THE FALL OF THE GIRONDE

The Girondins had little realized that in voting for the death of the King they had signed their own death-warrant ; that by lending themselves to this monstrous injustice they http://yamaguchy.netfirms.com/webster/frenchrev/fr_rev_07.html (25 of 61)5.4.2006 10:40:42

 

Nesta Webster, The French Revolution, ch 7

had helped to frame the system that was to bring about their downfall. If they had only had the courage of their convictions, and persisted in their resolution that an appeal should be made to the people, they would have had public opinion almost unanimously on their side, and could have defied the threats of the Mountain. Their contemptible weakness not only lowered them in the eyes of the multitude, but increased the audacity of their adversaries.

Ever since the beginning of the Convention angry murmurs against the Gironde had emanated continually from the Mountain, and as the months went by grew in volume ; the hall of the Assembly, always tumultuous, became at moments a pandemonium. Of this historians give no idea, but it must be realized in order to follow the true course of the revolutionary movement. For if we picture the Convention as it is habitually represented to us under the guise of a serious Senate sitting in debate on great political questions, and led by statesmen of commanding personalities inspired with pure zeal for the country’s welfare, it is perfectly impossible to understand the nature of the conflict that now arose, and that culminated in the successive slaughter of each faction. We must turn, therefore, to the accounts of contemporaries in order to visualize the fearful scenes of confusion that took place in the Assembly, and the part played by the socalled “ giants of the Convention.” Even the toned-down official reports of the debates afford us glimpses of the strangest incidents—members making simultaneous rushes at the Tribune, frantically disputing who should have the right to speak—“ 60 to 80 deputies advancing in a body on the President’s desk,”—the President ringing his bell to obtain silence, breaking his bell in desperation, breaking three bells in succession,[74] putting on

his hat to close the sitting—deputies drawing swords or brandishing pistols, threatening to blow out their brains, to stab themselves to the heart—roars from Danton, Legendre, David, of “ Vile intriguer ! Monster ! Murderer ! Imbecile ! Pig ! ”—Robespierre shrieking above the tumult, “ Kill me or let me be heard ! ”—Marat rushing about the hall like a maniac, crying, “ Let the patriots speak ! ” turning to the right and shouting, “ Be silent, brigand ! ” to the left, “ Be silent, conspirator ! ”—or, again, furious petitioners arriving at the bar of the Assembly, all talking at once, and all at cross purposes—the tribunes filled with brawlers and viragos hired by the opposing factions, shaking sticks and fists at the deputies, spitting on their heads, howling invectives. [75]

What was the reason for these continued dissensions ? If, as the Convention declared, every one wanted a Republic, if, as they had asserted in the past, the King was the sole obstacle to the regeneration of France, why should the overthrow of monarchy and King have proved the signal for a further outbreak of revolution more violent than any that had preceded it ? Why, as the Girondin Gensonné sensibly inquired, should the opposing faction, that is to say, the Mountain, continue “ to declaim against the National http://yamaguchy.netfirms.com/webster/frenchrev/fr_rev_07.html (26 of 61)5.4.2006 10:40:42

 

Nesta Webster, The French Revolution, ch 7

Convention and provoke insurrections ? What do they want ? What is their object ?

What strange despotism threatens us ? And what kind of government do they propose to give to France ? [76] English readers, indoctrinated by Carlyle, will answer : “ The Girondins were now reactionaries ; they wished to arrest the tide of progress ; their schemes of social reform did not go far enough to meet the real needs of the people.” For, according to Carlyle, “ all manner of aristocracies being now abolished,” the conflict that arose was between “ the Girondin formula of a respectable Republic for the Middle Classes ” and the “ Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity ” of the Mountain, by which the “ hunger, nakedness, and nightmare oppression lying heavy on twenty-five million hearts ” would be relieved. In these words Carlyle presents an imaginary situation. [77] It is probably true that by 1793 the Girondins had become genuine

Republicans—henceforth we find no trace of Orléaniste, Prussian, or English intrigue amongst them ; it is also true that they desired an orderly Republic, but this was to be no more in favour of the “ Middle Classes ” than of the great mass of the people. The Mountain, on the other hand—as represented by Marat, Robespierre and St. Just—no doubt dreamt of a Socialist State for “ the people ” only, but their immediate aim was still anarchy, by which “ hunger and nakedness ” must be immensely aggravated. For Robespierre and Marat were surgeons, not physicians ; their only remedy for all social ills was amputation ; they did not wish to relieve present distress or to put down injustice by legislation, but only to annihilate all existing conditions, and to exterminate all classes of the community except “ the people ” over whom they hoped to rule supreme.

It was therefore the Gironde, not the Mountain, that now came to the relief of hunger and nakedness ; it was Roland who pointed out the real causes of the famine and proposed measures for preventing it, [78] whilst Robespierre contented himself with vague theorizings and ignored offers of supplies. [79] Meanwhile Marat continued to urge the

people on to pillage, a method which greatly aggravated the situation by terrifying the shopkeepers and peasants into concealing provisions. It seems, indeed, not improbable that the Mountain pursued the same system in 1793 as the Orléanistes in 1789—that of engineering famine in order to rouse the anger of the people against their political antagonists. Thus a contemporary states that, “ at a sitting of the Comité de Neuf on September 2, 1793, it was decided by Jean Bon Saint André, Drouet, Cambon, and Robespierre, that an insurrection must be excited by means of the difficulty of supplies—and that the Municipality should direct accusations of monopoly against the party of the Girondins, Monarchists, and Brissotins.” [80] It was this accusation of

monopoly that in the hands of the Mountain served as a weapon against each rival faction in turn.

http://yamaguchy.netfirms.com/webster/frenchrev/fr_rev_07.html (27 of 61)5.4.2006 10:40:42

 

Nesta Webster, The French Revolution, ch 7

Such, then, were the men whom Carlyle represents as the protectors of the hungry and naked. The truth is that the people counted for very little in the great war between the Mountain and the Gironde ; it was not—as Kropotkin, following in the footsteps of Carlyle, falsely represents—such questions as feudal dues, the maximum price of bread, or communal lands that formed the subjects for heated debates at the Convention ; we have only to consult the Moniteur to find that the discussions that took place on these questions occupy a very small amount of space, and never became the occasion for tumultuous scenes. The great accusations levelled by one faction at the other related in no way to the needs of the people, but mainly to the form of government each wished to establish, the Gironde accusing the Mountain of wishing to establish a dictatorship under one of the Triumvirate—Marat, Danton, or Robespierre—the Mountain declaring that the Gironde aimed at a Federative Republic ; at the same time each hurled at the other the reproach of Orléanisme. Meanwhile the personal animosity existing between the members of the two factions, which found expression in recriminations of the most puerile description, made all hope of conciliation vain.

Whilst the politicians wrangled, the people bore their sufferings with admirable patience. Now for the first time at the bakers’ doors were formed those long processions known as “ queues ” that grew in length as the year advanced, and were to continue for two years without intermission. Paris accepted the situation with its usual insouciance.

“ The French, who have always made merry over everything, even over their misery and their greatest misfortunes,” says Beaulieu, “ made merry over these gatherings at the bakers’ doors, where they seemed rather to be asking for alms than for goods of which they paid the price… . I have seen women spend whole nights at these wretched doors for the sake of having an ounce or two of bad bread which dogs would not care for.

Well, the Parisians laughed over these sad gatherings ; they called them queues. Since one was in want of everything one went in the queue for everything—in the bread queue, the meat queue, the soap queue, the candle queue ; there was nothing for which there was not a queue.” [81]

Naturally, under these circumstances, when Marat proposed that the people should take the law into their own hands and pillage the shops, he endeared himself still further to the hearts of the tumultuous elements amongst the populace. “ The capitalists, the stockjobbers, the monopolizers, the tradesmen, the ex-nobles,” he declared in his Journal de la République Française, were to blame for the scarcity of provisions, and nothing but “ the total destruction of that cursed breed could restore tranquillity to the State… . Meanwhile let the nation, weary of these revolting disorders, take upon itself to purge the soil of liberty of this criminal race…. The pillage of a few shops, at the doors of which they hanged a few of the monopolizers, would soon put an end to these http://yamaguchy.netfirms.com/webster/frenchrev/fr_rev_07.html (28 of 61)5.4.2006 10:40:42

 

Nesta Webster, The French Revolution, ch 7

malpractices… .”

The call to plunder was received with enthusiasm, and in the morning of the 25th of February a troop of women marched to the Seine and, after boarding the vessels that contained cargoes of soap, helped themselves liberally to all they required at a price fixed by themselves, that is to say, for almost nothing. Since no notice was taken of these proceedings, a far larger crowd collected at dawn of the following day and set forth on a marauding expedition to the shops. From no less than 1200 grocers the people carried off everything on which they could lay their hands—oil, sugar, candles, coffee, brandy—at first without paying, then, overcome with remorse, at the price they themselves thought proper. In this they displayed a greater sense of morality than their leaders, who doubtless hoped that their enemies, the bourgeois, would be plundered without indemnity ; moreover, the crowd refrained from hanging any of the tradesmen at their shop doors as Marat had proposed. From the Anarchists’ point of view the rising had, therefore, proved a failure.

Marat, when denounced at the Convention for provoking these disorders, retorted in his usual manner by calling his accusers pigs or imbeciles who should be shut up in asylums ;[82] and he could well afford to defy them, for he had the mob now whole-

heartedly at his back.

The short-sighted Girondins, illusioned by the fact that the majority of the Convention was with them, under-estimated the force of this coalition. They could not realize that men who appeared in the eyes of all sane contemporaries so contemptible as Marat, so feebly vindictive as Robespierre, so addicted to empty noise as Danton, could end by carrying everything before them. They overlooked the fact that, as Danton himself afterwards expressed it, “ in times of revolution authority remains with the greatest scoundrels ”—that is to say, with the most unscrupulous ; and just as in the past it was the Orléanistes who had held in their hands the machinery of revolution, of which the Girondins had made use, it was now the Anarchists who alone knew how to frame that new engine of destruction—the second Revolutionary Tribunal—the Tribunal of the Terror. [83]

The first Revolutionary Tribunal, created on August 17, 1792, had proved a failure ; the populace were not yet ripe for wholesale executions ; the spectacle of the guillotine had disgusted the humane portion of the people, and disappointed the sanguinary. The massacres of September had therefore been preferred as a method of extermination, and on the 29th of November 1792 the Tribunal was suppressed. But now that the Anarchists could make sure of support from the populace, and the restraining influence of the Girondins had been reduced to nothing, Danton resolved on a further venture.

http://yamaguchy.netfirms.com/webster/frenchrev/fr_rev_07.html (29 of 61)5.4.2006 10:40:42

 

Nesta Webster, The French Revolution, ch 7

This time the Girondins were not to be spared ; on the contrary, it was they who were to provide the principal victims of the new Tribunal.

As usual, the responsibility for this measure was to be laid at the door of “ the people ”; the same calumnies, the same futile pretexts that had done duty at the massacres of September were again employed.

On the 8th of March Danton and Lacroix, who had returned from a mission to the army in Belgium, appeared at the Convention with an alarming report on the military situation. The troops had been almost totally routed ; treachery on the part of their officers could alone explain the state of affairs ; the remedy lay in raising fresh forces, but before marching on the enemy the patriots must exterminate traitors at home.

That, as in September, no connection whatever existed between socalled “ traitors ” in Paris and the armies abroad is of course obvious, but Danton, like Mirabeau, excelled in rendering the flimsiest pretexts plausible, and in concealing sanguinary designs beneath a flood of high-sounding oratory. The great speeches of Danton that have gone down to posterity as trumpet-calls to patriotism were mostly delivered at a moment when he was meditating some fresh plan for slaughtering his fellow-countrymen. Thus, just as “ audacity and yet more audacity ” had been the signal for the massacres of September, another famous phrase heralded the inauguration of the Revolutionary Tribunal. “ What matters my reputation ? Let France be free and my name for ever dishonoured ! ( Que la France soit libre et que mon nom soit flétri à jamais ! ).” Stirring words truly in the ears of posterity, less stirring in those of contemporaries to whom such exclamations had by long use become familiar. The demagogy, says Mercier, had “ created for itself a language to deceive and seduce the multitude. I have heard it shouted in my ear, ‘ Let the French perish as long as liberty triumphs ! ’ I have heard another cry out at a section, ‘ Yes, I could take my head by the hair, I could cut it off and give it to the despot ; I could say to him, Tyrant, this is the action of a free man ! ’ This sublimity of extravagance was composed for the populace ; it was understood and it succeeded… .” [84]

The famous exclamation of Danton was a phrase of this order, and, in the sense in which it is usually accepted, meaningless. What connection can be found between the reputation of Danton and the success of French arms in Belgium ? Why should his name be dishonoured by France becoming free ? But when we understand the real intention that lay behind the words, we find them pregnant with meaning. Was not Danton’s reputation to be for ever tarnished, his name for ever dishonoured, by the creation of that sanguinary Tribunal before which he himself was to be summoned only a year later ?

was he not to cry out between his prison bars in an agony of remorse : “ It was on this day I instituted the Revolutionary Tribunal, but I ask pardon for it from God and man ; http://yamaguchy.netfirms.com/webster/frenchrev/fr_rev_07.html (30 of 61)5.4.2006 10:40:42

 

Nesta Webster, The French Revolution, ch 7

it was not in order that it should become the scourge of humanity, it was in order to prevent a renewal of the massacres of September ! ” ?

Always, to the end, the same calumny on the people ! The people at the time the Revolutionary Tribunal was inaugurated showed no symptoms whatever of wishing to massacre anybody—had they not refused to carry out the sanguinary suggestions of Marat only a fortnight earlier ? Danton was well aware of this ; he well knew that the thirst for blood existed not amongst the people, but amongst the leaders of the Mountain, the members of the Commune. Indeed, with his usual audacity of speech, he frankly acknowledged his own bloodthirsty intentions. The famous trumpet-call loses something of its splendour when quoted with its less lofty sequel : “ What matters my reputation ? Let France be free and my name for ever dishonoured ! I have consented to be called a drinker of blood ! Well, let us drink the blood of the enemies of humanity ! ” Later in the evening, when the light in the hall of the Convention was growing dim, Danton sprang again into the tribune, and his great voice rolled out through the semi-darkness : “ It is important to take judicial measures to punish the counter-revolutionaries, since it is on their account that this tribunal is to be substituted for the supreme tribunal of the people’s vengeance. The enemies of liberty lift audacious heads … in seeing the honest citizen at his fireside, the artisan in his workshop, they have the stupidity to think themselves in a majority. Well, snatch them yourselves from popular vengeance ; humanity commands you ! ”

Suddenly, whilst the thunderous tones of Danton still quivered in the air, another voice was heard ; one word, one only, but filled with terrible import, rang out through the stillness of the spell-bound assembly : “ September ! ” It was again Lanjuinais, the one brave man who had dared to defend the King against the injustice of the Convention, who now arose in defence of the people against the calumnies of the great demagogue.

The shaft had found its mark ; for a moment Danton faltered, became confused, then, quickly recovering himself, summoned more audacity to his aid, piled calumny on calumny :

“ Since some one has dared,” he shouted, “ to recall those bloody days over which every good citizen has groaned, I will say, I myself, that if a tribunal had then existed, the people who have often been so cruelly reproached for those days would not have stained them with blood… . Let us profit by the mistakes of our predecessors … let us be terrible to prevent the people from being terrible !

Never was hypocrisy more flagrant. Who had accused the people of responsibility for the September days but Danton and his colleagues of the Commune ? By every other party, by Girondins and Royalists alike, the people had been absolved from all http://yamaguchy.netfirms.com/webster/frenchrev/fr_rev_07.html (31 of 61)5.4.2006 10:40:42

 

Nesta Webster, The French Revolution, ch 7

complicity ; not a single reproach had been uttered against any but the real authors of the crime. [85]

The brazen effrontery of Danton won the day ; the Revolutionary Tribunal was decreed in spite of the protests of Lanjuinais and the Girondins, and on the 6th of April held its first sitting at the Palais de Justice. The Court was composed of five judges, ten jurymen—twelve had been ordained, but were not forthcoming—and the Public Accuser, whose name was to strike a deeper terror into the hearts of the Parisians than even that of Robespierre—Fouquier Tinville.

On the opening day of the dread Tribunal, Fouquier alone seems to have entered with zest into the proceedings ; the populace, whose ferocity it had been declared impossible to restrain, behaved with lamentable weakness. When the first victim, a gentleman of Poitou named Des Maulans, was summarily condemned to death for emigration, “ the immense majority of the audience, particularly the women,” says M. Lenôtre in his admirable description of the scene, “ could not imagine that a man who had done no harm to any one should be condemned to death,” and, as the fatal sentence was repeated by each judge in turn, the crowd burst out into weeping, “ silently at first, then with much noise,” and, their emotion communicating itself to the judges and jury, the whole court was shaken by a storm of sobbing, shoulders heaved, handkerchiefs were pressed to eyes and lips, men turned away their faces to hide their tears.[86]

Yet so potent was the spell cast over all minds by the authors of these tragic happenings, so skilfully had they impressed upon the multitude the necessity for “ severity ” towards the “ enemies of the country,” that no one seems to have thought of stopping the proceedings, and all resigned themselves to what followed as to the inevitable.

Day after day further victims were sent to the guillotine—an ex-Brigadier-General named Blanchelarde ; Gabriel de Guiny, a naval lieutenant ; a young cabman called Mangot, who proclaimed himself a Royalist ; Bouché, a travelling dentist, who said that “ the Convention were brigands ” (sic) ( la Convention étoit des brigand), and continued to call out “ Vive Louis XVII. ! au f… . la République ! ” after his condemnation ; an aged soldier who, under the influence of drink, had said that “ France was too large for a Republic ”; a poor old cook called Catherine Clère, who had cried out “ Vive le Roi ! ” in the street at midnight, and had added in the hearing of passers-by that “ all that rabble who dictated laws to decent people should be massacred.” [87]

Truly a formidable band of conspirators ! That it was for such as these the Revolutionary Tribunal had been instituted no one could seriously imagine ; moreover, the leaders of the Mountain now showed their hand by publicly designating who were the real enemies of the country it was necessary to destroy.

http://yamaguchy.netfirms.com/webster/frenchrev/fr_rev_07.html (32 of 61)5.4.2006 10:40:42

 

Nesta Webster, The French Revolution, ch 7

At the same moment that the Revolutionary Tribunal began its sittings, Camille Desmoulins published his terrible indictment of the Girondins under the title of Histoire des Brissotins, ou Fragment de l’Histoire secrète de la Révolution sur la Faction d’Orléans et le Comité anglo-prussien et les six premiers Mois de la République.

Revolutionary historians, to whom the facts revealed in this pamphlet are exceedingly unpalatable, have endeavoured to prove that Camille did not intend to be taken seriously, that he had allowed himself to be carried away by his whimsical imagination, that he was overcome with contrition when he discovered that taunts he had merely launched in sarcasm served as real grounds of accusation against his political antagonists. But there is not a shred of evidence to confirm this convenient theory.

Camille Desmoulins, original only in his style, was always the echo of a stronger mind.

Once it was Mirabeau who had served as his inspiration, now it was Robespierre and Danton, later it was to be Danton only. In this Histoire des Brissotins the influence of Robespierre is plainly visible, and indeed, in his speech against the Brissotins only a few days later, Robespierre followed precisely the same line of argument as his disciple Camille.

To suppose that these accusations were suggested to Robespierre by Camille’s pamphlet would be absurd ; not to the feather-headed Camille can we attribute the relentless logic, the ingenious chain of evidence, by which the Brissotins are convicted of complicity in the past with three of the great revolutionary intrigues—the Orléaniste conspiracy, the intrigue with Prussia, the intrigue with the Jacobins of England. In these illuminating pages, perhaps the most brilliant Desmoulins ever wrote, the workings of the first two revolutions are mercilessly unveiled—the Orléaniste influence behind the socalled popular movement on the 12th of July 1789, the collusion of Mirabeau with the Duc d’Orléans at the march on Versailles, the accusations brought against the King and Queen for holding “ an Austrian committee ” by men who were themselves members of an Anglo-Prussian committee, the visits of Pétion to London in order to enlist the aid of his English allies, the support given to the Brissotins by the Whigs, the proposal of Carra to place the Duke of Brunswick on the throne of France, the persistent attempts to form an alliance with Prussia, the gold received from Frederick William, the negotiations with the Prussians at the camp of La Lune that resulted in the retreat of the invading armies after Valmy,—no Royalist has ever shown up the Revolution so completely. What wonder that revolutionary historians prefer to dismiss the revelations of this enfant terrible as an absurdity ?

It was not till much later that Camille realized that, in giving away the secrets of the first two Revolutions, he had given away his own share in the Orléaniste intrigue ; nor did he dream that a year later Robespierre, through the mouth of St. Just, would bring against http://yamaguchy.netfirms.com/webster/frenchrev/fr_rev_07.html (33 of 61)5.4.2006 10:40:42

 

Nesta Webster, The French Revolution, ch 7

Danton and himself precisely the same accusations of Orléanisme that he had brought against the Girondins. At present he thought only of destroying the rival faction. “ This work will send them to the guillotine ! I will answer for it !” he said to Prudhomme, giving him a copy of the pamphlet. “ That may be,” answered Prudhomme calmly ; “ so much the worse for you. Your turn will come… .” “ Bah ! ” said Camille, “ we have the people with us ! ” [88] He had forgotten, as every demagogue in turn forgot throughout the Revolution, that, in the words of Mirabeau, “ it is but a step from the Capitol to the Tarpeian rock ! ” To-day the populace of Robespierre was with him, to-morrow they would be with Robespierre only, and he might scream to them in vain from the tumbril to save him.

To Robespierre the pamphlet of Desmoulins served a double purpose, for it helped to rid him of both the factions he detested—the Girondins and the Duc d’Orléans, with his few remaining supporters. With his usual ingenuity he used one faction to destroy another, and we cannot doubt that it was owing to his influence that the Girondins on the 6th of April succeeded in obtaining the banishment of Philippe Égalité, the Marquis de Sillery, and Choderlos de Laclos, in spite of the protests of Marat. Three days later the whole Orléans family were sent to Marseilles and imprisoned. Thus was the principal bone of contention removed from Paris, and Robespierre could concentrate all his energies on overthrowing the Girondins. On the 10th of April he boldly demanded that they should all be summoned before the Revolutionary Tribunal ; at the same time Marat published an address, inciting the people to save the country by getting rid of “ all traitors and all conspirators.” The Girondins retaliated by accusing Marat of “ provoking disorders, and of attempting to destroy the Convention,” and so great was the indignation of the great majority of the Assembly at Marat’s incendiary proclamation that they actually succeeded in obtaining a summons against him to appear before the Revolutionary Tribunal.

But the movement was doomed to failure ; Marat had on his side all the turbulent elements of Paris, all the machinery of insurrection ; the jury, obedient to the dictates of Fouquier, declared Marat innocent, and the “ Friend of the People,” smothered in wreaths and roses, was borne triumphantly from the Palais de Justice on the shoulders of the crowd.

Of all the grotesque scenes of the Revolution this was perhaps the strangest—the malignant dwarf wrapped in a ragged coat of faded green, surmounted by an ermine collar yellow with age and dingy from long contact with his neck, the filthy handkerchief that usually bound his head for once discarded, and in its place a crown of laurels slipping down over the black and greasy hair, lending a still greener tint to the sickly pallor of his countenance. And the smile of Marat—that was enough to strike a http://yamaguchy.netfirms.com/webster/frenchrev/fr_rev_07.html (34 of 61)5.4.2006 10:40:42

 

Nesta Webster, The French Revolution, ch 7

chill to the stoutest heart ! Dr. Moore has described the sensation of horror that overcame him in the Convention at the sight of “ Marat attempting pleasantry ”; now he must have appeared more hideous still as, with withered cheeks creased into smiles, with mouth distended, he bent forward, holding out his arms to the people as if to press them to his heart.

The devotees presented an appearance worthy of the idol they carried ; all the jupons gras of Robespierre were there, nodding dishevelled heads in response to his greetings, throwing vinous kisses ; sans-culottes drunk with joy, cut-throats of September shouting, “ Vive Marat ! Long live the friend of the people ! ” [89]

This time popular dementia had gone too far, and the result of the “ triumph of Marat ” was to produce a wave of reaction. When the “ Friend of the People ” presented himself at his section he met with so hostile a reception that he was obliged to beat a hasty retreat. Nearly every evening crowds marched through the streets shouting, “ Down with the Anarchists ! Long live the nation ! Long live the law ! ” [90]

Good citizens, who had kept away from their sections on account of the anarchic schemes discussed there, now returned, to throw their weight into the scale of law and order ; a deputation from three sections arrived at the Convention to denounce “ the brigands who have dared to raise the standard of revolt, and who under the perfidious mask of patriotism wish to kill liberty.” [91] The speech was received with applause from a large majority of the deputies, and on the proposal of Barère, who had not yet thrown in his lot with the Mountain, the Convention decreed that an extraordinary committee should be formed, composed of twelve members, to inquire into the measures adopted by the Council of the Commune and the sections of Paris, and also into the operations of the Comité de Salut Public and its accessory, the Comité de Sûreté Générale.[92]

These two sanguinary committees—the great committees of the Terror—had only recently become a power. The former, which had originated in 1792 as the Comité de Défense Générale, took the further title “ et de Salut Public ”—under which name alone it was henceforth known—on the 6th of April 1793, the same day that the Revolutionary Tribunal began its sittings, whilst the latter, although subordinate to the Comité de Salut Public, had existed since 1789 as a Comité d’Information, assuming the name of Comité de Sûreté Générale in May 1792.

Hitherto the Comité de Salut Public had included men of all parties—Danton, Sieyés, Vergniaud, Guadet, Gensonné, Pétion, and others—but the restraint imposed on its operations by the Girondins exasperated Danton against the faction he had saved from the massacres of September, and he resolved on their destruction. Moreover, since seven out of the twelve members elected to the new Commission des Douze were http://yamaguchy.netfirms.com/webster/frenchrev/fr_rev_07.html (35 of 61)5.4.2006 10:40:42

 

Nesta Webster, The French Revolution, ch 7

Girondins, and the rest neutrals, it became evident that their inquiries into the workings of the two committees would act as a further check on the schemes of the Anarchists.

For six months the Girondins had now held up the course of the Terror which, but for them, would doubtless have formed the sequel to the September massacres. Therefore the Girondins must not be simply overthrown, but put out of existence. It was this that in the eyes of the Anarchists necessitated the rising of the 31st of May.

That a massacre of the whole faction was now contemplated by the Commune cannot be doubted. Dutard, the secret agent of the minister Garat, records that “ this moment is terrible, and much resembles that which preceded the 2nd of September.” [93] And indeed, on the 23rd of May, a further deputation from the section of La Fraternité came to the Convention to reveal the fact that at a meeting of the Council of the Commune, to which several of their members had succeeded in gaining admittance, it had been proposed that thirty-two deputies of the Gironde should be “ made to disappear from the face of the globe,” or “ Septemberized.” [94] This, according to a deputy from Brittany to whom the plan had been confided, was to be followed by a further massacre of 8000

people.[95] Thereupon the Commission des Douze ordered the arrest of Hébert, the deputy attorney of the Commune, and author of the bloodthirsty journal, Le Père Duchesne ; also of his two colleagues, Varlet and Dobsent. The same evening Hébert and Dobsent were imprisoned at the Abbaye.

The Commune retaliated with “ a deputation from sixteen sections of Paris ” demanding the release of the oppressed patriots ; meanwhile the women of the Société Fraternelle rushed through the streets armed with red flags, urging the people to march on the Abbaye and deliver Hébert—an appeal to which the people declined to respond.

The hall of the Convention at the Tuileries, which it had occupied since the 10th of May, became again the scene of indescribable confusion ; deputations poured in continuously ; the petitioners, unable to find room in the places reserved for them, overflowed into the seats of the deputies, many of whom, overcome with fatigue, had retired for the night. Then, amidst the howls of the crowd, Hérault de Séchelles proposed the liberation of Hébert and his colleagues, and the suppression of the Commission des Douze. A few deputies, joined by the petitioners, voting as if they were the legal representatives whose places they occupied, succeeded in carrying the motion.

But the next day the Convention, restored to its normal conditions, reinstated the Commission des Douze by a majority of 259 votes.

“ You have decreed the counter-revolution,” cried Collot d’Herbois ; “ I demand that the Statue of Liberty should be veiled ! ”

This decision of the Convention gave the signal for battle, and immediately the http://yamaguchy.netfirms.com/webster/frenchrev/fr_rev_07.html (36 of 61)5.4.2006 10:40:42

 

Nesta Webster, The French Revolution, ch 7

Commune proceeded to put the revolutionary machine in motion—no easy matter, for Paris in general was singularly calm, and two days were necessary to prepare the rising.

[96]

This is not the place to describe in detail the movement known as “ the Revolution of the 31st of May,” which was in reality simply a duel between the two opposing factions, and as such belongs to the history of the Convention, not to the story of the great popular outbreaks of the Revolution. No other great day of tumult was so completely artificial.

When on the morning of the 31st Paris awoke to the sound of the tocsin, armed forces summoned from the sections assembled mechanically, women gathered on their doorsteps “ to see the insurrection pass,” but no one knew what all the stir was about. [97]

Throughout the day the Convention was surrounded with troops, who, for the most part, had no idea why they were there and whom they were protecting. Meanwhile deputations from the sections streamed into the hall, some to demand the suppression of the Commission des Douze and the arrest of the Girondins, others to protest in their favour. Amongst the latter was the section of the Butte des Moulins, and in retaliation for its spirited action the Commune despatched messengers wearing municipal scarves to Saint-Antoine and Saint-Marceau to rouse the inhabitants with the news that members of this section had formed a centre of counter-revolution at the Palais Royal, and were wearing the white cockade of royalty.[98] The men of the Faubourgs who had been under arms for some hours, waiting for orders, marched off obediently with their cannon, and on arrival at the Palais Royal found indeed a battalion of the Butte des Moulins encamped there with detachments from other sections sent to their support—for what purpose no one seemed to know.

The folly of the whole proceeding now occurred to the men of the Faubourgs, who, after placing their cannon in position and ranging themselves in battle order, decided that before beginning to fire on their fellow-citizens it would be as well to discover whether there was any real cause de guerre between them. Accordingly a deputation was sent to verify the accusations of the agitators, and, as might be expected, the whole alarm was discovered to be needless—no white cockades were to be seen, the tricolour was flaunted everywhere, on hats and in the form of banners. Then amidst cries of “ Long live the Republic ! ” the gates were thrown open, and the opposing battalions fell into each others’ arms, swearing eternal friendship. [99]

This sort of thing was always apt to occur when the people were left to themselves to settle matters, and no agitators were at hand to stir them up to violence. On this occasion Santerre, who excelled in the art of exciting revolutionary troops, was absent from Paris, and Hanriot, who had been illegally made commander-general by the http://yamaguchy.netfirms.com/webster/frenchrev/fr_rev_07.html (37 of 61)5.4.2006 10:40:42

 

Nesta Webster, The French Revolution, ch 7

Commune, was at the head of the forces that surrounded the Convention.

As an insurrection, therefore, the 31st of May had proved a failure just as the Affaire Réveillon, the first march on Versailles, and the 20th of June had proved failures for want of popular support. Always throughout the Revolution the same abortive movement before each outbreak, the same miss-fire preceding the explosion !

At the Convention the Commune had succeeded in again obtaining the suppression of the Commission des Douze, but had been unable to secure the arrest of the Girondins.

So a further insurrection must be attempted, and all the following day was occupied in preparation. In the evening Marat appeared at the Commune and, after giving the order to the Council to begin the movement, proceeded himself to ring the tocsin. The same night the Anarchists struck their first decisive blow at the party of the Gironde by the arrest of Madame Roland, who, during the absence of her husband, was seized by emissaries of the Commune and led to prison at the Abbaye. The next morning, June 2, all Paris was again under arms, the tocsin rang out, an armed force of 80,000 men assembled, but amongst these 80,000, says the deputy Meillan, “ 75,000 did not know why they had been made to take up arms,” [100] nor, owing to the skilful organization of

the Commune, was it possible for them to discover.

For Hanriot, well aware that the honest citizens of Paris would not co-operate in the real purpose of the day—the destruction of the Girondins—had been careful to place the troops formed by the sections at a distance from the Château, some in the Place Louis XV. beyond the swing-bridge, which was closed between them and the garden, others in the Carrousel separated by a wooden barrier from the court of the Tuileries.[101]

Meanwhile his picked force of four to five thousand insurgents—including a number of German mercenaries belonging to the legion of Rosenthal under orders to march on La Vendée, whose total ignorance of the French language rendered them docile instruments of the Commune [102]—formed a cordon immediately around the Château to which all

the avenues were occupied by his officers or agents, “ who had received orders to suffer no communication between the hall (of the Convention) and the court or garden.” [103]

By this means the troops of the sections were powerless to intervene, whilst the great mass of the people that had as usual assembled to look on was kept in complete ignorance of what was passing. [104] On the part of the people the 2nd of June was thus the same absolutely blind movement as the abortive rising that had preceded it two days earlier.

If only the Girondins had stood their ground on this critical day it is probable that the victory would have remained with them, but now that their own fate was at stake they displayed the same pusillanimity they had shown at the trial of the King. Instead of http://yamaguchy.netfirms.com/webster/frenchrev/fr_rev_07.html (38 of 61)5.4.2006 10:40:42

 

Nesta Webster, The French Revolution, ch 7

bringing their eloquence to bear on the situation, the leading members of the Gironde, including Brissot and Vergniaud, dared not venture into the Convention, but sought refuge at the house of Meillan near by. Meillan himself, and also Barbaroux and Isnard, remained at their post in the Assembly, but it was left to Lanjuinais, who was not a Girondin, to act as the principal defender of the faction with which during these days he associated himself as the champion of liberty. In the name of the people the courageous Breton now denounced the efforts of the factions to create disorders. “ You calumniate Paris ! You insult the people !” cried the Mountain. “ No,” answered Lanjuinais, “ I do not accuse Paris ; Paris is good-hearted, Paris is oppressed by a few scoundrels.” Legendre the butcher, rushing upon Lanjuinais, attempted to drag him from the tribune, but, quelled by the sangfroid of his opponent, retreated discomfited, and only returned to the assault when reinforced by Drouet of Varennes fame, the younger Robespierre, and Jullien. A hand-to-hand struggle ensued, and Lanjuinais remained master of the situation. The craven Girondins, hearing of this momentary victory, attempted to reach the hall of the Convention and rally around Lanjuinais, but it was too late. A fresh deputation of the Commune arrived on the scene to demand their arrest, and departed shouting, “ To arms ! Let us save the country ! ”—a battle-cry echoed with fury by the tribunes.

Meanwhile Hanriot’s troops had closed around the Château and the mob had taken possession of the halls, corridors, and staircases ; the women-followers of Marat and Robespierre, constituting themselves doorkeepers, forcibly prevented the exit of deputies. At this Danton, who never believed in allowing the canaille—particularly the female canaille—to take command of the situation, grew indignant,[105] and when at last

the news reached the Assembly that armed sentinels had been placed at the doors of the hall, it was on the proposal of Danton’s ally, Lacroix, that the Convention despatched an usher to Hanriot demanding that the armed forces should be withdrawn from the Château. Hanriot replied briefly, “ Tell your b—— president that he and his Assembly can be d——d ( dis à ton f… . président que je me f… . de lui et de son Assemblée), and that if it does not deliver up the Twenty-Two to me within an hour I will blast it with cannon.”

Barère then proposed that the Convention should make a display of independence by going out to face the army of insurgents, and thereupon the whole Assembly, with Herault de Séchelles at its head, descended the great staircase by which Louis XVI. had left the Tuileries on the 10th of August, and filed out into the courtyard where Hanriot awaited them at the head of his men. The half-drunken commander again demanded that “ the Twenty-Two ” should be surrendered. Herault refused, and the deputies surrounding him, inspired with sudden courage, cried out, “ They want victims ! Let http://yamaguchy.netfirms.com/webster/frenchrev/fr_rev_07.html (39 of 61)5.4.2006 10:40:42

 

Nesta Webster, The French Revolution, ch 7

them kill us all ! ” Then Hanriot, grasping his sabre, turned to his troops and shouted, “ Cannoniers, to your guns ! ” But no one obeyed the order to fire. The men remained immovable—Hérault and a fellow-deputy who went boldly towards them saw that “ their eyes and attitude gave evidence of no evil design.”

The truth is that the multitude was opposed to the insurgents ; one of the sections of Paris actually pointed its cannon on the troops of Hanriot at the same moment that Hanriot’s cannon were pointed on the members of the Convention. [106] It was therefore once again the people who ranged themselves on the side of law and order, and Hanriot, disconcerted by their attitude, was unable to carry out his sanguinary designs.

The troops, drawn up in the garden on the other side of the Château, whither the Assembly now made its way, seemed equally averse to bloodshed, and contented themselves with crying out, “ Vive la Montagne ! Vive la Convention ! ” and from time to time, “ Vive Marat ! ” At this moment Marat himself, followed by the crowd of little ragged boys that his grotesque appearance frequently attracted, [107] appeared on the scene, shrieking imperiously to Herault, “ In the name of the people I charge you to return to your post, which you have basely deserted.” And he added significantly, “ Let the faithful deputies return to their posts ! ” [108] In other words, let the sheep be divided from the goats and the members of the Mountain retire into safety, whilst their opponents remain outside to be butchered. Hérault and his colleagues had evidently thwarted the designs of Marat by joining themselves to the Girondins who had been singled out as victims, but now, merged in the crowd of deputies, could not be distinguished by the insurgents. Such, however, was the authority the wretched dwarf had acquired that, obedient to the word of command, the Montagnards turned towards the Tuileries, leaving the Girondins to their fate, but the Girondins, seeing the snare, retreated likewise, and the whole Assembly, followed by Marat, re-entered the hall of the Convention and resumed the sitting.

Couthon, the friend of Robespierre, then proposed a decree against the Twenty-Two and the members of the Commission des Douze, but the parade round the courts and garden of the Tuileries had evidently convinced the leaders that violent measures would not meet with popular support, for it was no longer the imprisonment of the Girondins their opponents demanded, but simply their suspension, after which they were to be left in their own houses under supervision—a surprisingly mild conclusion to three days’

insurrection !

The list of the proscribed deputies was then read aloud, and meanwhile Marat repeatedly intervened, adding certain names and ordering others to be removed without even consulting the Convention. “ It was then,” says Meillan, “ that we understood all the http://yamaguchy.netfirms.com/webster/frenchrev/fr_rev_07.html (40 of 61)5.4.2006 10:40:42

 

Nesta Webster, The French Revolution, ch 7

power of Marat ”—well for them if they had realized it earlier, and stood together as one man to resist it.

Now at the eleventh hour the Assembly made one expiring effort to assert its independence ; several members rose to declare that “ they were not free, and that they refused to vote surrounded by bayonets and cannon ”—a resolution in which no less than two-thirds of the Convention finally concurred.

The Mountain, not to be beaten, solved the difficulty by simply voting without them, and the majority, “ thus becoming simple spectators, left the Montagnards to pass the decree, supported by a great number of strangers who, as on the 27th of May, had placed themselves in the seats of the legislators whose functions they had usurped.”[109]

So, by a violation of law and justice as flagrant as that which had brought about the condemnation of the King, the Girondins fell victims to the Revolution they had helped to prepare. And just as Louis XVI. on the eve of his death had seen in one prophetic moment the future that awaited France, brave Lanjuinais, proscribed with the faction whose cause he had defended, foretold the terrible era of which this day was to be the prelude in his last words from the tribune : “ I see civil war kindled in my country, spreading its ravages everywhere and rending France. I see the horrible monster of the dictatorship advancing over piles of ruins and corpses, swallowing you each up in turn, and overthrowing the Republic ! ”