 |
Chapter 13
Page: 166-182
CHAPTER XIII.
The Fete de la Federation of July 14, 1790; speech of Perrotin regarding the affair of Bonne Savardin ; resignation of Mirabeau; declaration of the king with respect to the properties which he wanted to retain; the mutiny at Nancy.
The national assembly decided to convene a French federation. It would be open to all: each city and each borough would send armed deputies to Paris and July 14, 1790 was the date set to celebrate this solemn occasion.
(167)
Ostensibly the object of this prodigious assembly was to bind all the French people together by a common oath. But the real reason conceived by the party of Orleans was to bind together a great mass of armed and corrupt individuals. The fact is that the duke d’Orleans returned from England at that time and appeared in public. His crimes having circulated in the provinces and he being the favorite of the ‘federes’, his reputation was also conveyed to incorruptible people who resisted the proposals which were made to them, namely to elevate the duke d’Orleans to regency.
Here is a touching incident which deserves to be recounted. A ‘federe’ Breton came to harangue the king but forgot what he wanted to say. Instinctively he knelt down and surrendered his sword to his monarch with these words, “Sire, I place into your pure and sacred hands the faithful sword of brave Bretons. Never may it be stained except by the blood of your enemies.”
The king bade him rise and clasped the Breton in his arms. Giving him back his sword, the king said, “It cannot be in better hands than those of my dear Bretons. Tell them that I am the father, brother and friend of all the French."
(168)
Then with tears in his eyes he declared: "I am so moved that I can’t find the words to say how I feel.”
Great preparations were made for the Fete de la Federation where gangs of municipal labourers worked side-by-side with enthusiastic volunteers. The time for preparing the field for such a massive gathering was very short thus it was completed with the spontaneous participation of Parisians from all walks of life. One was even going to seek the Carthusian monks and Carmelite nuns to make them work for the amusement of the rabble. One monk was girded with a saber while someone else slapped a grenadier’s hat on his head. General Lafayette, being present, cried out “Onward!” and said: "I took part in the American Revolution, and when I’m finished with this one I will partake of a third one in Rome." The poor fellow!
July 14 arrived and the armed federes (deputies of the National Guard) numbering some 45 000 met in the field of Champ-de-Mars where the spectators were innumerable. The king had wished to appear with his family on the same platform but this courtesy was not extended to him. Talleyrand, the bishop of Autun blessed the banners of the 83 departments of France and said the mass.
Bishop Talleyrand and commander-in-chief Lafayette of the National Guard were the leading participants in this fusion of patriotic and religious fervor that was typical of the early Revolution when church and state were still in harmony. In his capacity as command-in-chief, Lafayette took his solemn oath to the Constitution with these words:
(169)
"I swear to be forever faithful to the nation, the law and king; to uphold with all my might the Constitution; to protect, in accordance with law, the safety of the people and their property, freedom of movement of grain and sustenance in the interior of the kingdom, recognition of the public contributions and the forms in which they exist; to remain faithful with the French through the bonds of fraternity "
Then all the deputies raised their hands in affirmation. A moment later the members of the national assembly swore the same oath.
The king then rose and made this speech with much passion.
"May the majestic and touching ceremony solemnized today everywhere in the French kingdom be the prelude and pledge of the happiness which will shine henceforth on our heads. Let us forget our differences and ruinous hatreds in order to forge one people of brothers bound by the soft bonds of peace and love."
"Soon we will see the rebirth of confidence, abundance, and all the virtues which have departed for so long from amongst us".
"I swear to employ all the power which is delegated to me by the constitutional law of
(170)
the state, to maintain the Constitution and to carry out its laws." Shortly thereafter he went to the podium where he gave his oath and affixed his signature.
After the king had spoken, the queen, seated at another platform, took her son, the dauphin, in her arms and held him up to the nation. This act was met with universal approval. The people shed tears and expressed their love for him in a touching way.
Ah! if in this moment, the king had only taken his leave! But, moved by this public outpouring of fidelity and love, he forgot all about the public’s disgraces and tasted only the pleasure of being considered a friend. All too quickly this sweet disillusion vanished and he felt only the imponderable weight of chains.
The duke d’Orleans, starved for power and always a conspirator, exhausted his wealth to support his party. Here I must relate a telling anecdote which concerns this prince. He was involved in a dispute with M. Sulleau, a young lawyer and an honorable man. Wanting to exact revenge upon him, d’Orleans sent his representative, a man named Latouche, to fight him. The lawyer, in turn, had his jockey represent him in this fight thus stalemating the hired killer of the duke. Few are aware of this ‘combat by the two chancellors’. This Sulleau is the same one that Théroïgne had murdered on August 10, 1791, no doubt to avenge d’Orleans.
(171)
On August 18, 1790, a deputy named Perrotin accused of having assisted a man named Bonne Savardin to escape from prison, spoke these words to the assembly:
"Am I being charged in a lawsuit brought by the committee of research - a court which carries everywhere the spirit of inquisition and terror – a body which denounces its victims and heaps either fire or water upon all those who are struck by its sinister glances? Is this the tribunal whose salary is equal to that of domestic servants? Yes, I will be the first to learn how France might withdraw itself from the tyranny of this odious court." In this speech a man named M. Malouet added: "What have you heard? Here is a man who gave asylum to a man who was in prison without being accused. Now we want your honest opinion on whether M. Bonne Savardin should have been treated like a felon.”
The next day, August 19, the assembly received a letter of resignation from Mirabeau which read as follows::
(172)
Mr. President,
Regarding the protests made and in progress against the acts and decrees tending to demonize the monarchy, overturning laws, destroying or deteriorating the sacred titles of property on which rest both the rights of the king, premier gentleman of France (a title dear to the French and his majestic house), as well as the rights of the three orders inherent in a monarchy, and those of all the citizens of the kingdom, I declare, and ask you to do likewise, that the first act I make in my liberty which I enjoy from the kingdom, is to disassociate the title and functions which the members of the nobility of the Limousin had given me the honor to entrust when they appointed me to the States General.
I am, with respect,
the Viscount de MIRABEAU
On the 21st of same month of August, 1790, M. de Fancigny tendered a matter to the assembly which proved how much the deputies had degraded themselves by their conduct.
(173)
"Since there is open conflict,” he said, “between the majority and the minority, there is nothing but sabers that will keep these two brutish factions apart.” Meanwhile a firebrand named Cloots, one of the most ardent revolutionaries in Paris, standing close to a stable in the middle of a group of curious onlookers exclaimed: "Do you hear the noise coming from the stable? Too many oats are being fed to the horses…they should be given less! Courage, comrades! We will overcome!”
These incidents have a certain degree of importance because they give an idea of the freedom which still prevailed despite the obstacles of the committee of research.
The king was obliged to provide a list of the properties which he wished to retain for himself. He duly complied but it gave rise to a thousand sarcasms and as many calumnies. The more this unhappy king humbled himself and the more sacrifices he made, the more he was vilified. They wanted him to be lofty and egoistical in order to poison his actions, but he was always decent and human.
Here is the letter which he wrote to the representatives of his people on August 18, 1790.
"You know that it is only upon your repeated insistence that I explained myself regarding the
(174)
fixing of my civil list and the castles and property that it was advisable for me to preserve. I am informed that the provisions of these objects which concern the state and which I presented to you via M. de S. – Priest are being misinterpreted."
"I don’t think there is any need for me to point out how little importance I attach to what touches my personal interests and pleasures, or how much I subordinate them to the public interest. I readily relinquish most of the items indicated though there are several which I was not resolved to give up for reasons of general practicality and to preserve the pleasant atmosphere of Paris. I thus confine myself to the following properties:
"The Louvre; Tuileries along with the houses which depend on it, Versailles, St Cloud, Rambouillet, Fontainebleau, Compiegne and the fields and woods on which they depend."
"As for my hunting, you also wished me to make known my intentions. I specifically make it a point to not enjoy any pleasure that may be burdensome to my subjects. And please never lose sight of the fact
(175)
that my chief interests are those of the nation, and the relief of the people. It is those which touch me and which are really dear to me."
And here, I repeat, is the sovereign who was to be regarded as a tyrant!
August was fertile in great events including the massacre of Nancy which occurred on the 31st. I consider it a duty to provide an outline of the events that led to this mutiny of the National Guard and the oppressive measures that were used to quell it.
Unruliness reigned in all the army corps and this excessive insubordination alarmed the government. The number of seditious regiments and mutineers grew day by day.
With each courier camenews of new disorders, and the closing days of an honest king was only one rapid litany of ever-increasing sorrows.
The Minister for War (Latour-du Pin) came to announce at the assembly that pecuniary complaints had become unceasingly the cause of military insurrections. Soldiers wanted to force their superiors to provide registers of compatibility and to set themselves up as judges of their own demands.
Regarding this a decree was issued which read:
"Article III, That an audit shall take place in the presence of the commander of each corps and overseen by the second
(176)
Captain, the first and second lieutenant, the first and second sub-lieutenant, the first and second sergeants or marshals, the first and second corporals or brigadiers, and four soldiers.to verify the accounts of each regiment over the last six years.
"Article IV, That all defamatory graffiti as of the 1st of May 1789 will not be tolerated and will be at the risk of those who have in the past made similar grafitti".
"Article VII, That as of the publication of this decree, it is hereby announced that all new seditions and revolts, and legal proceedings made against the instigators, authors, and participants of these seditions, shall by this judgment strip these people of the title of active citizens, being traitors to the fatherland, treacherous, unworthy citizens forever banned from bearing arms, and to be expelled from their corps, even to be condemned to severe punishment."
However this did not prevent the regiments of the king (infantry); of Mestre-de–Camp, (the cavalry); and of Chateau-Vieux (the Swiss Guard) to rebel which in turn gave rise to a new decree, "which grants only twenty four hours to the soldiers
(177)
to repent under penalty of being hunted down and punished.” The same decree requested the king to order his prosecutor at the baillage of Nancy to render charges against all people of any rank, grade, or status who are suspected of having been instigators, or participants of the rebellion which erupted at Nancy since the proclamation of the decrees of the 6th and 7th of this month, and to authorize the military command at this place to dismantle and lay off the regiments of this garrison if they do not return immediately to order, or if they display the least resistance to the punishment of the principal culprits.
As soon as the soldiers were informed of this decree, they seized Mr. de Malseigne, the commanding officer, and Mr. de la Noue, commandant of that place who they believed would be responsible for carrying out the harsh terms of the decree. This gave rise to a coalition between the three garrison regiments in mutual defense of their precarious position. Officers of the King’s regiment armed themselves ineffectively while trying to restore order and they were wounded in the process. Then Mr. de Malseigne left for Lunéville
(178)
under guard by cavaliers of Mestre de-Camp who rode with sabers in hand. The pursuing militia was informed of this and rode to intercept the detachment. Fighting ensued in which several cavaliers were slain. What remained of the detachment returned to the garrison which, reinforced, went out again to seek vengeance on the pursuing militia.
This moment was favorable for the pursuing militia to try drawing support from Nancy but many of the citizen-guards of that city and department, influenced by the regular soldiers stationed there, had become persuaded that it was a question of being against the revolution so their allegiance lay with the rebellious soldiers.
A thing most disconcerting for the commanders at Nancy was to be obliged to follow the police militia and to expose themselves to the blows of this police force which killed 7 men and an officer. Meanwhile an adjutant of the same body was killed by a cavalier of Mestre de–Camp just at the moment when he was striking an officer of the King’s regiment.
A truce seemed at hand through a parlay between the police officers and the other bodies which involved the return of Mr. de Malseigne to the garrison at Nancy. But just when this peace appeared to be concluded, hostilities broke out again. The fury that now seized the police militia
(179)
became readily apparent the following day. The four friendly regiments and the prisoner, Mr. de Malseigne, were now in Nancy. To cement their solidarity, the populace which was always eager for blood, demanded the death of this commanding officer. Thus he was led, not to the municipality, but to the barracks, where he would rather be taken. More moderate voices prevailed which led him to be confined at the caretaker's lodge of the palace which was now surrounded by the furious police militia.
This is how things stood when Mr. de Bouillé approached with his army.
Deputies from the three king’s regiments, Chateau-Vieux and Mestre-de-Camp went to the municipality, likewise to the commanders of the district, and forced these bodies to send a delegation to Mr. de Bouillé, requesting him to withdraw his troops. When this delegation had no success, a second one was sent. Through these delegations, Mr. deBouille was informed that the arsenals had provided weapons to the most dangerous citizens; that the store of powder had been plundered; that the poor class of the people were united with the soldiers; that even the officers of the rebellious regiments were being forced to march and fight. He also learned that the prisoners de Malseigne and de la Noue were
(180)
at risk of having their throats cut at the first volley of rifle fire.
Unmoved by the consequences, Mr. de Bouillé’s chief aim was to prevent insubordination from spreading.
On August 31, the insurrection reached its climax. The rebels forced their commanding officers to call upon the police militia and the municipality to present them with a petition. The two sides went to the quarters of the King’s regiment where the proposed conciliation given to the soldiers was met with rejection and insults. Mr. de Bouillé required nothing less than the safe return of Mr. de la Noue and Mr. Malseigne; the surrender of four rebels from each regiment to be tried by the national assembly, and that the garrison left its doors open in surrender.
It was agreed to return the two officers but nothing more. Then the army advanced but they did not fire the first shot. Meanwhile the officers of the rebellious regiments did what they could to moderate the rage of the soldiers.
It was then that the young Desisles, an officer of the hunt in the King’s regiment placed himself in front of a cannon to prevent it from being fired and thus signaling the commencement of carnage. In the face of certain death he refused to move away and said to go ahead
(181)
and fire the cannon. At that moment he received four blows from a rifle which fortunately were not fatal.
The combat that ensued was bloody.
The rebellious citizens returned to their homes and drew by their windows. Most were killed by the cowardly enemy. One cannot comprehend the horrors that were committed. Hardly had some people been killed by the first volley than their bodies were trampled underfoot.
Then the soldiers of Bouillé shouted to those whose windows were closed, “Citizens, open your windows and recognize your friends. It is against a mutinous garrison which threatened your safety that we came to fight.” Then peace was restored. The national guard of Metz exhibited great valor and one has to regret the excellent fathers of families who remained behind at that place.
Such was the infamous affair at Nancy.
The assembly decided to pay homage to the bravery and wisdom of Mr. de Bouillé to whom it gave their thanks but, by an inconsistency which one cannot
(182)
comprehend, his reputation shortly thereafter became that of a monster, a brute and torturer. More inconsistency followed when a festival was instituted in honor of the soldiers of Chateau-Vieux who had been punished by their officers. Now they were portrayed as victims meriting all manner of caresses and benefits.
When one follows the illogical path of the national assembly, one will see nothing but political idiocy and inconsistencies everywhere.
|
|
|
