of the demands I before made, and which are in the War-office. The interest which I take in the success of the army of the Rhine, although I no longer command it, obliges me to correct your errors. Citizen Minister, you have set out with a false supposition; it is not therefore surprising that you have been grossly mistaken.'--vol. ii. p. 46.

He then enters into several historical details, which he says the Minister ought to understand, and of which he is entirely ignorant. He then proceeds with increased bitterness :

'I must thank you, moreover, for the indulgence with which you touch so lightly on some parts of my letter, which it seems are "trifling and beside the question." You say that " you look only to reason and the interests of the Republic, and that you are far from supposing that I can have been intentionally disrespectful to one of its Ministers.' I, also, Citizen Minister, look only to the Republic; but when the success of its arms requires that I should reproach a Minister with his ignorance or his unfitness for the very difficult duties that have been confided to him, I do not think that I am wanting in respect to the Republic, by pronouncing very strongly my opinion against him. The time is past when Generals worshipped a Minister, even if he were a blockhead. never was one of that contemptible class. I was a Republican even before the Republic; and whenever I have met such ministerial idols, I have treated them with contempt. I think, like every friend of liberty, that nothing is more advantageous to the public service than giving publicity to official correspondence. Such a system brings all public men under public observation and criticism, and serves alike to prove which of the functionaries deserve the confidence of the country, and which, on the other hand, have forfeited it by their utter imbecility. If I am of this latter class-denounce me!

'CUSTINE,

• Commander-in-Chief of the Army of the North

and the Ardennes.'-vol. ii. p. 49.

After reading these letters we have no longer any difficulty in understanding Custine's fate; can it be reasonably doubted that the peculiar and hitherto unaccountable virulence with which he was persecuted by the War-Office arose from the private vengeance of the Minister and his Secretary, and the faction to which they belonged. But the matter was delicate-Custine was highly popular in the army, and his adversaries were afraid to take any step against him while he remained among his troops. The Committee of Public Safety, therefore, under the pretence of consulting him on the measures of the campaign, and by expressions of unlimited confidence, enveigled Custine to Paris-where he arrived about the 18th July, and gave his adversaries much uneasiness for three or four days, by parading himself in a kind of triumph about the Palais-Royal, and other public places, where he was much followed and even applauded; but on the 22nd he

arrested and sent to the Abbaye. The revolutionary tribunal, which as yet showed some decency, seemed reluctant to try, and still more so to condemn him; but the implacable Père Duchesne denounced even the revolutionary tribunal for being too scrupulous, and under this pressure Custine was at length condemned on the 27th August, and executed next day.

6

With what we now see, we are no longer surprised, as M. Thiers seems to have been, at the appearance on the trial of the Secretary-General of the War Department, the terrible Vincent,' bringing from the archives of the War-office a mass of letters and documents, which, though he explained and commented upon them with malignant zeal, are admitted even by the Bulletin du Tribunal Révolutionnaire'* to have had little or nothing to do with Custine. The Bulletin talks of a number of letters produced by Vincent, but does not detail them. M. Thiers, in his usual fashion, repeats the observation of the Bulletin as to the number of the letters, but he seems to have taken no trouble to inquire what they really were; though we suppose they must be in the public archives. Of one thing we may be tolerably certain, that amongst them were not the two letters to the Minister which we have above quoted, and which were probably the most unpardonable offence of the unfortunate General.

The rest of the volume is occupied by desultory letters from and to the army of the North during the short command of Houchard and the beginning of that of Jourdan. Houchard's fate -like so many other obscure episodes of the great tragedy-is, when closely looked at, very remarkable and exemplary. He had been originally brought forward by Custine, but, on the turn of the tide, Houchard deserted and even denounced his friend and patron; and he was duly rewarded-by succeeding him—first, in the chief command of the army; and secondly, the very same day three months-on the scaffold! These papers throw no light whatsoever on the real causes of Houchard's fate-those alleged in the indictment are even more absurdly false than the charges against Custine. If ever the truth should be known, we have no doubt it will appear that he was the victim of the same detestable arts that he himself had so basely employed against Custine-indeed arte perire sua is the device of the whole revolution. It has been said that, as Custine had been denounced by Houchard, so Houchard himself was denounced by Hoche, then an ambitious

*This Bulletin was published in loose sheets, day by day-very hastily done-but it is the first, and, therefore, the best authority for all the proceedings of the Revolutionary Tribunal. M. Thiers has copied from it his account of Custine's execution. A complete set seems to be very rare, since one in the sale of the library of the unfortunate Labedoyère, in April 1837, brought 361 francs.

young

young soldier: but we have nothing in these volumes either to contradict or to authenticate that suspicion. We have read that the son of Houchard published at Strasburg, in 1809, a pamphlet on his father, in which the real causes of his death are revealed,' but we have not been able to see this pamphlet. It is worthy of notice that these legal murders had now become so common, that several historians do not think it worth while to mention so small a fact as the execution of this Commander-in-Chief, on a charge of being in alliance with the enemy he had beaten, and of having betrayed the country by the very victory which had saved it.

Indeed, nothing could be more deplorable than the situation of the general officers at this particular period-made responsible for armies which they were not allowed to command, and for events which they were not permitted to direct-insulted by every petty emissary of the clubs, and holding their stations almost at the will and pleasure of the proconsular tyrants. We shall conclude our extracts with a letter of Carnot's colleague, Duquesnoy, which will exhibit this system in a forcible light-premising that where we have put asterisks there are in the original the vulgarest terms of obscenity:

'DUQUESNOY to the COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC SAFETY.

· Avesnes, 18th Oct., 1793.

'Citizen Colleagues,-I send you herewith, to be shortened by the head, four *** officers. The first is Gratien, a general of brigade, who formally disobeyed the orders of his general of division to attack the enemy in the village of Watignies. If he had executed that order the battle would have been won three hours sooner, and we should have had more time to take advantage of our victory. The 12,000 or 15,000 men who were on the heights of Watignies would have been surrounded, and not one would have escaped; but this traitor or coward, far from executing his order, beat a retreat, caused us a great loss of men, and nearly the loss of the battle.

The second is the commander of the 25th regiment of cavalry. He also disobeyed the orders of General Fromentin to charge the enemy: instead of obeying, he wheeled to the left and *** ran away, which embarrassed our arrangements and cost us many brave republicans.

The third is the governor of this town, who is full of respect for Cobourg and his agents. The proof is the attention he showed the Prince de -, lieutenant-colonel of the regiment of Cobourg, whom he had carefully removed to a lodging in the town to have his wounds dressed, while our own brethren were lying in a church as if it had been a barn. I visited them all this morning, and they complained of this indecent partiality. How is it that one of our enemies should receive

more attention than our own soldiers?

The fourth is an Irishman, named Mandeville.

I this morning

heard

heard him called “ M. le Marquis." Now, as I don't love marquises, I send him to you.

• Health and Fraternity!

'DUQUESNOY.'-vol. ii. p. 323.

We believe that in all the annals of this bloody period there are not to be found two more frivolous reasons for shortening by the head the leaders of a victorious army, than that one showed humanity to a wounded prisoner, and that the other was called 'marquis' -probably in derision: but on the other two cases, in which Duquesnoy sends two officers of high rank to be guillotined for cowardice, we must direct the notice of our readers to the prodigious effect on individual conduct that the despotic power of these proconsuls must have had. Every officer was fighting with, as it were, a halter round his neck, and found it safer to rush on the enemy in front than to retire on his friend in the rear—in the former case death was only a chance, and if it came it was glorious-in the latter it was certain and ignominious. General Gratien, however, though broke on the field of battle for cowardice, and thus sent off to be shortened, escaped, by the favour, it is said, of Robespierre, and was reinstated in his rank. He afterwards served under Buonaparte-was the commandant of the corps that beat Schill at Stralsund (for which the King of Denmark was so base as to send him the order of Dannebrog)— and he died, in 1814, a commander of the Legion of Honour, and a Baron of the Empire!

But who was this colleague of Carnot?-this terrible Duquesnoy? and what became of him? His history may be told in three awful and instructive words-Duquesnoy was an apostate monk, an atheist, and a regicide. Taking a part in the Jacobin insurrection of Prairial (May, 1795), he was arrested, and perished miserably, in prison, by his own bloody hand! The comparison of the foregoing letter with the fate of this wretch affords a valuable addition to the great chapter of revolutionary retribution!

We regret that the promised continuation of this work has not yet reached us. It is probable that the documents (of the authenticity of which no doubt can be entertained) were irregularly obtained, and that some public authority or private arrangement may have arrested the publication.

ART.

ART. VIII.-1. Correspondence relating to the North American Boundary. Presented by command of her Majesty. A and B. 1838.

2. Report of the British Commissioners appointed to survey the Territory in dispute between Great Britain and the United States of America on the North-Eastern Boundary of the United States; with an Appendix. Presented to Parliament by command of her Majesty. July, 1840.

3. The Right of the United States of America to the NorthEastern Boundary claimed by them. Principally extracted from the Statements laid before the King of the Netherlands, and revised by Albert Gallatin; with an Appendix and eight Maps. New York. 1840.

4. A Brief History of the United States' Boundary Question. Drawn up from Official Papers, by G. P. R. James, Esq. London. 1839.

THE HE spirit in which we undertake the examination of the important and interesting question discussed in these publications, will be best indicated by an early expression of our sincere and cordial concurrence in the sentiments with which Mr. Gallatin prefaces his argument:

In the various negotiations with Great Britain in which I have been employed, there was always an earnest desire to remove subjects of contention, and to promote friendly relations; on almost all questions a conciliatory disposition; nothing at any time that could shake my confidence in the sincerity and good faith of that government. And I do believe that it would do justice, if it was once satisfied that justice was due. But under any circumstances whatever, the question must be settled. It would be the height of madness and of wickedness to come to a rupture, and for such an object. Both governments are animated by a sincere and earnest desire to preserve peace. It is not believed that the English nation wishes a war with the United States. It may be confidently asserted that, with an entire conviction of their right to the territory in question, there is not a more universal feeling amongst the people of America, everywhere and without distinction of political parties, than that of the preservation of peace, above all, of peace with Great Britain. It is the duty of the two governments speedily to devise and to adopt the means necessary for effecting the object; and I believe that means may be found.'-Preface, pp. ix, x.

* Mr. Gallatin, now, we believe, in his eighty-first year, has filled with distinction many important offices and embassies:-he was one of the American negociators of the treaty of Ghent, and afterwards (and pending these boundary discussions) minister of the United States in London.