Books: Memoirs of Napoleon Bonaparte, V7

L >> Louis Antoine Fauvelet de Bourrienne >> Memoirs of Napoleon Bonaparte, V7

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

This etext was produced by David Widger

MEMOIRS OF NAPOLEON BONAPARTE, VOLUME 7.

by LOUIS ANTOINE FAUVELET DE BOURRIENNE

His Private Secretary

Edited by R. W. Phipps
Colonel, Late Royal Artillery

1891

CONTENTS:
CHAPTER XIX. to CHAPTER XXVI. 1803-1804

CHAPTER XIX.

1803.

Mr. Pitt--Motive of his going out of office--Error of the English
Government--Pretended regard for the Bourbons--Violation of the
treaty of Amiens--Reciprocal accusations--Malta--Lord Whitworth's
departure--Rome and Carthage--Secret satisfaction of Bonaparte--
Message to the Senate, the Legislative Body, and the Tribunate--
The King of England's renunciation of the title of King of France--
Complaints of the English Government--French agents in British ports
--Views of France upon Turkey--Observation made by Bonaparte to the
Legislative Body--Its false interpretation--Conquest of Hanover--
The Duke of Cambridge caricatured--The King of England and the
Elector of Hanover--First address to the clergy--Use of the word
"Monsieur"--The Republican weeks and months.

One of the circumstances which foretold the brief duration of the peace
of Amiens was, that Mr. Pitt was out of office at the time of its
conclusion. I mentioned this to Bonaparte, and I immediately perceived
by his hasty "What do you say?" that my observation had been heard--but
not liked. It did not, however, require any extraordinary shrewdness to
see the true motive of Mr. Pitt's retirement. That distinguished
statesman conceived that a truce under the name of a peace was
indispensable for England; but, intending to resume the war with France
more fiercely than ever, he for a while retired from office, and left to
others the task of arranging the peace; but his intention was to mark his
return to the ministry by the renewal of the implacable hatred he had
vowed against France. Still, I have always thought that the conclusion
of peace, however necessary to England, was an error of the Cabinet of
London. England alone had never before acknowledged any of the
governments which had risen up in France since the Revolution; and as the
past could not be blotted out, a future war, however successful to
England, could not take from Bonaparte's Government the immense weight it
had acquired by an interval of peace. Besides, by the mere fact of the
conclusion of the treaty England proved to all Europe that the
restoration of the Bourbons was merely a pretext, and she defaced that
page of her history which might have shown that she was actuated by
nobler and more generous sentiments than mere hatred of France. It is
very certain that the condescension of England in treating with the First
Consul had the effect of rallying round him a great many partisans of the
Bourbons, whose hopes entirely depended on the continuance of war between
Great Britain and France. This opened the eyes of the greater number,
namely, those who could not see below the surface, and were not
previously aware that the demonstrations of friendship so liberally made
to the Bourbons by the European Cabinets, and especially by England, were
merely false pretences, assumed for the purpose of disguising, beneath
the semblance of honourable motives, their wish to injure France, and to
oppose her rapidly increasing power.

When the misunderstanding took place, France and England might have
mutually reproached each other, but justice was apparently on the side of
France. It was evident that England, by refusing to evacuate Malta, was
guilty of a palpable infraction of the treaty of Amiens, while England
could only institute against France what in the French law language is
called a suit or process of tendency. But it must be confessed that this
tendency on the part of France to augment her territory was very evident,
for the Consular decrees made conquests more promptly than the sword.
The union of Piedmont with France had changed the state of Europe. This
union, it is true, was effected previously to the treaty of Amiens; but
it was not so with the states of Parma and Piacenza, Bonaparte having by
his sole authority constituted himself the heir of the Grand Duke,
recently deceased. It may therefore be easily imagined how great was
England's uneasiness at the internal prosperity of France and the
insatiable ambition of her ruler; but it is no less certain that, with
respect to Malta, England acted with decidedly bad faith; and this bad
faith appeared in its worst light from the following circumstance:--
It had been stipulated that England should withdraw her troops from Malta
three months after the signing of the treaty, yet more than a year had
elapsed, and the troops were still there. The order of Malta was to be
restored as it formerly was; that is to say, it was to be a sovereign and
independent order, under the protection of the Holy See. The three
Cabinets of Vienna, Berlin, and St. Petersburg were to guarantee the
execution of the treaty of Amiens. The English Ambassador, to excuse the
evasions of his Government, pretended that the Russian Cabinet concurred
with England in the delayed fulfilment of the conditions of the treaty;
but at the very moment he was making that excuse a courier arrived from
the Cabinet of St. Petersburg bearing despatches completely, at variance
with the assertion of Lord Whitworth. His lordship left Paris on the
night of the 12th May 1803, and the English Government, unsolicited, sent
passports to the French embassy in London. The news of this sudden
rupture made the English console fall four per cent., but did not
immediately produce such a retrograde effect on the French funds, which
were then quoted at fifty-five francs;--a very high point, when it is
recollected that they were at seven or eight francs on the eve of the
18th Brumaire.

In this state of things France proposed to the English Government to
admit of the mediation of Russia; but as England had declared war in
order to repair the error she committed in concluding peace, the
proposition was of course rejected. Thus the public gave the First
Consul credit for great moderation and a sincere wish for peace. Thus
arose between England and France a contest resembling those furious wars
which marked the reigns of King John and Charles VII. Our beaux esprits
drew splendid comparisons between the existing state of things and the
ancient rivalry of Carthage and Rome, and sapiently concluded that, as
Carthage fell, England must do so likewise.

Bonaparte was at St. Cloud when Lord Whitworth left Paris. A fortnight
was spent in useless attempts to renew negotiations. War, therefore, was
the only alternative. Before he made his final preparations the First
Consul addressed a message to the Senate, the Legislative Body, and the
Tribunate. In this message he mentioned the recall of the English
Ambassador, the breaking out of hostilities, the unexpected message of
the King of England to his Parliament, and the armaments which
immediately ensued in the British ports. "In vain," he said, "had France
tried every means to induce England to abide by the treaty. She had
repelled every overture, and increased the insolence of her demands.
France," he added, "will not submit to menaces, but will combat for the
faith of treaties, and the honour of the French name, confidently
trusting that the result of the contest will be such as she has a right
to expect from the justice of her cause and the courage of her people."

This message was dignified, and free from that vein of boasting in which
Bonaparte so frequently indulged. The reply of the Senate was
accompanied by a vote of a ship of the line, to be paid for out of the
Senatorial salaries. With his usual address Bonaparte, in acting for
himself, spoke in the name of the people, just as he did in the question
of the Consulate for life. But what he then did for his own interests
turned to the future interests of the Bourbons. The very treaty which
had just been broken off gave rise to a curious observation. Bonaparte,
though not yet a sovereign, peremptorily required the King of England to
renounce the empty title of King of France, which was kept up as if to
imply that old pretensions were not yet renounced. The proposition was
acceded to, and to this circumstance was owing the disappearance of the
title of King of France from among the titles of the King of England,
when the treaty of Paris was concluded on the return of the Bourbons.

The first grievance complained of by England was the prohibition of
English merchandise, which had been more rigid since the peace than
during the war. The avowal of Great Britain on this point might well
have enabled her to dispense with any other subject of complaint; for the
truth is, she was alarmed at the aspect of our internal prosperity, and
at the impulse given to our manufactures. The English Government had
hoped to obtain from the First Consul such a commercial treaty as would
have proved a death-blow to our rising trade; but Bonaparte opposed this,
and from the very circumstance of his refusal he might easily have
foreseen the rupture at which he affected to be surprised. What I state
I felt at the time, when I read with great interest all the documents
relative to this great dispute between the two rival nations, which
eleven years afterwards was decided before the walls of Paris.

It was evidently disappointment in regard to a commercial treaty which
created the animosity of the English Government, as that circumstance was
alluded to, by way of reproach, in the King of England's declaration.
In that document it was complained that France had sent a number of
persona into the ports of Great Britain and Ireland in the character of
commercial agents, which character, and the privileges belonging to it,
they could only have acquired by a commercial treaty. Such was, in my
opinion, the real cause of the complaints of England; but as it would
have seemed too absurd to make it the ground of a declaration of war, she
enumerated other grievances, viz., the union of Piedmont and of the
states of Parma and Piacenza with France, and the continuance of the
French troops in Holland. A great deal was said about the views and
projects of France with respect to Turkey, and this complaint originated
in General Sebastiani's mission to Egypt. On that point I can take upon
me to say that the English Government was not misinformed. Bonaparte too
frequently spoke to are of his ideas respecting the East, and his project
of attacking the English power in India, to leave any doubt of his ever
having renounced them. The result of all the reproaches which the two
Governments addressed to each other was, that neither acted with good
faith.

The First Consul, in a communication to the Legislative Body on the state
of France and on her foreign relations; had said, "England, single-
handed, cannot cope with France." This sufficed to irritate the
susceptibility of English pride, and the British Cabinet affected to
regard it as a threat. However, it was no such thing. When Bonaparte
threatened, his words were infinitely more energetic. The passage above
cited was merely au assurance to France; and if we only look at the past
efforts and sacrifices made by England to stir up enemies to France on
the Continent, we may be justified in supposing that her anger at
Bonaparte's declaration arose from a conviction of its truth. Singly
opposed to France, England could doubtless have done her much harm,
especially by assailing the scattered remnants of her navy; but she could
have done nothing against France on the Continent. The two powers,
unaided by allies, might have continued long at war without any
considerable acts of hostility.

The first effect of the declaration of war by England was the invasion of
Hanover by the French troops under General Mortier. The telegraphic
despatch by which this news was communicated to Paris was as laconic as
correct, and contained, in a few words, the complete history of the
expedition. It ran as follows: "The French are masters of the Electorate
of Hanover, and the enemy's army are made prisoners of war." A day or
two after the shop windows of the print-sellers were filled with
caricatures on the English, and particularly on the Duke of Cambridge.
I recollect seeing one in which the Duke was represented reviewing his
troops mounted on a crab. I mention these trifles because, as I was then
living entirely at leisure, in the Rue Hauteville, I used frequently to
take a stroll on the Boulevards, where I was sometimes much amused with
these prints; and I could not help remarking, that in large cities such
triffles have more influence on the public mind than is usually supposed.

The First Consul thought the taking of the prisoners in Hanover a good
opportunity to exchange them for those taken from us by the English navy.
A proposition to this effect was accordingly made; but the English
Cabinet was of opinion that, though the King of England was also Elector
of Hanover, yet there was no identity between the two Governments, of
both which George III. was the head. In consequence of this subtle
distinction the proposition for the exchange of prisoners fell to the
ground. At this period nothing could exceed the animosity of the two
Governments towards each other, and Bonaparte, on the declaration of war,
marked his indignation by an act which no consideration can justify;
I allude to the order for the arrest of all the English in France--
a truly barbarious measure; for; can anything be more cruel and unjust
than to visit individuals with the vengeance due to the Government whose
subjects they may happen to be? But Bonaparte, when under the influence
of auger, was never troubled by scruples.

I must here notice the fulfilment of a remark Bonaparte often made, use
of to me during the Consulate. "You shall see, Bourrienne," he would
say," what use I will make of the priests."

War being declared, the First Consul, in imitation of the most Christian
kings of olden times, recommended the success of his arms to the prayers
of the faithful through the medium of the clergy. To this end he
addressed a circular letter, written in royal style, to the Cardinals,
Archbishops, and Bishops of France.

It was as follows:

MONSIEUR--The motives of the present war are known throughout
Europe. The bad faith of the King of England, who has violated his
treaties by refusing to restore Malta to the order of St. John of
Jerusalem, and attacked our merchant vessels without a previous
declaration of war, together with the necessity of a just defence,
forced us to have recourse to arms. I therefore wish you to order
prayers to be offered up, in order to obtain the benediction of
Heaven on our enterprises. The proofs I have received of your zeal
for the public service give me an assurance of your readiness to
conform with my wishes.

Given at St. Cloud, 18 Prairial, an XI. (7th June 1803).

(Signed) BONAPARTE.

This letter was remarkable in more than one respect. It astonished most
of his old brothers-in-arms, who turned it into ridicule; observing that
Bonaparte needed no praying to enable him to conquer Italy twice over.
The First Consul, however, let them laugh on, and steadily followed the
line he had traced out. His letter was admirably calculated to please
the Court of Rome, which he wished should consider him in the light of
another elder son of the Church. The letter was, moreover, remarkable
for the use of the word "Monsieur," which the First Consul now employed
for the first time in an act destined for publicity. This circumstance
would seem to indicate that he considered Republican designations
incompatible with the forms due to the clergy: the clergy were especially
interested in the restoration of monarchy. It may, perhaps, be thought
that I dwell too much on trifles; but I lived long enough in Bonaparte's
confidence to know the importance he attached to trifles. The First
Consul restored the old names of the days of the week, while he allowed
the names of the months, as set down in the Republican calendar, to
remain. He commenced by ordering the Moniteur to be dated "Saturday,"
such a day of "Messidor." "See," said he one day, "was there ever such
an inconsistency? We shall be laughed at! But I will do away with the
Messidor. I will efface all the inventions of the Jacobins."

The clergy did not disappoint the expectations of the First Consul. They
owed him much already, and hoped for still more from him. The letter to
the Bishops, etc., was the signal for a number of circulars full of
eulogies on Bonaparte.

These compliments were far from displeasing to the First Consul, who had
no objection to flattery though he despised those who meanly made
themselves the medium of conveying it to him. Duroc once told me that
they had all great difficulty in preserving their gravity when the cure
of a parish in Abbeville addressed Bonaparte one day while he was on his
journey to the coast. "Religion," said the worthy cure, with pompous
solemnity, "owes to you all that it is, we owe to you all that we are;
and I, too, owe to you all that I am."

--[Not so fulsome as some of the terms used a year later when
Napoleon was made Emperor. "I am what I am," was placed over a seat
prepared for the Emperor. One phrase, "God made Napoleon and then
rested," drew from Narbonne the sneer that it would have been better
if the Deity had rested sooner. "Bonaparte," says Joseph de
Maistre, "has had himself described in his papers as the 'Messenger
of God.' Nothing more true. Bonaparte comes straight from heaven,
like a thunderbolt.' (Saints-Benve, Caureries, tome iv. p. 203.]

CHAPTER XX.

1803.

Presentation of Prince Borghese to Bonaparte--Departure for Belgium
Revival of a royal custom--The swans of Amiens-- Change of formula
in the acts of Government--Company of performers in Bonaparte's
suite--Revival of old customs--Division of the institute into four
classes--Science and literature--Bonaparte's hatred of literary men
--Ducis--Bernardin de Saint-Pierre--Chenier and Lemercier--
Explanation of Bonaparte's aversion to literature--Lalande and his
dictionary--Education in the hands of Government--M. de Roquelaure,
Archbishop of Malines.

In the month of April 1803 Prince Borghese, who was destined one day to
become Bonaparte's brother-in-law by marrying the widow of Leclerc, was
introduced to the First Consul by Cardinal Caprara.

About the end of June Bonaparte proceeded, with Josephine, on his journey
to Belgium and the seaboard departments. Many curious circumstances were
connected with this journey, of which I was informed by Duroc after the
First Consul's return. Bonaparte left Paris on the 24th of June, and
although it was not for upwards of a year afterwards that his brow was
encircled with the imperial-diadem, everything connected with the journey
had an imperial air. It was formerly the custom, when the Kings of
France entered the ancient capital of Picardy, for the town of Amiens to
offer them in homage some beautiful swans. Care was taken to revive this
custom, which pleased Bonaparte greatly, because it was treating him like
a King. The swans were accepted, and sent to Paris to be placed in the
basin of the Tuileries, in order to show the Parisians the royal homage
which the First Consul received when absent from the capital.

It was also during this journey that Bonaparte began to date his decrees
from the places through which he passed. He had hitherto left a great
number of signatures in Paris, in order that he might be present, as it
were, even during his absence, by the acts of his Government. Hitherto
public acts had been signed in the name of the Consuls of the Republic.
Instead of this formula, he substituted the name of the Government of the
Republic. By means of this variation, unimportant as it might appear,
the Government was always in the place where the First Consul happened to
be. The two other Consuls were now mere nullities, even in appearance.
The decrees of the Government, which Cambaceres signed during the
campaign of Marengo, were now issued from all the towns of France and
Belgium which the First Consul visited during his six weeks' journey.
Having thus centred the sole authority of the Republic in himself, the
performers of the theatre of the Republic became, by a natural
consequence, his; and it was quite natural that they should travel in his
suite, to entertain the inhabitants of the towns in which he stopped by
their performances. But this was not all. He encouraged the renewal of
a host of ancient customs. He sanctioned the revival of the festival of
Joan of Arc at Orleans, and he divided the Institute into four classes,
with the intention of recalling the recollection of the old academies,
the names of which, however, he rejected, in spite of the wishes and
intrigues of Suard and the Abby Morellet, who had gained over Lucien upon
this point.

However, the First Consul did not give to the classes of the Institute
the rank which they formerly possessed as academies. He placed the class
of sciences in the first rank, and the old French Academy in the second
rank. It must be acknowledged that, considering the state of literature
and science at that period, the First Consul did not make a wrong
estimate of their importance.

Although the literature of France could boast of many men of great
talent, such as La Harpe, who died during the Consulate, Ducis, Bernardin
de Saint-Pierre, Chenier, and Lemercier, yet they could not be compared
with Lagrange, Laplace, Monge, Fourcroy, Berthollet, and Cuvier, whose
labours have so prodigiously extended the limits of human knowledge. No
one, therefore, could murmur at seeing the class of sciences in the
Institute take precedence of its elder sister. Besides, the First Consul
was not sorry to show, by this arrangement, the slight estimation in
which he held literary men. When he spoke to me respecting them he
called them mere manufacturers of phrases. He could not pardon them for
excelling him in a pursuit in which he had no claim to distinction.
I never knew a man more insensible than Bonaparte to the beauties of
poetry or prose. A certain degree of vagueness, which was combined with
his energy of mind, led him to admire the dreams of Ossian, and his
decided character found itself, as it were, represented in the elevated
thoughts of Corneille. Hence his almost exclusive predilection for these
two authors With this exception, the finest works in our literature were
in his opinion merely arrangements of sonorous words, void of sense, and
calculated only for the ear.

Bonaparte's contempt, or, more properly speaking, his dislike of
literature, displayed itself particularly in the feeling he cherished
towards some men of distinguished literary talent. He hated Chenier, and
Ducis still more. He could not forgive Chenier for the Republican
principles which pervaded his tragedies; and Ducis excited in him; as if
instinctively, an involuntary hatred. Ducis, on his part, was not
backward in returning the Consul's animosity, and I remember his writing
some verses which were inexcusably violent, and overstepped all the
bounds of truth. Bonaparte was so singular a composition of good and bad
that to describe him as he was under one or other of these aspects would
serve for panegyric or satire without any departure from truth.
Bonaparte was very fond of Bernardin Saint-Pierre's romance of 'Paul and
Virginia', which he had read in his boyhood. I remember that he one day
tried to read 'Les etudes de la Nature', but at the expiration of a
quarter of an hour he threw down the book, exclaiming, "How can any one
read such silly stuffy. It is insipid and vapid; there is nothing in it.
These are the dreams of a visionary! What is nature? The thing is vague
and unmeaning. Men and passions are the subjects to write about--there
is something there for study. These fellows are good for nothing under
any government. I will, however, give them pensions, because I ought to
do so, as Head of the State. They occupy and amuse the idle. I will
make Lagrange a Senator--he has a head."

Although Bonaparte spoke so disdainfully of literary men it must not be
taken for granted that he treated them ill. On the contrary, all those
who visited at Malmaison were the objects of his attention, and even
flattery. M. Lemercier was one of those who came most frequently, and
whom Bonaparte received with the greatest pleasure. Bonaparte treated
M. Lemercier with great kindness; but he did not like him. His character
as a literary man and poet, joined to a polished frankness, and a mild
but inflexible spirit of republicanism, amply sufficed to explain
Bonaparte's dislike. He feared M. Lemercier and his pen; and, as
happened more than once, he played the part of a parasite by flattering
the writer. M. Lemercier was the only man I knew who refused the cross
of the Legion of Honour.

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8