_Change in Napoleon's Principles of Government--Becomes suspicious
of Talleyrand and Fouché--Fouché endeavours, without the knowledge
of Napoleon, to ascertain the Views of England with respect to
Peace--His Plan is defeated by a singular collision with a similar
one of Napoleon--and Fouché is sent away as Governor-General of
Rome--His Moral and Political Character--Murmurings of the People
against the Austrian Alliance--Continental System--Ignorance of
Napoleon of the Actual Political Feelings of Great Britain--The
License System--Louis Buonaparte--Endeavours in vain to defend
Holland from the Effects of the Continental System--He abdicates the
Throne, and retires to Gratz in Styria--Holland is annexed to the
French Empire._
[Sidenote: CHANGES IN NAPOLEON'S GOVERNMENT.]
Since Buonaparte obtained, in 1804, the absolute rule of the French
Republic, a change had been gradually taking place in his principles of
government, and in the character of the statesmen whom he employed as
his ministers and advisers. For the first two years, and more, he had
governed on the principle of a limited monarch, who avails himself of
the best talents he can find among his subjects, and shows a deference
to those who are distinguished, either for the political part which they
have performed, or the share they possess in the good opinion of the
public. Among his advisers at this period, we find many of the leading
men of the Revolution; persons who, though they had been induced, from
various motives, to see the rise of Napoleon with equanimity, and even
to aid him, then their equal, in his attempt to climb to supreme power,
yet still remembered in what relation he and they had originally stood
to each other. In counselling an Emperor, these statesmen did it with
the more freedom, that they remembered a period when they were on a
level with him, nay, perhaps, when they stood a good deal higher.
This period of his reign, during which Napoleon suffered the wild and
powerful flights of his own ambition to be, in some degree, restrained
and directed by the judgment of others, formed the most laudable and
useful certainly, if not the most brilliant part of his career. But,
gradually as his power became augmented and consolidated, the Emperor
began to prefer that class of complaisant ministers, who would rather
reflect his own opinions, prefaced with additional recommendations and
arguments, than less courteously attempt to criticise and refute them.
The history of Napoleon justifies, or at least excuses him, for falling
into this natural error. He felt, and justly, that he was the sole
projector of his gigantic plans, and also, in a great measure, the agent
who carried them through; and he was led to believe, that, because he
did so much, he might as well do the whole. The schemes which he had
himself originally formed, were executed by his own military genius; and
thus it seemed as if the advice of counsellors, so indispensable to
other princes, might be unnecessary to a sovereign who had shown himself
all-sufficient alike in the cabinet and in the field. Yet this, though a
plausible, was a delusive argument, even though it appeared to be borne
out by the actual fact. It may be true, that in Buonaparte's councils,
few measures of consequence were suggested by his ministers, and that he
himself generally took the lead in affairs of importance. But still it
was of great consequence that such plans, having been proposed, should
be critically weighed, and canvassed by men of too much experience to be
deceived by appearances, and too much courage to be prevented from
speaking their mind. The advice of such men as Talleyrand and Fouché,
operated as a restraint upon schemes hastily adopted, or opinionatively
maintained; and their influence, though unseen and unheard, save in the
Imperial cabinet, might yet be compared to the keel of a vessel, which,
though invisible, serves to steady her among the waves, and regulate the
force by which she is propelled by her swelling canvass; or to the
pendulum of a time-piece, which checks and controls the mainspring of
the machinery. Yet, though Buonaparte must have been sensible of these
advantages, he was still more accessible to the feelings of jealousy,
which made him suspect that these statesmen were disposed rather to
establish separate interests for themselves in the government and
nation, than to hold themselves completely dependent on the Imperial
authority.
[Sidenote: TALLEYRAND--FOUCHÉ.]
The character of both Talleyrand and Fouché, indeed, authorised some
such suspicion. They had been distinguished in the French Revolution
before Napoleon's name had been heard of, were intimately acquainted
with all the springs which had moved it, and retained, as Buonaparte
might suspect, the inclination, and even the power, to interfere at some
possible state-crisis more effectually than accorded with his views of
policy. He had gorged them indeed with wealth; but, if he consulted his
own bosom, he might learn that wealth is but an indifferent compensation
for the loss of political power. In a word, he suspected that the great
services which Talleyrand rendered him with regard to foreign relations,
and Fouché as minister of police, were calculated to raise them into
necessary and indispensable agents, who might thus become, to a certain
degree, independent of his Authority. He doubted, moreover, that they
still kept up relations with a political society called Philadelphes,
consisting of old republicans and others, of different political creeds,
but who were united in their views of obtaining some degree of freedom,
either by availing themselves of such slender means of restraint as the
constitution, so carefully purged of every means of opposing the
Imperial will, might yet afford, or by waiting for some disaster
befalling Napoleon which might render their voice potential.[49]
The suspicions with which Buonaparte regarded his ministers did not rest
on vague conjecture. While he was in Spain, he received information,
appearing to indicate that a party was forming itself in the Legislative
Assembly, the bond connecting which was opposition to the Imperial will.
That body voted, it must be remembered, by ballot; and great was the
surprise and alarm of the assembly, when black balls, disapproving a
measure suggested to their consideration by government, were counted to
the number of an hundred and twenty-five, being a full third of the
members present.[50]
An official note, dated from Valladolid, 4th December, instantly
recalled the presumptuous dissentients to a sense that the power of
rejecting the laws laid before them in the Emperor's name, which they
had attempted thus boldly to exercise, was only intrusted to them for
show, but was meant to contain no really effectual power of control. The
words of Napoleon, the friend, as has been pretended, of liberal
institutions, are well worthy of remark. "Our evils," he said, "have
arisen in part from an exaggeration of ideas, which has tempted the
Legislative Body to consider itself as representing the nation; an idea
which is chimerical and even criminal, since implying a claim of
representation which is vested in the Emperor alone. The Legislative
Body ought to be called the Legislative Council--it does not possess the
right of making laws, since it has not the right of propounding them. In
the constitutional hierarchy, the Emperor, and the ministers his
organs, are the first representatives of the nation. If any other
pretensions, pretending to be constitutional, should pervert the
principles of our monarchical constitution, every thing is undone."[51]
This is all very intelligible, and shows that in principle, if not in
practice, the monarchical constitution of France rested upon the same
basis of despotism which supports the monarchical constitution of
Constantinople, where the Ulemats, or men of law, have an ostensible
title to resist the Grand Signior's edicts, and are only exposed to the
penalty of being pounded to death in a mortar, should they presume to
exercise it. Yet, a member of the French Legislative Body might have
been pardoned for being inquisitive on two subjects. 1st, He might wish
to know, if that body, chosen by the people, though indeed not directly,
did not represent their electors, whom was it that they did represent?
2dly, What was their real authority in the state, since they were not to
enjoy the power of rejecting the overtures which the constitution
contended should be laid before them, before they were passed into laws?
[Sidenote: FOUCHÉ.]
Buonaparte entertained strong suspicion that this recalcitrating humour,
so suddenly testified by so complaisant an assembly, must have had the
countenance of Talleyrand and of Fouché. So soon as he returned to
Paris, therefore, he sounded the latter minister on the revolt in the
Legislative Body, and desired his opinion on the sort of measures by
which he had repressed it. Fouché had been too long a spy upon the
private thoughts of others, to be capable of the weakness of betraying
his own. He expatiated, in a tone of panegyric, on the decisive tone of
the official note, affirmed that this was the only way to govern a
kingdom, and added, that if any constitutional body arrogated the right
of national representation, the sovereign had no choice but instantly to
dissolve it. "If Louis XVI. had acted thus," said the minister, "he
might have been alive, and King of France at this day." Astonished at
the zeal and promptitude of this reply, Buonaparte looked for an instant
with wonder at his minister, who thus avouched sentiments so different
from those which had governed the earlier part of his political life.
"And yet, Duke of Otranto," said the Emperor to the ex-jacobin,
"methinks you were yourself one of those whose voices sent Louis XVI. to
the scaffold?"--"I was," answered the supple statesman, without
confusion or hesitation; "and it was the first service which I had the
honour to render to your Majesty."[52]--This courtly answer saved the
minister for the moment; but Napoleon did not the less continue to see
in Fouché an object of suspicion and apprehension, whose power, owing to
his having been so long at the head of the police, was immense; whose
duplicity was unfathomable, and who evinced many indications of desiring
to secure some separate individual authority, either by being too
necessary to be dismissed, or too formidable to be offended.
Fouché himself has, indeed, admitted, that he endeavoured to regulate
the duties of his office, so as to secure as much power to himself as
possible, and was anxious, out of a desire of popularity, as well as
from respect for the virtue which he did not himself possess, to execute
those duties with the least possible harm to individuals. His mode of
transacting business with the Emperor was thus characteristically
described by himself. A person of rank, one of the _détenus_, desirous
of escaping from the durance in which he was confined, had been
fortunate enough to engage the interest of Fouché in his behalf. He had
received more than one intimation from this statesman, that his passport
would certainly be granted, but still it never received the Imperial
signature; and Fouché, who began to fear that his own sincerity might be
called in question, commenced one morning, in the presence of our
informer, and of one of the distinguished generals of the empire, the
following oblique explanation of the cause of his failure. "You no doubt
think yourself a brave man?" said he, addressing the general.--"Bah!"
replied the other, entering in to the same vein of raillery--"Brave?
brave as an hundred lions."--"But I," continued the statesman, "am much
braver than you. Look you, I desire some favour, the liberation of a
friend, or the like; I watch the happy moment of access, select the
moment of persuasion, am insinuating--eloquent--at length, by argument
or importunity, I am successful. Next day, the paper which should ratify
the boon which I had requested, is rejected when offered, torn perhaps,
or flung beneath a heap of petitions and supplications. Now, herein is
displayed my courage, which consists in daring again and again to
recommence the unacceptable suit, and, what is perhaps the last verge of
audacity, to claim it as a promise, which, being once pledged, can only
be redeemed by specific performance." In this confession we read the
account of a minister, still possessing influence, but declining in
favour, and already become the object of his sovereign's jealousy; to
whose personal request a favour cannot be decently refused, although a
promise, reluctantly conceded to importunity, is willingly forgotten, or
at length tardily and disobligingly granted.
Standing on these terms with a master at once watchful and jealous, we
cannot be surprised at the audacity of Fouché, who feared not to affect
a sort of independence, by anticipating the desires of Napoleon in the
public service, and even in the Imperial family. A striking instance of
the last occurred in his intrigue with Josephine on the subject of the
divorce;[53] and perhaps it was his escape out of that former
involvement,[54] without loss of power or credit, which urged him to a
second interference of a more public and national character, by which he
endeavoured to sound the possibility of accomplishing a peace with
England.
We may discover more than one motive for Fouché's proceeding in this
most important business without either the knowledge or consent of
Napoleon. He was aware that his master might have rendered it, in his
way of treating, impossible even at starting, to discover on what terms
Great Britain would conclude peace, by stating as preliminaries certain
concessions which it was probable would not be granted, but from which,
once stated, Napoleon could not himself recede. If, therefore, Fouché
could find some secret mode of ascertaining upon what terms a treaty
with England might really be obtained, he was doing a service to France,
to Britain, to Napoleon himself, and to the world. It is not the Duke of
Otranto, however, in particular, whom we would expect to incur disgrace,
and even personal hazard, on mere public grounds. But, besides the
pleasure which those who have long engaged in political intrigues find
in carrying them on, until the habit becomes as inveterate as that of
the gambler, we can see that Fouché might reasonably propose to himself
an important accession of influence by the success of such a
negotiation. If he could once acquire a knowledge of the price at which
Napoleon might obtain that peace for which the world sighed in vain, he
would become possessed of an influence over public opinion, both at home
and abroad, which could not but render him a person of extreme
importance; and if he was able to become the agent in turning such
knowledge to advantage, and negotiating such an important treaty, he
might fix himself even on Napoleon, as one of those ministers frequently
met with in history, whom their sovereign may have disliked, but could
not find means to dismiss.
[Sidenote: M. OUVRARD--FOUCHÉ.]
Acting upon such motives, or on others which we can less easily
penetrate, Fouché anxiously looked around, to consider what concessions
France might afford to make, to soothe the jealousy of England; trusting
it would be possible to come to some understanding with the British
Ministry, weakened by the loss of Mr. Canning, and disheartened by the
defeats sustained by the Spanish patriots, and the sinister event of the
Walcheren expedition. The terms which he would have been willing to have
granted, comprehended an assurance of the independence of the two
kingdoms of Holland and Spain (as if such a guarantee could have availed
any thing while these kingdoms had for sovereigns the brothers of
Napoleon, men reigning as his prefects, and, we shall presently see,
subject to removal at his pleasure,) together with the acknowledgment of
the Sicilian monarchy in the present King, and that of Portugal in the
House of Braganza. M. Ouvrard, a gentleman who had been permitted to go
to London on commercial business, was employed by Fouché to open this
delicate and furtive negotiation with the Marquis of Wellesley. But the
negotiation was disconcerted by a singular circumstance.[55]
The idea of endeavouring to know on what terms peace could be obtained,
had occurred to Napoleon as well as to Fouché; and the sovereign, on his
part, unsuccessful as he had been on two occasions in his attempt to
open a personal correspondence with the King of England, had followed
the steps of his minister, in making M. Labouchère, a commercial person,
agent of a great Dutch mercantile establishment, the medium of
communication with the British Government. The consequence was, that
Ouvrard, and the agent of the Emperor, neither of whom knew of the
other's mission, entered about the same time into correspondence with
the Marquis Wellesley, who, returned from his Spanish mission, was now
secretary at war. The British statesman, surprised at this double
application, became naturally suspicious of some intended deception, and
broke off all correspondence both with Ouvrard and his competitor for
the office of negotiator.[56]
Napoleon must naturally have been so highly incensed with Fouché for
tampering without his consent[57] in a matter of such vital consequence,
that one is almost surprised to find him limiting the effects of his
resentment to disgracing the minister. He sent for Fouché [June 2,] and
having extorted from him an avowal of his secret negotiation, he
remarked, "So, then, you make peace or war without my leave?"[58] The
consequence was, that the Duke of Otranto was deprived of his office of
minister of police, in which he was succeeded by Savary; and he was
shortly after sent into a species of honourable exile, in the character
of Governor-general of Rome.[59] It cost Buonaparte no little trouble to
redeem from the clutches of his late minister the confidential notes
which he had himself written to him upon affairs of police. For a long
time Fouché pretended that he had consigned these important documents to
the flames; and it was not until he had before his eyes the alternative
of submission or a dungeon, that he at length delivered up the Imperial
warrants, containing, no doubt, much that would have been precious to
history. Dismissed at present from the stage, we shall again meet with
this bold statesman at other periods of our history, when, as is
observed of some kinds of sea-fowl, his appearance seldom failed to
announce danger and tempest.
The character of Fouché, in point of principle or morality, could
scarcely be accounted even tolerable; but he had high talents, and in
many points the soundness of his judgment led him to pursue and
recommend moderate and beneficent measures, out of policy, if not from a
higher motive. On other accounts, also, many of the French had some
partiality to him; especially those who cast their eyes backward upon
their national history, and regretted the total loss of that freedom, so
eagerly longed for, so briefly possessed, and which they could never be
properly said to have enjoyed; and to the recovery of which, in part at
least, Fouché was understood to be favourable as far as he could or
dared. The remnant of the sterner Republicans might despise him as a
time server, yet they respected him, at the same time, as a relic of the
Revolution, and on different occasions experienced his protection. To
the Royalists also he had been courteous, and so decidedly so, as
encouraged one of the boldest agents of the Bourbons to penetrate to his
presence, and endeavour to bring him over to the cause of the exiled
family. Fouché dismissed him, indeed, with a peremptory refusal to
listen to his proposal; but he did not deliver him to the police, and he
allowed him twenty-four hours to leave the kingdom. These various
feelings occasioned to many, alarm and regret at the dismissal of the
Duke of Otranto.
The discharge of this able minister seemed the more portentous, that
shortly before it occurred, the terrible charge of which he was about to
be deprived, had received an alarming extension of jurisdiction. The
number of state prisons was extended from one, being the old tower of
Vincennes, to no less than six, situated in different parts of
France.[60] These Bastiles, chiefly old Gothic castles, were destined to
be the abode of captives, whom the Government described as persons who
could not be convicted of any crime perpetrated, but whom, as
entertaining dangerous thoughts, and principles, it was not safe to
permit to remain at large. The _lettre de cachet_, by authority of which
these victims of political suspicion were to be secluded from liberty,
was to consist in a decree of the Privy Council, which might have been
as well termed the pleasure of the Emperor. This measure was adopted on
the 3d of March, 1810, upon a report made to the Council of State in the
name of Fouché, and agreed to by them; but it was well understood, that,
in this and similar instances, the individual at the head of any
department was obliged to father the obloquy of such measures as
Napoleon desired to introduce into it. The minister of police was
therefore held guiltless of recommending an extension of the
Government's encroachments upon public liberty; which, in fact, were the
exclusive device of Napoleon and his Privy Council.[61]
[Sidenote: AUSTRIAN ALLIANCE UNPOPULAR.]
It was another unfortunate circumstance for Napoleon, that the observers
of the times ascribed the dismissal of the old Republican counsellors,
and the more rigorous measures adopted against political malecontents,
to the influence of the Austrian alliance. With many persons in France,
Buonaparte, as the Heir of the Revolution, might, like Danton,
Robespierre, and others, have exercised the most despotic authority,
providing he claimed his right to do so by and through the Revolution.
But they could not endure to see the Emperor Napoleon, while exercising
the same authority with a thousand times more lenity, attempt to improve
his right to the submission of his subjects by an alliance with one of
the ancient houses of Europe, against whom the principles of the
Revolution had declared eternal war. Every class of politicians has its
fanatics, and in that of the ancient Jacobins were many who would rather
have perished by the short, sharp terrors of the Republican guillotine,
than survived to linger in a dungeon during the pleasure of a son-in-law
of the Emperor of Germany. Such ideas, inconsistent as they were in
themselves, and utterly irreconcilable with the quiet, gentle, and
irreproachable character of Maria Louisa, who could never be justly
accused of even attempting to influence her husband upon any political
subject, circulated, nevertheless, and were even accredited in political
society. There was indeed this argument in their favour, that no other
motive could be assigned for Buonaparte's sparing Austria when she was
lying at his mercy, and choosing a partner out of her royal family, than
the desire of allying himself with the House of Hapsburg, and of gaining
such access as could be attained by such an alliance to a share in the
rights and privileges of the most ancient hereditary dynasty of Europe.
But in approaching to that fraternal alliance with legitimate royalty,
Napoleon proportionally abandoned those revolutionary principles and
associates, by whose means he had first climbed to power; and by this
change, rather of the basis of his authority than of the authority
itself, he offended many of the Republicans, without effectually gaining
the aristocrats, to whom his new connexion might have seemed a
recommendation. Indeed, when his right to sovereignty was considered
without reference to his possession, and his power to maintain it,
Napoleon was in some measure censured like the bat in the fable. The
democrats urged against him his matrimonial alliance with a house of the
ancient régime; while the aristocrats held him disqualified on account
of the origin of his power under the revolutionary system.
But although such objections existed among the zealots of both political
factions, the great body of the French people would have cared little on
what principle Napoleon had ascribed his title to the Imperial crown,
providing he had but been contented to allow the subject and himself the
advantage of a short repose from wars and conquests. This tranquillity,
however, was becoming every day less probable, for new incidents seemed
to dictate new acquisitions to the empire; and, unhappily for his own
and other countries, the opportunity of aggrandisement was with
Buonaparte all that it wanted to recommend it, and the pressure of the
occasion was always a complete justification of any measure which the
time rendered expedient.
That which now chiefly occupied him, since the overtures for peace with
England had been rendered abortive by the collision of his own
confidential emissary with that of Fouché, was the destruction of the
strength, and the sapping of the resources of that country, by dint of
enforcing and extending what he called the European Continental System;
which consisted of the abolition of all commerce, and the reducing each
nation, as in the days of primitive barbarism, to remain satisfied with
its own productions, however inadequate to the real or artificial wants
to which its progress in society had gradually given rise.
Like most foreigners, Napoleon understood little or nothing of the
constitutional opinions, or influential principles belonging to England.
He was well acquainted with human character, as modified by the
governments and customs of France and Italy; but this experience no more
qualified him to judge of the English character, than the most perfect
acquaintance with the rise and fall of the Mediterranean, amounting to
five or six inches in height, would prepare a navigator to buffet with
the powerful tides which burst and foam on the shores of the British
islands. The information which he received from that hostile country,
Buonaparte construed according to his wishes; and when it was supplied
by private intelligencers, they were of course desirous of enhancing the
value of what they told, by exaggerating its importance. It was, indeed,
no difficult task to impose on a statesman, ignorant enough of the
present state of North Britain, to believe that he could, even at this
time of day, have disturbed the security of the reigning family, by
landing in Scotland some candidate, having pretensions to the crown
through the House of Stuart. With the same inaccuracy, he concluded
every warm speech in Parliament a summons to revolt--every temporary
riot or testimony of popular displeasure, from whatever cause, a
commencement of open rebellion. He could not be convinced, that from the
peculiarity of the English constitution, and the temper of her people,
such disturbances and such violent debates must frequently exist; and
although, like eruptions on the human body, they are both unpleasant and
unseemly, they are yet the price at which sound internal health is
preserved.
[Sidenote: THE CONTINENTAL SYSTEM.]
Actuated by such erroneous views as we have stated, Napoleon conceived
that in 1810 he saw in England the important results of his Continental
System, or interdiction of British commerce with the continent.
The associations of the Luddites, as they were called, were at this time
giving great disturbance in the manufacturing districts of England.
These, it is well known, were framed to prevent the introduction of
looms wrought by machinery, or power-looms, to the superseding the
ordinary looms wrought by hand. The cause would have equally existed,
and the discontent also, if the Continental System had never been heard
of; for such discontent must and will exist in every trade where a
number of men are suddenly thrown out of employment by the introduction
of abbreviated means of labour. Yet Napoleon never doubted that these
heart-burnings, and the violence of the Parliamentary debates, arose
entirely from the new mode he had found of striking at Great Britain by
the destruction of her commerce. He, therefore, as we shall presently
see, examined all Europe, with the intention of shutting every creek and
fishing-port, through which cargoes of muslins or cotton goods could by
possibility penetrate; and the absolute authority which he could
exercise over the whole continent, with the exception of Russia, and of
the "still vexed" Peninsula, entitles us to compare him to the heedful
governor of a jail, who traverses his gloomy dominions at stated hours,
striking with his hammer every bar to ascertain that it rings sound, and
proving every lock, to see that no secret means of communication exists
with the free part of humanity. Thus commerce, the silken tie which
binds nations to each other, whose influence is so salutary to all
states, so essential to the very existence of many, was in danger of
being totally abrogated, unless in as far as it was carried on by a
system of licenses.
The adoption of this system, which went in a great measure to counteract
the effects of that very Continental System which he made it such an
especial point to press and enforce upon all neutral powers, was a
singular sacrifice made by Napoleon, partly to necessity, partly to the
desire of accumulating treasure.
The license system was a relaxation of the continental blockade, of
which England had set the example by giving protections to such neutral
vessels, as, clearing out from a British port, had a certain proportion
of their cargo made up of British goods or colonial produce. This was
what, in mercantile language, is termed a real transaction--the British
merchandise was purchased by such as designed to make a profit, by
selling it again upon any part of the continent to which they might be
able to introduce it. Buonaparte, in like manner, granted Imperial
licenses, purchased for large sums of money, by which trading vessels
were permitted to import a certain quantity of colonial produce, on
condition of exporting an equal proportion of French manufactures. This
system differed from that of England, in this important respect, that
the demand for articles of the French manufactures was entirely
simulated. The goods were not wanted in Britain, could not be re-sold
there without payment of heavy duties, and were often thrown into the
sea in preference to discharging the English duties upon them. Editions
of books, a commodity thus exported, and thus disposed of, were wittily
said to be _ad usum Delphini_. The prime cost at which these French
goods had been purchased, in compliance with Buonaparte's regulations,
was of course laid upon the colonial goods, which were the only actual
subject of trade. Thus, if the French manufacturers derived any profit
from the transaction, it was raised, not by their goods being exported
and sold in foreign countries, in the usual course of trade, but by the
prime cost being imposed as a tax upon the colonial produce imported;
and the price was paid, of course, not by the foreign market, which the
goods seldom reached, but by the French consumers of sugar, rum, and
coffee.
The real temptation for continuing this attempt to force a trade, was,
as we have seen, the impossibility of dispensing with colonial produce
entirely, and the large revenue accruing to the French government from
these licenses, who, in this manner, exercising a complete monopoly in a
trade which they interdicted to all others, made immense additions to
the treasure which almost choked the vaults of the pavilion Marsan, in
the Tuileries. The language held by the minister of Napoleon to the
powers thus affected, amounted therefore to the following
proposition:--"You shall shut your ports against British commodities;
for without your doing so, it will be impossible for the Emperor
Napoleon to humble the Mistress of the Seas. But while you are thus
deprived of all commerce, whether passive or active, Napoleon reserves
to himself, by the system of license, the privilege of purchasing and
dealing in the commodities of Britain and her colonies, which, reaching
your country by any other mode than through his permission, will be
subject to confiscation, nay, to destruction."
At a later period, Buonaparte greatly regretted that he had suffered the
emolument derived from the license-trade, to seduce him into relaxing
his Continental System.[62] He seems to lament having relinquished his
supposed advantage, as a vindictive freebooter might regret his having
been reduced to let go his hold on his enemy's throat, by the tempting
opportunity of plunging his hand into the pocket of a bystander. The
injustice which thus imposed on neutrals the necessity of abstaining
from a lucrative commerce, which France, the belligerent power, reserved
to herself the privilege of carrying on, in such degree as she might
find convenient, was of so crying a description, that, at any other time
than during the irresistible ascendency of Napoleon, the very mention of
it would have revolted all Europe. And even as times stood, the
non-compliance with terms so harsh and unjust, cost the fall of two
European thrones, ere it became the means of undermining that of
Napoleon himself.
[Sidenote: LOUIS BUONAPARTE.]
The first of the royal sufferers was the brother of Napoleon, Louis
Buonaparte, who had been created King of Holland. By every account which
we have been able to collect, Louis was an amiable, well-intentioned,
and upright man, of a romantic disposition, and a melancholic
complexion, which he had increased by studying the sentimental
philosophy of Rousseau.[63] But he was, in his brother's language, an
ideologist; that is, one who is disposed to do that which is right
according to principle, rather than that which circumstances render
expedient. He was embarrassed by some family disputes, and lived on
indifferent terms with his wife,[64] who was a greater favourite with
Napoleon than was Louis himself. Since he had been under the necessity
of accepting the crown of Holland, he had endeavoured to afford that
country all the protection which could be derived from his near
relationship to Napoleon; and if he could not save his subjects entirely
from the evils of a conquered and dependent state, he endeavoured to
diminish these as much as his means permitted. The Dutch, a calm and
deliberate people, gave Louis full credit for his efforts, and, in
general, regarded him as their friend and protector. But at the period
we treat of, the evils which approached their state were far beyond
Louis' power to avert or even to modify. Other countries may have more
or less of a commercial character, but Holland exists by commerce
entirely. It was the influence of commerce which gained her amphibious
territory from the waves, and, were that influence withdrawn, her fair
towns must again become fishing villages; her rich pastures must return
to their original state of salt-water marshes, shallows, and sand-banks.
The French exactions already paid, to the amount of one hundred millions
of francs, had purchased, as the natives of Holland fondly imagined,
some right to exert the small means of commerce which remained to them,
and which, under King Louis' sanction, were almost entirely engaged in
traffic with England, now declared contraband.
Napoleon used threats and commands to induce Louis to bring his subjects
to a more rigorous observance of the Continental System, while Louis
employed expostulation and entreaty in behalf of the nation over whom he
had been called to rule. Each brother grew more obstinate in his
opinion, and at length, as the Emperor began to see that neither fear
nor favour could induce Louis to become the agent of oppression in
Holland, his removal from that country was distinctly pointed at as the
consequence of his obstinacy. It was intimated, in a report by
Champagny, the Duke de Cadore, that the situation of Louis on the throne
of Holland was rendered critical, by his feelings being divided betwixt
the imprescriptible duties which he owed to France and to his family,
and the interest which it was natural he should take in the welfare of
Dutch commerce. To terminate this strife in his brother's mind, the
report informed the public that Napoleon meant to recall the prince of
his blood whom he had placed on the Dutch throne, since the first duty
of a French prince having a place in the succession to that monarchy,
was to France exclusively; and it was intimated, that Holland, divested
of her King, and her nominal independence, would be reduced to the
condition of a province of France, occupied by French troops, and
French officers of the revenue; and thus deprived of the means of
thwarting the Continental System, so necessary for the subjugation of
Britain, by the obstinate continuance of commercial intercourse with a
nation under the ban of the empire.[65]
[Sidenote: HOLLAND--ABDICATION OF LOUIS BUONAPARTE.]
This report is peculiarly interesting, as explanatory of Buonaparte's
views respecting the rights and regal authority of the sovereigns whom
he created and displaced at pleasure, as the interests of France, or
rather as his own, required, or seemed to require. Either, however,
Napoleon became, for the moment, ashamed to acknowledge this fact so
broadly; or he thought that such a contradiction of his repeated
declarations might have a bad effect upon the Westphalian subjects of
Jerome, and upon the Spaniards, whom he desired to become those of
Joseph; or, perhaps, the remonstrances of Louis produced some temporary
effect upon his mind; for he stopped short in his full purpose, and on
the 16th March concluded a treaty with Louis, the terms of which were
calculated, it was said, to arrange disputed points betwixt the
sovereigns, and render the independence of Holland consistent with the
necessary conformity to the Continental System.
[Sidenote: July 1.]
By this treaty, Zealand, Dutch Brabant, and the whole course of the
Rhine, as well the right as the left bank, were transferred from Holland
to France. French officers of the customs were to be placed in all the
Dutch harbours; 18,000 troops were to be maintained by the kingdom of
Holland, of whom 6000 were to be French; a fleet was to be fitted out by
the same kingdom for the service of France; English manufactures were to
be prohibited by the Dutch government; and other restrictions were
subscribed to by Louis,[66] in hopes his brother's stern resolution
might be so far softened as to leave the remaining portions of the
territories of Holland in a state of nominal independence. But he was
soon made sensible that this was no part of Napoleon's intentions.
Instead of 6000 French troops, 20,000 were assembled at Utrecht, with
the purpose of being poured into Holland. Instead of this foreign
soldiery being stationed on the coasts, where alone their presence could
be requisite to prevent the contraband trade, which was the sole pretext
of introducing them at all, Louis was informed, that they were to take
military possession of the whole country; and that the headquarters of
this army, which was totally independent of his authority, were to be
established at Amsterdam, his capital.
Seeing himself thus deprived by his brother of all power in the kingdom
which was still called his, Louis generously refused to play the pageant
part of a monarch, who could neither exert his rights nor protect his
subjects. On the 1st of July he executed a deed of abdication in favour
of his son, then a minor, expressing an affectionate hope, that though
he himself had been so unhappy as to offend his brother the Emperor, he
would not, nevertheless, visit with his displeasure his innocent and
unoffending family. In a letter from Haarlem, dated the 1st July, Louis
enlarged on the causes of his abdication, in a manner honourable to his
head and his heart, and with a moderation, when he spoke of his brother,
which gave weight to his just complaints. "He could not," he said,
"consent to retain the mere title of King, separated from all real
authority in his kingdom, his capital, or even his palace. He should be,
in such a case, the witness of all that passed, without the power of
influencing the current of events for the good of his people, yet
remaining responsible for evils which he could neither remedy nor
prevent. He had long foreseen the extremity to which he was now reduced,
but could not avoid it without sacrificing his most sacred duties,
without ceasing to bear at heart the happiness of his people, and to
connect his own fate with that of the country. This," he said, "was
impossible. Perhaps," he continued, "I am the only obstacle to the
reconciliation of Holland with France. Should that prove the case, I may
find some consolation in dragging out the remainder of a wandering and
languishing life, at a distance from my family, my country, and the good
people of Holland, so lately my subjects."[67]
Having finished his vindication, and adjusted means for making it
public, which he could only do by transmitting it to England, the
Ex-King of Holland entertained a chosen party of friends at his palace
at Haarlem until near midnight, and then, throwing himself into a plain
carriage which was in attendance, left behind him the kingly name and
the kingly revenue, rather than hold them without the power of
discharging the corresponding duties of a sovereign. Louis retired to
Gratz, in Styria, where he lived in a private manner, upon a moderate
pension,[68] amusing his leisure with literature.[69] His more ambitious
consort, with a much more ample revenue, settled herself at Paris, where
her wit and talents, independent of her connexion with Napoleon,
attracted around her the world of fashion, of which she was a
distinguished ornament.
Buonaparte, as was to have been expected, paid no regard to the claim of
Louis's son, in whose favour his father had abdicated. He created that
young person Grand Duke of Berg, and, although he was yet a child, he
took an opportunity to make him a speech, which we have elsewhere
adverted to, in which, after inculpating the conduct of his brother, the
tenor of which he stated could be accounted for by _malady_ alone,[70]
he explained in few words the duties incurred by his satellite
sovereigns. "Never forget, that whatever position you may be required to
occupy, in order to conform to my line of politics, and the interest of
my empire, your first duty must always regard ME, your second must have
reference to France. All your other duties, even those towards the
countries which I commit to your charge, are secondary to these primary
obligations."
Thus was the leading principle clearly announced, upon which the nominal
independence of kingdoms allied to France was in future to be understood
as resting. The monarchs, to whom crowns were assigned, were but to be
regarded as the lieutenants of the kingdoms in which they ruled; and
whatever part the interest of their dominions might call upon them to
act, they were still subject, in the first instance, to the summons and
control of their liege lord the Emperor, and compelled to prefer what
his pleasure should term the weal of France, to every other call of duty
whatever.
[Sidenote: HOLLAND ANNEXED TO FRANCE.]
The fate of Holland was not long undecided. Indeed, it had probably been
determined on as far back as Champagny's first report, in which it had
been intimated, that Holland, with all its provinces, was to become an
integral part of France. This was contrary to the pledge given by
Napoleon to the Senate, that the Rhine should be considered as the
natural boundary of France; nor was it less inconsistent with his
pretended determination, that the independence of Holland should be
respected and maintained. But both these engagements yielded to the
force of the reasoning used by his mouth-piece Champagny, in
recommending the union of Holland with the French empire, and with
France itself. They are worth quoting, were it only to show how little
men of sense are ashamed to produce the weakest and most inconsistent
arguments, when they speak as having both the power and the settled
purpose to do wrong. "Holland," said the minister, whose very effrontery
renders his arguments interesting; "is in a manner an emanation from the
territory of France, and is necessary to the full complement of the
empire. To possess the entire Rhine," (which had been proposed as the
natural boundary of France,) "your majesty must extend the frontier to
the Zuyder-Zee. Thus the course of all the rivers which arise in France,
or which bathe her frontier, will belong to her as far as the sea. To
leave in the hands of strangers the mouths of our rivers, would be,
Sire, to confine your power to an ill-bounded monarchy, instead of
extending its dominions to the natural limits befitting an imperial
throne." On such precious reasoning (much on a par with the claim which
Napoleon set up to Great Britain as the natural appendage of France,
along with the isle of Oleron,) Holland was, 9th July, 1810, declared an
integral part of the French empire.
But the usurpation was not unavenged. It cost Buonaparte a greater
declension in public opinion than had arisen even from his unprincipled
attempts on Spain. It is true, none of the bloody and extensively
miserable consequences had occurred in Holland, which had been
occasioned by the transactions at Bayonne. But the seizure of Holland
brought Buonaparte's worst fault, his ambition, before the public, in a
more broad and decided point of view.[71]
There were people who could endure his robbing strangers, who were yet
shocked that he, so fond of his kindred, and in general so liberal to
them, should not have hesitated to dethrone his own brother, merely for
entertaining sentiments becoming the rank to which he had been raised by
himself; to disinherit his nephew; to go nigh taxing so near a relation
with mental imbecility; and all on so slight a provocation;--for the
only real point of difference, that, viz. respecting the English
commerce, had been yielded by Louis in the treaty which Napoleon had
signed, but only, it seemed, for the purpose of breaking it. It was
observed, too, that in the manly, but respectful opposition made by
Louis to his brother's wishes, there appeared nothing to provoke the
displeasure of Napoleon, though one of the most irritable of men on
subjects with which his ambition was implicated. It seemed a species of
gratuitous violence, acted as if to show that no circumstance of
relationship, family feeling, or compassion (to make no mention of
justice or moderation,) could interfere with or check the progress of
Napoleon's ambition; and whilst the more sanguine prophesied, that he
who ran so rashly, might one day run himself to a close, all agreed that
his empire, composed of such heterogeneous parts, could not, in all
probability, survive the mortal date of the founder, supposing it to
last so long. In the meantime, it was evident, that the condition of no
state, however solemnly guaranteed by Buonaparte himself, could be
considered as secure or free from change while it was subject to his
influence. To conclude the whole, the Dutch were informed by the Emperor
with bitter composure, that "he had hoped to unite them to France as
allies, by giving them a prince of his own blood as a ruler; that his
hopes, however, had been deceived; and that he had shown more
forbearance than consisted with his character, or than his rights
required;"--thus intimating some farther and unexpressed severity, which
he might have felt himself justified in adding to the virtual exile of
his brother, and the confiscation of his late dominions; and
insinuating, that the Dutch had escaped cheaply with the loss of their
separate national existence.
FOOTNOTES:
[49] Southey, vol. iii., p. 405; Fouché, tom. i., p. 339.
[50] Fouché, tom. i., p. 329.
[51] Fouché, tom. i., p. 329.
[52] Mémoires de Fouché, tom. i., p. 331.
[53] Fouché, tom. i., p. 32.
[54] "It is well known that Josephine never spoke to the Emperor
otherwise than in favourable terms of all those who were about his
person; she was even of service to M. Fouché, though he had attempted to
become the instrument for bringing about her divorce."--SAVARY, tom.
ii., p. 178.
[55] "Although Sir Walter Scott does not mention me, I am able to speak
pertinently to this affair: the following is the truth. I went to Paris
in 1809, against my inclination, to comply with the wish of the
principal Dutch, who imagined that I could prevent, or at least adjourn
by my presence in Paris, and my immediate efforts, the evident intention
of seizing upon Holland. During my stay at Paris, I was persuaded that
all the tricks, the attacks, and ill-treatment, of which I was the
object, had not for their real end the union of Holland, since it was
the interest of France to aggrandise that kingdom, but that it was a
political stratagem, to induce the English government to repeal its
decrees of council, and to conclude the peace; and I was therefore
prevailed upon while at Paris to send M. Labouchère from Amsterdam to
London with instructions to make known to the Marquis Wellesley, that if
England did not withdraw its decrees of council, the union of Holland
with France was inevitable. The reply of the marquis proved at once how
favourable my government in Holland had been to France, since the
English Government declared, 'that the fate of Holland could not fail to
occasion much interest in England; but that, in the present state of
that country, the influence of France was so entire there, that the
political change spoken of, must have some weight in the determination
of the British Cabinet.' This attempt having proved useless, I could
only succeed in delaying the union of Holland, the decree for which
being prepared beforehand, and always in readiness, was often placed
before me--by sacrificing Brabant and Zealand. After my return to
Amsterdam, I was requested to allow M. Ouvrard a passage to England. I
consented to this the more willingly, as I imagined that it was in
consequence of the step I had already taken in sending M. Labouchère to
London. A short time after, the Emperor visited Antwerp. Whilst
conversing with him there, I assured him that there had been no
communication with England except that which had taken place through M.
Ouvrard, according to his request. My astonishment was extreme on
learning, that not only it was without his request, but that he was
ignorant of it, and from that moment he determined on the discharge of
M. Fouché, who had allowed so singular a proceeding."--LOUIS BUONAPARTE,
p. 65.
[56] Fouché, tom. i., p. 354; Savary, tom. ii., part ii., p. 208.
[57] "Ah, Fouché! how well the Emperor knew you, when he said, that your
ugly foot was sure to be thrust in every body's shoes."--LAS CASES, tom.
ii., p. 18.
[58] "Napoleon left the council, and gave orders to Savary to arrest M.
Ouvrard; at the same time, I was forbidden to have any communication
with the prisoner. The next day the portfolio of the police was given to
Savary. This time it was a real disgrace."--FOUCHÉ, tom. i., p. 358.
[59] "The decree constituting Fouché Governor-general of Rome, bears
date June 3, 1810. 'This nomination,' says Fouché, 'was nothing but an
honourable veil woven by Napoleon's policy, in order to conceal and
mitigate, in the eyes of the public, my disgrace, of which his intimates
alone had the secret."--_Mémoires_, tom. ii., p. 7.
[60] Saumar, Ham, Landskaone, Pierre-Châtel, and Fennestrelles.
[61] Fouché, tom. i., p. 352.
[62] Las Cases, tom. ii., p. 283.
[63] See _ante_, vol. ii., p. 211, _note_. "Louis had been spoiled by
reading the works of Rousseau."--NAPOLEON, _Las Cases_, tom. ii., p.
306.
[64] "As Louis and Hortensia had lived almost always separate since
their marriage, except three short periods of a few months, they each
demanded of the family council a separation, presently after Louis
arrived at Paris in 1809. But after a meeting of the said council was
granted, the separation was refused, though it had long existed in point
of fact. He was informed of the refusal verbally: no document whatever
was transmitted to him on a result, on which however depended the ease,
condition, and fame of a man of honour."--LOUIS BUONAPARTE, _La
Hollande_, tom. iii., p. 199.
[65] Documens Historiques sur la Hollande, tom. iii., p. 238.
[66] "This treaty, which was rather a capitulation, was imposed by the
Emperor, signed by Verhueil, and ratified conditionally by the King, who
added the words, '_as far as possible_.'"--LOUIS BUONAPARTE, _Documens
Hist._, tom. iii., p. 248.
[67] Documens Historiques, tom. iii., p. 310.
[68] "This is not correct. I did not, nor could not, receive a pension
from any one: my revenue was derived principally from the sale of my
decorations and jewels, and the interest of the obligations I had taken
upon me, in order to encourage the loan from Holland to Prussia at the
time of the greatest misfortunes of the virtuous sovereign of that
country, who, in spite of all opposition and every political
consideration, was anxious to acquit himself towards me with scrupulous
exactitude."--LOUIS BUONAPARTE, p. 69.
[69] In 1808, Louis gave to the world a sentimental romance, called
"Marie, ou les Peines de l'Amour," of which a second edition appeared in
1814, under the title of "Marie, ou les Hollandaises." A distinguished
critic describes the royal production as "a farrago of dulness, folly,
and bad taste."--(_Quart. Rev._, vol. xii., p. 391.) His treatise,
entitled "Documens Historiques, et Réflexions sur le Gouvernement de la
Hollande," is an unpresuming account of his administration in Holland.
[70] "The conduct of your father grieves me to the heart: his disorder
alone can account for it. When you are grown up you will pay his debt
and your own."--_Documens Hist._, tom. iii., p. 326; and _Moniteur_,
July 23, 1810. "When Napoleon received the news of his brother's
abdication, he was struck with astonishment: he remained silent for a
few moments, and after a kind of momentary stupor, suddenly appeared to
be greatly agitated. His heart was ready to burst, when he exclaimed,
'Was it possible to suspect so mischievous a conduct in the brother most
indebted to me.' When I was a mere lieutenant of artillery, I brought
him up with the scanty means which my pay afforded me I divided my bread
with him; and this is the return he makes for my kindness!' The Emperor
was so overpowered by his emotion, that his grief was said to have
vented itself in sobs."--SAVARY, tom. ii., part ii., p. 239.
[71] Napoleon acknowledged at St. Helena, that the "annexation of Louis'
kingdom to his own was a measure which contributed to ruin his credit in
Europe."--LAS CASES, tom. ii., p. 307.