Chapter 42

FOOTNOTES:[1]I have more especially used the archives of some of the great Intendancies, particularly that of Tours, which are very complete and relate to a very extensive district placed in the centre of France, and peopled by a million of inhabitants. My thanks are due to the young and able keeper of these records, M. Grandmaison. Other districts, amongst them that of the Île-de-France, have shown me that business was transacted in the same manner in the greater part of the kingdom.[2]Burke’s speech on the Army estimates, 1790.[3]Letters on a Regicide Peace.[4]See Note I., on the Power of the Roman Law in Germany.[5]See Note II., on the passage from Feudal to Democratic Monarchy.[6]See Note III., on the Decay of the Free Towns of Germany.[7]Burke’s speech on the Army Estimates, 1790.[8]See Note IV., Date of Abolition of Serfdom in Germany.[9]See Note V.[10]See Note VI.[11]See Note VII., Peasant Lands in Germany.[12]See Note VIII., Nobility and Lands on the Rhine.[13]See Note IX., Effect of Usury Laws on Land.[14]See Note X., Abuse of Feudal Rights.[15]See Note XI., Ecclesiastical Feudal Rights.[16]See Note XII., Rights of the Abbey of Cherbourg.[17]See Note XIII., Irritation caused to the Peasantry by Feudal Rights, and especially by the Feudal Rights of the Clergy.[18]See Note XIV., Effect of Feudalism on state of Real Property.[19]See the last chapter of this Book (xxi.) for a fuller account of the local government of Languedoc.[20]See Note XV., Public Relief, and Note XVI.[21]See Note XVII., Powers of the Intendant for the Regulation of Trade.[22]See Note XVIII., Spirit of the Government of Louis XI.[23]See Note XIX., Administration of a French Town in the Eighteenth Century.[24]See Note XX.[25]See Note XXI., Administration of a Village in the Eighteenth Century.[26][Que la justice administrative et la garantie des fonctionnaires sont des institutions de l’Ancien Régime.The difficulty of rendering these terms into intelligible English arises from the fact that at no time in the last two centuries of the history of England has the executive administration assumed a peculiar jurisdiction to itself or removed its officers from the jurisdiction of the courts of common law in this country. It will be seen in this chapter that the ordinary jurisdictions of France have always been liable to be superseded by extraordinary judicial authorities when the interests of the Government or the responsibility of its agents were at stake. The arbitrary jurisdiction of all such irregular tribunals was, in fact, abolished in England in 1641 by the Act under which fell the Court of Star Chamber and the High Commission.][27]See Note XXII.[28]See Note XXIII.[29][The article referred to is the 75th article of the Constitution de l’An VIII., which provided that the agents of the executive government, other than the ministers, could only be prosecuted for their conduct in the discharge of their functions, in virtue of a decision of the Council of State.][30]See Note XXIV., Traces in Canada of Centralisation of the old French Monarchy.[31]See Note XXV., Example of the Intervention of the Council.[32]See Note XXVI., Additional Patrols.[33]See Note XXVII., Bureaux de Tabac.[34]See Note XXVIII., Extinction of Loyal Activity.[35]See Note XXIX., Seignorial Dues in different Provinces of France.[36]See Note XXX., Self-Government adverse to Spirit of Caste.[37]See Note XXXI.[38]See Note XXXII., Extent of Exemptions from Taxation.[39]See Note XXXIII., Indirect Privileges under Taxation.[40]See Notes XXXIV. and XXXV.[41]See Note XXXVI., Nobles favoured in Collection of Taxes.[42][The use of the French termbourgeois, here and in some other passages translated ‘middle classes,’ is a further proof of the estimation of the power once exercised by that class in the community. In English the corresponding termburgesshas remained inseparable from the exercise of municipal rights; and we have no distinctive appellation, irrespective of political rights, for the large class which separates the nobility from the populace. That class is, in fact, in this country, both socially and politically,the people.][43]See Note XXXVII., Arthur Young’s Tour.[44]See Note XXXVIII.[45]See Note XXXIX., Violation of Vested and Corporate Rights.[46][This remark must be taken with some qualification as to the fact. These distinctions are not wholly eradicated at the present day in England, but they are mere questions of property, not of personal rank or political influence.][47]See Note XL.[48]See Note XLI., Exemptions of Public Officers from Taxation.[49]See Note XLII.[50]See Note XLIII.[51]See Note XLIV., Instructions of the Order of Nobility at the States-General of 1789.[52]See Note XLV., Religious Administration of an Ecclesiastical Province in the Eighteenth Century.[53]See Note XLVI., Spirit of the Clergy.[54]See Note XLVII.[55]See Note XLVIII.[56]See Note XLIX., Example of the Language of the Courts of Justice.[57]See Note L.[58]See Note LI., Of the Reasons which frequently put a restraint on Absolute Government under the Monarchy.[59]See Notes LII. and LIII.[60]See Note LIV., Example of the Mischievous Effects of the Pecuniary Rights of the Clergy.[61]See Note LV.[62]See Note LVI., Superiority of Method adopted in thePays d’État.[63]See Note LVII., Repair of Roads, how regarded.[64]See Note LVIII., Commitments for Non-performance of Compulsory Labour.[65]See Note LIX.[66]See Note LX., Escort of Galley-slaves.[67]See Note LXI.[68]See Note LXII.[69]See Note LXIII.[70]See Note LXIV.[71]See Note LXV., Infidelity in England.[72][Count Mollien was educated in the fiscal service of the old monarchy, and after having escaped the perils of the Revolution he became Minister of the Treasury to the Emperor Napoleon, and under the Restoration a Peer of France. He left Memoirs of his Administration, which have been printed for private circulation by his widow, the estimable Countess Mollien, in four volumes octavo, but not yet published. These Memoirs are a model of personal integrity and financial judgment, the more remarkable as it was the fate of M. Mollien to live in times when these qualities were equally rare. The work was reviewed in the ‘Quarterly Review,’ 1849-1850, and this article was republished in 1872, in Mr. Reeve’s ‘Royal and Republican France.’][73]See Note LXVI., Progress of France.[74]See Note LXVII., Judicial Institutions of England.[75]See Note LXVIII., Privileges of the District of Paris.[76]See Note LXIX.[77]See Note LXX., Arbitrary Augmentation of Taxes.[78]See Note LXXI., Manner in which Turgot spoke of the Country People.[79]See Note LXXII., Growth of Revolutionary Opinions under the Old Monarchy.[80]See Note LXXIII.[81]See Note LXXIV.[82]See Note LXXV., Contests in the Provincial Assemblies of 1787.[83]See Note LXXVI.[84]See Note LXXVII., Definition of Feudal Rights.[85]‘Correspondence of George Forster,’ i. 257.[86]Idem, ii. 286.[87]See ‘Waldemar’: a philosophical novel, by Jacobi, written in 1779. Notwithstanding its defects, which are immense, this book made a great impression, because these defects were those of the age.[88]The word in the French text isconfiance—‘l’image de laconfianceet de la mort.’ But this expression appears to me unintelligible, and the word has probably been wrongly printed or wrongly transcribed. M. de Tocqueville’s handwriting was singularly illegible, and these detached notes were written in characters which he was himself not always able to read. The passage here cited is from Vandelbourg’s French translation of Jacobi’s ‘Waldemar,’ where it might be verified (Tom. i. p. 154.)—H. R.[89]Letter of Johann Müller to Baron de Salis, August 6th, 1789.[90]Fox to Mr. Fitzpatrick, July 30th, 1789. (‘Memorials and Correspondence of Fox,’ ii. 361.)[91]Life of Perthes, p. 177; and of Stolberg, p. 179—in same book.[92]Not a man of education, of whatever rank, would pass through the town where Forster lived without coming to converse with him. Princes invited him, nobles courted him, the commonalty thronged about him, the learned were intensely interested by his conversation. To Michaelis, Heyne, Herder, and others who were endeavouring to solve the mystery of the antiquity and history of mankind, Forster seemed to open the sources of the primæval world by describing those populations of another hemisphere which had not come in contact with any form of civilisation.[93]See for these details Schlosser’s ‘History of the Eighteenth Century,’ and Forster’s Correspondence.[94]Mounier’s book, published at Tübingen in 1801, is entitled ‘Influence attribué aux Philosophes, aux Francs-maçons et aux Illuminés sur la Révolution.’[95]This was the view taken by the Abbé Barruel in his book on Jacobinism. In 4 vols.[96]‘Memoirs of Henry Steffens.’ Breslau: 1840. Steffens was born in 1775, at Stavagner, in Norway.[97]Buchez and Roux, ‘Parliamentary History of the Revolution,’ p. 480.[98]The Edicts of the 17th June, 1787, were:1. For the free transport of grain.2. To establish provincial assemblies.3. For the commutation of forced labour.4. A land subsidy.5. A Stamp Act.The Parliament accepted the three first, and resisted the two last. When the importance of the Edict on Provincial Assemblies is considered, which created new local powers, and comprised an immense revolution in government and society, one cannot but be amazed at the concurrence which existed, on this occasion, between the two most ancient powers of the monarchy, the one to present, the other to accept it. Nothing can show more forcibly to what a degree, amongst this people, who were all perpetually engaged, even to the women, in debating on government, the true science of human affairs was unknown, and how the Government, which had plunged the nation in this ignorance, had ended by sinking into the same darkness. This Edict completed the destruction of the whole ancient political system of Europe, overthrew at once whatever remained of feudal monarchy, substituted democracy for aristocracy, the commonwealth for the Crown. I do not pronounce on the value of this change. I merely affirm that it amounted to an immediate and radical overthrow of all the old institutions of the realm, and that if the Parliament and the King plunged together thus resolutely on this course, it was because neither of them saw whither they were going. Hand in hand they leapt into the dark.[99]16th July, 1787. The nation assembled in the States-General has alone the right to grant subsidies to the King.[100]Remonstrance of the Parliament of Paris, 24th July, 1787. Notes taken from the official documents.[101]Parliament of Grenoble, 5th January, 1678. ‘Despotic measures,’ said the Parliament of Besançon (1787), ‘are not more binding on a nation than a military constitution, and cannot run against the inalienable rights of the nation.’[102]Remonstrance of the Parliament of Grenoble, 20th December, 1787.[103]Remonstrance of the Parliament of Paris, 24th July, 1787.[104]In the speech of M. de Simonville, of the 16th July, 1787, delivered in the Parliament of Paris, he went back to 1301 to prove the utility, necessity, and safety of the States-General. He spoke at the same time of the Constitution, of patriotism, rights of the nation, ministers of the altars, &c. (Official Documents.)[105]Histoire du Gouvernement Français du 22 Février, 1787, au 31 Décembre.[106]Parlement de Normandie, 1787.[107]Parlement de Toulouse, 27 Août, 1787.[108]Parlement de Besançon, 1787.[109]A pamphlet entitled, ‘Réclamation du Tiers-État au Roi.’[110]‘Mémoire Apologétique,’ 1787.[111]The word in the original isévocation. I have adopted the English law term which most nearly approaches it.—Trans.[112]Remonstrances of the 4th January, 1788, and 4th May, 1788. A pamphlet of the time, written in defence of the King, is a mere diatribe against aristocracy. It was attributed to Lecesne des Maisons.[113]The object of the Edicts, which were sent down to the Parliament on the 8th May, 1788, is well known. The first and second of these established a new order of judicature. Exceptional courts of justice were abolished. Small courts were scattered over the country, which have since become the French Courts of First Instance. Higher courts were established to hear appeals, to sit on criminal cases, and on civil cases under 20,000 livres in value: these were the germ of the appeal courts of France; lastly, the Parliaments were to hear causes in appeal of more than 20,000 livres value—but this was a needless provision, and it has disappeared. Such was the reform comprised in the two first edicts. The third contained reforms of equal importance, in criminal and penal law. No capital executions were henceforth to take place, without such a respite as would afford time for the exercise of the prerogative of mercy: no coercive interrogatory was to be used: the felon’s bench was abolished: no criminal sentence to be given without reasons: compensation was to be awarded to those who should be unjustly indicted. The fourth and fifth edicts related exclusively to the Parliaments, and were designed to modify or rather to destroy them. (See the ‘History of the Revolution,’ by Buchez and Roux.)[114]These citations are from official documents.[115]‘Will posterity believe,’ said a pamphlet of the time, ‘that the seditious views of the Parliaments are shared by princes of the blood, by dukes, counts, marquises, and by spiritual as well as temporal peers?’ (‘Lettres flamandes à un Ami.’)[116]Letter of Charles R—— to the Commons of Brittany, 1788.[117]Decree of September 25th, 1788. (Official documents). On the occasion of the partial riot caused at Grenoble by the triumphant return of the Parliament (October 12th, 1788), the army, instead of repressing it, was incited by its own officers to take part in the movement. ‘The officers of the regiment’ (said an eye-witness) ‘did not show less ardour; they waited in a body on the First President to express the joy they felt on his return. On this occasion we cannot refuse ourselves the pleasure of paying them a tribute of praise. Their prudence, their humanity, their patriotism have earned for them the esteem of the city.’ I think Bernadotte was serving in this regiment.[118]September 14th, 1788. The Archbishop, as chairman, alone signed the letter written in the name of the three Orders which appears by its style to have been drafted by Mounier, November 8th, 1788.[119]Published between May 8th, 1788, and the Restoration of the Parliaments.[120]A single instance will suffice to show how the hatred of despotism, and public or corporate interests, caused the very principles of this Revolution to be repudiated by those who were to be its champions. After the Edicts of May, 1788, the whole bar of the Parliament of Aix signed a protest, in which the following sentences occur: ‘Is uniformity in legislation so absolute a benefit? In a vast monarchy, composed of several distinct populations, may not the difference of manners and customs bring about some difference in the laws? The customs and franchises of each province are the patrimony of all the subjects of the Crown. It is proposed to degrade and destroy the seignorial jurisdictions, which are the sacred heritage of the nobility. What confusion! What disorder!’ This document was the production of the great lawyer Portalis (afterwards one of the chief authors of the Code Civil): it was signed by him, by Simeon, and by eighty members of the Bar.[121]Yet in a paper, published a short time before the convocation of the States-General, the following lines occur: ‘In some provinces the inhabitants of the country are persuaded that they are to pay no more taxes, and that they will share among themselves the property of the landowners. They already hold meetings to ascertain what these estates are, and to adjust the distribution of them. The States-General are expected only to give a shape to these aggressions.’ (‘Tableau Moral du Clergé en France sur la fin du 18ème Siècle, 1789.’)[122]24th August, 1788. All the pamphlets of the time laid down a theory of insurrection. ‘It is the business of the people to break the fetters laid upon it. Every citizen is a soldier, &c.’ See ‘Remarks on the Cabinet Order for suppressing discussions in opposition to the Edicts of the 8th of May.’ (‘Bibliothèque,’ No. 595.)[123]Some of the authors of these papers favourable to Government were said to be Beaumarchais, the Abbé Maury, Linguet, the Abbé Mosellet, &c. The Abbé Maury alone was said to be receiving a pension of 22,000 francs. (‘Lettres d’un Français rétiré à Londres,’ July 1788.)[124]In the meetings which followed that of Vizille, and which took place either at Grenoble or at St. Rambert or at Romans, the same union was maintained and drawn closer. The nobility and the clergy steadily demanded that the representatives of the commons should be doubled, taxation made equal, and the votes taken individually. The commons continued to express their gratitude. ‘I am instructed by my Order,’ said the Speaker of the Commons at one of these meetings (held at Romans, September 15th, 1788), ‘to repeat our thanks; we shall never forget your anxiety to do us justice.’ Similar compliments were renewed at an Assembly, also held at Romans on November 2nd, 1788. In a letter addressed to the Municipalities of Brittany, an inhabitant of Dauphiny writes: ‘I have seen the clergy and the nobility renounce with a fairness worthy of all respect their old pretensions in the States, and unanimously acknowledge the rights of the Commons. I could no longer doubt the salvation of the country.’ (‘Letters of Charles R—— to the Municipality of Brittany.’)[125]See a pamphlet attributed to Serovan (1789), and entitled ‘Glose sur l’arrêté du Parlement’; and one entitled ‘Despotisme des Parlements,’ published on the 25th September, 1788, after the decree which suddenly made the Parliaments unpopular.[126]‘Le Tiers-État au Roi,’ by M. Louchet, December 20th, 1788.[127]‘Qu’est-ce-que le Tiers?’ p. 53.[128]Lacretelle, ‘Convocation des États-Généraux’; Bertrand de Molleville,’ Observations adressées à l’Assemblée des Notables.’[129]‘Observations lues aux représentants du Tiers-État à Bordeaux,’ December, 1788.[130]‘Requête du Tiers-État de la ville de Bourg,’ December, 1788.[131]‘Délibérations de la ville de Nîmes en Conseil général.’[132]‘Des conditions nécessaires à la légalité des États-Généraux.’[133]‘De la députation aux États-Généraux.’[134]‘Avis aux Français,’ 1788. A pamphlet written in 1788, but full of the true revolutionary spirit of 1792.[135]Mounier himself was just as little able as the most violent revolutionists, who were soon to appear, to conceive the idea of rights derived from the past; of political usages and customs which are in reality laws, though unwritten, and only to be touched with caution, of interests to be respected and very gradually modified without causing a rupture between that which has been and that which is to be—the idea, in short, which is the first principle of practical and regular political liberty. See Mounier’s ‘Nouvelles Observations sur les États-Généraux.’[136]The Marquis de Gouy d’Arcy in a ‘Mémoire au Roi en faveur de la noblesse Française, par un patricien ami du peuple,’ 1788.[137]This appears from a correspondence of M—— with M. Necker, examined by me in the archives.[138]For a fuller account of these Instructions, and a specimen of them, see Note XLIV. in the Appendix.[139]These Notes and Illustrations were translated by the late Lady Duff Gordon.[140]See last note.[141]I.e.not corporations for trading purposes, but bodies like our livery companies.

FOOTNOTES:

[1]I have more especially used the archives of some of the great Intendancies, particularly that of Tours, which are very complete and relate to a very extensive district placed in the centre of France, and peopled by a million of inhabitants. My thanks are due to the young and able keeper of these records, M. Grandmaison. Other districts, amongst them that of the Île-de-France, have shown me that business was transacted in the same manner in the greater part of the kingdom.

[2]Burke’s speech on the Army estimates, 1790.

[3]Letters on a Regicide Peace.

[4]See Note I., on the Power of the Roman Law in Germany.

[5]See Note II., on the passage from Feudal to Democratic Monarchy.

[6]See Note III., on the Decay of the Free Towns of Germany.

[7]Burke’s speech on the Army Estimates, 1790.

[8]See Note IV., Date of Abolition of Serfdom in Germany.

[9]See Note V.

[10]See Note VI.

[11]See Note VII., Peasant Lands in Germany.

[12]See Note VIII., Nobility and Lands on the Rhine.

[13]See Note IX., Effect of Usury Laws on Land.

[14]See Note X., Abuse of Feudal Rights.

[15]See Note XI., Ecclesiastical Feudal Rights.

[16]See Note XII., Rights of the Abbey of Cherbourg.

[17]See Note XIII., Irritation caused to the Peasantry by Feudal Rights, and especially by the Feudal Rights of the Clergy.

[18]See Note XIV., Effect of Feudalism on state of Real Property.

[19]See the last chapter of this Book (xxi.) for a fuller account of the local government of Languedoc.

[20]See Note XV., Public Relief, and Note XVI.

[21]See Note XVII., Powers of the Intendant for the Regulation of Trade.

[22]See Note XVIII., Spirit of the Government of Louis XI.

[23]See Note XIX., Administration of a French Town in the Eighteenth Century.

[24]See Note XX.

[25]See Note XXI., Administration of a Village in the Eighteenth Century.

[26][Que la justice administrative et la garantie des fonctionnaires sont des institutions de l’Ancien Régime.The difficulty of rendering these terms into intelligible English arises from the fact that at no time in the last two centuries of the history of England has the executive administration assumed a peculiar jurisdiction to itself or removed its officers from the jurisdiction of the courts of common law in this country. It will be seen in this chapter that the ordinary jurisdictions of France have always been liable to be superseded by extraordinary judicial authorities when the interests of the Government or the responsibility of its agents were at stake. The arbitrary jurisdiction of all such irregular tribunals was, in fact, abolished in England in 1641 by the Act under which fell the Court of Star Chamber and the High Commission.]

[27]See Note XXII.

[28]See Note XXIII.

[29][The article referred to is the 75th article of the Constitution de l’An VIII., which provided that the agents of the executive government, other than the ministers, could only be prosecuted for their conduct in the discharge of their functions, in virtue of a decision of the Council of State.]

[30]See Note XXIV., Traces in Canada of Centralisation of the old French Monarchy.

[31]See Note XXV., Example of the Intervention of the Council.

[32]See Note XXVI., Additional Patrols.

[33]See Note XXVII., Bureaux de Tabac.

[34]See Note XXVIII., Extinction of Loyal Activity.

[35]See Note XXIX., Seignorial Dues in different Provinces of France.

[36]See Note XXX., Self-Government adverse to Spirit of Caste.

[37]See Note XXXI.

[38]See Note XXXII., Extent of Exemptions from Taxation.

[39]See Note XXXIII., Indirect Privileges under Taxation.

[40]See Notes XXXIV. and XXXV.

[41]See Note XXXVI., Nobles favoured in Collection of Taxes.

[42][The use of the French termbourgeois, here and in some other passages translated ‘middle classes,’ is a further proof of the estimation of the power once exercised by that class in the community. In English the corresponding termburgesshas remained inseparable from the exercise of municipal rights; and we have no distinctive appellation, irrespective of political rights, for the large class which separates the nobility from the populace. That class is, in fact, in this country, both socially and politically,the people.]

[43]See Note XXXVII., Arthur Young’s Tour.

[44]See Note XXXVIII.

[45]See Note XXXIX., Violation of Vested and Corporate Rights.

[46][This remark must be taken with some qualification as to the fact. These distinctions are not wholly eradicated at the present day in England, but they are mere questions of property, not of personal rank or political influence.]

[47]See Note XL.

[48]See Note XLI., Exemptions of Public Officers from Taxation.

[49]See Note XLII.

[50]See Note XLIII.

[51]See Note XLIV., Instructions of the Order of Nobility at the States-General of 1789.

[52]See Note XLV., Religious Administration of an Ecclesiastical Province in the Eighteenth Century.

[53]See Note XLVI., Spirit of the Clergy.

[54]See Note XLVII.

[55]See Note XLVIII.

[56]See Note XLIX., Example of the Language of the Courts of Justice.

[57]See Note L.

[58]See Note LI., Of the Reasons which frequently put a restraint on Absolute Government under the Monarchy.

[59]See Notes LII. and LIII.

[60]See Note LIV., Example of the Mischievous Effects of the Pecuniary Rights of the Clergy.

[61]See Note LV.

[62]See Note LVI., Superiority of Method adopted in thePays d’État.

[63]See Note LVII., Repair of Roads, how regarded.

[64]See Note LVIII., Commitments for Non-performance of Compulsory Labour.

[65]See Note LIX.

[66]See Note LX., Escort of Galley-slaves.

[67]See Note LXI.

[68]See Note LXII.

[69]See Note LXIII.

[70]See Note LXIV.

[71]See Note LXV., Infidelity in England.

[72][Count Mollien was educated in the fiscal service of the old monarchy, and after having escaped the perils of the Revolution he became Minister of the Treasury to the Emperor Napoleon, and under the Restoration a Peer of France. He left Memoirs of his Administration, which have been printed for private circulation by his widow, the estimable Countess Mollien, in four volumes octavo, but not yet published. These Memoirs are a model of personal integrity and financial judgment, the more remarkable as it was the fate of M. Mollien to live in times when these qualities were equally rare. The work was reviewed in the ‘Quarterly Review,’ 1849-1850, and this article was republished in 1872, in Mr. Reeve’s ‘Royal and Republican France.’]

[73]See Note LXVI., Progress of France.

[74]See Note LXVII., Judicial Institutions of England.

[75]See Note LXVIII., Privileges of the District of Paris.

[76]See Note LXIX.

[77]See Note LXX., Arbitrary Augmentation of Taxes.

[78]See Note LXXI., Manner in which Turgot spoke of the Country People.

[79]See Note LXXII., Growth of Revolutionary Opinions under the Old Monarchy.

[80]See Note LXXIII.

[81]See Note LXXIV.

[82]See Note LXXV., Contests in the Provincial Assemblies of 1787.

[83]See Note LXXVI.

[84]See Note LXXVII., Definition of Feudal Rights.

[85]‘Correspondence of George Forster,’ i. 257.

[86]Idem, ii. 286.

[87]See ‘Waldemar’: a philosophical novel, by Jacobi, written in 1779. Notwithstanding its defects, which are immense, this book made a great impression, because these defects were those of the age.

[88]The word in the French text isconfiance—‘l’image de laconfianceet de la mort.’ But this expression appears to me unintelligible, and the word has probably been wrongly printed or wrongly transcribed. M. de Tocqueville’s handwriting was singularly illegible, and these detached notes were written in characters which he was himself not always able to read. The passage here cited is from Vandelbourg’s French translation of Jacobi’s ‘Waldemar,’ where it might be verified (Tom. i. p. 154.)—H. R.

[89]Letter of Johann Müller to Baron de Salis, August 6th, 1789.

[90]Fox to Mr. Fitzpatrick, July 30th, 1789. (‘Memorials and Correspondence of Fox,’ ii. 361.)

[91]Life of Perthes, p. 177; and of Stolberg, p. 179—in same book.

[92]Not a man of education, of whatever rank, would pass through the town where Forster lived without coming to converse with him. Princes invited him, nobles courted him, the commonalty thronged about him, the learned were intensely interested by his conversation. To Michaelis, Heyne, Herder, and others who were endeavouring to solve the mystery of the antiquity and history of mankind, Forster seemed to open the sources of the primæval world by describing those populations of another hemisphere which had not come in contact with any form of civilisation.

[93]See for these details Schlosser’s ‘History of the Eighteenth Century,’ and Forster’s Correspondence.

[94]Mounier’s book, published at Tübingen in 1801, is entitled ‘Influence attribué aux Philosophes, aux Francs-maçons et aux Illuminés sur la Révolution.’

[95]This was the view taken by the Abbé Barruel in his book on Jacobinism. In 4 vols.

[96]‘Memoirs of Henry Steffens.’ Breslau: 1840. Steffens was born in 1775, at Stavagner, in Norway.

[97]Buchez and Roux, ‘Parliamentary History of the Revolution,’ p. 480.

[98]The Edicts of the 17th June, 1787, were:1. For the free transport of grain.2. To establish provincial assemblies.3. For the commutation of forced labour.4. A land subsidy.5. A Stamp Act.The Parliament accepted the three first, and resisted the two last. When the importance of the Edict on Provincial Assemblies is considered, which created new local powers, and comprised an immense revolution in government and society, one cannot but be amazed at the concurrence which existed, on this occasion, between the two most ancient powers of the monarchy, the one to present, the other to accept it. Nothing can show more forcibly to what a degree, amongst this people, who were all perpetually engaged, even to the women, in debating on government, the true science of human affairs was unknown, and how the Government, which had plunged the nation in this ignorance, had ended by sinking into the same darkness. This Edict completed the destruction of the whole ancient political system of Europe, overthrew at once whatever remained of feudal monarchy, substituted democracy for aristocracy, the commonwealth for the Crown. I do not pronounce on the value of this change. I merely affirm that it amounted to an immediate and radical overthrow of all the old institutions of the realm, and that if the Parliament and the King plunged together thus resolutely on this course, it was because neither of them saw whither they were going. Hand in hand they leapt into the dark.

[98]The Edicts of the 17th June, 1787, were:

1. For the free transport of grain.2. To establish provincial assemblies.3. For the commutation of forced labour.4. A land subsidy.5. A Stamp Act.

1. For the free transport of grain.

2. To establish provincial assemblies.

3. For the commutation of forced labour.

4. A land subsidy.

5. A Stamp Act.

The Parliament accepted the three first, and resisted the two last. When the importance of the Edict on Provincial Assemblies is considered, which created new local powers, and comprised an immense revolution in government and society, one cannot but be amazed at the concurrence which existed, on this occasion, between the two most ancient powers of the monarchy, the one to present, the other to accept it. Nothing can show more forcibly to what a degree, amongst this people, who were all perpetually engaged, even to the women, in debating on government, the true science of human affairs was unknown, and how the Government, which had plunged the nation in this ignorance, had ended by sinking into the same darkness. This Edict completed the destruction of the whole ancient political system of Europe, overthrew at once whatever remained of feudal monarchy, substituted democracy for aristocracy, the commonwealth for the Crown. I do not pronounce on the value of this change. I merely affirm that it amounted to an immediate and radical overthrow of all the old institutions of the realm, and that if the Parliament and the King plunged together thus resolutely on this course, it was because neither of them saw whither they were going. Hand in hand they leapt into the dark.

[99]16th July, 1787. The nation assembled in the States-General has alone the right to grant subsidies to the King.

[100]Remonstrance of the Parliament of Paris, 24th July, 1787. Notes taken from the official documents.

[101]Parliament of Grenoble, 5th January, 1678. ‘Despotic measures,’ said the Parliament of Besançon (1787), ‘are not more binding on a nation than a military constitution, and cannot run against the inalienable rights of the nation.’

[102]Remonstrance of the Parliament of Grenoble, 20th December, 1787.

[103]Remonstrance of the Parliament of Paris, 24th July, 1787.

[104]In the speech of M. de Simonville, of the 16th July, 1787, delivered in the Parliament of Paris, he went back to 1301 to prove the utility, necessity, and safety of the States-General. He spoke at the same time of the Constitution, of patriotism, rights of the nation, ministers of the altars, &c. (Official Documents.)

[105]Histoire du Gouvernement Français du 22 Février, 1787, au 31 Décembre.

[106]Parlement de Normandie, 1787.

[107]Parlement de Toulouse, 27 Août, 1787.

[108]Parlement de Besançon, 1787.

[109]A pamphlet entitled, ‘Réclamation du Tiers-État au Roi.’

[110]‘Mémoire Apologétique,’ 1787.

[111]The word in the original isévocation. I have adopted the English law term which most nearly approaches it.—Trans.

[112]Remonstrances of the 4th January, 1788, and 4th May, 1788. A pamphlet of the time, written in defence of the King, is a mere diatribe against aristocracy. It was attributed to Lecesne des Maisons.

[113]The object of the Edicts, which were sent down to the Parliament on the 8th May, 1788, is well known. The first and second of these established a new order of judicature. Exceptional courts of justice were abolished. Small courts were scattered over the country, which have since become the French Courts of First Instance. Higher courts were established to hear appeals, to sit on criminal cases, and on civil cases under 20,000 livres in value: these were the germ of the appeal courts of France; lastly, the Parliaments were to hear causes in appeal of more than 20,000 livres value—but this was a needless provision, and it has disappeared. Such was the reform comprised in the two first edicts. The third contained reforms of equal importance, in criminal and penal law. No capital executions were henceforth to take place, without such a respite as would afford time for the exercise of the prerogative of mercy: no coercive interrogatory was to be used: the felon’s bench was abolished: no criminal sentence to be given without reasons: compensation was to be awarded to those who should be unjustly indicted. The fourth and fifth edicts related exclusively to the Parliaments, and were designed to modify or rather to destroy them. (See the ‘History of the Revolution,’ by Buchez and Roux.)

[114]These citations are from official documents.

[115]‘Will posterity believe,’ said a pamphlet of the time, ‘that the seditious views of the Parliaments are shared by princes of the blood, by dukes, counts, marquises, and by spiritual as well as temporal peers?’ (‘Lettres flamandes à un Ami.’)

[116]Letter of Charles R—— to the Commons of Brittany, 1788.

[117]Decree of September 25th, 1788. (Official documents). On the occasion of the partial riot caused at Grenoble by the triumphant return of the Parliament (October 12th, 1788), the army, instead of repressing it, was incited by its own officers to take part in the movement. ‘The officers of the regiment’ (said an eye-witness) ‘did not show less ardour; they waited in a body on the First President to express the joy they felt on his return. On this occasion we cannot refuse ourselves the pleasure of paying them a tribute of praise. Their prudence, their humanity, their patriotism have earned for them the esteem of the city.’ I think Bernadotte was serving in this regiment.

[118]September 14th, 1788. The Archbishop, as chairman, alone signed the letter written in the name of the three Orders which appears by its style to have been drafted by Mounier, November 8th, 1788.

[119]Published between May 8th, 1788, and the Restoration of the Parliaments.

[120]A single instance will suffice to show how the hatred of despotism, and public or corporate interests, caused the very principles of this Revolution to be repudiated by those who were to be its champions. After the Edicts of May, 1788, the whole bar of the Parliament of Aix signed a protest, in which the following sentences occur: ‘Is uniformity in legislation so absolute a benefit? In a vast monarchy, composed of several distinct populations, may not the difference of manners and customs bring about some difference in the laws? The customs and franchises of each province are the patrimony of all the subjects of the Crown. It is proposed to degrade and destroy the seignorial jurisdictions, which are the sacred heritage of the nobility. What confusion! What disorder!’ This document was the production of the great lawyer Portalis (afterwards one of the chief authors of the Code Civil): it was signed by him, by Simeon, and by eighty members of the Bar.

[121]Yet in a paper, published a short time before the convocation of the States-General, the following lines occur: ‘In some provinces the inhabitants of the country are persuaded that they are to pay no more taxes, and that they will share among themselves the property of the landowners. They already hold meetings to ascertain what these estates are, and to adjust the distribution of them. The States-General are expected only to give a shape to these aggressions.’ (‘Tableau Moral du Clergé en France sur la fin du 18ème Siècle, 1789.’)

[122]24th August, 1788. All the pamphlets of the time laid down a theory of insurrection. ‘It is the business of the people to break the fetters laid upon it. Every citizen is a soldier, &c.’ See ‘Remarks on the Cabinet Order for suppressing discussions in opposition to the Edicts of the 8th of May.’ (‘Bibliothèque,’ No. 595.)

[123]Some of the authors of these papers favourable to Government were said to be Beaumarchais, the Abbé Maury, Linguet, the Abbé Mosellet, &c. The Abbé Maury alone was said to be receiving a pension of 22,000 francs. (‘Lettres d’un Français rétiré à Londres,’ July 1788.)

[124]In the meetings which followed that of Vizille, and which took place either at Grenoble or at St. Rambert or at Romans, the same union was maintained and drawn closer. The nobility and the clergy steadily demanded that the representatives of the commons should be doubled, taxation made equal, and the votes taken individually. The commons continued to express their gratitude. ‘I am instructed by my Order,’ said the Speaker of the Commons at one of these meetings (held at Romans, September 15th, 1788), ‘to repeat our thanks; we shall never forget your anxiety to do us justice.’ Similar compliments were renewed at an Assembly, also held at Romans on November 2nd, 1788. In a letter addressed to the Municipalities of Brittany, an inhabitant of Dauphiny writes: ‘I have seen the clergy and the nobility renounce with a fairness worthy of all respect their old pretensions in the States, and unanimously acknowledge the rights of the Commons. I could no longer doubt the salvation of the country.’ (‘Letters of Charles R—— to the Municipality of Brittany.’)

[125]See a pamphlet attributed to Serovan (1789), and entitled ‘Glose sur l’arrêté du Parlement’; and one entitled ‘Despotisme des Parlements,’ published on the 25th September, 1788, after the decree which suddenly made the Parliaments unpopular.

[126]‘Le Tiers-État au Roi,’ by M. Louchet, December 20th, 1788.

[127]‘Qu’est-ce-que le Tiers?’ p. 53.

[128]Lacretelle, ‘Convocation des États-Généraux’; Bertrand de Molleville,’ Observations adressées à l’Assemblée des Notables.’

[129]‘Observations lues aux représentants du Tiers-État à Bordeaux,’ December, 1788.

[130]‘Requête du Tiers-État de la ville de Bourg,’ December, 1788.

[131]‘Délibérations de la ville de Nîmes en Conseil général.’

[132]‘Des conditions nécessaires à la légalité des États-Généraux.’

[133]‘De la députation aux États-Généraux.’

[134]‘Avis aux Français,’ 1788. A pamphlet written in 1788, but full of the true revolutionary spirit of 1792.

[135]Mounier himself was just as little able as the most violent revolutionists, who were soon to appear, to conceive the idea of rights derived from the past; of political usages and customs which are in reality laws, though unwritten, and only to be touched with caution, of interests to be respected and very gradually modified without causing a rupture between that which has been and that which is to be—the idea, in short, which is the first principle of practical and regular political liberty. See Mounier’s ‘Nouvelles Observations sur les États-Généraux.’

[136]The Marquis de Gouy d’Arcy in a ‘Mémoire au Roi en faveur de la noblesse Française, par un patricien ami du peuple,’ 1788.

[137]This appears from a correspondence of M—— with M. Necker, examined by me in the archives.

[138]For a fuller account of these Instructions, and a specimen of them, see Note XLIV. in the Appendix.

[139]These Notes and Illustrations were translated by the late Lady Duff Gordon.

[140]See last note.

[141]I.e.not corporations for trading purposes, but bodies like our livery companies.

Back to Index Next