fecution of all crimes of lefe-nation appertains to the representatives of the nation; that the affembly, in the conftitution which it is inceffantly occupied in forming, will point out the tribunal before which every perfon accused of fuch crimes, fhall be profecuted, that he may be judged according to the laws, and enjoy the advantage of a public trial." This ftring of refolutions was printed, and tranfmitted by all the members to their refpective conftituents. the Swifs guards, accufed of obeying the king's orders in oppofition to the people's wishes) who had been apprehended at Villeneaux, fhould be releafed. He drew a very interefting picture of all the horrors that fuch lawlefs proceedings would infpire, and entreated the affembly to exert every precaution in order to prevent a repetition of thofe calamities, which ought, if poffible, to be configned to perpetual oblivion; that fuch fanguinary executions, without trial, without form, and without law, were no less an outrage to juftice than to humanity, fubverfive of the public order, and fatal to the national honour. Thefe paffages of his fpeech were pronounced with a pathos fo truly affecting, as rendered them irrefiftible; every heart was moved, and every eye fuffufed with tears, while the only words which were heard throughout the hall, were those of "Mercy, mercy to the guilty; a general amnefty !"-At this moment the populace, who were waiting in the Place de Grêve, where the town-hall is fituated, loudly demanded M. Neckar; and while he went to a balcony, in order to gratify their wishes, the count de Clermont Tonnerre, who had accompanied him to Paris, propofed to the affembly to confirm, by a formal refolution, the generous vote of mercy and forgivenefs which he had framed. This motion was received and ratified with unanimous applaufe; and, on M. Neckar's return to the hall, the count de Cler mont Tonnerre read the refolution, which affected him most fenfibly, and excited his warmeft approbation. M. Neckar had, in the mean time, arrived at Versailles; and, after having paid his refpects to the king and the national affembly, he repaired to Paris, where he was received with every demonstration of enthusiastic joy. When he entered the townhall, he was feated in the chair belonging to the prefident of the reprefentatives of the commons of Paris, and was complimented on his ready compliance with the wishes of the nation, in ftrains of energetic eulogy, which being richly merited, could not but prove highly grateful to his mind. M. Neckar replied in a fpeech replete with fenfibility, and expreffive of the due fenfe he entertained of such distinguishing marks of attachment, efteem, and confidence, from a generous nation, of which he had ever profeffed his warmeft admiration, and to whofe service he devoted his life. He then took up a nobler fubject of difcuffion, and expatiated largely on thofe rights of humanity which every member of fociety is bound most religiously to obferve, with that animated eloquence, which a knowledge of his virtues rendered doubly impreffive; he conjured the reprefentatives of the commons of Paris to put an end In confequence of this refolution, to thofe fanguinary profcriptions, the affembly of electors difpatched at which even juftice fhudders, whofe two deputies and a guard to Ville. victims ever merit their fate. He neaux to conduct baron de Bezenval requested, in particular, that the to the frontiers of Switzerland. But baron de Bezenval (an officer of no fooner was this proceeding made known known to the feveral diftricts in Paris, than many of them fhewed trong marks of difapprobation. They obferved, that the national affembly had propofed to nominate a court, folely charged to take cognizance of crimes of high treafon, and to make the strictest enquiries into the confpiracy formed against the people; it was therefore aftonifhing, that a body of electors, without any official character, without any kind of delegation, without any legal authority, fhould fo haftily pronounce an amnesty and a general pardon. For themfelves, they fhould acknowledge no right which the people difavowed. This declaration intimidated the affembly of electors, who, far from daring to perfevere in a laudable measure, haftened to subscribe the following explanatory paper, replete with falfhood and equivocation: "The aflembly, at the requifition of fome districts, explaining, as far as neceflary, the refolution taken this morning, in confequence of the fpeech and requeft of M. Neckar, declare, that, in expreffing a fen timent of pardon and indulgence towards their enemies, they did not mean to include thofe who might be accufed or convicted of high-treafon to the nation; but, merely, that they would henceforward decide and punish only according to law; and, confequently, that they profcribe, agreeable to the tenor of the refolution, every act of violence and excefs that may tend to disturb the public tranquillity; and this refolution can bear no other conftruction, because the affembly from which it iffued, never fuppofed, nor could fuppofe, it had a right to pardon." This curious retractation was figned by the celebrated Parifian orator, M. Moreau de St. Mery, and by M. de la Vigne, prefident of the general affembly of the electors of the city of Paris, The affembly of the reprefentatives of the commons of Paris allo publifhed a fimilar declaration, f ing that they had recalled their or der for permitting baron de Bezenval to depart for Switzerland, and had taken the most efficacious measures to fecure this officer, until fuch time as the national affembly should have decided on the propriety of his detention, and the juftice of its motives. While thefe difgraceful tranfactions were paffing in the metropolis, a very warm debate had taken place in the national affembly, concerning the number requifite to conftitute a majority of votes; and it was at length decided that two hundred members fhould form a house, and that the plurality of voices in and above that number fhould be binding. On the following day the late proceedings of the Parifians were taken into confideration, when feveral members were weak-or rather awicked enough to infift that every man fufpected of harbouring bad intentions towards the nation, should receive exemplary punishment; by which means, a more intolerable fpecies of defpotifm would have been established, than that which they had recently abolished. But the converfation on this fubject being interrupted by the arrival of fome de puties from Paris, a regular debate enfued, after which it was refolved, that the national affembly, having heard the reports of the deputies of the reprefentatives of the commons of Paris, declared its approbation of the explanation given by the electors of Paris to their refolution of the thirtieth of July. (Thus did they condefcend to fanction the base retractation of a commendable act, a retractation, too, founded on falfehood!)-They refolved also, that if a generous and humane people (they had furely by this time for feited every juft claim to such flat tering epithets) wifhed for ever to prohibit all profcriptions, (they had never expreffed fuch a wifh!) it be came the reprefentatives of the nation to try and punish thofe who were accufed and convicted of having made any attempt against the fafety, liberty, and tranquillity of the public. (It became them to act with propriety and juftice, to regulate trials and convictions by the laws which exifted at the time when the crimes were committed, and not to inflict arbitrary punifhments warranted only by ex poft facto laws; moreover, if it became them to flight the dictates of mercy, and to punifh thofe who made any attempt against the liberty and tranquillity of the public, the inhabitants of Paris Thould indifputably have been the first objects of punishment!)-That, confequently, the national affembly perfifted in its former regulations repecting the refponfibility of minifters and thofe entrusted with the executive power, and the establish ment of a tribunal to decide on, and a committee to receive, informations, inftructions, and intelligence. They concluded their refolutions with an order to detain the baron de Bezenval, and conduct him to a place of fafety. Thefe proceedings certainly reflect no honour on the national affembly, as they tended to excite a fpirit of revenge, and to diffeminate fufpicion and miftruft at a time when they had just exhorted the people to a restoration of tranquillity, confidence, and peace. The confequence was fuch as might naturally have been expected; the minds of the public were kept in a state of continued alarm, and imaginary dan gers rofe up on every fide. At this conjuncture fome very warm debates were occafioned in the affembly by the feizure of fome letters, on the perfon of the baron de Caftelnau, the French refident at Geneva, VOL. II. among which was one from the duke of Dorfet, the English ambasfador at Verfailles, to the count d'Artois; which, as the prefident of the affembly had returned the packet to the mayor and permanent committee of Paris without reading it, gave rife to various reports not very favourable to England. When this delicate matter was taken into con fideration, very different opinions were entertained as to the most proper mode of proceeding; many of the members expatiated on the flagrant inconfiftency of violating epiftolary correfpondence, at a moment when the reprefentatives of the nation were exprefsly inftructed by their conftituents to provide a remedy for that abufe in future.-In the midst of these debates a letter was received by the prefident, from the baron de Caftelnau, informing him, that as foon as he knew the letters found on him had been laid before the prefident, he had written to the duke of Dorfet, entreating him to requeft they might be opened. The baron added, that on receiving the minister's orders for his return to Geneva, he asked for a delay of twelve days, with the view of paffing through Hainault to pay his refpects to the count d'Artois, to whofe perfon he was attached by his office (he had a place in the count's houfhold), as well as by the ties of gratitude. And he concluded by declaring, that the letters contained nothing but compliments on the part of the duke of Dorfet, and congratulations on the count's fafety. The prefident added, that he, himfelf, had received a letter from the duke of Dorfet, requesting an interview, which (doubtlefs through fear of offending the Parifian rab ble!) he had thought proper to decline. This fingular debate was at length terminated by the count de Clermont Tonnerre, who affured the affembly, that he had read the R letter letter in question at the town-hall of Paris, and that it did not contain one fyllable capable of being conftrued as injurious to the national intereft. But though this declaration was fufficient to convince the affembly of the futility of their fufpicions, it did not produce the fame effect on the wife inhabitants of Paris, who, having recently recovered the privilege of thinking, determined to exert it on every occafion. The refult of their meditations and difcuffions, in the prefent inftance, was a Sagacious difcovery, that England had entered into a treaty with the aristocratic party, who wished to reftore the ancient conftitution, and that the duke of Dorfet and the count d'Artois were the negociators between them. This idea being once adopted, a thoufand circumftances were fpeedily produced to fanction and confirm it. A pamphlet, falfely attributed to lord Camelford, (by M. Moreau de St. Mery, who had found fuch an imputation neceffary for the embellifhment of one of his patriotic harangues) had been recently publish ed, in order to prove that the claims of the people were in many instances unreafonable; a proof not very difficult to establish. This was deemed amply fufficient to fhew, that the fentiments of the English nation were hoftile to the popular caufe; and every poffible doubt on the fubject was removed when they heard of the equipment of commodore Goodall's fmall fquadron of obfervation at Portfmouth. It was then pofitively afferted, that the ariftocratic party had agreed to deliver the port of Breft to the English; in return for which, England was to affist them in diffolving the national affembly. The duke of Dorfet foon found an evident alteration in the conduct of the Parifians towards him; and when he was informed of the cause, he deemed it requifite to write to the count de Montmorin, one of the minifters, in order to contradict a report which he justly confidered as injurious to his honour; and as he was debarred from any direct communication with the national affembly, he requested the count would take upon himself to communicate to them the fubftance of his letter. This request was accordingly complied with; and in his letter, the duke fet forth, that he had heard reports from divers quarters, infinuating, that the court of England had affifted in fomenting the troubles which had afflicted the capital for fome time paft; that she had taken advantage of the present opportunity to take up arms against France; and that even a fleet was on the coast to co-operate with the difcontented party; that though fuch rumours were totally deftitute of truth, he understood they had reached the national affembly; and the Courier National, in its accounts of the fittings of the twenty-third and twenty-fourth of the month, had left fufpicions which were the more painful to him, as the count de Montmorin well knew how little the conduct of the English court had deferved them. He reminded the count of feveral converfations which had paffed between them at the beginning of June; the horrid plot that had been propofed relative to the port of Breft; the anxiety which he felt to put the king and his minifters on their guard; the answer of his court fo truly correfpondent with his own fentiments, and fo expreffive of horror at the base propofal which had been made. His grace farther obferved, that the court of England was earnestly bent on preferving the perfect har mony which fubfifted between the two nations; and in order to re ous infinuations, which had been fo induftriously propagated. He remarked, that it was of infinite importance to him that the national affembly fhould know his fentiments, that they fhould do juftice to thofe of his nation, and to the open conduct which he had invariably maintained towards France fince he had enjoyed the honour of being her organ. The duke concluded by faying, that he was the more defirous not a moment should be loft in communicating the contents of his letter, as he not only owed this explanation to his personal character, but to his country, and to the English refident at Paris, that they might be protect ed from the confequences of mifreprefentation. This letter having been read to the affembly, the prefident wrote to the count de Montmorin, defiring him to inform the duke of Dorfet, that the national affembly had expreffed the greatest fatisfaction at his conduct, and returned him thanks for the anxiety he evinced, in quality of ambaffador, to have his own fentiments, as well as thofe of his nation, communicated to them. A few days after this explanation took place, the duke of Dorfet fent a fecond letter to the count de Montmorin, to inform that minifter that he had just received from his court an exprefs approbation of his conduct, and a fpecial authority to exprefs, in the moft pofitive terms, the ardent defire of his Britannic majefty, and the British ministry, to cultivate and encourage the friendship and harmony which so happily degree, to the refloration of tranquillity in Europe. This letter was ordered, by the national affembly, to be printed and published, that every remaining prejudice against the English might be removed from the minds of the people. Having thus amicably terminated this delicate transaction, the affembly now refumed their dif cuffions on the interesting fubject of their new conftitution; but fo far from intending to take the ancient form of government for the bafis of their prefent regulations, many of the members infifted on the neceffity of refufing to the king the effential privilege of a veto in the formation of laws. Had this motion been carried, what would have become of their preliminary declaration, that the kingdom of France was a mo narchy ?-It would then, indeed, have had a nominal monarch at its head; but by depriving him of any fhare in the legislative power, and entrusting him only with the execution of their orders, he would not have been the chief magiftrate, but the menial fervant of the public. This dangerous and unconstitutional doctrine, however, was fortunately crushed in its birth. Still determined to fhew that they were wholly unconfined by the fhackles of precedent, and their proceedings unbiaffed by the conduct of the ftates general of the kingdom, convened in an early period of the monarchy, they refolved to begin ab ovo, by a declaration of the rights of man, On this backnied topic, every argument, phyfical and metaphyfical, which has` |