THE 
 
 OFFICIAL DEFENCE 
 
 OF 
 
 GENERAL MOREAU 
 
 THE TRIBUNAL AT PARIS, 
 
 WHEREIN 
 
 THAT GENERAL'S INNOCENCE IS MOST FULLY 
 ESTABLISHED. 
 
 TRANSLATED FROM THE ORIGINAL FRENCH, 
 
 WHICH HAS BEEN SUPPRESSED IN FRANCE. 
 
 HonDon : 
 
 PRINTED FOR LONGMAN, HURST, REES, AND ORME, NO. SQ, 
 
 PATERNOSTER-ROW; AND SOLD BY J. HATCHARD, 
 
 PICCADILLY; W. MILLER, BOND-STBEET; 
 
 AND W. J. AND J. RICHARDSON, 
 
 ROYAL EXCHANGE. 
 
 1804. 
 
THE 
 
 WILLIAM R. PERKINS 
 
 UBRARY 
 
 OF 
 
 DUKE UNIVERSITY 
 
 Rare Books 
 
 T. Gillet, Printer, Salisbury-Square. 
 
&in o 
 
 TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE. 
 
 MOREAU is fully justified by his able ad- 
 vocates. Nothing need be added to what they 
 have advanced in favour of him. 
 
 In publishing this work in another country, 
 the innocence or guilt of Moreau is however 
 of less importance than some of the facts 
 that have come forth on the trial of that 
 remarkable man. 
 
 It appears certain, that there are a number 
 of men, who were once in affluence, but are 
 now in indigence,who are attached to the cause 
 of the family of Bourbon, and who are perpe- 
 tually forming plans for its restoration ; that 
 A 2 
 
( iv ) 
 
 they deceive themselves as to their means, and 
 they frequently deceive those v^ho listen to 
 them, as to their intentions. 
 
 Amongst those are some men, no doubt, of 
 the purest honour, and most tried fidelity ; 
 but there are many others, who, under a dis- 
 guise easily assumed, and with the language and 
 professions analogous to it, begin by obtain- 
 ing confidence as men of honour, and pity as 
 the unfortunate adherents of a just cause. 
 
 Who can rend the Vindication of Moreau 
 without trembling at the determined villainy 
 of Holand ? 
 
 Who that has read the Vindication of Mo- 
 reau will wonder at the accusations brought 
 against Mr. Drake and Mr. Smith*, the repre- 
 
 * There can be no doubt that the emigrant, who obtain- 
 ed a note of invitation from Mr. Drake to dine with him, 
 merely as a matter of civility, copied the handwriting, 
 and fabricated a plot. If that gentleman condescends to 
 vindicate himself, the trial of Moreau will certainly render 
 the task more easy than it otherwise would be. 
 
( V ) 
 
 sentatives of his Britannic Majesty at two of 
 the courts of Germany ? 
 
 The murder of the Duke d'Enghein is 
 now no longer an enigma. 
 
 The tranquilHty of Europe, and the safety 
 of individuals, are in danger so long as the 
 
 greatest villains can put on the disguise of the 
 most honourable men ; and after sainins!; a 
 little confidence, fabricate a plot, and become 
 informers to obtain reward or avoid punish- 
 ment. 
 
 A single note of civility, an invitation to 
 a dinner, or a message to a third person, given 
 by a man who is marked out by the French 
 Government for destruction, serves in the 
 hands of one of those intriguing impostors 
 as a sufficient basis for an accusation. 
 
 Armed with this fabricated conspiracy, the 
 general accuser of France makes an exaggerated 
 report. If it is against an individual within 
 their power, he is tried and condemned : if he 
 is beyond their territory, but within their 
 
{ vi ) 
 
 reach, he is seized by stratagem or by force ;' 
 and if he is an English ambassador, he is pub- 
 licly accused to all the members of the diplo- 
 matic corps. 
 
 These circumstances merit attention, and 
 the example of Moreau may be of great utility 
 to other individuals, and perhaps to nations^ 
 The lesson has at least the advantage of being 
 very legible, and certainly the subject is 
 abundantly important. 
 
 To speak plainly, many of the French emi- 
 grants, exiled from • their country, ruined in 
 fortune, and reduced to want, have turned the 
 whole of their talents, their energy, their na- 
 tural disposition for intrigue, into a general 
 effort for reinstating themselves and their royal 
 master, at the expence of all those who will 
 listen to their tales. The peace of kings and 
 kingdoms, as well as that of individuals, is 
 with them a m.atter of no consideration ; but 
 to others it is a matter of serious consideration, 
 
( vil ) 
 
 that their numbers are great, their cause des- 
 perate arid their efforts incessant and imiversal. 
 It is curious to observe, how a few obscure 
 individuals, embarking in a popular cause, may 
 mislead the Public. We cannot help, when 
 we read the pretended meetings that never 
 took place, and the tales fabricated, in order 
 that Lajolais, a man cf no abiHties, might put 
 a few guineas into his pocket with ease, recol- 
 lecting the brilliant prospects held up here of 
 the restoration of the House of Bourbon by 
 General Moreau. 
 
 The horrible criminality of Roland is, how- 
 ever, greatly outdone by that of those who in- 
 terrogated him. It is impossible to have a 
 more complete specimen of the proceedings of 
 what are termed courts of justice in France. 
 It is impossible to read any thing that can give 
 us a higher opinion of the courts of justice in- 
 England. 
 
 The trial of Moreau is of the greater impor- 
 tance, that it is an authentic proof of the cor- 
 
( viii ) 
 
 ruption of the courts of justice in France, and 
 of its Government, whilst it proves that the 
 greater part of our information relative to the 
 state of that country is undeserving of confi- 
 dence or even of attention. 
 
 Pichegru certainly appears to have been de- 
 ceived either by Roland or Lajolais, and pro- 
 bably by both, and his disappointment seems 
 to have been extreme, when he found that 
 Moreau would enter into none of his views. 
 We shall say nothing of the errors that 
 crowned heads have fallen into in the same 
 way ; but recall to memory the false informa- 
 tion given to the Duke of Brunswick before 
 he invaded France — the false information that 
 preceded the expeditions of Quiberon and the 
 Helder. If any thing more is necessary, let 
 the reader consult Machiavel on that impor- 
 tant subject. 
 
DEFENCE 
 
 GENERAL MOREAU. 
 
 W FTEN it was known that Moreau was 
 arrested, and the reason assigned, the anx- 
 iety and consternation were great beyond 
 description. 
 
 This was natural ; he was either guilty or 
 innocent. Was he guilty? what! Moreau, 
 that modest warrior, who was only great 
 at the head of his army, and on the day of 
 battle; everywhere else so simple in his 
 manners, that his companions in arms called 
 him the man of Plutarch ; Moreau, who 
 was always thought so free from views of 
 personal aggrandisement; that man who 
 never dreamt of raising himself to power 
 at any of those revolutiouary periods when. 
 
( 2 ) 
 
 amidst the changes of feeble governments, 
 all France would have considered the ambi- 
 tion of General Moreau as an advantage; 
 that man who, in the midst of victories, 
 was never heard to utter a wish but for the 
 happiness of his country ! The pleasures of 
 private life w^re the only ones he longed 
 for in addition to his glory. 
 
 That a man so full of moderation, that 
 after having been a hero amongst heroes, 
 should bemean himself so far, as to become 
 a traitor to the cause and the government 
 he had so often and so long defended. The 
 most brilliant virtue is then nothing but a 
 continued groveling hypocrisy, since r>loreau 
 is become perfidious. 
 
 Was he innocent ? What then are we to 
 think of a government, till now so deserv- 
 ing of our confidence and affection, but 
 which all at once, deviating from that regard 
 which it professes for individual liberty, 
 loads with chains one of its greatest warriors; 
 
( 3 ) 
 
 and rewards v>lth accusations, a general 
 rendered sacred by the ennnent services he 
 had performed, tlie victories he had gained, 
 and the civic crowns he had deserved i\ r the 
 armies he had saved, and the vast countries 
 he had united to the French empire. What 
 safety then has the common citizen, if one 
 
 of the most illustrious of rdl let us 
 
 stop. The idea is too frightful, it must be 
 rejected, but wliile we reject that, we must 
 equally give up the afliicting idea, that 
 General Moreau can have tarnished his 
 glory. 
 
 Moreau has not forsaken his glory: he is 
 innocent. 
 
 The government has not forsalicn its jus- 
 tice, but it has been alarmed ; Moreau in 
 prison will be what he always was at the 
 head of armies, he will be the true friend of 
 his country, seeing nothing else, and incapa-* 
 ble of sacrificing the public weal to any per- 
 sonal consideration. 
 
 B 2 
 
( 4 ) 
 
 Just towards himself, he will not betray 
 his cause, or abandon his defence; and just 
 to his country, he will avow that the mea- 
 sures that have been taken, were in conse-r 
 quence of suspicions that required to be 
 done away. 
 
 They are, or they ought to be already 
 done away; the explanations which he has 
 given wall be published with plainness and 
 simplicity. We do not demand mercy, 
 we only request attention, to which we 
 have so many claims. 
 
 For these four last months, Moreau is 
 denounced by the report of the grand judge, 
 by placards in the streets, by the orders of 
 the generals to the armies they command, 
 by the addresses of public bodies and a great 
 number of the military. 
 
 No doubt, this zeal, though perhaps a lit- 
 tle irregular, is a proof of its laudable attach- 
 ment to government, but it does not prove, 
 it cannot prove any thing more. Above 
 
( 5 ) 
 
 all, it proves nothing against the person 
 accused. Generals are not judges. Their 
 very situation prevents them from being 
 able to enter into the merits of a criminal 
 question, and to form an opinion. Ts'elthcr 
 is he judged by the ministers or their pla- 
 cards, or justice and independence would be 
 no more. Neither is he judged by the ad- 
 dresses, vain echoes of popular accusation; 
 the distance of place, the signatures without 
 designation, render it impossible to attach to 
 them any degree of authority; they shew 
 the horror which their authors very natu- 
 rally feel for a crime like that which is sup- 
 posed to have taken place, but they go no 
 way to establish the fact, of the proofs of 
 which they must be totally Ignorant. 
 
 Nevertheless those orders, those placards, 
 and those addresses exist. They are in all 
 the iiewspapers, on all the walls, and in 
 every hand; for these four months, France 
 has resounded w^ith them; for these four 
 
( fi ) 
 
 months, every vaice that has been raised, 
 has spoken against General Moreau; not one 
 has been heard in his favour except that of 
 his generous brother. As for himrclf, in a 
 soHtary cell, denied the access of his family, 
 friends or counsel, he has been forced to be 
 silent, whilst his accusers were so loud; he 
 could not combat prejudice v\hen it Vvas 
 new; he could not answer accusations one 
 by one as they appeared, and before they 
 had formed a mass of crimination, nor give 
 the lie to falsities at the beginning, and be- 
 fore they had seduced the credulous, nor 
 ^t right the tales which malignity had in- 
 vented, which it is more easy to guard 
 against than to efface, nor explain those 
 parts of his conduct wdiich gave rise to rash 
 and fiise opinions. In a \\ord, all have 
 united to accuse Moreau; hitherto, no one 
 has had the means of defending him. Such, 
 we know, is the nature of a criminal process; 
 but that misfortune vras not the less severe 
 
( 7 ) 
 
 on him. Who is ignorant of the effect pro- 
 duced by such a reunion of voices against a 
 man of the greatest worth, who is reduced 
 in silence to submit, particularly after such 
 a revolution, where so many men have be- 
 trayed the cause, that suspicion is a natural 
 consequence ? 
 
 It is then necessary to hear the defence of 
 General Moreau with attentive recollection. 
 He asks that justice not in the name of his 
 victories, but in the name of his innocence. 
 He asks it also from a consideration that 
 ought to be dear to society; that is, the wel- 
 fare and security of every individual, Th^ 
 example of Geneiai Moreau proves but too 
 well one great truth. Amongst those whom 
 Providence has condemned to live in ages of 
 heroism at brilliant but terrible periods; when 
 the human species, tired of long repose, rises 
 up with a general movement, and gives it- 
 self up to great disorders; when empires are 
 overturned, and the face of things undergoes 
 
( 8 ) 
 
 a change ; when thrones arc erected, and 
 others moulder into dust ; when every thing 
 that was yesterday great and splendid is to- 
 day in obscurity and laid low ; when, by the 
 caprice of fortune, the most brilliant desti- 
 nies become the most miserable in a mo- 
 ment, and finish by inspiring pity, even in 
 the breast of an enemy. At such a moment 
 who can say that he will not some time be 
 in the situation of an accused person ? 
 
 Let every one look to his ovv^n situation, 
 and a very pardonable feeling for himself 
 will incline him to throw off the prejudice 
 lie may have conceived against General 
 Moreau. Let every thing be forgotten but 
 what is brought forward in the regular 
 course of justice; or rather let him remember 
 them, that he may be the more determined 
 to reject whatever comes through an irre- 
 gular and illicit channel. In fine, let him 
 come to the trial free from prejudice, and 
 listen to the defence with that regard for 
 
( 9 ) 
 
 presumed innocence, and that angel-like 
 impartiality which he will one day perhaps 
 invoke in his own cause, after having ful- 
 filled his duty in that of other men. 
 
 The advocates of General Moreau have 
 not sufficient time to recount the circum- 
 stances of his public life. They are known 
 to France and to Europe, It will then be 
 sufficient to advert to circumstances which 
 are more or less connected with the accusa- 
 tion. 
 
 Having arrived at the rank of general of 
 brigade, Moreau served in that quality in 
 the army of the North with 25,000 men 
 under his command, when, in the year 2, 
 Pichegru took the chief command. Ge- 
 neral Moreau never knew Pichegru till then^ 
 and was not educated by him, as has been 
 stated in some pamphlets. He, however, 
 soon conceived a great esteem for the talents 
 of that general, then one of the best in Eu-!- 
 rope ; and to this esteem was added per&onal 
 Q 
 
( 10 ) 
 
 attachment. But that Connection was riot 
 of long duration; for In the year 3 Pichegru 
 was, at the end of eight months, removed 
 to the army of the Rhine, and Moreau suc- 
 ceeded in that of the Nortji. 
 
 Peace with Prussia hiving given him sbrhe 
 months repose in Holland, and Pichegrtt 
 being called to the directory in the year 4, 
 Moreau succeeded him on the Rhine. He 
 took the command on the 1st Messidor of 
 the year 4; and on the 6th he passed the 
 Rhine. No Frenchman can have forgot 
 how, under his command, that army march- 
 ed from victory to victory. All must re-- 
 member the battles of Renchen and Fried- 
 berg, which made him master of Suabia, 
 Bavaria, and the circles of the Upper 
 Rhine. The defeat of the army of the 
 Sambre and the Meuse, which quitted him 
 at a hundred leagues distance from Franco, 
 in the centre of Germany, when surrounded 
 by two great armies of the enemy, only 
 
( 11 ) 
 
 served to add to his glory. All Europe 
 thought him lost, and France already de- 
 plored the loss of a valiant army, and of a 
 general whom that campaign had placed in 
 the rank of great commanders. 
 
 But Moieau was w^ith the French army. 
 He performed that skilful retreat which pro- 
 -duc^d more than glory. He saved the lives 
 of men who were besides brave, and be- 
 longed to France. x\l'ter having at Bibe- 
 nach defeated the enemy that followed him, 
 he passed with great slaughter through the 
 army that had the foolish temerity to inter., 
 ccpt his retreat ; and on the 5th Brumaire, 
 passing the Rhine at Huningue and Brisack, 
 he brough,t with hini about 7000 prisoners 
 taken from the enemy, 40 pieces of cannon, 
 and standards; and what was still a bcttei; 
 service, the army returned without much 
 loss from the heart of Germany, whence it 
 was scarcely ever expected to return. 
 
 The campaign of the year 5 was not less 
 c 2 
 
( 12 ) 
 
 brilliarit. It begun with a second passage of 
 the Rhine by the French army at Diersheirri, 
 on the first Floreal. The defeat of the enemy 
 ■Was complete, and 4000 men, with a ge- 
 neral, were made prisoners, and 20 pieces 
 of cannon, the military chest, and a number 
 of standards, fell also into his hands. Next 
 day Khel was taken, after a siege of more 
 than forty hours of the most obstinate re- 
 sistance. Such were the effects of that pas- 
 sage, that no obstacle remained to overruning 
 the whole of Germany. But during this 
 time the conqueror of Arcole and of Rivoli 
 did better than conquer : he made the terror 
 of his name and his arms prepare the way 
 for peace. The preliminaries of Leoben 
 ■were signed, arid the army of the Rhine and 
 the Moselle stopped its career of glory. 
 
 In passing the Rhine, the waggon of Ge- 
 neral Kllnglin had been taken, containing a 
 quantity of papers; and amongst the rest a 
 voluminous correspondence in cyphers, 
 
( 13 ) 
 
 which were brought to Moreau. Dessaix 
 was then sick, and was employed by Moreau 
 to decypher that correspondence. It was 
 long and difficult, and required much time 
 to comprehend but imperfectly the mean- 
 ing. It appeared to General Moreau and 
 the officers employed in that business, that 
 Pichegru had in the year 4 carried on a cor- 
 respondence with the French princes. 
 
 It was then the year 5; and no uneasiness 
 was caused by a correspondence that only- 
 related to the army, and its situation, so long 
 before under Pichegru. 
 
 Pichegru had left that army a year, and 
 now indeed did not command any army. It 
 is true he was become a member of the as. 
 sembly of Five Hundred, but in that situa- 
 tion he had none of the means in his power 
 which seemed to be the foundation of the 
 correspondence. All the spies that were 
 taken were tried and punished, without noise, 
 
( '< ) 
 
 and Moreau never even thought of makiag 
 a merit of doing that part of his duty. 
 
 All the projects, more or less real, had 
 been so disconcerted by the loyalty of the 
 general; and the army, notwithstanding 
 the arts used, was animated with so faithful 
 a spirit, that it w^^ precisely at that time 
 that the brilliant campaign was made into 
 the heart of Germany ; and such was the 
 terror it inspired, that, after the second pas- 
 sage of the Bhine, in the year 5, Moreau 
 would have forced the Emperor to peace, if 
 Bonaparte had not already dictated one in 
 Italy. 
 
 Such were the acts of Moreau and his 
 army ; of that same army, on which a year 
 before a few intriguer? had formed plans, 
 the only characteristics of whicli were illu- 
 siojii and folly. Perhaps the general, so 
 faithful to his trusty who had so nobly de- 
 stroyed 'all these chimerical plots, may be 
 
( 15 ) 
 
 allo^v^ed to have despised projects that were 
 overturned nearly as soon as conceived, and 
 to content himself with avenging his army 
 by its triurhphs, for those ill-grounded sus- 
 picions which had been entertained of its 
 fidelity, instead of denouncing an old com- 
 rade and friend without any utility to the 
 state : a man, indeed, who had done wrong, 
 but who was no longer to be feared, as he 
 had no longer any means left to execute his 
 bad intentions. 
 
 Moreaa did not write immediately to the 
 Directory about Pichegru ; and, since it is 
 necessary to say so, he never would have 
 done it had not the correspondence of Klin- 
 glih begun to become public towards the 
 end of the year 5. After the decyphering 
 of the papers, it had got into several hands, 
 and General Moreau knew that it was talked 
 of pretty publicly. Two officers told him, 
 that it would be necessary either to give an 
 account of that correspondence to the Di- 
 
( 16 ) 
 
 rectory, or to be himself comprehended in 
 the denunciation, which others would not 
 longer delay making. 
 
 General Moreau then , forced by necessity, 
 decided on writing, the l/th Fructidor, to 
 the Director Bartheiemy, to inform him of 
 this secret, which was no longer one in the 
 army, and which very soon would have been 
 public everywhere. He consulted the Di- 
 rector on that difficult affair, and, in the 
 letter, he did not conceal the repugnance 
 with which he made the communication. 
 *' You know me enough," said he to Bar- 
 theiemy, *' to believe how much it must 
 *' cost me." 
 
 The act of accusation against Moreau 
 dated that letter the 19th Fructidor. An 
 ill-formed figure may have caused the mis- 
 take, but it was really on the l/th; that, 
 however, is of little importance. 
 
 The act of accusation says, that he did 
 not write that letter on the iQth, spontii-^ 
 
( 17 ) 
 
 neously but in consequence of learning hy 
 the telegraph, on the 18th, the measnres 
 that had been taken by the Directory. That, 
 however, is an error, and is not the only one 
 committed in the act. It is nevertheless 
 necessary, in sfiih a case, to ascertain facts 
 ■with great precision. 
 
 The fact is, that on Fructidor, in the 
 year 5, there was no telegraph to communi- 
 cate with the army of the Rhine at Stras- 
 burg. It was established on that line in the 
 month of Brumaire, the year 6. Besides, 
 another proof that Moreau did not know the 
 events of the 1 8th when he wrote, is, that 
 his letter was addressed to Barthelemy, one 
 of the proscribed Directors. 
 
 The letter was given to the Executive Di- 
 rectory, and it was well known that Moreau 
 had not acted spontaneously in discovering 
 the plot ; he was presently recalled, and re- 
 turned to his family. 
 
 Such is the history of that denunciation, 
 
( 18 ) 
 
 which has been so much spoken of as the 
 cause of perpetual hatred between Moreau 
 and Pichegru. It is easy to see that the 
 least spark of justice in Pichegru ought to 
 make him very indulgent on that subject; 
 the denunciation was so Iv^ng retarded by 
 the remembrance of ancient friendship, and 
 only took place at last when it became un- 
 avoidable. Nevertheless Pichegru was trans- 
 ported to Cayenne, from which he escaped 
 to Europe. Moreau had no longer any 
 connexion with him, nor indeed did he ever 
 hear of him till the year 10. 
 
 Moreau's conduct, during that interval, 
 has been open to all France. In the year 7 
 we saw him, when the false impressions of 
 the year 5 were worn off, accept, by order of 
 the Directory, an inferior command in the 
 army of Italy. We have seen that man, 
 who is this day accused of ambition, accept 
 of a command under Scherer without a mur- 
 mur, and, after the misfortunes of that ge- 
 
( 19 ) 
 
 neral, only take a temporary command, to 
 retrieve his losses and save the army. With 
 25,000 he made head against 100,000, and 
 drew off his army at a slow march, and 
 without a check, through the Milanese 
 and Piedmont, putting garrisons into all the 
 fortresses. He beat the Russians at Valence, 
 and, rendering all their superiority of num- 
 bers useless by his able manoeuvres, concen- 
 trated his forces in the Genoese territory, 
 where he awaited the arrival of Macdonald, 
 and inaugurated the field of Marengo by a 
 victory obtained over General Belgarde. 
 After so many w^onders, to resign the com- 
 mand of that army which he had preserved, 
 to General Joubert, who shed tears on seeing 
 the admirable order that had been established, 
 and the noble and modest simplicity with 
 which he resigned to him the chief com- 
 mand. Joubert could not help giving him 
 marks publicly of veneration and regard. 
 He assisted, at the invitation of that succes- 
 » 2 
 
( 20 ) 
 
 ior, without any command, merely as an 
 amateur, as he jocularly said, at the too cele- 
 brated and unfortunate battle of Novi, where 
 the brave and unfortunate Joubert was killed. 
 Moreau there fought like a common soldier, 
 had three horses killed under him, and per- 
 formed prodigies of valour, to retard a defeat 
 which he had predicted. He then accepted 
 the dangerous honour of accepting the com- 
 mand of a beaten army, given to him by 
 general acclamation, and soon rendered it 
 so formidable to the enemy that they dared 
 not to attack him. He kept strong positions 
 in Italy, and retrieved the disasters of Jou- 
 bert, till he was succeeded by General Cham- 
 pionet, to whom he resigned the command : 
 thus, with infantine docility, taking and re- 
 signing the chief command at the will or 
 caprice of those whom he acknowledged as 
 his masters, although he was at the head of 
 an army devoted to him, and endeared to 
 all by his great services and abilities. 
 
( 21 ) 
 
 Such was Moreau, in Vendemiaire in 
 the year 8. Moreau, whom the act of 
 accusation represents as a suspicious person, 
 and an accompHce of Pichegru in the year 
 4. We see in what manner he has be- 
 trayed the interests of his country. 
 
 At the beginning of the year 8 he re- 
 turned to Paris, where he found a member 
 of the Directory in great consternation at the 
 weakness of the government ; a feebleness 
 arising from its nature, and which would 
 have rendered useless the greatest talents in 
 the universe. That Director was convin- 
 ced that France was lost if a more vigorous 
 executive power was not immediately orga- 
 nized, and one where there should be more 
 unity of action, which alone was fit to govern 
 a great empire. 
 
 This he said to Moreau, and Moreau 
 agreed with him. But who was the man 
 sufficiently able and determined to seize the 
 helm under such circumstances, and to raise 
 
( 22 ) 
 
 France to that glorious situation to which 
 she has since then been elevated ? 
 
 The vacillating, uncertain politics of the 
 directory had sent off the principal support 
 of the state to Egypt, from whence the 
 fleets of England, that covered the Medi- 
 terranean, seemed to forbid his return. — 
 Moreau had but to say the v^'ord to have 
 obtained supreme power ; Moreau will avow 
 the fact ; and had he thought that he could 
 have saved the republic he would have done 
 it without kesitation or delay. But, in re- 
 flecting on his own powers, he did not think 
 himself the man whom Providence had 
 destined for the saviour of France. 
 
 Far, however, be from Moreau false mo- 
 desty or vain affectation. Moreau did not 
 do himself injustice, neither has he sinned 
 against any other person: let him be per* 
 mitted, and he will confess that he felt 
 himself unequal, and unfitted for the task. 
 There is a place assigned to him in the order 
 
( 23 ) 
 
 qf things which he thinks himself not un-» 
 worthy to fill ; the field of battle in the day 
 of danger, when the chief of the state shall 
 deign to call him forth. Every other has 
 staggered his courage. The weight of busi- 
 ness frightens him. That self-denial ; that 
 privation of all comforts of private life ; that 
 continual exertion of the mind on public 
 affairs, which is the first and most indis- 
 pensable duty of those w^ho, in accepting 
 the supreme magistracy, cannot find an ex- 
 cuse of having the misfortune of being 
 born to it ; the incessant fatigue necessary 
 in governing from morning to night, and 
 and from night to morning, if one will by 
 their conduct justify their acceptance of a 
 place which they might have refused ; that 
 strength of mind which is necessary to sup- 
 port the weight of a great nation, and that 
 decided firmness which is required to go- 
 vern after the storms of a revolution of 
 such long duration ; to keep under all the 
 
( 21 ) 
 
 passions, all the men, and all the parties. 
 That rare discernment which is necessary 
 for avoiding all the dangers that surround a 
 young and a rising state ; the discretion to 
 know when to follow, and when to oppose 
 public opinion ; to know whom to employ 
 usefully, and chuse servants even amongst 
 malcontents and enemies. That genius, in 
 a word, which sees all, regulates all, and 
 provides for all ; which in the same instant 
 regulates the whole and its minute parts; 
 and which occupies itself at once on dangers 
 without and improvements within ; on men 
 and on things, the prosperity of individuals, 
 and the safety of the state. Such a precious 
 assemblage of great qualifications some years 
 ago would have appeared to us impossible, 
 and Moreau will not blush to say that he did 
 not feel himself possessed of them. Drawn 
 by an irresistible propensity to the ease of 
 domestic life, he thought, that after having 
 paid his debt to his country, he might 
 
{ h ) 
 
 Sacrifice the rest of his life to his personal en- 
 joyment, and return to the ploughshare 
 after handling the sword of the warrior. 
 Such were his desires and propensities. Let 
 us judge then if he was likely to ]^e eager to 
 embrace the opportunity offered tb him by 
 the director. 
 
 They reasoned together on the necessity 
 of establishing a stronger and more firm 
 government, and of the difficulty of finding 
 at that time in France a man fit for so 
 arduous a task, when suddenly they learnt 
 that, by a miracle almost incomprehensible. 
 General Bonaparte was debarked at Frejus. 
 In an instant Moreau draws the Director 
 apart, and says to him, *' Let all rest till 
 the arrival of General Bonaparte, he is the 
 man that is necessary to France." 
 
 The rest is known. Bonaparte arrives. 
 The director speaks to him. He calls 
 Moreau, and the 1 8th Brumaire shines forth. 
 
 E 
 
( 20 ) 
 
 Moreau marches to the Directory, and it is 
 dissolved. Bonaparte is proclaimed Consul. 
 
 The Consul orders Moreau to command 
 the army of the Rhine, and Moreau goes. 
 He organizes the army, and on the 5th 
 Floreal, in the year 8, passes the river 
 Rhine for the third time with his army. On 
 the 13th and 14th of the same month he 
 beats Kray at Engen, with the loss of 7000 
 prisoners, 90 pieces of cannon, and consi- 
 derable stores. On the 15th he gains the 
 battle of Maeskirch. On the igth he gains 
 a second battle at Biberach, on the same 
 plain where three years before he had gained 
 a former one. He sends a body of 22,000 
 men to the army of Italy, v^^hich, under the 
 command of- the greatest of all the French 
 Generals, was about to decide the fate of 
 France, and of all Europe. He did not for 
 that abate in his career of victory. He 
 passed the Danube, subdued Augsburg, and 
 
( 27 ) 
 
 on the plains of Kochstel washed away the 
 disgrace which on that spot French bravery 
 formerly received. There he made f)000 
 prisoners, took 5 standards, 20 pieces of 
 cannon, and immense magazines of stores. 
 He continued his victorious march, and 
 Newbourgand Laudshutt furnish new laurels 
 to his soldiers. Munich opens its gates ; 
 the Grison country is occupied ; Coire is 
 taken ; and the army of the Rhine arrives, 
 as if to witness and applaud the almost 
 supernatural victory by which the brave army 
 of Italy, under the conduct of that illus- 
 trious chief who plays with difficulties and 
 danger, reconquered for France her lasting 
 superiority, and the peace of Europe. A 
 treaty was granted by that army at the same 
 time that Moreau by an armistice gave breath 
 to the exhausted empire of Germany. Soon 
 that momentary tranquillity is at an end. 
 Moreau receives the order to march, and he 
 commences hostilities. The battle of Hoh- 
 E 2 
 
( 28 ) 
 
 enlinden acknowledges his presence ; the 
 battle of Hohcnlinden, where French 
 bravery achieved one of its most brilhant 
 victories, after the miracles of Italy, and 
 the immortal glory of Marengo ; the battle 
 of Hohenlinden, by which the army of 
 Moreau gained 10,000 prisoners, amongst 
 whom were three generals, besides SO cari- 
 nons, and 200 waggons with ammunition. 
 
 The frontiers of Austria are invaded ; 
 Salzburg receives a French garrison ; an4 
 Vienna, from which the French army was 
 only a few days m.arch, was in the utmost 
 consternation. An armistice was solicited, 
 and the terms prescribed by the conqueroi: 
 agreed upon ; peace was signed, and the 
 deftiny of France fixed once more. 
 
 Moreau returned to his family, wheri 
 the enemies of the public weal, whatever 
 their designs might be, endeavoured to give 
 a bad impression to the chief of the state, 
 of one of those who had the most sincerely 
 
( 29 ) 
 
 wished for its prosperity. Goodwill becomes 
 extinct ; Moreau makes some efforts, but in 
 vain, to regain it. He then lives retired 
 with his family, and breaks off all those 
 brilliant connections which are not suited to 
 a private life. He no longer keeps up a con- 
 nection with any public men, or even with 
 his old companions. He even in some de- 
 gree suppressed his attachment and his re- 
 membrances, not certainly because he was 
 insensible to them, but that he might fur- 
 nish no cause for uneasiness. A few friends, 
 almost all private men like himself, com- 
 posed the circle of his acquaintance. 
 
 The pleasures of a country life, of the 
 qhace, and of the theatre, but above all, 
 those of his family, were his amusement 
 and occupation. It was thus that he had 
 waited with patience and confidence till the 
 cloud of prejudice should be dissipated, and 
 till some happy occasion should offer of 
 proving by his services, or by his attach- 
 
( 30 ) 
 
 ment to the chief of the state, that he had 
 never ceased to honour his glory, and wish 
 for his success. 
 
 That life so tranquil, of which nothing 
 interrupted the harmony, was in a single 
 moment destroyed by a circumstance which 
 cam.e to awaken remembrances nearly ef- 
 faced. 
 
 General Moreau had at one time been 
 much acquainted with an ancient curate of 
 Pompadour, a man of some genius, uncle 
 to General Souhem, of the name of David. 
 This M. David, in 1/93, when the clergy 
 were persecuted, took refuge in the army 
 of his nephew. General Moreau has serv- 
 ed the republic ; but one may be permitted 
 to say, what no man will deny, that he 
 always held in abhorrence the persecutions 
 committed by the pretended republicans. 
 Whoever was a Frenchman, and conducted 
 himself well, had his protection ; and when 
 he was powerful David was unfortunate. 
 
( 31 ) 
 
 and he protected David. That M. David, 
 his nephev;^ Souhem, and Moreau lived all 
 together v\'ith Pichegru, since which time all 
 those persons saw each other with the plea- 
 sure that is usual to feel, on seeing those 
 with whom one has been in times of ad- 
 versity. 
 
 General Moreau had heard nothing of 
 him since the banishment of Pichegru till 
 the year 10, when David wished him to 
 give him a meeting. It was respecting 
 what he termed the denunciation of Piche- 
 gru ; Moreau satisfied him, and that in such 
 a manner, that he became the mediator 
 between him and Pichegru, and effected a 
 complete reconciliation ; a reconciliation 
 which cannot be much w^ondered at, after 
 the development of the circumstances which 
 attended and brought about the very inno- 
 cent letter of the 17 th Fructidor. 
 
 Whatever that reconciliation might be, 
 (the details of which belong to the answers 
 
( 32 ) 
 
 to the different acts of accusation, amongst 
 which it figures as a crime) General Mo- 
 reau learnt with great surprise, on the be- 
 ginning of last Pluviose, by General Lajo- 
 lais, the friend of Pichegru, whom Moreail 
 had occasion sometimes to see last summer, 
 that Pichegru was at Paris. Lajolais everi 
 pressed Moreau to meet Pichegru some- 
 where, not at home, and proposed several 
 places where Pichegru might speak to him 
 on business. General Moreau thought the 
 arrival of Pichegru at Paris, without the au- 
 thority of Government, was very unwise, 
 and constantly refused to give him any 
 meeting. 
 
 Pichegru decided what was to be done, 
 ^d, resolved at all events to see Moreau, 
 ventured to come to his house on the 1 1th 
 Pluviose, at eight in the evening. 
 
 It was a badly chosen day for Pichegru, 
 who, having come to France without pass- 
 ports and without authority, ought to have; 
 
( 33 ) 
 
 teen careful not to be seen; but the 11th 
 was the day of the week when Moreau waj 
 accustomed to see his friends. 
 
 Moreau, after some moments of a very- 
 unmeaning interview, begged him to go, 
 and he departed. 
 
 A few days after, a second visit of Piche- 
 gru took place, equally unexpected, after 
 which Pichegru never returned more. 
 
 There finished his personal intercourse 
 with Moreau, who heard no more of him, 
 except what will be explained in the answers 
 to the accusation on the following day by 
 one Roland. 
 
 These are the visits. The words which 
 were supposed to have been spoken from 
 Pichegru to Moreau, and Moreau to Piche-^ 
 gru, and which nobody heard, are become 
 matter for an accusation against Moreau. 
 
 It has been said that Pichegru has long 
 meditated the re-establishment of the House 
 of Bourbon. He conspired in their favout 
 
( 34 ) 
 
 in the year 4, and from that time Moreau, 
 either on account of his sparing Pichegru, 
 or because of the delay of denouncing him, 
 incurred serious suspicion. 
 
 Since then, say they, by the intermedia- 
 tion of David and Lajolais, Moreau is firmly 
 reconciled to Pichegru, and has been con- 
 nected with him. That reconciliation and 
 connection, after the previous conduct of 
 Moreau, were incompatible with the laws 
 of honour. They were then criminal, and 
 could only tend to trouble the state. 
 
 In fact, reports were spread in London, 
 that Moreau had promised to re-establish 
 the Princes of the House of Bourbon. 
 
 It is in consequence of this promise, that 
 Pichegru comes to Paris with other royalists, 
 and sees Moreau. 
 
 T'hose interviews could not but be cri- 
 minal ; besides, he had made offers to Mo- 
 reau for the House of Bourbon, which Mo» 
 reau indeed rejected ; but which in reject- 
 
( 36 ) 
 
 ing, he proposed to put himself at the head 
 of the party of Pichegru and the royahsts, 
 after they should have assassinated the First 
 Consul, on condition that he should be 
 made dictator, and that public opinion 
 Ihould be their guide. 
 
 At all events Moreau would at least be 
 culpable, though he had refused to take any 
 part in the conspiracy of Pichegru, for not 
 having denounced him to Government. 
 
 The charges are as follows : 
 
 1st, Possibility of being an old accom- 
 plice of Pichegru. 
 
 2d. Reconciliation and culpable connec- 
 tion with Pichegru. 
 
 3d. Engagement taken by Moreau to 
 re-establish the Princes of the House of 
 Bourbon; engagement attested by hearsay 
 and rumour spread in London. 
 
 4th. Interviews in Paris, and offers re- 
 jected, but replaced by contre-propositions, 
 F 2 
 
( 36 ) 
 
 having in view the overturning the go- 
 vernment of the First Consul. 
 
 5tb and last. Silence with respect to the 
 stay of Pichegru at Paris, and his projects. 
 
 Such are the crimes of which Moreau is 
 accused, and against which he is called upon 
 for his defence. 
 
 FIRST COUNT. 
 
 LnpJkated In the year 4 with Pichegru. 
 
 This ought not to appear in the trial. 
 What does it signify, in the year 12, to the 
 Consular Government, and particularly to 
 the Imperial Government, whether there 
 •was or was not a real or supposed conspiracy 
 in the year 4 to overturn the frail and feeble 
 constitution of the year 3, which the 1 8th 
 Brumaire reduced to dust, so happily, and 
 with the unanimous applause of all France? 
 
( 37 ) 
 
 And where should we all be, if the Go« 
 vernment under which we at length repose, 
 after so many storms, espousing the cause 
 of all the ephemerical governments which 
 are past, should demand of us a rigorous 
 account of all we have been doing during 
 fifteen years — of all that we have done for 
 or against the old royalty of 178S, or the 
 constitutional royalty of 1 791 : for or against 
 the revolutionary government of 1793 : for 
 or against the conventional government of 
 the year 3 ; for or against the directories of 
 Vendemiaire, Prairial, and Fructidor, which 
 30 rapidly overturned each other ? 
 
 On the 18th Brumaire, France rose out 
 of chaos. From that epoch we may date 
 her creation. Every thing that preceded it 
 was in the night of time, and the public 
 interest and repose, to which all should 
 yield, forbid us to inquire of any one what 
 he has thought or done respecting those 
 ephemerical governments, all of which were 
 
( 38 ) 
 
 at 1; St condemned in the lump on the 18th 
 Brumalre by the national will. 
 
 It is then truly ridiculous to search for 
 what Moreau did before the 18th Brumaire 
 against the directors. If at that time he 
 was guilty towards them, he has been infi- 
 nitely more so since ; for it was he who 
 marched, on the 18th Brumaire, to the 
 Luxembourg, and paralised their feeble au- 
 thority, while at St. Cloud, a new govern- 
 ment was rising up, which France was call- 
 ing out for with the most ardent desire. 
 
 That pretended crime of Moreau in the 
 year 4 against the Directory ought not then 
 to be found in the act of accusation. One 
 would think that it was only inserted to 
 awaken for a moment the malevoleijit sen- 
 timent which his letter of the 17th Fructi- 
 dor inspired, of which the motives Were not 
 known ; sentiments which his glory, his 
 victories, and reflection, have entirely dissi- 
 pated. 
 
( 30 ) 
 
 That is not an accusation. Truly speak- 
 ing there is no justification necessary to 
 that article. 
 
 Nevertheless General Moreau ought to 
 embrace with pleasure the opportunity of 
 explaining to the whole nation the part 
 which he took on the ] 8th Fructidor. 
 
 It appears too true that Piche^ru had cor- 
 respondences, in the year 4, with the royal- 
 alist army, and the Prince of Conde. The 
 plan seems to have been to acknowledge 
 Louis XVIII. to make him be declared by 
 the army of the Rhine, to mount the white 
 cockade, and deliver up some fortresses. 
 
 But Pichegru and the Prince did not 
 agree on many of the articles, particularly 
 on the question whether the right or the 
 left bank of the Rhine should be the theatre 
 of their movements, as well as concerning 
 a general amnesty, and the confirmation of 
 the sale of national lands, which Pichegru 
 
( 40 ) 
 
 required, and which the others would riot 
 grant. 
 
 This IS the general contents of the papers 
 of OlFenDourg : Whatever those papers may, 
 however, say relative to Pichegru, that ought 
 not to extend to Moreau ; and it is great 
 injustice in the act of accusation to impli- 
 cate him. The name of Moreau is scarcely 
 mentioned, and, when it is, it seems to sig- 
 nify that he was not of Pichegru*s opinion, 
 or he is named merely in recounting events; 
 but there is not a single word from which 
 it can be inferred that he was even consulted 
 in the business. The Attorney- general has 
 given no proofs, and he will never quote 
 any thing to support that opinion. 
 
 By what means could that magistrate 
 then attempt to implicate Moreau in that 
 plot, when there is not a single appearance 
 to warrant him in so doing ? 
 
 It was precisely at that time that Moreau 
 
( 41 ) 
 
 took the command of the army to lead itv 
 during a whole year, from victory to victory, 
 into the heart of Germany, and to crown all 
 hh treasons in so novel a way, by a scientific 
 retreat, which is the admiration even of 
 strangers, and of the oldest generals. 
 
 He was then the accomplice of Pichegru! 
 Surely, in that case, it would have been 
 very easy for that fortunate criminal to con- 
 summate his guilt without even reproach. 
 He had only to let fortune take her course. 
 He alone, in the heart of Germany, wa?. 
 sufficient to ruin the French army, cooped 
 up, in an unknown country, between two 
 armies more powerful than itself. He had 
 only to restrain an effort of genius, which 
 nobody thought possible. His army would 
 have perished, his treason succeeded, and 
 the traitor might have had the art still to 
 cover his perfidy under exploits sufficiently 
 brilliant to procure him honour and com- 
 memoration. 
 
( 42 ) 
 
 Away then with that ridiculous accusa- 
 tion, which belies the voice of all Europe, 
 and from which national gratitude should 
 have ever protected General Moreau. 
 
 But at least, says the act of accusation, 
 he was too long in revealing the plots of 
 Pichegru. v, 
 
 1st. The papers that were seized disco- 
 vered nothing till they were decyphered, 
 which was a long operation. No one was 
 namedj and the descriptions were so vague, 
 that those who were really implicated, when 
 put upon their trials, were acquitted ; and 
 that Pichegru might have been so himself, 
 if, instead of being banished^, he . had been 
 sent before the tribunals. 
 
 2d. That conspiracy was to have brokq 
 out in the year i, and this was at the end 
 of the year 5. General Moreau commanded 
 the army; he was master of every thing; 
 he watched over those suspected ; he had 
 arrested the ill-intentioned ; he had judged 
 
( « ) 
 
 and punished spies. Every thing had failed; 
 the schemes were broken and disconnected, 
 so as never to be recommenced. Victories 
 over the enemy were better than any accu- 
 sation for corrupting the army by means of 
 its chief. 
 
 Sd. That denunciation, useless in itself, 
 would have been directed against Pichegru, 
 the ancient general, and since then the 
 friend of Moreau, and could only have 
 served to make him be sent a few days ear- 
 lier to Cayenne. But the projects begun in 
 the year 4 with the Prince of Conde, and 
 the overturn of the government by the army, 
 had no connection with what passed in 
 Paris in the year 5, and with all those con- 
 temptible cabals in the interior councils, 
 which the breath of the Directory, feeble as 
 it was, might have reduced to nothing. 
 
 4th and last. As a proof that General 
 Moreau conducted himself well on that oc- 
 casion, the opinion of the public, unac- 
 Q 2 
 
( 44 ) 
 
 quainted with the secret circumstances 
 •which compelled Moreau to write the letter 
 q£ the 1 7th Fructidor, so useless to the state, 
 blamed Moreau for what he then did. Pub- 
 lic men may take a lesson from the strange 
 situation of Moreau, who was at first blamed 
 for having denounced Pichegru, and is now 
 accused of not having done it sufficiently 
 soon. 
 
 As to the rest, let us terminate the tire- 
 some discussion of this part of the accusa- 
 tion, by repeating what Moreau himself, 
 with reason and greatness of mind, when 
 tired with the debates on that subject, said, 
 — *' It is possible," said he, ** that I was in 
 ** some degree blameable towards the Direc- 
 " tory; but I think I have made ample 
 *' amends by gaining since thirty battles, 
 *' and saving two great armies.*' 
 
 But this is too much on that point : let 
 us proceed. 
 
( 45 ) 
 
 SECOND COUNT. 
 
 ReconclUatton and culpable Connection wtth 
 Fichegru in England, by means of David 
 and Lajolais, 
 
 David, the friend of Pichegru, and con- 
 nected with Moreau, had formed the plan 
 to bring them together. That thought was 
 David's alone : he has confessed it ; and no- 
 thing done by Moreau had led him to that 
 attempt. 
 
 The first inclination of Moreau was to re- 
 fuse reconciliation. The trials prove that. 
 
 The Abbe David concealed from Pichegru 
 the reluctance of Moreau, expressed on his 
 first proposal, and so obtained the consent 
 of Pichegru. ., ' 
 
 The Abbe David again saw Moreau, and 
 insensibly got the better of his reluctance 
 to the reconciliation. . 
 
( 40, ) 
 
 Generals Moreau and Pichegru thought 
 they had respectively some reproaches to 
 make each other relative to their military 
 life ; and by means of David, who wrote to 
 each of them, and without any letters pas- 
 sing between themselves, an explanation 
 took place, and they finished by being re- 
 conciled. 
 
 Things being in that state, nothing was 
 more natural and plain than the letter writ- 
 ten by David to Moreau in Messidor, the 
 year ] 0, in which he says, *' That he would 
 " not justify himself concerning the denun- 
 " ciation ; that if any blame could be laid 
 " to his charge, it was Government, and not 
 " General Pichegru, whom he thought im- 
 " plicated by the papers found, and whom 
 *' he wanted to save." 
 
 That he had regretted much that the 
 course Pichegru followed the last three cam- 
 paigns had confirmed his former doubts. 
 
 That as to the rest, the situation of Piche- 
 
( 47 ) 
 
 gru gave him pain ; and that if he knew 
 how to assist him he would ; and that if he 
 were to learn from authority that he was 
 the chief obstacle to his return to France, 
 he would soon remove that. 
 
 It is to be remarked, that notwithstanding 
 the obliging style of this letter, Moreau never 
 altered his opinion of Pichegru's conduct, 
 which he continued to consider as a blemish 
 in his character. 
 
 The letter itself appeared so harmless to 
 David, that he shewed it to such of the con- 
 stituted authorities and distinguished generals, 
 as still preserved any regard for Plchegru. 
 
 As to Moreau, he could not for a mo- 
 ment consider himself as blameable for the 
 reconciliation. 
 
 General Moreau is not a man to preserve 
 eternal resentment; his mind is mild and 
 generous. Revenge is not in his nature; 
 but he would not have of himself made the 
 first advances; but when his friendship wa? 
 
( 48 ) 
 
 desired "and asked, his heart, by a natutai 
 impulse, led him to consent. 
 
 Moreau could not be blamed for wishing 
 to see Pichegru being permitted to return, 
 when, in every public place in Paris, he met 
 officers of the Prince of Conde's army, which 
 a year before he had been meeting in the 
 field of battle. 
 
 Neither could he consider himself wrong 
 when other general officers had promised 
 to make interest for Pichegru's return, and 
 one had even gone directly to the First Con- 
 sul to obtain his consent. 
 
 General Moreau could not consider his 
 denunciation, nor the conduct of Pichegru 
 in the year 4, as any obstacle to his good 
 will and wishes towards him. 
 
 The dangers which Pichegru had brought 
 upon his country existed now no more ; they 
 were long since over; and Moreau, after he 
 succeeded to Pichegru in the commLind, had 
 taught the royal -and imperial armies, that 
 
( 49 ) 
 
 tbcy never more should set foot on the soil 
 of France. 
 
 He had said sufficient to them, that he 
 would only know them to conquer them. 
 
 When Moreau wrote to David, it was 
 profound peace, and it appeared to him, 
 that peace, friendly to liberal ideas and sen- 
 timents, allowed him to forget the faults 
 committed in war. 
 
 All this reasoning was favoured by the cir- 
 cumstance that a council of war, established 
 at the army to judge the accomplices of 
 Pichegru, had acquitted, them. 
 
 If, as the act of accusation says, these ge- 
 nerals had become reconciled, in order to 
 plot against the government of their coun- 
 try, the first seeds of this project would be 
 found in the circumstances which preceded 
 or accompanied their reconciliation, or in 
 the letters which they wrote. But they 
 discover nothing at all of the kind. The> 
 letters, far from containing any idea, do npt 
 
 H 
 
( 50 ) 
 
 even contain a word from which it could be 
 inferred that Moreau disUked the govern- 
 ment, or criticised its operations. 
 
 But the Abbe David was going off to 
 England, to carry over the thoughts of Mo- 
 reau to Pichegru, who had sent him twelve 
 louis d'ors to pay the expences of the jour- 
 ney ! 
 
 It has transpired from the discussions that 
 have taken place fifteen days ago, that Mo- 
 reau did not see David till he was just going 
 off; and that then he only wished him to 
 give his compliments to Pichegru, but not a 
 line was written on the occasion. 
 
 As for money, if Pichegru had really sent 
 twelve louis to David, so small a sum could 
 only be considered as a little aid to a neces- 
 sitous friend. 
 
 The intermediate agent of a conspiracy, 
 in which it is faid that England was a party, 
 and which was to overturn France, could 
 scarcely be in want of twelve louis to 
 
( 51 ) 
 
 perform a journey which was to bring to_ 
 gether the chiefs of the conspiracy. 
 
 General Moreau, possessed of an immense 
 fortune, * would not have left his emissary 
 in so necessitous a situation. 
 
 Besides, David has declared, that the letter 
 of Pichegru, by which he should have re- 
 ceived the twelve louis, was intercepted 
 and that he had borrowed ten louis of 
 General Donzelot for the expences of his 
 journey, the principal intention of which 
 was to induce Pichegru to return to France, 
 befides the probability of procuring to David 
 a settlement in England, in consequence of 
 a proportion that had been made to him for 
 the education of a young English nobleman, 
 from whom he was to receive 25ol. a year, 
 and live in the family. 
 
 The journey of David was no secret ; he 
 
 * See the report of the grand Judge, 27 Pluvlose, 
 year 12. 
 
( 52 ) 
 
 told all the Generals of his acquaintance 
 who knew Pichcgru, and had got for that 
 Ex-General a letter from a member of the 
 senate. 
 
 When stopped at Calais, though he had a 
 passport, neither writings or letters of any 
 kind were foiind upon him, in which there 
 was the least mention of General Moreau. 
 
 It has been said that General Morea^ 
 shewed friendship to David in the Temple. 
 
 Since when has it become a crime to 
 take an interest in the misfortune of a per- 
 son with whom one is connected ? Since 
 "^hen do the chains that bind the prisoner 
 command others to lose the feelings of hu- 
 manity ? 
 
 But, if David had been an agent of the 
 conspiracy, what would Moreau have done 
 after he wa? arrested ? 
 
 He ought either to have sought to excul- 
 pate himself, and destroy suspicion, or to 
 save himself from the punish naent which 
 
( 53 ) 
 
 the crime that the Abbe David would most 
 probably reveal, would bring upon him ; 
 or to put the finishing stroke to the con- 
 spiracy before the government could disco- 
 ver the whole. 
 
 Well — nothing of all that happens — 
 nothing is done — General Moreau does not 
 seek access to any magistrate, to see if he is 
 any way implicated in the papers found on 
 David. 
 
 He remains quietly at home, without 
 changing any of the usual habits of his life. 
 
 He writes to nobody, and David, that con- 
 triver of conspiracy, is not replaced by any 
 one whoever. 
 
 It must be observed, that Lajolais, who 
 is held out as the successor of David, did 
 not come to General Moreau till nine' 
 months after, as has been proved on the 
 trial, and that he came of his own accord, 
 -and at no request of Moreau. 
 
 ^Notwithstanding this, wh^n the arrestation. 
 
( 54 ) 
 
 of David took place, the peace was no way 
 broken. 
 
 At that time the communication with 
 England was open, and in two w^eeks a 
 conspiracy might then have been planned in 
 Paris, known in London, and ready for exe- 
 cution in this capital. 
 
 When all is silent, where can there be cri- 
 minality ? It is impossible to convert silence 
 into crime. 
 
 Will it be said, that the residence of Piche- 
 gru in London, and of Moreau in Paris, 
 ■was- a conspiracy ? 
 
 As for the Ex-General Lajolals, he did not 
 see General Moreau till Prairial in the 
 Year 11, when he brought a small open 
 note from Pichegru, recommending him for 
 some employment. 
 
 That small note was not brought from 
 London by Lajolais. Pichegru had sent it 
 over to him in France. This last circum- 
 stance deserves particular attention ; for, till 
 
( 55 ) 
 
 the trial, it seemed to be believed that La- 
 jolais had made two journeys to London, 
 and that it was at the return from the first 
 of them, that he delivered the note to Mo- 
 reau. 
 
 The trial has proved incontestibly that 
 Lajolais was only once in London, and that 
 in last December, which was seven months 
 after he brought the note to General Mo- 
 reau. 
 
 General Moreau postiled the memorial 
 by which Lajolais requested a situation. 
 
 They spoke together of Pichegru, and Ge? 
 neral Moreau does not deny that he said to 
 him, as he had to the Abbe David, that it 
 w^ould give him pleasure to see Pichegru re- 
 turned to France. 
 
 If that sentiment was a crime, it origi- 
 nated in the goodness of Moreau's heart, and 
 then it fhould find an excuse. 
 
 Lajolais, in his first interrogatories, said, 
 that he had seen General Moreau three or 
 
{ ^0 ) 
 
 four times at that period ; that Moreau had 
 expressed a desire to have an interview with 
 Pichegru, and that Lajolais said, that he 
 should go and ask for one. 
 
 That interview solicited, is considered as 
 the indication of a conspiracy between Ge- 
 neral Moreau and Pichegru, whose visits to 
 Paris have, they say, firmly established its 
 reality. 
 
 It is not possible not to see the great im- 
 probability of that story. 
 
 At Paris does a person ask for an interview 
 vith a person residing in London ? 
 
 It is easy to conceive an interview demand*, 
 ed between two persons residing near toge* 
 ther ; but an interview demanded by a per- 
 son in Paris with one in London, and 
 to take place in Paris, requires some expla- 
 nation. 
 
 During the trial, Lajolais has given that 
 explanation, and persisted three different 
 times in his account of it* 
 
( 5- ) 
 
 Born in Alsace, and speaking French badly, 
 he says, that the force of the expressions of 
 our language is not familar to him, and that 
 when he spoke of an hitervieiv, he meant 
 only to speak of the wish expressed by Mo- 
 reau to see Pichegru in France, which agrees 
 perfectly with what General Moreau him- 
 self says on that subject. 
 
 It is in vain to say, that there is a con- 
 tradiction between that declaration made on 
 the trial and what Lajolais said when coni- 
 fronted with General Moreau, when he per- 
 sisted in his first declaration. 
 
 The declaration on the trial is not con- 
 tradictory but explanatory ; for it explain^ 
 what he meant by the w^ord interview, and 
 it has never been refused on a trial to give 
 an explanation of what was said on tjjie first 
 interrogation. 
 
 The institution of a trial is founded on 
 the necessity there is of comparing, verify- 
 ing, and well understanding things, papers. 
 
( ^8 ) 
 
 and persons^ before sentence is pronounced, 
 in Qr(5er that the truth may be found out 
 from the variance or coincidence of all the 
 circumstances. 
 
 To prove that the explanation of Lajolais 
 on the trial was true and sincere, it is only 
 necessary to consider the glaring absurdity of 
 the first declaration, to which it was impos- 
 sible to attach any degree of credibility. 
 
 If an interview had been demanded by 
 Moreau in Paris of Pichegru in England, by 
 Lajolais, it must have been to begin or to 
 carry on a conspiracy ; yet Lajolais, the 
 bearer of so important a message, remains 
 seven months at Paris, after having seen Ge- 
 neral Moreau, without procuring the said 
 interview. 
 
 Lajolais remaining for a great part of that 
 long space of time with his relations in the 
 department of the Lower Rhine, is an un- 
 answerable proof of the falsity of his firft 
 declaration. 
 
( sg ) 
 
 AnotTier circumstance, not less important, 
 rs, that we learn from the trial, that on the 
 same day on which Lajolais is supposed to 
 have received this mission from General 
 Moreau, he requested General Moreau to lend 
 klm some money, njohich request was refused by 
 General Moreau. 
 
 No doubt remains since the trial relative 
 to this important part of the accusation. 
 
 Is it possible that General Moreau, at the 
 very time he trusted Lajolais with his secret, 
 and made him a party to his projects, should 
 refuse him the loan of a few louis ? 
 
 The very business of the conspiracy re- 
 quired money ; and it is evident that the 
 first thought of Moreau, after joining La- 
 jolais in the conspiracy, must iiave been to 
 unite purses where fate and fortune were 
 united. 
 
 Even if the conspiracy could have gone 
 forward vfithout money, can it be believed, 
 that Moreau would have risked a refusal 
 I 2 
 
( Go ) 
 
 which might expose him to the greatest clan- 
 ger of discovering his machinations. Ne- 
 cessity has too great power over the pas- 
 sions of men, to risk the effect it may pro- 
 duce ; and an information against Moreau 
 might have ruined him the very day after 
 his refusal. 
 
 To every thinking being who knows the 
 human heart, this refusal of money to Lajo- 
 lais is a proof that there was no criminal 
 connection between him and General Mo- 
 reau. 
 
 To all those explanations, which render 
 the matter very easy to be understood, let us 
 add another circumstance, which will con- 
 firm the innocence oi Moreau. 
 
 Victor Couchery, to whom it appears that 
 Lajolais had said that General Moreau in- 
 tended to write to Pichegru, went to know 
 what measures had been taken with Lajolais, 
 and if he really meant to write to Pichegru. 
 
 Victor Couchery, when confronted with 
 
( ei ) 
 
 General Moreau, has declared that General 
 Moreau replied : " That he had seen Lajo- 
 '' lais two or three times relative to his back- 
 " ing a petition ; that he had nothing he 
 " wished to be said, and that he would not 
 ** write to a man who resided in a couniry 
 ^' at war with France." 
 
 Couchery was the friend of Pichegru, 
 which Moreau knew ; and if he had written 
 to Pichegru by Laiolais, or if he wished to 
 write, or had sent a verbal message, he would 
 not have hesitated to say so to the brother 
 of his confident, and the most intimate 
 friend of Pichegru. 
 
 Lajolais went to ask postiles to his peti- 
 tion ; and it is because he went on no other 
 business, tiiat Moreau, without thmking of 
 the matter, refused him the money he de- 
 manded. 
 
 The declaration of Couchery, besides 
 provmg that there was no confidential busi- 
 ness between Moreau and Lajolais, confirms 
 
( 62 ) 
 
 also a thing proved on the trial, and that 
 Moreau refused to correspond with Pichegru 
 while he remained in an enemy's country; 
 but that he wished him to go to some neutral 
 territory, such as Germany, there to try to 
 get his name erased from the list of emi- 
 grants. 
 
 If it is said that all connexion between 
 Moreau and Lajolais bears a suspicious ap- 
 pearance, after the denouncing of the latter 
 in the year 5 ; it is to be observed that La- 
 jolais had been acquitted of the charge by 
 a council of war, and that, w^hen Lajolais, 
 forgetting all animosity, came of himself to 
 General Moreau, it did not correspond with 
 Moreau's usual way of acting to treat him 
 harshly : on the contrary, it is clear that it 
 was a duty in him to try to repair the injury 
 done to a man whom he had accused, and 
 who had been found innocent. 
 
I 63 ) 
 
 THIRD COUNT. 
 
 Promises made by Moreau to reinstate the 
 Princes. Promises attested hy the Ru- 
 piours current in London. 
 
 THE act of accusation states, that Rous- 
 s'llon had declared that Lajolais had said in 
 London that Moreau, discontented with the 
 government of the First Consul, would lend 
 every aid to overturn it. 
 
 Bouvet said, that Lajolais had confirmed 
 in London, all the expectations that were 
 entertained with respect to Moreau ; that he 
 had agreed to the plan laid by the princes, 
 and had promised that Moreau should pre- 
 sent the prince to the armies. 
 
 Rochelle declared that, in London, they 
 counted on the aid of Moreau, but he did 
 not say that Lajolais had spread the report. 
 
 In fine, Roger, if credit is to be given t© 
 
( 64 ) 
 
 four soldiers who guarded him at the Temple, 
 declared that he has heard it said that Mo- 
 reau was one ot the chiefs of the conspiracy. 
 
 Several other accused persons have been 
 interrogated before and during the trial, but 
 they have no hearsay evidence to give. 
 
 Thus, rumours of which the author is 
 not pointed out, and spread in London, that 
 Moreau was one ot the chiefs of a royalist 
 conspiracy, attested only by two witnesses, 
 amongst the great number of those who had 
 landed, and were on trial, Rochelle and Ro- 
 ger, together with the declaration of Bouvet 
 and Rousillon, that Moreau was to favour 
 the princes, and this founded only on the de- 
 claration of a third person, compose charges 
 on this count of the accusation. 
 
 We need not observe that, on the trial, 
 sorpe of the declarations of the accused have 
 varied and become less strong. Bouvet, in 
 particular, has formally declared that he is 
 now convinced that the royalists had bce« 
 
( 65 ) 
 
 deceived when they were promised the sup- 
 port of Moreau. He has even, with great 
 energy, blamed the confidence that he had 
 inconsiderately given to the hearsays with 
 respect to Moreau. 
 
 We need not observe that, with respect 
 to the pretended declaration of these guards 
 at the Temple, relative to Roger, has been 
 formally denied by him when confronted 
 with them. One of the guards has totally 
 retracted his evidence, and the others have 
 stammered and explained. Gilbert, the 
 guard who retracted, says, he does not know 
 why the name of Moreau was mentioned, as 
 he never heard Roger pronounce his name. 
 Gilbert has repeated his retraction with em- 
 phasis not less than three times. 
 
 Is it likely that Roger, who, on all his 
 examinations, denied all connexion with the 
 plot, and every thing laid to his charge, 
 should afterwards, without motive or ne- 
 
 K 
 
( 66 ) 
 
 and like an ideot, declare not only to one, 
 but to two, three, and even four persons, 
 that he is one of the chiefs ; thus sacrificing 
 his head for the silly pleasure of babbling to 
 four persons to him unknown ? 
 
 We shall not try to dive into the extraor- 
 dinary motives of those guards for insinuat- 
 ing themselves into the confidence of their 
 prisoner, whom they made speak to their 
 liking, when their duty was to be silent and 
 keep him safe : those motives might perhaps 
 be found very sufficient for suspecting the 
 whole of their evidence. 
 
 General Moreau has no occasion to con- 
 tradict such a charge ; but we will observe 
 that, had the Attorney-general chosen, he 
 might have found similar, and even better 
 materials for his indictment. We know, 
 and the official journal of France has given 
 extracts of them, that both English and 
 American papers have asserted that Moreau 
 
( 67 ) 
 
 had actually raised the standard of rebellion 
 against the First Consul, and that he fought 
 for the princes. 
 
 Let us state a fact in opposition to those 
 silly gazettes, those rumours of unknown 
 origin, those hearsays of Roger and Ro- 
 chelle. It has been proved on the trial 
 that Moreau, far from ever serving the 
 princes, or even listening to a proposition 
 made, for none ever has been made, spurned 
 even at the most distant hints thrown out 
 that he could assist in restoring the ancient 
 order of things, even if the Consular Go- 
 vernment should be overturned. 
 
 Those same royalists, who picked up such 
 rumours in England, complain bitterly that, 
 on their arrival in France, they find they had 
 been deceived about Moreau, that he is far 
 from being a royalist, and would not even 
 hear the princes mentioned. 
 
 It is not yet time to examine how they 
 <it last found out the truth, nor the fables^ 
 K 2 
 
( 68 ) 
 
 that were mixed with it, in order to prevent 
 that rage which might have broken out, and 
 been attended with danger, when they found 
 themselves so terribly deceived. 
 
 Wc shall content ourselves with saying, 
 for the present, that Moreau lent them no 
 assistance; that he never declared himself 
 for the princes, nor ever had an idea of en- 
 tering into a royal conspiracy. 
 
 But if all that is established as it is by the 
 trials and interrogations, it is impossible not 
 to draw the conclusion, that Moreau never 
 received any proposition from the princes ; 
 that he had never written, nor caused to be 
 written, any letter, nor sent any person to 
 the princes, nor to Pichegru, nor to any 
 other person who had their confidence and 
 his, to make promises to them or their 
 friends, or prepare the way for overturning 
 the Consular Government. This conclusion 
 is unavoidable — the opposite would be alto- 
 gether absurd. It is impossible to conceive 
 
( eg ) 
 
 that Moreau, who, even according to the 
 complaints made against him by the royal, 
 ist, rejected every offer that was made to 
 him, could have played a game so cruel for 
 them, and so dangerous for himself, as that 
 of entering into the correspondencies and 
 manoeuvies of a vast and extensive plot, 
 without advantage, or even without know- 
 ing to what end he was to attain. 
 
 " But," says Mr. Attorney General, ''this 
 " was rumoured in London !" 
 
 Ah ! the rumour was spread ! x^nd how 
 long is it since any people with common 
 sense put their generals and defenders to 
 death like traitors, because of rumours spread 
 amongst their enemies ? Surely that device 
 would be admirable, if, to get rid of states- 
 men or soldiers whomi they fear, it were suf- 
 ficient, in an indirect manner, to demand 
 their heads by reports in gazettes and ru- 
 mours amongst the people. 
 
 Ah ! the rumour was spread ! We could 
 
( 70 ) 
 
 even doubt that, for we have no proofs but 
 the very suspicious declarations of some of 
 the persons accused, who for one reason, of 
 which wx may conceive an hundred, might 
 calculate on saving themselves by such testi- 
 mony. We might deny it, we say, but we 
 chuse rather to believe it. To believe that 
 the English, afraid of invasion, try to create 
 a disturbance in the interior of France : that 
 some royalist chiefs, thinking it a good op- 
 portunity, encourage the idea, the wish to 
 create agitation, and send numbers of parti- 
 zans into France. It is necessary to give 
 them hopes and confidence, and they seize 
 upon and prostitute the great name of Mo- 
 reau — a name famous all over Europe — a 
 man universally esteemed. He had no place 
 under government, and it was thought that 
 some coolness towards him was evident. In- 
 terest and malevolence was indefatigable in 
 augmenting what existed, and imagining 
 what was wanting. A simple coolness was 
 
( n ) 
 
 represented as enmity, and the ridiculous 
 and false plans of the royalists took the form 
 of a little plausibility. A great general, 
 whose name stood high, cannot prevent in- 
 triguers from making an improper use of it, 
 but to render him responsible would be as 
 atrocious as it would be absurd. 
 
 When we want to trace those fabricated 
 rumours (made to deceive the subaltern in- 
 struments) to their source, we find it either 
 in anonymous pamphlets or in the individual 
 Lajolais, who denies it. Of the four accused 
 persons, two know not whence they had 
 the report, and two say they had it from 
 Lajolais. 
 
 General Moreau, taking advantage of the 
 denial of Lajolais, might suppose the others 
 impostures ; but General Moreau rather 
 chuses to say w hat he really thinks. 
 
 From the conduct of Lajolais, it docs not 
 appear impossible that he may have imposed 
 on Rousillon, and perhaps on others also. 
 
( 72 ) 
 
 The indigence of Lajolais may account for 
 
 this explanation. 
 
 General Moreau is too deeply afflidled on 
 his own account, having the disgrace of be- 
 ing accused, and the cruel necessity of being 
 obliged to justify himself, to augment gratui- 
 tously the san:ie disgrace and the same neces- 
 sity Lajolais. But he knows that whatever 
 his motives might be, Lajolais has not ad- 
 hered to truth in other matters, and from 
 the certainty of that, he is led to suppose 
 that he had not done it in this. 
 
 But why has he been an impostor? 
 What could have determined him to hold 
 the language represented? T04 dream of a 
 mission he never received, as he himself has 
 acknowledged, and to make promises in the 
 name of General Moreau (contrary to his 
 own opinions), promises which he never 
 had authority to make? We must again re- 
 peat, that m his indigence we find 'the an- 
 swer. 
 
( n ) 
 
 Let us condescend to see who and what 
 is this Lajolais. Connected formerly with 
 Pichegru during his command, that general 
 procured him, out of good-nature, the means 
 of existing, and hopes of advancement. 
 Having in the year 5, through indiscretion 
 rather than any great fault, shared in the 
 misfortunes of his friend, he was tried, and 
 lay in prison two years, from whence he 
 came out with an acquittal, but without a 
 farthing. He at first lived by borrowing, and 
 he confessed on his examination that he had 
 more than 80,000 livres of debt. Reduced 
 to the greatest distress, he learns from the 
 Abbe David, that he had effected a reconci- 
 liation between Moreau and Pichegru, and 
 he concluded that Moreau would be ready 
 to grant to Pichegru the first trifling service 
 that he might require. He procured for that 
 purpose (one knows not how) a small note 
 from the latter to Moreau, in which he 
 begged him to procure some advancement 
 
( 74 ) 
 
 for the poor General Lajo/ais, ruined by his 
 long imprisonment. He brought that letter to 
 Gros-Bois, and spoke to General Moreau of 
 their ancient friend, and of their explanation 
 with each other; he received some trifling 
 civilities, and General Moreau said that he 
 would see Pichegru with pleasure allowed to 
 return to France, but nothing more. Mo- 
 reau lived quite retired, and would solicit 
 nothing for Lajolais, and advised him to 
 apply elsewhere. Two or three other visits 
 to Paris begun and finished that renewal of 
 acquaintance. The last time they met, 
 Lajolais told Moreau that he was going to 
 Alsace, his ov^n country, and asked a loan 
 of some money. Moreau, whom no con- 
 nection rendered such a loan necessary, re- 
 fused it, knowing it would be money lost. 
 This is confirmed by the trial. — Lajolais 
 went off to Alsace, Moreau heard nothing 
 more of, and forgot him. 
 
 After, as we have found from Couchery, 
 
C 1^ ) 
 
 he had gone to Alsace, where he remained 
 through poverty, not having money to go 
 farther, at the end of several months he 
 found means to go over to England, at the 
 time when all were eager to create uneasi- 
 ness in France, in return for the threats of 
 invasion. A royalist invasion was considered 
 as a diversion likely to prove useful. Lajolais 
 might probably seize this opportunity to pro- 
 cure himself bread. It is Impossible for Mo- 
 reau to know how far he went in deceiving 
 Pichegru, and the credulous royalists, with 
 regard to the situation of France; but from 
 what has come out on the trial, and the lan- 
 guage attributed to him, with some appear- 
 ance of truth, by two of the accused, his 
 conduct in Paris, and some evident un- 
 truths which he has told, which he at first 
 maintained and then retracted, and after 
 that explained with great embarrassment. 
 Moreau thinks, from all these circumstances, 
 that Lajolais, in order to procure himself 
 L 2 
 
( 70 ) 
 
 importance and bread, may have gone con- 
 siderable lengths in promismg support and 
 assistance in France, which they have been 
 greatly disappointed not to find ready to 
 combat on their side. Thus has Moreau 
 been impUcated by a man on w bom he had 
 not bestowed a single though c. 
 
 Once more let us see the conclusion to be 
 drawn from all these probabilities on one side 
 and improbabilities on the other. If Lajo* 
 lais held the language in London that is re- 
 presented, and which all those who have 
 landed in France have found false with re- 
 spect to Moreau, he must have belied Mo- 
 reau; and if he did so, it must have been for 
 some motive: that motive could be no other 
 than to have resources and bread. But, be- 
 cause it suited Lajolais to belie General 
 Moreau at London, is the general to suffer, 
 or be made answerable for his conduct ? 
 
 One word more will finish this part of 
 the accusation. 
 
( 7; ) 
 
 General Moreau denies with horror that 
 he ever had any share in any project against 
 the Governnnent, or that he ever gave to 
 Lajc liiis, or any other person, a mission to 
 Pichegru, or to the princes, or to England. 
 
 Not one word written with his hand! 
 Not one witness appears against him. Po- 
 pular rumours, rash assertions, and a single 
 man, can send no one to the scaffold. And 
 to shew by one example to what a ridicu- 
 lous point of extravagance these rumours 
 have been carried, and hov.^ they merit con- 
 tempt rather than the thunders of justice, 
 names of persons the most respectable have 
 been made free with, and even that of the 
 Emperor has not been spared. And if two 
 of the accused say that Moreau was engaged, 
 two others of them, one Noel Ducorps, af- 
 firms that his brother told him that the re- 
 establishment of the Bourbons was with the 
 consent of Bonaparte — and another, Rochelle, 
 says that Lajolais had told him that the 
 
( 78 ) 
 
 French armies were at the disposal of Mo- 
 reau, and that every thing was prepared for 
 the Bourbons nnounting the throne. He de- 
 clares that Lajolais added, that Bonaparte 
 himself was almost come mto that idea. 
 
 Now is there a man of common sense, 
 who can hang the fate of an accused person 
 on such popular tales, in which they neither 
 spare names nor probabilities. This surely 
 is more than enough on this accusation. 
 
 FOURTH COUNT. 
 
 Interview with Pichegru and other accused 
 Persons. Propositions made and received. 
 
 IT was more than seven months that Mo- 
 reau had heard nothing of Lajolais, when, 
 toward the end of last winter, that general 
 came to see him, when Moreau, greatly to 
 his surprise, learnt that Pichegru was in 
 Paris. Lajolais then pressed him to give 
 
( 79 ) 
 
 Pichegru a meeting, to confer with him on 
 the means of getting leave to return to France; 
 Moreau rejused, and observed, that Pichegru, 
 being here without leave of Government, 
 might be arrested, and that he, Moreau, did 
 not chuse to run the risk of seeing him ar- 
 rested, perhaps, during their interview, and 
 thereby expose himself to all the silly infe- 
 rences that might be drawn from it : infe- 
 rences fromw^hich he had sufficiently suffered 
 on account of his letter of the 1 7th Fructidor 
 of the year 5, then so imperfectly understood 
 by the public mind. Lajolais returned to 
 the charge, and proposed several places, in- 
 sisting much on the desire of Pichegru to 
 speak with him ; Moreau persisted on his 
 side, and absolutely refused. 
 
 He thought then to have heard no more 
 of it ; when one day, at the end of Pluviose, 
 last year, about eight at night, when Lajo- 
 lais and two other persons were announced, 
 he mounted into the saloon, where he found 
 
( 80 ) 
 
 Lajolais, Pichegru, and Couchery. Couchery 
 was a friend of Lajolais, who had called 
 some months previously to ask if he had any 
 letters to send to Pichegru, to which Mo- 
 reau had answered, that he had nothing, 
 and that he would not write to him while 
 he was in a foreign country at war with 
 France. 
 
 Moreau was extremely vexed to see Piche- 
 gru, after what had passed in the year 5 ; 
 he never could have been easy if he had 
 been arrested in his house. They entered into 
 a library adjoining the saloon, where they 
 remained a few minutes. 
 
 Pichegru then spoke of nothing but his 
 erasure from the list of emigrants, and his^ 
 desire to live in France, and of the means 
 of getting a pas^^ ort to leave it. Moreau 
 advised him in that case to quit England, 
 and retire for some time into Germ.any. He 
 also pressed Pichegru to go away. Ke added, 
 that he would have seen him with pleasure. 
 
( 81 ) 
 
 if he could have been of use to him, but that- 
 not being the case, he wished not to see hirn 
 any more. They remained togetherabout fif- 
 teen minutes. On rejoining Lajolais, Moreau 
 reproached him with having brought Piche- 
 gru, and desired, with regard to himself, 
 that he hoped he would never return. 
 
 Nothing can be more free from guilt than 
 that interview. As a proof that it was of 
 no importance, it w^as too short for a first 
 meeting, on any thing of consequence rela- 
 tive to a conspiracy. Besides, even according 
 to the accusation itself, it is at the second 
 meeting that the opening of the conspiracy 
 is introduced. 
 
 Moreau would not again see either Piche- 
 gru or Lajolais; he had declared so formally 
 to both. Lajolais, indeed, never came back : 
 but a few days afterwards M. Roland, who 
 in the years 4, 5, 8, and Q, had served under 
 General Moreau, at the army of theRhine, as 
 inspector of transports, and who had been 
 
 M 
 
( S2 ) 
 
 in the habit of waiting on him occasionally 
 to pay his respects, arrived one morning, and 
 asked for a meeting with Pichegru, who 
 lodged at his house. Moreau refused. When 
 lioland said he had something very impor- 
 tant to communicate. Moreau persisted in 
 not seeing him, but, in order to soften a harsh 
 message to an old friend in adversity, said 
 that he would send his secretary to know 
 what General Pichegru wanted. 
 
 He waited very patiently for an answer, 
 when in the evening Pichegru arrived, 
 Moreau was told that one wanted him. He 
 went into his closet, and to his great surprise 
 found Pichegru. Moreau was very vexed ; 
 but Pichegru was there. Nothing indis- 
 creet on his part had taken place at the last 
 interview, and it would have been ridicu- 
 lous and unbecoming to make a disturbance 
 by turning him to the door. 
 
 The conversation began. Pichegru at first 
 spoke of his personal embarrassments, of 
 
( 83 ) 
 
 passports, and of returning to France. After 
 some vague observations, Pichegru turned 
 the C( nversation upon politics. That was 
 not extraordinary between two men who 
 had acted so great a part. Pichegru spoke of 
 the Invasion of England, the dangers attend- 
 ing the absence of the First Consul from Paris 
 for public tranquillity, and the consequences 
 ofa miscarriage. It was then that Pichegru 
 alluded to the changes that had taken place 
 in public opinion, on the abstract Ideas of 
 republican government. He spoke of the 
 Bourbons, of their misfortunes, and of their 
 rights, without opening any plan or settled 
 project, speaking by hypothesis — if the de- 
 scent on England should prove unfortunate, 
 //'In consequence of that misfortune parties 
 rose up again to tear their country afresh — 
 he tried to sound Moreau on that subject, 
 and his dispositions towards that family. It 
 was X\\tn,fortheJirsl time, that Moreau came 
 at the knowledge, not of a conspiracy, but 
 M 2 
 
( 84 ) 
 
 the slight insinuations of a7t opening for one. 
 As to Moreau, he repulsed all those insinua- 
 tions, drily, laconically, and decidedly. He 
 spoke to Pichegru of such things as being 
 incompatible with the new ideas of the na- 
 tion, and in themselves ridiculous. It was 
 then that he conducted himself the beft of 
 any time in all the business. Pichegru be- 
 came taciturn, and the meeting was finish- 
 ed with a request on the part of Moreau, for 
 him never to return, which Pichegru pro- 
 mised. Moreau and he separated very coolly, 
 Pichegru with an air of discontent. 
 
 The discontent of Pichegru is a thing 
 •well ascertained, since Roland, who cannot 
 be suspected of affection for General Moreau, 
 says, that in returning to Moreau, he did not 
 agree with him. Lajolais and Couchery say, 
 that he looked much discontented, and the 
 words they attribute to him are an unequi* 
 vocal proof that he was so. 
 
 However that may be, he never again re- 
 
( 83 ) 
 
 turned to Moreau — Lajolals had also been 
 forbidden, so that every connection between 
 Moreau and Pichegru was at an end, except 
 that Roland had not yet been forbidden to 
 return. 
 
 Roland returned next day, and made the 
 conversation turn on the samesubjeds with 
 those on which Pichegru had spoke. Mo- 
 reau, in a conversation with a man whom he 
 had known for fix or eight years, traced 
 the ideas of Pichegru ; but the whole, as he 
 himself allows, was treated by Moreau as 
 ridiculous folly. He then asked Moreau, 
 in case of new troubles, if he had never 
 thought of seizing some authority, which 
 appeared to Moreau to be ridiculous ; that 
 he answered with a smile of contempt: 
 " That if there were troubles, the Senate 
 ** would be there ; as to himself, he was not 
 " a madman ; that before a private indi- 
 " vidual like himself, retired from military 
 " affairs and men in power, could turn in 
 
( 80 ) 
 
 ♦' his mind any project of ambition ; the 
 " whole government must be overturned, 
 *' and that the Consul, his family, and all 
 *' those now in pov^^er, must be destroyed ; 
 " and that if ever he had wished for power, 
 *' it would have been when h^ was at the 
 " head of armies." There he finished, and 
 Roland, rather abruptly conducted to the 
 door, went away. 
 
 General Moreau attests this to be a true 
 account of the entire history of all his con- 
 nection, interview's, and discourses with 
 Pichegru and Roland, of which nobody ac- 
 cuses him, and nobody was witness. Not a 
 line, not a word from Moreau gave a single 
 idea. Pichegru is no more, and Pichegru 
 never uttered a word to contradict the as- 
 sertions of Moreau. It would seem then 
 unjust, on every principle, to impute other 
 words or actions to the accused, than those 
 which he has avowed on this occasion. 
 How could the act of accusation crimi- 
 
( a7 ) 
 
 nate Moreau in these conversations ? What 
 charges has it produced ? They are as fol- 
 low: 
 
 According to that act of accusation, there 
 was another interview between Moreau and 
 Pichegru, at nine in the evening, on the 
 Boulevard of La Madelaine. Lajolais swears 
 to it in one of his examinations. Victor 
 Couchery said that he knew of it ; but, 
 when examined farther, he said it was La- 
 jolais that told him of it. Bouvet de Lozier, 
 in a very extraordinary declaration which he 
 signed, a few moments after he had been 
 rescued from an attempt to self-murder, says 
 that he went on a day, named by Lajolais, with 
 Pichegru and others to the Boulevard ; that 
 Lajolais came and fetched Pichegru from the 
 coach, and carried him to meet Moreau in 
 the Champs Elysees, with whom he had a 
 conference, from the result of which it ap- 
 peared that Moreau opposed the royalists. 
 
 According to the act of accusation, Ar- 
 
( «8 ) 
 
 mand Pollgnac knew, by hearsay, that there 
 was a conference between Moreau, Pichegru, 
 and Georges, at Chaillot. 
 
 According to that act, Picot has declared, 
 that one day Pichegru waited for some one 
 at the water-side, at the Champs Elysees, 
 but the person never came ; that it was 
 Moreau he waited for, but that could not 
 have happened if Moreau had not promised 
 to come. 
 
 According to the act of accusation, Lajo- 
 lais said that Moreau had himseirappointed 
 the first meeting with Pichegru. 
 
 By the same act, on the testimony of Ro- 
 land, Moreau also appointed the second 
 meeting. 
 
 By that act also, on the testimony of Ro- 
 land, Moreau, in his conversation with him, 
 refused to join any royalist party ; but if they 
 ■would dispose of the Consul and Governor 
 of Paris, that then he would see what was to 
 be done, having a strong party in the Senate, 
 
( 80 ) 
 
 which would help him to [);et power, after 
 which they would see what was best to be 
 done. 
 
 It is a necessary, but a deplorable task to 
 answer such charges ; it, however, is not dif- 
 ficult. 
 
 Moreau, in the first place, declares he saw 
 Pichegru twice ; and as to whether any othet 
 meetings were proposed, at which Moreau 
 did not attend, there can be nothing of less 
 importance. 
 
 There could be no crime in promising to 
 go to the Champs Elysees, or Chaillot, to a 
 meeting which he did not attend. 
 
 Neither was there any crime to have seen 
 Pichegru on the Boulevard, as he had seen 
 him in his own house ; neither was their 
 any crime in sending his secretary. 
 
 If Moreau, in place of wishing to speak 
 the truth, consulted his own interest, he 
 would let those assertions go unanswered. 
 
 N 
 
{ 90 ) 
 
 A variety of contradictory and improbable 
 circumstances would give the lie to the 
 whole. 
 
 If we credit Lajolais, who demanded the 
 interview on the Boulevard, it w^as for a 
 Wednesday, and Moreau put it off till the 
 Friday, on account of a hunting-party, which 
 did not take place. What ! Moreau sends 
 to England for Pichegru to conspire with 
 him in Paris ; and when he arrives, for a 
 party of pleasure, w hich does not take place, 
 delays the great, the important, the long- 
 sought interview ! This is incredible. 
 
 We m.ust give credit to collections of hear- 
 says, made by Bouvet or Victor Couchery. 
 Bouvet says, he understood that, in that con- 
 ference, Moreau had given hints of a formal 
 refusal. Victor Couchery, on hearsay, be- 
 lieves that Georges came there, and that at 
 bis arrival Moreau departed, and that the 
 meeting with Pichegru was cold and short. 
 Moreau then did not at all act with Georges^ 
 
( 91 ) 
 
 nor did he act cordially with Pichegru. The 
 rumours of London were then not true. 
 Morcau had nothing to do with the busi- 
 ness. 
 
 The act of accusation itself allows, that 
 Moreau did not meet Pichegru at Chaillot, 
 but that he promised to meet him. All this, 
 if it were true, only proves the extreme re- 
 pugnance of Moreau to meet Pichegru. 
 
 Moreau then denies these facts, not in 
 order to defend himself, but for the sake of 
 truth ; and because, while he will deny no- 
 thing that he has done, he will not acknow- 
 ledge what he never did. 
 
 He then denies having been on the Bou- 
 levard, and no one says they saw him there ; 
 Georges did not see him. Bouvet did not see 
 him. Villeneuve did not see him. Bouvet and 
 Cuchery speak from hearsay ; and that hear- 
 say-appears to come from Lajolais. Lajolais 
 had appeared to say in his written interro- 
 gatories, that Moreau was there ; but since, 
 N 2 
 
( 93 ) 
 
 on the trial, he has complained tliat his de- 
 claration was taken down wrong. He ter- 
 giverses, explains, extenuates. He evidently 
 wished to do away his first evidence : he said 
 he believed, he thought he saw him, he was 
 not very certain — he was not very certain 
 thathe had made the appointment, he was not 
 very certain that he had there seen Pichegru. 
 We shall soon sec why he first spread the 
 report, and afterwards wanted to do it away. 
 General Moreau denies having been at 
 Challlot, and the porters of the house where 
 Pichegru lodged swore that they never saw 
 him there; neither is there any circumstance 
 to make it probable. 
 
 He denies having made any promise to 
 go to the Champs Elysees, and no witness 
 comes to prove that ever he did. The act 
 of accusation is beautifully logical in this 
 part. They waited there for somebody, and 
 as they waited for somebody, they waited 
 for Moreau, and as they waited for Moreau, 
 
( 03 ) 
 
 he must have promised to come I It is not pos- 
 sible seriously to refute such reasoning, but it 
 is cruel that the life of a man should be at 
 stake. 
 
 These reports, however, were spread 
 abroad, and credited. Why was this done ? 
 It appears, that for a small pecuniary ad- 
 vantage, Lajolais was interested in giving 
 the royalists hopes respecting Moreau : this 
 was fabricated for the purpose. 
 
 Having sold his falsehoods in London for 
 bread, he could not at once abandon his pur- 
 suit: he deceived Pichegru, first promised a 
 meeting with Moreau, and to gain time, said 
 there was a hunting party. Then a meeting 
 is made, where Moreau never comes : at last 
 Pichegru and Lajolais force themselves on 
 Moreau in his own house. 
 
 This is the explanation of the conduct of 
 Lajolais. When confronted with the illus- 
 trious man whom he had so grievously in- 
 jured, perhaps without any bad intention, 
 the agitations of his mind were visible to 
 
( 04 ) 
 
 all. Pressed between personal interest, \Ahich 
 forbid him confessing that he was nn impos- 
 tor, and, on the other hand, truth, in a case 
 where thelii'e of Moreau was at stake, he says 
 his declaration had been badly written down; 
 that being a German, he had cho?en his ex- 
 pressions improperly^ confessed that it was 
 possible he was mistaken, that Moreau had 
 never given a meeting on the Boulevard's, 
 that he had never seen Pichegru there, nor 
 had he ever given any mission to him in 
 London. A tardy return this to truth in- 
 deed, but still it is some reparation made to 
 the injuries done to Moreau, and some exte- 
 nuation of his own crime. 
 
 Let us pass to the denials of Moreau. 
 
 He denies having promised the first meet- 
 ing at his own house to Pichegru. Inde- 
 pendent of the variations of Lajolais, the cir- 
 cumstance is very improbable. It is a cus- 
 tom at the great houses in this capital to 
 have one day in the week to receive com- 
 
( 95 ) 
 
 pany. It was on that public day at Moreau's 
 house, that Pichegru presented himself. 
 Pichegru, whom for so many reasons, as an 
 outlaw, and a conspirator, it was necessary 
 to conceal. It is fortunate for Moreau that 
 almost all the accusations against him are 
 void of common sense. 
 
 Common sense will decide another point ; 
 Roland says that Moreau was to send his 
 secretary to Pichegru to fetch him to a con- 
 ference. Moreau on the contrary says, that 
 having refused a personal meeting, and to 
 get rid of the importunities of Roland,, he 
 had said he would send his secretary to hear 
 what Pichegru had to say. Of these ver- 
 sions, which is true ? Undoubtedly that 
 which shocks common sense the least : that 
 is, the account given by Moreau. 
 
 Even according to Roland's account, he 
 had been wath Moreau to ask a meeting. 
 Moreau gives it. What then ? Pichegru 
 knew where he lived ; he had been there. 
 
C 9'5 ) 
 
 What necessity for the intervention of the 
 secretary ? In conspiracies agents are never 
 multiplied uselessly ; and here he was quite 
 useless ; but Roland must give some account, 
 and in that which he gives, every thing is 
 unlikely, in the account of Moreau every- 
 thing is probable and natural. 
 
 Roland is a deceiver : but let us pass to a 
 more important point, to that monstrous 
 accusation which made our hair stand on 
 end, of which he is the author. By the 
 accounts of Roland and Lajolais, both and 
 all the conspirators, the royalists were de- 
 ceived in their hopes in Moreau, but they say 
 that it was only on account of personal am- 
 bition that Moreau would not second the 
 royal cause. They make Pichegru say, on 
 leaving Moreau at the second interview, " I 
 '* see well that that villain is also ambitious." 
 
 Let us consider this a moment. As Mo- 
 reau would not support the Bourbons nor 
 royalists, it is evident he could not be their 
 
( 07 ) 
 
 accomplice, that he had not made proposi- 
 tions to them in London, sent for them, or 
 promised them support. 
 
 All the intrigues by means of David are 
 then imaginary, and the pretended mission 
 of Lajolais to London and to the Princes an 
 odious falsity. That all connection with 
 Georges and his party are falsities of the 
 blackest nature is equally certain. 
 
 In a word, whatever Moreau's crimes 
 against the State may be, there is a palpable 
 and monstrous absurdity in trying him for a 
 royalist conspiracy. 
 
 Amongst the domestics of Moreau, most 
 of whom have been arrested, not one has 
 revealed a single circumstance to inculpate 
 him. His papers are seized, but we do not 
 find a single line to criminate him. 
 
 What then is this strange conspiracy 
 
 without conspirators, without witnesses, 
 
 without means, without proofs, without 
 
 traces, and, above all, without accomplices ? 
 
 o 
 
( 08 ) 
 
 Roland will answer this. 
 
 Roland says, that Pichegru, a royalist 
 conspirator, not having been able to ex- 
 plain himself to Morcau, and finding even 
 his hints rejected, had employed him to 
 make the great opening. These are his 
 words. It was then not made ; and Mo- 
 reau as yet was no conspirator. Roland con- 
 tinues and says, that Moreau proposed that 
 Pichegru should act another way, make the 
 Consul and Governor of Paris disappear, 
 and that as he had a strong party in the se- 
 nate, he would obtain the dictatorship, and 
 then they w^ould do what public opinion 
 should dictate. 
 
 Roland when confronted, and pressed by 
 his conscience, preserved some part of his 
 declaration, and rejected the rest. He did 
 not say that the words Consul and Governor of 
 Paris disappear, meant that they should be 
 murdered ; but, that if they should disap- 
 pear in a natural way, and that Moreau had 
 
( 00 ) 
 
 Said to him when speaking of his claims for 
 pubh'c authority, that before that could hap- 
 pen, it would be necessary that there should 
 neither be Consuls nor any of the men at that 
 time invested with public dignity. Let any 
 one judge what faith is to be placed in a wit- 
 ness who varies in so important a recital. 
 Where would be the safety of the best of 
 citizens, if it depended on the first wretch 
 who should thus explain a real or imaginary 
 conversation ? 
 
 A conversation! That idea alone makes one 
 tremble. A conversation cannot, however 
 violent againfl government, constitute trea- 
 son. What ! They do not reproach Mo- 
 reau with one single act of conspiracy. If 
 his heart is not pure his conduct is. He 
 has not taken one step, or seduced one ac- 
 complice ; not one has been produced. But, 
 says Roland, he has spoken ill. Roland de. 
 serves credit. Roland may have heard ill, 
 understood ill, remembered ill what was said 
 © 2 
 
( 100 ) 
 
 t)y Moreau. Are a few fugitive words, fe*» 
 peated by an incorrect hearer, and repeated 
 after a treacherous memory, to bring a maiv 
 to the block ! No, that is not possible tinder 
 a just Government ; and that under which 
 we live is just. 
 
 No ! Never shall we see under our Go- 
 vernment a citizen punished for the crime 
 of speaking, on the word of an informer. 
 
 But Roland, the informer, is already proved 
 to have spoken falsely by the man he has 
 -accused, and the story he tells bears a strange 
 species of probability. 
 
 According to him, the meaning is simply 
 this : Moreau, who is no royalist, says to 
 the partisans of the house of Bourbon, " I 
 *' will never serve the princes of that family. 
 *' But let the royalists act — I shall not in- 
 *' terfere — I shall wait for their success : let 
 *' them murder the consul and the governor 
 ** of Paris, and when they are masters, and 
 ** shall have surmounted all obstacles, ia 
 
( '01 ) 
 
 *^ place of proclaiming the king, to whom 
 *' they are devoted, and for whom alone they 
 *' conspire, they shall call me. I will come 
 " forth to reap the fruits of their labour and 
 *' their danger ; I will go to the senate, and 
 " have myself named dictator." 
 
 A more absurd idea never entered the hu- 
 man brain, than to suppose that pure royal- 
 ists would, at the risk of their lives, become 
 the deserters of their king, to have the ho- 
 nour of being the soldiers of the dictator 
 Moreau. 
 
 Roland sins even more against common 
 sense than he does against the truth itself: 
 he cannot be believed in any part of his de- 
 claration 
 
 The deceit is the more evident, that, ac- 
 cording to him, Moreau had said that he 
 had a great party in the Senate. Indepen- 
 dent of the improbability of that, and the 
 affront done to the most honourable body in 
 the state. General Moreau asks why there 
 
( >02 ) 
 
 arc no Senators brought to trial along With 
 him? 
 
 It may be said, but what is the interest of 
 Roland ?* Roland's interest may be two- 
 fold. 
 
 At firft he may have been only a vile in- 
 former, w^ho had invented a false accusation 
 for a high salary ; and this appears probable, 
 when we consider, that whilst the others 
 were thrown into the Temple, he alone, the 
 tempter of Moreau, and, of consequence 
 more guilty than him, has been placed in the 
 Abbey, where he constantly enjoys his sleep, 
 the company of his friends, and receives his 
 letters. The others are kept rigorously in 
 secret cells. 
 
 If, however, this is a mistake, and he was 
 
 * If the reader will look at the last page of additional 
 observations, he will see this question much better, and 
 indeed very completely answered. It would appear,'' 
 that the additional observations did not come out till 
 after the trial was altogether or at least in part over.—' 
 Translator's NoU, 
 
( 103 ) 
 
 a real conspirator, he may act thus to soften 
 the severity of his puniihment. Already an 
 idea of clemency was held out to him on an 
 examination. " If you declare nothing," said 
 they to him, " you will be looked upon as 
 *' an accomplice ; if you do declare what 
 *' you know, you may be considered as a 
 " confident^ Was it necessary to say more 
 to a base-minded man, to make him save 
 himself by Ues, where he had not truths to 
 discover? 
 
 He cannot be beHeved, because he him- 
 self is on his triaL He cannot be believed, 
 because he gives no proofs or circumstances 
 to support his assertions. He cannot be be- 
 lieved, because probabilities give him the lie. 
 He cannot be believed, because fugitive 
 words are too liable to alteration for one to 
 be certain that they were said absolutely in 
 that particular sense and meaning. 
 
 The whole proofs of that conspiracy, at- 
 tributed to Moreau, consist in the deciara- 
 
( 104 ) 
 
 tion of a man who is himself accused. Mo- 
 reau ought to be acquitted. 
 
 It remains to speak to the crime imputed 
 to General Moreau for net lodging an infor- 
 mation. 
 
 FIFTH COUNT. 
 
 General Moreau did not hiform on the Con- 
 spirators. 
 
 TO denounce a crime, it is necessary for 
 him who is to do that to be acquainted with 
 it. He must know the end proposed, and 
 means of execution. 
 
 He who denounces, without proof suffi- 
 cient to bring the delinquent to punishment, 
 is by the law a calumniator. 
 
 The denunciator is then to judge of th& 
 crime against which he is to give informa- 
 tion. 
 
 If the guilt is not manifest, if the circum« 
 stances and persons are uncertain, the duty of 
 ti citizen does not require him to interfere. 
 
( 105 ) 
 
 There is question here of a great plot 
 against the state. Such a plot can only be 
 known when individuals unite> and commu- 
 nicate their views, designs, and means of 
 action, tending towards one general purpose. 
 
 Moreau knew of no such conspiracy. 
 
 All that he saw was Pichegru and Roland* 
 
 As there was no witness to the conference 
 with Pichegru, Moreau alone can know 
 what passed. 
 
 He has established sufficiently that the 
 first conference was of no importance. 
 
 The second consisted of questions and sup- 
 positions, from which it appeared that, in 
 case of certain events, Pichegru wished to 
 restore the Bourbon family ; but when he 
 found Moreau averse, he kept, as indeed he 
 ought, his secret to himself. 
 
 Was he to tell bis secret to a man who 
 disapproved of his views, and would not act 
 with him ? 
 
 Moreau only knew of a wild idea of re- 
 
storing the Bourbons, which he found com- 
 pletely ridiculous. 
 
 Roland himself, Roland confesses that, on 
 the l/th, he did not incipart to him any 
 other. 
 
 There is no mention any where of a re- 
 gulated plan communicated to Moreau. 
 
 If Moreau, knowing no more, and wishing 
 to know no more, had denounced Pichegru, 
 what would have been the consequence ? 
 Pichegru was either gone off, or to be found 
 in Paris. 
 
 In the first case, producing no effect, it 
 would have been blamed. 
 
 In the second, Pichegru denying all, and 
 Moreau having no proofs, Moreau w^ould 
 have been left alone in the midst of his de- 
 nunciation, and considered as a calumniator. 
 
 Were we indeed to suppose that Moreau 
 knew of a real conspiracy, practicable and 
 near, then indeed, if he had not given infor- 
 mation, he would have failed in his duty to 
 
( 107 ) 
 
 hk country. He might have been deemed 
 indolent and careless, but could it be pu- 
 nished as a crime ? — No. 
 
 In the penal code of 1st September, 1791, 
 and of 3d Brumaire, year 4, amongst a very 
 numerous series of crimes and punishments, 
 this is not to be found. 
 
 The knowing of a crime, and not reveal- 
 ing it, is no where mentioned ; yet these 
 two laws contain the whole of our penal 
 code. Since these laws were made, w^e 
 know no crimes but such as are there men- 
 tioned. An action not mentioned there may 
 be blameable, but not punishable. 
 
 It signifies nothing that an ancient law 
 makes this a crime ; if it is not so by the 
 new one, it is no crime for us. 
 
 The penal code says so itself; and in fine 
 there is neither crime nor punishment, un- 
 less contained in the penal code. 
 
 After that, it is useless to search in ancient 
 laws for that which says, that he who con- 
 P 2 
 
( 108 ) 
 
 ceals a crime is equally guilty with him who 
 commits it. We know there was such a 
 law made by that suspicious monarch, 
 Louis XL in 14/7. 
 
 We know that Cardinal Richelieu punish- 
 ed De Thou in virtue of this law : a process 
 which, in recalling the execrated name of 
 Labourdemont, recals also the horrors of 
 which he was guilty. But what signifies so 
 ancient a law, which was never but once 
 put in force, and which none of the succes- 
 sors of Louis XI ever caused to be renewed? 
 
 Neither the famous ordinance of 15 3Q, 
 fabricated by the Chancellor Puget to ruin 
 Admiral Chabot, nor the ordinances of Or- 
 leans and of Blois, nor any other ordinances 
 known since 14/7, contain such an article. 
 
 We should not have a legislative code 
 adapted to every case, and forbidding every 
 punishment it does not command, were it 
 not for the danger of renewing a law 0£ 
 violence, which the silence of centuries has 
 
( 109 ) 
 
 condemned to eternal oblivion, which the 
 execration of posterity has followed in its 
 single example, and to prevent the work of 
 vengeance and despotism from being re- 
 newed under the reign of liberty, and in the 
 very temple of the laws. 
 
 In terminating this melancholy defence, 
 let us be permitted to express a sentiment 
 which has weighed heavy on our hearts 
 while we have been composing it. 
 
 Moreau is accused of wishmg to grasp 
 supreme power, and of conspiring against 
 the Emperor. 
 
 No ; we swear by honour and glory, Mo- 
 reau is not guilty. No : Moreau could not 
 wish again to involve us in the horrors of 
 a new revolution. He who knows but too 
 well what a devouring monster it is, since it 
 tore away his father while the son v^'as fight- 
 ing its battles. No ; Moreau could not wish 
 the ruin of a country, where his name is 
 
( 110 ) 
 
 surrounded with so much glory. A man so 
 modest, so free from ambition, when he had 
 the means of reigning : he that was so free 
 from jealousy of rivals, of far inferior capacity 
 to himself, which a weak government set 
 over him; surely he could never envy that fa- 
 voured genius, whom Providence has formed 
 to be the regulator of a great empire, and to 
 whom one may yield without shame, so ho- 
 nourable are still the places inferior to him. 
 Ah ! — What ! when all the kings of Eu- 
 rope court his alliance , when he has created 
 kingdoms and distributed crowns, is it pos- 
 sible, for an instant, to suppose that a thought 
 of rivalship can enter into the heart of a 
 man, who, whatever his abstract opinions re- 
 lative to forms of government may be, has 
 been always, during twelve years, faithful 
 and obedient to the government that the 
 will of the nation chose to institute ? He 
 has been obedient to Joubert and Sherer, 
 
( 111 ) 
 
 and to the people of heroes. He cannot be 
 ashamed to obey their chief. 
 
 BONNET, ^p, ,. 
 BELLART, i^^^^^^"?, 
 PERIGNONj ^°^""^^- 
 
 SUPPLEMENTARY OBSERVATIONS. 
 
 AMONGST a great number of means of 
 throwing off all blame from General Mo- 
 reau, several have been omitted. We wish 
 to bring forward one or two that are impor- 
 tant. 
 
 Already it has been observed how free he 
 was from reproach in his connection with 
 the Abbe David. The letter of the Gene- 
 ral to him is a clear justification of their 
 connection. In ten lines wc find a noble 
 explanation of his conduct in the events 
 which had preceded the 18th Fructidor of 
 the year 5. 
 
 Moreau's opinion on the blame attached 
 
( 112 ) 
 
 to Pichegru for his conduct in remaining 
 united with the enemies of France, contain- 
 " ed these words : I regret much that the 
 *^ part he has taken these three last cam- 
 ** paigns has confirmed that opinion," viz. 
 that he was in the conspiracy of Fructidor. 
 
 Yet he nevertheless testified his wish to 
 be useful to Pichegru, and to put no obstacle 
 in the way of his return to France. 
 
 One must shut their eyes not to see in all 
 this, instead of culpability and treason, love 
 and attachment to his country, and genero- 
 sity to an unfortunate friend. 
 
 We must add, that all this is better proved 
 now that the Abbe David declares distinctly 
 that he imparted his plan of a reconciliation 
 between Moreau and Pichegru to a number 
 of Generals, who had nothing to do with 
 intrigues or plots of any sort, and that he 
 only acted with their approbation. It is 
 now proved, that the words, in a letter from 
 Pichegru to David, *' If you could bring me 
 
( 113 ) 
 
 ** a few words from the friend, you would 
 " give me much pleasure," does not apply 
 to Moreau, but to a senator, who has allowed 
 this to be stated in his defence, and who in 
 reaUty sent the few words which were found 
 amongst David's papers when he was ar- 
 rested. 
 
 Another and more important object re- 
 lates to Roland, of whose atrocious villainy 
 there are proofs in every line of the absurd 
 and frightful speech which he puts in the 
 mouth of General Moreau. 
 
 The improbability and falsity is palpable, 
 but the speech that he gives to Moreau has 
 so weighed upon his loyal and genero\is 
 mind, that he requests that vve explain still 
 farther the circumstances which are only 
 pointed out in his defence, in order entirely 
 to destroy its credibility. 
 
 The question which brought on the an- 
 swer of Roland, where we find the words 
 Q 
 
( 114 ) 
 
 imputed to General Moreau, and the answer 
 even of Roland, are necessary to be compared, 
 in order to see how the one naturally pro- 
 duced the other, and how it was impossible 
 for Roland not to seize the opportunity of 
 saving his life, which he expected. Indeed 
 it is probable he bargained to purchase that 
 by an atrocious calumny. 
 
 To the first question, on the subject of 
 the conference recounted by Pichegru to 
 Boland, he answers, " It is already some 
 " time since that conversation took place, 
 ** and I cannot he certain, that that which 
 " was said to me then has rema'i)ied very fa'ttJu 
 ** S^^^b (accurately) on >vy memory, and I am 
 ** liable to mistake^ 
 
 Here comes an interrogation which occu- 
 pies three pages, and in which they tell Ro- 
 land that they know every thing that he has 
 said or done, that t e new of his confe- 
 rences with Pichegru, and they tell him that 
 
( ''5 ) 
 
 his apartment was so arranged, that, in spite 
 of all his precautions, the secret was betray* 
 ed. The question finishes thus: ** Take 
 " good care that in preserving silence, you 
 *' do not deprive justice of the knowledge 
 '* of any fact that ought to be known. You 
 " will force us to think, that mpJ ace of being 
 " the confidant you have heen the accomplice of 
 *' the men whom justice pursues. I request 
 " you then to speak with greater frankness^ 
 " and to tell me not only all that Pichegru 
 ** has said to you, but all you have learnt 
 " from Moreau, with whom it will be proved 
 *' you were the second day that Pichegru 
 *' lodged with you : you were heard speak 
 *' by the same means; and you said to 
 " Pichegru, that Moreau had a strong party 
 " hi the senate^ that he (Moreau) was at the 
 " head of an insurrection against the First 
 " Consul and the Governor of Paris, and that 
 *' there was question of the Bourbons, 
 Q 2 
 
( 116 ) 
 
 " i therefore command you to give ex- 
 " planatlons on all the facts, and respecting 
 *' the conferences to give us the whole 
 " truth." 
 
 It was on that question that Roland, afraid 
 before of making a mistake, and who doubted 
 the faithfulness of his memory, finds his re- 
 collection, at once banishes all his foolish 
 scruples, and goes on straight forward in the 
 route pointed out to him. He acknow- 
 ledges to have given wrong answers, but, 
 under the expectation of never being more 
 considered as an accomplice, but as a coti' 
 Jida?ity he asserts, that Moreau told him he 
 had a strong party in the senate^* * * * * j 
 that he could obtain power, but for that 
 purpose the Consul, &c. &c. must dis- 
 appear. 
 
 Who is it that cannot see the analogy be- 
 tween the artful question and the answer 
 ■ — how little appearance of truth there is 
 
( "7 ) 
 
 here ? The answer is destitute of all proba- 
 bility. 
 
 Roland, who till then had said nothing, 
 although nearly connected with Pichegru, 
 who had lodged in his house, having much 
 to fear, and taking the hint from the ques- 
 tion, that he may in future be considered as 
 an accomplice, unless he answers properly, 
 and saves himself by a great calumny. The 
 matter is easily understood ; for, indepen- 
 dent of the quality of the prisoner, the an- 
 swer stands unconnected, and its credibility 
 would be entirely lost by the situation in 
 which the man who answers is placed, who 
 saw that he could purchase his life by*- a 
 guilty evidence. 
 
 But let us go farther. Who was it that 
 had revealed all this before Roland was in- 
 terrogated } It must either have been Roland 
 himself or other witnesses. 
 
 If it was heard by other witnesses; wh^ 
 
( 118 ) 
 
 were they not produced ? If it was Roland, 
 and that is very probable, who does not see 
 him go grovelling to buy his life in promis- 
 ing information, which he had previously 
 invented. 
 
 It would be superabundant to say any 
 more on this subject. Roland is the only 
 one who affirms the fact, and Moreau posi- 
 tively denies it. 
 
 Roland is an accused man, and according 
 to every principle his declaration ought not 
 to be taken, it can form no proof. 
 
 It is supposed that Moreau wished to get 
 hold of power. His character, his manners, 
 his retirement from the world, both the 
 great world and the small, the total absence 
 of any witness that was intimate with 
 him, or that knew him, the improbability 
 of his making such a proposition to the 
 partisans of the Bourbons, all that makes 
 the accusation totally improbable. 
 
{ "9 ) 
 
 What just or impartial man will with- 
 stand such clear demonstrations ? 
 
 BONNET, ] Pleading 
 BELLART, >Counsel- 
 PERIGNONJ lors. 
 
 FINIS. 
 
 T. Gillet, Primer, Salisbury-square, 
 
/r^^ 
 
 yt^^l 
 
IT' 
 
-V "^^