circumstances of the seizure of the Duc d'Enghien at
considerable length, and says: "This is what really occurred,
according to what I have been told by those better situated to
know. A council was held on the 9th of March: It is almost
certain that previous to this council, which was a kind of
official affair, a more secret one had been held at the house
of Joseph Bonaparte. At the first council, to which were
convened only a few persons, all on a footing of family
intimacy, it was discussed by order of the First Consul, what
would be proper to do with a prince of the House of Bourbon,
in case one should have him in one's power, and the decision
reached was that if he was captured on French territory, one
had the right to take his life, but not otherwise. At the
council held on the 9th, and which was composed of the three
Consuls, the Chief Justice, the Minister of Foreign Affairs,
and M. Fouché, although the latter had not then resumed the
post of Minister of Police, the two men who expressed contrary
opinions were M. de Talleyrand and M. de Cambacérès. M. de
Talleyrand declared that the prince should be sent to his
death. M. Lebrun, the Third Consul, contented himself with
saying that such an event would have a terrible echo
throughout the world. M. de Cambacérès contended earnestly
that it would be sufficient to hold the prince as hostage for
the safety of the First Consul. The latter sided with M. de
Talleyrand, whose counsels then prevailed. The discussion was
a heated one, and when the meeting of the council was over, M.
de Cambacérès thought it his duty to make a last attempt, so
he followed Bonaparte into his study, and laid before him with
perhaps more strength than might be expected from his
character, the consequences of the deed he was about to
perpetrate, and the universal horror it would excite. ... He
spoke in vain. In the privacy of his study, Bonaparte
expressed himself even with greater violence than he had done
at the council. He answered that the death of the duke would
seem to the world but a just reprisal for what was being
attempted against him personally; that it was necessary to
teach the House of Bourbon that the blows struck with its
sanction were liable to recoil on its own head; that this was
the only way of compelling it to abstain from its dastardly
schemes, and lastly, that matters had gone too far to retrace
one's steps. M. de Talleyrand supplied this last argument."
_Chancellor Pasquier,
Memoirs,
volume 1, pages 190-191._
"Bonaparte's accession to the Empire was proclaimed with the
greatest pomp, without waiting to inquire whether the people
approved of his promotion or otherwise. The proclamation was
coldly received, even by the populace, and excited little
enthusiasm. ... The Emperor was recognised by the soldiery
with more warmth. He visited the encampments at Boulogne,"
and, afterwards, "accompanied with his Empress, who bore her
honours both gracefully and meekly, visited Aix-la-Chapelle
and the frontiers of Germany. They received the
congratulations of all the powers of Europe, excepting
England, Russia, and Sweden, upon their new exaltation. ...
But the most splendid and public recognition of his new rank
was yet to be made, by the formal act of coronation, which,
therefore, Napoleon determined should take place with
circumstances of solemnity which had been beyond the reach of
any temporal prince, however powerful, for many ages. ...
Though Charlemagne had repaired to Rome to receive
inauguration from the hands of the Pontiff of that day,
Napoleon resolved that he who now owned the proud, and in
Protestant eyes profane, title of Vicar of Christ, should
travel to France to perform the coronation. ... The Pope, and
the cardinals whom he consulted, implored the illumination of
Heaven upon their councils; but it was the stern voice of
necessity which assured them that, except at the risk of
dividing the Church by a schism, they could not refuse to
comply with Buonaparte's requisition. The Pope left Rome on
the 5th November. ... On the 2d December [1804] the coronation
took place in the ancient cathedral of Notre Dame. ... The
crown having been blessed by the Pope, Napoleon took it from
the altar with his own hands, and placed it on his brows. He
then put the diadem on the head of his Empress, as if
determined to show that his authority was the child of his own
actions. ... The northern states of Italy had followed the
example of France through all her change of models. ... The
authorities of the Italian (late Cisalpine) Republic, had a
prescient guess of what was expected of them. A deputation
appeared at Paris to declare the absolute necessity which they
felt, that their government should assume a monarchical and
hereditary form. On the 17th March [1805], they obtained an
audience of the Emperor, to whom they intimated the unanimous
desire of their countrymen that Napoleon, founder of the
Italian Republic, should be monarch of the Italian Kingdom.
... Buonaparte granted the petition of the Italian States, and
... upon the 11th April, ... with his Empress, set off to go
through the form of coronation as King of Italy. ... The new
kingdom was, in all respects, modeled on the same plan with
the French Empire. An order, called 'of the Iron Crown,' was
established on the footing of that of the Legion of Honour. A
large French force was taken into Italian pay, and Eugene
Beauharnais, the son of Josephine by her former marriage, who
enjoyed and merited the confidence of his father-in-law, was
created viceroy, and appointed to represent, in that
character, the dignity of Napoleon. Napoleon did not leave
Italy without further extension of his empire. Genoa, once the
proud and the powerful, resigned her independence, and her
Doge presented to the Emperor a request that the Ligurian
Republic ... should be considered in future as a part of the
French nation."
_Sir W. Scott,
Life of Napoleon,
chapter 48 (Paris edition, 1828)._
{1342}
"Genoa and the Ligurian Republic were incorporated with
France, June 3d 1805. ... The Duchies of Parma and Piacenza,
which, together with Guastalla, had been already seized, were
declared dependencies of the French Empire by an imperial
decree of July 21st. The principality of Piombino was bestowed
on Napoleon's sister Eliza, wife of the Senator Bacciocchi,
but on conditions which retained it under the Emperor's
suzerainty: and the little state was increased by the addition
of the Republic of Lucca."
_T. H. Dyer,
History of Modern Europe,
book 1, chapter 11 (volume 4)._
ALSO IN:
_C. Botta,
Italy during the Consulate and Empire of Napoleon,
chapters 3-4._
_Memoirs dictated by Napoleon to his
Generals at St. Helena,
volume 6, pages 219-225._
_J. Fouché,
Memoirs,
pages 260-274._
_Count Miot de Melito,
Memoirs,
chapters 16-17._
_W. Hazlitt,
Life of Napoleon,
chapters 38-34 (volume 2)._
_Madame de Rémusat,
Memoirs,
book 1, chapters 4-10 (volume 1)._
_P. Lanfrey,
History of Napoleon,
volume 2, chapters 9-10._
_M. de Bourrienne,
Private Memoirs of Napoleon,
volume 3, chapters 1-12._
FRANCE: A. D. 1805 (January-April).
The Third European Coalition.
"In England Pitt returned to office in May, 1804, and this in
itself was an evil omen for France. He enjoyed the confidence,
not only of his own nation but of Europe, and he at once set
to work to resume the threads of that coalition of which
England had formerly directed the resources. Alexander I. of
Russia had begun to see through the designs of Napoleon; he
found that he had been duped in the joint mediation in
Germany, he resented the occupation of Hanover and he ordered
his court to put on mourning for the duke of Enghien. Before
long he broke off diplomatic relations with France (September
1804), and a Russian war was now only a question of time.
Austria was the power most closely affected by Napoleon's
assumption of the imperial title. ... While hastening to
acknowledge Napoleon, Austria was busied in military
preparations and began to resume its old connection with
England. Prussia was the power on which France was accustomed
to rely with implicit confidence. But the occupation of
Hanover and the interference with the commerce of the Elbe had
weakened Frederick William III.'s belief in the advantages of
a neutral policy, and, though he could not make up his mind to
definite action, he began to open negotiations with Russia in
view of a rupture with France. The fluctuations of Prussian
policy may be followed in the alternating influence of the two
ministers of foreign affairs, Haugwitz and Hardenberg.
Meanwhile Napoleon, ignorant or reckless of the growing
hostility of the great powers, continued his aggressions at
the expense of the lesser states. ... These acts gave the
final impulse to the hostile powers, and before Napoleon
quitted Italy the Coalition had been formed. On the 11th of
April, 1805, a final treaty was signed between Russia and
England. The two powers pledged themselves to form an European
league against France, to conclude no peace without mutual
consent, to settle disputed points in a congress at the end of
the war, and to form a federal tribunal for the maintenance of
the system which should, then be established. The immediate
objects of the allies were the abolition of French rule in
Italy, Holland, Switzerland, and Hanover; the restoration of
Piedmont to the king of Sardinia; the protection of Naples;
and the erection of a permanent barrier against France by the
union of Holland and Belgium under the House of Orange. The
coalition was at once joined by Gustavus IV. of Sweden, who
inherited his father's devotion to the cause of legitimate
monarchy, and who hoped to recover power in Pomerania.
Austria, terrified for its Italian possessions by Bonaparte's
evident intention to subdue the whole peninsula, was driven
into the league. Prussia, in spite of the attraction of
recovering honour and independence, refused to listen to the
solicitations of England and Russia, and adhered to its feeble
neutrality. Of the other German states Bavaria, Baden, and
Wurtemberg were allies of France. As far as effective
operations were concerned, the coalition consisted only of
Austria and Russia. Sweden and Naples, which had joined
secretly, could not make efforts on a great scale, and England
was as yet content with providing subsidies and the invaluable
services of its fleet. It was arranged that, one Austrian army
under the archduke Charles should invade Lombardy, while Mack,
with a second army and the aid of Russia, should occupy
Bavaria and advance upon the Rhine."
_R. Lodge,
History of Modern Europe,
chapter 24, sections 13-15._
ALSO IN:
_Sir A. Alison,
History of Europe, 1789-1815,
chapter 39 (volume 9)._
FRANCE: A. D. 1805 (March-December).
Napoleon's plans and preparations for the invasion of England.
Nelson's long pursuit of the French fleets.
His victory and death at Trafalgar.
Napoleon's rapid march to the Danube.
Capitulation of Mack at Ulm.
The French in Vienna.
The great battle of Austerlitz.
"While the coalition was forming, and Napoleon seemed wantonly
to be insulting Europe and ignoring the danger of exciting
fresh enemies, he was in fact urging on with all rapidity his
schemes for the invasion of England, which he probably hoped
might be so successful as to paralyse all action on the part
of the European powers. The constantly repeated
representations of his naval officers had forced him, much
against his will, to believe that his descent upon England
would be impracticable unless secured by the presence of his
fleet. In spite of the general voice of those who knew the
condition of the French navy, he determined to act with his
fleet on the same principles as he would have acted with his
army; a gigantic combination of various squadrons was to be
effected, and a fleet great enough to destroy all hope of
opposition to sweep the Channel. For this purpose the 18 ships
of the line at Brest under Admiral Gantheaume, the squadron at
Rochefort under Villeneuve, and the Toulon fleet under
Latouche-Tréville, were to unite. The last mentioned admiral
was intrusted with the chief command. Sailing up the coast of
France, he was to liberate from their blockade the squadrons
of Rochefort and Brest, and with their combined fleets appear
before Boulogne. But Latouche-Tréville died, and Napoleon
intrusted his plans to Villeneuve.
{1343}
Those plans, all of them arranged without regard to the bad
condition of the French ships, or to the uncertainty of the
weather, were frequently changed; at one time Villeneuve from
Toulon, and Missiessy, his successor, at Rochefort, were to
proceed to the West Indies, drawing the English fleet thither;
then Gantheaume was to appear from Brest, throw troops into
Ireland, and thus cover the flotilla. At another time, all the
fleets were to assemble at the West Indies, and, joining with
the Spanish fleet at Ferrol, appear in the Straits of Calais.
To complete this last measure Villeneuve set sail from Toulon
on the 30th of March 1805, joined Gravina at Cadiz, and
reached Martinique on the 13th of May with 20 ships of the
line, and 7 frigates. His voyage was so slow that Missiessy
had returned from the West Indies to France, and the junction
failed. In hot pursuit of Villeneuve, Nelson, who had at
length found out his destination, had hurried. At Martinique
Gantheaume, with the Brest fleet, should have joined
Villeneuve; unfortunately for him, Admiral Cornwallis
blockaded his fleet. Villeneuve therefore had to return to
Europe alone, sailing for Ferrol to pick up a squadron of 15
ships. He was then, at the head of 35 ships, ordered to appear
before Brest, liberate Gantheaume, and appear in the Channel.
Back again in pursuit of him Nelson sailed, but supposed that
he would return to the Mediterranean and not to Ferrol; he
therefore again missed him; but as he had found means to
inform the English Government that Villeneuve was returning to
Europe, Calder, with a fleet of 15 ships, was sent to
intercept him. The fleets encountered off Cape Finisterre
[Northwest corner of Spain]. The French had 27 vessels, Calder
but 18, and after an indecisive battle, in which two Spanish
ships were taken, he was afraid to renew the engagement; and
Villeneuve was thus enabled to reach Ferrol in safety.
However, all the operations towards concentration had led to
absolutely nothing, and the English fleets, which the
movements towards the West Indies were to have decoyed from
the Channel, were either still off the coast of France or in
immediate pursuit of the fleet of Villeneuve. Nelson returned
to Gibralter, and as soon as he found out where Villeneuve
was, he joined his fleet to that of Cornwallis before Brest,
and himself returned to England. ... Meanwhile Villeneuve had
not been able to get ready for sea till the 11th of August.
... He was afraid to venture northwards, and with the full
approbation of his Spanish colleague Gravina, determined to
avail himself of a last alternative which Napoleon had
suggested, and sailed to Cadiz. This was a fatal blow to the
gigantic schemes of Napoleon. Up till the 22nd of August he
still believed that Villeneuve would make his appearance, and
in fact wrote to him that day at Brest, closing his letter
with the words, 'England is ours.' As the time for his great
stroke drew near he grew nervously anxious, constantly
watching the Channel for the approach of the fleet, and at
last, when his Minister of Marine, Decrès, told him that the
fleet had gone to Cadiz, he broke forth in bitter wrath
against both his Minister and Villeneuve, whom he accused of
the most shameful weakness. But Napoleon was not a man who let
his success be staked upon one plan alone. Though studiously
hiding from his people the existence of the coalition, and not
scrupling to have recourse to forged letters and fabricated
news for the purpose, he was fully aware of its existence. ...
Without much difficulty, therefore, he at once resigned his
great plans upon England, and directed his army towards the
eastern frontier."
_J. F. Bright,
History of England, period 3,
pages 1261-1264._