journal of Mrs. Elliott, p. 57).
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 59
It is evident that they were aware of Necker's impending
dismissal several days before it actually took place, and im-
mediately in the midnight council of Montrouge a scheme of
insurrection was planned. The advance of the troops and the
departure of Necker were to be made the pretexts for stirring
up the people ; with that superb capacity for eating their own
words which is the true art of demagogy, Necker, whom they
had hitherto overwhelmed with their sarcasms and openly accused
of monopolizing the grain, was to be represented to the people
as their one hope of salvation, and in the panic that would follow
on his dismissal the people " that foolish herd " that, as Cham-
fort said, " good shepherds could drive as they pleased " were
to be worked up to revolt. Then the Due d'Orleans, profiting
by the general confusion, was to be made lieutenant-general of
the kingdom, if not raised at once to the throne. " It only
depended on himself," said Mirabeau, who admitted the whole
scheme later to Virieu ; "his part had been arranged for him (on
lui avail fait son theme) ; the words he had to use had been
prepared." 1
Mirabeau rose triumphantly to the occasion. Hitherto he
had frankly disparaged Necker, referring to him as " the Genevese
penny-snatcher " 2 (le grippe-sou genevois) or "he clock that
always loses," and on the eve of his dismissal har^ already pre-
pared a speech for the Assembly accusing him of corflplicity with
the famine. But now that Necker's dismissal was to be made a
pretext for insurrection, Mirabeau, like the gigantic humbug
that he was, declared that " we can only regard with terror the
abyss of misfortune into which the country will be dragged now
that the exile of M. Necker, so long desired by our enemies, has
been accomplished." 3
Already on the gth of July the agitators of the Palais Royal
had begun to alarm the people concerning the fate destined for
their idol. " Listen to me, citizens ! " cried a mob orator who
had succeeded in collecting a crowd around him ; "we have
assembled here in order to declare to you that we shall regard
as a traitor to the country any one who shall make an attempt
not only on the life but on the ministerial office of M. Necker,
whom we intend to make permanent minister of the nation,
and since our King, though good and confiding, is incapable of
governing his kingdom, we nominate M. le due d' Orleans lieu-
tenant-general of the kingdom ! " 4
1 Procedure du Chdtelet, deposition du comte de Virieu.
2 ^ouvenirs sur Mirabeau, by fitienne Dumont, p. 208.
" Courrier de Provence, lettre 19," Mtmoires de Bailly, i 332.
* Montjoie, Histoire de la Revolution de France , chap. xli. ; evidence of
M. Perin, Procedure du Chdtelet, ii. 113.
60 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
The proposition does not seem to have been received with
great enthusiasm, and the agitators merely succeeded in produc-
ing in the people a state of mind aptly described by M. Louis
Madelin as a crise de nerfs. Already they had sufficient causes
for alarm the growing fear of famine, the brigands that sur-
rounded them, the assurances of the Palais Royal orators that
the King's troops were closing in on them for the purpose of
massacre, and now, following on all these terrors, came the fresh
alarm that Necker was to be dismissed, and the country involved
in bankruptcy and ruin. What wonder that the unhappy people
were thrown into a condition bordering on hysteria ?
THE 12TH OF JULY
The state of the weather further added to the excitement of
the Parisians, for the cold spring had been followed in July by a
burst of almost tropical heat, a circumstance that seems always
to have reacted on the minds of the populace, since nearly every
great day of tumult during the Revolution in Paris was unusually
hot. Sunday morning, the i2th of July, the day after Necker's
departure, was torrid ; the sun poured down from a cloudless
sky on to the crowds that from an early hour had filled the
garden of the Palais Royal. Already at nine o'clock a vague
rumour had reached the city that the worst had happened, that
Necker was dismissed, and as the panic news passed from mouth
to mouth the terrified citizens hurried to the Palais Royal to
ascertain the truth. By midday the garden was so packed
from end to end that no more standing room was available,
and people climbed on to the trees until the branches bowed
beneath their weight ; even the mob orators, after vainly attempt-
ing to pile up chairs and tables for their platforms, were reduced
to hanging from the boughs of the lime-trees whilst they harangued
the crowd. " This agitation," says Montjoie, who looked on
at the scene, " was terrifying. One must have seen it to be able
to form any idea of it." At every moment a fresh rumour was
circulated, adding to the general consternation ; now a messenger,
wild-eyed, rushing into the square and crying out that he had
just arrived from Versailles where the deputies were being
massacred ; now a panic-monger announcing that the Due
d'Orleans was exiled thrown into the Bastille condemned
to death ; now warnings shrieked to the terrified people that
the troops were marching on the city to put everything to fire
and sword. The seething multitude that filled the garden and
arcades was like a sea lashed by a hurricane ; at each new alarm
a long deep moan arose from thousands of throats, a moan that
now grew into a muffled roar of fury, now died away into the
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 61
silence of consternation. Then suddenly rumour gave way to
certainty. A fresh messenger from Versailles announced the
terrible news Necker was dismissed, had already taken his
departure, the country's doom was sealed ; and at this confirma-
tion of their fears the maddened people turned on the bearer
of ill-tidings and were with difficulty prevented from drowning
him in one of the fountains of the garden.
It was now twelve o'clock and the sun had reached the
meridian, beating down on the dense mass of heads and on the
burning glass of the Palais Royal. Suddenly a strange thing
happened. The glass mirror reflected the sun's rays on to the
cannon of the palace and, setting light to the charge, fired it
with a terrifying report, and so " the sun himself gave the first
signal for the Revolution." *
The effect of this circumstance on the minds of the people
was indescribable. The wildest scene of confusion began.
Men haggard with fear, women pale and tearful rushed hither
and thither ; the streets were filled with bands of citizens, silent
and distraught, hurrying like frightened sheep they knew not
whither. Unhappy people driven desperately to and fro by
the men who had made themselves their shepherds !
Yet the shepherds did not find their work too easy ; even
sheep refuse at moments to be driven in the right direction, and
still the people, for all their panic, showed no inclination to carry
out the designs of the agitators and begin the revolution in earnest.
Camille Desmoulins afterwards described his desperate efforts
that afternoon to stir the people up to violence ; some, indeed,
were so misguided as to cry, " Vive le Roi ! " "In vain I tried
to inflame their minds," says Camille ; "no one would take up
arms ! "
It was three o'clock in the afternoon when at last Camille,
coming out of the Cafe de Foy where the Orleaniste leaders
forgathered, encountered several young men walking arm-in-
arm and shouting, " Aux armes ! Aux armes ! " Immedi-
ately he saw his opportunity and joined them ; in an instant
he was hoisted up on to a table in front of the cafe, from which
position he afterwards related that he delivered an eloquent
harangue :
" Citizens, you know that the nation had asked for Necker
to be retained, for a monument to be raised to him, and he has
been driven away ! Could you be more insolently defied ?
After this stroke they will dare anything, and for to-night they
are meditating, have perhaps arranged, a Saint-Barthelemy of
patriots ! To arms ! To arms ! Let us take green cockades,
the colour of hope ! " He waved a green ribbon, fastened it in
1 Montjoie, Histoire de la Revolution de France, chap. xl.
62 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
his hat, and instantly the crowd, tearing down leaves from the
trees above their heads, adorned themselves with the same
emblem. Then, striking an attitude, Camille pointed a quivering
finger at the crowd, pretending to see amongst them the agents
of the police. " The infamous police are here ! Let them look
at me ! Let them observe me ! Yes, it is I who call my brothers
to liberty ! " He raised a pistol in the air. " At least they
shall not take me alive, and I shall know how to die gloriously ;
only one misfortune can befall me that of seeing France become
again enslaved ! "
Such is Camille's version of his tirade, but it seems probable
that much of it was inspired by esprit d'escalier and never found
utterance, for none of his auditors record it in these words.
Montjoie, in fact, declares that Camille's performance consisted
merely in standing on the table waving a pistol and calling out
" Aux armes ! " making horrible grimaces the while to over-
come his stutter.
At any rate his efforts were rewarded, for he was hauled down
from the table and carried in triumph on the shoulders of the
crowd, who now at last responded to the cry of insurrection,
arid arming themselves with sticks, hatchets, and pistols poured
into the streets thirsting to do battle with the menacing legions
the legions that meanwhile remained peacefully encamped
in the Champ de Mars.
This was undoubtedly the great moment to which the
Orleaniste conspiracy had been leading up. The people's minds
had been prepared by the alarms concerning the fate of the
duke, and were therefore more than usually disposed in his
favour as the victim of despotism. If he had now come forward
and shown himself to the frenzied crowd it seems probable that
he could have placed himself at the head of the movement.
But at this crucial moment the duke was not forthcoming, for
he had gone off at eleven o'clock that morning with his mistress,
Mrs. Elliott, to spend the day at his chateau of Raincy, and did
not reappear until the evening. Was his absence arranged by
the conspirators to give colour to their stories of his exile or
imprisonment ? Or did he disappoint his supporters by refusing
to be present ? We know that the pusillanimity of the duke
at every crisis made him the despair of his party, and that this
fear, moreover, was founded on a very real danger that of
assassination. When he fainted in the Assembly that summer
day only a few weeks earlier, and his coat was unfastened to
give him air, had it not been discovered that he wore beneath it
no less than four waistcoats, including one of leather, to protect
him from a dagger-thrust ? l It is possible, therefore, that at
1 Montjoie, Conjuration de d'Orleans, i. 296 ; Memoires de Ferrieres, i. 52.
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 6
o
the last moment his courage failed him ; but at any rate hi s
absence was foreseen by the conspirators, for the duke himself
being unavailable they led the crowd to the waxwork show of
M. Curtius in the Boulevard du Temple, where by mere coin-
cidence, Orleaniste historians would have us believe the busts
of the Due d' Orleans and Necker lay ready to hand.
Camille Desmoulins' subsequent remarks on this incident
show that he certainly did not believe in the theory of coincidence,
but recognized very clearly the design of the faction from
which, like every other Orleaniste, he became anxious to dis-
associate himself. " Will any one make me believe," he wrote
four years later, " that when I mounted a table on the I2th of
July and called the people to liberty, it was my eloquence that
produced that great movement half an hour later, and that made
the two busts of Orleans and Necker spring from the ground ? " 1
The procession with the two effigies had therefore been pre-
meditated, and Mirabeau, hardly less an enfant terrible than
Camille in giving away the secrets of his party, confirms this
statement. Referring to the I2th of July in his answer to the
Procedure du Chdtelet, he attempted to prove the duke's innocence
on this day by remarking, " When his bust was paraded he
hid himself." 2 Then the duke knew that his bust was to be
paraded ? Otherwise where was the virtue of his disappearance
from the scene four hours earlier ? Again, why should he hide
himself ? Why not, if he was innocent, have come forward
boldly and denied all complicity with the movement ? Thus
from Orleaniste evidence alone it is obvious that the incident
of the two busts was a ruse devised by the conspirators, with
the idea of putting popular feeling to the test ; it had been
resolved to try the people with the duke's effigy, and if, as seemed
not unlikely, it met with a hostile reception, nothing but wax
would suffer ; if, on the other hand, it was received with acclama-
tions, the duke was to be recalled from his retreat and placed
at the head of the movement. The effigy of Necker was, of
course, merely a cover to the real design " to parade only
one," remarks Prudhomme shrewdly, " would have been
clumsy." 3 Accordingly the two busts, wreathed in black
crepe and crowned, were carried in procession through the streets
whilst Orleaniste agents, posted in the crowd, cried out, " Hats
off ! The country is in danger ; here are its restorers. Vive
D'Orleans ! " Then, as the people failed to take up the cry,
the agitators went amongst them repeating, " Call out ' Vive
1 Fragment de I'Histoire Secrete, p. 8, April 1793.
2 Moniteur, ii. 33.
3 Crimes de la Revolution, by Prudhomme, iii. in.
64 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
D' Orleans ! ' For answer some asked wonderingly, " What
does all this mean ? " and the agitators replied, " Why, don't
you understand that Monsieur le due d'Orleans is to be pro-
claimed king and M. Necker his prime minister ? Come, cry
with us 'Vive D'Orleans I'" 1 Even at the Palais Royal the
busts met with a no more enthusiastic reception. On arrival
in the garden one of the men bearing the effigies, pointing them
out to the people, called aloud, " Is it not true that you want
this prince for your king, and this good man for his minister ? "
But only a few voices answered, " We wish it ! " 2
After this discouraging response the procession made its
way by the Boulevards to the Place Louis XV., where it en-
countered a regiment of the Royal AUemands under the Prince
de Lambesc, who rode up with drawn sword and scattered the
rioters. During the fray the bust of Orleans fell into the gutter ;
a linen-draper's assistant, Pepin by name, rushed to its rescue,
and in his attempt to pick up the mutilated effigy was wounded
in the leg and fell bleeding to the ground. 8 Raised in the arms
of sympathizers, Pepin was carried off to the Palais Royal to
exhibit his wounds ; he was not, however, too seriously wounded
to harangue the multitude. Dr. Rigby, an eyewitness of the
scene, describes " the whole mass agitated afresh by the appear-
ance of a man with a green coat whose countenance and manner
bespoke the utmost consternation. ' To arms, citizens/ he
cried, ' the Dragoons have fired on the people, and I myself
have received a wound/ pointing to his leg. This acted like
an electric shock."
Meanwhile the Prince de Lambesc and his troops made
their way towards the Tuileries across the great Place Louis XV,
which at this hour was filled with holiday-makers returning from
their Sunday afternoon festivities in the Bois de Boulogne and
the neighbouring villages ; through this crowd the troops ad-
vanced at foot pace, gently pushing aside those who obstructed
their passage, but the people, infuriated by the sight of the
soldiers, greeted them with a hail of stones. Gouverneur Morris,
who at this moment arrived upon the scene, thus describes the
incident : " The people take post among the stones which lie
scattered about the whole place, being then hewn for the bridge
now building. The officer at the head of the party (a body of
cavalry with their sabres drawn) is saluted by a stone, and
1 Crimes de la Revolution, by Prudhomme, iii. 112.
2 Mem, de Ferrieres, and statement by Clermont Tonnerre at the Pro-
cedure du Chdtelet. See also Souvenirs de Mme. Vigee le Brun, p. 129.
3 Montjoie, ii. 48, confirmed by Pepin himself, witness cxxiv. at the
Procedure du Chdtelet. According to these two witnesses this encounter
took place in the Place Louis XV. ; according to Bailly (i. 327) and to
Flammermont, La Journee du 14 Juillet (CLXXVII.), in the Place Vendome.
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 65
immediately turns his horse in a menacing manner towards the
assailant. But his adversaries are posted in ground where the
cavalry cannot act. He pursues his route, and the pace is soon
increased to a gallop, amid a shower of stones. One of the
soldiers is either knocked from his horse, or the horse falls under
him. He is taken prisoner and at first ill-treated. They fired
several pistols, but without effect ; probably they were not even
charged with ball. A party of the Swiss Guard are posted in
the Champs filysees with cannon."
The Prince de Lambesc, having thus reached the entrance of
the Tuileries, crossed the swing bridge into the garden with his
troops, but was again immediately assailed by a hail of stones,
chairs, and bottles that the crowd, assembled on the terraces at
each side of the bridge, flung down on the regiment. 1 In spite
of these outrages the soldiers still refrained from retaliating, and
in order to avoid bloodshed the prince ordered the troops to
evacuate the garden, whereupon the crowd rushed forward and
attempted to cut off their retreat by closing the swing bridge.
One old man, a schoolmaster named Chauvet, in the act of per-
forming this manoeuvre, was slightly injured by the Prince de
Lambesc, who struck him with the flat of his sword, causing a
wound that was speedily healed by means of a brandy compress. 2
Such was " the brutal charge " of the " ferocious Prince de
Lambesc," retailed with so much virtuous indignation by re-
volutionary writers. It is interesting to compare the evidence
of eye-witnesses, of Gouverneur Morris, of Montjoie, and of those
who appeared later at the trial of the Prince, with the version
circulated that night in Paris by the leaders of the agitation.
Dr. Rigby, who unfortunately was not present, thus records
the account given him by Jefferson :
" About seven in the evening Prince de Lambesc, who
commanded a regiment of German Dragoons, entered the
Tuileries . . . and made its gay crowds of citizens the objects of his
attack, enforced his commands by a sudden discharge of musketry.
The terrified multitude fled in all directions, and the middle of
the square was suddenly cleared of all but a feeble old man,
whose infirmities denied him the power of running. Against
this single defenceless individual the cowardly Prince lifted
up his arm, and either desperately wounded or killed him with
one stroke of his sabre."
This story every word of which was afterwards disproved,
and is now believed by no responsible historian 3 was loudly
1 Deux Amis, i. 276. Even this authority admits that the people were
the aggressors.
2 Taine, La Revolution, i. 62.
3 " The sanguinary Lambesc and his blindly ferocious troop were
singularly debonair; ten accounts testify to it. Although they were
F
66 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
proclaimed at the Palais Royal, and the alarm was followed by
messengers rushing into the square frantically declaring that
citizens were being massacred in the garden of the Tuileries,
and dragoons with drawn swords were crushing women and
children beneath their horses' feet. These fearful tidings had
the effect that for seven hours the mob orators had striven in
vain to produce, of arming the mob.
" From this moment," says Dr. Rigby, " nothing could
restrain the fury of the people ; they burst forth into the streets
calling ' Aux armes ! Aux armes ! ' Every house likely to afford
any was immediately entered. The gunsmiths' shops were
ransacked, and in a very short time the principal streets were
filled with a tumultuous populace, armed variously with guns,
swords, pikes, spits, and every instrument of offence and defence."
This disorderly band, joined by numbers of deserters from
the Gardes Francaises, now marched on the King's troops in
the neighbourhood of the Place Louis XV. Let us consult the
revolutionary account of the day to discover the manner in which
these bloodthirsty soldiers received the onslaught.
" Assembled in force near the depot on the old boulevard,"
say the Two Friends of Liberty, " they (the armed mob) advance
in good order, attack a detachment of the Royal AUemand, and
at the first discharge cause three horsemen to bite the dust.
These, although assailed, endure the fire of their adversaries without
replying, and double back on the Place Louis XV, where was
the main body of their regiment." 1
This, then, was the conduct of the troops accused by the
revolutionary leaders of carrying out a " massacre of Saint-Bar-
thelemy " amongst the citizens ! What further proof is needed
of the King's sincerity in assuring the people that these forces
had been summoned merely to protect them ? Nothing could
exceed the heroic forbearance of these much-tried men, and those
historians who would have us believe that their attitude was
owing to the fact that they sympathized with the people and
therefore could not be induced to use their arms against them,
calumniate not only the officers in command, but the people
themselves. Is it conceivable that the people could be so
stoned by the people in ambush behind the stone-heaps they contenten
themselves with advancing without charging. . . . That only one old mad
was knocked over and that so much was made of this in the popular camp
indicates better than all the contemporary accounts how mild was the
' repression ' " (Madelin, p. 63) . "It was the crowd that began the attack ;
the troops fired into the air. . . . All the details of the affair prove that
the patience and the humanity of the officers was extreme " (Taine, La
Revolution, i. 62) . See also La Journ6e du 14 Juillet, by Jules Flammermont,
p. clxxviii.
1 Deux Amis de la Liberti, i. 117
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 67
cowardly as to insult and attack men they knew to be their
friends ? All contemporary evidence points to the one con-
clusion the men were acting under orders from their officers,
and the officers, in their turn, were obeying the King's command
at all costs to avoid bloodshed. The order given to Bezenval,
and produced later at his trial, is proof positive of this assertion :
" Give the most precise and moderate orders to the officers in
command of the detachment you employ that they shall act only
as protectors, and shall have the greatest care to avoid com-
promising themselves or engaging in any combat with the people
unless they show themselves inclined to cause fires or commit
excesses or pillage that would endanger the safety of citizens." 1
It was a frightful position for the men in command, and
Bezenval, in deciding to withdraw the troops to the Champ de
Mars, was evidently only doing what he conceived to be his duty.
Royalists who reproached him for not adopting stronger measures,
and revolutionaries who laughed at his retreat, were alike in-
capable of appreciating his dilemma. " If I had marched the
troops into Paris/' he wrote afterwards, " I should have started
civil war on one side or the other ; precious blood would have
been shed without any useful result. ..." True, but how much
innocent blood might have been spared that flowed hereafter ?
Civil war with all its horrors cannot equal the horror of leaving
the mob to execute its own vengeances unrestrained, for a rioting
mob, like a woman in hysterics, needs firmness to bring it to its
senses ; too great solicitude but weakens its power of self-control,
and leaves it a prey to frightful convulsions even more dangerous
to itself than to those against whom its fury is directed. Paris,
which through that feverish Sunday had worked itself up into a
nervous crisis that nothing but iron discipline could have allayed,
was now, through the mistaken humanity of those in command,
left unprotected, and at the withdrawal of all lawful authority ;
rapidly passed into a state of frenzied panic. To all law-abiding /
citizens, the night that followed was a night of terror, for, at the
signal of insurrection, the hordes of brigands, that since the
Affaire Reveillon had been kept in reserve by the leaders to
create fresh scenes of violence, 2 came forth armed with sticks
and pikes and paraded the streets, pillaging the armourers'
shops, and threatening to burn down the houses of the aristocrats.
The Quinzaine Memorable puts the number of these profes-
sional bandits at 20,000, Droz at no less than 40,000, and when
we remember the terror created in the provinces of France
only a few years ago by half-a-dozen motor bandits Bonnard
an4 his gang it is easy to imagine the horror and confusion
1 Order given to B6zenval on July 12, 1789. See the Moniteur, iii. 33.
8 Bailly, i. 337.
68 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
inspired by thousands of such ruffians suddenly let loose and
armed in the streets of an undefended city. 1
To these hired bands were added all the dregs of the Faubourgs
drunkards, wastrels, degenerates, prototypes of the modern
Apache, whose native love of violence needed no incentive ;
prostitutes who tore the ear-rings from the ears of passers-by,
" and if the rings resisted, tore the ears " ; smugglers who saw
their chance of booty and led the crowd to burn down the barriers
and defraud the customs. 2 Where in all this pandemonium
were " the people " to be found ? No good citizens were abroad
that hot and terrible night, the true " people," the peaceful
bourgeois, the quiet and laborious working men and women of
Paris, hid themselves in their humble dwellings no less fearfully
than the aristocrats in their hotels of the Faubourg Saint-Honore,
whilst all the while the tocsin sounded drearily and the cry of
the rioters, " Des armes et du pain ! " rang out in the darkness.
" During that disastrous night," say the Two Friends of Liberty,
" sleep descended only on the eyes of children ; they alone reposed
in peace whilst their distracted parents watched over their
cots."
THE 13TH OF JULY
Morning dawned on a demented city ; wild bands still paraded
the streets, and were only prevented by good citizens, who
mingled with them, from committing horrible excesses. One
horde, however, succeeded in breaking into the convent of Saint-
Lazare, " the asylum of religion and humanity," where, disre-
garding the entreaties of a white-haired priest who threw himself
on his knees and begged them to spare the sacred precincts, they
proceeded to pillage and destroy the library, laboratory, and
pictures, and finally descending to the cellars broke open the
casks of wine, gorging themselves with the contents. Next day
no less than thirty unfortunate wretches, both men and women,
were carried dead or dying from the scene.
The news of this senseless outrage burst on Paris " like a
clap of thunder " ; terrified tradesmen shut their shops, and good
citizens once more barricaded themselves behind closed shutters.
" To the cries of fear," say the Two Friends of Liberty, " are
added the tumultuous cries of several lawless bands, bold-eyed,
and ready to dare and do anything, who rove through the streets
and public places, and in whose hands the weapons they carry
1 Note that even the Two Friends of Liberty admit these to have been
" hired brigands " (Deux Amis, i. 283), though they carefully refrain from
mentioning who hired them. Are we to believe again this time that it was
the Court ?
2 Histoire du Regne de Louis XVI, by Joseph Droz, p. 292.
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 69
seem even more dangerous than those of the enemies (i.e. the
King's troops !). The moment was the more perilous since all
the springs of public administration were broken, and Paris
seemed abandoned to the mercy of whoever chose to make him-
self master." 1 On the I3th of July the worst fears of the people
were thus not caused by the King's troops but by the brigands,
and further, the removal of all lawful authority added immensely
to the panic.
When at ten o'clock of this dreadful morning the tocsin of the
Hotel de Ville rang out again it was, therefore, in no sense a
signal of revolution, but a summons to all good citizens to take
up arms in defence of their lives, their wives and children, and
their property. 2 In this moment of real and immediate peril
the imaginary menace of the King's troops was forgotten, and
men of all classes, rich men, nobles, bourgeois and working-men
alike, hastened to the Hotel de Ville to demand arms for their
defence. Inevitably, however, a number of brigands and
emissaries of the Palais Royal, who already that morning had
burst into the Hotel de Ville and carried off by force 360 guns,
now mingled with the law-abiding citizens, and threw the
authorities into a frightful predicament. They wished to arm
the milice bourgeoise, yet not to reinforce the brigands. Bezenval,
appealed to later in the day, flatly refused, declaring he could
give up no arms without an order from the King ; 3 Flesselles, the
provost-marshal, adopted less courageous tactics and attempted
to put the people off with fair words, temporizing as a father
1 Deux Amis de la Liberte, i. 284.
2 M. Louis Madelin has emphatically refuted the error perpetuated by
historians on this point. The milice bourgeoise, he explains, had been
formed " not at all as a hundred years ago so many historians and a crowd
of their readers believed against the Court but against the brigands. . . ."
Thus since the 25th of June the Hotel de Ville had been preparing for the
coming danger, and the message carried by its bell must not be misinterpreted.
" This bell of the Hotel de Ville had until the last few years a very definite
significance for the historians of the Revolution it called the great city
against the Government of Versailles. The more recent researches, and
those least to be suspected of retrospective anti-revolutionism, convey to
us a different sound. The city called for help, desperately, because in the
night the bandits, that for three weeks had been dreaded, were invading it,
pillaging the shops, robbing the passers-by. Far from wishing to destroy
the Bastille, the bourgeois of the Hotel de Ville Liberals of yesterday
would rather have built twenty more to enclose the beasts of prey that
infested the disorganized city" (Madelin, pp. 62, 64). Yet even " recent
researches " were not needed to prove this fact, since the oldest authority of
all, the Deux Amis, had clearly stated it.
3 Bezenval suspected the good faith of certain of these deputies:
"Although the orators of these deputies had prepared their speeches skil-
fully, it was easy to see they had been prompted, and that they were
asking for arms for the purpose of attacking us rather than to defend
themselves" (Memoires de Bezenval, ii. 369).
70 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
might do with a sick and fretful child that asked for a razor as
a plaything : " My friends, I am your father, you will be satisfied,"
he told the frenzied multitude, and sent them in all directions
to seek arms where none were to be found. For this he has been
bitterly condemned by historians, yet what was the unfortunate
FlesseUes to do ? An officer in charge of an arsenal suddenly
confronted with a heterogeneous crowd of civilians clamouring
for firearms, and threatened with death if he gives a direct
refusal, must possess a very ready wit if he can hold his own
diplomatically. Yet so far was Flesselles from wishing to thwart
the good citizens of the milice bourgeoise, that he sent to Versailles
for an order authorizing their equipment.
Versailles meanwhile was ill-informed of the progress of
i events in Paris. The Assembly, persisting in its assertion that
1 the tumult was caused solely by the presence of the troops,
continued to send deputations to the King demanding their
removal from the environs of Paris, whilst the King, seeing in
the troubles of the capital only the work of the brigands, 1 held
this to be no moment for the withdrawal of armed force, and
repeated his former statement that the troops were necessary
for the defence of the citizens. Whilst heartily approving the
formation of the milice bourgeoise? he did not consider this
body of armed civilians sufficient to cope with the situation
unsupported by regular troops, and therefore insisted on keeping
the troops within reach of the city ready to come to the rescue
if required. At the same time he replied to Flesselles' message
with an order authorizing the organization and equipment of
12,000 men for the milice bourgeoise, and naming the officers
he desired to command these patriotic legions. " What amazes
us," remarks M. Louis Madelin, " is that this correspondence
between Flesselles and the Court should have appeared next
day, even to calm minds, as ' an unfortunate connivance sufficient
to justify the massacre of the magistrate by the people.' " 3
Before the King's reply to Flesselles had reached the capital,
however, the citizens had already formed the milice bourgeoise,
and instead of 12,000 men enrolled 40,000, which they later
increased to 48,000. These patriotic civilians at first showed
themselves perfectly capable of maintaining order. All con-
temporaries, whether Royalist or revolutionary, speak of the
admirable way in which the milice bourgeoise dealt with the
situation. "The magistrates assembled at the Hotel de Ville,
and the inhabitants of the several districts," writes Dr. Rigby,
" were called together in the churches to deliberate upon the
measures proper to be taken. ... It was resolved that a certain
1 Bailly, i. 340. * Ibid. 367 ; Rivarol, p. 45.
8 Madelin, p. 65.
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 71
number of the more respectable inhabitants should be enrolled
and immediately take arms, that the magistrates should sit
permanently at the Hotel de Ville, and that committees, also
permanent, should be formed in every district of Paris to convey
intelligence to the magistrates and receive instructions from
them. This important and most necessary resolution was
executed with wonderful promptitude and unexampled good
management."
By the evening of the 13th order was, therefore, once more
restored throughout the greater part of the city, but unfortun-
ately the ringleaders were as usual left unimpeded to continue
the work of insurrection. A few obscure wretches, mere tools
of the conspirators, were hanged, having been handed over to
justice by the men who had set them in motion, and who now
proceeded to work up a fresh agitation at the Palais Royal and
other revolutionary centres of the city. Once more the menace
of the troops served as a pretext for inflaming the minds of the
people, and the fact that throughout the day these same troops
had remained completely inactive, had allowed the citizens to
arm without resistance and were even now preparing to with-
draw from the neighbourhood of Paris, did not prevent this
absurd alarm from gaining ground.
Amongst the most energetic of the panic-mongers on this
day was a new recruit to the Orleaniste conspiracy, a young
lawyer of peculiarly frightful appearance named Georges Jacques
Danton, whose eloquence consisted in a form of noisy badinage
that rendered him immensely popular at street corners. His
massive head and somewhat Kalmuck features lent themselves
singularly well to the violence of his oratory, as, now chaffing,
now thundering, he kept his audience in good humour that
pleasure-loving Parisian audience that he, essentially the man
of pleasure, understood so well.
Another lawyer, Lavaux, entering the convent of the Cor-
deliers, the centre of one of the new districts of Paris, found
a mob orator in frenzied tones calling the citizens to arms in
order to resist an army of 30,000 men who were preparing to
march on Paris and massacre the inhabitants. Lavaux was
surprised to recognize in this panic-monger his old colleague,
Danton, and, never doubting his sincerity, took advantage of
the orator pausing for breath to assure him that these fears
were unfounded he himself, Lavaux, had just returned from
Versailles, where all was quiet. " You do not understand,"
Danton answered; "the sovereign people have risen against
despotism. Be one of us. The throne is overturned and your
employment is gone. Think it well over." 1
1 Danton, by Louis Madelin, p. 19.
72 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
There was in Danton a certain frankness that disarmed
criticism ; he made no secret of the fact that in the Revolution
he saw less the fulfilment of any political aspirations than the
opportunity for pleasure and profit. 1 " Young man," he said
later on at the Cordeliers to Royer Collard, " come and bellow
with us ; when you have made your fortune you can then follow
whichever party suits you best." 2
That Danton was definitely financed by the Due d' Orleans
was not only the belief of his political adversaries but the general
opinion of Paris. When in August 1790 he sought election as
a " notable " of the Constitutional Commune of Paris, he was
reported to be " a paid and perfidious agent of the Due d' Orleans,"
and rejected for his venality by forty-two out of forty-eight
sections of Paris. 3 Even M. Louis Madelin, who admires Danton,
is unable to clear him from this charge : " The most generally
received opinion was that the Due d'Orleans supported Danton.
If we admit that he was paid, it is there, I think, that we must
seek the principal payer." And he adds this sentence that in
a word sums up Danton's political creed : " Danton was all his
life an Orleaniste." 4 After such an admission it is idle to
accredit Danton with either patriotism or disinterestedness ;
that any man who loved his country could sincerely believe
he was working for its good in attempting to replace the honest
and benevolent Louis XVI. by the corrupt and despotic Due
d'Orleans is inconceivable. The popular conception of Danton
as a patriot burning with zeal for liberty and the Republic is
therefore based on a fallacy ; Danton was neither a democrat
nor a Republican, but a paid agitator of the party who would
have instituted a far worse despotism than France had ever
before endured.
Already on this I3th of July a triumph had been secured
by the conspirators ; the green cockade was discarded as repre-
senting the colours of the Comte d'Artois, and red, white, and
blue, the livery of the Due d'Orleans, substituted as the emblem
of liberty. The fact that these were also the colours of the town
of Paris was a fortunate coincidence that served to veil the
manoeuvre. 5
1 See, amongst many contemporary testimonies, the article on Danton
by Beaulieu in the Biographie Michaud : " This man had not, like many
others, embraced the Revolution as a philosophical speculation ; his views
were less elevated. More attached to sensual pleasures, he belonged to
that class of intriguers who lend themselves to great upheavals in order to
make their fortunes ; sometimes indeed he made no mystery of his projects
in this respect." z Essais de Beaulieu, iii. 192.
3 Etudes et Lefons sur la Revolution Franfaise, by Aulard, iv. 134.
4 Danton, by Louis Madelin, p 48.
6 Historians of all parties have endeavoured to deny this Orleaniste
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 73
Throughout the night that followed the leaders of the con-
spiracy were at work organizing the insurrection of the morrow.
A plan of attack on the Bastille had already been drawn up, 1
it only remained now to set the people in motion. This was to
be effected by circulating the news early in the morning that
the troops were advancing on the city and that the citizens were
to be bombarded from within by the cannons of the Bastille.
The members of the " committee of electors " at the Hotel de
Ville were now denounced as traitors to the country, 2 and the
death of Flesselles was ordained. 3 A further list of proscriptions
included the Comte d'Artois, the Prince de Conde, the Marechal
de Broglie, the Prince de Lambesc, the Baron de Bezenval,
Foullon and Berthier, 4 and the people were to be made to carry
out these vengeances of the demagogues by the same means
that had been employed in the case of Reveillon, that is to say,
by affixing to each victim a calumny calculated to rouse the
fury of the mob. Thus Broglie, Bezenval, and Lambesc, whose
real crime in the eyes of the demagogues was to have ensured
the safe transit of supplies into Paris, were to be accused of
plotting with " the Court " to massacre the citizens ; Foullon,
for whose condemnation we have already seen the reason, was
origin of the tricolore, but contemporary evidence is strongly in favour
of these colours being chosen as those of the duke. Thus Ferrieres (Mem, i.
119) : " The revolutionaries adopted the cockade made of white, blue and
red, it was the livery of the due d'Or!6ans." Beaulieu (Essais, i. 522) :
" Blue, red and white, which are said to be the colours of the town of Paris,
but belong just as much to the due d'Orleans." Lord Dorset (Dispatches
from Paris, ii. 243) : " Red and white in honour of the due d'Orleans."
Lafayette (Mem. iii. 66) speaks of " the strange coincidence that the
colours of the town should happen also to be those of the duke." Most
convincing of all is the statement of Mrs. Elliott, the duke's mistress, whose
sole aim was to exonerate the duke of all complicity in the revolutionary
movement (Journal, p. 33) : " The mob obliged everybody to wear a
green cockade for two days, but afterwards they took red, white and blue,
the Orleans livery." Moreover, Camille Desmoulins later on admitted the
same : " When patriots needed a rallying sign, could they have done
better than to choose the colours of the one who first called us to liberty ? "
(Revolutions de France et de Brabant, iv. 439).
1 This important point, which entirely refutes the idea of the march on
the Bastille as a spontaneous movement of the people, is admitted even by
revolutionary authorities, by Deux Amis, i. 313, note : "It is certain that
the taking of the Bastille was planned, and that the day before plans of
attack had been drawn up." Also Dussaulx, De I' Insurrection parisienne et
de la Prise de la Bastille, p. 44 : " The taking of the Bastille had been
planned. M. le Marquis de la Salle certified to me that the day before he
had received for this purpose a plan of attack."
2 Marmontel, iv. 180; Dussaulx, p. 206 (edition Monin).
3 Marmontel, iv. 199 ; Bailly, i. 381, 382
4 Histoire du Regne de Louis XVI ', by Joseph Droz, p. 293 ; Histoire de
la Revolution, by Montjoie.
74 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
to be declared to have said that " if the people had no bread,
they could eat hay " ; his son-in-law, Berthier, whose untiring
energy in combating the famine had seriously obstructed the
designs of the conspirators, was to be denounced to the people
as " a monopolizer of grain," and in the case of Flesselles, whose
sole crime was loyalty to the King, a forged note was prepared in
order to inflame the minds of the populace. For the murder of
the Comte d'Artois no pretext was needed ; the principal, perhaps
the only truly reactionary member of the Royal family, he was
already too unpopular to require calumniating, and a placard offer-
ing a reward for his head was boldly affixed at the street corners. 1
It will be seen, therefore, that the motives that inspired the
demagogues were totally different from those acted on by the
people, and this fact explains the confused and frequently
abortive nature of the succeeding revolutionary tumults. The
leaders had planned that the mob should do one thing, and the
mob, not being in the secret, did another, hence the apparently
inexplicable and pointless crimes that took place. Amongst
these, we shall see, was the massacre of the garrison at the
Bastille, which had not been ordained by the Palais Royal.
THE 14TH OF JULY
Whilst the panic concerning the approach of the troops was
thus being prepared, how were these bloodthirsty legions engaged?
Bezenval, having waited in vain for orders throughout the whole
day of the I3th, decided at one o'clock in the morning of the
I4th to retreat to the Champ de Mars and the ficole Militaire
on the other side of the Seine ; and thus at the very moment that
the alarm of their advance on the city was trumpeted to the
terrified population, the troops were actually moving away to
the distance. This circumstance might have been expected
to refute the false alarm in circulation, but the agitators were
clever enough to turn it to their own advantage. The troops
were on the move, they told the people, and though they might
appear to be retreating, this manceuvre was only a question of
reculer pour mieux sauter it was evident that De Broglie intended
to unite these troops with superior forces in order to make an
overwhelming advance on the capital, and reduce it to ashes.
Such was the amazing credulity of the Parisians that this ludicrous
story was universally believed and once more threw the city
into a state of frenzied panic. The citizens, who yesterday had
flown to arms against the brigands, now prepared themselves to
do battle with the bloodthirsty troops of the King. 2
1 Essais de Beaulieu, i. 522.
2 Montjoie, Histoire de la Revolution, p. 87 ; Marmontel, iv. 182. See
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 75
The terror and confusion that prevailed throughout the city
was indescribable ; from seven o'clock in the morning of the
I4th false alarms succeeded each other without intermission
the Royal Allemand had already encamped at the Barriere
du Tr6ne, other regiments had actually entered the Faubourg
Saint-Antoine, cannons had been placed across the streets, whilst
those on the ramparts of the Bastille were pointing at the city.
" At the Palais Royal the most violent motions followed each
other with terrifying rapidity; the most vehement orators,
mounted on tables, inflamed the imagination of the audience
that crowded around them, and spread itself about the city like
the burning lava of a volcano ; inside the houses were seen the
distress of husbands and wives, the grief of mothers, the tears
of children ; and in the midst of this universal confusion the
tocsin sounded without interruption at the cathedral, at the
palace (the Palais de Justice) and in all the parishes, drums beat
the ' generate ' in every quarter, false alarms were repeated,
and the cry of ' To arms ! To arms ! ' The machinery of
war and desolation, convulsive movements, and the sombre
courage of despair such is the horrible picture that Paris
presented on the I4th July."
One might suppose this lurid description to emanate from
the pen of an incorrigible reactionary, unable to see in the tumult
of the capital the sublime spectacle of a nation rising as one man
to oppose tyranny, and representing as agitators those noble
orators who called the citizens to arms. Not at all. This
account is given by no other than the Two Friends of Liberty
themselves, who thus ingenuously disclose the methods used
by the revolutionaries to create a panic. For all this terror
and confusion, these tears and cries and " movements of despair,"
there was no cause whatever ; the troops at the Champ de Mars
remained completely inactive, the Bastille was utterly unpre-
pared for defence, still less for aggression, and the only soldiers
in the Faubourg Saint-Antoine were the increasing numbers of
deserters from the army, whilst the one real danger the brigands
had been disarmed and subdued by the milice bourgeoise.
Thus the whole agitation was the work of the revolutionary
leaders who, in order to accomplish their designs, did not scruple
to strike terror and dismay into the hearts of the people. What,
also Deux Amis de la Liberte, ii. 297 : " The regiments encamped in the
Champs filysees had retired during the darkness, but their real motive and
the place of their retreat was unknown. An attack was expected every
moment ; nothing was talked of but the troops that were to come and make
an assault on the capital." Historians have almost invariably misrepre-
sented this point, confounding the panic caused by the brigands on the
1 3th with that caused by the troops on the i4th.
;6 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
indeed, were the " tears of mothers " or the " cries of children "
to cynics such as Laclos and Chamfort, to the members of the
councils of Montrouge and of Passy, and the agitators of the
Palais Royal, to Danton, Camille Desmoulins, Santerre, and St.
Huruge ? The " people " existed to serve their purpose, not
to inspire their pity.
But how was an unarmed multitude to carry out the attack
on the Bastille ? The disarming of the brigands by the patriotic
citizens the day before had deprived the revolutionary leaders
of their most valuable instruments, and, in order to re-arm these
ragged legions, it was necessary to drive the population once
more to raid the armouries. This was speedily effected, and in
the course of the morning thirty to forty thousand people of all
sorts and conditions, with Theroigne de Mericourt in their midst,
invaded the arsenal of the Invalides and seized every weapon
they could find, whilst the troops in the neighbouring Champs
de Mars obedient to the order not to shed the blood of the
citizens offered no resistance. " Famished tigers," say the
Two Friends of Liberty, " fall less rapidly upon their prey."
In the struggle several were suffocated, others killed in their
furious endeavours to wrest the weapons from each other. Such
were the citizens to whom Flesselles was denounced as a traitor
for not delivering arms.
But now the moment had arrived to turn the attention of
the people in the direction of the Bastille, for so far the alarm
of the pointing cannons had created no popular determination
to attack the state prison. A further incentive must therefore
be provided in order to produce the effect desired by the leaders
of a spontaneous movement of the people to overthrow the
monument of despotism. For this purpose a fresh rumour was
circulated by a bandit posted in the crowd collected in the Place
de Greve around the Hotel de Ville the arms the people sought
had been conveyed to the Bastille, it was there that they must
go to find them. And at this news a roar arose from the excited
crowd, and from thousands of throats the cry went up, " Let us
go to the Bastille ! "
What was the Bastille, that monument of despotism, at
whose destruction lovers of liberty all over the world rejoiced ?
A grey stone fortress with eight pointed towers, surrounded b y
a dry moat and separated by two drawbridges from a gateway
opening into the Rue Saint-Antoine. Over the poor and populous
Faubourg it loomed forbiddingly, a mysterious relic of the past,
holding within its wall many ancient secrets. Yet was it the
A. Chambre du Conseil
B. Bibliothdque
C. Pont / vis, et Porte
du Chateau
D.Maisondu Gouuerneut
E. Corps de Garde
F. Premier Pont le via
(de I'Auctnce'e)
G.Courde I'Orme
H.CourduGouuernement
Emery Walker Ltd. si
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 77
place of horror it has been represented ? In order to realize how
far its evil reputation was merited in its day we must compare it
with other prisons of the period. Now if we consult the report of
the philanthropic John Howard on the State of the Prisons all over
Europe, published in 1792, we shall find that the prisons of France
in the reign of Louis XVI. compared very favourably with those
of other countries. In England, Howard tells us he saw prisoners
during the years 1774, 1775, and 1776 " pining under diseases,
expiring on the floors in loathsome cells, of pestilential fevers,"
half starved and in rags ; in some gaols they occupied " sub-
terranean dungeons, of which the floor was very damp, with
sometimes an inch or two of water." Even women were loaded
with heavy irons. Many of these unhappy creatures were,
moreover, innocent, being detained in prison a year before trial.
When Elizabeth Fry visited Newgate over thirty years later,
matters had not improved very appreciably. All this, however,
was due less to deliberate cruelty than to the carelessness that
characterized our forefathers, and is not to be compared with the
deliberate brutality exercised in German prisons. Howard, on
visiting Germany, was taken down into " a black torture chamber
round which hung various instruments of torture, some stained
with blood. When the criminals suffer the candles are lighted,
for the windows are shut close, to prevent their cries being heard
abroad."
In France, Howard found active reforms being carried out
in the prison system. " The King's declaration . . . dated the
3oth of August 1780, contains some of the most humane and
enlightened sentiments respecting the conduct of prisons. It
mentions the construction of airy and spacious infirmaries for
the sick . . . a total abolition of underground dungeons." Howard
had, unfortunately, not provided himself with a permit to visit the
Bastille, and so was unable to gain admission, 1 yet in one sentence
he sums up the feeling that the state prison inspired in the minds
of contemporaries : " In this castle all is mystery, trick, artifice,
snare, and treachery."
Imagine an old house where, at the end of a long passage, a
black door was to be found, locked and bolted, through which
one might not pass, leading into a room that held a secret
of some strange and terrible kind, known only to the owner
of the house ; then picture the wild imaginings to which
the mystery would give rise, the children hurrying past with
1 Visitors were admitted on a permit to the Bastille. " M. Howard
could, therefore, have obtained admittance like any one else he had taken
no steps to obtain permission to enter and was sent away, so he was only
able to speak of the facts he had collected on the subject" (Bastille
devoiUe. 2^ mQ Livraison (1789), p. 13).
78 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
bated breath, the servants whispering their suspicions to the
village, conjuring up monstrous theories of what was to be
found there.
Thus the Bastille at the end of the Rue Saint-Antoine, with
its grim portals and its eight grey towers, provided a perpetual
matter of speculation to imaginative minds ; and if at times the
preposterously thick doors with their gigantic locks opened to
admit the curious, they suspected that much was still concealed
from them. Down below those stone floors, hidden from the
light of day, were there not subterranean dungeons, " the resort
of toads, of lizards, of monstrous rats and spiders/' where the
victims of despotism " pined in darkness and solitude " until the
mind gave way, so that when at last deliverance came, the
prisoner had passed beyond all human aid ? Worse still, were
there not dreadful torture-chambers, iron cages eight feet long,
in which unhappy captives were confined, and, beneath the
masonry of those stone walls, the mouldering skeletons of men
done to death secretly at dead of night ? Most gruesome of all
was the story of the chambre des oubliettes, a room of outwardly
smiling aspect, scented with flowers, and lit by fifty candles.
Here the unsuspecting prisoner was led before the governor and
promised his liberty. But the human monster who presided
over the destinies of the captives waited only to see the rapture
of his victim before giving a signal at which the floor opened, and
the wretched man fell upon a wheel of knives and was torn to
pieces. 1
Such is the legend of the Bastille, perpetuated by Louis Blanc
and Michelet, and in our country by Carlyle and Dickens, but
which rests on no shadow of a foundation. It should be noted
that it was not amongst the people that the legend arose ; " the
people," says Mercier, " dread the Chatelet more than the
Bastille; they are not afraid of the latter because it does not
concern them, consequently they hardly pity those imprisoned
there." Such awe as it inspired in them, such curiosity as it
aroused in their minds, had therefore been instilled in them by
the men whose wealth or talents or importance entitled them to
lettres de cachet the tickets of admission to the Bastille. The
State Prison, known ironically to contemporaries as the " Hotel
des Gens de Lettres," was almost exclusively reserved for people
suspected of designs against the State, for conspirators, forgers,
writers of obscene books or seditious pamphlets whose lively
imaginations threw a lurid light over their experiences. Of
these, the most vehement hi their denunciations were Latude
and Linguet, both, as M. Funck Brentano and M. Edmond Bir6
have proved, unscrupulous liars whose testimony is refuted not
1 Deux Amis, i. 375.
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 79
merely by the statements of other prisoners, but by the still
existing archives of the Bastille.
Researches also made by M. Alfred Begis, M. Victorien Sardou,
M. Victor Fournel, M. Ravaisson, and M. Gustave Bord have
unanimously revealed the fact that under Louis XVI. the Bastille,
though dreadful merely as a place of captivity, bore no re-
semblance to its legendary counterpart. The damp, dark
dungeons had fallen into complete disuse ; since the first ministry
of Necker in 1776, no one had ever been imprisoned there. All
the rooms were provided with windows, and either stoves or
fireplaces, good beds, and furniture, whilst the prisoners were
allowed to occupy themselves in various ways with books,
music, drawing, and so on and in certain cases to meet in each
other's rooms for games. The food was excellent and plentiful ;
many of the menus recorded by prisoners would tantalize the
palate of an epicure, and this was so even under Louis XV., when
De Renneville, in a pamphlet written after his release with the
object of denouncing the Bastille, admitted that " certain
people had themselves imprisoned there in order to enjoy good
cheer without expense." *
Yet, for all these amenities, the abolition of the Bastille as
a place of arbitrary imprisonment was undoubtedly desired by the
nation, and had been demanded by the cahiers of the noblesse
as well as of the Tiers fitats. The request was made, moreover,
in no spirit of sedition ; the King was confidently appealed to,
in virtue of his well-known humanity, to demolish this relic of
bygone tyranny.
As early as 1784 the architect Corbet had published the Plan
of a Public Square to the Glory of Louis XVI. on the Site
of the Bastille, and this scheme was being openly discussed in
1789. Moreover, in the Seance Royale on June 23, Louis XVI.
had again proposed the abolition of lettres de cachet, thereby,
as M. Bire points out, sounding the knell of the Bastille.
The destruction of the Bastille by force was therefore needless
from the point of view of the nation as a whole, but necessary
to the designs of the revolutionary leaders, firstly, because it
deprived the King of the glory of destroying it ; secondly, because
it served as a pretext for an insurrection ; thirdly, because it
exercised a restraining influence over the Faubourg Sain t-Antoine ;
and fourthly, because its continued existence was a menace to
their personal security. The State Prison must be demolished
instantly if they were to make sure of not expiating their crimes
within its precincts.
This was the task the people were to be worked up to by terror
to perform. It is evident, however, that no intention of this
1 De I' Inquisition Franfaise ou Histoire de la Bastille, 1724. \/
8o THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
kind existed in their minds when the march on the Bastille began. 1
On this point all reliable contemporaries are agreed the idea of
" the people " rising as one man to overthrow the " monument of
despotism " is a fiction; the greater proportion of the crowd that
marched on the Bastille were animated by one motive only that of
procuring arms for their protection. 2 " It was not," says M.
Funck Brentano, " a question of liberty or of tyranny, of deliver-
ing prisoners or of protesting against authority. The taking of the
Bastille was carried on to the cries of ' Vive le Roi ! ' ' March/
said the women to their men, ' it is for the King and country ! ' " 3
Whilst the honest citizens, animated by no sanguinary in-
tentions, thus prepared to march on the Bastille, what was the
disposition of the Governor, De Launay ? It is amusing to
compare the fiction circulated amongst the populace with the
reality recorded by the colleagues of De Launay. " Despotism,"
say the Two Friends of Liberty, " threatened us from the ram-
parts of the Bastille. De Launay, worthy minister of its ven-
geance, was entrusted with the care of its fearful dungeons,
shuddering at the very name of liberty, trembling lest, with the
tears of his victims, the gold that was the object of his desires,
the price of their torments and of his brutality, should cease :
the cowardly and avaricious satellite of tyranny had long been
surrounding himself with arms and cannons. Since the insurrec-
tion of the Faubourg Saint- Antoine (the Affaire Reveillon) he
had been unceasingly engaged in preparations for defence. . . ." 4
The truth was that De Launay had reduced the other officers
to desperation by his unpreparedness. In vain Bezenval had
warned him that the castle was unfit to resist the attack ; in vain
De Flue, the captain of the Swiss contingent, sent to reinforce
the garrison on July 7, urged him to take measures of defence.
" From the day of my arrival," says De Flue, " I learnt to know
this man ; by the meaningless preparations he made for the
defence of his post, and by his continual anxiety and irresolution,
I saw clearly that we should be ill commanded if we were attacked.
He was so overcome with terror that at night he took for enemies
1 " This resolution (to attack the Bastille) appeared sudden and un-
expected amongst the people, but it was premeditated in the councils of
the Revolutionary leaders" (Marmontel, iv. 187).
" There is every reason to conclude, by the false reports and alarms
that were circulated everywhere, that it was desired to keep up, to increase
the agitation, and lead to the siege of the Bastille " (Bailly, i. 375).
2 " They went to the Bastille, but only to get arms and munitions"
(Dussaulx, p. 211, edition Monin).
3 Precis exacte du Cousin Jacques.
4 Deux Amis, i. 306.
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 81
the shadows of trees and other surrounding objects. . . ." 1 Even
M. Flammermont is obliged to admit the pacific intentions of the
Governor : " One sees that De Flue cannot understand the
weakness of poor De Launay. For him, a soldier by profession
and a foreigner, the besiegers are simply enemies ' Feinde '
this is the word he constantly applies to them ; whilst the Governor
no doubt saw in them citizens whose blood he feared to shed even in
the defence of the fortress confided to his care." 2
This tribute from a writer whose sole object is to glorify the
besiegers of the Bastille effectually disposes of the theory of De
Launay as the instrument of despotism. In fact, as all evidence
proves, he did everything in his power to settle matters by peace-
ful arbitration. When at ten o'clock in the morning of the I4th
a deputation of three citizens arrived at the Bastille to complain
that "the cannons on the ramparts were pointing in the direction of
the Faubourg Saint-Antoine " a position they had always occu-
pied 3 De Launay received them with his customary urbanity
and invited them to breakfast with him. The cannons, he assured
them, should be drawn back in their embrasures ; the embrasures
themselves should be boarded over to soothe the alarms of the
people. No injury whatever should be done to the Faubourg
Saint-Antoine, and in return he hoped that the inhabitants would
refrain from aggression.
The deputies lingered so long at De Launay's hospitable board
that the crowd of citizens who had followed them, and were
waiting meanwhile in the outer court, began to grow impatient.
The sight of the cannons being drawn back in their embrasures
added further to their excitement, and it was immediately
concluded that this movement had been made for the purpose
of charging the guns with balls.
De Launay and the three deputies were still at breakfast
when a second deputation arrived from the district surrounding
the Bastille, headed by ]\L Thuriot de la Roziere, and again
followed by a crowd. De la Roziere was admitted to the
Governor's apartments opposite the entrance to the courtyard
of the prison, and as soon as the three former deputies had
departed he addressed De Launay in these words :
" I come, sir, in the name of the nation and of the country to
represent to you that the cannons placed on the towers of the
Bastille are a cause of great anxiety and spread alarm throughout
1 La Jouvnie du 14 Juillet, by Jules Flammermont, p. Ixviii.
2 Ibid. p. Ixix.
3 "If cannons were perceived on the battlements it was because they
wer,e habitually used for firing salutes on fete-days : since the far-off Fronde
no balls had been fired from them. The Faubourg saw them every morn-
ing, but such was the popular excitement that this morning they seemed to
assume a threatening aspect" (Madelin, p. 66).
G
82 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
Paris. I beg you to have them taken down, and I hope you
will acquiesce with the demand I have been ordered to make to
you." De Launay may not have been lion-hearted, but to this
proposition he had the courage to reply : " That is not in my
power ; these cannons have been on the towers from time im-
memorial and I cannot take them down without an order from
the King. Already informed of the alarm they cause in Paris
but unable to be taken off their mountings, I have had them
drawn back from their embrasures."
No governor of a fortress could possibly make a more pacific
reply, but it did not satisfy De la Roziere, who now requested
De Launay to admit him to the prison. To this the Governor
at first demurred, but finally allowed himself to be over-per-
suaded by Major de Losme, the most humane and broad-minded
of all the officers at the Bastille, known as the " Consoler of the
Prisoners," and the very antithesis of the despotic De Flue.
The Governor having led De la Roziere over the smaller draw-
bridge into the courtyard of the Bastille, they found the Swiss
Guard, some of the Invalides, and all the officers assembled there,
whereupon De la Roziere proceeded to appeal to them " in the
name of honour, of the nation, and of their country, to change
the direction of the cannons and to surrender."
It is difficult here to recognize the " ferocious De Launay
shuddering at the very name of liberty " : for at this open defiance
of his authority he joined De la Roziere in making the soldiers
swear that they would not fire or make use of their arms unless
they were attacked. 1
De la Roziere, however, not content with this assurance,
insisted on wasting more time by going up to inspect the battle-
ments, whilst the people outside grew more and more impatient
and excited. De Launay, who had accompanied him, now
looked forth from the heights of the Bastille and saw for the
first time the large and threatening multitude that completely
blocked the end of the Rue Saint-Antoine and was beginning to
penetrate into the outer courtyard of the prison. At this sight,
it is said, the Governor grew pale ; the thing he had long dreaded
had come to pass : the people were marching on the Bastille.
Was it cowardice that whitened the cheek of the unfortunate
Governor ? It seems unlikely ; De Launay was provided with
formidable measures of defence " fifteen cannons bordered the
towers, and three field-pieces were placed in the great courtyard
opposite the entrance gate presenting a certain death to those
bold enough to attack it. Ammunition, moreover, was not
1 c ' On the provocation of the Governor himself the officers and soldiers
swore that they would not fire and would not make use of their arms
unless they were attacked " (Bastille dtvoitee, ii. 91).
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 83
wanting. . . ." Why, then, should the Governor tremble ?
Could he not, with a few volleys from his guns, sweep both street
and courtyard clear of the encroaching multitude ? This was,
however, precisely the course he feared to take, so he found
himself in the dilemma that faced all upholders of the royal
authority throughout the Revolution the necessity for repress-
ing violence, coupled with a dread of shedding the blood of the
people. The power was all in their hands, but they feared to
use it, and this fear the outcome of the philosophy of the age,
increased by a knowledge of the King's humanity paralysed
the arm of law and order, and gave to the revolutionaries an
immense advantage. This, then, was the fear that caused De
Launay to grow pale, and that, according to De Flue, would have
made him surrender the castle had not De Flue and the other
officers represented to him that he could not thus betray his
trust to his royal master. 1
When at last De la Roziere left the castle it was too late to
stem the rising tide, and a short half-hour later the armed crowd
arrived on the scene. This crowd that we have already seen
setting forth for the purpose of obtaining arms had now, how-
ever, been reinforced by other elements, which it is important
to distinguish if we would attempt to understand the chaotic
movement that followed.
First of all, then, there were the honest citizens who desired
arms for their defence ; secondly, the revolutionary leaders, the
ferocious Maillard, Theroigne de M6ricourt, and Jourdan, later
to be known as " Coupe-tete," all determined to accept no pacific
measures but to destroy the castle ; thirdly, the motley crew
of " brigands " not in the secret of the leaders, thirsting for
violence, consisting not only of the aforesaid Marseillais and
Italians, but also, according to Marat, of large numbers of Germans, 2
presumably deserters from the royal troops ; fourthly and lastly,
the crowds of merely curious who longed to explore the inner-
most recesses of the Bastille, to see for themselves the ghastly
torture-chamber, the iron cages and the oubliettes, and bring to
light the many nameless and unhappy prisoners lingering for-
gotten in dark dungeons down below.
This tumultuous and heterogeneous mob, armed with guns,
sabres, and hatchets, now surged into the outer courtyard (the
Cour de FAvancee) shouting, " We want the Bastille ! Down
with the troops ! "
1 La Journte du 14 Juillet, p. cxcviii.
2 " The Bastille, ill defended, was taken by a few soldiers and a troop
of wretches, mostly Germans and also provincials. The Parisians those
eternal idlers (ces kernels badauds] appeared at the fortress, but curiosity
alone brought them there to visit the dark dungeons of which the mere
idea froze them with terror" (Marat, Ami du Peuple, No. 530).
84 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
The besiegers were, however, confronted by the raised draw-
bridge known as the Pont de 1'Avancee opening into the Cour
du Gouvernement, and beyond that by the second drawbridge
leading into the castle itself. Two men, Tournay and Bonne-
mere, 1 thereupon climbed to the roof of the shop of M. Riquet,
a perfumer, and by this means reached the wall surrounding
the moat of the Bastille. Sitting astride on the top they managed
to work themselves along to the Corps des Gardes by the side
of the drawbridge, and the amazing point is that the garrison
allowed them to do this without firing a shot, contenting them-
selves merely with shouting warnings from the battlements, 2
and this conciliatory attitude was maintained even when the
two men proceeded to cut through the chains of the drawbridge
" de 1'Avancee," which fell with a terrific crash, killing one man
in the crowd and wounding another. Instantly the whole mob
rushed forward into the Cour du Gouvernement, and now for
the first time the garrison, anxious to prevent their attacking
the second drawbridge, opened a fire of musketry, scattering
the people in all directions, and finally driving them back into
the outer courtyard. This was the incident which gave rise
to the legend that De Launay, having let down the drawbridge
and enticed the people into the Cour du Gouvernement, treacher-
ously opened fire on them.
Around this treachery the first of the two with which De
Launay was accused during the siege of the Bastille contro-
versy raged for over a century, but responsible French historians
are now agreed that the incident occurred as it is here described. 3
The most convincing proof in favour of De Launay lies
perhaps in the inexpediency of such a manoeuvre. If he would
not make use of the legitimate means of defence at his disposal,
why should he resort to treachery and thereby needlessly enrage
the people ? Had he wished to carry death and destruction
into their ranks he had only to fire any of his fifteen cannons
from the ramparts. There was no necessity to entice them
within range of musketry fire.
1 Bastille devoilee, ii. 92 ; Deux Amis, i. 317. The citizens of the Fau-
bourg Saint- Antoine gave their names as Davanne and Demain, but M.
Flammermont (p. ccv, note) and M. Victor Fournel, Les Hommes du 14
Juillet, p. 216, accept the former statement.
3 Even the Two Friends of Liberty admit this : " Two men , . . get up
on to the roof of the guard-house in spite of the cries and threats of the
garrison of the fortress." See also Bastille devoilee, ii. 93 ; Marmontel, iv.
191. M. Flammermont 's assertion that they acted under the fire of the
garrison is therefore contrary not only to evidence, but to probability, for,
considering the slow rate at which they must have progressed, they would
have proved an easy target had the garrison chosen to fire.
3 " This pretended treachery of De Launay, which was immediately
noised all over Paris ... is disproved not only by the accounts of the
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 85
It is easy, however, to understand the misunderstanding
that gave rise to the story of De Launay's treachery. The rear-
guard of the crowd, seeing the fall of the drawbridge, the onrush
of the people in the front, and then the fire directed on them
from the battlements, could not know by what means the draw-
bridge had been let down, and immediately concluded that the
order had been given by De Launay so as to lure the people on
to their destruction. The cry of treachery having once been
uttered, the agitators, mingling in the crowd, saw their oppor-
tunity to fan the flame of popular fury, and messengers were
despatched all over Paris to circulate the news of De Launay's
hideous perfidy. At the H6tel de Ville it raised a storm of
indignation, and a further deputation was sent to the Bastille
to inquire of M. de Launay whether he " would be disposed to
receive into the chateau the troops of the Parisian militia, who
would guard it with the troops already stationed there and who
would be under the orders of the town." But when the deputa-
tion arrived, the fusillade going on between the garrison and
the besiegers made it impossible to communicate with the
Governor, and in the frightful uproar that now prevailed the
white handkerchiefs waved by the deputies in sign of truce
passed unperceived. A second deputation, armed this time with
a flag and drum, succeeded, however, in attracting the attention
of the Governor and officers on the battlements, who replied by
inviting the deputies to come forward, but to persuade the
crowd to keep back. At the same moment a subordinate officer
on the ramparts, to prove the good faith of the garrison, reversed
his gun in sign of peace, and this example was followed by his
comrades, who called out loudly to the crowd, " Have no fear,
we will not fire, stay where you are. Bring forward your flag
and your deputies. The Governor will come down and speak
to you."
But here another misunderstanding occurred which gave
rise to the story of a second treachery on the part of De Launay,
besieged but of the besiegers themselves, and is rejected to-day by all
historians" (Funck Brentano, Legendes et Archives de la Bastille, p. 256).
M. Flammermont admits with regard to this accusation : " All that is
false." Even M. Louis Blanc with a rare impulse of fairness absolves De
Launay from this charge : " Such was the confusion that the greater
number (of the crowd) were not aware under what intrepid effort the chains
of the first bridge had been broken ; they believed that the Governor him-
self had given the order to let it down in order to entice the multitude and
more easily to make carnage amongst them. . . . De Launay was capable
of having given the order to fire but not of having committed the perfidious
atrocity imputed to him, and justice demands that his memory should be
openly cleared of it " (Histoire de la Revolution, ii. 381). In spite of all this
evidence the story of De Launay's treachery is persistently repeated by
nearly every English writer.
86 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
for just as the deputies were about to advance, a man in the
crowd obviously an agitator posted there to prevent arbitra-
tion started a fresh alarm that one of the cannons was pointing
at the people, and immediately every one took up the cry and
urged the deputies not to trust the " perfidious promises " of
the garrison. 1 The deputies thereupon retreated into the Cour
de 1'Orme and remained standing there for a quarter of an hour,
disregarding the shouts of the garrison urging them to advance.
De Launay, now convinced that the signals of peace were merely
a ruse to obtain admittance to the castle by treachery, remarked
to his officers : ' You must perceive, messieurs, that these
deputies and this flag cannot belong to the town ; the flag is
certainly one that the people have seized and which they are
using to surprise us. If they were really deputies they would
not have hesitated, considering the promise you made them,
to come and declare to me the intentions of the Hotel de Ville ! " 2
Then, since the crowd continued to fire at the garrison, the
garrison once more returned their fire, and the battle continued
with redoubled violence. The story of this second treachery
of De Launay was again circulated through Paris the Governor,
it was said, had replied to the flag of truce with signs of peace
and, the deputies having confidingly advanced, the garrison
had discharged a volley of musketry, killing several people at
their side. Around this point again controversy has raged,
but all reliable evidence proves that the second accusation of
treachery was as unfounded as the first, 3 for on two points all
accounts agree the deputies did not advance and the crowd
continued without interruption to fire on the garrison.
Moreover, to this second charge of treachery, as to the first,
1 Deux Amis, i. 325.
1 "Recit des Assieges," Deux Amis, i. 321 ; Bastille devoilee, ii. 97.
3 The legend was repeated at the time by a great number of writers,
including even Lord Dorset, who was not present at the siege, and whose
account is inaccurate in nearly every point. It is refuted, however, not
only by Montjoie, Beaulieu, and Marmontel, but by the principal revoke
tionary authorities Bastille devoilee (ii. 99) ; Dussaulx, p. 219 (edition
Monin) : " In order to have the right on all these points, to accuse the
Governor and his garrison of perfidy one would have to be very certain
that they saw and recognized the signals of the deputies, and if they did
indeed perceive them it must be admitted that it was impossible for them
to cease action whilst the fire of the besiegers continued, and whilst they
were being shot at not only from the foot of the fortress but from the tops
of the neighbouring houses." Beaulieu explains the situation by stating
that a part of the garrison that is to say the Invalides were on the side
of the people, and that it was they who signed to them to advance, whilst
the rest the Swiss were for holding out, and it was they who fired.
This is the view taken by Louis Blanc (ii. 385), who also in this instance
denies De Launay's treachery. " No historian any longer admits this
legend," says M. Louis Madelin.
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 87
the same line of reasoning may be applied what object could
De Launay possibly have for needlessly infuriating the people,
though still at this stage of the siege he refused to open fire on
them from the cannons ? Further, why should he fire on a
deputation when we know from the evidence of his officers
that he would have seized any opportunity to capitulate, and
that it was mainly at the instance of the Swiss De Flue that he
continued the siege ? x Obviously, as Beaulieu remarks, " there
was no treachery, but only a frightful confusion."
At the Hotel de Ville the news of De Launay 's latest perfidy
roused a fresh storm of indignation, and the wildest rumours
were circulated amongst the crowd assembled in the Place de
Greve. Now, amongst the groups of citizens angrily discussing
the situation, there moved a tall young man, who listened
eagerly to all that was said, and at last entering into the conver-
sation heard of the " massacre of citizens " that was taking place
at the Bastille. This young man was Pierre Hulin, the manager
of a laundry on the outskirts of Paris ; he had come into Paris
early that morning on business, and, finding a crowd assembled
in the Place de Greve, he joined it at the precise moment that
the news of De Launay's second treachery had set all minds
aflame. Hulin, who was a brave man, unconnected with any
intrigue, shared the general indignation, and seeing that his
handsome countenance and commanding appearance had
evidently found favour with the multitude, he turned and
addressed them in these spirited words :
" My friends, are you citizens ? Let us march on the Bastille !
Our friends, our brothers, are being massacred. I will expose
you to no chances, but if there are risks to run, I will be the first
to run them, and I swear to you on my honour that I will bring
you back victorious or you will bring me back dead ! " 2
The people, taking this courageous and eloquent young man
to be at least an officer, immediately rallied around him, and
the whole Place de Greve resounded with the cry, " You shall
be our commander ! "
Hulin accepted and found himself at the head of an army
by no means contemptible ; here were grenadiers of Ruffeville,
fusiliers of the company of Lubersac, a host of bourgeois, and
three cannons, and these on their way to the Bastille were
reinforced by several Invalides and two more cannons.
In this second start for the Bastille there was undeniably a
strong element of heroism ; these men setting forth, burning
with indignation at a supposed outrage on their fellow-citizens,
1 1 Bastille devoilee, ii. 127, 128. See also account by De Flue in Revue
Retrospective.
a Montjoie, Hist, de la Revolution, xlv. no ; Deux Amis, i. 327.
88 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
are in no way to be confounded with the brigands who had
preceded them. To attack the fortress, which at this moment
they honestly regarded as the stronghold of tyranny, belching
forth fire and smoke on all those who attempted to approach it,
was indeed a brave adventure that required no little personal
courage and self-sacrifice. The fact that all the commotion
was based on a misunderstanding does not detract from the
gallantry of the enterprise. The incident is all the more remark-
able in that it was the one and only occasion in the history of the
Revolution when a crowd was led by a true man of the people, and
not by the professional agitators or their tools. Hulin was a
noble and disinterested man, and, as we shall see, proved himself
worthy of the confidence the people had placed in him.
This formidable contingent with their five cannons, Hulin
marching at the head of the bourgeois, sergeants leading the
Gardes Franaises, arrived at the Bastille by way of the Arsenal
to find a scene of indescribable confusion. The crowd, infuriated
by De Launay's supposed treachery, had bethought themselves
of a plan for burning down his house by wheeling wagon-loads
of straw into the Cour du Gouvernement and setting light to
them. The brigands in the crowd, not content with inanimate
objects on which to vent their fury, seized on a pretty girl,
Mile, de Monsigny, the daughter of a captain of the Invalides,
whom they took to be the daughter of De Launay, and by signs
intimated to the garrison that they would burn her alive if the
castle were not surrendered. The girl, who was little more than
a child, fainted with terror, and was dragged unconscious on to
a heap of straw. M. de Monsigny, seeing this from the towers
of the castle, rushed to his daughter's rescue, but was knocked
down by two shots from the besiegers, and the horrible crime
was only averted by the bravery of Aubin Bonnemere he who
had cut the chains of the drawbridge and who now succeeded
in carrying the girl away to a place of safety.
It is difficult to reconstruct the exact order of events at this
point of the siege, but it would seem that the arrival of Hulin
and the army with cannons coincided with the setting light to the
wagon-loads of straw, and that at this moment the first and only
charge was fired from one of the cannons of the Bastille. Accord-
ing to Montjoie the discharge was made when the garrison
perceived the cannons of the besiegers arriving on the scene ;
according to the Two Friends of Liberty it followed on the
attempt to set fire to the Governor's house ; but on one point all
authorities are agreed the Bastille had fifteen cannons, and during
the whole siege one was fired once. 1 No further proof is needed of
1 Bastille devoilee, ii. 101 note, 121; Deux Amis, i. 326; Montjoie,
Histoire de la Revolution de France, xlv. 112 ; Mannontel, iv. 193.
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 89
De Launay's humanity : had he chosen to make use of the means
within his power, even the authors of the Bastille devoilee
are obliged to admit, he could have swept the courtyard clear
of assailants : "If the platform of the great bridge had been
lowered, and the three cannons charged with grape-shot in the
courtyard had been fired, what carnage would not have been
made ? " 1 But now the artillery of the besiegers being brought
into play, the confusion reached its height : the roar of the
cannons and the rattle of musketry mingled with the howls of
the mob, whilst the smoke of the burning wagon-loads of straw
blinded and nearly suffocated the besiegers. A brave soldier,
Elie, of the Queen's Infantry, assisted by a " muscular and in-
trepid linen-draper, Reole," at the risk of their lives dashed
into the flames and removed the wagons, thereby clearing the
atmosphere, but in no way quieting the pandemonium. On
all sides men were falling dead and dying to the ground, but
most of these casualties were caused, not by the fire of the
Bastille, but by the crowd itself who, not knowing how to load
the cannon, were killed by the recoil or were fired on by each
other. Hulin had succeeded, however, in destroying by gun-
fire the chains of the drawbridge de FAvancee, whereupon the
whole mob pressed forward once more into the Cour du Gouverne-
ment, and two cannons were mounted opposite the second draw-
bridge leading into the Bastille itself.
This movement seems to have entirely deranged De Launay ;
obliged to choose, and choose immediately, between the shame
of surrender and the wholesale massacre of the people by cannon
fire, he was indeed between the devil and the deep sea, and it
is said that, unable to decide on either course, he now resolved
on the desperate measure of setting light to the powder magazine
and blowing up the castle. But two Invalides, Becquard and
Ferrand, restrained his hand, thereby saving both besiegers and
besieged from total destruction.
One thing is certain, the garrison made almost no defence.
" I was present at the siege of the Bastille," says the Chancelier
Pasquier, " and the so-called combat was not serious ; the resist-
ance shown was practically nil. ... A few shots from guns
were fired (by the besiegers) to which no reply was made, then
four or five cannon shots. . . . What I did see perfectly was
the action of the soldiers, Invalides and others, ranged on the
platform of the high tower, raising the butts of their rifles in
the air, and expressing by every means used under such cir-
cumstances the wish to surrender." 2
1 Bastille divoiUe, ii. 126 ; Montjoie, ibid. xlv. 112.
2 See also Bastille devoiUe, ii. 121 : " The garrison, so to speak, made no re-
sistance." Georget, one of the besieging gunners, expressed the same opinion.
90 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
It is evident, as Beaulieu says, that the garrison were divided,
the Swiss, with De Flue at their head, urging the Governor to
continue the siege, and the Invalides, whose sympathies were
with the people, begging him to capitulate. 1 At last De Launay,
yielding to the entreaties of the latter, ordered two of his men to
go up to the battlements with a drum and a white flag of truce.
No flag was forthcoming, but the Governor's handkerchief was
hoisted on a staff, and with this banner the men paraded the
towers of the prison for a quarter of an hour. The people,
however, continued to fire, and replied to the overtures of the
garrison with cries of " Down with the bridges ! No capitula-
tion ! "
De Launay then retired to the Salle de Conseil and wrote a
desperate message to the besiegers : " We have twenty thousand
weight of powder ; we shall blow up the garrison and the whole
district if you do not accept the capitulation."
In vain De Flue represented to De Launay that this terrible
expedient was wholly needless, that the gates of the fortress
were still intact, that means of defence were not lacking, that
the garrison had suffered the loss of only one man killed and
two wounded the note was handed to a Swiss, who passed it
through a hole in the raised drawbridge to the crowd beyond.
The besiegers gathered on the stone bridge at the other side of
the moat were at first unable to reach it, but a plank was fetched,
a man in the crowd came forward, walked along it, fell into the
moat and was killed instantly. A second man followed accord-
ing to one report lie, according to another Maillard and this
time the slip of paper was safely conveyed to the people. At
the words, read aloud by lie, a confused cry arose, "Down
with the bridges ! " but whilst some added, " No harm shall
be done you," others continued to shout, " No capitulation ! "
But filie answered loudly, " On the word of an officer no one
shall be injured ; we accept your capitulation ; let down your
bridges ! "
On the strength of this promise De Launay gave up the key
of the smaller drawbridge, the bridge was let down, and the
leaders of the people Elie, Hulin, Tournay, Maillard, Reole,
Arn6, and Humbert entered the castle. The next moment an
unknown hand inside the courtyard of the prison lowered the
great drawbridge, and instantly the immense crowd poured
on to it and with a mighty rush surged forward into the
Bastille. Whose was the hand that did the deed ? No one
to this day knows for certain. De Launay had not intended
1 " The Swiss exhorted the Governor to resist, but the staff and the
non-commissioned officers strongly urged him to surrender the fortress "
(Deux Amis, ii. 333).
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 91
admitting the crowd before parleying with the leaders, and
it seems probable that the bridge was treacherously lowered
by certain of the Invalides who were in collusion with the
people. 1
If so, they paid dearly for their cowardice ; for the mob,
according to the habit of mobs, did not pause to discriminate,
but fell upon the Invalides with fury, leaving the Swiss to escape
unharmed.
Meanwhile lie and his comrades approached the Governor,
who was standing with his staff in the great courtyard dressed
in a grey coat, with a poppy-coloured ribbon in his buttonhole,
and holding in his hand a gold-headed sword-stick. According
to certain accounts Maillard, or a man named Degain, there-
upon seized him, crying out, " You are the Governor of the
Bastille." Legris addressed him brutally. 2 Marmontel shows
a nobler picture of this dramatic moment :
" filie entered with his companions, all brave men and
thoroughly determined to keep their word. Seeing this the
Governor came up to him, embraced him, and presented him
with his sword and the keys of the Bastille." " I refused his
sword," lie told Marmontel, " I only accepted the keys."
filie's companions greeted the staff and officers of the castle
with the same cordiality, swearing to act as their guard and
their defence. 3 Hulin, too, kissed the unfortunate Governor,
promising to save his life, and De Launay returning the embrace,
pressed the hand of Hulin, saying, " I trust to you, brave man,
and I am your prisoner."
But though these pioneers showed themselves magnanimous,
" those that followed them breathed only carnage and vengeance,"
for at the fall of the great drawbridge it was the brigands armed
with forks and hatchets who first penetrated into the castle,
leaving the soldiers who had carried on the siege at the other
side of the moat. This horrible crowd gathered so threateningly
around the Governor that filie, Hulin, and Arne resolved to
lead him out of the castle to the H6tel de Ville. At the risk of
their lives the little procession started out, lie carrying the
1 " An Invalide came to open the door situated behind the drawbridge
and asked what they wanted. ' That the Bastille should be surrendered/
they replied. Then he let them in" (Deux Amis, i. 337). " I was very
much surprised ... to see four Invalides approach the door, open them,
and let down the bridges" (Relation de de Flue, Flammermont, ccxxxv.).
2 " Recit de Pitra," La Journee du 14 Juillet, p. 48 ; Montjoie, Hist, de
la Revolution, xlv. 115.
3 Marmontel, iv. 194. " The ones who entered first approach the van-
quished with humanity, throw their arms round the necks of the staff
officers as a sign of peace and reconciliation, and take possession of the
fortress as surrendered by capitulation" (Deux Amis, i. 338).
92 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
capitulation on the point of his sword, Hulin and Arne following
with De Launay held between them.
Thus began the terrible journey to the Place de Greve ; fight-
ing every inch of the way, the two heroic men led their prisoner,
receiving on their heads and shoulders the blows of the multitude.
All through the seething Rue Saint- Antoine Hulin never left the
arm of De Launay ; struck at, fired at, insulted, he struggled for-
ward ; once, fearing that the bare head of the Governor exposed
him to danger, Hulin quickly covered it with his own hat, but
the next instant nearly fell himself a victim to the fury of the
populace. Three times the people tore De Launay from his arms,
and three times Hulin wrenched him from their clutches with
torn garments and blood streaming from his face. De Launay,
wounded from head to foot, pale but resolute, " with head held
high and a still proud eye," made no complaint, uttered not a
single murmur, only when the crowd had again hurled themselves
upon him, and Hulin once more dashing into the fray had caught
him in his arms and borne him from their midst, the old man
pressed him to his heart and cried, " You are my saviour. Only
a little more strength and courage. . . . Stay with me as far as
the Hotel de Ville." And turning to lie he exclaimed, " Is
this the safety you promised me ? Ah, sir, do not leave me."
But Hulin's strength was now rapidly failing him. The
interminable journey was almost ended ; they had reached the
Arcade de St. Jean only forty steps onward to the Hotel de Ville
and safety. But even as they entered the Place de Greve a
furious horde of brigands bore down on the procession, and once
more De Launay was torn from the arms of his protectors, whilst
this time Hulin, utterly exhausted, sank upon a heap of stones
or, according to another account, was dragged there by the hair
and flung down senseless. When again he opened his eyes it
- was to see the head of De Launay raised on a pike amidst the
savage cries of his murderers.
" I have seen the Sieur Hulin more than a year afterwards,"
writes Montjoie, " grow pale with horror and shed torrents of
tears as he recalled that bloody sight. ' The last words of
the Marquis de Launay will always echo in my heart,' he said ;
' night and day I see him, overwhelmed with insults, covered
with blood, and gently addressing his murderers with these
words, " Ah, my friends, kill me, kill me on the spot ! For
pity's sake do not let me linger ! "
Ghastly as was the massacre of De Launay, it was followed
by crimes even more glaringly unjust. The Swiss who, as we
have seen, during the siege of the Bastille were the keenest to
continue the defence, and to whom most of the firing was due,
one and all escaped without injury, but to the Invalides, who
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 93
had sympathized with the besiegers, the crowd showed no pity-
Three were immediately put to death, and amongst these was
Becquard, who had restrained De Launay from blowing up the
castle. The hand that had thus saved the lives of countless
citizens was cut off and paraded through the streets, then
Becquard himself was hoisted to the fatal lantern. Three
officers also perished, and to make the senseless violence of the
day complete, De Flue, who throughout the siege had urged the
Governor to greater severity, was allowed to escape, whilst the
merciful De Losme was barbarously butchered.
Two former Bastille prisoners, the Marquis de Pelleport and
the Chevalier de Jean, 1 entered the Place de Greve at the moment
of De Launay's death. Pelleport, seeing that the same fate would
befall De Losme, who during his captivity had always been his
friend, rushed forward and threw his arms around him.
" Wait ! " he cried to the mob, " you are going to sacrifice
the best man in the world ! I was five years in the Bastille, and
he was my consoler, my friend, my father ! "
At this De Losme raised his eyes and said gently, " Young
man, what are you doing ? Go back, you will only sacrifice
yourself without saving me."
But Pelleport still clung to De Losme, and since he was un-
armed, attempted with his hands to keep off the raging multitude.
" I will defend him against you all ! " he cried ; " yes, yes,
against you all 1 "
Thereupon a brigand in the crowd dealt Pelleport a blow
with an axe that cut into his neck, and raising the weapon was
about to strike again when De Jean flung himself upon him and
threw him to the ground. But De Jean in his turn was assailed
on all sides, struck with sabres, pierced with bayonets, until at
last he fell fainting on the steps of the Hotel de Ville. Then
De Losme was massacred, and his head was raised on a pike and
carried in procession with De Launay's.
The remaining Invalides were led through Paris amidst the
execrations of the crowd : twenty-two of these unfortunate old
men and several Swiss children in the service of the Bastille
were brought to the Hotel de Ville, where on their arrival a
revolutionary elector 2 brutally addressed them with these
words : " You fired on your fellow -citizens, you deserve to be
hanged, and you will be on the spot." Instantly a chorus of
voices took up the cry : " Give them up to us that we may hang
them ! " But the Gardes Frangaises, with filie at their head,
interposed, throwing themselves courageously between the
Invalides and their assailants.
1 Charles de Jean de Manville, half-brother to the Comtesse de Sabran,
a mauvais sujet who had been imprisoned in the Bastille for forging a will.
2 Bastille devoiUe, ii. no ; Hist, de la Revolution, par Montjoie.
94 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
" I shall never forget that terrible moment," wrote Pitra ;
" the crowd hurling itself upon the prisoners, the Swiss on their
knees, the Invalides clasping the feet of lie, who, standing on
a table crowned with laurels, vainly strove to make his voice
heard above the tumult, whilst the Gardes Frangaises surrounded
them, making a rampart of their bodies and tearing them from
the hands of those who would have dragged them away."
So, says Montjoie, " men of no education, soldiers and rebels,
gave a lesson in justice and humanity to the barbarous elector."
But this mobile crowd, stirred by a word to violence, was also
by a word moved to pity. Suddenly one of the Gardes Frangaises
cried aloud, " We ask for the lives of our old comrades as the
price of the Bastille and of the services we have rendered ! "
lie in a broken voice, with trembling lips, joined his entreaties to
theirs, " I ask for mercy to be shown to my companions as the
prize of our deeds " ; and pointing to the silver plate belonging to
De Launay which had been offered to him he added, " I want
none of this silver ; I want no honours. Mercy, mercy for these
children," he turned to the little Swiss standing by him ; " mercy,
mercy for these old men," he added, taking the hands of the
trembling Invalides, " for they have only done their duty."
" filie," says Dussaulx, " reigned supreme, as he continued to
calm the minds of the people. His disordered hair, his streaming
brow, his dented sword held proudly, his torn and crumpled
clothing, served to heighten and to sanctify the dignity of his
appearance, and gave him a martial air that carried us back to
heroic times. All eyes were fixed on him. ... I seem still to hear
him speaking : ' Citizens, above all, beware of staining with
blood the laurels you have bound about my head otherwise
take back your palms and crowns ! '
At these noble words a sudden silence fell on the tumultuous
crowd, then a few voices murmured " Mercy ! " and the next
moment a mighty shout went up from every mouth. " Mercy,
yes, mercy, mercy for all !" and the great hall re-echoed the cry
of pardon.
So at last the Invalides and little Swiss were led out by the
same crowd that had clamoured for their blood, and feted amidst
general rejoicing.
" Thus ended this great scene of fury, of vengeance, of vic-
tory, of joy, of atrocities, but where there gleamed a few rays
of humanity." l
More than a few rays ! On this terrible I4th of July great
deeds were done, deeds of glorious valour and self-sacrifice.
Against the murky background of brutality and horror the names
of filie, Hulin, Arne, Bonnemere stand out in shining letters, and
1 Bailly, i. 385.
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 95
the fact that these men took no part in the subsequent excesses
of the Revolution shows that they were not the tools of agitators
but honest men acting on their own initiative and, as such, truly
representative of the people. For patriots like these the revolu-
tionary leaders had no use ; the instruments they needed were of
a different stamp. Jourdan, Maillard, Theroigne, Desnot, the
" cook out of place " who had cut off the head of De Launay, all
these will reappear again and again in the great scenes of the
Revolution, but of lie we shall hear no more.
What share must we attribute to the people in the crimes
of this day ? Out of the 800,000 inhabitants of Paris only
approximately 1000 took any part in the siege of the Bastille, 1 ^
and we have already seen the elements of which this 1000
were composed. That the mob by whom the atrocities were
committed consisted mainly of the brigands, the evidence of
Dussaulx further testifies :
" They were men," he says, " armed like savages. And what
sort of men ? Of the sort that one could not remember ever having
met in broad daylight. Where did they come from ? Who had
drawn them from their gloomy lairs ? " And again : " They did
not belong to the nation, these brigands that were seen filling
the Hotel de Ville, some nearly naked, others strangely clothed
in garments of divers colours, beside themselves with rage,
most of them not knowing what they wanted, demanding the
death of the victims pointed out to them, and demanding it in
tones that more than once it was impossible to resist." Further,
that they were actually hired for their task is evident. Mme.
Vigee le Brun records that on the morning of this day she over-
heard two men talking ; one said to the other, " Do you want
to earn 10 francs ? Come and make a row with us. You have
only got to cry, ' Down with this one ! down with that one.'
Ten francs are worth earning." The other answered, " But shall
we receive no blows ? " " Go to ! " said the first man, "it is we
who are to deal the blows ! "
Dussaulx confirms this statement in referring to the lanterne,
" where butchers paid by real assassins committed atrocities
worthy of cannibals."
But tools when they happen to be human are sometimes
difficult to manipulate. In massacring the garrison of the
Bastille it is evident that the brigands exceeded their orders,
1 So little commotion did the siege of the Bastille cause in Paris that
Dr. Rigby, unaware that anything unusual was going on, went off early in
the afternoon to visit the gardens of Monceaux. " I doubt not that it
(the /attack on the Bastille) had begun a considerable time and even been
completed before it was known to many thousands of the inhabitants as
well as to ourselves."
96 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
for neither De Launay nor the Invalides had been proscribed
in the councils of the revolutionary leaders. 1 The murder of
Flesselles, the provost-marshal, had, however, as we have seen,
been ordained during the preceding night. The forged note
was prepared and handed round amongst the populace ; it
purported to be a message from Flesselles to De Launay and
contained these words : "I am keeping the Parisians amused
with promises and cockades ; hold out till the evening and you
will be reinforced." This note, of which only a copy was pro-
duced, and the original, though sought for during six months,
could never be discovered, is admitted by Dussaulx, Bailly, and
Pitra to have been merely the faked-up pretext given to the
people by those who desired the death of Flesselles. But on this
occasion " the people " proved recalcitrant, and Flesselles was
allowed to pass unharmed out of the H6tel de Ville. Then a
hired assassin, " not a man of the people," says Montjoie, but
a well-to-do jeweller named Moraire, approached him as he came
down the steps and fired a revolver into his ear. Flesselles fell
dead, and the crowd, once more carried away by the sight of blood,
cut off his head and bore it on a pike with De Launay's to the
Palais Royal. Thus perished the first victim on the list of
proscriptions drawn up by the Palais Royal ; the only other
in Paris at the tune was the Prince de Lambesc, but though
attacked by the mob, his carriage seized and burnt, he was able
to make good his escape. At the King's command the Comte
d'Artois, De Breteuil, and De Broglie left Versailles and succeeded
in reaching the frontier unmolested, thus avoiding the fate
designed for them by the conspirators, but the Prince de Conde
on his journey from Chantilly encountered at Crepy-en-Valois
the constituency of the Due d' Orleans emissaries sent by the
duke to stir up the peasants, and narrowly escaped drowning in
the Oise.
Foullon, though warned of the conspirators' intentions re-
garding him, was at his chateau of Morangis and refused to fly.
To the supplications of his daughter-in-law he only answered :
" My daughter, you are aware of all the infamies circulated about
me ; if I leave I shall seem to justify my condemnation. My
life is pure, I wish it to be examined, and to leave my children
an untarnished name." He consented, however, to go to the
chateau of his friend M. de Sartines at Viry, and on the morning
of the 22nd of July he started forth on foot. M. de Sartines was
out when he arrived, and Foullon awaited his return in the
garden, when suddenly a horde of ruffians, led by one Grappe,
1 Malouet, i. 325 ; Montjoie, Conjuration de d'OrUans, ii. 87. On this
point Montjoie shows great fairness, for he does not attribute to the
Orleanistes crimes that were not of their devising. It is evident that
he had definite grounds for his accusations.
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 97
burst in upon him. His whereabouts had been discovered by
the treachery of a servant of Sartines' not, as certain writers
have stated, his own servant, who remained with him and en-
deavoured to protect him from his murderers.
Then the unfortunate old man of seventy-four was led to
Paris, and in ghastly mockery the ruffians proceeded to mimic
the sufferings of our Lord, crowning Foullon with thorns and,
when on the long road to Paris he complained of thirst, giving
him vinegar to drink.
At the Hotel de Ville Lafayette vainly attempted to save
him from the fury of the populace. " But this agitation," says
Bailly, now the mayor of Paris, " was not natural and spontaneous.
In the square, and even in the hall, people of decent appearance
were seen mingling in the crowd and exciting them to severity.
One well-dressed man, addressing the bench, cried out angrily,
' What need is there to judge a man who has been judged for
thirty years ? ' The lying phrase attributed to Foullon, " If
the people have no bread let them eat hay," was successfully
circulated, and at last the infuriated mob stuffed his mouth with
hay and hung him to the lantern. 1
Meanwhile Foullon 's son-in-law, Berthier, was arrested at
Compiegne, in the midst of his efforts to assure the provisioning
of Paris. It was said, to inflame the passions of the crowd, that
he had ordered the corn to be cut green so as to starve the people.
The truth was that letters had reached him from all sides de-
scribing the urgent demand for grain, and Necker himself had
written on the I4th of July ordering him to cut 20,000 septiers
of rye before the harvest in order to supply the present need, 2
but Berthier had refused to comply, preferring to ensure the
circulation of grain already stored, and by means of untiring
activity he succeeded in providing the necessary supplies. This,
of course, the revolutionaries could not forgive him, and Berthier
was driven to Paris amidst the execrations of the populace. As
he entered the capital, followed by a mob of armed brigands, the
head of his father-in-law was thrust through his carriage-window
on the end of a pike. Faint with hunger and sick with horror
he reached the Hotel de Ville, but before the lantern could be
lowered a mutineer of the Royal Cravatte plunged his sabre into
his body. Thereupon " a monster of ferocity, a cannibal/' tore
1 Von Sybel, in his History of the French Revolution, i. 81 (Eng. trans.),
says of the death of Foullon : " This crime was not the result of an out- ]/
break of popular fury, it had cost the revolutionary leaders large sums of
money, for which thousands of assassins were to be had. In Mirabeau's
correspondence the following statement occurs : ' Foullon's death cost
hundreds of thousands of francs, the murder of the baker Frangois only a
few thousands.' "
2 La Prise de la Bastille, by Gustave Bord, p. 33.
H
98 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
out his heart, and Desnot, the " cook out of place " who had cut
off the head of De Launay and again " happened " to be on the
spot, carried it to the Palais Royal. 1 This ghastly trophy,
together with the victim's head, was placed in the middle of the
supper-table around which the brigands feasted.
Such were the consequences of the siege of the Bastille so
vaunted by panegyrists of the Revolution. Well may M.
Madelin exclaim : "A new era was born of a prodigious lie.
Liberty bore a stain from its birth, and the paradox once created
can never be dispelled."
And what of the Bastille, that haunt of despotism, whose
destruction was to atone for these atrocities ? Alas for the
deception of the people, their investigation of the hated fortress
revealed nothing remotely resembling the visions presented to
their imaginations no skeletons or corpses were to be found,
no captives in chains, no oubliettes, no torture - chambers. 2
True, an " iron corselet " was discovered, " invented to restrict
a man in all his joints and to fix him in perpetual immobility,"
but this was proved to be an ordinary suit of armour ; a destruc-
tive machine, " of which one could not guess the use," turned
out to be a printing-press confiscated by the police; whilst a
collection of human bones that seemed to offer a sinister signifi-
cance was traced to the anatomical collection of the surgery.
The prisoners proved equally disappointing. Seven only
were found four forgers, Bechade, Lacaurege, Pujade, and
Laroche ; two lunatics, Tavernier and De Whyte, who were mad
before they were imprisoned, and the Comte de Solages, incar-
cerated for " monstrous crimes " at the request of his family.
The first four disappeared into Paris. The remaining three
were paraded through the streets and exhibited daily as a show
to an interested populace. Finally, the Comte de Solages was
sent back to his inappreciative relations, whilst a kind-hearted
wig-maker attempted keeping Tavernier as a pet, but was obliged
to return him hastily to the Comite, who despatched him with
De Whyte to the lunatic asylum at Charenton.
The Revolution showed itself less indulgent to Bastille
prisoners than the Old R6gime. The romantic conception of
Dickens in the Tale of Two Cities, wherein a former victim of
1 Note that even the Two Friends of Liberty admit that the death of
Berthier was engineered : " It seems that the people, without knowing it,
were the blind instruments of the vengeance of the intendant's private
enemies or of the cruel prudence of his accomplices. Electors noticed from
the windows of the Hotel de Ville several people scattered about the square
who seemed to be the leading spirits of the different groups and to direct
their movements" (Deux Amis, ii. 73).
* Bastille d&voilee, ii. 21, 39, 82.
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 99
despotism is made to remark that " as a Bastille prisoner not
a soul would harm a hair of his head," is entirely refuted by
history. Two, as we have already seen, were nearly massacred
in their attempts to save De Losme, and subsequently no less
than ten Bastille prisoners perished at the hands of the revolu-
tionaries eight were guillotined and two were shot. Of these
greatest irony of all was Linguet, the man whose revelations
had contributed more than any other evidence to inflame public
feeling on the subject of the Bastille. Linguet did his best to
atone for the calumnies he had circulated, for in December 1792
he wrote to Louis XVI. begging to be allowed the honour of de-
fending him. Eighteen months later, in one of the many horrible
prisons of the Terror where he awaited his summons to the
guillotine, Linguet had leisure to meditate on the amenities of
the Bastille.
THE KING'S VISIT TO PARIS
It was through the medium of the Palais Royal that the news
of the taking of the Bastille reached Versailles, for the King's
messengers were waylaid by revolutionary emissaries, whilst
the Vicomte de Noailles and other Orleanistes were deputed to
announce the events of the day to the Assembly. Needless to
say, these events were ingeniously distorted to suit the purpose
of the intrigue the Bastille had been taken by force, De Launay
had fired on the deputation of citizens and met with the just
reward of his treachery at the hands of " the people." The
presence of the troops was, of course, still represented as the
only reason for these disorders.
The King, informed of the desperate state of affairs, replied
to the Assembly : " You rend my heart more and more by the
account you give me of the troubles of Paris. It is not possible
to believe that the orders given to the troops can be the cause."
They were most certainly not the cause, and the removal of the
troops was followed a week later, as we have seen, by disorders
still more frightful in the massacres of Foullon and of Berthier.
But the King, assured by succeeding deputations that no other
measure would restore peace to the capital, torn between his
own convictions and the entreaties of the deputies, finally re-
solved to appeal to the better feelings of the Assembly. Accom-
panied by his two brothers he appeared in the great hall,
and in the simple human language peculiar to him, that con-
trasts so strangely with the redundant periods of the day, he
implored their aid in dealing with the crisis :
, " Messieurs, I have assembled you to consult on the most
important affairs of state, of which none is more urgent, none
touches my heart more deeply, than the frightful disorder that
zoo THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
reigns in the capital. The head of the nation comes with con-
fidence into the midst of its representatives to tell them of his
grief, to ask them to find means for restoring calm and order/'
Then, referring to the hideous calumnies circulated on his inten-
tions notably the monstrous fable that he had ordered the
hall of the Assembly to be mined in order to blow up the deputies
he added, with a pathos and dignity that won for him the
sympathy of almost the whole Assembly :
" I know that people have aroused unjust suspicions in your
minds ; I know that they have dared to say that your persons
were not in safety. Is it necessary to reassure you concerning
such criminal rumours, refuted beforehand by your knowledge
of my character ? Well, then, it is I, who am one with my nation,
it is I who trust in you ! Help me in these circumstances to
assure the salvation of the State ; I await this from the National
Assembly, from the zeal of the representatives of my people. ..."
Then, since he was persuaded the milice bourgeoise were
competent to maintain " order " in the capital, he ended by
announcing that he had ordered the troops to retire from Paris
to Versailles.
In the wild enthusiasm that followed this speech of the
King the voice of the revolutionary factions was for once stifled,
and Louis XVI. was escorted back to the Palace amidst the
acclamations of deputies and people. Cries of " Vive le Roi ! "
resounded on every side, and so immense a crowd assembled
that the King took an hour and a half to cover the short
distance between the Salle des Menus and the Chateau. The
unfortunate monarch, pressed upon from every side, saluted
unresistingly on both cheeks by a woman of the people, grilled
by the rays of the July sun, suffered almost as much by the
warmth of his subjects' affection as two days later he was to
suffer by their coldness, and he reached at last the marble stair-
case nearly suffocated and streaming with perspiration.
Meanwhile the Queen, holding the Dauphin in her arms
and little Madame Royale by the hand, came out on to the
balcony that same balcony from which less than three months
later she was to face a very different crowd. The children of the
Comte d'Artois came to kiss her hand ; the Queen stooped to
embrace them, holding the Dauphin towards them. The little
boys pressed him to their hearts, and Madame Royale, slipping
her head under her mother's arm, joined in the caresses. The
King arrived at this moment and appeared on the balcony amidst
the cheers and benedictions of his people.
In Paris, likewise, the people longed for peace. When on
the same day eighty-four deputies went to the capital to read
aloud the King's discourse, and to announce the dismissal of the
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 101
troops, they were received with acclamations, and from thousands
of throats arose the cry, " Vive le Roi ! Vive la Nation ! " The
whole city was in an ecstasy of happiness. Lally, the tender-
hearted Lally, took advantage of the restored good-humour of
the people to address them at the H6tel de Ville and entreat
them to put an end to disorder :
" Messieurs, we have come to bring you peace from the
King and the National Assembly. (Cries of Peace ! Peace !)
You are generous ; you are Frenchmen ; you love your wives,
your children, your country. (Yes ! Yes !) There are no more
bad citizens. Everything is calm, everything is peaceful . . .
there will be no more proscriptions, will there ? " And with
one voice the people answered, " Yes, yes, peace ; no more
proscriptions ! "
Then the Archbishop of Paris (Monseigneur de Juigne) spoke
with fatherly compassion of the misfortunes of the capital, after
which he led the people amidst thunderous applause to sing a
Te Deum of thanksgiving at Notre Dame.
Alas, the people were not allowed to enjoy for long this
restored harmony 1 Such was the amazing ingenuity of the
agitators and the credulity of the Parisians that in the space
of a few hours the city was thrown into a fresh panic " The
troops are not being sent away flour intended for Paris is
being held up soldiers are tearing the national cockade off
passers-by and stuffing their guns with them the city has only
three days' supplies." The workmen engaged in demolishing
the Bastille were told that their bread and wine were poisoned. 1
Then, when the fury of the populace was once more thoroughly
aroused, deputations of fishwives were sent by the leaders of
the conspiracy to demand that the King should come to Paris.
It was the first of the series of attempts made by the revolutionaries
to have the King assassinated by the people. They dared not do
the deed themselves, for they knew the frightful punishment
attaching to regicide ; they knew, moreover, the furious indigna-
tion so foul a crime would arouse in the minds of the people
in general to whom the King was still almost a sacred being.
But if the populace could be sufficiently inflamed, and at the
psychological moment the King were brought amongst them,
might not some brigand lurking in the crowd, some obscure
fanatic, give way to a sudden impulse and pull the trigger of his
rusty flint-lock ? The thing was not impossible. 2
" Paris again worked on by its perfidious agitators " (Marmontel, iv.
214). See also Ferrieres, i. 1 54 ; Montjoie, Conjuration de d'Orleans, ii. 73 ;
Deux Amis, ii. 32.
2 Montjoie, Conjuration de d'Orttans, ii. 77 ; Souvenirs d'un Page (le
Comte d'Hezecques), p. 300.
102 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
The Queen, who foresaw the same possibilities, threw herself
in vain at the King's feet and implored him not to expose himself
to the threatening populace. But the King, convinced " that if
each citizen owes to his sovereign the sacrifice of his life, the
sovereign equally owes to his country the sacrifice of his, turned
a deaf ear to all forebodings, trusted to his people and the good
genius of France, and in spite of the Queen's entreaties showed
himself firm and unshakable. ' I have promised/ he said ; ' my
intentions are pure ; I trust in this. The people must know that
I love them, and, anyhow, they can do as they like with me.' " 1
" Louis XVI.," says De Lescure, " was neither a superior
intellect nor an energetic will, he was an incorruptible conscience,"
and these words give the clue to all his oscillations, for conscience
is necessarily a more uncertain guide than policy or self-interest.
As long as he felt convinced a certain course was right he followed
it without a thought for his personal safety or advantage the
trouble was that he could not always decide which course was
right, and allowed himself to be swayed by conflicting counsels.
On this occasion he did not hesitate the people wished him to
go to Paris; he would go, and his conscience being at rest he
could meet any fate with tranquillity.
At ten o'clock in the morning of July 17 the King, escorted
by the deputies of the Assembly and the milice bourgeoise, set
forth for Paris. His guards were taken from him, and in their
place marched 200,000 men armed with scythes and pickaxes,
with guns and lances, dragging cannons behind them, and women
dancing like Bacchantes, waving branches of leaves tied with
ribbons. In order not to tire the people the King had ordered
the procession to move at foot's-pace, and it was four o'clock by
the time it reached Paris. 2 In the midst of this threatening
escort Louis XVI. sat pale and anxious, and on entering the
city he leant forward, casting his eyes wonderingly over the
assembled multitude that received him in an ominous silence,
for the people had been forbidden to cheer him. So potent
was the spell exercised over the popular mind by the leaders
of the Revolution that not a soul dared to utter the cry
of " Vive le Roi ! " and brigands posted in the crowd silenced
the least murmur of applause. 3 Thus, dragged like a captive
through the streets of the city, the King was obliged to endure
this terrible humiliation for which no cause whatever existed;
he had done absolutely nothing to forfeit the popularity which
only two days earlier he had enjoyed. The good Archbishop of
Paris fared still worse at the hands of the populace, for alone
of all the procession he was hissed by those he had ruined
1 Deux Amis, ii. 42 ; Montjoie, Conjuration de d' Orleans, ii. 77.
2 Montjoie, Conjuration de d' Orleans, ii. 81. 8 Marmontel, iv. 214.
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 103
himself to feed. Sitting in his carriage, his eyes downcast,
striving to overcome the agitation of his mind, his thoughts
must have indeed been bitter.
As the procession passed through the Place Louis XV the
possibility that both the Queen and the revolutionary leaders
had foreseen was realized a hand in the crowd pulled the trigger
of a gun, and the shot missing the King killed a poor woman at
the back of the royal carriage. 1 The incident was hushed up,
and even the King was unaware it had occurred. Thus, saved
by the mysterious power which protected him every time that
he was brought face to face with the people, the King reached
the Hotel de Ville.
Under an archway of pikes and naked swords he passed to
the throne prepared for him. Bailly presented him with the
tricolour cockade, and the King accepting it as that which it
professed to be the cockade of Paris placed it in his hat.
Then suddenly it seemed that the spell was broken, and cries
of " Vive le Roi ! " broke out on all sides. Once more Lally
passionately appealed to the people's loyalty :
" Well, citizens, are you satisfied ? Here is the King for
whom you called aloud, and whose name alone excited your
transports when two days ago we uttered it in your midst.
Rejoice, then, hi his presence and his benefits." After reminding
the people of all the King had done for the cause of Liberty he
turned to assure the King of the people's love : " There is not
a man here who is not ready to shed for you the last drop of his
blood. No, Sire, this generation of Frenchmen will not go back
on fourteen centuries of fidelity. We will all perish, if necessary,
to defend the throne that is as sacred to us as to yourself. Perish
those enemies who would sow discord between the nation and
its chief ! King, subjects, citizens, let us join our hearts, our
wishes, our efforts, and display to the eyes of the universe the
magnificent spectacle of one of its finest nations, free, happy,
triumphant, under a just, cherished, and revered King, who,
owing nothing to force, will owe everything to his virtues and
his love."
Again and again Lally was interrupted by tumultuous
applause, and the King, overwhelmed by this sudden revulsion
of popular feeling, could only murmur brokenly in reply, " My
people can always count on my love."
His departure for Versailles was as triumphant as his arrival
had been humiliating. When he entered his carriage with the
tricolour cockade in his hat an immense crowd gathered round
him, crying, " Long live our good King, our friend, our father ! "
1 Montjoie, Conjuration de d'OrUans, ii. 82 ; Essais de Beaulieu, i. ;
Bailly, ii. 61.
104 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
It was eleven o'clock before he reached the Chateau. On the
marble staircase the Queen, with the Dauphin in her arms, was
waiting for him in an agony of suspense, and at the sight of the
husband she had not dared to hope ever to see again Marie
Antoinette fell weeping on his neck. But when she raised her
eyes and saw that sinister badge the enemy's colours in his hat
her heart sank ; from that moment she felt that all was lost.
But the King was happy, not because his life had been spared,
but because he believed that he had regained the love of his
people.
RESULTS OF THE JULY REVOLUTION
So ended the Revolution of July, and what had it brought to
the people ? To the immense majority, unaffected as we have
seen by lettres de cachet, the destruction of the Bastille meant
no more than the destruction of the Tower of London would
mean to-day to the inhabitants of Whitechapel. Indeed, certain
amongst them shrewdly recognized that in attacking it they were
fighting for a cause that was not their own. The Abbe Rudemare,
walking amongst the ruins of the Bastille the day after the siege,
came upon a workman engaged in the task of demolition who
brusquely accosted him with the words : " Mon chevalier, vous
ne direz pas que c'est pour nous que nous travaillons ; c'est bien
pour vous, car nous autres, nous ne tations pas de la Bastille :
on nous f . . . a Bicetre. N'y a-t-il rien pour boire a votre
sante ? " *
The people had indeed admirably served the design of the
conspirators, taking on themselves all the risks and facing all the
dangers of revolt, whilst the men who had worked them up to
violence remained discreetly in the background Now, in all
the great outbreaks of the Revolution we shall find that the
mechanism was threefold, consisting of, firstly, the Instigators ;
secondly, the Agitators, and thirdly, the Instruments; and of
these three classes only the last two incurred any danger. Thus
at the siege of the Bastille the mob and its leaders alone took
part in the battle, whilst the Instigators prudently effaced
themselves. For the role of the Instigators was not to lead
insurrection but only to provoke it, and having laid the mine
to retreat into safety the moment it produced the desired ex-
plosion. So throughout the whole course of the Revolution we
shall never find Danton figuring in the tumults he had helped to
prepare ; he was, therefore, not present at the siege of the
1 " Journal d'un pretre parisien, 1789-1792," published in Documents
pour servir & I'histoire de la Revolution de France, by Charles d'Hericault and
Gustave Bord, i> 165.
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 105
Bastille, but he visited it next day when all danger was over ; 1
St. Huruge also kept away, but he was at Versailles the day after
shaking his fist at the Queen's windows and uttering furious
invectives against the royal family ; 2 Santerre contented himself
with sending his dray-horses to represent him in the fray ; 3 whilst
Camille Desmoulins, the hero of the I2th of July, who first called
the people to arms, was careful to postpone his arrival on the
scene until after the capitulation.
The women of the Orleaniste conspiracy proved more courage-
ous : Theroigne was in the thick of the fight and received a sword
of honour from the leaders ; Mme. de Genlis watched the siege
from the windows of Beaumarchais' house, opposite the gate of
the Bastille, with the Dues de Chartres and Montpensier the
sons of the Due d'Orleans at her side.
The duke himself behaved with his usual pusillanimity ;
instead of going to the King and boldly requesting to be made
lieutenant-general of the kingdom, as the conspirators had
planned, he presented himself timorously at Versailles and asked
permission to go to England "in the event of affairs becoming-
more distressing than they were at present." The King looked
at him coldly, shrugged his shoulders, and made no reply.
But though the Orleanistes had failed to bring off their great
coup of putting the Due d'Orleans at the head of affairs, they had
nevertheless accomplished a great deal. The destruction of the
Bastille by force and not by the King's decree had proved a
powerful blow to the royal authority, but the most important
result of the outbreak from the point of view of both the revolu-
tionary factions was the effect produced on the public mind.
The people before the Revolution of July, says Marmontel, " were
not sufficiently accustomed to crime, and in order to inure them
to it they must be practised in it." The Parisians, always eager
for spectacles and enchanted by novelty of any kind, had now
been initiated into a new form of entertainment the fashion of
carrying heads on pikes and of hoisting victims to the lantern ;
and though it would be unjust to accuse the mass of the true
people the law-abiding and industrious citizens of sympathy
with these atrocities, it is undeniable that from this date the
populace of Paris the idlers, wastrels, and drunken inhabitants
of the city acquired a taste for bloodshed that made them the
ready tools of their criminal leaders. So, although, as we shall
see, the crimes that followed were invariably instigated, if not
performed, by professional revolutionaries, we shall find hence-
forth a steady deterioration in the mind of the populace, and
even in the mass of the true people a growing indifference to
1 Danton, by Louis Madelin. a Memoires de Mme. Campan, p. 235.
3 Le Marquis de Saint-Huruge, par Henri Furgeot, p. 202.
io6 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
bloodshed and submission to violence, that five years later made
the Reign of Terror possible. Thus the Revolution of July,
whilst serving the cause of the Orleaniste conspiracy, had likewise
paved the way for Anarchy.
In England the news of the siege of the Bastille was received
with mingled feelings. All true lovers of humanity rejoiced at
an event that at the time they believed to herald the dawn of
liberty, though many Englishmen, like Arthur Young * and
Wordsworth, Jived to realize their error. Burke, more far-seeing,
wondered whether to blame or applaud ; thrilled by the struggle
for freedom he shuddered nevertheless at the outbreak of
" Parisian ferocity," and dreaded its recurrence in the future.
But to the Whigs and the revolutionaries of England this triumph
of the Orleaniste conspiracy was a matter for the heartiest con-
gratulation. " How much the greatest event it is that ever
happened in the world and how much the best ! " wrote Fox
to Fitzpatrick. To the Due d'Orleans, whose despicable conduct
had sickened even his supporters in France, Fox thought fit to
send his warm compliments : " Tell him and Lauzun (the Due
de Biron) that all my prepossessions against French connections
for this country will be altered if this Revolution has the con-
sequences I expect." The anniversary of the " fall " of the
Bastille was celebrated the following year by the Revolution
Society at the tavern of " The Crown and Anchor/' where more
than 600 members, presided over by Lord Stanhope, drank to
'' the liberty of the world, and Dr. Price demanded the inauguration
of a " league of peace."
But whilst the Subversives of this country gave way to
1 It is perhaps not generally known that Arthur Young, who has been
U falsely quoted as the panegyrist of the French Revolution on account of his
earlier works, Travels in France, 1789, and On the Revolution in France,
1792, entirely recanted from his former opinions, and in 1793 wrote a
denunciation of the Revolution no less vehement than that of Burke.
This pamphlet, entitled The Example of France, a Warning to Britain, has
been very carefully ignored by democratic writers in this country. Lord
Morley, in his essay on Burke (English Men of Letters, p. 162), accounts for
it by describing Young as becoming " panic-stricken." There is, however,
I believe, a simple explanation of Young's complete volte-face on the subject
of the Revolution. His earlier work was written in France under the
influence of the set in French society that he frequented, and this set we
shall find on examination to have been entirely Orldaniste hence his
exaggerated strictures on the Old Regime. With the best portion of the
" noblesse," and even with the " royalist democrats," he was unacquainted,
and the disgust he expresses at the cynical behaviour of certain nobles
at a dinner-party he attended is readily explained by the fact that the
party consisted of the Due d'Orleans and his supporters (see entry for
June 22, 1789). It was from these sources, therefore, that Young gleaned
his earlier opinions on the state of France, and which a fuller knowledge
of facts and not " panic " led him to relinquish.
THE SIEGE OF THE BASTILLE 107
rejoicing, the Government of England resolutely refrained from
any expressions of satisfaction at the blow to the monarchy of
France ; out of respect to Louis XVI. the playhouses of London^?
were prohibited from representing the siege of the Bastille on
the stage.
The conduct of England provided, indeed, a marked contrast
to that of Prussia. " All the symptoms of anarchy in France/'
writes Sorel, " all the signs of discredit in the French state, are
seized upon abroad eagerly by the Prussian agents and com-
mented on in Berlin with acrimonious satisfaction. Hertzberg,
whilst priding himself on his ' enlightened views/ shows himself
on this occasion as good a Prussian as the favourites of his
master. This is because the crisis serves his intrigues and he
hopes to profit by it. ' The prestige of royalty is annihilated in
France/ he writes to the King on the 5th of July ; ' the troops
have refused to serve. Louis has declared the Seance Royale
null and void ; 1 this is a scene after the manner of Charles I. Here
is a situation of which the governments should take advantage/ '
That the English Government should not seize this opportunity
to attack the rival to her naval supremacy is inconceivable to the
mind of the good Prussian. " The I4th of July overwhelms
him (Hertzberg) with joy. ... He hails it after his fashion as
a day of deliverance. ' This is the good moment,' declares Hertz-
berg ; ' the French monarchy is overthrown, the Austrian alliance
is annihilated, this is the good moment, and also the last oppor-
tunity presented to your Majesty to give to his monarchy the
highest degree of stability/ " 2
Von der Goltz, still faithful to the precepts of his former
master, showed himself as enthusiastic as Hertzberg; he, too,
sees in the I4th of July the final defeat of the Queen he had so
long sought to defame in the eyes of the French nation, and is
equally unable to understand the attitude of the British am-
bassador, Lord Dorset, who allows his personal feelings of
gratitude and affection for the royal family of France to override
the satisfaction he might be expected to experience at the unique
opportunity offered to his country. The Comte de Salmour,
minister for Saxony, had filled his post more ably. " The Saxon
Minister," Von Goltz writes to the King of Prussia on July
24, " though principally frequenting the society of the Queen,
on account of his uncle, the Baron de Bezenval, nevertheless,
I must do him the justice to admit, continues to behave very
well to me (i.e. assists Von der Goltz in his schemes against the
Court ?). The ambassador for England, owing to his personal
attachment to the Queen and the Comte d'Artois, is as distressed
1 This was, of course, absolutely untrue.
2 L' 'Europe et la Revolution Franfaise, ii. 25.
io8 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
by all that has happened as if the blow had fallen on the King,
his master. In truth it must go to his heart, but would it not
be well if he distinguished better between his personal affections
and the interests of his post ? " 1 Frederick William, delighted
at the zeal of his ambassador, thereupon wrote to order Von der
Goltz to get into touch with the revolutionary leaders in the
National Assembly and to continue his campaign against the
Queen. Von der Goltz, obedient to these commands, stirred up
further hatred for Marie Antoinette, " intrigued against the
Court of Vienna, and thanks to his equivocal relations with the
revolutionaries paralysed the measures of the French ministry." 2
By the Prussians, therefore, the fall of the Bastille is regarded as the
triumph of Prussia over Austria. The Government of Berlin,
says Sorel, " sees that which it dared not hope for by the happiest
fortune, that which all the diplomacy of Frederick had so often
vainly attempted to secure the Austrian alliance dissolved, the
credit of the Queen lost for ever ; influence acquired by the
partisans of Prussia, and in consequence all avenues opened to
Prussian ambition.'' 3
1 Flammermont, La Journee du 14 Juillet, and Rapport sur les Corres-
pondences des Agents Diplomatiques, etc., p. 128.
2 Sorel, L'Europe et la Revolution Francaise, ii. 69 ; Flammermont,
Rapport sur les Correspondances des Agents Diplomatiques, etc., p. 127.
8 Sorel, L'Europe et la Revolution Francaise, ii. 25.
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES
109
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES
DISORDERS IN THE PROVINCES
THE desire of the people for peace and for a return to law and
order after the King's visit to Paris on the I7th of July neces-
sitated strenuous efforts on the part of the revolutionary leaders
to fan up anew the flame of insurrection. Often the task seemed
almost hopeless, and Camille Desmoulins now embarking on
his sanguinary Discours de la Lanterne, in which the Parisians
were incited to hang further victims afterwards described to
the Assembly the immense difficulty the agitators encountered
in overcoming the disinclination of the people to continue the
Revolution. " I reduce to three," wrote Buzot later, " the
methods employed by the masters of France to lead this nation
to the point she has now reached calumny, corruption, and
terror," x and though in these words Buzot alluded to the men
who afterwards became his enemies, the Terrorists, they might
still more aptly be applied to his former colleagues, the members
of the Orleaniste conspiracy. 2
Calumny directed against the victims, corruption of the
instruments, and terror created in the minds of the people
such is the history of the three months that led up to the march
on Versailles.
Of these three methods terror proved the most potent ; in
order to rouse the people one must begin by frightening them.
It was Adrien Duport, 3 one of the most inventive members of
the Club Breton, who devised the project known to contemporaries
as " the Great Fear," a scheme which consisted in sending
messengers to all the towns and villages of France to announce
the approach of imaginary brigands, Austrians or English, who
were arriving to massacre the citizens.
On the same day, the 28th of July, and almost at the same
hour, this diabolical manoeuvre was repeated all over France ; v
1 Memoirs of Buzot, p. 61.
* It is probable that Buzot was never an Orleaniste but, like Robespierre,
he worked with them at the beginning of the Revolution.
8 Essais de Beaulieu, i. 506.
in
ii2 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
everywhere the panic-stricken peasants flew to arms, and thus
the great aim of the revolutionary leaders was realized the
arming of the entire population against law and order. 1
By this means anarchy was complete throughout the kingdom,
and the crimes of July 14 and 22 in Paris were followed in the
provinces by atrocities too revolting to describe. This Reign
of Terror, organized by the Orleanistes, was, in fact, even more
frightful than the Terror of Robespierre four years later ; the
victims were arraigned before no Revolutionary Tribunal,
received no warning of their fate, but suddenly found themselves
the centre of a raging mob, accused of crimes they had never
committed, reproached for words they had never uttered, and
put finally to a death even more horrible than the guillotine.
In no case, however, do we find these outrages to be the
spontaneous work of the people ; the conception of down-
trodden peasants rising incontrollably to overthrow their op-
pressors, as in the earlier jacqueries, is entirely mythical, and
exists in the minds of no contemporaries. Such violence as the
people committed was invariably instigated by revolutionary
emissaries who persuaded them to act under a misapprehension,
and methods of diabolical ingenuity were employed to overcome
their reluctance. Thus, for example, the agitators, taking
advantage of the King's benevolent proclamations in favour of
reform, succeeded in making the peasants believe that Louis
XVI. wished to take part with them against the noblesse, and
to invoke their aid in demolishing the Old Regime. Messengers
were sent into the towns and villages bearing placards or proclaim-
ing by word of mouth : " The King orders all chateaux to be
burnt down ; he only wishes to keep his own ! " and such was
the amazing credulity of the country people that they set forth
to burn and destroy, believing in all good faith that they were
carrying out the orders of " not' bon roi." ' 2
When, however, the people proved recalcitrant, the revolu-
tionaries were obliged to resort to force ; in Dauphine in Bur-
gundy, in Franche Comte, real bands of brigands were employed
to stir up the villagers, who in some cases offered a spirited
resistance. " This troop of maniacs went into all the villages,
rang the bells to collect the inhabitants, and forced them with
a pistol at their throats to join in their brigandage. . . . This
1 Moniteur, i. 324 ; Beaulieu, i. 506 ; Appel au Tribunal de I' Opinion
Publique, by Mourner ; Memoires de Frenilly, p. 121. See the very curious
account of the scene that took place at Forges in Normandy given by
Mme. de la Tour du Pin, Journal d'une Femme de Cinquante Ans, i. 191.
Note that the manoeuvre was admitted and approved by Louis Blanc, La
Revolution, i. 337.
2 Montjoie, Conjuration de d' Orleans, ii. 105 ; Deux Amis, ii. 255 ;
Moniteur, i. 324 ; Essais de Beaulieu, ii. 16.
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 113
army of bandits threw the whole of Burgundy into consternation,
where the bravest inhabitants of the towns and country places
united all their efforts and advanced against these common
enemies of the human race, who breathed only murder and
pillage." x At Cluny the peasants, led by the monks to whom
they were devoted, received the brigands with guns and cannon-
fire and with stones flung from the windows. " They did not
allow a single brigand to escape, they were all killed or led away
as prisoners to the royal prison. They were found in possession
of printed forms : ' By order of the King.' This document
gave instructions to burn down the abbeys and chateaux because
the seigneurs and the abbots were monopolizers of grain and
poisoners of the wells, and intended to reduce the people and
the subjects of the King to the lowest pitch of misery." 2
At St. Germain the brigands unfortunately won the day,
and the inhabitants sent a deputation to the Assembly protest-
ing against the murder of their mayor, Sauvage, guiltless of any
offence, the victim of " a crowd of strangers who had thrown
themselves upon the town " and torn the unhappy man from
the hands of his fellow-citizens. 3 The mayor of St. Denis,
Chatel, met with a still more terrible fate. Throughout the
preceding winter he had been seen " always surrounded by the
unfortunate, to whom he gave free orders for bread and meat
and wood ... so that the inhabitants of St. Denis called him
' the father and the saviour of the poor people.' ' But suddenly
Chatel found himself accused by messengers from Paris of
monopolizing grain, and was put to a lingering death of which
the details are so unspeakably revolting that it is impossible to
describe them. 4 Huez, the mayor of Troyes, another " bene-
factor of the poor," was also butchered in much the same manner.
It will be seen, therefore, that the aristocrats and clergy
were not the only victims pointed out for vengeance to the
people : the law-abiding bourgeois, the benevolent citizen, what-
ever his rank, was equally abhorrent to the revolutionary leaders ;
the houses of peasants who would not join in excesses were
burnt likewise. 5 It was not a case of " misdirected popular
fury," but of a definite system pursued by the agitators which
1 Deux Amis, ii. 257.
2 Lettres d'Aristocrates, published by Pierre de Vassiere, p. 256; Deux
Amis, ii. 258.
3 Deux Amis, ii. 93 ; " Report of Deputation from St. Germain to the
National Assembly," Moniteur, i. 184.
4 Montjoie, Conjuration, ii. 91 ; Deux Amis, ii. 172.
6 In Mac_onnais, not far from Vesoul, banditti to the number of 6000,
collepted together, set fire to the houses of those peasants who would not
join them, and cut down 230 of them (Report to the National Assembly,
March 22, 1791).
I
W
:
ii4 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
consisted in exterminating every one who encouraged content-
ment with the Old Regime. Three years later the minister,
Roland, gave the clue to this design when he stated that " in
1789 the misguided people allowed themselves to be worked
up into fury and to immolate the men who were occupied in
feeding them." 1 The massacre of these good citizens is there-
fore to be explained in the same way as the attacks on Reveillon
and Berthier.
So obvious was it, indeed, to all contemporaries that these
outrages were contrary to the interests of the people, that revolu-
tionary writers can only explain them by the theory that they
were instigated by the " enemies of the Revolution/' that is
to say, by the aristocrats themselves, who, in order to bring the
cause of " liberty " into disrepute, stirred the people up to vio-
lence, and for this purpose had their own chateaux btirnt down ! 2
But if the object of the aristocrats in persuading the people
to burn down their chateaux appears incomprehensible, the
object of the revolutionary leaders in doing so is very obvious,
for by this means not only were the nobles driven out of the
country, but in the process of destruction the seigneurial granaries
were frequently burnt down likewise, fields of standing corn
were, trampled under foot, and consequently the famine was
seriously aggravated. 3
The manner in which the news of all such excesses was
received at the National Assembly proves only too clearly the
collusion between the revolutionary deputies and the agitators
of the provinces. No historian has revealed this more clearly
than Taine, and his strange inconsequence in heading his chapter
on the disorders in the provinces as " spontaneous anarchy "
has been commented on by several modern French historians. 4
" Thus," writes Taine himself, " is rural ' jacquerie ' prepared,
1 Le Ministre de I'lnterieur aux Corps Administratifs, September i,
1792.
a See, for example, Deux Amis de la Libevte, ii. 90 and following pages,
where all the excesses described by Montjoie are related in almost identical
language, but the recital ends with the words : " Such was the march of
aristocracy ! " Let any one who can make sense out of the following
passage : " The enemies of the Revolution, profiting by the general dis-
position to credulity, strove to fatigue the people by alarms spread for the
purpose in order afterwards to lull them into a false security : their plan
was to drive them to excesses so as to bring them through licence under the
yoke of despotism." Since few reprisals were ever taken, however, it is
difficult to follow this line of reasoning.
3 Moniteur, i. 324 ; Fantin Desodoards, p. 196 : " Hordes of brigands
paid by the Due d'Orleans devastated rural property without distinguishing
to which party the proprietors belonged ; the granaries disappeared with
e grain they contained."
* La Conspiration revolutionnaire de 1789, by Gustave Bord, p. 62 ;
Chassin, i. 109 ; La Revolution, by Louis Madelin, p. 74.
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 115
and the fanatics who fanned up the flame in Paris fan it up like-
wise in the provinces. ' You wish to know the authors of the
troubles/ writes a man of good sense to the Committee of Inquiry ;
' you will find them amongst the deputies of the Tiers, and
particularly amongst those who are attorneys or lawyers. They
write incendiary letters to their constituents, these letters are
received by the municipalities which are likewise composed of
attorneys and lawyers . . . they are read aloud in the principal
square, and copies are sent into all the villages.' " J
" I will tell my century, I will tell posterity," cries Ferrieres,
" that the National Assembly authorized these murders and
these burnings ! " 2
In vain the true democrats in the Assembly Mounier,
Malouet, Lally Tollendal, Virieu, and BoufHers rose to protest
against outrages on humanity and civilization committed in the
name of liberty ; the members of the revolutionary factions in
every case defended these excesses.
On July 20 Lally, in harrowing terms, described the horrors
that were taking place in Normandy, Brittany, and Burgundy,
and ended with the words : "A citizen king forces us to accept
our liberty, and I do not know why we should wrest it from him
as from a tyrant. If I insist on the motion I have put forward,
it is that love of my country impels me, it is that I accede to the
impulse of my conscience ; and if blood must flow, at least I
wash my hands of that which will be shed." 3
The speech was received with cries of fury from all parts of
the Assembly, though the side of the nobles ventured to applaud.
The murder of Foullon and Berthier had filled Lally with
burning indignation. On the morning of the 22nd of July, he
told the Assembly, the son of Berthier, pale and disfigured, had
entered his room crying out, " Monsieur, you spent fifteen years
defending the memory of your father ; save the life of mine
and let him be given judges ! " But Lally appealed in vain to
the humanity of the Assembly. Barnave, rising furiously,
exclaimed with a violent gesture, " Is this blood then so pure
that one need fear to shed it ? " 4
1 Arthur Young was present when one of these letters was received in
the provinces. " The news at the table d'hote at Colmar curious, that the
Queen had a plot, nearly on the point of execution, to blow up the National
Assembly by a mine, and to march the army instantly to massacre all
Paris. ... A deputy had written it ; they had seen the letter. . . . Thus it
is in revolutions, one rascal writes and a hundred thousand fools believe "
(Travels, date of July 24, 1789).
2 Ferrieres, i. 161. 8 Moniteur, i. 183.
4 Article on Lally Tollendal in Biographie Michaud ; also Second Letter
of Lally Tollendal to his Constituents. This speech of Lally's and the
exclamation of Barnave, though recorded by countless contemporaries, are
suppressed in the Moniteur' s account of the debate that took place on
July 23.
n6 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
Mirabeau went further. " The nation," he declared, " must
have victims I" In a letter to his constituents he had openly
defended the crimes attending the siege of the Bastille : " The
people must be essentially kind-hearted since so little blood has
been shed. . . . The anger of the people ! ah ! if the anger of
the people is terrible, the cold-bloodedness of despotism is
atrocious ; its systematic cruelties create more wretchedness
in a day than popular insurrections create victims in the course
of years." 1
The unhappy people of France had yet to learn that demagogy
can be systematic too ; that demagogy, moreover, can become
more potent than despotism, because it does not merely bring
external force to bear upon the people, but like a skilful jiu-
jitsu wrestler turns the people's own power against themselves.
This was the whole secret of the early revolutionary movement :
the people, by calumny, corruption, and terror, were made to
work out their own destruction, to kill their best friends, and
to strike down the hands that fed them.
THE WORK OF REFORM
In Paris, as in the provinces, a great fear held all hearts in
its grip. " The anarchy is most compleat," wrote Lord Auckland
on August 27 ; " the people have renounced every idea and
principle of subordination . . . even the industry of the labouring
class is interrupted and suspended ... in short, it is sufficient
to walk into the streets and to look at the faces of those who
pass to see that there is a general impression of Calamity and
Terror." *
" The National Assembly," Fersen wrote a week later,
" trembles before Paris, and Paris trembles before 40,000 to
50,000 bandits and vagabonds encamped at Montmartre and in
the Palais Royal." 3
In the midst of these alarms the Royalist Democrats of the
Assembly struggled bravely on with the work of reform. Already
the foundations of the Constitution had been laid at the Seance
Royale of the 23rd of June ; it only remained for the nobility
and clergy to complete the scheme the King had inaugurated by
surrendering their seigneurial rights.
Now " the people " of France are by nature retentive of
their possessions, and were therefore not disposed to believe that
any class enjoying privileges would voluntarily renounce them.
1 Eighteenth Letter of Mirabeau to his Constituents. See Moniteur,
i. 191, note 2.
2 Letter of Lord Auckland to Pitt. Auckland MSS.
3 Le Comte de Fersen et la Cour de France, i. xlix.
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 117
The great scheme of the revolutionary leaders from the beginning
of the Revolution had been to play on this conviction. 1 In the
cahiers drafted by Laclos and Sieyes the " privileged classes "
were persistently represented as opposed to reform, and later the
disorders in the provinces were instigated by the same propaganda.
The moment had now come to bring off the great coup of the
revolutionaries and show the nobility and the clergy to the
people as their declared enemies. This was to consist in proposing
to the Assembly to abolish at a sweep the entire feudal system.
The privileged orders would be sure to protest, and a further
triumph would thus be provided for the Orleaniste cause. What
a signal for fresh insurrections in the provinces if it could be
proclaimed to the people that the nobles and clergy had formally
refused to relinquish their privileges ! On the other hand, if
the " privileged orders " capitulated the Orleanistes would still
score a victory, for, as I have shown, the weakening of the
noblesse was an essential part of their scheme for making the
Due d'Orleans a monarch a la Louis XIV. " Thus," says
Montjoie, " d'Orleans on coming to reign would find no longer
those provincial states, those sovereign courts, that clergy, that
noblesse . . . which formed a tribunate between the King and
his subjects . . . there would be in France only one master and a
people without protectors." 2
Even the Republican Gouverneur Morris clearly recognized
this danger when he urged Lafayette " to preserve if possible
some constitutional authority to the body of the nobles as the
only means of preserving any liberty for the people."
The Orleanistes, of course, had no intention of giving liberty
to the people, and so the destruction of both nobility and clergy
was necessary to their designs. Accordingly, at a meeting of
the Club Breton, 3 it was decided that the Vicomte de Noailles,
a penniless member of the nobility and an ardent supporter of
the Due d' Orleans, should propose to the Assembly the complete
abolition of seigneurial rights.
The plan was carried out on the evening of the 4th of August,
but to their eternal honour the nobility and clergy of France rose
as one man to renounce all their ancient privileges seigneurial
1 Memoires de I'Abbe Morellet, i. 335.
a On this point the opinion of Montjoie is confirmed by no other than
Robespierre himself, for in his illuminating Rapport on the Orl6aniste con-
spiracy, delivered four years later through the mouth of St. Just, we find
this passage : " They (the Orleanistes) made war on the noblesse, the guilty
friends of the Bourbons, in order to pave the way for a" Orleans. One sees at
each step the efforts of this party to ruin the Court and to preserve the
monarchy."
8 Montjoie, Conjuration, ii. 120 ; Histoire de I' Assemble Constituante, by
Alexandre de Lameth, i. 96.
n8 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
justice, dimes, the rights of the chase, and all those feudal
dues the loss of which reduced many landed proprietors to
beggary.
At the end of the sitting Lally Tollendal rose to remind the
Assembly that it was the King who had first set them the example
of self-sacrifice by the surrender of his rights, and to propose that
" Louis XVI. should now be proclaimed the Restorer of French
liberty." * This time the eloquence of Lally carried all before
him ; the proposal was instantly taken up by both deputies and
people ; for a quarter of an hour the hall of the Assembly rang
with shouts of " Vive le Roi ! Vive Louis XVI, restaurateur
de la liberte fransaise ! "
The decision was conveyed to the King in an address from the
Assembly, and Louis XVI., in accepting the title of honour con-
ferred on him, declared his sympathy with the new reforms :
" Your wisdom and your intentions inspire me with the greatest
confidence in the result of your deliberations. Let us go and
pray Heaven to guide us, and render thanks to Him for the
generous feelings that prevail in the Assembly." 2 The last
obstacle to the work of reform had now been removed, and
nothing remained but to frame the Constitution in accordance
with the wishes of the King, nobles, clergy, and people.
On July 2j the Royalist Democrat, Clermont Tonnerre, had
presented to the Assembly the " Declaration of the Rights of
Man," 3 and by this charter and the resumes of the cahiers
the wording of the Constitution was to be framed. Now, on
August 27, Mounier, in the name of the Committee of the Consti-
tution, came forward with an improved plan by the Archbishop
of Bordeaux. 4 It will be seen, therefore, that the Royalist Demo-
crats were again the leaders of reform and rightly earned the name
they bore later of " the Constitutionals," whilst on the other
hand we have only to consult the Moniteur to find that in the
debates that took place on the subject of the Constitution the
revolutionary leaders in the Assembly were conspicuous by their
silence. The thunderous eloquence of Mirabeau, the biting
irony of Robespierre, so potent to destroy, ceased directly the
work of reconstruction began. True, the Abbe Sieves, that
" dark horse " of the Assembly now Royalist, now Republican,
and all the while the intime of the Orleanistes had taken part
in framing the Constitution, but when it came to renouncing
his own privileges Sieyes showed the worth of his Liberalism and
openly opposed the abolition of the dimes, 5 whilst the Arch-
1 Moniteur, i. 287 ; Bailly, ii. 217 ; article on Lally Tollendal in
Biographie Michaud.
* Moniteur, i. 335. * Ibid. i. 216. * Ibid. i. 390.
* Ibid. i. 328 ; Memoires de Rivarol, p. 147.
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 119
bishop of Paris, hissed by the mob as an aristocrat, came forward
at the head of the clergy to renounce them. 1 The history of the
Revolution is full of these little ironies.
It now became evident to the revolutionary leaders that the
tide was turning irresistibly against them ; during the discussion
on the Constitution the existence neither of the monarchy nor
of the reigning dynasty had been brought into dispute for, so
far, no one dared to differ from the unanimous demands of the
cahiers and it was plain that not only the monarchists but Louis
Seizistes were leading the House. " Louis XVI.," a deputy
had declared, " is no longer on the throne by accident of birth ;
he is there by the choice of the nation." 2
To both Orleanistes and Subversives the future, therefore,
looked very black indeed ; at this rate France would be re-
generated without further convulsions, and both monarchy and
reigning dynasty established more firmly than ever. From the
Orleaniste point of view the Constitution would inevitably prove
disastrous, for either it would stop the Revolution altogether,
or, if they were able to continue it and bring about the desired
change of dynasty, the Due d'Orleans would have to content
himself with becoming a Constitutional monarch a position
it would not amuse him in the least to occupy. Some pretext
must therefore be found immediately for creating fresh dissen-
sions. This was provided by the debate on the " royal sanction "
which began on August 29 and turned on the questions : " Should
the King be allowed to retain the right of the ' Veto ' ? If so,
should the ' Veto ' be ' absolute ' or ' suspensive ' in other
words, should the King be able absolutely to 'veto' the pro-
mulgation of a law or merely to suspend its promulgation until
a later date ? "
Undoubtedly the Royal Veto was a relic of autocracy, and as
such might reasonably be condemned by independent democratic
thinkers, but, as several deputies immediately pointed out, the
question was one on which the Assembly had no power to de-
liberate, since " the royal sanction had been demanded by the
people in the cahiers." 3
11 The law was made by the nation," said D'Espremenil,
" we have only to declare it." 4
Thus spoke the spirit of pure democracy.
The Royalist Democrats, true to their cahiers as to their
King, therefore unanimously supported the royal sanction. " I
regard the royal sanction," declared Lally Tollendal, " as one
of the first ramparts of national liberty." 5 "I would defend
' 1 Moniteur, i. 331 ; Rivarol, p. 146. a Moniteur, i. 391.
* See Articles VI. and VII. quoted on pp. 7 and 8.
* Moniteur, i. 397. 6 Ibid. i. 419.
120 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
it," he said again, " to my last breath, less for the King than for
the people." 1
Here, then, was the pretext needed by the revolutionary
leaders for once more stirring up insurrection, and agitators were
sent into the clubs and cafes of Paris to tell the citizens that
" traitors in the Assembly had voted for the absolute Veto of
the King, who would now revoke all the decrees of August the 4th
and France would be again enslaved." 2
They were careful, however, not to mention to the people
that several of the Orleaniste deputies, including Mirabeau
himself acting presumably in the interests of the duke had
voted for the absolute Veto. 3 The Royalist Democrats alone,
and not the Royalists who opposed reform, were represented to
the people as their enemies. Playfair is one of the few English
contemporaries who have commented on this significant fact :
" Perhaps the thing that may the most convince impartial men
of the existence of a criminal plot is, that the moderate party of
the reformers in the Assembly, that is those who were royalists,
but had obtained popular favour by their eloquence and love of
liberty, were those whom the party in power, the Lameths,
Barnave, Mirabeau, etc., turned against with the greatest fury.
Mounier, the Count de Lally Tollendal, and upwards of forty
more of the moderate party, received anonymous letters threaten-
ing their lives. . . . This would seem to be proof that the reigning
party were more afraid of the men who were attached to liberty
than of the pure royalists, as the personal characters of the former
left no hopes of leading them over to the violent measures in
view." *
So again we find the revolutionary movement diametrically
opposed to the work of reform. Let any one who challenges this
statement explain the following circumstance : the plan of the
Constitution founded on the Declaration of the Rights of Man
universally agreed to be the purest expression of democracy was
given to the Assembly by the Royalist Democrats on August 28,
and two days later a price was set on the heads of all these
men by the revolutionaries at the Palais Royal. 6 Mounier, who
1 Moniteur, i. 399.
2 Deux Amis, ii. 361 ; Memoires de Bailly, ii. 327 ; Ferrieres, i. 222.
8 According to the Memoires de La Fayette, Mirabeau had voted for the
absolute Veto on the advice of Claviere, the future Girondin : " ' You see
that bald head/ he said, pointing out Claviere to several deputies who
spoke to him in favour of the Suspensive Veto, ' I do nothing without
consulting it.' And the bald head, Republican in Geneva on the loth of
August (1792), had declared for the absolute Veto " (Memoir es de La
Fayette, iii. 311).
* Playfair's History of Jacobinism, p. 244.
6 Article on Mounier in Biographic Michaud by Lally Tollendal.
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 121
from the first had shown himself the most intrepid champion of
liberty Mounier who in an excess of democratic zeal had proposed
the Oath of the Tennis Court, and to whom more than to any
one the principles of the Constitution were due was now held
up to popular execration, and from this moment his life was
perpetually threatened. 1 Could there be any explanation but
the one offered by Mounier himself that the whole agitation
was a plot to prevent the framing of the Constitution ? 2
FIRST ATTEMPT TO MARCH ON VERSAILLES
By the usual methods of calumny and terror the mind of the
populace was once more stirred up, and a panic on the subject
of the Veto spread through Paris. The fact that to many of the
people the Latin word conveyed no meaning whatever greatly
facilitated the work of the agitators. " Do you know what the
Veto is ? " they cried out at the street corners. " Listen, then.
You go home and your wife has prepared your dinner, then the
King says ' Veto ! ' and you get nothing to eat ! " 3
The " suspensive Veto," a peasant told Bertrand de Molle-
ville, was the right of the King to suspend, i.e. to hang, any one he
pleased. Some people, indeed, believed the Veto to be alive :
" What is he, this Veto ? What has he done, this brigand Veto ? " 4
By the evening of Sunday, August 30, the garden of the
Palais Royal had become once more a raging sea ; so immense
was the crowd that it overflowed into the surrounding houses ;
the windows and the very roofs were packed with people. Sud-
denly from a window of the Cafe de Foy there shot forth the
shoulders and shaggy black head of Camille Desmoulins, who
shouted excitedly to the assembled multitude :
" Messieurs, I have just received a letter from Versailles
telling me that the life of the Comte de Mirabeau is no longer
safe, and it is for the defence of our liberty that he is exposed
to danger ! " 5
The panic news was passed from mouth to mouth " Mirabeau
has paid with his life-blood his attachment to the cause of the
1 " M. Mounier, one of the principal authors of the Revolution and one
of the first leaders of the patriotic party, Became suddenly the object of the
people's hatred and of the favour of aristocracy ! " (Deux Amis, iii. 166).
For " people " as usual read " revolutionaries " I
* Mounier to the Assembly, August 31 : " It is evident that perverse
men desire to build up their fortunes on the ruins of the country. You see
the plan to prevent the Constitution from being formed and developed "
(Moniteur, i. 400).
t 3 La Revolution, by Louis Madelin, p. 87.
4 Article on St. Huruge in the Revue de la Revolution, published by
Gustave Bord, vol. vi. p. 251.
6 Procedure du Chdtelet, evidence of Dwall, witness cccxvii.
122 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
people " " Mirabeau has been stabbed to the heart no,
poisoned " a letter from Mirabeau himself warned the people
that the country was in danger, that fourteen men had betrayed
their cause. 1
These tidings drove the crowd into a frenzy of alarm, and
thus the ridiculous situation was created of a vast multitude
inveighing against the Veto and at the same time stricken
with panic for the safety of its chief supporter Mirabeau !
' The people," remarks Bailly, " did not as yet know their
lesson." 2
It was now that the Orleanistes saw their opportunity for
launching their great scheme of a march on Versailles. If the
King persisted in retaining his popularity with the people by
giving into their demands and continuing to favour reforms, it
was idle to hope that the people would rise against him. The
remoteness of Versailles from the centre of agitation added
greatly to the glamour that surrounded the person of the King ;
shut in behind the gilded barriers and the dim red walls of the
great chateau of the Roi Soleil, Louis XVI. still retained to some
degree the character of a sacred being, whose infrequent appear-
ance in public inspired the great mass of the people with wondering
awe. But if Louis XVI. could be brought to Paris to become
the object of everyday contemplation by the multitude, the halo
might be expected to fall from his head. At the palace of the
Tuileries, close to the Palais Royal, the revolutionary leaders
would have him in their power, 3 and the populace they held at
their command could be trained to degrade the Royal Family in
the eyes of the still loyal people.
Accordingly it was announced at the Palais Royal that in
order to save the country from the horrors of the Veto, and to
ensure the safety of Mirabeau, a deputation must be sent to the
Assembly to insist that the King and the Dauphin should be
brought to Paris. Camille Desmoulins shrieked that the Queen
must be imprisoned at St. Cyr and that the deputation should
consist of 15,000 armed men. At the same time threatening
messages were despatched to the President of the Assembly,
the bishop of Langres ; one signed by St. Huruge ran thus :
" The Patriotic Assembly of the Palais Royal have the honour
to inform you that if that portion of the aristocracy, composed
of a party in the clergy, a party in the noblesse, and 120 members
of the Commons, ignorant and corrupt, continue to disturb
harmony and to demand the ' absolute sanction/ 15,000 men
are ready to light up their houses and chateaux, and yours in
1 Ferrieres, i. 220 ; Deux Amis, ii. 360.
z Memowes de Bailly , ii. 327.
3 Appel au Tribunal de I'Opinion publique, by Mourner, p. 65.
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 123
particular, Monsieur, and to inflict on the deputies who betray
their country the fate of Foullon and of Berthier." *
The authorship of these two murders was thus clearly revealed.
But the number of insurgents promised by the leaders was
not forthcoming, and at ten o'clock in the evening St. Huruge,
armed with the petition, set forth at the head of only 1500 un-
armed men for Versailles. The aspect of their leader was terrible
enough to inspire his followers with courage a massive figure
surmounted by a huge red face, eyes of extraordinary audacity
flaming forth from under a thick black wig, St. Huruge appeared
the very incarnation of the revolutionary spirit. 2
But the daring of St. Huruge, like the daring of Danton, was
more apparent than real ; the first sight of danger reduced him
to the utmost meekness. 3 On this occasion danger of a very
formidable kind confronted him Lafayette, the great opponent
of the Orleaniste conspiracy, was ready for him. The proces-
sion having marched boldly down the Rue Saint-Honore found
their passage blocked by the National Guard, of which Lafayette
was the commander, and being turned back they proceeded to
march to the H6tel de Ville, where Bailly and Lafayette himself
were waiting to receive them. The popular general had little
difficulty in reducing St. Huruge to submission ; perfectly docile
and even " contented " he consented to retire from the scene,
but for greater safety Lafayette imprisoned him in the Chatelet.
So ended this first attempt to march on Versailles. But
the project was not abandoned. On the contrary, from this
moment it was perpetually discussed, and a fresh pretext was
sought for stirring up the people.
EVENTS AT VERSAILLES
When on the i8th of September the King made his reply to
the demands of the Assembly requesting him to sanction the
reforms of the 4th of August, it became evident that no opposi-
tion could be hoped for from the royal authority. The King's
reply was both reasonable and sympathetic ; in a long and
detailed analysis he discussed each reform in turn, pointing out
that certain articles were only the text for laws that the Assembly
must frame. He ended with the words : " Therefore I approve
1 Memoires de Bailly , iii. 392.
2 Esquisses historiques de la Revolution Franpaise, by Dulaure, p. 286.
3 A contemporary records that St. Huruge having been once reproached
for allowing himself to be flogged without retaliating, he replied, " I never
interfere with what goes on behind my back " (L'Ami des Lois, 17
pluviose, An VIII). See article on St. Huruge in the Revue de la Revolution
edited by Gustave Bord, vol. vi.
124 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
the greater number of these articles, and I will sanction them
when they have been drawn up into laws."
This conciliatory reply left the revolutionary leaders no
further ground for agitation, and they contented themselves
with insolently remarking that the King had not been asked to
"sanction" the decrees of the Assembly but only to "promulgate "
them. Floods of rhetoric were then expended on the precise
significance of the two words. But as the King sensibly observed,
how was it possible to " promulgate " laws that had not yet
been framed ? However, in order to pacify the contentious
deputies, he finally yielded to their demands, and two days later,
on August 28, accorded his " acceptation pure and simple " to the
decrees of August 4. 1
The Assembly then proceeded to discuss the embarrassment
in the finances. But here again the King showed his desire to
relieve the situation by coming forward to offer all his silver
plate to the nation, whilst at the same time the Queen sent 60,000
livres' worth to the Mint. The proposition met with immediate
remonstrance from the Assembly, but the King persisted in his
resolution. 2
This was the moment chosen by Mirabeau for a tirade against
" the rich " " the frightful gulf of bankruptcy must be filled,"
he declared to the Assembly. " Well, then, here is the list of
French proprietors. Choose amongst the richest so as to sacri-
fice the fewest citizens. . . . Strike ! Immolate without pity
those wretched victims ; precipitate them into the abyss ; it will
close again ! . . . You shrink with horror ? Inconsistent men !
Pusillanimous men ! " 3
The speech was received with " almost convulsive applause "
by the Assembly.
Yet how was Mirabeau himself carrying out the principle of
austere self-sacrifice ? Camille Desmoulins will tell us. On the
2gth of September exactly three days after Mirabeau's tirade
Camille wrote these words : " I have been for a week at Versailles
with Mirabeau. We have become great friends ; at least he
calls me his dear friend. At every moment he takes me by the
hands, he thumps me, then he goes off to the Assembly, resumes
1 The King is frequently stated to have refused this sanction until
October 5, but contemporaries of all parties are explicit on this point.
See Deux Amis, iii. 29 ; Memoires de Bailly, ii. 379 ; Marmontel, iv. 238 ;
Histoire de I'AssembUe Constituante, by Alexandre de Lameth, i. 142.
2 Moniteur, i. 496 ; Bailly, ii. 389. On the question of the King's
" rigid economy " with regard to his personal expenses see the address from
the National Assembly on January 5, 1790 (Moniteur, iii. 52).
3 Moniteur, i. 519. Mol6, the actor, who was present on this occasion,
delighted Mirabeau by telling him he had missed his vocation he should
have gone on the stage ! (Souvenirs d'^tienne Dumont, p. 133).
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 125
his dignity as he enters the hall and works wonders, after which
he comes back to dine with excellent company and sometimes
with his mistress, and we drink excellent wine. I feel that his
too delicate fare and overloaded table corrupt me. His claret and
his maraschino have a virtue that I vainly seek to ignore, and
1 have all the difficulty in the world in resuming my republican 1
austerity and in detesting the aristocrats whose crime is to
give these excellent dinners. I prepare motions, and Mirabeau
calls that initiating me into great affairs. It seems to me that
I ought to think myself happy when I remember my position
at Guise. ..." Oh, people, these are your defenders !
It is said that only a few weeks before, Mirabeau, looking
out of the window and seeing a crowd of poor people fighting
at a baker's shop for bread, uttered the cynical remark, " That
canaille there well deserves to have us for legislators ! " Like
Danton he at least was frank, and no one would have been more
amused than Mirabeau himself at the efforts of his biographers
to represent him as a lofty idealist and lover of the people.
What was the truth about Mirabeau at this juncture when
the march on Versailles was being planned in the councils of the
Orleaniste leaders ? Was he amongst them ? His panegyrists
have vainly endeavoured to absolve him from complicity, but
contemporaries, even those who were his friends, are obliged to
admit that he knew what was to take place even if he did not
help to prepare the movement.
" I am inclined to think," says Dumont, " that Mirabeau was
in the secret of the events of the 5th and 6th of October. . . .
What I believe is, taking everything into consideration, suppos-
ing that the insurrection of Versailles was led by the agents of
the Due d'Orleans, that Laclos was too clever to confide every-
thing to the indiscretion of Mirabeau, but that he had made sure
of him conditionally. ... It is impossible not to believe in
some liaison between them." 2 This from the intime of Mirabeau
is conclusive. Camille Desmoulins, who at this date " idolized "
Mirabeau, also gave away his friend later on : " Will any one
make me believe that when I stayed at Versailles with Mirabeau
immediately before the 6th of October ... I saw nothing of
1 The use of the word " republican " by Desmoulins at this date may
seem to contradict the statement that he was an Orleaniste, but the word
was frequently used during the earlier stages of the Revolution to signify
simply " public-spirited " (see, for example, the remark of Mounier to
Mirabeau on p. 140). On the other hand, Montjoie may be right in saying
that at this moment Camille Desmoulins had temporarily gone over to
Lafayette and Republicanism (Conjuration de d'Orleans, ii. 153). This
would explain the disagreement that seems to have taken place between
Desmoulins and Mirabeau at the end of this visit to Versailles.
2 Souvenirs sur Mirabeau, p. 121.
126 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
the precursory movements of the 5th and 6th ? Will any one
make me believe that when I went to Mirabeau at the moment
that he heard the Due d' Orleans had started for London, his
anger at seeing himself abandoned, his imprecations . . . made
me conjecture nothing ? " *
The plan of the conspirators was undoubtedly either to
persuade the mob to march on Versailles and murder the King
and Queen, or more probably to murder the Queen only and
bring the King to Paris. Of all this Mirabeau was evidently
well aware even if he was not one of the authors of the scheme
and it would seem that at moments the dreadful secret preyed
on his mind. Perhaps amidst the mire of his life some hereditary
traditions of honour, some instincts of chivalry, had survived
which made him shrink from the brutal crime of which a noble
and beautiful woman was to be the chief victim, and at these
moments he was almost tempted to abandon the sordid intrigue
into which he had been drawn and throw himself into the worthier
cause of defending his King against the designs of a usurper.
Yet if he did so, what reception would he meet with from the
Court ? The King and Queen, he well knew, regarded him with
aversion. Was it not possible, therefore, that by deserting the
conspiracy he might simply become the enemy of Orleans and
gain no favour with the King ? Thus haunted with the horror
of the thing he wished the King would find out for himself the
tragedy that was impending. Often at this tune Mirabeau, in
speaking of the Court to his friend La Marck, would ask un-
controllably, "What are these people thinking of? Do they
not see the abyss that is opening under their feet ? " Once in
a violent outbreak of exasperation he cried out, " All is lost ;
the King and Queen will perish you will see it and the populace
will batter their corpses." And then, seeing the horror on the
face of La Marck, he repeated, " Yes, yes, their corpses will be
battered you do not understand sufficiently the danger of
their position ; it ought to be made known to them."
But it had been made known to them, and by Lafayette him-
self in a letter to the Comte de St. Priest dated September 17.
On the 23rd, therefore, the King warned the Assembly of
" the threats of ill-disposed persons to march out of Paris with
arms," and of the measures he had taken for the protection of
the deputies. The Assembly, however, was already aware of the
intention. " I repeat without fear of contradiction," says Mounier,
" that every day the ministers received the most alarming infor-
mation on this subject, and the King's Guards were several times
obliged to spend the night in readiness to mount their horses." 1
1 Fragment de I'Histoire secrete de la Revolution, 1793.
* Appel au Tribunal de I'Opinion publique, p. 67.
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 127
If under these circumstances a plan was formed by certain
Royalists to convey the Royal Family to Metz or to some other
place of safety, is it altogether surprising? That any such
project existed has never yet been proved the only evidence
brought forward by the revolutionary writers being the rough
copy of a letter from the Comte d'Estaing to the Queen l which
fell into the hands of the conspirators but even if the supposi-
tion were correct, what perfidy would this imply on the part of
the Royalists ? Why, if the fives of the King and Queen were
daily threatened, should not their loyal supporters attempt to
rescue them from their assassins ? The scheme involved no
design on the liberties of the nation, and the flight of the Royal
Family to Metz would have been undertaken, like the flight to
Varennes two years later, simply in self-defence. At any rate,
one undeniable fact remains the plan was not attempted, the
King and Queen of their own free will decided to stay at Versailles
and face the danger.
THE BANQUET OF THE BODYGUARD
The municipality of Versailles, alarmed no less for the safety
of the town than of the Royal Family, now decided, on the advice
of the Comte d'Estaing, commander of the National Guard of
Versailles, to request the King to summon another regiment as
a reinforcement of the bodyguard, the Swiss dragoons and
milice bourgeoise that at present constituted the garrison,
and were held to be inadequate " to resist the attack of 2000
armed men." 2 Accordingly the " Regiment de Flandre " was
ordered to Versailles and arrived on September 23. Immediately
the conspirators set to work to corrupt the newly arrived troops,
and women of the town were sent to distribute money, food, and
wine amongst the soldiers, 8 and to exact from them the promise
not to defend the King in case of insurrection. " One would not
have supposed," writes a revolutionary chronicler of the day,
" that it is to the vilest class of our prostitutes that we owe the
happy event that brought the King to Paris and the consolation
that the day of October the 5th was not more murderous. . . . The
leaders of the people . . . sent to Versailles ... in bands and
by different routes three hundred of the prettiest street-walkers
of the Palais Royal with money, instructions, and the promise
of being disembowelled by the people if they did not carry out
1 Deux Amis, iii. 101 ; Montjoie, Conjuration de d' Orleans, ii. 167.
z Deux Amis, iii. 112 ; Bailly, ii. 281 ; Rivarol, p. 256.
3 Montjoie, Conjuration ded Orleans, ii. 172 ; Ferrieres, ii. 273 ; evidence
of Elizabeth Pannier, wife of a restaurant keeper at Versailles, witness xx.
in Procedure du Chdtelet.
128 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
their mission faithfully. It was these female deputies who,
amidst the pleasures of love, obtained from the soldiers the
patriotic oath which rendered their arms powerless before their
fellow-citizens." x
By the same means which had been employed to seduce the
Gardes Franchises before the siege of the Bastille, the men of
the Regiment de Flandre were now turned from their allegiance
to the King, and as a sign of defection adopted the tricolour
cockade. 2
The loyal troops of the King saw all this with growing alarm,
and resolved to bring the Flemish regiment back to its allegiance.
Now it was a time-honoured custom for the King's bodyguard
to entertain at supper any newly arrived regiment ; accordingly
the officers of the Regiment de Flandre were invited to a banquet
at which a number of the Swiss Guards, the milice bourgeoise,
and others were also present. The theatre of the Chateau, lent
by the King for the occasion, was brilliantly decorated, and lit
by hundreds of candles ; around a huge horse-shoe table the
officers of the bodyguard and the officers of the Flemish regiment
were seated alternately, and the bands of the two regiments
played throughout the feast. Were the faithful soldiers of the
King to blame if they took this opportunity to revive the waning
loyalty of their comrades ? Were they to be reproached with
treachery to the nation if under their influence the men of the
Flemish regiment broke out into cries of " Vive le Roi ! "
When at this juncture the Royal Family entered the hall,
the Queen leading Madame Royale by the hand, an officer of
the bodyguard carrying the Dauphin in his arms, enthusiasm
knew no bounds, and a storm of acclamation burst forth un-
restrained.
To the minds of Frenchmen there was something intensely
tragic in the sudden apparition of the little group over whose
heads so terrible a storm was gathering, and at the sight of the
Queen a beautiful woman, a wife, a mother, whose life they
knew was daily threatened all the ancient chivalry of France
awoke in them, and to a man they resolved to defend her. The
last touch of pathos was given by the band of the Regiment
de Flandre with the air from " Richard Coeur de Lion " :
O ! Richard ! o mon Roi ! 1'univers t'abandonne !
The selection was painfully apt ; all the world was deserting
the unhappy King, and with the passionate loyalty of their race
the gallant bodyguard at this supreme moment mustered around
him. Men of both regiments sprang on to their chairs, waved
1 Correspondance secrete, i. 414.
3 Fails relatifs a la derntire insurrection, by Mounier.
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 129
their glasses aloft, and shouted themselves hoarse with cries of
" Vive le Roi ! Vive la Reine ! Vive le Dauphin ! "
The scene was afterwards described by the revolutionaries
as a " drunken orgy " ; it is possible that both wine and music
had gone to the heads of the revellers is the fact altogether
unprecedented in the annals of regimental dinners ? but the
fact implies no criminal intention towards the nation.
The occasion provided, however, the pretext for which the
conspirators were waiting, and the story was immediately circu-
lated in Versailles and carried to the Palais Royal it is said by
the Due d' Orleans himself 1 that the officers of the bodyguard
had refused to drink the health of the nation and had trampled
under foot the " national cockade." The accusation, emphatic-
ally denied by eye-witnesses of the scene, 2 rested on the evidence
of one man alone, a certain Laurent Lecointre, cloth-seller and
officer in the milice bourgeoise of Versailles, who was filled with
rancour against the bodyguard because he had not been invited
to the banquet, 3 and who was therefore not present.
The exact truth about the " toast of the nation " is impossible
to discover, but from the evidence of the most reliable witnesses
it appears that the health of the nation was not drunk because
the toast was not a customary one, and so was not proposed on
this or any former occasion. 4 It was, therefore, not refused.
As to the incidents of the cockades, the officers of the body-
guard could not have torn off the national cockades and trampled
on them, for the simple reason that they had not adopted them
but were still wearing the white cockade. 5 At the same time it
seems that white cockades were distributed by the ladies of the
Court to the Regiment de Flandre, and that voices were heard
to exclaim, " Long live the white cockade, it is the right one ! "
But when we remember that the tricolour represented the
colours of the Due d' Orleans, that it had become in reality not the
" national " but the " revolutionary cockade," and was regarded
amongst soldiers as the badge of desertion, 6 was it unnatural
that those who desired the King's cause to triumph over the
designs of a usurper should have attempted to replace it by the
royal emblem ? If so, as Mounier points out, " Where was the
1 Evidence of De Pelletier and of De Grandmaison in Procedure du
Chdtelet.
2 Memoires de Mme. Campan, p. 248 ; speech of the Marquis de Bonnay
to the Assembly on October i, 1790, in Moniteur for this date ; evidence of
La Brousse de Belleville, witness xxn. in Procedure du Chdtelet, etc.
3 Montjoie, Conjuration de d' Orleans, ii. 173 ; Appel au Tribunal, by
Mounier, p. in.
4 Ferrieres, i. 275.
* Ibid. i. 260 ; Deux Amis, iii. 128
* Fails relatifs a la derniere Insurrection, by Mounier, p. 9.
K
130 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
crime ? What law obliged one at Versailles to wear the cockade
of Paris ? Why should one not have been allowed to prefer the
colour that from all time had been that of our flag ? Why, on
a day that the Royal Family was threatened, should not all
courageous men have rallied round this sign of fidelity ? " 1
A strange incident followed the banquet. A chasseur of the
Trois fiveches was found by Miomandre, an officer of the Royal
Turenne, sunk in despair, with his forehead resting on the hilt
of his sword. When asked what was his trouble he broke out
into sobs and disjointed sentences in which the following words
alone were audible : " That fine household of the King ... I am
a great fool . . . The monsters, what do they demand ? . . . those
rascals of a commander and D' Orleans ! " Then falling on his
sword he attempted to take his life. At this moment several
of his comrades appeared on the scene, and hearing what had
occurred one of them exclaimed, " He is a good-for-nothing
we must get rid of him ! " Thereupon they kicked the wretched
man to death " as one would crush an insect." 2
It will be seen, then, how frightful were the consequences to
any one who attempted to betray the designs of the conspirators,
how potent was the Orleaniste " terror " that during the first
stages of the Revolution held sway over the minds of men and
sealed the lips of those who would have revealed the truth con-
cerning the preparations for the insurrection of October 5.
PRELIMINARIES OF THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES
The story of the Guards' " orgy " had served the purpose of
rendering this loyal regiment odious to the people, but a further
obstacle must be removed from their path if the conspirators
were to succeed in their scheme of bringing the King to Paris.
" It was necessary," says Mounier, " in order to execute their
plan, to get rid of the King's guards and of all those who would
have defended his liberty. They feared the courage of the Queen,
and so she must be given over to the fury of the people." 3 Louis
XVI., surrounded by his feeble and purblind ministers, was not
to be feared ; they had but to assure him that the people wished
him to go to Paris and to Paris he would go. But the Queen
would see the plot and offer resistance. " The King," said
Mirabeau a year later, " has only one man with him that is
his wife." 4
So by every species of calumny, by the circulation of the
1 Appel au Tribunal, by Mounier, p. 91.
2 Deux Amis, iii. 134 ; Ferri&res, i. 279.
3 Appel au Tribunal, p. 65.
4 Correspondance entre Mirabeau et La March, p. 107.
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 131
foulest libels, by every method the " infernal genius" of Laclos
could devise, 1 popular rage was stirred up against the Queen at
the Palais Royal and in the Faubourgs of Paris. " The Queen
was at the head of a counter-revolution the Queen was the sole
cause of the disorder in the finances the Queen had said that
the happiest day of her life would be when she could wash her
hands in the blood of the French," that she " would not mind
being shut up in Paris, provided the walls of her prison were
made of the bones of Frenchmen." 2 But the accusation that
stirred most deeply the passions of the people was that the Queen
was responsible for the scarcity of bread. For, in spite of a
magnificent harvest only six weeks earlier, the supplies of grain
were again declared to be insufficient, the bakers' shops were
besieged, working-men waited all day to obtain a 4 Ib. loaf and
returned empty-handed to their starving families.
Hunger is apt to render one light-headed ; under its dizzying
spell many things seem possible that with a well-nourished brain
one would recognize as absurd, and so the half-famished dwellers
in the Faubourgs readily accepted the assurance that the King,
the Queen, and the " aristocrats " were at the bottom of the
trouble. Gouverneur Morris thus describes an orator haranguing
the people : " The substance of his discourse was : ' Messieurs,
we are in want of bread, and this is the reason it is only three
days since the King has had the suspensive Veto, and already
the aristocrats have bought suspensions and sent the grain out
of the kingdom/ To this sensible and profound discourse his
audience gave a hearty assent. ' Ma foi ! he is right. It is only
that ! ' Oh, rare ! These are the modern Athenians ! "
But were these poor people altogether to blame for their
credulity ? Many of them could neither read nor write. How
were they to know that neither Court nor aristocrats had anything
whatever to do with the circulation of grain at this crisis, since
the whole question had been placed under the control of the
" Committee of Subsistences," headed by the popular mayor,
Bailly, who, helpless as ever before the manoeuvres of the
Orleanistes, vainly endeavoured to thwart the monopolizers ? 3
The truth is that this famine, like the one that had threatened
earlier in the year, was fictitious ; the want of bread, as con-
temporaries of all parties agree, did not really exist, but was
artificially produced in order to inflame the minds of the people
1 " I know that several of the libels published then (before the 5th of
October) were paid for by the agents of the Due d'Or!6ans " (M6moires de
Malouet, i. 344). Others were undoubtedly paid for by Von der Goltz.
2 Lettre d'un Fran$ais sur les moyens qui ont opirb la Revolution, pp. n,
12, and 31.
8 La Conspiration r&volutionnaire de ij8g, by Gustave Bord, p. 211.
132 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
against the Court and Government. 1 This point, habitually over-
looked by historians, gives the key to the whole movement of
October 5.
Moreover, that this artificial famine was again the work of the
Orleaniste conspiracy there can be no doubt whatever, for apart
from the statements of Montjoie, Rivarol, the Comte d'Hezecques,
and Mounier, which all exactly agree, we have that of Bailly
himself, and no one was in a better position than the mayor to
judge of the real state of affairs, nor was any man less likely to
defend the Court against the accusation of a plot if any such had
existed. Who were the authors of the plot Bailly, however,
indicates very clearly : " The parties who sought to bring about
an insurrection, well realizing that there was no finer opportunity
than the want of supplies, made every effort to make an unequal
/./division either by pillaging our convoys without (the city) or
, taking them by force from the bakers within, or else by cornering
the bread so that one should have too much and the other go
without, or in purposely placing amongst the crowd assembled
at the bakers' doors strong men who could ill-treat and injure
the weak so as to make the people complain. When I passed
in front of one of these shops and saw this crowd, my heart was
torn, and I can still hardly see a baker's shop without emotion." 2
A further method employed by the agitators was to tell the
people that the flour was bad, and as much of that which was now
on the markets came from abroad, and differed in colour and
flavour from the home-grown variety, this story was readily
believed, and the people were persuaded to rip up the sacks,
dispersing the contents. No less than 2000 sackfuls were thrown
into the Seine. 3 These diabolical methods had the desired effect
of denuding the markets and driving the poor of Paris to
desperation.
1 See, amongst the assertions of innumerable contemporaries, that of
Mounier, Appel au Tribunal, p. 74 : " At the time of October the 5th,
means were adopted that had been tried several times before, that of
creating a famine and then accusing those who were called aristocrats so
as to give the impression that abundance was at the disposal of a prince
without power, and thus to associate the feeling of vengeance with the
feeling of want." Mounier goes on to point out that Brissot himself was
obliged to admit that before the insurrection of October 5 " there had
existed for some days that apparent famine of which we spoke before.
This famine did not really exist." Brissot then proceeded to accuse " the
aristocrats," but as Mounier observed : " We will not seek to show how
absurd it was to accuse of these manoeuvres those who were to be the
victims of them, whilst it would have been much more correct to conclude
that since the aristocrats of Versailles were the objects of the people's
hatred, that hatred was excited by the partisans of the democracy. It
is at any rate true that M. Brissot admitted the famine was fictitious
and consequently that a plot existed."
2 Bailly, ii. 406. 8 Ibid. ii. 359.
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 133
Meanwhile the agitators were hard at work. In the Faubourg
Saint-Antoine, Santerre and the orator Gonchon, whose red and
blotchy countenance rivalled in hideosity that of Danton or of
St. Huruge, stirred up insurrection. 1 At the Palais Royal, on
Sunday, October 4, " Danton roared his denunciations," and
" Marat made as much noise as the four trumpets on the Day
of Judgment." It was now that the morrow's march on Versailles
was publicly announced on the pretext of " the scarcity of bread,
the desire of avenging the national cockade, and of bringing the
King to Paris." 2
By these means the movement, like the one that had
preceded the siege of the Bastille, was made to appear spon-
taneous an uncontrollable rising of the people that the
leaders were powerless to subdue. But at the Due d'Orleans*
house in Passy 3 the march had already been planned, and the
elements of which the mob was to be composed arranged by
the conspirators.
" If an insurrection were possible," Mirabeau had said, " it
would only be in the event of women mingling in the movement
and taking the lead." 4 Did the idea of a " hunger march of
women " originate with Mirabeau ? Or had he merely in one
of his frequent moments of indiscretion given away the secret
of his party ? The truth will never be known, yet one thing
is certain the plan did not originate with the women, but
was adopted for an excellent reason by the organizers of the
expedition.
Now, the leaders of the revolutionary mobs were never fond
of facing artillery or troops of whose defection they had not
previously assured themselves, and at Versailles they well knew
that not only the King's faithful bodyguard awaited them, but
also certain cannons which pointed threateningly at the Avenue
de Paris, by which the procession must approach the Chateau.
If, however, a contingent of women could be induced to march
first and form a screen between them and the troops, the rest of
the army could safely advance with their artillery. 5 The plan
was well thought out, and the conspirators entertained no doubt
that the women of Paris could be incited by the pangs of hunger
to co-operate. Accordingly supplies were now entirely cut off,
1 Gonchon received the sum of 30,000 to 40,000 francs for each insurrec-
tion he succeeded in exciting (Memoirs of the Comtesse de Bohm, p. 196,
edited by De Lescure).
8 Appel au Tribunal, by Mounier, p. 123.
3 Histoire de la Revolution de France, by Fantin Desodoards, i. 340.
4 Crimes de la Revolution, by Prudhomme, iii. 161.
6 Appel au Tribunal, p. 123 : " Those who directed it (the insurrection)
had judged it expedient to make it begin with women, so that the soldiers
would be less likely to use force."
i 3 4 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
and when the wet and windy morning of Monday the 5th of
October dawned, the Faubourgs of Saint-Antoine and Saint-
Marceau found themselves absolutely without bread.
THE 5TH OF OCTOBER
This was the signal for the insurrection to begin, and as
early as six o'clock bands of rioters, led by harridans of ferocious
aspect, started out to collect recruits. Now, according to the
history books that enlightened our youth, the women thus
assembled and induced to march on Versailles were principally
fishwives, ragged and dishevelled furies, endowed, like their
counterparts in our own old Billingsgate, with a peculiar talent
for invective. Rivarol, however, in a passage which we shall
find later on confirmed by unquestionable evidence, shatters
this time-honoured legend. " The women who went from Paris
to Versailles are always designated by the name of poissardes.
This is unfortunate for those who sell fish and fruit in the streets
and markets ; truth compels one to say that, far from joining
forces with the sham poissardes who came to recruit them, they
asked at the guard-house at the point of Saint-Eustache for help
in driving them back." x Why, indeed, should the poissardes
wish to march on Versailles ? In the past the King and Queen
had no more loyal subjects than the women whom the Old Regime
courteously designated " the Ladies of the Market." Was it
not their privilege to present themselves before their Majesties
and express in prose or verse their congratulations or condolences
on every event of importance ? Moreover, the gala dress of
black silk and diamonds they wore on these occasions 2 pro-
claimed them to be no wretched victims of want and misery,
such as we have seen depicted riding on the cannons to Versailles,
but prosperous " citizenesses " who took a truly Parisian pride
in their appearance. What wonder, then, that the " Ladies of
the Market " indignantly refused to join the motley crowd
that had collected on the Place de Greve for the purposes of
insurrection ?
Indeed, it was obvious to all onlookers that this crowd was
not what it pretended to be a gathering of hungry women
driven by desperation to revolt. " The first women who pre-
sented themselves at the Hotel de Ville were powdered, coiffees,
and dressed in white, with an air of gaiety, and gave evidence
of no evil intentions ; gradually their numbers increased ; some
rang the tocsin, others laughed, sang, and danced in the court-
1 Mimoives de Rivarol, p. 263.
2 Mtmoires de Mme. Campan, p. 167.
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 135
yard," 1 which proves, as Mounier says, " that amongst these
women a large number were not suffering from want, but were
only sent to stir up the others." 2
Moreover, the aspect of certain of the harridans and so-called
poissardes who led the movement struck observers as peculiar,
for it was noticed that beneath ragged skirts there peeped forth
trousers, that shaven chins appeared above muslin fichus, and
that large heavily-shod feet presented an odd contrast to rouged
and powdered faces. In a word, it became apparent that a
number of these " hungry women " were not women at all but
men in women's clothes? and it was said that amongst them were
recognized several of the Orleaniste leaders JLaclos, Chamfort,
Latouche, Sillery, Barnave, and one of the Lameths 4 whilst one
" monstrously fat " poissarde was declared by the people to be
the Due d'Aiguillon. 5 According to certain contemporaries these
gentlemen notably Laclos and Chamfort were accompanied
by their mistresses, and Taine adds that their number was swelled
by a quantity of deserters from the Gardes Francaises with the
women of the Palais Royal, to whom they acted as souteneurs,
and from whom they may have borrowed their disguises. 6
These, then, were the elements that formed the nucleus of
the expedition, and it will therefore be understood why the first
contingent of women presented so gay and prosperous an appear-
ance. But in order to give a popular air to the rising it was
necessary to secure the co-operation of as many " women of the
people " as could be induced to join the procession, accordingly
shops, workrooms, and private houses were entered, and cooks,
seamstresses, mothers of families were bribed or forced to follow
threatened with violence if they refused. A washerwoman
on the Seine described to the Chevalier d'Estrees the efforts
made to enlist working- women in the movement. " What ! "
the Chevalier had said ironically to this woman on the 5th of
October, " you are not at Versailles ? " to which the washer-
woman indignantly replied, " Monsieur le Chevalier, you are
mistaken, like every one else, in imagining that it is laundresses
1 Evidence of M. de Blois, member of the Commune, witness xxxv.
in the Procedure du Chdtelet.
2 Appel au Tribunal, p. 124.
8 On the men in women's clothes see Appel au Tribunal, by Mourner,
p. 124, and the testimony of eye-witnesses vn., ix., x., xxxm., xxxiv.,
xxxv., XLIV., LIX., xcvin., ex., cxLvi., CLXV., ccxxxvu., cccxvi., and
many others in the Procedure du Chdtelet.
4 Memoires concernant Marie Antoinette, by Joseph Weber, ii. 210;
Montjoie, Conjuration de d'OrUans, ii. 245 ; evidence of the Chevalier de
La Serre, witness ccxxvi. in Procedure du Chdtelet.
' 5 Evidence of La Serre and St. Martin (officer in the Regiment de
Flandre), witness xcviu. in Procedure du Chdtelet.
6 Taine, La Revolution, i. 153.
136 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
and other women of the same kind who have gone to Versailles.
Some one certainly came to my boat and made the proposal to
myself and my companions, and it was a woman who offered us
six and twelve francs, but that woman is no more a woman than
you are ; I recognized her distinctly as a seigneur living at the
Palais Royal or near it, whose valet I wash for." 1
But if the honest and industrious women of the people showed
themselves unwilling, there lurked nevertheless a terrible element
of violence in the underworld of Paris that even another century
of civilization has never robbed of its ferocity, and that once its
passions are aroused knows neither reason nor pity. From this
underworld there now poured forth bands of wastrels and
degenerates, drink-sodden women clutching broomsticks, above
all, street-walkers inflamed with the easily-roused passions of
their kind, reckless, abandoned, shrieking foul invectives all
these assembled on the Place de Greve and proceeded to attack
the Hotel de Ville. With a hail of stones they drove back the
mounted guards defending the entrance, and battering down the
doors swarmed into the building, pillaged the armoury, carried off
two cannons, eight hundred guns, as well as munitions and silver,
attempted to hang a luckless priest they discovered in the belfry,
shouting the while, " The men have no courage, they dare not
take revenge ! We will act for them ! The representatives of
the Commune are traitors and bad citizens, they deserve death,
M. Bailly and Lafayette first of all they must be hanged to
the lantern/'
These imprecations again show very clearly the influences
at work amongst the crowd, for both Bailly and Lafayette
were the idols of the people, but had rendered themselves odious
to the agitators Bailly by his indefatigable efforts to provide
the capital with bread, and Lafayette by his steady opposition
to the Orleaniste conspiracy. So once again we see the power
of the mob turned against the people.
Meanwhile the men who had carried out the attack on
the Bastille known as the volontaires de la Bastille were sum-
moned and now arrived on the Place de Greve led by Maillard,
who seized a drum, beat a roll-call, and invited the women to
follow him to Versailles. This heterogeneous army of women,
of men in women's clothes, and brigands from the Faubourgs,
armed with pistols, scythes, pikes, and muskets, mustered in the
Champs filysees, and at one o'clock set forth for Versailles with
Maillard at their head. As usual, the organizers of the movement
had been careful to expose themselves to no danger, those who
joined in the procession prudently sheltering themselves behind
1 Evidence of St. Firmin, bourgeois de Paris, witness XLV. in Procedure
du Chdtelet.
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 137
petticoats from the possible fire of the King's troops, whilst
the men whose eloquence had stirred up popular agitation
Danton, Marat, Santerre, Camille Desmoulins, Gonchon took
no part in the day's proceedings, but kept away altogether from
the scene of action. 1 The only prominent Orleanistes who
ventured forth on this occasion without the safeguard of an
incognito were Maillard, the " Generalissimo of the Brigands,"
and Theroigne de Mericourt, who now appeared on a black horse,
dressed in a scarlet riding-habit and black hat, and escorted by
a jockey in the same colours, which were the racing colours of
the Due d'Orleans. 2
Again, as at the siege of the Bastille, it was mainly on a few
obscure ruffians that the conspirators depended for the execution
of their designs Desnot, the " cook out of place," who had joined
in the murder of De Launay and of Foullon, and Mathieu Jourdan,
alias Jouve, in turn butcher, blacksmith, smuggler, and artist's
model " the man with the long beard " of whom eye-witnesses
speak shudderingly, and who on this famous day was to earn the
name of " Coupe-Tete."
So in the wind and rain the ten-mile march to Versailles
began, and if in this setting out we can detect no element of
heroism as in the start for the Bastille, there is yet a poignant
note of pathos to be found amongst the working-women dragged
from their peaceful labours and forced to embark on the hazard-
ous enterprise of which they could not dimly understand the
purpose. Several of these women poor patient tools of the
conspirators afterwards described the methods employed to
goad them onwards as, shivering in the cold drizzle, they
started on the weary journey. The imprecations of the sham
poissardes against the Royal Family increased their disenchant-
ment. " Yes, yes ! " cried one of the furies, a notorious demi-
mondaine, armed with a sword, " we are going to Versailles to
bring back the Queen's head on the point of a sword." But
the other women silenced her. 3
Many of the crowd were bribed ; barefooted women drew
from their pockets six-ecu pieces wrapped in paper, ragged men
tossed gold and silver coins in the air, and the hope of further
gain still drove them onwards. 4 Others trudged patiently, lured
1 St. Huruge was still safely lodged in the Chatelet, so his courage could
not be put to the test.
2 Evidence of Jeanne Martin, a sick-nurse forced to march " with
threats of violence," witness LXXXII., and De Villelongue, witness LXXIX. in
Procedure du Chatelet.
3 Evidence of Jeanne Martin and of Madeleine Glain, charwoman,
witness LXXXIII. in Procedure du Chdtelet.
4 Evidence of witnesses x., LVI., LXXXII., cxcix., CCLXXII., and
CCCLXXXVII. in Procedure du Chdtelet.
138 'THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
by the promise of bread which the good King was to give them,
and, indeed, amongst the marching multitude food was sorely
needed. By the time they reached Sevres the pangs of hunger
had become acute, and the terrified inhabitants having closed
their shops and barricaded themselves behind doors and windows,
the women flung themselves upon the restaurants, battered down
the shutters, and after feasting on all the food and wine that
lay at hand proceeded to Versailles, which they entered about
four o'clock in the afternoon, shouting " Vive le Roi ! " tumultu-
ously as they marched. 1
Whilst these scenes had been taking place in Paris the calm
of Versailles continued undisturbed. Every one knows that
the King went hunting, for no historian has forgotten to mention
the fact, but few, if any, have remembered to add that he knew
nothing whatever about the tumult in Paris. 2 It was certainly
known to many deputies of the Assembly, but no one seems to
have thought it necessary to inform the King, and he was allowed
to start for Meudon serenely unconscious of the coming danger.
Moreover, such was the detachment of " the representatives of
the people " from the troubles of the capital that, whilst the
revolutionary mob was mustering, they continued tranquilly
discussing the new criminal code.
Mirabeau afterwards admitted that he was warned in the
morning of " the increasing agitation of the people," and " the
nature of things " told him that Paris was marching on Versailles,
yet he had spent the afternoon with La Marck studying maps
of Brabant. 3 This confession, intended to prove his non-com-
plicity with the movement, certainly testified to the amount of
sympathy he entertained for the people. The King's apparent
unconcern is therefore less singular than it has been made to
appear. But though the Assembly had omitted to tell the
King of the disturbances in Paris, they had not forgotten to
reiterate their demand for his sanction to the first principles of the
Constitution and the Declaration of the Rights of Man. Before
starting for the hunt Louis XVI. sent his reply to this request. 4
The principles of the Constitution he frankly admitted did
not " present indiscriminately to his mind the idea of perfection,"
and could only be judged on their completion. " If, however," he
added, " they will fulfil the wishes of my people and assure the
tranquillity of the kingdom, I accord, in conformity to your
wishes, my consent to these articles, but on the express condition,
1 Evidence of Maillard, witness LXXXI. in Procedure du Chdtelet ; Deux
Amis, iii. 178.
2 No messengers were able to reach the King, as they were all stopped
by the mob of women on the road from Paris (Deux Amis, iii. 177).
8 Moniteur, vi. 31. * Ibid. ii. 8.
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 139
from which I shall never depart, that in accordance with the
result of your deliberations the executive power shall reside
wholly with the monarch (ait son entier effet entre les mains du
monarque}." In other words, the King stipulated that he should
not be called upon to renounce the power accorded him by the
Constitution itself*
The Declaration of the Rights of Man he confessed that he
found difficult to understand doubtless it contained excellent
maxims, but could only be " justly appreciated when its real
meaning had been denned by the laws to which it must serve
as the basis."
Louis XVI. was a disciple not of Rousseau but of Fenelon ;
the tangible needs of the people he could comprehend, but vague
theorizing on equality and universal happiness simply bewildered
him.
The King's reply provoked a fresh outburst of fury from the
revolutionary factions in the Assembly. Robespierre declared
it to be destructive of the Constitution, " contrary to the rights
of the nation " ; Petion, taking advantage of the ensuing tumult,
arose to denounce the banquet of the bodyguard. Cries broke out
on all sides " Orgies threats the patriotic cockade trampled
underfoot." 2 The Orleanistes, Sillery, Mirabeau, the Lameths,
called out in furious tones, " The nation must have victims ! " 3
The Comte de Barbantane, seated in a tribune with Madame
de Genlis and the two sons of the Due d' Orleans the Due de
Chartres and the Due de Montpensier cried threateningly, " It
is evident that these gentlemen want more lanterns ; well, they
shall have them ! " and the voice of the Due de Chartres was heard
to add, " Yes, yes, messieurs, we must have more lanterns ! "
At this the Marquis de Raigecourt and the Marquis de Beau-
harnais rose indignantly exclaiming, " It is abominable that any
one should dare to express such sentiments here ! " 4
Monsieur de Monspey demanded that Petion should sub-
stantiate his charges against the bodyguard, but Mirabeau
interposed. " Let the Assembly declare that in France every
one except the King is inviolable, and I will make the denuncia-
tion myself ! " and turning to the deputies around him he added
1 Principles of the Constitution, article iii. : " The supreme executive
power resides exclusively with the King (reside exclusivement dans les
mains du roi " (Moniteur, i. 390).
2 Ferrieres, i. 295.
3 Montjoie, Conjuration de d'OrUans, ii. 204.
4 This scene is, of course, not recorded in the Moniteur. It was related
by the Marquis de Digoine du Palais, witness CLXVIII., and the Marquis
de x Raigecourt, witness cciv., in the Procedure du Chdtelet, and confirmed
by other witnesses present, including Mounier, president of the Assembly,
in his Appel au Tribunal, p. 233.
140 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
these terrible words : "I will denounce the Queen and the Due
de Guiche ! "
Again a voice was heard from the tribune occupied by
Madame de Genlis and the sons of the Due d' Orleans : " What !
the Queen ? " And another voice in the same tribune replied,
" The Queen as much as any one else if she is guilty ! " 1
Whether Mounier heard these words or not it is evident that,
like all other witnesses of the scene, he realized that Mirabeau's
declaration to the Assembly was directed against the Queen, 2
and might prove the signal for her assassination by the occupants
of the gallery if the denunciation were proceeded with ; accord-
ingly he closed the discussion.
Mounier at this crisis had no further doubts as to Mirabeau's
complicity with the criminal plot against the Royal Family.
During the scene that had just taken place Mirabeau had left
his seat, and going round to the President's chair had whispered
to Mounier under cover of the tumult :
" Monsieur le President, 40,000 men are arriving from Paris ;
hurry the discussion, close the sitting be taken ill say you
are going to the King ! "
" And why, Monsieur ? "
" Here is a letter, M. le President, announcing the arrival
of 40,000 men from Paris." 3
" All the more reason," answered Mounier, " for the Assembly
to remain at its post."
" But, Monsieur le President, you will be kiUed ! "
" So much the better," Mounier said with bitter irony, " if
they kill us all, but all, you understand, without exception ;
public affairs will go the better (les affaires de la republique
en iront mieux)." 4
" Monsieur le President, the phrase is neat (le mot estjoli) \ "
But whilst this dialogue was taking place the advance guard
of " women " from Paris had marched down the Avenue de
Paris that faces the Chateau of Versailles, and were now collected
at the door of the Assembly clamouring for admittance. Maillard,
1 Evidence of the Marquis de Digoine du Palais in Procedure du
Chdtelet ; Ferrieres, i. 299.
2 Faits relatifs & la derniere Insurrection, by Mounier.
3 Note that Mirabeau afterwards stated that he only guessed " by the
nature of things " that Paris was marching on Versailles. See Moniteur.
4 Appel au Tribunal, p. 302. Mirabeau, in recounting this scene
(Moniteur, vi. 31), described Mounier as saying, " So much the better, we
shall be all the sooner a republic ! " This was probably intended to dis-
credit Mounier in the eyes of the Royalists, but it is obvious that Mounier,
who never concealed his allegiance to the monarchy, could not have said
this, and that he used the word republique in the sense of res-publica
the public good in which it was frequently employed at this period by
Royalists as well as revolutionaries.
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 141
in a shabby black coat with a naked sword in his hand, at the
head of twenty women, was permitted to enter, and at once
began in furious tones to denounce the " monopolizers of grain " :
" The aristocrats wish to make us die of hunger ; to-day they
have sent a miller a note of two hundred livres telling him not
to grind."
" Name them ! Name them ! " cried the Royalists of the
Assembly.
But before this direct appeal both revolutionary deputies
and delegates of the people were dumb. At last Maillard, or
according to other accounts the women, answered, "It is the
Archbishop of Paris ! " 1
At this monstrous calumny even the Assembly rose in-
dignantly, and with one voice declared, " The Archbishop of
Paris is incapable of such an atrocity ! " 2
Maillard, once more urged by Mounier to substantiate his
charges, could only murmur with an air of embarrassment
that " a lady he had met in a carriage on the road to Versailles "
had assured him of the fact.
To this, then, were the accusations of the revolutionary leaders
against the " aristocrats " of monopolizing grain reduced !
In order to satisfy the demands of the women, the Assembly
finally decided to send several of their number as a deputation
to the King, who had now returned from the hunt.
Not until several bands of women and brigands (who had
marched ahead of the revolutionary mob) were actually in
Versailles had Louis XVI. been informed of the insurrection.
De Cubieres, an equerry, rode out to Meudon with a note from
the Comte de St. Priest; the King read it, and turning to his
gentlemen said, " Messieurs, Monsieur de St. Priest writes that
the women of Paris are coming to ask me for bread." His eyes
filled with tears. " Alas ! if I had any I should not wait for
them to come and ask me for it. Let us go and speak to
them."
Nothing was further from his mind than the idea of a hostile
demonstration ; it was to him, the father of his people, these
" hungry women " had turned in their distress, and his only
concern was to help them.
A stranger present, M. de la Deveze, seeing his emotion,
mistook it for fear. " Sire, I beg your Majesty not to be
afraid."
" Afraid, Monsieur ? " the King answered proudly. " I have
never been afraid in my life ! " and mounting his horse he rode
off to the Chateau at a gallop. The Comte de Luxembourg
1 De Juigne, to whose benevolence I have already referred.
2 Deux Amis, iii. 183.
142 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
was waiting for him and asked for orders to be given to the
bodyguard.
" Orders ? " said the King with a laugh. " Orders of war
against women ? You must be joking, Monsieur de Luxem-
bourg ! "
The ruse of the Orl6anistes had succeeded, and by the advance
guard of so-called women the King's defenders were disarmed.
From the windows of the Chambre de Conseil Louis XVI.
looked out on the armed mob advancing through the wind and
rain along the Avenue de Paris towards the Chateau ; before
long the Place des Armes had become a sea of pikes and muskets.
Amidst this raging multitude Mounier, at the head of his deputa-
tion, was advancing on foot through the mud, and during the
quarter of an hour of waiting for admittance at the grille of the
Chateau was obliged to endure the insults of the mob, who cried
out that " the deputies of the Assembly with their 18 francs a
day enjoyed good cheer, whilst they allowed the poor to die of
hunger " ; that " when they had only one King they had bread,
but since they had 1200 they perished in misery." x
The deputation, consisting of six deputies with six women
clinging to their arms, was increased by six more women before
their admission to the Salle de Conseil. Louis XVI. received
them with his customary benevolence.
" Sire," said Louison Chabry, a pretty flower-seller of seven-
teen from the Palais Royal, " we want bread."
" You know my heart," answered the King ; " I will order all
the bread in Versailles to be collected and given to you."
Whereat Louison, overcome by the King's goodness, fell
fainting to the ground. Smelling salts were brought ; Louison
revived and begged to be allowed to kiss the King's hand.
" She deserves better than that ! " said Louis XVI., embracing
her.
Louison departed with the other women, enchanted by their
visit, crying out, " Long live the King ! Long live our good
King ! Now we shall have bread ! "
But one of their number still displayed resentment. The
Chevalier de la Serre attempted to reason with her, pointing
1 These words, uttered by the people themselves and heard by a member
of the deputation, Alexandre de Lameth (see his Histoire de I'Assemblee
Constituante, i. 150), were afterwards attributed by Mirabeau to St. Priest
in the Assembly (Moniteur, ii. 36), evidently as a revenge on St. Priest for
having explained to the women that the Commune of Paris and not the
King was responsible for the provisioning of the capital (see St, Priest's
letter to the National Assembly in Memoires de Bailly, iii. 422). But if,
as several contemporaries state, Mirabeau himself was amongst the crowd
outside the grille of the Chateau when these words were uttered, it is evident
where he really heard them.
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 143
out that they had to do with a good King, a good father, that
their condition greatly distressed him ; but the woman replied,
" Our father is the Due d'Orleans ! "
Her companions interrupted her by repeating, " Vive le
Roi ! "
" Non, f . . . .," she retorted, " it is ' Vive le Due d'Orleans ! ' " l
It is evident, therefore, that certain of the women had been
primed by the Orleanistes, but the greater proportion were, as
Ferrieres says, " acting in all good faith : they did not know
the plans of the conspirators. Dragged by force to Versailles,
hearing it incessantly repeated that the people were dying of
hunger, and that the only way to stop the famine was by appeal-
ing to the King and the National Assembly, they thought they
had achieved the object of their journey by obtaining a decree
of the Assembly and getting it sanctioned by the King/' 2
What, then, was their dismay when they returned triumphantly
to the waiting multitude with the King's promise to find them-
selves received by howls of execration : " They are cheats, they
have been given money ! They have received no written order,
they must be hanged ! " A fury in the crowd, tearing off her
garter, dragged one of the women towards a lamp-post, and
would have hanged her there had not an officer of the body-
guard rushed to her rescue and brought her with the rest of the
deputation into safety, inside the Cour Royale. These women
then begged to be allowed to return to the King and ask for his
order in writing, and the request having been granted they
reappeared once more waving the royal signature aloft. Their
accounts of the King's goodness had the effect of temporarily
calming the excitement of the crowd ; cries of " Vive le Roi ! "
went up on all sides ; for the moment the King's defenders thought
the situation saved.
The women who had formed the deputation, now realizing
that they had been the dupes of the conspirators, insisted on
returning to Paris in order to tell the Commune of their reception
at Versailles, and Louis XVI., informed of their intention, ordered
royal carriages to be provided for the journey. Lest, however,
too glowing an account of the King's benevolence should be
conveyed to Paris, Maillard was deputed by the leaders of the
insurrection to accompany the women and counteract their
influence.
In all probability, if the tumult had been, as it is habitually
represented, the spontaneous rising of a hungry multitude
driven by want to beg the King for bread, the matter would
1/ Evidence of the Chevalier de la Serre, witness ccxxvi. in Procedure
du Chdtelet.
2 Ferrieres, i. 308.
144 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
have ended there, and the people having accomplished their
purpose would have returned peacefully to their homes. But
the conspirators had determined otherwise.
Immediately on the arrival of the armed mob every effort
had been made to provoke a quarrel with the bodyguard, but
these gallant men, true to their orders not to use force against
the people, endured insults and threats without replying. When
at last a man of the Paris militia attempted, sword in hand, to
break through the regiment, the Marquis de Savonnieres, followed
by three other officers, pursued the insurgent and struck him
with the flat of his sword, but a shot fired by Charpentier of the
Versailles militia broke the arm of Savonnieres and inflicted
injuries from which he died some weeks later.
This affray provided the signal for battle ; on all sides the
cry went up that the Guards were charging the people ; the
militia hastily advanced their cannons in the Avenue de Paris
towards the grille of the Chateau, and the mob, closing around
the bodyguard, attacked them with pikes and stones and fired
into their ranks, fortunately with so little certainty of aim that
the men escaped with slight injuries. Still the bodyguard
refrained from retaliation, and Lecointre he who had denounced
their " orgy " four days earlier seeing this, and fearing that no
pretext would be provided for further violence, rushed forward
and overwhelmed them with reproaches. 1 It was at this crisis
that the King, informed of the cries of " Vive le Roi ! " and the
momentary cessation of hostilities produced by the deputation
of women, and concluding that peace was now restored, sent his
fatal message to the bodyguard to retire. The militia of Ver-
sailles, taking advantage of the movement, immediately opened
a volley of musketry fire on the retreating troops, whilst brigands
armed with guns and pikes pursued them with shots and blows.
It was said afterwards by the Orl6anistes that the bodyguard
now returned the fire of the insurgents and treated the people
with harshness, thrusting them aside with their sabres, but of
these acts only two eye-witnesses could be produced, the
Orleaniste, De Liancourt, 2 and again Lecointre, 3 the inveterate
enemy of the bodyguard who was brought forward at every turn
by the conspirators to prove their charges against the King's
defenders. On the other hand, reliable contemporaries speak
only of the patience and forbearance of these gallant men who,
in obedience to orders, refrained from using the weapons at their
1 Appel au Tribunal, by Mounier, p. 145. Evidence of La Brosse de
Belville, witness xxn. in Procedure du Chdtelet. Miomandre de Sainte
Marie, garde du corps, witness xvm., also stated that it was Lecointre
who stirred up the crowd against the bodyguard.
2 Appel au Tribunal, by Mounier, p. 155. 8 Ibid. p. 148.
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 145
command. 1 So once again the arm of law and order was
paralysed, and the people who should have been protected were
left to become the victims of the conspirators.
Whilst these scenes were taking place in the Place d'Armes,
Mounier, imagining that reforms in the government would satisfy
the multitude who were calling out for bread, continued to im-
portune the King for his sanction to the principles of the Con-
stitution and the Declaration of the Rights of Man. Louis XVI.,
whose sound common sense showed him the absurdity of accord-
ing the royal sanction to philosophical axioms, repeated his
opinion that at this stage his acceptance would be premature,
but, on the assurance of Mounier that nothing else would allay
the tumult, finally appended his signature to the words : "I
accept purely and simply the articles of the Constitution and
the Declaration of the Rights of Man." Then, confident that
he had done all that lay within his power to restore public tran-
quillity, he awaited events with calmness. In response to the
entreaties of the Comte d'Estaing that measures should be taken
for the defence of the Chateau, he wrote at seven o'clock on this
terrible evening, after the departure of Mounier and his fellow-
deputies, these astounding words :
" You wish, my cousin, that I should express my opinion on
the critical circumstances in which I find myself, and that I
should take a violent course, that I should make use of legitimate
means of defence, or that I should leave Versailles. Whatever
may be the audacity of my enemies they will not succeed ; the
Frenchman is incapable of regicide. ... I dare to believe that this
danger is not as urgent as my friends are persuaded. Flight
would be my total undoing and civil war the disastrous result.
. . . Let us act with prudence. ... If I succumb at least I shall have
no cause to reproach myself. I have just seen several members
of the Assembly and I am satisfied. . . . God grant that public
tranquillity may be restored but no aggression, no action that
could let it be believed that I think of avenging or even of
defending myself."
Meanwhile Mounier, returning triumphantly to the Assembly
with the royal sanction, found the wildest scene of confusion
taking place. A mob of women, 2 of brigands, and of men in
1 Appel au Tribunal, p. 148. Alexis Chauchard, captain of infantry,
witness ci. in Procedure du Chdtelet, stated that " the King's guards behaved
in this affair with the greatest circumspection ; that he saw the people
throw mud and stones at them and vomit imprecations against them
without their making any attempt to repulse this attack."
2 It should be noted that eye-witnesses, unlike historians, do not
describe the women who created this uproar in the Assembly as pois-
sardes but as " light women," some even of a class too superior to be
regarded as " kept women " (see evidence of the Vicomte de Mirabeau,
L
146 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
women's clothes, had invaded the hall and taken possession of
the seats of the deputies, where they regaled themselves with
ham sandwiches, pies, and wine brought in from a neighbouring
restaurant. The brigands, ragged and of ferocious aspect,
adopted a threatening attitude, but ihefilles dejoie were enjoying
themselves immensely. It was a situation that appealed irre-
sistibly to their mocking humour ; true gamines of Paris, they
found it exquisitely funny to chaff these solemn legislators and
dance on the platform of the President, to overwhelm the un-
happy bishop of Langres occupying the President's chair in the
absence of Mounier with obscene pleasantries. " Now you
must kiss us, calotin \ " And the bishop, amidst screams of
laughter, was obliged, sighing deeply, to submit to their vinous
embraces.
Mounier, arriving in the midst of this pandemonium with
his precious document, fondly imagined that the announcement
of the " royal sanction " would act as oil upon the troubled
waters, and profiting by a lull in the tumult read the King's
message aloud. But to the women of Paris, as to the King
himself, these vague formulas conveyed but little meaning, and
Mourner's announcement was greeted by the hungry elements
amongst them with the cry, " Will that give bread to the poor
people of Paris ? "
The President, realizing the impossibility of continuing the
debate most of the deputies indeed had already left the hall
broke up the Assembly. But the women had no intention of
being done out of their evening's entertainment, and imperiously
demanded the return of the deputies. The President's bell was
rung, members were fetched from their beds, the Assembly re-
sumed its sitting. Once again the message containing the royal
sanction was read aloud, only to be met with the same cry of
" Bread ! Give us bread ! "
Nothing is more amazing in the history of the Revolution
than the total inability of the " representatives of the people "
to understand the people's mind. The King, appealed to by the
hungry women, could readily enter into their sufferings, but the
Assembly, in response to their cries for bread, offered them
the foundation-stone of the Constitution. For at this supreme
moment these so-called democrats, actually surrounded by the
witness CXLVI. in Procedure du Chdtelet), whilst nearly all state that a great
many men disguised as women were seen amongst them. No doubt there
were a certain number of " women of the people " who had been forced to
march to Versailles amongst those calling out for bread, but the " indecent
scenes " described were evidently produced by the Orleaniste conspirators
and the women they had brought with them. It was mainly the leaders of
the expedition who crowded into the Assembly ; most of the poor creatures
from the Faubourgs were left outside in the rain.
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 147
clamouring multitude, calmly resumed their discussion on the
criminal code.
It is hardly surprising that at this the indignation of the
women broke out afresh, and the Assembly was peremptorily
ordered to discuss the question of food-supply. The voice of a
deputy addressing the House was drowned by shouts of " Bread !
bread ! not so many long speeches ! " and " Shut up that babbler.
It doesn't matter about all that it is bread that matters ! "
Some of the women clamoured for Mirabeau, whose grotesque
appearance amused them : " Where is our Comte de Mirabeau
our little mother Mirabeau ? " A man in the tribune next
to the President exclaimed loudly that the deputies should
concern themselves with the people.
At this Mirabeau, who had no intention of allowing the
canaille to command, arose and thundered, " I should like to
know by what right any one should dictate to us the course of
our debates ? Let the tribunes remember the respect they owe
to the National Assembly ! "
The women, enchanted at this display of authority, noisily
clapped their hands and cried " Bravo ! "
Whilst this tumult raged in the Assembly scenes far more
terrible were taking place outside on the Place d'Armes. The
wild autumn day had faded into a wet and cheerless night, and
the immense multitude, unable to find shelter, gathered round
huge fires they had lit at intervals about the square, and at one
of which a horse of the bodyguard, massacred in the fray, was
being cooked and eaten. On such a scene of misery and squalor
did the great Chateau of the Roi Soleil look down that dreadful
evening ! The women, wet to the skin, caked with mud after
the long march from Paris, wandered round the courtyards
sobbing pitifully, crying out that " they had been forced to march
and did not know what they had come for " ; 1 others, savage with
hunger and fatigue, danced round the bonfires shrieking furious
imprecations against the Queen, Lafayette, Mounier, the Abbe
Maury, the Archbishop of Paris. " Marie Antoinette has danced
for her pleasure, now she shall dance for ours ! " " Yes, let the
jade skip, we will throw her head from the windows ! We will
have the drunkard for our king no longer, it is the Due d' Orleans
that we must have for king ! "
Thus the furies of the under-world, revolting enough in truth,
but surely less revolting than the Due d' Orleans, skulking through
the crowd in the Avenue de Paris, " endeavouring to escape
detection but unable to flee from his conscience/' 2 less revolting
1 ,M6moires de Madame de la Tour du Pin, i. "222,
8 Ferrieres, i. 313 ; evidence of De Boisse of the King's bodyguard,
witness ccxiv. in Procedure du Chdtelet.
148 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
far than the petticoated roues of the Palais Royal, stirring up
a poor and hungry populace to commit crimes they dared not
undertake themselves. It was said by many witnesses, and never
disproved by any conclusive alibi, that all through that fearful
night, and again the following morning, the members of the con-
spiracy were at work distributing money and inciting the people
to violence ; that Mirabeau, brandishing a naked sword, was seen
in the ranks of the Regiment de Flandre exhorting them to de-
fection ; 1 that Theroigne in her scarlet habit went from group
to group giving the names of deputies to be massacred, and dis-
tributing money done up in paper packets ; 2 that fine gentlemen
in embroidered waistcoats " slipped coins concealed in cockades
into the hands of the women " ; 3 that Laclos, Sillery, Barnave,
the Due d'Aiguillon, dressed as women, were again recognized
mingling with the crowd, fanning up the flame of popular fury
in preparation for the massacres of the morrow. 4
Suddenly at midnight, when the frenzy of the populace had
reached its height, the roll of drums and the red glare of torches
announced the arrival of Lafayette at the head of the Gardes
Franaises in the Avenue de Paris.
How did Lafayette come to be leading this second army
of insurgents to Versailles ? The fact has provided Orleaniste
writers with the pretext for shifting the blame of the insurrection
on to their opponent, and it was precisely in order to be able to
do this that they had contrived to implicate Lafayette in the
movement. As a matter of fact Lafayette had held out for
hours against the entreaties of his men, who, prompted by the
1 Montjoie, Conjuration de d'OrUans, iii. 90 ; Weber, ii. 207 ; Fantin
Desodoards, i. 213 ; Procedure du Chdtelet, witnesses xxxvi., CLVII., CLXI.,
ccxxvi. ; Ferrieres, i. 307.
2 Procedure du Chdtelet, witnesses xci. and CLVI.
3 Evidence of an eye-witness, Anne Marguerite Andelle, ccxxxvi. in
Procedure du Chdtelet, a linen-worker dragged by force to Versailles. On the
money distributed amongst the soldiers of the Regiment de Flandre and
amongst the people see also witnesses XLIX., LVI., LXXI., LXXXII., ex. and
cxxvi.
4 " All the roues of the Palais Royal, the accomplices, or rather the
instigators of the Due d'Orleans, Laclos, Sillery, Latouche, d'Aiguillon,
d'Oraison, Mirabeau, and several other minor personages, were on foot all
night in the midst of this rabble, whom they intoxicated in every manner.
Public evidence subsequently showed some of them as having adopted the
most ignoble disguises so as not to be recognized" (Weber, ii. 210). See
also Montjoie, Conjuration de d'Orleans, ii. 245, and evidence of the Chevalier
de Lasserre, witness ccxxvi. in Procedure du Chdtelet. Jean Diot, cure and
deputy of the National Assembly, witness ex., described a conversation he
heard during this night in which a man dressed as a woman, " tall and of
great corpulence," offered two of the people fifty louis on behalf of the Due
d'Orleans to murder the Queen on the following morning.
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 149
Orleanistes, insisted on his leading them to Versailles. At the
Hotel de Ville that morning, whilst Lafayette was occupied in
sending off despatches to warn Versailles of the approaching
invasion, six grenadiers had entered and accosted him with
these words : " General, we are deputed by six companies of
grenadiers: we do not think you are a traitor, but we think
that the Government is betraying us. It is time all this
ended. . . . The people are wretched ; the source of the evil is
at Versailles ; we must go to fetch the King and bring him to
Paris ; we must exterminate the Regiment de Flandre and the
bodyguard who dare to trample on the national cockade. If
the King is too weak to wear his crown, let him renounce it.
We will crown his son, a council of regency will be nominated,
and all will go well."
As this was precisely the plan of the Orleaniste conspiracy
Lafayette immediately realized that the men were merely
repeating their lesson, and, recognizing the trap laid for him, he
attempted to dissuade them from marching on Versailles.
" What ! " he said, " you mean then to make war on the
King and force him to abandon us ? " The use of the final
pronoun is significant; even the Republican Lafayette was
obliged in his more honest moments to admit that Louis XVI.
was on the side of the people, and the soldiers, thus appealed to,
momentarily forgot their lesson and readily concurred :
" General, indeed we should be very sorry, for we love him
well, but if he left us we have Monsieur le Dauphin."
In vain Lafayette continued to remonstrate ; the men once
more took up the refrain : " The source of the evil is at Versailles ;
we must go and fetch the King and bring him to Paris ; all the
people wish it." Finally Lafayette went out on to the Place
de Greve and, with Bailly, attempted to address the crowd
collected there. But the people, he had begun to discover, were
easier to rouse than to pacify, and the spirit of insubordination
he had openly encouraged at the beginning of the Revolution
was now turning against himself. In vain he strove to make
himself heard; an angry uproar arose; one voice was heard
above the others crying, "It is strange that M. de Lafayette
should wish to command the people when it is for the people to
command him ! "
Then Lafayette, reluctantly mounting his white charger,
placed himself at the head of the troops, whose numbers were now
being rapidly increased by the lowest rabble of the Faubourgs,
which, armed with pikes and pitchforks, with cutlasses and
hatchets, poured into the Place de Greve crying out, " Bread 1
bread ! To Versailles ! "
At the sight of this terrible army Lafayette once again
150 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
hesitated, and, seeing this, the crowd broke into fury; howls of
rage, threats of death rose from a thousand throats ; for the first
time Lafayette, idol of the people, heard the voice of the people
raised against himself. At that he grew first red, then pale, made
a movement as if he would dismount, but a dozen hands gripped
his bridle : " No, General, you shall not escape us ! " While
he temporized a message from the Commune was slipped into his
hand ordering him to march. Lafayette glanced at the paper,
grew paler still, then gathered up his reins, and with a set counten-
ance gave the word of command to march. " He rode at the
head of his troops," says Montjoie, " like a criminal led to
execution " ; and that in all probability he was going to his death
Lafayette well knew, but, bitterer thought still, this was to be
death with dishonour !
So it came to pass that at midnight, after an eight hours'
march, Lafayette entered Versailles. Calling a halt at the turn-
ing of the road leading to the National Assembly he demanded
of his army to take the oath of fidelity to the nation, the law,
and the King ; then entering the Assembly filled with the drunken
crowd he made his way through the turmoil to the President's
chair and assured Mounier that he could answer for the loyalty
of his troops.
Although so exhausted that he was hardly able to drag himself
up the staircase, Lafayette afterwards presented himself at the
Chateau and administered the same soothing assurances. " I
was without apprehension," he wrote later; "the people had
promised me to remain quiet."
But the Queen, who had no confidence in the benevolence of
revolutionary mobs or in generals who marched at their heads,
received Lafayette coldly. She realized, as he with his foolish
optimism could not, the frightful danger that confronted them
that night. " I know," she said, " that they have come to
demand my head, but I learnt from my mother not to fear death,
and I can await it with calmness."
All around her in the Chateau terror and confusion prevailed ;
women ran hither and thither, peeping forth fearfully from the
windows at the dull glare beyond the railings, where by fire and
torchlight that raging sea of humanity tossed tumultuously,
listening with beating hearts to the hoarse murmurs, broken now
and again with savage howls and fiendish laughter ; others,
helpless and distracted, paced the great Galerie des Glaces, the
scene of so much splendour, and in all minds one question arose
was this night to be their last ?
Amidst these scenes Marie Antoinette alone was calm, and
with undisturbed serenity continued to rouse the fainting spirits
of those around her. When a number of her gentlemen came to
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 151
her door to beg for permission to order out the horses from the
royal stables and mount them in defence of the Royal Family,
the Queen returned only this reply : "I consent to give you the
order for which you wish on the condition that if the life of the
King is in danger you should make immediate use of it, but if I
alone am imperilled you will not use it."
Her women, realizing that she was the chief victim designated
by the conspirators, threw themselves at her feet and begged her
to escape. " No," she answered, " never, never will I abandon
the King or my children ; whatever fate awaits them, I will
share it."
Then dismissing her attendants she remained alone, waiting
for death. At this moment a note was brought to her ; she
opened it, and read these terrible words : " I warn her Majesty
that she will be murdered to-morrow morning at six o'clock."
She knew then that she had still six hours of life, and, placing the
note in her pocket, quietly announced her intention of retiring
to bed. In vain her gentlemen begged to be allowed to remain
and protect her. " No, Messieurs," she answered without a trace
of emotion, " take your leave, I beg you ; to-morrow will prove
to you that you had need of rest to-night."
With these words she left them and slept an untroubled sleep
until the frightful dawn of the morrow.
THE 6TH OF OCTOBER
Lafayette, according to current report at this crisis, retired
and slept also. " II dormit centre son roi," wrote Rivarol
bitterly. But did he really sleep ? The truth will probably
never be known. Montjoie says no ; Lafayette himself said
that, worn out with fatigue, he went to the H6tel de Noailles and
was about to snatch a few hours of slumber when the tumult
of the morrow recalled him to the Chateau. But if he did sleep
the fact must surely be attributed not to treachery but un-
controllable physical exhaustion, combined with the conviction
that the Gardes Frangaises were completely under his control
and that further disturbance was impossible.
But the bodyguard, more alive to the danger, had refused
on the assurances of Lafayette to leave the Chateau unpro-
tected, and remained therefore throughout the night as sentries
before the doors of the Royal Family. For greater safety the
Queen's waiting-women, Madame Thibault and Madame Augue,
seated themselves against the doors of her bedchamber, and by
this devotion saved her life.
' For nearly three hours all was calm : the Queen slept in her
great bedroom looking out on to the quiet Orangerie ; the King
152 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
slept in his facing the courtyards and the now deserted Place
d'Armes ; the crowd slept likewise, anywhere and everywhere
in sheds and stables, on the floors of outhouses and kitchens ;
eight or nine hundred spent the night on the benches of the
Assembly.
But all night Luillier of the bodyguard, commander of the
Scotch company, kept his watch, wandering around the Chateau
and assuring himself that if the tumult began again the great
gilded barriers would avail to keep out the raging populace.
Then towards dawn an unseen hand unlocked a gate in the
railing, and immediately a band of women and armed men
streamed through to the courtyards and the garden that lay
beneath the Queen's windows on the other side of the Chateau.
Luillier in consternation sought the Marquis d'Aguesseau,
major of the bodyguard, and, encountering him at the foot of
the great marble staircase leading to the Queen's apartments,
said, " Monsieur, the King and Royal Family are lost if the
brigands now passing through the courtyards to the terrace
penetrate into the Chateau. I implore you to give positive
orders.''
" Place two sentinels at each of the gates," answered
D'Aguesseau ; and turning to the bodyguard he said, " Messieurs,
the King orders and begs you not to fire, to hit no one in a
word, not to defend yourselves."
" Monsieur," said Luillier, " assure our unhappy master that
his orders will be carried out, but we shall all be assassinated."
For sublime devotion to duty, for heroic obedience to insane
commands, the conduct of the King's bodyguard on this 6th of
October can show no parallel in history except, perhaps, in the
charge of Balaclava. Of all historians Montjoie alone has paid
these gallant men their due, and it is from his pages that we must
borrow the glorious story of their stand against odds so terrible
and overwhelming. Do not their very names bring with them
a breath of chivalry ? Gueroult de Berville, Gueroult de Valmet,
Miornandre de Sainte Marie, De Charmand, and De Varicourt
we seem to be reading in some gold-emblazoned scroll that tells
of knightly deeds done by followers of Saint Louis around the
walls of Antioch. It has been said that the Old Order was
effete, and this might well be so if it were judged by the faithless
courtiers who at the first hint of danger deserted King and
country ; but amongst these soldiers of the King there was yet
stern stuff that, had it been allowed full play, must have saved
the monarchy. For the last time we see them, these warriors
of old France, rallying in a final expiring effort around the
tottering throne. Henceforth the King must look elsewhere for
his defenders Swiss Guards will bleed and die for him, super-
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 153
animated gentlemen will draw ineffectual swords in his service,
women will throw their fragile bodies between the King and
his assassins, but the heroic bodyguard will appear no more on
the scene the long romance of French chivalry is ended.
It was a quarter to six in the grey dawn of the autumn
morning when the raging mob burst through the side gate into
the Cour Royale. The sentinels of the Paris militia, vouched
for by Lafayette, offered no resistance, and seeing this the
brigands, who at first had trembled at finding themselves within
the royal precincts, realized that they incurred no danger, and
" flung themselves like tigers on all the members of the body-
guard that they encountered." 1 The brave Deshuttes fell
pierced with a hundred wounds ; his body was dragged into the
Cour des Ministres, where Jourdan " Coupe-Tete " cut off his
head, and in a sudden access of homicidal fury smeared his face,
his arms, his long and ragged beard with the blood of his victim.
And at this horrible spectacle the mob went mad likewise and,
bespattering themselves in the same manner, danced around the
mutilated corpse. Then the cry went up, " We must have
the heart of the Queen ! " But already a large portion of the
mob had poured through the archway by the Chapel and the
Cour des Princes and burst into the Chateau.
The scene that followed was horrible ; even at this distance
of time one's heart stands still as one reads the descriptions
of contemporaries who, with awful realism, bring before one's
eyes the mad rush of the crowd up the great marble staircase
of the Roi Soleil towards the Queen's apartments ; we can see,
hear, even smell them, those tattered brigands of the Faubourgs,
those dishevelled harridans and blaspheming women of the town,
mud-stained and haggard with fatigue after the long march from
Paris and the few brief hours of sleep snatched on floors and
benches, and all mad for blood, all clutching cruel weapons of
their own devising knives tied to broomsticks, scythes and
pikes and billhooks and howling as they tear upwards like a
pack of wild beasts rushing on their prey. " Where is that/. . . .
coquine ? We will cut off her head ; we will tear out her heart ;
we will make cockades of her entrails, and it will not end there ! "
And amidst these hideous imprecations again the same refrain :
" Long live Orleans ! Long live our father, our king Orleans !"
Was the Due d' Orleans himself amongst the cannibal horde
on the marble staircase ? Did his hand point the way to the
door of the Queen's apartments ? Many contemporaries believed
it, but to this point we shall return later and leave it to the
1 Evidence of M. de Sainte-Aulaire, lieutenant-commander in the body-
guard, witness CLVIII. in Procedure du Chdtelet.
154 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
reader to form his own opinion of the evidence brought forward.
One thing is certain, the crowd never paused, never hesitated for
a moment, as people unfamiliar with the interior of the Chateau
might be expected to do, but made straight for the hall of the
Queen's bodyguard " as if led by some one who knew the way." 1
There on the threshold twelve of the guards were waiting
to receive them. Miomandre de Sainte-Marie stepped boldly
forward and attempted to check the wild onrush of the mob by
one despairing appeal to their vanished loyalty :
" My friends, you love your King, yet you come to disquiet
him in his very palace ! "
For answer the crowd rushed upon Miomandre and nearly
felled him to the ground, and the guards, forbidden to defend
themselves, were driven back into the hall where, with a quick
movement, they succeeded in closing the doors in the face of
their assailants. Only three rooms now between the Queen
and her assassins four folding doors to be beaten down before
the savage horde could close around her bed and thrust their
terrible weapons into her heart ! The guards, to gain time,
barricaded the doors of their hall, but the fragile panels quickly
yielded to the blows of pikes and muskets ; the crowd rushed
forward into the hall. Already De Varicourt was killed and his
head gone to join Deshuttes' on a pike outside in the courtyard.
The guards were driven back step by step over the parquet into
the Grande Salle ; Du Repaire was left alone to guard the door
of the Queen's bodyguard. The next moment Du Repaire was
overthrown and dragged to the head of the staircase ; a man
with a pike and another in woman's clothes 2 seized him
Miomandre rushed to the rescue and saved the life of Du Repaire
who, wresting a pike from his assailants, continued to defend
himself. Then Miomandre, his face streaming with blood,
realizing that nothing now could keep back the raging mob,
dashed to the door of the Queen's antechamber, opened it, and
cried out to Madame Augue, one of the Queen's women, " Madame,
save the Queen, they have come to kill her ! I am here alone
against two thousand tigers ; my comrades have been forced
to leave their hall ! "
There was nothing for it but to leave the brave Miomandre
to his fate. Madame Augue quickly shut the door, pushed in
the great bolt, and flew to the Queen's bedside : " Madame, get
out of bed ! Do not dress ; escape to the King ! "
The Queen sprang out of bed; her ladies threw a mantle
1 Memoir es de Madame de la Tour du Pin, i, 227.
2 " At the moment that he was thrown down he saw a coloured trouser
beneath the skirt of one of those who attacked him " (evidence of Du
Repaire, witness ix. in Procedure du Chdtelet).
A.. Passage by which the Queen escaped
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 155
around her shoulders, a petticoat over her head, and hurried
her through a side door leading to the CEil de Boeuf by a narrow
passage. At the end of this the door, invariably open, was, on
this day of all others, locked. She beat on the panels ; after
five agonizing minutes a servant opened to her, and she reached
the King's rooms in safety, crying out, " My friends, my dear
friends, save me and my children ! "
So, owing to the courage of the two heroic guards, the Queen
still lived the great coup of the conspirators had failed.
Meanwhile around the door of the Queen's guards the fight
continued; now at last the guards made use of weapons Du
Repaire with the pike he had captured, Luillier and Miomandre
with their swords, defended their lives against the horde of
assassins. Miomandre by a blow from a pike was thrown to
the ground, and an assassin standing over him raised the butt-
end of his gun, bringing it crashing down on his victim's skull.
Miomandre, bathed in his blood, was left for dead, but the crowd
having swept onwards through the doorway into the Queen's
apartments, he raised himself, staggered to his feet, and escaped.
The next moment the door of the Queen's bedchamber was
beaten down, and the furious horde, amongst them two of the
men disguised as women, rushed forward to the bed to find it
empty. It is said by Montjoie and Rivarol that in their rage
they plunged their pikes into the mattress, slashed at the bed-
clothes with their sabres, and then by way of the great Galerie
des Glaces proceeded to attack the (Eil de Bceuf ; according to
Madame Campan they did not enter the Queen's room, but reached
the (Eil de Bceuf through the hall of the King's guards. In
either case their intention was to break down the doors of the
(Eil de Bceuf, where a few remaining members of the bodyguard
were entrenched, and having massacred the King's last defenders
to fall upon the Royal Family, who had taken refuge in the King's
bedroom beyond. But this plan was frustrated by an un-
expected check a detachment of grenadiers belonging to the old
Gardes Fransaises drawn up before the doors of the (Eil de Bceuf.
What had happened to bring about this sudden return to loyalty
in the mutineers who, at the siege of the Bastille, had rallied to
the standard of revolt ? One thing only Lafayette, at last
aroused from his optimistic lethargy, had risen to the occasion.
From the moment the attack on the Chateau began that
attack which he had persisted in believing would never take
place his conduct was admirable, and it is unquestionably to
Lafayette that must be accorded the eternal honour of saving
the Jives of the Royal Family on this 6th of October. At the first
sound of the tumult he had sprung up, mounted his horse, and
summoned his grenadiers to the rescue of the King and the
i 5 6 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
bodyguard. " Grenadiers," he cried, " will you suffer brave
men to be basely assassinated ? . . . Swear to me on your
honour as grenadiers that no harm shall be done to them ! "
The grenadiers took the oath, and rallying around their still
adored commander hastened to rescue the guards who had
fallen into the clutches of the assassins. They were joined
immediately by the men of the Parisian militia, and these, clasp-
ing in their arms the white-haired brigadiers of the bodyguard,
cried out, " No, we will not murder brave men like you ! "
So again, as after the siege of the Bastille, the mutinous
soldiers were turned by a word from revolutionary fury to senti-
ments of humanity, and it was these men who but yesterday
had marched against their King that were drawn up in his
defence outside the (Eil de Bceuf.
Inside the room the officers of the bodyguard, who had been
driven back from the door of the Queen's apartments, were
waiting to prevent the insurgents from reaching the Royal Family
collected in the King's bedroom beyond, and the grenadiers,
wishing now to effect a coalition with their former enemies,
rattled at the door-handle to attract their attention, whilst at
the same time keeping the mob at bay.
Chevannes, Vaulabelle, and Mondollot of the bodyguard
cried through the door, " Who knocks ? "
" Grenadiers ! "
Then Chevannes, opening the door, courageously confronted
the men he took to be his enemies. " Messieurs," he said, " is
it a victim you seek ? Here is one. I offer myself. I am one
of the commanders of the post ; it is to me that belongs the
honour of dying the first in defence of my King, but, by God,
learn to respect that good King ! "
But Gondran, commander of the grenadiers, held out his
hand : " Far from wishing to take your life, we have come to
defend you against your assassins."
In an instant grenadiers and guards fell into one another's
arms, mingling tears of joy, calling each other friends and
comrades ; the guards consented to wear the tricolour cockade,
and finally the men of the two regiments joining forces drove
the rabble from the Chateau.
The tide had now turned irresistibly against the conspirators.
Down below in the Cour de Marbre the grenadiers were still
fighting bravely for the lives of the guards, and the King, seeing
the fray from the windows, rushed out on to the balcony of
the great bedroom of Louis XIV. and cried out to the people
for mercy to be shown to his faithful defenders. Several of the
guards in attendance followed after him, and waving their hats,
adorned with the tricolour cockade, cried out, " Vive la nation ! "
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 157
The situation was saved ; in a moment that strange Parisian
crowd had forgotten their fury, and to the shouts of " Vive la
nation ! " responded with cries of " Vive le Roi ! "
Then the conspirators determined on one final effort to
achieve their purpose, and voices were raised calling for the Queen
to appear likewise on the balcony.
All this time Marie Antoinette had remained in the King's
bedroom with her children, surrounded by her weeping women
and distracted courtiers ; the ministers Luzerne and Montmorin
appeared incapable of action, whilst in a corner Necker, the
people's idol, sat sobbing helplessly. Marie Antoinette alone
was calm, rousing the courage of those around her, quieting
the little Dauphin who repeated plaintively, " Maman, I am
hungry." Only at one moment her serenity failed her, as, looking
down from the windows, she perceived suddenly amongst the
raging multitude the figure of Philippe d' Orleans walking gaily
arm-in-arm with Adrien Duport, 1 and at the sinister vision the
Queen caught the Dauphin to her heart and, half rising from her
seat, cried out in an agony of terror, " They are coming to kill
my son ! " Marie Antoinette well knew that it was not " the
people " who were most to be feared.
The cries of " Vive le Roi ! " that had broken out when the
King appeared on the balcony showed that he at least had not
lost his place in their hearts, and when at this moment word was
brought that the Queen too must show herself to the crowd, she
advanced confidently towards the balcony holding the Dauphin
and Madame Royale by the hand.
" She took her children with her for safety," says a revolu-
tionary writer she who would have died a hundred deaths to
save them ! No more cruel calumny has ever been uttered
against Marie Antoinette. It is easy to understand the idea that
inspired her action. What mother worthy of the name does not
believe that the sight of her offspring must melt the fiercest heart ?
And surely no stronger appeal could be made to the women she
believed to be the same poissardes who, but a few short years
earlier, had presented themselves at this very spot to hail the
birth of the Dauphin than to show his younger brother to them
now ! Were not the poissardes mothers too ? Undoubtedly,
if the poissardes had composed the crowd, the result would have
been just as the Queen anticipated, but the conspirators shrewdly
1 Ferrieres, i. 327. See also the evidence of the Marquis de Digoine
du Palais, witness CLXVIII. in Procedure du Chdtelet : "In the same place
(the Cour de Marbre) was M. le Due d'Orleans walking with M. Duport
whom he held under the arm, and with whom he was talking in a very
gay and easy manner." The duke was also seen at this hour by witnesses
cxxvu., cxxxn., cxxxin., cxxxvi., cxcv., who described him playing with
a light switch he carried in his hand and " laughing incessantly "
158 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
foresaw this also, and a man's voice in the crowd cried out
threateningly, " No children ! " At that Marie Antoinette,
comprehending that the rage of the multitude had not abated,
handed the children to Madame de Tourzel and came forward
alone.
As she stood there on the balcony in the pale light of the
October morning, her hair disordered, a little yellow-striped
wrapper hastily thrown over her night attire, 1 her face, of which
the dazzling tints had once defied the painter's art, now changed
to a stricken pallor, Marie Antoinette had never seemed so much
a Queen. Folding her hands on her breast she raised her eyes
above the angry sea of pikes and muskets, filling the courtyards
of the Chateau and stretching right away across the Place d'Armes
to the Avenue de Versailles, and looked to heaven, " like a
victim offering herself up to death."
And at this sight a hush fell over the tumultuous crowd, a
breathless and tremendous silence during which the Queen's life
hung in the balance. But amongst all that vast multitude only
one man was found ready to carry out the design of the con-
spirators. This brigand raised his gun to his shoulder, took aim
at the Queen, but, according to Ferrieres, dared not pull the
trigger ; according to Weber, the weapon was angrily dashed
v from his hand by his companions. The next moment the silence
was broken by a wild outburst of applause ; cries of " Vive la
Reine ! ' ' resounded on every side. Lafayette, coming forw r ard into
the balcony, raised the Queen's hand to his lips and kissed it.
The storm of acclamation redoubled ; the situation was saved.
So once again the designs of the Orleanistes were frustrated ;
only one hope remained to them if the King and Queen were
to be brought to Paris the people might yet be worked up to the
pitch of fury necessary to their assassination. Accordingly a
voice in the crowd 2 was heard calling out, " The King to Paris !
The King to Paris ! " and instantly the cry was taken up by
the multitude. Hearing this the King decided to consult the
Assembly, and a message was sent to the hall requesting that
the deputies should come to the Chateau to discuss the situation.
" We must not hesitate," replied Mounier ; "let us fly to the
King." But Mirabeau had no mind to expose his person to
the tender mercies of the revolutionary crowds whose benevolence
he was never tired of praising, 3 and immediately opposed the
1 Evidence of the Comte de Saint- Aulaire, witness CLVIII. in Procedure
du Chdtelet.
8 Ferrieres says " a few voices " ; Bertrand de Molleville, " one voice
only."
8 " M. le Comte de Mirabeau represents the danger of leaving the accus-
tomed place for sittings " (Moniteur, ii. 12).
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 159
suggestion. " It is inconsistent with the dignity of the Assembly
to go to the King ; we cannot deliberate in a King's palace."
" Our dignity," retorted Mounier, " consists in doing our
duty, and at this moment of danger our sacred duty is to be
with the King ; we shall reproach ourselves eternally if we
neglect it."
Then the King, with the courage which the deputies lacked,
announced his intention of going to the Assembly since the
Assembly would not go to him, and thereupon the Assembly,
" with the sound of musketry fire all around," settled down to a
long discussion on the manner of receiving him. 1
Whilst these inconceivable delays were taking place the
crowd was becoming more and more excited, and at last the King,
despairing of the Assembly's co-operation, resolved to take the
matter into his own hands and accede to the demands of the
people. Going out once more on to the balcony he accordingly
addressed them in these words :
" My children, you wish that I should follow you to Paris.
I consent, but on the understanding that I shall not be separated
from my wife and children, and I ask for the safety of my body-
guard."
The crowd replied with cries of " Vive le Roi 1 Vive les gardes
du corps ! " Guns were fired as a sign of rejoicing. But once
again the agitators succeeded in turning the tide of popular
feeling, and it was in the midst of a raging herd that the Royal
Family set forth on the terrible seven hours' drive to Paris. Around
the carriage the vilest of the rabble had collected, pressing against
it so closely that it seemed to be borne upon their shoulders ;
sitting astride on cannons were the sham fishwives, carrying
branches of poplar adorned with ribbons, and women of the
streets, still drunk with blood and wine, singing foul songs
of the gutter, and insulting the Queen by their gestures and
grimaces.
In order to give colour to the story that the Court had been
monopolizing the grain, the Orleanistes now released supplies
and brought up wagon-loads of grain to join in the procession. 2
The people, completely duped by this manoeuvre, surrounded
the wagons, crying out repeatedly, " We are bringing you the
baker, the baker's wife, and the baker's boy (Nous vous amenons
le boulanger, la boulangere et le petit mitron)."
In the rear were the tragic remnants of the bodyguard forty
to fifty shattered men, disarmed, bareheaded, worn with hunger
and fatigue, their garments torn and blood-stained, led prisoner
by brigands armed with pikes and sabres, to meet, for all they
knew/ with a fate as hideous as their comrades Deshuttes and
1 Moniieur, ii. 12. 2 Montjoie, Conjuration de d'Orttans, ii. 272.
160 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
Varicourt, whose heads had been carried two hours earlier to
Paris, and brought in triumph to the Palais Royal. 1
As the procession passed through Passy the Due d' Orleans,
who had hurried on ahead, was seen on the terrace of his house
surrounded by his children, and with them Madame de Genlis,
frantically impatient to witness the humiliation of the Queen, to
whose Court she had never been able to gain admittance. At
the sight of their vanquished rivals joy unrestrained broke out
on the countenances of this ignoble family. Mademoiselle
d'Orleans gave way to hysterical laughter. Some of the brigands
in the crowd, recognizing the duke, in spite of his efforts to con-
ceal himself behind the rest of the group, cried out, " Vive le
Due d'Orleans ! Vive notre pere d'Orleans ! " nor could ducal
frowns and gestures silence these incriminating acclamations. 2
It was seven o'clock in the evening when the Royal Family
reached the Hotel de Ville to be complimented by Bailly on " the
beautiful day " that had brought the King to Paris. Louis XVI.,
in a voice faint with hunger and exhaustion, replied that he came
" with joy and with confidence into the good city of Paris/'
Bailly, in repeating the King's words to the people, omitted to
say " with confidence," but the Queen, whose presence of mind
even at this crisis had not deserted her, interposed in clear tones :
" You forget, Monsieur, that the King said ' and with confi-
dence.' ' Whereat Bailly, turning to the people, added, " You
hear, Messieurs ? You are more fortunate than if I had said it
myself." At half -past nine, by the glare of torches, the Royal
Family entered the palace of the Tuileries that for nearly three
years was to be their prison. It is said that the King was radiant,
his confidence in his people once more restored, for at this, as at
every other crisis of the Revolution, he never lost sight of the fact
that the people were misled and to be pitied rather than blamed.
" There are evil men," he said next day to the little Dauphin,
" who have stirred up the people, and the excesses committed are
their work ; we must not bear a grudge against the people." In this
conviction, which to the last day of his life Louis XVI. never
relinquished, is to be found the secret of that amazing spirit of
forbearance which has been attributed to his weakness.
1 Many contemporaries, including Madame de Campan, say that these
heads were carried in the procession, but Weber, the Deux Amis, Bertrand
de Molleville, and Gouverneur Morris distinctly state that they were carried
on ahead and arrived in Paris at twelve o'clock, before the procession had
started from Versailles. The Chancelier Pasquier saw them carried into
the Palais Royal (Memoires, p. 72).
z Montjoie, ii. 273 ; Histoire de la Revolution de France, by the Vicomte
F. de Conny; evidence of the Vicomte de Mirabeau, witness CXLVI. in
Procedure du Chdtelet.
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 161
THE ROLE OF THE PEOPLE
The point that Louis XVI. failed to realize was that the
revolutionary mob which marched on Versailles was not the
people at all, but an assemblage composed of impostors both
male and female, and of hired rabble from the Faubourgs ; the
only element that could be described as representing the people
being those poor women forced against their will to march.
So indignant were the true women of the people at the mas-
querade conducted in their name that, on the morning after the
arrival of the Royal Family in Paris, a deputation of the " Ladies
of the Market " presented themselves at the Commune of Paris
to repudiate all complicity with the movement by means of the
following petition :
" Messieurs, we come to represent to you that we at the corn
market took no part in what happened yesterday ; we disapprove
of it . . . ; we devote to public justice women who have no other
qualification than that of light women (femmes du monde) and
prostituted to those who, like themselves, only wish to disturb the
peace and tranquillity of good citizens." 1
The deputation proceeded to declare that " they disapproved
of the indecent way in which the women had presented them-
selves to the King and Queen, and that, far from having spoken
against Messieurs Bailly and Lafayette, they would defend them
to the last drop of their blood." They requested that the National
Guard should be ordered to bring these women back to order.
This little petition was deposited on the table and signed by the
members of the deputation, but amongst these only three were
able to write their names. 2
According to Rivarol the poissardes also went to the Tuileries
on the same morning and " presented a petition to the King and
Queen to demand justice for the horrible calumny which rendered
them accomplices of the violence committed the day before
towards their Majesties." 3
1 A confirmation of the statement made by certain contemporaries that
Laclos, Chamfort, and other leading Orleanistes took their mistresses with
them.
a " Extrait du proces verbal des representants de la Commune de
Paris," published in the Histoire Parlementaire of Buchez et Roux, iii. 137.
3 Memoires de Rivarol, p. 263. Madame Campan in her Memoires also
refers to this visit of the poissardes to the Tuileries, but, contrary to Rivarol,
describes them as identical with the women who marched on Versailles,
and declares that they opened the interview with reproaches against the
Queen, though they ended by crying " Vive Marie Antoinette ! Vive notre
bonne reine ! " But Madame Campan's account of the 6th of October is in-
correct in several points ; moreover, we know that her loyalty to the Queen
M
i6 2 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
In the light of the deputation to the Commune this statement
of Rivarol's seems credible enough ; if the women protested to
the electors of Paris, why should they not have protested to the
King and Queen ? It may be suggested that it was the women
of the corn market only who went to the Commune, but if so,
why did they not say that it was from the women of the fish
market that they wished to disassociate themselves, instead of
stating distinctly that the women who marched on Versailles
were of a totally different class the class of " light women " that
the " respectable poor " usually hold in abhorrence ?
The whole of this incident has been very carefully kept dark
by the conspiracy of history, for, of course, it effectually disposes
of the cherished revolutionary legend that the march on Versailles
was conducted by women of the people. Even if we doubt the
veracity of Rivarol, the petition to the Commune is an absolutely
unanswerable refutation of this theory, and therefore no mention
has been made of it by any revolutionary writer, either amongst
contemporaries or amongst posterity.
From the point of view of the people the march on Versailles
proved naturally disastrous ; the cause of liberty had been dis-
graced in the eyes of the world and the work of reform arrested
in full swing. Several of the democratic deputies realizing this
left the country in despair, and amongst this number were two
of the most ardent defenders of the people Mounier l and
is more than doubtful, and since she refrained from any reference to the
deputation to the Commune which testified so strongly in the Queen's
favour, she is quite as likely to have misrepresented the truth about the
deputation to the Tuileries. On the loyalty of the " Dames de la Halle "
at this moment see also Lettres d'un Attache de Legation, date of October 16 ;
Documents pour servir & I'Histoire de la Revolution Francaise, by Charles
d'Hericault and Gustave Bord, 2nd series, p. 260.
1 Mounier's denunciation of the 6th of October in his Appel au Tribunal
de I 'Opinion publique contains one of the most eloquent testimonies to the
democracy of Louis XVI. : " Without doubt the nation had been long
oppressed by a crowd of abuses ; the rights of citizens were not sufficiently
protected against arbitrary power. But had these abuses begun under the
reign of Louis XVI. ? Had he done nothing to merit our gratitude ?
What prince ever lent a more attentive ear to all those who spoke to him
in favour of his people ? . . . Did he dishonour his reign by sanguinary
orders, by proscriptions ? Did he steal property ? And what an atrocious
exaggeration to describe the mistakes of his Ministers as excesses which
wore out the patience of the people, and to consider them as sufficient
reasons for dethroning the King ! I will not speak here of all the ad-
vantages we owe to his benevolence the abolition of servitude in his
domains, the abolition of corvees and of torture, the establishment of
provincial administration, the civil state of the Protestants recognized, the
liberty of the seas. Would he have lost all his authority if he had had less
confidence in the love of his people ? " Note that all these reforms men-
tioned by Mounier dated from before the Revolution.
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 163
Lally Tollendal. Clermont Tonnerre remained to be massacred
at his post, Virieu to perish on the scaffold; Malouet alone
of the Royalist Democrats survived the succeeding storms of
the Revolution.
THE R&JE OF THE ORLfiANISTES
Even the eyes of Lafayette were now at last opened to the
truth about the Orleaniste conspiracy. Hitherto his Republican
fervour had prevented him from offering a too determined opposi-
tion to the revolutionary movement, but if the I4th of July
had moderated his revolutionary ardour, the 6th of October, he
declared to the Comte d'Estaing, had made him a Royalist. 1
It was all over with liberty, he now saw, if the Orleanistes were
to prevail, and with a courage he too seldom displayed he
resolved to tell the King the whole truth, and to insist on the
exile or conviction of the duke. At the same time Lafayette
sought an interview with the duke himself, of which the following
account is given in the Correspondence of Lord Auckland :
" The duke was at the head of a formidable party, the purpose
of which was to send the King away, if not worse, and to make
himself to be named Regent, etc. M. de Lafayette has worked
out this plot in wonderful silence, and once master of every
proof he waited on the duke last Saturday (Oct. 10) for the first
time, and told him these words on which you may depend :
' Monseigneur, I fear there will soon be on the scaffold the
head of some one of your name/
" The duke looked surprised.
' You intend, Monseigneur, to have me assassinated, but
be sure that you will be yourself an hour later.'
" The duke swore on his word of honour that he was not
guilty.
" The other continued, saying :
' Monseigneur, I must accept your word of honour, but
as I have under my hand the strongest proof of your whole
conduct, your Highness must leave France or else I shall bring
you before a tribunal within twenty-four hours. The King has
descended several steps of his throne, but I have placed myself
on the last ; he will descend no further, and in order to reach him
you will have to pass over my body. You have cause for com-
plaint against the Queen, and so have I, but this is the moment
to forget all grievances.'
} " M. de Lafayette swore to me on the road (from Versailles to Paris
on Oct. 6) that the atrocities had made a Royalist of him " (Letter from
the Comte d'Estaing to the Queen, October 7, 1789).
1 64 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
" The duke consented to depart. The day after they were
with the King, before whom the marquis repeated to the duke
all he had said."
But Louis XVI., always magnanimous, refrained from
humiliating his cousin by a public exposure of his conduct, and
contented himself with sending him on a pretended mission to
England. According to Montjoie he hoped by this indulgence
to dissuade the duke from continuing to monopolize the grain.
" In the situation where so many misfortunes and crimes have
placed me," he said to Orleans, "I see only the needs of the
people. My sole desire and likewise my first duty is to give
them back their subsistence." Accordingly he agreed to forgive
everything that had taken place on the condition that the
duke would open his granaries, of which a number were in
England, and restore the corn he had concealed. A mission to
the English Court was to be the pretext for his departure. 2
Whether Montjoie is right on the real object of the duke's
journey and his statement is confirmed by the revolutionary
Desodoards 3 it is certain that the mission of the Due d' Orleans
to England was not, as his supporters would have us believe,
an official one, but a pretext either to cover his restoration of
the grain or simply to get him out of the country. The corre-
spondence of English contemporaries on this point is conclusive,
and shows that in England likewise the Due d'Orleans was
universally regarded as the author of the atrocities committed
on the 6th of October. 4
The Royalist Democrats, amongst whom we may now count
Lafayette, refused, however, to be satisfied with the mere exile
1 Letter from Mr. Huber in Paris to Lord Auckland, dated October 15,
1789. The above conversation is given by Mr. Huber in French. His
account of the incident is confirmed in the Memoirs of Lafayette.
2 Conjuration de d'Orleans, ii. 318.
3 Histoire Philosophique, by Fantin Desodoards, i. 222.
* See besides the foregoing letter to Lord Auckland those from Lord
Henry Fitzgerald in Paris to the Duke of Leeds, published in Dispatches
from Paris, edited by Oscar Browning. On October 29 Fitzgerald writes :
" In short, my Lord, the general impression is that the Prince was chief
promoter of all the disturbances here, of the expedition on Monday the 5th
of this month to Versailles, that his designs against the King were of a very
criminal nature, that he aimed at the Regency of the kingdom for himself
and proposed to bring his own party into power. It is supposed also that
M. de Lafayette is the person who discovered the conspiracy forming, and
that, having made it known to the King, his Majesty in goodness ,of heart
employed him on a pretended commission to England, as a pretext only,
and to shield him by honourable exile from further pursuit."
Again on November 6 : "I must assure your Grace that I have every
reason to believe that his commission to England was a pretended one," etc.
See also Playfair's History of Jacobinism, p. 220, note ; Biographical
Memoirs of the French Revolution, by John Adolphus, ii. 249 and following.
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 165
of the duke, and resolved to expose the whole design of the
Orleaniste conspiracy. Mourner was the chief instigator of this
movement. 1
Accordingly in November the Chatelet of Paris opened an
immense inquiry into the events of October 5 and 6. In
spite of the threats of the Orleanistes a great number of witnesses
came forward to testify against the infamous manoeuvres of
the duke and his supporters, and these witnesses were not taken
only from amongst aristocrats or Royalists, but from amongst
men and women of all classes soldiers, hairdressers, deputies
of the Assembly, washerwomen, ladies-in-waiting, tradesmen,
and domestic servants jostle each other in the 570 pages published
by the Chatelet, and no one should attempt to write a line on ,
October 5 and 6 without consulting the graphic descriptions
given by these eye-witnesses of the manner in which the march
on Versailles was engineered. 2 In the light of this great mass of
evidence no impartial mind can possibly doubt that the whole
insurrection was the work of the Orleaniste conspiracy the
forcing of the women to march, the men in women's clothes,
the money distributed amongst the crowd, the presence of the
duke himself and of his supporters in the thick of the tumult
always followed by cries of " Vive le bon due d' Orleans ! Vive
notre roi d'Orleans I " All these facts were proved beyond
dispute.
That the duke was indeed actually amongst the crowd on
the marble staircase showing them the way to the Queen's
apartments can hardly be doubted, but on this point the reader
must be left to form his own opinion from the evidence given
in the Appendix of this book. 3
The Chatelet having thus accumulated information from
every quarter, finally sought the testimony of the victim against
1 Avant-propos to the Tableau des Temoins . . . dans la Procedure du
Chdtelet, 1790.
a The whole of the inquiry is to be found at the British Museum under
the heading Procedure criminelle instruite au Chdtelet de Paris sur la
denonciation des faits arrives a Versailles dans la journee du 6 octobre 1789.
Imprimee par ordre de I' A ssemblee Nationale. Museum press mark, 491 . i .2.
Readers should beware of consulting the Orleaniste publication, Abrege de
la Procedure criminelle instruite au Chdtelet, etc., in which the most important
evidence is suppressed, but the brochure entitled Tableau des Temoins et
recueil des faits lesplus interessants, etc., an answer to the aforesaid Abrege,
is a genuine resum6 of the inquiry.
8 Von Sybel, the German historian, considers that " the strongest
evidence against the Due d'Orleans was furnished several years later by
the, discovery of a letter bearing the date of October 6 in which he directs
his banker not to pay the sums agreed upon : ' Run quickly, my friend,
to the banker . . . and tell him not to deliver the sum ; the money has not
been gained, the brat still lives!' (le marmot vit encore}." This would '/
i66 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
whom all the worst outrages of October 6 had been directed
the Queen of France. But to the inquiries of the commissioners
who presented themselves at the Tuileries for the purpose, Marie
Antoinette made only the reply : "I saw everything, I heard
everything, I have forgotten everything (J'ai tout vu, j'ai tout
entendu, j'ai tout oublie)." x
The supreme opportunity had been given her to bring her
arch-enemy to justice a course that might have saved the lives
of the Royal Family and put an end to the whole Revolution,
but with sublime magnanimity she chose to reject it. Yet there
are still historians capable of saying that Marie Antoinette
" knew not to forgive " !
But the evidence collected by the Chatelet was already more
than sufficient to prove that the events of October 5 and 6 were
the work of a conspiracy. Even the " Comite des Recherches "
of the municipality of Paris, to whom the Chatelet applied for
information, though in collusion with the Orleanistes Brissot
was, in fact, one of its leading members admitted in its report
that " the execrable crime which denied the Chateau of Ver-
sailles in the morning of Tuesday the 6th of October had for
instruments bandits set in motion by clandestine manoeuvres
who mingled with the citizens," but in order to avert investiga-
tion as to the authors of these manoeuvres the Comite refused
to extend its inquiries to anything that took place before the
morning of the 6th. By this means, as Mounier points out, all
the preparations that led up to the march on Versailles, and
even the organization of the march itself, were to be kept dark,
so as to throw the entire blame on a " few obscure ruffians "
whom the conspirators were quite ready to deliver over to justice. 2
In spite of these obstacles the Chatelet had no difficulty,
however, in deciding who were the true authors of the insurrec-
tion, and on the 5th of August 1790 the magistrates unanimously
convicted the Due d'Ofleans and Mirabeau as deserving of arrest.
The following day a deputation from the Chatelet presented
themselves at the Assembly and placed all the documentary
evidence they had collected on the table.
seem to indicate that some one had been bribed to murder the Dauphin,
but the incident rests only on the authority of Real, minister of police
under the Empire, who declared that he had held the note in his hands.
See Philippe d'OrUans Egalite, by Auguste Ducoin, p. 72.
1 Montjoie, Conjuration de d'OrUans, ii. 71 ; Dispatches from Paris,
ii. 311.
8 Appel au Tribunal, p. 76. See also Fantin Desodoards, p. 283 :
" The Orleanistes had no doubt that the Chatelet would regard this affair
from the point of view indicated by themselves, and would throw all the
odium on a few obscure ruffians who could easily be represented as secret
agents of the Royalists."
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 167
Boucher d'Argis then opened the debate with these dramatic
words :
" At last we have torn aside the veil from the deplorable
event now all too celebrated. They will be known those
secrets full of horror ; they will be revealed those crimes that
stained the palace of our kings in the morning of October
the 6th ! "
But the Orleanistes had still far too much power over the
Assembly to be brought to justice. Chabroud, the hireling of
the duke, 1 was deputed to draw up a report exonerating both
the delinquents, and this was followed by tirades from Mirabeau
and the Due de Biron, which had the usual effect of cowing the
Assembly. To any impartial mind these speeches for the
defence are hardly less convincing proof of the conspirators'
guilt than the report of the Chatelet. Not a single charge against
the defendants is effectually refuted ; the feebleness of the argu-
ments employed is equalled only by their audacity. The
" people " whom these demagogues did not hesitate to stigmatize
as " ruffians " or as " tigers " 2 were alone to blame ; the only
conspiracy was that of the " enemies of the Revolution " ! In
other words, it was the " aristocrats " who had organized the
march on Versailles !
Mirabeau, adopting his usual device of drowning his lack of
reason or logic in floods of meaningless verbiage, thundered
against the Chatelet : " This history is profoundly odious. The
annals of crime offer few examples of infamy at the same time
so shameless and unskilful." Several of the most incriminating
accusations he boldly admitted, 3 but endeavoured to explain
them away by sophistries so futile that even the Assembly would
have been forced to reject them had not Mirabeau, with superb
cunning, hit on an argument that terrified the Assembly into
acquiescence. "It is not the 6th of October," he cried, " that
is being brought to trial it is the Revolution ! " And at this
1 Montjoie, Conjuration de d'Orleans, iii. 84. Fantin Desodoards
(Histoire Philosophique, etc. i. 286) says Chabroud received 60,000 francs
from the Due d' Orleans for this report.
2 " Perhaps ruffians had mingled with the multitude and it had become
their mobile instrument. ... A homicidal band advances, in its frenzy it
respects nothing. Soon there is nothing between the tigers and Louis
XVI." (Speech of Chabroud).
8 For example, Dr. la Fisse, witness LV. in the Procedure du Chdtelet,
had stated that Mirabeau, on receiving a note from the Due d'Or!6ans after
the 6th of October saying that he was leaving for England, had exclaimed
furiously to those around him, " See here read ! He is as craven as a
lackey, he is a blackguard ( jean f outre) who does not deserve all the trouble
ta,ken for him ! " (Compare this with Camille Desmoulins' description of
Mirabeau's " anger at seeing himself abandoned," quoted on p. 126 of this
book.) Mirabeau admitted having made this remark, but explained he
only meant it was " a mistake " for the duke to go to England !
i68 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
the Assembly, dominated by the two revolutionary factions,
who well knew that if the Revolution ended it was all over with
them, hastily reversed the judgement of the Chatelet and de-
clared both Orleans and Mirabeau innocent. At this monstrous
decision of the Assembly a cry of indignation went up from all
those who loved justice, and who from the beginning of the
Revolution had striven for the cause of true liberty. 1
Amongst these was Mounier, who wrote from Switzerland
his Appeal to the Tribunal of Public Opinion denouncing the
report of Chabroud : "I can conceive nothing so revolting as
the efforts of M. Chabroud to justify the most frightful crimes,
his indulgence towards the assassins, his hatred for the victims,
his outrages against the witnesses and against the judges (of
the Chatelet), the threatening tone of the Due d'Orleans and the
Comte de Mirabeau, the eagerness with which the conclusions
of the reporter (Chabroud) were hastily admitted, without
examination and without discussion. Nothing of all this should
surprise me, yet it provoked in me indignation almost equal to
that which I felt on October 5 and 6, 1789. Perhaps the apology
of crime should inspire more horror than crime itself."
Yet it is this apology of the crimes of October 5 and 6 that
for more than a hundred years has triumphed over truth and
justice ; by nearly all historians the Procedure du Chdtelet and
the great denunciation of Mounier whom up to this point
they have quoted unceasingly in support of revolutionary
doctrines have been persistently ignored, and the character of
the French people has been blackened for the better white-
washing of an ignoble prince and his boon companions. Such
is the " democratic " method of writing history !
The truth is that the march on Versailles was nothing but an
Orleaniste rising ; not only must the people be exonerated from
blame, but so must also the other revolutionary intrigues. In
all the preparations that took place beforehand, in all the
sidelights thrown by the Chatelet on the crimes committed, we
can find no trace of either Anarchist, English, or Prussian co-
1 For the opinions of English contemporaries on the absolution of the
Assembly at the instigation of " the whitewasher Chabroud," see, for
example, Playfair's History of Jacobinism, p. 220 ; Robison's Proofs of a
Conspiracy, p. 392 ; and the statement of Helen Maria Williams, a bitter
enemy of the King, in her Correspondence of Louis XVI. i. 235. Even
Dumont, the friend and evidently, for a time, the accomplice of Mira-
beau, admitted the doubtful honesty of the Assembly in exonerating him.
" The events of October 5 and 6," wrote Dumont, " have been imputed to
the Due d'Orleans, and the Chatelet implicated Mirabeau in the conspiracy.
The National Assembly declared that there was no case for conviction
against one or the other. But the absolution of the Assembly is not the
absolution of history, and many veils yet remain to be raised before these
events can be pronounced on" (Souvenirs sur Mirabeau, p. 117).
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 169
operation ; the leaders were men known to be devoted solely to the
interests of the Due d' Orleans, the instruments were in his pay.
But if these other intrigues took no actual part in the move-
ment, they accorded it their heartiest sympathy. The out-
rages of the 6th of October had furthered the cause of anarchy.
Robespierre could still afford to lie low, biding his time, whilst
the Orleanistes proceeded with the work of demolition.
By the revolutionaries of England the events of October 5
and 6 were hailed with fresh rejoicings. At the meeting-house
of the Old Jewry on November 4, Dr. Price delivered his famous
political sermon in praise of the French Revolution. " What
an eventful period is this ! I am thankful that I have lived to
see it ; I could almost say ' Lord, now lettest thou thy servant
depart in peace, for mine eyes have seen thy salvation ' I have
lived to see a diffusion of knowledge which has undermined
superstition and error. ... I have lived to see thirty millions
of people indignant and resolute, spurning at slavery and demand-
ing liberty with an irresistible voice. Their king led in triumph,
and an arbitrary monarch surrendering himself to his subjects."
After this discourse the members of the Revolutionary Society
of Great Britain adjourned to the London Tavern and passed
an address of congratulation on the " glorious example of France,"
which was transmitted by Lord Stanhope to the National
Assembly.
But there was one man in England whose passionate love of
liberty inspired him with the eloquence that alone could counter-
act these monstrous libels on a noble cause. Burning with
indignation Edmund Burke arose and in his immortal Reflections
opened the eyes of his fellow-countrymen to the true character
of the French Revolution and the outrages of October 6. "Is
this a triumph to be consecrated at altars ? to be commemor-
ated with grateful thanksgiving ? to be offered to the divine
humanity with fervent prayer and enthusiastic ejaculation ? . . ,
I shall never think that a prince, the acts of whose whole reign
were a series of concessions to his subjects, who was willing to
relax his authority, to remit his prerogatives, to call his people
to a share of freedom not known, perhaps not desired, by their
ancestors ... I shall be led with great difficulty to think that
he deserves the cruel and insulting triumph of Paris and of Dr.
Price. / tremble for the cause of liberty, from such an example
to kings. I tremble for the cause of humanity in the unpunished
outrages of the most wicked of mankind."
Burke 's stirring appeal met with a prodigious success and
carried all the sane portion of the people with him. Hitherto
they had retained a certain sympathy with the Revolution ; the
national " sporting " instinct had responded, as we have seen,
170 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
to the enterprise of attacking the Bastille, but this same instinct
recoiled at the cowardly attempt to massacre the defenceless
Royal Family in their beds. ' ' After the 6th of October, ' ' says the
Republican Dumont, " many sensible men (in England) began
to think that the French treated infamously a king who had
done so much for them." 1
The effect of Burke's speech was undoubtedly to save England
from revolution ; Dumont even goes so far as to question whether
he was not " the saviour of Europe." In vain the English
revolutionaries retorted with a storm of seditious pamphlets;
their efforts were speedily transformed into waste paper, whilst
Burke's denunciation will live as long as the English tongue is
spoken.
" Its merit," wrote the contemporary John Adolphus, " can
only be appreciated by the never-dying rancour it excited in
the minds of his opponents, a rancour which age, affliction, sick-
ness, and even death could not assuage." 2 It is not assuaged
yet ! Still, after more than a hundred years, the Radical press
does not weary of reviling the author of the great Reflections,
and owing to its unremitting efforts England has never been
allowed to know the debt she owes to Edmund Burke. 3
But if England began henceforth to regard the French
Revolution with aversion, Prussia continued to express unfeigned
admiration for the principles of French liberty. The decrees of
August 4, which deprived the German princes of their estates
in Alsace and Lorraine, had already embittered feeling between
Austria and France, and paved the way for the dissolution of
the hated Franco- Austrian alliance; and, although perhaps
Prussia hardly realized it at the time, the first step had been
taken towards the incorporation of these provinces with the
future German Empire. Well might Hertzberg and Von der
Goltz rejoice at each succeeding stage of the Revolution ! "A
King without authority," wrote the Minister of Saxony to Berlin,
whilst the march on Versailles was preparing, " a state without
money or military power ; in a word, a vessel caught in a storm
and of which Mirabeau is the only pilot what importance can
France have henceforth in Europe ? " 4
1 Souvenirs sur Mirabeau, p. 96.
2 History of the French Revolution, by John Adolphus, ii. 298.
3 So thoroughly has this propaganda been carried out that in the
popular edition of the Reflections, which the good taste of the British public
made it necessary to publish, a preface has been inserted explaining that
Burke was ill-informed on the subject and urging the reader to consult Mr.
Arthur Young's Travels in France. But the writer carefully refrains from
mentioning Arthur Young's later work, The Example of France, which con-
firms every word uttered by Burke in rather stronger language !
* L'Europe et la Revolution Francaise, by A. Sorel, ii. 26.
THE MARCH ON VERSAILLES 171
Prussia had indeed every reason to be grateful to the
Revolution. Was it a recognition of this debt that inspired
the Prussians to enter Versailles eighty-two years later to the
strains of the " Marseillaise " ? The 6th of October 1789 had
proved but the prelude to the 8th of January 1871, and in the
great gallery of the palace, stained with the blood of the King's
bodyguard, William I. of Prussia was proclaimed German
Emperor amidst the acclamations of his conquering hordes.
THE INVASION OF THE TUILERIES
173
THE INVASION OF THE TUILERIES
COURSE OF THE INTRIGUES IN 1790 AND 1791
A PERIOD of nearly three years elapsed between the second and
third great outbreaks of the Revolution. During this interval
changes so fundamental took place among the factions that the
outbreaks of 1792 must be regarded as an entirely different
movement in fact as a new and distinct revolution.
In order to understand the causes that produced this second
revolution it is necessary therefore to form some idea of the course
taken by the revolutionary intrigues since the march on Versailles.
With the exile of the Due d'Orleans and his mentor Choderlos
de Laclos the Orleaniste conspiracy was temporarily arrested,
and by the desertion of Mirabeau in the following spring lost
its principal dynamic force. Mirabeau, it was said, had been
" bought " by the Court ; true, Mirabeau received payment, but
this time only for the expression of his real opinions. He had
always despised the Due d'Orleans, and once the King's bounty
had freed him from this ignoble servitude he devoted all his
immense energy to building up the royal authority he had spent
the previous years in overthrowing.
Louis XVI., who, as M. Sorel well expresses it, " saw only in
the Revolution a misunderstanding between himself and his
people, exploited and stirred up by a band of sedition-mongers,"
hoped by the capture of the chief agitator to put an end to
hostilities.
On the I3th of July 1790, before taking his oath to maintain
the Constitution on the following day at the Fete de la Federation,
Louis XVI. appeared at the Assembly, and delivered himself of
this strangely human message to his people :
" Tell your fellow-citizens that I wish I could speak to them
all as I speak to you here ; tell them again that their King is
their father, their brother, their friend ; that he can be happy
only in their happiness, great with their glory, mighty through
their 'liberty, rich through their prosperity, that he can surfer only
in their griefs. Make the words or rather the feelings of my
176 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
heart to be heard in the humblest cottages and in the dwellings
of the unfortunate ; tell them that if I cannot go with you into
their abodes, I desire to be there by my affection and by means
of laws that will protect the weak, to watch with them, to live
for them, to die if necessary for them. ..."
But the return of the Due d'Orleans two days earlier which
Lafayette was either too foolish or too cowardly to oppose gave
a fresh impetus to the conspirators, and insurrection broke out
with redoubled fury at the Palais Royal. The professional
agitators of 1789 St. Huruge, Grammont, Fournier TAmericain
were now reinforced by a gang of hired brigands, known as
the company of the " Sabbat," raised by the De Lameths and
consisting mainly of Italians notably Rotondo, Malga, and
Ca valiant i whom we now find mingling in all the revolutionary
mobs, and committing every form of sanguinary violence. 1 In
the summer of 1790, soon after the Fete de la Federation, Rotondo
was despatched to St. Cloud to murder the Queen whilst she was
walking in the garden, and failed only because the rain kept her
indoors on the day appointed ; 2 again in the following November
Rotondo and Cavallanti led a mob to pillage the house of the Due
de Castries, who had wounded one of the De Lameths in a duel.
At the same time the Due d' Orleans entered into relations with
another intriguer Madame de la Motte, famous in the affair of
the necklace, who now returned to Paris, and occupied a magni-
ficent hotel in the Place Vendome provided for her by the duke
in return for fresh libels on the Queen. 3
Meanwhile, in spite of the fact that he had sworn to maintain
the Constitution and had placed no obstacles whatever in the
way of the Assembly, the King was still kept a prisoner by
Lafayette at the Tuileries in direct violation of the principles
laid down by the people. 4
It was under these circumstances that Louis XVI. decided
in desperation to appeal for intervention by foreign powers. At
the end of October an envoy was despatched to the Marquis de
Bouille, in command on the frontier, to inform him that " the
King's position under the gaolership of Lafayette had become
so intolerable that he contemplated flight to the frontier to one
1 La Conspiration revolutionnaire de 1789, by Gustave Bord, p. 20 ;
Le Marquis de St. Huruge, by Henri Furgeot, pp. 192, 225 ; Crimes et
Forfaits de L. P. J. d'Orleans decouverts par un citoyen.
z Memoires de Mme. Campan, p. 276.
3 Memoires de Lafayette, iii. 157 ; Correspondance secrete, p. 481.
* See the Resume of the Cahiers, p. 7, Article II. " The person
the King is inviolable and sacred," Article XI. " Individual liberty
sacred." Therefore either as King or subject Louis XVI. could m
legally be kept a prisoner, not only without the formality of a trial
without even any reason being given for his detention.
THE INVASION OF THE TUILERIES 177
of the places under Bouille's command, in order to muster around
him all the troops and also those of his subjects who had remained
faithful to him, to endeavour to win back the rest of his people
who had been misled by sedition-mongers, and to seek support
in the help of his allies if all other means to re-establish order
and peace proved unavailing." 1
Now since the suggestion contained in this letter of an appeal
to the King's allies, the Austrians, has been made the chief ground
of accusation against both Louis XVI. and Marie Antoinette, it
is important to understand their real intentions on this question
of the " Appel a 1'fitranger." No one has explained the matter
more clearly than M. Louis Madelin, the historian who best
represents modern French opinion :
" Marie Antoinette . . . appears to have thought of this appeal
to Europe towards the summer of 1790. The idea she entertained
concerning it a woman's idea, perfectly childish is still little
known in general. She dreamt in no way of a counter-revolution
brought to Paris in the baggage-wagons of the foreigner, but of
a simple manifestation on the frontiers, by means of which the
Court would show that they ' disapproved of the way the King
was treated.' The Emperor would mass his troops, make a
feint of advancing, Louis XVI. would place himself at the head
of the French army, and Leopold would then retire before his
brother-in-law, who, aureoled by this victory, would re-enter
Paris surrounded by the love of an expectant people."
The plan was futile, however, for the reason that the "friendly "
sentiments of the European sovereigns to whom this appeal was
made were outweighed by their political ambitions. " The cause
of kings ! The cause of dynasties ! " cries M. Madelin ; " that will
be said hypocritically in 1792, but the Revolution neither alarms
nor scandalizes Europe in 1789 and 1790, it is rather a cause for
rejoicing." All the splendour of old France that had evoked
the envy and admiration of foreign monarchs was centred not
only in the Court but in the Capetian dynasty, consequently the
sight of France, their eternal rival, bleeding in the dust from
self-inflicted wounds, seemed to these lesser powers no occasion
for knight-errantry. As to the ties of blood which have been
represented as binding together the royal families of Europe in
a confraternity dangerous to the interests of their subjects, their
feebleness was never better exemplified than in the French
Revolution, for of all the European sovereigns Leopold II.,
Emperor of Austria, brother to the Queen of France, was perhaps
the least eager to defend his sister's interests or even to ensure her
safety, whilst Gustavus III. of Sweden, bound by no ties of kinship,
alone displayed activity in responding to her appeal.
1 Memoires de Bouiltt, p. 181.
1 78 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
In the case of Frederick William II. of Prussia, it was not
merely a matter of passive acquiescence in the disorders of France,
but, as we have already seen, of active co-operation. The intrigue
of Von der Goltz which we must follow in the pages of Sorel
had prospered marvellously since the march on Versailles, for
he had succeeded in carrying out his Prussian Majesty's in-
junctions by forming a coalition with several of the most in-
fluential revolutionary leaders, notably the Orleaniste Petion.
In May of 1790 Frederick William had written to Von der Goltz
ordering him " to keep this Petion on the alert, to express the
satisfaction he (the King) feels at his conduct, and to let them
know in Berlin whether it would not be expedient to give him
a pension." 1
This letter was followed five months later by the despatch of
a fresh emissary to France, a certain Jew agitator named Ephraim,
who arrived in Paris on September 14, 1790, armed with a letter
from the King of Prussia to Von der Goltz instructing him to put
Ephraim in touch with the revolutionary leaders and pave his
way for him :
" Goltz had been preparing it for a long time. He arranged
for the admission of the royal go-between with Lafayette, with
Barnave, with Lameth ; he put him in touch with Petion, Brissot,
Gensonne, and their friends (i.e. with the future Girondins).
Ephraim found them full of animosity against Austria and full
of cordiality towards Prussia. He showed himself still more
anti- Austrian than any one amongst them, and the cynicism of
his language with regard to the Queen seemed a certain guarantee
of the sincerity of his sympathy for France."
Ephraim then tried to worm his way into the confidence of
the King's minister, Montmorin, but without success. " ' The
object he put forward/ said Montmorin, ' is a commercial treaty,
but I have occasion to believe that his mission extends further
and that he has been instructed to sound us on a political under-
standing.' . . . Montmorin had good reasons for distrusting all
these Prussian manoeuvres ; Ephraim was playing a very perfidious
part in Paris. He frequented the clubs and made himself noticed
by his democratic violence. ' His object/ wrote Montmorin,
' is to embroil us with the Emperor of Austria, and he thinks that
in stirring up the public against the Queen he will succeed in this
more easily. He goes in for underhand dealings and tries to
work upon the journalists. I am almost certain that he dis-
tributes money, and I know that he draws large sums from the
banker/ " 2
1 All the following quotations are taken from L' 'Europe et la Revolutii
Franpaise, by Albert Sorel, vol. ii. pp. 69, 157.
a It was his refusal to form an alliance with Prussia at this crisis thai
THE INVASION OF THE TUILERIES 179
Montmorin's suspicions were perfectly correct, for on this
point we have the evidence of contemporaries belonging to
absolutely opposite parties. Thus the Comte de Fersen, writing
to Gustavus III. of Sweden on March 8, 1791, states that Ephraim
has been supplying money to the agents of revolutionary propa-
ganda " not long ago he again received 600,000 louis." 1 And
Camille Desmoulins threw further light on the matter in 1793 by
this significant phrase : " Is it not a fact aptly brought forward
by Philippeaux that the treasurer of the King of Prussia, in giving
him an account of the expenses for last year, produces an item
of six million ecus for corruptions in France ? " 2 In all the
sordid annals of the Hohenzollerns no greater perfidy has ever
been brought to light ; already they had embarked on the
programme which in our own day they have pursued with un-
failing success the engineering of revolution in all those countries
they wish to subdue. Well might the English Jacobin Miles
exclaim : " Of all the sceptred miscreants who have dishonoured
royalty since you and I have perambulated this earth, I know
of none so base, so mean, so infamous as the present King of
Prussia. He has authorized his agents throughout Europe to
commit a kind of general pillage to cajole and rob all nations."
For Miles, revolutionary though he was, displayed no small
perspicacity in seeing through the intrigues of certain so-called
democrats, and he was not deceived, as are our visionaries of
to-day, by protestations of sympathy with the cause of liberty
emanating from the willing slaves of Prussian despotism.
" Some of the German courts," he wrote on March 12, 1791,
" have emissaries here all apostles of liberty preaching equal
formed the principal charge against Montmorin when he was brought to
trial by the Girondins two years later. The words in which this accusation
is conveyed afford clear evidence that the Girondins were acting in the
interests of Prussia, and throw a curious light on their political morality :
" It had been assumed," runs the official report read aloud by the Girondin,
Lasource, that M. de Montmorin " had not believed in the sincerity of the
advances made by the Court of Berlin. It was not possible that this Court
should not have been of good faith, since it (the Court of Berlin !) has been
so from all time, and that it can only be the natural enemy of that of
Vienna . . . M. de Montmorin . . . knew that jealousy and rivalry was
fomenting more than ever between these two Courts, since he knew and
admitted himself that it was the King of Prussia who had excited and fomented
by his agents the insurrection of the Belgians and the Liegeois (against Austria).
He therefore knew perfectly the attitude of the King of Prussia, and if he
refused to adopt his views it was not because he doubted his sincerity, but
because he did not wish for an alliance with that Court. What reproaches,
Messieurs, has not France to make against this ex-minister ? " (Moniteur,
xiii. 591). Montmorin was therefore to be condemned as a traitor to France
because he had refused to form an alliance with a Court that he knew to be
fomenting sedition in a rival State !
1 Le Comte de Fersen et la Cour de France, i. 87.
* Fragment de I'Histoire secrete de la Revolution, p. 44. \/
i8o THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
rights and assuring the giddy multitude that their example will be
followed by the whole world. Prussia for intrigue takes the lead.
She pays court to each party as appearances may seem to favour.
The Tuileries she disregards. All her agents vociferate against
the house of Austria as plotting with the Queen for the purpose
of destroying the Revolution." *
The skill with which this intrigue was conducted shows that
the teachings of Frederick the Great had been laid to heart by
his disciples. Frederick had always believed in the dissemination
of democratic doctrines abroad whilst remaining a past master
in the art of counteracting their influence at home. The rulers
of the various German states had now more than ever need to
exercise this talent, for the people of Germany displayed alarming
symptoms of revolutionary fever. The doctrines of the German
Illumines that had contributed so powerfully to the revolution
in France were now making themselves felt in the country that
gave them birth. Burke, writing in this very year of 1791,
remarks : "A great revolution is preparing in Germany ; and a
revolution, in my opinion, likely to be more decisive upon the
general fate of nations than that of France itself. ..."
This revolution, which might have proved the salvation of the
civilized world by overthrowing the despotism of the Hohenzollerns,
was averted by the revolution in France.
The death of Mirabeau in April 1791 removed a formidable
obstacle from the path of Prussia. The author of The Secret
History of the Court of Berlin, who had declared that " war is the
national industry of Prussia," was not the man to be deceived
by the pacific protestations of Frederick William's emissaries.
Mirabeau knew far more than was convenient about the intrigues
of the Hohenzollerns, and he detested Hertzberg. " That old
fox," he declared exultingly to Dumouriez, " had only a short
time to live." 2
Four days later Mirabeau himself was dead. The truth of
the verdict, " Death from natural causes," was never proved
conclusively, and the Orleanistes were strongly suspected of
avenging themselves by poison for the defection of their most
valuable ally. But is it altogether impossible that Ephraim
may have been concerned in the matter ? The Jew agitator,
at any rate, played an active part in the tumult that took pic
a fortnight later when the Orleanistes, once more hoping
achieve the King's death at the hands of the people, 3 drove
1 The Correspondence of William Augustus Miles on the French Revc
tion, i. 256.
2 Mtmoires de Dumouriez.
8 " The object of the plot was the assassination of the King " (Choderlos
de Laclos, by fimile Dard, p. 286).
THE INVASION OF THE TUILERIES 181
mob to the Tuileries under the pretext of preventing the Royal
Family from going to St. Cloud for Easter. The same thing had
been attempted the year before when women were sent to incite
the crowd to violence, but their efforts had proved unavailing,
and the King had set forth upon his journey amidst the acclama-
tions of the Parisians and cries of " Bon voyage au bon Papa ! " 1
The revolutionary leaders realized that more potent instruments
must be employed if they were to bring off their coup. Danton,
the principal organizer of the movement, 2 remained as usual in
the background, but Laclos disguised as a jockey and Sillery as
a lackey were recognized amongst the crowd. Again the pro-
fessional agitators had been summoned St. Huruge and the
bloodthirsty members of the Sabbat ; " Malga gorged with gold
and wine " mingled with the troops, inciting them to murder ;
Rotondo led the rabble. 3 But it was said to be Ephraim who
had financed the movement with the funds confided to him by
his royal master. 4
This outrage finally decided Louis XVI. to carry out his plan
of flight to the frontier, and on the 20th of June the Royal Family
set forth on the fatal journey to Montmedy that ended in their
arrest at Varennes. The Orleanistes immediately seized the
opportunity to fan up popular fury against the King ; the gutter
press in their pay poured forth pamphlets describing Louis XVI.
as legros cochon, 5 a besotted drunkard, " a monopolizer, a swindler,
a false-coiner, a devourer of men." 6 At the Jacobin Club, Real,
amidst furious abuse of the King, proposed that the Due d'Orleans
should be urged to accept the regency. 7 The duke, who at the
first news of the King's flight had driven round Paris with a smile
on his lips congratulating himself on his victory, now became
struck with panic, and exasperated his supporters by publishing
a letter composed for him by Madame de Genlis declining the
regency. 8 But Laclos, energetic as ever in the cause of his
royal " protege," drew up a petition in collaboration with
Brissot, demanding the deposition of the King and, in spite of
the protests of Brissot, 9 " his replacement by constitutional
1 Correspondance secrete, p. 450. i/
2 Danton boasted of this at his trial : "It was I who prevented the
journey to St. Cloud." See Notes de Topino Lebrun ; also Bulletin du
Tribunal revolutionnaire, No. 21822, "Defense de Danton."
8 limile Dard, op. cit. ; Correspondance secrete, 523 ; Lettres d'Aristo-
crates, by Pierre de Vaissiere, p. 291.
* 6mile Dard, op. cit.
5 Le Nouveau Paris, by Mercier, i. 192.
6 Revolutions de France et de Brabant, by Camille Desmoulins.
'''Seances des Jacobins for July 3, 1791. \/
8 Memoires de Mme. de Genlis, iv. 92.
9 Memoires de Mme. Roland, ii. 285 ; Mtmoires de Brissot, iv. 342.
182 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
means " in other words, the substitution of the Due d'Orleans
for Louis XVI.
The Orleanistes, however, had over-reached themselves ;
in degrading the King they had succeeded in degrading the
monarchy, and now for the first time the cry of " No more kings ! "
made itself heard, and the proposal was made that the phrase
composed by Laclos should be replaced by one demanding the
abolition of the monarchy. 1
This suggestion of a Republic, emanating from the Club of
the Cordeliers and a section of Paris entirely under their control
known as the Theatre Frangais, 2 met with the support of only
a few isolated revolutionaries, including Brissot and Condorcet,
whose Republican convictions were more than doubtful, and was
violently opposed by the Jacobins, who were mainly Orleanistes.
Already at a sitting of the Club, immediately after the flight to
Varennes, a member who ventured to propose a Republic had
been indignantly shouted down, 3 and the amendment suggested
by the so-called " Republicans " was therefore rejected by the
Jacobins, and the original proposal of Laclos retained in the
petition which was to be presented at " the altar of the country "
erected on the Champ de Mars.
By means of cajolery, threats, and the dissemination of panic
news, 4 some thousands of signatures were obtained in the Fau-
bourgs principally those of women and children 5 and early
in the morning of the day appointed, July 17, 1791, a disorderly
crowd assembled on the Champ de Mars, and after inaugurating
the ceremony by the murder of two unoffending citizens an
old soldier and a wig-maker, who had taken refuge from the rays
of the sun beneath the steps of the altar in order to enjoy a frugal
breakfast 6 proceeded to the usual revolutionary pastime of
pelting the troops assembled by Lafayette with stones. Where-
upon Lafayette and Bailly, the mayor, with unwonted firmness,
hoisted the red flag and proclaimed martial law, but the soldiers,
exasperated by the pistol shots that now succeeded to the hail
of stones, without waiting for further orders fired on the rioters
and killed a number of them. 7
1 Aulard's Stances des Jacobins, iii. 43. 2 Buchez et Roux, x. 145.
8 See Journal des Debats de la Societe des Amis de la Constitution, etc.,
Seance of July i, 1791. M. Varennes asks whether the throne shall be set
up again, and whether a monarchic or republican government would be
best : " Grand bruit, brouhahas " ; the President calls the member to order.
Also Seance of July 8, 1791, M. Goupil in a speech refers to " the opinions
that prevail in this society in favour of Republicanism." The greatest
tumult arises at this sentence, and a member reminds the speaker that
" all this uproar is caused by your attributing to the society sentiments it
has never entertained. (Universal applause.)"
4 Beaulieu, ii. 540. 5 Ibid. ii. 538. 6 Ibid. ii. 541.
7 Lafayette was ever after blamed for this so-called " massacre " by
THE INVASION OF THE TUILERIES 183
As in all popular tumults, the display of force brought the
mob to its senses ; in an instant the whole Champ de Mars was
swept clear of insurgents, but, what was more important, the
fusillade had the effect of terrifying the revolutionary leaders.
The Jacobins, assembled in their Club, hastily escaped by doors
and windows, and ran for their lives amidst the jeers of the
populace. 1 Brissot, Camille Desmoulins, and Fr6ron " dis-
appeared " ; 2 Marat betook himself once more to a cellar ; 3
Robespierre, trembling in every limb, hurriedly changed his
lodgings ; 4 Danton fled to the country, and thence to England ; 5
whilst Hebert, the terrible Pere Duchesne, who for once had
ventured out into a popular tumult and heard the bullets of the
soldiery whistling past his ears, never recovered from his fright :
" It seems," says his biographer, M. d'Estree, " that every time his
pamphlets mention this fusillade . . . they sweat anguish ; and
this terror doubles his ferocity." 6 At the same time the Jew
Ephraim, openly accused by Royalist writers of financing
seditious libels and plotting the death of the Queen, was arrested
and imprisoned for two days in the Abbaye, after which he was
sent back to Prussia and we hear of him no more. 7
The tumult, described henceforth by revolutionary writers
as " the massacre of the Champ de Mars," was, moreover, not
the only check received by the Orleaniste faction at this crisis ;
a more serious reverse was the defection of several of the most
influential Orleaniste leaders. Barnave, who with Petion had
been sent to escort the Royal Family on the terrible return journey
from Varennes, had been won over by the sight of the Queen's
the revolutionary leaders ; Bailly paid for it with his life. Yet it is certain
that Lafayette did everything in his power to restrain the indignation of
the troops. See Beaulieu, ii. 543, and the evidence of Gouverneur Morris,
who was an eye-witness of the scene : " To be paraded through the streets
through the scorching sun, and then stand like holiday turkeys to be
knocked down by brickbats, was a little more than they (the troops) had
the patience to bear ; so that without waiting for orders they fired and
killed a dozen or two of the ragged regiment. The rest ran off like lusty
fellows," etc. (Diary and Letters of Gouverneur Morris, i. 434). L
1 Beaulieu, ii. 545.
2 Histoire des Girondins, by Granier de Cassagnac, i. 330 ; La Tribune
des Patriotes, by Prudhomme ; Revolutions de France, by Camille Des-
moulins, No. 86 ; Camille Desmoulins, by Edouard Fleury, i. 230.
3 Camille Desmoulins, by Edouard Fleury, i. 227 : " The terror of
Marat seems to have begun the day after the flight (to Varennes), when
he was overcome by panic lest Louis XVI. should return at the head of an
army and put him ' in a hot oven.' " See L'Ami du Peuple, No. 497.
* Memoires de Mme. Roland, i. 65, 209, 210 and note. Robespierre's
terr 
