ing the message; another were for maintaining the decree; but as the keeper of the seals was silent, although, had it not been for the chilling effect of the water, he might have represented that, according to the constitution, the assembly had no right to refuse to hear a message from the king; the business ended here, and the order of the day was called for.

In the account of this transaction given in the newspaper called the Moniteur, the words used by M. Bertrand were mistated. He was represented, after the words to stop the emigration, to have added, of navy officers. He thought proper to address a letter to the editor of the Moniteur, desiring that the mistake might be corrected, as he had not mentioned the officers of the navy, nor could with propriety have done it, no one officer having deserted his post since his appointment to the place of minister of the marine. This letter formed the pretext for a denunciation against M. Bertrand a short time afterwards.

The legislative assembly manifested so great a disposition to put an unfavourable construction on the king's measures, that he was constantly on his guard, had the constitution always before his eyes, and seldom proposed any plan to his ministers or adopted 'one proposed by them, without previously examining whether or not it was strictly conformable to it; and if there were doubts on that head, he generally rejected the measure. This attention rendered it difficult for the king's enemies to find, what they eagerly looked for, any matter of accusation founded on his having infringed the constitution. An attempt was made to put that construction on his having made use of the veto. It was said to be applying a constitutional power diametrically against the spirit of the constitution. But who are to be the judges in this matter? If it be the assembly, then the veto is a word signifying nothing. If it is the king, then there was no infringement of the constitution. But no prudence on his part could have enabled him to avoid all the dangers with which he was surrounded; nor could human pene

tration foresee what was to be the effect, when ambition, enthusiasm, prejudice, patriotism, ignorance, and caprice, acting upon a large body of men possessed with power, are the causes. Indeed, many events in the course of this revolution are so surprising, and so little to be looked for from what occurred immediately before, that they may be compared to the tricks of a juggler, who bewilders the senses of the spectators, and, every time he removes the cup or the hat, presents some object extremely dif ferent, if not precisely the reverse of what the expected

to see.

For example-Who could have expected that the archbishop of Sens would be succeeded, as prime minister of France, by a foreigner who was a protestant by religion and a republican by birth? After being created minister upon account of his popularity, who could have imagined that M. Necker would be ordered to quit the kingdom when his popularity was at the highest? Could those who saw him flying like a felon to the frontiers conceive, that he would within a few days be recalled and brought back in triumph to his former situation? Or could those who saw the frantic joy of the people at his return imagine, that he would soon after be permitted to withdraw out of the kingdom without notice or regret? After all the time and labour which had been bestowed in forming a constitution of a monarchical form; after the whole nation had sworn to maintain it; after the legislative assembly, amidst the plaudits of the galleries, had declared against a republic in the month of July 1792, who could have believed that a republican form of government would be decreed in the month of September of the same year ? Could it have been foreseen that the duke of Rochefoucault, M. Mounier, and many more who struggled to obtain freedom for France, would be murdered or driven out of their country as the agents of despotism? When the king was a prisoner and the nation in anarchy, who expected that the raw soldiery and undisciplined peasantry of France, under the direction of

a general who had never before commanded an army, should baffle the skill and energy of a numerous veteran army, commanded by a general of the highest military reputation in Europe? At a moment when they certainly could not wish for new enemies, who could have thought that the convention would have wantonly provoked every neighbouring state by ridiculous and hostile decrees? When unhappy and distracted France was suffering under the most cruel internal commotion, and on the point of exhausting her strength by civil war as much as her bitterest enemies could wish, who could have imagined that they would contrive a scheme, the effect of which was to assuage commotions, unite her councils, and inspire her with a vigour she never had shewn before? Could any body who had seen Robespierre odious to the great majority of the convention, and with difficulty allowed to speak, have imagined that this very man, who seemed to hate mankind and was formed for being hated by them, was ever to acquire power by popularity, and be able to exercise a degree of tyranny over those zealots of freedom, which it could hardly be expected the mutes of a seraglio would have long submitted to?

To return to the period we left. When the king and those around him seem to have shut their hearts from any other view, and to have centered all their hopes of comfort and security in conforming to the regulations of the constitution, it was peculiarly unlucky that there was not perfect concord in the king's council on other points of conduct. Though there is reason to believe that all the ministers wished well to their country, the most distinguished for talents and energy among them were of very different characters. M. de Narbonne, the minister of war, was a man of spirit and enterprise, of very pleasing manners, of a great share of wit, and various other accomplishments. M. Bertrand, the minister of the marine, was more advanced in life, of a clear and masculine judgment, of unremitting application, but of plainer manners than is usual with his countrymen. He had managed

the public affairs as intendant in the province of Britanny, during a difficult period, with great steadiness, and equally to the satisfaction of the king and the province.

As it had been remarked by M. Bertrand, that some of the ministers during the first assembly had been brought into trouble by communicating with the committees, owing to their words or actions having been misrepresented, he proposed to his colleagues, that they should communicate and correspond directly with the assembly, as ordained by the constitution, and never with the committees. This being approved of by the king, was agreed to by all the ministers, except M. de Narbonne, who at this time enjoyed a great share of popularity, was praised in the journals of Brissot and Condorcet, while M. Bertrand was abused in both. M. de Narbonne imagined that it was only by preserving his popularity that he could be of service as a minister either to his king or country. He therefore corresponded with the committees, went often there, was always well received, and appeared to be on a friendly footing with several leading deputies of the Gironde party. This conduct was highly displeasing to M. Bertrand and some of the other ministers, and, with other subjects of disagreement, was the cause of M. de Narbonne's quitting the office of minister. After his resignation, as the misunderstanding between him and M. Bertrand had been commented on in Brissot's journal, the latter thought it expedient to resign also. The consequence was the entire dissolution of this administration, —an event much to be regretted; because perhaps it was the only administration since the revolution, in which all the ministers were at once attached to the king and to the constitution. M. de Narbonne soon afterwards joined the army under M. La Fayette, whose conduct in support of the constitution he approved, and thereby drew upon himself the hatred first of the Jacobins, and finally of the Gironde party.

CHAPTER XXIX.

The Jacobin Administration-War with the Emperor-The Austrian Committee revived-Memoirs of Madame de la MotteThe King's Household Troops reduced-Seditious Scenes in the Gardens of the Tuilleries-Divisions in the Council-Decree for an Army of Twenty Thousand Men-Views of the Jacobins-Observations of Camille Desmoulins-King negatives the Decrees-Roland dismissed—Dumourier resignsM. La Fayette writes to the National Assembly-Appears at the Bar-A project for the Escape of the Royal Family-Reflections on the Behaviour of the King, Queen, and Princess Elizabeth.

ON N the dissolution of this administration, the king was advised by M. Cahier de Gerville to form an administration of a popular nature, as the best means of acquiring the confidence of the nation, and of precluding those marks of jealousy and ill-humour that were shewn against all his measures. M. Dumourier, the same who has since rendered himself so famous, was appointed minister for foreign affairs; M. La Coste for the marine; M. Duranton minister of justice; and a short time after M. Roland, a man of a grave character and republican principles, who had formerly been inspector of commerce and manufactures, was named minister for the interior; M. Claviere of Geneva, a person celebrated for his knowledge in finance, minister of contribution; and M. Degraves, a man of a mild and diffident character, and in a weakly state of health, succeeded M. de Narbonne as minister of war. This was called the Jacobin administration; although Lacoste, Duranton, and Degraves never had been of that society, and the other three within a very short time were more obnoxious to the Jacobins than any men in France.

The assembling of emigrants on the frontiers of France, particularly in the Austrian Netherlands, the countenance given to them by foreign princes, the proclamations issued by the king's brothers, and a variety of other cir