answer was not one of refusal, and late in the evening of the 23rd, Dumouriez called on Roland to inform him that he was appointed. When Dumouriez was gone, Madame Roland, who had then seen him for the first time, told her husband that Dumouriez was not sincere, and that he must not trust him: "He has expressed great satisfaction at the patriotic selection which he had to announce to you, but I should not be surprised if he should turn you off one day." Madame Roland never could overcome her dislike to Dumouriez, and her judgment of him is not altogether wrong. Dumouriez complained of Madame Roland's disposition to meddle with public business. The six ministers at first lived with a mutual good understanding, and dined together the three days of every week in which a council was held; each minister entertained the rest in turns. All went on well for a month, when Roland proposed that his wife and friends should be of the party at his house; and Lacoste and Dumouriez resolved no longer to take their portfolios with them to these dinners after having in vain protested against "this ridiculous innovation." * but the Lives of Plutarch' was the book that most | in Paris, visited Madame Roland, and asked if her fixed her attention, and when she was nine years of husband would take a place in the new ministry. The age, she secretly carried Plutarch to church to read instead of her prayer-book. "From this time," she says, "I date the impressions and the ideas which made me a republican without thinking that I was to become one." As she grew towards womanhood, her reading was of the most diversified kind, natural history, politics, religion, philosophy; Rousseau, Voltaire, Montesquieu, Buffon, Locke, Spinosa: nor did she neglect the accomplishments that become her sex, or the little household cares that belong to a woman's duties. In 1773, the death of her mother, to whom she was tenderly attached, threw Manon into violent convulsions, which for some days endangered her life. Her father was not a prudent man, and his affairs, which were in a bad condition during his wife's lifetime, grew worse after her death. When Roland wrote to him to ask his daughter to wife, whom he had already known for some years, her father, who did not like this austere suitor, returned a rude answer of refusal. The daughter took lodgings in a convent, resolved to live with the utmost economy on her little fortune she only went out twice a week; and one visit was to her father's house, to look after his linen, and to take back with her what required mending. After a few months Roland persuaded her to leave the convent, and to marry him. Without strong attachment to her husband, she esteemed his virtues, and was an exemplary wife. She copied out his manuscripts, corrected his proofs, and, as Roland's health was delicate, she prepared such dishes as were most suitable to him: she was his secretary, nurse, and cook. At Amiens, where they lived four years, Madame Roland became a mother, but she still continued to assist her husband, who had undertaken a large part of the new Encyclopædia. They never quitted their lodgings except to take a walk; and Madame Roland, who had studied botany, amused herself with collecting the plants of Picardie. In 1784 she visited England with her husband, and Switzerland in 1787. They were settled at Lyon when the Revolution commenced. "It came," she says, "and warmed us with its flame; friends of humanity, worshippers of liberty, we thought it would regenerate the human race, destroy the withering misery of that unfortunate class over which we had so often lamented; we hailed it with delight." Being deputed by the city of Lyon to watch over its interests while the Constituent was sitting, Roland came to Paris in February, 1791, with his wife, and they Dumouriez, Mémoires,' ii., 174; Madame Roland, became acquainted with several members of the As-Mém.,' i., 291, describes the dinners at her own house; sembly. They stayed seven months in Paris, and left it to pass the autumn of 1791 near Lyon. One of the last acts of the Constituent was to suppress the places of inspectors, and Roland returned to Paris in December, 1791, to claim some recompense for the loss of his place after many years of service. On the 21st of March, Brissot, who had been in correspondence with Roland and his wife, before they came to settle It was during their seven months' residence at Paris, in 1791, that a little circle was formed at Roland's house of the most ardent apostles of liberty. Brissot was one of the first who visited them; and Brissot brought Pétion. Buzot and Robespierre were also admitted into this little society. For Buzot, Madame Roland conceived admiration and attachment, which were felt in return. She thought Robespierre was an honest man, and passionately devoted to the cause of freedom. She had observed his reserved habits, that he was a careful listener, and seldom spoke in company, and that he made use of what he heard in their society in his speeches. "But Robespierre," she said, "defends his principles with warmth and obstinacy; it requires courage to be the only one to defend them at a time when the number of the defenders of the people is prodigiously reduced. The court hates him, and we must therefore love him." Robespierre did not attend the little parties very regularly, but he came occasionally to ask Madame Roland for a dinner. During her short absence from Paris, Madame Roland corresponded with Buzot and Robespierre; and on her return, after the sittings of the Legislative Assembly had commenced, her intimacy and we may infer that she was present both during dinner and after. Dumont (Souvenirs,' &c., c. 20), who saw Madame Roland several times at these meetings of the ministers and of the Girondins, gives a favourable picture of her. She listened, but did not mix in the conversation. Her charms were heightened by her simple and tasteful dress, never an indifferent thing in a woman, and the modesty of her behaviour. Dumouriez was a libertine, and his manners showed it. He was not the man to Madame Roland's taste. with Brissot and the leaders of the Gironde prepared Delessart's feebleness in his negociations with the the way for her husband's accession to power. Roland court of Vienna had brought him into prison; and had a reputation for probity, and he had that respect- Dumouriez did not require this warning to conduct able mediocrity which disarms envy and jealousy, and affairs with more vigour. Of all the foreign states, points a man out for promotion amidst rival and dis- Germany was most interested in the speedy settlement cordant interests. But mediocrity, in itself impotent, of the affairs of France and the restoration of tranquilrequires aid and support. Roland had a wife, a woman lity. There were three distinct parties in the Gerof beauty, talent, courage, and decision; one who manic body, the Empire, Prussia, and Austria; but might hope to inspire a somewhat sluggish husband all three had the same interest in preserving neutrality with a portion of her own energy. She was courted and a conciliatory policy. As to the rights of the and admired by a powerful party, and her husband's princes who had possessions in Alsace, which had been appointment was the homage paid to her superior affected by the abolition of feudalism within the activity, her talents, and her charms. French territory, all that was necessary was to give them indemnity, and it does not appear that the Assembly would have refused it; several of the petty princes were ready to accept it, and this matter might have been settled, if the great princes of the empire opposed the negociation for indemnity. But the real difficulty was the question of the emigrants. A body of them armed and disciplined were at Ath, in the Low Countries, from which place they had made an unsuccessful attempt to surprise the citadel of Valenciennes. A battalion of infantry had left Dunkerque with the military chest and the colours, and had crossed the frontiers into the Low Countries, where they were well received. On the 19th of March, Dumouriez wrote to De Noailles, the French ambassador at Vienna, who was ill-disposed to the Constitution, and instructed him, in the name of the French king, to require of the court of Vienna that the number of troops in Belgium should be diminished, and the French emigrants dispersed. The answer of De Noailles was a request to be recalled, as he had no hopes of being of any further use at Vienna. Dumouriez worked with unceasing activity; he was fertile in plans, a ready writer, and a lover of order; he had talents for administration as well as for war. He set about regulating the foreign relations, and revising the pension list. He asked from the Assembly, had not made it an affair of general concern, and and he got six millions of francs for the secret expenses of his department, without being under the obligation of rendering any account of it. Pétion came to ask him for thirty thousand francs a month for the police of Paris, and, contrary to the king's advice, Dumouriez made him a month's payment. The king had told Dumouriez that Pétion would employ the money in hiring people to write against him (the king). Dumouriez says that he found out that the king was right, and he paid the money only once; but he gives no further explanation. Dumouriez conquered the repugnance which the king had conceived for him, pleased him by economical reforms, and amused him by his frank and lively behaviour, and by his anecdotes. The queen wished to see him, and they had an interview, which, commenced with violent irritation on the part of the queen, terminated in a better understanding; but she told him a truth, which everybody suspected, On the 27th of March, Dumouriez again wrote to and which was one of the main causes of all the trou- De Noailles, and instructed him to inform the court bles: "Neither the king nor I," she said, can en- of Vienna that if a positive answer was not immediately dure all these novelties of the Constitution." On returned, the French king would consider himself in another occasion the queen said to Dumouriez, in the a state of war. On the 14th of April, Dumouriez presence of the king, "You see that I am miserable; communicated to the Assembly his letter of the 19th I cannot even go to the window on the side of the of March, two answers of De Noailles to that letter, garden. Yesterday evening, in order to get a little and his own letter of the 27th. He also communicated air, I showed myself at the window of the court, when a letter which Louis had written with his own hand to a cannonier of the guard addressed me in an insulting the king of Hungary and Bohemia-(Francis was not manner, and added, 'What pleasure I should have in yet elected emperor),-in which the French king seeing thy head on the top of my bayonet.' In this declared that the tranquillity of Europe would depend dreadful garden, on one side you may see a man on the answer; that he had freely accepted the Conmounted on a chair reading with a loud voice horrible stitution, and would abide by it. The Assembly things against us; on another, there is a soldier or an immediately declared that there was ground for abbé whom they are dragging to one of the basins, impeaching De Noailles, and an ambassador was while they load him with insults and blows; others appointed to replace him. But a second despatch are playing at ball, or quietly walking about. What arrived from De Noailles, on the 5th of April, two a place! what a people !" days after the first: he had changed his mind, resumed negociations, and had got an answer. The answer was a note from the vice-chancellor Cobentzel, who was more accessible than his master the chancellor prince Kaunitz. * Madame Roland gives an amusing description of the cabinet councils, and of the idle gossip between the king and his ministers. She had certainly a better notion of doing business. She never would believe in the king's sincerity. † Dumouriez, Mém.,' ii., Liv. 3., c. 6. Compare Madame Campan, Mém.,' ii., 200. De Noailles, in his letter to Dumouriez of the 5th of April, 1792, which was in answer to the letter of the 27th of March, said: "The reply of the Count de Cobentzel has confirmed me in the opinion which I have always held, that there was no wish to attack us, but that there was an intention to make demands upon us, as to which it would perhaps be difficult to agree before having tried the force of arms. The Austrian minister has told me that the concert between Austria and the other powers was no longer a personal affair of the king of Hungary and Bohemia; that he could not withdraw from it without the other courts, and that this concert would continue to have the same object so long as anything should not be terminated, which remained to settle with France. He has specified to me these three points: 1. Satisfaction to the princes who had possessions in the French territory. 2. Satisfaction to the pope for the Comtat of Avignon. 3. The measures which we (the French) should think proper to take, but which should be such that our government should have sufficient power to check every thing which could disquiet other states." * On the 19th of April, this letter of De Noailles was communicated to the Assembly, which repealed the decree of impeachment passed against him. On the 20th of April the king came to the Assembly with his ministers, and Dumouriez read a long report which he had made to the council on the 18th, about the state of foreign affairs. The report recapitulated the negociations between France and Austria since the promulgation of the Constitution, "that work of reason," as the report calls it. The conclusion of the report was, that, as there was no satisfactory answer to the despatches of the 19th and 27th of March, the nation was in a state of war; but as there was no article in the Constitution which authorized the king to declare the nation in a state of war, the king was recommended to make to the Assembly a formal proposition for war against Austria, in the terms provided by the Constitution. After the report was read, the king said that the resolution contained in the report was unanimously adopted by the council, and adopted by himself; and accordingly he "formally proposed to the National Assembly war against the king of Hungary and Bohemia." The president replied to the king, that the Assembly would take the question of war into their serious consideration, and inform him of the result. The discussion commenced immediately, If the answer is not very precise on the third point, the fault is that of the vice-chancellor. Some of the French historians seem to give rather an interpretation of the answer than the terms themselves. and continued to a late hour at night, when war was resolved on almost unanimously, and it was sanctioned by the king. Though Louis told the truth in saying that he had adopted the determination of the council, he was really opposed to the war, and he had drawn up a paper in which he gave his reasons against the war, and he had made all the ministers sign it.* The grounds on which the Assembly determined to declare war were drawn up by Condorcet. The most distinct, the most justifiable ground, if we admit the truth of the allegation, was, that the court of Vienna, in violation of treaties, had given open protection to French rebels. The party which had given the king his ministry, wished for war; and the court of Vienna, though it had committed no open act of hostility, had given cause for just suspicion of its hostile intentions, and had conducted the negociations in such a way as to hasten the rupture. The declaration of war caused general joy in France. It seemed to settle the difficult question which the emigrations had raised, and the dubious behaviour of the king. Even some of the moderate party thought the war would put an end to internal dissension by uniting all to oppose the common danger, and that it would give employment to many turbulent men whom the Revolution had called into existence. In a single evening the Assembly decided this important question, a war with the house of Austria, the chief of the confederate powers; a war which lasted near a quarter of a century, and changed the face of Europe.‡ Dumouriez, in his Mémoires,' (ii., Liv. iv., c. 1,) has treated of the negociations, which preceded the war; and he defends himself against the charge of being the author of it. He says (c. 2) that, as minister, he did all that he could to prevent the war; he admits that, as a Frenchman, he wished 66 the nation to declare for war, the only noble, the only proper resolution;" and "that he would have considered the nation as cowardly, and as unworthy of liberty, if it had longer submitted to the insolence and the hostilities of the court of Vienna." Dumont says, "Dumouriez wished for war, and he found in the conduct of Austria sufficient reasons to justify it." The colleagues of Dumouriez did not wish for war. Brissot was resolved to have war: and this selfsufficient man, who prided himself on the virtues of his private life, was ready to adopt the most dishonest and shameful means to induce the Assembly to vote for war. (Dumont, Souvenirs sur Mirabeau,' p. 411.) CHAPTER XXVI. THE TWENTIETH OF JUNE. than twenty to twenty-five thousand men at his disposal; for as he had to leave his strong places at some distance in his rear, it was necessary to garrison them sufficiently. The plan of the campaign was this: La THE Gironde urged Dumouriez, as soon as he was minister for foreign affairs, to appoint an ambassador to England, a man who could be trusted, for it was important to ascertain that England would not enter into a continental war, which was imminent. Talley-fayette was to march from Metz to Givet, which was on rand was the most proper person, but he was excluded by one of the self-denying decrees of the Constituent. Chauvelin, a young man, was accordingly named as ambassador, and Talleyrand went with him to direct him. The embassy was not well received either by the British court or the public in general; there was a suspicion founded on the character of Talleyrand and those who accompanied him, that their object was to propagate revolutionary opinions. The real object was to secure peace with England.* In the present state of its finances, with an army disorganized, and all the best officers among the emigrants, France did not seem to be in a condition to proclaim war. But men were not wanting, adventurers of all kinds, and persons who were out of employment owing to the disorder occasioned by the disturbed state of France. The National Guard, who had hitherto only contributed to effect the revolution, were now employed to defend it, and were put on the same footing as the troops of the line. The minister, Degrave, was uneasy at the desertion of the officers: Duchâtelet, who had signed his name to the first announcement of a republican journal and was eager for war, said that the subalterns would make much better officers than those who had deserted: "There is," said he," the same difference as between amateurs and artists; even if all the old officers had left us, we should not be worse off; we shall have more emulation in the army, and generals will be found among the soldiers." The French found both officers and generals. For generals they had at present Rochambeau, Lafayette, Luckner, and Dumouriez, who were succeeded by others "to whom nature gave great talents, which were developed by circumstances," Pichegru, Hoche, Masséna, Moreau, and lastly Bonaparte.† The plan of the campaign was formed by Dumouriez, for Degrave, the minister of war, conscious of his incapacity, took the opinion of his colleague. Rochambeau, who commanded the army of the north, had about thirty-five thousand disposable men. Lafayette commanded the army of the centre, with not more the Maas, close upon the Belgian frontier, and from Givet to advance into Belgium and seize the strong post of Namur. From Namur he was to advance at his discretion either upon Liège or Brussels, and in possession of either of those places, he was in the centre of the Low Countries. The Low Countries had attempted a revolution before the French Revolution commenced, and though Austria had reduced them to submission, there were still many disaffected persons, who it was supposed would welcome the French arms. The barrier fortresses on the frontiers of Belgium had been demolished by the orders of the emperor Joseph; the country was open to invasion, and everything promised success. Simultaneously with the movement of Lafayette, Biron was ordered to march with ten thousand men upon Mons, where the Austrian general Beaulieu was stationed with a small force. Théobald Dillon was to advance from Lille, seize Tournay if he could, and then to join Biron, or to receive his further instructions. Biron and Dillon were officers of Rochambeau, who feeble in health, and ill-disposed to obey the orders of the ministers, remained within the French frontiers. The advance of Biron and Dillon was only a feint: the real attack was conducted by Lafayette. Biron left Valenciennes and encamped at Quiévrain, within the Belgian frontier, on the 28th of April, 1792. From Quiévrain he advanced to Boussu, where Beaulieu had posted some light troops. All at once two regiments of dragoons took to flight, calling out, "We are betrayed," and the whole French army followed them. The officers in vain attempted to rally their men, who threatened to shoot them. The camp at Quiévrain was pillaged, the military chest taken, and the French reached Valenciennes in the greatest disorder. On the same day, and at the same hour, Théobald Dillon advanced from Lille to Bessieux, on the road to Tournay, with three thousand men, of whom one-third were cavalry; but on the appearance of a few hundred Austrians marching out of Tournay, the cavalry took to flight, the infantry followed, and the whole body hurried back to Lille, leaving their artillery and baggage behind. Dillon followed the fugitives to Lille, where he was massacred by his own soldiers, together with a colonel of engineers, named Berthois. The real cause of this disgraceful retreat was never known: it could hardly be fear; it might be that the army was totally disorganized, and possibly there was treachery. Yet nothing of the kind happened with the troops of Lafayette, nor with a small body of troops Much was said at this time about an 66 Austrian Committee," an invisible body, which was supposed to be hostile to the constitution and liberty. There may have been something of the kind during the sittings of the Constituent, but there was nothing now. Yet Bertrand de Moleville and Montmorin visited the Tuileries after their resignation, and this excited suspicion, for Moleville was an intriguer. Carra, in his which advanced, under general Carle, from Dunkerque | between Dumouriez and the Gironde. When the to Furnes, to try the disposition of the people in that decree was passed, which allowed Dumouriez the six part of Belgium. Lafayette with great trouble had millions for secret expenses, he took the money, but, moved his artillery and part of his troops, under the he says, never read the decree, which as he supposed reorders of Narbonne, over a country ill provided with lieved him from all accountability for the money except roads, a distance of about a hundred and fifty miles in to the king. But Guadet, on looking at the decree, five days; but the chief part of his army was still found that it did not release Dumouriez from accountin cantonments at Dun, which was thirty leagues from ability, and he resolved to call Dumouriez to account. Givet. His advanced guard of three thousand men The general maintained that the decree had been falsiwas at Bouvines on the 1st of May, half way to Namur fied; he declared that he would not account, and he from Givet. Lafayette was in his camp at Rancennes. told the king that he would resign. His firmness On hearing of the misfortunes of Biron and Dillon, he carried him through: the decree was repealed, and a did not advance, and he wanted supplies. Dumouriez new one was passed with the clause which had been maintains that the attack on Namur was quite inde- omitted by accident or design; and the king sancpendent of the operations of Biron and Dillon; and as tioned the new decree. they had failed, that was an additional reason why Lafayette should endeavour to execute his part of the plan, especially as he had a stronger force than the Austrians could oppose to him. Dumouriez blamed Lafayette; and Rochambeau and Lafayette blamed the minister of war, and particularly Dumouriez, who had planned the campaign. The Gironde supported the ministry, and the Assembly drove from their bar a deputation of the Cordeliers, who came to denounceAnnales Patriotiques' of the 15th of May, entitled the generals: "Three hundred of our brothers have 'On the Plot of a St. Barthelemy of the Patriots,' perished; they have had the fate of the Spartans at denounced Moleville and Montmorin as members of Thermopyla," said these classical orators: "the the committee which designed to make a massacre in public voice, always more sure than the ministerial, Paris. The two ex-ministers proceeded against Carra tells us that they have been the victims of treason." for defamation before the Juge de paix, Larivière. "Drive the knaves out," cried a hundred voices; and Carra, when questioned by the judge, said that he had the knaves retired. his information from the three deputies, Merlin, Bazire, and Chabot, members of the committee of surveillance. The judge sent to the Assembly for the documents in the possession of the committee of surveillance, which would serve as evidence in the affair before him; but he got no answer. He then sent some gendarmes to bring Merlin, Chabot, and Bazire before him; and this irregular proceeding brought the matter before the Assembly. A decree of impeachment was passed against Larivière, who was sent before the court of Orleans. Gensonné and Brissot undertook to prove the existence of an Austrian Committee. Brissot defined an Austrian Committee to be a faction of enemies of liberty, which at one time governing in the name of the king, whom they deceived, at another directing his ministry, have always betrayed the people and sacrificed the interests of the nation to those of a family; the subjection of this committee to the house of Austria was its principal sign.* Rochambeau resigned his command; and Degrave retired from the ministry, and was succeeded by Servan, then a colonel of one of the regiments of Paris, who was on close terms of intimacy with Roland and his wife.† The Gironde had now Roland, Servan,' and Clavière, to represent them in the ministry, and their object was to govern through them. But it was not so easy to govern Dumouriez. At one of the ministerial dinners, Guadet, who was present, read a long letter addressed to the king, which he wished the ministers to sign; the purport of the letter was to induce the king to dismiss his confessor, who had not taken the oath, and to choose one who had. Lacoste and Dumouriez would not sign it: Dumouriez said that he would not allow a letter to be written to the king on matters that touched his conscience; that it concerned nobody whether the king had "an iman, a rabbi, a Papist, or a Calvinist, to direct his conscience." Vergniaud and Gensonné admitted, that to address such a letter was an improper proceeding. The matter dropped, but it helped to make a breach Dumouriez defends himself in his Mémoires' against the charges of Rochambeau and Lafayette. As to this affair, see Bertrand de Moleville, Annals,' &c., vi., c. 15; and the letters of Rochambeau and Lafayette, 'Hist. Parlem.,' xiv., 210, &c. This affair contributed to increase the popular hatred against the court, and the Gironde being unable to govern by the ministers, resumed their hostile attitude towards the king. According to the terms of the Constitution, the king's guard was to be composed of those who were on active service in the line, or of citizens who had served + Dumouriez says that he does not know if Servan was a * Brissot's discourse on this Austrian Committee is lover or not of Madame Roland. The insinuation is unge-printed in the 'Hist. Parlem.,' xiv., 283. See Bertrand de nerous, especially from him. Moleville's remarks on this affair, Annals,' &c., vi., c. 16. |