clergy to take an oath of fidelity to the nation, the law and
the king, and to maintain the constitution. This oath they
were to take within a week, on pain of deprivation. The King,
before assenting to this measure, wished to procure the
consent of the Pope, but was persuaded not to wait for it, and
gave his sanction, December 3rd. ... Of 300 prelates and
priests, who had seats in the Assembly, those who sat on the
right unanimously refused to take the oath, while those who
sat on the left anticipated the day appointed for that
purpose. Out of 138 archbishops and bishops, only four
consented to swear, Talleyrand, Loménie de Brienne (now
Archbishop of Sens), the Bishop of Orleans, and the Bishop of
Viviers. The oath was also refused by the great majority of
the curés and vicars, amounting, it is said, to 50,000. Hence
arose the distinction of 'prêtres sermentés' and
'insermentés,' or sworn and non-juring priests. The brief of
Pius VI., forbidding the oath, was burnt at the Palais Royal,
as well as a mannikin representing the Pope himself in his
pontificals. Many of the deprived ecclesiastics refused to
vacate their functions, declared their successors intruders
and the sacraments they administered null, and excommunicated
all who recognised and obeyed them. Louis XVI., whose
religious feelings were very strong, was perhaps more hurt by
these attacks upon the Church than even by those directed
against his own prerogative. The death of Mirabeau, April 2nd
1791, was a great loss to the King, though it may well be
doubted whether his exertions could have saved the monarchy.
He fell a victim to his profligate habits, assisted probably
by the violent exertions he had recently made in the Assembly.
... He was honoured with a sumptuous funeral at the public
expense, to which, says a contemporary historian, nothing but
grief was wanting. In fact, to most of the members of the
Assembly, eclipsed by his splendid talents and overawed by his
reckless audacity, his death was a relief. ... After
Mirabeau's death, Duport, Barnave, and Lameth reigned supreme
in the Assembly, and Robespierre became more prominent. The
King had now begun to fix his hopes on foreign intervention.
The injuries inflicted by the decrees of the Assembly on
August 4th 1789, on several princes of the Empire, through
their possessions in Alsace, Franche Comté, and Lorraine,
might afford a pretext for a rupture between the German
Confederation and France. ... The German prelates, injured by
the Civil Constitution of the clergy, were among the first to
complain. By this act the Elector of Mentz was deprived of his
metropolitan rights over the bishoprics of Strasburg and
Spires; the Elector of Trèves of those over Metz, Toul,
Verdun, Nanci and St. Diez. The Bishops of Strasburg and Bale
lost their diocesan rights in Alsace. Some of these princes
and nobles had called upon the Emperor and the German body in
January 1790, for protection against the arbitrary acts of the
National Assembly. This appeal had been favourably
entertained, both by the Emperor Joseph II. and by the King of
Prussia; and though the Assembly offered suitable indemnities,
they were haughtily refused. ... The Spanish and Italian
Bourbons were naturally inclined to support their relative,
Louis XVI. ... The King of Sardinia, connected by
intermarriages with the French Bourbons, had also family
interests to maintain. Catherine II. of Russia had witnessed,
with humiliation and alarm, the fruits of the philosophy which
she had patronised, and was opposed to the new order of things
in France. ...
{1271}
All the materials existed for an extensive coalition against
French democracy. In this posture of affairs the Count
d'Artois, accompanied by Calonne, who served him as a sort of
minister, and by the Count de Durfort, who had been despatched
from the French Court, had a conference with the Emperor, now
Leopold II., at Mantua, in May 1791, in which it was agreed
that, towards the following July, Austria should march 35,000
men towards the frontiers of Flanders; the German Circles
15,000 towards Alsace; the Swiss 15,000 towards the Lyonnais;
the King of Sardinia 15,000 towards Dauphiné; while Spain was
to hold 20,000 in readiness in Catalonia. This agreement, for
there was not, as some writers have supposed, any formal
treaty, was drawn up by Calonne, and amended with the
Emperor's own hand. But the large force to be thus assembled
was intended only as a threatening demonstration, and
hostilities were not to be actually commenced without the
sanction of a congress. ... The King's situation had now
become intolerably irksome. He was, to all intents and
purposes, a prisoner at Paris. A trip, which he wished to make
to St. Cloud during the Easter of 1791, was denounced at the
Jacobin Club as a pretext for flight; and when he attempted to
leave the Tuileries, April 18th, the tocsin was rung, his
carriage was surrounded by the mob, and he was compelled to
return to the palace. ... A few days after ... the leaders of
the Revolution, who appear to have suspected his negociations
abroad, exacted that he should address a circular to his
ambassadors at foreign courts, in which he entirely approved
the Revolution, assumed the title of 'Restorer of French
liberty,' and utterly repudiated the notion that he was not
free and master of his actions." But the King immediately
nullified the circular by despatching secret agents with
letters "in which he notified that any sanction he might give
to the decrees of the Assembly was to be reputed null; that
his pretended approval of the constitution was to be
interpreted in an opposite sense, and that the more strongly
he should seem to adhere to it, the more he should desire to
be liberated from the captivity in which he was held. Louis
soon after resolved on his unfortunate flight to the army of
the Marquis de Bouillé at Montmédy. ... Having, after some
hair-breadth escapes, succeeded in quitting Paris in a
travelling berlin, June 20th, they [the King, Queen, and
family] reached St. Menehould in safety. But here the King was
recognised by Drouet, the son of the postmaster, who, mounting
his horse, pursued the royal fugitives to Varennes, raised an
alarm, and caused them to be captured when they already
thought themselves out of danger. In consequence of their
being rather later than was expected, the military
preparations that had been made for their protection entirely
failed. The news of the King's flight filled Paris with
consternation. The Assembly assumed all the executive power of
the Government, and when the news of the King's arrest
arrived, they despatched Barnave, Latour, Maubourg and Pétion
to conduct him and his family back to Paris. ... Notices had
been posted up in Paris, that those who applauded the King
should be horsewhipped, and that those who insulted him should
be hanged; hence he was received on entering the capital with
a dead silence. The streets, however, were traversed without
accident to the Tuileries, but as the royal party were
alighting, a rush was made upon them by some ruffians, and
they were with difficulty saved from injury. The King's
brother, the count of Provence, who had fled at the same time
by a different route, escaped safely to Brussels. This time
the King's intention to fly could not be denied; he had,
indeed, himself proclaimed it, by sending to the Assembly a
manifest, in which he explained his reasons for it, declared
that he did not intend to quit the kingdom, expressed his
desire to restore liberty and establish a constitution, but
annulled all that he had done during the last two years. ...
The King, after his return, was provisionally suspended from
his functions by a decree of the Assembly, June 25th. Guards
were placed over him and the Queen; the gardens of the
Tuileries assumed the appearance of a camp; sentinels were
stationed on the roof of the Palace, and even in the Queen's
bedchamber. ... From the period of the King's flight to
Varennes must be dated the first decided appearance of a
republican party in France. During his absence the Assembly
had been virtually sovereign, and hence men took occasion to
say, 'You see the public peace has been maintained, affairs
have gone on, in the usual way in the King's absence.' The
chief advocates of a republic were Brissot, Condorcet, and the
recently-established club of the Cordeliers. ... The
arch-democrat, Thomas Payne, who was now at Paris, also
endeavoured to excite the populace against the King. The
Jacobin Club had not yet gone this length; they were for
bringing Louis XVI. to trial and deposing him, but for
maintaining the monarchy."
_T. H. Dyer,
History of Modern Europe,
book 7, chapters 2-3 (volume 4)._
ALSO IN:
_J. Michelet,
Historical View of the French Revolution,
book 4, chapters 8-14._
_M'me Campan,
Memoirs of Marie Antoinette,
volume 2, chapters 5-7._
_Marquis de Bouillé,
Memoirs,
chapters 8-11._
_Duchess de Tourzel,
Memoirs,
volume 1, chapter 12._
_A. B. Cochrane,
Francis I., and other Historical Studies,
volume 2 (The Flight of Varennes)._
FRANCE: A. D. 1791 (July-September).
Attitude of Foreign Powers.
Coolness of Austria towards the Émigrés.
The Declaration of Pilnitz.
Completion of the Constitution.
Restoration of the King.
Tumult in the Champs de Mars.
Dissolution of the Constituent National Assembly.
"On the 27th of July, Prince Reuss presented a memorial [from
the Court of Austria] to the Court of Berlin, in which the
Emperor explained at length his views of a European Concert.
It was drawn up, throughout, in Leopold's usual cautious and
circumspect manner. ... In case an armed intervention should
appear necessary--they would take into consideration the
future constitution of France; but in doing so they were to
renounce, in honour of the great cause in which they were
engaged, all views of selfish aggrandizement. We see what a
small part the desire for war played in the drawing up of this
far-seeing plan. The document repeatedly urged that no step
ought to be taken without the concurrence of all the Powers,
and especially of England; and as England's decided aversion
to every kind of interference was well known, this stipulation
alone was sufficient to stamp upon the whole scheme, the
character of a harmless demonstration."
{1272}
At the same time Catharine II. of Russia, released from war
with the Turks, and bent upon the destruction of Poland,
desired "to implicate the Emperor as inextricably as possible
in the French quarrel, in order to deprive Poland of its most
powerful protector; she therefore entered with the greatest
zeal into the negociations for the support of Louis XVI. Her
old opponent, the brilliant King Gustavus of Sweden, declared
his readiness--on receipt of a large subsidy from Russia--to
conduct a Swedish army by sea to the coast of Flanders, and
thence, under the guidance of Bouillé, against Paris. ... But,
of course, every word he uttered was only an additional
warning to Leopold to keep the peace. ... Under these
circumstances he [the Emperor] was most disagreeably surprised
on the 20th of August, a few days before his departure for
Pillnitz, by the sudden and entirely unannounced and
unexpected arrival in Vienna of the Count d'Artois. It was not
possible to refuse to see him, but Leopold made no secret to
him of the real position of affairs. ... He asked permission
to accompany the Emperor to Pillnitz, which the latter, with
cool politeness, said that he had no scruple in granting, but
that even there no change of policy would take place. ...
Filled with such sentiments, the Emperor Leopold set out for
the conference with his new ally; and the King of Prussia came
to meet him with entirely accordant views. ... The
representations of d'Artois, therefore, made just as little
impression at Pillnitz, as they had done, a week before, at
Vienna. ... On the 27th, d'Artois received the joint answer of
the two Sovereigns, the tone and purport of which clearly
testified to the sentiments of its authors. ... The Emperor
and King gave their sanction to the peaceable residence of
individual Émigrés in their States, but declared that no armed
preparations would be allowed before the conclusion of an
agreement between the European Powers. To this rejection the
two Monarchs added a proposal of their own--contained in a
joint declaration--in which they spoke of the restoration of
order and monarchy in France as a question of the greatest
importance to the whole of Europe. They signified their
intention of inviting the coöperation of all the European
Powers. ... But as it was well ascertained that England would
take no part, the expressions they chose were really
equivalent to a declaration of non-intervention, and were
evidently made use of by Leopold solely to intimidate the
Parisian democrats. ... Thus ended the conference of Pillnitz,
after the two Monarchs had agreed to protect the constitution
of the Empire, to encourage the Elector of Saxony to accept
the crown of Poland, and to afford each other friendly aid in
every quarter. The statement, therefore, which has been a
thousand times repeated, that the first coalition for an
attack on the French Revolution was formed on this occasion,
has been shown to be utterly without foundation. As soon as
the faintest gleam of a reconciliation between Louis and the
National Assembly appeared, the cause of the Emigrés was
abandoned by the German Courts."
_H. Von Sybel,
History of the French Revolution,
book 2, chapter 6. (volume l)._
At Paris, meantime, "the commissioners charged to make their
report on the affair of Varennes presented it on the 16th of
July. In the journey, they said, there was nothing culpable;
and even if there were, the King was inviolable. Dethronement
could not result from it, since the King had not staid away
long enough, and had not resisted the summons of the
legislative body. Robespierre, Buzot, and Pétion repeated all
the well known arguments against the inviolability. Duport,
Barnave, and Salles answered them, and it was at length
resolved that the King could not be brought to trial on
account of his flight. ... No sooner was this resolution
passed than Robespierre rose, and protested strongly against
it, in the name of humanity. On the evening preceding this
decision, a great tumult had taken place at the Jacobins. A
petition to the Assembly was there drawn up, praying it to
declare that the King was deposed as a perfidious traitor to
his oaths, and that it would seek to supply his place by all
the constitutional means. It was resolved that this petition
should be carried on the following day to the Champ de Mars,
where everyone might sign it on the altar of the country. Next
day, it was accordingly carried to the place agreed upon, and
the crowd of the seditious was reinforced by that of the
curious, who wished to be spectators of the event. At this
moment the decree was passed, so that it was now too late to
petition. Lafayette arrived, broke down the barricades already
erected, was threatened and even fired at, but ... at length
prevailed on the populace to retire. ... But the tumult was
soon renewed. Two invalids, who happened to be, nobody knows
for what purpose, under the altar of the country, were
murdered, and then the uproar became unbounded. The Assembly
sent for the municipality, and charged it to preserve public
order. Bailly repaired to the Champ de Mars, ordered the red
flag to be unfurled, and, by virtue of martial law, summoned
the seditious to retire. ... Lafayette at first ordered a few
shots to be fired in the air: the crowd quitted the altar of
the country, but soon rallied. Thus driven to extremity, he
gave the word, 'Fire!' The first discharge killed some of the
rioters. Their number has been exaggerated. Some have reduced
it to 30, others have raised it to 400, and others to several
thousand. The last statement was believed at the moment, and
the consternation became general. ... Lafayette and Bailly
were vehemently reproached for the proceedings in the Champ de
Mars; but both of them, considering it their duty to observe
the law, and to risk popularity and life in its execution,
felt neither regret nor fear for what they had done. The
factions were overawed by the energy which they displayed. ...
About this time the Assembly came to a determination which has
since been censured, but the result of which did not prove so
mischievous as it has been supposed. It decreed that none of
its members should be re-elected. Robespierre was the proposer
of this resolution, and it was attributed to the envy which he
felt against his colleagues, among whom he had not shone. ...
The new Assembly was thus deprived of men whose enthusiasm was
somewhat abated, and whose legislative science was matured by
an experience of three years. ... The constitution was ...
completed with some haste, and submitted to the King for his
acceptance. From that moment his freedom was restored to him;
or, if that expression be objected to, the strict watch kept
over the palace ceased. ... After a certain number of days he
declared that he accepted the constitution. ... He repaired to
the Assembly, where he was received as in the most brilliant
times. Lafayette, who never forgot to repair the inevitable
evils of political troubles, proposed a general amnesty for
all acts connected with the Revolution, which was proclaimed
amidst shouts of joy, and the prisons were instantly thrown
open. At length, on the 30th of September [1791], Thouret, the
last president, declared that the Constituent Assembly had
terminated its sittings."
_A. Thiers,
History of the French Revolution
(American edition), volume 1, pages 186-193._
ALSO IN:
_M'me de Stael,
Considerations on the French Revolution,
part 2, chapters 22-23, and part 3, chapters 1-2._
_H. C. Lockwood,
Constitutional History of France,
chapter 1., and appendix 1._
{1273}
FRANCE: A. D. 1791 (August).
Insurrection of slaves in San Domingo.
See HAYTI: A. D. 1632-1803.
FRANCE: A. D. 1791 (September).
Removal of all disabilities from the Jews.
See JEWS: A. D. 1791.
FRANCE: A. D. 1791 (October).
The meeting of the Legislative Assembly.
Its party divisions.
The Girondists and their leaders.
The Mountain.
"The most glorious destiny was predicted for the Constitution,
yet it did not live a twelve month; the Assembly that was to
apply it was but a transition between the Constitutional
Monarchy and the Republic. It was because the Revolution
partook much more of a social than of a political overthrow.
The Constitution had done all it could for the political part,
but the social fabric remained to be reformed; the ancient
privileged classes had been scotched, but not killed. ... The
new Legislative Assembly [which met October 1, its members
having been elected before the dissolution of the Constituent
Assembly] was composed of 745 deputies, mostly chosen from the
middle classes and devoted to the Revolution; those of the
Right and Extreme Right going by the name of Feuillants, those
of the Left and Extreme Left by the name of Jacobins. The
Right was composed of Constitutionalists, who counted on the
support of the National Guard and departmental authorities.
Their ideas of the Revolution were embodied in the
Constitution. ... They kept up some relations with the Court
by means of Barnave and the Lameths, but their pillar outside
the Assembly, their trusty counsellor, seems to have been
Lafayette. ... The Left was composed of men resolved at all
risks to further the Revolution, even at the expense of the
Constitution. They intended to go as far as a Republic, only
they lacked common unity of views, and did not form a compact
body. ... They reckoned among their numbers Vergniaud, Guadet,
and Gensonné, deputies of the Gironde [the Bordeaux region, on
the Garonne], powerful and vehement orators, and from whom
their party afterwards took the name of 'Girondins'; also
Brissot [de Warville] (born 1754), a talented journalist, who
had drawn up the petition for the King's deposition; and
Condorcet (born 1743), an ultra-liberal, but a brilliant
philosopher. Their leader outside the Assembly was Pétion
(born 1753), a cold, calculating, and dissembling Republican,
enjoying great popularity with the masses. The Extreme Left,
occupying in small numbers the raised seats in the Assembly,
from which circumstance they afterwards took the name of 'the
Mountain,' were auxiliaries of the 'Girondins' in their
attempts to further a Revolution which should be entirely in
the interest of the people. Their inspirers outside the
Assembly were Robespierre (born 1759), who controlled the club
of the Jacobins by his dogmatic rigorism and fame for
integrity; and Danton (born 1759), surnamed the Mirabeau of
the 'Breechless' (Sansculottes), a bold and daring spirit, who
swayed the new club of the Cordeliers. The Centre was composed
of nonentities, their moderation was inspired by fear, hence
they nearly always voted with the Left."
_H. Van Laun,
The French Revolutionary Epoch,
book 1, chapter 2, section 3 (volume 1)._
"The department of the Gironde had given birth to a new
political party in the twelve citizens who formed its
deputies. ... The names (obscure and unknown up to this
period), of Ducos, Guadet, Lafond-Ladebat, Grangeneuve,
Gensonné, Vergniaud, were about to rise into notice and renown
with the storms and disasters of their country; they were the
men who were destined to give that impulse to the Revolution
that had hitherto remained in doubt and indecision, before
which it still trembled with apprehension, and which was to
precipitate it into a republic. Why was this impulse fated to
have birth in the department of the Gironde and not in Paris?
Nought but conjectures can be offered on this subject. ...
Bordeaux was a commercial city, and commerce, which requires
liberty through interest, at last desires it through a love of
freedom. Bordeaux was the great commercial link between
America and France, and their constant intercourse with
America had communicated to the Gironde their love for free
institutions. Moreover Bordeaux ... was the birthplace of
Montaigne and Montesquieu, those two great republicans of the
French school."
_A. de Lamartine,
History of the Girondists,
book 4, section 1 (volume 1)._