[Sidenote: FRENCH NEWSPAPERS]
In the inaugural address pronounced by the celebrated Montesquieu
on his admission to the French Academy, January 24, 1728, he said:
“Talents without virtues are fatal presents, only proper to add
strength to our vices and to render them more conspicuous.”
Had Montesquieu lived to this day he would have thought in the same
spirit.
But he would not have survived the Revolutionary storm unless he had
taken refuge in exile.
I well remember a rebuke I once received from Robespierre when I
extolled “The Spirit of Laws.”
“The Spirit of Laws,” said he, “is the production of a fanatic and
weak mind (_imbécile_), replete with dogma and prejudice; if
Montesquieu were now alive he would very soon be less by a head, _car
il était un parlementaire, non pas un bon Republicain_.” The word
_parlementaire_ means, strictly speaking, a Roundhead or a Whig;
but such a person was not sufficiently divested of prejudice to be a
good Republican in the eyes of Robespierre; besides, as the tyrant
continued, “being a member of the ancient parliament of France (he was
president of that at Bordeaux) he was _necessarily_ an enemy of
Republican Government, for which reason, notwithstanding his dogmas and
prejudices in favour of public liberty, he was without doubt worthy of
death as an aristocrat and a conspirator.”
When I heard that Montesquieu would have been less by a head had he
fallen into Robespierre’s hands, I felt an unpleasant sensation in
my throat, and I therefore was immediately _convinced_ that
the tyrant’s arguments were correct; but knowing that extremes of
servility and opposition were alike obnoxious to him, I endeavoured
to appease him with observing that it was very true, the author of
“The Spirit of Laws” groped in darkness, especially in the article in
which he treats of Influence of Climate, as it was now _clear_
that the enlightened principles of the Revolution were equally
applicable to the whole race of man, and that there would probably be
a National Convention very soon in China; but still that I could not
avoid considering Montesquieu, as well as Machiavel, in the light of
a pioneer of liberty! “Machiavel, the pioneer of liberty!” he cried
(giving me a fixed look with his two large tigerish eyes and clenching
his fists, the usual preliminaries of a warrant of arrest), “you are
not acquainted with the true principles, the doctrines of Machiavel
established tyranny over the whole of Europe.” Every one who has read
Machiavel with attention, which I am persuaded Robespierre never did,
if he read him at all, must be satisfied that his book “The Prince,”
was written solely to expose the machinations of tyrants, and caution
the people of free States against their intrigues.
I have been led to these remarks in order to expose the worthlessness
of the literary claims of those _political_ writers and orators
who affect a great deal of information when they possess none. No
people possess greater facility than the French in persuading the world
that they know everything, when in fact they know little or nothing.
When I was about to depart for France I was requested by the
proprietors of a long-established daily paper in London to procure if
possible some intelligent person in whom they might confide to act as
a proper correspondent, to give them authentic information of what was
passing in France. When I arrived in Paris I therefore addressed myself
to men of approved talents in science, and, as I had been informed, of
knowledge in politics.
[Sidenote: FRENCH NEWSPAPERS]
The sum I was empowered to offer was sufficiently captivating, and
they buzzed about me in consequence like so many paupers round the
overseer of a parish in the act of distributing bread. With respect to
operas, plays, masquerades, concerts, balls and all the other equipage
of folly and pleasure, information respecting them was none of my
object. I wanted such communications as should prove useful to men of
understanding, to the politician, the manufacturer and the merchant; I
did not care to learn whether the First Consul slept at Malmaison or
the Tuileries. The points upon which accurate information might be of
incalculable advantage to the British public were, who was the last
person robbed, banished, poisoned, or otherwise murdered by the order
of the chief of the State, what measures were in agitation to sap the
foundations of any kingdom, and what independent community was next to
be overthrown and enslaved.
Accordingly I stated distinctly to my would-be correspondents that we
required _facts_ and _facts only_. Politics were the principal topics
of conversation during our interviews, and I was utterly astonished to
discover the profound ignorance my new acquaintances displayed.
None of them seemed to have any just notion either of the state of
Europe or their own country. After a short intercourse I discovered
that with the little information I had gained I already knew more of
the affairs of France than they did.
However, that I might not be led away by my own opinions, I suggested
to five of those gentlemen, who I selected from the crowd owing to
their distinguished credentials, that they should take up their
pens and give a specimen of their manner of treating things, that
I might forward such writings immediately to the two gentlemen in
England who had commissioned me to seek for correspondents. I told
this to each applicant separately, and requested he should choose
his subject for himself. Two of those individuals were members of
the National Institute, one a very celebrated Professor, and the two
others distinguished and respected _savans_! Five hours after the
conversation I received an _estafette_ from one of the Institute
men, and before two days had elapsed despatches arrived from all
the rest. After having read them all over with repeated attention,
I decided, for the sake of my own credit, to send none of them to
England. They were so puerile that I will stake my honour upon a boy
at Eton or Westminster writing more and better to the purpose.
They were full of flowers, tropes and metaphors, but contained nothing
solid; and all overflowed with the commonplace metaphysics of the new
Philosophy. My embarrassments now increased, for the Club of Sages,
whom the report of my commission collected round me, besieged my
lodgings day after day, like suitors in the ante-chamber of Talleyrand;
and notwithstanding their courteous carriage and apparent indifference
they all asked me anxiously what news I had received by the post. The
awkward situation in which I found myself compelled me eventually
to say that my colleagues had altered their plans and determined
to confide their correspondence to an English gentleman now in
Paris--_i.e._, _myself_.
But although these philosophers did not obtain any ulterior benefit
from my offer, I was enabled by my intercourse with them to obtain
considerable information respecting the state of the Press in Paris at
the present time, and I here give the result of my inquiries.
Newspapers in France are under the immediate control of the police, and
are principally edited by those illuminated children of science, better
known under the title of the National Institute.
The _Moniteur_ is the first in order in baseness and infamy. It is
considered the official paper of the Government. As all its papers are
under the superintendence of the police, they are _all_ official.
Its nominal proprietors are Messrs. Roederer[1] and Hautrive,[1] but
the profits belong to a club consisting of five Ministers, those of
Finance, Interior, Foreign Affairs, War and Police. Roederer receives
a stipend of £800 a year (which, with his income of a Councillor of
State, gives him £3500 to spend) as a salary for editing the paper,
for which he is of course considered the responsible person. All
the expenses of paper, printing and publishing, are defrayed by the
Treasury.
[Sidenote: CHARACTERS OF EDITORS]
Hautrive is not a stipendiary or responsible editor, but he writes
in the _Moniteur_, and his articles are well paid. The Decemvir
Barrère receives £1000 per annum for his literary assistance, but he is
really acting as a private spy for the First Consul, on the operations
of the Jacobins. He is likewise engaged as spy upon the Grand Spy,
Fouché, Minister of Police.
The different Ministers frequently employ the pens of their subalterns
in office. You cannot be mistaken respecting the authors of the
articles, as their style convicts them. The following may, however,
serve as general rules for the discovery of the distinguished literati
engaged.
_Ferocious and blustering passages on the power of the Republic, in
the style of epic prose._--Treilhard,[1] ex-Avocat, ex-Director,
ex-Negotiator, and Councillor of State.
_Religious homilies and pious incantations, with much whining
about the restoration of the Catholic Faith, but written in good
style._--Portales,[1] the Elder Councillor of State, who from a
professed atheist, having read the Bible over and over again, as he
says, during his exile at Homburgh, has found himself converted, and on
his return converted Bonaparte to believe what he believes, and is now
a saint as well as his disciple.
_Gasconades, calembours, bombast, apostrophes to nature, mothers with
infants at their breasts. Hard-hearted men who never had children,
heaving bosoms of humanity, all the impure verbiage of the Tribunal
of the National Convention._--Barrère, ex-member of the Council of
Public Safety. Practical reporter of all its atrocities, who signed
the death warrants of about 40,000 of his countrymen, avowing in
the Committee that dead men tell no tales; afterwards sentenced to
transportation; turned Christian in jail, won the good opinion of his
jailer, at whose table he said grace before and after meals. Escaped
from prison and secreted himself till Bonaparte attained supreme power,
to whom he sent a fulsome address, declaring _he_ was the reporter
who made known to astonished Europe the exploits of the hero of Italy;
liberated by the commiseration and sympathy of his master, he now licks
his feet and is his humble servant; though retired (as his profession
requires) he lives in good style, near my lodgings, keeps a girl of his
own and is allowed by the First Consul to share in the profits of a
house of ill fame which he founded.
_Comparisons between Great Britain and the great nations;
between porter and burgundy, coals and wood, roast beef and
bouillie._--Chaptal,[1] the chemist, Minister of the Interior, one
of the basest of slaves.
_Surly remarks on the tyrants of the ocean, the insolence
and intrigues of British Government, the cravings and jealous
disposition of the Nation of Shopkeepers, the National Debt of
England, its exhausted resources, bad faith and sincere integrity of
France._--Roederer, Councillor of State, member of the National
Institute, ex-avocat, has always sided with every party in order to
illustrate practically his valuable treatise on making loans and on
solving the question whether the State should pay its debts. He was
Procureur-General, Syndic of the Department of Paris, during the
expiring moments of the Monarchy.
_The same in more fluent and easy language._--Hautrive,[1] a
pensioner of the Consul and nominal sub-editor of the paper.
_Sallies respecting Malta and hints respecting Egypt and the
Mediterranean._--Regnault de St. Jean d’Angely, Councillor of State,
in great favour with Bonaparte, formerly an avocat of Saintogne, a
furious royalist as long as Louis XVI. continued to fee him. Intrepid
royalist, editor of the _Journal de Paris_ in 1791; violent
Jacobinist, editor of the _Gazette de Milan_ under the auspices
of Bonaparte in 1796. Member of the Constituent Assembly, in which
capacity he was pensioned by the Order of Malta to plead on behalf
of its rights; in return for which he betrayed his clients, went to
the island as the Commissary of the Directory, and superintended the
administration of the plunder. Completely sacked the Palace of the
Grand Master, Baron de Homfesch, pilfered all the plate and money
he could lay his hands on, composed a Revolutionary Gazette for the
Islands of the Archipelago, and returned to France laden with an
immense booty, is a member of the National Institute in the class of
Political Economy; is a married man with a family, keeps a girl, but is
saving and takes care of the main chance.
[Sidenote: FALSE NEWS]
_Barefaced lies and swindling propositions._--Talleyrand, Minister
of Foreign Affairs, ex-Bishop of Autun; renounced Christianity and his
Order, went to England, 1793, to assist Chauvelin and Moret in lulling
the English Government. Trembling for his head remained there after
the war broke out. Took lodgings at Mr. Colpus’s, near Highgate Pond,
during which time he made a point of eating boiled beef on Fridays,
departed for America, whence he humbly sued for permission to return
to France. The Directorate, being in want of a dexterous rascal to
manage the pillage, sequestration of the German abbeys, and other
ecclesiastical possessions, permitted him to return home, and gave
him the portfolio of Charles de la Croix; since which he has been
actively engaged in the decomposition of Europe and in converting the
German Empire into a State Lottery for himself and his masters--takes
bribes from all and cheats all, with placid composure. Feels a great
reluctance to enter into negotiation without a preliminary douceur (the
American commissioners to wit); the greatest swindler in Europe. Rich
as Lucullus, has lately resumed Christianity and sent to request the
Pope will unfrock him and give him absolution for his past sins. The
First Consul has promised to make it his care that his Holiness shall
execute this request, and in return for which special grace Talleyrand
will richly reward the Pontifical Ambassador for the expenses incurred
in negotiating the business.--Keeps Madame Grand, of Indian fame, at
the hotel of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, where she acts in every
way as if she were his lawful wife. He also keeps a young tit at a
little château where he transacts private business.
Is a man of rank, education and princely birth, possesses transcendent
abilities, and perhaps is the greatest living rogue and liar in
Christendom.
_Sensible data on the public law in Europe, afforded though
not written for publication, but digested by Roederer for the
Press._--Rosensthiel, formerly principal Secretary of Legation to
the French Ministers at the farcical congress of Radstadt in 1799, the
pupil and friend of Pfeffer, long employed in the diplomatic department
under the old Monarchy; devotedly attached to his King, detesting the
Revolution, on that account dismissed by Dumouriez, when Minister
of Foreign Affairs; having been imprisoned, proscribed and ruined.
Father of a large family, he was constrained from the necessity of his
circumstances to accept the Consulship of Elsineur in 1796, whence,
being the only Frenchman profoundly versed in the history and practice
of public law, he was again transferred to the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs. Modest, mild, virtuous and learned, he is therefore _not_
a member of the National Institute.
These are the principal workmen who furnish the _Moniteur_ with
leading articles, most of which are a vehicle for blustering and
imposture.
The next Parisian newspaper in rank and circulation to the Moniteur is
the _Journal des Défenseurs de la Patrie_. In this paper there are
often good articles and useful literary criticisms. But all political
reflection is, for obvious reasons, banished from its pages.
One, Joseph la Vallée, without appearing ostensibly to take any
interest in this paper, is really paid £260 sterling by the Government
for watching its concerns.
I have seen a great deal of la Vallée; he is endowed with great
intellectual acquirements. He is a modest, inoffensive man, extremely
anxious to oblige, not loquacious, but interesting in conversation.
He is not a member of the National Institute, which may account for his
integrity. In one of our conversations he complained bitterly of the
English newspapers for their animadversions on the French Government,
and particularly on the First Consul, expressing his fears that these
attacks might lead to bloodshed between the two countries.
[Sidenote: CONTROL OF PRESS BY BONAPARTE]
I desired him to name the papers he alluded to; he mentioned the
_Porcupine_ and the _Morning Post_. I explained to him that the
_Porcupine_ was nonexistent, having been for some months merged in the
_True Briton_. He was quite confounded by this information, for he had
no idea the _Porcupine_ had been relinquished. He observed that the
_True Briton_ was however also extremely violent.
“Why then,”, I returned, “do you not, my dear friend, answer them
with equal vehemence?” “Because these political discussions are not
agreeable to the Government, for if we replied it would be impossible
to do so without translating and so publishing the arguments of the
enemy, for such discussions would only unsettle the minds of people and
might shake the Government.” “Ah, vive la Liberté,” said I. “I thought
I was in a free Republic!” He gave no reply, and our conversation
abruptly ended.
A curious incident took place a few years ago here. It was common
talk the Senate (Législatif Conseil) were to pass a decree continuing
Bonaparte in the Consulate for life. A paper was circulated containing
remarks upon the meanness of such a project, declaring national
gratitude should proclaim Napoleon Bonaparte Emperor of the Gauls, and
make the throne hereditary to his race.
The very next day there appeared in the _Journal des Défenseurs_
a well-written article in the true spirit of a Republican against
not only the Imperial project, but also against that of making the
Consulate a life-long appointment. Soon after I had read it la Vallée
called on me. “You see,” said he, “Frenchmen can write as they please.
Nothing shall deter me,” continued the indignant Republican. “I never
disliked the late King, nor shared in the events of the Revolution;
but rather than see any one of my fellow citizens upon the throne of
France, I would burn this hand if I did not write against him!”
_Two days_ after this animated declaration, I took up the same
journal and read a long laboured dissertation on the innumerable
advantages the Republic would obtain by conferring the Consulate for
life “on the genius of victory and peace.” I became extremely desirous
of another interview with the intrepid Republican. But he never came
near us for several days. At length we met him at a dinner party,
consisting of twenty persons. He betrayed on seeing me some confusion
and sheepishness. I shook him heartily by the right hand, whispering in
his ear, “I am happy to find you have not burnt it.” I was sorry I gave
way to this not ill-natured jest, for a visible dejection overspread
his features, and he remained depressed and dispirited during the whole
time he was in my company that evening.
_Le Chef du Cabinet_, the best printed of the Parisian journals,
is compiled with care, and gives in general a fairly faithful account
of continental news.
One of the principal writers in this paper and in _Le Publiciste_
is Garot, member of the Senate, and also of the National Institute.
Before the Revolution he was what the French call _homme des
lettres_, _i.e._, a poor lawyer without practice. In England,
our men of letters, successful or otherwise, are almost invariably men
of a classical education and cultivated talents. But in France, a mere
smattering of Greek and Latin, learnt principally through the medium of
translations, constitute their principal studies.
He began his career with writing paragraphs for the _Mercure_. He
was next a member of the Constitutional Assembly, in which his talents
were considered in so contemptible a light that he was never noticed.
But in later years he attributed his silence in that Assembly to his
philosophy. He then became editor of the _Journal de Paris_.
Here he seems to have been most liberally paid, as out of six months’
savings, he managed to find 32,000 livres (£1280 sterling), with which
he purchased a house and garden.
[Sidenote: JOSEPH LA VALLÉE]
In April 1792, he arrived in England, in the suite of the French
Embassy. After the memorable 10th of August in the same year, he having
returned to France, was made by the Convention _Editeur de la
Gazette Nationale_.
Less than two months later, on October 9, he was appointed Minister of
Justice. Here was a leap!
During his short ministry, he truckled to every faction, and courted
the goodwill of every demagogue. He was nevertheless pronounced an
imbecile, deposed, arrested for a day, and released. He next composed a
book, in which he compared himself to Sully, Turgot, and our Lord Jesus
Christ. He was appointed Commissary of Public Instruction, but shortly
afterwards cashiered. Then sent as French Ambassador to the Court of
Naples, in order to pave the way for the irruption of a Republican army.
Recalled and nominated a member of the Council of the Ancients,
dismissed by Bonaparte--he retired into a corner, and quitted his
obscurity for a seat among the Mutes. He then became the apologist of
Bonaparte, as he had before been of Robespierre and Danton--gets a
pension of £3000 sterling per annum of the public spoils, and finally
becomes a member of the National Institute. He, now, in a work of his
lately published, calls Robespierre _un monstre, un fou, scélérat,
étranger à une bonne logique, having a soul filled with suspicion,
terror, vanity and vengeance_. His elocution, he pronounces to have
been _senseless babbling, eternal and tiresome repetition of the same
sentiments for the rights of man, the sovereignty of the people on
principles of which he incessantly harangued without ever propounding a
new or correct idea_.
The following epistle was found among the papers of Robespierre after
his execution; it was a letter, written by this very Garot to the man
whom he afterwards described as given above.
_October 30, 1793._
“I have read your report on foreign powers, and the extracts of
your last speech, delivered to the Jacobins: as I have not at
this time an opportunity of making my sentiments known to the
public, I hasten to acquaint you yourself with the impressions
they have made on me.
“The report is a _magnificent_ piece of policy, Republican
morality, style and eloquence. It is with such _profound_
and exalted sentiments of virtue, and I will add with such
_language_, that the nation one represents is honoured in
the eyes of all mankind. The style of the report on foreign
Powers is throughout dignified, pointed and elegant, and rises
to the tone of the highest order of eloquence by the grandeur of
its sentiments and its ideas.
“Your speech to Louvet, your speech on the trial of Louis Capet,
are in my opinion the most exquisite pieces which have appeared
during the whole Revolution. They will be studied in the schools
of the Republic as models of classic eloquence, and they will
be transcribed upon the pages of history as the most powerful
causes that have operated on the destiny of France.”
_Le Citoyen Français_ is the most independent paper in Paris.
Before the usurpation of Bonaparte, Thomas Paine frequently furnished
it with articles, but since that event he has withdrawn his assistance.
_Le Journal de Commerce_ is under the direction of Monsieur
Penchet, member of the Commercial Council and the Board of Commerce. He
is a respectable man, possessed of enlightened views and scientific and
practical knowledge.
The _Publiciste_, the _Gazette de France_, _Journal des Débats_ are
the remaining newspapers, worthy of notice. It is refreshing to the
national pride of an Englishman to contrast the wretched state of the
craven French Press with the free and vigorous reasoning which appears
in the London journals; I become hourly more enamoured of my country
and more disgusted with the Republic.
Louis XIV. during the whole of his reign never degraded the Press of
his country as it is now degraded. But with respect to other branches
of literature, the French still shine with uncommon brilliancy, and as
no man is more ready than myself to do them justice, when they deserve
it, I will describe some of those publications in my next letter.