ee
© hi gates BOLES
ae anUniversity of Virginia Library
DC138 .F32 1927
ALD The revolutionary spirit in Fr

HN

644 bbe

Ww

AX OO

idt ot‘

Ts
oo
te
aes
od
or
re
.
+
4-
ad
”
CI
»
on
geri
on
ir
ae
Prom)
eal
rie
or
en
“Tr
me
ec
ra
7

Ses Eee ieee?

     
    

Ghiverfity Lirgin (a

   

th

—_—

| “lL; - SS 4 Pr
ls “@n Burd of Weffover 7!
f ~ % ) : aA _Z if
SS vy of9® —_ZJ
BYRD LIBRARY

Firginia Siftory ana Literature
Founded in Memory of
ALFRED H. BYRD,M.A (1887)ss

2242

Pew es ter

> ad

Ts

iteae~ |

*

“

a

RTS USS PRT ASRS ASST

JABT)
te ee>
ry

‘4
L
o]
*
4
,

pis peressetadseve ceceTHE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT
IN FRANCE AND AMERICA

™
CT
ad
7
3
o
”
ri
F
‘
iY
y

poe pe srassassisreTHE
REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT
IN FRANCE AND AMERICA

A study of moral and intellec-
tual relations between France
and the United States at the
end of the eighteenth century

by

BERNARD FAY

Translated by
RAMON GUTHRIE

 

 

 

iE

 

 

NEW YORK
HARCOURT, BRACE & COMPANY,
a)

as “L’Esprit Réz

e olutionnaire en France
et aux Etats-Unis a la Fin du XV Ille Siécle”

Published in Franc

COPYRIGHT, I927, BY
HARCOURT, BRACE AND COMPANY, INC.

~ ie Cig e
@-« x °
© ® °
. ; . ° : :
. . ® - ° > . ®
o ® .
° se :
. ®e :
ee oS a Si
- a «
. i. = ft e ~ e ee
eo € °
> > >
o
PRINTED IN THE U. S. A. BY
QUINN @ BODEN COMPANY, INC,

RAHWAY, Ny J,Contents

CHAPTER

I
II
iil
IV
V

IN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD .

THE CREATION OF THE UNITED STATES
ESSAYS IN FRATERNITY

SPIRITUAL UNION .

THE GREAT SCHISM

APPENDIX I

APPENDIX II

NOTES

BIBLIOGRAPHY

INDEXgerne

Torey ree ee
eee er ee ree

THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT
IN FRANCE AND AMERICA

PS ry eaeee

oJ
4

: Peter SPR eee ee

tacacuneixiegdChapter I

IN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD

Moral situation of France and England in 1770, pp. 3-8. Role
and influence of Raynal, pp. 8-13. Deist mysticism in
France, pp. 13-17. Controversy on America representing an
unknown and admired force, pp. 17-23-

Religious liberty in the new world, pp. 23-26. Quarrel between
England and her colonies, pp. 27-33- American opinion and
France. Decreasing unpopularity of France, pp. 33-43:

Death of Louis XV. Hopes roused in France and the good will
of Louis XVI, pp. 43-45. Desire for a national uplift
at home and abroad. The American crisis seems to furnish
the opportunity for such a movement. Vergennes wishes to
take advantage of it, pp. 45-48. French public opinion seems
divided on the question, pp. 48-55- Vergennes’ efforts to
turn opinion in favor of the Americans. He uses Beaumar-

chais as a means of persuading Louis XVI, pp. 55-61.
THE PICTURE OF THE INTELLECTUAL AND POLITICAL
world of the times that is presented by the books and
newspapers published between 1770 and 1775, 1s char-
acterized by a contrast: a lull has settled over the earth;
the great powers of the West are eyeing each other and
seeking to avoid violent conflicts, governments are striv-
ing for stability and permanence; and even the great
writers seem to be prolonging an age whose most brilliant
period has gone by. Yet at the same time, a fever of
newness is beginning to spread, an acute and indistinct

restlessness prevails throughout the world.

?

assests sacziet

A
‘t
Ni
A
i
S
i
*
Ha
a)
0

SSeS er eres tre pts Cer ee: 5
gPatedssoSoSspssrssasszgasigigativctssates

ce |
r+ e)

Pere eee eT eos tel!

=dae Be ke ee |

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 

THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

England and France, the two great nations whose
diplomats and writers served as models to the world at
large, illustrate very clearly the precarious equilibrium
between the strength of custom and the desires of men.
The state of peace established by the treaty of 1763 was
maintained; Louis XV wanted to die without having
seen any new wars. England knew this; her newspapers
repeated it; but it was also felt that France was under-
going a moral transformation whose results no one could
foretell.” Together with too feeble efforts at reorganiza-
tion were seen riots, bankruptcies, and waves of wrath
and popular indignation. In 1770 not a month went by
rae without the English papers announcing a revolt in
France.* And the continental newspapers, although they
admired the strength and incontestable political superior-
ity of England, enumerated without pity her quarrels and
dissensions, the which were all the more striking and
conspicuous since the discussions of the English Parlia-
ment were then the only example of the free parliamen-
tary activity.‘

Peace had facilitated the relations between the philos-
ophers of the various nations, and intellectual collabora-
tion between France and England had developed. At
Paris Anglomania went so far that plays and books
were written making fun of it, such as the wearying
Anglomane by Saurin,° or attacking it, as did Le Dic-

teonnaire social et patriotique. The London newspapers,IN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 5

for their part, were justified in saying that “London is
the general clearing-house for French merchandise” (dis-
patch from London quoted in the Pennsylvania Gazette
Gh July; 1771).

Unfortunately this cordial intercourse seemed con-
cerned only with futilities, and neither the arts nor the
sciences afforded any evidence of its fruitfulness. After
the Encyclopédie, which was nearing completion; after
the great works of Voltaire, the only remaining evidence
of whose activity was little clandestine pamphlets; after
the famous novels of Rousseau, who was living in re-
treat, France could offer the world nothing that seemed
to be of the same caliber; nor was it Debelloy, Mar-
montel, or Baculard d’Arnaud who could offset this
mediocrity in the eyes of other nations and break this
lethargy.

France dozed in her defeat as England in her victory.
Louis XV was still called “the Well-Beloved,” but he
was hated and, even more perhaps, scorned. D’Aiguil-
lon, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, was unpopular; and
the Comptroller-General Terray, in spite of his efforts
to ameliorate the condition of French finances, found
himself both hated for what he did succeed in doing and
incapable of realizing sufficient reforms. The exile of
the Parliaments had excited against the King and his
government both the upper middle class and the writers

of the time, and these formed the dominant as well as theTT

Tn

ryorines v

  

6 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

most active part of the small group which bore the name
of “public opinion.” Hatred and scorn reigned every-
where. It was the same in matters of religion. Since the
suppression and dispersion of the Jesuits, the philosophic
campaign seemed to have died down—although in 1770
Holbach had published his great book, Le Systéme de la
Nature. But this book with its materialistic affirmations
was rather a résumé of already-known theories than a
fresh attack. On the contrary, there arose from all sides
a call to religious sentiments.° Here we have Voltaire
building a church, attending communion on Easter Sun-
day, preaching from the pulpit: here is Rousseau dream-
ing and finding outlet for his mystic soul in the Réveries
dun Promeneur solitaire. Turgot severs relations with
the Encyclopédistes: Helvetius,’ before his death, forms
the project of uniting writers and savants into a Masonic
lodge for fraternal labors in the search of knowledge and
the practice of benevolence. On every hand F reemasonry
springs up afresh to create lodges to which are drawn
the finest minds and the noblest souls of the century,
weary of negation and argument. Whether it be that the
lessons of Rousseau are beginning to bring forth fruit,
or simply that the French soul is being borne in this di-
rection by the rhythm and the law of its activity, on all
sides one hears an appeal to sentiment and a protest
against sterility and negation. In religion, in politics, in
science, there is a tendency to endow sentiment with

power. Odes are written on such subjects as navigation,IN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 7

attacks of fever, etc. The utilitarian role of the arts is
emphasized and dwelt upon with emotion.” People find
pleasure in styling themselves patriots; and this term,
together with that of Citizen, comes into general usage.”
This tendency becomes so outstanding as to create a
mode: it is fashionable to affect spontaneity. The ascend-
ancy of Madame du Barry over Louis XV was the re-
sult of her charm and of a sort of good-fellowship with
which she treated him. Thus, underneath the great quar-
rels of the century—the which were now somewhat ap-
peased—a vast movement, until now obscure and re-
pressed, was sweeping along the younger generations and
even laying hold upon their elders, whom it was even-
tually to sweep away. It is not yet a question of a cam-
paign with a well-defined program and precise aims, as
was the Encyclopédie: neither is it a group of artists set
on the road to success, as in 1660. It seems to be a phe-
nomenon of neither a purely intellectual nor a social
order. It is rather a profound modification of the moral
being of an entire people and of an entire era. England,
no more than France, escaped it. Chatterton and Mac-
Pherson were bringing new accents into her poetry. In
her political life old Chatham on the brink of death be-
holds both the amazing corruption of the Court and the
violences of the Whigs of Wilkes’ following.” He lives
to see the frenzied people of London carry their radical
Lord Mayor in triumph and hail him as a prophet. The
old statesman is moved, and his feeble voice takes on an8 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

almost religious accent when it foretells his country’s
trials. Even the far-off colonies in America are inflamed
with the fire that the Whigs of Europe have kindled:
they are wrought with a fever that no one understands.
If one considers the civilizations of France and England
as the center of the occidental world of the eighteenth
century, it may be said that about 1770 this world was
undergoing a religious and sentimental crisis that was
impelling nations toward a moral and political ideal dif-
fering from the one that was still officially accepted.

After the wave of discussions and criticism, the world
was ready to feel, to love and to admire. An urge to
worship was making itself felt. But first new objects of
worship and new forms were needed.

A study of the most significant intellectual works of
the years 1770-1774 ought to show how contemporary
writers judged this phenomenon and in what way this
mysterious force was working in them.

One of the most remarkable books of the end of the
eighteenth century is without question the work which
Abbé Raynal published in 1770 under the pompous title,
Histoire philosophique et politique des Etablissements et
du Commerce des Européens dans les deux Indes (Am-
sterdam, 1770). The concept of the book is an original
one. Raynal’s intent was not to treat of battles and of
kings, but to show how economic considerations dominate
nations. He defended, therefore, by the plan of his

book and by its very title, a materialistic thesis, whichIN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 9

also afforded him an opportunity for criticizing indi-
rectly all the undertakings and all the great enterprises
of the European nations during the preceding three cen-
turies. For the splendor of great wars and the glory of
valiant kings, he substituted the glamor of far-off dis-
coveries and the prestige, both mysterious and scientific,
of the men who found worlds glittering with gold and
strange religions. Thus he laid hold upon the imagina-
tion, and in a time when books of travel were in such
vogue, he furnished in the guise of erudition information
at the same time original and picturesque. He afforded a
considerable contribution to the effort of the times
toward the finding or the creating of a new marvelous-
ness which should be divorced from the childishness of
mythology, from conventions and from superstition, and
which should be a thing of the living present without
losing its emotional appeal. Raynal’s talent, bombastic,
violent and rationalistic, put vehemence into the most
arduous exposition and exploited avidly all the resources
of picturesqueness, strangeness and wonder that the New
World could offer him, and all this, with a weight and
precision well calculated to impress the reader. Given so
splendid a subject, he could continue all the attacks of
the philosophical eighteenth century against intolerance,
superstition, servitude, and the cupidity of the Euro-
pean governments. He could give God a piece of his
mind for having permitted so much suffering. A priest

himself, he could curse the priests.10 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

This he did. And his book had the most brilliant suc-
cess of the century; about it rallied all those who
felt the irk of discontent and restlessness. In all stations
and spheres, hearts and minds were galvanized by it,
from young Manon Phlipon,“* who devoured it, to
Monsieur le Chevalier de Chateaubriand, who made it
his breviary and drew from it no doubt his desire to set
forth in search of Celuta and the Northwest Passage.”
As was the custom of the time, all the authors who were
handling kindred subjects or who were supposedly mak-
ing new studies of the same one, copied it without trou-
bling to make changes. The Abbé Roubaud” in his
Histoire générale de [ Asie, de Afrique et dePA mérique
in fourteen volumes, did little save transcribe the infor-
mation and statements of Raynal. Hornot, who pub-
lished in 1776 a Histoire abrégée des principaux Evéne-
ments arrives dans le Nouveau Monde, cut out parts of
it for the sake of brevity but changed nothing. Thus,
up to 1789, hardly a year went by but an imitation of
Raynal appeared. His book had been translated into all
languages; and in the English colonies in America, who
were then in conflict with their motherland, special edi-
tions of such chapters of Raynal as dealt with the
grounds of this conflict were published. It is, then, by its
intention and by its effect, a book of great value.” It is
surprising how little worth it has from the point of view
of exact knowledge. We know that Raynal incorporated
into his book items that his friends furnished him andIN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 11

that he inserted them without verification. These were
generally only philosophical dissertations.** But he him-
self did not gather his data with rigorous exactness: to
give an idea of the population of Philadelphia he cites
the statistics of 1731.°°

He states that Pennsylvania is on the seacoast, al-
though in reality it is separated from the sea by a dis-
tance of more than twenty-five miles. To depict New
England and New England life, he inserts a discourse
by a poor wench, Polly Baker,*’ who had been accused
and convicted. of having six illegitimate children. He
tells how the court, touched by her frankness and natu-
ral virtue, pardoned and released her. And from this he
proceeds to draw moving philosophical conclusions. Later
Franklin told him the tale of how, when he was a young
publisher, he had, for lack of other copy, composed an
imaginary discourse which he had attributed to a certain
Polly Baker, who was supposed to defend and justify
herself for having six illegitimate children. This dis-
course had had so much success that all the English pa-
pers had reprinted it.

Raynal maintained that such an error on his part was
a glorious one, and he changed nothing in his book.** At
any rate, he cannot be accused of having sacrificed exact-
ness merely for the sake of logic. He seems to have felt
neither hesitation nor shame at contradicting himself. On
page 372 of his Volume VI he bemoans the lot of New
England, which he claims has been, for the past fiftyThi

a

12 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

years, falling more and more deeply into decline; and on
page 425 of the same volume he declares that soon the
colonies will become as densely populated as their mother
country and will equal it in power. These errors are par-
ticularly unpardonable, for it was quite easy to obtain
information concerning the English colonies in America,
since they were a constant subject of conversation and
had been described in numerous English books. Raynal’s
inaccuracies were further accentuated by the dogmatic
tone with which he spoke on everything and chose to
admonish mankind. He undertook to reprimand, with
neither modesty nor reserve, the English government, the
discontented colonists and the nations of Europe. He
regarded all these details as being of relative unimpor-
tance to one who possessed the key to the mysteries of
life, the true light: a philosophic soul. The information
that he furnished was merely a bait. His aim was above
all to teach truths of a general nature. Thus the errors in
the facts that he furnished generously on Pennsylvania
and Boston seemed to him to be abundantly made up
for by the great lessons which he drew from the morality
of the Quakers, by his predictions of the glorious future
of America and by the moral and political applications
which he deduced from them.

The most brilliant and affirmative part of his for-
midable book, in which nothing is spared, is the picture
of North America. He executed it with special care and
put into it some of his most sonorous pages. In these,IN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 13

his whole program is revealed, or at least all that he
himself knew of his program. It is significant that he
inserted them at the end of his sixth and last volume.”

It is the thought of the young European peoples, set
down in the solitudes of the New World, given to new
and simple religions, devoted to liberty and free from
corruption, that starts him teaching and prophesying. He
sees in them the future masters of the universe, the pre-
ceptors of Europe. In doing this he gives concrete ex-
pression to ideas that were already in circulation. As
early as 1734, Voltaire in his Lettres sur les Anglais had
given a brilliant picture of the Quakers. He portrays
them as primitive men, the only true disciples of Christ,
who, like the Quakers, did not baptize, did not partake
of communion, and condemned luxury and war (Cwvres
de Voltaire, Vol. XXII, pp. 82-95). In his Traité sur Ja
Tolérance (1763) he lavishes on them the same praises.
Indeed, throughout his literary career he used them as a
weapon against Catholicism. In his Essa¢ sur les Maurs
he devoted entire pages to William Penn and his reli-
gious organization in the New World, so simple, so rea-
sonable, and so fraught with virtue. ‘“These primitive
beings are of all men the most worthy of respect,” he
writes. In the Philosophical Dictionary the words “bap-
tism,” “church,” “Quakers,” “Hermes,” and “tolerance”
gave him the opportunity to continue this portrait of the
customs and character of the Quakers, with their sane

fervor which bore no offense to philosophy and, above14 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

all, their altruism. Indeed, one of the most violent at-
tacks against Catholicism about 1770 was the anonymous
pamphlet, attributed to Voltaire, L’Américain sensé par
hazard en Europe (Rome, 1769), in which the Catholic
dogmas and the Mass are made the object of ridicule and
blasphemy in the name of pure Reason. The custom of
using the Quakers as the representatives of wisdom and
common sense was so generally accepted that one of the
enemies of Voltaire and the philosophers, in refutation
of the Sage of Ferney, wrote in 1768 a pamphlet which
he entitled Les Quakers a leur Frére Voltaire”
(London, 1768). This little work by Fabry d’Autrey, in
which Voltaire is rebuked in concise but measured terms
and his violences reproached with firmness, shows the
place that, even before Raynal, the Quakers held in re-
ligious and philosophic controversy. The principal nov-
elty that Raynal brought into play in treating this sub-
ject consisted of the use of a prophetic and impassioned
tone instead of the raillery and the indirect allusions of
Voltaire.

He describes thus the future of the Quakers: “How
may we associate the strictness of the evangelical max-
ims which govern the Quakers to the letter, with that
organization of offensive and defensive force which
keeps all Christian peoples in a state of continual war-
fare? If anything distinguishes favorably the disciples
of Jesus from the children of Mohammed, it is the weap-
ons that the former seem to have abandoned to the lat-IN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 15

ter. Was it not persecution and martyrdoms that swelled
the ranks of Christianity at its birth? Even so, the Quak-
ers flourished under the hand of the executioner and the
conqueror. By patience in prisons and in tortures, they
will gain more converts than the gibbets of the wicked
can destroy. What would the French or the Spaniards
do if they invaded Pennsylvania, weapons in their
hands? Unless they slaughtered in a single night or in
a single day all the inhabitants of this happy land, they
would not stamp out the germ and the posterity of these
gentle and charitable men. Violence finds its limitations
‘n its own excesses. It consumes itself and is extinguished
like fire in its own ashes. But virtue, when it is directed
by an enthusiasm for humanity, by the spirit of frater-
nity, comes to life again like a tree under the blade of
the ax. The wicked need the aid of the multitude to
carry out their sanguinary projects. The righteous man,
the Quaker, needs only a brother to receive from him or
to give him succor. Go, ye warrior peoples, ye peoples of
slaves and of tyrants, go to Pennsylvania! There you
will find every door open, all possessions unguarded,
not a soldier, and many merchants and laborers. But if
you torment them or afflict them, they will take flight
and leave you their fallow fields, their factories in ruins,
their deserted shops. They will push on to cultivate and
people a new land, they will circle the world and die
along the way rather than slaughter you or obey you.
What will you have gained save the hatred of mankind16 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

 

and the execration of centuries to come?” * His enthusi-
asm for this primitive folk leads him to use them as a
great lesson to the nations. He exclaims, ‘“‘Pennsylvania
gives the lie to the imposture and the flattery that pro-
claim with impunity in temples and courts that man has
need of gods and kings. The righteous man, the free man,
needs only his equals to be happy” (0. cét., Vol. VI,
p. 294). Then he depicts the moral decadence of Europe
and the progress of America, where agriculture, arts and
sciences are to prosper, and which is to bring about a
new era for humanity (édem, p. 425). He believes that
this result is inevitable and does not countenance any
attempt of immoral European intrigues to hasten it. He
does not even accord the English colonists the right to
free themselves by force, so much does he desire their
absolute spiritual purity and see in them the apostles
of a new moral world. He lays these praises and these
heavy responsibilities upon the thirteen colonies, who
were then having difficulties with Great Britain, their
mother country. In his preaching are mingled the voice
of a prophet announcing a God and that of a tutor in-
structing a pupil. The essential and secret thesis of his
book might be recapitulated approximately in this for-
mula: the moral reformation will] come about through
€conomic phenomena and through the influence of Amer-
ica; it will be inaugurated by the Anglo-Americans, a
people which “enjoys all the happiness compatible with
human frailty”; it will follow the lines that humanIN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 17

reason and philosophy will trace for it, and therefore it
is necessary that proponents of philosophy bring the
Philadelphians to understand what their duty is and
what their method of accomplishing it should be. Out
of this collaboration, to which the former are to con-
tribute their ideas and precepts, the latter their faith
and their acts, the reign of wisdom will be born.

His exhortations fell on ready ground. His ideas might
seem grotesque because of the daring fashion in which
he warped them to his ends. But they could neither sur-
prise nor shock. America and the English colonies were
then the center of impassioned discussion, political as
well as scientific and philosophical.” A certain Abbé De
Pauw, a philosopher of the Berlin school, had just pub-
lished in that city a work which had attained a great
success and caused unusual stir. It was entitled
Recherches philosophiques sur les Anglo-Américains.
Abbé De Pauw had discovered that America was a con-
tinent of recent formation, that it had hardly finished
drying out, or even that it was still just a bit wet. It
was therefore in every way inferior to Europe; the plants
there were smaller and scentless, the animals were feeble,
the men puny, without hair, and, what is still more seri-
ous, as inept as they were torpid in the delicate and capi-
tal art of reproduction. Abbé De Pauw’s book is highly
obscene. It is based on most disconcerting scientific lucu-
brations, as the pages which I have reproduced in Appen-
dix I prove; but it enjoyed great popularity, as muchPeony

THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

because of its picturesqueness as because of the conclu-
sions of which it was fruitful: the savages are good for
nothing, the famous “‘state of Nature’’ is a myth; hurrah
for luxury and Europe that produced it! As soon as it
was published, the book was refuted. A Benedictine, a
disciple of Rousseau, Dom Pernetty,” showed that De
Pauw had misunderstood Lahontan, the principal au-
thority for his calumny of the savages, and that, as a
matter of fact, these savages possessed, together with
great natural virtue, a degree of strength unknown in
our degenerate climes. Dom Pernetty believed in Nature,
and Abbé De Pauw, in Progress; both of them based
their arguments on inexact data and made more effort to
be sensational than to be honest. In this they succeeded,
moreover; for in five years De Pauw’s book had gone
into four editions and Pernetty’s into at least three.”
The whole scientific world was stirred by their quarrel.
Buffon went to the trouble of discussing De Pauw and
investigating the degree of truth to be found in his work.
He concluded that De Pauw had wrongly confused the
northern part of America with the southern. It is only
in the South that the animals are puny.”* And even Buf-
fon’s conclusion is false, as Jefferson clearly shows in his
Notes on Virginia.” Public opinion, siding with Ray-
nal, preferred to reconcile these two theses: it was agreed
that America in itself did not equal Europe, an older and
more advanced continent. However, the “state of Na-

3

ture,” which America enjoyed, being in itself good, theIN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 19

Europeans who had established themselves on that con-
tinent and who had improved the soil and the climate
united the advantages of both hemispheres, being both
carried along by the moral and material progress of Eu-
rope and purified by the American “state of Nature.”

Such, then, was the double aspect under which these
much-discussed colonists were known in France. All the
newspapers of the time were united in praising the
Quakers for having liberated their slaves and thus given
an example to the world.” A rather mediocre, but none
the less esteemed, writer of the period, Guillard de
Beaurieu, dedicated to the inhabitants of Virginia his
book, L’Eléve de la Nature. This book describes a model
education as conceived by a disciple of Rousseau. A
young man, who has been left to pass his early child-
hood in complete isolation is then taken, naked, to an
almost desert island and left there in order to discover
for himself all that man needs to know.” Here is an
ideal mixture of civilization and nature. And this book
is placed under the patronage of the Anglo-Americans
and especially of the Virginians; because, says Beaurieu,
they have found a means to cultivate their country with-
out having large cities, without luxuries, without crimes,
and without infirmities. “You are as Nature would have
us all,”’ he cries in an effusion of tenderness.

This testimony of Beaurieu is important, not because
of the artistic or philosophical value of the book, but

because it expresses the point of view of the followers

ean

ny

Tera

20 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

of Rousseau and the Economists. The latter professed
the greatest respect for these transplanted Europeans,
who, without becoming corrupted, had been able to base
their civilization on agriculture while still practicing the
arts. Le Journal d’ Agriculture and the Ephémerides du
Citoyen, their two principal organs, spoke continually
of this people who had undertaken the destruction of
slavery, who so generously defended against England
the principles of natural rights, who cultivated their
land so well, and who “devoted themselves greatly to
education, from which general prosperity for this happy
land was expected to spring” (Ephémeérides du Citoyen,
1974. Vol)

There is also talk of Franklin, the great scholar who
had cultivated the sciences and politics and subjugated
lightning, while organizing the postal service of Phila-
delphia. Another object of admiration is the Philosophical
Society of Pennsylvania, which had just been founded
and whose spirit of philanthropy and utility seemed
both to mark the conquest of the solitudes of the New
World by European philosophy and to afford in its sim-
ple and practical wisdom a lesson to futile and corrupt
Europe. The founding of this body was hailed in warm
terms addressed to both the society and its organizer,
Franklin. Even outside of the Economist group, it was
considered a great event: Les Observations sur la
Physique, Journal des Savants, and the publications
which copied them mention it.*° The reason is thatIN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 21

Franklin had come to be known and appreciated. Ar-
riving in France as soon as discussions with England had
taken a serious turn, he had previously (on his trip in
1767) made friends with scholars such as Chappe,”
Father J. E. Berthier and Dalibard, with whom he was
already in correspondence. He had seen Quesnay and
was in relations with the whole group of Economists,
especially with Dupont.*’ From the date of his second
visit in 1769, he kept up a very regular correspondence
with the scholarly Le Roy * and a certain Doctor Bar-
beu Dubourg, a devout physiocrat, a very worthy man,
generous and exceedingly pious, who immediately began
to translate Franklin’s works.** The edition in two thick
quarto volumes, very carefully done, appeared in 1773.
It was praised and discussed everywhere; for in invent-
ing the lightning-rod, Franklin had made a master
stroke: he had hit upon a means of showing himself a
benefactor of humanity and of subjugating one of the
most mysterious and merciless forces of Nature. People
were even more appreciative of the magic of his discov-
ery than of the benefit that it conferred. From 1773 on,
he was held up in all the lettered circles in France as
the perfect type of a natural man and philosopher. He
inspired a pious admiration and a religious respect.

It needed no more than this for public opinion, al-
ready restless and in search of emotions, to be roused in
favor of the Anglo-Americans. But the persecutions that
the English ministry heaped upon these colonists, whoae

22 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

had so many good qualities and who had always fought
so well for the mother country, redoubled public inter-
est in their favor. Everywhere people took their side.
They were carrying on the fight of Liberty, and already
they were a matter of legend. The future of this new
world of which people dreamed seemed to be in their
hands. They were not urged to revolt, for people believed
them too righteous to use violence; but it was thought
that in them the world would see the first modern mar-
tyrs of the true religion.*” Raynal voiced this impression,
the Economists printed it every month in their
Ephémérides, and the other papers repeated it. Even the
official journals acknowledged it; for we find in the
Gazette de France of April 4, 1774, this truly curious
item, which the Mercure also published in its number of
April, 1774: “Our navigators, who have studied the
northern continent well, assert that an innate taste for
liberty is inseparable from the soil, the sky, the forests
and the lakes which keep this vast and still new coun-
try from resembling the other parts of the globe. They
are persuaded that any European transported to those
climes would contract this peculiar characteristic.” Thus
public opinion and the leaders of thought in France
formed an idea of the Anglo-Americans, which, in the
midst of dominant disorder and spiritual restlessness,
constituted a sort of moral and social ideal. It was like
a Utopia, almost unreal and yet half true. De Pauw’s
grotesque discussions, Raynal’s sensational book, theIN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 23

theories of the Encyclopedists, led people to seek eagerly
everything that might come from the colonists and to
form the most flattering conception of them as an agri-
cultural, philosophical, tolerant, pious, reasoning, and

happy nation.)
*

* *

This glowing picture, modeled close to the heart's
desire, was in danger of not conforming to reality. The
English colonies, it is true, did owe their founding to a
need for religious liberty: the Pilgrims, who founded
Plymouth, the first New England colony, in 1620, the
Puritans who had settled Massachusetts Bay in 1630,
had certainly been led to leave England by neither a
taste for adventure nor a thirst for riches. One may also
believe that George Calvert, Lord Baltimore, the founder
of Maryland, sought in the New World only religious
liberty for himself and for his Catholic coreligionists.
And William Penn, in spite of his political and com-
mercial shrewdness, was clearly guided by his religious
faith when he organized his government of Pennsylvania
at the end of the seventeenth century; and during this
whole century it was indeed religious persecutions that
drove the French Huguenots, the Irish Catholics and
others of their kind from Europe. But we must not ignore
the fact that Virginia, founded by the London Company,
as well as the Carolinas, New Jersey, Georgia, Dela-

ware, Connecticut and New Hampshire owe their ori-~~

24 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

gins to the spirit of adventure and speculation. As for
Rhode Island, although it owed its foundation to reli-
gious persecutions, it was to those which the Puritans
of Massachusetts visited upon their dissenting brethren.
We cannot then deny the religious preoccupations of the
Anglo-Americans, but neither can we see in them toler-
ant and disinterested philosophers. Sometimes they did
have these qualities and, taken over a long period, they
showed themselves to be liberal on the whole; but
throughout New-England, the established church was
maintained as an exacting and intolerant secular power;
and in Virginia, New York, the Carolinas and Mary-
land, the Church of England occupied a like position,
although it held a less tyrannic dogma and displayed a
greater degree of complaisance. In 1770-1774 it could be
said that, except in Pennsylvania and Rhode Island, ab-
solute tolerance was very little practiced on American
soil. Nor was the “‘state of Nature’’ in better case. From
North to South, all the colonists were united in their
hatred of the Indians.** They had much more scorn and
antipathy for them than the French colonists of Canada
had ever felt. Contact and association with these primi-
tive people had not been sufficient to modify the habits
of the Anglo-Americans. Concerning the Indians and
their ways, they were strangely ignorant. For example,
we find the Anglo-Americans who were the most kindly

disposed toward the Indians seeing in them one of the
Lost Tribes of Israel.°’IN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 25

From this point of view, the Jesuits and the French
travelers were much ahead of the English. They had,
concerning the Indians, a curiosity often mixed with sym-
pathy which enabled them to understand them more
thoroughly.** Moreover, it must not be thought that the
English emigrants to America had kept their customs
and civilization just as they were before their emigra-
tion. Life in the wilderness, silence and meditation had
wrought profound transformations in these people. On
the pious, strict and patient men of the North, their sur-
roundings had stamped a new and altogether remarkable
character of strength, simplicity and fearlessness. ‘These
men had developed pride and individuality at the same
time that their entire natures were undergoing simplifi-
cation. Their instincts had become more direct and more
violent. Thanks to the vastness of the territory that they
had conquered and the material well-being that they had
built up, the inhabitants of New England, coming in
direct contact with the soil, were forming a new race in
whom, under a strict morality, were hidden faculties for
simple and strong delights and whose predominantly
pessimistic religion concealed an unlimited optimism. In
the South, the cultured class, idle because of slave labor,
and delivered, by their remoteness, from many European
prejudices, produced, along with typical English gentle-
men, some few cultivated minds endowed with curiosity
and independence. Since there existed in the South a

class of poor whites, whose success was rendered diffi-

f ‘\ >26 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

cult by social conditions and slave labor and who, more-
over, were not under the restraint of a strong religious
discipline, as was the case in the North, every bold idea
and every violent act found fertile soil there. These emi-
grants, come from Europe to make their fortunes and
thrown the more brutally in contact with the wilderness
because they had no solid religious bond and strong so-
cial instinct to unite them, as did the colonists in the
North—these penniless emigrants knew, if not the “state
of Nature,” at least a state of warfare with Nature in
all its might. Among those who did not die of it, the
result was a pugnacious, violent and avid temperament.
In contrast with such elements, the merchant class of the
ports, who carried on commerce with England, enjoyed
a cosmopolitan luxury and found time to read, may seem
colorless and impotent. But it was this class that fur-
nished staunch citizens and leaders. In vain was it de-
stroyed as Tory; it sprang up again as Federalist. With-
out its rebellious children, the American Revolution
would never have come about. The situation of the
Quakers was similar. Even in Pennsylvania, they were
in minority. But the pureness of their lives, their com-
mercial shrewdness, their nomadic habits, the advantage
that the tolerance which they practiced gave them, and
finally, the remarkable development of individual per-
sonality which their system produced, all this gave them
a prestige and an influence far out of proportion to their
number.IN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 27

These thirteen colonies, each one of whom had its own
government with a system of popular representation, a
governor named by the king, a very wide autonomy in
everything that concerned their internal life, so long as
they should show themselves loyal—these thirteen al-
most independent States were for a long while faithful
subjects of England. They were attached to the mother
country by their language, by the body of their institu-
tions and customs, and, above all, by a common enemy
and peril—the French. For the Anglo-Americans, the
great peril had always lain in France. The English and
French colonies were founded during the same period.
But the French were bolder, penetrated farther, were
more adaptable, and more successful in making friends
with the savages. If they had been more numerous,
with such advantages they would undoubtedly have con-
quered; but they never came over in sufficient numbers,
they were never well enough provisioned; and the French
navy was not strong enough to maintain contact between
them and France. Thus they were doomed to succumb,
but it was not without having fought. When, in 1753,
Franklin proposed the union of the English colonies, it
was in order to ward off the danger from France. In
1755 the young John Adams thought that the only ob-
stacle that prevented the Anglo-Americans from dom-
inating the world was the French.”

The treaty of 1763 did away with this obstacle. Eng-

land, triumphant, took Canada—for its own advantage28 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

and in deference to the wishes of the colonists. These
latter, rightfully proud of the part that they had played
in the victorious combat, saw opening before them an
era of prosperity and growth. In the immense forests,
where the English had been beaten, the colonial militia
had conquered the French. Young leaders such as Colo-
nel Washington would have done honor even to an old
nation. From now on, the danger caused by the Indians
allied with the French was to disappear and the peace-
ful conquest of the West was to be possible. A world
had been delivered into the hands of these 1,700,000
colonists. Security and wealth were to grow in propor-
tions that even the most ambitious would not have dared
to hope for ten years earlier. This struggle, so gloriously
brought to a close, inspired the Americans with a pride
and confidence in themselves which prompted them to
perfect their social state and to realize their desire for
progress. The growth that the thirteen colonies under-
went from 1764 to 1774 was both physical and moral.

All this England failed to take into consideration. It
was with astonishment that she beheld the colonists de-
manding rights and prerogatives that heretofore they
would not have dreamed of imploring. For two centuries
it had been taken for granted that the English Parlia-
ment might make laws for the English colonies as well
as for the motherland, and there had never been any
difficulties on this score. The king was considered to have

the same prerogatives in America as in Europe, and Par-IN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 29

liament the same power to levy taxes. For two centuries
it had been thus. But times had changed. When Lord
Bute, later Lord Grenville, the English premier, at-
tempted to make the colonies contribute to the lightening
of the heavy debt that England had contracted, the
colonists protested. In 1764 James Otis, one of the lead-
ers of New England Whigs, in his stirring pamphlet,
The Rights of the British Colonists Asserted and Proved,
maintained that the English Parliament could make laws
for the general good of the colonies, but not tax the
property of the Americans nor, consequently, their com-
merce. He demanded representation in Parliament for
his compatriots. His pamphlet was violent. The English
government took no notice of it, or considered it only
as a bit of empty ranting, and proceeded to pass the
Stamp Act. Public opinion in all the colonies was roused,
there was a general movement to boycott English goods;
the law could not be enforced, and Parliament decided
to repeal it in 1765. But the agitation did not cease. In
1767 the English prime minister tried to levy taxes to
which the Americans could find no constitutional objec-
tion; and, since they had recognized Parliament’s right
to make laws and regulations for the good of the colo-
nies, so long as these laws in no way concerned their in-
ternal administration, he conceived the plan of placing
a duty on the tea, glass, paper and lead that was im-
ported into America. He also wished to establish an army

in the colonies under the pretext of affording them pro-30 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

tection. He was ready to use force and made no attempt
to conceal it. The colonists’ protest took on a serious
tone. Samuel Adams in Massachusetts and John Dickin-
son in Pennsylvania asserted that these measures vio-
lated American liberties, since, by this method of taxing
the colonists’ imports, Parliament could dominate their
commerce entirely. Dickinson asserted, however, that the
thought of independence was far from him. But, as one
may see, the American controversy had made progress.
There were riots, and once more the English government
yielded. In 1770 it repealed all duties except the tax
on tea but arranged that, even then, tea should be sold
cheaper in America than in England.

In spite of this concession, American public opinion
was aroused, and it continued to fight for the principle
involved. This long quarrel had diminished loyalty to
England, strengthened the American Whigs, and given
the colonists popular leaders. At Boston in December,
1773, some English ships carrying tea were pillaged. In
answer to this, the English government closed the port
of Boston, changed the charter of Massachusetts in such
a way as to control the administration of this colony and
took military measures. Thereat the colonies united, set
up a Congress and prepared for resistance.

From this too brief summary it is obvious that the
colonists had changed perceptibly since 1763, if not in
their disposition, at least in their arguments and their
point of view. They had been supported and carriedIN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 31

along in this struggle by forces that had taken them far
beyond the goal that they had set out to attain. Their
effort was the result of the general tendency of the Eng-
lish Whigs toward increasingly democratic concepts.
The English Whigs, and especially Pitt, supported them
unflaggingly from 1763 to 1773. Thus, this quarrel
might seem to be a by-product of the struggle between
the English parties. But such an interpretation does not
suffice to explain a movement so formidable and so
varied in character. As a matter of fact, the American
resistance was not purely political and economical. It
was also a moral, sentimental and religious crisis. It en-
tailed the revision of the whole system of Anglo-Saxon
metaphysical concepts which until then had been tacitly
accepted. We find Virginia refusing to receive her
Anglican priests from England any longer and abandon-
ing almost entirely the practice of a cult heretofore so
strong.” The Baptist doctrine was spreading and taking
the place of more precise forms of Protestantism.” Even
New England Congregationalism was dividing into three
branches“* and, under the name of Universalists, a group
of pastors and worshipers who refused to believe in
damnation was forming. This movement was to go
further and further in the direction of liberalism and
to lead to Unitarianism. As early as 1773, J. Murray had
voiced the desire which the dissident Puritans enter-
tained for a more indulgent church with more vague and

consoling dogmas.** Moreover, it was between 1760 and32 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

1770 that the first Methodist missionaries traveled
through America setting up highly democratic religious
associations.** Thus in all the Southern colonies, which
were originally Anglican, religious practices were dying
out; in the Central colonies, where religious tolerance
among Protestants prevailed, sects multiplied and be-
came more and more popular, optimistic and anti-dog-
matic; and even in New England, the bulwark of
Puritanism, a schism was brewing. Men’s confidence in
their own ability to seek out God, if not to create Him,
was apparent and steadily increasing. This attitude was
the result of the isolation of the Americans, who, in their
simplified life, could not long keep an appreciation of
the value of strict and subtle dogmas. It was a result of
their effort to free themselves in religion, as in politics,
from all foreign domination and to find for themselves
codes especially adapted to their own characteristics. In
short, it proceeded from this very American sentiment:
that the less government there is, the less moral and
material restraint there is, the better and happier men
are. This was the doctrine of Samuel Adams, one of
the most far-seeing among the American leaders. It re-
vealed the influence that Nature and the American soil
had exerted on these exiled Englishmen in transforming
them and inspiring them with the passionate desire to
form an autonomous body with an ideal and a will of
its own—a Nation. In 1773, this word had not been pro-

nounced. It was even looked upon with aversion. Never-IN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 33

theless, it was the inevitable outcome of the struggle that
had begun. This nationalism, this religious tension, this
urge toward a simple and natural state of society, led
toward a new ideal.

This was perceived in France, as we have already
noted. But did this discernment—this intuition one might
say, for it seems to have been based only on a most
vague acquaintance with America—effect the course of
the American Revolution? Could the influence of French
public opinion and of international philosophy make it-
self felt in the English colonies from 1760 to 1773?

Many American historians have denied it. Perhaps they
have been beguiled by the laudable desire to impute all
the merit of this glorious enterprise to the colonists
alone. Perhaps they have allowed themselves to be
obsessed by the economic causes of the conflict. But the
American Revolution was also a moral phenomenon.
The English colonies as early as 1763 possessed a power-
ful, organized and well-informed public opinion. In the
years from 1763 to 1773, this public opinion acquired a
remarkable degree of coherence and experience. Jour-
nalism developed: every town of any importance had
its news-sheet. Boston, New York, and Philadelphia had
as many as five or six. They were weeklies and often very
well edited. They contained a body of news copied from
the Whig newspapers of England, local news and letters
from other parts of the colony or from the neighboring

colonies, numerous advertisements of runaway slaves,oer!

34 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

    
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  

stray horses, abducted women, cargoes arriving from
Europe, servants, animals or objects for sale, and acts
and laws of the colony. Usually one quarter of the space
was reserved for letters from the readers discussing
political and religious questions. There were also literary
extracts. Of course, there were no editorials. Neither the
word nor the thing it designates had yet been invented.
Such as they were, these newspapers with their modest
four pages went everywhere, represented everything, and
had a degree of life and activity such as is found in
no European newspaper of the same period. Because of
the source from which they were taken, the items con-
cerning Europe were numerous and fairly impartial. In
addition to the newspapers, all the large cities were be-
ginning to have circulating libraries, such as the Society
Library at New York and the Library Company at Phil-
adelphia, Boston and Charleston. One-fifth of the con-
tents of these libraries was non-English. All the people
of high society subscribed to them.*®

The first learned society in the New World was organ-
ized at Philadelphia and immediately took its place
among the foremost societies of the world. To the
already existent colleges—Harvard near Boston, the old-
est; William and Mary in Virginia; King’s College at
New York; the University of Pennsylvania; Princeton
in New Jersey—were added others, such as Dartmouth
and the College of Rhode Island.*7 They had begun by
teaching theology principally, but gradually more pro-IN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 35

fane subjects were mixed with sacred learning. These
colleges developed an élite whose moral rdle in the history
of the United States was very important. Harvard and
Princeton were centers of “enlightenment” and liber-
alism. These colleges spread European ideas among the
younger generations. Moreover, many rich families of
New England sent their children to study in England
and Switzerland. This custom was even more common
in the South. The scions of the first families in Virginia
and South Carolina were expected to go to London to
study law, and they continued thereafter to make
periodic visits to Europe. Many revolutionary leaders
had traveled in Europe before 1773; for example,
Charles Carroll, Henry Laurens, and especially, Frank-
lin, who in 1767 was humiliated at finding the French
so superior to the English in politeness.”

What part did France play in the international rela-
tions of the colonies? It has often been said that she
enjoyed a deep-grounded hatred. And this seems plausible
when we consider the years of warfare that had separated
the two peoples. It is true that one finds in the American
books and newspapers of the period the imprecations
that might be expected. Stansbury, in 1771, recalled
Crécy, Poitiers and Agincourt and held them up as ex-
amples to be repeated.” In 1774 John Adams himself
asserts that France is too turbulent not to make war.”
But it is above all the newspapers that furnish a rich

harvest of anti-French tirades.— Ra Par era ee ee ee hel ba ke de be pe RED e Ee ee A ee EEL ou eS

Tories

pms

THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

 

36
Louis XIV was always held up as the most perfect

example of tyranny and intolerance, and the sermons

which were constantly being preached against papism
never failed to mention France.” It was especially in
New England, at Boston and Harvard, that the custom
of abusing the Pope and, with him, France, his faithful
ally, had been preserved.’ The Puritan pastors also at-
tacked France as irreligious; and Ezra Stiles, the presi-
dent of Yale University, spoke cruel words on the sub-
ject of Voltaire and his spirit of negation in 1771.°* The
ageressive spirit of France was feared: the papers were
continually announcing that the French had bought wood
to build ships or hemp to make ropes. They also dwelt
with harrowing detail on the decadence of France, the
revolution that threatened her, the shame of her King
and the immorality of her upper classes. From 1770 to
1774, Madame du Barry was mentioned more often than
any other European personage.”® In 1770 a letter signed
Marcus Aurelius was published in the New London
Gazette and reprinted by more than twenty journals
throughout the colonies. ‘Whosoever claims that this
nation has the gayest spirit and life is deeply mistaken.
For all the gayety there is at Paris, the peasants and vil-
lagers are miserably poor. This kingdom, which
contains eighteen million of men, has been enslaved by
the standing army which the King maintains,” °° And
England, to keep this animosity glowing, gave the ereat-

est publicity to the affairs of Corsica. France was shownIN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 37

as the violator of the right of smaller peoples. The
colonists, touched to the quick by this propaganda, had
formed societies to aid the Corsicans, such as the Knights
of Corsica who met in New York in 1770 and 1771.”

Thus the animosity against France seems formidable.
Nevertheless, on thorough consideration we note that, in
most cases, the campaign against France hides in reality
a campaign against England. If the New London Gazette
spoke of a kingdom enslaved by a standing army, it was
because the English ministry wanted to establish an army
in America. If the Knights of Corsica were so active in
New York in 1771, it was because the American patriots
were seeking an opportunity to get together and manifest
in favor of the rights of smaller peoples.

Often France was taken as a scapegoat rather than

directly attacked. Behind her, the real butt of the attacks

was Europe, the domination which the Old World
was trying to impose upon the New World, and England
herself. But these readymade examples and _ these
acknowledged facts were used to bring about the accept-
ance of a bold conviction. In reality France herself had
gained a great deal of prestige in America since 1703.
America, thirsting for culture and eager to hold a rank
in the world, was beginning to study French. Harvard
had begun it in 1732, and the University of Pennsyl-
vania in 1754, under the influence of Franklin. Princeton
took up this study in 1768 under the guidance of John

Witherspoon, who introduced a new and extensive series

PS Py Te Tt Se Pes ee:
ZSSoZaSS52 3S 525ARs BS gett

pe ee eee S
sastetcte

eee ee ee Te ee Per eee oe Leet el ek

“
‘

19
f
u38 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

of courses.”° In 1750 Franklin drew up a plan for a uni-
versity in which French should have a great place. In
1757 he himself took charge of the French education of
his daughter. This same condition held in New Eng-
land.” In 1773 Ezra Stiles, the president of Yale Col-
lege, had his son learn French.° In all the cities, schools
of French were becoming numerous. We find M. Giraut,
a Protestant from Poitou, teaching French and founding
a French Night School at New York in 1772. Two years
later the Reverend Tétard, pastor of the French Re-
formed Church of the same city, announced the opening
of a French pension. M. de Saint Pry, with his courses of
French, dancing and deportment, was a competitor. At
New York also we find John Haumaid acting as instruc-
tor in French to the students of King’s College. And in
1774, three Italians established themselves as teachers of
dancing, music and French. At Yale a certain Louis
Delille from the University of Bordeaux arrived in 1770
and gave lessons in French and history; he was received
in the best society. Later he went to Harvard, where he
continued to teach—on his own account, it seems—in the
shadow of the great university. At Cambridge there was
also a M. de Viart, who taught both French and fencing;
and in Boston itself M. Regnier, who instructed in both
subjects." There were people of this kind everywhere,
especially in the ports; but the most curious of them was
Francis Daymon, who lived at Philadelphia, where he
kept school in a tailor shop and wrote a syntax of FrenchIN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 39

verbs. He claimed to be from Paris and all the news-
papers carried his advertisements. He seems to have been
successful, for he was engaged as secretary to the first
Continental Congress, a post which allowed him to act as
sponsor for the French secret envoy, M. de Bonvouloir.
It is probable that he himself was already in relations

62

with the French government.” Received in households,
these teachers went throughout the land and took with
them the arts and manners of France. At the age of five,
Jefferson was already studying French.”

With the spread of the French language, the reading
of French books became general. Each month the papers
published a list of the books that had arrived from
Europe. At New York about a quarter of these books
were French. In the other ports the proportion was lower,
though never less than one-eighth.

The most popular books were Marmontel’s stories, the
memoirs of Sully and, above all, Fénelon’s Télémaque
and Rollin’s histories, which were in current use in the
English colonies and were everywhere praised for their
right thinking.“ Voltaire’s Traité de la Tolérance en-
joyed an extraordinary popularity and more than one
correspondence discusses it. Franklin read it in 1764.”
In lettered circles the French classics were studied, al-
at least

 

though they were considered scarcely moral
such was the opinion of John Adams’ wife who, in 1773,
declared that ““Moliére is not moral, for he renders vice

ridiculous without exalting virtue.” °°©gsgrRrssas

it 74{Seres

rer
“4
ren)
ve
te
hehe
ra
eal
fms
asl
Vere
Tu
et
ar
a
a
tm
rr
©

 

40 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

But the great philosophers were not forgotten. In 1771
and 1772 copies of Rousseau’s novels and Emile were
sold in South Carolina, Pennsylvania, and New York,
and even in Virginia.’ Voltaire’s works were also found
everywhere, and Montesquieu was even more popular;
for he was received in the universities, where Rousseau
did not appear and where Voltaire entered only by
accident.

It is Montesquieu who is the most frequently quoted.
The newspapers speak of Rousseau’s behavior and activi-
ties,°® but they give extracts from Montesquieu. On May
3, 1770, The New York Journal publishes a letter from
a reader who says that the moment predicted by Montes-
quieu, when the English constitution will be broken down
because the legislative branch of the government will be
worse than the executive branch, has come. In 1772 The
New London Gazette prints a tirade against oppression,
in which servitude is defined by quoting a page from
Montesquieu. In the same year this article was reprinted
in Carolina.” We find in the next two years many ex-
amples of definitions taken from Montesquieu. From
Voltaire, philosophic pages which speak of “works that
save rather than faith” and such extracts from his letters
to Lord Chesterfield as show the servility of England are
quoted.” In New England, in 1770, his epistle to Fred-
erick, in which he proves to him the necessity of a religion,
is reprinted.” Raynal likewise is continually praised and

sometimes quoted; and even an edition of extracts fromIN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 41

his Héstotre des Indes was published, but care was taken
to choose from it only what was positive and to leave out
everything negative. For the promulgation of religion
everything seems good to the pastors of Philadelphia,
who even go so far as to make use of Bossuet.”

One might add to these proofs and show that, from
the moment of its foundation, the Philosophical Society
of Philadelphia was eager to enter into relations with
France and to pay homage to Buffon; “* that during these
years the newspapers of South Carolina ™ published ar-
ticles in French * and that French musicians were féted
at Charleston,’° that De Pauw’s and Raynal’s books, as
soon as they were published, were already being dis-
cussed." Every question that impassioned France woke
echoes in America. What is more, America was aware of
the part that France was to play as arbiter between Eng-
land and her colonies and felt that a secret complicity
linked America and France together in some obscure way.
In 1768 The Boston Gazette was already appealing to
Louis XV." Franklin never ceased to be impressed with
the advantages that France would derive from the quar-

rel between England and her colonies. He felt that it

 

could not be avoided—and this as early as 1764." Could
a real hatred exist under such circumstances? Is it not
probable that most people of some education shared the
opinion of John Adams, then a school-teacher in Massa-
chusetts? ‘If we consider everything,” he wrote in 1761,

“the religion, government, freedom, navy, merchandise,

Pete eee re Se es Se Pee

Ree ee

J
J]
a
4
a)
»
a
)
ar
ai
Le
Ll
"
'
4
bed |
*h
ar
;
ald
H
r

eeTT

arte

rg

Rear

42 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

manufactures, policy, arts, sciences, numbers of inhabi-
tants and their virtues, it seems to me that England
falls short in more and more important particulars than
it exceeds the kingdom of France.” *°

For a long while the English colonies had been the
natural enemies of the French, but this was ended now.
The French had been beaten and subjugated in the New
World, and this victory over a valiant enemy left the
colonists with a real pride which was already allaying
their hatred. Then too, they had come to consider France
as a necessary element of world civilization, an opinion
which was common in that day. More and more they saw
in her the balance which maintained equilibrium and pre-
vented England from becoming despotic. And this too
was the view of the other nations. But they also had a
sentiment that belonged to them alone; it was the feeling
that, in their moral and political crisis, France was to aid
them in finding a solution. They began to seek avidly her
support in the field of philosophic innovations, both
moral and political.

True, they knew her very slightly. She appeared to
them under a threatening and dangerous aspect which
differed widely from the idea that Europe held concern-
ing France. But the radicals and the upper classes in
America were quite ready to respond to ‘the intense curi-
osity which was drawing France toward them. The two
peoples, with a strange ignorance of each other’s most
essential characteristics, groped out toward each otherIN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 43

and prepared to share the fever that agitated both of
them and was to upset the world.

*

ae,

On the eve of the first bloodshed in the American
conflict, Louis XV died. He had reigned so long and his
death was so sudden that public opinion throughout the
world was profoundly stirred by it. In France Louis the
Well-Beloved had come to be hated and despised; the
people were so accustomed to condemning his vices and
despotism and decrying the timorous policies of his latter
years, that they hailed the new reign as a sort of Golden
Age. They could not dissimulate the joy that they felt
and the hopes that they held for a future wherein, in-
stead of the good pleasure and the vices of the King,
Reason, accompanied by her retinue of virtues and social
ameliorations, was to rule. A unanimous enthusiasm drew
all hearts toward this young monarch of whom so little
was known, but whose pure living, family virtues, zeal
and keenness in his work, and finally, whose modesty,
indicated that he would understand the wishes of the
nation and respond to its appeal by a reorganization of
the kingdom. Philosophers as well as officials, commoners,
nobles and clergy, impelled by patriotism, the desire for
reform and thought for the future—all greeted the new
reign with joy; for they believed, even in this happy
moment, that it would benefit private, as well as public,errr

Tena

    
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  

44 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

interests. The warmth of these sentiments was augmented
by the generally accepted impression that the hour was a
critical one and that things could not long be left to drift.
Abbé Royer expressed this idea in his Déscours sur
le Sacre de Louis XVI: “God will furnish us rules of
conduct, as necessary as ever in a time when the seeds of
discord sowed by the enemy seem about to bear fruit
from the rising to the setting of the sun, from the snows
of America to those of Europe,” and in the margin he
noted: “the English colonies in America’’, thus indicat-
ing clearly the extent of the problem and of the concerns
which preoccupied French citizens in 1774.

From Louis XVI, they asked and hoped. for a great
effort toward liberty. He was called upon to restore
parliamentary liberty, liberty of thought and the liberties
of the people. And, even more, he was expected to give
philosophy the place that the philosophers held to be her
due—the direction of the State. The King, for his part,
came to the throne with a desire to govern according to
the wishes of the people and to repose upon the most
enlightened, as well as the most righteous, opinion avail-
able. He showed this when he chose as Minister of War
the Count de Muy, whose honesty was as famous as his
piety. He showed it even more clearly in appointing to
his council the old Count de Maurepas and in encourag-
ing by his attitude the compliment that the people paid
them both in nicknaming his minister “Mentor.” OfIN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 45

weak character, but honest and conscientious, he dreamt
of a reign in which he should have no initiatives to take
other than those which should be dictated to him by the
best minds and the voice of the people. He went so far as
to read assiduously the most advanced organs, such as the
Annales edited by the famous lawyer Linguet; and such
reading seems to have fascinated him. He understood
that miracles were expected of him, and he counted above
all on his good intentions to win the love of his sub-
jects and to realize their desires. Alas, he was called
upon simultaneously to free negro slaves, to reéstablish
religion, and to be the enlightened despot preached by
the philosophers and sought by the Economists!

To satisfy these demands the two primary needs were:
first, to reform the internal administration of the king-
dom ; second, to restore the international importance that
it had lost since 1763. There could be no moral unity in
France without the complete suppression of injustices
and abuses. Public opinion demanded concrete reforms
which should be not only a provisional amelioration, but
also a proof of a new spirit. Views as to what the nature
of these expected reforms should be varied with the indi-
vidual tendencies and aims. The most definite program
was that of the Economists, who held out for a moral as
well as a material reform of the kingdom by the encour-
agement of agriculture, the freedom of trade and the

simplification of the administration. All parties empha-

™ _— Pe? Pe .' A — = re
“ ~~. . —T rT) = 224 Sa Be et oxo 4 74 a 2S Fes | . ~
Pov e tte rer ti Pee a eh Per ee a 2 ae Sesesss- oe

Tl
a
ai
a

To
.
'
a
’46 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

sized tolerance, mores,* a religion and the liberty of dis-
cussion. The reéstablishment of French prestige was
ardently desired. The peace of 1763 had been humiliat-
ing, its consequences had been worse. It was felt that all
the nations of the world, even those who looked to her
for protection, held France lightly. Compared with Eng-
land, whose flourishing commerce, naval supremacy and
free parliamentary institutions made her an object of
both fear and admiration, France seemed a feeble and
backward nation, in no condition to impose its will by
force or to win respect by its institutions and spirit. This
decline was especially apparent in the attitude of the
smaller nations, formerly under the protection of France,
and who had served her so well and been so greatly
succored by her during the preceding century. The
French were well aware of this, and the government saw
clearly that it would never have prestige in the eyes of
the people as long as France remained in this humiliating
position, and as long as England held absolute control of
international relations. Here was a need that French
diplomats, as well as tradesfolk and writers, felt. For
the satisfaction of her own citizens, France must regain
her moral and material position in the world. A policy of
force would not suffice, an intellectual campaign was also
called for.”

* Whenever the French word “mceurs” is used in this work as part
of the philosophic vocabulary of the eighteenth century, I have trans-
lated it mores. In addition to its usual meaning, “manners and customs,”
this word implies both “simple living” and, by an extension encouraged
by the philosophy of Rousseau and the Encyclopedists, “social and indi-
vidual morality and virtues.”—Tyranslator’s note.IN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 47

In the ministry that Louis XVI formed, the two domi-
nant tendencies of opinion were clearly apparent. It was,
one might say, a ministry composed of strong men and
reformers. Beside Maurepas, the two most notable figures
were Turgot, the minister of Finances, and the Count
Gravier de Vergennes, ex-minister to Sweden, in which
post he had displayed great ability. Turgot, one of the
hopes of the Economist group, came into power with
definite ideas as to what he intended to, and was expected
to, accomplish. He had adopted, with some restrictions
and modifications, the program of his friends, and he
asked that the King should first of all bend his efforts to
the restoration of French credit and finances. Vergennes,
who had witnessed the decline of French prestige abroad, *
intended first of all to remedy that condition. It so hap-
pened that the American conflict brought the royal gov-
ernment face to face with the question without leaving
it any opportunity to avoid a decision.** During these
years, 1774 and 1775, circumstances had precipitated the
crisis in America.

After the Boston Tea Party (December, 1773) and
the severe measures taken by England against Boston and
the occupation of the town by a British army under the
command of Gage, a common impulse had moved the
colonies, and a Continental Congress had assembled at
Philadelphia in September, 1774. This body, it seems,
dared neither to speak of independence nor even to ¢hink

seriously of it. On the contrary, it proclaimed that thea tet

  

48 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

colonies did not wish to separate from England and that
they recognized the authority of the King but demanded

 

the exclusive right to make for themselves, subject to the
King’s veto, such laws as concerned only themselves.
They decided to urge the colonies to import nothing
further from England. On every hand, the American
Whigs organized and armed themselves. Finally, a con-
flict in which there was bloodshed took place at Lexing-
ton, where an English flying detachment, having tried to
disperse by force a body of Americans, met with reverses
(April 19, 1775). A second Congress assembled at Phila-
delphia in May, 1775. It addressed a last appeal to the
King. But at the same time, it appointed , Washington
commander-in-chief of the American forces and decided
to take up arms. There was still no talk of independence,
so strong was the hold of England on these colonies who
had so often fought beside the armies which now they
were going to fight against. Moreover, who would have
dared to raise the standard of revolt against England,
when she was known to be so strong and the colonists felt
themselves so isolated? As Whigs allied to the English
Whigs, the Americans were to hesitate a long while be-
fore declaring themselves free, although everything, and
above all that deep moral instinct which can not be re-
sisted, urged them to this step.

In these conditions France was called upon to take a
definite stand. The conflict placed England in a difficult
position and threatened to destroy the finest fruits of herIN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 49

victory in 1763. France could not ignore this opportunity
to bring about the revision of that disastrous as well as
shameful treaty. This everybody felt; and public opinion
was impatient, although its tendencies were still vague
and contradictory. This same divergence of opinion pre-
vailed in the King’s council, whose two strongest person-
alities stood in opposition. Turgot, the great reformer,
wanted to cure France “from the inside” and scouted any-
thing that smacked of venture, risks, expense and, conse-
quently, of war. The Americans interested him as a
curious phenomenon. Their courage and their repub-
licanism enlisted his sympathy. But he opined that they
needed neither him nor France and that, moreover, if
France was to be saved, the government must allow noth-
ing to distract it. Turgot, it has been said, had a mind as
heavy as it was great. He lacked sometimes that fine
sensibility which divines the opportune moment and
picks its way around difficulties. His colleague, the Count
de Vergennes, was a man of another sort. Conscientious,
painstaking, of grave countenance, a boring conversa-
‘ tionalist, it is said, because of his efforts to be witty, he
possessed a fine and quick mind. Hennin, one of his
assistants who knew him well, describes him as being of a
religious and philosophic turn. ““He considered himself to
be the minister of the King responsible for the happiness
of the world, and he was convinced that his master
needed only wisdom and vigilance in order to take the

highest place among sovereigns.” ™ He knew thoroughly

‘
c
{
”
|
r
‘
ay
Ml
Ty
»

es

Pe eet ee

7 a)50 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

both Europe and the mentality of the times. In his first
general report to the King (December 8, 1774), he said:
“Opinion, it is said, is the queen of the world. The gov-
ernment that can establish it to its own advantage
doubles with the idea of its real strength the considera-
tion and the respect which have been, and ever will be,
the reward of a well-directed administration and the most
certain guarantee of its tranquillity.” In this same docu-
ment, which is very important since it constitutes a pro-
eram submitted to the King, he declares himself to be
the enemy of all political injustice, “for if might is
right,” he says, “and convenience a warrant, on what
then will the security of states repose?’ He wished to
have as few wars as possible and refused to countenance
a policy of conquest. He believed that the acquisition of
colonies was no advantage, for all colonies were difficult
to defend and impossible to hold for ever; and European
conquests, he concluded, by the moral wrong that they
would do France, would harm rather than help her. To
win the support of public opinion he conceived to be the
King’s first need.

It was this that made him decide to take a stand in
favor of the Americans immediately. Such a step would
be well received in France and could offend nobody in
Europe. It would show the smaller nations that the policy
of Richelieu was still being followed in France, that the
disinterestedness of France was more than a diplomatic

formula. Moreover, all that had been done by his pred-IN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 51

ecessors in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs urged him
toward this course. It seems certain that in ceding Canada
to England, Choiseul had had, if not the intention, at
least the consoling hope, that this province might be a
bone of contention between the English colonies and
their mother country. And why should he not have be-
lieved what all the philosophers, his friends, believed
at the time: that no state could keep its colonies
indefinitely ?

It is certain that he kept himself continually informed
on American affairs. To mention only a few, and the most
illustrious of his agents, it is known that in 1764 he sent
M. de Pontleroy to inspect the English colonies in
America.** Recently there has been found in the archives
of the Hydrographic Service the manuscript report of an-
other secret agent, whom he sent to America in 1705 and
who saw all the revolutionary leaders: Patrick Henry,”
Galloway, Charles Carroll, etc. This agent joined to his
report maps of the principal American ports and notes
indicating how they could be taken.* He insisted at
length on the sentiment of liberty that existed among the
inhabitants. Shortly before his fall in 1768, Choiseul
also sent on a similar mission the excellent soldier De
Kalb, who visited all the colonies—without great results,
however.”

Continuing in this tradition in 1775, at the beginning
of his ministry, Vergennes sent out Achard de Bonvouloir.

This French officer was already well acquainted with52 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

America and succeeded by the intermediary of Francis
Daymon in obtaining interviews with the principal
American leaders who were concerned with the interna-
tional questions in Congress, such as John Adams, Samuel
Chase and Franklin. Thus Vergennes was following a
tradition, although he contributed to it his own high sense
of honesty, his concern for public opinion and his com-
prehension of the moral crisis that the world was passing
through.”

His task was not easy, for public opinion was far from
unanimous. In the ministry itself, M. de Maurepas, old
and weary, would have liked to end his career without any
new great adventures. Turgot was hostile to the war; and
although M. de Saint Germain agreed with Vergennes,
his place in the cabinet was not secure, and his successor-
to-be, the future minister, Prince de Montbarrey (whose
precise motives it is difficult to discern, since he himself
seems not to have been too well acquainted with them)
was in the opposition. Doubtless he was animated only
with a desire to intrigue against a minister of whom he
was jealous.*° But we can not incriminate thus blindly the
entire block of public opinion which in 1775 was begin-
ning to come out against America. We read, for example,
in the letters of Madame du Deffant, a woman of intelli-
gence and one who knew whereof she spoke, “Lord North
is an honest man and I should be sorry if he were to
quit the ministry.” °* She declared herself to be a royalist.
Mallet du Pan in the Journal historique et politique otIN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 53

Geneva took the same attitude.” These people, slightly
in arrears of the times, held things English in esteem and
could not admit the superiority of the upstart nation.
They belonged to the generation of philosophers who had
accomplished the great work of criticism and whose re-
ligion and hope were summed up in their faith in luxury,
the refinements of civilization and enlightenment. Their
influence, though considerable, was of no avail against
the tide that swept along the younger generation. It is
more serious to see such men as Suard, royal censor and
editor of a great newspaper, a man up-to-date, modern
and constructive, who corresponded with Wilkes in order
to be better informed on American affairs, declare that
the colonies had a tremendous future from a moral as
well as an economic point of view, but that they ought
to realize it without breaking away from England.” He
thought as did Chatham. Thus, many social, literary and
intellectual groups resisted the current because of intel-
lectual habits that they had contracted and because of
the esteem in which England was held. They felt that it
was a question of changing a moral and political ideal,
of accepting, and even encouraging, a new nation and an
immense and obscure experiment. All those for whom the
“state of Nature” had no particular attraction looked on
the Americans with antipathy; and this affords a fairly
accurate means of measuring the groups into which the
doctrines of Rousseau had not penetrated.

Nevertheless, the bulk of public opinion was withore

Crore

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

54 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Vergennes. The soldiers longed for a war in order to
have a chance to fight; the middle class admired the
Americans sincerely and expected much from their revo-
lution. The young nobles were curious concerning these
climes and men. And most of the writers continued in the
direction that they had already taken and desired this
philosophic crusade which might shake the entire world:
they supported the Americans in spite of their break with
England. All the principal newspapers took the same
attitude. In 1775, they published full details concerning
the struggle in which the Americans were so deeply en-
gaged. Almost all of them represented the English as the
aggressors at Lexington. The most zealous of these sheets
were Le Courrier d’ Avignon, which received its news
through Marseilles, and the Gazette de Leyde, which,
because of religious and commercial bonds, received first-
hand information directly from America. Yet, behind
praises of these papers, there lurks a certain bewilder-
ment: they are at loss to interpret the future, and a great
hesitation seems to reign among them when it comes to
saying what ought to, and what will, be done. On the
other hand, it is strange to note that the newspapers
under the direct control of the government take a clear
and affirmative tone. For instance, in 1775 the Mercure
de France published an article which proclaimed that the
discovery and conquest of America by Europe “‘was the
most frightful of the calamities that humanity had suf-

 

ee e°
ecIN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 55

fered at the hands of man.” But, this article continues,
now that the North American English colonies are rich
enough and strong enough to be independent whenever
they wish, their independence will be the signal for the
liberation of both continents and “the people will labor
. . . everything will prosper. Luxuries as well as neces-
sities will abound. All Europe, freed from this expense,
will enter into profitable commerce with the whole of
America and with prosperity. Then America will be
proud to have taken Europeans into her bosom. Then,
and only then, will Europe reap the reward for the dis-
covery of America.” The Gazette de France speaks with
quite as much assurance: it praises incessantly the Ameri-
cans, their leaders and their humaneness in warfare. It
was this publication which coined the word “insurgents”
which was to have such success. ‘“This is the term,” we
read, “by which the moderate party designates the Ameri-
cans, while the others call them traitors and rebels.”
Through the pages of these governmental organs we
feel the influence of Vergennes. It is he who gives this
spirit of decision to the official sheets, while the other
papers receive their news only from English sources—
Whig, it is true. But even the Whigs were well disposed
toward America only as long as she remained English,
and they became hostile as soon as she expressed a desire
for autonomy. This explains the hesitation of the French
papers, eager to praise the colonists but hampered by theOey

56 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

very news that they themselves printed, the source of
which they could not, however, accuse of being hostile to
the insurgents.

This confusion of public opinion and the hesitation of
the King hampered Vergennes. Louis XVI was inclined
toward peace. He felt that the majority of his ministers
was opposed to war and to everything that might bring
about war. He wanted to be convinced that to aid the
colonies would be honest as well as in accord with both
the interests of France and the will of the Nation.”
Hazard afforded Vergennes the opportunity to convince
the King and to stimulate public opinion indirectly.

Caron de Beaumarchais, although of obscure origin,
had made a rapid and brilliant conquest of fortune; under
the protection of Paris Duverney, he had become rich in
a very few years. On the death of his employer, his ac-
counts were subject to suspicion and the heirs of Paris
Duverney brought a suit against him which, in spite of
liberal bribing of judges, he lost. He got his revenge by
publishing libels which made his name famous through-
out the world. The following year he produced The
Barber of Seville, which had marked success. He was
then forty-three years old. He was exiled. But since he
was known as a clever man and had friends at court, he
succeeded in getting the new King to send him to London
on a secret mission which called for a discreet, able and
wide-awake man. King Louis XV, in the course of his

secret correspondence with his emissaries and diplomats,IN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 57

had drawn up a plan for the invasion of England. Un-
fortunately, this plan, instead of being carefully laid
away, had fallen into the hands of the Chevalier d’Eon,
whence there had resulted grave annoyance for the
French government. The Chevalier d’Eon, diplomat and
wit employed in the King’s secret service, would have
passed on with his century without leaving any more
trace than many other wits, if he had not taken it into
his head at the age of forty-three to change his sex and
become a woman. He had done it, it is true, at the urge
of an imperious motive; for, having involved himself in
a quarrel with a nobleman who boasted unusual skill
with a sword, he was on the edge of being drawn into a
duel wherein he might have lost his life. He preferred to
lose his sex and proclaimed himself to be a woman. This
happened while he was attached to the embassy at Lon-
don and had Louis XV’s plan in his possession. He made
use of this circumstance to call upon the French govern-
ment to provide him with resources sufficient to the needs
of a lady of fashion and threatened to sell the plan to
England if his demands were not complied with. To
settle this complicated affair it was decided to send a
skillful agent to discover whether Mademoiselle d’Eon
really did belong to the fair sex, whether she could be
seduced, and what was the minimum price that must be
paid for the documents. Beaumarchais was chosen for
this mission because of his physique, his moral and intel-

lectual qualities, and his financial embarrassment, whichSE

rare

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

58 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT
guaranteed his zeal. He did his best. Unluckily, Made-

moiselle d’Eon inspired him with a tender devotion; and
she seems not to have shared his sentiment. She even ap-
pears to have made use of his affection to dupe him.”
Beaumarchais was therefore in a sorry situation; but, far
from wasting his time, while he was paying court to his
enchantress, he cultivated the acquaintance of as many
people as possible. Thus he met a certain Arthur Lee,
who was the brother of a London alderman and belonged
to a powerful Virginia family. Arthur Lee had brothers
in both camps, but he was of a very enthusiastic nature
and probably favored the Americans. He even acted as
their agent at London. He met Beaumarchais and won as
much of his heart as was still free. The two men under-
stood each other marvelously. Beaumarchais was sud-
denly touched with grace. He, who had never been good
for anything useful and whose whole life had been one of
cynicism and raillery, was filled with faith in the future
of America. He was inspired with the idea of being her
liberator. And into his letters dealing with the painful
d’Eon affair (which dragged out and afforded neither his
heart nor his purse the satisfaction that he merited) he
insinuated increasingly enthusiastic suggestions that
France should aid the Americans and that he himself

should be appointed to serve as intermediary. This

pleased Vergennes, who showed the letters to the King.
They were well written and quick with conviction and

intelligence.IN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 59

This tone, these accents, this comprehension of the in-
tellectual setting and the moral and political situation of
the world, were sufficient to weigh down the balance and
bring about the eventual decision. Louis XVI saw un-
mistakably in them the voice of the people. And Ver-
gennes immediately took advantage of his favorable
inclination to set about furnishing arms to the insurgents.
Beaumarchais was authorized to return to France and to
establish a maritime and trading company under the
name of Roderigue Hortalez and Company. This firm
was to engage in trade with Bermuda and to sell, without
thought of profit, everything that the colonists needed to
continue their resistance. We must state that Beaumar-
chais was undoubtedly sincere.” His intelligence was too
sharp for him to have expected to reap any great profit.
He worked for the sake of glory and to have his share in
the greatest revolution of the century. He did not manage
this enterprise with great wisdom, as we shall see; but he
went into it with a great disinterestedness and with a
generosity that was rewarded with blackest ingratitude.
The adventure—the founding of a new nation in a new
world in the name of philosophy and the King of France
—was so fascinating and romantic that we may pardon
Beaumarchais for having sought to find in it above all an
esthetic pleasure. When he went to Le Havre under a
false name to tend to the loading of his ships in secret,
he could not resist the temptation to attend the theater

and even to act in a play there. But, when it was neces-60 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

sary, he did not hesitate to risk his own money, to send
his merchant ships into the conflict, and to break his own
neck in hurrying to Paris to announce the capture of
Burgoyne’s army by the Americans. Beaumarchais’s love
for America was an unhappy one, but now, more than a
century later, we must render him justice. He ruined
himself for the American cause, and no one would be-
lieve it; for it seemed impossible that he had done it in
good faith and that he had been so artless as to rob no-
body. But the truth is that he did rob nobody and that
he died in misery at Paris for having met Arthur Lee
and given himself too completely to the American cause.

An ironic destiny had found in him the personage both
necessary and sufficient for brushing aside all hesitation
and establishing the worship of America. He knew noth-
ing of the New World, and his agreement with Arthur
Lee was a wholesale misunderstanding, but he was of
service to the nations. His enthusiastic and ill-advised
activity was typical of the whole tendency which was
drawing France toward America and America toward
France without either one knowing anything of the
other. This sentiment was only the more acute because
of the fact that it was brought about by imaginings so
far from reality and because the peoples themselves dif-
fered so widely. Thanks to this popular enthusiasm, the
decision of Vergennes and the adventurous genius of
Beaumarchais brought about French intervention for the
liberation of the New World. This act has been repre-IN SEARCH OF A NEW WORLD 61

sented as a clever wile against England, a machination
to regain Canada or Louisiana. But no impartial mind
can help being struck by the fact that in Vergennes’s

reports, Beaumarchais’s letters, and the newspapers of

c
ir
n
]
t
~
OD
an’
16,
a
fe
r
ag
+t
a
ws
a
a
73
“
TP
baa
%
n
”
rf

the time, there is never any question of acquiring terri-
tories nor of ruining England, but of giving the world a
new economic law that should fit the needs of all peo-
ple, and of satisfying public opinion, which demanded

a new era, one of justice, liberty and morality.Chapter II

THE CREATION OF THE UNITED STATES

Obstacles to an understanding between France and the United

States, pp. 63-73. Vergennes tries to overcome them; he
urges the Americans to declare their independence. The
Declaration of Independence and the French government,
pp. 73-81. Enthusiasm in France, La Fayette’s departure,
pp. 81-87. Vergennes continues his propaganda in France
to influence the King, the Court and the people, pp. 87-94.
He succeeds, thanks to La Fayette, Franklin and Burgoyne’s
surrender, pp. 94-99. Alliance between France and the
United States; integrity of the alliance; its principal aim
is, by establishing the United States, to restore the prestige
of France, pp. 99-104.

Rejoicing in the United States and in France, pp. 104-108.

Vergennes tries to maintain this exaltation at a high pitch
and to make use of it. His propaganda in the United
States; it encounters hostile forces, pp. 108-115. His en-
ergy in carrying on the war. His desire to moderate Amer-
ican ambitions, pp. 115-121. Zeal of the French volunteers
for the United States, pp. 121-125. Development of a sym-
pathy with France in the United States and the social trans-
formations resulting from it, pp. 125-132. French secret
agents in America are almost entirely successful, pp. 132-138.

France wearied by too long a war; the United States are less

 

popular. Vergennes works to arrest this movement, pp. 138-
145. Vergennes’s friendship for Franklin, with whom he col-
laborates without seeing the extent of his influence in France,
pp. 145-147. Franklin at Paris: his réle as a prophet. His
secret activities. Masonic, literary and religious organizations
growing up about Franklin. Popularity of Poor Richard,
pp- 147-156. Public opinion in France sees the United States
through Franklin and creates the Franklin legend, pp. 156-
163.

62CREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 63

IN 1775 THE LEADING STATESMEN OF BOTH FRANCE AND
America felt a well-defined willingness to work together.
The leading spirits of the French ministry, Vergennes
and Turgot, felt the necessity of such a movement; and
in America Adams, Lee, and Franklin, and all the mem-
bers of Congress who took thought for the future, turned
toward France as toward a natural friend. Reason or
instinct had led these far-sighted minds to choose the
path toward which public opinion, hungering for a new
faith and moral activity, was blindly urging them. But
the task of making possible this codperation was not easy.
It involved so complete a change in the traditional
thought of the two peoples, so radical a departure in
diplomatic policy, that there was no telling where it
would lead. Taken as a whole, the French people and
the American colonists had no practical knowledge of
each other and no means of becoming better acquainted.
Their relations lay entirely in the domain of intellect
and ideas. Commerce, which is ordinarily the means of
establishing relations between people of different nation-
alities, was prohibited; for England reserved for herself
exclusively the rights of importation and exportation in
her colonies. It was only a very limited group in each
country, composed of travelers, scholars and diplomats,
who had any accurate first-hand idea of the nation with
which their own land was to link its destinies. In Amer-
ica, where it was necessary to bring into line the major-

ity of the voters, this situation was particularly grave.

Pee pees TT PSST ET Sr PeT ereer eer eee

Por

2f3

rr
a
i
'
"
"
J
'
"
’
“
‘Cor

Tana

64 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

The Tories were beginning to perceive it; and out of
hatred for France as well as in order to hamper the
revolutionary leaders, they revived with a fresh bitter-
ness and zeal all that had formerly been said against
France. They depicted France as weak and incapable of
opposing a powerful England. They emphasized the dan-
ser of allowing France to regain her footing, for then
the liberty of the English colonies would be threatened
by an ancient and relentless enemy. Their favorite argu-
ment, moreover, and the one which they continually re-
peated in their sermons (for many of these pamphleteers
were priests of the Church of England) was that Amer-
ica ran a great risk in allying herself with a “popish”
nation. This argument was the more effective since, as
we have seen, the American Revolution had a religious
side and tended toward a Protestantism increasingly free
from all dogma and from all ecclesiastical hierarchy.
These pamphlets and these sermons did not fail to im-
press the people; for, during the year 1775-1770, a
goodly number of Frenchmen had gone to America and
had not made a favorable impression. In fact, as soon
as it was known that hostilities between the colonists
and their mother country had begun, every adventurer in
the Antilles had come to offer his services to the Amer-
icans, with all the air of the greatest generosity—and
with an insatiable thirst for commissions, commands and
money. Now, there had always been a great many hot-

headed and unscrupulous young men in these tropicCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 65

islands where slavery existed and to which the best fam-
ilies of France were accustomed to send their black sheep.
In 1775 and 1776, Congress spent many a weary hour
in dickering with these dubious heroes whom the Amer-
ican army had come to hate with utmost sincerity. This
was a source of great annoyance to Congress, which was
trying to lead the people into an alliance with France
and found itself obliged to go about it indirectly.
Vergennes encountered a like difficulty. It was not
easy to transfer a zeal for things American from a purely
literary plane to one of action. The cult for England
still had its devotees, especially in high society. M. de
Stormont, the English ambassador at Paris, was a very
amiable and popular young man. He was the lion of
the drawing-room of many a great lady, young and old.
Moreover, he found effective arguments against every
pro-American effort on the part of Vergennes. France’s
hands were tied by the treaty of 1763, which had estab-
lished between herself and England a peace that she
had no plausible pretext for breaking—unless it be this
very serious reason: that the treaty of 1763 was brutal,
rapacious and insulting. As a further precaution,  Stor-
mont fought Vergennes in the field of public opinion.
He could not publish books hostile to the Colonies and
Vergennes’s policy in France because of the censorship
which would have immediately suppressed them. But he
could have them published in Holland. In 1775 and the
beginning of 1776, The Hague was flooded with anti-66 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

American pamphlets. They were brought out by mer-
chants with interests at London and by English agents.
The Jew, Isaac Pinto, alone signed three of them.* These
publications were well calculated to have an effect on
the French public. They admitted that the course of
events must necessarily in time bring about the liberation
of the New World, but they denied that the time for
this had yet come and that the Americans were in the
right. They tried to rouse monarchial sentiment against
the rebels. They appealed to the wisdom of European
governments, all of whom might well tremble lest the
wind of rebellion blow over the entire New World. They
tried to employ intimidation and to depict England’s
strength in glowing colors.

The confusion which reigned amid the French public
permitted these pamphlets to win over hesitant minds.
As a matter of fact, though everybody in France ad-
mired the Americans and expected them to bring about
a moral reform, there were few people who had more
than very vague notions concerning their present quarrel
and their future as a nation. Some people, such as
Turgot * and most of the physiocrats, considered their
victory inevitable and assured even without the aid of
France, who had no reason to interfere openly. Others
declared that the New World was going to supplant
Europe and that its supremacy was the great danger of
the future.° Others looked down on the insurgents as

plebeians and shopkeepers and disparaged this peopleCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 67

which was distracting public opinion so much. It was
perhaps this sort of jealousy that inspired the pamphlet-
eer Linguet,° who was then very popular and was rrl-
tated at seeing public attention turn away from him.
There were certain shrewd people who looked upon the
whole business as only pre-arranged feints between Eng-
land and her dependencies; high personages such as the
Duc de Croy belonged to this group.‘ There were also
people who, jealous of Vergennes, belittled America for
the sake of intrigue, and this was particularly grave
since the principal member of this group was the Prince
de Montbarrey, the Minister of War.° There were ad-
venturers who would have liked to keep participation in
American affairs to themselves alone; the Marshal de
Broglie furnishes a striking example of this point of
view. He believed that America, with her revolution
which resembled that of Holland, was in her turn going
to need a “‘stadholder.’”’ Now who could aspire to this
office if not a European and a great general? He de-
duced that he himself would be the man, and with this
in mind, he encouraged French officers among his friends
to emigrate to America. He aided materially the de-
parture of La Fayette;° and his own aide-de-camp, De
Kalb, went over with the special mission of preparing
the way for his stadholdership. Others reflected on the
possible establishment of a monarchy in America and
sought to aid in bringing it to pass. But the greatest ob-

stacle was the increasingly strong party which, in the68 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

name of the ideals of monarchy, refused to countenance
the insurgents; great ladies such as Madame du Deffant
expressed these views, and in many places the provin-
cial nobility repeated them. They even found echo in the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs. This: was also the attitude
of Favier and of the historian, Moreau. High function-
aries like Malouet,” commissioner of Santo Domingo,
thought that the example of the Americans was danger-
ous and might lead far afield. Even philosophers, such
as D’Alembert, proclaimed that peace was the highest
consideration; and, with the greatest theoretical enthu-
siasm for the colonists, were hostile to an intervention
in their favor. D’Alembert wrote to Frederick the Great
on February 23, 1776: “Although a war two thousand
leagues away concerns me less than did that of 1756, I
still fear lest this drop of oil spread till it reach us.” *
In spite of the enthusiasm of the greater part of public
opinion, in spite of the enthusiastic articles which the
Gazette de Leyde, the Courrier d Avignon and the Jour-
nal héstorique de Genéve published concerning this ‘“‘peo-
ple regenerated,” there still remained a decisive step to
take—and public opinion hesitated.”

It was a difficult situation in many ways and Ver-
gennes had more than one reason to be worried. Spain
had no sympathy, either as a people or as a government,
for this nation in rebellion. Central Europe, where

Poland had just been robbed of a third of her territoryCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 69

(1772), beheld the war between Russia and Turkey
scarcely finished before this new war seemed imminent.

It was very natural for a philosophic mind in such
circumstances and at a time when so many reforms were
urgent in France, to desire above all things to avoid war.
This was the attitude of Turgot. Consulted by the King
in March, 1776, concerning the policy to be followed
with regard to Great Britain, he pronounced himself in
favor of peace. He saw three principal reasons for not
intervening. First of all, it was useless: the fated course
of events would bring about the independence of all
the colonies that the various empires, kingdoms and re-
publics of Europe still possessed. “As for colonies in-
tegrally united to the mother country,” he said, “there
can be no more of them. Fortunate and wise will be the
nations who renounce their colonies to turn them into
allied provinces no longer subject to their rule. Spain
must expect to be abandoned by her colonies; she should
be preparing for the commercial changes that the new
régime will cause. And it is scarcely worth worrying
about even if the English should attack our own colo-
nies, since it would be more to our interest to own none
at all. What difference does it make to us then whether
England subdues her insurgent colonies or not? ™ Sub-
dued, they will keep her so busy with their attempts to
be free, that we shall have nothing more to fear from

her. If they are freed, the whole commercial system will

Tr
be 2
a
a
”
ae
a
nm
aT
ai
alg
A
t
ey
rs
the
*
i
ts
ry)
n
ty
a
PH
i
f

v
"
i
’
’

SPAT ALEZAzcsrPree

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

70 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

be changed, and England will have no other preoccupa-
tion than that of assuring herself the benefits of the new
system by efforts that will be incompatible with war.”

Turgot further feared the expense that military oper-
ations would entail. He set forth this argument in these
terms: ‘“The state of our finances is not so desperate that,
if it were absolutely necessary to support a war, we
could not find resources—if it were with a probability
of such decisive successes as would shorten its duration.
But nevertheless, it must be admitted that we ought to
avoid it as the greatest of misfortunes, because it would
render impossible for a long time, and perhaps forever,
a reformation that is absolutely necessary for the pros-
perity of the state and the relief of the people. In mak-
ing a premature use of our strength, we should run the
risk of making permanent our weakness.

“A third reason ought to make us decide against the
project of attacking England; namely, the very great
probability that this attack would be the signal for a
reconciliation between the mother country and the colo-
nies and would precipitate the very danger which we
wish to avoid.” Turgot concluded therefore that only
measures of precaution would be advisable and only
then on condition that they should not commit the gov-
ernment too deeply. ‘““We must do nothing hurriedly but
rather wait to have the certitude that England really
does intend to attack us. Keeping this in view, however,

and on condition of not violating our neutrality and ofCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 71

taking no action directly, let a way be found of fur-
nishing the colonists by means of commerce with the mu-
nitions, and even with the money they need.” ™

An attitude so lacking in generosity toward these glo-
rious insurgents seems strange today. To interpret it cor-
rectly we must take into consideration both the material
circumstances and the intellectual atmosphere of 1770.

Turgot, like Vergennes, wanted a world-wide refor-
mation. He believed that such a reformation was neces-
sary. He hoped that the United States would play a
part in it; since, even in 1778, he said of them: “It is
impossible not to have hopes that this people will realize
all the prosperity for which it is qualified. It is the hope,
and can become the model, of humanity at large. It
should prove to the world, by actual example, that men
can be free and orderly and that they can get along
without the chains of all kinds with which tyrants and
charlatans, whatever robe they wear, have tried to
shackle them in the name of public welfare.”® It should
furnish the example of political liberty, religious lib-
erty and the liberty of commerce and industry. The
refuge which it offers to the oppressed of all countries
should comfort the earth. Man’s opportunity to avail
himself of this refuge in order to flee from the results of
bad government, will oblige governments to be just and
enlightened: gradually the rest of the world will open
its eyes and perceive the emptiness of the illusions with

which politicians have deluded themselves.” *” We can-q2 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

not therefore reproach him with having lacked sympathy
for the Americans, but they interested him much less as
a people than as the witnesses and martyrs of an ideal.
His attachment for them was idealistic, intellectual and
exacting. Looking forward to a complete reformation of
governments, he joined to a belief in the sovereignty of
the people an unshakable faith in popular wisdom. He
hoped to see formed purely democratic states wherein the
people should wield the power directly by means of a
single body of representatives. He insisted that the so-
ciety of the future should conform to this rule and to the
doctrines of the Economists. He wrote to Price, “I am
not satisfied, I admit, with the constitutions which have
been drawn up thus far in the different American states.
You are right in condemning the Constitution of Penn-
sylvania for the religious oath which is obligatory before
one can become a member of the representative body.
The others are even worse: there is one, I believe it is
that of New Jersey, which obliges one to believe in the
divinity of Jesus Christ. I note in the greater part of
them purposeless imitations of English usages. Instead
of bringing together all authorities into a single one
(that of the nation), they establish different bodies, a
representative body, a council, a governor—because Eng-
land has a House of Commons, a House of Lords and
a King. They busy themselves with balancing the dif-
ferent powers as if this equilibrium of forces, which was

believed necessary to offset the overwhelming prepon-CREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 73

derance of the royalty, could be of any use in a republic
founded on the equality of all its citizens, and as if any-
thing that establishes different bodies were not a source
of division.” Holding these views, he blamed the Amer-
icans for their imperfections. He desired less to lhghten
their sufferings than to see them attain to true wisdom,
and it displeased him that the most democratic nation in
the world should be liberated by the most enslaved
nation.”

While he feared war for France as a material disas-
ter, he was alarmed lest French intervention in America
should be a moral danger for the colonies. And with all
his might he struggled against the current that was car-
rying him along.

But Vergennes, behind an air of moderation, had a
bold and ambitious intelligence. He had seen in Amer-
ica a means of restoring the moral credit of France while
crushing English pride and winning the favor of a young
nation at a time when this was necessary. A real sym-
pathy, which his friends encouraged, impelled him
toward the valiant colonists. Instinctively and by the
spirit of his profession, he believed in the efficacy of
human action on destiny. He believed that America
would free herself neither by the action of economic
forces nor by her own resources alone, but that she
needed aid.

The aid that he gave at first was of a moral nature.

By all the means at his disposition, he brought pressure

PEST TPE SES TT Tere Pee err

thy
‘
ot
t
oo
hd
oi]
+
wv
r
7= Teas5e5 en
oh eect a Are re

eteeed Sivstteelte cies)
Breet et Fees eee ES

Eres.

eT oe eee te

Othe

  

74 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

upon the Americans to induce them to think of inde-
pendence, to talk about it, and to proclaim it. His ac-
tivities have been underrated and his influence in this
decisive phase of the American Revolution has been sys-
tematically belittled. He himself later sought to conceal
it in order not to be accused of duplicity toward the
English. We have seen that in 1775 he sent M. de Bon-
vouloir to Philadelphia to talk with the members of
Congress and to bring them to understand the French
attitude. Bonvouloir was to say, “As long as you are
subjects of Great Britain, we can not, and must not, do
anything for you. The only means that you have of ob-
taining our support is by declaring yourselves inde-
pendent.”’ Adams, Franklin, and R. H. Lee had heard
this message and had been deeply impressed by it. More-
over, as early as 1775, John Adams and Samuel Chase
of Maryland had exposed the necessity of trading with
some foreign nation if they were to be in a position to
carry on the war for any length of time.** Now the
French colonies were the nearest, but how were they to
negotiate a commercial pact with France without send-
ing her an ambassador, and how were they to send an
ambassador without declaring themselves independent?
Chase proposed sending a mission to France. Supported
by the Adams, he succeeded in passing a motion to choose
delegates to negotiate a commercial accord with France.
The Tories and the conservatives fought bitterly against

this measure which they declared to be the immediateCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES ag

prelude to separation from Great Britain; but they were
deteated. This was all that was accomplished in 1775.
The time had not yet come. But during the whole winter
the patriots did not cease talking it over among them-
selves. Their newspapers throughout all the colonies
spoke continually of the favorable inclinations of France
and of the fact that she could not intervene as long as
England held sovereignty over America. The Boston
Gazette, one of the most powerful Whig organs in New
England, said on October 28, 1775: “American sailors
returning from France all declare that they are well re-
ceived in the French ports and that the French are wait-
ing only for an American declaration of independence
to intervene.” It is an ordinary thing to see the most of-
ficial newspapers continually associating these two terms:
independence and alliance with France. It is curious to
find Ezra Stiles, the president of Yale College, a fervent
patriot but also a fervent Protestant and not over
friendly toward France in general, noting in his diary,
June 19, 1776, that he had just seen a French merchant
and that this man had told him that he had learned
from the agent of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs who
was in charge of the American section that all the arms
and munitions that the Americans needed for their strug-
gle were to be furnished them. France asked only that
they declare their independence first.” Everything that
came from France conveyed the same message; and this

impression, thanks to the zeal of the Whig leaders and

~sr tT se tt et eS ee 7.7
spoeestasrisdgizapipic:z

Ass

e2is22

esses econ tzteostsz

J
"
~Peeetet stiri tects el eee sh eeste|

oheszegerte fate is

Orr

 

76 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

their newspapers, was spread among the entire popula-
tion of the colonies.

When the Congress of 1776 opened, so much blood
had been shed and things had gone so far that a recon-
ciliation with England seemed very difficult. However,
the majority of the delegates had not received from their
constituents instructions to render irreparable the break
between Great Britain and her former colonies. Certain
ardent Whigs, such as John Dickinson, who had fought
from the very beginning for the American cause and
who held great sway, would have preferred to continue
waiting yet a while and to avoid, if possible, any defi-
nite steps toward separation from the mother country.
The debate was violent and its outcome for a long while
remained dubious. The notes which Jefferson took dur-
ing the discussion and John Adams’ autobiography give
us an insight as to what took place. Adams and his na-
tionalist friends had drawn up and proposed (June 7,
1776) a resolution couched in these terms: “Resolved,
that these united Colonies are and of right ought to be
free and independent States, that they are absolved from
all allegiance to the British Crown and that all political
connection between them and the State of Great Britain
is and ought to be totally dissolved. That it is expedient
forthwith to take the most effectual measures for forming
foreign alliances. That a plan of confederation be pre-
pared and transmitted to the respective Colonies for their

consideration and approbation.” ** This text plainlyCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 17

shows the linking up of the two ideas as well as the
patriots’ effort to win over the conservatives to the idea

of independence as an international necessity, a neces-

eee TPC ETE TES SS eET ree

sary evil—which, however, would be immediately com-

cats

pensated by a new and more worthy relation with great

3

nations. The conservatives argued that France was not

"

+
a
La
cy
“
0

ready to intervene and that American opinion did not
desire independence.

All that Vergennes had done during the past year fur-
nished ample refutation of this argument. As for the
apathy of the American public, it could not be a decisive
factor in a moment when circumstances were at so criti-
cal a point. The patriots replied that there was no time
to be lost, that they must make haste, that they had al-
ready waited too long, and that, if they had declared
their independence in 1775, they could have already,
with the help of France, prevented England from bring-
ing German mercenaries to America. This opinion tri-
umphed. Such is the very great part that France played
in the discussion of American independence in 1775 and
1776. Indeed, it seems that she furnished the final and
decisive argument. This impression is further confirmed
by the disputes in 1777, in the course of which the lead-
ers of the conservatives declare, “You cannot help but
see that this declaration of independence was premature,
since France has not declared in your favor,” while the
embarrassed Whig leaders are becoming alarmed at the

French government’s delay and are beginning to wax8 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

7

indignant about it.” We cannot assert that the United
States would not have attained independence without
the moral influence of France and the activities of Ver-
gennes, but it is evident that the declaration of 1776
would have been impossible at that time and in those
particular conditions, without this moral influence and
without the steps which the French Ministry of Foreign
Affairs had taken during the preceding three years. It
was the first great diplomatic success of Louis XVI's
government; and it was also, one might say, the first
instance of diplomacy through public opinion furnished
by this eighteenth century, which was so full of contra-
dictions and, in the course of which, the aspirations of
the people, stifled, it seems, by the puissant personalities
of great monarchs such as Frederick, Catherine and
Maria-Theresa, so seldom made themselves felt.

There has been much discussion to determine the de-
eree to which the Declaration of Independence, consid-
ered as an intellectual work, was an American product
and how much of it was due to European influences,
English or French. Jefferson, who drew it up, was one
of the most cultivated minds in Congress, in which there
were, however, many men of great ability and high edu-
cation. Jefferson spoke French and had read the French
philosophers—at least the most notable ones, such as
Rousseau, Voltaire and Raynal.

At the time of the signing of the Declaration of In-

dependence, an edition of extracts from Rousseau hadCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 79

just been published at Philadelphia.” And, although for
the most part, Jefferson, belonging as he did to the great
Anglo-American Whig party, appears to have taken most
of the ideas that the Declaration of Independence con-
tains from Locke, it seems that the idea of an entirely
conditional social contract, as well as that of the abso-
lute equality of all men, goes back rather to an inspira-
tion found in Rousseau.** But such a discussion would
be futile and would lead to nothing save vague hypothe-
ses. Jefferson said that in writing this famous document
he had recourse to no other book or pamphlet. The Decla-
ration of Independence was, as far as he was concerned,
an outburst of religious and patriotic sentiment. It is this
very stamp of fervor and mysticism that is the real in-
novation. It has often been said that the Declaration of
Independence together with the proclamation of rights
that it contains was only a résumé, a recapitulation of
ideas that were already accepted and applied in Amer-
ica. This is not altogether true. The de facto liberty
which the English colonists enjoyed was as much the re-
sult of their isolation as of common-law rights and rec-
ognized charters. In short, it was a product of circum-
stances. Jefferson elevated this liberty, he changed the
sense of it, he made it a product of reason and of the
will of men. He presented it to the world as an absolute
and universal truth, as obligatory and eternal as the
truths of religion. He undertakes the expression of it

with a conviction, a solemnity and a warmth of spirit80 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

that remind us of Rousseau. He hands it down to the
world as a universal moral code.

Reread this majestic preamble:

“When in the Course of human events, it becomes
necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands
which have connected them with another, and to assume
among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal
station to which the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God
entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind
requires that they should declare the causes which impel
them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-
evident, that all men are created equal, that they are
endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pur-
suit of Happiness.”

Is it not a profession of faith? It is the fruit of this
great movement of philosophic and mystic unrest whose
development in France and in America from 1770 to
1770 we have shown. Such is the sentiment that per-
vaded Jefferson and dictated the Declaration of Inde-
pendence. This Virginian—philosopher and deist, hos-
tile to the established church, steeped in the worship of
Reason, a follower of the doctrines of the physiocrats,
filled with a passion for tolerance—formulated the text
that was to serve as a standard around which souls in
quest of a new faith were to rally. And it was indeed
for them that he wrote it. Although the ideas that he em-

bodies in it, drawn as they are from Locke and theCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 81

French philosophers, are not original, the Declaration of
Independence nevertheless remains a document of capital
importance in the history of thought. It transfers new
and bold ideas from the domain of speculation and
polemics into that of popular faith, into the realm of
the practical and the sentimental. Is it not just this that
Rousseau seems to have been the first to do and that
Raynal had tried so brilliantly to accomplish? Is there
not ground for believing that, in this also, Jefferson felt
unconsciously an influence which came principally from
France?

The declaration was well received in France. Few
newspapers dared to publish it, because the stir would
have been too violent. But it was privately circulated
everywhere, and all the papers spoke of it as a moving
and sublime act. The Gazette de France described the

emotion that fired the American troops when the Decla-

5

ration of Independence was read to them,”° and in L977
the same paper published lengthy details concerning the
celebrations at Philadelphia and Boston to commemo-
rate July 4, 1776. It described “the enthusiasm that the
anniversary of liberty can inspire in republican hearts.” *°
In 1777 the Courrier de ? Europe, which was subsidized
by the French government, published the complete text
of the famous document. In February of the same year
the Gazette dUtrecht did the same. Both the populace
and the upper classes experienced the religious thrill that

runs through a nation when a new ideal has just trans-

ee Se oe ee oe égéga-

2rrte5

nr
rr
a
“
°

G

f

u
Ty
"
"
bi |
"
i
ay
a
"
O
4
1ee ot oes

Pete ere res.

cee eee!

Reet se Bete ee es

sGeZogree

  

82 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

os

formed its spiritual life. Participation in this crusade for
liberty became the topic of every tongue. At first there
was no critical and detailed study of the declaration;
this came only gradually and later on. It was accepted
as an act of faith, it was lived first and read afterward.

From Stockholm, King Gustave hailed it with enthu-
siastic applause and wrote to his French friends to tell
them that after such a manifestation, this century was
undoubtedly going to be “‘the century of America”; *‘
while in the streets of Paris a popular refrain all during

the autumn of 1776 repeated:

Vergennes, the ninny,

Our bungling minister,

Lets the sullen English

Beat the insurgents.

Low and docile valet of all England,
To George the Third

He gave his word

That we should be his friends

Throughout his ministry.

This effervescence was soon to take a more acute turn;
for the Americans at last were going to have a representa-
tive who was capable of drawing all Europe into a
philosophical crusade.”*

In March, 1776, Silas Deane, an ex-member of the
Congress, had set sail with a commission from this body
to procure arms in France and to feel out Vergennes. He
was authorized to mention vaguely a possible separation

between America and England. Deane was an honestCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 83

Connecticut Yankee, fairly well educated, a good busi-
ness man with a taste for ostentation. He had more zeal
than judgment. He was liked in France, where Vergennes
received him a few days after the news of the Declara-
tion of Independence had arrived. Vergennes was very
kind to him, promised him full liberty and protection in
France, refused to enter into a discussion of a possible
alliance, but helped him along his way by putting him
In contact with Beaumarchais, who was to furnish arms
to the colonists, and Gérard, counselor-of-state and the
commissioner of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, who was
in charge of maintaining liaison between the colonies
and France.” From this time forth, Gérard was prepar-
ing for the alliance.*° Deane saw a few people at Paris,
but he did not speak French and his magnetism was lim-
ited. Luckily for the United States, Congress, immedi-
ately after July 4, set about providing itself with diplo-
matic representation in France. Deane, Franklin and Ar-
thur Lee were chosen as ambassadors to France. The
discussion of these measures began on July 18. Frank-
lin sailed October 26 and arrived at Nantes in the
early part of December, 1776, after a hard and danger-
ous crossing. He was instructed to negotiate a treaty of
alliance on a footing of equality. He was to promise the
King of France no commercial monopoly, to bind him
to undertake no conquest on the American continent, and
to ask his protection for the American merchant marine,

and recognition of American independence, financial aid

goes psec se Seba batch tia ds
SP cb sfstSeFs sss sesszasipaecen +

eet es + +s Se

ee > |

oh]

a
el
‘Pee ese sid Ste teers ol thet oh cache!

Toe eee ee So

84.

THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

 

and arms. He was empowered to offer a convention cov-
ering the conquest of English islands and the restitution
of the Newfoundland fisheries to France.** These terms,
which were discussed at length, contained, as one may
observe, nothing that might rouse enthusiasm in France.
To us today they seem ridiculous. But Franklin’s per-
sonality was to make up for the insufficiency of the terms
that he was instructed to offer. He arrived modestly,
with the air of a poor old scholar fleeing from a topsy-
turvy world in search of refuge and peace. He seemed
so wise and so given to meditation that this pose de-
ceived many—at least among the diplomats and clever
people. Simple folk made no such mistake: to them,
Franklin was, from the very first, the messenger of
America, come to ask for help and to plead the cause of
Liberty before an apathetic Europe. In his footsteps,
poems, odes and hymns broke into bloom. At Paris the
learned made much of him; provincial poets wrote to
him; philosophers sent him memoirs; park-bench poli-
ticians confided their grandiose schemes to him; and of-
ficers of all ranks came to ask him to enroll them in
American service. As a matter of fact, most of them
wanted to be employed as generals, but they were will-
ing to die for the liberty of the New World. It was an
extraordinary outburst of self-sacrifice. In the Antilles
there was a movement to raise a French legion to serve
under Washington.” Congress, a bit weary of the hero-

ism of the Creoles, refused.** But they could not refuseCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 85

all that was offered them. There was at Paris and in the
Court in those days a powerful family that has never
been forgotten in France, the Noailles family. Together
with the La Rochefoucaulds d’Einville, the Noailles
formed the most liberal faction of French nobility, and
they had taken the American Colonies under their spe-
cial patronage. Their number, their influence, their so-
cial and intellectual prestige were of infinite value to
these poor tradesmen of New England whose task it was
to negotiate with the most polished court in the world.
Now among the Noailles, there was a young man, am-
bitious, generous, rich and, in the vocabulary of the
time, “republican”: M. le Marquis de La Fayette, son-
in-law of Louis de Noailles, Duc d’Ayen. During this
year of 1776, he happened to be attached to the ser-
vice of the Duc de Broglie at Metz. He met the Duke
of Gloucester and heard him praise the Americans and
predict the triumph of their cause; he came under the in-
fluence of the Duc de Broglie and his dreams. At last.
enthusiasm, ambition and the taste for adventure made
him decide to join the Americans. Deane and Franklin,
deeming that his act would be a signal triumph for the
American cause, promised him the rank of General. The
Duc de Broglie aided him in every way; and his secre-
tary, M. de Boismartin, was the most active agent in re-
cruiting a group of officers to accompany him, procuring
him a ship, and helping him to elude the watchfulness

of the Court, which made a pretense at preventing this

rep eee Tee ere Tere ee!

a erie oie 2 a ee ann

a

4

i)
0
Tit
ry
Oo

eter eee ere re ree eee as TeOe

86 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

notorious departure but which, in reality, took no serious
measures to stop it.°* La Fayette set sail with De Kalb
and a large detachment of officers.*” The news was spread
about Paris and caused a great sensation. La Fayette was
one of the richest nobles of the Court, his uncle, the Duc
de Noailles, was French ambassador to the English
Court, and he was related to all the first families of
France. The unexpectedness and boldness of this sensa-
tional escapade delighted everybody. Even the enemies
of America had nothing but praise for La Fayette.
Madame du Deffant, grown bitter and cheerless, was en-
chanted. “It is a sheer folly, no doubt,” she wrote to
Walpole, ‘but one that in no way dishonors him but,
on the contrary, indicates courage and a taste for
slory.” *° The contrast between the fine spontaneity of
La Fayette and the hesitation and silence of Vergennes
roused the indignation of the populace, who attacked the
prudent minister vigorously in the song:

A man of strife he never was,

For peace he hankers so

We'll see ourselves well beaten now

And never strike a blow—

Thanks to Vergennes.**
And the enthusiasm for liberty found a more positive
expression in the Epzstle to the Bostonians by the young
poet Parny:

For my part, it gives me pain

To see you proclaim in spite of mockery
This Roman brutality,CREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 87

Which makes us two thousand years older.
And you, O unjust and rebellious people,
Without pope, king or queen,

Would dance to the clank of the chains
Weighing down the human race;

And upsetting the perfect balance

Of the regular order,

Would have the effrontery to be free

And beard the whole world.**

These couplets have already a revolutionary tone.
They represent La Fayette’s gesture as a crusade and the
Declaration of Independence as a message to a suffering
and enslaved world. Their wrath is turned against the
French government, despotic toward its subjects and
timorous toward the outside world. They are impreca-
tions. They come from the people and they represent the
people. A new passion was born in the hearts of the
French populace.

This attitude was unjust, it is true, in its accusations
against Vergennes, for the minister had never ceased to
be the propagator of the new ideas and of enthusiasm
for America. Patiently and unwearyingly, yet without
compromising himself, he worked for realization of a
Franco-American treaty; and‘a large group of his sub-
ordinates aided him, supported him, and gave him warm
encouragement.*” There was Hennin, his chief clerk and
secretary to the Council of State, who, married to a
Protestant, longed for a liberal and tolerant policy in
France. There was Gérard de Munster, state councilor,

who was of an Alsatian family and was now in charge

!
a
Lo
é

Eee Pe Te Pe ee ee ee ee eee eey LL

  

88 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

 

of American affairs; he was fascinated with the vast
prospect that the future of this new nation opened to
him. There was Garnier who, because of his intimacy
with Franklin and the esteem in which the minister
held him, acted as go-between and secret agent both at
the French embassy in London and in Paris. He drew
up reports, notes and circulars for Vergennes. Finally,
there was Genet, the father of Madame Campan, the
Queen’s chambermaid, and who himself was at the head
of the bureau of interpreters, translator for the Minis-
ter of Foreign Affairs, and intermediary between this
minister and the press. Edme Genet’s too great no-
toriety has made us forget the services that his father
rendered the United States. As Minister to Petrograd
he could not hold his post, and as Minister to the United
States, his blunders would have cost him his head if he
had not renounced returning to France forever. His fa-
ther, a sensible and enterprising man, during the years
from 1776 to 1782 busied himself with publishing and
reproducing inflammatory pamphlets, which the minis-
terial censorship had forbidden in the form of brochures,
but which the propaganda service brought into France
in the guise of magazine articles.*° Vergennes had to
overcome the resistance of M. de Maurepas, who claimed
that the Americans were capable of winning their free-
dom unaided, and who was violently opposed to the idea
of having a war at his age. Thus, in the year 17775 We

see the Ministry of Foreign Affairs holding to policies ofCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 89

its own, quite distinct from those which the rest of the
government followed. In order to force Mentor-Maure-
pas’s hand, Vergennes continued and accentuated his
working on public opinion in France and in Europe. All
the newspapers that were under the tutelage of the min-
istry (and in those days the supervision of the principal
newspapers was a task that lay in the province of the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs) were obliged to print news
that was favorable to America. And, from the Gazefte
de France to the Courrier d’ Avignon, they did it faith-
fully. The newspapers published abroad, and conse-
quently admitted into France only on authorization from
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, were obliged to adopt
the same attitude. And since the papers published in
western Germany, where English influence was pre-
dominant, did not behave in accordance with these re-
quirements, action was taken against them. The Cowrrer
d’ Europe, founded at London, was subsidized in order
that it should print impartial news concerning the Anglo-
American quarrel. The famous Thévenot de Morande
and Brissot wrote for it.** But they also received money
from the English government, which rendered their po-
sition a delicate one and caused them to fall into Ver-
gennes’s disfavor.** Such seems to have been the origin
of a most curious sheet of which Genet was the secret
director and Franklin the editor-in-chief: Les Affacres de
lV Angleterre et de l Amérique. This paper began to ap-

pear in 1776; in July of this year, all the decent andTR URTET ESE teed Stet ihe ce ee eee oe eek
ee Oe tate Ce eats ee tet. me be Sl hk Rd

ere.

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

go THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

“Tight-thinking” publications, such as the Mercure de
France, announced its publication in most friendly terms.
The importance of this curious magazine, which forms a
collection of sixteen volumes, cannot be overestimated.
Each volume contains two parts, (1) articles, essays,
translations, documents on conditions in England and
America, (2) a remarkable résumé of current events in
these two countries and in France. The prudence of this
publication in everything that concerns France, and its
boldness in attacking England would be certain enough
clews as to its origin.*® But we also have a correspondence
between Genet and Franklin, in which they discuss the
best means of working up public opinion. The most au-
dacious move on the part of the Affatres de l Angleterre
ct de l Amérique was, without doubt, the reprinting of
long extracts from Common Sense, Thomas Paine’s great
revolutionary pamphlet.“ It is true that the editor of the
Affaires de l Angleterre et de ? Amérique takes pains to
refute Paine’s diatribes against monarchy and inherited
privilege, and to show that the American is really a mon-
archist without being conscious of it. But he praises un-
stintedly the sentiment of independence with which this
book is stamped, as well as its author’s patriotism and
his zeal for his country’s future. The analysis of the
Declaration of Independence which this editor publishes
and the approbation which he accords it are interesting.
He approves especially the principle of the equality of

men (which is, he says, a religious principle and the baseCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES gl

of all religion) and the idea that legislative authority
comes from the people. This concept is recognized by all
sensible governments, for they all proclaim that they owe
their subjects, above all things, justice. Thus, it is in
trying to represent the American program as a religious
and moral ideal, a code that corresponds essentially to
the deepest needs of man and to the maxims of govern-
ments, that this unofficial propaganda is carried on and
developed. This periodical did not hesitate to publish
Price’s Observations on Civil Liberty,” which the censor
of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs had suppressed as
containing dangerous views on personal liberty and the
extent of human rights.*° It offered all its subscribers an
“American code,” thus spreading everywhere the theories
from across the sea. We can form an idea of the success
of this campaign when we learn that the American con-
stitutions published about 1778-1779 in the Affacres de
l Angleterre et de l Amérique were translated by the Duc
de La Rochefoucauld d’Einville.”

However, besides M. de Maurepas, it still remained to
persuade the one person who alone could decide between
peace and war—the King. Louis XVI hesitated between
two contradictory desires. He would have liked to cleanse
the honor of France from the stain of the last war and
to win back the prestige that the crown had enjoyed at
the beginning of the century and had lost by the defeats
of the Seven. Years’ War. He would have liked to follow

the course mapped out by his Minister of Foreign Affairs,

’
“
ui
i |
Mi
i
*e
a
A |

’

_ Sree te eet eee ee 7
Portree rete The see Seer eey ret er

a
sizezhQ2 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

whom he esteemed highly and who showed him the in-
surgents in a very favorable light. His character led him
to fear violence and to despise deception equally. His
choice of Maurepas as minister and counselor indicated
plainly his desire to live at peace with the world, just
as the care he had taken to reorganize his army and navy
indicated his ambitions. He left no writings that might
allow us to read his thoughts, but such reports of his
words as have come down to us show him in this light.

He often expressed the remorse that he felt at support-
ing the Americans by clandestine aid and secret acts.”
He read Linguet, whose gazette reflected a monarchial
opinion unfavorable to America. And, finally, in
Madame Adelaide, whom he was in the habit of con-
sulting on questions of foreign policy, he must have
found very little sympathy for a rebellious people. Surely
he felt no particular enthusiasm. (Witness the joke
which he played on Diane de Polignac, to whom—be-
cause she was forever preaching Franklin to him—he
sent a certain vessel in which the eye that was tradi-
tionally painted on the bottom of such utensils in those
days was replaced by a portrait of the hero of the New
World.” ) The English newspapers were acquainted with
this attitude and placed their hopes for peace in the
King.” On the other hand, they accused the Queen of
inciting him to war. It is indeed possible that, in 1776,
the Queen, under the influence of Choiseul, of whom she

was very fond, and the younger members of the Court,CREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 93

who were very warm toward the Americans, may have
been well affected toward their cause. But this did not
last long; in November, 1770, Maria Theresa wrote to
Mercy, “My daughter would do well to show less predi-
lection for the English. I have learned that it has caused
some irritation in France.” * Her interview with Frank-
lin was cold.” This was because Vergennes and Louis
XVI, far from letting her take part in the diplomatic
work of that year, had taken special pains to keep her
out of it. She could not favor a policy in which she had
had no influence.

Moreover, a doctrinary party had been formed with
the purpose of opposing the enthusiasm for America in
the name of the sound doctrines of monarchy.” The
English had taken advantage of this tendency: in the
Court and in the city, their agents had set up laments on
the blindness of the French monarch. The publications
of the Affaires de l Angleterre et de Tl Amérique had
alarmed the conservative elements in the government.
The Declaration of Independence had astonished and dis-
mayed a goodly number of people. The tendency of the
day, in making room for faith, had aroused a counter-
current, still feeble and localized, but whose influence
was making itself felt, especially among state-function-
aries and members of the former Court. It was sufficient
to make an impression on the King and to hamper the
minister, who claimed to, and wished to, speak in the

name of the people.”

fi
f
DC
y
co
4
t
;
p
a
'e
7
tT)
rr
ry
rT
‘*
oo
“ls
oo
|
it)
4
tS
cl
.

pracalzageprygczes94 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Haste was necessary: in spite of the secret aid that
was being furnished them generously, the Americans were
losing ground and their representatives were protesting
against the delay in recognizing them. They were begin-
ning to talk of a reconciliation with England. Such in-
formation as was obtainable showed them as being ani-
mated with a sincere enthusiasm but disagreeing as to
means, poorly armed, weakly governed, and the prey of
cabals. English propaganda was flooding the world with
be news affirming the existence of a close accord between
ca France and Great Britain and stating that the French
3 fleet was being dismantled.”

Fortunately for the United States, the impression pro-
duced by the Declaration of Independence was spread-
ing and becoming more profound: Linguet himself, al-
though he often criticized the insurgents, wrote, toward
the end of the year 1777: “It is not this quite fanciful
liberty which many look forward to seeing them enjoy
[that rouses enthusiasm in France] .. . it is the fact
that, while defending only their own interests, it is
really our cause that they plead. In calling the English
Crown to account, it is the abuses of a// monarchies that
they are attacking. . . . The blind hope of being able
perhaps to imitate them some day and even of being
aided by them in breaking our own chains, this is what
wins the insurgents so many friends among us.” ** The
regions far from Paris awoke and gave voice to their
sentiments. Even at Marseilles, a club was formed toCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 95

celebrate every month the victories and the virtues of
the Americans and to commemorate their independence
and their federal union.*’ Revolutionary sentiment grew,
because of the appeal that Jefferson’s formula had for
all nations. At the same time, revolutionary mysticism
became more and more fervent at Paris and built up a
veritable worship about Franklin. This “meritorious and
handsome old man,” this “eagle-creator of America,” as
the Duc de Croy called him, seemed, from his solitude in
Passy, where he lived in philosophic retirement, to elec-
trify Paris.°* People came to see him and consult him;
when he went out in society, all the great ladies kissed
him. He shared the intimacy of the greatest scholars of
France; and the widow of Helvetius, whose salon was
so influential, was his agent as well as his intimate
friend. He was Turgot’s kindred spirit. He moved only
in the highest of social circles, but he always kept all
of his proud simplicity. In the company of the La
Rochefoucaulds, the Noailles, the powerful financier Le
Ray de Chaumont, the Maréchale de Mouchy, the Prin-
cesse de Tingry, the Marquise de Flamarens—every-
where that Franklin appeared, a religious respect pene-
trated all those present.°” At Madame du Deffant’s house
in a gathering who looked down on the Americans, every
tongue was hushed and the conversation took on a grave
and calm tone as soon as he appeared. He knew how to
retort with moderation, wit and effect.“” One day at a

dinner of wits, some one remarked, “One must admit,

tee

ee oe ee eer. free tery ees ee f

Pe oe Pe

+ 596 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

sir, that it is a noble and superb spectacle that America
presents today.” “Yes,” he replied modestly, “but the
spectators pay no admission.” During those months of
1777 when the American cause appeared to be lost,
Franklin cloaked himself in a mantle of reserve, ill
health and philosophy.” He talked very little. But as a
comment on the news from America, he had formulated
the phrase, “Ca zra,” a slogan that was to have a long
career.” He inspired those about him with confidence
in this nation with which no one was acquainted but of
which they believed him to be the perfect and complete
personification. His gravity and moderation impressed
the government, the King and the nation. He knew how
to hold attention and to show himself as everything that
the people expected of him. He knew how to hide away
also to allow public imagination the pleasure of per-
fecting this image which was already so splendid. All
the while he was firing the enthusiasts, he seemed so
prudent that he reassured the timorous. Everywhere peo-

ple repeated this Latin verse conceived by Turgot:
Eriputt calo fulmen, sceptrumque tyrannis.”

We shall have occasion to study in detail the extent
of his moral influence on the French nation; suffice it to
note here that this influence, which was both widespread
and profound, was principally consecrated to serving and
representing his country. Vergennes, who accepted

Franklin’s advice and gave him the benefit of his ownCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 97

counsels, made use of his reputation and the legend,
which fortified greatly everything that he himself could
say to the King regarding the future importance of the
United States and their integrity.

The French officers who had gone to America also
acted as a powerful stimulant to the portion of the pub-
lic that loves heroism, the clash of swords, brave display
and rapid victories. As a matter of fact, these victories
had been neither as complete nor as immediate as the
noble adventurers had imagined they would be. But this
was not known. There was talk of the Marquis de La
Fayette’s marvelous deeds in the New World and of the
way in which he had become a general at twenty. At
home, his young wife, so appealing a figure, showed
around letters from the hero, and kind words were
spoken for America. “And now,” he wrote to her, “as
the wife of an American officer, you must study your
lesson. People will say, ‘They have been defeated.’ You
will reply, ‘It is true, but between two armies of equal
strength and in open country, old soldiers always have
an advantage over new ones... and besides, they
lost more men than the Americans.’ People will say,
‘Philadelphia has been captured.’ Answer, ‘You are fool-
ish. Philadelphia, an open city, has no importance.’ Then,
if they insist, send them about their business.” This was
the kind of propaganda to be found at Madame de La
Fayette’s house, and it is not so different from that which

we ourselves have heard and practiced.”

if
s
"
’
a
ty
7]
”
7
wl
a
"
oy
rH
"
4
‘
is
é
Sb
*
Dt
‘
‘
i?
.
hem@rieye

98 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Such zeal found its recompense. The admirable vic-
tory of Saratoga, where the American militia captured
an English army and the foremost English general, came
in time to confirm the words of Madame de La Fayette,
Franklin and Vergennes. Songs, comedies and anecdotes
sprang up on every side. In the street, one heard sung
to the tune of Femme Sensible the proclamation of Gen-

eral Burgoyne: *

Now hark to me, ye insurgents,

Nay, do not weep to hear

That this poor Burgoyne—
Well, what?

Has gone to be a monk.

The excitement spread even to Versailles. A farce
burlesquing Burgoyne’s surrender was played there.”
The victory was so much the more impressive since the
veterans had been beaten by those very untrained troops
of whom the English had made such incessant fun. It
was indeed the triumph of Mind and Justice over Brute
Force. Vergennes profited by the moment. Immediately
he opened negotiations with Franklin for the conclusion
of a commercial treaty, and then for a defensive alli-
ance. Maurepas, surprised by the insurgents’ victory,
swayed by public opinion and weary, gave up resisting.
The King also was dazzled. His hesitations had been
only natural considering the state of the treasury and all
the reforms that it was urgent to accomplish in the king-

dom, but in the face of this significant omen and popu-CREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 99

lar clamor, he would have considered that he was be-
traying his trust if he had turned his back on so favor-
able an opportunity. He yielded gracefully. Moreover,
Vergennes had been able to gain his confidence and there
was a bond of real friendship between them. Such was
the conclusion of a long secret struggle carried on in
France by the progressive elements who, since the coro-
nation, had brought pressure on the King to make him
accord his policies with the wishes of the nation and re-
store to France her ancient prestige. To achieve this vic-
tory, it had been necessary to shape public opinion, to
give it a clear direction and a positive impulse. It had
been necessary to accept in general the American ideas
and to popularize the American as the type of modern
man who was at once the most perfect and the nearest
to Nature. Lastly, it had been necessary to accord cir-
cumstances with moral needs, to strike a balance between
statecraft and generous spontaneity. Vergennes may ap-
pear to have been a Utopian, but we cannot deny him
the glory of having realized a Utopia that he had long
cherished and striven to bring about.

It took both coolness and daring to undertake in 1778
this extraordinary enterprise which consisted in bringing
the oldest and most thoroughly traditionalist kingdom in
Europe to recognize the youngest republic and the most
democratic government in the world. In December the
KKing of Bavaria had died, and the diplomats of all-the

powers were exchanging notes, while the Prussian and100 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

 

Austrian armies were preparing for war. France, allied
with Austria, was going to have a decision to make.
What is more, in this strange adventure she did not even
have the support of her principal ally, that great Amer-
ican power, Spain, whom Vergennes had been working
in vain for two years to win over. The English navy was
intact and had been mistress of the seas since 1703. No
European government was showing the least sympathy
for the insurgents, not even the King of Prussia, on
whom Continental Congress had thought it could count.
Frederick found diversion in watching this remote con-
flict in which one of the strongest powers of the earth
was exhausting itself. He saw no reason why any one
should fight for what had no bearing on his own inter-
ests. The German princelings were selling their soldiers
to England and were well satisfied when they failed to
return, for in that case, they received a higher price for
them. In spite of some few sincere propagandists, Ger-
many was apathetic and cold toward the insurgents.”
Vienna was hostile. Some interest was felt in Italy, and
the inhabitants of the old free cities admired the Amer-
ican example; but Maria Theresa’s government was very
prosperous. No one made a move. Vergennes’s action
was courageous and daring. Louis XVI’s decision was
generous.

True, the King feared that if France did not inter-
vene then, there was danger of a reconciliation between

the guilty mother and her emancipated daughter; true, heCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 101

might well fear for the French colonies in that case. But
all that was remote, while the perils to be braved in case
of an intervention were immediate. On February 6,
the treaties of alliances were signed at Versailles, and
Franklin and Deane were presented at the Court. The
King immediately had it announced to the English Court
that he had recognized the independence of the United
States. War was inevitable. Why was France going to
fight? To weaken England, it is most frequently an-
swered. To destroy her, it is sometimes said. The treaty
of alliance proves that France’s only immediate objective
was the independence of the United States. In fact, this
treaty stipulates that France shall recognize the inde-
pendence of the United States, that the two nations shall
lend each other armed aid for the reciprocal defense of
their possessions in the New World. It provides for cer-
tain advantages to be accorded to French ships in Amer-
ican ports, but no commercial privileges. The United
States are to accord France only the treatment of the
most favored nation, but they remain free to accord the
same rights to other nations. The two countries engage
themselves not to sign a separate peace and not to cease
hostilities until the independence of the United States
shall be recognized. These terms exchanged between a na-
tion of twenty million inhabitants, provided with a
powerful fleet and the first army of Europe, and a diplo-
matic service that was famous for its superior craft, to

say nothing of its past; and a people numbering two mil-102 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

lions, half invaded, without commerce or industry, al-
most without government—these terms in such condi-
tions do honor to Vergennes’s spirit of justice. They
showed clearly his intentions. The instructions that he
gave Gérard when he sent him to be the first French
minister plenipotentiary at Philadelphia set forth yet
more clearly the minister’s views. ‘These instructions,
dated March 29, 1778, assign Gérard as his essential
objective the maintenance and consolidation of Amer-
ican independence. They order him, to this end, to avoid
any separate peace, to work with all his efforts toward
cementing the union of the thirteen states. They indi-
cate no territorial ambitions on the part of France and
no commercial aim. France desired that this new moral
being, the United States, should live. She wanted them
to be strong. This, in Vergennes’s eyes, was an essential
condition for guaranteeing the reéstablishment of the
liberty of the seas. But above all, to France it meant the
resuming of her role as arbiter, and that under particu-
larly brilliant circumstances; for the United States rep-
resented an ideal, both spiritual and social, toward which
opinion and the enlightened had lifted up their voices
these many years.°* Vergennes’s zeal in defending the in-
terests of Spain and his care to safeguard Louisiana for
this power have often been blamed. But what reason had
he, since he was seeking a success of opinion and in-
fluence for his country, to betray an ancient and precious

ally? The Family Pact was at that time considered asCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 103

the kingbolt of the French policy. And beside, who was
to have Louisiana if not Spain? To give it to England
would have been to give an enemy the key which opened
the door both to the Spanish possessions and to the do-
mains of the United States. Give it to the United States?
How should he imagine that a group of little republics,
spread over an immense and sparsely settled territory,
might find any advantage in acquiring the immense conti-
nent that was called Louisiana, also, or that they were
In any condition to exploit it? The ideal that Vergennes
had formed concerning the United States and their philo-
sophic spirit did not allow him to doubt their modera-
tion.” There has been an attempt, based on apocryphal
memoirs published later, to show that he coveted Louisi-
ana and was scheming to obtain it. This contention is
false. Neither Vergennes, nor any of the other French
ministers of the day, believed in the permanence of colo-
nies. They were all convinced that the best of colonies
were not worth the bloodshed and the money they cost,
for they were sure either to free or to ruin themselves.”
His thoughts were so far from such machinations that he
sent word to the Americans to refrain from an expedi-
tion into Canada, for fear that the King, who wished
neither to betray his one-time subjects nor to take back
a domain that he considered useless, should be obliged
to adopt an attitude which might offend the Canadians
or trouble the Americans.” The advantage that Louis

XVI and his ministry sought in this treaty and in this104 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

war was therefore, above all, of a moral and intellectual
nature. It was French civilization that they wanted to
see triumph, and whose prestige they wanted to restore
by associating it with the most important event of the
times. This step had, moreover, an immense material in-
terest, through its repercussion on the other nations, es-
pecially the smaller nations, and might well bring about

profound changes in the commerce of the entire world.”

>

* OX

The United States showed themseives worthy of the
friendship that was offered them. They received the news
with unbounded joy, and the patriots were unanimous
in declaring that the alliance guaranteed the safety of
the State. Richard Henry Lee wrote to his compatriot
Patrick Henry, the great Virginian leader: “I look at
the past condition of America as at a dreadful precipice,
from which we have escaped by means of the generous
French, to whom I will be everlastingly bound by most
heartfelt gratitude. . . . Surely Congress will never re-
cede from our French friends. Salvation to America de-
pends upon our holding fast to our attachment to
them. . . .” “ Now, R. H. Lee had been the principal
champion of independence and he was later to become
the most ambitious and the most sensitive of the Amer-
ican patriots."* His colleague in Congress, Samuel Adams,

the most uncompromising democrat in America, alsoCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 105

wrote under the date of April 20, 1778, that France had
dealt generously with America.” When the army heard
the news, it was fired with the deepest joy and the wild-
est enthusiasm. Washington felt that France had acted
with wisdom and generosity.”* From one end of the coun-
try to the other, the signing of the treaty was celebrated.
Boston, the capital of the Puritans and of Protestantism
in the New World, set the example. On April 13, a cele-
bration was held at the American Coffee House in honor
of the news that had come from France. A toast was
drunk to Louis XVI.” Articles were published declar-
ing that the war was virtually over in America, since it
was going to break out in Europe, and that England
would now cease tormenting her one-time colonies.”® But
it is especially in Congress that one may gauge the im-
portance of France’s move and the effect which it pro-
duced. This body, in which there was so much division
and where so many interests were striving for supremacy,
Was unanimous for accepting the treaty with France and
thanking Louis XVI. It is curious and amusing to see
shortly afterward the pains that the congressional dele-
gates took in arranging the reception of Gérard when
this French minister arrived at Philadelphia. Anxious
to show themselves worthy of that. French politeness
which was so famous throughout the world, and eager to
give a good impression of their own station, the mem-
bers of Congress took council almost every day during

two weeks as to the proper etiquette for receiving the

ons,
b
mH
t
Pb
”
Co
fs
a
r
~
7
i
"
f
Ld
Ml
4
a
:
ad
a
4
'

Tt TTT lt eee ;
ete oh ee ee ee oe? ee ee106 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

French minister plenipotentiary.” The Northern mem-
bers were in favor of a republican simplicity and feared
lest Congress appear servile; the Southern members
wanted pomp befitting the occasion of the greatest
Republic in the world receiving the representative of the
most powerful Monarch of Europe. They debated on
the number of horses that should draw the carriages,
the number of steps to be climbed and the shape of shirt-
frills. But the reception was a great SUCCESS. In the
course of it, Henry Laurens, the presiding officer of Con-
gress, said to Gérard: “The treaties between His Very
Catholic Majesty and the United States show so clearly
his wisdom and magnaminity that they inspire the re-
spect of all nations.” ® Gérard was delighted. Immedi-
ately he wrote to Vergennes that before his arrival there
had been factions and dissensions, but that the French
alliance had done away with all that. He congratulated
himself on seeing all groups equally eager to carry out
his wishes and to show him their respect and affection.”
We cannot help feeling that he was rather easily carried
away by effusions. He was chosen as arbiter of mooted
questions. Henry Laurens came to consult him and ask
his advice on pending business. One side and the other
waited on him, and his opinions seemed to settle the
decisions of Congress. It was perhaps too good to be
true, but he was delighted with it all. We can say
without reservation that, for the American people, the

alliance with France appeared to be the work of a divineCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 107

Providence anxious to save its chosen people. A wave of
fraternity ran over the land. It was not to prevent
clashes and difficulties, but it rendered possible this fan-
tastic cooperation between two peoples who until then
had known each other only through calumnies and wars.

In France a like enthusiasm stirred the nation. One
may well say that this was the zenith of Louis XVI’s
reign. Diplomatic circles, with the exception of the min-
ister’s intimates, were surprised.” But the nation recog-
nized its own wishes and hopes.** There was talk of
nothing save enlisting to serve the country, setting out
for America as a volunteer, and dying for liberty. This
great King in the role of the protector of independence
was a spectacle that moved every sensitive soul. And in
those days every one in France had a sensitive soul. The
fleet was in excellent shape and well equipped (twelve
years after a most humiliating peace it could still meet
the English fleet on an equal footing). The French en-
joyed the astonishment of Europe, they were amused at
the rage and surprise of England, but above all, they
savored the new and philosophic sentiment of having,
beyond the seas, a brother-people, so noble, so courage-
ous, so steadfast, whom they loved so well and knew so
little. In France, these months were to mark the apothe-
osis of Philosophy, at last triumphant and creative. Vol-
taire, old and laden with glory, came to pluck the last
laurels that his gnarled hand was to gather. At the Comé-

die Francaise he was crowned. At the Academy of Sci-ree

108 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

ences, Franklin brought forward his grandson to receive
Voltaire’s blessing, and the dying poet pronounced over
the young man’s head the words, “God, Liberty,” which
caused a thrill of mystic enthusiasm to run over the
throng, while the apostle of tolerance and the liberator
of the New World embraced.* Their glory seemed for
an instant to blend together, and the spectators under-
stood then the identity of their work; there was no mis-
taking the significance of this ceremony. Philosophy, too
long the slave of abstract reasoning, entered into all
hearts and brought forth at last tangible manifestations
and contributions. People wept for joy and knelt in wor-
ship of human wisdom, now grown so powerful that it
could engender life, guide the soul, and enrapture hearts
with ecstasy. Mind, satisfied with its triumphs, rested on
the magnificent spectacle of liberty conquering a world,
creating an ideal, producing a saint, and converting the
great ones of the earth.

Whether or not he shared it himself, Vergennes was
obliged to sustain public opinion at this high pitch of
enthusiasm, or at least to be able to show the world the
spectacle of this young nation, free and natural, pros-
pering through the aid and friendship of France. It was
necessary that public interest should be held and that a
union of purpose, desire and ideal should reign between
the two allies. It was hoped that the war would be a
brief one and that England would avail herself of facili-

ties for yielding gracefully.” Neither the minister norCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 109

the public felt any hatred toward her. They were glad
to have a chance to teach her a lesson, but they admired
her civilization and knew that she was necessary to the
equilibrium of Europe. One might say that the relations
between the two countries never ceased to be courteous,
or even that they were more courteous after the begin-
ning of hostilities than before. Admiral Rodney, who
was in France at the time, was allowed to return to Eng-
land. It was not a question of war to the death, but of
a strugele for prestige and influence. French plans for
an invasion of England were never carried very far, and
England never attacked France on the continent. It was
in the New World that the war waxed bitter, and it was
waged as much in the minds of the people as on the fields
of battle. The English left no stone unturned to regain
by force, fraud and persuasion, the domination that was
slipping away from them. Vergennes on his part made
use of all his resources to aid the Americans and to guide
them. The primary result of the war was to be the crea-
tion of the United States; the problem was therefore not
solely a diplomatic and military one.

First of all, it was necessary that the United States
should consolidate their national life. Now during the
period of struggle and suffering that extends from the
moment of the French intervention to the capitulation
at Yorktown, Congress showed particular weakness and
sluggishness. The people, weary of a war too long drawn-

out, did not furnish enough volunteers, and finances wereSET

 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

110 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

in a bad way, for taxes were not coming in. All these
difficulties encouraged the royalists and engendered fac-
tional quarrels. Congress turned continually toward
France, their powerful ally, who was so rich and so
strong, and whose aid should have made success so easy.
The Tories exploited this tendency. In their pamphlets
they repeated that France had deceived the insurgents in
not sending them sufficient assistance.*° In their verses, in
the countless popular songs which they spread through-
out the country, they dwelt on the desperate slowness
of the war, due to the indolence and blundering of
France, or on the indemnities which would be a conse-
quence of pretended French generosity." Their newspa-
pers, which the patriotic sheets quoted, claimed that the
French people, thoroughly devoted to monarchy, would
have refused to fight for the United States if the Pope
had not given the French King the right to invest the
entire North American continent.** One of these papers,
edited by a man of learning who was, at once, a cunning
pamphleteer, a good editor and a clever spy, a certain
Rivington, conducted a campaign against France that
was as patient as it was violent. He made use of calum-
nies concerning the stupidity of the King, the frivolity
of the Queen, the bad condition of French finances, the
wrath of the people; he printed fables threatening the
Americans with a fate similar to that of the frogs who
wanted a king.*® But, above all, he published exact and

disheartening details concerning all that was happeningCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 111

and was going to happen in France. The accuracy of his
information is remarkable, and it could not fail of its
effect.°° As early as May 17, 1780, Rivington announced
that La Fayette had persuaded Louis XVI to send an
army commanded by Rochambeau to America, and he
furnished a number of curious details on this subject.”
But his principal effort was directed against Franklin
and the French alliance.” When, in March, 1780,
Americanus claimed that Franklin had delivered the colo-
nies over to the King of France on the sole condition that
they should be free from English domination, should
have the privileges of free French citizens and the certi-
tude of escaping Purgatory, thanks to the intervention
of the Pope, it had little weight, although these pleas-
antries did not fail to amuse even the Whigs; but when,
among letters seized by English cruisers, Rivington pub-
lished extracts from the correspondence of Beaumarchais,
Barbé-Marbois, etc., tending to prove that France, far
from being disinterested, had territorial ambitions, he
touched a sensitive spot; for this had direct bearing on
the results of the war.”

In 1778, England, her first lunge having failed, could
no longer hope to regain her colonies. She was prevented
from this by her internal situation and by international
developments. The Tories, angered against the Amer-
icans and their democratic spirit, were unwilling to see
a reconciliation effected otherwise than by force and thus

rendered any peaceable adjustment impossible. The

*
¢
"
nal
fy
4
_
“
"
"
i
’
wT
’
a
H
4
5
a
‘4
a
A
rt
oh
»
eT
”
ot
”
ad
*
vi
|
i
ob
Th
rtmy lt he

112 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Whigs, who had always supported their brothers across
the sea, could not abandon them in the hour of greatest
danger. They therefore carried on an intense liberal and
revolutionary propaganda, of which the campaigns of
the famous Wilkes are the most conspicuous example.
But they hated despotic and catholic France. She had
always appeared to them, and still appeared to them, as
the most implacable enemy of philosophic ideas and of
liberty. They could not allow her to triumph. Thus opin-
ion was irreparably divided, and the ministry was in no
condition to maneuver skillfully to obtain a peace with-
out dishonor. It was obliged to fight. Unfortunately the
strength of France, the heroism of the American patriots,
and the hostile indifference of Europe rendered a mili-
tary triumph impossible. England could no longer rea-
sonably hope to see a royal government reéstablished
in America and the loyalists reseated in power; but she
could hope to wear out France, divide the insurgents
and regain a foothold among them. She did not cease to
work with these results in view, and it may be said that
she did not fail entirely.

After Gérard’s arrival quarrels and parties seemed to
have disappeared in Congress. But such admirable har-
mony was not to last long. Subjects for dissensions were
not lacking in Congress. There was the natural rivalry
between the big states, such as Massachusetts and Vir-
ginia, and the little states, such as Delaware and New

Jersey; then there was the opposition of interests and tem-CREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 113

peraments that divided the North from the South. There
were the aspirations of every state that wanted to ex-
pand toward the West and demanded its share of these
lands, for which it was so difficult to show valid titles
(for the only legitimate proprietors were the Indians,
and they had no titles). Also there were private ques-
tions and rivalries, struggles for influence and power be-
tween men endowed with a strong combative spirit, a
high sense of their rights and a mystic enthusiasm for
their works. The question of embassies and missions in
Europe was a most ticklish one; for almost all these
men, who drew no salary as delegates to Congress, were
tradesmen ; and a trip to Europe in a time like this might
mean considerable profit to them. This question was the
apple of discord. Jealousy led the Lees of Virginia,
who had a strong following in Congress, to accuse Deane,
and indirectly Franklin, of having arranged with Beau-
marchais to make Congress pay for provisions and equip-
ment which, the Lees said, were a gift from the King of
France. Deane, angered at this injustice, flew into a rage
and ruined everything. Beaumarchais tried to prove that
he had really paid for the merchandise sent to America
and he could not do it; because, though he had indeed
paid for it, he had nevertheless drawn it from the ar-
senals of the King, who was still at peace with Eng-
land.” Gérard wanted to defend the honor of the King,
who was thus indirectly accused of having aided the

United States secretly while he was still at peace withre

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

114 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

England. He wanted to put an end to the quarrel and
seemed thus to be siding with Deane. The Lees turned
in wrath against him. Thomas Paine, then secretary of
the Committee on Foreign Affairs in Congress, sided
against Deane for some unknown reason (for it has not
been proved that he had received money from the Lees,
though it is certain that he was entirely ignorant of the
facts of the affair). Beaumarchais and Gérard alone
could reveal the origin of the goods, but reasons of state
prevented them from bringing forward anything save
affirmations. Thus the case turned out very badly. Beau-
marchais, whom Congress, prudent in case of doubt, re-
fused to pay, went to his ruin and disgrace.” Deane
ruined himself in seeking justice and, mad with rage,
revolted against Congress and France, the cause of his
misfortunes, and became a traitor without salary in the
service of England, for whose benefit he filled gazettes
with recriminations against Congressional stupidity and
French duplicity.°* Led on by this controversy, the Lees
had formed in Congress a compact group which hence-
forth regarded Gérard with such suspicion that the un-
happy minister chose to fall ill and return to France.
He was regretted by Congress, for whom he had gone to
infinite pains and whom he had loved sincerely. They
had been grateful to him for having been so worthy, so
distinguished, so well informed on all subjects and so
obliging. But he had committed one grave error in the

course of his embassy. He had come to America as to aCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 115

land that lay very close to the state of Nature. He had
behaved according to the dictates of sentiment, had been
warm-hearted, always ready to give his time, efforts and
advice. In spite of his great intelligence, he had chosen
the wrong road.”’ The effusions of April, 1778, were not
to be confused with everyday life, and the all-embracing
benevolence of Franklin was not to be attributed to a
deliberative assembly. He left a Congress seriously
divided against itself and suspicious of France; already
a separation into parties was beginning to manifest itself
in its ranks. The Lees, irritated against Gérard, gathered
around them all those who were partisans of an absolute
and uncompromising independence, a far-spread develop-
ment of the country and the establishment of a balance
between France and England.** To them, America’s mis-
sion seemed to be of such a nature that it allowed of no
collaboration, unless it were of a temporary nature. On
the other hand, their opponents still stood out for the
benign and philosophic solution which was Franklin’s
aim; the union of the freest nation in the world with the
most enlightened nation in the world to assure peace and
the prudent and regulated development of the United
States. These two parties differed essentially on one capi-
tal point: the reliance that could be placed on the moral
integrity of France. The former were inclined to survey
it continually and doubted its genuineness. The latter
trusted France and saw her as their sister-nation.

The predominance of the latter group had to be

ee et Pere Pere Pee ett ee Oe eee. mt

scott

5
ba!
i
CO
CF116 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

assured at any price. Vergennes, through his ministers,
his manner of conducting the war, in short, through his
entire official position, strove toward this end and
brought a veritable propaganda to play on public opinion
in order to accomplish it.

In place of Gérard, he took care to send a cautious and
prudent man; he warned him against excesses of zeal
and against sentimental indiscretions. The Count de La
Luzerne was fat, red-faced, myopic, and had rather fine
manners. He was highly cultured and had a deep knowl-
edge of his profession. The Americans found him punctil-
ious and a bit of a routinist. He did not give the im-
pression of being a strong personality, and this was no
doubt for the best.°® He had with him as Consul-General,
M. de Barbé-Marbois, quick-witted, curious, learned and
a bit restless, a man who had the art of both pleasing and
displeasing the Americans sovereignly. Marbois did not
content himself with living at Philadelphia and there
attending to such business as was confided to his cares;
he took great pains to become acquainted with the coun-
try; its inhabitants and their genius. Often in La
Luzerne’s absence, he exercised the functions of chargé-
d’affaires and succeeded fairly well, although his rather
meddling activity often annoyed the Americans. La
Luzerne arrived in America in the midst of the quarrels
stirred up by the Deane affair. He took pains not to in-
volve himself in it in any way and thus succeeded in

appeasing somewhat the partisans of the Lees. The criti-CREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 117

cal situation of affairs in the winter of 1779-1780 gave
France an opportunity to prove her intentions and the
sincerity of her friendship. Already the French fleet had
twice been sent to aid the insurgents, Vergennes went
further than this; it was decided to send an army of two
divisions to the American continent and to place this
army under Washington’s orders. It was this army that
was to render such effective aid in bringing about the
surrender at Yorktown (October, 1781), which finally
decided the destiny of America. In addition to this, two
French fleets were to lend their support to the Americans,
and the great fleet commanded by M. de Grasse was to
assure the naval superiority of the allies in the waters of
the New World. These good offices were not confined to
the field of military operations. France, through the
medium and at the instance of Vergennes, during these
years made a gift to America of ten million livres Tour-
nois and lent them forty-seven million.*”° At a period
when the treasury was empty and when financial reforms
were so urgent, this constituted a veritable proof of
affection. Moreover, in all questions and in all diplomatic
circles, Vergennes acted as agent for the Americans. It
was through his influence that Spain came into the war
despite her antipathy for the Americans and the uneasi-
ness with which they inspired her. This feeling was so
strong in Spain that the King could never be persuaded
to sign a treaty or an article of alliance with the Ameri-
cans. In vain did the French ambassador, M. de Mont-118 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

morin, try to persuade the Court of Madrid. M. de la
Vauguyon was more successful at The Hague, where,
with his assistance, John Adams succeeded in inducing
the Dutch government to declare in favor of America.”
We find Vergennes being of as much service as possible
to the American ambassadors in the posts that they
occupy in Europe and lavishing on them such counsels as
he deems prudent to prevent them from going about beg-
ging for alliances sure to be refused.” Arthur Lee and
Ralph Izard scorned his advices but had reason to regret
having done so.”

While France was doing so much, one would be in-
clined to think that La Luzerne’s position must have been
an easy one. Much to the contrary, every month that
went by rendered it more difficult. Their reverses and the
sufferings that an interminable war inflicted on a people
who were naturally peaceful, embittered the Americans.
They laid the blame on France. Congress was proving
unreasonable in its demands.*** Between their constitu-
ents, who were already exhausted with sacrifices and who
were going to be called upon to reélect them, and the
King of France, who was so wealthy, the delegates pre-
ferred to have recourse to the latter; and if La Luzerne
seemed inclined to deny them, they sadly voiced fears
that they might be obliged to treat with England if the
war did not end soon.

Congress dealt fairly. It kept up no clandestine rela-

tions with England and it made no attempt at a recon-CREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 119

ciliation. But all of its members did not entertain an
equal affection for France, and more than one of them
longed for the easy commercial relations of the old days
with people of the same blood and tongue. La Luzerne
felt this very clearly when he was obliged to resume an
irritating discussion that Gérard had rather clumsily
stirred up in Congress. It was the matter of deciding
what peace conditions should be imposed on England and
what conditions should be accepted from her. Vergennes,
anxious to get through with it, and persuaded that a
favorable turn of events, properly handled, would bring
a solution of the problem quite as well as military suc-
cesses, wanted to know in advance the intentions of the
United States and the minimum of their demands. The
discussion began in 1778, and it was still going on when
the preliminaries were signed.’ It had done more to
cause coolness between France and the United States
than any other incident. France and Vergennes admired
the United States and judged them to be intelligent and
philosophical, but still weak and badly organized. Ver-
gennes judged that after the war they would need time
and quiet to work out a stable government and to regain
their prosperity. He wished sincerely to see them happy.
He did not imagine them at all as conquerors or imperial-
ists, but thought that their immense territory and abund-
ant resources would suffice them. He hoped that they
would continue to set the world an example of modera-

tion and prudence. He had to take into account the fearsrrr

120 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

expressed by many people in high situations, that too
much encouragement might render them aggressive and
thus create a new danger for Europe.’’’ Nothing could
persuade him to set them up as rivals to Spain, the
ancient ally of France, and to allot them the territory of
Louisiana, which the French had discovered and
colonized. Nor could anything persuade him to sacrifice

to the Americans the one right and privilege of long

standing that France had succeeded in preserving from

England in 1763, the fishing rights of Newfoundland.
In 1778, very few Americans would have protested
strongly against this point of view. The most prudent of
them, Gouverneur Morris, for example, declared: “In
general, we feel the disadvantages of expanding toward
the South.” But the irritation which smoldered in a
certain Congressional party against Gérard led some poli-
ticians not to accept the French suggestions without
opposition. Adams, in the name of the New England
fishermen, demanded imperiously fishing rights along the
entire bank of Newfoundland, and he united all the
Northern states in a bloc that had every appearance of
hostility toward France. Some of these violent patriots
may have feared too prompt an end to the war and conse-
quently held out for conditions that would not be easy to
obtain. They demanded, as fundamental peace terms,
navigation privileges on the Mississippi and the New-
foundland fishing rights; and they urged the conquest of

Canada. This greed shocked and surprised Vergennes.CREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 121

La Luzerne, ordinarily prudent and silent, pled so well
that he rallied and kept a majority on his side and that
Congress, trusting in Vergennes, concluded by leaving
him to judge the peace terms. But all this discussion, all
this haggling, had done real harm to French prestige. It
left a goodly number of the delegates irritated and ex-
cited. The eventual solution was both courteous to the
King of France and flattering to his minister; but sus-
picions had been awakened and a spirit had been stirred
up in Congress which was to incite this body to free itself
of every vestige of French tutelage as soon as it
was possible. This feeling did not amount to hatred save
in the case of one or two members; it was not even ani-
mosity, for it did not entirely exclude gratitude; but it
Was a sympathy mixed with reserve, fear and doubt. It
did not extend to all the members of Congress, or perhaps
even to a majority; but it influenced Congress as a body,
and it was not able to overlook it. This conflict is a grave
one, for it has definite bearing on the mission and moral
role of the United States in the world.”

France was not represented in the United States by its
diplomatic agents alone. She had other envoys who were
more apt to reach the hearts of a young and generous
people. The officers who, from 1776 on, had flocked to
serve Liberty on the battlefields of the New World were
not all spotless heroes, but almost all of them were men
of courage, and some of them gave proof of a loyalty and
generosity that were worthy of the people to whom they122 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

were devoted. After a stormy youth, the Marquis de la
Rouérie,* a very wealthy young nobleman from Brit-
tany, had decided to finish his life in a monastery, but
he suddenly caught the enthusiasm for America and,
crossing the water, renouncing his title and his name and
spending his fortune unstintedly to equip a cavalry corps,
he won a place among the foremost combatants of the
war. He was in a continual wrangle with Congress, who
refused to make him a general but sent him horses which
were killed under him. He was always threatening to
abandon the whole adventure, but when he did leave for
Europe it was only to return with arms, money and pro-
visions for his beloved companions in arms. He was not
killed in action, but he displayed thoroughly his Breton
pride and courage. We must also mention all those officers
of Pulawski’s Legion who went to their death so nobly
along with him. Nor would it do to pass over the magnifi-
cent zeal of those who with Steuben and Du Portail built
up the engineering corps of the American army and
brought to a victorious end the glorious operations of the
siege of Yorktown. It may be said that the military
science of the Americans came from France. All the books
that were printed for the instruction of officers, artillery-
men and engineers, were translations from the French.”
It would take many pages to give the Marquis de La
Fayette all the credit that he deserves. He was patient,
modest, courageous and able during his whole stay in

America. He was unassuming enough to accept a modestCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 123

situation in 1777, and he won to his rank by his courage.
Wounded in the first battle in which he took part, he then
accepted the dangerous mission of making an expedition
into Canada; and when Congress gave up this plan, La
Fayette returned to his subaltern rank. He served as
Washington’s lieutenant in the hardest battles of L778.
When d’Estaing and his expeditionary force were beaten
off Rhode Island, he was strong enough and calm enough
to stand between the irate Americans and the French,
who were indignant at the injustice done them. When he
returned to France to offer his services to the King
against England, he did not forget the Americans; and
it was his entreaties that opened Vergennes’s eyes and
made him decide to send an expeditionary force to Wash-
ington’s aid. La Fayette had had reason to hope to be
chosen for this command, and to desire that the leader-
ship of these superb divisions might be accorded to him
even unofficially. Yet he was able to become a devoted
friend to Rochambeau, as he had been to Washington.
The end of the Virginia campaign is largely due to the
consummate skill which he displayed in drawing Corn-
wallis into the trap that was laid for him at Yorktown..
La Fayette was spirited, gracious, well-dressed, gen-
erous, and truly a young hero.

In a material way he did much for the Franco-Ameri-
can cause. He did even more by his example, his attitude
and his enthusiasm. In America his name was on every

tongue. Every heart beat with gratitude to him. ‘“‘The124 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Marquis” meant La Fayette. And this name was blessed.
Many others had come before him, of whom some were
even more courageous, more devoted or more learned in
military arts. Many came after him who were still more
brilliant: there was the Duc de Lauzun with his legion
that was to be found everywhere where there was danger
or pretty women; there was the Chevalier de Chastellux
with his halo of philosophy and his charming manners;

° the Viscount de

there was the Count de Damas,”
Noailles, the Count de Charlus, the Count de Broglie—
all handsome, noble and wealthy. There were the six
thousand soldiers, the finest of the French army, whose
fine build, discipline and courage won all hearts. It is
true that the people admired them, that they were aston-
ished to find them so different from what the English had
said of them, so polite and reserved, so strict against pil-
lage. It is true that they flocked out to welcome them and
that afterward they talked of their admirable conduct,
but still “the Marquis” was chosen as the type for all the
rest.” He alone stood out as a definite personality for
the mass of the American people. And this image did
more than everything else to facilitate the relations be-
tween the French and the Americans in the New World.
The mind needs an image in order to love and under-
stand. La Fayette was this image. Whatever there was of
incomplete, immature and superficial about him, far from
hurting him in their eyes, was accepted by the mass as a

mark of youth; and he fired this young nation with en-CREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 125

thusiasm. La Fayette was made to be a young hero. It
was only in America that he fulfilled his destiny. The
passing years, which brought him heaviness, did not bring
him maturity. But at twenty, lithe, energetic, generous
and filled with a patriotic faith, he was a fine example of
a being to whom philosophy was a religion, without
pedantry, platitude or pettiness. All the newspapers in
America related his exploits. People in all parts of the
country, at Boston, Philadelphia, Richmond and Balti-
more, had a chance to see him. He never came into conflict
with Congress. In the army he kept aloof from juntas and
remained faithful to Washington.”” The only relations
that any one had with him were personal. And this was
why he was loved. Even with his soldiers he was never
anything but a gentleman to whom a military command
had been confided. And this was his salvation. Even the
regions that were most refractory to French influence,
such as New England, sang his praises.

He was seen everywhere. All the highest and wealthiest
social circles were open to the French officers. And these
were also intellectual circles. It is evident that this fusion
was not without influence on the spiritual life of the
United States; so much the more so, since at the same
time French merchants were establishing themselves in all
the ports. As a matter of fact, most of these latter were
badly adapted to the United States. Some of them, how-

ever, succeeded; and those who did not, remained in thean

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

 

126 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

cities and taught French for a living. There were also
some few penniless officers who did the same.’™

Under these combined influences, various currents de-
veloped in America. The most elementary one consisted
of a refining of manners. The newspapers published
articles protesting against such boorish usages as toasts
which every one around the table drank out of the same
bowl, drinking-bees, etc. They proudly published the list
of the names of the most elegant French officers who had
come over the sea, and it is easy to perceive that their
minds were on France and that they were observing her
intently..* In 1777, Washington wrote to Congress that
they must receive La Fayette well because of his high
social position, and among his papers we find a list of the
most distinguished nobles of the French army, which he
had requested La Fayette to draw up for him in 1780.”
Washington thought it wise to seek the support of this
class of society and to study their politeness, which was
renowned throughout the world.*”

This influence, though it is incontestable, is subtle and
difficult to analyze. We may indicate its presence, but
any attempt to trace its manifestations would be futile.
It is easier to show how the French officers and professors
rendered American education more artistic and intellec-
tual.

Frenchmen settled in all the cities, even those that were
occupied by the English. Advertisements of French pro-

fessors appeared in the papers at Baltimore, Boston, NewCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 127
York, Richmond and, above all, at Philadelphia, where

there were as many as three of them, of whom one was a
certain M. Robin of Paris, who said that he was a pro-
fessor for adults and refused to take children as pupils;
another was M. Quesnay, the son of Louis XV’s physi-
cian; and the third was a M. Brival de la Broderie, who

taught Latin, English and French, especially to ladies.’

Fair sex, in you I do confide.
Choose me and make no error;
Beneath the wings of such a guide
The hawk inspires no terror,

his advertisement read.

Thus the study of French was spreading among al-
ready mature people who wished to perfect their educa-
tion. It is significant to see the large universities including
French in their curriculums. From Paris, Deane had
written to Stiles, the president of Yale, to propose found-
ing a chair of French and a French library at Yale. He
prided himself on having interested a number of his
wealthy French friends in this project and on being able
to raise the money easily. Stiles was perplexed; the idea
pleased him, but he did not dare carry it out, for Yale
was the center of orthodox Puritanism. He consulted his
friends: the preachers were of the opinion that it would
be very dangerous because of “popery” and that the offer
should be refused; the judges saw no danger in it and
wanted him to accept the offer; the Governor was con-

sulted and he also urged Stiles to accept. Finally, the128 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Corporation which directed the college ratified the meas-
ure. But Deane could no longer make good his offers.
Harvard showed itself more liberal.”* In 1779, an in-
structor was chosen to teach French outside of the college.
The first of these instructors was Vandal in 1779. In
1780, Poullin was given the appointment and, in 1782,
Albert Gallatin, a young immigrant from Geneva, who
was to become one of the most remarkable Secretaries of
the Treasury that the United States ever had, after hav-
ing been a violent democrat.*® In 1780, French had be-
come a regular, though not an obligatory, part of the in-
struction at Harvard.’*® In 1782, freshmen and sopho-
mores were allowed to study it in place of Hebrew. This
is a very significant fact and one that marks clearly the
growth of what might be called secular learning in this
old Puritan university. Moreover, Franklin was having
sent from France to Harvard profane books of a decid-
edly deistic tendency, such as Le Monde primitif by
Court de Gébelin, which same Gébelin was in regular cor-
respondence with Professor Sewall.** And Harvard paid
its court to her country’s allies by awarding doctorates
honoris causa to M. de La Luzerne, M. de Marbois and
M. de Valnais, the French consul at Boston.” We find
the same attitude at William and Mary College, the
oldest and most famous institution of the South and one
which in those days rivaled Harvard. In 1779, Jefferson,
as governor of Virginia and “‘visitor’ of William and

Mary, had a chair of French created and gave it toCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 129

Charles Bellini. This was the first professorial chair to
be established in the New World for the teaching of
a modern language.”** But in 1782, Rhode Island Col-
lege wrote to the King of France requesting him to
found a chair of French and a French library in their
institution.” Dartmouth College sent its president to
Europe for the same purpose.*” And the legislators of
Massachusetts inserted in their constitution a clause rela-
tive to education and the arts which was inspired, John
Adams says, by a desire to follow the example of France
in encouraging the sciences. From this. resulted the
foundation of the Academy of Arts and Sciences at
Boston, which resembled the French Academy.?”

The spirit of philosophy penetrated along with French
books. The bookshops advertised an ever-increasing pro-
portion of French works, and even the towns that the
English occupied were touched by this movement. Thus,
at New York in 1782, Rivington published a new edition
of Raynal’s great work.’ In various parts of the United
States, the newspapers published translations of Raynal’s
book on the American Revolution or of his other works.’
It is above all Virginia, where the established church was
broken down and where great religious confusion seems
to have reigned, that furnishes examples of this kind.?”°
Jefferson, who is a good representative both of the cul-
ture and the intellectual attitude of the highest class in
Virginia, was writing about this time, at the request of

Barbé-Marbois, his Notes on Virginia, which are so per-130 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

vaded by the doctrine of the Economists and so fired with
philosophic zeal for the freeing of negro slaves and for
tolerance.”

In these Nozes, he refutes with indignation and respect
Abbé De Pauw’s calumnies against America. He quotes
Buffon, Daubenton and all the great French scientists of
the period. He turns toward them as his instructors. One
feels his eagerness to seize their spirit. It is also during
this period that, in the discussions of Congress, Benjamin
Rush uses examples from Raynal and Montesquieu to
combat a project for having each state cast a uniform
vote? John Adams, setting out for Europe and having
decided to become a great diplomat, bought all the
French treatises on diplomacy that he could find. In
short, the leaders of American thought are suddenly be-
coming disciples of this civilization with which they are
so unfamiliar. They select from it whatever best com-
pletes their own personalities and responds to their own
instincts and desires. Thus formal refinement and the
philosophic spirit are the two contrasting aspects that
French influence takes on. Even La Luzerne becomes a
propagator of philosophy and tolerance. It was he who
brought Congress to listen for the first and only time to a
sermon preached by a Catholic priest in a Catholic chapel.
The good Abbé Bandole, chaplain of the French em-
bassy, had the honor after the siege of Yorktown of con-
sratulating Congress in the name of God in the following

terms: “You offer the universe the admirable spectacle ofCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 131

a society which, founded on the principles of equality and
justice and now arriving at its perfection, can insure to
the individuals who compose it all the happiness of which
human institutions are capable.” *** It was he and Gérard
who acted as intermediaries between Congress and the
Quakers.’ Their great apostle, Benezet, became so inti-
mate a friend to Gérard that he was in the habit of writs
ing letters to him to explain his duties and those of the
King of France. As a matter of fact, Louis XVI, or
rather Vergennes, was anxious to be in the good graces of
this estimable sect and to reconcile them as much as possi-
ble with Congress.**” Under French influence, the harsh-
ness of Puritanism thawed to such an extent that Quesnay
played Beaumarchais’ Ewgénée at Philadelphia at a time
when all theatrical productions were forbidden by Con-
gress. This was the first French play given in the United
States. A tempering of too bleak a morality, an easing of
social and political bonds, a moderate sentimentality and,
on the whole, a tendency to rely on men and instincts
rather than on governments—these are the characteristics
that we find among the Americans who came under the
influence of French philosophy about 1780; and they
were the best minds of the country. The Constitution of
Pennsylvania is an example of the work of faithful
readers of Turgot: in order to give the people absolute
control of public acts, they provided for a single house,
elected for short terms and under the continual super-

vision of the voters. Here the blind enthusiasm that132 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

France had received from America comes back to it. It
is a curious case of a people imitating itself by taking as
a model a concept that another people has formed of it.

Alarmed at seeing America open itself to such diverse
and opposed doctrines, Gérard, and later La Luzerne, had
sought to exercise a more methodic influence on the coun-
try through its best newspapers and preachers. They
wanted to obey the instructions of Vergennes, who had
ordered them to do everything in their power to consoli-
date the national union of the United States; and they
had recognized, as had their superior at Paris, that only
public opinion could impose this discipline. Many Ameri-
can writers and journalists offered Gérard their services.”
But he had judgment enough to prefer to choose his
men.’ He had a man to do the heavy work such as
pamphlets and daily articles. For a long time this writer
signed his work Leonidas. His task was to bring people to
appreciate the value of liberty and independence and to
see what an excellent thing was the French alliance. All
this was nothing but the truth. Leonidas expressed it well
but not brilliantly. Gérard found a better man. The cele-
brated pamphleteer Thomas Paine had had difficulties
with Congress over certain indiscretions committed in
the exercise of his functions as secretary of the Commit-
tee on Foreign Affairs. Since Gérard believed himself to
have been the original cause of Paine’s having lost his
place, and since Paine was both impecunious and willing,
Gérard offered to facilitate his work. He asked nothingCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 133

of him save that he continue to publish his courageous
and patriotic works as he was in the habit of doing.’
He was requested not to attack France. It was under
these conditions that Paine wrote his Criss. He had even
the politeness to bring La Luzerne the draft of the pam-
phlet for corrections, and some of the most stirring pas-
sages of this republican pamphlet were gone over by the
French minister to the United States. His work was so
satisfactory that he was requested to write a history of
the war. The archives of the French consulates and of the
embassy to the United States would have been placed at
his disposition; but Paine was indolent, and the history
of the American Revolution never saw day, to the great
regret of La Luzerne.**” There was also a clergyman from
Boston, Samuel Cooper, an excellent man, cultivated and
pious, and who for the past twenty years had devoted
himself to the Whig cause in: Massachusetts. He was a
preacher with a very open and philosophic mind. He had
seen that, without France, the United States would
probably not be able to hold out to the end. He had
viewed with alarm the hostility of the Bostonians and all
the Congregational clergy toward France, and he had set
himself courageously to battle against this current.’*° His
resources did not allow him to do much. He accepted the
aid of the King of France, who gave him, as he did Paine,
a thousand dollars a year to allow him to hire a secretary
or an assistant. It would be unjust to accuse these men,

and presumptious to seek to defend them. In a criticalree)

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

134 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

moment for their country, their country’s most faithful
friend asked them to help her to unite the spiritual forces
of the United States into a desperate resistance against
the invader. Nothing was demanded of them except that
they should devote themselves to the service of the com-
mon cause. Vergennes had clearly specified this to
Gérard and he repeated it to La Luzerne, and both these
ministers obeyed his instructions. Such good words as the
writers who were in relations with La Luzerne had to
say for France were rather less emphatic than those
voiced by other writers, but they were more accurate. It
is meet that the King of France should have given a
pension to the most brilliant pamphleteer and the most
prominent republican in America, the man who was later
to become one of the principal agents of the republican
Revolution in France and who was to risk his life to
save that of the King who had fed him, and whom he had
flattered, combated and dethroned. Such was the destiny
of Thomas Paine. That of the Boston preacher was sim-
pler; after three years of patient and fruitful work, he
was taken ill. He had succeeded in gathering about him
both Frenchmen and Americans and in bringing them to
understand each other and discuss things intelligently.
His sermons had made the pretty, slender Colonial
churches ring with the name of the King of France; and
Puritan congregations had prayed for His Very Christian
Majesty. He died and his work, like the friendships that
he had built, lived after him.**CREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 135

For General Sullivan I have less esteem. He kept La
Luzerne informed concerning the intentions of Congress.
The French were obliged to pension him to prevent the
English from doing it. His servile attitude toward La
Luzerne is painful; he was an employee rather than a
discreet friend.

These methods succeeded. The American papers, in-
clined to take over integrally news items and articles from
the English Whig papers, were provided with original
articles and discussions. They heard of France and its
heroes and sometimes of its philosophers. It was especially
at Boston and Philadelphia, the two intellectual and re-
ligious capitals of the country, that this effort made itself
felt. The bulk of the American people was admirable
human raw-material, shaped by the civilizations of
Europe, but renewed by Nature and rich in a vast
future.** It was capable of creating an absolutely new
motherland and of feeling for a far-off people, foreign
in race and culture, a spontaneous and generous frater-
nity. The American people turned toward France de-
liberately and gave her their affection. The proofs of
this are innumerable. In the popular comedies, we find
Tories cursing the French intervention as the principal
cause of American independence; in treatises on political
economy, we find apostrophes addressed to the public
saying: Should we not be ashamed to ask France for
money to spend on ourselves instead of paying our

taxes? *“* And the newspapers repeat: The fine thing136 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

about the Franco-American alliance is that it is equally
favorable to both nations and that the French people
desire it. It is also recalled that, even before their enter-
ing the war, the French were favorable to the Americans,
that they received them in a friendly way, that prayers
were offered up in the convents for an American victory,
and that the women had favored them. Louis was com-
pared to Abel and George to Cain. ‘There was resentment
against the members of Congress who were unwilling to
show confidence in France. In Virginia, the Lees found
themselves the butt of a veritable popular indignation.
Even Adams was an object of disapproval. A warm sym-
pathy guided the American people.” Here and there a
croup resisted. At Yale, the students from old Puritan
families discussed in their clubs the dangers of the French
alliance.**’ At Boston, merchants who had kept up Eng-
lish affiliations battled stoutly against public opinion.
At Philadelphia the surliest of the Quakers might well
consider these impudent foreigners as Moloch in person;
all this was merely local opposition and without in-
fluence. For the United States at war, the French alliance
was truly an unmitigated blessing and a full satisfaction.
It was only Congress as a body that reacted in a certain
measure against the general current. This was because
it did not accept the moral and philosophical ideal with
which Vergennes was imbued and which the French
thought might rightly be attributed to the Americans asCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 137

a nation. Congress felt that this land was called to a
great destiny, but it did not foresee the decisive influence
that the American Revolution would have on Europe. It
took more thought for worldly greatness and material
power. However, its opposition remained vague and was
mitigated by respect for Vergennes and the ideal that he
had formed of the United States.*** As for the people,
they had accepted whole-heartedly the friendship that
the greatest European nation held out to them. They
were willing to share their enthusiasm and to hold in
common the great aspirations which impelled them to-
ward a spiritual life that should be at once humane, con-
cerned with utility, preoccupied with the mysteries of
sciences and directed by a great and vague love for their
fellow men. The blending of these two races permitted
the sentiment of equality to develop to an extraordinary
degree, for it brought together men from the two ex-
tremes of society. The brotherhood of camps was a bond
between them. In short, this period of tumult and effu-
sions afforded every one a vision of Liberty that was not
to be forgotten. The ardent curiosity and zeal of the
French hastened and shaped the development of the
United States into a nation and woke in the Americans
an eagerness to know themselves and to define and realize
their potentialities. And this same influence that inspired
them with an international and universal genius also

roused their national spirit. Vergennes did more than any138 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

one else to group the Americans behind Congress and to

make them feel the brotherhood of nations.

*

*

In Europe, he had to combat the discouragement that
too long a war engendered. It was not always easy to
maintain harmony between French and American
opinion. When the French fleet was beaten off Rhode
Island, when d’Estaing lost the battle before Savannah,
when it was learned that the English had taken Charles-
ton and reconquered the whole of Georgia, the people
were irritated at seeing a war that should have been ended
quickly drawn out to such length. Naval officers were
beginning to attack d’Estaing and to criticize the Ameri-
cans..*® The French sailors, accustomed for centuries to
fighting the English, could not associate with the New
England sailors, who had so often engaged in privateer-
ing against France, without brawls breaking out between
them. We find evidence of this friction in a book pub-
lished in 1780, entitled Le Journal @un Officter de la
Flotte de M. le Comte d’Estaing. These naval reverses
also had the disadvantage of causing enormous losses to
French commerce and of bringing French merchants, who
heretofore had been in favor of the American cause, to
wish for peace. John Adams was impressed with this atti-
tude on the part of French middle-class society in 1779.”
The depreciation of continental money and the attemptCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 139

that Congress made to fix the value of paper money at
one-fortieth of its original value contributed to disrupt-
ing commerce and ruining many French firms who were
engaged in exporting to America. Such measures gave the
impression that America was completely exhausted.*”
This view was whispered about at Versailles. And in
1779, there were to be heard on the streets the following
couplets deriding Raynal, “whose mistakes had been cut
out of whole cloth,” and the United States:

I have seen the various refuges

Of this nation still in infancy.

Its pride, its independence,

Are unknowingly preparing its chains.
It is frugal because of indolence

And the liberty it worships

Is only a hatred of duty.1®

The return of a large group of French officers, whom
Congress had refused to commission as generals, helped
to spread this discontent.’ The English propaganda
made use of these divers incidents and the favorable
atmosphere. The Mémoire justificatif de la Cour de Lon-
dres sur la présente guerre brings out the duplicity of
Louis XVI in inciting the Americans to revolt, aiding
them secretly, and, having thus broken his pledge, trying
to make it appear that he had gone into the war only be-
cause he was forced into it by armed aggression. This
document appeals to monarchial sentiment. The writings
of Tucker and Pownall were even more artful and effec-

tive.”’* They set forth the fact that, as soon as the war@eivie

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

140 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

was finished, Great Britain would resume her commerce
with the United States, and thus France would have
given her time, money, enthusiasm and men for nothing.
Ignoble pamphlets attacking Vergennes, Sartines and
Franklin, “the octogenarian chameleon,” were secretly
circulated. The most notorious works of this kind were
La Cassette verte de M. de Sartines, which appeared in
1779, and L’ Histoire d’un Pou frangais, which was pub-
lished in 1781. They relate, in the guise of court gossip,
everything that could be gathered together concerning
the weakness of the Americans, their impudent way of
asking for money and the annoyance that this caused the
King. They consisted mainly of statistics on amounts that
France had already advanced to the insurgents, and
of anecdotes showing the Queen’s irritation against
America. They made mock of Franklin’s noble sim-
plicity and described him as a dull bourgeois; they ap-
pealed to every prejudice of caste and station to poke
ridicule at both Franklin and, especially, those whom he
represented—the Quakers, “whose arrogance sticks
through their cloaks,” as a song of the time said of them.
This propaganda slipped in with everything that came to
France from England (for relations between the two
countries were never suspended) and also with every-
thing that was allowed to come in from Germany. Han-
over and all the adjacent regions, and in general all the
official circles throughout Germany, were at this time
entirely under the control of English newspapers andCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 141

the English Court. In 1780, when Prince Max de Deux
Ponts (Zweibricken) and his regiment the Royal Deux
Ponts were fighting in America in Rochambeau’s division,
the Gazette de Deux Ponts announced that, to its great
regret, it could not publish in its columns a letter from
a young French sailor who was filled with enthusiasm for
the United States, “‘because,’

3

it went on, “there is still
in the minds of the German people a certain admiration
for the English which prevents them from taking kindly
to anything that is detrimental to England.” **®

There was therefore a secret fermentation that could
not be checked by force and which was all the more dan-
gerous because Necker, like Turgot, did not believe in
the necessity of the war and because, except for the inde-
pendence of the United States, the French people could
see no definite reason for fighting nor any immediate end
to be gained by all this bloodshed. The cabal that was
working against Vergennes, his policies and the United
States, had every opportunity during these hard years
for sowing discord and shaking the confidence of those
who had faith in the future, France’s moral role and the
Americans. All the cynicism, sarcasm and jealousy of
the Court was banded together against Vergennes. He
defended himself as best he could. He kept a close watch
over the newspapers and punished those of them who be-
haved badly or attacked the Americans. His faithful
Genet *” continued to insert in their columns everything
he could find that was encouraging for the future of the

err142 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

alliance. The Mercure, the Journal des Savants, the
Affaires de V Angleterre et de l Amérique continued their
work and redoubled their activities.

In 1779 and 1780, Vergennes published or circulated
a series of pamphlets designed to dissipate the unfavor-
able impressions that were spread among the masses and
to defend the American cause. There was Favier, who
erudgingly rendered him the service of writing Les Let-
tres du Comte d’Albany au Lord Bute, in which it is
stated that the King of France had the right to recognize
the United States, since all the powers recognized with-
out hesitation the Barbary States. Favier, hostile in his
heart to the recognition of the United States, but anxious
to win Vergennes’s favor, accepted this way of doing ito
His controversy with the minister on this subject is so
curious and sets forth so clearly the point of view of
both of these men that I have thought it well to give it
in extenso in my Appendix IJ. Among these pamphlets,
we also find one by Beaumarchais, Observations sur le
Mémoire justificatéf de la Cour de Londres, in which the
author boldly declares that he had done everything on his
own initiative and despite the King’s wishes and cites, by
way of proof, the fact that he had ruined himself there-
by. Shrewd and thoroughly familiar with the current of
public opinion, he asserted that, if Congress had rejected
the services of French officers, it showed clearly that the
King had not sent them and that Congress “through re-

publican pride, was not willing to share the glory ofCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 143

their victory!” There were also the Lettres de M. R. au
Lord D. touchant le Tratte de Commerce conclu entre la
France et les Etats-Unzs written by an anonymous author
who knew what ought to be said. He maintained that the
aim of the war was the freedom of the seas and that it
was therefore a just one. He refused to discuss the ques-
tion as to whether or not a people had the right of insur-
rection, and he affirms that, in any case, this right does
not exist in an absolute monarchy such as France. We
must also mention Les Lettres d’un Membre du Congres
americain, Le Pamphlet programmatique, Le Proces des
trots Rots, Les Observations sur le Traité de Paix de
1763 by the Baron de Sainte-Croix, Le Destin de
? Amérique by Cerisier, Les Réflextons impartiales sur
P Amérique, and L’ Américain aux Anglais. All these pam-
phlets undertook to prove that the Americans had re-
volted because of English injustice, which violated the
British constitution. They were therefore in the right and
their revolution, by opening up a new commerce to
Europe, would bring back peace and prosperity and
moderation to the world. All these pamphlets argue the
good faith of the King of France, the utility of the war,
and the brilliant future of the United States. They are
well worded but monotonous and rather colorless. Were
they sufficient to stir public opinion and to silence critt-
cisms%? This is all the less probable since good reasons
have never soothed any irritation, no matter how unjust

it may have been. The movements of public opinionThat

oT

 

144 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

which were then going on in France, and which by their
violence should have foretold other troubles to come,
could be appeased only by means of the same nature.
This is why we find Vergennes making as much use as
possible of imagination and sentiment.” He tried to en-
grave on all hearts the image of Washington, whom he
held in unbounded esteem and whom he would like to
have seen made dictator of America. Having felt the in-
fluence that this great man exerted on those about him,
he wanted to make him appear still greater and he did
everything in his power to increase his prestige. He took
as a basis the legend that was beginning to grow up about
this name—Washington, the Fabius of the New World,
as great as a Roman, and as calm as they, like them a
citizen and more enlightened and modest than they,
Washington, whom people were beginning to admire as
the hero of a war without victories but full of sacrifices,
Washington, who was nothing except by the will of the
people, and who professed a religious respect for the
people’s will. Here was a new type of hero, one who,
thanks to his virtues and his remoteness, entered into,
and established himself in, the popular imagination.
Along with Washington went the image of William Penn
and the legend of the Quakers, a people so pious without
priests or churches, so virtuous without dogmas. This
legend already existed for a group of intellectuals and
philosophers, but it became popular especially through
Franklin, whose simple manners and modest dignity wereCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 145

taken for Quakerisms. Franklin was the prototype in
accord with which all other images were formed. People
saw in him and Penn the deist sage, and in Washington
the prudent and heroic patriot. Franklin’s personality
and his stay in France are the source of most of the
visions and hopes that were the immediate preparation
for the French Revolution. His importance is primordial,
and Vergennes knew it; and for this reason their co-
operation was at once of a personal, philosophic and
political nature."** Without Franklin’s presence at Paris
from 1776 to 1783, Vergennes’s politics would have been
powerless to guide public opinion.

There was a great friendship between these two men.
In the crucial hours, Franklin went to comfort Vergennes.
He pointed out victory as being inevitable, the Ameri-
cans as being resolved to fight to the bitter end, and Eng-
land as weakened. He set forth frankly his own views
and the demands that the situation of the United States
obliged him to transmit to the French Court, but he also
let him see that the alliance had in him a resolute de-
fender. Although the partisans of the Lees, jealous of
Franklin’s success and uneasy at the harmony that existed
between him and Vergennes, repeatedly urged Congress
to recall Franklin and to hold an investigation of his
activities, these offensive measures were never taken; and,
without having any such dazzling popularity in the New
World as he enjoyed in Europe, the ‘modern Lycurgus”

was nevertheless able to do much to calm American skit-

    
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 

oer ey oe le ES ks£F $9*R235.t423242 057279
Pere et eset th ass. :

tee erie ed cesses tt ees

    
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

146 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

tishness and to encourage a feeling of friendship for
France.’ Invariably he wrote to his friends, even those
who were tainted with Toryism, that the alliance with
France alone could save America, that the welcome which
the French tendered to the Americans was both moving
and marked with a splendid generosity, and finally, that
the King and his ministers had no aims other than the
independence of the United States and the peace of the
world.* Thus the sincerity and loyalty of Franklin,
during this long mission in France, afforded one of the
finest examples of moral diplomacy to be found in those
days, or since. The only guile that he deigned to use
was that affectation of weariness and decrepitude which
permitted him to give counsel, advice and warnings to
Vergennes, like a grandsire on his death-bed bidding a
last farewell to his tearful grandchildren. The French
Court, which appreciated his intelligence, his zeal and his
uprightness and wanted to keep him at any price, was
always impressed by this tone—which, by the way,
brought more than a little money into the depleted Ameri-
can treasury. But this pose, sincere without doubt, but in
any case philosophic, pleased the French so much and
was so in keeping with the conception which they had
formed of their idol, that we cannot blame Franklin for
having responded in this way to the encouragement of
popular fervor.

A more serious difference than either of them was

clearly aware of separated Franklin from Vergennes.CREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 147

Both of them were philosophers and what we should call
esprits libres. Both of them dreamed of a world in which
men should be more righteous, happier and less oppressed.
Both of them saw in the American war a means of bring-
ing closer this happy era. They both yearned for a new
ideal of brotherhood and justice to reign over the nations.
But for Vergennes, this ideal had a Catholic and mon-
archial basis, while Franklin’s concept was that of a mind
formed by his heredity and the democratic and Protestant
education of Boston. While they thought that they were
collaborating in the same work, in reality Vergennes and
Franklin were headed in diverging directions.** Vergennes
aspired to a moral ideal which should supplement the
traditions and dogmas of Catholicism without destroying
them. Franklin, without desiring a social and political
revolution nor brutal overthrowing of religion, envisaged
a moral religion which should destroy dogmas and finally
reign alone. He could not help favoring certain mani-
festations in France which alarmed the orthodoxy of
Vergennes; and he went much further in this direction
than Vergennes suspected, much further than it is ordi- fae
narily believed even today. sae

From 1777 to 1784, Franklin had a considerable social i
influence in Paris; he was one of the most elegant figures,
and probably the most sought-after man in the capital. 3
His glorious situation, his illustrious friends, his fasci- ; :
nating personality—all this led the most fashionable

hostesses to seek to draw him to their salons; and he148 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

could not always refuse gracefully. Popularity 1s an ex-
traordinarily capricious pet: to keep it from running
away one must feed it and caress it continually. Franklin
nursed his public along. He appeared in their drawing-
rooms modestly dressed, without a wig, but with the halo
of his magnificent white hair. Knowing the prejudices
and gossip that were stirred up by his frequent requests
on the behalf of the United States for money, he observed
the greatest simplicity. His grandsons, who lacked the
cood sense to follow his example, became the object of
unfavorable comment. Franklin kept an air of silence
and reserve, as much by inclination as for the sake of
dignity and to discourage calumnies which would have
made him out to be a clever propagator of subversive
theories. His intelligent silence delighted Paris. He
talked freely only in the houses of some few of his
friends: Madame Helvetius, whom he thought of marry-
ing and in whose salon all the philosophers and influ-
ential Freemasons of the time used to gather; Madame
Brillon, the wife of a ferméer-général, and Turgot. He
was less restrained with his colleagues at the Academy
of Sciences.*® Le Veillard, Le Roy and Dalibard were
old friends of his, and conversations with them presented
neither dangers nor drawbacks. He was therefore assidu-
ous in his attendance at the Academy, and this exemplary
regularity was still another source of popularity. The
same good sense that had made him decide to live in

Passy and to stay there in spite of the hardship that itCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 149

entailed when he wanted to go to Paris or Versailles, had
led him to furnish his house modestly and to manage it
with frugality. He had few visitors; and he had leisure
for work, for carrying on secret negotiations and even for
printing in secret, for he had installed a printing-press
in his house.*** His only luxury was a carriage, which
shocked John Adams, but was indispensable.’ He enters
tained well, however, and knew how to spend money
when it was necessary; but in his home he had the art of
giving always the impression that his life, his habits and
his person were strange and foreign. By this means, he
kept both curiosity and public interest unflagging and
always remained for the French something new, original
and different. He knew and understood his surroundings
so well that he adapted himself to them without losing
anything of his own personality. Thus he proved the
possibility of reconciling a friendship for France with
fidelity to American virtues. Nothing could have done
more to dispose the intelligent public, and even the
masses, in favor of his far-off country than this man who
understood them so well, loved them so intelligently and
imitated them so little. The memory of Franklin lasted
for half a century.

The public still admired this great man obscurely and
imagined his activities as having something mysterious
about them. Though it was not definitely known, it was
suspected that the three editions of the American consti-

tutions published at Paris in 1778 and 1783 had been150 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

brought out through his efforts..°° He had succeeded in
having them translated by the Duc de La Rochefoucauld
d’Einville, and had obtained from Vergennes the promise
that the censorship, without formally approving them,
would allow them to circulate and would do nothing to
hinder their sale, which officially was secret.” He put
the Articles of Confederation into circulation in the same
way. Moreover, the Affazres de T Angleterre et de
? Amérique, in which he played a not unimportant part,
was free to print whatever it wished, and it took full
advantage of this privilege. Beside this, Franklin pro-
cured here and there pamphlets which he proceeded to
turn to good use. It is thus that the Letter to the Hesstans
by Mirabeau, published through Franklin’s offices and
perhaps written at his request, was for a long while
attributed to him. He also gave the public translations
of such letters as had been seized at sea when they hap-
pened to contain messages from Clinton to his govern-
ment and were encouraging to the American cause.’ He
read the American papers carefully and had reprinted
everything that gave a favorable impression of the
courage of the insurgents, their morale, their kindness and
their enthusiasm for the French alliance.

To these discreet labors, which Vergennes encouraged,
he joined another activity. Franklin had become the cen-
ter of Masonic activities in Paris. Before leaving the
United States, he had been a high dignitary in American

Freemasonry. During his stay in France, he took part inCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 151

the great effort to strengthen and spread Freemasonry,
which began about 1775 and lasted until 1789." The
establishing of the first Grand Orient in France dates
from 1773. All throughout the country at this time,
secret societies were being formed directly or isidirectly
under the influence of Freemasonry. Some of these had
special aims, such as the Society of the Wooden Sword
which united the young nobles of the Court about 1772-
1774. Several clubs had the purpose of aiding the Ameri-

172

cans and spreading their ideas.’*” We have already men-
tioned the existence of one or two of these at Marseilles.
At Paris there were others, of which the most important
had as their center the Palais Royal and the foyer of the
Opera. Many of the Economists and many of Franklin’s
learned friends were Masons, and his ereat friend,
Madame Helvetius, was somewhat the Egeria of the asso-
ciation.’** She and her husband had tried to create a lodge
of a new kind, one which should group all the most
prominent artists and writers of the period. Helvetius
thought, and not illogically, that since Freemasonry en-
visaged the reform of society by means of enlightenment
and philosophic benevolence, it was essential to interest
philosophers and writers in it. This project was realized
about 1769 through the initiative of Lalande, who was
very influential in Freemasonry, and Madame Helvetius,
who recruited members for the new lodge, which was
called the Lodge of the Nine Sisters. Among the first to
be received were the president Dupaty, Condorcet, Cail-any)

152 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

hava d’Estandoux, Fallet, the secretary of the Gazette de
France, Garnier, the elder Parny, Dorat Cubiéres—and
then, after 1778, Romme, Court de Gébelin, Grouvelle,
Mercier, de Seze, Comte Turpin de Crissé, Piccini, Fran-
cois de Neufchateau, Fontanes, Chamfort, Demeusnier,
Voltaire, Roucher, Prince C. de Rohan, the younger
Parny, Prince E. de Salm-Salm, Vernet, Lacépede, Hou-
don, Berthelot, Lemierre, Imbert, and Flins des Oliviers.
It is also said that La Métherie, Brissot, Bailly, Cerutti,
Danton, Chénier, Péthion, Rabaut Saint-Etienne, Fau-
chet, Bonneville, Florian and Berquin belonged to it
after 1783. This lodge was very prominent for the caliber
of its members. Its beginnings were propitious. In 1778
it admitted Voltaire, who was proposed by Court de
Gébelin and Franklin. On November 28, 1778, in spite
of the prohibitions of the government, who did not want
any further notoriety to be given this philosopher, the
lodge held a great session to celebrate the apotheosis of
Voltaire. In the course of the ceremony, hopes for the
success of the Americans were expressed. In spite of the
government, the lodge continued its activities, which
consisted in directing lectures, literary studies and artistic
expositions, and aiding the poor.’* Encouraged by the
favor of the public, it decided to create an auxiliary lodge
composed of women. The formal affiliation took place
on March g, 1779. It occasioned a scandal which shows
clearly the nature and the boldness of the Lodge of the
Nine Sisters. In the usual discourse, instead of havingCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 153

the serpent speak to Eve, Cupid was substituted. The
ladies objected. There was a riot, which was both dis-
reputable and scandalous. The Grand Orient was in-
formed of it (Louis XVI himself saw to it, it is said),
but Lalande warded off the danger; and to assure itself
against prosecution by the authorities and the Grand
Orient, the lodge chose Franklin as “Venerable” in 1779.
He was already an assiduous member and attended all
the meetings and assisted such poor as were assigned him.
He became the protector of the lodge and saved it. While
he was occupying the office of “Venerable,” a celebration
was held in his honor (May 1, 1780) and the lodge made
considerable gains in membership. It also founded, under
the name of the Museé de Paris, a sort of free university,
where the public was offered a higher education that was
at once modern, scientific and philosophic. This institu-
tion had great success. It established branches, the most
flourishing of which was known under the name of the
Lycée de Paris. There La Salle, Milly, Dupaty, E. de
Beaumont, Pastoret and La Harpe gave lectures that
won great favor with the public and attracted much
attention. The promoters of the idea, Court de Gébelin,
the Abbé Cordier de Saint-Firmin, La Dixmerie, and
Fontanes had leaned continually on Franklin for the
realization of their project whose original initiative may
well have been Franklin’s."*” The Musée was loyal to
the United States.*° On November 22, 1782, it held a
celebration in their honor; and it was at the Lycée thatTHE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

154
Hilliard d’Auberteuil first ‘ntroduced his book on the

United States, the first French work to be consecrated
to the history of that nation2’? The activities of the
Lodge of the Nine Sisters had therefore an aim that was
both political, literary and moral.2® But, in the last
analysis, it was the religious and moral side that most
impressed its contemporaries ; and it is in this that Frank-
lin was of special value to the lodge. As a matter of fact,
he attended the meetings of many other lodges and liter-
ary societies, but none of them interested him as much
as the Lodge of the Nine Sisters, where his position as
patriarch was recognized and utilized. For instance, we
find him going to the “Assemblee des Savants et Artistes, ’’
directed by Pahin de Champlain de la Blancherie, who
hoped to organize a vast international collaboration of
all savants in the service of science and fraternity.” In
Franklin’s papers, we find many invitations to the meet-
ings of other lodges, which he seems to have attended,
but he gave all his devotion only to the Lodge of the
Nine Sisters.2®° And it is this lodge, more than any other
organized body, that made him the “holy philosopher
and saint” that he so long remained in the eyes of France.
The Lodge of the Nine Sisters, with its great religious
and symbolic ceremonies in which the Supreme Being
and Wisdom were worshiped, is a forerunner of things
to come. It was aided in its work by a little book by
Franklin, which had just been newly translated and pub-
lished in France and had achieved a considerable successCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 155

—Poor Richard’s Almanac. In 1773 Barbeu-Dubourg
had published a French translation of it in his Giuvres
completes de Franklin, but these two thick 7 quarto
volumes were too cumbersome to sell well and circulate
among the people. In 1777 was published a new transla-
tion in an octavo volume, which had at least one edition
in 1777 and five in 1778. All the newspapers spoke of it.
Here we must mention the great career that this little
book had in France from 1771 to 1800. In December,
1777, Grimm’s Correspondance littéraire says of it: ‘““The
morality of this book is set forth in a series of maxims
full of good sense, energy and clearness. Nothing except
the eternal repetition of the phrase, ‘as Poor Richard
says,’ makes this little patriotic catechism wearying to
read. Yet we know of no book that is more worthy of be-
ing placed in the hands of all readers.” ** The book was
circulated in the provinces. The Feuille hebdomadaire
de la Généralité de Limoges declares on January 28,
1778: “We exhort country priests and school-masters to
procure this work and to have their scholars learn it by
heart.” It scored a popular success and was sold in the

streets for four sous.**”

A legend was growing up about
Franklin. All the portraits of the time picture him tam-
ing the lightning and conquering tyrants. This twofold
victory is constantly recalled.“ The Constitution of
Pennsylvania, the most democratic in the world, and the
Declaration of Independence were also attributed to him.

It was said, and believed, that he, Samuel Adams andore

   
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

156 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Washington between them had made the American Reyo-
lution.

He united all the qualities necessary to give him a
great religious influence in this eighteenth century, so
restless and hungry for faith. His brilliant career, start-
ing from such a humble beginning, his scientific discov-
eries, which revealed new and unknown forces and even
gave the impression of having subdued and enchained
them, his courageous position as an American patriot,
which made him appear to all eyes as the sponsor of inde-
pendence, his moral writings, his goodness, his intelli-
gence, the mixture of intellectual simplicity and penetra-
tion and, lastly, his marvelous ability to reduce things to
their simplest terms and to make the masses understand
them—all this tended to make him a sort of high priest of
Philosophy. When Voltaire died, he stood unquestioned
in this position. His correspondence testifies to the place
that he held in all hearts. Here we find a letter from an
officer who desires to go to America. Here is the son of a
wool merchant, dissatisfied with his life in his father’s
house, who writes to ask him for advice. Here an Irish
exile implores his aid. A Benedictine writes to ask him to
pay his debts and promises him his prayers in exchange.
Condorcet asks for information regarding the fitness of
the negroes for liberty. Mably seeks details concerning
the laws of the United States. A village school-master
sends him the text of a federal and Masonic pact to be
proposed to all the sovereigns of the world in order toCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 157

assure perpetual peace. Now a Utopian sends him a tract
on the reform of France to be transmitted to Vergennes.
The Cardinal de Rohan invites him to dinner, and Marat
takes him to see experiments in physics.*** M. de Mont-
losier consults him as to means of earning money, and
Brissot seeks information on the New World. Dozens
of odes on peace and America are sent to him. Madame
d’Houdetot gives a garden-party in his honor, at which
is sung:

He restores to human nature its due.

In order to free it he strove to enlighten it.

Virtue herself to win fresh adoration
Has borrowed the form of Benjamin.*®

Preachers quote him from the pulpit,**° and Robes-
pierre dedicates to him his first great speech, in defense
of a burgher of St. Omer who insisted, despite the terror
of his fellow-citizens, on maintaining a lightning-rod on
his house.**’ The past and the future of France join in
the worship of Franklin. The entire group of future revo-
lutionary leaders are already gathered about him; among
them are Brissot, Robespierre, Danton, La Fayette,
Marat, Bailly, Target, Duval d’Esprémesnil, Péthion,
Abbé Fauchet, La Rochefoucauld Liancourt, the Duke of
Orléans, etc. They are drawn to him as the annunciator
of a new faith that they were seeking and that they bore
in their hearts. It is no exaggeration to consider him as
the prophet and saint of a new religion; for all the mystic
elements ordinarily attributed to a saint are found in his

|

ryt158 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

legend—humility, an almost supernatural power capable
of performing miracles and of controlling the forces of
Nature, goodness, suffering and piety. He points the way
to all the eager and restless souls who feel the need of a
new faith, rational and, at the same time, practical. This
is what Vergennes did not perceive, and it is the gravest
deception that Franklin, quite unintentionally, practiced
on his friend.

The literature of the time bears witness to all this.
It is mediocre and swamped with books on the Americans
—as seen through Franklin. There is no first-hand knowl-
edge of the subject, no serious documentation, but quan-
tities of enthusiasm and of moralization. There was a
swarm of curious mystic pamphlets which, in the form
of prophecy and in the style of the Apocalypse, predict
the victory of the insurgents, the rise of America and
the decline of Europe.*** Such books as had serious pre-
tensions were usually worth scarcely more. Dubuisson, a
Creole from Santo Domingo, published in 1778 a work
entitled Abrégé de la Révolution de l Amérique anglaise.
It was not without a certain facility of style, but it had
no other value. In his documentation, taken entirely from
English newspapers and periodicals, the author ignores
both official papers and secret documents. He had had
personal contact with none of the great men who directed
or opposed the Revolution. He wrote his book to be agree-
able to the public by praising the Americans and to please
the minister by showing that the Americans were notCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 159

rebels, but poor people whom England had tormented
and driven to violence. He paints a sublime and vague
picture of Washington. Les Essats historiques et poli-
tiques sur les Anglo-Américains by Hilliard d’Auberteuil,
in spite of his title, is quite as bad. Hilliard, also, con-
ceived the idea of writing his book when he was in Santo
Domingo. He was pensioned by M. de Sartines and
wrote for him.” His work, in two thick quarto volumes,
does not seem to have cost him much effort. It is merely a
jumble of irrelevant detail taken from newspapers of
various localities and put together without criticism and
with no other aim than the picturesque and sentimental.
Since the book is made up of material taken from English
papers and was written with the intent of pleasing the
French public and government, it is particularly faulty.
It is an account, in chronological order and with many
errors, of the American war. It is illuminated with flowers
of rhetoric, such as the description of the burning of New
York by the despairing patriots, or the story of George
and Molly, slain by the English soldiers at the height of
their wedding feast. Here is the picture that Hilliard
gives of Congress in 1776: “The most illustrious and the
wisest men among the Americans met in all the provinces.
They opened the books where the ancient charters which
had been granted to the colonies and the general assem-
blies were preserved. The people were struck with re-
spect on seeing a gathering of old men whom age had

rendered venerable without sapping the vigor of theirTarr

160 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

minds.” His description of the Anglo-Americans is not
less imaginary. He takes the only precise details that he
furnishes from the famous Abbé de Pauw: “Although the
Anglo-Americans are less robust than most of the Euro-
pean peoples, although the humidity of their climate
seems to weaken them, yet they have more temerity and
are less sensitive to wounds than the Europeans, and in
general they recover more easily.” He describes Franklin
thus: “Everything about him announces the simplicity
and innocence of the manners and customs of the an-
cients. . . . He had stripped off borrowed hair... .”
By which he means that Franklin did not wear a wig.
Such is the literary and historical value of Hilliard
d’Auberteuil, whose work enjoyed the high patronage of
M. de Sartines, was paid for by the ministry, received
with favor by the philosophic public, and turned to
derision only by the paltry handful of people who knew
something of the subject. Hilliard had given his book
some slight interest by publishing at the end of it the
constitutions of the various American states. The only
clear and accurate idea that Franklin had been able to
put into his head was that of the future greatness of the
United States and the necessity of opening commerce
with the French colonies to them. The only impression
that this rubbish left on the public was one of admiration
for certain great men and of religious respect for the
United States. As for the subtle distinctions with which
he attempts to prove that the Americans have, throughCREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 161

their charters, certain rights that the French, as subjects
of an absolute monarchy, will never have, no one took
them seriously. They merely reveal certain fears that
the French government felt at that time and the secret
difference between official opinion and real opinion.

Thus the war did not continue in the conditions under
which it had begun. Between malcontents and enthusi-
asts, the minister’s position was becoming difficult; and,
probably without wishing it, Franklin was the principal
cause of this trouble. In 1782 nobody perceived this, for
then the important fact was still that France had helped
the Anglo-Americans to found a nation with a new ideal
about which the partisans of progress were to rally and
which was to be the basis of new alignments of power in
the political and moral world. Both the French and the
Americans, when they heard the news of the surrender
at Yorktown, where the finest English army in the New
World had been captured by a combined French and
American army, experienced emotions very like those
called forth by the Declaration of Independence and the
alliance. Here again was a triumph for Franklin and
Vergennes.

But behind this apparent result, a movement as yet
obscure was developing. All these men who had united
for a crusade against England the oppressor, and who
had succeeded in breaking down both her domination in
the New World and her supremacy of the sea, all these

men who, drawn together by great ideas and a great hope,162 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

had read the Declaration of Independence with such
enthusiasm and had adored Franklin, now found them-
selves carried further than they had intended. For Ver-
eennes, there seemed to be nothing further to do except
to apply this victorious policy of justice to interior re-
forms that should be in accord with this new spirit while
still respecting the ancient institutions of France and the
political and religious dogmas of which they were the
expression. For the disciples of Franklin, there loomed
the necessity of bringing to its full realization this re-
ligion, which as yet existed only in promise, but which
was to become a thing apart, to complete the ancient
forms of worship and to overthrow them. They wanted to
keep the United States as a rallying-point; they under-
stood that the new nation had risen on the political and
intellectual horizon only by the assistance of France;
but they refused to admit that the reformation of France
could be limited to a mere readjusting. Between them
and Vergennes, there seemed to be only a difference of
degree; but already there was all the distance that sepa-
rates 1788 from 1789 between them, all the distance that
lies between the Assembly of the Notables and the night
of August 4th.

Once more France had shown her adaptability and the
versatility of her culture. Out of her Latin and Catholic
civilization, out of her monarchial society, she had drawn
elements capable of winning over, enchanting and aiding

infinitely this young Anglo-Saxon, Protestant and demo-CREATION OF THE UNITED STATES 163

cratic people. The two nations had been a marvelous

stimulant for each other. They had furnished an ad-

mirable example of spontaneous friendship. France had
done much to give the United States more order, stabil-
ity, national consciousness and culture and, at the same
time, an international consciousness. And the United
States had stirred up in France an intellectual and senti-
mental tide whose might was to overthrow an entire

world established for three centuries.

eee ere ters tty set

thre eeeChapter IiI

ESSAYS IN FRATERNITY

   
  
 
  
  
  
   
   
 
 
  
  
  
   
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  

The end of the war separates France and the United States in-
stead of drawing them together. Coldness between Vergennes
and Congress, pp. 164-173. This is not, however, a break
between them, pp. 173-175. The United States are still popu-
lar with the Frenchmen who have been in America, priests,
officers and writers, pp. 175-184.(¢in entire literature grows
up about the United States, pp. 184-190. La Fayette is the
center of the movement in favor of the United States, pp.
190-193. The French philosophers consider the United States
as a field of experiment for the world; Raynal and Mably,

pp. 193-203. Mirabeau, pp. 203-200.

In America France as a nation becomes more and more popular,
although her moral corruption is feared. French ideas pene-
trate the colleges, society, literature, religion and politics,
pp. 206-223. Example of the Constitutional Convention, pp.

223-229.

In France a revolutionary group forms about La Fayette, among
the nobles, and Brissot, among the middle classes, the which,
with the support of the republican and moral ideas from
America, tries to undertake the reform of France and of the

world. This is the Patriot’s party, pp- 229-251.
THE TREATY OF 1783 MARKED THE TRIUMPH OF THE
Allies but also divided them irreparably. Indeed it was
rather an outline for reconciliation between England and
America than a consecration of the Franco-American
alliance. In spite of the efforts of Vergennes and Frank-
lin, this treaty, which was to have been the basis of a

close collaboration between France and the United States,
164ESSAYS IN FRATERNITY

ruined all hope of an intimate political accord between
the two countries.

In fact, from 1781 the irreconcilables in America had
succeeded in imposing one of their leaders, John Adams,
as a member of the Peace Commission. John Jay, who
was chosen along with Adams to represent the United
States in the negotiations, was supposed to be very favor-
able to France. In Congress he had shown himself as
moderate and very friendly to La Luzerne. He was
descended from a French family which had emigrated for
religious reasons and settled in New York. In this family
there still smoldered a warm indignation against the
royal Government of France and the Catholics. But John
Jay, with great self-control, had never let any of this
show before the French Minister. Nevertheless, when he
was sent to Madrid to prepare an alliance with Spain,
and saw himself scorned and ignored, he felt wrath rising
in him against his Catholic Majesty and Courts in gen-
eral. Shortly after he was ordered to Paris where peace
negotiations were beginning between Vergennes and
Franklin on one side and Oswald on the other.* The
American delegates were instructed to demand the un-
conditional recognition of American independence, the
integrity of their territory and the fishing rights and the
navigation of the Mississippi; but they were to follow
in every respect Vergennes’s opinion and to decide noth-
ing without him. The French Minister had brought Eng-
land to accept all the American demands and those of

eT
-aeel
ooTe

e@eyeye

166 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Spain, France’s old ally, who wanted Florida, which she

had conquered, and Gibraltar, which she had not been

able to take in spite of violent efforts and great sacri-

fices2 For herself, France asked only the restitution of

Senegal, the right to fortify Dunkirk, the fishing rights

of Newfoundland and status quo in the Antilles. Ver-

gennes was anxious to furnish an example of a just and
generous peace. Oswald, the English delegate, proved
amenable. He had promised that his Court would recog-
nize the United States and cede them a portion of Can-
ada; and he seemed ready to make peace at any price.
One point remained difficult to solve: Gibraltar, which
the English did not wish to give up and which the Span-
ish demanded. Vergennes sent Rayneval to London to see
if the English Ministry could not be persuaded to give
in. Just then Jay arrived at Paris. Rayneval’s mission
seemed suspicious to him; he thought that Vergennes was
making a pawn of the United States. Oswald saw this
and took advantage of it. He showed Jay a letter which
had just been seized at sea in which Barbé-Marbois, the
French chargé d’affaires at Philadelphia, protested to
Vergennes against the territorial ambitions of the Amer-
icans and especially against their designs on the Missis-
sippi. Jay allowed himself to be convinced that Ver-
gennes shared his agent’s views, and wanted to betray
the United States. He believed it; and he easily won
over John Adams to his views, and both of them forced

the hand of Franklin, who refused to admit Vergennes’sinten ence a ee “a

ESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 167

duplicity. The American delegates therefore had secret
conferences with Oswald. They found him well disposed
and obtained everything they desired except Canada.
When they had come to an agreement and had signed
the preliminary articles, they delegated Franklin to in-
form Vergennes of it. Thus they had violated their in-
structions, abandoned an ally against whom they had no
evidence, except such as was furnished by the common
enemy, and they deserted Vergennes, whose task it was to
defend the interests of France and of Spain against Eng-
land and failed to give him any support. Now, the ques-
tion of Gibraltar was still pending, and the English Min-
ister who, before the signature of the preliminary articles
with the Americans, would perhaps have yielded, now
refused, feeling that it was certain that France would
now find it decidedly awkward to continue alone with
Spain this war which she had begun with the purpose
of aiding the United States. As a matter of fact, the
American delegates had added to their treaty a clause
specifying that it should be valid only from the mo-
ment when France and England should come to an agree-
ment. Thus they did not violate the pact of alliance
with France—or at least the letter of it. But they felt
that their action was open to criticism; they hastened to
justify themselves before Congress, and they brandished
Marbois’s letter. Congress, much agitated by the event,
deliberated for a week (November 23-30, 1782). In the
end it condemned its ambassadors—and at the same time168 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

ratified their treaty; but it did proclaim that it would
not lay down arms without France. Thereupon Spain,
worn out, renounced Gibraltar and peace was signed.’
Vergennes had been indignant when he had learned
of the secret and direct negotiations of the Americans
with the English. The harm done to the Allied cause
had seemed to him the more grave, and the Americans
the more culpable, because at that very moment Con-
gress was making urgent requests for further financial
aid. He was angry, not at seeing the advantageous terms
obtained by the Americans, but at discovering duplicity
in them in place of the candor that he had expected. In
all these negotiations, he had had in view not the ambi-
tons of France or of her Allies, but the balance of power.
He found it insulting and bitter to be so misunderstood.
France, and himself in her name, had shown conclusively
that she did not seek any territorial acquisitions or any
exclusive commercial privilege. He had aided the United
States to make of them a free and happy nation, but he
had not had the least intention of making them the great
conquering nation of the New World; and he did not
conceive that the Americans, already masters of a terri-
tory that was scarcely settled, should feel the need of
increasing this immense domain.” He thought that the
majority of the Americans were with him in these “mod-
erate” views. His error was therefore of an intellectual
order. What would have happened if the delegates of
the United States had had confidence in him? It is hardESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 169

to say; but it seems, judging from all he had done for
Franklin, that the latter would have been able to con-
vince him and to persuade him to defend whole-heartedly
the demands of Congress.
Vergennes was too prudent to break off everything in
a moment of impatience. He was too deeply involved
with the United States to retreat gracefully in the eyes
of the world. He could not thus lightly abandon what
was considered as his great life work. He remained si-
lent. It was with satisfaction that he saw Congress con-
demn its delegates. He was glad to be able to conclude
the work of peace satisfactorily in spite of this incident.
He gave the money that was asked of him. But he did
not forget the lesson that he had received.’ A member
of Congress had asked Barbé-Marbois if the French king
would complain. “A great nation never complains, sir,”
replied Marbois, “‘but it feels the injury and does not
forget.” ° There was less chance of Vergennes’s forget-
ting since the enemies of France and America never gave
him an opportunity. Congress, more and more dominated
by the irreconcilables, appointed John Jay as Secretary
of State. As far as France was concerned, this amounted
to a justification of those who had attacked her in 1783.
It meant that the control of external politics was placed
in the hands of an enemy of the alliance. Jay considered
that France had already benefited more by the alliance
than the United States. He felt that the States should

immediately set about isolating themselves. He distrusted

pis)170 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

all of Europe, but he was inclined to feel some sympathy
for England since she was a Protestant power. He was
too clever to attack Vergennes openly, but he took ad-
vantage of every opportunity to lessen political relations
between France and the United States. He succeeded in
preventing the signing of a consular convention between
the two countries. In 1788, when Vergennes, whose per-
sonal prestige in America was considerable, died, Jay in-
formed Montmorin, who was then French Minister of
Foreign Affairs, that he considered that in the alliance
of 1778 the King of France had had in view only the
independence of the United States and that, since this
independence was now recognized and assured, he con-
sidered the alliance terminated. Montmorin protested in-
dignantly in the name of the King.’ Jay was aided in
his work by the English propaganda which had been
revived since 1783 and was being carried on actively.
The English had newspapers devoted to attacking
France. Indeed, the first newspaper printed in French in
the United States seems to have been one of these. This
organ named Le Courrier de ? Amérique was published
at Philadelphia from July to October, 1784. It was
edited and published by Boinod and Gaillard, two
Dutchmen of French descent, who hated France cor-
dially. Their work consisted in slandering the French
Minister and his agents; they laid stress on all the
causes of discord between France and America and dwelt

on the persecutions that France had made the HuguenotsESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 171

suffer. They published a list of illustrious Americans
whose families had been obliged to leave France because
of the repeal of the Edict of Nantes, and among them
there was of course John Jay. Their paper praised Ray-
nal and quoted him continually. These tirades were too
violent; they did not succeed, and the American Post
Office Department, in accord with the French Minister,
refused to admit the paper to the mails, which brought
about its fall.“ The most serious thing in this affair had
been that the paper aimed not only at being sold in
America, but also at coming into France and there carry-
ing On a campaign against the Government.®

The Independent Gazetteer of Boston took its place in
attacking France; ** but even the loyal and moderate
newspapers were open to English propaganda, for they
had no French translators and made up their columns
from those of the London newspapers. Thus the Court
of Great Britain always succeeded in circulating news
items announcing both that France held the United
States under a humiliating tutelage and that Vergennes
was thinking of taking over a part of the American con-
tinent. This went so far that in 1787 Vergennes issued
an official denial of these rumors. There was nothing to
make them plausible, but they were repeated incessantly,
and, what is more, are still running on. This secret cam-
paign had some influence on Congress, which had been
impressed by the incidents of 1783. The aristocracy of

New England, very religious and anti-Catholic, listened172 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

favorably to it. Many a sermon of this period contains
pious exhortations to the Americans to turn away from
dangerous and corrupt Europe. For a while these criti-
cisms endangered the popularity of Franklin, who was ac-
cused of blind devotion to France.” In self-defense, he
was obliged to ask John Jay to give him a certificate of
loyal services. Jay very grudgingly gave him one, but
couched it in very curt terms.”

Vergennes observed this campaign. It no longer sur-
prised him. But it wearied him and kept him from feel-
ing the warm interest in the United States that he had
felt heretofore. Besides, the Court was frankly hostile
to Americans. The Queen refused to receive Monsieur de
Moustier,** who was sailing as Minister to the United
States in 1788, for “she had nothing to say to a people
among whom the name of the King and that of the
Queen must be hated.” ** Many of the philosophers and
writers condemned the peace of 1783, not that they
wanted conquests, but there was a desire for reparations
for all the financial losses that this long war had en-
tailed, and there had been no provision for these. Cer-
tain newspapers began to complain and to criticize Amer-
ica sharply.° The French merchants and fishermen were
in favor of an act forbidding the importation of Amer-
ican merchandise into the French West Indies.” More-
over, since there was seldom any mail directly from the
United States and all the news came through England
(which meant that it was very much blackened), it wasESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 173

very difficult for any one to form a favorable opinion
of the young nation. As a consequence of England’s
skill in reéstablishing herself in the United States, Amer-
ican commerce had fallen back almost entirely into the
hands of those who had held it before 1774; and this
did nothing to smooth the course of Franco-American
relations.

Vergennes, therefore, ceased to feel unlimited good will
towards the United States. He held their fickleness and
their distrust against them. His instructions to the
French Ambassadors in the United States were limited
to this: ““No more propaganda, no more expense; let us
maintain simply the alliance, and let us be on our guard.
Let us refrain from meddling in American internal af-
fairs.” His policy bore no trace of resentment. He sought
to please the Americans by opening up to them, as much
as the ideas of the time allowed, commerce with the
French Antilles, in giving them a free port in France and
in showing friendship for them in many ways.** La Lu-
zemne, who was Minister until 1784, had become at-
tached to the American people, and, without having
much use for their Government, thought well of the
nation. Therefore he went about putting in effect Ver-
gennes’ orders only by delicate degrees.*® He ceased pay-
ing salaries to members of Congress, cut off Paine’s pen-
sion, it seems, in 1784, and took no other journalists
either in Massachusetts or Philadelphia into his employ.
He had thought of having Paine write a history of the174. THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

war in America, and finding him too lazy, he contented
himself with going over with Ramsay every page of his
book on the revolution in South Carolina. More than
a hundred passages in this book, which is still one of the
best histories of the war in America, were changed accord-
ing to the instructions of the French Minister.” La Lu-
zerne, Marbois, who took this Minister’s place, and
Otto," who replaced Marbois, made a point of keeping
in close touch with the Universities and the learned bod-
ies.” The French Ministers were fond of frequenting the
American Philosophical Society. In short, although they
gave up all intense and precise propaganda, they contin-
ued to be interested in the intellectual and moral destiny
of the United States.** They watched over this country
with passion and curiosity. They kept up a constant so-
licitude mingled with reserve. Such was the attitude that
Vergennes had also adopted and that he deemed becom-
ing to France. He made the newspapers under his con-
trol take up the same line. The Gazette de France, for
example, said nothing against the United States; it men-
tioned them much less often, but it avoided laying stress
on their troubles and their difficulties. He had kept
his friendship for Franklin, who mourned him sincerely
when he died. After his death, a similar line of conduct
was followed until 1789. Monsieur de Montmorin had
indeed some new ideas, but these already belonged to
the French Revolution. Vergennes and the group of

agents who surrounded him had remained faithful to theESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 175

people of the United States out of dignity and sentimen-
tal sympathy. But, alarmed by the tendencies of their
politicians, he had avoided keeping up relations with
them. In accord with Calonne, they had opened French
ports to the Nantucket whalers whom the new situation
and the taxes levied by England were starving. Many
American families settled therefore at Dunkirk.* A con-
siderable portion of the public followed the Government
in its attitude. Peace had appeared to be an honorific
victory for France, and it was felt that the United States,
having overcome their difficulties, no longer needed
French aid. People of conservative opinion had adopted
this opinion, which, as far as Vergennes was concerned,
cloaked but partially a sad disillusionment and almost a
moral bewilderment.

The people of the two nations did not perceive the

difficulties under which the Franco-American alliance

°

~

was operating.” It is true that the friendly relations
which they still kept up underwent a change of charac-
ter, but there was a strong sympathy on both sides. It
even increased. In spite of the ill repute that American
finances had in Europe, in spite of the jealousy of the
French merchants, who feared American competition in
the markets of the Antilles and even in France, the mid-
dle classes and the small tradesmen were more and more
interested in what was going on across the seas and more
and more willing to undertake the voyage.

The officers who had come back from the United

4 Pee toe tree Te Py wr Be! ;
ieee heads ch er err Sey er eee ee eee ee,

r
br
Uy

To]
in
i
"
i J
v
a
a

U
a
’
4
'
i176 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

States with Rochambeau had given enthusiastic accounts
of their stay in America. The impression that they had
received, like that which they had left behind them, was
one of the principal bases of Franco-American harmony.
They had all come back filled with zeal for the young
nation. The most enthusiastic of all were, perhaps, the
priests who accompanied the army. We have already
spoken of Abbé Bandole, chaplain to the Embassy of
France, who preached before Congress in honor of the
surrender at Yorktown and delivered such a fine repub-
lican sermon. We must also mention Abbé Colin de Sep-
vigny, who before leaving the United States wrote to
Ezra Stiles, ‘In gremio ecclesiae romanae ossa mea fe-
quiescent. Sed usque ad ultimum vitae meoe finem, in
veneratione Americanorum delectata erit anima mea.” ™
But the most noteworthy of the Americanizing priests
was the Abbé Robin. This righteous ecclesiastic was al-
ready known for his Masonic activity; he belonged to
the group which had founded the Lodge of the Nine
Sisters. On Franklin’s recommendation, he was attached
to Rochambeau’s army as chaplain and followed particu-
larly the Vicomte de Noailles and his regiment, where he
established a sort of welfare center to keep the officers
from becoming restless, drinking or indulging in any of
the other distractions that were better avoided in a coun-
try where it was necessary to inspire respect and sym-
pathy. This work, both pious and social, had drawn at-
tention to Abbé Robin. Soon it was announced that heESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 177

was going to publish a book on his campaigns, and the
Nouveau Voyage by Abbé Robin (1782) was the first
public testimony to the enthusiasm which the expedi-
tionary force felt for the Americans.”’ This little book
is rather ridiculous and very dull. The style has neither
sparkle nor vivacity. It is both unctuous and in bad taste.
Nevertheless, a certain simplicity as to both form and
subject matter pleased the public and won the chaplain
its favor. Robin begins by describing his troubles aboard
the frigate which took him to America over stormy seas.”
He embroiders on the old tales of the Abbé De Pauw
and Raynal; he depicts with care the American women,
who are so pretty at twenty, but whom the humidity of
the climate ages prematurely, and the men, who are so
robust, but whom the same condition renders indolent.
He asserts that the natural virtues of this people go so
far that mothers are in the habit of putting their virgin
daughters to bed with transient guests as an expression of
confidence and to keep them warm. “And nothing immod-
est ever happens,” says the good Abbé, who had found
this account in the works of English travelers who in
turn had taken it from the works of other travelers of
the seventeenth century and of limited veracity. The
Abbé Robin admires Boston with its pretty little wooden
houses and its wealthy peasants. He praises Washing-
ton, the hero of the modern world, who commands like
a citizen and serves like a nobleman. He exalts the
future of the United States, which have already gone178 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

so far but which will become rich, powerful and en-
lightened. The most curious thing in this book is his
religious concept. He has a deep admiration for the
Quakers, whom he defends and 1s to defend on every oc-
casion. He is but little concerned with dogma, but he
condemns “unlimited tolerance.” “The more enlightened
a religion is,” he says, “the more intolerant it is.’ The
United States will be obliged to impose a unified faith,
for without it there can be no national unity. Thus in
the United States, Robin acquired a great sympathy for
the Americans’ liberty and equality. He expects from
them a veritable revelation, but he had beheld them
without losing his philosophical tendencies which in-
clined him to accord the State excessive powers and in-
fluence. He was in favor of intolerance, not as a Catho-
lic, but as a philosopher who wanted to reorganize the
world on a new plan, and desired that this reform should
be accomplished by the Government under the direction
of enlightened minds.

One may trace the diffusion of these doctrines and of
this moral and social faith throughout the French clergy.
One of the most curious examples of it without doubt is
the sermon which the Abbé Racine pronounced at Tou-
louse, January 11, 1784, in praise of Louis XVI and
America. He describes the enthusiasm for liberty to
which he attributes the tenacity of the Americans. It is
this enthusiasm that gave badly armed militia the vic-

tory over picked soldiers. In this sermon Franklin andESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 179

Washington are held up as great moral reformers. A
large portion of the lower and middle clergy was imbued
with this American sentiment which led them to believe
in the coming of a new world, which should be organ-
ized according to religious principles, benevolent, ra-
tional and universal.

It is an acknowledged fact that the officers of the
French army in America came back to France enthusj-
astic for the new country and filled with subversive ideas.
Enough distinction is not made between these officers,
for it is hardly probable that all of them held the same
opinion and had the same experience. We must not con-
fuse the officers who went to America before the alliance
and those who followed Rochambeau. Almost all the
officers who went before 1778 and who came back to
France were hostile to the United States for not hav-
ing given them enough decorations, enough glory or
enough money.” Those who were satisfied and remained
to the end had a chance to know the Americans and be-
came attached to them without greatly admiring their
political forms, which during this war had shown them-
selves as very lax and impotent.” La Fayette was almost
the only one who was a faithful admirer of American
political institutions and even he wrote in 1780 that
Washington was going to be appointed dictator of the
United States and that it was a very good thing.**

In Rochambeau’s army, which was mostly composed
of volunteers, and which had only social relations with180 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

the Americans, the officers were greatly in favor of the
customs and ideas of the New World. They came as
saviors. They were received everywhere as honored
rpuests, and the women admired them. Now, the women
| of the United States, then as now, were very beautiful.
| The French officers were struck by this, and it disposed
them immediately in favor of liberty. Since their beau-
tiful hostesses were as virtuous as they were charming
and simple, this roused in them a flood of images in-
spired by Rousseau and their best instincts. They de-
scribed the pretty Quakeresses of Philadelphia or the
beautiful Puritans of Newport so vividly that they built
up a veritable legend. It must be said to the glory of
France that the foreign officers in the King’s pay proved
much more surly and much less susceptible to the quali-
ties of the fair sex. The only discordant notes in the con-
cert of praise which the field journals of the French of-
ficers in America contained are found in the accounts
and letters of the Swede Fersen and the Rhinelander
Deux Ponts. Except for these two (and the Duc de
Lauzun) they all praised the virtues and beauty of
America and of the American women.”

They brought back an unforgettable impression of
Washington. This hero had received them with a simple
grandeur in which there had been nothing provincial or
servile. He had spoken with frankness and dignity; he
had discussed questions with courtesy and, except for a
moment of temper, which had been quickly pardoned, hisESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 181

conduct had merited nothing but praise.** And praise
him they did, and fervently. Every diary kept by a mem-
ber of the French forces contains a physical and moral
portrait of the American Commander-in-Chief. The best
known of these is the one which was written by the
Chevalier de Chastellux, Orderly-Officer to Rochambeau,
“If some one shows you medallions of Caesar, Trajan or
Alexander, you may, on seeing their features, still ask
what was their stature and their build. But if you dis-
cover among the ruins the head or a bit of marble from
an antique Apollo, give no thought to the other parts of
the statue but be assured that they are worthy of a god.
. » « I desire only to express the impression made on
me by General Washington, the concept of a perfect en-
semble which cannot be reproduced by enthusiasm, which
would rather reject it, since the effect of proportion is
to diminish the idea of size.” ** This encomium is typ-
ical, for although Monsieur de Rochambeau was the mili-
tary leader of the French army in America, and although
his prudence, his philosophic mind and public spirit were
able to win everybody’s support and to facilitate rela-
tions with Washington and his staff, Monsieur de Chas-
tellux, member of the French Academy, champion of the
idea of progress in France, and intimate friend of the
house of Orléans, was truly the spiritual leader of the
expedition. He made a point of visiting all the famous
places and people of America, and the account of his
travels is a very diverting picture of the United States182 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

in 1780. Its style is facile and pungent, too much so
perhaps, for it shocked many people when it was pub-
lished; they could not understand how M. de Chastellux
could have chosen to be witty on so great and religious
a subject. What especially spoils Chastellux’s style for
the modern reader is an affectation of Anglicisms that is
neither natural nor amusing. However, he reports con-
versations, and he describes personages in an exact and
living way. He was very happy in the United States,
but he enjoyed especially the prestige that he derived
from his name, his title and his glory. He admired the
Americans and he loved them; he found in them a rare
example of virtue, but he poked fun at the Quakers.
He expressed doubts concerning equality and protested
in the name of the Arts which the United States were
neglecting too much. His book was admired especially
for the portraits it contained and the accounts of mili-
tary operations, which he described at length.

He brought back from this New World an agreeable
impression and an inclination towards enthusiasm. He
had talked a great deal with Jefferson about Ossian, lib-
erty and religion, and almost always they had come to
agree. The Virginian sage therefore seemed to him the
perfect type of the philosopher. Both of them felt the
same need of an entirely interior religion which should
have an application to social and rational life. Alto-
gether, this is the most precious memory that Monsieur

de Chastellux brought back from America; and in spiteESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 183

of his care to say nothing which should be subversive or
might encourage revolution, through his admiration for
Washington, his friendship with Jefferson and his reli-
gious aspirations, Chastellux exerted an influence favor-
able to the United States and the new ideas.®°

There were very few of these officers who did not hold
a like attitude. We can feel various tendencies among
them. Some of them caught simply a taste for an adven-
turous life and saw nothing in America that they thought
France should imitate. The Vicomte de Mirabeau is a
notable example of these.*° Others were overcome with
admiration; they felt a sort of vague and mystic wor-
ship scarcely apt to make for action, but which prepared
them to expect great commotions.*’” But most of them
had admired, compared and discussed, and these had come:
back home with their heads full of ideas for reforms, at
first obscure, but which became more definite and ac-
quired more and more a general direction as the years
went by and as their memories became classified. In gen-
eral, their concept is one that derives from Rousseau, but
the image that they formed of the “state of Nature” is
less vague and less abstract. It leads more directly to
action and to a religious sentiment. It has come out of
the domain of literature into that of deeds and immedi-
ate desires. They dream of a revolution without persecu-
tions like that of America, of equality without jealousy,
of natural righteousness without imperative dogmas and

of a religious faith without clergy or mysteries.Ter

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  

184 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

It is difficult to know what the common soldiers
thought and said on their return. If one might judge by
modern times, they must have described the taverns, the
wine, the tobacco and the beds and decided in favor of
their own country. But this is perhaps unjust. The only
two texts which represent the middle-class opinions at
this period are not less enthusiastic than the writings of
the young nobles. A letter from a young French sailor
which was published in the Gazette des Deux Ponts of
January, 1781, describes with rapture the United States
and declares that a nation made up of such citizens can
not be vanquished. And in 1782 a young French mer-
chant, Joseph Mandrillon, published Le Voyageur ameri-
cain, a book of information concerning the trade, the
life and the resources of the United States. Mandrillon
copied from English books all such details as are accu-
rate, and from Raynal all those that are false. But where
it is a question of judgment and conclusions, he listened
only to his heart. “The virtues of the Americans, drawn
from nature and from the simplicity of their habits, are
not as with us, the product of hypocrisy or of pride; it
is virtue unmixed and unornamented.” ”

A knowledge of the United States was disseminated
among the public during the years from 1783 to 1789
by accounts and diaries published by returning officers.
In general, they were taken as a basis for opinions con-
cerning the United States. But it is also necessary to

take into account the modifications of opinion which wereESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 185

accomplished by the numerous translations of English
works on the United States that appeared at this time.*°
Among these were Carver’s Travels (1784) * with his
amusing and fantastic stories of the Indians, Burnaby’s
account which is full of praise of Washington and confi-
dence in the future of the United States. There is also
John Filson’s book (1785) with its curious accounts of
the mysterious river in Kentucky where the Europeans
and the Indians lived side by side and amused them-
selves by massacring each other.” Finally, we have the
Hiéstory of the American Revolution in South Carolina
(1787) by David Ramsay, a reliable work, well written
and well translated. Ramsay is the first real historian
to write an exact account of the events which took place
between 1770 and 1783. What is more, his book is clear
and entertaining. This series of books might have suf-
ficed to instruct the French public and to prevent it from
making serious errors, but it seems as if nothing could
prevent popular imagination from creating for itself a
‘sentimental and philosophic America. Even while these
translations and memoirs were being published, the “his-
torians” who gathered these documents and wrote the
histories sought only to rouse emotion. Hilliard d’Auber-
teuil dared to republish under new titles his voluminous
work of 1782 which contained such a lovely jumble of
errors and sentiments. A certain Abbé Pierre de Long-
champs gave the public an Héstozre impartiale des
Evénements militaires et politiques de la dernicre Guerre186 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

(1785) in three volumes. This work went into three edi-
tions. It included a sketch of the English Colonies in
1775, copied from Raynal, and a sort of calendar of
military operations taken from English publications. In
his preface Abbé de Longchamps set forth and adopted
as his own the French ministerial thesis of 1778: Great
Britain had violated the contract that she had granted to
her people; the Americans were therefore within their
right, and Louis XVI, in aiding them, had only fol-
lowed the tradition of the Kings of France who had al-
ways defended the weak and the oppressed. He predicted
that the Revolution of English America would spread
‘nto South America and “there develop talents and lights
which until now had been smothered by the European
despotism.” In 1787 two other historical works on the
late war were published in Paris: L’Hestocre de la der-
niere Guerre by Julien Leboucher, which gave an ac-
curate account of the military operations almost with-
out alluding to political events, and L’Hiéstoire des
Troubles de V Amérique anglaise by Francois Soules.
These two authors took almost everything they said from
documents published by the English Government, Le-
boucher with greater insight, Soulés with greater imag-
ination. Soulés set forth all the arguments most favor-
able to the Americans, and he proclaims the right of
nations to self-determination. He praises the United
States but believes it his duty to remind them that they

are made for virtue and that without viri: they willESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 187

fall and that the greatness of nations comes from such
mores as strengthen a government. In these works there
is no trace of personal research, no original philosophic
view, no serious intent, only a perpetual scramble to
enhance the heroes—Penn, Washington and Franklin,
and a philosophic concern for giving good advice to the
Americans, who seemed to be the pampered darlings of
humanity. The compilers who handled the same subjects
followed this same method in order to bring them within
the understanding of the great public, but they took even
less pains. Monsieur Poncelin de la Roche Tilhac, Coun-
selor of the Marble Table, in spite of his pompous name
and his fine title, published a sorry little Almanach
americain in 1783, which gives a sketch of America taken
from Raynal, whose mistakes he religiously preserves. In
1784, J. Mandrillon brought out a new edition of his
book under the title of Le Spectateur américain, but he
had done nothing save to add encomiums of Washington
and moral counsels to the Americans.** He Says in this
book: “To break the chains of despotism in the sacred
name of liberty is the most righteous and the worthiest
act of man.” Mandrillon is especially anxious that the
Americans preserve their virtue in order to continue their
sublime work. To this end he advises them to set up in
their temples images of their great men and to have a
political and religious calendar in which each day shall
be marked with the name of one of these heroes. “What

glory for ye and what joy for your descendants to read188 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

some day with holy respect these precious names!” he
says. This extraordinary need for morality and religious
sentiment came over every one who had to do with the
United States. We find an epic poem on America De-
livered published at Antwerp in 1783 by a French
refugee who was trying to curry favor. In this incredible
conglomeration of verses and notes, which fills no less
than two volumes, the author seems sincere only when

he speaks of liberty and tolerance:

Great liberty, the highest happiness!
The only true blessing of mankind! *

The rest is a jumble of personifications, allegories, plati-
tudes and flatteries.

Several novels contribute to this glorification of the
virtues and greatness of the American heroes. An entire
literature turns around Asgill, the young English officer
who, taken prisoner by the Americans, was to have been
put to death to avenge the brutal execution of an Amer-
ican Major, but whom the intervention of the Queen
of France saved. Monsieur de Mayer began by publish-
ing a novel about this unhappy young man in the Collec-
tion des Romans; then he brought out a second and more
complete version of the story in which he describes the
anxiety of Mrs. Asgill while waiting for her son to be
put to death and Washington’s grief at being obliged
to refuse him mercy. In 1785 J. L. Lebarbier Le Jeune
published a play on the same subject; it was badly con-
structed in the conventional style with no psychologyESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 189

other than that of effusion, but it shows the Americans
and the French so brimming over with brotherly feeling
and devotion to the commonweal that the audience is
deeply touched. And this is only the beginning of a ser-
ies. Even Hilliard d’Auberteuil recovered his loquacity
and described the unhappy lot of Miss MacRea, a young
American girl, in love with an English officer, who was
killed by the savages while she was trying to reach Bur-
goyne’s army. This little book is interesting, for it is made
up of sentimental and picturesque elements taken from
Chastellux. Hilliard lays stress upon the Biblical charac-
ter of the United States. The whole novel is flooded with
a light of piety, nature and sorrow. It belongs to the
series of works which paved the way for romanticism and
which themselves struck the romantic note. It is interest-
ing to note that Baculard d’Arnauld, one of the authors
who exploited this vein the most thoroughly, during the
eighteenth century devotes a long story to a similar epi-
sode. His novel Amé/ée seems to have been inspired by
Hilliard’s Miss MacRea.** A little later it became fash-
ionable to use the United States as a background for any
novel in which the author wished to portray true virtue.
Loszwinski, the worthy and kindly hero of Fawblas by
Louvet, has served with Washington and La Fayette: he
remembers it with pride.** Ducray Duminil in Lolotte
et Fanfan (1788) describes Boston and New England;

then he skips to Charleston and gives a new description.190 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

Against this background he deploys a most moving story
of unrewarded virtue and miraculous adventures.

Thus, books were continually presenting to the public
the romantic, sentimental and religious legend which,
through the efforts of travelers and authors, the United
States had become. But this legend was symbolized and
illustrated most perfectly by the Marquis de La Fayette.
After his return to France, M. de La Fayette had not
lost sight of his adopted country, which he visited in
1784. to be overwhelmed by ovations in all the cities
through which he passed. He kept up the closest friend-
ship with General Washington, and during his whole
political career he was always glad to accept advice from
the American Fabius. He let it be seen and known that
Washington was his ideal morally as well as politically.
He encouraged the consequent linking of their names
which writers had adopted since 1778. Reposing on this
friendship and on the popularity that he enjoyed
throughout the United States, La Fayette had set him-
self up as the protector of the Americans in France.”
Besides the Minister, who for his part had wisdom and
perception enough to keep up cordial and intimate rela-
tions with him, La Fayette played a diplomatic part, less
discreet than he seems to have believed, but still very
efficacious.“* When Jay tried to obtain facilities for
American commerce in the French West Indies and in
Europe, he made use of La Fayette, who through his

great prestige, his family’s position and Vergennes’s‘

ESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 191

favor, could obtain anything that his friends desired.”
Every Monday he invited the principal members of the
American colony of Paris to dinner, and he was their
intercessor at the Court.°*° It is he who persuaded Calonne
to have the Nantucket fishermen, whom the English at-
titude had deprived of their means of livelihood, come
to France.” The most brilliant part of his activities con-
sisted in being to some degree the intellectual ambassa-
dor of the United States. While the Minister of the
United States could do nothing except represent his Gov-
ernment and defend its political and commercial inter-
ests, La Fayette, whom every one considered as an Amer-
ican, and as the most perfect representative of America,
defended and propagated the ideas that were then held
to be essentially American: tolerance, the suppression of
slavery, the liberty of the press, and parliamentary gov-
ernment.” La Fayette was American and not English be-
cause he considered as essential a zeal for Liberty rather
than the subtle combinations of constitutions. His public
activity was greatly aided by the secret and energetic
support that Vergennes always lent him. It was through
him that he was able to bring to a successful end his
campaign in favor of the Protestants. Vergennes was a
partisan of tolerance.”* He defended it before the King,
and one may believe that the memorandums that the
Quaker Benezet sent him in 1781 to point out to him
the necessity of liberating the French Protestants made

an impression upon him; for in 1786 the French Quak-192 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

 

ers and the Nantucket fishermen living at Dunkirk wrote
to him to obtain recognition of their rights to practice
their religion freely. Vergennes obtained the liberty of
the Quaker cult in France in spite of the opposition of
certain Catholic bishops and the other Reformed
churches.** But no one knew this at the time, and La
Fayette profited by the discretion of his illustrious
friend. He gained another brilliant victory for humanity
and for his own glory when, at his own expense, he had
all the slaves in Guiana set free.** At the Assembly of
the Notables, his solemn protest in the name of the
Protestants and his appeal to the States-General, the
first that had ever been made, spread his renown every-
where. There were jealous people who accused him of
being a free thinker and of seeking notoriety, but he
gathered behind him the group of young men who were
full of ideals of progress and generosity.”

Occupying a prominent place in the public eye and
taking care to remain there, La Fayette did not allow
France to forget the United States and their teachings.
He failed perhaps to show the real conditions of life in
the New World, and he did not give a very exact idea of
what American character and liberty were; but he was
an admirable living legend. With all the newspapers,
even the most favorably inclined printing English news
concerning the United States, he was the most positive
and the most shining refutation of the calumny which

condemned all the free Americans as a nation of beggarsESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 193

and boors. Gradually all his former companions in arms
srouped around him, and a sort of a party was formed,
American in name and tendency, although they knew this
far-off country very imperfectly.

The philosophers, who were not less eager for in-
fluence and power, also sought to utilize the United
States. This new country interested them greatly and
aroused their imagination as well as their curiosity—the
former, without doubt, more than the latter. This virgin
continent where everything remained to be done and
which lay plastic and malleable in the hand of the legis-
lator, was for these impassioned legislators as fascinating
a spectacle as a superb block of marble is to a sculptor,
They were but little interested in becoming acquainted
with this people and its country, for they considered it
unformed and sincerely hoped that it was not foo well
formed, for this would have deprived them of a chance
to exercise their talents. Moreover, they admired it in-
finitely for this very quality and were ready to concede it
the best of instincts and the noblest of dispositions on
condition that they be asked to concede nothing else. It
was an unlimited possibility, a field of experiment for
Europe wherein philosophy would realize all its dreams
and create its Eden.

We find this attitude among the most illustrious as
well as among the most humble—Mably, Raynal, Tar-

get, Dupaty, Mirabeau, Mazzéi,** Abbé Genty, the royal

 

censor, Condorcet and the philosopher Gargaz, who was194 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

a school-teacher in Provence and an ex-convict. Not a
book on America was printed between 1775 and 1790
but ended with a sort of homily. There were very few
visionaries of the time who could pass by this oppor-
tunity to aid the insurgents at least by their advice. In
1784 Target sent a long letter to the newspapers of New
York, whence it was copied by all the American news-
papers. This worthy parliamentarian reminded the Amer-
icans that the eyes of Europe were fixed on them, that
they were obliged to make a success of their Constitution.
He recommended good mores as being indispensable to
the happiness of nations. He recognized that the Ameri-
cans already had good mores; but if they did not encour-
age them sufficiently, they might disappear. “Develop
national education, outlaw riches and conquests, hold
brotherly feasts and, above all, have passions—virtuous
ones it goes without saying, for without passion a peo-
ple is nothing.” °° They were so determined to enlighten
the New World that Monsieur Pollier, a magistrate of
Lausanne, begged Franklin to send Congress the copies
of his book on government and mores which he had in-
tended for this august body.” But, compared with Abbé
Raynal, all the others are mere schoolboys.

Towards the end of the American war, Raynal took
two initiatives which were to have a great influence on
contemporary thought. He published a book to enlighten
the United States concerning themselves (1781) and
established at the Academy of Lyons" a literary contestESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 195

to determine whether the discovery of the New World
had been a blessing or a curse, and how the sufferings
that it had brought about could be remedied. Raynal’s
book is a clear and luminous production, but it is full
of contradictions and errors. Raynal wants to praise the
Americans, but he wants to make them understand that
their task is not yet finished—nay, that it is scarcely
begun. In an emphatic and religious tone, he admonishes
them. “‘People of septentrional America, may the example
of all the nations that have preceded you, and especially
that of your mother country, instruct you. Beware of the
affluence of gold!” Moved by a desire to be impartial
and to show how completely he has his subject in hand,
he places himself at all possible points of view. The re-
sult is comic. He reproaches France for having made an
unnatural alliance and one which surely hides ulterior
motives. He rebukes France for this and then concludes
that it would have been more seemly to have kept a
high hand over the insurgents instead of according them
a treaty which gave them rights over France. He praises
the heroism of the Americans for defending the glorious
cause of liberty, and he adds: “However, their soldiers
are not very courageous; and this is because the Revolu-
tion came about without the Americans having had any
serious reason for complaint and without their having suf-
fered any grave wrong at the hands of England.” He con-
cludes that ‘‘the Americans will free the New World, but

it is to be hoped that a rival power will spring up against

TST Tse er eT Cee er ee
FOROS TEALSIAAZ ALS BASS

eo. T+

Peer tit ry

"
uM)
"
*
U
’196 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

them, for without danger republics could not conserve
that virtue which is the soul of liberty. After the war,”
he went on, “the United States will undoubtedly become
a tefuge for all the scum of Europe’; and this worried
him, but he ended up superbly: “Heroic country, my ad-
vanced age does not permit me to visit thee. Never shall
I find myself in the midst of the worthy personages of
thine Areopagus. Never shall I attend the deliberations
of thy Congress. I shall die without having seen the
abode of tolerance, of mores, of laws, of virtue and of
liberty. A free and sacred earth will not receive my ashes,
but I shall have yearned for it, and my last words will
be prayers to Heaven for thy prosperity.” “ It is, and
it was, easy to criticize this generous outburst, to show
in all these fine sentiments which follow and contradict
each other an effort toward an emotion that the heart
does not feel, in all these conflicting counsels and prophe-
cies an attempt to be very wise ending up in sheer non-
sense, and finally, in this criticism of the Franco-Ameri-
can alliance an exaggerated respect for England mixed
with an exaggerated scorn for France. Thomas Paine, at
the instigation of the French Minister in Philadelphia,
from whom he was receiving a pension, wrote a sharp
reply to Raynal. He denounced his errors in facts and
his faults of logic and refuted the absurd claim that the
Franco-American alliance was contrary to nature, by
showing that this alliance had benefited and would bene-
fit both nations."? He held Raynal up to ridicule, but theESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 197
Abbé kept his prestige and the influence of his book was
prodigious. He was credited with great wisdom. To live
up to his reputation he founded at the Academy of Lyons

a literary prize consisting of a sum of 1200 livres. The

subject of the contest was the following: “Has the dis-

covery of America been useful or harmful to mankind?

If benefits have resulted from it, by what means may
they be preserved and augmented? If it has produced
evils, by what means may they be remedied?” The
prize was to have been awarded in 1783; it never was
awarded. No satisfactory reply was submitted, and the
prize was carried over from year to year, until in 1789
the Academy of Lyons, in accord with Raynal, decided
that the sum should be devoted to other purposes.** Of
the numerous essays which were submitted, four have
come down to us. One of them is by Condorcet and an-
other by Chastellux; Abbé Genty, the royal censor, is the
author of the third; as to the fourth, it has come down
to us without the author’s name. These four essays are
unanimous in declaring that the discovery of America
was a misfortune, since it spread intolerance and slavery,
but that the American Revolution is the remedy to the
evil, since it opens a new era for humanity. “O country
of Franklin, of Washington, of Hancock, and Adams,
who could wish that you had not existed both for them
and for us?” exclaims Chastellux. “The independence of
the Anglo-Americans is the event the most apt to hasten

the coming of the Revolution which should bring happi-

rete

FSEsSepsrizegizapigicizay

eeaiase

ci

a

4
'
a
io
’
’198 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

ness to the world. In the bosom of this newborn Republic
lie the true treasures which will enrich the world,” says
Genty. As for Condorcet, he goes even further; writing
under the pseudonym of Godard, he shows that in de-
veloping the population of the world, in making com-
merce free, and above all, in giving the world a new
and unique example of the respect that is due to the
rights of man, North America is laying the foundation
for a renovation of the world, which at last beholds the
triumph of the true principles. The anonymous author
takes the same stand and declares that, in affording the
nations a model of a pure and free nation, the United
States have forced governments to become moderate and
peoples to. take stock of themselves. We see toward what
doctrines Raynal had led his compatriots, thanks to the
United States. It is also to be noted that the Académie
des Jeux Floraux of Toulouse had had the same idea
as Raynal and had established a prize for dissertations
on the greatness and the importance of the American
Revolution in 1784. The two essays submitted for this
prize which have come down to us have less value than
those submitted for the prize that Raynal offered. They
were composed by a lawyer in the Parliament of Toulouse
and a captain in the Regiment of Brittany. Both of
them are enthusiastic; but the lawyer extols the Amer-
icans rather in the name of Reason, and the captain in
the name of Nature, for he was a disciple of Rousseau.

Both of them set forth the utility of the American Revo-ESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 199

lution in holding up an example for the world at large
to follow. Both of them, but especially the captain, put
in a good word for virtue and lay stress on conjugal vir-
tue as being of the greatest value to newly formed
societies.

While this group of philosophers were preaching good
mores to the Americans and, at the same time, lauding
American doctrines to the rest of the world, Abbé Mably,
just and severe, was making a thorough study of the new
and much-vaunted constitutions; and when John Adams
questioned him, he confessed to grave misgivings as to
this experiment on the part of so virtuous a people.”
How should all their noble qualities escape from the cor-
ruption that penetrates everywhere through laws? Alas
—*“the legislator will take steps to guard them; he will
feel sure of realizing his hopes; but his work will serve
only as a spur to ungoverned passions which will pre-
cipitate the Republic either into anarchy or into oligar-
chy,” he says on page § of his book. The thought that
a nation is made up of men dismays him: “How shall
one view without alarm the mass of men who make up
society? All of them have active and differing passions.
Some of them are incapable of thinking. And these are
the greater, and even the greatest number.” With such
an opinion of men and their faculties, it is easy to imag-
ine what must have been the misgivings of the good
Abbé Mably, who was, moreover, enamored of perfec-

tion, virtue and ideal legislation, and who felt’ the deep-

i
]
'
'
d
'
a
'
“4
a
«
:
r
ie
“
hy
"
a
”
7
a
7]
a
"
Me
(
;
TT
*
tl200 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

est sympathy for the Americans. He praises them for
being the only republic wherein the citizens are not
treated like cattle. He made a study of their constitu-
tions one by one, and in a very confused book, he points
out their shortcomings. He takes up the text of each con-
stitution without knowing or stopping to consider its ap-
plication, then he proceeds to praise or condemn it. When
he finds defects, he considers them as the germ of imme-
diate disaster. When there are no defects to be found,
he is even more alarmed, for there is nothing more de-
ceptive than an appearance of perfect health. He sees
in everything the signs of a nascent aristocracy; but he
seems however to look forward to it, though he regrets
that a perfect democracy should be impossible to realize.
He emphasizes the Americans’ duty to encourage good
mores. The liberty of the press and tolerance are bad, for
they bring about laxness and open too clear a field to
the vices. He fears lest the United States end up in
atheism and would like Congress to draw up a “moral
and political catechism” which all the Americans should
be obliged to accept. He remarks that the Greeks and the
Romans, although they were so strong for liberty, would
never have tolerated the absolute freedom of the press.
He is in favor of suppressing commerce and luxury be-
cause they undermine mores. To maintain these mores,
he advises that Congress be strengthened, that a more
durable executive branch be created and that great cele-

brations be held every year to commemorate the anniver-ESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 201

sary of independence. He warns the Americans that they
must make haste, for vices creep in rapidly and become
habits. But he concludes sadly: Do all this; it will un-
doubtedly be in vain, but at least you will have nothing
for which to reproach yourselves.

This attitude of an idealist reformer whom nothing
here below could satisfy, but who would like at least to
save from disaster the only people in whom he finds a
tendency toward perfection, was much appreciated at the
time. Mably was frequently copied and imitated. This
afforded writers the opportunity to speak of free consti-
tutions and, under the guise of condemning them, to ad-
mire them at heart and to lavish on them from time to
time compliments which more than made up for criti-
cisms. A certain Demeusnier, who was commissioned by
the Encyclopédie méthodique to write the article on the
United States, put so much philosophic zeal into it that
he almost drove Jefferson to distraction. Since he was
favorable to the United States and anxious to speak well
of them, he begged the American minister at Paris to
draw up a résumé of the American constitutions for him.
Jefferson sent him an article, which Demeusnier altered
and then sent back to Jefferson, who corrected the errors.
Demeusnier invented fresh ones and then sent his article
to Jefferson and Humphreys, and later to La Fayette.
After this final correction, Demeusnier retouched his
work and, in so doing, recast the whole article, much

to the detriment of accuracy. The result was an essay ofOrr ay

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

202 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

which one half was taken from Raynal, while the other
half was made up of inaccurate commentaries from
Mably on a few exact bits of information which Jeffer-
son furnished. It laid stress, however, on the part that
Jefferson had played in spreading tolerance and the vic-
tory that he had won in Virginia.” As a general thing,
this is the only clear point brought out in the studies of
America of this period.

At any rate, this emphatic and, one might say, apoca-
lyptic tone annoyed the Americans greatly. They would
have liked people to know their country and not its
shadow, their life and not the dreams of the reformers
who talked about it. They felt, wrongly perhaps, that a
real knowledge of the United States would spread their
influence and make it a more fortunate one. Jefferson did
his best to fight against the mania for dissertation with-
out documentation. We have seen what pains he took
with Demeusnier and for what little results. He did even
more than this. He published his Notes on Vérginza,
which he had formerly prepared in order to refute De
Pauw and Raynal. He made them more complete and
furnished concrete information on the United States and
their products to prove that they are in no way inferior
to those of Europe. His book, ponderous and without lit-
erary value, would not have been read if it had not con-
tained some chapters in favor of the freedom of the negro
slaves. It was not until 1788 that a book was published
which gave a clear idea of the United States. In thatESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 203

year, Mazzéi published his Recherches historiques et poli-
teques sur les Etats-Unis, of which one volume is de-
voted to pointing out Raynal’s errors, another to Mably’s
absurdities, and many pages to the various other stupidi-
ties written about the Americans. His work is well done,
but it is almost unreadable because of the accumulation
of details and the confusion of discussions. It was not
widely read, although it furnished for the first time an
exact resumé of the founding of the thirteen colonies
and a truthful exposition of the economic difficulties
which led to a break between England and her colo-
nies. His fourth volume, devoted to a study of the con-
temporary United States, is very interesting. He paints
them with optimism and shows the eminent qualities of
the savages and negroes. He tells how much the example
of the Americans in bringing over the doctrines of lib-
erty from theory into practice, had aided and would aid
the European nations. His democratic and anti-religious
zeal led him to attack the Quakers as sectarians. Maz-
zéi was undoubtedly right in trying to make the worship
for the United States that was in vogue in France more
precise and nearer to reality; but he did not employ a
tone that could win favor. People did not ask to be con-
vinced of the virtues of the Americans, but to be thrilled
and moved by them. Pamphlets like those of Turgot and
Mirabeau, with all their prejudice and sententiousness,
even when they contained reproaches against the United

States, did more to make them popular than the most

wert Te eet? Tees eee
ee ee er re tt peers Te serey
Poco ti ree Toro pa al

ese.

tt
at
Po
re
"
ty
Is
ci

J
na
ai
t
Ul204. THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

serious studies could as long as they remained unimpas-
sioned and cold. Turgot’s little book, which was published
in 1784 (as were Mirabeau’s Considérations sur ? Ordre
de Cincinnatus), had been written in 1778 as a reply
to Price, who had just published a tract in favor of the
United States. Turgot informed him that, in his opinion,
the United States were indeed “the hope of mankind

. and especially of the enlightened; all the friends
of humanity should at this time join their lights and add
the fruit of their reflections to that of the American
sages to aid them in the great work of their legislation.”
He condemned their attempt to set up a balance of the
powers of government, which he considered to be an
‘Ilusion and a serious drawback to liberty. He blamed
the American tendency to mix religion and civil govern-
ment. He was in favor of as little government as pos-
sible and absolute tolerance; in short, he asked that the
Americans be themselves completely and without re-
striction. There is something pathetic in the worried and
solicitous tone with which he says all this. But his pages
are pale beside those of Mirabeau. This latter writer had
taken up arms with fury against an institution which the
American officers had decided to create to perpetuate the
memory of their efforts and their victory—the Order of
the Cincinnati. This society was also to have a treasury in
order to assist such members or such of their families as
might be in need. The officers who had fought in the

war and their direct descendants were to have the rightESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 205

to belong to it. The idea of a military league at once
aroused violent opposition in America, and particular in-
dignation was felt against the clause which provided for
hereditary transmission of the right of membership.

A magistrate from South Carolina wrote a virulent
pamphlet denouncing this autocratic and military con-
spiracy against which there was soon a strong opposition.
Washington, who was elected President of the Order,
yielded to the extent of repealing the hereditary clause,
but he maintained the Order, saying that to dissolve it
now would be an insult to the French officers who had
consented to belong to it. Certain enemies of the Order
of Cincinnatus, and among them Franklin, suggested to
Mirabeau that he take up the controversy and attack the
Order in the name of France. Mirabeau hastened to fol-
low this counsel. In 1784, he published one of the most
daring works of the times. He had translated and
abridged the American pamphlet. He had added to it a
violent attack against nobility on the pretext that, in the
only country that was happy enough to be free of this
scourge, the Order of the Cincinnati could lead to no other
end than the creation of a patrician order. He exclaimed,
‘The idea of a man being born a magistrate, a legislator
or a judge is absurd and contrary to nature!” There is
no truth in the claims of the nobles who say that vir-
tues are transmitted along with blood. “How much of
the original blood remains after ten generations, and are

not the proudest families those that go back the fur-206 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

thest2” To the Americans he said, “America can, and is
even going to, determine with certainty whether mankind
is destined by its nature to liberty or to slaverys; ait
was therefore easy to see that if the violent blame seemed
to fall on the Americans, in truth, it was not they who
bore the brunt of these accusations. On the contrary, they
were held up as the enviable model for those who have
yet to set themselves free. Mirabeau employed, but with
more daring and precision, the method that Mably and
Raynal had used, and, following their example, he util-
‘zed the United States as the model for other nations,

the concrete form of their moral ideal.

xk

*

These methods annoyed certain Americans who did not
feel attracted by the vocation of Messiah-nation; but,
on the whole the people were flattered, and the bolder
spirits across the sea read eagerly these polemics in which
the name of the United States recurred frequently as the
emblem of Liberty and moral perfection. In spite of the
hostility of the American government, who feared the
cuile of the French King and the corrupting spirit of
the French pamphleteers, the American people kept up
its sympathy for those who had helped them so much in
working out their salvation.” In this critical period for
the American nation, when it had to rally about a new

government and resist tendencies toward demagogy andESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 207

all the other dangers which assail a new people, its news-
papers found space to print long dispatches on happen-
ings in France. Most of these dispatches came from Lon-
don, and although the American journalists avoided
printing anything that was too unfavorable to France, a
good many insinuating details slipped into their columns.
The English government took care to have it announced
from time to time that France was going to retake Louisi-
ana or Florida or Canada, or that she had been obliged
to give up Corsica because she could no longer govern
it. Letters were printed whose burden was that America
ought not to allow theatrical productions, since it was
because of the theater and the vices that it fostered that
France had been able to subjugate virtuous Geneva.”
But, in as much as it was possible, the American papers
fought against English propaganda, and their columns
are a striking testimony to the vitality of popular sym-
pathy with France. They reprinted the articles by the
sreat philosophers on the United States and usually
praised the wise counsels that their ardent writings con-
tained. They gave news of the French officers who had

9

served in America,” of La Fayette especially, but also
of La Rouérie, whom they declared was a great friend
of the United States.” The prizes that the provincial
academies were founding in France were announced; and
in each number we find professors, merchants, dressmak-
ers and importers of French wines appealing to the pub-

lic, which seems to have treated them well. Their ad-208 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

vertisements were printed in French and in English. The
newspapers in the large ports especially, such as Balti-
more, Philadelphia, New York and Boston, prided them-
selves on understanding France and doing her justice.
They went so far as to publish notes affirming that the
French press was not as completely sagged as the Eng-
lish would have it believed, that France was ceasing to
be bigoted and was breaking away from Catholicism.
Certain pamphleteers, to shame the United States for
their slowness in reorganizing their finances, recalled the
generosity of Louis XVI; and this prince was continually
held up as the great benefactor of the United States. On
the death of Vergennes, the papers gratefully enumer-
ated all that he had done for the United States and for
humanity.” Lastly, a new sentiment was becoming more
and more evident every year in the American papers, na-
tional pride and pleasure at seeing France, who was their
ereat and generous friend, beginning to be fired by their
ideas and to imitate them. During the year 1788, there
was not a single American town in which this sentiment
was not expressed. The spiritual partnership between the
two nations and the moral réle of the United States was
becoming a matter of popular interest.” Undoubtedly
one of the most interesting examples of this was the
mayor of New Haven’s decision to appoint as citizens
of the town a number of illustrious Frenchmen, among
whom were Target, La Rochefoucauld, Condorcet, etc

Education had a tendency to adopt itself to these newESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 209

interests. Everywhere colleges and schools were being
founded, and educational problems were being discussed
with great ardor. In a curious article in the New York
Daily Advertiser, Benevolus asserts that the Americans
ought to have an education of their own, for, he says, the
system of education conceived by Rousseau is fitting only
for a Swiss bourgeois and Fénelon’s system is becoming to
a French prince.’* The best models would be Leyden or
Edinburgh, but what is needed is a more practical edu-
cation and one which would not oblige our young men
to go abroad. This was the general opinion. Even the
most educated Americans and those who knew Europe
best, such as Adams and Jefferson, recommended that
young men should study in America and go to Europe
only to finish up their education.” All of them feared
lest the young men acquire aristocratic habits, and only
a few rich merchants like Robert Morris “° saw an advan-
tage in sending their sons to study in the Old World.
The Americans were anxious to develop their national
characteristics and to impose their ideals on the growing
generation. However, they considered a knowledge of
French as indispensable to a cultivated man. In 1786,
the Maryland newspapers published at length discus-
sions as to whether a college should be established in
the state and on what system; and every one agreed that
such a college should teach French, since it was the lan-
guage most in use in good society. It should be remem-

bered that, in the minds of its founders, the University210 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

of Maryland was not to be established for the education
of an intellectual élite, but for young men of the middle
classes.” Every one admitted that for girls French was
a necessary ornament like music and dancing.” Thus,
while French was gaining rather slowly in the colleges,
we find professors of French in great number in all of
the important cities and especially in the ports. At Phila-
delphia in 1785, there seem to have been at least five
French professors, of whom two were for women: at New
York there were three, at Baltimore eight, at Annapolis
one, at Portsmouth, Virginia, one, at Augusta four, of
whom two also taught music, at New Rochelle one, at
Providence one, and at Boston two or three.” It is to be
noted in passing that the South, where individual luxury
is more developed in the upper classes, seems to have at-
tracted the most professors of French. Beside, it was eas-
ier to come over from Santo Domingo to Baltimore or
Portsmouth than to Boston. And most of these professors
came from the French West Indies.”

In the colleges, French was considered as both useful
and dangerous. It was feared that this language might
serve as a vehicle for new and subversive ideas. Now
most of the American colleges were situated in New Eng-
land and were dominated by the clergy. At Yale, for
example, Ezra Stiles, a clergyman himself, but cultured
and a philosopher as well as pious, was unable to install
a French professor—even a Protestant one. He did how-

ever introduce Montesquieu’s Espret des Lots as a text-ESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 211

book and taught it himself to seniors.** Harvard, which
was under the control of a more liberal clergy, had been
bolder and continued so. Indeed there seem to have been
as many as two instructors in French there at once, and
French was a regular part of the curriculum for sopho-
mores and juniors. It was accepted as a substitute for
Hebrew, the old religious tongue in such repute among
the Puritan clergymen. In 1787, a new French professor,
M. de Nancréde, a very likable and brilliant man, had
been appointed by the University and was to exert a real
influence on the students.**” When the School of Medi-
cine was founded, the French consul was present at the
ceremony ; and this school showed more French influence
than any other part of the University. In fact, J. War-
ren, the director of the school and the brother of the
hero who was killed at Bunker Hill, had been impressed
by the methods employed by the French surgeons in the
last campaign, in which he himself had served as a mili-
tary surgeon. He had therefore adopted French methods
in many particulars. In chemistry, the text-book used
was Fourcroy.** Through Crévecceur, the French consul
at New York, the University, as well as the principal
American physicians, received free the Journal des Méde-
cins militaires francais,’ and French representatives en-
deavored to gain publicity in America for the Odserva-
tions sur la Physique, the best French scientific review.*”
The King had given to Harvard a collection of seeds

with which to start a botanical garden. He had also given212 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

books to Harvard, William and Mary and the Univer-
sity of Pennsylvania. The Academy of Sciences at Paris
sent its publications to Harvard, and French travelers
sent it their works. Thus we find a letter from Harvard
thanking Brissot for the gift of his Voyage en Amérique.
At Princeton, Witherspoon, an intelligent, erudite and
pious president, paid tribute to French as a language. He
often quoted the French theologians, the Jansenists and
even Bossuet.*® He carried on a systematic campaign
against the Libertines and preached against Rousseau, al-
though he himself had advanced and liberal views. In
short, he inspired a desire to know French, but he did not
judge it prudent to do more.” It was this question of
philosophy in general that governed the spread of French.
In the West, where there must have been much less need
of it, it was nevertheless introduced very early (in 1783),
for the clergy had almost no influence in this region.
French was ordinarily offered to the wealthier students
who went to boarding-schools before going to college.”
Law students were also urged to take up French because
of the great prestige that Montesquieu enjoyed, and be-
cause a desire was felt to liberate America from English
law.®° In art and in all higher education, France was con-
sidered as the best school."* Students were sent to see the
Louvre and David’s studio.” It was this that inspired
the project of Quesnay de Beaurepaire, who in 1786-
1788 tried to found a Franco-American University at

Richmond and almost succeeded. After having been anESSAYS IN FRATERNITY D1

officer in the French army, he resigned his commission in
order to serve in America, where he fell ill and was taken
in by a Virginian family. After the war Quesnay tried
to earn a living in the New World. He had tried to es-
tablish a French school at Philadelphia or New York,
but he had found Virginia more propitious. There, thanks
to the support of high society and of Masonic lodges, of
which he was a faithful member, he was enabled to build
a college. His project was to make it a school of higher
learning especially designed to fit the needs of young
men who were planning to become architects, painters,
etc. He even offered scholarships for students who should
show themselves to be gifted and promised to send them
to Europe to complete their artistic education. He
wanted his college to be international. He asked the
French Academy to take it under their patronage and to
choose professors for it. He had formed a European com-
mittee to launch his work. He also wanted to obtain the
support of the Academy of Sciences of London, to which
he made some advances. In exchange for this patronage,
he promised the European Academies to carry on such
research, studies or experiments as they might desire.
The Academy of Sciences of Paris accorded him the sup-
port that he asked.”* He began collecting funds. All the
great friends of America and of the new ideas in France
were behind him. He was presented to King Louis XVI
in October, 1788.°**

The movement of intellectual collaboration was en-ee Par ee Sy e
. us ®

TEP eriiei siti aeee ce.
Bethe eet eet SD LS eR SER ES.

oe eo

Piatt

   
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

214 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

couraged by the learned societies of France and Amer-
ica, guided usually by partisans of progress and reform.
A degree of intimacy had grown up between the French
Academies and those of America, especially that of Phila-
delphia, which in 1786 had elected as members Ver-
gennes, the Marquis d’Angeville, Barbeu-Dubourg,
Chastellux, Coste, Daubenton, La Fayette, D’ Anne-
mours, the French Consul, Abbé Fontant, the Comte de
Guichen, La Luzerne, Lavoisier, Barbé-Marbois, who
even held the post of Counselor, Raynal, the Abbé Ro-
zier, the Duc de La Rochefoucauld, Condorcet, Cabanis,
the aeronaut Charles, and was to elect in 1787, Otto,
Cadet de Vaux, etc.—altogether twenty-one Frenchmen
out of fifty-five members. Every year it received the best
scientific works published in France. It discussed the sub-
jects in which Paris was most deeply interested, such as
aerial navigation and animal magnetism. The Academy
of Sciences of Paris sent it a fine electric apparatus; and
Rittenhouse, one of its members, constructed at his own
expense a superb astronomical machine for the King of
France. The King showed his satisfaction by gifts and
friendly letters.”

This whole movement had been started by Franklin,
who had the gift of circulating knowledge of every kind
and of stirring intellectual activity in all those who came
in contact with him. He was in the habit of sending his
friends the best books that came out in France, and Jef-

ferson followed his example. He sent books on mathe-ESSAYS IN FRATERNITY Ds

matics to his young friends, the Gazette de Leyde and
the Gazette de France to all those who wanted to keep
up with European affairs, and, to give him an idea of
the political situation and of coming reforms, he sent
Madison the works of Mably, the Tableau de Paris,
L’Espion anglais, and the pamphlets of Dupont and
Condorcet.””

This philosophic literature was to be found every-
where. The catalogues of the libraries and those of the
reading-rooms show that, despite a marked fidelity to
Fénelon and Rollin, both of whom remained as classics
in education, there was an invasion of Montesquieu, who
was being read more and more, and of Rousseau, whose
Confessions and Nouvelle Hélotse were often mentioned.
But it is Voltaire and Raynal especially who seem to
have gained in favor with the public at large. The news-
papers frequently printed extracts from Voltaire, par-
ticularly the pages concerning tolerance and his relations
with Frederick the Great. They often printed Raynal’s
exhortations inciting the Americans to continue in their
virtues. About 1788, more interesting reviews were be-
ginning to be published, especially at Boston and Phila-
delphia.*” From the start they gave a great deal of space
to things French. One of them went so far as to publish
long extracts from the Code de la Nature,” and one feels
that this kind of sensibility had gained considerable
eround. We find many selections of this nature: moving

and sentimental stories and encomiums of Nature and216 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

tolerance, which were sought in French literature. These
were read eagerly and were used as weapons in the po-
litical struggles that were then going on. Saint Jean de
Crévecceur’s moving book which dealt with the experi-
ences of a French colonist in the West persecuted by the
Indians, had a wide success; and the saddest and most
picturesque episodes of his work were reprinted many
times in America from 1782 to 1788.°° This book glori-
fied the free and enlightened man, living in the midst of
virgin nature as it existed in the frontier posts and the
great forests along the Mississippi. This ideal was also
that which the poets, the historians and the novelists
sought. David Ramsay’s history, written with the as-
sistance of La Luzerne, professed a sincere and naive re-
spect for France and represented the Franco-American
alliance as being beneficial and generous to America.
But this history: kept within the bounds of prudence.
The two great poets of the American Revolution, Fre-
neau and Joel Barlow, on the contrary, dared to speak
out. In American poetry, which was then very abundant,
there was constant reference to the revolutionary spirit
of the French and of their philosophers. David Hum-
phreys, who had been orderly-officer to Washington,
dedicated his collected poems to one of them, the Duc de
La Rochefoucauld. He spoke of the King of France and
his subjects as

Sublimely good, magnanimously great,
Protector of the rights of human kind.*°ESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 217

Barlow published at Hartford in 1787 the first and the
finest epic poem that America has produced: The Vision
of Columbus.” This poem was to have been part of a
more voluminous work. The author imagines Columbus
receiving in a dream a revelation of the sublime future
that awaits the United States. This method, which seems
to have been inspired by Voltaire’s Henriade, permits
him to burst forth into lyric praise of the Bourbons and
France. He hails Louis XVI as the “pride of Kings”
and praises him for the generosity that he had shown in
intervening in favor of the United States without seek-
ing any selfish end and with the sole purpose of aiding an
unhappy people and responding to the enthusiasm of his
subjects. After having extolled French soldiers and their
generals, Barlow, in a style that has both amplitude and
strength, goes on to describe Columbus’ vision of uni-
versal peace. The destiny of America was to lead all the
nations to unite in one vast democratic league. A re-
ligious fervor suffuses the soul of the poet. Later he was
to become one of the leaders of the democratic party and
to carry on a widespread propaganda in favor of the
French alliance. Freneau had a like destiny and we shall
find him at the head of the Jacobin pamphleteers in 1790.
Between 1783 and 1788 he wrote excellent poetry. He
had composed a prologue for Beaumarchais’s Eugenze
when Quesnay had produced it at Philadelphia in 1780;
and in all his work, he expressed an intense enthusiasm

for liberty—a sentiment that Witherspoon may perhaps218 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

have communicated to him when he was a student at
Princeton. Freneau was a very gifted poet. He loved
nature and especially the sea, on which he passed many
years of his life. He was in advance of his times, and
sometimes his work has a violent and desperate accent
that since the beginning of the nineteenth century has
been called Romanticism. He is the only one of his gener-
ation in America who has this quality. His satiric poems
breathe an ardent hatred of despotism, and he had the
art of carrying bitterness to such lengths as were per-
missible in those days—which is to say, further than we
should consider proper today. He carried on a vigorous
campaign in favor of the alliance with France and praised
Louis XVI as the greatest monarch that the centuries
had known. Everything that came from France roused
his enthusiasm: in the Montgolfiers, he saw the promise
of a new age, scientific and happy. Behind the French
monarchy he divined and sought eagerly for the France
of the Revolution, which already filled him with rap-
ture°2 The conflict between the conservative elements,
who were religious and Anglophile, and the Francophiles,
who were partisans of philosophy and tended toward
deism, is illustrated by the resistance with which a group
of Connecticut poets called the “Hartford Wits” met the
propagation of French ideas. In 1786 they collaborated
in publishing an epic poem entitled The Anarchiad.”*

This poem is amusing and brutal. Its young authors

wrote it to express their scorn for all these windy, igno-ESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 219

rant and impractical French philosophers who dared to
condemn the United States and to give them advice
while they themselves were living under a despotism.
They depicted De Pauw as being puffed with pride at
having discovered a telescope which diminished objects
in proportion to their remoteness. Thanks to this fine
instrument, one could see everything that grew and lived
in America as infinitely smaller than the products and
men of Europe. Target, Raynal, Mably and Hilliard
d’Auberteuil were also assailed. But it was especially
against Mirabeau, his immorality and violent theories,
that the authors turned their wrath.

Throughout the United States, a religious restlessness
was making itself felt. The people as a whole were
touched with a disaffection toward priests and churches.
There was difficulty in the South in reorganizing the
Church of England, which had now become the Episcopal
Church. In Maryland the newspapers were agitating for
the most complete tolerance. The Baptists, who were to
make so much progress, were still in a preparatory phase.
Their democratic spirit and manners destined them to
become the most flourishing sect during these troubled
years. The Lutheran Church was going through the most
trying crisis that she had ever been subject to in the New
World.

The credo was becoming vague, especially among the
pastors; and the members of the congregations were re-

fusing to pay for the maintenance of the parishes, many

re rte . E : eT)
PEE eT ere Tey ©) ek Oe et ee oe Dy

ea eee e et eerie eee er

rs

a

ere

rv
“

”
BS
“
”
a
iz
Tn
"
“

LT
9
Hl220 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

of which disappeared. Even in New England, a region
so pious and so faithful to traditions, the spirit of toler-
ance and indifference was spreading together with
deism.%* A Catholic funeral was held at Philadelphia for
the first time since the foundation of the city when Don
Juan de Miralles died and a great ceremony was held in
his honor. The spectators were even somewhat surprised
at the piety and edifying deportment of the Papists."”°
In 1785, when John Thayer's conversion to Catholicism
was known, people were a little surprised and shocked;
but, when in 1788 a French priest came to settle in Bos-
ton, founded a church there and asked for Protestant help
to finish paying for it, it called forth either indignation
or enthusiasm. Certain newspapers made use of the occa-
sion to speak of Catholicism and to come out in favor
of tolerance.2°° The Massachusetts Sentinel for June 21,
1788, said: “Most of these happy results may be at-
tributed to our independence and our alliance with our
ereat and good ally, Louis of France, the protector of
the rights of humanity against tyranny.” The edict which
gave full liberty to the Protestants in France and the
various other liberal decisions of Louis XVI had caused
ereat stir in America. Pastors had spoken of them in the
pulpit. They began to quote Montesquieu and to discuss
La Rochefoucauld in their sermons. They preached the
generosity of the King of France and, in general, were
favorable to the alliance, although it caused them some

uneasiness. They admired the fine manners of the French-ESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 221

men, the refinement that they had brought into vogue;
but, as ministers of the gospel, they condemned this
superficial elegance and beauty which are only external

and constitute a kind of hypocrisy.’

The gravest mani-
festation—for this time it was not mere corrupt living
nor a mild tendency toward tolerance—came from
Colonel Ethan Allen, the hero of Ticonderoga. In 1784,
he published a book entitled Reason, the Only Oracle
of Man, in which he set forth for the benefit of Vermont
farmers the most cynical theories of the deists. He de-
nied the divinity of Christ, the veracity of the Scriptures,
the miracles and revelations. He demanded a traditional
cult and a practical morality. His style, simple and even
dull, and his direct arguments, rendered the work even
more effective and shocking.

This restlessness was not to limit itself to remaining
abstract and intellectual. It was to engender material
disorders, the most famous of which were the riots in
Massachusetts known as Shays’ Rebellion, because Shays

108

was the principal leader of the rebels.” These riots re-
sembled those which took place in Rome when the
plebeians refused to pay their debts. In truth, causes for
dissatisfaction were not lacking in America during 1786
and 1787. Taxes were heavy, trade was far from flourish-
ing, and many people had contracted debts during the
war. The creditors wanted to recover their money, the
debtors clamored for governmental aid; and when they

did not get it, they had recourse to violence.222 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT
This revolt, which was accompanied by bloodshed and

of which English propaganda made abundant use against
the United States, was variously received. Some people
were alarmed by it and thought that it would be neces-
sary to modify the Constitution. Others felt that it was
only natural and, on the whole, rather wholesome and
beneficial, because it kept up the taste for liberty and the
sense of independence alive in the nation. Jefferson was
one of the latter; and one can see in his attitude a trace
of the intellectual habits that he had contracted, un-
doubtedly from frequenting the French philosophers.
Jefferson and his friends, Madison and Monroe, all the
eroup of liberal politicians and patriots from Virginia,
found in the French philosophers two inspirations which
seem to be contradictory: the cult for the United States
as the chosen nation which was responsible for the salva-
tion of the world and for its reformation, and the desire
to have as weak a government as possible." These two
tendencies, one of which seems to lead to a narrow and
haughty nationalism, the other toward a, weak and im-
potent and very individualistic democracy, are reconciled,
as the reader will recall, only by the French philosophers
from whom Jefferson and his group drew their ideas.
According to them mores are the important bond which
makes nations strong. The state should be weak, but
there should be a strong and active public spirit. It was
necessary to be ready at all times to modify the laws in

order to fit them to circumstances and temperaments. TheESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 223

important thing was the creation of a national character
and of a popular ideal, to which everything else should,
if necessary, be sacrificed. They were therefore only
mildly concerned over the uprising. Their great hope was
to succeed in infusing their fellow citizens with the ideal
that was to remodel the world. Meanwhile other groups
were alarmed at seeing the disorder gaining ground and
menacing private property as well as the property of the
State. They were so disturbed that there were even
murmurs in favor of a monarchy.” The merchants in
the ports, the New England clergymen, dismayed at see-
ing their prestige diminish, and, in general, all men of
wealth and position wished for a transformation of the
Constitution. The inaction and weakness of Congress was
visible evidence of the need for a change. Something re-
sembling harmony was established between the demo-
crats and the conservatives: the former saw that now was
the time to act if their dream of creating a model nation
was not to have been a vain illusion and the United
States to lose their prestige; the latter were anxious to
build up a strong central government. The masses
awaited the outcome, once more curious and divided.*”

In May, 1787, a convention composed of the leading
spirits and the best citizens of America met at Philadel-
phia to work out the basis of a new constitution. All the
states were represented. Washington, Franklin, Jay,
Hamilton, Madison, Gouverneur Morris, Charles Pinck-

ney, Rufus King and the famous jurist Wilson were

ats ieoe tescaty ee bata tekstas
eer Pee ree he ee ee Se De 2 ae eee

se}

<3

—

i
ry
‘a

 

 

224 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

present, together with many others. A battle immediately
broke out between the little states and the large ones,
both parties holding out for statutes that would accord
them a more important part in the future federation. The
smaller states feared that they would be oppressed by
the larger ones and did not want a constitution which
would bind them too closely and give the central govern-
ment too much power. The larger states were in favor of
a confederation whose bonds should be solid and whose
government strong. One can easily imagine how involved
the debate must have been in view of this opposition
between the two constituent elements of the Union as
well as the latent conflict between temperaments and
political ideals. This latter conflict led a democrat like
Madison, because he represented the interests of a large
state, to support the contentions of a Northerner, a con-
servative and a partisan of a strong central power, like
Rufus King or the illustrious Alexander Hamilton.
Therefore, from an intellectual, as well as a political,
point of view, this famous constitution, which for more
than a century seems to have assured the happiness and
prosperity of the United States, must be considered as a
series of compromises. From an intellectual point of view,
the discussion was very confused.

From 1783 on, the great authority in matters of law
vand political theories was Montesquieu. He was continu-
' ally quoted and sometimes read,, for the newspapers and

magazines published extracts from his works. But thisESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 225

brilliant and subtle mind, so full of devious turnings, had
not left a clear impression on all intelligences. Therefore
we find everybody citing this authority during the Con-
stitutional Convention and making use of him to defend

contradictory theses.**

The patriots in general agreed as
to adopting Montesquieu’s idea of the three powers, as
they applied it, and his concept of a strong government
founded on the balancing of these powers. During the
Philadelphia convention, the partisans of a strong govern-
ment, who in reality considered monarchy as the best
form of government and the English monarchy as the
most perfect type of monarchy, abandoned hope of im-
posing this view and, fearing public opinion, scarcely
mentioned the idea of royal government.’** Alexander
Hamilton was one of this group, and probably John Jay
also. It is possible that the almost religious cult for de-
mocracy which had spread at an equal pace in France and
in America, each country influencing the other, had some-
thing to do with this discretion on their part.”* This
hypothesis is the more reasonable since Hamilton and
Jay were both anxious to establish a form of government
which should resemble as much as possible the English
government as seen through Montesquieu.”

The democrats, for their part, remained moderate.
Franklin made a motion, which from an intellectual
point of view was a most important one, that the two
houses be replaced by a single house and that the system

of checks and balances modeled on Montesquieu’s Eng-

BetesaSsJHSeSs Bars zegsesespscrria~ecs

zser

ante

’

'
,

«ae

J

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

26 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

t

lish doctrine be replaced by a purely democratic system
which would have given the people as much direct
exercise of power as possible. This was the concept of
Turgot and of the French democrats who had served in
the American Revolution. Franklin failed in this project.
He next tried to provide that the chief magistrate should
not be paid, thinking thus to avoid intriguing for the
place and to safeguard social morality. He cited the
example of the members of the French parliament but
without success; but in the course of this discussion he
had several times the opportunity to speak of monarchy,
and this he did in no uncertain terms.”* At the critical
moment when slavery and its suppression were being dis-
cussed, Dickinson, who was in favor of abolishing it,
held up the example of France, who had forbidden the
keeping of slaves in her territory.’ In these divers dis-
cussions, Franklin and his friends yielded, because they
did not attach much importance to a written constitution,
which it had been promised, moreover, would be revised.
They deemed that the important thing was to establish
harmony, to form a solid body as a nation and to main-
tain the democratic spirit. They said that this text,
mediocre as it was, would be a good basis for discussions
and changes in the years that were to come. Various ele-
ments were involved in the controversies which then took
place in order to get the various states to accept the Con-
stitution. First of all, it cannot be denied that a strong

impulse was leading the colonies toward a union. For aESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 22

long time the Americans had dreamed of a federation.
But it is interesting to note that the example most often
cited as an example of a federation is the one which
Henry IV had hoped to establish among the European
countries.”** This example had certainly a strong appeal
in religious and liberal circles in the United States. On
the other hand, the enemies of the new Constitution
seized on everything that Montesquieu says against. large
republics, while the partisans of the Constitution replied
that the only way to avoid meriting the just condemna-
tions which Montesquieu directs at large republics was
to unite in a federation, a form of government that
Montesquieu praises positively.”” The Anti-Federalists
turned to Turgot and laid stress on his criticisms of the
system of two houses. In the great and splendid pamphlet
which Hamilton, Jay and Madison **® published in de-
fense of the work of the Constitutional Convention, all
three of them cited the example of France and the works
of French authors, each according to his personal ten-
dencies; Jay used such references to show the dangers
that foreign interventions and intrigues held for trusting
and weak republics; Hamilton used Mably to set forth
the advantages of confederations in that they prevent
neighboring nations, which otherwise would be jealous
of each other, from doing each other harm. Hamilton
harked back three times to the worthy Abbé. As for
Madison, he quotes extracts from Montesquieu to prove

that a confederation unites the advantages of a republicPy Per eririerisci st tite rece eeel ee tases rire

rrr

    

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

228 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

with those of a monarchy. He also employs Montes-
quieu’s commentaries to show that there should be a
division of powers. Thus, on the capital points of this
controversy, this great pamphlet made a pretense at turn-
ing to French authorities and following their counsels.”
Just how much sincerity there is in all this is hard to say;
but in any case, we have here a clear proof of the prestige
that the French theoreticians enjoyed in the best circles
‘n America. At the Massachusetts convention, Bowdouin
recalled Montesquiew’s praise of federations in defense of
the new Constitution. At the Pennsylvania convention,
Wilson cited Necker and Montesquieu at length to show
that the proposed Constitution was indeed in accord with
the true spirit of democracy. In Virginia, the plan was
criticized as being apt to lead the United States into a
régime as despotic as that of France. France was often
brought into the discussion because the enemies of a
strong federation claimed that the generosity of France
made measures of defense and an army unnecessary. In
South Carolina the same tone prevailed. Finally, with
ereat difficulty, after much hesitation, further compro-
mises and a definite promise that Congress, as soon as it
met, should amend certain articles in such a way as to
render them in keeping with the rights of man, the Con-
stitution was ratified.”

Throughout this great political battle, the participants
never ceased to think of France, to feel the influence of

her philosophers and to seek to realize the idea] thatESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 229

France had set for the United States. The democratic
party, which seems to have been defeated, had in reality
made concessions only in order to put the struggle upon

—_—

more propitious grounds.

k
x

Franklin, the unrivaled leader of the democratic party,
was soon to pass from the scene; but he was to keep the
halo that France had placed about his head and which
the New World beheld at first with astonishment and
later with admiration. Franklin’s activity during the war
had been heroic, able and sovereignly efficacious. His
efforts during the years from 1782 to 1785, the date of
his leaving France, however less conspicuous they may
have been, were not less fruitful. An object of universal
veneration, he afforded France the example of the per-
fect sage, whose head victory could not turn and who, in
fact, took advantage of it only to do more good and to
return to his intellectual works. He continued to attend
the Lodge of the Nine Sisters, to be present regularly at
the sessions of the Academy of Sciences and to carry on
researches whenever he had time for such work.’ He
concerned himself with his harmonica, stoves and means
of avoiding seasickness; people wrote him letters on
these and other practical subjects, which, far from ap-
pearing as laughable as they would perhaps seem today,

afforded the public a high idea of his altruism and in-

re

t

ar
rn
vby
%
rH

i
cy
i]
'

TES Tih PE re
658 22355 29255353225345 pipdésicisecss230 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

creased his renown as a saint and a benefactor of human-
ity.2> A new edition of Poor Richard's Almanack was
brought out, and the poet Feutry wrote an appendix for
it, entitled Commandements de 1 Honnete Homme, the
purpose of which was to show that these maxims should
be taken as a moral code. With his support, the Lodge of
the Nine Sisters undertook a campaign for the modera-
tion of legal punishments.’** The president Dupaty was
the leader of this campaign, and Franklin contributed to
it by publishing a letter at the end of the pamphlet en-
titled Observations d’un Voyageur anglais sur la Matson
de Force de Bicétre. He showed how unjust it was to
punish theft with death, while in time of war privateer-
ing was encouraged. He also condemned military disci-
pline as being worse than slavery. The author of the
Observations d’un Voyageur anglais was Mirabeau. This
was not the first time that these two revolutionary leaders
had collaborated. Mirabeau had already published at
Franklin’s request Considerations on the Order of Cincin-
natus. The group of Franklin’s friends formed a sort
of philosophical headquarters-staff. Madame Helvetius’s
salon continued to flourish and to reflect the ever-
increasing brilliance of Franklin’s glory. He inspired
the masses with enthusiasm, and this impression did
not displease him.’ He tells how moved he was on
seeing the poor peasant from Provence who had sent
him an incredible pamphlet whose style was as bad

as its spelling. This man’s name was Gargaz. He hadESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 231

come on foot all the way from his province to see
Franklin, and when he saw him, he threw himself at
his feet and begged him to persuade the King to give
him back his place as schoolmaster, of which an unjust
condemnation had deprived him, and to submit to the
King and the United States a project for a Masonic
union between all the sovereigns of the world in order to
assure peace and fraternity.”* Franklin, moved to tears,
interceded in his favor. And Gargaz redoubled his efforts
and had his memorandum published. In the highest
society, the admiration for Franklin ran quite as high,
and people were astonished at the brilliant career of this
man who, arriving in France as an outlaw, had become
the minister of a victorious people allied to France. In
1783, the Duc de Croy brought his grandson to see the
ereat man in order that he might behold “‘a man whose
glory as creator and liberator of his country and as
founder of its laws and sciences, is above any compari-
son that might be made.” **” When Franklin left Paris, it
was in one of the King’s own litters, which Louis XVI
had lent him in order to lighten the weariness of the
journey. Later he wrote to his friends in Paris wise and
useful letters, little philosophic fables and charmingly
tender messages. They saw from the newspapers that the
throngs at Philadelphia had followed the example of
those of Paris. Franklin’s entry into Philadelphia was a
triumph. His friends in Paris published a pamphlet
which described in detail this ceremony with which anr)

 

232 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

nation of philosophers welcomed the great man and it
affords a spectacle of a philosophy apt in the things of
this world, potent in the domain of the mind and imbued
with a pious moral.”

Franklin’s departure from Paris was almost coinci-
dental with the publication in book form of the Leftres
Pun Cultivateur américain (1784) which was published
without the name of the author, but which was the work
of Hector Saint-Jean de Crévecceur. Crévecceur who be-
longed to an old and honorable Norman family, had early
emigrated to Canada. After having tried his hand at vari-
ous trades, he had settled in the region that lay to the
west of the English colonies. He had bought land and
cleared a farm where he seems to have lived happily until
the outbreak of the American Revolution. Then, obliged
to choose between the English government and the new
American government, he was in a cruel dilemma until
the cruelest moment of all, when the Indians, allied with
the English, drove him from his home. In his flight, he
was captured by the English, who put him in prison at
New York. His plight stirred the pity of an English of-
ficer, who enabled him to escape. He returned to France,
where Madame Houdetot, who was herself of a Norman
family, took him under her protection. At her house he
met Franklin and all the other leading spirits of the
Americans in France. He began to show his writings—
rather ingenuous but colorful and moving accounts of

what he had seen and suffered in America. His friendsESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 233

helped him to revise and correct this work, and he set
about having it published. It achieved the greatest success
of the times. It consists of a series of anecdotes dealing
with American life, the life that was the least known and
had the greatest attraction, the life along the frontiers,
at the edge of the great forests where one encoun-
tered wild beasts and Indians in red paint, savage but
kindly and spontaneous. Crévecceur depicted the rustic,
wild and solitary existence, one neighbor is all of so-
ciety and man loves his neighbor with a Scriptural love,
the long winter days when there were no other pleasures
than the crackling fire and the assembled family, silent
but warm with tenderness. He pictured summer in the
virgin forests, the frightful serpents, coiling and fighting
among themselves. He let the reader share the happiness
of a peaceful family, in whose existence the most out-
standing events were the children’s birthdays, when the
father planted a little tree that in twenty years the
daughter would contemplate with pride. He also de-
picted in gentle and glowing terms the devotion of the
good old slaves. He described with horror the tortures
that certain whites. inflicted on these unfortunate crea-
tures. But he dwelt especially on the cruelties of the
English in America, and he gave the highest and most
stirring appreciation of the Quakers’ adoration for God.
These noble and kindly Quakers, for whom death and
ridicule were but petty annoyances, and who, steadfast

in their morality, simple in their living and unwavering

Pees ee Pe ee Sl oe Pe Pe) ee ee oe

-*>

e223

o

a
.
J

al
5eee ee ee ate e eee eect oe st eee

abu

234 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

in their virtue, refused with equal determination to kill,
to steal or to take oaths. Crévecceur had not tried to make
a novel out of his book. He gave it out as he had written
it, at random. The reader felt that it was a confession, a
perpetual effusion. Some passages had a tender and touch-
ing charm of which something remains even today. I
quote as an example this one page, from among many
others, which describes a rustic holiday. Crevecceur cele-
brated it every year to commemorate the transplanting
of a sassafras that he had found in the forest and placed
in front of his house: “The anniversary of this little event
has been solemnized regularly ever since by a gay though
simple little celebration to which we invite our neighbors.
Our celebrations, as you know, are always accompanied
by dancing, or rather, we have no celebrations without
joy, and our pleasure is always showed or expressed by
dancing. There is no holiday in the year that I enter into
with more pleasure. Our good negro, December, who for
years has been too old to work, is still musician enough
to preside at our dances. He enjoys telling the neighbors
who attend the celebration all the details of this little
event; he does not overlook the part that he took in help-
ing me to pull up and transplant the sassafras, and my
daughter loves him all the more for it. As soon as she is
married, he says, he expects to divide his time and pass
six months of the year at her house. ‘Because, he says,
‘although I can no longer do anything myself, I know

more than any other negro about how things should beESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 235
done, and old December’s advice will be as useful to my
master’s daughter when she is married as my care was in
her early childhood when I used to carry her into the
fields and leave her, wrapt in my overcoat, to sleep at the
foot of a tree while I worked. I loved her as if she had
been a little black girl.’ ” “* Such pages went straight to
the heart, and no one could help admiring them and
shedding tears on reading them. This book, therefore, had
a deep and serious success.

The public was deeply stirred by it. In France, as in
America, the best magazines and the most popular news-
papers reprinted pathetic passages from Crevecceur. They
praised his sincerity and admired his piety which did
harm to none and seemed to be the highest type of true
religion, that of the heart, just as his characters seemed
to be the worthiest type of man gone back to Nature
without having sacrificed his dignity.” It is in Crévecceur
that we must seek the concept that was held about 1735
of the ‘“‘state of Nature” as the philosophers would have
had it. The savages were never considered except as a
curiosity, and people were delighted at seeing a white
man, and a Frenchman, practicing true spontaneous vir-
tue. The book inspired both prose and verse. In 1787, a
comedy in prose by Gorgy, Les Torts apparents, sought
to put on the stage this simple but pure life of the Amert-
can colonists. The year before, in Le Voyage d’ Amérique,
L. Bourdon had sung the mystic aspects of the United
States:

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
  
 
 
   
  

aeeta~

Pee pert teehee eerl yore ten

itis)

ree ee ee ey fe

SS .. Smeyie

236 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

    
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

In them we still behold the sons of Nature... .

By contemplating Her and heeding Her commands,

They have through righteousness made simple all their laws;
Her hand it is that traced throughout their codes sublime
The reasonable bounds to all authority.

Behold a refuge where the never-changing law

Is to be just and kind, devout and tolerant... .-
Where, piously constrained by Nature and Her laws,
Each household, in the throes of pious ecstasy,

Worships the One Supreme according to its lights;
Where, of their sacred rights by our sages made aware,
A people lifts the prayers of Truth and of Mankind
Before the holy shrine of Joy and Liberty

Unto Philosophy, the priestess of their God ;

And where the humblest turns for redress of his wrong
And Righteousness is held the peer of daring deed.
Such is the sanctuary America shall be,

And Louis’s high renown shall never pass away.'°*

This zeal was not confined to literature. On every hand

there was talk of setting out for America. Lanthenas
thought of going and tried to persuade his friends the
Rolands to go with him, but they hesitated on account
of their age, they said.** Nevertheless, they thought
seriously of founding an agricultural colony in America.
Bernardin de Saint-Pierre, the author of Pawl et Vir-

ginie, was fired with the same idea and went so far as to

eather information as to the feasibility of the scheme.”
Benjamin Constant,'*’ weary of Europe and Madame de
Charriére, contemplated a similar means of escaping from
them. As for the Marquis de Lezay Marnésia, he actually
tried to put the plan into execution. A passionate fol-

lower of Rousseau, and sincere Catholic and devoted toESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 237

the King, Monsieur de Lezay Marnésia was weary of
the iniquity of mankind and thirsted after the “state of
Nature.” He longed to see the realization of a moral re-
form and set out for Ohio in search of it.*** A large group
of noble and courageous souls were pervaded with this
particular form of idealism. They had read Rousseau
and their minds turned toward the United States.
Their influence would not perhaps have been very wide
had not this aristocratic and somewhat chimeric ideal
been communicated to the middle and lower classes by
one of the most daring of pamphleteers and one of the
most consistent forerunners of the French Revolution:
Jean-Pierre Brissot. Brissot was the son of an inn-keeper
at OQuarville near Chartres. His eager soul and active
mind had driven him to literature. In order to have an
English air and to make an impression, he had taken the
pen-name, Brissot de Warville. From his youth up, Bris-
sot had had serious tastes and high aims. He suffered
from having a heart that was eager to believe and a mind
that could not be satisfied with the dogmas and faith that
others accepted. When the American Revolution broke
out, he immediately showed his enthusiasm for America
by writing a pamphlet against England. He offered it to
Vergennes, who thought it too violent. He found a pub-
lisher for it at Neufchatel. The pamphlet attracted
notice, and Morande, who was then editor of the Cowr-
reer de l Europe, offered Brissot a place on the staff of

this paper.’ Brissot had found his work and, from then

Perea epee Pl err ter lt oe

"4
a
co
ra
”
”
fs
4
es

J
ai)

38 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

on, devoted himself to it completely. His aim was to lay
the foundations for a social and moral reform by means
of journalism and the spreading of enlightenment. The
task, as he saw it, was a twofold one, and the most im-
portant part of it was to consist in substituting new, in-
telligent and life-giving beliefs for a faith that had
outlived its usefulness.**? Meeting Franklin and later
Crévecceur, whom he encountered at Madame Houdetot’s
home, turned him more and more in the direction of
America. Brissot had harbored the design of establishing
at London a “lycée” similar to that which the Lodge of
the Nine Sisters had established at Paris, and of publish-
ing in connection with it a periodical which should not
only concern itself with the activities of the lodge, but
should also strive to spread enlightenment.” He had not
succeeded in this enterprise; he was drifting with neither
work nor aim when one day he came upon Le Voyage de
M. le Marquis de Chastellux, which had just been pub-
lished.*** He was indignant at the tone of mockery which
the nobleman affected and at the scorn that he showed
for the great truths. He hastily wrote a pamphlet ™ to
show that this so-called philosopher had maligned the
negroes, who in reality were worthy of liberty and in all
ways the equals of the whites, and the Quakers, whose
mores were pure and whose religion was wholesome since
it was both moral and free from superstition. Brissot
concluded by asserting that Chastellux had belittled the
dignity of man when he claimed that this dignity wasESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 239

of no value in itself but was entirely proportionate to
the personal worth of the individual. “All men are born
free, equal and independent,” he wrote. “It was aristoc-
racy, your prejudice, that ruined Rome.” In the name of

Rousseau, Brissot proclaimed that all men, free or slaves,

are endowed by Nature with an equal dignity. His pam-,

phlet created a great stir. Chastellux was a member of
the Academy, an old friend of Voltaire’s, and a well-
known philosopher. To criticize him was both audacious
and dangerous. Brissot’s pamphlet, very clear and elo-
quent though rather lacking in refinement and good
taste, won him a public. He allied himself more closely
with all those who were looking forward to reforms and
trying to bring about the realization of these hopes. In
his periodical, La Bibliotheque de Jurisprudence, Brissot
had given evidence of his philosophic enthusiasm by pub-
lishing a sort of prose ode on American freedom and by
printing the text of the Constitution of Pennsylvania. In
1786, he and his friend Claviére did more than this: they
wrote an essay in refutation of the calumnies against the
United States that were being circulated in France and
England. In order to give their pamphlet a practical ap-
peal and to reach the middle-classes, they treated the
question from the commercial point of view especially
and drew attention to all the advantage that France
could derive from commerce with the United States.
They could not, however, refrain from taking a philo-

sophic glance at the past and future of the Americans.

SheSeRasiszagizgasipicei

eS oer ee

e
a
&

re
f
Oy240 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

They praised their tolerance and the liberty of the press
that existed in America, and they declared that the new
constitutions had regenerated the country and that all of
‘ts citizens were working together for the common good.
With such an aim, with such enlightenment and such
liberty, one might expect miracles from them. Such was
the tenor of the essay entitled De Ja France et des Etats-
Unis . . . par Etienne Claviére et Brissot de Warville,
published in London in 1787. After such a work and the
favorable sensation which it roused, Brissot was con-
sidered as one having authority.

He frequented La Fayette’s house. He collaborated
with Bergasse (both of them were seeking a means of
banding men together under the pretext of social or
scientific experiments, “but in reality to crush despot-
ism’”).‘** With this purpose, Brissot founded one after
another two societies: the Gallo-American Society, which
was to promote friendly relations between the two
peoples and to seek out everything in America’s expe-
rience and institutions that might be of use to reform in
France; and the Society of the Friends of the Negroes.
The Gallo-American Society was made up only of a small
croup of prominent persons, but all of its members were
valuable ones, because of either their ardor or their posi-
tion. This organization bore a strong resemblance to the
Masonic lodges. Like them, it endeavored to bring to
accord on great general principles and a wide plan of

common action men whom personal interests and pettyESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 241

questions separated. The first members of this society,
which was founded in January, 1787, were Brissot, Ber-
gasse, Crevecceur and the Geneva banker, Claviére, with
whom Brissot had become intimate and who shared his

“They set about obtaining and circulating

aspirations.
accurate information concerning the Americans and also
doing whatever they could to promote abstract morality
“without any religious acceptation.”’ They succeeded in
attracting a few new members and in publishing a certain
number of letters and documents in the Journal encyclo-
pedique. Finally, when Brissot went to America the fol-
lowing year, he founded an American chapter of the
society and inserted advertisements in the newspapers in
Massachusetts and throughout New England inviting

146

good citizens to join it.” He met with a certain response ;
but this semi-secret society whose avowed purpose was
the spreading of enlightenment but whose immediate
objectives were not precisely defined, was somewhat
compromising. In January 1789 it was still going on
with its work secretly and with but few members and
limited resources. Brissot had more success with the
Society of the Friends of the Negroes. He established this
society in the early part of the year 1788, it seems, and
from the first succeeded in enrolling illustrious and able
men in its ranks. The first members were, beside Brissot
himself, Carra, Mirabeau, Cerisier, Duchesnay, Ysaru,
Valady, Bréban, the Marquis de Bourges, Volney and

Condorcet. Péthion and La Fayette joined it in theTen

 

242 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

course of the year, and Condorcet was chosen president.
As an argument in favor of freeing the slaves and by
way of proving that this step was feasible, the Friends of
the Negroes cited the example of the Quakers. They
placed themselves to some extent under the patronage
of this sect, for they had affiliations with the English
Quaker societies whose aim it was to abolish slavery and
they used in their own propaganda the pamphlets that
English and American Quakers had written on this sub-
ject.“7 Brissot’s correspondence leaves little doubt that
the true object of this society, as well as of the Gallo-
American Society, was to spread enlightenment and thus
to prepare the way for revolution or reforms in France;
but its avowed purpose was so pertinent and the evil it
combated so flagrant, that the society itself immediately
met with great favor in advanced circles. It grew
rapidly and was known in both hemispheres. We still
have an interesting letter from Jefferson thanking Bris-
sot for having invited him to join it and refusing. “Those
whom I serve have never been in a position to lift up
their voices against slavery,” he says. “I am an Ameri-
can and a Virginian and, although I esteem your aims,
I cannot affiliate myself with your association.”

To merit his renown as a Quaker and an American,”
it still remained for Brissot to visit the United States.
Claviére, who was interested in a vast financial enter-
prise having to do with the redemption of the American

debt, gave him the opportunity to go to America andESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 243

paid the expenses of his trip. Claviére’s proposition
would enable him to visit the American Friends of the
Negroes, to extend the Gallo-American Society, to spread
his fame and to earn some money.” Brissot sailed with
a recommendation from the Minister of Foreign Affairs
which La Fayette’s protection had procured for him.
When the French minister at Philadelphia, Monsieur de
Moustier, saw him, he was dumbfounded at the mes-
senger that his superior had sent him, and he told him
so. Brissot spoke out brazenly against the Government
of France and did not hide his enthusiasm for that of
the United States.*** Boston fascinated him. He was de-
lighted at seeing Washington and finding that their ideas
were in accord. Both of them, in fact, thought that a
ereat future lay before the young nation, and they were
right. Brissot extended the Society of the Friends of
the Negroes, he founded a chapter of the Gallo-Ameri-
can Society, he bought lands, he made arrangements for
his brother-in-law to settle in America, he became
acquainted with Quakers and gave a more definite form
to his own faith—but he failed in his negotiations for
redeeming the American debt. And when he saw in an
American gazette that the States-General were about to
be assembled in France, he hastened back to his destiny.*”*

He brought back powerful weapons for the Revolu-'
tion. Not that he had made a fortune nor yet enriched »
himself with warm friendships. He seems not to have ‘

been extremely in favor with the calm and prudent244. THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Americans.2°* But he had made a study in revolution.
He had faith and a concise idea as to what he wished to
accomplish. He attacked the root of the problem of re-
form in France, and not its manifestations. He could
speak to the middle class in a language that it had long
been waiting to hear.

Brissot had attempted to realize the dream that Pahin
de Champlain de la Blancherie before him had enter-
tained when he established his international institute of
learning, that Quesnay had tried to realize through his
University, and that one of his friends, Nancréde, pro-
fessor at Harvard, was to endeavor to bring true by his
publications and teaching. But Brissot had had the art of
holding public attention and had employed symbols that
had wide appeal. A great part of public opinion in
France, and that the most active part, followed him. ‘The
word Quaker had never enjoyed such popularity before.
André Chénier, the one really great French poet of the
period, was preparing to glorify the humanity of this
sect which, by its virtues, atoned for all the crimes of
the Europeans in the New World.’ Beside Benjamin
Constant, Lanthenas, the Rolands and the Marquis de
Lezay Marnésia, the famous Doctor Guillotin and his
friend Saugrain, the bookseller, weary of French des-
potism, were considering emigrating to America.” A
Norman gentleman named Jean de Marsillac, an ex-
officer, had just been converted to Quakerism. He set

himself up as the apostle of the sect in France, sentESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 245

memoranda to the King, made pastoral rounds, visited
the mother chapter at London, prepared pamphlets for
propaganda and contemplated making the voyage to

157

America. “’ People in high society, without leaving their
social circles or changing their manner of life, adopted
the manners of these “primitives.”” Old Monsieur de
Lescure gave a card-party, and when the playing was at
its height, a halt was called while prayers were said and
the Bible read. Then the party went on.*® A little book
that was published in 1778 and enjoyed great popularity,
Le Calendrier de Philadelphie, gives a just idea of this
enthusiasm. It is more Quaker than the Quakers. It de-
fines them thus: ““Dogmas are for the human mind and
morals for the heart. Not believing it possible to bring
all minds together under the same dogmas, William Penn
tried to unite all hearts in a morality which is every-
where, and always will be, the same among all peoples.”
This opuscule, after a short preamble devoted to an en-
conium of the Quakers, whom it represents as a deist and
American sect in contrast to the backward and despotic
Catholic Church, ends with a long calendar which gives
for each day of the year moral precepts of the same
nature as those of Poor Richard. This curious warping
of Quakerism is intended to make it a better weapon
against the Roman Church, which is directly envisaged.
Thus, at the dawn of the French Revolution, the re-
ligion of the Quakers, which is and was essentially

Christian, became in France a sort of deism and a com-246 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

mon ground on which all the minds that were weary of
dogmas and ecclesiastic hierarchies could meet, pray and
range themselves. Condorcet, whose hostility to the
French clergy and Catholicism is well known, had not
hesitated to rally to this group and make use of the
weapon that it afforded. We have seen that he was asso-
ciated with Brissot in the Society of the Friends of the
Negroes. He had also drawn up a model constitution for
Mazzéi’s book on the United States, in which he set
forth once more Turgot’s thesis; the absolute sovereignty
of the people, the futility of a system of checks and bal-
ances and the necessity for tolerance. In his Lettres dun
Citoyen des Etats-Unis a des Frangais sur les Affaires
présentes, he upheld the same theories and insisted on
the essential equality of all men and France’s duty to
follow glorious examples of liberty and tolerance that the
United States had afforded her.

The most amusing and widely esteemed Parisian news-
paper of the time, Le Journal de Parts, was a willing
means of spreading these ideas and popularizing this
attitude; its columns were full of discussions on the
Quakers, virtue, the American constitutions and social
perfection. Lyons, with its Academy, was also a center
of American liberalism. From 1785 to 1788, the Journal
de Lyon published long and interesting letters from
Savary, who had emigrated to America and was cultivat-
ing lands in western Pennsylvania. Without having

Crévecceur’s ardent sensibility, Savary’s letters had aESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 247

similar tone and present an idealized picture of the New
World. A traveler tells of having seen at Lyons in 1788
a poster couched in these terms: “Louis the severe, the
present King of France, who has given liberty to the »
Americans and made slaves of his own subjects.” *””

The center of this movement was La Fayette’s hotel
at Paris and the house occupied by Jefferson, who did
not disdain to dabble in French politics and to give
advice. Arriving in France with a fairly vague ideal de-
rived from Montesquieu, Jefferson, under the influence of
his philosopher friends, had come to think as they did.
He was inclined to believe that free Indians were hap-
pier than the subjects of a tyrant. From the first, he had
been charmed by the refinement and elegance of the
young French nobles, and this impression made him con-
tinue to the end to believe that the Revolution would be
effected through them and by their efforts. The middle-
class he was not acquainted with and he could not there-
fore estimate its strength. As for the lower classes, he ad-
mired them from a distance. He gave them credit for
being the least alcoholic people in the world. He pitied
certain regions of France for their poverty and filth; but
in general, he had the impression that the country was
rich and that there were lands in France as well, or per-
haps better, cultivated than those in England. Jefferson
was an honest man and a generous soul, but his discretion
and reserve prevented him from playing the part of a
leader in France. He might rather have been a conspira-se

 

248 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

tor. And this he was to a certain extent, for he incited to
harmony and action the group of very influential young
nobles and scholars who admired him and listened to his
advice. To the masses he was an imposing and distant
figure.’ Since he was simple in both dress and bearing,
his reserve was not held against him. He won wide ad-
miration, and he did more perhaps by his prestige and his
discreet counsels than a more striking personage might
have accomplished.

As a matter of fact, he was obliged to observe a cer-
tain degree of prudence.” A powerful and alert group
was forming to combat this American and revolutionary
movement. In 1788 the Année Littéraire and the Journal
de Bruxelles took a decidedly hostile attitude toward the
United States. Jefferson was attacked by the first of these
publications for his criticisms of Mably and indecent
statements on the subject of religion. This periodical
also characterized the current praises of America as “de-
fectuous declamations.” *? The most able and persistent
enemy of the Americans during the years 1787, 1788 and
1789 was Mallet du Pan, editor of the Mercure de
France. Mallet was a shrewd and tireless worker. He was
almost the only one of all the pamphleteers who paid any
attention to documentation: we find that he had sub-
scribed to the best American magazine of the time. He
felt the Revolution coming on and he believed that the
enly cure for France’s ills was a constitution like that of

England. The increasing popularity of American ideasESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 249

dismayed him."** He wanted to be prepared to point out
the weaknesses of these ideas, and in his letters to the
Mercure he did this often. In 1788 the revolutionary
struggle had already begun in France. The young nobles,
stimulated by La Fayette’s example, had rallied about
him; the Parliaments, resentful of the King’s conduct,
and the middle-class, grown restless and distrustful, made
no secret of their desire to see radical changes brought
about in the administration of the kingdom. Almost
everybody shared this feeling. The masses felt the need
of believing and feeling an enthusiasm and of having a
living, applicable faith to replace the ancient beliefs
which the philosophic campaigns had destroyed. They
wanted the reform in France to be a moral reform. One
heard the watchwords, Liberty, Fraternity, Justice and
Equality. In the center of these powerful and unformed
aspirations, had formed a nucleus which was firing the in-
different and aiding the fervent. It put its faith in a revo-
lution that should follow the example of the United
States in its general lines and take as its model the pious,
tolerant and social deism that was believed to be one of
the attributes of the Americans. It might be said that a
sort of Church had been formed between 1783 and 1788
with this ideal as its tenet. Through La Fayette it at-
tained the highest classes, through Brissot the lowest; but
all those who had a definite idea of revolution belonged
to it. The generation of Raynal and Mably and their ilk,

with their groping about and their theoretical concerns250 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

had gone by. The fever that was smoldering in the veins
of France was a fever of action and mysticism. In the
France of 1788 there was already a powerful group of
men who believed in the sovereignty of the people and
considered man as endowed with certain inalienable
rights such as happiness, property, the liberty of thought,
of conscience and of commerce. La Fayette, Brissot, Con-
dorcet, Target and their friends had agreed on these prin-
ciples. Without being consciously republicans, they had
rejected the very essence of monarchy, its doctrines and
its claims. They tolerated it as an existing condition and
did not dream of attacking it directly, for their aim was
to break down aristocracy and the Catholic Church and
take possession of their social prestige and spiritual power.
Such, on the whole, was the attitude of the leading
“patriots.” It reveals the extent to which they had been
influenced by the United States. In fact, although for
more than a century people had turned toward England
for examples of wise policies and masterly, constitutional
structure, although the English Whigs were still circu-
lating pamphlets and essays criticizing the institutions of
despotism, it was America alone who had drawn the eyes
of the world to the spectacle of a sovereign people, as
virtuous and pious as it was free. It was America that
had first wakened enthusiasm and faith and brought the
world to comprehend the value of fraternity. The ideas
that she typified and resumed were old ones, but she was
the first synthesis of them, living and worthy of worship.ESSAYS IN FRATERNITY 251

Although, in all the controversies, Great Britain and the
English Whigs had furnished splendid arguments for the
reformers, it was the New World that gave them a com-

mon soul and drove them into action.

Te
2
”
*
ou
i
ibe
L
-

’
By)
Ly
1]
"
3
7
-
i
Br
5
'

Se tt eters sess

Pere re Sts te NS Se ee
eee eS Pee Pe Pe eee eeThe

The

Chapter IV

SPIRITUAL UNION

importance of American ideas in France from 1789 to 1792,
pp. 253-263. Their influence in the States-General and the
Constituent Assembly; the Declaration of the Rights of
Man, the Night of August 4, spiritual communion between
France and the United States, pp. 263-276.

After the group of young nobles, the bourgeois who are begin-

ning to be the leaders of the Revolution make use of the
American ideal. Brissot’s example, pp. 276-286. Franklin’s
death gives rise to an enthusiastic manifestation, pp. 286-293.
With him Quakerism becomes popular and is used as a
weapon against Catholicism, pp. 293-296. It is also used to
prime republican propaganda, pp. 296-302.

governments, on the other hand, have difficulty in agreeing,
pp. 302-307. This is all the more true since the opposition
party in America has rallied to the French revolutionary
ideas and uses them as a means of attacking Washington's
administration. Washington commences to feel some irrita-
tion, pp. 307-314. The Girondists, with their dream of unit-
ing all democracies and carrying on a crusade against Eng-
land, make the situation even more delicate, pp. 314-321.
Genet’s mission, though it kindles the masses with violent
love for France and her Revolution, angers the American
administration, pp. 321-332.

In France the popularity of the United States does not diminish,

but Robespierre, in spite of his sympathy with them and his
desire to conciliate them, does not succeed in bringing the
American government to adopt a brotherly attitude, pp.
332-340. French culture spreads in the United States and
has great influence, pp. 340-348. But party conflicts contin-
ued and the government was thinking of a rapprochement
with England. Behind the spiritual communion of the Peo-
ple, was the opposition ef the governments. Revolutionary
mysticism prevailed, but it had not succeeded in building up
a united faith, pp. 348-351.

252SPIRITUAL UNION 253

THE COMTE DE VERGENNES HAD DIED WITHOUT HAVING
transmitted to his successor, it seems, the maxims and
observations that had made him adopt the United States
as an ally and friend of France and as an example to the
European nations and a basis for a program of internal
reforms. Only those who were in his intimate confidence,
such as Hennin and some few of his agents, remembered
his intentions. They were forgotten by the mass of the
public, heedless and distracted by the roar of new events.
Vergennes had tried to bring about the union of the
French in opinion, government, the army and commerce,
by the philosophic and profitable war of 1778, which was
to have permitted the orienting of all minds toward new
and positive conceptions, political, social and moral.* The
results, vast as they were, had not had the scope that he
had hoped for them; and one feels throughout the latter
years of his life an anxiety that his reserve and hesitancy
hide but partially. A well-informed pamphleteer has
described, in a way that often seems to me to be accurate,
inquietude that Vergennes felt during this period. In
a pamphlet entitled Le Comte de Vergennes, cause des
Etats généraux (1788), the author maintains that it was
the war in America, its cost, and the current of opinion
created by Vergennes and circumstances, that made it
necessary to convoke the States-General. This view,.
which has often been developed since, cannot fail to seem
justified when one has followed the activities of this min-

ister from 1774 to 1784. It is probable, however, that—

254 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

 

Vergennes never envisaged the assembling of the States-
General and a series of reforms like those that were
executed between 1789 and 1792. His successor, Mon-
sieur de Montmorin, was far from such thoughts. He did
not see very clearly how the United States could be of use
to France, and, although he had a liberal turn of mind,
he was imbued with English ideas; he scorned the rabble
and failed entirely to perceive that the New World was
a force.” From about 1785 on, and more so every year,
the group that was making use of the United States and
exploiting their popularity was the party of young and
public-spirited nobles who desired a complete remodeling
of France and were eager to play the principal part in
bringing it about. Their participation in the American
war had given them great prestige with the army, the
middle class, the Parliaments and the women. Vergennes
had made use of them, but they had learned how to turn
the arms that he had put into their hands to their own
advantage. The Marquis de La Fayette was the standard-
bearer of this group. His reception in America had been
a triumph. Washington’s friendship had been both an
inspiration for him to do big things and a guarantee in
the eyes of the people of his own public-spiritedness. It
was a sort of a school, and when people saw the master,
sO wise, so strong and so pious, chosen, in spite of his
modesty, to be President of the greatest republic in the
world, they imagined that his pupil would not fail to
seek a like honor.’ The Marquis de La Fayette, influentialSPIRITUAL UNION 255

at the Court, in favor at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
rich, young, elegant and skillful in keeping up his popu-
larity, and moreover an honest man, had ostensibly taken
over the leadership of the patriots’ party.” He was in
touch with the parliamentarians and in accord with the
Protestants, and he kept his former companions-in-arms
grouped about him. Any one who was interested in
America fell automatically under his protection.” He was
very close to Mr. Jefferson, who was kind enough to aid
him and advise him discreetly. Jefferson’s tact and judg-
ment were remarkable.® He did not as yet know France
well, but he loved her deeply, and he had social and
philosophic theories which allowed him to judge and
understand her.

Jefferson and La Fayette were very close friends.
Jefferson was not at all jealous at seeing La Fayette in-
trude somewhat upon his functions as Minister of the
United States at Paris, and Monsieur de La Fayette
gladly consented that Jefferson should play the part of
Mentor in the great tragedy of the French Revolution.‘
Jefferson, with his fine manners, his learning, his discre-
tion and his aversion for tumult and futile discussions,
was an ideal peacemaker. He helped to clear up ideas and
to make them practical and to establish harmony be-
tween people. Moreover, no one could accuse him of not
being democratic enough, and his moral aid was invalu-
able. It is difficult to determine, through the maze of all

the old papers, foxed pages and immature scribblings on

Ey Ut epes tose terrrsee

Peer ee re

oe ee Se te. oe ee Re ee

ee ee Ear

teas

»

eh

“
¢
j

ee256 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

the subject, just what the exact role and the reciprocal
influence of these men were. One always ends up in
hypotheses. However, it seems certain that, during the
whole of the preparatory period of the Revolution and
in the months that preceded the convoking of the States-
General, Jefferson kept in steady contact with La Fayette.
We have proof that when the States-General began
their sessions, Jefferson’s house was the headquarters of
the patriotic party. They gathered there to discuss ques-
tions and, above all, to come to agreements; for Jefferson
stressed the need of harmony among all the workers for
the Revolution. He deemed that, in order to succeed,
the Revolution should be radical in spirit and bring about
a total change of ideas, but should remain moderate and
progressive in practice. He had confidence in the King.
He urged La Fayette and his friends to form a bloc with
the people and the King against the privileged classes. La
Fayette states that the most important compromises,
those which eventually permitted the establishment of a
constitution, were gone over and discussed at Jefferson's
house. Mounier, Lally, Rabaut, Duport, the Lameths and
Barnave came there, and it was there that they agreed to
accept the royal veto and the system of one legislative
body divided into two parts, which the good Virginian
favored so strongly.® Thus all those among the privileged
classes and the young nobles who had progressive ideas
united under the guidance of the Minister of the United

States; and this tendency was so general that, even inSPIRITUAL UNION 257

Brittany, when the Parliament wanted to rouse the
people, they distributed by night more than four hun-
dred pamphlets recalling the American Revolution and
the rights of the people.*’ All parties recognized then, and
later proclaimed, that the Americans were the model
that the revolutionary idealists sought to follow in 1789
and that the whole nation saw in La Fayette a new
Washington." This, however, does not prove that the
French nation as a whole knew exactly what the nature
of the American Revolution had been or what part
Washington had played in it; but they felt that
there was a great lesson to be learned and were moved
by a mystic desire to imitate the Americans and to accept
their revolution as a model, a rule and a universal truth.
They had faith.

In opposition to the feudal world, which was looked
upon with loathing, and the existing institutions in
France, from which it was felt that no good might be
expected and which the reformers distrusted and hoped to
destroy, the United States and their principles and gov-
ernment were a banner and a symbol of hope. People
felt confidence in them. They were a badge of good-
citizenship for any one who had fought for them and de-
fended them. Thus la Rouérie, in spite of his aristocratic
opinions and attitude, was held in respect by the Assem-
bly of Brittany because it was remembered that he had
fought in America; and Robespierre consented to receive

a noble when he was sure that he had fought for the in-258 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

surgents.? Among the diverse classes and groups who
labored together in the preliminary work of the French
Revolution, America created a unity, purely idealistic
without doubt, but very useful; for it provided a common
language and brought about a singleness of purpose, or at
least, an agreement to disagree. ‘These somewhat vague
aspirations that were accepted in principle and without
having been examined closely, as a basis of accord, were
responsible for the hours that seem to us to have been the
most benign and noble of the Revolution. And these
moments are all of them suffused with a tender, chimeric
and pious Americanism.”* In 1789, Roland, who was later
to become minister, said in an address to the Academy of
Lyons, “The moderation of the American government
creates as zealous patriots as were ever the most famous
republicans; the moderation of their principles renders
them akin to the most complete cosmopolites, in their
universal benevolence; and their situation ought to make
them most powerful commercially. . . . The charm of
their philosophy alone, which is so fit to win hearts, seems
to lay the foundations for the triumph of their opinions
and promises some day to gather many peoples into their
consoling religion.” In the Annales patriotiques for No-
vember 3, 1789, Carra, who was not moderate in his
views, exclaimed, ‘“O happy people, you have neither
monopolists nor ministerial charlatans, neither aristocrats,
archbishops nor bishops; and even Nature overwhelms

you with her benefits.” Even the theater, which reflects inSPIRITUAL UNION 259

a general and attenuated way the preoccupations of the
moment, gives us an idea of what the United States
meant to the Parisian in the street in 1789. In La Vallée
de Shénandoah en Virginie, a comedy in two acts in
prose interspersed with couplets, we find a virtuous
colonist of Virginia welcoming European emigrants flee-
ing from oppression, and the regenerated Europeans love
each other without forgetting that they were formerly
serfs and lords.

The pious Virginian treats his slaves as friends, and

the whole cast sings:

Here there reigns equality,

Here man to man is brother,

And in this land reigns no false pride

Adored in every other.
On his estate, the Virginian has a bower where every
evening the family and the servants gather to chant the

evening prayer, the hymn of Liberty:

O thou whose glance puts base flattery to rout,

O thou whose name alone doth blanch dark tyranny, etc.
Then any one kisses and marries. There is in this play,
as in the speeches of Roland and Carra, no accurate
knowledge of America; but nobody minded that. During
these years of enthusiasm, people seldom read books that
had been published earlier. Only the tender Crevecceur
and the sensitive Brissot seem to have had many readers,
but Chastellux, Hilliard d’Auberteuil, Mazzéi (who did

have some knowledge of the country) and Mandrillon,

shad eSsseSetsesrigazszgapigager

“i
+o
ot)
r
io
Oy
7)
1)
a
"
a
q
7
f
a]
q
4
f
7
iu
‘
"
.260 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

 

who had accurate commercial data, were no longer read.
Raynal, himself in favor of the French Revolution, was
no longer being read as generally as he had been from
1770 to 1789. Henceforth the Le/tres dun Cultivateur
Américain set the tone. The books of travel that were
published were translations from English and presented a
picture of the United States deformed by spite and bit-
terness. Auburnet in 1790, Smith in 1791, and Long in
1793 dwelt on the ferocity and cruelty of the Americans
during their war for independence and showed them in
unfavorable contrast with the goodness and gentleness
of the Indians. This sort of thing, however, was not cal-
culated to be unpopular in France, then in the midst of
one of the most violent crises a nation has ever come
through. But these accounts, aiming as they did at the
picturesque and at evoking colorful impressions, con-
tained nothing that might give a precise and just picture
of the United States in 1789. The only other source of
information that lay within the reach of the French
people was even more vicious. American land agents
were beginning to flood Paris, London and Hamburg
with prospectuses vaunting the virtues of the American
people and the inexhaustible fertility of their soil.”
Brissot had engaged in these speculations without much
success and had been obliged to give them up in order to
look after more important affairs. But Joel Barlow,”
the great American poet, was in Paris and succeeding only

too well in finding innocent and childlike souls to whomSPIRITUAL UNION 261

it seemed quite natural to buy lands along the Kentucky
or the Ohio without inquiring either whether the lands
really existed or whether the Indians were still in the
habit of living there and making their rounds in quest of
scalps. These speculators were so successful that the re-
sulting scandal has not been forgotten even unto this day.
An American company sold certain nobles and members
of Parliament superb lands along the Ohio River in Ken-
tucky. Lezay Marnésia and Duval d’Esprémesnil became
the patrons of the enterprise, and the colonists set out.
The party was made up mostly of liberal aristocrats who
were seeking a land of “true liberty,” of liberty according
to Rousseau. When they arrived they found that the
lands were almost inaccessible, situated in a dangerous
and savage region, and that, what was more, the company
that had sold the lands did not own them. The wretched
emigrants would have starved to death had it not been
for the charity of other colonists who took them in, and
the pity of Congress who gave them other lands.”

The departure of these members of Parliament for the
Scioto gave rise to violent discussions and much gossip.
The patriots, the party then in power, thought it unbe-
coming of them to leave France in the midst of a period
of reorganization. They were indignant at seeing aristo-
crats seeking refuge in a land of liberty. It was not, in
fact, one of the least strange spectacles of this astonish-
ing period.’ This incident shows how far confidence in

the United States and their ideal had penetrated into all

i
’
o
0
7
Lay
DO
a
a
os
ah
ot
To
ety
Oo
"
w
“."
wv
7
be
nie
ba
a
H262 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

classes and made an impression on even those who con-
sidered themselves above the giddiness of the times. Lezay
Marnésia, the disciple of Rousseau, emigrated to America
with the aid of Duval d’Esprémesnil,”* one of the first
proponents of resistance to absolute monarchy, and in
company with officers of the royal army and nobles from
the Court of Versailles. It was, in short, an example of
old society seeking sanctuary in the temple of Liberty.
The concept of liberty that these men entertained was
not identical with that which inspired the revolutionists ;
in certain respects these two concepts were even opposite,
but the United States formed the link between them.
Chateaubriand’s voyage bears further witness to this state
of mind. Chevalier de Chateaubriand was at that time
young, ambitious, a dreamer and favorably inclined to-
ward the new ideas. He scorned the rabble and thirsted
for the unknown. He was fond of the sciences, poetry,
solitude and melancholy. Too proud to intrigue for the
favor of the King or the plaudits of the mob, too ardent
to brook delay, filled, like every one else, with a reverence
for America, he yearned to go to this far-off land and to
learn to know it, to try his fortune there and to associate
with the heroes of liberty—a desire similar to that which
had inspired Brissot. He needed only a reason or a pre-
text for the voyage. The learned Malesherbes furnished
him one: the search for the Northwest Passage of which

there was much talk at the time.”

There was something absurd in the idea: Chateau-SPIRITUAL UNION 263

briand was not a sailor, a geographer or a botanist; and
he had no special knowledge that could possibly con-
tribute to the success of the undertaking. However, as
pretexts went, it was honorable in the eyes of his con-
temporaries and well calculated to impress posterity.
Everything indicates that when Chateaubriand set forth
he was much more eager to see Washington and the
battlefield of Lexington than the Pacific Ocean. He har-
bored in his heart the revolutionary piety that was be-
ginning to transform France. He combined the enthu-
siasms of a philosopher with those of a Christian. Later
he made his choice, and from this fine frenzy whence
others had derived the cult for a democratic republic, he
brought forth French Romanticism. It was a loophole,
a means of accepting the ideas of the times by adapting
them to his own personality. Chateaubriand’s voyage to
America links him closely with the French revolutionary
croup and their ideas.”

Whenever it could show that it was following an
American precedent or an American principle, the
patriots’ party was sure of having with it the weight of
public opinion. It owes its most brilliant successes to
principles from across the sea. There has been much dis-
cussion as to the origin and sources of the Declaration
of the Rights of Man; but a text by Mounier, who
assisted in drawing up this famous document, shows
without ambiguity what the prime considerations

of the authors of the Declaration were at the time.

can tetndntatahatcheananee F Sot, FF
edeSeSoHsSsssrisigszgapipgagses sr essa z esses est

Sot ow ae eee

k
Li
|
u
ers
on
7
"
7
7
"
*”
"
4
rn
J
|
*
\9
i
ah
r
a
5
i
?
“>
*
oa]
a
i264 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

The disciples of the Anglo-Americans in the assem-
bly had set forth the pretended advantages of a declara-
tion of rights, and most of the deputies did not foresee
the consequences of such a step. Those who were
acquainted with the American declaration of rights
thought that it would be possible to bring about the adop-
tion of one which would avoid any statement that might
tend to favor license.” ** He repeats in two places that
he yielded to those who were in favor of a declaration of
rights only after much discussion and because they con-
tinually cited “the example of the American states.” In
fact, the idea was in the air. For a long while, La Fayette
had thought of a declaration of rights, and he had gone
so far as to draw one up, it seems, and had discussed it
with Jefferson.” Four editions of the Constitutions of the
United States had already been published since 1778.”
Now these constitutions were usually preceded by a pre-
amble which asserted and summed up the principal rights
of citizens and of men. The most famous of these was
that of Virginia, which contained formulas concerning
Tolerance and Liberty that have become famous. Thomas
Jefferson was believed to have written it, and it is only
natural that those with whom he was associated should
have read and discussed it.* Throughout the early
months of the year 1789, pamphlets were circulated
calling for a declaration of rights and holding up as an
example the American documents.” At least three of

these have come down to us. All three of them areSPIRITUAL UNION 265

grounded on the idea of a social contract and equality be-
tween men. We find in them the same doctrines that
are set forth in the preambles of the American constitu-

tions. This similarity of views and aims leads us to ac-

cept these words of La Fayette as typical of the opin-,

ions of the times: ““The era of the American Revolution,
which may be regarded as the beginning of a new social
order for the entire world, is, properly speaking, the era

9? 26

of declarations of rights.” ** There was a feeling that
every revolution should have its declaration of rights,
just as every religion should have its catechism, and that
the reform of society ought first of all to be internal, to
correspond to a moral renascence and to be based on
common aspirations and beliefs. The function of a decla-
ration of rights was to formulate this credo and to re-
veal to the citizens what was already engraved in their
hearts.’ Attempts have been made to fix a distinction
between the American declarations and their French
equivalent and to consider the former as statements of
fact and of rights that were already acquired and rec-
ognized, and the latter as a program of reforms. Such
a procedure is arbitrary, for in every case, the declara-
tions of rights were documents whose value was abstract
and which, even in America, proclaimed principles that
the government reserved the right to apply more or less
rigorously as it saw fit. In both cases, in France as in
America, one may say that the declarations of rights

were acts of faith of a political religion. Their original

PSSSSt ascii sasszgapyigscers~

tte tia Fe

a

Ps
+
Le
n

i]
J
a
i
'
‘
J
r
"
'266 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

model is much less this or that English text than it is
Moses and the Twelve Tables.** Just as the Decalogue
aims at defining the duties of men toward God, so the
American and French revolutionists intended to define
the duties of men toward Man. As for the details of the
French declaration, most of them are inspired by the pre-
amble of the Constitution of Virginia in 1776, as might
be expected; but here and there we find articles more
closely related to this or that other American constitu-
tion which was more explicit as to some particular right
that had been mentioned by the writers of the time—
Mably, Jefferson, Mazzéi, Brissot or the sage Franklin.
The very religious and democratic Constitution of Massa-
chusetts and the Constitution of Maryland, a state which
Raynal had already praised as early as 1770 for its tol-
erance,”® are the two other documents that seem to have
been copied systematically by the French constitution-
alists.°° A detailed comparison of the French Declaration
of Rights with the preambles of these three constitutions
brings out a striking resemblance. Let us consider for
example Article I of the French document: “Men are
born and remain free and equal in their rights. Social
distinctions can be founded only on common utility.” Is
it not similar to the American texts: “All men are by
nature free and independent, and have certain inherent
rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society,
they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their pos-
terity” (Virginia Bill of Rights, Art. I). “All men areSPIRITUAL UNION 267

born free and equal, and have certain natural, essential,
and inalienable rights” (Constitution of Massachusetts,
1780, Article I). Mr. Jellinek’s book shows that the
same is true of every paragraph.

It seems therefore that the discussion may be consid-
ered closed. From the historical as well as from the
ideological point of view, we have proofs that the
Declaration of the Rights of Man, drawn up by the
French Constitutional Assembly, was suggested and con-
tinually influenced by the examples of America. Un-
doubtedly the rigorous, logical and concise form that the
French legislators gave it, the extraordinary fervor that
surrounded its conception, the quarrels that it stirred up
and the victories that were won throughout the world in
its name, made it to some extent a universal moral code
and conferred upon it a spiritual and material impor-
tance that the American declarations never had. But this
changes nothing as to the question of its origins. We
must add that in this domain of general phrases and
great sentiments it would be futile to seek to attain rig-
orous precision. Since 1770 the principles embodied in
the French and American declarations had been consid-
ered by many people as recognized truths. The legis-
lators of Europe and America invented nothing; even in
their phraseology there was nothing strikingly new. All
of these doctrines are descended from the Reformation
and the ideas that it spread through France, England
and America at the end of the sixteenth and the begin-

i
,

,
")
a
oy
7
i
Ley
"
io
ry
Pe
ps
4.
im
ie |
Oe
at
a
aed
Oa
"
ir
|
}
rr
Ps
asay

268 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

ning of the seventeenth centuries. To say who was the
frst to defend these democratic doctrines would be im-
possible. Even before the Renaissance, were there not
philosophers during the Middle Ages to uphold them?
Thus an almost unbroken chain links these theories with
those of the ancient republics. Nevertheless, America was
the first country whose soil gave them shelter and whose
people put them into practice, while in Europe they were
still being discussed vaguely, abstractly and obscurely.
Roger Williams, when he proclaimed the right of lib-
erty of conscience in Rhode Island, was the initiator of
the entire mystic and democratic movement of the eight-
eenth century. He was the first to define in a social con-
tract the right of liberty of conscience, and his phrases
contained the germ of all the declarations that were
drawn up subsequently. In 1776, the intellectual achieve-
ment of French philosophy during the entire century, the
sentimental and pious attitude that Rousseau and Ray-
nal had adopted and, finally, the discreet instigations of
the French minister undoubtedly gave Jefferson the idea
of drawing up the Declaration of Independence of the
United States in a grandiose and dogmatic tone. These
were the sources of his daring, but he was satisfying first
of all a religious need and following an American tradi-
tion. In 1789 it was clearly recognized in France how
very American the whole idea of a solemn declaration

of rights was; and bringing about the acceptance of the

project was one of La Fayette’s triumphs. The mon-SPIRITUAL UNION 269

archists always blamed him for what they considered
his impertinence in taking over from a small, democratic
country with no past, indefinite formulas that could have
no application to a great monarchy.”

Still another of his initiatives seems to have been sug-
gested to him by America and his desire to play the part
of a French Washington: the National Guards. As long
as he remained in command of the National Guards, La
Fayette continued to hold up before his soldiers the ex-
ample of the Americans. He endeavored to have the
skeleton of this organization composed of veterans who
had served in America.” He tried to inculcate into them
the spirit of the militia that he had commanded in 1778
and 1779. He did not fail entirely; and when his faith-
ful National Guards saw him’in danger, they remem-
bered his exploits in America. A scrap-book that was
made by one of his friends, a member of the National
Guard in 1790, has come down to us. Three-quarters of
this little book is made up of citations having to do
with La Fayette’s conduct in America. It tells of his
glory in the New World, of all that he did for Liberty
and how well he understood her, and of how he came
to be loved and worshiped by the sons of Penn.** His
brother-in-law, the Vicomte de Noailles, was to have his
hour of glory. In a book written at the time, Cérutti
claims that, if La Fayette was responsible for the suc-
cess of the American Revolution, it was the Vicomte de

Noailles who, in the night of August 4th, completedro

os

270 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

and terminated the revolution in France.” For a long
while in the secret councils that were held at his house,
Jefferson had urged La Fayette and his friends to break
away in a signal fashion from the nobility, to go directly
to the people and the King and rule with the support of
these two forces. In the eyes of an American, the ex-
istence of privileged classes was incompatible with that
of Liberty.** We have seen how Mirabeau in 1786 used
his polemic against the Order of Cincinnatus as a weapon
to attack the principle of heredity. Jefferson, without
being as violent (for he was a wealthy Virginian, a slave
owner and a man of prudence), accepted in principle the
same doctrines and asked only that they be applied with
discernment.*® The young nobles and prelates who in that
famous night swayed the decision of the Assembly were
led by Noailles and La Rochefoucauld Liancourt, who
was also thoroughly under the influence of America.”
Noailles had been, with La Fayette, one of the first to
want to set out for the New World. La Rochefoucauld
Liancourt had lived and grown up in a circle that was
whole-hearted in its enthusiasm and labors for the Amer-
icans. The manner in which they accomplished their act,
their willing self-sacrifice, the spontaneity of the whole
Assembly and the impression that this step made every-
all this went hand in hand with the concept that

 

where
these young men held of a peaceful, benevolent and bril-
liant revolution, such as the American Revolution had

been for them.SPIRITUAL UNION 271

In the course of the year 1789, the patriots’ party,
still united in appearance and already divided in real-
ity, conducted itself in conformity to the principles that
it had been proclaiming and holding up as American
since 1783. To obtain action, to assure success and to
win favor, it made use of the example of America. It
carried this system far. For instance, it was said at the
time that the names of the French departments had been
chosen in imitation of the Americans, who named their
states and counties for their geographical characteris-
tics."° This party tried to give its entire conduct the ap-
pearance of disinterestedness, piety and morality which,
along with Franklin, Washington and Penn, was consid-
ered the mark of true republicanism. On the whole, the
public recognized them as faithful to their model.

The impression produced in America was similar. The
American nation, which until now had been interested
in France especially because of its upper classes and its
culture, and had known only a limited number of the
élite of its population, suddenly discovered France. It
was no longer the learning of the French philosophers
that was admired, but the nation as a whole. The Ameri-
cans were delighted and proud at finding traces of their
own influence and the memory of their high deeds at
every point of the Revolution. It was with rapture that
they recognized the unity of principles and mysticism.
No matter to what group they belonged, they were car-

tied away by this enthusiasm. Fenno, a Federalist who272 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

had founded the Gazette of the United States and was
very close to Jay, Rufus King and all the traditional
enemies of France, wrote in his number for April 18,
1789: *° “The Revolution of America, it was very clearly
predicted, would have a great influence upon the public
affairs of the European world, but the most sanguine ad-
vocates for the liberties of mankind could not have an-
ticipated those surprising events, which have already
transpired to distinguish the annals of the present age.
Our generous and magnanimous ally, the French nation,
in their publications upon laws, government and Free-
dom discover a noble ardor in the best of causes, and the
following communication will show that under the best
of Kings they are on the eve of establishing a new and
free Constitution.” In all the states and in all the news-
papers in 1789, one finds a considerable number of news
items concerning France which, in spite of the unflagging
activity and shrewdness of English propaganda, were
unanimous in praising France, her efforts and her new
government, and in recognizing all this as a product of
American influence. Of this there could be no doubt, since

>

“the Marquis,” who was so well known over here, was
leading the movement over there.*” The newspapers of
the most remote towns in the United States from Ver-
mont to Georgia began publishing two or three times as

much French news as they had in the preceding years.

¥ They sometimes printed at great length extracts from

speeches by Moreau de Saint Méry and, more especially,SPIRITUAL UNION 273

from the speeches of Rabaut Saint-Etienne; and they in-
serted pages from the great French writers on liberty—
Voltaire, Necker, and Mirabeau. In most of the papers
there appeared articles on the Bastille and poems in
which the taking of the Bastille was celebrated and com-
pared to the former struggles in America. A profound
and sincere joy was felt. There was no condemnation
for any one except occasionally for the privileged classes;
and blessings were heaped upon the heads of the King,
La Fayette, the patriots and the army.” America received
incoherent masses of news items that were difficult to
understand because they came from London in batches.
In winter there were sometimes two weeks without any
newspapers whatsoever, and then they would arrive in
bales at a time. Sometimes the last mails arrived first
and then there would be gaps that no one knew how to
bridge over in the information that was received. But
public opinion never faltered, it saw immediately that
the revolution was drawing the two countries together,
making them more alike and uniting them in spirit, in-
tention and faith.”

More anxiety was felt in governmental circles. Eng-
land was bringing pressure to bear upon them, and they
felt the influence of a strong nationalist party that
wanted to have no relations with Europe and could not
bear the thought of Europe setting herself free. In their
opinion it was impossible that these enslaved nations

should be ripe for liberty. But Jefferson was vigilant;

7
at]
"

7
7
ud
a
a
ry
rT
|
iT
ir
"9
fi
i
> rl
i
r
’
«
a
i

$€e47g=-2<Mir *
Hebe ss

 

274 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

his active pen presented the French Revolution in the
most favorable light and dwelt on its similarity to the
American struggle for independence. When he returned
to America at the end of 1789, he was able to expose
in person all that he had seen, and, by his speeches and
his sincerity, he made a profound impression on all
classes of American opinion and especially upon the opin-
ion of those who were in power. Moreover, the French
minister at this time, the Comte de Moustier, was an en-
ergetic and talented man gifted with a knowledge of
character. When he arrived in the United States, Mous-
tier was not favorably inclined toward this nation of
bourgeois; but prolonged contact with the American
people and its politicians convinced him of the excellent
qualities of the nation. It is true that Moustier had a
hobby: his dream was that France should regain, posses-
sion of Louisiana. His motives were purely patriotic, but
the idea was ill timed. Moustier often wrote about it to
Montmorin, who seems to have paid little attention to
the project, for he had neither the time nor the means
to do so.*° Public opinion was not interested in the idea,
and the attitude of such people as were acquainted with
it was generally hostile.** Moustier wanted to take back
Louisiana, not out of hostility to the United States, but
because of the weakness and incompetence of Spain. He
thought that the Mississippi Walley, under a King of

France who was a good friend to the United States and

would open up the navigation of the river to them,SPIRITUAL UNION 275

would be prosperous and could not but further French
influence in the New World.” In spite of this project,
of which he talked too much and which was highly dis-
pleasing to America, Moustier became friendly with
Washington, who had just been unanimously elected
President of the United States. He was able to see what
that Washington

 

Genet unfortunately did not perceive
was a great man and a wise one, that he was well dis-
posed toward France and held an absolute dominion over
the American people. With his support, France had noth-
ing to fear from the United States. Washington was a
sincere friend of France. His great soul was capable of
gratitude. He had seen the French soldiers fight, suffer
and conquer, and he was not one to allow it to be said
that France had acted only in her own interest. He knew
too well what the war for independence had _ been.
Therefore his friendship for Moustier and confidence in
him were both deep and useful.** He thought, and he
said, that a community of principles as well as of inter-
ests would hold the two peoples together forever. There
were fewer of Jay’s supporters in the new Congress which
was composed of elements who had not kept the spirit of
the former Congress. The fact that the new régime in
America was simultaneous with the Revolution in France
also suggested an agreeable comparison, and the roads
that the two nations were following seemed to be paral-
lel.” Every one in America accepted and approved the

President’s policy of friendliness to France, and even

Pere Peeerl fer:

ewer eres ts etter st

a

a ee

Ld
a
A
‘Hs
"
a
’
7
7
ui
a
a
4

ry
}
fi

rsamas |

 

276 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

John Adams himself, who had come back to America
disgusted with England, seemed to accept it.” The clergy
and the former Tory classes also seemed to be coming
around to this attitude. Moustier received a visit from
the pastor Jedediah Morse, who gladly consented to in-
sert several passages furnished him by the French min-
ister in his geography; and his whole book, the only work
of its kind that had as yet been published by an Amer-

ican, was very friendly toward France.”

*

oe

La Fayette, as commander-in-chief of the French Na-
tional Guards, profiting by the support and advice of his
ereat and old friend Washington, the President of the
federal republic of the United States, seemed to loom
up as a considerable moral force; and in the latter
months of 1789 he might well have had the impression
that the two worlds, sincerely united in spirit, asked
nothing better than to work hand in hand. He was jus-
tified in hoping that his fondest wishes were about to
be realized. In the eyes of the world, he had succeeded
in a most daring and chimeric effort to find a common
ideal for an enormous and scarcely populated federal re-
public and a European kingdom of twenty-six million
inhabitants.

La Fayette wanted to remain at the head of the revo-

lutionary movement. He devoted hours every day toSPIRITUAL UNION 277

keeping up and developing his popularity, but he was
neither a great orator nor a gifted organizer.” His idyllic
and moderate conception of a revolution that should be
a succession of spontaneous effusions, reciprocal conces-
sions and religious rejoicings was soon to appear silly
and irritating. Behind the young nobles who had at first
led the attack against absolute monarchy, new groups
and new classes, eager for action and victory and filled
with a feverish unrest, were pressing on. When one com-
pares the enthusiastic and altruistic tone of a La Fayette
at the beginning of the Revolution with the harshness
of a Brissot or a Madame Roland, one quickly compre-
hends why La Fayette and his friends could not long be
the leaders of this formidable movement.

Their aspirations were too vague and too theoretical ;
their religious enthusiasm was too superficial. With them,
the need to believe and to feel was a vogue. In the ruder,
more ardent and more sincerely religious spirits, of whom
there were so many in the French middle class during the
eighteenth century, the revolutionary flame was to burn
more intensely and kindle everything about it. These cul-
tured, energetic and impassioned commoners had soon
felt that the Revolution could not take place without
them, and they set themselves to the task of carrying it
on for themselves and by themselves. They had much
more to look forward to and to gain; they were less
trammeled by the past, and the class spirit that united

them constituted a vital force. This spirit gave every

ee Pee py a ee ee oe Se
reset eeeerl core Ser ets

Pe Sot tet oe eee |

yy
*
oa
I
»
ad
i
oY
"
a
rf
|
|
on
ig
A
Tr
y 4
t
‘
.
,oat)

 

 

278 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

word and act a sharp, clear value, while the young no-
bility seemed to be strolling along through a revolution
painted by Boucher. The enthusiasm for America and
the hopes of the early months of 1789 had at first been
a bond between these two groups of patriots; but the dis-
cussions at the Assembly and the necessity of coming to
hn agreement on a definite program brought about a most
complete rift between them. In the course of these quar-
rels, the young nobles allowed the advantage of their
/ moral prestige to slip away from them. Little by little
; their American laurels were withering. They had come to
| be looked upon as schemers bragging of past and dubious
services in order to usurp a place to which their lack
| of zeal did not entitle them. They allowed the shining
~ ideals of reform which they had cherished at first to be-
come tarnished, and their American theories and zeal
now seemed to be mere phraseology.” It is not a little
surprising to see what constant and incoherent use the
moderate monarchists made of the United States in 1789
and 1790.

During these two years, newspapers and pamphlets
were continually holding up the example of the Ameri-
cans and discussing its value. There was not a single
journal but spoke of it; and some of them, such as Mira-
beau’s Courrier de Provence, Brissot’s Patrzote fran¢ais
and Mercier. and Carra’s Annales patréotiques—made

mention of the Americans in every issue. Two transla-

tions had just revived the interest of such discussions:SPIRITUAL UNION 270

John Adams’ Davila, which was a most incoherent and +

vigorous defense of moderate aristocratic constitutions,
and especially of the English Constitution; and the
Examination of the Government of England by Living-
ston,” a brief and violent pamphlet which, in the name
of pure democracy, took up the defense of Turgot’s
thesis and condemned the system of two legislative bod-
ies as being a useless impediment to the machinery of
government and one that rendered popular control too
vague. This book was a source of perplexity to the mon-
archists and the neutrals.” It was published at the mo-
ment when the discussion of the division of the legisla-
ture into two bodies was at its height. Mounier, Lally
and Bergasse were endeavoring to prove that the separa-
tion of the three powers and the establishment of a legis-
lature consisting of two houses were general and univer-
sally recognized principles. Livingston’s book and the
stir that the most ardent patriots proceeded to make
about it placed the conservative revolutionists in the an-
noying position of being obliged either to come into con-
flict with American influence or to compromise. Mounier
attacked the Americans, Lally said that Livingston had
failed to understand.** The controversy became more
complex and obscure every day; the same examples were
cited in support of contradictory axioms. In the end, the
system of two houses came to be looked on more and
more as an aristocratic English device and out of keep-

ing with true American usages. The idea of having a

eo? eee 2

EP Pere Pe Ne ee 5
Spb fSstassJoSeSs3sri2egseansois

Perey ts

$5 SESSTASS ERE ERAT

eee

J
a
’
"
a

J280 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

single house became a moral principle and a proof of
confidence in the people. It was linked with the person
and the cult of Franklin, who had been the protagonist
of this idea at the federal convention of 1788 and dur-
ing his entire stay in France.” By not having been will-
ing to yield on this point in time, the constitutional mon-
archists lost much of their prestige as ‘““Americans.” They
came to be considered as “English.” They accepted this
classification and began criticizing the American Consti-
tution, with no other result than to make themselves an
object of hatred or scorn. Mounier, who was the frankest
of them, suffered the most.** La Fayette did not commit
himself and was given the benefit of the doubt. When
the question of assignats came up, there was a similar
battle of arguments and pens. It was true that the United
States had made use of paper money and that its use
had been of assistance to them during their great strug-
gle; but they had ended up in partial bankruptcy, and
their paper money did not enjoy too enviable a reputa-
tion. Those who were opposed to the use of paper money
in France now had a chance to utilize the example of
America to disparage paper money and thus to bring
about a division among the revolutionists. It would be
no exaggeration to say that more than two out of every
three of the pamphlets on the question of paper money
cited the example of America.” The supporters of the

monarchy took this means of trying to turn to their ad-

vantage the American legend, of which they perceivedSPIRITUAL UNION 281

all the benefits and weight. The Gazette de Paris for
September 13, 1790, for instance, quotes Paine’s pam-
phlets against American paper money during the Revo-
lution and adds: “In spite of so many attributes, gifts
and virtues, in spite of the genius of a Washington, a
Franklin and an Adams, the value of American conti-
nental money fell off ninety-five per cent. Yet America
was a virgin nation, closer to Nature than any other, and
more favorably disposed toward the usages and daily bar-
ter of men whose needs are modest and who know no
other luxuries than those born of the advantages that
they have at hand.” To this the patriots replied, with the
sreatest respect for America, that the situations were in
no way parallel, since America was at war in 1770, her
territory was invaded, and she offered only vague securi-
ties. Moreover, they continued, what ruined the Ameri-
can notes was the shameless way in which they were
counterfeited at London in order to injure the credit of
the insurgents, but France would be able to prevent that
and, Cérutti added, Congress had just given France se-
crets for manufacturing them that would guarantee ab-
solute security.”°

Whenever the conservatives and anti-revolutionaries
could find an example of anything that smacked of aris-
tocracy or prudence in America, they immediately pub-
lished it. They made use of the fact that the Americans
did not have universal suffrage and had laid down strict

conditions for eligibility; we find this argument in sev-

aS s$aFsSr3-5522EZ2z Spt Bd

iby
r
a
a
'
if
a
mt
'
ay
’
a
ra
7
ba]
i
"
iA
oy
i)
%
Ty
oI
”
re
a
a
"
ml
rn
|
‘
r
i

eziste?

tt a. ry

sestzagcecgcees

ee Oe ee ae ee el282 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

eral pamphlets published in 1789. Later the great pow-
ers that the federal Constitution accorded the President
were used to support a demand that the King be given
at least a similar power. When the critical question of
the veto was raised—a question that did the constitu-
tionalist cause so much harm by dividing its supporters,
both sides adduced the American veto; and we must
admit that in this case the example of the United States
savored more of monarchy than their French friends al-
lowed. It became a regular procedure with the support-
ers of the King to quote from authentic or non-existent
American sources. In 1789 the Abbé Morellet had pub-
lished over Franklin’s name an Avis aux Fatseurs de Con-
stitution, which was intended to show that popular op-
position to the government did not prove that the
government was wrong or that its form was defective.
About the same time, letters purported to have been
written by Washington to La Fayette concerning the
revolution were being printed and circulated. In these
letters the American Fabius was supposed to say, Nou
have badly devised both your interests and the proper
limits for the liberty of a great kingdom.” “ In its num-
ber 114 for 1790, the Journal général de la Cour et de la
Ville, edited by Brune and known to be in the service of
the Court, published an authentic letter from Franklin
to his friend Le Roy asking for news of himself and ex-
pressing regret at the alarming news from France. “I
fancy that natural philosophy is receiving but little at-SPIRITUAL UNION 283

tention at the present time,” he wrote, “and that the
voice of learning is with difficulty heard in the midst of
all your troubles.” This phrase and others of its ilk an-
noyed and hampered the revolutionists greatly; it was
evident that the Journal de la Cour had played a master
stroke.°* This victory was followed up; the example of
America was most often used as a means of contrasting
the moderation and kindliness of the great American
revolutionary leaders with the violence and party-split
of their French counterparts. La Fayette was continually
under attack for his ambition, which contrasted unfavor-
ably with Washington’s modesty. The moderation of
Franklin, who reserved judgment on everything and
wished to impose nothing by force, was often held up.
Examples of American probity were also accumulated to
confront the French legislators and convict them of their
own unworthiness.” This was a maneuver in the cams
paign of the aristocrats, but was also pleasing to the
masses; and it was decidedly dangerous to do anything
that swelled the prestige of the Americans, for despite all

nice distinctions, discussions of America always turned

to the profit of the democrats. Some few details favor-'

able to a strong government might indeed be found in the
American Constitution, but nothing could refute the fact
that the United States had created or propagated a new
spirit and that this spirit was one of fraternity and fer-
vent democracy.

Beyond the monarchists, who were trying to turn the

Pe hh ea Te ee ee ee ee

<ee4arg=a2<

ba
+
rn
]
th
a284 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

American moral concepts to their own advantage, and
the friends of La Fayette, who were endeavoring to re-
main at the head of the revolutionary movement by
means of this morality, the bolder patriots were taking
up their position and making more and more their own
the ideas, the sentiments and the enthusiasm that the
American war had brought forth. There was no question
but that the best weapon against Catholicism and its
hierarchy was this nation where no religion, so it was
believed, was recognized by the State and where priests
had no other activities than preaching and doing good.
All quibbles and questions of detail were effaced by the
fact that the Americans had been able to build up a
strong religious spirit without accepting the Catholic
dogmas and almost without retaining any vestige of tra-
ditional Christianity.”°

Before 1789 there had already been talk of the intel-
ligent piety and social zeal that it quickened among the
Americans. Voltaire had been one of the first to write
about the religion of these democrats and “primitives.” *
The establishment of the liberty of the press made it
easier to talk of this religion, and the conflict occasioned
by placing the clergy on a civil basis rendered the
discussion the more poignant. The monarchists, needless

to say, did not want to be drawn into this question, and

La Fayette avoided as much as possible any precise ex-
pression of his beliefs and his attitude toward the Church.
This line of conduct was dictated by the respect that heSPIRITUAL UNION 285

still felt for the King, his desire to reconcile all tenden-
cies, and a real lack of religious concern. His attitude
was none the less displeasing to a great many of the
patriots, and La Fayette lost thus much of the esteem
that he had enjoyed as a free-thinking, frank and bold,
American spirit." Where he hesitated, others dared.
Brissot’s book, Nouveau Voyage dans les Etats-Unis,
was a curious mixture of material details and religious
feeling. The underlying theme of the book was faith in
the ideal of the ‘natural man.” “The prosperity of a so-
ciety,” says Brissot, “is always in proportion to the ex-
tent of its liberty; and liberty is always in inverse pro-
portion to the extent of the powers of the government.”
He described the tolerance of the Americans, the simplic-
ity of their clergy, who were worthy and well behaved
because they led a normal life instead of being, as the
French clergy was, condemned to “an artificial and im-
moral existence.”’ Brissot showed the United States not
only as having liberty, prosperity and a religion without
dogma, but also as being very close to the “state of Na-
ture.” In sincere admiration he exclaims, “The potato!
There is the food for the man who wants to be, and is
capable of being, free!” °° For, he goes on to say, it
grows everywhere without being cultivated. And so it is
with the man who lives in this happy state which satis-
fies his instincts and at the same time develops in him
neither evil nor artifice; he can no longer be forced,

there is neither coercion nor punishment possible for him.

pageta~eces

Peta ee ee Pe Pere Sad.

©
i
Oo
iu
ce
ao
”
’
oT
r
ba
&
a
*
i286 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

In America everything is simple and rustic, and the
mores have escaped contamination. Brissot offered his
book to the French public in the hope of bringing his
fellow-countrymen to an appreciation of the importance
of mores and inciting them to acquire such ways as
should naturally make for liberty. “Without private
mores, there can be no public mores, no public spirit and
no liberty,” he says."” The ardent appeal and fearless ini-
tiative of this pamphleteer was the signal for a sort of
crusade. There was much talk of mores and of the Amer-
icans as an example of mores. Rabaut cited their exam-
ple in his orations in favor of the Protestants. The pa-
triotic newspapers and even the anti-revolutionary organs
had constant recourse to the United States for standards
by which to judge the mores of the public men of
France.”

This morality became a matter of mystic devotion. It
took on this aspect even more markedly when the death
of Franklin allowed him to be almost deified and canon-
ized as the first “republican saint.” As long as he had
been alive, there had always been reason to fear that, in

spite of his silence and discretion, he might express per-

sonal opinions and might not be in accord with the views
of those who wanted to make use of the Franklin legend.
His life could add nothing further to his glory, and his
words might have been detrimental to his cult. His pass-
ing was greeted with grief not unallayed with enthusi-
asm. All of the French leaders endeavored to adopt himSPIRITUAL UNION 287

as a patron saint and to pass as his disciples. On learn-
ing, during a session of the Assembly, that Franklin had
died, Mirabeau mounted to the rostrum and pronounced
a few impassioned and grief-stricken words that stirred
the whole assembly with emotion: “The sciences owe
Franklin their tears, but it is Liberty—it is the French
people who should mourn him most deeply: the liberty
that we enjoy he aided us to attain, and the sparks of
his genius glow in the Constitution that is our boast.
. . . He went down to the grave gently with the thought
that Liberty, spreading everywhere, was going to better
mankind—for it was above all with the betterment of
man that he was concerned. Even to the brink of the
srave, he continued writing moral text-books for his
compatriots.” The Assembly decided to go into mourn-
ing for thirteen days.” It accepted the gift of the busts
of Franklin and Washington which were offered by
Houdon (June 18, 1790). This was only the beginning
of the great ceremonies in honor of the holy man. On
June 13, the Duc de La Rochefoucauld Liancourt pro-
nounced a eulogy of Franklin before the Society of 1789.
With great solemnity of words and warmth of sentiment
he extolled Franklin’s activities as a propagator of en-
lightenment in the New World and forerunner of French.
liberty."* He furnished details that were both interest-
ing and new to the French public, concerning the reli-
gious unrest that Franklin had felt in his youth and all

that he had done (by means of clubs, newspapers and li-288 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

braries) to create a deist center at Philadelphia. He
lauded the idea of a single legislative body and attrib-
uted its adoption in France to Franklin’s influence.
“This great idea alarmed the legislators of Pennsylvania,
but he succeeded in reassuring half of them and finally
brought about the adoption of this principle which the
National Assembly has made the basis of the French Con-
stitution.” The Society of 1789 approved this discourse
so sincerely that they passed unanimously La Roche-
foucauld Liancourt’s motion that they go into mourning
in honor of Franklin. They also decided to place a bust
of Franklin in their assembly hall with the inscription:
“Homage rendered by unanimous vote of the Society of
1789 to Benjamin Franklin, Object of the admiration
and regrets of the Friends of liberty.” “ The Commune
of Paris, not to be outdone in public spirit and piety,
held on July 21, 1790, in the Rotunda a great funeral
ceremony in memory of the Sage of Pennsylvania; and
the Abbé Fauchet, chaplain to the King and one of the
most prominent leaders of the revolutionary clergy, pro-
nounced a sonorous discourse that was intended to re-
semble Bossuet’s funeral orations on a more republican
and grandiose tone. This eulogy of Franklin is one of the
most amazing bits of oratory of the period. “I praise a
great man,” Fauchet said, “a founder of American lb-
erty. I praise him in the name of the mother-city of

French liberty: I am a man also, I am free, I have the

approval of my fellow-citizens—it is enough: my wordsSPIRITUAL UNION 289

will be immortal.” Then he set forth the glory of Frank-
lin in his triple role as friend of humanity, liberator of
America and “one of the foremost builders of our sacred
Constitution.” Fauchet reviewed the life of this son of
a candle-maker, who through his wisdom and goodness
had become one of the greatest men in the world. He
spoke of the benevolent and religious spirit that had
euided him throughout his life. ‘““That religion of right-
eousness through which one loves God and men, and
which, according to our Holy Scriptures, is the only one
pure and without blemish, was in Franklin’s heart and
in his works.” He quoted Poor Richard. He repre-
sented Franklin as preparing the American Revolution to
be “a great example to the Universe.’’ He compared the
liberty of France with that of the United States and de-
clared: “I have said that the first great nation to possess
the fullness of liberty is the Anglo-American nation; the
first nation to prepare to enjoy the perfection of liberty
is France—and doubly therefore is Franklin the foremost
lawgiver of the world.’ His grandiloquent peroration
ends thus: “Venerable sage, august philosopher, founder
of the felicity of thy native land, instigator of the lib-
erty of France, prophet of the brotherhood of mankind,
may gentle happiness embellish the end of thy career.
. . . Lhy last regards beheld about thee a happy Amer-
ica, beyond the sea, a free France, and in the near future
the salvation of the world. The United States, thine own
family, have wept for the Father of their Republic;THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

290

France, thine adopted family, honors the generator of her
laws; humanity, thy great family, will revere thee as
the universal patriarch who made the alliance between
Nature and Society. Thy memory belongs to all cen-
apnies: thy remembrance to all peoples, thy glory to eter-
nity.” “’ This panegyric embodies the ideas that were
associated with Franklin and the United States. It 1s
typical and was accepted as such at the time. It was
creatly admired, although some malicious jounzia
jealous of Fauchet, tried to make it appear ridiculous.”

On June 14, the Friends of the Revolution and of Hu-
manity, assembled at the Cafe Procope, had honored the
memory of Franklin by holding a funeral ceremony. The
chandeliers had been covered with crépe and the second
room of the café was hung with black draperies; on the
door were written the three words, “Franklin is dead.”
At the end of the hall a bust of Franklin had been placed
on a pedestal and crowned with oak leaves; below it was
the word, ‘Vir.’ Two cypresses arched their somber
branches above it, on each side of it were globes and
maps, and below it was the symbol of immortality, a
serpent biting its tail. There was an oration and bread
was distributed to the poor.”* On November 13, 1790;
the Academy of Sciences met in a public session to mourn
its former collaborator. Condorcet spoke in the name of
this illustrious company and, weaving together all the
ideas that were dear to him, he made a crown of glory
for Franklin’s head.*° He showed the young Benjamin,SPIRITUAL UNION 291

so eager to set men free, to reform them and to find a
new moral discipline, that Pythagoras alone might be
compared to him. He depicted. the noble American char-
acter, so simple and so great, so near to Nature, arriving
at the essential verities, not by a violent effort of the
mind, but by the calm development of enlightenment in
an atmosphere devoid of prejudices; and this gave him
the opportunity to compare Franklin with Socrates. He
exalted the progress of human intelligence, in which
Franklin had been one of the foremost artisans and which
is the base of all revolutions that are for the good of
humanity. Although he profited by the occasion to
descant incidentally in favor of a single legislative
house, it is upon this principle of the amelioration of the
world through education and rational forms of worship
that Condorcet placed special emphasis. Such was the
tribute that the Academy of Sciences laid upon the Sage’s
orave.

There was praise for Franklin from every quarter.
Marat said bitterly: “Yes, it is time that the nations
cease to bow down before the idols of fortune and learn
to respect their defenders, to cherish their benefactors,
to feel their loss and to make public display of their
crief. But is it for the most redoubtable enemy of pub-
lic liberty to propose the lament for an apostle of Lib-
erty?” ** He and the true patriots were pained at seeing
the profane honor their hero. Brissot cried out: “Genius,

simplicity, goodness, tolerance, modesty, unflagging292 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

=

ardor for work, love of the people—this is what Frank-
lin represents, these are the qualities that a man must
unite within him in order to aspire to such an altar as
his.” © To admire and worship Franklin became a vogue.
A contractor had bought the stones from the Bastille and
had them carved into little statuettes of Franklin which
sold well and at a good price.”

The true worshipers were indignant at seeing his
image displayed among puppets and billikins in shops
and public squares and along the quais.** The famous
phrase, ‘Poor Richard,” was used for the title of news-
papers and pamphlets. The name of Franklin was given
to printers’ shops and political clubs, for example the
section of Bordeaux. The Jacobin Society had had his
bust placed in its assembly hall.” On the boulevards a
play entitled L’Imprimeur ou la Fete de Franklin by
Desfontanes was produced.* At the back of the stage
was a bust of Franklin that a pious printer had placed
there to do homage to the great man. The printer, un-
justly accused, succeeds in proving his innocence and the
play ends with these lines in memory of Franklin:

If you would say who among men
Upheld the torch of honor,

Who, like Rousseau, showed us how
To become what we are,

Ah! it is Franklin, ever Franklin,
Whose name shall be our song!

But even more interesting than these rather frivolous

manifestations is the reéditing of Barbeu-Dubourg’sSPIRITUAL UNION 293

Le petit Code de la Raison humaine, which is dedicated
to Franklin and inspired by him. It is an attempt at a
moral catechism based on the principles of Rousseau’s
Contrat social, the natural goodness of man, tolerance
and democracy. In 1791, important fragments of Frank-
lin’s memoirs, a charming little book full of the charm of
simplicity, frankness and artlessness, finally appeared.
All the contemporaries looked upon it as a sequel to Rous-
seau’s Confessions. This book has not the fullness of
Rousseau’s work, but it abounds in humanity, grace, and
sound wisdom. It comes nearer to the average man with-
out losing any of its admirable qualities. It is more moral
and more practical. It corresponds very satisfactorily to
the common concept of Franklin as the prophet of the
gospel of Nature.’ The worship of Franklin had become
almost a sect in itself. The Lodge of the Nine Sisters
continued to hold its meetings and, during the year 1790,
published frequent eulogies of Franklin, among which
was Milhaud’s very long but fairly gracious ode wherein

we find the lines:

The ashes of Franklin are covered with tributes,
The prayers of the poor, the shepherdess’ flowers,
The chains of the slave and the tears of the world.*®

Two groups had set themselves up as the direct disci-
ples of Franklin: the Quakers, grouped about Marsillac,
Bonneville and the Cercle Social; and the Girondists, of
whom Brissot was the leader and Roland the school-

master.

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
  
 
 
  
    

a Se Pe hy oy ee ee RSE
er peer et eee eel ek pode cs

acacndgeececoerivue294. THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Jean de Marsillac, whom we have already mentioned
in connection with his activities in favor of the Quakers
in 1788, sought to take advantage of circumstances to
develop Quakerism in opposition to Catholicism and
make it the revolutionary religion. With the concurrence
of the English Friends, he organized a thorough propa-
ganda. He wrote and published under the auspices of the
Cercle Social a La Vie de Guillaume Penn (1791) which
had a wide circulation and was well received. On this
subject, the Mercure de France of June 2, 1792, said,
“The Quakers are the only people who have given the
world an example of society founded entirely on moral-
ity.” The Journal général de l Europe praised the Quak-
ers for “having been able to ally so much amenity with
Christian mysticism.’ During this same period, Marsillac
also published, at Amsterdam, Le Principe ow la Régle de
Vie des premiers Chrétiens. In the beginning of 1791,
judging the moment to be propitious, he came to Paris
with William Rotch,®® the representative of the Nan-
tucket Quakers living at Dunkirk, to whom Louis XVI
had been so kind. His purpose was to present to the As-
sembly a request that the Quakers be authorized to prac-
tice their religion according to their lights, that they be
exempted from military service and from taking oaths,
and that they be allowed to appear before the Assembly
without removing their hats. Brissot, Grégoire and
Rabaut Saint-Etienne acted as negotiators between the

Assembly and the delegation of Friends. They arrangedSPIRITUAL UNION 295

for a splendid ceremony. They chose a time when Mira-
beau was presiding, for they deemed him friendly to the
sect. Demeusnier, Chapelier, Lameth and, of course, La
Fayette lent their support to the Quakers, who were ac-
corded a cordial reception, a superb discourse by Mira-
beau, and an invitation to be present at the session, but
no very definite concessions.*” Marsillac, however, had
not wasted his time. He gave a series of lectures on the
morality of the Quakers, visited a great many of the
deputies and became a close personal friend of Grégoire’s.
These two even entertained the project of establishing a
large Quaker seminary in the Chateau of Chambord and
even took steps toward putting the project into execu-
tion. On every hand one heard it said that, as soon as
the Constitution should become effective, thousands of
Quakers were going to immigrate to France.” There was
talk of organizing the Quaker sect at Paris, and in a let-
ter dated June 1, 1792, a housewife wrote to her son:
“If you meet a Quaker, kiss the hem of his garment for
me. Among all the multitude of men that covers the face
of the earth, there are none, to my way of thinking, who
do more honor to humanity. Since I know them only
through pictures, if you meet any of them anywhere, tell
me about them and let me know whether the descriptions
of Voltaire and the other philosophers have not flattered
them.” * The Masonic and mystic club, the Cercle Social,
which was also called ‘““The Universal Confederation of

the Friends of Liberty” and whose organ was La Bouche296 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

de Fer, a very daring sheet edited, it seems, by Bonne-
ville, the grandson of Racine, made use of many Quaker

‘deas. The Abbé Fauchet, the principal orator of this
club, was inclined toward a sort of Quakerized Catholli-
cism inspired by Penn.”* The aims of the club, which was
a federation of peacefully inclined and righteous friends,
were close to the ideal of the Quakers. La Bouche de Fer
for the month of October, 1790, declared: “The civil
laws of these veritable human beings have more merit
than all those which are at present in force on this earth,
and I hope that both worlds will conform to them.” This
propaganda was not without result: people came to con-
sider the words “Quaker,” “American” and. “freemas
synonymous; and, especially in Girondist circles, which
were daring and inclined to favor novel undertakings,
there was thought of importing the customs and ideas of
Quakerism into France on a large scale. Bancal des Is-
sarts, Lanthenas and Brissot had such a plan, and there

is mention of it in Madame Roland's correspondence.”
La Feuille villageoise, the great rural newssheet, which
the Girondists employed to effect the gradual de-Chris-
tianization of the countryside and whose editors were at
frst Cérutti, and later Ginguené, printed encomiums of
the Quakers on several occasions and described the work-
ings of their religion and expressed hopes of seeing it

flourish in France.”

In the realm of politics, the Quaker religion was the

starting-point of the first and most daring republicanSPIRITUAL UNION 297

propaganda in France. The very fact that the American
constitutions, all democratic and republican as they were,
were constantly being republished could not fail to have
an influence, especially since this publishing was the
work of men like Demeusnier, who was a member of the
Assembly. He produced in 1790 a volume entitled
L’ Amérique indépendante which was a résumé of the
various constitutions of the United States. In 1791,
Delacroix accomplished a similar work by his Constitu-
tions des principaux Etats de ? Europe et des Etats-Unis
de l Amérique. His book went into three editions. It was
impossible to speak of the United States without men-
tioning the word “‘republic,” and it was not a question of
republics crowded into a limited territory laden with an-
tiquated institutions, like Venice or the Swiss cantons.
The United States were a federal republic with immense
resources, modern ideas and a considerable population
that was continually growing and affording striking ex-
amples of its vitality. In the highest society, certain
groups openly proclaimed themselves as republican and
cited the example of America: Madame de Tessé, La
Fayette’s aunt, was an avowed republican in 1789. The
Trudaines, Madame de Guibert and their friends held
like views.”* But it was very difficult for Frenchmen and
revolutionists to speak of a republic in 1789, because
public opinion was not yet prepared to desert the King.
The nobility, out of a spirit of chivalrous fidelity, would

immediately have rallied in his favor, and it is probable

ery rs298 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

one

that the bulk of the nation would have followed them.

The cahiers of 1789 indicate no widespread republican

sentiment. The most radical revolutionists were silent on

the subject; but to speak constantly, as Brissot did, of

the moral and social superiority of the republics of the

New World over the kingdoms of the Old World was
“1 itself a bold stroke and an excellent preparation for
further temerities. Condorcet was a republican at heart,
but he attacked the monarchy only through the praises
that he lavished on the United States. To be able to un-
dertake a campaign in favor of a republic with any hope
of success, it was necessary first of all to show how an-
tiquated the very principles of the French government
were, and to found a new code and accustom public opin-
ion to the idea of a new régime. The Declaration of the
Rights of Man proclaimed the new social and legal code.
It made no provision for the King—no more than the
American declarations had made for him. The contro-
versies about the Declaration and the Constitution, with-
out bringing up the question of a change of government,
had led to the discussion of the comparative advantages
of various forms of government, and, as early as 1789,
we find startled monarchists arguing the drawbacks of a
republic and the advantages of monarchy. The example
adduced is always that of the United States.*” Inevitably
the United States brought up the question. In the course
of the great ceremonies in honor of Franklin of which

we have already spoken, the republican spirit and moral-SPIRITUAL UNION 299

ity of the great man were extolled without any opposing
voice being raised. In 1791, the United States played a
more decided part in the spreading of republican ideas.
Thomas Paine, who had come to France the first time
in order to see the philosophers and to meet the mem-
bers of the government that paid him, had come back
to Paris again. He had become acquainted with the group
of Brissot’s friends and the men who later were to be-
come the Girondists. He was an avowed republican and
followed Franklin in favoring a single legislative house.
When Burke published his pamphlet on the Revolution,
Paine refuted it in a work entitled The Rzghts of Man,*
wherein he set forth a complete theory of democracy.
Analyzing the origins of power, he showed that every
government reigns either through the domination of
superstition, the threat of force or the result of a contract
—the only legitimate form of government. Now in order
that the contract be respected, the executive should be
neither strong nor independent of the people. It is the
height of absurdity, Paine showed, for the executive office
to be hereditary. This pamphlet, dated 1791, was widely
read in England and in France. Although it did not pro-
nounce the word republic, it could lead to no other con-
clusion. When the King had fled to Varennes, Paine and

some of his friends took the lead in calling for his destitu-

tion and the transformation of France into a republic.
Villette and he were the only ones to dare come out

frankly at a moment when every one else was still hesi-——__

 

  

 

200 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

/jtant for fear of an unequal struggle. It was at this time
||that Paine’s famous controversy with Siéyés took place,
:

with the American upholding the principles of republi-

‘canism and the Frenchman those of monarchy.”* Brissot
was just beginning to unfold his real views and expressed
himself as being in favor of keeping the King for the time
being, not that a kingdom was the best form of govern-
ment, but for the sake of prudence and in the expectation
of something better. Even his friends cried out that Paine
\ was mad, but his example gave courage and showed how
much could be said with impunity.°° Everywhere people
talked of him. In the elections for the Convention, Paine
was elected in four departments, although he was known
only through his writings and his personality was not a
winning one. The royalists in 1791 were highly incensed
against the United States; they accused them of being
the initial cause of the Revolution and of continuing
even now to incite the country to a change of govern-
ment. Morris met with this state of mind among all his
friends. The accusation was not altogether justified, for
neither the government nor the American leaders had
done anything to convert France to republicanism. On
the whole, they had confidence in Louis XVI and would
not even have wished for his downfall. But the moral
propaganda that had been going on in France since 1775
had indeed brought about a profound change of princi-
ples, beliefs and purpose in a large and influential class

of society. The mystic respect for divine right had grad-SPIRITUAL UNION 301

ually been supplanted by a reverence for the rights of the
people and spontaneous morality. These principles had
appeared to be compatible with the old order of things
provided it were modified; but, in proportion as they
took shape and as their applications were extended, it
became more apparent that they were replacing and con-
flicting with the past and called for a complete remodel-
ing of society. This is the path that La Fayette, La
Rochefoucauld Liancourt, Brissot and all those who were
concerned with the liberation of the world were follow-
ing more or less consciously and sincerely. Some of them,
like La Fayette, contented themselves with stopping half-
way and found refuge in a sort of sentimental and in-
tellectual fallacy, which did embarrass them greatly,
since their interests demanded it; but more violent, cour-
ageous, and deliberate spirits had in a short time fol-
lowed the road to the end. They were aided by certain:
Americans, notably Thomas Paine and Joel Barlow. In,
1791, Barlow published an essay, An Address to the
Privileged Orders, in which he attacked feudalism as ac-
centuating inequalities in an immoral way, the Church
as being inevitably intolerant and obscurant, standing
armies as a weapon of despotism, and the tendency on
the part of governments to try to increase public revy-
enue. He condemned all these institutions of the past for
corrupting the soul of man, and he called for their sup-
pression in the name of morality. At the same time he

offered the American public a virulent and mystic poem,@yieye

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

302 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

The Conspiracy of Kings, in which he portrayed with
great lyric power the alliance of all tyrants against the
light. Paine and Barlow were translated, read and dis-
cussed. They gave definite shape to the many impres-
sions and sentiments that the tales of America and the
enthusiasm for things American had engendered, but
their influence was less important than that of a Frank-
lin or a Jefferson. It was effective only in making the

French public pass from ideas to actions.

*
K kK

In France the United States were judged by the two
or three great personalities, Franklin, Washington and
Jefferson, who were known in Europe; there was
no clear concept of the people themselves or of their
importance. Therefore, the moral and spiritual collabora-
tion of the two countries had difficulty in finding any
practical means of manifestation. To conciliate the op-
posed interests of two peoples is always a delicate task.
It was all the more difficult in 1789-1792 because, in
France as well as in the United States, the newly estab-
lished parliaments were eager to display their zeal in de-
fending the national patrimony. Both countries, con-
fronted with a grave economic and financial crisis, sought
to make use of all their resources and were ready to re-
nounce none of them. It was all very well to approach
the study of general problems with the most high-mindedSPIRITUAL UNION 303

idealism: material questions were always solved accord-
ing to the law of the least effort and sacrifice. Such re-
lations as existed between merchant and merchant, and
government and government, from 1789 to 1792, were
far from being happy ones. True, private citizens ex-
changed friendly letters on Franklin and the French
Constitution; but the United States put a tax on French
ships entering American ports, and the French Assembly,
after bitter discussions that were none too friendly to the
United States, refused to facilitate the importation of
whale-oil and American tobacco as had been requested.
The Assembly was governed by questions of local inter-
ests and failed to take into consideration the danger of
weakening the commercial bonds between the United
States and France. They had spoken so much of the vir-
tues of the Americans that they had forgotten that they
were also tradesmen.’*’ This young government should
have been handled with skill and tact, for English in-
trigue was rampant in America at the time; but the As-
sembly was not aware of this. The Minister of Foreign
Affairs was too closely occupied with internal politics to
keep himself informed on what was happening so far
away from Paris. Monsieur de Moustier, who was a good
minister and had been able to win the friendship of
Washington, was not sent back to America. Various cir-
cumstances and the vile little intrigues of Gouverneur
Morris, an American businessman and politician who was

then residing in Paris and who, while selling land,304. THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

found time to meddle with everything else, made Mont-
morin decide not to reappoint Moustier to the American
post.‘ The pretext was that Moustier was too much of
fan aristocrat. The real reason was that the English fac-
tion in America, with whom Morris was closely allied,
had instructed him to prevent Moustier’s return to Amer-
ica because they were afraid of his intimacy with Wash-
ington.” He was replaced by Otto, who was intelligent
but had neither authority nor material means at his dis-
position. In 1792, La Fayette, at the prompting of Mor-
ris, had secured the appointment as minister to Amer-
ica for Monsieur de Ternant, who had shown great
courage in the American war but was of an uncongenial
nature and, despite intellectual qualities of a high order,
lacked ability, dignity and forcefulness."” Moreover,
what could he possibly have done, since he was entirely
out of touch with his superior, who never wrote to him,

and the American newspapers kept announcing the most

+

frightful commotions in France

France treated American trade with severity. She
talked vaguely of a new commercial treaty that she was
willing to negotiate with the United States on a most
generous basis; but the disorganization of the Ministry
of Foreign Affairs prevented the realization of these
projects. The intelligence and propaganda services in
America had been allowed to run down at the very mo-
ment when France had the greatest need of systematic
support from her friends.” Without doubt she had inSPIRITUAL UNION 305

Jefferson a faithful and intelligent friend, but his tem-
perament, which was tactful rather than combative, and
the disadvantageous position in which his long absence
from the United States had placed him, together with
the fact that he was on good terms with neither Hamil-
ton nor Morris, both of whom were very influential,
rendered his task difficult."° Washington, although he
was well-disposed toward France and glad to see her
adopting free institutions, was unfortunately in close re-
lations with Gouverneur Morris and had complete confi-

dence in him. Now Morris held a most equivocal position

in Europe. Agent for his friend, Robert Morris, who had-

a grudge to settle against the French farmers-general and
visited his wrath on France as a whole, and a friend of
John Jay’s also, Gouverneur Morris had gone to London
to negotiate commercial conventions with England; but
it seems that his real intent was to seek an alliance or at
least to lay the foundation for one. Disappointed at hav-
ing failed in his mission, he returned to France filled
with an ambition to play an important part in affairs.
He studied the situation, visited La Fayette, whom he al-
ready knew, Madame de Staél and Montmorin, and de-
cided that he had a chance to distinguish himself in be-
coming the secret agent of the King and Queen.**’ Morris
scorned the populace and did not believe in monarchy.
Perhaps he felt some sympathy for Louis XVI. Even this
is open to doubt. It is certain, in any case, that he made

friends in both camps. The turn of his mind and his am-

Notre,

    
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
   

PO et Ly Sree tree eee
ete SoSsSS523E 95545-8455

—. es

oo tos S|

a ee306 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

J
bition led him to draw a sharp, clear and amusing picture
of what he observed, but one that was cynical and tinged
with pessimism. He represented the revolutionists as
scoundrels and their opponents as fools. And it was from
him that Washington received all the information on
which his judgment was based.*®* Since at the same time
the Southern and Central states were being invaded by
a throng of poor people, French Creoles fleeing from
Santo Domingo, then in the grip of civil war and flames,
the Americans could not help being impressed by the
somber news from Europe which coincided so well with
what they themselves saw in America. Franklin in 1789
was already dismayed at the rumors of massacres that
came from France and implored his friends to assure him
that they were untrue.” The English propaganda, on the
contrary, exaggerated them wantonly. A little newspaper
“1 Massachusetts," for example, reprints from an Eng-
lish paper under the date of December 15, 1789: © France
seems at present to be in a state of complete anarchy.
The authority is tossed about among the three orders.
_. But in view of the important part that women are
taking in the revolution in France, a correspondent
opines that the poor Frenchmen are in danger of being
reduced to a government of petticoats. He asks the pub-
lic which is to be the most feared of the three forms of
eovernment: monarchy, aristocracy OF petticoats?” In
1790 many American papers said more simply: “Great

troubles are coming about and continue to disturb manySPIRITUAL UNION 307

parts of France. A great many good citizens are falling
sacrificed to this momentary rage, massacred by unprin-
cipled brigands and ungoverned hordes.” ** At New York
the Weekly Register for September 3, 1790, called the
government of France “‘a mad and despotic democracy.”
Washington had received as a present from La Fayette
a key to the Bastille which he had been disposed to ac-
cept as a harmless little souvenir.” But with the news
and rumors of massacres, the struggle against the Catho-
lic Church and the freeing of the slaves, America began
to be more alarmed. The French Revolution ceased to
be a remote and interesting adventure in which one might
feel a certain pleasure at having a spiritual part and a
certain glory at having served as a model. It became a
domestic problem. It loomed up as an immediate dan-
ger. Morris’ letters, Jay’s intrigues, the wave of refugees,
the English dispatches—everything combined to give an
alarming aspect to this France whence there now came
only grandiloquent messages and starving refugees. The
rich and the clergy were commencing to be frightened,
and the press was beginning to mutter.

A new situation was developing. Until now the politi-
cal parties in America had been on the whole a continua-
tion of the English parties. The American Revolution
had been begun originally by the English and American
Whigs to fight against the Tories in both countries. Dur-
ing the whole duration of their war for independence,

the American patriots considered themselves as members

owe eel308 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

of a single party and spoke of themselves as Whigs. In
the years that followed the treaty of 1783, with the ne-
cessity of clearing up the situation and the problems that
resulted from the treaty, this feeling underwent only a
eradual change. In general, the American leaders re-
mained faithful to the doctrines of English liberalism,
but they came into contact with the radicalism of the
French philosophers, and some of them came to have a
more concise concept of democracy. Franklin was one of
these. Nevertheless the looseness of the federal organi-
zation and the confusion which still reigned in national
life prevented the setting-up of solidly unified parties
with general platforms. In 1787 and 1788 when the Fed-
eral Constitution was discussed, it seemed as though two
parties were about to take shape—the Federalists, who
were in favor of the national ideal; and the anti-Feder-
alists who battled for the protection of state-rights. It
was very soon evident that the nationalist sentiment
would sweep aside any opposition to the application of
the Constitution, not because this document was believed
to be perfect, but because the United States really ex-
isted as a nation. The Constitution was therefore adopted
by all as an experiment and the first step toward a na-
tional life. Immediately two problems presented them-
selves to the American statesmen; that of foreign policy
and that of internal organization. The United States as
a nation had to choose between a rapprochement with

their former mother country, England, who was still theirSPIRITUAL UNION 309

principal customer and source of imports, and France,
their ally, to whom they owed their victory and who
had, more than any one else, aided them in attaining a
high place among the nations.”** The French army and
fleet had been the two strongest arguments in favor of
the recognition of the United States by the European
sovereigns. Gratitude and economy counseled the main-
taining of the French alliance: race instinct and com-
mercial interests pointed toward England. The problem
of internal politics was closely related to that of external
politics. Should there be a strong government which
should take an active concern in developing the com-
merce and credit of the nation, or a government as weak
as possible which should leave individuals to act and
should count on France to guarantee it the respect of
other nations? The wealthy merchants in the seaports,
the New England tradesfolk, who, satisfied with having
beaten Great Britain and conscious of the bond of reli-
gion, language and civilization, asked nothing better
than to have cordial relations with her now; the busi-
ness men of New York, where George II’s birthday was
still a public holiday; the rich planters of South Caro-
lina, who had many links with high English society—
all these groups remembered that the Revolution had
been started to force England to respect traditional lib-
erties and rights of British citizens."™

All these classes were in favor of establishing friendly

relations with England as soon as she should consent to

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

et ee ee eS ee re ee310 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

treat the United States with consideration. They sought
to copy the English institutions as much as possible. By
the provisions of the Constitution it was these people
who elected the senators. Hence we find in the American
Senate from 1789 to 1792 a strong aristocratic strain.
The senators even discussed the creation of titles for
American high dignitaries, and they aspired to a govern-
ment by the rich and the wise.’* John Adams, who rep-
resented the attitude of the New England Federalists
accurately, looked forward to seeing a nobility formed in
America and to belonging to it himself.”* Alexander
Hamilton, whom Washington had chosen as his Secre-
tary of the Treasury and intimate advisor, was a mon-
archist*” He deemed it impossible to speak of royalty
in America for the time being, but he wanted to build
up as strong a central power as possible, develop the ex-
ecutive office, whose prerogatives had not been very
clearly defined in the Constitution, and work gradually
toward a monarchy.

To carry out this plan it would have been necessary
to crush out the influence of France in America. The
French philosophers had early urged the United States
toward a popular government. With the development of
the French Revolution, this current became infinitely
stronger and made itself felt in all spheres. It was no
longer simply philosophic elucubrations after the man-
ner of Raynal that the American newspapers translated

from French, but accounts of combats in which the peo-SPIRITUAL UNION 311

ple had taken part and triumphed. The imagination was
stirred. When they saw American leaders like Paine in-
volved in it, people could not fail to be interested in
the struggle. The European crisis, placed thus within the
reach of the American populace, woke the masses to a
consciousness of their strength and their rights. All those
who were dismayed at the aristocratic character of the
Senate, all who were discontent or jealous of the upper
classes, rallied to the true democrats who held by the
French doctrines and shared the French revolutionary
enthusiasm. Jefferson, who had just returned from
France and who combined his prestige as a pilgrim of
Liberty with his ability as a leader, immediately became
the standard-bearer of the resistance to the aristocratic
English spirit. He and his friends did not want to put
the question on the grounds of federalism.”* They did
not desire the dissolution of the federation. But they did
wish to place the government in the hands of the people
and to efface every vestige of aristocracy and aristocratic
government. To accomplish this, the masses had to be
roused, wakened from their apathy and organized. A
simple slogan and a principle had to be found. From
1790 on, there were really two parties: the Federalists,
supported by the merchants and most of the population
of New England, and the Democratic Republicans, sup-
ported by the farmers throughout the country and espe-
cially those of the South and West. One of these parties
professed complete confidence in the people; the other312 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

claimed that the people needed guidance and a strong
government. Neither of the two parties was willing to
admit that it aimed at the destruction of the union or the
republic, but each of them accused the other of intending
the dissolution of the federal bond and the establishing
of a despotism. In reality, it was a combat of tendencies
and beliefs. The American Constitution was briet and
rather ambiguous on many points; its entire sense could
be changed according to the way in which it was applied.
It was much less a text than a theme—hence the impor-
tance of this conflict. In this struggle the Americans no
longer took as models the English parties, but the French
parties. The Republicans were called ‘“Jacobins” and the
Federalists were nicknamed either “monarchists” or
“monocrats.” The standard about which the battle raged
was France. The Federalists wanted to be quit of the
alliance. Their members in the Senate passed a law ap-
plying the same treatment to French ships as to the ships
of all other nations, an act that was certainly not in ac-
cord with the spirit of the treaty of 1778. The Senate
also managed to drag out the discussion of the consular
convention with France. It received the cordial communi-
cations of the Constituent Assembly without enthusiasm.
Washington had not yet ratified this policy.” He held
the balance.” While the Federalists, supported by the
newspapers that they had subsidized (the chief among
these was The United States Gazette, published by
Fenno at Philadelphia), and the Republicans, led by Jef-SPIRITUAL UNION 313

ferson, who had persuaded Freneau to found a demo-
cratic sheet, The National Gazette, were exchanging
harsh words, the President kept silent.*** The Republican
newspapers extolled French enthusiasm and published
Paine’s Reghts of Man, which held that every nation has
the right to dispose of itself as it sees fit. The indignant
Federalists replied with horrible details concerning what

122

was taking place in France.” They printed Pzblicola, a-
pamphlet by the young John Quincy Adams, the son of
John Adams, who denied absolutely the right of nations
to revolt, and maintained that there were imperishable
laws that unite nations and set limits to the rights of the
citizen. He praised the Constitution of England and criti-
cized that of France severely. It was believed that John
Adams himself was the author of the pamphlet, and there
was a general movement of hostility against him. He
quarreled with Jefferson, who had had Publicola at-
tacked in The National Gazette, and the discord touched
even Washington’s advisors.’** The supercilious attitude
of England did not render the Anglophiles’ task easy, but
the alarming news from France made the work of the
Francophiles quite as difficult. Both sides endeavored to
kindle the masses in the name of the immortal rights of
the people, which France was defending, or in the name
of the immortal laws of God and morality, which Eng-
land was upholding against anarchy. The question was
laid before the people. The two great parties that were

to do battle for the power were already clearly defined,314 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

/ although not entirely formed, in 1790. The combat was
to be violent, but the issues were clear; for both parties
had consented to wage it on the question of France and
French democratic principles.

The fact was, that France had identified herself with
democracy and become its champion in the eyes of the
world. She had just overthrown the royal government.
The movement started in 1791 by Paine and his club of
five republicans, Paine, Condorcet, Bonneville, Duchatel
and Lanthenas, had been crowned by success. From this
sroup, the republican idea had spread to all the revolu-
tionary groups. In his second addition to The Rights of
Man, Paine had set forth clearly. the question of Mon-
archy or Republic. He had depicted the immorality of
the monarchical régime, which, founded on force, does
not respect the primary rights of man or consider itself
bound by the terms of the social contract. Popular opin-

) ion had been so profoundly stirred by his writings that

| Paine, without being a candidate, was elected to the Con-

| vention in four departments. This was the most brilliant
| | period of his life. He seems at that time to have been
| bothcdisinterested and enthusiastic. He was bold and

: stood out as the-center of the ‘republican doctrinaries.
French opinion, exalted and violent, was ripe for such
propaganda. The King, by his flight and his weakness,
had lost his prestige; the nobles were either disarmed or
in flight; the constitutionalists felt that their position

was untenable. Everywhere a tense moral restlessnessSPIRITUAL UNION 315

reigned. When his Girondist friends had prepared the
way for the 10th of August,* Paine set to work with re-
newed energy. He published in the Fewzlles villageotses
and the Pafréote frangais anti-monarchical essays with
the purpose of dissuading the French from ever return-
ing to this régime of persecution, absurd heredity and
absolutism.’** At the same time, Barlow, in A Letter to
the Convention, was demanding in the name of Man,
whose nature was essentially good, that he be allowed to
govern Himself and that governments of oppression and
royalty be abolished.** Thus the two Americans contin='
ued their campaign, which now was victorious and with-
out danger for them. They put zeal and sentiment into
their work and implored the nation to show herself gen-
erous, abolish the death penalty and treat all citizens hu-
manely. The Convention was touched by the letter; Bar-
low was voted French citizenship and entrusted with the
work of organizing Savoy into a French department.
In the midst of her dangers and trials, republican
France, wild with joy, proclaimed herself the sister of
America. The example of the American Revolution had
already been used frequently to whip up the enthusiasm
of the populace; now it was only natural that Washing-
ton and his heroic barefoot soldiers should be called to
mind. Regnault de Saint-Jean d’Angély in L’Ami des
Patriotes for January 14, 1792, had said, “We shall
conquer just as the Americans did, for we have had even

* Tenth of August, 1792. The date of the popular uprising which de-
stroyed French monarchy, and put the King in prison.316 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

more to endure than they.” Perlet in his journal for Sep-
tember 15, tries to encourage his countrymen as to the
future by reminding them of Franklin’s phrase, “Ca
ira.’ *° By way of urging the citizens to bear up under
their privations, Louvet, at the Jacobin Club on Janu-
ary 30, 1792, told how the Bostonians had gone with-
out tea, a beverage that was so dear to them, in order to
combat England. Lemaire’s Pére Duchéne compared the
National Guards to the American militia and asserted
that they would conduct themselves as well. The Journal
universel for September, 1792, pointed out that the
American Revolution had suffered calumny such as was
now being circulated about the French Revolution, but
had triumphed nevertheless. America stood in every
one’s eyes as an example of patriotism and heroism. It
was no longer used to stimulate republican sentiment,
which had now reached a high degree of intensity, but to
maintain combative instinct, which could not be too
great at a moment when France, divided internally, was
being attacked on all sides. Just as it served as a stimu-
lant for the victors, the thought of America was also a
consolation for the vanquished. Necker devoted his leisure
as a fallen minister to criticizing the Jacobin revolution
and pointing out its defects. His book, Du Pouvoér
exécutif, extolled the Americans from every point of
view for having been able to carry on a humane revolu-
tion and organize a strong republic. It was alternately an

elegy and a dithyrambic. And the most illustrious vic-SPIRITUAL UNION 317

tims of the Revolution turned their eyes, just as Necker
did, to this land of liberty and peace. Most of the mon-
archists who had codperated with the patriots and
favored the Revolution in its beginnings, would have
liked to seek a refuge in America. Talleyrand was only
too happy to be able to flee there to escape French and
English proscriptions. The Vicomte de Noailles, Omer
Talon and Beaumets had taken refuge in America. A
group of bankers and tradesmen had tried to provide a
shelter for themselves and had bought a great tract of
land in the northern part of the State of New York
called Castorland. La Ray de Chaumont, his brother-in-
law Chassanis, Alexander Lerebours, Bailly, Moreau de
Saint-Meéry and Volney were connected with this specu-
lation, which was in the nature of an insurance against
possible catastrophes in France.*** Prospectuses of a com-
pany organized by Thomas Cooper in Pennsylvania were
circulated in France to attract the émigrés. Everywhere
victims of the persecutions were thinking of setting out
for America. We find La Fayette asking to be allowed to
leave for the United States and sending his son there,
and Benjamin Constant, dismayed at the turn of events,
wrote to Madame de Charriére: “America! America!
America! If some day I leave Colombiers forever, if I
see all liberty die out of Europe, there will still remain
one refuge. . . . You will stay behind perhaps, but sad
and embittered. I shall go to Kentucky.” It was at this
time that Madame de La Tour du Pin fled to America,|

a

 

   

318 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

and Madame de Genlis was contemplating doing the
same. The Sulpicians of Paris sent a colony of their
brethren to Baltimore. Above the fray in which mon-
archists and republicans, Girondists and Montagnards
were slaughtering each other, there remained one sacred
and absolute ideal of liberty and social: justice—the
United States. They were done with as a catchword of
conspiracies and revolutions ; henceforth they had a higher
role; they maintained the ideal which otherwise in the
turmoil of conflict and passion would have been for-
gotten. For some it was a moral and political ideal; for
others it was religious and literary.”

France and America were united in the same faith and
exchanged their prophets. Paine’s Réghts of Man and
Barlow’s Advice to the Privileged Classes and Letter to
the Convention had just been published in Paris. The
French public kept up its courage by reading Paine’s
Common Sense and his American Crisis, which he had
written to sustain the morale of the American insurgents
in the trying moments of their revolution. A new edition
of Poor Richard was published. Despite the turmoil of
events, people read and discussed a translation of The
Federalist by Jay, Madison and Hamilton, as well as the

American constitutions and John Adams’ defense of

‘them.?”? As seen from France, the spiritual union of the

two countries seemed to be a very close one. It seemed
like a federation of free nations. Already at the end of

1791 and the beginning of 1792, there had been talk of aSPIRITUAL UNION 319

universal confederation of nations. The Prussian Cloots,
who styled himself the “Orator of the Human Race,”
had not been the only one to uphold this ideal. Rabaut
Saint-Etienne, in his Adresse aux Anglais, had held up
the example of the United States and had called for a
constitution of the United States of Europe.” The
Jacobins had hung English, French and American flags
in their assembly hall, and discourses in praise of Frank-
lin and the Americans had been pronounced before them.
Clubs in the provinces had imitated their example: at
Bergerac, Bordeaux, etc., in 1792, the flags of the nations
“confederated for liberty’—Poland, England, America
and France—had been installed.*** In March, 1792, in the
parade of the soldiers of Chateauvieux a symbolic group
represented the free nations—France, America and Eng-
land.* The Annales patriotiques for February 1792 said:
‘Tt is from the fraternal alliance of the various peoples
of the earth that should finally be born the great system
of peace, happiness and prosperity destined to mankind
by Providence and human perfectability.” *” National
celebrations were planned in honor of the free nations.
Instead of the past, which they cast aside, the revolu-
tionists revered the present, and in place of ancestors
they honored brother nations.*** The Girondists adopted
this idea and practiced it, but it did not belong to them
exclusively. It was only that it was easier for them to
stand as sponsors of it because of their connection with

the American leaders such as Paine, Barlow and Jeffer-

rl320 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

son. There again America was to be the pivot. No very
energetic action could be expected from Poland, who had
not been able to save herself. England, for all her
enthusiastic democratic elements, had a strong and hostile
government. Only in America were both opinion and gov-
ernment free. All the elements of her society, it was be-
lieved, were friendly to France, since all of revolutionary
France was friendly to America. The union of the two
sreat republics of the world would have afforded a bril-
liant example of fraternity and constituted an all-power-
ful moral force. Paine, Brissot, Roland and the whole
Girondist party dreamed of realizing this union. A
curious little pamphlet, Nowvelle Alliance a proposer
entre les Républiques francaise et américaine by Ducher,
published in the early part of the year 1793, shows what
hopes were being entertained at the time. Ducher was a
fiery patriot who had been consul in the United States
during Montmorin’s ministry and had been dismissed as
a result of his misconduct and incendiary words. His
desire was that the two truly free nations of the earth
should not content themselves with guaranteeing their
possessions but should also guarantee their democratic
institutions and endeavor to trade with each other as
much as possible. Brissot and Paine conceived a brilliant
plan for bringing this about. They knew that in America
Louis XVI was admired and respected as a benefactor of
the United States. The execution of the King would meet
with disapproval in the New World. On the other hand,SPIRITUAL UNION 321

it would have been imprudent to keep him in Europe
within reach of his partisans. They planned therefore to
send him to America under a strong guard and turn him
over to the Americans as a proof of France’s humaneness
and friendship for her sister nation. Brissot arranged to
have appointed as minister at Philadelphia, which was
then the federal capital, Genet, the son of Vergennes’s ‘
clerk, and the nephew of Madame Campan, an intelli-
gent and energetic young man and an ardent patriot, who
had received a remarkable education from his father.
Genet spoke several languages, and especially English,
well. His connections, patriotism and intelligence made
him the ideal agent to accomplish this generous and deli-
cate mission. Bonne Carriére, to whom the post of min-
ister to the United States had already been promised,
was ousted.*** Paine was to propose that Louis be exiled,
and Brissot and all his Girondist friends were to force
the motion through.*** Pamphlets signed by “A Quaker”
were circulated to ease the way to this solution.”
Paine’s plan was not destined to success. On the ap-
pointed day when Louis XVI was to have been saved,
Paine alone, among all the Girondists, had courage
enough to play the part that had been assigned to him
and plead for the King’s life in the name of America.
The Girondists contradicted themselves and were power-
less. Genet, who had been kept waiting in order that he
might take the King with him, sailed alone. But he was

still under instructions to rouse the American people and“warn

222 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

their government to a pitch of generous enthusiasm that
should range them side by side with France against des-
pots. In the orders that he received, he was told to
strengthen the bonds between the two countries and to
negotiate a new commercial treaty to draw them closer
together. These orders also denounced the duplicity of
Vergennes and Montmorin toward the United States,
claiming that all the while they were flattering America,
they were trying to stunt her growth and to keep her
from conquering Canada, Florida and Nova Scotia, in
the hope of stifling liberty. Genet was to make amends
for these wrongs by following a generous and disin-
terested policy toward the United States in order to
establish ‘“‘a close concord that should favor in every way

99 138

the extension of the empire of Liberty. He was
authorized to draw up a national pact with the United
States to be a mutual guarantee of the territories and
forms of government of the two nations. He was to seek
to free Spanish America and, if possible, unite Canada to
the United States. It was recommended that he place his
dependence especially on the Americans in the West, the
Kentuckians and Ohioans. He was given blank letters-
of-mark and advised to make use of the friends of France
in Congress. He set out entrusted with both propaganda
and diplomacy, with both war and provisioning. Even if
he had been prudent and strong, the task would have
been too great; but he was both rash and weak. His false

ideas of the United States, which he imagined, after theSPIRITUAL UNION 323

manner of the philosophers, as being idyllic and pure,
were a stumbling-block to him; and the triumphal recep-
tion that was tendered him at Charleston completed the
turning of his head. He thought of himself as a Roman
Proconsul. He began to distribute letters-of-mark and
organized Charleston as a base for French privateers in
the Caribbean and the Gulf of Mexico. The consul,
Mangourit,’*’ was to supervise the arming of the ships,
regulate their sailings, and attend to the sale of prizes
and exert all possible pressure on American opinion in
order to bring about an intervention in favor of France
and an expedition against New Orleans. Charleston be-
came for some time a sort of revolutionary capital in the
southern United States. Men were proud to wear the tri-
color cockade and call each other citizen and even don
the red liberty cap at banquets. The agitation was kept at
a high pitch by the descendants of French Huguenots,
who, remembering what their ancestors had suffered, cele-
brated with joy the fall of the monarchy. In January,
they had already organized a great procession in honor of
the National Assembly.** Thirteen salutes had been fired
to begin the ceremony. Then the parade, led by Manourit,
Pastor Coste of the French Reformed Church, and all
the public dignitaries and officials, had begun its march
through the town. It stopped before the French Church
and the flag was dipped as an atonement for the persecu-
tions of Louis XIV. At Saint Philip’s Church, the pro-

cession came to a halt. Salvos were fired, and Coste made

=

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
   

SS he et ee ee ee

en as

Se

fe IE ey324 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

 

a speech. Then a Te Deum and the Marseillaise were
sung.““* It was a great day of fraternization. Such was
/the atmosphere that Genet found on his arrival. He had
heard Brissot say that the Americans were kindled with
the flame of liberty and would certainly be eager to cast
/their lot with France. The wild joy with which he was
welcomed and Manourit’s enthusiasm completely per-
suaded him that nothing could halt the American people
on the path of war and Democracy.™ However grave
may have been Genet’s faults, we should not forget the
impression that this frenzied and seemingly unanimous
reception must have made on an impassioned Girondist
who had just come from the Russian court where he had
been treated with the utmost coldness and had lived
isolated amid the indifference of the people. After having
conferred with Mangourit, he set out for Philadelphia
and crossed the States of South Carolina, North Carolina
and Virginia on the way. Everywhere the same rapturous
enthusiasm greeted him. The farmers of the South were
anti-clerical on the whole. They had suffered a great deal
at the hands of the English from 1779 to 1783 and
hated them. They distrusted the federal government and
were glad to envince their attachment for France, who
had just beheaded her King and declared war on Eng-
land, their enemy of yesterday, and Spain, their enemy
of tomorrow.” They especially hated the latter power
for continuing to bar the Mississippi to the free Ameri-
Jcans. The news of the death of the King and the warSPIRITUAL UNION Seat

against England had just come, and it had not immedi-
ately stirred up an unfavorable reaction. The people ex-
cused France in the midst of her tragic struggle, and
withheld judgment. It is surprising to see the calm with
which the upper classes took the news: the atrocious jest,
Capet sine capite, was heard on all sides. This man, who
formerly had been so highly lauded, now seemed to be
scorned by all. A tavern-keeper near Philadelphia dared
to hang in front of his inn a sign depicting the execution
of Marie Antoinette with the inscription beneath it, “4
la Reine de France quillotinée.’ The Jacobin who had
had this idea was very proud of it. ™
fate of the King and Queen, did that of La Fayette at
first evoke any such warm compassion as might have
been expected. When it was learned that “the Marquis”
had left the republican army and gone over to the enemy
and that the Austrians had put him in prison and were
keeping him there with cold cruelty, people felt sorry for
him no doubt; some few newspapers published notes of
srief and condolence, but there was no energetic mani-

146

festation in his favor.**° Months, years, passed, and La
Fayette was still in his dungeon. A young American from

Charleston, Huger, risked his life to save him. Congress

; . }
discussed whether or not there was anything else that

they might do. The country as a whole did not quite
understand these quarrels between the revolutionists nor

why La Fayette had stopped halfway on the road to

 

No more than the ¥

revolution. Therefore, in spite of a vague pity that was

 

~

———— aaa326 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

\ . e . . . ° iia
\ felt for him, in spite of good intentions, nothing definite
| was done. No particular group had any immediate
interest in looking after him; the Federalists considered
|

| him as a democrat and a false prophet, and the Republi-

| cans saw in him a traitor to the cause of the people. Thus

' during 1792 and 1793, neither the misfortunes of Louis
XVI and Marie Antoinette nor those of La Fayette
roused American opinion against France.

In truth, this apparent indifference was rather a stupor.
The American revolutionary party, which was beginning
to organize, was very obstreperous. The news from
France had thrown it into a redoubtable but, thus far,
purely mystic and inoffensive state of excitement. They
planted liberty-trees and talked of forming legions to
go to France, but they did nothing untoward; and the
Federalist groups, alarmed, surprised and undecided,
waited. There was a moment when it almost seemed as
if the weight of public opinion in America would turn in
favor of France and a benevolent neutrality toward her.
Washington had proclaimed the neutrality of the United
States in the war that was being waged, but he had no
intention of repudiating the treaty of 1778 and was still
eager to follow a policy friendly to France. At this point
he learned of Genet’s arrival. The French minister came
on to Philadelphia, harvesting the homage of the throngs
along the way. People offered him wheat for France; they
asked to enlist in the French army, they formed demo-

cratic and Jacobin societies at his instigation. His entrySPIRITUAL UNION 327

into Philadelphia was a popular triumph. But the men of
position and those in the government circles held aloof.
Washington was already offended. Even before present-
ing himself to the President, Genet had begun his func-
tions as Minister Plenipotentiary of France, dared to
arm French privateers in an American port, and made

147

Charleston a French naval base."*’ The President did not
approve of this lack of respect and these warlike acts,
which the treaty of 1778 did not clearly cover. (Only the
right of arming privateers in American ports was specifi-
cally accorded France, and not that of bringing in prizes
and selling or arming them.) Lastly, Washington did not
like these waves of brusque and ardent sentiment that
were working such sudden havoc throughout the entire
country. His deliberate and profound nature considered
them as both a danger and a folly. Genet’s next mis-
fortune was to fall into the hands of the Republican
party, who made use of him without being of any service
to him in return. The Republicans needed some one to
organize an active campaign against the Federalists and
the government. They lacked courageous leaders. Neither
Jefferson, Madison, nor Monroe was willing to compro-
mise himself. Genet launched a splendid movement for
them. Everywhere he organized, or had organized, demo-
cratic societies, veritable political and electoral leagues
against the Federalists.** He radiated an intense enthu-
siasm. He did everything in his power to separate the

American people from their government. Seeing that328 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Washington treated him coldly, he decided that “old
Washington” had seen his day, that he lacked energy,
and that a courageous stand would soon force him to
follow the will of the people. Genet felt an intense moral
Y and mystic force behind him. He considered Washington
an old man, worn-out and spiritless.“” He consulted
Jefferson, who answered him vaguely and promised him
his support. Genet wanted to bring about the invasion
of Louisiana to strike a blow at Spain and England. He
delegated the naturalist Michaux to go to Kentucky under
scientific pretexts and come to an agreement with General
Clark, who would be provided with the necessary means
for organizing an expedition in Kentucky against New
Orleans.’*° Jefferson approved the project and put Genet
in touch with Brown, the Governor of Kentucky. Gov-
ernor Moultrie of South Carolina was also informed of
the plan and approved of it. This was the means that
Genet had found of taking advantage of American
neutrality, which he did not hope to be able to violate or
bring to an end immediately because of Washington and
the American aristocracy. He continued to arm ships at
Charleston and other ports. Washington, in accord with
his cabinet in not desiring war, forbid him to sell or arm
French prizes in the waters of the United States."* Genet
received communications every day from all parts of the
Union congratulating him warmly. He felt that he had
the support of Jefferson, the Secretary of State. He be-
lieved that it would be safe to take bold steps. He madeSPIRITUAL UNION 329

a pretense of obeying Washington’s order, but he con-
tinued arming prizes secretly. Washington learned of it
and openly attacked Genet, who was placed in an embar-
rassing position. His situation was all the more difficult
because he had talked too widely. Led on by his desire to
rouse the masses and feeling that they were with him, he
had organized the French Consulates into bureaus of
propaganda and publicity. He had recommended that
they pay particular attention to the newspapers and
spread in the North news hostile to the English and the
Indians, and in the South attacks against Spain. He him-
self made tours in the course of which he spoke with
violence and eloquence on the subjects of liberty, intol-
erance, the federation of nations, etc. At his instigation,
Jefferson and other Republicans wrote fine anonymous
pamphlets against England and tyrants.”** During 1793,
in the Philadelphia General Advertiser alone, “Junion,”
“Juba” and “An Old Soldier” spoke in favor of “the
people’s war’ and criticized Washington. Genet gave
dinners and presided at banquets, and good cheer in-

spired him. In the course of a visit of this kind to New

York, he shocked Noah Webster so deeply by criticizing »

Washington and preaching against Christianity, that
5 I 5 45 )

Webster. who until then had been favorable to France,
5

became her most violent enemy. During this same visit, it

seems, Genet declared that, if the American government
would not listen to reason, he would make a direet appeal

to the people.’ It was just this that he had been doing

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

SSN RSE ma rg oe Sea Stes Sy siss ss ase

Ser eee ett ae eo eee330 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

     
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

ever since his arrival in America. He was only adopting
Paine’s formula: the government versus the people. But
these words came to Jay’s ears. Jay was shrewd. At last
he saw a way of breaking down Genet’s position and
striking a serious blow at French influence. He repeated
the French minister’s words. He had Genet attacked
in all the Federalist papers for this anarchistic attempt
to disrupt the nation and the American Constitution.
National pride was engaged. Within a few days, Genet
found himself abandoned by his best friends. Jefferson
disavowed him officially as he had already disowned him
in deeds. Washington’s cabinet was unanimous in asking
the Convention to recall Genet, and the request was trans-
mitted through Gouverneur Morris,” who was then
American minister in Paris and who, on his own initiative
and through the good offices of the discreet friends that
he had among the Jacobins, had it decided that Genet
should be guillotined as soon as possible after his re-
turn.*®° He would only have been following his Girondist
friends who had just suffered the same fate. Thus Genet’s
fraternal mission came to a tragic end. It had been disas-
trous for France, but very useful to the Republican
party in the United States, which was left strong and
well organized. By means of Genet’s democratic clubs,
it had gathered to it and organized all the violent ele-
ments of the population. These were chiefly immigrants
from Europe—Germans, Irishmen and Frenchmen of
the lowest classes. Through Genet’s efforts, these menSPIRITUAL UNION 331

had acquired a class-consciousness and learned their
strength.” Genet had begun the battle well: his attacks
against governmental aristocracy, the clergy and the
executive pointed out the road that must be followed to
achieve victory. He was beaten, but he left the admin-
istration and the Federalist party in a critical situation.
England still seemed hostile, and even those who hoped
for a reconciliation with her could not see clearly how to
bring it about. France was becoming unreasonable, and
the United States could foresee the time when they would
have to pay dearly for her alliance. Within the country
itself, a party of unprecedented violence was forming and
drawing into its ranks men who had never held a place
nor been of any importance in American life. A fever of
democracy had laid hold on the land. The people as a
whole wanted no war, either foreign or civil; but even
the majority of the New England preachers were lauding
France in lyric terms for combating tyrants, destroying
the Papacy and the Catholic Church, and laying the
foundations of a new era.*” In the face of this outburst,
which in the ports and along the frontiers was becoming
dangerously active, the government was badly armed.
In July, even more feverish and enthusiastic demonstra-
tions had taken place.“ The tone employed by the Re-
publican newspapers and the clergy was becoming worthy
of the Apocalypse. Although few people were in favor of
it, a war with England was possible, and a material and

moral cataclysm seemed inevitable. The supporters of332 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT
the government, who thus far had been wealthy and
orderly citizens, felt that in self-defense they would
have to exert themselves more than formerly. Their news-
papers began to employ a more energetic tone. They
counted on the minister whom the English had at last
sent to America. They procured pamphleteers, among
whom Noah Webster,’ the lexicographer, and William
Willcox were the most prominent.’ Webster was quite
sincere. Willcox’s activities seem to have been more open
to suspicion.*” In order to fight on equal terms, while
working toward a reconciliation with England, the Fed-
eralists turned their attention to the clergy, especially
in New England, and tried to raise up the old religion in
opposition to the new one. This was difficult, for the
clergy was bound by liberal traditions of long standing
and imbued with democratic tendencies. Nevertheless, the
impiety of the French was a good theme to exploit. In
A793 the American clergy did not seem decided as to the
direction it should follow, and Federalism stood waver-
ing before a Republican party, heterogeneous it is true,
but very numerous and filled with a mystic fervor. [The

ardor of French Jacobinism was in its veins.

or

*K  O*K

The Republican party followed all the transitions of
the moral and political conflict in France. It accepted

/ the French Revolution in all its phases and pronounce-ml a
sea tial

      
 
  
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
   

SPIRITUAL UNION 333

ments. When Brissot, the great apostle of Americanism,
fell, no one in America regretted him or took his part.
Sympathy was felt for La Fayette, who still enjoyed
some of his prestige and was looked upon as being mis-
taken but not guilty." Brissot, who was not widely
known and who had done nothing for America, went
down unmourned. Yet, the party in France that had
made the most use of the United States and placed the
greatest store on her friendship sank with him. Robes-
pierre, as we have seen, had been a worshiper at the
shrine of Franklin from his youth up. He remained faith-
ful to this worship in his maturity; and even when he
was attacking Brissot’s partisans in the name of patriot-
ism and morality, he spoke with profound veneration of
Franklin.“ His devotion had nothing of the sentimental
effusiveness that characterized that of the Girondists;
but the deist religion, rational and mystic, was still the
point on which he and his adversaries had most in com-
mon. Both sides aimed at setting up a republican religion,
but each of them wanted to be its founder. In their
attitude on this point, the followers of Brissot were more
hostile to Catholicism and more given to pure negation
than Robespierre, for they had begun their attacks earlier
than he and believed that there was more to be demol-
ished before beginning to build anew. Moreover, their
constructive spirit was limited and vague.’** Robespierre
seemed more moderate, since he personally had come into

power at a time when Catholicism was helpless. He there-334 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

fore sought rather to make use of its ruins; but nothing
proves that he had any sympathy for the Church. The
Jacobins were directing a heavy attack against the fed-
eralism of Brissot’s followers and their imputed desire to
imitate the United States. There is no conclusive evidence
that they entertained this desire. There was indeed a dis-
cussion at the Jacobin Club in September 1792, during
the course of which some citizens defended federal gov-
ernment as it was practiced in the United States; but
these men seem to have been obscure and to have had no

165

connection with the Girondist chiefs.“ The only ground
on which they might be accused of federalism is the in-
sistence with which they always proclaimed, in accord
with Franklin, that democracy demanded a government
as weak and as lax as possible in order to leave the people
the real master of its own destinies.“*° In the danger that
menaced France in 1792-1793, this theory was imprac-
ticable. Robespierre triumphed easily. But, after all,
his efforts to moralize the Revolution are only, all things
considered, the systematic prolongation of the senti-
mental concept that Brissot voiced when he said, “With-
cout private mores there can be no public mores and no
liberty.”

With the fall of Brissot, the most prominent American
figures among the French Revolutionists dropped out of
sight—particularly the great apostle of the republic,
Paine, whom the Jacobins, friends of Robespierre, put in

prison where other Jacobins, friends of Morris, saw to itSPIRITUAL UNION 335

that he remained.*’’ Once master of the situation, Robes-
pierre set about realizing his projects for a religion. One
after the other, France saw launched Hébert’s Religion
of Reason, Robespierre’s Cult of the Supreme Being and
the decadary cult. It will be remembered that the spec-
tacle of the American Revolution had long inspired the
French pamphleteers and philosophers with the idea that
a deist and social religion with its holidays was necessary
to a well-ordered state. A lay calendar entitled the Ca/-
endrier de Philadelphie had already been printed in 1778.
In 1792, Manuel proposed following up this idea.*** In
the various forms of worship that functioned in France
during these years, whatever the label may have been, the
contents were always largely American. Children were
baptized in republican fashion with the name of Frank-
lin.” The life of Franklin was published in the newspa-
pers under the heading “Morale.” *° In the Alphabet des
Sans-culottes, pour former la Jeunesse républicaine, to the
question, ‘“Who are the great men who by their writings
laid the foundation for the Revolution?’ *” the an-
swer was, “‘Helvetius, Mably, J. J. Rousseau, Voltaire
and Franklin.” In the decadary ceremonies, homilies were
read on the subject of the Americans, their virtues and
the union of the republicans of the world to bring about
the world’s salvation. The Americans were represented as
making an appeal to the French, as for example in the
discourses pronounced by Citizen Maurin at the Temple

of Reason of the Bonne-Nouvelle Section from the tenth

re336 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

of Pluviése to the twentieth of Ventose, of the year II."
The Chansonnier de la-Montagne and the Lyre républ-
caine show that Franklin and the United States were
still used as perfect examples of republican virtue.” In
short, if through the turn of party politics, things Ameri-
can enjoyed less vogue than formerly, the moral influence
of the United States continued to be felt along the same
directions as it had been for the past twenty years. This
influence was still strong and popular. Its diffusion makes
it difficult to follow it in all its varied manifestations,
but it is to be felt wherever spiritual ardor reigns and
wherever minds are concerned with other aspects of the
revolution than the mere armed conflict.

The policy that Robespierre followed was not hostile
to the United States. He wanted to win back the Ameri-
cans and continue the policy of the monarchy, which had
been interrupted by Brissot’s blundering, and reconcile
statecraft with a frankness befitting republics. He blamed
neither America nor her leaders for anything, but con-
sidered Genet at fault. He decided therefore to send to
America a young, intelligent and able man, Fauchet.

The new minister was to be supervised and aided by a
committee composed of the French Consuls in America:
La Forest, Pétry and Le Blanc. This commission was in-
structed to disavow.Genet and all his works, arrest him,
tender friendly words to the American government and,
by way of a guarantee, order French privateers in Ameri-

can waters to disarm, and condemn those who had armedSPIRITUAL UNION 337

them originally. They were also to put an immediate stop
to the expedition against New Orleans, which violated
American neutrality, to see that the treaty of 1778 was
respected and to negotiate a new commercial treaty.
Lastly, Robespierre recommended that the commission
win the confidence of Washington. These instructions,
wise on the whole, were, however, very vague; and,
whether because the mails had been intercepted by the
English or because his superiors at Paris had no time to
give to such remote questions, F'auchet was never to re-
ceive any others.’ Since, beside this, he quarreled with
two of the members of his council, his task was not an
easy one. The aim of his instructions was to restore order,.
clarity, and moral rectitude in the international relations,
which had been muddled by intrigue and ill-advised en-
thusiasm. But Fauchet again was one who knew the
United States only through their legend, and his instruc-
tions and Robespierre’s counsels to him were inspired
only by this legend. His effort toward political honesty
was as futile as Genet’s impassioned virtue.

In fact, before Fauchet’s arrival, Genet had struck a
most serious blow at France’s reputation by publishing
his instructions. These instructions claimed that, in going
through the archives of Foreign Affairs, it had been estab-
lished that the old régime had always been dishonest,
mercenary, jealous and selfish in its relations with the
United States. This declaration, which seemed to be a

confession, did not cause any great scandal at first; but338 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

 

it was noted down carefully. Gradually it was circulated
throughout the United States, and it greatly complicated
the task of Fauchet, who had come to speak in the name
of France eternal.” He was well received, however.
Throngs acclaimed him, democratic societies wrote to
him, Randolph, who had become Secretary of State in
place of Jefferson, treated him as a friend, and Wash:
ington showed him flattering attentions. Along his way,
“Ca ira’ was played.”

Fauchet wanted to avoid entanglements. He tried to
keep on friendly terms with the Federalists, but it was
impossible to be in favor with both parties; he was
obliged to make a choice. He soon became the agent of
the Republicans, not conspicuously as Genet had, but
discreetly and by back-stair intrigue. Out of contact with
the country that he represented, attacked by his own
colleagues, suspected by the principal American dignita-
ries, harassed by the Republicans, who wanted guarantees
of his good faith,’ Fauchet was also obliged to combat
the disastrous influence of the French refugees who were
arriving by the thousand from Santo Domingo, starving,
disgruntled and miserable. In the larger cities there were
former Conventionalist émégrés, filled with hatred for
Robespierre; and in the country districts there were mon-

archists and Constitutionalists.***

Everywhere Fauchet
found the prestige of La Fayette still flourishing and in-
creased by his afflictions. Thus every move he made was

| dangerous. He found himself prisoner of the enthusiasmSPIRITUAL UNION 339

that Genet had stirred up and which, swelled to the pro-
portions of a social force, carried him along just as a
regiment carries a flag that it appears to follow. In addi-
tion to his official duties Fauchet tried to carry on secret
negotiations. In this he was going against the instructions
that had been given him officially. Necessity forced him
to it perhaps, for his enemies were unscrupulous; but he
was punished for his secret audacity as severely as Genet
was for his unbridled tongue.’ His great error during
these first months of 1794 lay in believing that the Ameri-
can people loved France for herself and were ready to
serve her. He did not see that the Republican politicians
loved France above all as a weapon in national politics,
as an all-mighty lever for moving minds and raising en-
thusiasms to a high plane. He failed to distinguish the
differences between a common ideal and a community of
interests.

As a matter of fact, the situation of the American gov-
ernment, and of Washington, who at that time was the
American government, was as perilous as that of the
French minister. Washington was caught between the
intrigues of Fauchet, who wanted a treaty but had noth-
ing precise to offer, and the Federalists, who undertook,
by coming to an agreement with England, to avoid war
and realize all the benefits that had been expected of the
peace of 1783 and calm the rising tide of turbulence,
license and the French doctrines, which threatened to

wipe out the old Anglo-American civilization.

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
  
   

eee te See ee rer ee te ee Pl See he ls oe ee
Pe yet Set ya eee ~ - ;340 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

It was no longer, as it had been in the preceding years,
a matter of slow infiltration through the upper classes.
French influence was seeping into the masses. From 1780
to 1788, through the efforts of the group of intellectuals
and philosophers in France who concerned themselves
with the United States, interesting attempts had been
made to introduce EHuropean education into America.
French professors had settled in all the cities, and all
the larger colleges either offered French or allowed it to
be taught. This tendency continued and became even
more pronounced from 1789 to 1794.'°° Montesquieu
was studied at Yale. At Brown and Harvard commence-
ment orators discussed the French Revolution and praised
it. At Cambridge a learned professor, Monsieur de
Nancréde, exerted a real influence.” Students entering
William and Mary College were obliged to know the
elements of French. At Williams College, students who
so desired could study French and be examined in this
subject. At Columbia University a Frenchman, Villette
de Marcellin, was engaged to teach his mother tongue.
It is even more significant to find the preparatory schools
that were then being founded, providing their students
with facilities for learning French.’ On the other hand,
no institution had adopted Quesnay’s plan; there was no
longer any question of offering a more purely cultural
education like that of the old régime in France.” Ques-
nay himself, interrupted in the midst of his work of

/ organization by the Revolution, had remained in France.SPIRITUAL UNION 341

There he had at first concerned himself with moderate
revolutionary politics and had even published a news-
paper. Later he dropped out of sight in the turmoil and
nothing further was heard of him.*** The building that
had been constructed at Richmond to house his university
was finally used as a theater. Jefferson and John Adams,
to make up for his defection and do something of a like
nature, had thought of transporting the entire University
of Geneva to America; but public opinion was not favor-
able to the plan.”*’ It was felt that foreigners, speaking
a language unintelligible to the masses, would be lost
and useless in America. Popular sentiment, elated at the
triumph of American ideas throughout the entire world
and proud of its new country, demanded a practical and
democratic education suited to the needs of the country.
Noah Webster expressed this thought in The American
Museum, the most prominent magazine of the time, in
1792. It was admitted, however, that the education of
girls should be more complete and cultural. In this same
magazine we find articles whose intent it is to show how
necessary French is in the education of women. The men
had no time to lose. They wanted knowledge that would
be of use to them; hence we find many professors of
French keeping schools of dancing and fencing for young
men at the same time.***

In the libraries French books were becoming increas-
ingly numerous. They were also of a less intellectual and

more popular character. There was still, it is true, a

 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
   

abetaSeSs bert aagszgapipigcse%342 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

goodly proportion of the works of Voltaire, Rousseau
and Raynal; but the writings of Sully and Fenelon,
which formerly were to be found everywhere, were be-
coming rarer.**’ Most of the French books that were com-
ing into America were books of travel, historical works
and novels. The works of Marmontel and the sentimental
tales of Madame de Genlis were in the greatest demand.
Throughout the magazines and newspapers, one finds
numerous translations and adaptations from French
novels concerning the poor black slaves, the virtues of the
Swiss and the life of the French peasants.** One of the
most famous American novels of the time, Charlotte,
is a sentimental and heart-rending tale, bedecked with
ornaments from Sterne, in which a French villainess plays
a dramatic part. In 1789 Mrs. Morton of Boston had
published a novel entitled The Power of Sympathy,
whose virtuous, emotional and worldly tone was inspired
by Sterne and Marmontel. This influx of French senti-
mental novels into the cultivated circles of the United
States was favored by the ever-increasing number of
émigrés. Girondists, Constitutionalists and even Mon-
archist refugees were coming to the New World in search
of a simple life and an ideal inspired by the reading of
Rousseau. They were so deeply penetrated with this sen-
sibility that it left its stamp on everything they touched.
Nancréde, professor at Harvard and faithful disciple of
Brissot, published a moral and literary manual, L’Adei/le

francaise, in which he printed long extracts from Ber-SPIRITUAL UNION 343

nardin de Saint Pierre.**” To their American acquaint-
ances, Madame de La Tour de Pin, the Marquis de Lezay
Marnésia, the Vicomte de Noailles, Omer Talon, etc.,
appeared as apostles of a refined “state of Nature”; and
a new sentimentality invaded American literature, which
until then had been somewhat rude and unpolished.”
The innumerable poems of the period have the soft
romantic breath and lyric flame of the revolutionary
spirit. In cultured and religious minds, the French in-
fluence led to a mystic concept of life and took on a
literary form. With politicians and men of action, it
became a practical, and at the same time, impassioned,
cult. To the former, the turmoil of revolution revealed
the infinite value of tender, delicate and profound senti-
ments, and inspired the desire for a world in which the
dictates of the heart should be the supreme law for
actions and works of art. For the others, revolution was
the means of laying hold on happiness and establishing
it on earth.*** The magazines were continually publish-

ing practical recipes of agriculture, natural sciences and

applied physics, translated from French. The phil-*

osophic Society of Philadelphia also was guided by the
spirit of practical philanthropy. It elected to its member-
ship statesmen, such as Brissot and Moreau de Saint-
Mery, and benefactors of humanity, such as Crevecceur
and Artaud, the president of the Cercles des Philadelphes
de Cap Frangais, journalists such as Luzac, and refugees
from the Cape, the Antilles and France. The period of

si
tt344 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

sreat names had passed; that of practical work had
come.”

It was through the masses that French influence was
filtering in. A French theater was opened at New York
and Le Devin de Village was played there in 1791. At
Boston, in spite of protests, plays were produced.” All
the large cities had French benevolent societies, which
were founded with the purpose of helping the poor, but
soon became clubs where good food and gay living were
the rule. The Philadelphia club is typical of its kind and
is still in existence.°* The French Masonic lodges of
Santo Domingo had been transplanted and were func-
tioning in Philadelphia as well as in the other ports, it
seems. They had a tendency to introduce a new and radi-
cal spirit into American Masonry, which until then had

been very conservative.’ Everywhere French influence

‘tended toward deism. At Boston, where French Catholics

had been allowed to build a chapel and, it is said, Protes-
tants attended Catholic services, this was taken as a sign
not of intense faith, but of tolerance and indifference.”
The same was true in Baltimore and in the West, where
French Sulpicians had settled. At Baltimore they had
established a university and, in the West, missions; but,
although they were tolerated, they made almost no
conversions and had no American followers.’*’ Genet
preached deism unchecked ; and in Massachusetts, Citizen
Godineau pointed out the impossibility of believing in
the divinity of Christ (1794). The same year the BostonSPIRITUAL UNION 345

papers published letters discussing and praising Robes-
pierre’s speech of April 21, 1794, on science and religion.
The American clergy preached the destruction of the
Papacy and Catholicism, and seems not to have per-
ceived that its blows rebounded against itself. Until
1794, on the whole, no fear of French deism was mani-
fested. Much to the contrary, writers and orators turned
it to their own uses and exploited it.’ Thus every-
where in the realm of words, the French Revolution
accomplished its work. Seven French newspapers, at
least, were published in the United States and kept up
a close contact between the French émigrés and the
American nation. Among these publications were: Le
Courrier politique de ? Univers of Boston, moderately
republican; Le Courrier francais of Philadelphia, Jaco-
bin; Le Courrier politique de la France et de ses Colonies
of Philadelphia, the organ of the French Creole refugees ;
Le Journal des Révolutions (1793); L’Etotle américaine
(1794); Le Patriote frangais at Charleston. There was
also Le Niveau de Europe et de Amérique septen-
trionale, the first journal of political economy to be pub-
lished in America. It was edited at Philadelphia by a
French émigré, Tanguy de la Boissiére."”” Everywhere,
under French influence and as a product of increasing
excitement, newspapers sprang up. They were divided
clearly into opposition and governmental organs; some of

them were unreservedly Francophile; others were tacitly

ail
|
crs

rit346 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

hostile but pretended to be fired by an enthusiasm for
Liberty.

All the works of the intellect in America, and par-
ticularly those that emanated from the masses or appealed
to them, reflected the struggle that was going on. Poetry,
which was the most spontaneous, democratic and wide-
spread form of literature, seemed entirely consecrated
to France and dominated by a Jacobin lyricism come
from Europe. Freneau, the greatest and most original of
the American poets of the period, celebrated the taking
of the Bastille in vigorous and eloquent verses.” In
spite of a vocabulary that is sometimes colorless or bom-
bastic, he succeeded in producing works that are great
because of his sincerity and passion. His prose-works,
which were published in his curious and admirable
National Gazette, are of equal merit. His work abounds
in pleas in favor of the republic, written in a brief,
violent, sardonic and compact style. As a polemic writer,
Freneau is harsh and forceful without being coarse. His
sincerity glitters like steel. In comparison with him,
Fenno, the editor of The Gazette of the United States,
is heavy and dull. These two papers, together with the
Federalist Columbian Centinel and the Republican Argus
and American Apollo of Boston, were the most interest-
ing and best presented of their kind. Every number of
them contained a variety of verses, letters from the
readers on the burning subjects of the day, official proc-

lamations, prices, European and American news, localSPIRITUAL UNION 347

advertisements, etc. Hamilton, Rufus King and John
Quincy Adams were the greatest purveyors of pamphlets
in favor of peace and neutrality. They maintained that
the treaty signed with the King of France could not be
valid under the French Republic and that, moreover,
there was no means by which the United States could
be of real assistance to France in the war. These essays,
lucid and without emphasis, are colorless and have lost
whatever interest they had in their time. As a rule, they
are well constructed and plausible. The replies that were
written by Madison under the name of Helvidius, and
the other Republican leaders under various antique
pseudonyms, defended Genet, who was then under fire,
and represented him as a martyr to the cause of the
people. They strove to show that the execution of Louis
XVI was justified by the dangers that beset France and
the crimes of the monarchy. They made appeal to the
sentiment of the brotherhood of the nations and the
passion for Liberty. Their vehement tone and prophetic
pronouncements were intended to impress the imagina-
tion. The modern reader finds their dogmatic tone and
superficial mysticism wearying, but it is easy to under-
stand how new and striking they must have seemed to
the readers of the period. The most eloquent clergy-
men followed the same lines. In their sermons they
praised France as the scourge of God, the exterminating
angel, and even as a sort of Messiah, guilty but justified.

Many pastors sought to wake the slumbering zeal of348 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT
their congregations by preaching a new variety of
millenarianism.”””

It was into this atmosphere of religious excitement and
political intrigue that Fauchet came in April 1794. The
pro-English Federalists, feeling how insecure was their
hold on public opinion, sought to avenge themselves by
diplomatic means. Jay was to save the day for them if
Washington would allow it and if the tide of popular
indignation could be stemmed.

Washington, despite his popularity, ability and
elorious past, had not been able to restore spiritual har-
mony and soothe over party quarrels; on the contrary, the
Republicans, who were becoming aware of their strength
and numerical superiority, were beginning to go so far
as to call for war against England. They controlled the
sreatest number of newspapers and the most truculent
ones. In spite of the opposition of powerful interests, in
spite of the merchants and the former Tories, who
naturally joined forces with the enemies of France, their
influence was everywhere felt. People like Samuel Adams,
who formerly had been so suspicious of France, rallied
to her ideals and allowed themselves to be carried away
by her enthusiasm.”” In such a moment Washington was
obliged to do one of two things: yield to the rising tide,
or employ stratagems and place his confidence in the
conservative Federalist party. He doubtless did not share
all their hatreds nor yet the blind hostility that kept them
from recognizing past services, but he dreaded war andSPIRITUAL UNION 349

had no sympathy for the new and turbulent party that
treated him so slightingly. Therefore, before Fauchet
could begin his intrigues, he sent Jay to England to try
to obtain a treaty that would regularize relations between
England and America and allow the renewal of their
former friendship and intimacy. Thus French culture,
the pro-French party and the French tribunes could be
combated. Provided with extensive powers, Jay set sail.
His primary purpose was to bring England to respect the
terms of the treaty of 1783 and surrender the post in
the West that she was still occupying. He was author-
ized to make concessions. He was to make haste; for the
Republicans were beginning a campaign to bring America
into war, and in Congress, Madison was urging the adop-
tion of a measure placing an embargo on English com-
merce if Great Britain did not respect the American ships
engaged in transporting goods to France. This vociferous
discussion was a further embarrassment to the govern-
ment. It was then that the administration had a happy
inspiration. In order to obtain favorable terms from Eng-
land, have a free rein in America and calm excited public
opinion, there was an advantage in pretending to be
negotiating with France.** Although every one expected
to see him choose a Federalist or a veteran politician like
Chancelor Livingston for this task, Washington selected
a young politician from Virginia who was known for his
republican opinions, James Monroe. Monroe’s sincere

friendship for France and revolutionary enthusiasm

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
   

SRSs2Zassizagpsgiges teers ses sss ees

ee ee eer pers re

ee

wseecs

ed

eo350 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

 

were beyond suspicion. He accepted the mission in the
hope that his devotion to the cause of Liberty would
enable the two republics to find a common ground on
which to unite. Morris, he was told, had been recalled
in order to please the French. He was instructed to come
to an agreement with Robespierre without sacrificing the
dignity of the United States. He was asked to draw up a
detailed report on France and her moral, religious and
political conditions, and instructed to represent Jay’s
negotiations as a purely formal step whose purpose was
to prove the good faith of the United States in case war
should become necessary. He was to say that Jay would
take up only the question of reparations to be obtained
and to add that the friendship of the United States and

205

her President was assured to France.” These instruc-
tions, which were in contradiction to those given to Jay,
delighted Monroe, who, in his zeal and enthusiasm, did
not suspect the adventure in which he was engaged. He
set out for France and arrived just after the Ninth of
Thermidor, in the midst of the joy and relief that fol-
lowed the fall of Robespierre. The Convention, still
hesitant and bewildered, was delighted to receive this
representative of the United States who arrived at such
a fortunate moment. A house belonging to the govern-
ment was placed at his disposition. His reception was an
elaborate ceremony, and French and American flags were
hung in the hall where the Convention held its sessions.”””

Before this body, Monroe proclaimed the brotherhoodSPIRITUAL UNION 351

of republics and exalted the cause of Liberty. A speech in
the same tone was pronounced in reply to him. He was
deeply touched, for he had expected no such re-
ception as this. He admired everything he saw. Even
the riots and successive executions of the revolutionary
leaders he justified by the necessity of keeping a watch
over the probity of men in power. France, he said, had
cast off her leaders as soon as they had given the first
sien of a spirit of tyranny or corruption.” Thus once
more the spiritual union of the two peoples was pro-
claimed, once more the masses might believe in the moral
unity of all free peoples, and the doctrine of the uni-
versal and inevitable Revolution that was to save the
world was proclaimed to the nations. The effort had been
sustained since 1788, and in 1794 Monroe must have
thought in his zealous and upright soul that the hour had
come to realize all the great hopes, “a consolation that
those who desire good and have served the cause of

Liberty may feel.”Chapter V

THE GREAT SCHISM

John Jay involves Washington and the Federalists in a policy

of rapprochement with Great Britain in spite of the re-
sistance of public opinion, pp. 353-362. At the same time
the American clergy begins attacking France as anti-rell-
gious, pp. 362-368. The French ministers try in vain to
combat this movement; they are prisoners of the Republican
party in the United States and cannot appease the govern-
ment, although they have a great moral influence on the

people, pp. 368-376.

A mystic love for France and her revolutionary ideal guides

Monroe, the American minister, in his mission, but he fails,
Pp. 377-382. French public opinion is roused against the
American government, although the political ideals and lib-
erty of the United States are still admired, pp. 382-394. The
Directory tries to intimidate the American government with-
out losing the favor of the American people. Talleyrand’s
influence in this direction, pp. 395-403. The Directory re-
fuses to receive the minister sent by the United States. Tal-
leyrand tries to extort money from the three commissioners

that the United States send subsequently, pp. 403-406.

This immoral act stirs the American people to great indignation:

 

the Republicans are dismayed, the Federalists endeavor to
profit by the crisis to carry out their program, a strong gov-
ernment, war with France, destruction of irreligion, pp. 406-
420. The Republicans feel that public opinion is turning
once more in their favor because of the progress that
“French” ideas have made in America. They resume their
democratic and mystic campaign, emphasizing French ideas,
pp- 420-424. President Adams makes advances to France,
PP: 424-425.

352THE GREAT SCHISM 353

At this moment Talleyrand is alarmed and seeks a reconciliation.
Negotiations are undertaken and Bonaparte signs a conven-
tion. He tries to utilize the memory of Washington as a
standard around which to rally both democrats and mon-
archists, pp. 425-441.

But the establishment of a Bonapartist government in France
marks the true separation between the United States and
France, the moral separation. Nevertheless an American
ideal of deist morality, a vision of liberty that wins over
even the monarchists and exerts an influence on the writers
of Romantic tendencies remains in France, pp. 442-451.
America renounces pagan France and her political corrup-
tion, pp. 451-458. But France is still a powerful stimulant
in American drama and literature, as well as in political,
social and religious life, pp. 458-471. Thus thirty years of
spiritual commerce between France and the United States
brought about the creation and diffusion of a new democratic
ideal. This friendship was as fruitful as it was impassioned,

PP: 471-478.
JOHN JAY IS AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT PATIENCE CAN
achieve. His mission in 1794 marks the triumph of his
fixed idea. Jay mistrusted France already in 1782: he
was the first to wish to see the alliance broken off. In
1783 he had succeeded in making a peace with England
without France, at the end of a war that America had
won by the aid of France.* From 1784 to 1788, as Secre-
tary of the Department of Foreign Affairs, he was able to
prevent the signing of consular conventions between
France and America; and in 1787 he declared that the
treaty of 1778 had already lapsed since it was signed
only for the duration of the war.” In 1793 he was
again one of the first to say that an alliance concluded
with Louis XVI could not rightfully remain in force

with the republic that had decapitated the King.” As354. THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

he had hated and despised Louis XVI and Vergennes,
so did he visit his hatred and spite on Brissot and
Robespierre. The sentiment that animated Jay was a
violent, all-embracing and vague fury against French
culture and the French spirit. Religious zeal and rancor
made him hate this Catholic and revolutionary coun-
try.* He set out for England in 1794 to link once
more the destinies of the United States with those of
England; and in the early part of the year 1795, he
submitted to the approval of the American government
the text of a treaty that was at last to break down all
accord between France and America. Jay had been sent
to England to obtain reparation of all the wrongs done
the United States—the retention of the forts in the
West in spite of the formal stipulations of the treaty of
1783, the illegal seizure of American ships on the high
seas and the forcible enrolling of American seamen in
the British navy, and the systematic destruction of all
the commerce that the Americans might have with France
and her colonies. Jay accepted a treaty that promised
once more the evacuation of the West, which had already
been promised in 1783, but refused any redress of the
other wrongs that America suffered, bound the United
States to some degree to the English policy by establish-
ing the principle that England should always be accorded
the treatment of the most favored nation, that no other
nation at war with England should have the right to

arm ships or sell prizes in American ports, and that Eng-THE GREAT SCHISM 355

land herself-should have this right. No American citizen
was to be allowed to accept a commission as a privateer
from any government at war with England under pain
of being considered as a pirate and treated as such. These
articles were aimed directly at France, who, by virtue of
the treaty of 1778, believed herself entitled to arm
ships in American ports and who, in 1776, had not
disavowed her citizens who went to serve in the American
forces.” Thus, without formally breaking the treaty of
alliance with France, Jay’s treaty rendered it impossible
of execution and substituted a defensive alliance with
England for the one with France. To imagine that
America might aid England in blockading France and
laying waste her commerce and still remain her ally
would have been absurd. In reality what Jay proposed
was a complete reversal of policy, although there was
some attempt to hide by hypocritical phraseology the
advantages that were to be given England. An illusory
reciprocity in all points concerning warships and arma-
ments was laid down as a principle; but the only condi-
tion under which this reciprocity could be brought into
play was in case of war between the United States and
France. Moreover, even from a commercial point of view,
the treaty was all in the favor of England, for while Eng-
land was allowed to send ships of any size to trade be-
tween America and the British West Indies, the only
American ships that were allowed to engage in this trade

were those displacing less than seventy tons; and also356 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

the Americans were not to have the right to trade be-
tween the British West Indies and other countries.

This treaty, with everything offensive to American
dignity that it contained, the position that it accorded to
England and its dissimulation and pitfalls, could not be
satisfactory to any sincere American patriot. Washington
looked upon it with disfavor; but, impatient with France
and determined not to enter the war on her side, he was
inclined to accept the text of Jay’s treaty, as Hamilton
urged him. However, perceiving how dangerous might
be the indignation of the people, Washington wanted the
treaty to be kept secret as long as possible.

The Senate discussed it and, faithful to its principles,
ratified it without the nation at large having learned its
contents (June 24, 1795). But a Senator from Virginia,
Thomas Mason, a friend and supporter of Jefferson, took
it upon himself, despite the wishes of the administration,
to give the text to a great democratic newspaper, The
Aurora of Philadelphia, which immediately published it.

Then began one of the most violent conflicts that
American politics have ever known. The nation as a
whole was hostile to Jay’s treaty and considered it as an
insult. It offended both American dignity and the re-
ligion of revolution. It was unfair to France and a blow
to the French party in America. It joined in hypocrisy
the bonds that had been burst asunder in ecstasy in 1770
and 1783; and for an honorable alliance on a footing of

equality with a great European nation, it substituted aTHE GREAT SCHISM 357

one-sided pact with the former sovereign. In his letters
to his friends, Jay declared that it was impossible to act
with “more delicacy, friendliness and seemliness” than
England had displayed during these negotiations.” His
friends defended this point of view stubbornly, and a
conflict that at first seemed unequal was waged between
the nation on the one side and the group of Federalists
who were in power on the other. Citizens of towns ad-
dressed petitions to the government. On all sides there
were demonstrations. At Charleston Jay, Adams and the
Devil were hanged in effigy. The newspapers published
articles and letters from all parts of the country attack-
ing Jay and his treaty. The House of Representatives
was opposed to it, and the merchants, who were ordi-
narily so pro-English, condemned it." Washington said
on July 29, 1795: “‘At present the cry against the treaty
is like that against a mad dog and every one in a manner
seems engaged in running it down.” The battle lasted
from the beginning of 1795 to the end of 1796, and the

Federalists triumphed.

Even before the publication of the treaty, the conflict '

had begun. The President, anxious to make a clean sweep
of the remains of the Jacobin influence that Genet had
spread throughout the country, had published a procla-
mation against the Jacobin clubs and democratic societies,
thereby attacking the instrument to which the pro-French
party and the Republicans owed their strength. In fact,

these clubs were the place where the immigrants, the

oad
er

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
   

Sak eSsJeSoss5sr23453535294E474~

er;
72s

ets

ee ee ee358 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

poor and uneducated, mingled with certain intellectuals,
became conscious of the force that their organization
represented and began to put it into action. The Presi-
dent of the United States and the Federalist leaders were
alarmed at the new force that was coming into being.
It was all the more violent for the fact that its dogma
was easily summed up and communicated in the three
words, “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity,” or in the briefer
American formula that it took for its credo: “Equal
Liberty.” In order to discredit them and stamp out their
influence, the President made use of the religious preroga-
tives that belonged to his office: in his Thanksgiving
Proclamation calling on the nation to render thanks to
God for the protection that He accorded the United
States, he inserted a denunciation of the Jacobin clubs
and their spirit. The Republican newspapers immediately
began a campaign to defend these societies against the
accusations of illegality and being an evil influence.
They showed that, on the contrary, they constituted a
salutary check on the too great powers of the executive.
They proved that these groups gave the people a means
of exercising a continual control over their representa-
tives. They were very outspoken in their criticisms of
Washington for refusing to obey the wishes of the people
and turning deliberately toward England. They evoked
the memory of Franklin in order to condemn these

machinations. The Aurora of Philadelphia and The

Argus, published by Greenleaf at New York, were con-THE GREAT SCHISM 359

tinually assailing the government and taking the part of
France.” These two great papers were copied in every
city in America. It was The Aurora that procured the text
of Jay’s treaty and dared to publish it. While the sur-
prise and indignation that followed this exposure were
at their height, Greenleaf published long series of articles
written by B. and R. R. Livingston under the pseu-
donyms of Decius and Cato. The Independent Gazetteer
of Philadelphia published a series of articles signed
Atticus, and The Aurora contributed to the campaign by
printing articles signed variously Hancock, Valerius,
Pittachus, Belisarius, etc. The theme of these attacks was,
with a varying degree of violence, always the same: the
President was reproached especially with having tried
to impose this treaty on the people without taking their
wishes into consideration, and with having sought a
reconciliation with a country that stood out as the cham-
pion of tyranny. As much as possible, the Republicans
confined the argument to the grounds of democracy.
They also spoke of the violations of the alliance with
France that were contained in the new treaty, but by
preference they drew attention to the question of the
principle involved. The dangers resulting from the high-
handedness of a despotic executive and an alliance with
an enslaved people were the main points of their argu-
ment. On every hand were heard protests of this kind.
Samuel Adams and John Dickinson, the author of the

famous pamphlet, The Letters of a Pennsylvania Farmer,

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    

ceo P eet el eer Sey PS tee be de

eeastsbad
> 2 SF pee Te

seca szcertses360 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

openly came to the support of the Republican cause.”
French cockades were worn on the streets, and militia
companies could not give a dinner without drinking
cordial toasts to the triumph of France. The Americans
celebrated the victories of France and the liberation of

Holland. Freneau wrote:

Genius of France, pursue thy chase
Till Reason’s law restore
Man to man in every clime.

He also wrote an ode of vengeance against Jay.”

The publication of the text of the treaty with Eng-
land had surprised the Federalists, but it had not caught
them altogether off their guard; for the campaign that
they had begun against the democratic societies tended
to refute in advance every argument that their adversa-
ries might bring up in the name of the principles of de-
mocracy. The Gazette of the United States, the most
typical of all the Federalist papers, since it was under
the direct control of Hamilton, the real leader of the
Federalists, had filled its columns in every issue from
January to July 1795 with attacks against the demo-
cratic societies and with letters advocating an alliance
with England. When the wave of indignation broke, it
had only to refute point by point everything that the
Republicans said about the treaty itself. Hamilton, with
his marvelous lucidity, did this in a long series of articles

which he signed Camillus. It is indeed the poorest of his

works. He tries in vain to prove by a long discussionTHE GREAT SCHISM

 

361

of details that the treaty is advantageous to the United
States, consistent with international law and judicious.
He takes the trouble to cite French jurists in order to
show his impartiality; but the work is long, heavy and
unconvincing.”

All this while, Hamilton and his friends were receiv-
ing powerful assistance from the English minister and
the many agents that England had stationed throughout
the Union. This minister, Hammond, who seems to have
been a clever man, had a large budget at his disposition
and knew how to be generous with it in rewarding such
members of Congress as were willing to heed his coun-
sels.” He also employed publicists, the most remarkable
of whom was a certain Cobbett, an Englishman by birth
and nationality, who had but recently settled in Amer-
ica. He wrote at first for the Massachusetts Sentinel.
Cobbett’s specialty was attacking the Jacobins with their
own weapons. His vehemence and coarseness, his gift for
calumny, his talent for introducing anything into the
realm of political discussion, made him a redoubtable ad-
versary but also a compromising friend. In the first phase
of the campaign, he was very useful to the Federalists,
who were rather lacking in popular leaders; and it is
curious to note that the only truly democratic voice that
the Federalists found to plead their cause was that of
an Englishman.” In addition to bribery and polemics,
the English minister made use of pamphlets and indirect

means. Mallet du Pan’s pamphlets attacking the French362 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Revolution were published in translation by the old Riv-
ington (who seems not to have ceased acting as an Eng-
lish spy), and were given a wide circulation. Boissy
d’Anglas’s speeches against the Jacobins were reprinted
from the French newspapers.’° The old but still service-
able trick of having the papers announce that France
was about to seize Louisiana was brought into play
again.’’ In such a game, England had everything in her
favor; for ignorance of things French was still rife in
America, where certain newspapers even went SO far as
to say “the Abbé Volney” in speaking of the famous
Jacobin philosopher. English propaganda in America was
once more in full swing. The government of Great Brit-
ain, without having changed its sentiments toward the
former colonies, considered them as a useful weapon in
the conflict with France. To spur them on, it kindled
their hatred against the Jacobins and their suspicions
against France, who was denounced as the seat of Jaco-
bin intrigues. Little novels, such as The Democrat or
the Intrigues and Adventures of Jean le Noir, brought
these accusations within the comprehension of all the
people.”

The New England papers were the most forward in
disseminating and favoring this news and these pam-
phlets and novels. A movement that almost amounted
to a crusade had begun in the Northern States and was

of great service to both England and the Federalists.””

New England had always been inclined to consider it-THE GREAT SCHISM 363

self as being under the special protection of God and
chosen by Providence for the mission of purifying the
world. Many clergymen had been pleased to compare
the Puritans and the Pilgrims, in their colonization of
Massachusetts, to the Jews fleeing from the persecutions
of the Egyptians. In 1793 Dwight wrote to Wolcott:
‘Not only young gentlemen from our sisters States, but
from every quarter of this globe would do well to pass
a few years of their life amongst us, and acquire our
habits of thinking and living. Half a dozen legislators
or even scholars bred in New England and dispersed
through the different countries of Europe every year
would in half an age change the political face of affairs
of the old world.” This comparison between Israel and
the United States, and particularly New England, re-
curred continually in the sermons of the Puritans.” Such
an attitude naturally led the preachers to consider the
French Revolution as an appeal from God to the United
States, either to magnify their virtues or to exhort them
to penitence. As long as they could make use of the
French mysticism to reénforce the old faith of the Puri-
tans, they did not evince any hostility against the revo-
lutionary tendencies, remembering doubtless how much
France had helped America toward her independence.
They protested but little at first against the execution
of Louis XVI. They greeted the battle between France
and Catholicism with joy. For years they had predicted
the downfall of papistry and despotism; for years they364 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

had sought to unite the dogmas of Christianity with the
zeal for Liberty and enliven one with the other. The
great emotional tumult that the French Revolution oc-
casioned throughout the world had at first appeared to
them to be something similar to the religious movements
that came about from time to time in the world and
brought the masses back to the spiritual life. At first
they saw in the French Revolution only mystic trans-
ports, heroic devotion to Liberty, and Christian deism.
It seemed to them that here was a new and formidable
force working toward the same ends as they themselves,
and one that they might utilize.* But when the French
Revolution and the French party in America had re-
vealed their purely deistic tendency, the New England
clergy began to change its attitude. The openly anti-
Christian speeches of Genet and the echo that they found
in America were an unmistakable warning. It was no
longer a valuable auxiliary that they saw in the French
Revolution, but a powerful enemy that would have re-
placed the religion of Christ with the worship of man
deified. Noah Webster in his work on the French Revo-
lution (1794) pointed out that, no sooner had France
escaped from the domination of papist superstitions, than
she fell into new forms of bigotry, such as the Cult of
Reason, which, he said, derived from the same pagan
stock.22 Webster’s book had been widely read in New

England. It made the more impression since, almost at

the same time, America was beginning to receive copiesTHE GREAT SCHISM 365

of Paine’s latest book, The Age of Reason, written dur-
ing his imprisonment, as a supreme insult to the God
of the Christians, against whom he cited everything that
he judged incongruous and incredible in the Bible, as
well as the old arguments of Voltaire and Rousseau, to
conclude in favor of the existence of a Supreme Being,
architect and astronomer, who regulated the general
course of things without concerning himself with details.
This book contained a rich harvest of blasphemies and
profanations. It roused indignation everywhere. Now, in
the eyes of the American patriots, Paine was the most
concrete link between their own Revolution and that of
France. Preachers and publicists hastened to confute him.
Belknap refuted him with citations from the Bible, J.
Dennie with insults, and Cobbett with revilings mingled
with calumny and vituperation.™ A little later there was
published in London a third book which was to have
sreat success in America, where it was translated, pub-
lished and widely circulated: Memoirs on Jacobism, by
Abbé Barruel.”* This great work was the first systematic
attempt to show that the French Revolution was a prod-
uct of a satanic activity and establish a connection be-
tween the campaigns of the German IJluminati, the Ma-
sonic lodges and the Jacobins. In short, he defined the
French Revolution as the Antichrist. This view was cer-
tain to please the preachers of Massachusetts and the
other Northern states, for it suited their own mystic

tendency and allowed them to appeal to a fervor that366 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

was no longer grafted upon the revolutionary mysticism,
but was, on the contrary, opposed to it. This France,
papist, monarchist and corrupted, now suddenly over-
whelmed, by an inexplicable wave of new and diabolic
mysticism—was not this one of the tokens of the end of
the world, the Beast against whom America alone, pure
and Christian, her feet set on the true path, stood as the
representative of the Church, decimated but still re-
sisting ?

David Osgood, a clergyman of Medford, Massachu-
setts, was the first to perceive it. In a sermon preached
on September 20, 1794, he belled the cat. He was the
first to condemn France and her revolution formally from
the pulpit, when most of his colleagues were still saying
with Morse: “While we felicitate ourselves on a freedom
from the various calamities which afflict this magnani-
mous nation, we cannot but feel deeply interested in their
happiness and wish for their success in all virtuous meas-
ures to advance a cause dear to mankind and in defense
of which we formerly experienced their generous aid.” »
Osgood opened up a new road. He had followers; he
created a sensation. Sullivan, under the pseudonym of
Nouvion,” refuted him with vehemence; but the blow
had been a telling one; and from that day forth, we
find this same theme in dozens of sermons. The orthodox
Congregational clergy was the most zealous producer of

such homilies. Also it is in the newspapers of the North

that we find the most attacks against France. They criti-THE GREAT SCHISM 367

cized her republican bigotry, the which, after having been
considered for six years as a sound doctrine, was now
branded as a false teaching. They condemned her for her
low morality and her bloody violences wherein there was
nothing pure. They condemned her Constitution which,
while finally recognizing the value of the balance of
powers, did not understand how to go about putting it
into practice. Lastly, they repeated that France was a
mere beginner in the school of liberty and that she had
tried to imitate the United States but had failed because

o7
mi

of her lack of mores and virtues.” They supported their
argument with the documents that Genet had foolishly
published after his disgrace; by way of justifying him-
self, the former minister had made public the instruc-
tions given him on his departure from France, which, as
the reader will remember, contained a thorough and false
arraignment of Louis XVI, whom they accused of du-
plicity toward the United States because he had not con-
sidered it natural that they should increase their terri-
tory indefinitely at the expense of his Spanish allies.
These documents had had a tremendous effect. Every-
where they had been accepted as proof of French im-
morality, and at this moment no argument could have
shaken the French influence, reposing as it did on a sen-
timental and religious enthusiasm, more profoundly.
There was hardly a pamphlet attacking France during
the years 1795-1796 but cited Genet’s instructions and

drew from them the most bitter conclusions. Thus clergy,368 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

pamphleteers and politicians struck at the very heart of
the Franco-American alliance.”

The response was furious and worthy of the attack.
Aside from the customary vilification, its special aim was
to save the republican cult. The French minister led the
chorus, but the popular sentiment of the poor and farm-
ing classes joined in enthusiastically.

The situation of the French minister was not an easy
one. To combat the calumnies and inaccuracies that the
English newspapers circulated throughout the American
public and press, he had only two weapons at his com-
mand, intrigue and faith. French newspapers were not
reaching America or were arriving too late and irregu-
larly.”® Since 1785, the French press service had been
disorganized and seemed in a fair way to remain so. Cer-
tain consuls, among them Mangourit at Charleston, un-
dertook to carry on controversies, but it only brought
them into discredit. Robespierre’s instructions to Fauchet
when he set out for America had been very friendly to the
United States and very moderate: he was simply to try
to draw the two countries together by making the Amer-
icans forget Genet and by offering them very consider-
able advantages, namely, Louisiana and Canada. Fauchet
had behaved with reserve and had made a favorable im-
pression on Washington. Unfortunately, the moral crisis
through which the United States were passing and the

influences that were working on Washington, had

brought about a coolness between the President and theTHE GREAT SCHISM 369

French minister. Despite anything he might do, Fauchet
had found himself, like Genet, prisoner of the Repub-
lican party and enemy of the Federalist party, with
which Washington was now patently allied. Monroe and
R. R. Livingston had become Fauchet’s secret counselors
and exercised an absolute control over his decisions. They
urged him on to a war to the knife against the Federal-
ists. Fauchet had the wisdom to conduct himself with
prudence. However, when Jay’s treaty was submitted to
the Senate, he could not refuse to take action.*° He had
come into close relations with Randolph, Washington’s
Secretary of State, and it might be said that they col-
laborated. It is perhaps through Fauchet’s influence on
Randolph that Monroe was chosen as envoy to France.
It was certainly Randolph who advised Fauchet to use
indirect and dubious means to procure a majority in the
Senate against Jay’s treaty. Tazewel, a senator from
Virginia, was his agent. Fauchet at that time was wor-
ried and discouraged, for he had just learned of Robes-
pierre’s fall and his own replacement by Adet, who ar-
rived shortly after. He therefore turned over his powers
and his intrigues to his successor, who was so lacking in
vigilance and shamelessness that the senators eluded
French influence, took dinner with Hammond, passed
part of the night at his house and voted the treaty by
a large majority.** The worst of it was that Hammond,
who knew of Fauchet’s machinations, was clever enough

to secure a dispatch proving that Randolph had been

S223 ag2zgazigaica«s

ssgia Se dets Seb sts2cseiTst33¢

ee

errr re se fo St eo Pe

peas sseS Dg rd apis eh thesis tess

a370 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

concerned in them. He had this paper turned over to
Washington; and by this one stroke the political career
of Randolph and the reputation of Fauchet and France
were compromised.”

It seems to be true that Randolph received no money
from Fauchet, but it is certain that he did help him in
distributing it. Fauchet’s efforts to exonerate him were
futile; everybody persisted in believing him guilty.
Fauchet’s failure can be laid at the door of the French
government; he had been left without instructions and
without support in the midst of the most difficult condi-
tions and in a most critical situation.** He returned to
Europe embittered. As with Genet, his enthusiasm had
given place to indignation. In this nation whom he had
seen at first as the apostles of a common faith, he now
saw hypocritical bigots. He recommended an energetic
policy to the French government and urged that France
retake the Mississippi valley in order to bring the Amer-
icans to appreciate her force and the value of an alli-
ance with her. He advocated neither violence nor inter-

ference with American internal politics, but a close ac-

cord with the Republican party.”

Adet, who succeeded him, tried to follow this pro-
cram. Like Fauchet, he was still young and a scholar
(chemist) whom the Revolution had drawn into poli-
tics. He regretted leaving Geneva where he had been
the French minister, and he did not hide his dejection at

being sent to America. He wrote an imprudent letter inTHE GREAT SCHISM 371

which he compared the Republic of Geneva with that of
the United States, much to the detriment of the latter.
This letter was discovered and published in the United
States. He also lacked adaptability. His scruples frus-
trated Fauchet’s immoral machinations. He did not how-
ever refrain from sending three agents into the West to
spy out and stir up the inhabitants of the region. His
antipathy for America was so marked that he could not
possibly make a favorable impression.*” He employed an
émigré from Santo Domingo, Tanguy La Boissiere, to
draw up a report on commerce between the United States
and France. This work, which was very remarkable for
its documentation, was published in an edition of one
hundred copies, and Adet did not allow any of these
copies to be sold or shown to the Americans, lest it should
be used as a weapon against France. By temperament
he was a dogmatic Jacobin and a reformer. For him
the love of France was an article of faith, not only for
Frenchmen, but for all men. He said scornfully of Jef-
ferson: “Although an admirer of the efforts that we have
made to break our chains and dissipate the clouds of
ignorance that hang over mankind, Mr. Jefferson is an
American and, as such, he cannot sincerely be our
friend.” ** The Committee of Public Safety had directed
him to present a French flag to President Washington.
For fear of seeing the flag neglected and slighted, Adet
waited until Congress was in session to execute this com-

mission. The presentation occasioned a very impressive

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
  

- ab elteSeSeeisezagszgapiepigc«ers372 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

session in the House of Representatives, who accepted
this token of friendship with the deepest and most sin-
cere emotion. The flag was accompanied by a note from
the Committee of Public Safety exalting Liberty, the
Republic, the republican brotherhood of nations, and the
French victories that were preparing the way for a repub-
lican universe. The House replied in the same spirit; but
Washington, in his speech of thanks, said that the flag
would be deposited in the archives of the United States.
The American flag was hung in the assembly-hall of the
Convention. The difference of treatment roused Adet’s
indignation. “This flag,” he said, ‘will be hidden away
in an attic and destined to become the provender of the
rodents and insects that live there.” *’ Filled with resent-
ment against the Federalists and the government, he
began carrying on a furious propaganda in favor of the
Republicans. Despairing of obtaining any satisfaction
from the President and the existing Congress, he went
through the country stirring up support for Jefferson.
When the critical moment of election approached, he
published in The Aurora of Philadelphia four open let-
ters to the American government couched in pompous
and sentimental terms and threatening reprisals if the
American government did not change its attitude and
cease violating the treaty of 1778. He announced that
France, by way of showing her disapproval, was about

to recall him. His intention was to evince a melodra-

matic change of heart and show himself once more as aTHE GREAT SCHISM 373

generous friend as soon as the triumph of the Republi-
cans should be assured.** It is painful and sad to recall
all these intrigues when one remembers the sincere en-
thusiasm that the masses in America felt for France.

In many churches, the victories of France were still
celebrated as triumphs for Liberty. The majority of the
newspapers still represented France as defending the
cause of humanity. This was particularly true in the
South and West where almost all of the papers spoke in
these terms. There was rejoicing at the “liberation” of
Holland. The 14th of July was celebrated. South Caro-
lina distinguished itself by its ardor, but Baltimore was
not far behind. The Irish members of Tammany were
almost all of them Francophiles, as were the Germans.
News of French victories was eagerly published through-
out the country. Nevertheless, public opinion and French
propaganda suffered two defeats: Jay’s treaty was rati-
fied by both Houses; and Adams was elected president
over Jefferson, who lost by two votes. The fear of war
had given the Federalists the support of the House of
Representatives. Through the efforts of the clergy, their
party had gained strength in the North and had not been
defeated in the South.*® Moreover, they had at their dis-
position all the resources that their position as the party
already in power afforded. They had scored a victory,
but not without great difficulty, and the fight was not
over. Between ¢her ideal of a strong government that
should dominate the people and mark out their path for

me
sanity374 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

them according to the dictates of traditional morality,
and the other ideal of a weak government that should
accept the orders of the people as its political and moral
code, there could be no truce. The Republican party,
which had been so weak in 1792, was now of equal
strength with the Federalists, and thirsted for vengeance.
It had consolidated itself; and slowly its great man, Jef-
ferson, drawing from French examples whatever he
judged assimilable in America, had formulated a doc-
trine. He still took refuge behind the French doctrines,
which helped him to elaborate his own; but his party
was becoming a national party with a world-wide plat-
form and mission.

Thus in 1796 and 1797 all those in whose hearts the
democratic ideal burned, all those who were to become
the leaders of the Republican party, came under French
influence and derived their doctrines from those from
across the sea. Nothing is more curious than to see John
Dickinson, the enlightened patriot of 1770, the methodic
and moderate revolutionist, so firmly attached to the
French Republic in 1797. In the letters that he pub-
lished under the name of Fabius, he took a generous and
philosophic attitude that was in keeping with his ideal-
istic soul. He saw the French Republic as the heir of
Louis X, who in 1315 declared all citizens of France
equal, and Louis XVI, who freed the United States. It
is the daughter of Rome, fighting in the name of im-

mortal principles, against the venality and despotism of

England, resembling Carthage in these respects. ThusTHE GREAT SCHISM 375

in the cultured and religious mind of Dickinson, France
had become the incarnation of an eternal liberating
force, the guide of groping Humanity.” At the other
extremity of the United States, in western Pennsylvania,
the democratic leader H. H. Brackenridge, a flery orator
whose eloquence swayed throngs, offers a striking exam-
ple of the worship of France. His novel, Modern .Chiv-
alry, undoubtedly the most amusing and original Amer-

ican novel of the time, shows the extent to which France

dominated all imaginations in the West. The hero of the \

book is a certain Teague O’Regan, a shrewd and pusil-
lanimous Irishman who has hired out as a servant to a
land-owner, Captain Farrago.” The master, who resem-
bles somewhat Don Quixote, lacks originality and is used
merely as a double for the author of the book, but Teague
is a living character, and although Brackenridge imitated
rather puerilely Scarron’s Roman comique and Lesage’s
Gil Blas, Teague is truly an Irish-American colonist of
1797. His adventures at Washington’s court where he
goes to ask for an appointment, his efforts to acquire
elegant manners, the lessons that he takes from a French
dancing-master, his joy at being appointed tax-collector
in Pennsylvania, the trials and tribulations that he en-
counters in the exercise of his office, which lead to his
being tarred and feathered by people of his district in
wrath at his greed—all this is told in a lifelike, true and
clean-cut way. With rapid and sure strokes, Bracken-
ridge depicts life in the taverns, along the roads, in the

ministries and in the camps of the new-born country.

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
  

rere ee eee Pe re Pe el ee376 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Nothing gives a more accurate notion of the social con-
ditions and the ideas that prevailed in those days. But
the purpose of the book is to show that, even in a re-
public, care must be taken to maintain the spirit of de-
mocracy and keep magistrates from arrogating personal
power and forgetting that they are merely public serv-
ants.*? One of the most characteristic episodes of this
book is the meeting between Farrago and the old Marquis
de Lezay Marnésia in the mountains where the illustrious
old man has retired in his flight from demagogy. An ele-
gant and rather moderate discourse condemning the
French Revolution is put into the mouth of Marnésia.
Farrago answers him skillfully and earnestly and proves
that in its essential principles the French Revolution is
right, because it upholds the inalienable right of all men
and all generations to direct their own destinies. With-
out this there would be no progress, says Farrago, and
through him, Brackenridge.

In Brackenridge’s novel, as in Dickinson’s pamphlet
and many poems and articles of the period, reverence for
France is intimately connected with faith in the rights
of man. These two elements form a sort of cult: it is no
longer, as it was in 1776, a mixture of Biblical spirit

and national consciousness; it has become in itself a reli-

gion that dominates and threatens to exclude all others.THE GREAT SCHISM 377

No one, with the possible exception of Paine, was
more imbued with this faith than Monroe; and again,
the difference between the faith of these two men was
one of tendency rather than intensity. Each of them is
a prototype of the revolutionary intellects that Jacobin-
ism created. Monroe had gone to France, not for the
realization of personal ambitions or national aims, but
to bring about a unity of action between the two great
republics of the world and establish their collaboration
on a base of profound spiritual intimity. He considered
himself as the envoy of the American people to the
French people, and he sought to see all problems not
from the American or French points of view, but from
the standpoint of the rights of man.** He had believed
in the good faith of the American government that sent
him to France at the same time that it sent Jay to Eng-
land. In France he did not hesitate to take the Conven-
tion into his confidence and open his heart to them. At
a time when every one distrusted his neighbor, he made
it a principle to have confidence: he had confidence in
the future of the French Republic. He believed that
France was not trying to draw the United States into
war and that she wished the Americans only good, as she
asserted, He believed that France would defend the in-
terests of the United States sincerely against Spain and
England (1794). He believed that at the same time the
United States would endeavor to help France in the full

measure of her means. He suggested in America and in

ey
ont
ae a)378 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

France that the Americans might advance money to
France in 1795, as France had done for America from
1776 to 1783."* He felt sure that the American govern-
ment wanted to make Jay’s negotiations with England
as acceptable as possible to France, and he candidly
wrote to Jay to obtain a text of the treaty (1705). me
saw in the discussions between France and the United
States concerning commerce and privateers, a question of
principle which the two republics would settle in a
friendly way according to the dictates of the right and
their hearts. He had but scant sympathy for the Amer-
ican merchants who, under the protection of a friendly
flag, carried on a commerce hostile to France; and he con-
centrated his efforts on bringing the American govern-
ment to comprehend that the French Revolution had been
the renovation of the world and that it was an accom-
plished fact, and endeavored to show the French that
they had everything to gain from the friendship of the
United States, but that violence would spoil everything.
His diplomatic correspondence is curious and admirable;
his notes, which expose all of his relations with the mem-
bers of the Conventions and later with the Directors and

their ministers, bear witness to his good faith and his

intelligence.*® He was the dupe of no one except his faith,
and he was the dupe of every one. The American gov-
ernment hid the true nature of Jay’s treaty from him
and let him lie involuntarily to France. The Directory

made subtle attempts to persuade him to be its politicalTHE GREAT SCHISM 379

agent in America and, since he was too honest for this,
tried at least to use him as a means of obtaining money
from the United States.” In spite of the resentment that
he justly felt against his government for sending him on
a mission with misleading instructions, in spite of the
difficulty of his position in France after the signing of
Jay’s treaty, Monroe did not give up hope; he remained
in Paris in expectation of better times to come, a Repub-
lican election in America or a return to prudence and
idealism in France.** He importuned the Directory with
efforts to prevent them from sending Vincent, the Gov-
ernor of Santo Domingo, to the United States with an
ultimatum and appointing Mangourit, Genet’s famous
collaborator, who had caused so much disturbance and
carried on so much propaganda as French consul at
Charleston, to the post of Minister to the United States.”
He succeeded (1796); and he would thus have gained
enough time for a change of attitude to take place in the
United States, if the counsels of Fauchet, Adet and
Paine had not at last persuaded the Directory to try to
impress the Americans by recalling the French minister
at Philadelphia shortly before the electoral campaign in
favor of Jefferson.*® Even then this decision was only
provisional and was to have been revoked in the event of
Jefferson’s victory. Thus Monroe, by his conviction and
devotion, not unmixed with a certain naiveté withal, had
been able to maintain a degree of harmony between two

' governments inclined to hate each other. Paine shat-380 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

tered his work. Imprisoned through the efforts of Robes-
pierre and Gouverneur Morris, so it seems, Paine had
come to harbor a boundless hatred against his persecu-
tors, and he considered Washington, the friend and pro-
tector of Morris, as one of them. Instead of seeking to
establish accord through confidence, as Monroe did, he
attempted to accomplish it by suspicion. He began mak-
ing denunciations. Also, he was in need of money, he
drank too much, he led an irregular life, he had lost
his seat in the Convention, and a sort of belated ambi-
tion made him seek to play a part in diplomacy. Monroe
had been instrumental in securing his release from prison
and in keeping him alive. Both men held to the same
principles; but Monroe was a mystic and trusting be-
liever, while Paine had become a suspicious fanatic and
inquisitor.°° He attacked Washington publicly as a
scoundrel and the author of his own sorrows, in an open
letter which caused the greatest scandal both in America
and in France (July, 1796). In various pamphlets he
urged the Convention to adopt a highly radical constitu-
tion, and at the same time he wrote articles against Eng-
land to be circulated in America for the French govern-
ment. He furnished information concerning America to
Delacroix, the Minister of Foreign Affairs. He tried to
influence this minister and public opinion by the infor-
mation that he gave and by inspiring the communica-

tions of the fiery patriot, Jacques Ducher, the former

consul at Wilmington, who continued to concern himselfTHE GREAT SCHISM 381

with American affairs. There is still preserved in the
Archives of Foreign Affairs the memorandum from
Paine and Ducher recommending that the Directory re-
fuse to receive as minister Pinkney, whom the American
government had just appointed to this post, in order, as
Paine said, to ridicule Washington, who had chosen
Pinkney, and to safeguard the principles of Democracy.”

Paine’s advice received more consideration than Mon-
roe’s. Monroe, accused in America of supporting Paine,
and in France of being disloyal, was recalled (1797).
However, before leaving, he attended a ceremonial recep-
tion that the Directory gave as a farewell to him, in
order to show the high esteem that they would ever feel
for a patriot, even when they considered his government
as a traitor. Monroe did not try to evade it, whether
because he himself was exasperated at last, or because he
counted on this fraternal ceremony to open the eyes of
the American people. He ended his diplomatic career as
he had begun it, with a confession of faith in the Rights
of Man, without fearing or caring what his government
might think of it.

While Jefferson, Monroe and their friends were trying
to rouse the American people in the name of the new
morality, a like problem confronted the French people»
The action of the United States in ratifying Jay's treaty
with England had placed France in the necessity of de-
ciding the question as to whether it was better to keep

up an alliance whose very spirit had been violated, or382 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

to sever relations with a nation to whom they were
united by sympathy, common principles and similarity
of government. From 1795 to 1797 public opinion in
France was greatly preoccupied with this question, and
it may be said that it was one of the moral worries of the
Directory. This government, which succeeded the Con-
vention without adhering to its principles, had to solve
in this question one of the gravest and most delicate
problems of doctrine that ever confronted it. From Sep-
tember, 1796, to January, 1798, the reports of the Paris
police mentioned at least every month great agitation
concerning the United States in the cafés where politics
were discussed. It is one of the subjects that recurs most
often; and behind the euphemisms of the agents of the
Directory, we divine the restlessness and dissatisfaction
occasioned in the mind of the public by the policy that
the French government was following in the New World.
The public, moreover, was very badly informed, and
these discussions and rumors prove how ignorant it was
of the most essential facts: John Adams was considered
as a friend of France, through a confusion, no doubt,
with his cousin Samuel Adams, and a thousand absurd
rumors were current. Paine and the Paris group of
United Irishmen seem to have contributed to stirring up
French opinion against the American Federalists, Jay’s
treaty and, in a general way, the United States.”

In fact, the two most general sentiments among the

public were disapproval of the Directory for persistingTHE GREAT SCHISM 283

in an arrogant and unjust policy, and wrath against the
American government for having abandoned France in
favor of England. All the French newspapers, except
those that were in the pay of England, gave echo to these
opinions during the year 1795. They still employed a
friendly, affectionate or admiring tone, according to their
tendencies, in speaking of the American people, whose
hostility to Jay’s treaty was everywhere mentioned and
praised. They laid much emphasis on the opposition be-
tween Washington and the American nation—the one
srown old and beguiled by England, the other generous
and loyal. They brought out the facts that the French
West Indies lay at the mercy of the wrath of America,
that French commerce needed American ships and ports,
and that a break between the two great republics would
be a shameful calamity. More than all this, it was felt
and said in all circles that the United States represented
a moral force that France needed and an ideal that she
could not deny without renouncing the principles of 1789
and 1793.”

Even among the Royalists, a current of opinion very
favorable to the United States had set in. In proportion
as the French Republic deviated from the American type
of government, it became easier and more tempting for
them to laud America.” They recalled that she owed her
pure liberty to Louis XVI. But above all, there was the
fact that the émégrés who had been able to flee to the

United States and who, for the most part, hoping to see

pPes cSt eesiseescensrgss se

yt384 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

the end of the Revolution, had not remained there, had
come back to France filled with a profound and indelible
sentiment of affection and gratitude for the country that
had welcomed them so generously. Received by the aris-
tocracy of New England, New York and Philadelphia,
they had seen all the pleasantest and most winning
aspects of America. After the turmoil of France, they
had enjoyed these homely and wholesome ways. Steeped
in the spirit of Rousseau, they had seen the Indians, the
negroes and the farmers in a poetic light. They had ap-
preciated the beauty of the soil, the plants and the race.
A poetic rapture pervaded them.” They had wept on
eating their first slice of white bread on this free and
virgin soil. They had shed even happier tears on freeing
their slaves, wild with gratitude, before returning to
Europe.” The best and most fascinating descriptions of
the United States about 1795 have been left us by Roy-
alist émégrés,; but the finest of these is unquestionably the
one written by Henriette-Lucie Dillon, Marquise de La
Tour du Pin de Gouvernet, daughter-in-law of Louis
XVI’s Minister of War. Saved by Madame Tallien, she
passed what were doubtless the two happiest. years of her
life in America. There she lived the life of a farmer-
philosopher, milking her cows, making her butter, super-
intending her slaves and servants, giving bits of ribbon
to the Indian women, who adored her, and winning over
the braves by the charm of her smile and the splendor of
her manners. She frequented Talleyrand, who was kindlyTHE GREAT SCHISM 385

and sincere with her. Her best friends were the Schuy-
lers, the Van Rensselaers, Alexander Hamilton, all the
finest and most intelligent society of the New York aris-
tocracy. But above all she loved her farm, her country
dog and the starry sky. When she came back to France,
her heart seemed rent in two. “I felt no pleasure at re-
turning to France,” she says.” Many an emigre knew
this sentiment. Europe was a disappointment to them.
We might mention first of all Chateaubriand, who owed
to this sense of disappointment his Amefica, the America
of which he dreamed during the long nights in bivouac
along the Rhine and in the garrets of London, the Amer-
ica that he created and revealed to the world. His first
book, Essaé historique, politique et moral sur les Revolu-
tions anciennes et modernes considérées dans leur Rap-
port avec la Révolution francatse (1797), shows his en-
thusiasm and disappointment; he admires the French
Revolution and he condemns it. He exclaims: “I have
seen the fields of Lexington. I stood there in silence, like
the traveler at Thermopylae, contemplating the graves of
these warriors of two worlds who were the first to die in
obedience to the laws of Country. On treading this philo-
sophic ground which told me with mute eloquence of how
empires disappear and rise, I confessed my nothingness
before the paths of Providence and bowed my forehead
to the dust.” °° Then he added: “The American Revolu-
tion is the immediate cause of the French Revolution.” ®

In the pages that he devotes to America, Chateaubriand386 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

shows himself as a faithful disciple of Raynal, and some
of his phrases are directly inspired by those of Raynal.
Like the Abbé, he condemns on moral grounds the action
of France in intervening to defend rebellious subjects;
like him, he admires the patriotism of the Americans and
their doctrines; like him, he praises their principles and
fears lest they prove unable to remain faithful to them.
There is a gibe at the Quakers and a eulogy of Major
André.” All this might have been written in 1786 and
links Chateaubriand with the past, with the group of
pre-revolutionary philosophers. But his lengthy and
moving description of an evening along the Hudson and
the songs of the American women bemoaning the fate
of André, and the new tone that he uses in speaking of
the land of America bear witness to his personal impres-
sion. The essay ends with the magnificent description
of “a night among the savages of America.” To him, as
to Madame de La Tour du Pin, the United States had
revealed new conformities between man free and spon-
taneous, and living things.** He was filled with a long-
ing, an obsession, not political but lyric and emotional.

In order to forestall any confusion with the Jacobin and

patriotic mysticism, he is inclined to describe the United
States as the land of the Indians, but this is essentially
only a literary artifice; he knew nothing, or almost noth-
ing, of the Indians; what he did see and what moved
him were the fields of Lexington. His attitude is typical

of that of the most intelligent and sincere of the émgrés:THE GREAT SCHISM 287

Lezay Marnésia, wandering throughout Europe after his
return from America, retains the delightful image of a
world where earth, principles and man move together in
a natural and tranquil liberty, illumined by the fear of
God.* Madame de La Tour du Pin, Chateaubriand and
Lezay were converted in the New World to the worship
of natural liberty as it is born from the contact of man,
living in isolation and free from the restraint of an im-
perious government, with Nature. And with them this
worship was emotional, artistic and personal.”

Many other ézgrés had lived in America at Marietta
in Ohio and Gallipolis, the colony founded by the Scioto
Company, which struggled along until the end of the
century. Others, with the Vicomte de Noailles, Omer
Talon and Dupetit-Thouars, had tried to found the
Asylum in Pennsylvania and had lived there for some
time; but all of these undertakings had finally failed for
lack of capital, practical intelligence and physical
strength. Nevertheless, all of these colonists who had re-
turned to Europe had brought back sentiments similar
to those of Madame de La Tour du Pin: they denounced
the speculators as the cause of their sorrows, but they
loved the soil, Nature and the life of the “American
wilderness.”’ *

Thus it is not surprising to find the Royalist papers
at Paris and outside of France taking the part of the
United States in their quarrel with France, satirizing

Thomas Paine (who, in truth, was legitimate prey) and388 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

exalting Washington, who henceforth was held up as the
noblest example of a man of order guided by a prudent
love of liberty. This was the attitude of Mallet du Pan,
Peltier, etc.°°

Such also was the attitude of the conservatives, the
sreat mass of citizens, yesterday monarchists, who had
joined the Revolution only to save their lives and were
seeking to gain control of the Directory and, if possible,
to bring it around to a policy of liberalism. Some of these
conservatives were only Royalist conspirators in disguise,
but most of them were former Feuillants, patriots of
1789, Constitutionalists and sincere reformers who, im-
pressed by the magnitude of the French Revolution,
adopted the democratic idealism spontaneously. They
were sincere in dreaming of a general conciliation and a
eradual adapting of France to the Republic. Many of
them had no projects for the future but sought only to
live: after the sufferings of the Terror, they accepted
the inevitable and tried only to make the government
bearable. Everything led them to admire the United
States and use them as an argument. The happiness,
simple life, tolerance, order and religious spirit that
reigned in the New World made it a democratic Eden
for these conscientious and apprehensive minds. As a
general thing, they saw it from the Federalist point of
view and felt a strong sympathy for that party. A

voluminous book, Le Tableau de la Situation actuelle

des Etats-Unis @ Amérique by C. Pictet of GenevaTHE GREAT SCHISM 389

(Paris, Year III), which was printed in 1795 and en-
joyed popularity during the following years, bears wit-
ness to this state of mind. Pictet was an honest citizen
of Geneva, a philanthropist who had devoted many years
to the service of his country and the improvement of
agriculture. He believed in the progress and goodness of
humanity. He was also a man of letters like his brother
Marc Antoine Pictet, in collaboration with whom he pub-
lished the Bzbliothéque britannique, one of the best lit-
erary, economic and philosophic reviews of the period:
Pictet’s picture of the United States is taken from the
works of Pastor Morse, Tench Coxe and Jefferson; his
compilation is not highly original, and its only merit is
to bring American books within the reach of the French
public and to show the United States as a rare example
for the world at large, and one so admirable that Pictet
exclaims: “Other nations will pay dearly perhaps for
imitating the dangerous example of so noble a revolu-
tion.” He shows the American uprising as having its
origin in a concern for the noblest of principles and as
remaining always peaceable and moderate; he shows the
colonists as capable of maintaining ‘‘an orderliness, son
of Liberty,” and he cries out to Heaven, “O Liberty!
Liberty! Daughter of Heaven! Precious gift, meet only
for righteous nations! Source of virtues, glory and pros-
perity!” *’ He proves that the Americans owe their good
fortune to their mores, their morality and their religion,
which makes them understand the rights of man.®* This390 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

is the same lesson that is contained in the letters of the
Duc de La Rochefoucauld Liancourt, then a refugee in
America, whence he sends his friends, the former Con-
stitutionalists, patriotic and philosophic exhortations.
He even published in 1796 a little work on the prisons
of Philadelphia, in which he praises the justice and hu-
maneness of the Pennsylvanians for seeking, not to pun-
ish, but to improve their convicts. Although he does not
make it himself, a comparison between this humane and
generous republic and the Convention naturally suggests
itself to the reader’s mind. It is in the name of the United
States and the ideal that they represent that the con-
servatives carried on their battle against the absolutism
of the Convention, and later, of the Directory.”

In 1795 a complete series of pamphlets criticizing the
Constitution in the name of Liberty had already ap-
peared. The most spirited of these is undoubtedly the
one written by Adrien Lezay, the son of the Marquis de
Marnésia.”? It was entitled Qw’est-ce que la Constitu-
tion de 1793? but the police having forbidden criticism
of the Constitution, Lezay renamed his pamphlet Conséd-
érations sur les Etats de Massachusetts et de Pennsyl-
vanie, ou Paralléle de deux Constitutions, dont Pune est
fondée sur la Division, l'autre sur VUnité de la Légis-
lature. Lezay proclaims that there are no more great
men, and no more pure men, in this world unless it be

beyond the seas in America and that it is therefore to

that country that France should turn for examples ifTHE GREAT SCHISM 391

she would have a good Constitution. He preaches in
favor of two legislative houses, the balance of powers,
liberalism and tolerance, as practiced by the Ameri-
cans. He imagines Samuel Adams looking out over
the superb Boston Bay with the rich, peaceful and vir-
tuous city spread out before him, explaining to the au-
thor the workings of the constitution to which the land
owes its prosperity. It is a sort of Socratic dialogue—in
intention at least (for as a pamphleteer, Lezay is straight-
forward and daring, but prosaic). He brings out clearly
enough the dangers of a single house, even in Pennsyl-
vania where men are almost perfect. This pamphlet made
a great impression, and the arguments that it contained
were used by other writers. Lenoir Laroche utilized them
and also cited the example of America in his tract,
L'Esprit de la Constitution quz convient a la France.
Mounier did the same in Ado/phe. In all these works the
example of Massachusetts was taken as being the per-
fect type of liberty within the law, and the American
mores as being the highest degree of virtue. In 1796
Roederer ” wrote that the United States were the hap-
piest nation on earth because they had an agricultural
civilization, and La Harpe™ stated that common sense
had taken refuge in America.” All parties took the
United States as a standard by which to judge the cor-
ruption of the times. Delacroix, making a study of the
means of regenerating France, demanded that she should

first come to a reconciliation with the United States392 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

“who preceded us in liberty and almost inoculated us
with it.” “* In his Considérations sur la France, Joseph
de Maistre was halted in his criticisms of all the various
governments, by the United States in which he found
nothing to condemn.” He declined to pass judgment on

3

them by saying, “Let them grow up,” and he respected
them. We see what a privileged situation that North
America enjoyed in the opinion of all the philosophers,
even the monarchists and conservatives. This esteem and
influence are also apparent in the newspapers and politi-
cal controversies. Many papers excused Washington’s
government for accepting Jay’s treaty by asserting that
French inferiority on the seas put the United States at
the mercy of England. They exposed the sins of the Con-
vention and the ruin of American commerce by French
privateers. Finally, when it was learned that the Direc-
tory had refused to receive Pinckney, although he had ar-
rived in Paris with a regular appointment as American
Minister to France,‘” Louis Philippe de Ségur dared to
take up the defense of the United States in two stirring
articles in which he stated that the French Republic was
to be blamed for its treatment of its allies (April-May,
1797)."" A few weeks later in the Council of the Five
Hundred Pastoret * took up the same theme and asked
that the government be condemned for having insulted
the United States (2 Messidor, Year V) and be obliged
to return to a juster policy. He wanted first of all an in-

vestigation. This motion, urged with great insistence andTHE GREAT SCHISM 393

supported by a vigorous newspaper campaign, caused a
great stir and would undoubtedly have produced results
if the Directory had not put an end to all this opposition
by the coup d’état of the eighteenth of Fructidor. At this
date Dupont de Nemours’ paper, L’Héstorien, which had
been the most ardent defender of the United States and
their ideal, also disappeared.” One feels to what extent
the Jacobins and the supporters of the Directory had
been worried by this attack and how great a danger they
had considered it. The Conservateur for the first of Com-
plémentaire, Year V (September 17, 1797) contains a
significant paragraph: it says that the Directory was wise
to put an end to royalist plots by the coup d’état of the
eighteenth of Fructidor, because the monarchists were
trying only to prevent the functioning of the government
and “such was the purpose that inspired Pastoret’s mo-
tion of order.” In this year 1797, the United States were
to some extent the standard around which the parties
fought. The conservatives used them as a means of criti-
cizing the executive and discrediting the integrity of the
Directory. The Directory sought to prove that it was
following the true tradition of the heroes of 1776 and
1793; it wanted to break with the American government
without ceasing to benefit by the moral prestige of the
United States. Its position was an awkward one. Its ma-
terial triumph over the conservatives afforded it only a

breathing-spell.*° It could not live without a doctrine;394. THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

and it needed the American principles, although they em-
barrassed it more and more every day.

Great changes had taken place among the Jacobins and
the revolutionary patriots since 1792. The enthusiasm,
mixed with confidence and hope, that had reigned among
them then had given way to a somber determination in
which distrust and resentment had a part. And the gov-
ernment established by the Constitution of 1794 had not
reassured them; it gave the political power to the wealthy
peasants and bourgeois. It sought its support in the most
conservative classes, among whom monarchist tendencies
still survived. In spite of foreign victories, it was no
longer the spirit of Valmy that was dominant among the
Jacobins of 1795. The Convention attacked them and
closed their clubs; the Directory kept them out of power
and used them as a weapon against the reactionaries.
Thus they collaborated with a government that they
despised or, at least, distrusted. This government still
used the revolutionary vocabulary frequently and tried
to take advantage of the patriotic ardor, but above all it
sought to safeguard material interests and satisfy per-
sonal ambitions. Any too definite moral code was a hin-
drance to them. Thus the Jacobins, through resentment,
and the Directory, as a ruse, were to have the same atti-
tude toward the United States and a common policy.
They sought to rouse the nation against its government,
they praised the people and attacked the administration

in word and deed.THE GREAT SCHISM 395

The opinion that the Jacobins and the Directory

formed of the United States was derived from the ac-
counts and descriptions of the latest French ministers to
America, Fauchet and Adet, and the impressions of the
revolutionary émigrés who had been restored to favor,
such as Moreau de Saint-Méry, Demeusnier, Talleyrand,
Hauterive, Volney, etc. We have also seen how much in-
fluence Paine exercised on all the French revolutionary
groups in matters that concerned the concept of America
and the policy to be followed with regard to her. Fauchet
and Adet both came home very much dissatisfied with
their mission. But Fauchet seems to have studied the
United States more thoroughly and understood them
better than his successor. He perceived their impor-
tance.’ In the reports that he submitted to the French
government on his return from America, he said: “The
United States have shown to great advantage in these
latter times of revolution and disputes concerning the
nature of governments.” The American institutions have
been held up as a model to which governments pride
themselves on having more or less conformed; and, since
the most complete happiness that may be desired in the
social order has resulted from them, they are everywhere
adduced as a conclusive authority in matters of political
controversy. Cabinets like to acquire a standing in the
eyes of the people by claiming to be in good intelligence
with a nation that is regarded as being the most wisely

governed.” Fauchet recognized the close moral bonds be-

    
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 

cw Saket Te eee eee —o PP ee, Pere ter Fy | Be
eh ehstecSsisSrhshsrtsipssapipigisisessczseisisiiziie sy396 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

tween France and the United States, as well as the blun-
ders of the French revolutionary governments in the New
World; but, filled with resentment against the govern-
ment at Philadelphia, he urged a policy of ‘‘firmness”’
toward the United States. He wanted France to give ef-
fective aid to the pro-French party and intimidate the
pro-English party. Adet went further than this. Of a less
judicious character than Fauchet and resentful at having
been sent to America, he was prejudiced against this
country, of whose value and importance he was neverthe-
less aware. He had confidence in the American people.
“The party in the government of the United States which
is devoted to England seems to me to have filled the
measure of outrage toward the French nation,” he wrote
‘n Nivose of the Year IV (1796), “but the people re-
main constant in their attachment for us. It would doubt-
less suffice for the Directory to adopt firm and judicious
measures to recall our allies to their true interests and
make them declare themselves against England, their
natural enemy.” Adet’s plans were adopted and put into
application—and miscarried. This defeat made Adet only

the more bitter and finished making him a dangerous

 

advisor.”

It is strange that the whole group of intelligent, pa-
triotic men and sincere revolutionists who had gathered
around Talleyrand and his friend the Constitutionalist
bookseller, Moreau de Saint-Méry, should have been so

bitter and so harmful to a good understanding betweenTHE GREAT SCHISM 397

France and the United States. Coming to America filled
with a longing for liberty and a desire to see a land
where it was being given an honest trial at last, these
illustrious personages were also filled with an extraordi-
nary vanity that caused them great suffering. Equality,
as it was practiced in America, at first annoyed and later
enraged them. Moreau de Saint-Méry has left us an in-
terminable account of his stay in the New World, which
is a masterpiece of wounded conceit and short-sighted-
ness. Obliged to earn his living at Philadelphia by en-
gaging in trade, and later, selling and printing books, he
could not forgive the American authorities and upper
classes for neglecting him.“ With only the rabble as as-
sociates, he preferred to associate with nobody; his un-
dertakings failed and he became embittered. The judg-
ments that he pronounces on American life and morality
are a gross and blind injustice. He could not forgive the
young republic for ignoring, or rather, for being averse
to, the use of enemas, and he drew from this prejudice
on their part the gravest conclusions against the good
sense and sincerity of the Americans. In spite of himself,
he still admired their tolerance, liberty, popular govern-
ment and simplicity, but he did not understand them;
and he circulated, together with the cruelest calumnies,
the silliest inaccuracies. Those who came to his shop
every day to talk with him and discuss the destinies of
the world around his counter while they sipped Madeira

wine—Talleyrand, Demeusnier, Théophile de Cazenove,

  

nA
yt
a398 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Beaumetz, Nancréde, Volney and Boislandry—could not
fail to be influenced by the ideas of the eloquent Mo-
reau. It is curious to see Talleyrand’s views correspond
so faithfully with his. Talleyrand had, however, been re-
ceived in the best society of Philadelphia. Hamilton had
entertained him royally. He had grown wealthy. But this
was not enough. Of a caustic wit and unlimited ambi-
tion, Talleyrand was unhappy and restless in the United
States. He was humiliated when Washington refused him
an audience. He suffered at feeling himself despised by
the middle class as one of the causes of the French Revo-
lution. He waxed indignant at the artlessness of the
Americans and the “religious prejudice” that prevailed
among them. The immoral life that he led, by making
him an object of opprobrium, led him to despise Amer-
ican society. He accused it of hypocrisy. Liberty without
license was beyond his understanding. In short, this man,
one of the most intelligent of his time, returned to Eu-
rope without having in the least understood the New
World. He could not withhold his admiration, for his
mind retained its perspicacity, but even this sentiment
was mixed with hatred. He had found himself dwarfed,
out of his element, even somewhat ridiculous, in this
country that he had hoped to dazzle, instruct and direct.
This impression and their inability to recognize the reli-
gious character of the entire American population, in-
cluding even the revolutionaries, explain the attitude of
Moreau de Saint-Méry, Talleyrand and their friends,THE GREAT SCHISM 399

without excepting Volney, of whom we shall speak
later.”

Talleyrand’s influence had great weight; and in order
to comprehend the conduct of the Directory with regard
to the United States, we must examine closely the activi-
ties of the former Bishop of Autun. After his return to
France, thanks to the protection of Madame de Staél,
he immediately succeeded in being admitted to the Insti-
tute to which he addressed two communications. That of
the fifteenth of Germinal, Year V, was entitled Memo-
randa on the Commercial Relations of the United States
with England. This work, clear, brief, intelligent and
composed well and in a delightful style, could not fail
to impress the Institute and, at the same time, political
circles. Into this paper Talleyrand had put all his dis-
satisfaction with the United States, whose moral great-
ness he still endeavored, however, to exploit. He showed
the United States as being entirely devoted to England,
with whom they had language, genius and commercial
interests in common. With the greatest inaccuracy,
though not unskillfully, he accused Louis XVI and his
government of having tried to discourage merchants from
trading with the United States, and he stated that it was
now too late to begin such commerce. He concluded there-
fore that France could scarcely hope to have close rela-
tions with the Americans. He depicted them as being
governed on all occasions by their interests and as being

still incapable of forming a nation, because their char-400 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

acter was unformed. His judgment was most harsh and
arbitrary. He cited very few facts in support of his views.
He contented himself with saying “How could America
have a character of her own when her population is com-
posed of fishermen and woodcutters?’” Fishermen, living
continually at sea, form attachments for no land and
have no country. As for the woodcutters, he goes on,
“The American woodcutter takes no interest in anything;
any emotional idea is far from him: the branches that
Nature limns with such elegance, beautiful foliage, a
bright hue that enlivens one part of the forest, a strong
wind that spreads gloom over another—all this is noth-
ing to him; he has no memories to attach to anything.
His only concern is the number of strokes that it will
take to fell his tree. . . . The product of his toil does
not go through all the stages of growth so endearing to
the farmer; he does not follow up the destiny of his
products: he does not know the pleasure of new experi-
ments, and if, on leaving the spot where he has lived for
years, he does not forget his ax, he leaves no regrets be-
hind him.” ** After such poetic reasoning and this scarcely
scientific exposition of American shortcomings, Talley-
rand praised the perfection of the social life of the
United States, where every one was free, where absolute
tolerance reigned, and where one of the most violent revo-
lutions that the world had ever seen was followed by an
era of peace, prosperity and liberty. From this he drew

the following moral, which was addressed rather to theTHE GREAT SCHISM 401

Directory than to the Institute: “After a revolution that
has changed everything, we must be able to lay aside our
hatreds, unless we are prepared to renounce our happi-
ness for ever.” “’ The work closed with this reflection.

Talleyrand could not but be satisfied with his work.
He had given vent to his spite, flattered rather basely the
powers that were, proffered the fashionable counsels and
proved his talent as a diplomat as well as a philosophic
writer. His phrases suited the taste of the times, and
they were abundantly reprinted and praised. Even the
friends of the United States did not seem to perceive
how much wrong the Memoranda would do. They were
too delighted with this adroit appeal to tolerance to care
to quibble with Talleyrand. The Jacobins made use of
it, but they took but few extracts from it, because of the
moderate counsels that it contained.”

From the end of 1794 to the middle of 1797, the Jaco-
bin newspapers and the periodicals subsidized by the
Directory received much information in the spirit of Tal-
leyrand’s contribution. We find Mazzéi giving out to the
French papers a letter in which Jefferson describes with
indignation the autocratic spirit of the Federalists. A cer-
tain M. de Bulow’s attacks on the character and customs
of the Americans were given wide circulation. Paine was
writing his articles against Washington. There were also
here and there virulent letters from American Republi-
cans denouncing the Federalists and Adams. La Décade
philosophique published a letter from Marsillac, the402 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Quaker, who, under the influence of, and perhaps in col-
laboration with, Volney, furnished information on life in
the United States and painted a sad picture of the con-
dition of the arts in America. With less severity, a
friend of Brissot’s, F. M. Bayard, brought out a book on
the United States in 1791 in which, mingled with de-
lightful picturesque and romantic scenes and warm
praises of the people, we find violent criticisms of the
American character.°° If we add that the French news-
papers drew their information concerning the United
States from the English press, we shall understand the
tone of the Jacobin papers. They noted with joy and
accuracy, however, all the celebrations held in America
in honor of France, all friction between England and
the United States, and all the symptoms of a revolt of
the American people against their government. They did
not fail to praise the two sister revolutions of France
and America. They came out in favor of following the
example of the United States, who had banished the
Tories for ever and never allowed them to return, who
tolerated all religions but scorned them all. The papers
continued to cite Franklin as a republican saint. In short,
they mixed bitterness and enthusiasm according to the
needs of the polemic. They would have liked to continue
utilizing America as the example of a perfect and com-
plete revolution, while despising its government and, if
possible, its people. But this was difficult. Thus, from

the criticisms of Jay’s treaty, which began in the middleTHE GREAT SCHISM 403

of 1795, to articles hostile to Pinckney, and virulent de-
nunciations of Ségur and later Pastoret (May and June,
1797), their tone grew more vociferous. In June, 1797,
it was a curious mixture of insult and affection, of ma-
terial and moral concerns, of violence and flattery.”
The action of the French government unfolded along
the same lines. On May 9g, 1793, and July 27, 1793, the
Convention had already passed decrees subjecting Amer-
ican ships to the enterprises, supervision and depreda-
tions of French privateers. A series of other measures to
the detriment of American commerce had been adopted.
In November, 1794, Monroe had succeeded in obtaining
satisfaction for some of the American wrongs and even a
decree proclaiming anew the principle that any neutral
flag protected merchandise; but in 1796 the Directory,
seeing that this more conciliating attitude had not pro-
duced favorable results, returned to harsher measures. It
decided that France would treat neutral ships as they
allowed themselves to be treated by England. The Min-
ister of External Relations, prompted by Adet and feel-
ing personally aggrieved, urged the Directory to take
steps to intimidate the United States. Barras, weary, it
seems, at hearing the American virtues too much praised,
was hostile to America. Carnot had seen with indignation
the United States making common cause with England
through Jay’s treaty. He desired a frank and energetic
move on the part of France. He wanted her to act in all

honesty. La Réveillére-Lépaux hedged ; Monroe, a mystic404, THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

like himself, had persuaded him to have patience, and
La Réveillére may also have preferred more indirect
means. Rewbell and Letourneur seem to have followed
the lead of the others.” Barthélémy was the most peace-
fully inclined, as much by taste as in consequence of the
tendencies of the conservative party to which he be-
longed, but he alone could do nothing and he was looked
on with suspicion. Thus, as soon as Monroe had left,
violence had a clear field. The Directory refused to re-
ceive C. C. Pinckney, who presented himself at Paris with
papers drawn up in due form proving that he was the
minister chosen by the United States. He was sent back
under vain pretexts suggested by Paine.

The appointing of Talleyrand as Minister of External
Relations in July, 1797, was the final blow to friendship
between France and the United States. It is here that
the saddest incident in the period, and the most shameful
one for the good name of France, occurs. John Adams,
the President of the United States, in spite of the con-
duct of France with regard to America, sought a recon-
ciliation; for he was not inclined to give over to the
tutelage of England, and he was on unfriendly terms
with the fervent Anglophiles.** He therefore designated
three envoys-extraordinary to France; two moderate
Federalists, John Marshall and C. C. Pinckney, and one
moderate Republican, Elbridge Gerry. They reached
Paris in 1797 and immediately tried to get in touch with
Talleyrand. The French minister sent them three un-THE GREAT SCHISM 405

official agents, Hottinguer, Bellamy and Hauteval, to tell
them that the Directory was highly incensed and would
not treat with them until it received a “douceur.” The
United States must also furnish money to France in the
form of a loan. The Americans, justly indignant, re-
fused. Talleyrand’s emissaries renewed their propositions,
while the amiable Marquis de Villette tried to cajole
Pinckney and poor Beaumarchais was sent to wait on
Marshall. Beaumarchais, down to his last penny, ruined
by the refusal of the United States to pay him, went to
call on Marshall and asked him to help him to win his
suit, in which event he promised to reconcile him with
the Directory at his own expense. This imprudent step
achieved Beaumarchais’s disgrace in the eyes of the
Americans and was of no avail. These intrigues lasted
three months. Finally the American envoys decided to
send Talleyrand a letter explaining and discussing the
points in question (January, 1798). Talleyrand replied
in March by an insolent letter in which he mingled the
Just protests of France with exorbitant claims and

criticisms. He asserted that the United States had done

everything to bring about the rupture and accused

Marshall and Pinckney of being hostile to France.** He

offered to negotiate with Gerry alone. In January the

Directory had taken new measures against American

ships to prevent them from trading with England. Pinck-

ney and Marshall decided therefore to leave France im-

mediately, while Gerry, prompted by the hope of bring-406 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

ing around Talleyrand, with whom he had had personal
relations, to more favorable sentiments, remained a few
weeks longer.

Talleyrand had played an infamous part in this affair.
He knew the United States, he knew the spirit of
morality that reigned in this country, he knew it only
too well for having come into conflict with it so often
during his stay in Philadelphia.** The pleasure of
humiliating the Americans in his turn, shocking them with
impunity and winning money at the expense of people
who claimed to be incorruptible, led him to this base
and stupid act. His tastes and his skill at subterfuge led
him to think that he would easily be the winner at this
game that the innocent Americans could hardly know
how to play. He was mistaken, for the Americans had in
their favor their indignation, and behind them an im-
pulsive and idealistic people. And he himself was the
agent of a corrupt government. On this occasion Talley-

rand was lacking in both honesty and judgment.
*

* O*K

He provoked in America one of the most violent and
and this at

 

unanimous reactions that has ever been seen
a time when the triumph of the Republican party seemed
certain and would have brought about a good under-
standing with France. The fact was that, in the elections

of 1796, Adams had won by a very slight majority. Jef-THE GREAT SCHISM 407

ferson, who was Vice-President, had such great prestige
and had been so near to victory that his increasing in-
fluence could be counted on, the more so since the new
President, although a Federalist, had been exasperated by
the intrigues of Alexander Hamilton, the former cabinet-
member in 1789 and the power behind the throne in
Washington’s administration. Hamilton, anxious to keep
control over everything that went on at Philadelphia,
had secretly sought to have Pinckney elected in place of
Adams. Adams was therefore prone to bear a grudge
against him and to distrust him. Moreover, Adams, with
his natural spirit of contradiction, was inclined, at the
time when his party was playing into the hands of Eng-
land, to remember what he had seen at London after
the war for independence; his culture, which was really
a wide one for the times, and the knowledge of French
writers that he had acquired during the last ten years
made him tend to greater moderation than was usual with
the Federalists or than his own character suggested.
Lastly, he knew that he was looked upon with disfavor
in a goodly number of Federalist circles; and this feeling,
together with his pride, his honesty and his lack of
political subtlety, made him a man independent of
parties, as much as this was possible in 1797. He kept
the same cabinet that Washington had had, out of defer-
ence to his illustrious predecessor; but he drew nearer to
Jefferson and drifted away from Hamilton. He spoke of

France in severe terms, but he would have done the samecree)

408 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

with regard to England; and he thought, and wrote, that
France was less evil than his Federalist friends claimed.”
Since there was also a solid Republican majority in the
House of Representatives, led by a few such able men
as Madison, Gallatin and Nicolas, France, during the
spring and summer of 1797, was once more well defended
before American opinion. It is true that she no longer
had an accredited minister in the United States, but the
chargé-d’affaires, Letombe, was a man ripe in years and
judgment and respected.*’ She had also a secret agent,
Monsieur Hauterive (cé-devant Comte d’Hauterive),
who acted as an intermediary between the French gov-
ernment and its supporters. Volney, Collot and the sons
of the Duke of Orléans were traveling about the United
States; and at Philadelphia the bookseller, Moreau de
Saint-Méry, was carrying on a discreet propaganda and
printing pamphlets favorable to France; here and there
French agents distributed Paine’s writings.** At Philadel-
phia the Courrier frangais was voicing the Jacobin doc-
trines of Paris, while at New York the Gazette francaise
was evincing greater prudence. Everywhere French poli-
tics were being discussed.*” At New York an impresario,
M. Maison, presented “the Democratic Citizen, Mon-
sieur Aristocrat and Mademoiselle Moderate in their sur-
prising performance.” These puppets seem to have
achieved great success, whether it be because of their
personal charm or because of the pleasure of the allusions

to which their performance gave rise. Discussion wasTHE GREAT SCHISM 409

rife, and France was always the center of the debate—
when the House tried to oblige the President to help La
Fayette, when it wanted to reduce the American arma-
ment, and when it replied in moderate terms to John
Adams’ message announcing the return of Pinckney, re-
jected by the Directory. Ames pronounced impassioned
discourses setting forth the good fortune of the United
States, the people chosen of God. Harper attacked vio-
lently the blind friends of France. Gallatin, summing
up the “French” ideas, said solemnly: “If we complain
of the prodigality of the administration or want to con-
trol it by refusing to appropriate all the money which is
asked, we are stigmatized as disorganizers; if we oppose
the growth of taxation we are charged with the design
of subverting the constitution and of making a revolu-
tion; if we attempt to check the extension of our political
connections with the European nations we are branded
with the epithet of Jacobins.”’ *°

In the newspapers the conflict took on a harsher form:
there were headings, “French Friendship,’ under which
were listed all the acts of piracy committed by French
privateers; and columns headed “English Friendship,” in
which were published all the acts of pillage committed
by English privateers and the agents of that nation; there
were essays on equality, details concerning French vic-

tories +”

and this young leader called Bonaparte, whom
certain well-informed people asserted was an American

born in Connecticut.’ But the battle raged particularly

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
  
  
   

wee tere eee eee ee el Pere Ses er teres tere rere

" ~~ t).
= Sy esse 2szeel

“=

ee 2 ee ee

Pel Phe pis + Fes sis ssissu410 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

around the question of religion. Volney was the standard-
bearer of the deists; he was attacked on all sides by the
pastors and the faithful. Even Priestley, the English
liberal scholar, who had taken refuge in America, wrote
an open letter condemning his impiety. The controversy
caused so much stir that every one wanted to take a hand
in it. Dwight took the trouble to give a course before his
students at Yale on the dangers of unbelieving phi-
losophy, and at commencement the students held Volney
up to ridicule.** But above all this, rang out the voice of
the great poet Freneau, exalting Bonaparte, the destruc-
tion of the Papacy, the capture of Rome, and Monroe’s
generous mission. The vehement pamphlet which the lat-
ter had circulated widely to justify himself and show the
grandeur, the beauty and the nobility of France, had
been well received Thus, in the midst of discordant
rumors and brutal polemics, the thing that stood out
most brilliantly was the passion of the American people
for Liberty and their sentimental attachment for France,
despite quarrels, misunderstandings and politics. In
spite of the rebuffs of the Directory, the American gov-
ernment, while continuing to arm, sent to France a new
commission composed of the three ambassadors whose
difficulties with Talleyrand we have already followed.
But the year 1798 began with sinister rumors threatening
wate

Yet no one was prepared for what did happen. Adams
was the first to receive the announcement of the strangeTHE GREAT SCHISM 411

negotiations. He kept it to himself and only asked Con-
gress to take measures for the defense of the United
States, for he had no hope of bringing France around
to peaceful views. A violent discussion took place in the
House, and the Republicans were indignant that the
executive should thus alarm the country without furnish-
ing evidence to support his words; they demanded that
the correspondence between the President and the envoys
to France be communicated to them. In reply Adams
transmitted to Congress a copy of the reports that
Marshall and Pinckney had sent him (April 2, 1798);
then he had these documents published in the newspapers.
Thereupon the opposition melted away, the country was
unanimously back of the President. From Congress, from
which many of the best Republicans retired, judging that
the struggle was in vain, even into the streets, where
French cockades, hitherto so popular, vanished entirely,
the whole nation was swept by a wave of stupefaction,
indignation and wrath.’

With a single impulse, all New England rose in sup-
port of Adams and the Federalists. The newspapers were
unanimous in declaring that Talleyrand’s negotiations
were shameful, and even in the coffee-houses, that until
now had been Jacobin, the crusade against France was
preached. A like movement ran over the Central States,
where English propaganda was strong and well organ-
ized; *°" even the Quakers, it is said, took a warlike atti-
tude. At Philadelphia, Cobbett,** the great English

a)
eae
aoeA412 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

pamphleteer, poured forth on the United States his
furious and powerful prose; he had at this time more than
3,200 subscribers, which was enormous for those days,
and he had just inaugurated a rural edition of his
paper.’ Even in the South, there was a profound change
of sentiment, especially in Virginia; the Federalist party
suddenly found itself in control of public opinion. The
West, which received the news more slowly and was
more intensely democratic, was touched only much later
and less deeply. Fromiall parts of the Union, messages,
addresses and petitions came to the President, telling him
of the country’s grim resolution not to give in to French
corruption and tyranny.””° “Millions for defense and not
one cent for tribute,” was the slogan adopted by all;
and, in accord this time with his party, his country and
his own conscience, Adams responded to this enthusiasm
with an enthusiasm quite as vehement and with energetic
measures. He felt himself to be great and strong, the
head of a powerful and united nation resolved to die for
its liberty.“ Jefferson, discouraged, looked on and dared
do nothing.** Meanwhile, the Federalists, popular for the
first time since 1788 and strongly organized, were in a
position to realize the program that they had been medi-
tating for so long; failing a monarchy, the establishment
of which was impossible in America, they could set up a
solid government by and for “the best people.” After the
X Y Z scandal (these were the initials under which
Adams, not wishing to reveal the names of Talleyrand’sTHE GREAT SCHISM 4123

agents, had designated them), this was easy; it sufficed to
take France as the example of what should not be done
and to show the nation clearly that this was their inten-
tion. Thus in a few months Congress decided to declare
the treaties with France null and void and to arm a fleet
and an army, at the head of which Adams placed Wash-
ington, the patriarch of American liberty. Adams, sup-
ported by the United States, solemnly declared that he
would “never send another minister to France without
assurances that he would be received, respected and hon-
ored as the representative of a great, free, powerful and
independent nation.” The government did not yet declare
war, for it judged that France, furious at the publica-
tion of the X Y Z Correspondence, would immediately
sever relations and that the war would be a defensive one
and therefore very much easier to bring the Republicans
to accept. On his arrival in the United States, John
Marshall was welcomed by a throng wild with joy and
enthusiasm. His journey to Philadelphia was comparable
only to that of Genet in 1792. To the Federalists this
crisis was the unique opportunity to found a healthy
government at last. They bent their efforts to this end.
First of all, it was necessary to reénforce the powers of the
executive. Profiting therefore by a rumor that was every-
where in circulation to the effect that the country was
overrun by French spies, Adams had a law voted giving
the President the power to expel all foreigners from

American territory. Another law, the Sedition Act, which414 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

provided for heavy fines and as much as two years of
prison for any one who should plot against an American
government official or hinder the execution of a law or
libel an official or defame the government, etc., was also
passed. This amounted to gagging the press and crushing
out opposition.

In vain had the Republicans protested against meas-
ures so contrary to the Declaration of Independence; in
vain had Gallatin fought to the last ditch in the House;
in vain had the great Republican paper of Philadelphia,
Franklin Bache’s Aurora, tried to defend France. Public
opinion was not with them. Bache had adroitly tried to
prove that X Y Z were not agents of the Directory, but
men employed by the enemies of the French government
to ruin its reputation. This interpretation had convinced
but few people. Bache had laid stress on Talleyrand’s
conversations with Gerry and the conciliating spirit that
the French minister had shown; but it was no longer
possible to make people listen to praises of Talleyrand,
and his labor was lost."* Souvaroff and Nelson were the
two men the most popular in America.’ There were no
more toasts drunk in France at banquets, but invocations
of American liberty and praises of Adams were voiced. A
colored engraving was everywhere circulated showing a
turbaned monster with five heads dressed like a Turk,
who menaced the three American envoys standing in a
croup at the left, dignified, calm and well dressed. The
Devil-Directory was demanding a great deal of moneyTHE GREAT SCHISM 415

from them and treading under foot a book labeled
“Equity.” At the right a white man, a negro and a mon-
key seemed to be busy eating frogs, while an ignoble
woman was beheading a man. The verse beneath the
caricature ran:
Americans never
From Freedom will sever.11®

Letombe at Philadelphia and Rozier, the consul at Bos-
ton, did indeed succeed in circulating clandestinely a few
documents and pamphlets proving the pacific spirit of
France; and the Chevalier de Yrujo and Moreau de
Saint-Méry worked shrewdly along with them at the
same task, in which The Aurora assisted them.”® But
this was merely a proof of the courage and ingenuity of
these men, for their efforts were of no avail and exposed
them to severe punishments. The propaganda in favor of
peace that a few of the faithful carried on found no echo
except in the West.” The rest of the country listened
only to voices praising Adams, recounting the American
naval victories and exalting national dignity.

The Federalists were too clear-sighted not to endeavor
to maintain and organize their dominion over popular
opinion. Federalist literature from 1788 to 1800 is con-
siderable. In prose and in verse it concentrated its
attacks on France. From insidious propaganda to em-
phatic diatribes, it neglected nothing. At the instigation
of the principal Federalist leaders, works on the conquest

and occupation of Switzerland by France were translated.

  

Reerane)

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

416 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

The newspapers published extracts from them and also
printed pages from Miss Williams’ account of her
travels in France, those pages on which the cruelties of
the revolutionists were best described. They brought out
in this way the character of France as a conqueror and
the danger of America’s being invaded as Geneva and
Holland had been. The speeches in which Harper, the
most prominent Federalist orator, criticized the policy of
France and showed its crafty ways and ulterior motives
were published. The veterans of Federalism, Joseph Den-
nie and J. Hopkinson, published brochures denouncing
France and her disorders. The Federalist poets of Con-
necticut joined their voices to those of the politicians.
Richard Alsop wrote The Political Greenhouse for the
year 1798, in which he described American Jacobinism in
darkest colors, denounced its supporters and declared
that Barlow was
Trained in Illumination’s School
And hired by rogues to play the fool.**®

This sarcastic and coarse tone prevailed in all these pro-
ductions, which resembled literature only by the fact that
they were printed. The Stand, the great pamphlet that
Hamilton produced at this time, was vastly superior to
the others in form, although quite as violent. It is skill-
fully composed in order to answer all the arguments in
favor of France and to impress the imagination. Hamil-
ton depicts France as cruel, thirsting to conquer Europe;

acquire a universal dominion such as Rome formerlyTHE GREAT SCHISM 417

had, and in the name of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity,
impose an impious gospel everywhere. He pictures Amer-
ica, innocent, faithful to her treaties, suddenly assailed
by this monster that hopes to filch her wealth and corrupt
her. This violent attack is well written, but its tone is
sometimes burdened with a wearying insistence scarcely
in character with Hamilton, due to the passion that im-
pelled him and his desire to show clearly that morality
and religion were involved.’ In fact, from now on, the
whole Franco-American quarrel took on this character,
and the fight against France was preached in almost all
the churches of America as a crusade.’*” This was the
result of an initiative on the part of the New England
clergy, so pious, enthusiastic and zealous, so eager to do
good, and so accustomed to exercising a political in-
fluence which they were anxious to retain.” Looking on
the United States as a land blessed by God, they were
led to consider France as the Antichrist, and two works
had just confirmed these views; these were the books of
Robison and the Abbé Barruel on the Bavarian Illumi-
nati, the Freemasons and the Jacobins. The latter were
represented as the agents and successors of the Illumi-
nati and Freemasonry. A great conspiracy united them:
they aimed at the destruction of Christianity. The books
of Robison and Barruel, documented at length and some-
what obscure, were not easy for American readers to
digest. Synopses of them were made and quoted by all

the newspapers. They were commented and abridged;

     
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
   

TSE SZe lS Pe pis tH es sto srssSeze418 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

 

and there was not a zealous pastor, were he Congrega-
tionalist, Reformed Church or Huguenot, Dutch Church,
Presbyterian, or Episcopal, but preached from the pulpit
the gospel that should save his flock from “The Beast.”
As early as 1794, Osgood had outlined this theory, but it
was spread and vulgarized by Jedediah Morse, the
famous writer who was so prolific and erudite and had
already produced so many bulky and fairly interesting
books on the geography of America and the world.”
Morse had been a defender of France, and now he set
about attacking her with all the zeal of a convert. It
was hardly before the years 1796-1797 that he changed
his opinion of her. Until then, the mysticism propagated
by the French Revolution had seemed to him to be good
and useful.?** By a process of logic, this new faith that
he had loved, if it did not come from God Himself could
only be a very dangerous work of the Devil. The change
in Morse and his colleagues was so complete that they
forgot the praises that they had lavished on France as
the destroyer of papism, and preached the condemnation
of France in accord with the Catholic priest Barruel. It
is almost comic to behold their violence when one thinks
of all the great men from Washington to Franklin who
had belonged to Freemasonry or were still among its
initiates. Most of the lodges had been very patriotic from
1770 to 1783, and it might well be said that they had
been one of the cradles of the spirit of independence.

Morse’s argument presented itself therefore under a well-THE GREAT SCHISM 419

chosen religious and mystic aspect, but it was not without
entailing some few difficulties in practice.* Although
Washington had condemned the Jacobin societies and
all spontaneous and extra-constitutional organizations,
the fact remained that Freemasonry in America in 1798
had by no means a revolutionary aspect. Nevertheless,
the Federalist leaders and the New England clergy felt
that the evil was a deep-grounded one and not merely a
political crisis. They wished therefore to cauterize the
wound. Morse denounced France, the Illuminati, the
Masons and the Jacobins in a great sermon on May 9,
1798, just at the moment when the X Y Z scandal was
causing the greatest stir. Like a flame in a forest, the idea
ran over all New England and then gained the other
states where, however, it was more disputed. It was par-
ticularly in Connecticut and Massachusetts, at Harvard
and Yale, that these ideas were set forth, defended and
maintained. Elsewhere they were accepted, but people
asked for evidence. As proofs, Morse furnished in two
new sermons, of which the second was pronounced in
1799, various French diplomatic documents tending to
prove that France had not dealt frankly with the United
States in 1778-1783, quotations from Robison, informa-
tions against Monroe and Paine, letters attacking French
propaganda in America and extracts from Miss Williams
concerning the Worship of Reason in France.” These,
in general, are the documents that were used everywhere,

with here and there criticisms of the French Revolu-420 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

tionary calendar (which was taken as testimony of the
Convention’s rage for dechristianization), a discourse by
a priest from the Rhone in defense of religion, and decla-
rations by Cloots proclaiming religion to be useless. All
this made an impressive collection. Thus did victorious
Federalism attempt both to fetter the press and win over
souls.’*°

The Republicans, who seemed decisively beaten in the
field of politics and government, found courage to defend
their doctrine. This they did forcibly and with ability.
Although it had been difficult for them to justify the con-
duct of France, on the other hand, it seemed easy to them
to defend the French édeas when the attack was turned
against them. Had not the revolutionary spirit that ani-
mated France come from America? It was important to
save it at any price. The Republican party could do noth-
ing else, for all the power was in the hands of the Fed-
eralists. Their rebuttal was solely on the grounds of
ideas and principles, but it was none the less effective for
that. This time, as often since, it was made evident that a
cause is never lost with American people if it can make
an appeal to their spirit of idealism and their optimistic
sentiments. In opposition to the Federalists, who wanted
to curb the individual in order to preserve his virtues,
the Republicans recalled the Rights of Man and pro-
claimed that the best way to develop good instincts in
the individual is to let them grow freely. To the ideas of
restraint and religious discipline, they opposed those ofTHE GREAT SCHISM 421

spontaneity, liberty and religious enthusiasm. James Sul-
livan, for instance, in his pamphlet, An Impartial Review
of the Causes and Principles of the French Revolution
by an American (Boston, 1798), explains that the “‘state
of Nature,” being one of ideal and perfect liberty, is
therefore not accessible to any nation, but every nation
enjoys a greater liberty in proportion as its mores and
its morality are better. The government of the old régime
in France having brought up its subjects badly, the
French could not be ready for a strong dose of liberty,
and if there were excesses during the French Revolution,
it was due to the priests and the King. It was therefore
just that these latter should have suffered, and the
destruction of the papacy should be considered as one of
the greatest triumphs of the Revolution; for it was the
spirit of the English revolution and one of the principles
that guided the American revolutionists. Sullivan con-
cludes with an encomium of republics and an appeal to
defend them, since they are the hope of the world.’
Philip Freneau in a prettier and more delicate brochure,
Letters on Various Interesting and Important Subjects,
shows a farmer arguing with his pastor, not from party
spirit, but from a concern for truth.*”* This pamphlet was
in the tone of Franklin’s Poor Richard, but it was more
supple and literary. These political letters presented
scenes in taverns and rural life; they were moderate but
biting and very hard on the clergy behind a veil of re-

spect. He blamed the Directory for having immoral

— te
lat
gia ie422 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

agents, but cleared France of the charge of atheism; she
has a religion of her own, that is all, he said. In splendid

verses written in 1798 he explains this religion:

O Liberty, seraphic name

With whom from heaven fair virtue came,
From whom through years of misery toss’d
One hundred thousand lives were lost,
Still shall all grateful hearts to thee
Incline the head and bend the knee.**®

And the great poet mingled the bitter accents of satire
with hymns of piety in order to make clear the erandeur
of Liberty and the ignominy of her enemies. Barlow,
the other great pamphleteer of the Republicans, pub-
lished in Paris in 1798 a little booklet full of bitterness
against Adams and the monarchical tendencies of certain
Americans. Its harsh, popular and lawless, though in-
spired, tone was certain to create a sensation. To make
amends for this outburst, he produced in 1800 a serene
and pure work entitled Letters from Paris. In this book
he proclaimed the necessity of the United States and the
entire world achieving Liberty; but the United States,
favored by circumstances, ought to set the example. He
called on his fellow countrymen to cease deifying the
executive, and to remember the great principles, and
especially this one: “The art of government is in reality
the art of substituting a moral force for a physical
force.’ He lauded the federal system as furnishing

the easiest means of applying these principles, as theTHE GREAT SCHISM 423

good King Henry IV of France had been the first to see
and proclaim.”

The newspapers circulated these verses and copied or
summed up these pamphlets in their columns. The first
to reopen the fight against Federalism had been certain
democratic newspapers of New England, such as The
Independent Chronicle of Boston and The Bee of New
London, certain western sheets, and of course The Aurora
of Philadelphia. These papers also published the text
of speeches pronounced by the Republicans."** They at-
tacked Cobbett with his own weapons, insult and
calumny ; they criticized the clergy for concerning itself
with politics instead of attending to its own business;
finally, they silenced Morse. Morse had received a letter
from a German named Ebeling, who was very learned
and well-informed on American affairs, warning him to
take care, because he was mistaken in attributing any
revolutionary activity to the Illuminati of Bavaria.
Morse had kept this letter without showing it. But the
papers learned of it and published it, thus rendering
Morse ridiculous at the same time that they refuted his
arguments. A letter in the same tenor from Weishaupt
arrived shortly afterward.*” In short, protests and criti-
cisms flowed in from all sides. Morse had the humiliation
of seeing his own weapon turned against him. A Descrip-
tion of the Illuminati of New England was a pamphlet
by J. C. Ogden, who claimed to have learned of the
organization of a secret sect in New England composeden

424 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

of Federalist pastors and resembling that of the Tllumi-
nati. He said that Jay and his friends belonged to an
association of this kind** The denunciation of the
Illuminati ended therefore in ridicule, and the effect
of mysticism that had been sought was not attained.
The same was true in other fields, but the most striking
event was the success of Jefferson and Madison in having
resolutions voted in Kentucky and Virginia recalling the
fact that the Union was a contract and that the States,
as members of the Union, had the right to break it in case
of usurpation of power or violation of the rights of indi-
viduals. Never before had the doctrine of the Rights of
Man been so formally taken as the rule of American
national life. Thus American opinion, which had been
scandalized by the unseemly conduct of the French gov-
ernment, was still attached to the principles which France
represented and which had become those of the Repub-
lican party. In trying to break them down, the Federalist
party had only paved the way to its own final fall.
Adams himself felt this. He was an honest, strong and
intelligent man, when he was not in bad humor, which,
it is true, happened almost never. He saw Washington
and Hamilton eager to arm, fight, conquer Florida and
kill Frenchmen. He saw the campaign of the ardent
Federalists and joined in it, but he perceived that the
people with all their enthusiasm were not flocking to
their standards, that they were weary of the war before
it had begun, and that to fight beside England againstTHE GREAT SCHISM 42

wn

France would be to go backward fifty years. All this he
saw, and also the fact that he himself could by no means
acquire military glory. He thought that Hamilton was
plotting too much to become the leader. He was irritated.
He was quite ready to admit that true Americanism
would consist rather in abstaining from European quar-
rels than in mixing into them. Together with a few other
clear-sighted Federalists, he was worried at the part that
English agents were playing in America. Finally, as he
often did, he preferred his enemies to his friends and
had foresight in spite of his advisers.’** Since Talleyrand
had made known to him that the French government
would gladly receive an American ambassador, he asked
the advice of his cabinet and, in spite of their most ex-
plicit opposition, sent a new delegation of three members
to Paris.

ok
Kk >

In France the situation had changed greatly. Talley-
rand was too intelligent not to see his error and appre-
ciate its gravity as well as its possible consequences. The
pleasure of vengeance and the illusion of vice had led
him too far. As soon as he learned of the departure of
Marshall and Pinckney, his attitude changed. He tried to
negotiate with Gerry and adopted a conciliating tone.
Gerry, recalled by Adams, was unable to accomplish any-

thing, but he brought back to America certain evidences

    
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
   
 
 
 
 
 
  
   

. " —S . Se . tees eer
‘ SeSt te eT eet  eee . Stes rere ee rr
sPstcrd case Ses 83s +s SEZ Se ap i gigs ger sss+=- 52

a5
+ £3

ee ee |

es

ot ee ee426 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

of good intentions. Shortly after, the account of the X Y
Z negotiations, published at Philadelphia in April,
reached Paris with remarkable rapidity. It was in Talley-
rand’s hands as early as the month of Prairial, Year VI
(May 1798). He felt that Adams was angry and would
go to great lengths. He was frightened; immediately he
sent a report to the Directory (the twelfth of Prairial,
VI) in which he denied formally having been in any way
concerned “‘in these shocking propositions.” In his con-
duct, he said, “all was simple, all was pure, all was
worthy of the loyalty of a Frenchman.” He gave an exact
analysis of the documents published by the American gov-
ernment, then he proceeded to draw a very dark picture of
the situation of the United States, directed by a govern-
ment allied with that of England, and monarchial. He
recommended calmness, prudence and moderation. He
begged the Directory to issue a manifesto along this line.
In short, he sought to clear himself and wriggle out of un-
pleasant straits. All that was needed for him to make
advances to the United States was the opportunity.”
In fact, public opinion was astonished and indignant at
seeing this new difficulty that the Directory had created
by its arrogant policy. The cafés were hostile, as the re-
ports of the police allow us to see; the royalist news-
papers gloated; the English were circulating throughout
Europe the American version of the X Y Z affair.
Finally, the Jacobins were casting doubt on Talleyrand’s

probity and recalling his antecedents.*** No one was will-THE GREAT SCHISM 427

ing to take the responsibility for a break with the United
States, and Talleyrand was in a fair way of being chosen
as the scapegoat.**’ Advice and counsels of moderation
were raining in from all sides. Volney, arriving from
America, stressed the danger of a war and urged that the
government treat with Adams politely. Kosciusko, who
had just returned from a triumphal journey in America,
where the Republicans had received him with open arms,
gave the same advice. Logan, a prominent and influential
Republican who had just arrived in Paris with letters
from Jefferson, presented a memorandum to the Direc-
tory in the same tone. This cost him dearly moreover,
for the Federalists never forgave him this act which they
considered an intrusion on the functions of the execu-
tive.** These travelers and all the Frenchmen returning
from America agreed in saying that the X Y Z negotia-
tions had united the Americans against France and that,
unless something were done in haste, there would be war.
Finally, Dupont, the French Consul-General to Phila-
delphia, whom Adams had sent back without allowing
him to exercise his functions, presented Talleyrand with
a report which the minister received with joy and which
got him out of his difficulties. Dupont very skillfully
threw the blame on the governments that had succeeded
each other in France during the past ten years, the ten-
dencies of the American government, the acts of violence
of certain French officials in the West Indies and the

exactions of French privateers. Talleyrand’s “awkward-

    
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
   

oe re SeStivye

428 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

ness” was buried under this pile of reproaches, the which
were, moreover, justified.’ Talleyrand submitted the
report to the Directory and asked it to take action in the
direction indicated by Dupont. The Directory approved.
Circular instructions were sent to the West Indies to
put a stop to the capture of American ships. The Direc-
tory entered into indirect relations with Vans Murray,
the American minister at The Hague, and let Adams
know that his representative, or representatives, would
be received with pleasure and due honor.

This change of front, which was in part the result of
the pressure of public opinion, the circumstances of the
moment, and Talleyrand’s personal fears, was due above
all else to moral factors. The Directory had very little to
fear from the United States either on land or on the sea;
and it had nothing to expect from them, as it knew. But
America was still a great moral force; and for a govern-
ment that was feared but held in little esteem in Europe,
and violently combated within the country, and that
wanted to claim the sanction of principles from which,
however, it often departed, to quarrel with America
would have been a further and disastrous loss of prestige
and a cruel handicap.’ America was the only nation in
the world that could appear to be guided by the same
ideal as France; to break this spiritual unity, even though
it was fictitious, would have been dangerous. At least,
this is what all the memoranda presented to the Directory
at this time say or insinuate. In the newspapers under itsTHE GREAT SCHISM 429

control, such as the Rédacteur, the Directory had articles
published setting forth its moral purity and proclaiming
its desire to extend a fraternal hand to the American re-
public. Talleyrand circulated a pamphlet containing the
proofs of his innocence and moderation.*** The French
government sought no advantage except friendship, She
had no political end in view. She desired only to help the
Americans to preserve their federal union and their fine
democratic spirit.” Such is the conclusion of the com-
plete final report that Talleyrand submitted to the Direc-
tory the twentieth of Pluvidse, Year VII (January
1799).

This policy of conciliation inaugurated by Talleyrand

143

was to succeed, thanks to Adams’ decision to send nego-
tiators in spite of his cabinet and his party, in spite of
even Washington. He had ‘in his support the opinion of
the majority, which was opposed to a war and grieved
at seeing the two great republics of the world fighting
among themselves at the risk of discrediting their com-
mon ideal. When the three envoys, Vans Murray, Oliver
Ellsworth and Governor Davie of South Carolina,
arrived in France, a new government had been set up.
The Consulate had succeeded the Directory, and no one
knew what attitude it would take on the American
problem.

On November 11, 1799, Napoleon Bonaparte had
come into power and had established, under the name of

Consulate, a government that aspired to be stable and430 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

 

constructive, to derive its support from property-owners,
to bring about peace and continue the Revolution while
making it more humane, tolerant and generous. The con-
‘servatives, the discouraged royalists, the wealthy classes
and the great mass of the people who had had enough of
war and turmoil, had rallied to Bonaparte, whose per-
sonal prestige was so great. Nevertheless Bonaparte, still
a novice in the art of carrying on revolutions, had hesi-
tated in the course of his enterprise: all his past was
Jacobin and revolutionary. He, more than any other,
held the cult of Country and the great ideals of 1789.
It was these ideals that had made him. Sincerity and the
need of defending himself against the royalist movement
that was taking shape made them necessary to him in
1799. The death of Washington and the revival of popu-
larity that it brought to this great man came along at
the right moment to furnish Bonaparte an outburst of
revolutionary mysticism that was both tinged with a
conservative spirit and dominated by a pleasing concept
of the dictatorship of virtue. In the first days following
his accession to power, Bonaparte informed himself on
the American questions, which had remained at the point
where Talleyrand had left them: that is to say, inclined
toward moderation and accord, but with nothing precise
about them.“ The weight of public opinion was in this
direction, and one pamphlet after another called for an
understanding with the United States.** On the thir-
teenth of Pluvidse of the Year VIII (January, 1800), theTHE GREAT SCHISM 431

news of Washington’s death spread through Paris. It
attracted public attention immediately. For some years
there had been less talk of Washington in France.*** The
liberator of the New World had been very popular from
1780 to 1792, the period during which his former French
companions-in-arms and lieutenants had carefully main-
tained his renown, from which they were not without
deriving some benefit. La Fayette, who from 1789 to
1792 had been known under the name of “the French
Washington,” had been most assiduous in furthering and
utilizing the glory of his illustrious friend. Thus Wash-
ington, admired between 1775 and 1783 as a great gen-
eral, a powerful personality and an able dictator, had
become, for the needs of the cause and as a result of
events, the model of the great Citizen, modest and de-
voted, for whom political offices are only a means to
service, who has no other will than that of the people
and whose majesty is made up of abnegation, poise, and
—I should almost say—mediocrity.““‘ From 1793 to
1798 his glory underwent an eclipse; the French could
hardly pardon him for his policy of rapprochement with
England and his distrust of the Revolution. They were
inclined to portray him as the leader of the anti-French
party in America and to hate him accordingly. Never
had the popularity of Washington been so imperiled as
in 1797, in France as in America.* But his death re-
paired all this. For the Americans, whatever might be

their opinions, he became once more the great man who

«entrte

432 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

had brought about the military victories of the war for
independence. They no longer feared him, and he be-
came a subject of pride. In France, Bonaparte hastened
to lay hold on his glory and make it an emblem about
which to rally all Frenchmen who were revolutionary in
spirit but men of order in deed. It was to be a symbol, in
the eyes of the public, of the reaction against Jacobism
and the Directory, without denying the principles of
1789. It was the emblem of morality and wholesome
republicanism. It would once more give the new regime
in France the means of profiting by the American revo-
lutionary mysticism, so important ever since 1778." On
the 13th of Pluvidse, as soon as the news of the death of
Washington was known at Paris, a member of the House
of Representatives, F. Faulcon, asked that body to vote
a funeral oration in honor of Washington such as Frank-
lin had received formerly, and forthwith he began a
eulogy of the great man. Faulcon was a conservative, a
Catholic with monarchial tendencies; he belonged to the
group which even during the Directorate had supported
the American government and called for a policy of
peace abroad and tolerance at home. After various dis-
courses in which many favorable things were spoken of
Washington, the House passed to the order of the day.
It was no longer 1790, and the legislative body still
contained too many Jacobins who had not forgotten Jay’s
treaty.”°° But the First Consul went over their heads.

His Minister of External Relations, in a report on theTHE GREAT SCHISM 433

United States, had advised him to have a statue of the
Great Man erected in a public place at Paris. The Min-
ister said: “A people who will some day be a great people
and is today the most orderly and happiest people on
earth, mourn the death of Washington, who had aided
them more than any other man to win their liberty. #20an.
The name of Washington is attached to a period forever
memorable: he will honor this age by his talents, the
elevation of his character and his virtues, which even
envie dared not disparage. . . .” He therefore desired
that “France, who had foreseen all the glory that human-
ity might attain and all the benefits that the policy of
enlightenment might derive from the new kind of social
institutions and the new sort of heroism of which Wash-
ington and America were to furnish the common ex-
amples,” should offer a striking testimony to her
emotion.’ Bonaparte decided that Washington’s statue
should be placed in the Tuileries, where twenty-seven
statues were to be set up. It was to be made by Houdon
and would be enthroned in this palace amid a host of
heroes, among whom Franklin, intentionally excluded,
would not figure. Bonaparte decided that the mourning
for Washington should be celebrated on the very day
when the flags captured in Egypt were to be installed in
the Invalides. A funeral oration was to be pronounced.
He himself ordered that all the flags should be draped
with crépe; and he addressed an order of the day to the

consular guard, in which he exclaimed: ‘Washington is

    
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 

pt re ts F :
ager i~ecssssessi reg

- rr ys tett ees -“
SSs2sb7eFSSsFs 25 33a F sz apizg

a eed se 5 el Fs Sf ZlPracoez2si434 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

dead. This great man fought against tyranny. He con-
solidated the liberty of his Country. His memory will
always be dear to the French people as well as to all the
free men of both worlds, and especially to the French
soldiers, who, like him and like the American soldiers,
fight for liberty and equality.” *°? The orator who com-
posed and delivered the eulogy of Washington in this
ceremony was M. de Fontanes, a moderate monarchist
who had recently returned to France. He was on friendly
terms with Elisa Bonaparte, and it was she who had
recommended him to Lucien.*** His discourse on this
occasion was undoubtedly the greatest literary and politi-
cal triumph of Fontanes’s career. It won him the favor of
the First Consul and the public. Fontanes knew what he
ought to think, and he expressed it with emphasis. He
depicted Washington as good, kindly, firm and, above
all, humane, devoted to Liberty, but capable of imposing
order on political parties. The whole eulogy was a series
of allusions and lauded the First Consul, not equally
with Washington, but much more than Washington.
This superiority, due to the fact that Bonaparte was a
living hero instead of a dead one, also resulted from the
incomparable luster of the First Consul’s victories and
all that the people expected of him. In his peroration
Fontanes said, “It seems to me that, from the heights of
this magnificent dome, Washington cries out to all
France, ‘Magnanimous nation, you who know so well

how to honor glory, I conquered in the name of inde-THE GREAT SCHISM 435

pendence, but the happiness of my country was the prize
of my victory. Do not content yourself with imitating
the first part of my life: it is the second part that recom-
mends me to the eulogies of posterity!’ Yes, thy counsels
shall be heard, O Washington! O Warrior! O Legislator!
O Citizen without reproach! He who, though yet young,
has surpassed thee on the fields of battle, will, as thou
didst, close with his triumphant hands the wounds of
his Country. . . . The acclamations of all the centuries
will at last accompany the hero who bestows this blessing
on France and on the world that she has too long un-
settled.” Fontanes adroitly showed the continuity of
French sympathy toward the United States. He also
evoked in one way or another all the governments that
had succeeded each other in France since 1775, in order
that their spiritual union, at last refound, should pene-
trate the hearts of all his hearers. This timely theme
had already been utilized by the newspapers that sup-
ported the Consuls: Les Débats had said: “If Alexander
shed tears on the grave of Achilles, if Caesar in Spain
meditated at the foot of a statue of Alexander, Wash-
ington’s grave will be the retreat to which the man who
now holds the reins of the government in France will
sometimes withdraw in spirit to reflect again on what he
already knows—that there is a glory more noble, more
moving, more worthy of the applause of all men, than
that of arms and conquests.” **° The Gazette de France
and the Journal de Paris took the same attitude. The436 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

latter published an ode on the death of Washington,
whose lyric platitudes were not at all out of place in
1800.°° What these papers, the most conservative as
well as the most influential and best directed organs of
the time, said all the others repeated. At the Portique
républicain, the fashionable literary assembly of the day,
Billardon de Sauvigny read a scene from his play on
Washington, which was produced in 1791. In certain
cities of the provinces, Angers for example, ceremonies
were held in imitation of the one at Paris. The Masons,
who had had an illustrious brother-member in Washing-
ton, and the Theophilanthropists, who were in search of
lay saints, made their meetings resound with the name
of the Hero. The eulogy pronounced by Dubroca at the
assembly of the Theophilanthropists is the most note-
worthy testimony to this worship." These enthusiastic
words were not addressed to Washington alone, they were
uttered for the benefit of all the Americans and mani-
fested the desire for reconciliation that prevailed in
France. The First Consul worked deliberately toward this
end. He had formed a commission of three members,
Jerome Bonaparte, Roederer and Fleurieu, to treat with
the American plenipotentiaries, and he attached great
importance to the success of the negotiations. At the
Ministry of External Relations, every one was in favor
of this step, especially Hauterive and Otto. Since France
was unwilling to renounce the treaties of 1778 or pay
an indemnity to the United States for the American shipsTHE GREAT SCHISM 437

captured, while the American government, stirred up by
the X Y Z scandal, had strictly ordered its delegates to
obtain these two concessions, nothing more than a con-
vention could be signed.*’* Postponing until later the
solution of these problems, the convention settled that
the two countries should mutually restore all prizes
and confiscated property and that they should pay
their debts. It thus permitted the renewing of relations
without, however, reéstablishing them on a secure basis.
To compensate for the partial failure and to take all
possible advantage of the partial success, the First Con-
sul had a celebration held at the Chateau de Mortefon-
taine to bid the American delegates farewell and thank
them. The entertainment was as sumptuous and brilliant
as possible, and was given great publicity. A rather ill-
assorted banquet in which statesmen, Jacobins, actresses,
and a few unexpected guests thronged about the First
Consul and the delegates, was followed by an allegorical
exhibition of fireworks representing France and the
United States, their revolutions and their renewed friend-
ship. Then a play was acted. Mlle. Contat played Les
Jeux de Amour et du Hasard. It is even related that
the First Consul, having received from the prefect a
present of some Roman coins that peasants had just dis-
covered in the surrounding country, wanted to distribute
them among the American delegates as a token of friend-
ship. They answered that the laws of their country pre-

vented them from accepting anything; but Bonaparte

    
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
   
 

ee ee ee ee ee re Re oe Bl

est Pee
atszsSeteyte2se22438 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

replied, “There is nothing better to be done with these
relics of a great republic than to make a present of them
to the citizens of the American republic.” He insisted
that “these relics of a free people be given to the freest
of all men who live in society on earth.” And this was
the last grandiose scene of a well-arranged spectacle.”
Doubts have been cast on Bonaparte’s sincerity during
this period. But everything tends to prove that as a young
man he had sincerely admired the United States and
Washington.’ Since then, he had been but little con-
cerned with them, but he had never ceased to subscribe
to his revolutionary credo; and it must have been a real
pleasure for him to use his power to forward so republi-
can an act as the reconciliation of the two great democra-
cies. It has further been alleged, especially in America,
that he was on the point of signing the treaty of Saint-
Ildefonse which gave back to France her empire of
Louisiana and the Mississippi and made her an American
continental power. American historians ordinarily deduce
that he was dealing underhandedly with the Americans
when he evinced friendship for them while he was pre-
paring to reoccupy Louisiana. But it seems as if these
two things may have been compatible in his mind and in
the minds of the French citizens of the time. The United
States had neither rights nor claims to Louisiana. They
had often had causes for complaint against Spain. France
had colonized these regions and had always felt a lively

interest in them and a strong attachment for them. OnlyTHE GREAT SCHISM 439

the wisdom and philosophic spirit of Vergennes had kept
her from doing anything to reconquer them or even de-
siring to do so. But times had changed. With the French
Revolution, national sentiment had taken a new form
and fresh strength. To hope for the extension of one’s
country was to hope for the triumph of the moral ideal
in which one believed: it was therefore a mystic action
and sentiment, and not a mere material calculation.
Neither Bonaparte nor the public opinion that supported
him had any reason to blush for coveting Louisiana in
1800.

In America, however, they were condemned for it. It
was no longer, as in 1778, a mere survival of the old
Anglo-Saxon hatreds against France: it was national
sentiment and the consciousness of the great destiny to
which they were called that made the American people
take this attitude. It was also an attachment to demo-
cratic principles and the desire to create for themselves
a new world in which liberty should reign.“ Jefferson
had just been elected President of the United States.
America had once more proclaimed—and that brilliantly
—her will to remain a democratic state. In spite of the
bitter campaign carried on against Jefferson, who had
been represented as an atheist, an agent of France and
a man of no constructive ability, he had received a
majority throughout the country. By its mistakes and
its internal weakness, the Federalist party had paved the

162

way to its own defeat.’ It had enacted energetic laws,

i
i
ae440 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

but it had not enforced them. It had denounced France
violently, but except for fairly brilliant naval opera-
tions, it had done nothing against her. The Federalist
leaders, with their aristocratic tendencies, desirous of a
strong government under the guidance of the best and
wealthiest people, had neither dared nor known how to
realize their program in the brief moment when popular
enthusiasm would perhaps have permitted it. The rivalry
between Hamilton, with his monarchist tendencies, and
Adams, with his aristocratic republican spirit, had been
fatal and had brought about defeat.

But this would not have happened if the country and
Adams himself had not been imbued with the ideas that
were then known as French and that called for the sover-
eignty of the People and a religious respect for them.
These principles—most of them had already been in-
volved in the American Revolution—had changed charac-
ter under the influence of the French Revolution. Instead
of being taken as axioms resulting from the religious and
political traditions of England, they were henceforth
truths in themselves, a religion apart, and they had taken
on a universal and absolute character that they were far
from having in 1770. They had gradually begun to
acquire this character after 1770 under the influence of
the French philosophers and impassioned discussion. ‘Thus
they formed a much more general theory and a much
more definite discipline. They had a much more pro-

found authority over human thought and occupied aTHE GREAT SCHISM 441

much greater place in the life of man. This transforma-
tion is all the more curious since, from 1788 to 1799, the
American Constitution was composed, interpreted and
applied by a party which, for the most part, had no con-
fidence in the dogmas of democracy and sought, with the
support of a considerable portion of the clergy, to turn
the people away from them. By his tact, his external
moderation and internal violence, Jefferson, with the
support of the masses and the immigrants with French
tendencies, had just come into power; it was both the
continuation of the revolution of 1776 and a new revo-
lution. Coming three years earlier, it would without
doubt have drawn France and America together; in 1800
it was, on the contrary, to put an increasing distanc. be-
tween them, for Bonaparte’s military dictatorship, his
despotic empire of conquest, could not fail to look with
hostility upon sincere democrats.’** Moreover, the policy
of unlimited expansion which he seems to have adopted
for France alarmed every one, even in America. Lastly,
the continental blockade and the English blockade, by
making intercourse between Europe and America almost
impossible, completed the widening of the breach be-
tween the two peoples. The world of ideas is not autono-
mous to such a degree as to permit the exchange of ideas
and sentiments when nations have neither commerce,
navigation nor interests in common.
*

Fi es

    
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
  

See Se Tee ee Sire ee) et ek}

SSPEA442 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Nevertheless, thirty years of intellectual and senti-
mental collaboration cannot be wiped out without leaving
a trace. After 1800 the American argument still retained
great value in France; and it had so strong a hold on
minds that no party neglected it. We have already
pointed out how much it had discommoded the Jacobins
since 1796, especially those who felt a violent antipathy
toward the Christian dogmas and all religious sentiments.
Volney expressed this point of view and this annoyance
in the book that he produced after his return from
America, Tableau du Climat et du Sol des Etats-Unis
d’ Amérique. As a matter of fact, Volney had personal
grievances: he had not been very well received in Amer-
ica. [he newspapers and the clergy had scarcely left him
any peace, and a law had been passed especially to permit
him to be deported. A more patient man than he was
would have been irritated. Now Volney had neither mod-
esty nor patience in excess. He therefore wrote a book
asserting that the United States were bigoted, avaricious
and tiresome, that their women never washed themselves
and that only patriotism made them think that their
climate was a good one. For all its bitter and violent tone,
the book has savor and contains curious information,
but it is lacking in accuracy and justice. Monsieur de
La Rochefoucauld Liancourt, although he showed better
breeding and wrote less colorful French, was scarcely
more amiable. His feelings also had been rumpled. His

first enthusiasm had faded in the course of his long stayTHE GREAT SCHISM 443

in America. He had not been widely enough received and
listened to. He took his revenge in eight very heavy, very
monotonous and very pedantic octavo volumes. They are
in reality the notes of his travels and those of Moreau
de Saint-Méry, almost without revision or completion.
Here and there we find in it documents that are of: use
in the history of this period, but the heaviness of the
style and the mediocrity of thought render the book
futile and intolerable despite its material importance.
Liancourt cannot help admiring the liberty and tolerance
that prevailed in the United States, but he understood
neither the genius nor the character of the country. He
takes every occasion to rail at priests, pastors and be-
lievers; he does it without grace’ and usually without
reason. Nothing of his book was to live.*”

Beside these books, and quite as futile as they were
in promoting good relations between the two coun-
tries, there was during’ several years a complete Bona-
partist literature whose purpose was to bring the example
ot America 'to the support of the moderate revolutionary
policy of the First Consul. These books, of which the two
most typical are doubtless L’histotre politique et philoso-
phique dela Révolution de l Amérique septentrionale by
the Citizens J. Chas'and Lebrun (Paris, Year IX) and
Coup d’Oedl politique sur le Continent by Charles Sa-
ladin (Paris, 1800), aim at proving by the example of
America that all revolutions can; and ought to, end in an

era of assuagement and reconciliation. They compare

    
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
   

eet ee yee tr ete eel Coes Sey Pree

ee ee ee444 THE! REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Bonaparte to Washington. But the obscurity of the writ-
ers and their lack of talent made their labors vain. Very
soon they became impossible: it was no longer Washing-
ton whom Bonaparte imitated, but Caesar and Augustus.

The American tradition, which still persisted ‘and re-
fused to be uprooted, had its center and stronghold in
the ideal of Liberty and a religious love of Democracy.
It is surprising to’ see how much influence America con-
tinued to have over those of the revolutionaries who still
felt the need of mysticism and worship. Thomas Paine
was one of the founders of Theophilanthropy in France
and he organized a chapter in America. And as long as
the revolutionary cults »were followed, Franklin was
glorified. In the month of Vendémiaire, Year IJ, when
Rousseau’s remains were transferred to the Pantheon, a
statue of Franklin was carried in the procession. During
the whole Directorate, a life-size fresco painting of
Franklin beside Rousseau, Voltaire, Helvetius and Marat
was to be seen in a café at the corner of the Boulevards
and the Rue du Faubourg-Montmartre. In the Year VIII
a celebration was held in honor of Benjamin Franklin in
the Temple of Victory (Saint-Sulpice), and a conjurer
called up his ghost together with that of Mohammed in
the Cours des Capucines (Place Vendome). The news-
papers frequently printed letters and paragraphs taken
from his works, and his biography published in the Year
VI was very well received.**© He did not cease to be reé-THE: GREAT ' SCHISM

garded by the republican worshipers as one of the sub-
lime» men whom. they were pleased. to oppose to the
Catholic saints, whose cult was beginning to revive, In
the Year IIT, people were:singing:

Give us back the names of all the saints

At the corner of each street.

Rousseau, Buffon and Franklin—
Let us throw their statues down.?°

La Décade and the other great reyolutionary papers
faithfully cherished the memory of Franklin. The second
part of his autobiography was published for the first time
in | La Décade for February, 1798. It is about his form
that popular imagination: in France grouped everything
that it remembered of America. Once more’ Franklin was
a more popular. personage in France than in the United
States. Bonaparte did not like Franklin and ‘tried to
stifle his influence. Gradually he pulled away from: the
United) States and \ceased to'employ them as a proof of
his republican: spirit. It: was’ with the followers of La
Fayette, the democratic idealists and dreamers, that the
American: tradition, | with all its: pious, noble and gen-
erous qualities, then took refuge. We can follow its trace
through the first! forty years of the nineteenth century as
far as de Tocqueville. When we remember that La Fay-
ette rode into triumph on the crest of the Revolution of
1830, we perceive that this survival, which still enjoyed
a great moral prestige at least, is not to be belittled. It

PP
ey
ae

miei)446 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

 

alone is worthy of a complete study, and this is not the
place to broach it. It will suffice to have mentioned its
importance.

On the other hand, it is curious to see the American
legend develop among the monarchists. Almost all of
the royalist émégrés came back to France filled with en-
thusiasm, and they conserved the memory of this simple,
happy and truly free life in the New World. We have
seen how much regret Madame de La Tour du Pin and
the Marquis de Lezay Marnésia felt at leaving this land
of liberty. The same was true of the sons of the Duke
of Orléans, who were so well received during their stay
in the United States. Their memoirs bear witness to this;
and already the books of the period revealed the favor
that. the United States enjoyed in certain royalist cir-
cles.*"*. The good Abbé Bonnet de Fréjus,"*’ who saw in
Bonaparte a new Monk, wrote a thick book, Les Efats-
Unis de T Amérique ala Fin du XVIII ° Siecle, with the
sole purpose of exalting the natural liberty, humane,
tolerant and benign, that reign in this country and of
contrasting it with the false liberty that was obtained by
violence in France. Saint Jean de Crévecceur, whose book
had had.so much success before the Revolution, published
another! of the same nature in 1801, Voyages dans la
haute Pennsylvanie, whose dominant ideas are similar
to. those of Abbé Bonnet. But is it not most curious to
find them, (again) in, Le Voyage en Amérique, which

Chateaubriand published in 1827? This writer, who wasTHE GREAT SCHISM 447

considered the great upholder of’ monarchy by divine
right during the first third of the century, expresses in
this book a boundless admiration for Washington, whom
he compares with Bonaparte at the expense of the latter,
depicting the great emperor as a destroyer and the great
democrat as a creator. Who can forget these’ marvelous
phrases? “‘A quietude envelops the activities of Wash-
ington, he moves slowly; it seems as if he felt himself the
representative of the liberty of the future.’ This man,
who does not stand out greatly, because he is natural and
in true proportion, blended his existence with that of
his country; his glory is the common patrimony of in-
creasing civilization; his renown looms up like a sanc-
tuary whence flows an inexhaustible spring for the peo-
ple.” This admiration is not mere resentment against
Bonaparte; it has a positive quality. Chateaubriand can-
not help seeing, in the United States, the future; and in
the form of government that they have adopted, a model
of perfection. ‘““The discovery of the representative Re-
public in the United States is one of the greatest political
events of the world. It has proved, as I have said else-
where, that there are two kinds of practical liberty: one
belongs to the infancy of peoples. It is the daughter of
simple living and virtues; it was that of the first Greeks
and the first Romans; it was that of the savages of
America. The other is born of the old age of peoples.
It is the daughter of enlightenment and reason; it is the

liberty of the United States replacing that of the Indians.

    
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
   
 

~ - - skAvtitseze
Sas Hessen ets itszes 4
| oat i. > fReO>. ©

Fics

ete rer She ee ee oe Se oes

e
+i 3%:

as ztertzee e448 THE REVOLUTIONARY ‘SPIRIT

Happy land that in the space of less ‘than three centuries
has passed from one liberty to the other almost: without
effort and by dint/of:a struggle that lasted less: than eight
years! . |, .. Whatever the. future may be; liberty will
never disappear entirely. from) America; and’ it’ is this
that we must account as one of the advantages of Liberty,
the daughter of enlightenment; over Liberty; the daugh-
ter of mores... it imcreases as time goes on instead of
deteriorating as the other form:does.”’ Lastly, the United
States, having a sparse population for an immense terri-
tory, will be protected: “For a long while its wildernesses
will be its mores, and its enlightenment, its liberty.” In
the light of these texts, does it not seem:as if Chateau-
briand, at the time when out of fidelity and ostentation
he was playing the part of an unflaggingly faithful ser-
vitor of monarchy, ‘thought and believed that: the future
of the world lay: in “Liberty, the daughter of mores”
such as he had seen in America?’ Can we help: seeing in
him a worshiper of Liberty who learned from’) America,
and not from France or her Revolution;: that ‘it’ is' pos-
sible for men to be free? Throughout) his: life he did
not forget this lesson, even when he was serving 'a cause
that seemed opposed! to this faith.’

In .1801 he wrote Azala, in: 1802 ‘René—+always \the
wildernesses, the purity, the rapture! of this new ‘world.
The brightest dreams of his:-youth Chateaubriand ‘gave
to America; or, perhaps, derived’ them: from this land.
Whether or not ‘he heard ‘‘the voice of the flamingo that,THE GREAT ‘SSCHISM 449

hidden in the reeds of the Meschacébé, foretold a storm
for the middle of the day,” whether or not he saw “at
the ends of 'the forest avenues, bears drunk with grapes
swaying on the branches of the elms, caribous: bathing
in the, lake, black squirrels playing, in. the thickets,
mocking-birds, Virginia doves the size of sparrows alight-
mg on lawns red with strawberries, ‘green | parrots with
yellow heads climbing in spirals to the tops of cypresses,
humming+birds sparkling against the jasmine of Florida;
and bird-catching serpents hissing as they hang, swaying
like grape+vines, from the domes of the forest’’—-whether
he saw, heard: and touched all these things, or dreamed
it, is of little import. He had felt it! intensely; it was
his America. The germ of) all this was in the first im-
pression that the United States had made on him. The
good Crévecceur says in) his: book, at a: time when, filled
with enthusiasm, he tries to depict the falls of Niagara,
and fails in it: “How shall I describe the effect that is
produced: on ‘the: mind by a long contemplation of this
movement,’ this eternal struggle; and: on the senses: by
the ‘uninterrupted flow of so! violent an uproar, such. an
image of chaos? How shall I analyze the impressions
that result from the view of these gigantic and menacing
objects whose: immensity is so: disproportionate to the
weakness of our organs? It is only in the calm: of the
study, and not on'the spot, that it is possible to draw a
picture of it.’ * Crevecceeur saw all that Chateaubriand

saw and tried to express: all’ that Chateaubriand

a
et450 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT
expressed. But he lacked genius; his book is bad. Their

descriptions are identical except for the single difference
of genius. Crévecceur was no more true to life than Cha-
teaubriand. Artistic impression cannot be measured like
scientific or experimental knowledge; intensity is of
ereater worth than precision, accuracy or breadth of
knowledge. Thus the testimony of Chateaubriand is one
of the most important documents that might be found.
Qn this impression, many another is modeled, and it
summed up many of the faltering and ill-defined yearn-
ings that others felt. For Chateaubriand, as for Madame
de La Tour du Pin, Lezay, Crévecceur and Desjardins,
America and the United States represent a certain phys-
ical joy, an intense and ecstatic perception of Nature
that no other place affords. All these travelers have
spoken the delight of the first piece of bread eaten on
American soil.’”* But only Chateaubriand found the
image of the flamingoes of the Meschacébé to express it.
All of them came under the influence of American reli-
giousness, which made lay preachers of Crévecceur and
Lezay and a convert of Madame de La Tour du Pin;
but Chateaubriand wrote Le Génie du Christianisme. It
is in America that Nature made felt most keenly her
substantiality and divinity during these last years of the
eighteenth century. The American influence afforded a
transition between the influence of Rousseau, which it
prolonged and transformed, and Romanticism, for which

it prepared the way. After the concept of an abstract andTHE GREAT SCHISM 451

cc 3

chimeric “state of Nature,” which was finally becoming
empty and visionary, it created and developed the idea
of a modern civilization that would be perfected by the
intimate contact of man with Nature and by liberty and
piety. It furnished the example of this civilization; it
turned the imagination away from the past and directed
it toward the future. Thus it provided a marvelous
stimulant, and the impulse that it communicated to the
minds of men, for all its being codrdinated, mingled and
later blended with other currents, remains none the less
one of the great intellectual forces of the eighteenth and
nineteenth centuries.

If France in drawing apart from America was still to
retain the profound imprint that this nation had made
on her sensibility, it is not less true that the United
States, scandalized by the X Y Z Correspondence and
irritated by the policies of Napoleon, was to remain for
a long while under the influence of French thought. It
is true that the newspapers rarely printed any news ex-
cept from English sources—the French papers arrived
with too much delay; but in these English articles and
intelligences, they sought out faithfully everything that
might evoke the French spirit and ideas. The conflict of
the years 1795 to 1800 had been reéchoed in all fields of
activity. The position of privilege that France had en-
joyed in education in the United States underwent a
sharp attack from 1797 to 1800. All the ground gained
between 1774 and 1795 was lost for twenty years. In452 THE !REVOLUTIONARWN? SPIRIT

1795, and, '1796 the newspapers still ‘carried advertise-
ments: of! French courses and: lessons ‘(three at: Philadel-
phia, four at) New York, two; dancing-masters! at; Balti-
more,: one at Pittsburgh, one :ati:Princeton,, eight ‘at
Charleston, one: at; New» Haven, ete.). After 1797. there
were:no ‘more.; Except: in! the West, :we find almost ino
more, of these, advertisements, \innocuous «and |pacifie as
they, were; either through coercion or stimidity ‘they: had
been). given up.''’ ‘The .French’' professors took: to cover;
many. of them returned to, France: In ithe colleges where
French:was taught, it happeried, as at Harvard, that the
students rebelled against their professors:under: the: pre-
text that all Frenchmen: were Jacobins. There: were! no
more French cockades; only the black cockade, the badge
of theFederalists,,.was to be:seen, A two-fold:movement
came, about in the large’ universities ; an increasing‘ un-
ruliness anda surprising irreverence for religious) exet-
cises manifested itself, and this wave of immorality: was
attributed: to: the: influence of French. ideas; on the: other
hand, the majority of the students and’ professors were
Federalists;and hated-France. The discourses pronounced
by, the young men. in):their,clubs or at;commencement
ceremonies bear witness to; this. Volney and his impiety
bore,the brunt |of, these attacks im1797, while in 1798
the principal concern was the defense of American :dig-
nity. Volney; has; left!.us several pages) full of andigna-
tion at this, persecution, which, he endured with irage,.al-

though ,to ,us..they, seem, mild enough. Yale, : Harvard,THE GREAT SCHISM 458

Princeton and Brown’ were the “ringleaders."™ A young
Princeton student in 1798 characterized the Fretich Revo-
lution in’ these ternis :.“‘Francevhas been governed by a
succession of tyrants with whom the Neros! and: Caligulas
of antiquity do‘not merit to be compared.” |

The same moderation prevailed at\Harvard31in 41708
a young man there) said ini speaking of ‘the Prenck Revoz
lution: “It has inva manner annihilated society in’ one
country of Europe.” And in’ 179q°he uséd this eompari+
Som ina: poeny describing ‘the’ students’ corrupted* by ‘the

French ‘spirit:

Like pigs'they eat; they drink at’ ocean’ dry.

They steal, like France, like Jacobin’ they lie.4%
In ‘these’ conditions the’ French’ professors and: the pré-
fessors’ who had’ the’ French spirit ‘were obligéd "to ' Bo.
Harvard in’ 1798 omitted the French ‘oration’ from’ ‘its
commencement exercises in order not to raise’ a storm of
protest.’ Gradually ‘the teaching’ of Frénch- was’ aban-
doned:’ Harvard, Columbia ‘and Bréwn: Seem to“have
given it up at the beginning Of’ the nineteenth! century.
In the South, ‘whith was’ less touched’ by ‘the’ wave! of
hostility’ to’ France, we ‘still find ‘the University 6f South
Carolina beginning’ to teach’ French in 1864; ‘asthe’ Uni-
versity of North Carolina had doné‘in°?1802 but ‘it was
only for a few years—it was eventiially done away with
because'of the immorality of French authors.*™ Thstitu-
tions of the West Still. persevéréd in’ teachin? French)

but this region was not the center of learning.’”® In the

   
  
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
   
   
   

Pee Se TP ee el Pl ee Set eS od

eekhshs2-5
+ £5 te

ot Bae}

ed se eoCreed

454 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

teaching of medicine and law France continued to hold
an important place, for these subjects had a less direct
relation to politics. Nevertheless, Montesquieu, Burla-
maqui, Grotius and Valtel, although they expressed
French culture in a certain measure, hardly represented
the French judiciary concept of the beginning of the
nineteenth century. When France adopted the Civil Code
with its precision, its Roman logic and its rigidity, this
was a fresh obstacle to the French judiciary influence in
America; for the United States held to customs and laws
that resembled those of England, and their law was based
on usage, the decisions of the courts and tradition. Only
Louisiana, which had received the French system of laws
in 1801, kept the new system and still adheres to it. The
friction between the two countries even modified the rela-
tions between the learned societies of France and the
United States.” The Philosophical Society of Philadel-
phia, which, having been founded by Franklin, was lib-
eral and daring by tradition, no longer dared to take
into its membership a considerable number of French-
men, as it had done heretofore. Before 1798 Liancourt,
Talleyrand, Adet, Volney, Alexandre Lerebours, etc., had
been accorded this honor; from 1798 to 1802 Dupont de
Nemours was the only Frenchman elected, and com-
munications from Frenchmen, hitherto very frequent, be-
came rare.’*° In all these domains there was somewhat
of a lull to hostilities after 1800, but it was only a tem-THE GREAT SCHISM 455

porary calm and not a return to the glowing popularity
of 1788.

America had been too deeply shocked by French im-
morality. Even leaving out of consideration the X Y Z
affair and the blasphemies of Volney, there were other
scandals that, for all their being neither literary nor po-
litical, had made no less impression on public opinion.
Could the Americans forget Talleyrand, the former
bishop, refined grandee and _ illustrious revolutionary,
walking the streets of Philadelphia with his mulatto mis-
tresses on his arm? *** Two scandals in particular stirred
the upper classes deeply from 1798 to 1800. The reader
will remember Monsieur de Marsillac, the former officer
and student of medicine at Montpellier who was con-
verted to Quakerism and had been its exponent in France
and later had gone to America to follow this religion in
a place where his piety was more secure from the guillo-
tine. The Quakers of Philadelphia received him as a
brother and honored him. This lasted several years. He
piously attended the meetings of the Friends, and the
spirit often descended upon him. One day he was almost
killed by a runaway horse, and all the Quakers of Phila-
delphia went to bear him their consolations. When the
emigrés returned to France, Marsillac thought of going
back home to see his native Alencon once again. In 1798
he paid farewell visits to all the brethren. Then he em-
barked, and the rumor later reached Philadelphia that,456 THE REVOLUTIONARY: ‘SPIRIT

a$ soon'as he set foot aboard the ship, John de! Marsillac
had changed his clothes, put on a velvet suit and shoes
with silvet buckles, drunk, sung and even rolled under
the table: It was said that he had taken delight in deny-
ing his brethren and in playing a flute in public, Every
one talked of it; and he was solemnly excommunicated
from the congregation. He had been the leader of the
French Quakers: and''the link between the Friends. in

2

France’ and those in’ America.”

This incident which made:a painful and profound im-
ar pression among pious ‘people: in America, did not /have
the disastrous publicity, of the Tilly-Bingham ‘scandal.
This affair upset society throughout the United States.
Mr: Bingham was’ a) successful and. very opulent mer-
chant ‘who had represented Congress in the: French West
Indies during the Revolutionary War. Later he had trav-
eled'in France.’ He had’ married a charming and refined
woman; Miss Willing, had been elected senator and, as
a tich man, an outstanding Federalist:senator, the hus-
band of a fascinating woman and ‘the father of two
charming ‘daughters, ‘He led an ostentatious life at the
court! of Philadelphia, where he had built: a superb. resi-
dencein the English style. There he gave many: dances
and entertained royally; for Mr) Bingham was much at-
tached ‘to: his: wife:and wanted to divert her: It was’ the
best ‘house! in. Philadélphial! Only ‘the most aristocratic
Frenchmen’ were teceived:) Talléyrand appeared there, as
did Liancourt; the Vicomte de Noailles was an habituePe nek md

THE GREAT SCHISM 457

of the house. Louis Philippe of Orléans would:have been
only too glad to have married into the-family.

There were others who went: there, and among them. a
eertain Count Alexandre dé Tilly, aman already. ripen:
ing in: years but not in wisdom: He had Jed an adventur-
ous and: obscure life, in the course of: which his: fortune
had, disappeared. He was amusing, without doubt, and
clever. He won favor. He paid his court to the younger of
the» Misses; Bingham; and) between the. third. andthe
fourth of April the young: lady disappeared’ abdut. one
o'clock in the morning. ‘The next day it was’ learned that
she ‘/had married Count Alexandre de Tilly. Every ‘one
was astounded and indignant. ‘‘Oh, those ‘Frenchmen’
people said on every hand. There: was as much ‘adovas
there ‘had: been over’ Messrs... X, Y,' and) Z; and’ Mrs.
Bingham ‘would have died of chagrin if her friends had
not been able to find the girl and persuade Tilly to allow
her: to pay a visit to het mother. So Miss Bingham left
her: new husband for'a few hours and never returned to
him: Thereat Tilly, whose grief had not taken away his
sense of realitiés, put advertisements) in; the papers .an-
nouncing the abduction of: his: wife as if it had /been’ a
quéstion of a runaway slavé or)anadultetess:;:'At the
same tume he commissioned a lawyer by the name’of Sam-
son Levy to summon her: parents'to restore his: young wifé
to him. Mr. Levy, a Jew; it 1s said, carried onthe nego-
tiations' so well that he obtained, not the young’ lady,
whom the offended husband perhaps no. longer) desired

     
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
   
 

: SRR RYH Hee eS rere eset es
eee teeth to Pere el es er oe | ed

eS oe ee ee et}

en

rae458 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

ardently, but the payment of Tilly’s debts and an annual
income of £5,000 sterling. Tilly, who had had his face
slapped, also received satisfaction on this point: Mr.
Baring, the offender, declared that he had forgotten him-
self “in a moment of agitation.” Then Tilly returned his
wife’s letters and engaged himself to leave’ Philadelphia
and to facilitate a divorce, a step which he had moreover
rendered easy in advance by his admirable foresight in
furnishing a slightly inaccurate name on the marriage li-
cense. He kept his promises, and in 1800 everything was
settled. But the scandal became a legend."***™*

It is true that Marsillac and Tilly were isolated cases.
There were at that time hundreds of honest, worthy and
upright Frenchmen in America, and their neighbors and
friends respected them; but these shocking incidents and
a few others, adroitly circulated and compared with the
libertine novels of France and Volney’s irreligious decla-
rations, sufficed to develop the legend of an atheist and
cuilty France. The Federalists made the most of it, and
throughout this vast but provincial America the effect
produced was tremendous. This happened at the moment
when Washington’s virtues and greatness of soul were
everywhere being celebrated. They were seen as a symbol
of the American people. Thus, in contrast to a corrupt
France, there stood a pure America.

In spite of this opposition, in spite of the almost com-
plete breakdown of French education in America, some-
thing remained, and France had given the United StatesTHE GREAT SCHISM

a treasure of great price. One feels it during the years
when, throughout the New World, calumny and outrage
against France arc being circulated. At the same time
French books do not cease to be current; thought from
across the sea holds its own and French civilization con-
tinues to have a fascination. There is a tendency to evict
the philosophers. Voltaire and Rousseau, although we
still find advertisements of their works, seem to be read
less. Rollin and Fenelon have retained their popularity.
The Abbé Barthélemy with his young Anacharsis * scored
a considerable success; American writers went so far as
to compose imitations of it. History and books of travel
are still in vogue. As for French novels, they seem to be
more and more appreciated, especially those of Mme. de
Genlis. The magazines also are full of extracts and trans-
lations of works with philosophic and religious tenden-
cies: Bernardin de Saint-Pierre, Mme. Roland, etc., are
the principal authors whose works are thus exploited.
Les Etudes de la Nature, translated and published at
Boston by Nancréde, seem to have had a wide success.
On the whole, readers were seeking therefore a certain
mysticism more vague and more artistic than they found
in the churches and in American works of art. It goes
without saying that many revolutionary articles, espe-
cially those by Mercier, are translated and quoted; but

* The Travels of the Young Anacharsis in Greece by the Abbé Bar-

thélemy affords an interesting picture of public and private life in
Greece in the fourth century.—Tyranslator’s note.

eteteneds tebabats eee ee
er ee he Pe es eee.460 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

this is rather by way of documentation than in answer
to any literary concern or any taste for them.”

It is in the theater that French influence is most di-
rect. The very introduction of drama into the larger
American cities had been due in a great measure to the
arrival of French officers, writers, hairdressers, dancers
and actors in the United States. During the Revolution-
ary War, the theater was forbidden in America. The first
man to produce a play was Quesnay de Beaurepaire, who
played Beaumarchais’s Eugénée and thereby raised a
mooted question. It was only in 1784 that a company
began playing regularly in New York and Philadel-
phia.***

With the progress of the French Revolution and the
wars in Europe, a troupe of French actors, and later a
troupe of dancers, emigrated to America. An English
company came also, but it was filled with the French
spirit and was at first patronized by the revolutionaries.
To tell the truth, the American theater on the whole was
very audacious. In 1793, when the French fleet was at
New York, the Marseillaise was sung in the theater and
a great democratic manifestation took place. Baltimore
also was visited by the French troupe, and it was one
of the factors in the strong French influence that pre-
vailed in that city.’ At New York in 1795, a play was
produced representing the capture of the Bastille; the
crimes of the Court were discussed, a son discovered his
father who had been a prisoner for years, and the IronTHE GREAT SCHISM 461

Mask and skeletons brought out of secret dungeons ap-
peared before the eyes of the spectators. At Charleston
an Italian impresario named Colomba exhibited puppets
representing the execution of Louis XVI and the Queen.
The audience saw the guillotine fall and the heads drop
into the basket. “All is done by an invisible machine
without any visible aid,” the artist announced. The au-
thors were not less subject to French influence.*** Dunlap,
the leading playwright of the period, translated a great
many of his plays from French. He imitated farces like
Jérome Pointu and melodramas like Bella, ou la Femme
aux Deux Maris by Alexandre Duval.**’ After 1797 he
imitated and exploited Kotzebue, Schiller and the whole
German theater, without, however, neglecting the French.
His melodramas have all the paraphernalia of Romanti-
cism, knights, abbeys, mysterious monks, hermits, ghosts,
etc. He was rather a producer than an original play-
wright on the whole; he always exalted liberty in his
plays. John Daly Burk, a fiery Irishman and democrat,
is more original and interesting. In 1798, the year that
was so critical for Franco-American friendship, he dared
to produce a play entitled Female Patriotism or the death
of Jean d’Arc, an historic Play in five Acts in which
Jeanne d’Arc exclaims:

It is not to crown the Dauphin Prince alone
That hath impelled my spirit to the wars,
For that were petty circumstance indeed ;
But on the head of every man in FranceTHE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

 

To place a crown, and thus at once create

A new and mighty order of nobility,

To make all free and equal, all men kings,

Subjects to justice and the laws alone:

For this great purpose have I come amongst you.
[Shout: Liberty and Equality.] *°°

These lines give an idea of the nature of original drama
in the United States and of the vogue for things French.

The novel, written especially for and by the upper
classes, was less easily bent to the French mode than the
theater. It was the refuge of pious and religious souls.
There were here and there imitations of the good Madame
de Genlis, the virtuous Marmontel and Anacharsis, but
most of the inspiration for novels came from England.
A single writer of great talent, Charles Brockden Brown,
seems to have sought originality. He attained it by com-
plicating infinitely his plots, whose general plan often
reminds me of that of Coelina, ou l’Enfant du Mystere.
There are many things in these novels, and although
time has rendered them somewhat difficult to read, we
find certain beauties in them. They also are full of a
strong, pungent and original sap. Pirates, robbers, in-
cendiaries, heroines, somber monsters athirst for blood,
and mysterious specters—all these appear, and many
scenes have a German tinge. The flame of liberty that
burns in them is French, however. In Arthur Merwyn
(1799) we have Martinette who, born at Ragusa, enlists
as a volunteer in the French army and kills thirteen of-
ficers, among whom are two émigrés, at Jemmapes. IfTHE GREAT SCHISM 463

Brunswick had not beat a retreat that day, Martinette
would have gone to assassinate him with his own hands
“out of a generous attachment for Liberty.” In Ormond
(1799-1800) there are French privateers, French depu-
ties beheaded by Robespierre, etc. While remaining under
the influence of England and undergoing that of Ger-
many, the American novel acts as a vehicle for French
ideas. This is even more true of poetry, which was then
the popular form of literature.” There were almost no
newspapers that did not publish verses every day during
this period when there were no serial novels. The most
gifted American writer of the time seems to have been
Philip Freneau, the descendant of French Huguenots
whom we have already seen writing and fighting for lib-
erty. Animation, eloquence, power of vision, ease of ex-
pression, a naturalness that was rare at the time, and a
remarkable sense of reality, such are Freneau’s principal
qualities. His articles are as good as his verse. He was a
champion of France to the end. In the years 1798-1800
he gave himself freer rein than ever before, he satirized
Cobbett superbly in verse, he glorified Liberty and fought
against the idea of a war with France who was defending
the cause of humanity. He worshiped the People and did
not want great men to usurp its dignity. In speaking of
Washington he said:

He was no god, ye flattering knaves,

He owned no world, he ruled no slaves,
But—exalt it if you can—

He was the upright honest man.464 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

He had read Rousseau and was sometimes inspired by
him.**”? His knowledge of French was good but not com-
plete, and we find few literary procedures copied from
French authors in his work.’ He had taken a religion
and not a literature from France, but in this religion he
was an impassioned and heroic believer. The same was
true of the young men who wrote revolutionary verse
without having his gifts; France had transformed them
all, but she had not made French poets of them, nor
had she persuaded them to imitate Joseph Chenier,
Roucher, Delille, or Baour-Lormian, the greatest French
poets'of the day, nor even Racine. As for Voltaire, he
was already too tiresome to be read carefully or copied
in America. Songs, quatrains and stray verses—this is
what we do sometimes find coming over from the French.
But after all these scraps of poetry belong to all coun-
tries. The very extensive reading of French books in
America at the end of the eighteenth century did not
bring about a movement toward imitating them. The
forms remained Anglo-Saxon even when the spirit was
thrilled with an ecstasy that came from France. A book
by Samuel Miller, 4 Brief Retrospect of the Eighteenth
Century, shows that France was esteemed as the nation
the most advanced in chemistry, natural history, geogra-
phy, philosophy, and history. Her art was admired, al-
though it was considered to be in decadence; and as for
her language, it was said, “It has indeed become what
Latin was, a universal tongue.” It is therefore not thatTHE GREAT SCHISM 465

French authors lacked the intellectual and literary esteem
necessary to give them a more concrete influence over
the United States; it was a general and curious phe-
nomenon: French writers roused American minds and
created original reactions in them at a time when Eng-
lish writers were less interesting and stimulating, but af-
forded examples that could easily be utilized and imi-
tated. French culture in America was a means of libera-
tion, not a model to be copied. Indeed its great role seems
to have been to aid hardy and simple minds, who might
have lacked enterprise or imagination, to find themselves
and adopt a new spirit that should lead them to create
a new form for themselves. Barlow, Freneau and Brack-
enridge are three cases of this. Out of enthusiasm for
France they celebrated the revolutionary spirit; and with-
out wasting any vain concerns on form, they composed,
in forms that were already known, crude but original and
sincere works that are the first expressions of the genius
of the United States, straightforward, frank, strongly
idealistic, tenderly attached to material life, noble with
a tinge of stiffness, humble with glory.

Was it not the same with politics? The victory of
Jefferson in 1800 was considered as the triumph of
French ideas. It is true that Jefferson owed much to
France. The man who, as early as 1776, had written the
Declaration of Independence as a moral and religious
code, the man who had always fought for the rights of
the individual and who in 1788 had extolled revolts as

eet
ei
ied466 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

being wholesome and of value to democracies—for this
man the French Revolution had been a formidable rev-
elation. It is not sufficient to define a doctrine, to prac-
tice it, or even to bring about its acceptation in order
for it to attain fullness of life; it is necessary that it be-
come incarnate in a social form and that it become a
dominant passion. Thus a concept which seems immuta-
ble is modified by its internal growth, its radiations and
incarnations.’** Jefferson was fully conscious of all the
spiritual value that the success of the French Revolution
had for him and for the United States. It cannot be de-
nied that in 1800 he was the champion of French philos-
ophy. But this term designates rather a tendency than a
coherent body of doctrine. Since 1775 France had sent
to America moderate revolutionists, Jacobins, royalists
and skeptics; each of them, in a circle more or less wide,
had had influence and contributed in forming the con-
cept that America held of France. Jefferson had had an
intimate friend in La Fayette; he had also kept up con-
tinuous relations with Genet, Fauchet, Mazzéi and other
revolutionists. In France he had especially frequented
and loved the upper class that had been overthrown by
the Revolution.*®’ When he wrote to France, it was to
order his wine, objects of art or books on architecture,
rather than to procure political works or revolutionary
documents.

Jefferson, considered by the patriots of 1789 as tim-
orous, had made a common cause with the Jacobins ofTHE GREAT SCHISM 467

1793, and had been considered in America as a theoreti-
cian of atheism, anarchy and violence. In 1788 he con-
demned the Constitution of the United States as being
too monarchical and centralized; when he had been in
office eight years, he left the central power stronger than
in 1800. He, the friend of France, was the artisan of the
definitive rupture between France and the United States.
Never were there so few relations between the two coun-
tries as during this period; and Jefferson acceded to this
state of things. What then had he retained from his as-
sociation with France?

Before him, the ruling group had had visions of build-
ing up a strong government, creating a stable power
based on the support of the upper classes and the clergy
and capable of imposing on the nation whatever it con-
sidered to be for its good and of turning it away forcibly
from what it judged detrimental. Jefferson transformed
this internal policy; his own policy was based on the
respect of the people and confidence in their judgment
as well as their strength. Now this is an idea that he
had already voiced in Paris in 1788 and that the group
of patriots of 1789 had cherished. Before him the gov-
ernment had worked toward a policy of reconciliation
with England and a sort of commercial and naval co-
operation with her. Jefferson turned the interest back to
America. He refused the friendship of England. He was
the first to set in movement the peaceful conquest of the

interior of the immense continent on which the United468 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

 

States had founded a free nation. He spread the empire
of liberty beyond all boundaries, and his conquests were
peaceable, as all the conquests resulting from this pol-
icy were to be. This again was the great idea that he and
his Girondist friends of 1793 had harbored.

America, the purified continent, America, the liberated
continent, America turning away from Europe—these
precepts would have brought tears of joy to the eyes of
the French philosophers, the Mablys, Raynals, and Con-
dorcets who had counseled the new-born United States
to fill in their harbors in order to remain agriculturalists
and upright men.

How much they would have admired this deist reli-
gion whose sway was marked by a most extraordinary
impetus on the part of the Christian churches in Amer-
ica. From 1800 to 1815 was the great period during
which the Baptists, the Presbyterians and the Methodists
conquered the South and the West.*** The Federalists
declared that French atheism would be rife under Jefter-
son’s administration ; they cited the dissenting newspapers
that supported Jefferson, The Aurora at Philadelphia,
The Argus at New York, The Independent Chronicle at
Boston, The Temple of Reason at New York, which rep-
resented Christ as the greatest deist that ever lived,’”’
The Argus of Virginia, etc. As a matter of fact what
did flourish under his administration was French Catholi-
cism which, introduced in 1792 by the Sulpicians, trav-
eling companions of Chateaubriand, had at first beenTHE GREAT SCHISM 469

slow to grow but had taken new life after 1802. The
Sulpicians had had only one American student in their
seminary at Baltimore before 1800; from 1800 to 1810
more than twenty were ordained in the Order.’ They
had founded a college at Georgetown. Their brethren
were evangelizing all of the West, the Mississippi valley
where the French had already done so much. All of the
first Catholic bishops of this region were French; what is
even more, the first Catholic bishop of Boston was a
Frenchman, Mer. de Cheverus, and it is said that if he
had remained there, his personal prestige would have
brought to Catholicism a part of the high aristocracy of
the city.*°° And all this took place under a Republican
administration! The reign of tolerance and democratic
enthusiasm foretold by Franklin, Raynal, Mably, Con-
dorcet, and others had brought about, not a disappear-
ance of the Protestant churches, but an adaptation of
them. The Presbyterian, Baptist and Methodist preach-
ers who converted the West were not ordinarily scholars,
but rather they were popular leaders who, mixing with
the crowd and speaking its language, appealed to its
good sense, and even to its senses, while angling for souls.
They stirred the masses as they had been stirred in the
Jacobin clubs.”°° In the North, the emancipation took on
more subtle forms; minds eager for liberty and optimism
turned toward the Unitarian doctrine, which refused to
believe in one God in three persons. For more than thirty
years the Congregational church in Massachusetts had470 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

seen faith in precise dogmas, and most especially in that
of the Trinity, decreasing; but these tendencies remained
vague and no scission occurred between the reformers and
the orthodox believers. It was only in 1785 that the first
church that officially renounced the trinitarian dogma
was opened at Boston. Salem became the center of the
Unitarian movement. A group of laymen and three
clergymen led the fight. One of the first laymen to adopt
the new ideas had been Thomas Pickering. According to
his own story, doubt had first come into his mind during
the Revolutionary War one day when he heard General
von Steuben express the deist ideas that he had received
in France and say that he would believe more easily in
an absurdity than in the Trinity. Of the three pastors
who preached Unitarianism at Salem, William Bentley
seems to have been the firmest and the most ardent. He
was a great democrat, a friend of Jefferson and a sup-
porter of the French, whose philosophy he had studied.
Thus almost everywhere in New England the Unitarian
doctrine spread along with zeal for France. In 1800 it
could be said that “there was not a single clergyman in
Boston who believed strictly in the Trinity.” Harvard
tended to become the center of the new sect. In fact, al-
though the students, carried away by their youth and
patriotism, were ardent Federalists during the last years
of the eighteenth century, the faculty was continually
being reénforced by liberals and democrats. President
Willard (1781-1804) was on intimate terms with friendsTHE GREAT SCHISM 471

of Voltaire, corresponded with Price and Priestley, and
favored the philosophic spirit. Thus in these years of for-
mation, Unitarianism grew up in the shadow of the
“French doctrines.”’ Catholicism, which was developing
at the same time, had a much more popular character
than in Europe. It was to be a long while before there
were American monks and a rich and artistic ritual. It
was a humble and combatant church. The Frenchmen in
this church represented, on the whole, culture, broad-

mindedness and a tendency toward mysticism.

>

*  O*

At the conclusion of this study we find ourselves there-
fore in the presence of two phenomena, which character-
ize the relations between France and the United States
from 1770 to 1800, and which we have often had the
occasion to point out in these pages: the collaboration
of France and the United States in elaborating and
spreading a democratic doctrine which won over hearts
as well as nations; the reciprocal action of the two peo-
ples in stimulating each other’s desires and revealing and
exalting each other’s most characteristic forces.

From 1770 to 1800 a body of ideas that seems to be
the product of their relations and represents in the eyes
of the world the true spirit of democracy has formed in
these two countries. England had played a considerable
part in the preceding century in defining and propagating472 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

liberal ideas. After 1770 she seems to undergo an eclipse.
It is true that the English Whigs still have great philos-
ophers and vehement spokesmen; Wilkes, Price, Priest-
ley, maintain the traditions of the party and expose the
most daring political views. But they turn toward Amer-
ica-and toward France to find the land of their hearts’
desire. As a people, England exerts an influence hostile
to new ideas, reforms and democracy during this period.
On the contrary, the world at large begins to consider
with admiration the United States, who on a virgin soil
are building an ideal and Arcadian republic; then, with
a mixture of alarm and fervor, it sees France establish a
democratic form of government in the place of the old-
est monarchy in Europe. Therefore it is truly in Amer-
ica and France that we find the stronghold of revolution-
ary ideas at the end of the eighteenth century.

It is impossible to define these principles with exacti-
tude and to determine what their first origins were. In
fact they are not definitely fixed, and they have varied
continually according to the governments in power in
America and in France from 1774 to 1800. The sover-
eignty of the people, the liberty of the individual, social
and political equality, the necessity of good mores in
order to establish a republic, the infallibility of the
nation—such were in short the principal doctrines that
constituted the Franco-American revolutionary spirit
from 1770 to 1800. No one of them was original. They
came from Rousseau, Montesquieu, Locke, the Refor-THE GREAT SCHISM 473

mation, the Renaissance, the Middle Ages, Rome and
Greece. They were given their first complete expression
in the Declaration of Independence and in the Constitu-
tion of Virginia in 1776; then we find them embodied
without great change in the Declaration of the Rights
of Man in 1789, in the writings and proclamations of
Bonaparte and in the messages of Jefferson in 1801. The
purely intellectual work has not therefore been intense
during these thirty years.

The original element, as early as 1770, was the reli-
gious fervor with which people set themselves to the task
of solving political problems and seeking out a code of
principles that might serve as a rule for life as a whole
and food for the soul. In 1770 the Declaration of Inde-
pendence was the first response to this appeal. It pro-
claimed briefly, but in a grandiose tone, a moral and
political catechism. Its novelty consisted in treating as
universal and necessary truths principles theretofore dis-
cussed and upheld only by isolated individuals. It
brought the ideas of the Encyclopedia, Rousseau and the
English philosophers into the realm of collective thought,
sentiments and faith. It was not merely a daring stroke
risked at hazard by the spirit of reform in America.
French philosophy had prepared souls for it, and the
French ministry urged it.

As the years went by, this new moral code of these
nations seemed so noble that all peoples dreamt of imi-
tating and developing it. The French Declaration of the474 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Rights of Man is an example of this zeal. It contributed
precisions and deductions that had been lacking in the
American texts. It transformed these admirable and re-
mote principles into a formidable moral reality for Eu-
rope and for the world. For Europe, democracy in Amer-
ica was a benign, chimeric and innocuous dream; democ-
racy in France, the democracy spread by the French
armies, was the most violent emotion of modern times.
Thus the ideas of the Franco-American revolutionary sys-
tem are original, not for themselves, but for the fact of
their being grouped into a body of doctrine and for the
sentiment that proclaims them axioms and eternal truths.
These ideas, through the work accomplished by the
American people and the French people, have laid hold
on the entire human being—intelligence, sentiment, and
will, although in 1770 they enjoyed only the theoretical
adherence of the mind.

Their domination was to be durable. La Fayette had
been the most famous symbol of this transformation.
Apostle of pure democracy, hero of America, one of the
first leaders of the French Revolution, he remained, even
though he had deserted the revolutionary camp in 1792,
the symbol of democratic idealism and Franco-American
friendship. His popularity, tarnished by his ill-advised
move in favor of monarchy in 1792, recovered its luster
under the Empire, when once again he roused admiration
by his resistance to arbitrary government. He maintained
this courageous attitude all his life and he was rewardedTHE GREAT SCHISM 475

for it. The Revolution of 1830 brought him back in
triumph. Later still the theory that he represented and
defended was to find in Alexis de Tocqueville a master-
ful historian and philosopher. It is curious to find in
Tocqueville after more than half a century the concepts,
with but little change, of the young nobles who had vis-
ited America and had derived from her a democratic
philosophy scarcely adapted to their condition, their
tastes and their instincts, but one from which they could
not escape. Thus there was formed again in the middle
of the nineteenth century a school which the violence of
events had been able to bend but not to break, and which
maintained faithfully the cult of the principles of 1776.

From these principles America had derived less a body
of doctrine than a method for finding itself and creating
her true personality. France and her revolutionary spirit
aided her in forming herself but did not impose a form
upon her. We have seen that many of the errors and
successes of the French policy in America were the out-
come rather of the use that the Republican party in the
United States made of France, than of the action of
France herself. Jefferson and his French ideas were mar-
velous stimulants for all the natural originality of this
country and the blending of its fertile races. Jefferson
was not under the domination of any French prejudice;
he was able to admire the revolutionary ideas without
accepting them as a tyrant. They afforded him the means
of rejecting England whom it would have been so dan-476 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

gerous for this young nation, closely related to Great
Britain, to imitate. They provided America with a new
religiousness and new forces of enthusiasm even when, as
a nation, she had no common faith.

And all this has dissolved, blended and disappeared in
the gigantic personality that is taking shape—the Amer-
ican nation. Ideas have become irrecognizable, sentiments
have developed so much that sometimes they have turned
on themselves; deist tolerance, for example, brought
about in certain ways an expansion of Catholicism. But
without the first impulse of faith and desire, everything
would undoubtedly have taken another course. I am not
prepared to pronounce here on the value of this faith or
to say whether or not another would have been prefer-
able, as the Federalists claimed; but on contemplating
the sway that is still exercised over the American masses
by the two or three great principles that guided Jetter-
son and his party—confidence in the people as a spon-
taneous force, impassioned attachment to religiosity and
morality without dogma being in the least involved, jeal-
ous love of the American soil which they consider sancti-
fied—on finding these ideas still so dominant, one feels
how much the shock of the French Revolution stirred
these souls and how much they were transformed by it.

Yet to see in their intimity only an effort toward de-
mocracy would be to limit the part that France played
in the life of the United States and that of the United

States in the life of France. As we have mentioned,THE GREAT SCHISM

America wakened in the French mind the taste for Ro-
manticism. By its physical beauty, the diffusion of its
religions, and its spontaneous liberty, it prompted eager
and sensitive spirits like Chateaubriand to conceive a
modern, religious and sentimental literature, wherein
liberty should be the daughter of enlightenment, the
ecstasy of Nature should be pious and illuminated, and
strangeness and appeal should lie in the present instead
of in a remote past. In return, France, while she was stir-
ring up a wave of republicanism, introduced Catholi-
cism, the arts, the theater and French culture into Amer-
ica. She woke a thousand contradictory yearnings and
enriched American civilization beyond measure.

It seems therefore that from 1775 to 1800 there
reigned an impassioned intellectual union between the
two countries which was to be severed only by the dis-
appointment of the French Empire and the almost total
suppression of commercial relations, due to the conti-
nental and British blockades. France and the United
States were dazzled by each other. The best minds of
both countries threw themselves recklessly into this
friendship. All the admirable qualities that they did not
comprehend enticed them. A thousand tendencies, there-
tofore obscure, took shape and became images and de-
sires; the revolutionary spirit, eager to transform the
world and to act immediately, took the place of the spirit
of reform. French intellectualism and American religios-

ity formed a torrent that swept over the world. The two478 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

 

countries loved each other for their differences. These
they often misunderstood even while admiring them
greatly. They did not succeed in exchanging their char-
acteristics, as for a moment they had hoped they might.
They did what was better than this: thanks to these very
differences, they discovered in themselves resources of
which they were unaware. Among nations, as among in-
dividuals, there seem to be those whose personalities are
so much alike that in loving each other, even in a medi-
ocre way, they imitate each other, and again, there are
those whose beings are so distinct that in admiring and
cherishing each other and trying in all ways to act one
on the other and one for the other, they can only create.
Men who have this gift are veritable “revealers” for
their friends. These are the loftiest, the most difficult
loves, and the most fruitful. When such friends part, it
seems as if they had lost all, as if they had conserved
nothing of each other. Nobody discerns anything in com-
mon between those who have just separated; for what
they have retained is the great mystery, it is life and per-
sonality itself, the form that they needed. These gener-
ous intimacies, so rare even among men, are even rarer
among nations. But the friendship of France and the
United States between 1774 and 1800 affords such a
spectacle. It is a mistake, I believe, to try to find intri-
cate contrivances in it. If we consider it from an intel-
lectual point of view, it is above all a mirage, a story of

love.Appendix I

Abbé De Pauw’s theory concerning the origin and age of
America, taken from RECHERCHES PHILOSOPHIQUES SUR
LES AMERICAINS, Vol. I, pp. 105-107 (edition of 1770).

If we admit that the American continent had been up-
set by secondary causes, floods and earthquakes, later
than our continent, we shall comprehend why there ex-
isted such a marked difference between all the possible
objects of comparison of these two parts of the globe.

Our horizon had an air of antiquity, because human
industry had had time to repair the ravages occasioned
by the convulsions of Nature. In the opposite hemisphere
men had just climbed down from the rocks and eleva-
tions where, like new Deucalions, they had taken refuge;
coming down into vast prairies still covered with sloughs
and slime, their constitutions had been vitiated by the
vapors of the earth and the humidity of the air. The
lack of warmth in their temperament, their unbelievably
sparse population, their feeble and enervated bodies, the
endemic sickness to which they were subject, all this in-
dicates that they had undergone an essential and recent
alteration.

The character of newly cleared and drained lands is
widely enough known: the heavy and fetid vapors that

rise from them are everywhere equally unhealthy and en-
479480 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

gender chronic maladies among the inhabitants. By what
happens in one canton, in one province, we can judge
what should happen in an entire country and pass from
the little to the great: if it takes a long succession of
years to purify the least beach from which the water has
receded, what lapse of centuries will it not take to clear
up a considerable portion of the globe invaded by the
ocean and dried by evaporation or other causes of one
kind or another?

The consequence involved by a deluge seems to have
escaped the notice of the most enlightened Authors; it is
not enough that the overflow should have subsided and
that the waters should have receded; in order to become
inhabitable and healthy the soil still needs a thorough
drying out which only time can accomplish: the most
favorable spots become covered with vegetation and
trees, and it is only then that men can go in and finish
the work of clearing their abode by labor and industry.

The peoples of America are therefore, in this sense,
more modern than the nations of the Old World: they are
weaker because their native soil is more unwholesome,
and we now perceive the reason why they were all found
in a state of savagery or half savagery. The time to po-
lice themselves thoroughly had not yet sounded for them;
their climate had first of all to ameliorate itself, the val-
leys and meadows had to dry out more, their constitu-
tions had to grow stronger, and their blood to purify
itself.Appendix 2

Controversy between Favier and M. de Vergennes con-
cerning the legitimacy of French intervention in Amer-
ica and the propaganda that should be carried on against
England. (Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Memoirs and documents. France. Vol. V, Folio © to 30).

(The phrases and words in italics are those underlined

in the original text.)

Paris, March 18, 1778.
My Lorp,

When I had the honor of waiting on you on Thusday
last, you deigned to ask me for a work concerning the
right that the King had or might have to make a treaty
of commerce or to contract an alliance with the United
States of America, in short, to recognize authentically
the independence and the sovereignty of this new Re-
public. Since that day I should have written a volume
on any other subject that lies within the field of my
competence. I shut myself up in my study, I meditated a
ereat deal, made researches, worked—and I have done
nothing. 1 did not foresee that, neither by me nor by
any one else, is there anything to be done on this subject.

I ought however to report to you the obstacles that I

encountered in this work as I set about it. You know my
481482 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

devotion and you deign to render me justice; this is the
reason for the respectful confidence with which I permit
myself to expose to you freely what I think of the proj-
ect of the work in question.

My desire to please you and to make myself useful
made me seize upon the ideas that M. Gérard presented
to me the more eagerly, since you appeared to approve
of them at first glance. I therefore engaged myself to
undertake this work, and I promised you to execute ?2t,
although very imperfectly.

But on returning alone to Paris, I began to meditate
on an outline. Accustomed to establishing principles first
and then deducting the corollaries from them (according
to the Wolfian method), I immediately perceived that,
in a work which might become the material for a mani-
festo, the usage to make of these principles becomes a
very delicate question.

In fact, nothing would be easier for an American, for
an Englishman even, than to prove according to the gen-
eral principles adopted by the two nations that the united
colonies, being almost independent DE FACTO, are inde-
pendent DE JURE on the grounds of their separation from
England; that from their respective independence and
the pact of their union, follow necessarily their sover-
eignty and the legality of the powers delegated by them
to the general Congress; that this body has become the
representative of their collective sovereignty; that tt zs
therefore @ DE FACTO and DE JURE power, and that anyAPPENDIX

other power may without violating international law *
make not only treaties of commerce and navigation with
it, but also offensive and defensive alliances, as the States
of Europe are accustomed to do among themselves.
But: 1st, these Anglo-American principles are not gen-
erally recognized and adopted in all the rest of political
society of the States of Europe. They are equally out-
lawed in the most prudent republics and in true Mon-
archies. In England itself, those of the Tories who are
called strict have never adopted these opinions of the
Whigs, the twelve judges, organs and interpreters of the
laws, the King’s Council ¢ (or les Gens du Roi), the
majority in the administration, especially the Scottish
party formed by My Lord Bute, maintain constantly,
though to palpably little avail, approximately the same
dogmas in favor of the reigning House, for which the
dethroned family were so much reproached; 2nd, Would
it be proper to put into the mouth of a King of France
or his minister paradoxical assertions concerning natural
liberty, inalienable and inadmissible rights of the people
and its inherent sovereignty, which have not ceased to be
repeated, commented, ransacked and compiled for two
centuries, from Francois Hottoman’s Véndicte contra
tyrannos to J. J. Rousseau’s Contrat social? Would it be
prudent even? (Pardon, my lord, a liberty that cannot
concern you.) If the King, if the government, appeared
* Jus gentium. In the original French, le droit des gens.—Translator’s

note.
+ This phrase is in English in the original—Translator’s note.

awe meet484. THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

to profess such maxims, would we ourselves be exactly
safe from their application and from their being turned
against us? Has France no province which might appeal
to the original Contract, or at last to a subsequent pact,
definite, written and preserved, by which she gave her-
self to the crown of her own free will? Are not Langue-
doc, Brittany and Provence in this position? And even
some of the conquered provinces, having yielded and
having been ceded only on condition that they retazn all
rights, customs, laws and privileges—could not they also
oppose the title of possession itself to manifest abuses of
domination ?

Yet, we must admit that, for a long while and espe-
cially during the last thirty years of the preceding reign,
these abuses were carried so far by that of authority, even
under a mild prince, that they became flagrant and un-
bearable.

Undoubtedly we may expect of the new reign the re-
form of a part of these abuses, and France already
blesses her young King for having at least put a stop to
their progress. Produced by necessity and existing for the
same reason, the state of finances does not allow the mo-
ment of their suppression, even in the most happy fu-
ture, to be envisaged.

If, therefore, the rights of a people were imprescripti-
ble and consequently irrevocable, if after having ceded
them to a State or a sovereign by a formal but condi-

tional pact, by a synallagmatic contract; the sovereignAPPENDIX 485

having failed in the condition séne qua non, the people
would resume its rights and might legitimately take back
what it had ceded, that is to say, the Soveretgnity, which
would belong to it and be énherent! What other right
would the State, this abjured sovereign, have save that
of force? ‘And could this right always, in all combina-
tions of eventual, or at least, possible, circumstances, re-
tain its energy and efficacity ?

What usage against France then could not England
herself make of the application and retortion of these
principles which France would have freely sponsored
against England? But, supposing that this latter country
should never be strong enough to stir up and support a
rebellion in France, what would not this Monarchy have
to fear for its internal tranquillity from the sancizon that
the government itself would have accorded to these max-
ims from across the sea? The propagation of these ideas
is already only too apparent. It had begun a long while
ago with the writings of sects and the proclamations of
parties. But the effervescence of American liberty is com-
pleting the work of turning many heads at Paris, and
the contagion is spreading throughout the kingdom. Your
prudence, my lord, and your sagacity had without doubt
foreseen the observations that I have taken the liberty to
make on this subject in a few notes of my Hypothetec
Speculations. M. Gérard, whose abilities and competence
are far above mine, has moreover the advantage of

knowing and understanding the circumstances, of which486 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

I am still ignorant. He seemed to have forestalled the
objections and settled the difficulties by very ingenious
solutions: 1st, that England, having accepted the prznc?-
ples of Revolution, could no longer deny the colonies the
right to abjure the mother country, just as she herself
had abjured the Stuart family; that this latter right,
being derived from the former, is only a natural conse-
quence of it, and that the [English] nation could not
deny it without disavowing the principle itself, that is to
say, the principle of its present constitution. In accepting
this parity, which after all is very just, I shall merely
take the liberty to remark that England might dispute it
entirely, at least as to form. In the first case, it was the
Nation assembled in Parliament which declared the
throne vacant and chose for itself Kings from another
house. In the second, it is colonies, members of the Brit-
ish Empire, which separate themselves from the main
body without any other sanction than their own will.
They do not abjure an individual or a family, but a
whole nation of which they are a part. This nation, as-
sembled in parliament, has not abjured explicitly (nor
even implicitly, as did James II) its rights and authority.
These rights still hold in all their force. No foreign
power has the right to be the judge or arbiter of them,
nor consequently to decide the question by a formal rec-
ognition of the Independence and Sovereignty of the
separated colonies.

Such might be the answer of the Minister of St.APPENDIX 487

James’s if he cared to discuss constitutional questions;
but, too much occupied with these matters of contention,
he would at least have no account to render on this score
to foreign powers, and would probably not condescend
to enter into the discussion.

Europe herself might feel some surprise at seeing
France, the perpetual sponsor for the Peace of West-
phalia and the born arbiter of all differences that may
arise between the head of the Germanic body and its
members, looking with a tranquil and indifferent eye
upon the usurpation of Bavaria and, at the same time,
without right, title, competence or the consent of those
involved, setting herself up as a tribunal between Eng-
land and her colonies. For, after all, to treat with these
latter from Crown to Republic, to be the first to recog-
nize them in this character, would be to judge the case
and to pass sentence;

2nd, That the danger or at least the embarrassment
that might be foreseen in treating so delicate a subject
in a Monarchy and, perhaps, in the name of Monarchy,
would easily be avoided by means of a distinction that
suggests itself; namely, that each State has its own con-
stitution, that that of France is not that of England,
that the difference between them is known and does not
need to be proved; that, in consequence, there are no ap-
plications or retortions to be feared and no annoyance
could result from it.

I shall admit, if you wish, the principle established488 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

by M. Gérard, that each State has its own Constitution,
although in truth this seems to be more of a conventional
axiom than an actual truth. In England, fundamental
law is the latest act of Parliament. In France, the thing
that might make one suspect that there is no constitu-
tion is the fact that, among all the bodies and all the
individuals who have written so much, harangued so
much and disputed so much on this subject—as if a con-
stitution did exist, none of them have been able to agree,
either with others or among themselves, as to the nature
of this constitution. In view of the conflict of their sys-
tems, the contradiction of laws, facts and examples for
and against, in the confusion that results, any reader a
bit difficult to convince is obliged at least to suspend his
judgment; and the more he observes, the more he puts
things together, the more he is tempted to believe that
this constitution is yet to be born. But, in admitting the
existence of these two constitutions, I shall permit myself
to feel some doubts as to the consequence. I have already
exposed some of the at least very probable dangers for
the internal tranquillity of his kingdom, which might
sooner or later result from a French Monarch’s adopting,
in a manifesto, these Anglo-American maxims. I shall
only add that the development of these same principles
in favor of the English colonies would be a very bad ex-
ample for our own.

Ordinarily I write without books, the matter of which
I treat having for a long while been constantly in myAPPENDIX 489

mind. I felt obliged to make some researches as to the
abstract principles of this matter. J dug up an old Gro-
tius from the bottom of a closet. I thumbed it over and
I found in Book II, Chapter IX, Paragraph 10, M.
Gerard’s opinion on the subject of the ancient colonies:
that their submission to the mother country was not in
obedience to natural law. And in fact (as M. Gérard
has so justly remarked), it is certain that the Greek
colonies did not remain in the dependence of the
mother country long after their establishment. It was not
the same with the Roman colonies. They followed the
fortunes of the provinces in which they were incorpo-
rated and were detached from the Empire only by force
at the time of its fatal downfall.

Grotius would without doubt have spoken further and
more discreetly of colonies if those of the Europeans had
been more important in his time. But they were still in
their infancy. He therefore does not mention them and
says only a word in passing about the colonies of an-
tiquity. Also he cites on this subject only Thucydides
and Denis of Halicarnassus.

But even if this doctrine were intended to apply to
modern colonies, it would not be a reason for the gov-
ermment to encourage its propagation by its own ex-
ample. We have already only too many fanatics who
believe in it and charlatans who preach it. However that
may be, supposing the existence of our constitution, let

us admit at least that its nature is as yet not well enough

ee a ee ee 2S 2 2 eo <e* ie lieth teetiend sal

ry490 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

known and clearly enough determined for us not to fear
compromising it by the comparisons and analyses that
this controversy might occasion. Silence on this subject
is to be recommended; perhaps in the end we shall be
obliged to command it and to have it rigorously observed.
Is it then the place of the Monarch to break this silence®

ard, M. Gérard has cited the famous example of
Elizabeth’s conduct toward the United Provinces as soon
as they had shaken off the yoke of Spain. I myself cited
this in Questions importantes and Spéculations hypo-
thétiques. 1 had also recommended that we imitate it.
But, whenever I have proposed treating with the United
States, I have always distinguished between a secret con-
vention between unofficial intermediaries and informal
agents and a formal treaty of alliance or commerce. I
have not ceased to emphasize the necessity of having such
a treaty preceded or accompanied by a strong diversion
against England elsewhere even than in America. \ pre-
supposed the existence of certain conventions of 4as-
sistance, and I should have desired that this aid had been
more prompt and efficacious. Indeed I have thought and
said that such aid would hasten the moment for an in-
evitable rupture. I have added that this constituted an-
other reason for making our aid so forceful, so consistent
and of such weight that it would make an impression on
these new allies and keep them from making peace with
England. But also I have always supposed that this alli-
ance would remain hidden and indirect, like a germ readyAPPENDIX 491

to hatch out, and that its development by a formal and
direct treaty would be postponed until the moment of
the first open hostilities on one side or the other.

I know that here the example of Elizabeth might be
raised against me. I myself have mentioned the fact that,
a long while before entering into open warfare against
Spain, she had concluded a formal alliance with the
United Provinces, that she had furnished them money,
troops and generals and had taken over strongholds.
What is the consequence of this? It is that Elizabeth
was in a position with regard to Philip II which differed
from that of Louis XVI toward George III. The Spanish
monarch was not yet waging open war against her, but
he was employing all the resources of intrigue and fanati-
cism to hatch conspiracies and to stir up rebellions in
England and Ireland.

He was flooding the two kingdoms with emissaries and
agitators. He disputed this Queen’s title to her posses-
sions. Even her life was not in security. Several conspira-
tors convicted of having made attempts against it had
admitted their relations with Spanish agents, ministers
and governors and confessed to having received money
and encouragement of all kinds. Finally, Elizabeth
rightly felt herself justified in going beyond the limits
of international law in order to thwart the attempts of
a prince who respected them so little. If Philip’s dark
and slow-moving policy made him prefer the continua-
tion of this underhanded war to open warfare, it was be-Trent

4g2 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

cause he hoped to succeed better by it; and it was only
after having tried vainly all other operations, that he
finally decided to declare war. It was really a mere fur-
ther formality, for hostilities on both sides had begun
long before and were being carried on vigorously in both
the Old and the New World. The King (of France)
would not have the same griefs to allege to-day against
the King of England.

But what need would we have had to justify a treaty
of alliance with the United States if we had contented
ourselves with a secret convention such as I had defined
and imagined? There would still have been time to
change it into a formal treaty dated, if we wished, the
day after the declaration of war or after the first open
hostilities.

Then the King might without difficulty have openly
avowed the treaty of alliance. The law of war, being in
itself only the suppression of all other laws, there follows
naturally that to harm a declared enemy by all sorts of
means, even to furnish aid and encouragement to rebel-
lious subjects (or those whom this enemy may consider
so), as Louis XIII and Louis XIV did for the Portu-
guese and then later for the Neapolitans, the Messinese
and the Hungarian malcontents. From this right also
proceeds that of making offensive and defensive alliances
with revolted subjects and even, when they are joined in
a body to give themselves a king or to form a republic,
that of recognizing their sovereignty and their inde-
pendence.APPENDIX 493

Things have come to such a pass that there is no longer
any way to retreat; and if a formal treaty with the
United States exists, if we have been obliged to admit
it, if we have felt obliged to notify the King of England
of it officially, if, in consequence, his Ambassador has
received orders to quit Paris without taking leave, if in
fact he is to leave next Monday; it is no longer the time
to discuss the legality or illegality of the treaty in ques-
tion, and much less, the motives that the government
doubtless had for concluding it. The ability and prudence
of our ministry ought to make one suppose that these
motives were so preponderant that there was apparently
no other course to choose. It now remains only for us to
draw up a manifesto to precede or accompany a declara-
tion of war.

In my humble opinion (to use the English expression)
there is no necessity of speaking of the treaty in question
in this manifesto. It will be only too thoroughly dis-
cussed in the English manifesto, and the Minister of St.
James’s will not fail to lay stress on this secret hostility
for a long while inavowed to refute our just complaints
concerning the open hostilities of 1775, committed by
England against France in time of peace. France is not
under any obligation to justify the treaty by principles,
dissertations and citations. She has only too many excuses
for declaring war without this. The reports of the Ad-
miralty, those of the governors and other officers of our
colonies should furnish a writer abundant enough ma-

terial.

a
ert
ee)494. THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

It must be admitted that the aggressions, violations of
territory and depredations committed of late by the Eng-
lish in our seas, along our coasts and even in our ports
might be justified in certain respects 2” themselves, but
they are none the less irregular and none the less vicious
in form. And of what is it a question save form, in a
manifesto as in a legal process! Right and wrong on
both sides, it is the form that counts. The form is the
only thing to be considered—and with reason; for how-
ever we set about it, we shall prove nothing by consid-
ering the maf¢éer itself. If it is the matter that decides,
it is by the cannon’s mouth; and this will perhaps be
the only reply that will remain for us to make on the
subject of this treaty. May it be unanswerable!

I am with profound respect, my lord, your very hum-
ble and very obedient servant.

(Signed): FaviER

[The remainder is in Favier’s handwriting. |

P.S. I have explained the motives of my excuses, deign
now to accept my very humble thanks.

When you asked me for the work in question, you
were so kind as to tell me that ¢t was to be placed be-
fore the eyes of the King.

This step on your part would imply that I have your
favor, which would undoubtedly have assured me the
approbation of his Majesty. What greater good fortune
could have befallen me? Concerned only with the gloryAPPENDIX 495

of the King and of your ministry, I feared lest I should
compromise both of them in following the outline that
M. Gérard had traced for the plan of the manifesto. I
thought it my duty to sacrifice personal interest to such
great motives.

It seemed to me impossible to jwstfy a formal treaty
with the colonies before a declaration of war, by any
other principles than those of the preambles of their con-
stitutions. And these principles cannot be ours. We might
at most palliate in a manifesto the irregularity of this
step by reasons of fact and not of right. We should
hasten to bury the English grievance under the multi-
tude of our own grievances. Any one of our own griefs
is in itself of less weight, but their number and the ac-
cumulation, with the aid of a little hyperbole, would
not have failed to give them, as a whole, a weight that
would put the balance in our favor.

After having enumerated all these grievances then and
placed the picture in the light the most unfavorable to
England, one might slip in a word concerning the treaty
(since it is no longer possible to deny it). It could be
stated that the King was in the right in negotiating and
concluding it; because the excesses, violences, and the
hostile procedures of the English against the flag of His
Majesty and French Commerce, had put him in a de facto
state of war with that nation; that from this state of war
would result the same dangers and the same need of tak-

ing precautions as from an open and declared war; that

a) A
yt
7496 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

consequently and in order to protect and assure the navi-
gation and commerce of his subjects, the King had found
himself obliged to conclude a treaty with the nation the
most interested in maintaining the liberty and security of
commerce, etc., etc.

Pardon, my lord, this crude scrawl. These are a few
ideas that presented themselves to my imagination after
my letter was written; they are not exactly marvelous.
They will merely prove that I am keeping the subject in
mind and that, at least, like Diogenes, I am rolling my
barrel.

I have finally consented to dine with M. Fullarton to-
morrow. I shall have the honor of waiting on you on
Saturday, my lord, and of telling you why I accepted
this latter invitation. Perhaps something interesting will

come out of our conversation.

Paris, April 17, 1778
My Lorp,

You have undoubtedly been surprised at my silence
during the last two or three weeks, after the orders that
you did me the honor to give me when we last met in
the presence of M. Gérard.

I admit that I still feel the same hesitation as to how
to go about a task, easy in appearance, but, to my way
of thinking, most difficult. I despaired of doing it, and

I went to Versailles last Saturday to have the honor ofAPPENDIX 497
telling you so. I did not have that of waiting on you,
your door was closed. Not having found M. Moreau, I
left a note for him.

Since then I have reflected as to how I might write
something reasonable and, at the same time, fitting, with-
out doing violence to my principles. If I had not always
had these unfortunate scruples, I should have achieved
success long ago, as so many others have done.

You yourself, my lord, approved the observation that
I made to M. Gérard, that these principles being those
of Monarchy, we must above all avoid compromising
them, even under the cover of anonymity. And I shrunk
from doing so all the more after you were so kind as to
inform me of its particular destination.*

I needed a frame-work; and only two days ago one
presented itself to my imagination. I submit this idea in
all humility to your superior judgment. I should con-
sider myself very fortunate if you deigned, my lord, to
indicate to me means of handling the subject better.

I know the extent and the multiplicity of your occupa-
tions. Perhaps you will hardly have time to glance at this
mere outline during the next few days. On my return
from the country, where I am going to pass the holidays,
I expect to pay you a visit Friday to renew my homage.

I am, with profound respect, my lord, your very hum-
ble and very obedient servant.

(Signed): Favrer

* The pamphlet was to be read by the King, as Favier mentions in his
preceding letter.—Tyranslator’s note.

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  

pee re re Peete ee ee Pl Se he ee ee

=F

esa szies?

ey Oe ee

ee ed

a

ee ee498 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

[ All this is in Favier’s handwriting, and the enclosures
include the manuscript of La Lettre du Comte d’ Albany
au Lord Bute. Vergennes replied to these letters in the

following communication. |

VERSAILLES, April 22, 1778

I received, sir, the letter that you were so kind as to
address to me. This work is a new proof of your zeal
and talents, and I am all the more grateful to you since
you were working in contradiction to your own princi-
ples. I understand how much hesitation and constraint
you must have felt; and this, as well as my duty to re-
spect your scruples, would prevent me from having fur-
ther recourse to your talents to expose more fully the
principles which ought to be the essential bases of the
work that I had proposed to you. Be persuaded however,
sir, that I shall always seize with pleasure the oppor-
tunity to make use of your abilities and learning and to
sive you proof of the sincerity of the sentiments with

which I remain very sincerely, sir... .

P.S. [In Vergennes’s handwriting. ] I do not want to
impose too much on your complaisance. To convince oth-
ers, one must first be convinced one’s self, and I see that
you are not. I hope that other subjects will afford me the
occasion to ask you for new proofs of your zeal and new

fruits of your learning.Notes

CHAPTER I

1The American newspapers are the principal source from
which I have drawn for the study of public opinion. As early
as 1760, under the impulsion of Franklin, the Press had attained
a high degree of organization in the English colonies in Amer-
ica, and the liberty that it enjoyed permitted it to give expression
to all points of view. Every town of any importance had its
gazette, which printed, it is true, only a small number of copies
(from a few hundred, it seems, up to a thousand, rarely more
than this). The newspapers of the large ports were of course the
most important and the most valued. In fact, it was through
them that all European news was disseminated. European news
items were taken from English papers and the accounts of trav-
elers, merchants and sailors. After 1775, French papers from the
West Indies, Dutch papers and, finally, newspapers from France
were circulated and translated; but it was still from England
that most of the news came. The American papers were in the
habit of copying each other; an editor would make up his paper
(usually a weekly appearing on market-day) from clippings
taken from ten or a dozen other papers to which he subscribed.
In addition to such news items, these papers also printed official
announcements (acts of the State Legislatures or Continental
Congress), local news, letters from readers, and usually poems
and sometimes literary selections in prose. Advertisements often
filled half the space and were even accompanied by illustrations.
Among these advertisements we find announcements of stolen
horses, runaway slaves and unfaithful wives.

Franklin had made Philadelphia the veritable center of infor-
mation for the New World. The situation of this city allowed
him to circulate his papers in all the other colonies. Philadelphia
enjoyed great liberty. Boston and New York, as ports and rich
499

Terstters tes =
Bars FE ZSF4yeGsE*

Fee terete Pere ye

Spee re te ey fe

sees

2<

ee ee

pear ee ers500 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

 

and cultivated cities, had a well-directed and influential press.
The New York newspapers were inclined to be English in tend-
ency and those of Boston to be American. The South, which had
very good newspapers before the Revolutionary War, does not
seem to have been able to rebuild them. Baltimore and Charles-
ton possessed flourishing gazettes, but they never had the pres-
tige of the Northern papers. In each chapter we have mentioned
the most important organs of the period under consideration.
There is no modern book on the American press during the eight-
eenth century. The book on this subject by I. Thomas, which ts
already very old (it dates from the beginning of the last cen-
tury), is a curious and useful, though very incomplete, docu-
ment. As for the alphabetical catalogue of all the American
newspapers from 1620 to 1820, which M. C. Brigham is pub-
lishing in the collections of the American Antiquarian Society,
it is of great value.

2 For the pacific inclinations of Louis XV, see the news from
English sources printed in the Boston Post Boy (Dec. 31, 1772);
Boston Evening Post (Aug. 10, 1772); Massachusetts Spy (July
2, 1772); Pennsylvania Gazetie (March 21, 1771); New York
Gazette (March 25, 1771), etc.

8 For the riots in France, see the New York Gazette, New
York Journal, Pennsylvania Gazette, Pennsylvania Chronicle,
Massachusetts Spy, Boston Post Boy, Boston Evening Post,
passim, etc. (1770).

4Concerning internal quarrels in England, see Nouvelles
extraordinaires de Leyde (Jan. 13, 1770); Journal Encyclope-
dique de Bouillon (Sept. 2, 1771); Mercure de France (October,
1771). Gazette de France, passim, during the winters of 1770
and 1771.

5 Saurin (Bernard Joseph), 1706 to 1781, was a dramatic poet
and a philosopher. He is especially known for his Spartacus, a
tragedy in five acts (1760), and his Anglomane, a one-act com-
edy (1772).

® Concerning Voltaire, see Histoire de France, published under
the direction of M. Lavisse, Book VIII, Part II, p. 304.

7 Concerning Helvetius and the revival of Freemasonry in501

France see Louis Amable, Une Loge maconnique d’avant 1789;
La R.L., les Neuf Seurs (Paris, 1897), pp. 1-8 and g-10.

8 For the odes on navigation and crises of fever, see Mercure
de France, No. 2 (January, 1770), p. 12, and No. 1 (October,
1773)» PP+ 5-13-

® Concerning the use of the terms “patriot” and “citizen,”
see Mercure de France, May, 1770, pp. 125-128, and July, pp.
87-88.

10 John Wilkes (1727-1797), Whig politician of an extraordi-
nary violence, who was very popular in England between 1770
and 1779.

11 Madame Roland, Lettres de Madame Roland, published by
Claude Perroud, new series, Vol. I, pp. 229-244 e¢ seq.

12Concerning Chateaubriand and MRaynal, see Mémonzres
ad Outre-tombe (edited by Biré), Vol. I, p. 192.

18 Abbé Roubaud (Pierre-Joseph-André, 1730-1792), econo-
mist and author.

14 Quérard mentions fifteen editions and modifications of Ray-
nal between 1770 and 1798 and adds that there were others. The
American version is entitled Sentzments of a Foreigner on the
Disputes of Great Britain with America. Translated from the
French (Philadelphia, 1775). See also Bzbliographie critique de
VAbbé Raynal, by A. Feugeére (1922), pp. 15-18.

15 For the collaborators of Raynal, see Un Précurseur de la
Révolution, ’ Abbé Raynal, by A Feugére (Angouléme, 1922),
pp- 175-201.

16 For Raynal’s errors as to the boundaries of Pennsylvania,
see Histoire des Etablissements des Européens dans les Deux-
Indes (Amsterdam, edition of 1770), Vol. VI, p. 195.

17 Polly Baker’s speech is found in the same edition, Vol. VI,
pp. 157-262.

18 The anecdote concerning Franklin and Raynal is related by
Jefferson, Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. X, p. 121, and
A. H. Smyth, Writings of Benjamin Franklin, Vol. II, p. 470.
For these and other errors committed by Raynal, see Un Précur-
seur de la Révolution, [Abbé Raynal, by A. Feugére (Angou-
léme, 1922), pp. 200-231.

Oe
el
ors

kde)502 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

19 The pages of Raynal concerning the English colonies in
America are found in Vol. VI, pp. 176-426, of the work cited
above.

20 Henry Fabry (Comte d’Autrey), Catholic theologian and
apologist, especially known for his refutation of Christiantsme
dévoilé (1776).

21 Raynal, Histoire des Etablissements des Européens dans les
Deux-Indes (edition of 1770), Vol. VI, pp. 309-311.

22 Abbé Corneille De Pauw (1739-1800), philosopher and au-
thor, uncle of Anarcharsis Cloots.

23 Dom Pernetty, Benedictine of Saint-Maur (1716-1801),
known for his researches in alchemy and his disputes with his
superiors.

24 De Pauw’s book had at least one edition at Berlin in 1768,
one at London (Berlin) in 1770, one at Berlin in 1771, one at
Cléves in 1772. Dom Pernetty’s book was brought out at Berlin
in 1770, had one edition in two volumes in 1771, and was re-
edited with De Pauw’s book at Berlin in the same year.

25 See (Euvres completes de Buffon (Paris, 1845), Vol. III,
PP- 353-357:

26 See Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. II, pp. 60-61.

27 See articles expressing the typical attitude of public opinion
concerning the New World and the Americans, Journal d’Agri-
culture, January, 1773, pp. 15-30; Mercure de France, August,
1786, pp. 36-42.

28 For Guillard de Beaurieu, see the article by M. Legouis in
La Suisse universitaire (April, 1901), sixth year, No. 7.

29 See Ephémérides du Citoyen (1771), Vol. XI, pp. 74-80;
Journal d’Agriculture (February, 1773), pp. 156-165.

80 See Le Journal des Savants (February, 1773), p. 873 O5-
servations sur la Physique (1773), Vol. I, p. 38, ete.

81 [Abbé Chappe d’Auteroche (1722-1769), astronomer, mem-
ber of the Académie des Sciences; Father J. E. Berthier, of the
Oratory (1710-1783), philosopher and naturalist, famous for his
kindness; Dalibard (Thomas-Frangois), botanist and Franklin's
disciple in electricity.

82 Pierre Dupont de Nemours (1739-1817), economist, editor-593
in-chief of the Journal d’ Agriculture and of the Ephémérides du
Citoyen.

88 Concerning Franklin in France in 1767, see Writings of B.
Franklin (ed. by A. H. Smyth), Vol. I, pp. 418-419; Vol. V,
PP- 49-52» 92°93, 153-154, 192-193, etc.

84 Julien David Le Roy (1728-1803), architect and scholar,
member of the Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres.

85 We find an example of this philosophical attitude in favor
of America in the very important Gazette de Leyde (1773),
passim.

$6 Concerning the hatred of the Indians in the United States,
see the news items from America in the Mercure de France
(January, 1773), pp. 206-208; August, p. 209; April, 1774, etc.

87 This opinion is expressed notably in The History of the
American Indians . . . by James Adair, Esq. (London, 1775).

88 On the accounts of French travelers and missionaries among
the Indians of North America, see Gilbert Chinard, L’Amérigue
et le Réve exotique dans la Littérature francaise au XVII © et au
AVIIT & Siécles.

89 See Writings of B. Franklin (ed. Smyth), Vol. III, p. 203,
and Old Family Letters, Series IV, pp. 2-7.

40 Concerning irreligion in Virginia: Old Churches, Ministers,
and Families in Virginia, by Bishop Meade, especially pp. 174
and 175.

41On the spread of the Baptist Church in America, see The
American Church History Series. A History of the Baptist
Churches in the United States, by A. N. Newmann, Chapter I.

42 Concerning the schism in the Congregational Church, see, in
the same series, Williston Walker’s book.

48 Concerning the formation of the Unitarian and Universalist
churches, see The Religious Forces of the United States, by H.
K. Carroll.

44 Concerning the development of Methodism, see Massachu-
setts Historical Society Proceedings (1914-1915), Vol. XLVIII,
pp. 254-268, M. J. S. Bassett’s article, “Popular Churches after
the Revolution,” and in The American Church History Series,
the volume on Methodism by J. Buckley.504. THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

 

45 Concerning the political philosophy of Samuel Adams, see
Writings of Samuel Adams, by H. A. Cushing, Vol. I, pp. 287-
289, and 233-234.

48 In 1773 the Society Library of New York was already pub-
lishing a catalogue. We have the catalogue for 1770 of the Li-
brary Company of Charleston. The Philadelphia Library regu-
larly published advertisements in the newspapers, and Francis
Daymon was the librarian in 1774 (Pennsylvania Journal, June
15, 1775):

Boston had had, as early as 1640, the first and largest public
library in the Anglo-American colonies. That of Harvard Uni-
versity, which did not cease to grow, was already excellent in
1773, as the catalogue published that year proves. It had been
imitated. Boston was the city of books on the American conti-
nent. See particularly Voyages dans les Colonies du Milieu de
l'Amérique septentrionale by M. André Burnaby, pp. 152-164.

47 Dartmouth College was founded in 1769. Rhode Island
dates from 1764, but it did not begin its full development until
later (see Historical Catalogue of Brown University).

48 The Records of the College Faculty at Harvard, for the
years 1763 to 1775, afford a very striking document concerning
the development of education in America.

49 Concerning Charles Carroll’s voyage to Europe, see The Life
and Times of John Carroll, by Peter Guilday (New York), pp.
6, 14, etc. For the voyage of H. Laurens, who was President
of the Congress, and later prisoner in England, see Lives of
American Merchants, by John Frost, passim. For Franklin’s voy-
age, see Writings of Franklin (ed. by A. H. Smyth), Vol. We
PP: 49-52.

50 See The Loyal Verses of Joseph Stansbury and Dr. Jona-
than Odell (ed. by Winthrop Sargent), p. 4.

51 John Adams, schoolmaster, member of the Congress, and
later ambassador to England and President of the United States.
See Warren-Adams Letters, p. 31.

52 Concerning Louis XIV and his reputation in the United
States, see Works and Writings of John Adams, Vol. IV, p. 38.NOTES 505

°’ Concerning the Pope and the United States, see Papist
Idolatry, by J. Mayhew (Boston, 1765); A Discourse on the
Man of Sin, by Gad Hitchcock (Boston, 1770), and the whole
series of the Dudleian Lectures.

®4 See Literary Diary of Ezra Stiles, Vol. I, p. 179.

5 See especially the years 1772 and 1773 of the Boston Gazette,
the Massachusetts Spy, the Pennsylvania Gazette, the Pennsyl-
vania Packet, the New York Post Boy. See particularly in Riv-
ungton’s Gazette of Oct. 28, 1773, the comparison of France
with a sparrow.

°° New London (Connecticut) Gazette (July 22, 1770).

*7 See New York Gazette (Aug. 21, 1771).

*8See United States Bureau of Education Bulletin (1913),
No. III, The Teaching of Modern Languages in the United
States, by Charles Hart Handschin, pp. 16, 17, and 22.

°° Writings of B. Franklin, Vol. III, pp. 24-28; Vol. IV, pp.
419-423.

6° Diary of Ezra Stiles, Vol. I, p. 409.

81 Concerning Giraut, New York Gazette (Feb. §, 1770); for
Teétard, zd. (Oct. 5, 1772); for Haumaid, zd. (May 14, 1774);
for Saint-Pry, New York Gazetteer (March 23, 1775); concern-
ing the three Italians, zd. (May 19, 1774); for Delille, Diary of
Stiles, Vol. I, pp. 388, 408, 409, etc., and Boston Gazette (June
8, 1772, and May 17, 1772). For Régnier, Boston Post Boy
(June 20, 1774). Concerning M. de Viart, see Essex Gazette
Gees 15.1772).

®2 Concerning Daymon, see Pennsylvania Gazette (Jan. 3,
1771; April 23, 1771; Sept. 19, 1771); Pennsylvania Journal
(June 15, 1774) and Doniol, Participation de la France a ('Etab-
lissement des Etats-Unis, Vol. I, pp. 267-287.

83 Writings of Jefferson, Vol. I, p. 3.

64] have deliberately refrained from giving the numbers of
the catalogues in which the various French books that I have
spoken of here are mentioned. The value of these catalogues
varies greatly according to the man who composed them and the
person or persons who owned the library. Each of them has its506 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

own particular intention, and they cannot logically be considered
as a whole.

In fact there are three distinct categories to be distinguished :

1. The catalogues of public libraries whose books were read
and circulated in the larger cities.

>. Those of the booksellers, who sometimes kept on their
shelves books that were unsalable and continued offering them
for sale year after year. (The American booksellers did not al-
ways choose the books that they sold; they received them from
England by the ships that brought over tea, hardware, furniture
and cloth. Their furnishers often sent them books whose vogue
had passed in order to get rid of them, and these books were
badly received by the American public. Sometimes they sent very
modern books which the American public rejected as being too
worldly and scandalous.)

3. The catalogues of private libraries, which were scarce and
of little interest. In fact, in almost all the libraries of celebrated
men the majority of the books were gifts from the authors or
their friends and the owners did not read them. We know that
this was true in the case of Washington, whose splendid library
was merely a proof of his popularity in Europe and by no means
indicates that either he or his family took any interest in litera-
ture. We are justified in feeling the same suspicions with regard
to Franklin, Jefferson, John Adams, Madison, etc.

Thus we may say that in America at the end of the eighteenth
century a book that is often mentioned in the catalogues of the
public libraries may well be a popular book, a book often men-
tioned in the advertisements of the booksellers may be one that
has been coldly received by the American public, and one often
mentioned in the catalogues of private libraries may be alto-
gether unknown in America.

The only indication that would show that the book had been
read would be marginal notes in the handwriting of the owner
and having to do with the contents of the book. In every case in
which such evidence was to be found, I have taken it into ac-
count.

Such are the reasons that have made me refrain from givingNOTES 507

statistics on this point in which the reader would have found
only a deceptive accuracy.

°° Writings of B. Franklin, Vol. IV, pp. 267-268.

66 WV arren-Adams Letters, p. 18.

87 See the catalogues of the New York Society Library, Charles-
ton Library Company and Philadelphia Library Company already
mentioned.

68 See Pennsylvania Gazette (Sept. 20, 1770), for example.

69 South Carolina Gazette (Nov. 24, 1772).

70 See New York Journal (May 26, 1774), Maryland Journal
(Nov. 3, 1774)-

7 Boston Post Boy (Aug. 13, 1770)-

72 See The Harmony Between the Old and New Testament,
by T. Coombe (Philadelphia, 1774), p

73See Transactions of the American Philosophical Soctety
(1879), Vol. 1, pp. 1-25

74 See South alee. ra (Aug. 651772)

75 Massachusetts Historical Society Proceedings (1915-1916),
Vol. XLIX, p. 440 e¢ seq.

76 Karly Proceedings of the American Philosophical Socwety
(Philadelphia, 1884), pp. 168, 169, 170.

77 See New York Gazetteer (Nov. 9, 1775), for example.

78 See Gazette of Boston (Oct. 20, vee

7” Writings of B. Franklin, Vol. V, p- 47:

80 Works and Writings of John ee Vole: Ile ps io;

81 Simon-Nicolas-Henri Linguet (1736-1794), lawyer and fa-
mous pamphleteer, editor of the Annales politiques du XVIII ™
Siecle, exiled under Louis XVI, beheaded under Robespierre.
Vergennes and Louis XVI took an interest in him and protected
him. See Correspondance publiée par M. de Lescure, p. 254-

82 See Mémoire de Vergennes, pour le Roi, dated Dec. 8, 1774;
Archives des Affaires étrangéres, France, Mémoires et Docu-
ments, Vol. 446, pp. 32- 33:

83 Concerning Vergennes’s ideas, see the very curious book of
Doniol, Le Comte de Vergennes et P. M. Hennin, p. 98 et seq.

84 See Doniol, Participation de la France a l Etablissement des
Etats-Unis, Vol. I, pp. 280-283.

    
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
  
 
  
 
 
  
 
 
  
 
  
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
    

gé4gee7%

SF Ft es ee:
ssezszgsee

Sere Tit
pa dahsjoFess bse

oor

eee eT east oe)

SIR eet ee

Ts

waders ie co ess508 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

 

85 Te Comte de Vergennes and P. M. Hennin, pp. 90-92.

86 France in the American Revolution, by James Breck Perkins,
pp. 25-26.

8? Patrick Henry, whose famous words of revolt were pro-
nounced in 1765, later became one of the Anti-Federalist leaders
in Virginia. Charles Galloway, a patriot in 1765, became more
and more interested in a reconciliation with England, and his
opinions brought him into disfavor with the insurgents.

88 This discovery was made by M. Abel Doysié, who published
this journal in The American Historical Review, Vol. XXVI,
No. 4, and Vol. X XVII, No. 1 (1921).

89 Friedrich Kapp, Life of Johann Kalb, pp. 1-46.

89 See Doniol, Participation de la France a l' Etablissement des
Etats-Unis, Vol. I, pp. 280-283.

There were undoubtedly several other secret missions. At the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, we find indications that the Cheva-
lier d’Annemours, who was later consul at Baltimore, traveled in
America to obtain information, about 1773 (see Archives des
Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Mémoires et Documents, Vol. I,
pp. 18-40). I am even inclined to think that the Chevalier d’An-
nemours may have been the mysterious agent of 1705.

°1 Concerning the opinions of the Prince de Montbarrey, see
Mémoires du Prince de Montbarrey, Vol. II, pp. 259, 267-8, 294,
297, 308, etc. The Prince de Montbarrey attracted attention by
the various memorandums that he drew up in 1775; immediately
afterward he entered the King’s council and was appointed Min-
ister of War in 1777.

°2 Correspondance compléte de Madame du Deffant, Vol. I,
P- 499-

°8See Journal historique et politique de Genéve (January,
1775), article on the political situation.

°4 Mémoires historiques sur la Vie de M. Suard, by Dominique
Joseph Garat (Paris, 1820), Vol. XXVIII, pp. 122-123.

°5 Gazette de France (Nilay 12, 1775)-

°6 See Doniol, Participation de la France a l’Etablissement des
Etats-Unis, Vol. I, pp. 275-285, 359-365, etc. See the references

in the index under the name of Louis XVI. This is the only con-ee ore ey

509
clusive and irrefutable body of documentation concerning the at-
titude of the King at this period.

87 Concerning Caron de Beaumarchais, see Doniol, Participa-
tion de la France a l’Etablissement des Etats-Unis, passim;
Loménie, Beaumarchais et son Temps, Vol. I, p. 19; Perkins,
France in the American Revolution, pp. 58, 64, 68-85, 104, and
105. For the Chevalier d’Eon, see the same work, pp. 74-77.

CHAPTER II

1 Anti-French polemic in America. See Massachusettensis (Bos-
ton, 1776), by D. Leonard, p. 57 et seg. Plain Truth. Written by
Candidus (Philadelphia, 1776). A Discourse on the Times (Nor-
wich, 1776). A candid Examination of the Mutual Claims of
Great Britain and the Colonies (New York, 1775), by Galloway.
The Church’s Flight into the Wilderness. An Address by Samuel
Sherwood (New York, 1776) and Loyal Verses of Stansbury and
Doctor Johnathan Odell, p. 4.

2 Concerning the adventurers of the Antilles in America, see
Writings of Washington, Vol. V1, p. 37. Mémoires, Correspon-
dances et Manuscripts du Géneral La Fayette, Vol. I, pp. 16-20,
and Journal of the Continental Congress, Vol. VI, pp. 595, 768;
857, 904, etc.

2 Concerning Pinto, see Bibliographie des Ouvrages francais
sur les Etats-Unis.

4¥For the attitude of Turgot, see Doniol, Participation de la
France a l’Etablissement des Etats-Unis, Vol. I, pp. 280-283.
Concerning the attitude of the Physiocrats, see articles by the
Abbé Roubaud in the Nouvelles Ephémérides économiques
(1776), Vol. III, pp. 48-76.

5 Correspondance inédite de l’ Abbé Galzani, Vol. XI, p. 203; and
Mercure de France (January, 1777), Ppp- 127-137:

6 Journal de politique et de Littérature de Bruxelles, edited by
Linguet, article concerning the letter of Kerguelen (Janwesss
1776).

7 Journal inédit du Duc de Croy, Vol. I, p. 302.

® Mémoires autographes de Monsieur le Prince de Montbarrey,

Vol. II, pp. 268-293.

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    

~SrTrPeo ert Tt ee 7 -
abesrHeSs55552SRSF4 52055

&st22

i

Seta

ee ee ee

pss sshsscsssuseessre=

a aes

PT +2

ee a i ee510 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT
° Doniol, Participation de la France, Vol. II, pp. 70-73, and

the Historical Society of Pennsylvania’s Franklin Papers, Vol.
II, the Projet de J. de Sparre and the Mémoire of July 2, 1779,
which follows.

10-11 Concerning Favier, see Archives des Affaires étrangeres,
Mémoires and Documents, France, Vol. V, pp. 6-11. Concerning
Madame du Deffant, see Correspondance compléte de Madame du
Deffant, Vol. III, pp. 306-307. Concerning Moreau, see Mes Sou-
venirs, by Jacob-Nicolas Moreau (Paris, 1808), Vol. II, pp. 25,
315-318. Concerning Malouet, see Mémoires de Malouet, Vol. I,
pp- 414-417. Concerning d’Alembert: Cwvres de d'Alembert, Vol.
V, pp. 372, 374 and 386.

12 See, for example, Gazette de Leyde (Jan. 1, 1776; Jan. 30,
1777, etc.), Courrier d’Avignon (Jan. 3, 17773 Jan. 17, 1777)s
etc.; Journal historique de Genéve, No. 1 (January, 1777)-

18 Doniol, Participation de la France, Vol. I, p. 281.

14 7Td., Vol. I, pp. 282 and 283.

15-16 Mirabeau, Considérations sur Ordre de Cincinnatus, pp.
199-201.

7d.; Pp: 190.

18 Doniol, Participation de la France, Vol. I, pp. 2 and 267-270.

19 Fife and Works of John Adams, Vol. II, pp. 454-459 and
474, and Journal of the Continental Congress, Vol. II, p. 392.

20 Literary Diary of Ezra Stiles, Vol. Il, p. 10.

21 See Life and Works of John Adams, Vol. II, pp. 502-510,
Vol. IX, pp. 387, 396, 409; Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol.
I, pp. 18-23.

22 See the very typical letter from William Livingston to
Henry Laurens, Feb. 5, 1778, in A Memoir of the Life of W.
Livingston, by Theodore Sedgwick, p. 185, and the not less curi-
ous answer of Laurens, zd., pp. 167-258. See the letter of John
Randolph to Thomas Jefferson, and the letters of the latter in
1775-1779 in American Antiquarian Society Proceedings (April,
1920). See, further, Warren-Adams Letters, pp. 184 and 259;
Correspondence of Ralph Izard, Vol. I, p. 1203 Virginia Ga-
zette of Dixon (April 20, 1776; Aug. 10, 1776, etc.), and
Massachusetts Spy (June 21, 1776).NOTES 511

23 Concerning this edition of Rousseau, see Journal of the Con-
tinental Congress, Vol. III, p. 507. It was published by John
Roberts, and P. L. Ford is the first to have pointed it out.

24 See “Jefferson and the Social Compact Theory” by G. P.
Fisher, in Yale Review (1894).

25 See Gazette de France (Aug. 22, 1777)-

26 See Courrier de l’Europe (March 11, 1777)-

27 T ettres de Gustave III a la Comtesse de Boufflers, p. 102.

28 See Correspondance secrete de Métra, Vol. III, p. 307-

29See Deane Papers, Vol. I, pp- 179-183, 194, ete. See
Doniol, Participation de la France, Vol. I, pp. 494-520;

30 Concerning the attitude of Gérard, see particularly the memo-
randum that Doniol cites (Partzczpation de la France, Vol. I,
p- 243).

81 See Journal of the Continental Congress, Vol. V, pp- §75-
588, 768, 813, 817, and 827.

82 See Journal of the Continental Congress, Vol. VII, dated
March 14, 1777:

88 Concerning the arrival of Franklin and his immediate tri-
umph, see Calendar of the Papers of Benjamin Franklin, Vol. I;
pp. 200-300. There is not a page without an enthusiastic letter
and an offer of service. The poems are found p. 200 ef Seq. See,
further, Journal du Duc de Cro¥, Vol. Ill, pp. 294-295, etc.

84 Concerning the departure of La Fayette, see Mémoires de
Lafayette, Vol. I, pp. 9-16.

35 See France in the American Revolution, by J. B. Perkins,

p- 115. .
36 Tettres de la Marquise du Deffant a Horace Walpole, Vol.

III, pp. 374-375-

37 See Recueil Clairembaut Maurepas, by E. Raunie, Vol. IX,
p. 118.

88 Same Recuezl, pp. 134-135.

89 Concerning Hennin, see Doniol, Le Comte de Vergennes et
P. L. Hennin, passim. Concerning Gérard, see Doniol, Partici-
pation de la France, passim; concerning Garnier, see Journal
inédit du Duc de Cro, Vol. IV, p. 141. Concerning Genet, see
Souvenirs d’Alexandrine Pannetier d’Arsonval, pp. 1-10; and

Py FP Sy : Pye eS ee oy re 4
Popes ts etter tree

hats Se

eer.

Pere tT Sass

Toe

ae! Tere ¥
Se512 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Calendar of the Papers of Benjamin Franklin, Vol. I, pp. 450,
464, 536, etc.

40 Concerning Vergennes’s procedure with regards to the censor-
ship, see the typical example of a book that he authorizes on con-
dition that it be refused by the censor: Archives des Affaires
étrangéres, France, Mémoires et Documents, Vol. DLXXXII,
p. 115. Concerning the secret organizations of Genet, The Cal-
endar of the Papers of Benjamin Franklin gives suggestive de-
tails; see the pages cited above.

41 See Mémoires de Brissot, Vol. 1, pp. 157-165.

*2 Thévenot de Morande, pamphleteer and journalist, lived
principally at London and published a collection of scandalous
anecdotes under the title of the Gazetzer cuirassé. He was chief
editor of the Courrier de [ Europe, into which he took Brissot.
Then they quarreled, and at the beginning of the revolution,
Morande was the principal enemy of Brissot. He was then in
the pay of the Court.

*8 See Calendar of the Papers of Benjamin Franklin, Vol. I,
pp- 450, 465, and 536,-and Vol. III, p. 56, etc.

*£Tt is in Vol. I of the Affazres de l’Angleterre et de l Ameéer-
wque, pp. 33-103, that the extracts from Paine are cited.

*° It is in Vol. III of the Affasres de l’ Angleterre et de l Ameér-
wque that Price’s Observations on Civil Liberty were published,
PP. 45-231.

*° See the Archives du Ministére des Affaires étrangéres, France,
Mémoires et Documents, Vol. DLX XXII, pp. 85-87.

47 See Calendar of the Papers of Benjamin Franklin, Vol. I,
p. 229.

*® Concerning the attitude of Louis XVI, Mémoires historiques
et politiques du réegne de Louis XVI, by Jean-Louis Soulavie,
Vol. IIT, pp. 347, 393, 395, and especially 397-480, and Mémozres:
Souvenirs et Anecdotes by the Comte de Ségur, Vol. I, pp. 154-
156.

*© Anecdote related by Madame Campan, Vol. I, pp. 232-234.

°° See, for example, New York Gazette (1777: June 9, Sept.
29, Oct. 6 and 27, etc.; and further, July 12, 1779).
°! Correspondance secréte de Marie-Antoinette et de Mercy,he ren

  

NOTES 513

letter of Marie-Thérése to Mercy (dated Nov. 3, 1777), Vol. III,
p. 127. See also Mémoires de Madame Campan, Vol. I, pp. 233-
234, and Vol. II, p. 30.

52 See La Cassette Verte de M. de Sartines (1779), pp. 22-23.

58 Reply to the Declaration of the Congress (London, 1777)-

54 Concerning this opposition in conservative circles, see the
typical pages of Mes Souvenirs, by Jacob-Nicolas Moreau, Vol.
II, pp. 318-319.

55 Doniol, Participation de la France, Vol. Il, pp. 572 and 628.

56 Gazette ou Journal politique des Deux-Ponts (additional
number, Jan. 15, 1778).

87 Concerning the Club of Marseilles, see Gazette ou Journal
politique des Deux-Ponts (same date, same number).

58 See Journal du Duc de Croy, pp. 300-302.

59 Hale in Franklin in France has treated at length this ques-
tion of Franklin’s friends, but it is sufficient to read Calendar of
the Papers of Benjamin Franklin, Vol. I, from p. 200 to the
end, to have a clear idea of them. One even derives from these
papers an impression of reality which is more interesting than
any compilation.

60 Lettres de la Marquise du Deffant to Horace Walpole, Vol.
III, pp- 349-350-

61 Correspondance littéraire, philosophique et critique by Grimm,
Vol. XII, p. 85.

62 See Journal de Perlet (Sept. 15, 1792).

68 Correspondance compléte de Madame du Deffant, Vol. IL,
PP» 313°314-

64 See Mémoires de Lafayette, Vol. I, pp. 18, 45, 103, 109, 126,
133, etc. The text cited is p. 108.

65 Correspondance secréte de Métra, Vol. V, pp- 388-392.

66 This farce was entitled Matroco. See Bibliography of Frank-
lin by P. L. Ford, p. 318, and Affaires de | Angleterre et de
Amérique, Vol. VU, p. 28.

87 Concerning the situation in Germany, see Gazette des Deux-
Ponts (1777), No. 89. Concerning the state of mind in Italy, see
in Calendar of the Papers of Franklin the various letters coming

    
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    

ryt be

vvct ree I
eee Pere ee)

adsbejeSeses

Toe

—e - - 7 . ~4 A ee ees bo 4 |
cee eee ee ee eee ee ae ek

Sse raises514 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

from Italy; for example, Vol. II, pp. 42-43, No. 13; pp. 283,
293; 507, etc.

68 See Doniol, Participation de la France, Vol. III, p. 153.

°° Concerning the Mémoire sur la Louisiane imputed to Ver-
gennes, see the excellent article by Edward S. Corwin in Lhe
American Historical Review (1915), Vol. XXI, pp. 33-61, on
the subject of “French Objectives in the American Revolution.”

70 See especially the memorandum of Turgot to Louis XVI, in
which these ideas are expressed: Doniol, Participation de la
France, Vol. I, pp. 280-283. All the newspapers seem to share
this opinion, but the economists are the most explicit. See the
article of the Abbé Roubaud in the Nouvelles Ephémérides éco-
nomiques (1776), Vol. III, pp. 48-76.

71 Concerning the question of Canada, see Perkins, France in
the American Revolution, pp. 45, 46, 227 and 471, and Journal
of the Continental Congress, Vol. XII (Oct. 24, 1778; Dec. 5,
etc.)

72 See Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. VI,
p. 150; Vol. X, p. 140.

73 See Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. IV,
pp. 120-125.

74 Memoirs of the Life of Richard Henry Lee, by His Grand-
SONsute dt. 1ee, D. 105.

7 Writings of Samuel Adams, Vol. IV, p. 10 et seq.

® Writings of Washington, Vol. VII, p. 2.

77 Boston Continental Journal (April 13, 1778).

78 See Boston Continental Journal (May 21, 1778).

79 See Journal of the Continental Congress, Vol. XI (July 11-
AUS 1, 1793).

80 Journal of the Continental Congress, Vol. XI (dated Aug. 6,
1778).

81 Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. IV, pp.
120-135.

82 Concerning this surprise, see Journal du Duc de Croy, Vol.
IV, pp. 72-74.

88 For evidence of this enthusiasm see Journal historique de
Genéve (1779). Preliminary speech in January.rye

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
  
 
    

515

84 (Euvres de Voltaire, Vol. I, p. 276.

85 For Vergennes’s attitude toward England, see Doniol, Le
Comte de Vergennes et P. L. Hennin, p. 103.

86 See, for example, the pamphlet by Charles Inglis, The Let-
ters of Papinian (New York, 1779).

8T See Songs and Ballads of the American Revolution by Frank
Moore, pp. 236, 269, 274 and 289.

88 New York Weekly Museum (Dec. 17, 1781).

89 See Rivington’s Royal Gazette (March 28, May 27, and
Oct. 21, 1778)-

90 See Rivington’s Royal Gazette (March 28, May 27, Oct. 21,
Oct. 24, Dec. 5, 1778, etc-).

1 Rivington’s Royal Gazette (May 17, 1780).

82 See Rivington’s Royal Gazette (March 1, 1780).

°3 Writings of Madison, Vol. I, pp. 299-300.

94 See this authentic evidence in Deane Papers, Vol. II, p. 368,
and the history of the question, Vol. III, pp. 374, 392, 419» 434
467, 477, 497, etc.

°5 The whole question is well summed up in France in the
American Revolution, by J. B. Perkins, pp. 86-117.

96 Deane Papers, Vol. IV, p. 494 et Seq.

87 The book of M. Phillips, The West in the Diplomacy of the
American Revolution, in its first fifty pages contains a detailed
and exact analysis of the situation of Gérard at Philadelphia in
1778-1779, p- 37- See in this book the analysis of the two parties.

°8 Writings of Samuel Adams, Vol. IV, p. 244.

9 See Literary Diary of Ezra Stiles, Vol. II, pp. 379-373:

100 Concerning the gifts and loans made by France, see De-
partment of Interior, Census Office, Report on Valuation, Taxa-
tion, and Public Indebtedness in the United States (June, 1880),
p- 299; History of National Loans by R. N. Baylay.

101 See France in the American Revolution by J. B. Perkins,
pp. 503-513, and Correspondence of John Jay, Vol. I, p- 377:

102 See Works and Writings of John Adams, Vol. IH, pp. 270-
280, and Doniol, Participation de la France, Vol. V, pp- 55-59:

103 J, B. Perkins, France in the American Revolution, pp. 222-

220%516 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

104 See, for example, the discussions and decisions of the Con-
gress (dated Nov. 28 and Dec. 12, 1780), Vol. XVIII of the
Journal of the Continental Congress.

°° Concerning the discussion relative to the terms of the treaty
of peace, see Phillips’ book, The West in the Diplomacy of the
American Revolution, which is a detailed résumé of these inter-
minable discussions.

*°° Concerning the opinion of Vergennes, see Archives des Af-
faires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. XIV, p. 379; Vol. XIX, p.
AZ) Vol exo pp. 372. AlA-Alg. c7ostetc:

*°7 All this is the résumé of Phillips’ book, already cited, and
of the Journal of the Continental Congress, Vols. XIX, XX,
XXI.

*°8 Concerning La Rouérie, see Journal of the Continental Con-
gress, Vols. XI and XII (Jan. 1, Jan. 13, Feb. 3, June 25,
1778), Vols. XIII and XV (Jan. 13, Feb. 4, 5, 12, 13, and 17,
and June 26, 1779).

*°° For example, on Feb. 23, 1776, the Continental Congress
gave $13.50 to Francis Daymon for translating from the French
the regulations of the Continental Army. All the military books
published by the Congress were French; see The Art of War by
M. de Lamont (Philadelphia, 1778). The book also contained an
article by the Chevalier de la Valliére, “Le Réglement militaire,”
translated from the English by Francis Daymon (Philadelphia,
1776). L’Ingénieur de Campagne, written in French by the Cheva-
lier de Clatrac, and translated by Major Lewis Nicola (Philadel-
phia, 1776).

**° The Comte de Damas, born in 1758, later an émigré, and
Brigadier-General during the Restoration. Charles-Louis-Victor
de Broglie (1758-1792), member of the Constitutional Govern-
ment, guillotined. The Vicomte Louis-Marie de Noailles (1756-
1804), member of the Etats-Généraux, famous for the part he
played in the night of August 4, later emigrated to America and
was killed in a naval battle while he was serving in the French
navy in 1804.

*** Concerning the impression that the French troops made, see

Maryland Journal (Aug. 27, 1782) and The Magazine of Amer-NOTES rag

ican History, Vol. 1V, Diary of a French O fficer (Cromot Du-
bourg), pp- 229, 383, etc.

112 Concerning the attitude and the success of La Fayette, there
are innumerable sources to be cited. See in the Carnet de la Sa-
bretache (1896), p. 436, “Souvenirs de Villebresme”’; Boston Ga-
zette (June 8, 1778; Apr. 19, 1779; July 30, i7sis Dec 17;
1781, etc.).

113 See, for example, Quesnay de Beaurepaire. His very typical
story is told in his Mémovre concernant l’ Académie des Sciences
et des Beaux-Arts des Etats-Unis de Amérique, pp- 19, 24, 25;
28, 35, 95, 101, and 106. See also The Life of Albert Gallatin,
by Henry Adams, pp. 20-44.

114 See, for example, Massachusetts Spy (Feb. 1, 1781; Sept.
13, 1781) and Voyage du Marquss de Chastellux, Vol. I, p. 267.

115 Writings of Washington, Vol. VI, pp. 160-161.

116 Mémoires de La Fayette, Vol. I, p. 384.

117 Concerning Robin, see Freeman's Journal (Aug. 15, 1781) ;
concerning Quesnay, see zd. (Oct. 31, 1781, and Sept. 29, 1782).
Concerning Brival, see Pennsylvania Ledger, Jan. 21, 1778, etc.

118 See Literary Diary of Ezra Stiles, Vol. UU, pp. 296, 297;
299, 301, 304, etc. (I owe these supplementary details to the
kindness and erudition of Professor Newhall of Yale.)

119 Concerning Vandal, see Harvard Record of the College
Faculty (March 3, 1779); concerning Poullin, zd. (Seut. 15,
1780); for Gallatin, zd. (Aug. 20, 1882) ; concerning Gébelin,
Voyage of M. Carver, p. 183.

120 See C, H. Handshin, The Teaching of Modern Languages
in the United States, p. 21.

121 Harvard Records of the College Faculty (Nov. 27; 1780).

122 Tq. (July 18, 1781) and Salisbury Family Memorial, pp-
319-320.

123 See in William and Mary Quarterly, Vol. XIV, No. 2,
“Early Courses and Professorships at William and Mary Col-
lege” by L. G. Tyler, p. 77-

124 Calendar of the Papers of Benjamin Franklin, Vol. IV,
P- 347:

125 Td., p. 460.518 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

126 Works and Writings of John Adams, Vol. IV, pp. 260-269.

127 Rivington’s Royal Gazette (April 12, 1780; Jan. 24, 1781, |
and Nov. 22, 1777). |

128 Massachusetts Spy (Sept. 5, 1782); #reeman’s Journal
(Oct217; 17815) Apr. 4, 1783). ete:

129 See Bassett, Popular Churches after the Revolution (Massa-
chusetts Historical Society Proceedings, 1914-1915), Vol. XLVIII,
pp- 254-268.

130 [Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. I, p. 91.

131 Tife and Works of John Adams, Vol. II, pp. 490-500.

182 See Catalogue of the Library of John Adams and notice
all the French books on diplomatic history that it contains, all of
them earlier than 1780.

183 Freeman’s Journal (Oct. 31, 1781).

134 See Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. X,
pp. 215-220; Vol. VI, pp. 75-76 and 258.

185 See Freeman’s Journal (Jan. 16, 1782).

186 Concerning Gérard and the propaganda, Archives des Af-
faires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. IV, pp. 183 and 321; Vol. VI,
p. 70.

137 Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. VI, pp.
178-179.

188 Td., Vol. VI, pp. 167-168.

189 Td., Vol. XIII, pp. 413-414, and especially Vol. XXI, p. 30.

140 See, concerning Samuel Cooper, zd., Vol. VI, pp. 168-169;
Wolee<l Ver. 170, etc.

141 See especially zd., Vol. VI, p. 140.

142 See zd., Vol. VI, pp. 178-179; Vol. XIII, pp. 413-4143 Vol.
XVI, pp. 265-276; Vol. XVII, pp. 309-405 and 481.

143 See particularly The Massachusetts Spy (Boston) and the
Freeman’s Journal (Philadelphia), the two most typical, most
Gallicized, and best edited “patriotic” newspapers of the time.
See years 1779-1783.

144See The Motley Assembly, a Farce (Boston, 1779). See
Essays on the Free Trade by a Cityzen of Philadelphia (Phila-
delphia, 1779), of Pelatiah Webster.

145 Massachusetts Spy (Oct. 7, 1779). See also zd. (June 20,

1778).NOTES 519

146 Concerning the Lees’ situation, see Writings of Madison,
Vol. I, pp. 65 and 301 ef seg. See also Archives des Affaires
étrangeres, Etats-Unis, Vol. VI, p. 296, and Doniol, Participation
de la France, Vol. IV, pp. 153 and 200.

147 Tife and Letters of Simeon Baldwin, p. 60.

148 See especially Writings of Madzson, Vol. I, pp. 299-304
and 403-415, and Journal of Eliza Drinker (Jan. 25, 1781).

149 See Service hydrographique de la Marine. Maps and dia-
grams. Library, Manuscript 7228B, Vol. II, pp. 216-223, and
Vol. I, passim. This very curious diary was discovered by M.
Abel Doysié. It is to be regretted that he has not yet been able
to publish it. See also Souvenirs d'un O fficier Royaliste by the
Comte de Romain, pp. 49-51.

150 Works and Writings of John Adams, Vol. III, p. 195.

151 See Journal du Duc de Cro¥, Vol. IV, p. 229; Lettres de
M. de Kageneck, p. 128, etc.

152 Mémoires secrets de Bachaumont, Vol. XIV, pp. 269-278.

153 See La Cassette verte de M. de Sartines, pp. 37-39 and
56-60, and Journal du Duc de Croj, Vol. IV, p. 159-

154 Mémoires adressés aux Souverains de l'Europe by M. Pow-
nall, translated from the English by M...- - (London, 1781),
and Cui Bono by J. Tucker (London, 1782).

155 See Mémoires secrets de Bachaumont, Vol. XIV, p. 269.

156 Gazette des Deux Ponts, number of January 21.

157 Concerning Genet’s activities in those years, see Works and
Writings of John Adams, Vol. VII, pp. 59-63, 160-180.

158 See Archives des Affaires étrangeres, Etats-Unis, Mémoires
et Documents, Vol. V, pp. 27-30. Concerning Vergennes’s atti-
tude toward the press, see the pamphlet of 1780, Réveries dun
Suisse.

159 See Doniol, Participation de la France, Vol. IV, p. 587 ef
seq.; Archives des Affaires étrangeres, Etats-Unis, Correspondance
politique, Vol. XXIII, p. 363 et seq.

160 See Journal du Duc de Crojy, Vol. IV, pp- 167-168; Cor-
respondance publiée par M. de Lescure, p. 167, etc.

161 T ettres de M. de Kageneck, p- 17-520 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

162 See Journal of the Continental Congress, Vols. XIX, XX,
and XXI (Jan. 2, Feb. 23, 1781), ete. ,

163 See Writings of Franklin, Vol. VII, pp. 289 and 400-402, |
Vol. VIII, pp. 24-30 and 39, etc.

164 Concerning Franklin’s ideas, see Writings of Franklin, Vol.
VII, pp. 427-431.

165 Concerning Franklin’s attitude and that of his grandsons,
among the great mass of documents, see J. P. Brissot, Mémoires
publiés par Claude Perroud, Vol. I, p. 138 et seg.; Correspon-
dance publiée par M. de Lescure, p. 180 et seq.; Mémoires secrets
de Bachaumont, Vol. X, p. 121, etc.

166 See in American Historical Review (1915-1916), Vol. XXI,
pp. 708-719, “A Missing Chapter of Franco-American History”
by D. J. Hull.

187 See Works and Writings of John Adams, Vol. III, pp. 160-
161.

168 See Calendar of the Papers of Benjamin Franklin, Vol. I,
p-: 22

169 Writings of Benjamin Franklin, Vol. IX, p. 27 et seq., and
“A Missing Chapter of Franco-American History” by D. J. Hill.

170 Writings of Benjamin Franklin, Vol. VIII, pp. 440-448;
Vol. IX, p. m Calendar of the Papers of Benjamin Franklin,
Vol. I, pp. 225, 450, 452, and 466; Mémoires secrets de Bachau-
mont, Vol. XXII, Dp: 6i

171 See Louis Amable, Une Loge maconnique d avant 1789,
Introduction and pp. 45-93.

172 See Mémoires secrets par M. le Comte dAllonville, Vol.
II, p. 48.

178 Concerning the Epée de Bois, see Doniol, Parteczpation de la
France, Vol. I, p. 663.

174 See Louis Amable, of. cit., pp. 1-18. Everything that fol-
lows is but a synopsis.

175 All this is taken from Amable’s book, pp. 18-180.

178 Concerning the Lycée de Paris and the Museum, see Amable,
same book, pp. 187-204.

177 See Journal intime de l’Abbé Mulot, pp. 71, 79, and 82.errr

     
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
  

NOTES 521

178 The best evidence of this fact is given by the Mémoires
secrets de Bachaumont, Vol. XIV, p. 65; Vol. XXII, p. 154.

179 See Nouvelles de la République des Lettres (1777).

180 Calendar of the Papers of Benjamin Franklin, Vol. I, p.
5035 Vol; II, pp. 128, 272, and 371; Vol. IIT, pp. 32, 150, ete:

181 Correspondance de Grimm, Vol. XII, p. 29.

182 4 fiches de province (Jan. 7, 1777):

183 Journal du Duc de Croy, Vol. III, p. 302; Souvenirs and
Portraits par M. de Lévis, pp. 51-52; Mémozres de Abbé Mo-
rellet, pp. 295-322; Works and Writings of John Adams, Vol.
IX, p. 623, and p. 69, 1, 13. Concerning Franklin, Voltaire’s
successor in the eyes of public opinion, see Correspondance pub-
liée par M. de Lescure, p. 180 et seq.

184 Al] this is taken from the Calendar of the Papers of Ben-
jamin Franklin, save Condorcet’s letter, which is to be found in
the archives of the American Philosophical Society. See Rozen-
garten, Early Proceedings of the American Philosophical Soctety
(Dec. 30, 1774). The Benedictine is Dom Bernard, Vol. I, p. 196.
The schoolmaster is Gargaz, zd., Vol. II, pp. 25 and 39; see the
very interesting little book by G. S. Eddy; A Project of Uni-
versal and Perpetual Peace Written by Prerre-Andre Gargaz.
Introduction and Typographical Note by G. S. Eddy (New
York, 1922). See also M. Aulard’s article in the Revue de Paris
(Sept. 1, 1922). For the other, see zd., Vol. I, pp. 234-240; Vol.
Diep. 3203..\V.0). LIL, p: 20, etc.

185 See La Comtesse d’Houdetot by Hippolyte Buffenoir, p. 44.

186 Discours sur la Natssance de Mgr. le Dauphin, by M. Pois-
sonnier (1782), p. 25 et seq.

187 Calendar of the Papers of B. Franklin, Vol. IV, p. 468.

188 See Paul Jones ou prophéties sur l Amérique, l Angleterre,
la France, l’Espagne, la Hollande, etc., by Paul Jones. Corsaire,
Prophéte et Sorcier and L’ Apocalypse britannique ou les Reveéla-
tions d’un bon Breton (London, 1782), etc.

189 See Correspondance publiée by M. de Lescure, p. 2943 Cor-
respondance secréte de Métra, Vol. XIII, pp. 387-390, 403, etc.THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

CHAPTER IIl

1 Concerning the réle of John Jay, see John Jay, by G. Pellew,
pp. 1-96. On his anti-French sentiments, Correspondence and
Public Papers of John Jay, edited by H. P. Johnson, Vol. I;
pp. 181 and 275; Vol. II, pp. 69, 353, 371, etc.5 and Archives
des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. V, pp. 353-354-

2 The exact account of the negotiations is found in France in
the American Revolution, by J. B. Perkins, Chap. XXV, pp.
470 et seq. This author’s conclusions seem correct and are justi-
fied by all the documents I have seen in the Archives of Foreign
Affairs.

3 See Writings of Madison, Vol. I, pp. 199-305 and 403-406.

4 See Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. XXV,
pp. 64-70. We find here and there the indication that a part of
the American opinion held these “moderate views” and did not
desire the acquisition of the West. In 1787, a Southern newspaper
expressed satisfaction at the idea that France was going to oc-
cupy Louisiana. See Virginia Independent Chronicle, March 7,
1787.

5 Archives des Affaires étrangeres, Etats-Unis, Vol. XXVIII,
pp: 320 and 437-439.

6 See Writings of Madison, Vol. I, pp. 406-407.

7™See Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol.
XXXII, pp. 33 et seqg., and 208-212.

8See Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol.
XXVIII, pp. 137, 173, and 178, and Le Courrier de l Amérique
(imprimé chez Cist, distribué par Boinod et Gaillard) (Phila-
delphia), July-October, 1784. Nine numbers out of fourteen are
known, thanks to M. A. Shearer, librarian of the Grosvenor Li~
brary at Buffalo, where the collection is found. See also the vari-
ous advertisements inserted in the American newspapers by Boi-
nod and Gaillard, Gazette of the State of South Carolina, Aug.
2, 1784, and Philadelphia Freeman’s Journal, Jan. 12, 1785.

°See Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol.
XXVIII, p. 369.
seid: VOlseXOwlox, ps 51.NOTES $23

11 On this question see, for example, the Pennsylvania Packet,
Jan. 27, 1781.

12See particularly The Dying Legacy of an Aged Minister
(Boston, 1783), by S. Mather.

13 Correspondence of John Jay, Vol. III, p. 69 e¢ seq.

14 See Journal de Madame Campan, Vol. Il, p. 30.

1° See, for example, Conszdérations sur la Paix de 1783, en-
voyées par lAbbé Raynal au Prince Frédéric Henri de Prusse
(Berlin, 1783).

16 See, for example, the Année littéraire (1784), Vol. VIII, pp.
289-304.

*7 See Mémouzres secrets de Bachaumont, Vol. VIII, pp. 20-24.

** Concerning Vergennes’s attitude, see Archives des Affaires
étrangeéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. XXIV, pp. 340-343; Vol. XXV, pp.
64-70; Vol. XXVIII, p. 320; and Mémoires et Documents,
France, Vol. CDVI, pp. 351-357.

* Concerning La Luzerne, see, for example, Archives des Af-
fares étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. XXVII, p. 213.

20 See zd., Vol. X XIX, pp. 148-150; Vol. XXX, pp. 42-43 and
140.

711. G. Otto, Comte de Mosloy (1754-1817), native of the
Duchy of Baden, private secretary to the Chevalier de la Lu-
zetne, later chargé d’affaires at Philadelphia. He returned to
France in 1792 and joined the Girondist party, which appointed
him chief of the first division at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Cashiered and imprisoned in 1793, he was saved by the Ninth of
Thermidor. He returned to his post at the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs through Sieyés’s favor and became very influential. In
1800, he was appointed ambassador in London. Later he was sent
to Munich and Vienna. He was appointed Counselor of State and
finally Minister of State under Napoleon (1813). He lived in
retirement under the Bourbons. From 1798 to 1800 his influence
on American affairs was important.

22 See, for example, zd., Vol. XXVIII, pp. 57, 412, etc.

*3Td., Vol. XXVI, pp. 199, 252 e¢ seq.

** Concerning the Nantucket fishermen, see Memorandum Writ-
ten by William Rotch (Boston, 1916), pp. 1-15.

rl

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
   
 

3522 2ER2525e8

ee ee ee ee tT
Peer he tt el hee524 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

25 For the average opinion on the treaty, see, for example, in
the Journal historique de Genéve (1784, the first number of that
year), the Tableau de l’ Europe.

26 Concerning the Abbé Colin de Sepvigny, see Lzterary Diary
of Ezra, Stiles, Vol. Il, pp. 517-519.

27 See, on the Abbé Robin, Mémoires secrets de Bachaumont,
Vol. XXI, p. 191, and Louis Amable, Une Loge magonnique
d avant. 1789, pp. 21-25.

28 Discours sur la Paix, delivered Jan. 11, 1784, by M. l’Abbé
Racine (Toulouse, 1794).

29 Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. IV, pp.
A2G2AZ0; A275 etc:

30 See, for example, Mémoires du Comte de Moré de Pongr-
baud, pp. 109-118, 122-123, 141-148, and especially 171-174; and
also in Collections of the New York Historical Society, for the
year 1878, pp. 384-396, La Rouérie’s letters, p. 13, Letters 1-16.
See, among many others, the charming memoirs of the Prince de
Broglie and of the Comte de Ségur in Mélanges publiés par la
Société des Bibliophiles (Paris, 1903), Deux Francais aux Etats-
Unis.

81 Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Supplement
No. 3, Letter from La Fayette, Sept. 10, 1780.

82 See, for example, in Le Comte de Fersen et la Cour de
France, published by the Baron R. M. de Klinckowstrom, Wola
pp. 42-45, 46-72, and My Campaigns in America, a Journal Kept
by Count William de Deux Ponts.

83 See Perkins, France in the American Revolution, pp. 322-
224.

8 See Voyages de M. le Marquis de Chastellux, Vol. I, pp.
119-121.

85 See zd., Vol. II, pp. 32-46.

86 Eugene Berger, Le Vicomte de Mirabeau, pp. 46-67.

87 See, for example, Mémoires de Rochambeau, pp. 322-328.

88 See, for example, Souvenirs du Lieutenant-Général, Comte
Mathieu Dumas, Vol. I, pp. 112-130.

89 The American Traveller (Amsterdam, 1782), p. 64.NOTES 525

40 Travels in the Interior of North America, by Jonathan
Carver (1783).

“ Voyage dans les Colonies du Milieu de l Amérique septen-
trionale faits en 1759 et 1760, by M. André Burnaby (Lausanne,
1778).

*2 The Beginnings of Kentucky, by John Filson (1775).

#3 See Le Spectateur américain, p. XI.

** (Euvres de M. Arnauld (Paris, 1803), Vol. I, Amélie, Eng-
lish anecdote. See especially pp. 316-330.

45 This poem was of Chavanne de la Giraudiére, as we learn
from Brissot’s Mémozres (Perroud edition, Vol. I, pp. 332-334).

*° Les Amours du Chevalier de Faublas, by Louvet du Coudray
(new edition, Paris, 1789), Vol. I, pp. 219-224.

47 See Amz des Lois of the nineteenth of Germinal, Year VI,
Durand-Maillane’s article concerning La Fayette’s ambitions be-
fore 1789. See in the Mémoires de La Fayette the nature of his
relations with Washington; for example, Vol. I, pp. 140-142;
Vol. II, pp. 121-125, 109-113, etc.

48 Mémoires de La Fayette, Vol. II, pp. 157-161, 163-168, 226-
233, etc. See also Correspondence of John Jay, Vol. II, p. 313.

49 See The Correspondence of John Jay, Vol. Ill, pp. 135 e¢
$€G.5 200-220, 326 et seq.; Vol. II, pp. 42-43.

5° See Salisbury Family Memorial, pp. 319-323.

‘1 See Memorandum Written by William Rotch, pp. 1-20, and
Letters of an American Farmer (Créveceur), Vol. III.

52 See Mémoires de La Fayette, Vol. II, p. 60, and especially
Brissot’s typical note, in Mémozres de Brissot, Vol. I, p. 279.

53 Doniol, Le Comte de Vergennes et P. M. Hennin, p. 90.

54 See Journal of the Friends’ Historical Society, Vol. XV, p.
49 et seq.; Memorandum Written by William Rotch, pp. 1-203
Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. XV, pp. 15-
17.

°> Concerning La Fayette and the negroes of Guiana, see
Mémoires de La Fayette, Vol. Il, pp. 140-143.

56 See Lettre d’un Correcteur des Comptes a M. le Marquis de
La Fayette. Pamphlet without locality or date, written about
1787 or 1788.526 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

57 Mazzéi was an Italian from the Duchy of Tuscany, who
settled in Virginia and was a great democrat and a friend of
Jefferson.

58 See, for example, the Boston Independent Chronicle, Aug.
26, 1784.

59 See Writings of B. Franklin, Vol. IX, p. 326.

60 Concerning the prize offered by the Academy of Lyons, see
Journal de Lyon, Sept. 29, 1784, and Jan. 9, 1788, and Esprit
des Journaux (1791), Vol. XII, pp. 120-134.

61 Révolution de l’Amérique, by M. Abbé Raynal (Dublin,
1781), pp. 66-67.

62 Letter addressed to Abbé Raynal concerning American af-
fairs, published in translation, Paris, Buisson, 1791. See also
Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. XXI, p. 20,
and especially Vol. XXII, pp. 160-163.

68 See Journal de Lyon, Sept. 29, 1784, the same references as
for note 59.

®4 Correspondance de Grimm, Vol. XIII, p. 264.

65 Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. VI, p. 3 et seg.

66 The author of the American pamphlet attacking the Order
of Cincinnatus was named A%danus Burke. See Mirabeau’s ac-
count of the whole affair in Considérations sur Ordre de Cin-
cinnatus. See also Mémoires biographiques by Mirabeau, Vol. IV,
pp. 156-162.

67 One of the most striking examples of the penetration of
French documents and ideas is that of the Massachusetts Spy,
one of the best American newspapers of the time. During the
years 1783-1788, it published extracts from Raynal, Turgot,
Target, Voltaire, Rousseau, Lesage, Necker, Calonne, Créve-
ceeur, etc. It reprinted articles from the Journal de Paris, La
Gazette des Deux Ponts, La Gazette de Santé, etc.

68 See especially Loudon’s New York Packet, Jan. 16, 1786,
and Jan. 23, 1786; Massachusetts Spy, Feb. 1, 17873; Maryland
Journal, Feb. 17, 1786; Feb. 26, 1786, etc.

€9 See Note 67. See also the collection of the New York Packet,
1783-1788, and the Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer, 1786-
1788.527

70 Concerning La Rouérie, see Massachusetts Spy, Aug. 21,
1786. La Fayette is continually mentioned; see especially the
year 1784 in the volumes of the Massachusetts Spy.

71 For advertisements in French, see The Maryland Journal,
Feb. 14, 1786. See the eulogy of the French press in the Penn-
syluania Journal, July 13, 1785; comment on anti-Papist France
in the Massachusetts Spy, June 30, 1785; praise of Louis XVI
and his generous conduct in the Massachusetts Spy, Sept. 17,
1784; concerning Vergennes, New York Daily Advertiser, April
10, 1787.

“2 For the sentiment of spiritual union between the two coun-
tries, see, for example, the Maryland Journal, Oct. 5, 1787;
Aug. 5, 1788; Aug. 9, 1788.

78 See The Boston Independent Chronicle, May 25, 1785.

74 See The New York Daily Advertiser, March 23, 1787.

7 See Works and Writings of John Adams, Vol. IX, p. 530-
540; Old Family Letters, Series I, p. 57; Writings of Thomas
Jefferson, Vol. V, pp. 87, 152-154, and 186; and A Collection
of Essays, by Noah Webster (Boston, 1790), p. 1-20.

78 See Calendar of the Papers of B. Franklin, Vol. Il, p. 401.

77 See Maryland Journal, March 14, 1786.

78 Concerning French instruction for girls, see Columbian
Magazine, September, 1787, pp. 643 et seq.

79See Freeman’s Journal (April 5, 1786); Pennsylvania
Packet (Sept. 14, 1784; Feb. 22, 1785; Oct. 1, 1785) 3; New York
Gazette (Nov. 20, 1783); New York Journal (July 12, 1784);
Maryland Journal (Aug. 3, 1784; Jan. 18, 1785; March 24,
1786; June 2, 1786; Dec. 1, 1786; Sept. 11, 1787); Maryland
Gazette (June 4, 1785; Oct. 14, 1785); Norfolk and Ports-
mouth Journal (Jan. 9, 1788); Georgia State Gazette (Nov. 11,
1786; Oct. 28, 1786; April 3, 1787; Nov. 11, 1788); Massa-
chusetts Spy (Sept. 17, 1788) ; New York Daily Advertiser (Dec.
30, 1786; June 16, 1786); New York Packet (Dec. 1, 1785) ;
Providence Gazette (April 2, 1785).

80 It would be very difficult to determine the exact number of
French professors in America. In fact, the only means by which
this could be found out would be reading the newspapers of

asi
eel
ors528 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

the time in which professors of all kinds usually published their
announcements. Unfortunately, we have only a relatively small
number of complete files of American newspapers published dur-
ing the eighteenth century. Although for cities like Boston, New
York, and Philadelphia, it is possible to find almost complete
collections of the four or five principal newspapers after 1783,
this is not true of the smaller cities or of the Southern cities. Any
statistics therefore would favor the North unduly as compared
with the South. They would also exaggerate the difference be-
tween the years of peace and the troubled years, since the latter
have left us only fragmentary newspapers of small size, which
were not numerous and did not represent contemporary intel-
lectual life.

81 See The Diary of Ezra Stiles, Vol. Il, pp. 296-304 and 534,
and Vol. V, p. 347; see also Hartford Courant, March 13, 1783.

82 See Harvard Records of the College Faculty under the dates
of Aug. 16, 1787, and Oct. 8, 1787, etc.

88 See Harvard Records of the College Faculty under the dates
of Sept. 18, 1783, and Harrington, The Harvard Medical School,
Vol. I, pp. 285-295. See also The Harvard Medical School in
1788-1789, by D. Head, pp. 2-12.

84 This journal was in such demand that Crévecceur could not
fill all the requests for it that were sent him. See Boston Inde-
pendent Chronicle, July 8, 1784.

85 See Archives of the American Philosophical Society, Letters,
Vol. I, the letter from Rozier. See also Boston Gazette, March 8,
1784.

86 See Harvard Records of the College Faculty under the dates
of Jan. 9, 1784; Sept. 8, 1788, etc.

87 See The Works of John Witherspoon, Vol. V, p. 237; Vol.
VI, Letters 34-128; Vol. VIII, pp. 25, 29, 44, 86, 193, 198, 202,
and 308; and Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol.
REXVALL: ps 125:

88 See The Teaching of Modern Languages in the United
States, by Charles Hart Handschin, p. 14.
89 See the same book, pp. 13-14.

80 See The Harvard Law School, p. 185.NOTES §29

*t See, for example, Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. VI,
p. 167.

See Autobiography of John Trumbull, p. 67 et seq.

8 See Revue rétrospective, July-December, 1789, and Aug. 1
1789.

**See Mémoire, Statut et Prospectus, concernant l’ Academie
des Sciences et Beaux-Arts des Etats-Unis de l Amérique établie
a Richmond, Capitale de la Virginie, presentés par le Chevalier
Quesnay de Beaurepaire (Paris, 1788). See also for further in-
formation New York Gazetteer, Dec. 17, 1784; Virginia Inde-
pendent Chronicle, November and December, 1787; Virginia
Gazette, Sept. 11, 1788; Virginia Gazette or the American Aa-
vertiser, Sept. 13, 1786, and Dec. 13, 1786; and Gazette de
France, Oct. 31, 1788, and Maryland Journal, Sept. 2, 1788.

°° See Transactions of the American Philosophical Society
(1789), between the dates Sept. 26, 1783, and June, 1786. See
also Rozengarten, Early Proceedings of the American Philosoph-
ical Society (1884), after Jan. 13, 1783.

°° See Writings of Benjamin Franklin, Vol. VII, pp. 400-402
and 411-413, and Vol. IX, p. 286; and Writings of Thomas
Jefferson, Vol. V, pp. 87 and 137, and Vol. VI, pp. 23, 96, etc.

87 See especially The Charter, Bye-laws ... of the New York
Society Library (1789). A catalog of the Books Belonging to the
Library Company of Philadelphia (Philadelphia, 1789).

98 See American Magazine, January, 1788.

°° Concerning Hector Saint-John de Créveceur (1735-1813),
see Saint-John de Crévecewur, by Robert de Créveceeur (Paris,
1883), and Saint-John de Créveceur, by Julia Post Mitchell
(New York, 1916). See in particular, in this latter work, the list
(pp. 346-359) of the American magazines and newspapers that
mention Crévecceur.

100 See Miscellaneous Works of David Humphreys (New
York, 1804), pp. 1 and 13.

101 See The Vision of Columbus, by Joel Barlow (Hartford,
London, 1787). See particularly the preface, p. xiil (edition of
1807).

102 See The Poems of Philip Freneau, edited by Fred Lewis

3530 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Pattee (Princeton, 1902). Concerning Louis XVI, see Vol. I,
pp. 167 and 247; concerning the balloons, p. 276, etc.

103 The Anarchiad, a New England Poem. Written in concert
by D. Humphreys, Joel Barlow, John Trumbull, and Dr. Lemuel
Hopkins (New Haven, 1861). The original edition, which is very
rare, was published in 1786. Barlow separated from this group a
short time later.

104 See Popular Churches after the American Revolution, by
J. S. Bassett, already cited.

105 In the Collections of the Massachusetts Historical Society,
Vol. I, Series V, Belknap Papers, p. 60.

106 See zd., Series V, Vol. I, p. 249; and Vol. II, pp. 116-240,
and Massachusetts Spy, Nov. 13, 1788. See also Writings of Ben-
jamin Franklin, Vol. IX, p. 303.

107 See, for example, A Sermon Delivered to the first Religious
Society in Roxbury, December, 1783, by Eliphalet Porter (Bos-
ton, 1784), and A Sermon Preached at Lexington, by Zabdiel
Adams (Boston, 1783).

108 See G. R. Minot, History of the Insurrection in Massa-
chusetts (Boston, 1810), pp. 60-61.

109 See, for example, Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. VI,
PP- 392-394.

110 See, for example, Correspondence of John Jay, Vol. Ill,
p. 217, and Works of Washington, Vol. XI, p. 54.

111 See, for example, New York Journal, Oct. 25, 17873 Nov.
8, 1787, etc.

112 See, for example, The Federalist, pp. 14-19 (Works of
Alexander Hamilton, Vol. XII).

113 See A Study of the Monarchial Tendencies in the United
States, by Louise Burnham Dunbar, University of Illinois Studies
in the Social Sciences, Vol. X, p. 55.

114 See Works of Alexander Hamilton, Vol. I. The original
draft which Hamilton prepared for his speech on June 18, 1787,
in which he says, “The advantage of the monarch is this: he is
above corruption, he must always intend, with respect to foreign
nations, the true interest and glory of the people. Republics liable
to foreign corruption and intrigue. It is said a republican gov-NOTES §31

ernment does not admit a vigorous execution. It is therefore bad,
for the goodness of a government consists in a vigorous execu-
tion,” etc.

115 See Works of Alexander Hamilton, Vol. I, pp. 347-360;
Correspondence of John Jay, Vol. Ill, p. 22

116 See Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787, Reported
by James Madison (New York, 1920), under the dates June 2,
1787; May 31, 1787, and Sept. 17, 1787.

117 See zd., pp. 443-446.

118 See, for example, Pamphlets on the Constitution of the
United States, edited by P. L. Ford (Brooklyn, 1888), p. 248.
Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the
Federal Constitution, by Jonathan Elliot (Philadelphia, 1881),
Vol. II, p. 208. It is also to be noted that the Mémozres de Sully
was one of the most widely read books in America at this time.

119 See, for example, Elliot, Debates, Vol. III, p. 421, and
Essays on the Constitution, by P. L. Ford, pp. 257-279.

120 See Elliot, Debates, Vol. III, p. 422 et seg., and p. 483 et
S€q.

121 See Works of Alexander Hamilton, Vol. XI, pp. 42, 140,
141, 156, 62, 67, 358, 359, and 363; Vol. XII, pp. 14-19 and
256.

122 See same references as for Note 121.

123 See Elliot, Debates, Vol. II, Massachusetts Convention, pp.
209, 421, and 483; Vol. III, pp. 53, 79, 105, 152, 213, and 361.

124 The very particular role that Franklin played inspired a
page of Sainte-Beuve whose accuracy and far-sightedness seem so
remarkable that I think it should be quoted here: “If all those
who conversed with Franklin at Passy had hearkened well to his
precepts and propositions, they would have looked twice before
undertaking a complete remodeling of the Old World. At the
same time we must add (even at the risk of uttering a contra-
diction) that it was difficult for those who heard him not to be
kindled and not to be tempted to reform society radically: for
a too great—simplifier.

 

he himself, in his manners, was a great
“There was nothing about this positive man to discourage
utopianism ; rather, he invited people to it by the novelty and the

    
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    

Pert ee

oie eerie Lee eer bee oes

rere ere ee ey te

ee 2 ad

7.

at

es

ee et oe532 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

perspectives that he seemed to open upon the future. While
he conversed, he made his hearers long to apply his ideas; but
he did not give equally to those who listened to him (the Con-
dorcets and Chamforts, for example) his temperament, his dis-
cretion in details, and his prudence.” (Causerzes du Lundi, third
edition, Vol. VII, p. 181.)

125 See Writings of Benjamin Franklin, Vol. UX, pp. 79, 182,
193.256; etc:

126 See Louis Amable, Une Loge franc-maconne d’avant 1789,
pp. 150-186.

12) Id:.pp. 1-20:

#28 Concerning Gargaz, see Journal de la Littérature francaise
et etrangére (Deux Ponts), May, 1786; Calendar of the Papers
of B. Franklin, Vol. II, pp. 25, 140; Vol. III, p. 29, ete.

129 Mémoures znédits du Duc de Croy, Vol. IV, p. 272.

180 See, for example, Journal de Paris, Oct. 20, 1785; Writ-
ings of Franklin, Vol. IX, from p. 470 on, and especially pp.
495, 503, 575, etc.; Mémozres secrets de Bachaumont, Vol.
XXIX, p. 181, and Vol. XXX, p. 23; and Extrazts des Gazettes
américaines, No. 1 (Paris, 1786).

*81 See the references to Crévecceur in Note gg.

132 See Crevecceur, Lettres d’un Fermier américain, edition of
i7o4,, Vol. 1, p. 220.

*83 The circulation of Crévecceur’s works was incredibly rapid,
and it would take twenty pages to furnish a complete bibliogra-
phy of them. See particularly Le Mercure de France, Jan. 21,
1785, and Jan. 29, 1785.

84 Voyage d’Amérique. Dialogue en vers entre l’Auteur et
l’Abbé (London and Paris, 1786), p. 20 e¢ seq.

*8° See Lettres de Madame Roland, published by Claude Per-
roud (Paris, 1813), Vol. II, p. 688.

*8° Ta Jeunesse de B. Constant, by M. Rudler, pp. 241 and
250.

87 See Euvres complétes de Bernardin de Saint-Pierre, Vol. V,
p- 51; Vol. XI, pp. 147 and 173; Vol. XII, pp. 112-137 and
176-185, and Correspondance de Brissot, (Perroud edition), p.
174.NOTES 533

188 Claude-Frangois-Adrien, Marquis de Lezay Marnésia, 1735-
1810. Poet, utopian, and philanthropist.

189 All this is taken from the information that Brissot gives
about himself in his Mémozres (Perroud edition).

140 Mémoires de Brissot, Vol. I, p. §4.

ad, \V0l.1, pp: 191 and’230:

142 Td., Vol. II, p. 46 and thereafter.

143 The pamphlet was called: Examen critique des Voyages de
M. le Marquis de Chastellux, by J. P. Brissot de Warville (Lon-
don, 1786).

144 Mémoires de Brissot, p. 54.

140 See Correspondance de Brissot (Perroud edition), pp. 140-
146. See Massachusetts Spy, Dec. 25, 1788, and Saint-Jean de
Créveceur, by Julia P. Mitchell, passim.

146 Concerning the efforts of Brissot to establish the Gallo-
American Society in the United States, see the manuscripts rela-
tive to this society in the John Carter Brown Library at Provi-
dence, and the announcements in the newspapers: Massachusetts
Spy (Dec. 25, 1788); New York Journal or Weekly Register
(Dec. 26, 1788), and Hartford American Mercury (Dec. 15,
1788).

147 Concerning the Society of the Friends of the Negroes, see
Mémoires de Brissot, pp. 71-80. Correspondance de Brissot, p.
165-175.

148 Correspondance de Brissot, pp. 167 and 171.

149 See Mémoires de Brissot, pp. 74 and 64; Correspondance de
Brissot, pp. 143-145 and 157.

190 See Correspondance de Brissot, pp. 165-166.

151 Correspondance de Brissot, pp. xlili-xlvi and pp. 179-183.

152 Correspondance de Brissot, pp. 171-179, and Munzstéere des
Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. XXXIV, pp. 6-9.

158 All this is taken from Correspondance de Brissot, pp. 180-
265.

14 See Old Family Letters, Series I, pp. 82-83.

155 See (Euvres de A. Chénier (Dimoff edition), Vol. II, pp.
100-101.

166 Concerning Saugrain and Guillotin, see Writings of B.

   
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
  
   
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
   

Pewee eee ee TT TT Ts tt |

ate eet:

eee ee te

$5 3532534. THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Franklin, Vol. TX, p. 367 et seg.; Nouveau Voyage de Brissot,
Vol. I, p. 376; A Memoir of the Life and Work of Dr. Antoine-
Francois Saugrain (St. Louis), by W. V. Byars; and the article
by N. P. Dandridge, “Antoine-Francois Saugrain de Vigny,” in
The American Surgical Association Bulletin (1904). This infor-
mation and these references were obligingly furnished me by the
Pettus family of St. Louis, who count Saugrain among their an-
cestors.

87 See The Journal of the Friends Historical Society, Vol.
XV, p. 49 et seg.; Vol. XVI, pp. 18-22 and 81-90.

© See Mémozres de Madame de la Rochejacquelin, Vol. I, p. 21.

*°° Journal de Lyon, March 15, April 12 and 27, Aug. 30, Sept.
13 and 27, 1786.

69 See Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. V, pp. iii, 152-
153, 395-397, and 402; Vol. VI, pp. 50-58, and pp. 103-106 on
the happiness of the Indians; Vol. VII, pp. 88-89 and 114; Vol.
XVII, p. 153 e¢ seq., etc.

**! Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol.’I, pp. 154-157.

** See Année Littéraire, Vol. II, pp. 46-48, 256, and 172; Vol.
V, pp- 242-283, etc.

*88 Mercure de France, October, 1788, pp. 11-24. See also Amer-
ican Museum, January, 1788, list of subscribers at the beginning
of this number.

CHAPTER IV,

*See Doniol, Le Comte de Vergennes et P. M. Hennin, pp. 90-
100.

"Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. XXXII,
p- 350.

* See, for example, Recherches historiques et politiques sur les
Etats-Unis de ? Amérique septentrionale, by Mazzéi, Vol. IV, pp.
120-126.

*See Mémoires de Brissot, Vol. II, pp. 137 and 279, and Mé-
mowres de Lafayette, Vol. II, pp. 163, 188, and 220-233.

° See Salisbury Family Memorial, Vol. I, pp. 319-325.

°See Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. V, p. 3313; Vol. I,
pp. 150-160, and Vol. VII, p. 333.NOTES 535

7See Mémoires de Lafayette, Vol. Il, pp. 141, 157, 219, 230,
and 296.

8 See Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. V, p. 331; Mémozres
de Lafayette, Vol. II, pp. 1-12.

9See Mémoires de Lafayette, Vol. III, p. 202 et seq., and
Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. I, pp. 154 and 158; Vol.
VII, p. 226 e¢ seq.

10 See Premiers Mouvements de Bretagne ou Principe des Ef-
forts du Peuple breton contre les Projets de l Aristocratie de
Robe et d Epée (1789).

11 See, for example, Réclamation du Tiers Etat et Supplique
au Roi (1788), Le Despotisme des Parlements ou Lettre dun
Anglais & un Francais, p. 10. Observations sur le Principe qui a
produit les Révolutions de France, de Geneve et d’ Amérique, by
M. Isnard, October, 1789, pp- 4, 5; 38, and 46. See also Mémonzres
de Brissot, Vol. II, pp. 278-280. Correspondance de Brissot, p.
157. Souvenirs sur Mirabeau, by Etienne Dumont, pp. 211 and
297. Mémoires d’un Voyageur qui se repose .-- >, by M. Dutens
(Paris, 1806), Vol. II, p. 317. Mémozres historiques sur la Vie
de M. Suard et sur ses Ecrits, by Dominique-Joseph Garat, Vol.
XXI, pp. 318-320.

12 See Collections of the New York Historical Society for the
Year 1878, pp. 384-387; Hérault de la Nation sous les Aus pices
de la Patrie, p. 221, and Mémoires d’Outre-Tombe (Biré edition),
Vol. I, p. 309. Concerning Robespierre and America, see Mémozres
de B. Barere, Vol. Il, p. 201.

18 See, in Modern Philology, Vol. XV, No. 8 (December,
1917), pp- 91-92, M. F. Baldensperger’s very interesting article,
where this page can be found.

14 See, for example, Observations générales et importantes sur
VAffaire de Scioto (no date) and Etablissements francais dans
les Etats-Unis d’Amérique (press of the Patriote francais, pub-
lished in 1789 or 1790).

15 See Correspondance de Brossot, pp. 458-460.

16 See J. G. Rozengarten, French Colonists and Exiles in the
United States, pp. 19-25, and H. Carré’s article in Revue de
Paris (fifth year, 1898), pp. 310-340. See also ‘“The Methods

«ee WE We536 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

and Operations of the Scioto Group of Speculators,” in Missis-
sippt Valley Historical Review, Vol. I, No. 4; Vol. II, No. 1
(March and June, 1914). Ohio Company Series, Vol. I (pub-
lished by Archer Butler Hulbert, Marietta, 1915), p. lxxv et seq.
“Andrew Craigie and the Scioto Associates” in The American
Antiquarian Society of Proceedings (1913), New Series, Vol.
eM, Part Lf, p. 222.

*T See Le Parlement de Paris établi au Scioto (1790) ; the ar-
ticles in Le Fouet National, Jan. 9, 1790; Le Journal de la Cour
et de la Ville, March 6, 1790, and La Chronique de Paris, May
15 and Aug. 5, 1790; Le Songe d'un Habitant du Scioto publié
par Lui-méme (Paris, 1790). See also Lettre de M. de V. a M.
le C. D. M. a l’Occaston des Observations publiées sur V Etab-
lissement du Scroto (Paris, 1790); Le nouveau Mississippi, par
un Patriote Voyageur (1790); Considérations sur les Fonds pub-
lics des Etats-Unis (Paris, 1793); and Pennsylvania Journal,
June 2, 1790.

*8 Duval d’Espremesnil (1746-1794). He was interested in the
Scioto project, but he died before he was able to set out for
America himself. Concerning his réle, see the article by H. Carré
in the Revue de Paris, Vol. V, pp. 318-340.

* See Mémotres d’Outre-Tombe (Biré edition), Vol. I, pp. 276,
305-309, etc.

*° See zd., pp. 311 and 356, and Giraud, Nouvelles Etudes sur
Chateaubriand, p. 163.

*" See Recherches sur les Causes qui ont empéché les Francais
de devenir libres (1792), by M. Mounier, Vol. II, pp. 22-22.

“* See Mémoires de Lafayette, Vol. I, p. 303 et seg.; Vol. II,
P- 309.

** The edition of 1778, the two editions of 1783, and that of
1790.

“* See Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. VI, p. 10.

*° These pamphlets are entitled Déclaration des Droits du Rot
et de la Nation francaise, précédées de Celles de la Chambre des
Pairs et des Communes d’Angleterre et de Celles des Provinces
unies d’Amérique a l’Epoque de la Révolution, par lV’ Auteur du
Droits des Nations; Projet de Déclaration des Droits de 1 Hommedee etted Lt)

 

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    

537

et du Citoyen, by M. Servan, advocate in the Parliament of
Grenoble (1789); Déclaration des Droits, traduite de Anglais
avec Original a Coté (London, 1789).

26 See Mémoires de Lafayette, Vol. II, p. 303.

27 See especially Mémoires de Brissot, Vol. II, p. 64.

28 See what I. Herzberg says about the influence of the Bible
on the Declaration of Independence in Thomas Jefferson as a
Man of Letters. See also Mémorres de Lafayetie, Vol. II, p. 309,
in which he calls the Declaration of Rights “the Catechism of
France.”

29 See Raynal, Histoire philosophique des Etablissements euro-
péens dans les deux Indes, Vol. VI, pp. 311-330-

80 See the very exact statement of the traces left by the Amer-
‘can declaration on the French texts in La Déclaration des Droits
de V Homme, by G. Jellinek, pp. 39-44. Concerning the Constitu-
tion of Virginia and the Act for Religious Freedom, see Writings
of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. VI, p. 10.

81 See, for example, the monarchist pamphlet, L’Intérét de la
France a une Constitution monarchique (Berlin, July 15, 1791),
in which we find the tirade: “It is not the philosophico-political
dogmas placed at the head of the ephemeral Constitutions of some
few American States, at a time when it was a question of spur-
ring the people to an insurrection, that became the political prin-
ciples of the Americans after the acquisition of their independence.
The object of their government is set forth in the very short pre-
amble of the present Constitution, which has replaced all this
metaphysical trash. The material rejected by the Americans has
been gathered up by the French, and it is with this refuse from
the Americans that the French nation has consented to allow the
constitution of a government to be built, which, if it would not
satisfy the Americans, will certainly be even less satisfactory to
the French, who are as dissimilar from the Americans, and per-
haps more so, as from the Chinese.”

82 See in particular the speech that La Fayette made to the of-
fcers of the Garde Nationale in October, 1789; Extrait dun
Discours adressé par M. Le Marquis de La Fayette, vers la Fin-
a’Octobre, aux Officiers de la Garde Nationale, assemblés chez

Sp iz apigass=

: ~ este =esy ees
iat sia 3s J hee de th etek,

Fase poecargian srs -t-4=2

a ee a

ee Te |538 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Lui, especially p. 5. See, further, Mémozres de Lafayette, Vol. III,
pp. 227-2209.

88 See same pamphlet as above and Mémoire historique de M.
La Fayette (Paris, Year If).

34 Tettres a M. le Vicomte de Noailles sur sa Motion du 4
Aotit, 1789 (Paris, 1789), by M. Cérutti, pp. 3-11.

35 See Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. I, pp. 154-158.

88 See Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. I, pp. 154-158. Note
what Montmorin thought of the réle of Jefferson during those
days (same reference). See, further, Souvenirs d’un Nonagenaire,
by Yves Besnard, p. 353, which seems to attribute a much more
active role to Jefferson. In reality, the two texts are in accord, for
Jefferson attacked the clergy and the nobility at this time but
supported the King. Concerning his moderation, see also Writings
of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. VII, pp. 227, 256, and 371 et seq.

87 Francois Alexandre Frédéric, duc de la Rochefoucauld Lian-
court (1747-1827), peer of France, member of the Institute, fa-
mous for his philanthropy and his activities during the Revolu-
tion. He was president of the Constituent Assembly, and later
emigrated to England and the United States.

88 Courrier francais, Feb. 27, 1790.

89 See Gazette of the United States, April 18, 1789.

40 Concerning the relations between the French and American
Revolutions, see especially Herald of Freedom, July 20, 1790;
Pennsylvania Gazette, Dec. 23, 1789, etc. For praises of France
and translations of French revolutionary documents, see Penn-
syluania Gazette, Oct. 14 and 21, 1789; Gazette of the United
States, March 24, April 21, and Dec. 16 and 23, 1789; Herald
of Freedom, Nov. 17 and Dec. 1, 7, and 15, 1789, etc.

41 See the same articles as above and also Massachusetis Sen-
tinel, July 18, Aug. 5 and 15, Sept. 2, and Oct. 7 and 14, 1789,
etc. This is only an example of what may be found in the line of
French citations and literary extracts in an American newspaper
in 1789. At least thirty newspapers are quite as abundant in
them: Gazette of the United States (Philadelphia), Herald of
Freedom (Boston), Philadelphia Gazette, Boston Gazette, etc.
#2Tt is in the dispatch of July 20, 1789, published by theNOTES 539

Herald of Freedom, that we find this attitude most clearly ex-
plained. We cannot place much confidence in some dispatches
published in the American newspapers at this period which seem
to have emanated from the French government or its agents, such
as the letter in the Massachusetts Centinel, Jan. 4, 1790.

48 Concerning the pressure brought to bear by opinion and the
English government, see Writings of Washington, Vol. XI, pp.
177 and 493; Vol. XII, pp. 25 and 53; Journal of William
Maclay, pp. 249, 349, 350, 386, 394, etc. See Archives des Af-
faires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. XXXIV, p. 10, to the effect
that France was not ripe for liberty; Works and Writings of
John Adams, Vol. XI, p. 563 et seg. Diary of Gouverneur
Morris, Vol. I, pp. 110, 113, 139, 143, and 251.

44 See, for example, Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. VI,
pp. 398, 406, 448, etc. Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-
Unis, Vol. XXXIV, p. 343, etc.

45 See Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol.
XXXITI, p. 104, 223; Vol. XXXIV, p. 154.

46 Td., Supplement 2, Vol. VI, p. 330 e¢ seq.

47 Concerning Moustier’s project, see Archives des Affaires
étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. XXXIV, p. 32 et seq. See also Diary
of Gouverneur Morris, Vol. I, pp. 139-143. A study of the
Archives of Foreign Affairs shows that the bureaus and the min-
ister were silent as to Moustier’s suggestions.

48 See Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol.
XXXIV, p. 154 et seg. These dispatches are remarkable.

49 Concerning this period, see Archives des Affaires étrangeres,
Etats-Unis, Vol. XXXIV, pp. 5-8; Vol. XLIV, pp. 460-500 ;
Vol. XLVII, p. 403.

50 Concerning John Adams, see Archives des Affaires étrangeres,
Etats-Unis, Vol. XXXIV, p. 109; Vol. XXXV, pp. 147 and
375:

51 See Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol.
XXXIV, p. 253.

52 See the account of La Fayette’s attitude and methods in the
Diary of Gouverneur Morris, and especially Vol. I, pp. 165-172,
262-265, etc.

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
    

Sears aagsgasigscerin~

ee eee!

Peer ey Se ts rt

ge ee

PS eer te ee ee es oe

3233745254540 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

58 See a whole series of pamphlets attacking La Fayette: ze
privée, impartiale, politique, militaire et domestique du Marquis
de Lafayette, Général des Blewets, by ¥. Robert, member of the
Society of the Friends of the Constitution of Paris (1790). Con-
cerning the divisions among the moderate revolutionists, see Théo-
dore de Lameth, Mémoires, pp. 106-109.

54 Robert Livingston (1746-1813), of one of the best New
York families, member of the Continental Congress, Chancellor
of the United States. He was a prominent Francophile and a
great democrat.

55 The pamphlet that Morellet hastened to write on this sub-
ject bears witness to this: Letére écrite a l Occasion de l Ouvrage
intitulé Examen du Gouvernement de l Angleterre.

56 See Considérations sur les Gouvernements et principalement
sur Celui qui convient a la France, pp. 14, 16, 22, 34, and 37.
A Monsieur le Comte de Lally Tollendal en Réponse a sa Lettre
a ses Commettants, pp. 117-118, etc.

57 See in particular Extrazts du Journal de la Société dé 1789.
Discours de La Rochefoucauld Liancourt, June 13, 1790, P- 8.

58 See the pamphlets of Mounier and Lally cited above as well
as that of Morellet. See also Lettre 4 M. Mounier (Paris, 1789),
by M. Blin, Deputy from Nantes, in particular pp. 22-23. On
Mounier’s attitude toward the Americans after. 1789, see
Recherches sur les Causes qui ont empéché les Frangavs de devenir
libres (1792), by M. Mounier, Vol. I, pp. 22-24, 93,1: and
200. Concerning the increasing unpopularity of Mounier and his
friends, see Patriote francais, Sept. 8 and 9, 1789, etc.

59 See, for example, Letire de M. Bergasse a ses Commettants ;
Le Financier philosophe et patriote (Paris, 1780), by Mi. Cla:
p- 10; Au Peuple francais sur les Assognats, par un Citoyen des
Etats-Unis (Paris, 1790), p- 12; Lettre écrite au Bonhomme
Richard, concernant des. Assignats, etc.

60 See Idées simples et précises sur le Papier-Monnaie (Paris,
1791), by M..Cérutti. See Réflexzon sur la Dette publique ex-
igible, in Courrier de Provence (September, 1790), No. 193-

61 See in particular Théorie des Etats-Géneraux (Paris), pp.aie Tr

sae a

 

NOTES 541

33 and 50. Considérations sur:les Gouvernements, by Mounier,

22

. a ha @

62 Concerning the executive, see all of the voluminous book by
Necker, Du Pouvoir exécutif dans les grands Etats, especially
Vol. I, pp. 68 and 179-180, and Vol. II, pp. 1-250.: Concerning
the veto see this work and Patriote francais, Sept. 8, 9, and 14,
1789. See, further, the Dzary of Gouverneur Morris, Vol. I, pp.
69, 108, 150, and 165, and in La Feuille du Jour, the article of
Jar. '3,° 1701, etc:

63 See, in Etrennes de la Nation, Extraits dune Lettre du
Général Washington a M. le Marquis de La Fayette.

64 See especially Le Patriote francais, Jan. 2, 1790.

65 Concerning the moderation of the Americans, see Vie privée
du Marquis de La Fayette. (Paris, 1790), pp. 48-523; Journal de
la Cour et de la Ville, June 19, 1790; and Courrier francais,
supplement to its number of Nov. 19, 1789. Concerning La
Fayette, Washington, and Franklin, see Actes des Apotres ( 1789),
No. 5, p. 12; (1790), Vol. VIII, p. 45 et seg.; Avis aux Fazseurs
de Constitutions (1789), par Benjamin Franklin; Je crais la
Banqueroute, pp. 26-27, etc.

66 Concerning the role of the United States and the Americans
from. a religious point of view during the Revolution, see Sow-
venits d’un Nonagenaire, Mémoires de Franco Yves Besnard,
Vol. I, p. 353.

87 See Ceuvres Completes de Voltaire, Vol. XII, pp. 419-423;
Vol. XVIII, pp. 498-501; Vol. XX, pp. 311-313.

68 See Mémoires de Lafayette, Vol. III, pp. 59 and 202.

°° See Vol. I, pp. 15, xxiv, 146-150, 283-293, etc., in Nouveau
V oyage dans les Etats-Unis de l’ Amérique septentrionale, by J. P.
Brissot (Warville).

70 See zd., Vol. I, pp. xii and 24-31.

71 Jean-Paul Rabaut, called Rabaut Saint-Etienne (1742-
1793). See Guvres de Rabaut Saint-Etienne, Vol. .V, p. 368.
Concerning the criticisms of public men by means of American
examples, see L’Ami du Peuple, Oct. 2, 17993 L’Union, Feb. 22,
1790; Journal universel, Oct. 31, 17923 L’Orateur du Peuple,
No. 48, etc.

arte

    
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    

sds esesacaetsbte ibaa

oiebiss2e5235e3233 risscsssiiosss

. ee

Se

Sree ee to ts to

ee

roar

2&4 25¢

, tos so
<7 Oe eT542 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

~

72 See, for example, the account in Le Patriote francais, June
13, 1790.

73 Logographe, June 19, 1790.

74See Extrait du Journal de la Société de 1789. Speech by
La Rochefoucauld Liancourt, delivered June 13, 1790.

‘eid.

78 See Courrier de Versailles a Paris, by M. Gorsas, July 26,
1790; pp. 371-380.

ld,

78 See among these criticisms Actes des Apédtres (1790), Vol.
VI, No. 157; Folies d'un Mois, Dec. 3, 1790, etc.

79 See Chronique de Paris, June 17 and 19, 1790.

80 See Condorcet, Eloge de M. Franklin (Paris, 1791).

81 See L’Ami du Peuple (1790), Vol. I, No. 134.

82 Patriote francais, June 13, 1790.

83 See Souvenirs de la Terreur de 1788 4 1793 (Paris, 1841),
by M. Georges Duval, Vol. II, p. 185.

8 Vie privée, impartiale, politique de M. le Marquis de
Lafayette (Paris, 1790), pp. 48-51.

85 See the whole series of pamphlets published by the Franklin
Press; for example, La Vie privée et politique de J. R. Hebert
(Paris) is from the Franklin Press, Year II. See also Recueil de
Documents pour U’Histoire du Club des Jacobins de Parts, by BP.
A. Aulard, Vol. III, p. 291; Vol. IV, p. 489; and Suite des
mémoires du Général Dumouriez, p. 326.

86 This play is in the Bibliothéque Nationale, Mss. fr. INGA;
Collection Solienne, No. 9284. It contains twenty-three pages,
and its title is L’Imprimerie ou la Féte de Franklin (anonymous).

8™ See Chronique de Paris, Feb. 22, 1791, and introduction to
Franklin’s Autobiography.

88 See Tribut de la Société Nationale des Neuf Seurs, July 14,
17990, pp- 51-59.

8° Concerning Marsillac and his action, see The Journal of the
Friends’ Historical Society, Vol. XV, p. 49; Vol. XVI, pp. 18
and 81; and Memorandum written by William Rotch.

20 In addition to the two sources cited above, see Chronique de
Paris, the editorial for Aug. 12, 17913; Patriote francais, edi-NOTES 543
torials for Jan. 8, 1790; Le Postillon, Feb. 11, 17913 and Péti-

tion respectueuse des Amis de la Société chrétienne, appelés
Quakers, presented to the National Assembly, Thursday, Jan.
10, 1791.

91 See at the headquarters of the Society of Friends at London
the collection of Marsillac’s manuscripts. I feel a deep gratitude
to this Society for having put its archives at my disposal with the
greatest generosity. Among these documents we find a correspond-
ence between Marsillac and the General Assembly of the Depart-
ment of Loir-et-Cher (at the end of 1792) and enthusiastic let-
ters from Grégoire recommending the Quakers to the authorities
of that department. The whole plan for the installation at Cham-
bord is explained in them. The intention was to create a School
of Moral Industry. See also Journal of the Friends’ Historical
Society, Vol. XVI, p. 21 et seg.; Memorandum written by Wil-
liam Rotch, pp. 56-60. See also in the manuscripts of Marsillac
his letter of May 1, 1791, in which he speaks of the establishing
of the Quaker sect at Paris.

82See Journal d’une Bourgeoise pendant la Révolution (pub-
lished by Edouard Lockroy, Paris, 1881), p. 103.

93 See La Bouche de Fer, patriotic and fraternal newspaper,
and especially the prospectus in the heading. See also Vol. II of
this publication, No. 2, p. 14, etc.

4 See Lettres de Madame Roland (published by Claude Per-
roud), Vol. II, pp. 77, 80, 273, 688 et seq., and 744.

5 See particularly La Feuille vallageowse, Aug. 24, 1791; and
Jan-112, 1792, etc.

°6 See Diary of Gouverneur Morris, Vol. 1, pp. 29; 34-36, 428-
429, etc.

97 See, for example, Observations sur le Principe qui a produit
les Révolutions de France, de Genéve et d’Amérique (Evreux,
October, 1789), by M. Isnard, Engineer of Bridges and High-
ways, and De la République et de la Monarchie, a pamphlet with-
out date but published in 1789.

°8 See the preface to Vol. III of Lzfe and Writings of Thomas
Paine.
°9 Td, and Annales patriotiques, July 14, 1791.

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    

BSstzaigszgagigigo’s teeters se sss t=ee

ae ee er eee ee,

eee mee ee ry Fe tg

ee ee aed

ee ee

een re eee

a544. THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

100 For the discussions of the Assembly concerning American
commerce, see Courrier de Provence, Feb. 13, 17913 Annales
patriotiques, Jan. 27, 1791; Journal du Soir, Feb. 13, 1791;
Courrier francais, Feb. 24 and March 2, 1791, etc.

101 See Diary of Gouverneur Morris, Vol. I, p. 513.

102 See Writings of Washington, Vol. XII, p. 5 et seq.; Vol.
XI, p. 493, etc.

103 See Diary of Gouverneur Morris, Vol. I, pp. 249, 139-143;
and 262-295. At that time Montmorin and La Fayette were com-
pletely at the. mercy of Morris, to whom they had confided too
many secrets. See also Mémoires de Lafayette, Vol. Il, pp. 8-12.

104 See Diary of Gouverneur Morris, Vol. I, pp. 139-143 and
249, and Archives des Affaires. étrangeres, Etats-Unis, Vol.
XXXV, pp. 301-305.

105 See Diary of Gouverneur Morris, Vol. I, p. 275.

106 See Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Ums, Vol.
XXXV, pp: 301-304; Vol. XXXVI, pp. 266-268, etc.

107 Concerning Gouverneur Morris and his activities, see the
excellent dispatch from Otto in the Archives des Affaires
étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. XXXV, pp. 301-3053 and Diary of
Gouverneur Morris, passim. For his opinion of the people, see
Vol. I, pp. 110 and 545 et seq.; concerning the Queen, Vol. I,
p- 100; concerning the King, pp. 436-438, etc.

108 See Diary of Gouverneur Morris, Vol. I, p. 4923 Vol. I,
pp. 9-11, etc., and Writings of Washington, Vol. XII, p. 203,

109 See Writings of B. Franklin (Smyth edition), Vol. X, p. 66,
letter to D. Le Roy.

110 See Stockbridge Western Star, Dec. 15, 1789.

111 See Stockbridge Western Star, Dec. 7, 1790, and Gazette
of the United States, Aug. 18, 1790.

112 See Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol.
XXXV, p. 647.

118 Concerning the parties in the United States at this period,
see Political Parties and Party Problems in the United States,
by Y. A. Woodburn, pp. 1-10.

114 See Journal of Maclay, pp. 18-22.

115 Concerning the American Senate, see Archives des AffairesNOTES 545

éetrangeres, Etats-Ums, Vol. XXXIV, p. 354; Vol.. XXXV, pp.
66 and 301-303. See also the Journal of Maclay, passim, and in
particular pp. 89, 233, etc.

6 See Journal of Maclay, pp. 249 and 349-350, and Writings
of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. I, p. 279, ete.

117 See Chapter Three, Note 114, and Writings of Thomas
Jefferson, Vol. I, pp. 270-283 and 417 e¢ seq.

18See Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol.
XXXY, p. 3755. ete.

119 For the attitude of the Senate, see Journal of Maclay, who
was himself a senator and whose testimony cannot be doubted,
since it is borne out by a series of facts; see pp. 74, 379 and 412
(concerning the consular convention with France), 381, 382 (con-
cerning the question of tonnage and the Senate’s desire to break
the alliance with France), and finally, 386 and 397, which are
irrefutable documents; etc.

120 See Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol.
XXXV;, p. 301.

121 Concerning Fenno, see Life and Correspondence of Rufus
King, Vol. I, pp. 400-430, 501-503, ete. For much information
on Fenno, I am indebted to Miss Frances Ward of Evanston,
Ill., who possesses a remarkable collection of papers and docu-
ments concerning this period of American history and who is
preparing a study on Fenno. Concerning Freneau as a journalist,
see, in Johns Hopkins University Studies, The Political Actii-
ties of Philip Freneau, by Samuel E. Forman, passim, and Writ-
ings of Thomas Jefferson, VOLPI pe 354) Ole ky psa 7i7ks
Writings of Madison, Vol. VI, p. 24, etc.

122 For a better example of the Republican polemic, see Fre-
neau’s National Gazette (1791-1792), and, for the Federalist
side, The Gazette of the United States (same years). See also the
Diary or Loudon’s Register of New York, which published in
June, 1792, Paine’s Rights of Man.

128 Concerning the Jefferson-Adams quarrel, see Writings of
J. Q. Adams, Vol. I, pp. 65-110, and Writings of Thomas Jef-
ferson, Vol. VIII, p. 243.

aso234l4SeSess

Peer errs The erry Sere tet)

oe oe

ed

  
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

op Sa dgepeyrHe

ee eo eee ee

ot oe ee

Teter e ee oe ee ee

wha dee tess wees

roe

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
  

a= ee +546 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

124 See Life and Writings of Thomas Paine, Vol. III, pp. 101-

109.
125 See The Political Writings of Joel Barlow (New York,

1796), p. 92 ez seq.

126 See Recueil de Documents pour Histoire du Club des Jaco-
bins de Paris, by F. A. Aulard, Vol. III, pp. 350-351.

127 See, in the Massachusetts Historical Society, the manuscript
journal of Castorland.

128 See, for example, Description topographique de six cent
mille Acres de Terre dans l’Amérique septentrionale (prospectus,
1792) and Plan de Vente de trow cent mille Acres de Terre sit-
uées dans le Comté de Northumberland et d’ Huntington (1794)-
Concerning La Fayette, see Correspondance inédite de Lafayette,
p. 193. On B. Constant, see La Jeunesse de B. Constant, by M.
Rudler, p. 483. Concerning Mme. de la Tour du Pin, see Journal
dune Femme de cinquante Ans (published by A. de Liedekerke,
Beaufort, 1913), passim. Concerning Madame de Genlis, see
Mémoires inédits de Madame la Comtesse de Genlis, Vol. IV,
p. 129. Concerning the Sulpicians, see The Sulpicians in the
United States, by Charles G. Herbermann, pp. 15-23.

129 See, for example, Mercure de France, March 3, 1793;
Journal encyclopédique, Jan. 30, 1793, and pamphlets such as
Les Aventures politiques du Pére Nicaise (Paris, 1793), P+ 21,
etc,

180 See Adresse aux Anglais, par un Représentant de la Nation
frangaise (Paris, 1791), pp. 7-8.

181 See Recueil de Documents pour [Histoire du Club des
Jacobins de Paris, by F. A. Aulard, Vol. III, pp. 290 and 307,
and Annales patriotiques, Feb. 7, 1792.

182 See Courrier des quatre-vingt trois Départements, March 6,
1792.

133 See Annales patriotiques, Feb. 7, 1792.

184 See Courrier des quatre-vingt trois Départements, April 20,
1792.

185 See on this subject the very curious testimony of Genet
himself in Life and Writings of Thomas Paine, Vol. IV, p. 12.
136 See La Trompette du Pére Duchéne, No. 92, Aug. 18, 1792.NOTES 547

187 See, for example, Lettre d’un Quaker américain a un Re-
publicain francais (Paris, 1792).

188 See Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol.
XXXVI, pp. 480-500.

189 Michel-Ange-Bernard Mangourit was a revolutionist from
the beginning. He was sent to the United States as Consul at
Charleston; from there he went to Valais, and then to Italy. Con-
cerning his activities in America, see “The West in Diplomacy,’
by F. J. Turner, in the American Historical Review (1898), Vol.
III, passim, and in particular pp. 570-580, 629, etc.

140 Similar celebrations took place in many other large cities.
For those of Boston and New York, see Boston American A pollo,
Jan. 3, 1793, and Boston Columbian Sentinel, Jan. 26, 1793.

141 Aj] this is taken from Reminiscences of Charleston, by
Charles Fraser (Charleston, 1854), pp. 39 and 40 et seq.

142. See Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol.
XXXVII, p. 295 e¢ seq.

143 See id., same pages and pp. 393-395:

144 See National Gazette, April 20, 1793: Massachusetts H1s-
torical Society, Vol. Il, Series 5; Belknap Papers, Vol. Il, p.
325; Writings of Madison, Vol. I, pp. 251-253, ete.

145 This fact is related by La Rochefoucauld Liancourt in
Voyages dans les Etats-Unis d’ Amérique (Paris, Year VIII),
Vol. VI, p. 8.

146 See, for example, The Boston American Apollo, Jan. 11,
1793:

147 Concerning the enthusiasm in America in 1793, see W rit-
ings of James Monroe, Vol. I, pp. 251-254, 271, 277, ete. See
especially Massachusetts Centinel, June 23, 1793; Stockbridge
Western Star, Jan. 15 and April 16 and 23, 1793; Pennsylvania
Gazette, July 10, 1793; Gazette of the United States, May 25,
1793; General Advertiser, April 26 and May 31, 1793:

148 See Turner, The West in Diplomacy, p. 639.

149 See Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Ums, Vol.
XXXVII, p. 434 et seq.

150 Jq7., Vol. XX XVIII, pp. 35 and 80-94.

151 Tq. pp. 112, 158, and 402-406.

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

ee er eet Se er Pes te Te,

Pere ee ere et ery ye te

es]

sS5558s57405 58 060

re

aL.

ee et es

a7 OY ee eT548 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

152: Td., Vol. XXXIX,'pp. 137-140.

153 See Notes on the Life of Noah Webster, compiled by Emily
E. F. Ford, edited by Emily E. F. Skeel, Vol. I, pp. 366-369.

154 See Morse, Federalist Party in Massachusetts, p. 101 et seq.,
and Life and Correspondence of Rufus King, Vol. I, pp. 460-
470.

155 See Diary of Gouverneur Morris, Vol. Il, pp. 45-55 and

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
  
 
 
 
 
   

go-60; and Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol.
XXXIX, p. 159; Annales patriotiques, Nov. 20, 1793.

158 See, for example, The West in Diplomacy, by ¥.: Turner,
pp- 639-640.

157 See Diary of Ezra Stiles, Vol. Ill, pp. 491 and 496; Mr.
Mellen’s Thanksgiving Sermon, Nov. 20, 1794; A Discourse on
the Fall of Papacy, by R. Fleming (Boston, 1794), etc.

158 See Reminiscences of Charleston, by Charles Fraser, p. 40;
Pennsylvania Gazette, July 10, 1793; New York Daily Adver-
ser, duly 12, 1793, etc.

159 Noah Webster, lexicographer, pamphleteer and journalist
(1758-1843).

160 William Willcox, a lawyer from New York, famous for
his sensational attacks on France from 1792 to 1798. He. had
begun by being a warm defender of France. See his article in
the Federal Gazette, June 13, 1793.

‘61 Webster was led to found a Federalist newspaper in 1793
in order to defend the policy of his party and criticize France.
Wolcott prompted him and helped him. Concerning this enter-
prise, see Notes on the Life of Noah Webster, by E. KE. F. Ford,

: Vol. I, pp. 364-370.

182 See Writings of James Monroe, Vol. I, ps 251. See in par-
ticular the series of articles signed “A Republican” in the
Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer (1794), etc.

88 See Le Défenseur de la Constitution, by Maximilien Robes-
pierre (1792), pp. 328-329.

®* On the religious unity of all the revolutionary doctrines,
see Les Orsgines des Cultes Révolutionnaires, by A.. Mathiez,
pp- 9 and 21; on the Girondists, zd., p. 75.NOTES 549

165 See Recueil de Documents pour l Histoire du Club des Jaco-
bins de Paris, by F. A. Aulard, Vol. IV, p. 273 e¢ seq.

166 Tn Nouveau Voyage dans les Etats-Unis de Amérique
septentrionale, by J. P. Brissot, Vol. L, p. xxiv, we read: “The
prosperity of a society is always in proportion to the degree of
liberty, which in turn is in inverse ratio to the extent of the
powers of the government.”

167 Concerning this mysterious affair, see the account of Paine
himself, whom there is no reason for doubting, since all the docu-
ments that can be found confirm his statements and prove the
bad faith of Gouverneur Morris. See Life and Letters of Thomas
Paine, Vol. III, pp. 150-215. The letter from Gouverneur Morris
in the Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. IV, p.
91, shows that, far from seeking to aid him, Morris tried only
to harm him. See also zd., Mémoires et Documents, Etats-Unis,
Vol. X, p.:162.

168 See Recueil de Documents pour l Histoire du Club des Jaco-
bins de Paris, by F. A. Aulard, Vol. IV, p. 411 e¢ seq.

169 See Feuzlle villageowse, Jan. 3, 1793-

170 See Républicain francais, 2 Fructidor, Year II.

171 Alphabet des Sans-culottes ( Paris,s¥ ear:I1),) pi aa.

172 Entretiens d'un Citoyen de Philadelphie, by Citizen Maurin,
employee in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

173 See Le Chansonnier de la Montagne (Paris, Year III), pp.
37 and 69; La Lyre républicaine (Paris, Year III), pp. 163 and
NG fike

174 Concerning Robespierre’s intentions with regard to Amer-
ica, see Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Ums, Vol.
XXXIX, pp. 159, 255-260 and 284.

175 Td., Vol. XL, pp. 298-302; Vol. XLVI, pp. 407-412.

179 Tqd., Vol. XL, pp. 264, 290-295, and 299-302; Vol.” XLI,
p- 17-

177 See the description of the situation in which Fauchet found
himself, in his dispatches and those of his colleagues, id., Vol.
XLI, pp. 387 and 375-377; Vol. XLII, p. 322; Vol. XLII, pp.
147-152 and 151-153; Vol. XLVII, pp. 410-418,

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
  
 
 
    

Pert errr eet er. Pr re ted

Paes

a es

saves ses SRS

Ses eee

oP eet 2 Ss

he a ee ee

mo eS nt ee Ss

ee re rr

oo tet pe pepzecgns suede

=S 58?550 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

178 Tq,, Vol. XLI, p. 99; Vol. XLIV, pp. 476-527; and Vol. Il
(Supplement 1), pp. 136-150.

179 See id., Supplement 1, Vol. II, pp. 135-150, and Vol. XLIV,
pp. 263-268 and 487-515.

180 See Diary of Ezra Stiles, Vol. Ill, pp. 497 and 518.

181 See The order of the Exercises of Commencement, July 20,
1791 [at Harvard]; The Harvard Advocate, 1913-1914, pp. 76-
79 (very curious article by Mr. Baldensperger on Nancreéde) ;
Providence Gazette, July 8, 1792.

182 See A History of Columbia University (1904), p. 753 The
Teaching of Modern Languages in the United States, by Charles
H. Handschin, p. 22.

183 See The Teaching of Modern Languages in the United
States, pp. 13-14.

184 Concerning Quesnay de Beaurepaire and his works, see
Avis impartial aux Citoyens, adressé aux honorables Membres
du Comité de Subsistance de Paris, Aug. 19, 1789; Second Avis
impartial aux Citoyens ou Contrepoison (no date); Trotsiéme
Avis impartial aux Citoyens (no date); Quatriéme Avis umpar-
tial aux Citoyens (no date). All these pamphlets are signed by
Quesnay and contain details on his life and attitude. He an-
nounced this series as a periodical, but no subsequent numbers
have been found.

185 See Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. IX, pp. 291 and
297; Life and Works of John Adams, Vol. VIII, pp. 516-517,
etc.

186 See The American Museum: A Letter to a Young Lady
(October, 1792); Study on the Education of Youth (November,
1792), by Noah Webster, pp. 282-284. For teachers of dancing
and French, see, for example, New York Daily Advertiser, Oct.
20, 1790, and Nov. 9, 1791; New York Journal, Aug. 28, 1791,
etc.

187 Concerning the importation of French books at this period,
see the curious information contained in Mathew Carey, Author,
Editor and Publisher, by Earl Bradsher (1912). The catalogues
of books consulted furnish supporting evidence; see in particular
those of the New York Society Library for 1791, 1792, 1793;NOTES 551

and the catalogues of Carey in the American Mercury for 1791
and 1792 (there is one for each month). These are the most typ-
ical, for New York and Philadelphia were then the two principal
centers of the book trade in the New World.

188 See, for example, Columbian Magazine, February, 1790, pp.
82-87; November and December, 1791, pp. 293 and 381; April,
1792, pp. 225-228, etc. Charlotte, a Tale of Truth, by Mrs.
Rowson (Philadelphia, 1794), The Power of Sympathy (Bos-
ton, 1789).

189 See Modern Language Notes, Vol. XX XV, pp. 10-18, the
article by Prof. Schinz on Nancréde and his Abele francaise.
The Harvard Library possesses a copy of L’Abeille.

190 See, for example, Voyage dans les Etats-Unis d’ Amérique,
by La Rochefoucauld Liancourt, Vol. I, pp. 148-152 and 316-320,
etc.

191 See, for example, the collection, Muscellaneous Works,
Prose and Poetical, by a Young Gentleman of New York (1795),
by J. B. Linn, in which there are real lyric qualities and a ro-
manticism that is sometimes delightful. See further 4 Famuly
Tablet (Boston, 1796), by Abiel Holmes, and Poems on Several
Occasions by John Swanick, Esq. (Philadelphia, 1796), espe-
cially pp. 38, 45 and 120, etc.

192 See Transactions of the American Philosophical Soctety, the
list of members at the beginning.

193 Concerning the theater, see New York Daily Advertiser,
Jan. 1 and Feb. 4 and 22, 1791, etc.; Boston American A pollo,
Nov. 9, 16, and 23, and Dec. 7, 1792.

194 See in particular the archives of the French Benevolent So-
ciety of Philadelphia, founded Jan. 1, 1793, in which we find
picturesque information concerning the Société des Grivois
founded in the same city in 1794 by Frenchmen.

195 See in the collection of the Pennsylvania Historical Society
the papers relative to the two French lodges from Santo Do-
mingo, established at Philadelphia between 1792 and 1794, the
Amenity and the Lodge of Saint John of Jerusalem. Concerning
the conflicts between the French Masons and the American lodges
in the United States, see, for example, Proceedings of the M. W.

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    

HeSsEasssazgzszgsprtpicus552 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Grand Lodge of Ancient York Masons of the State of Varginia,
by John Dove (Richmond, 1874), pp. 151 et seq., 181, etc.

196 See Boston Herald of Freedom, April 22, 1791; State Ga-
zette of North Carolina, Feb.°5, 17893 Argus, Aug. 21 and Sept.
4, 1792, etc.; Nouveau Voyage de Brissot, Vol. I, p..121.

197 See The Sulpicians in the United States, by C. G. Herber-
man, pp. 38-51.

198 See Salem Gazette, July 22,1794; Stockbridge Western
Star, Feb. 28, 1794; Northampton Hampshire Gazette, Jan. 160,
1790; letter from John Fenno to Col. J. Ward (collection be-
longing to Miss Frances Ward of Evanston, Ill.). See the very
typical sermon by Samuel Stillman: Thoughts on the French
Revolution, A Sermon, Nov. 20, 1794 (Boston).

199 'Taneuy de la Boissiére, after having been a notary at Santo
Domingo, emigrated to the United States. There he wrote articles
and’ pamphlets; later he returned to France. The only known
copy of his Niveau de l’Europe et de Amérique septentrionale
is at the Bibliothéque Nationale. See Archives des Affaires
étrangeres, Etats-Unis, Vol. XLV, pp. 80-84.

200 See The Poems of Philip Freneau, edited by F. L. Pattee
(Princeton, 1902), Vol. III, p. 102.

201 See, for an example of the Federalist pamphlets, John
Quincy Adams, Publicola (Writings of J. Q. Adams, Vol. I,
pp. 65-110), and Columbus (id., Vol. I, pp. 149-176); for an
example of the Republican pamphlets, see in particular Madison,
Helvidius (Writings of J. Madison, Vol. V1, p. 138 et S€g.) +

202Tn addition to the sermons of Stillman and Mellen cited
above, see that of J. Morse, The Present Situation of the Other
Nations, A Sermon, Feb. 19, 1795, -and. that of S. West, 4
Sermon, Feb. 19, 1795.

203 See Writings of Samuel Adams, Vol. IV, pp. 253-358, 368,
etc.

204 Concerning the attitude of the Federalist leaders, the respon-
sibility of Hamilton, Jay, and Washington, see Jay’s Treaty,
by Samuel Flagg Bemis (New York, 1923), and especially pp.
70-76, 198-205, etc.

Hy
;
:NOTES 553

20° See Writings of James Monroe, Vol. I, pp. 285, 293-296;
Vol. II, pp. 1-10 (his instructions).

206 Td., Vol. II, pp.1-30, etc.

207 Td., Vol. Il, pp. 34-51.

GHAPTER, V,

1 See Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, Vol. Il,
Pp- 352, 354; 452-et seg.; Vol. Ill, p. §4; Archives des Affaires
étrangeres, Etats-Unis, Vol. X XV, 64-70.

2 See Archives des Affaires étrangeéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. XXXI
complete, in which Otto, the French chargé-d’affaires, explains
his negotiations with Jay in Vol. XXXII, p. 186; Vol. XLIV,
pp. 465-470. Concerning Jay’s views in 1787, see zd., Vol.
XXXII, p. 33 ef seg.

See Writings of Washington, Vol. XII, pp. 340, 418 ef seq.,
403, etc.

*See Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, Vol. Il,
pp. 351 and 452; Vol. III, p. 119 e¢ seq., and especially Vol. IV,
p- 199 et seg. and 208. See Writings of Madison, Vol. VI, pp.
130-135, and The Life of John Jay, Vol. I, pp. 297-300.

* Concerning Jay’s treaty, see: the book by Samuel Flagg
Bemis, Jay’s Treaty (New York, 1923), in which the role of
Jay is analyzed with the greatest clearness and a perfect impar-
tiality. See especially Mr. Bemis’ opinion concerning the negotia-
tions as a whole and their results, pp. 260-270.

® See Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, Vol. IV,
p- 144.

™See Writings of Washington, Vol. XIII, pp. 76-78. See also
the newspapers of the time; for example, The Boston Independ-
ent Chronicle for April, 1795, and following months. See also
Reminiscences of Charleston, by Fraser, p. 45.

8 See Writings of Washington, Vol. XIII, p. 76.

©The Philadelphia General Advertiser, better known under its
other name, The Aurora, was founded in 1790 by Franklin Bache,
grandson of Franklin. From its beginning this newspaper distin-

  
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
  

f ‘ 24

- : ot se : Peres
oo PSTETreoritit. ree wert. besns 22 ee et

Per rr ere ee SP ele Pe ee bee frzeTssTe : E

peer ep ey ty Tt

eo

PN ee ee eee es ee)

2aa25

— ER TS TT554 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

guished itself among the other publications by its interest, the
abundance of news that it contained, and the value of its articles.
In the first number Bache defines the policy of the newspaper
thus: “The Liberty of the press is the stronghold of Liberty.”

The Aurora was to have divisions on: (1) internal politics,
(2) external politics, (3) agriculture, (4) commerce, (5) indus-
try, (6) the arts, (7) the sciences, (8) intellectual works, (9)
anecdotes, (10) poetry.

The Aurora was faithful to this program until 1798. In that
year, Bache, who, in spite of the epidemic of yellow fever, had
not been willing to leave his post, succumbed to the disease.
Duane succeeded him with no less vehemence but less talent.
The Aurora was the unofficial organ of the French legation.

10 See Writings of Samuel Adams, Vol. IV, pp. 365-375. Con-
cerning Dickinson, see in particular Writings of Dickinson
(1801), Vol. II, which contains his Letters of Fabius complete.

11 See Philadelphia General Advertiser, November and July 7,
1795; New York Daily Advertiser, Feb. 14 and May 14, 1795;
Providence Gazette, April 18, 1795, etc.; and also in The History
of Philadelphia, by Sharf and Westcott, the descriptions of the
last months of 1795 and the first months of 1796.

12 See Poems of Freneau, Vol. Ill, pp. 129, 1325 and 134.

13 See Works of Alexander Hamilton, Vol. V, pp- 190-491.

14 See Archives des Affaires étrangeres, Etats-Unis, Vol. XLIV,
pp. 508-517, and Vol. XLVIII, pp. 259-263, etc.

15 William Cobbett (1766-1835), English publicist, who was
anti-revolutionary during his stay in America and was very
active in serving the Federalists and the Minister of Eng-
land there. Returning to England in 1804, he became a rad-
ical. See Mathew Carey, Editor... , by Earl L. Bradsher, up
to p. 20, for the life of Cobbett.

16 See The Dangers Which Threaten Europe, from the French
of Mallet du Pan, by James Rivington (New York, 1795), and
The Democrat, or Intrigues and Adventures of Jean le Nour
(New York, Rivington, 1795). See also Stockbridge Western
Star, Sept. 15, 17953; Gazette of the United States, May 27, 1790;
Porcupine’s Gazette, March 13, 1797, ¢te.NOTES 555

17 Charleston City Gazette, Nov. 9, 1795:

18 See, for example, Gazette of the United States for the years
1795, 1796, and 1797, under the dates of Jan. 10, Feb. 16, March
12, April 18, and July 9, 1795; Feb. 19, March 5, and May 18,
1796, etc. See also Porcupine’s Gazette.

19 See Boston Columbian Sentinel, Salem Gazette, and Stock-
bridge Western Star for 1795-1796. These are the most typical
organs of Federalism in Massachusetts. In them one can follow
day by day the campaign against French Jacobinism. See the
analysis of this campaign in The Boston Independent Chronicle,
March 30, 1795:

20 See The Federalist Party in Massachusetts, p. 101. On the
United States as the chosen people, see 4 Sermon on the Freedom
and Happiness of America, Feb. 19, 1795, by Abiel Holmes, and
also A Sermon Deliwered on the Ninth of May, 1798, by
Jeremy Belknap, and A Discourse by Eliphalet Porter (Boston,
1798), etc.

21 See Chapter IV, and Notes 156-159.

22 See The Revolution in France Considered in Respect to its
Progress and Effects, by an American (New York, 1794).

28 See Answer to Paine’s Rights of Man, by H. Mackensie,
Esquire, To which is added a Letter from P. Porcupine (Phila-
delphia, 1796), and The Federalist Party in Massachusetts, pp.
107-109, as well as Dissertation on the Character, Death and
Resurrection of Jesus Christ, by Jeremy Belknap (Boston, 1795).

24 See Federalist Party in Massachusetts, pp. 85-95, and New
England and the Bavarian Illuminati, by Vernon Stauffer, passim,
for the whole book is devoted to the study of the spread of Bar-
ruel’s book and ideas. Abbé Augustin Barruel (1741-1820),
writer and pamphleteer, who published his great anti-revolution-
ary work at London in 1797: Mémoires pour servir a  Histowre
du Jacobinisme, five volumes.

25 See The Wonderful Works of God, A Sermon, by David
Osgood (Boston, 1794). A Discourse Deliwered Feb. 29, 1795; by
David Osgood (Boston, 1795), and The Present Situation of the
Nations of the World Contrasted with Our Own. A Sermon
Delivered, Feb. 19, 1795 (Boston, 1795), by Jedediah Morse.556 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

26 See The Altar of Baal Thrown Down, or the French Naton
Defended Against the Pulpit Slander of David Osgood, by
Citoyen de Novion (Boston, 1795).

27 See the list contained in The Federalist Party in Massa-
chusetts, pp. 101-106.

28 See in particular The Forester, an American Tale, by Bel-
knap (1796), pp. 100-108. Observations on the Dispute Between
the United States and France, by R. Goodloe Harper (Philadel-
phia, 1797). See in the newspapers Hamilton’s Horatius (Writ-
ings of Alexander Hamilton, Vol. V, pp. 180-184) and his
Camillus (Writings of Alexander Hamilton, Vol. V, pp. 190-
250), and the very good résumé of the results that the publica-
tions of Genet’s instructions brought about, in Vol. II of Supple-
ment 1, of Correspondance politique (Etats-Unis), Archwes des
Affaires étrangéres, pp. 130-140.

29 See Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. ALI,
p. 126:

30 Td., Vol. XX XIX, pp. 255-260 and 466-470; Vol. XL, pp.
298-302; Vol. XLI, p. 17; Vol. XLIV, pp. 487-527.

81 [d., Vol. XLIV, pp. 502-527.

82 Td., Vol. XLIV, pp. 263-268.

83 Td., the pages cited above seem to exculpate Fauchet. Vol.
XLIV, pp. 508-512, confirms this impression, which Adet’s state-
ment in his dispatch of the first of Vendémiaire, Year VI, ren-
ders almost a certainty. (Jd., Vol. XLVIII, pp. 259-263.)

34 See zd., Vol. XLIII, pp. 323, 371, 411, 425, and 473; Vol.
XLIV, pp. § and 487-510.

85 See zd., Supplement 1, Vol. II, pp. 130-140, and regular
series, Vol. XLIV, pp. 57, 73, 219, and 508-510; Vol. XLVI,
PP: 342-343:

86 See zd., Vol. XLV, pp. 82-83 and 252. Adet’s remark con-
cerning Jefferson is taken from Vol. XLVI, p. 502.

87 See zd., Vol. XLV, pp. 16-18.

88 See zd., Vol. XLV, pp. 41, 52, and 141; Vol. XLVI, pp.
130, 131, and 342. Concerning his proclamation, see Vol. XLVI,
pp- 383, 393, and 400.

89 See the account of the fluctuation of public opinion fromor eri

 

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    

NOTES

day to day by Liancourt in Voyages dans les Etats-Unis
d’ Amérique (Paris, Year VIII), Vol. V, passem, and particu-
larly, pp. 113, 150-152, 183, 233-234, 236-237, and 238; Vol.
VI, pp. 89-90 and 327; Vol. VII, pp. 68-72, etc. Concerning the
democratic spirit in the West, see The Lexington (Kentucky)
Gazette for 1796 and 1797, and especially Sept. 6, 1797; The
Rights of Men (Paris, Ky.); The Washington Mazrror, etc. To
form an idea of the opposition press, see The Philadelphia
Aurora, edited by Bache; The Boston Independent Chronicle,
The Charleston City Gazette, and Greenleaf’s New York Argus
for the years 1796-1797. Concerning Baltimore see the entire file
of The Maryland Journal for the years 1795-1796 and the
Gazette francaise, 27 Thermidor, Year II. On South Carolina,
see Charleston City Gazette and Reminiscences of Charleston, by
Charles Fraser (Charleston, 1854), pp- 42-49. Concerning Tam-
many and other associations, see New York Argus, July 5, 1790,
etc.

40 See The Political Writings of John Dickinson (Wilming-
ton, 1801), pp. 167-286.

41H. H. Brackenridge, born in Scotland in 1748, came to the
United States in 1753, studied at Princeton, where he made the
acquaintance of Freneau, and later studied law. He settled in the
West and became an intelligent, democratic, and moderate judge.
He published Modern Chivalry, mentioned in this work, in 1796.

42 See in particular pp. 147-149 of Modern Chivalry, where
these ideas are expressed.

48 For this point of view clearly and honestly expressed, see
Monroe’s address to the Convention, Writings of James Monroe,
Volatit ap. sll.

44 Td., Vol. II, pp. 108 et seq., 162, 167 et seg., and 194-205.

45 See id., Vol. II, pp. 227-230, 236-255, and 310-314.

46 See id., Vol. II, pp. 162, 347-359, and 407-410; concerning
his relations with the French government and the stratagems of
the latter, see zd., Vol. II, pp. 432-440, 440-447, 460-462, 484-
488, etc.

47 Concerning Monroe’s patience, see zd., Vol. III, pp. 8-10,

48, 54, 62, 19 et seq., etc.

Perce yess tte eer fore tes

soe 254 535927

org eee

Ps

Se rgcges sper dgepcer ye

Sa es a ee ee558 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

48 See zd., Vol. III, p. 48 et seg. See also Archives des Affaires
étrangeéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. XLV, pp. 150, and 182-190; Vol.
XLVI, pp. 100-110.

49 See zd., Vol. XLIV, pp. 524-527; Vol. XLV, pp. 141, 172,
348-250, 381, and 411; Vol. XLVI, pp. 144, and 425; Vol.
XLVII, pp. 32, 247, etc.

°° Concerning the life of Paine at this period, see the impar-
tial information furnished by Monroe (Writings of Monroe,
Vol. II, pp. 440-447; Vol. III, pp. 150-170, etc.). We cannot
place great confidence in what Conway says about Paine.

°t Writings of Thomas Paine, Vol. III, pp. 256-285, 328-344,
286, 312, 345-367, etc.

°2 See Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. XLVI,
pp. 130 and 425; Vol. XLVII, p. 32.

°8 See Paris pendant la Réaction thermidorienne et sous le Di-
rectoire, by A. Aulard (Paris, 1898), Vol. III, pp. 299, 571, 595;
672, and 700; Vol. IV, pp. 23, 44, 57, 75, 84-86, 104, 162, etc.
The account of the confusion between John and Samuel Adams
occurs on p. 700, Vol. III.

°* See, for example, La Gazette Nationale, (Aug. 31, Sept. 9,
Oct. 2, and Dec. 13, 1795, and Jan. 31 and March 29, 1796),
which blames Jay’s treaty but praises the American people and
sets forth the necessity for an understanding. See also Mercure
francais for 15 Vendémiaire, 4 and 20 Messidor, Year III; Ga-
zette de France for 19 Germinal, Year III; 25 Fructidor, Year
III; and L’ Historie for 15 Pluvidse, Year IV, etc.

°° See Paris pendant l’Année 1796, No. 5; Tableau de Paris,
June 24 and July 9, 1796; Courrier Républicain for 21 Vendé-
miaire, Year III. See also Mémoires du Comte de M. (Paris)—
the memoirs of the Comte de Moré de Pontgibaud—pp. 248-249.
See the opinions that Chateaubriand held and wrote at this time:
(Euvres complétes de Chateaubriand (Paris, 1834), Vol. I, pp.
15 and 1595.

°6 See especially Les Mémoires du Comte de M., pp. 224-225,
226-227, and 228-257, and Journal d’une Femme de cinquante
Ans (Journal de le Marquise de la Tour du Pin de Gouvernet),
pp- 5-25; Vol. II, pp. 69-72.NOTES 559

57 See Journal d’une Femme de cinquante Ans, pp. 1-43; Vol.
II, pp. 85-87.

58 Id., passim, and especially Vol. I, pp. 333-341, and Vol. I,
pp. 1-89.

59 (Euvres completes de Chateaubriand (1834), Vol. I, p. 153.

COT des p15 4.

61 7d., pp. 153-156. The criticism of the Quakers is contained
in Note 3, p. 151.

62 Td., Vol. II, pp. 110-124 and 252-262.

88 See Lettres écrites des Rives de l’Ohio, by Claude-Frangois-
Adrien de Lezay Marnésia (Paris, Year IX), pp. 1-8 and 113-
144.

8 See Note 55 of this chapter.

65 See Rozengarten, French Colonists and Exiles in the United
States, the chapters devoted to Gallipolis and the Asylum.

66 Jean Gabriel Peltier, a famous royalist pamphleteer, editor
of Les Actes des Apétres. Died in 1825.

87 See Tableau de la Situation actuelle des Etats-Unis d’Amer-
ique (Paris, Year III, 1795), Vol. I, pp. 118 and 36-38.

68 Charles Pictet de Rochemont: (1755-1824), after having
served in the French army (1775-1783), returned to Geneva,
where he exercised certain public functions and was appointed
Counselor of State. He endeavored to develop agriculture in his
country and exerted a real influence, as much by his example
as by the works that he published. In 1814 he represented the
Geneva government at Paris. Later he was sent to the Congress
of Vienna. On his return, he was appointed commander of the
armed forces of Geneva. The quotations concerning the United
States are taken from pp. 26-37 and 116-119 of his Tableau de
la Situation actuelle des Etats-Unis de ! Amérique.

8° See Des Prisons de Philadelphie, par un Européen (le Cito-
yen La Rochefoucauld Liancourt). There were at least three edi-
tions of this pamphlet. See also Un Philanthrope a’ Autrefows, La
Rochefoucauld Liancourt, by ¥. Dreyfus, pp. 108-128.

70 Adrien de Lezay Marnésia (1770-1814), son of Claude-
Francois-Adrien, Marquis de Lezay Marnésia, was a pamphle-
teer of the opposition under the Directory and a friend of

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

srs 2 <2 Spe sy ee fe aea-Se
estat + etre ti ere teehee ee eS,

eetatabesses

Teer ere eT tt Tet st.)560 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Roederer. He later became reconciled with the Empire and was
appointed prefect.

71 Comte Pierre-Louis Roederer (1754-1835). See his pamphlet,
Du Gouvernement (no date), p. 53.

72 Jean-Francois de Laharpe (1739-1803), noted literary critic,
monarchist in 1795. See his pamphlet, Owz ow Non (no date).

“8 Jean-Jacques, Comte Lenoir Laroche (1749-1825), a mod-
erate monarchist, who, after having tried to defend Louis XVI
and escaped from the Terror, enjoyed a certain prominence under
the Directory. He was Minister of Police and a member of the
Conseil des Anciens. Later he was reconciled with the Empire and,
at the time of the Restoration, to the Bourbons, who made him
a peer of France.

™ See Des Moyens de régénérer la France, by Citizen Delacroix
(Paris, Year V), pp. 302-306.

8 Joseph-Marie, Comte de Maistre (1754-1821), gentleman of
Savoy. See his pamphlet, Considerations sur la France (London,
1797), p- 65.

76 See Actes des Apétres, July 2, 1797; La Quotidienne, Feb.
14, 1797; Paris pendant 1797, Jan. 14, 1797; L’Historien, 15
Nivose, 23 Nivose, and 20 Germinal, Year V; Courrier universel,
3 Floréal and 18 Messidor, Year V; Mercure universel, 10 Ger-
minal, Year V; Journal de Paris, 29 Floréal, Year V, etc.

7 See in particular Nouvelles politiques, April 25 and May 17,
1797-

78 Claude-Emmanuel-Joseph-Pierre, Marquis de  Pastoret
(1756-1840). At first a violent revolutionist, he became a con-
servative in 1792 and emigrated. Under the Directory he was
a member of the Five Hundred and was outlawed as a royalist.
Senator under the Empire, he was made a peer by the Bourbons.
See his speech in the newspapers of the time, all of which pub-
lished it; see, in particular, Paris pendant 1797 under the date
of June 30, 1797.

79 Pierre-Samuel Dupont de Nemours (1739-1817), a noted
economist, friend of Turgot, and one of the principal writers of
that school. He also held official positions under Louis XVI and
during the Revolution. Under the Directory, he was a memberNOTES
of the Conseil des Anciens and edited L’Hzistorien, a conserva-
tive and philosophic newspaper. He emigrated to America and
died there.

80 Concerning the attitude of the conservatives, see the articles
by Ségur cited above, which are very typical. On the attitude of
the Directory, see the responses of the unofficial and Jacobin
papers. The most typical seems to me to be that contained in
the issue of Le Journal des Hommes libres for 7-8 Messidor,
Year V, in which the whole situation is discussed and the Direc-
tory cleared of blame.

81 See in particular Fauchet’s complete report to the Directory,
Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. XLIV, pp.
460-520.

82 See zd., Vol. XLIV, pp. 460-462.

pei Seetd.. VOL. LV, ps Al.

84 See Voyage aux Etats-Unis de l Amérique, 1793-1798, by
Moreau de Saint-Méry, passim, and especially pp. 38, 41-44,

304, 305, 308, etc.

85 Note the extraordinary analogy between p. 299 of the
Voyage de Moreau de Saint-Méry and p. 101 of the Mémozres
de l'Institut National des Sciences et Arts, Sciences morales et
politiques, Vol. II (Paris, Year III), which contains Talley-
rand’s memorandum concerning commercial relations of the
United States with England. Concerning Talleyrand’s reception
in the United States, see Journal d'une Femme de cinquante Ans,
Vol. II, pp. 18-20, 25-35, 63-64, and 69-70; Mémoires du Comte
de M., pp. 230-235, 236-246, etc. See also Voyage de Moreau de
Saint-Méry, which contains many opinions that derive from Tal-
leyrand or at least from the intimacy between Talleyrand and
Moreau.

86 See Mémoires de l'Institut National des Sciences et des Arts,
Sciences morales et politiques, Vol. Il, pp. 101-102.

Slide, ‘p. 100.

88 See, for example, Nouvelles politiques, April 17, 17973
Journal d’Economie politique, 30 Germinal, Year V; L’His-
torien, 18 Germinal, Year V, etc.

ert Pe ee ae es

ys ey ray
$adsbsGoseSsh-stsSegszapey

ere

ee ee eb es Ft

ee a

et ees Dee ee eee ee ee 2

a er

Pyare eee

sSrapip Oey

sigtareteseperscsSesnvsa resets562 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

89 See Décade philosophique, 30 Pluvidse, 10 Ventose, 30 Ger-
minal, Year IV; 20 Pluvidse, 30 Germinal, 30 Floréal (letter
from Marsillac), 20 Messidor, Year V; La Sentinelle, 16
Nivose, 5 Messidor (letter from M. de Bulow), Year V; Le
Républicain francais, 10 Frimaire, Year VI; Writings of Thomas
Paine, Vol. III, p. 368; Writings of Jefferson, Vol. IX, p. 355;
Gazette francaise de New York, May 8, 1797.

90 Ferdinand-Marie Bayard, born in the Orne in 1768, was a
writer and an officer of the regular army, but this book seems
to be the only permanent monument that he left. Voyage dans
lV’ Intérieur des Etats-Unis, by Ferdinand Bayard (Paris, Year V,
1797).

1 See, for example, Annales pairiotiques, March 17, 28, and
29, May 23, and Nov. 12, 1796; March 24 and April 9, 1797;
Le Républicain francais, 22 Vendémiaire, 8 Brumaire, 17 Nivose,
2 Pluvidse, Year V; 2 Vendémiaire, Year VI; Louvet’s Sen-
tinelle, 4 Vendémiaire, 30 Vendémiaire, 19 Brumaire, 24 Floréal,
16 Prairial, 8 Thermidor, Year IV, ete.

92 See Mémoires de Barras, Vol. Il, p. 85; Mémoires de La
Réveillére-Lépaux, Vol. Il, pp. 257-267; Mémoires historaques
et diplomatiques de Barthélemy, by Soulavie, p. 60; Writings of
J. Q. Adams, Vol. II, pp. 27, 71, 168, 175, and 185; Wratengs
of James Monroe, Vol. Il, pp. 130-135, 460, 456, 463, and 484;
Vol. III, p. 624; Writings of Thomas Paine, Vol. Il, p. 268.
The testimony of La Réveillére-Lépaux, although it is the most
precise and most detailed, cannot be accepted without some res-
ervations, since it does not agree with contemporary documents
and accords too glorious a role to its author.

93 See Works and Writings of John Adams, Vol. II, pp. $37,
540, §54, 557, and 558; Vol. X, pp. 114-116 ez seq.

4 See the account of these transactions in the remarkable book
by Albert Beveridge, The Life of John Marshall, Vol. I, pp. 24-
357:

®5 Concerning Talleyrand’s attitude see, in addition to his com-
munication to the Institute, which is very typical, his Mémozres

(published by the Duc de Broglie), pp. 236-239 and 240, andNOTES 563

Mémoires, Lettres inédites et Papiers secrets (Paris, 1891), pp.
125 and 129.

86 See Works and Writings of John Adams, Vol. VIII, pp.
§70 et seq., 617, 624, and 677-692; Vol. IX, pp. 11 e¢ seq., 29,
Ba,.etc.

87 Letombe was French Consul at Boston for a long while. He
was a personal friend of John Adams and enjoyed great esteem
in the United States. Concerning Letombe and Adams, see Works
and Writings of John Adams, Vol. IX, pp. 12-14.

98 Alexandre-Maurice Blanc de la Naulte, Comte d’Hauterive,
Counselor of State (1751-1830). Consul at New York in 1792.
After his dismissal from this post, he remained in America, where
he later served as a secret agent for France. He was very close to
Talleyrand, who took him into the Ministry of External Rela-
tions. He played an important part under the Empire and was
in favor with the Restoration. Concerning his secret activities and
his friendship with Talleyrand, see Papers de Barthélemy, Vol.
VI, p. 251, and Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol.
XLVII, pp. 393-397; Vol. XLVIII, pp. 16, 141, 265, 310-320,
369-370, etc. Concerning General Collot’s mission, see Works and
Writings of John Adams, Vol. IX, pp. 12-15, and Marc de Vil-
liers du Terrage, Les derniéres Années de la Loutsiane frangaise,
p. 365 et seq. Concerning the other propagandists, see Archives
des Affaires étrangéres, Vol. XLVII, pp. 198 and 268-276; Vol.
XL, pp. 285 and 286; Vol. XLI, pp. 13-20; Voyage de Moreau
de Saint-Méry, pp. 247-250, 252-253, etc.

89 See Gazette francaise de New-York, Feb. 8, 1797; and
New York Herald, Jan. 7, 1797-

100 See Annals of Congress, Vol. VI, pp. 1340 et seq., 2302,
2714, 1778, etc. See also Gordy, Polztecal History of the United
States, Vol. I, pp. 296-297, which quote the passage from Gal-
latin transcribed here.

101 The newspapers which give the most accurate idea of the
violence of the struggle and in which we find all the characteris-
tics here mentioned are The Gazette of the United States, Porcu-
pine’s Gazette, on the Federalist side, and The Aurora and The
Boston Independent Chronicle, on the Republican side.564 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

102 See in particular the protest that Volney felt obliged to pub-
lish on the subject of this rumor, Aurora, Feb. 8, 1796.

103 See The Russels of Birmingham, by J. Jeyes, pp. 251-255
and 270-280; Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. X, p. 35;
The Nature and Danger of Infidel Philosophy, by the Reverend
Timothy Dwight (New Haven, 1798); Porcupine’s Gazette,
June 7, 1798, etc.

104 See Poems of Philip Freneau, Vol. III, pp. 135, 139, 151,
etc., and Writings of James Monroe, Vol. III, pp. 383-457.

105 For examples of these rumors, see Columbian Centinel
(Boston), Jan. 24, 1798.

106 See Voyage de Moreau de Saint-Meéry, p. 263.

107 See concerning the situation at this time, Archives des Af-
faires étrangéres, Vol. XLIX, p. 333 e¢ seq.

108 Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. XII, p. 347.

109 See Porcupine’s Gazette for February, 1798.

110 See Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. X, pp. 63, 219, etc.
Concerning the South, see, for example, the files of the Lexzng-
ton (Kentucky) Gazette for 1798.

111 See Works and Writings of John Adams, Vol. VIII, pp.
570-620.

112 See Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. X, pp. 51, 58, 63,
and 77, and Gordy, Political History of the United States, Vol. I,
p- 319.

118 See The Aurora for April and May, 1798. There was a
whole campaign in this direction during these months. See espe-
cially the series of articles signed Sydney.

114 See the praises of Souvaroff and Nelson in The Gazette of
the United States, April-July, 1799; Porcupine’s Gazette, Jan.
29, 1799, and the following weeks; the Columbian Centinel
(Boston) for June, 1799, and the number of Sept. 25, 1799.

115 See this caricature in the Archives des Affaires étrangeéres,
Etats-Unis, Vol. L, p. 39.

116 See zd., Vol. L, pp. 285-286; Vol. LI, p. 13; Voyage de
Moreau de Saint-Méry, pp. 251-253.

117 See in The Lexington (Kentucky) Gazette, November and
December, 1798, the series of articles signed “Timoleon.”NOTES

118 See What Is Our Situation and What Are Our Prospects?
(May, 1798), by Joseph Hopkinson; An Address to the People
of Maryland (Philadelphia, 1798), by John Dennis; Mr. Har-
per’s Speech on the Foreign Intercourse Bill (1798).

119 See Works of Alexander Hamilton, Vol. VI, pp. 259-318.

120 See in particular The Gazette of the United States (Phila-
delphia), April, 1798, to December, 1799; The Columbian Cen-
tinel (Boston), The Commercial Advertiser (New York), The
United States Chronicle (Providence), same dates.

121 No newspaper gives a more exact and complete idea of the
way the Federalist polemic was carried on than The Gazette of
the United States for the years 1799-1800. On July §, 1799, it
printed an article on France which contained the declaration that
the war then in progress was a war of religion, “a bloody promul-
gation of a new faith, as was that of Mohammed in the seventh
century.”

122 See Vernon Stauffer’s book on this question, New England
and the Bavarian Illuminati. Although it is somewhat confused,
it contains very complete information on the entire campaign of
the Congregationalist clergy.

123 See The American Geography, by Jedediah Morse (1789).
See the praises of France in The Present Situation of the Other
Nations of the World Contrasted with Our Own. A Sermon,
by Jedediah Morse (1795).

124 See the speech by Thayer reported in The Newport Mer-
cury, Oct. 16, 1798, and in The Hartford Courant, Aug. 6, 1798.
As examples of anti-French sermons, see 4 Discourse on the
National Sin, by William Linn (1798) 3; The Duty of Americans,
by the Reverend Timothy Dwight; The Devil Let Loose (Boston,
1799); A Discourse by Eliphalet Porter (1798), etc. Note the
gibes of the Republicans on this alliance of all the churches
against France, Boston Independent Chronicle, Sept. 30, 1799-

125 All this is only a résumé of New England and the Ba-
varian Illuminati, by Vernon Stauffer.

126 There is not a single American newspaper, but, from Au-
gust, 1798, on, frequently printed articles, discussions, or litet-
ary or historical extracts on this subject. But the newspapers of

pee he Ba ee Dy hee Se, Sesh. t-
Sass ptsepszgayprpsossirersrs er sss tl Feags
—— -==2- —_

ty tebshs2 cs sist

Se i es

ee 2

eee

ad

2348 +3243:

et566 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

New England were the most ardent. See in particular The Massa-
chusetis Mercury of Boston.

127 See An Impartial Review of the Causes and Principles of
the French Revolution, by an American (Boston, 1798), pp- 1-35
and passim.

128 T etters on Various Interesting and Important Subjects, by
Robert Slender (Philadelphia, 1799).

129 See Poems of Freneau, Vol. IV, p. 202.

130 See The Second Warning (Paris, 1798) and Letters from
Paris to the Citizens of the United States, by Joel Barlow (Lon-
don, 1801).

181 See in The Aurora of Philadelphia, March 19, 1799, the
very curious article signed “A Republican” against the danger-
ous union of Federalist politicians and the clergy and against
the tendency of the American President to act as a pope.

182 See New England and the Bavarian Illuminati, by V. Stauf-
fer, pp. 250-300. See also American Mercury, Sept. 26 and Nov.
1 and 14, 1799; The Bee, Dec. 20 and 27, 1799; Aurora, Nov.
16 and 25 and Dec. 6 and 9g, 1799; Connecticut Courant, Nov.
30, 1799; Massachusetts Mercury, Dec. 27, 1799, etc.

188 See A View of the New England Illuminati (Philadelphia,
1799), and Voyage de La Rochefoucauld Liancourt, Vol. IU, p.
260.

134See Works and Writings of John Adams, Vol. VIII, p.
624; Vol. IX, pp. 11, 24, 29, 33, 35, etc. See also Notes on the
Life of Noah Webster, compiled by E. E. F. Ford, edited by
E. E. F. Skeel, Vol. I, pp. 504-505.

185 See Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol.
XLIX, pp. 333 and 393-404; Vol. LI, pp. 40-50. The phrases
quoted are from Vol. XLIX, pp. 393-404.

188 See Paris pendant le Révolution thermidorienne et sous le
Directoire, Vol. IV, pp. 767 and 791; Vol. V, p. 21, etc.

187 See Décade philosophique, 30 Prairial, Year VI, p. 570 ef
seqg.; Journal des Hommes libres, 22 Prairial, Year VI; La
Chronique universelle, 22 and 23 Prairial, Year WI; Paris
pendant 1798, May 30, 1798; Le Spectateur du Nord, 3 Comple-NOTES 567

mentaire, Year VI; Patriote francais, December, 1798, pp. 441-
463, etc.

138 See Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. L,
pp. 118-124 and 270-285; Vol. LI, pp. 40-50, and The Life and
Letters of H. G. Otis, by Morison, pp. 168-170.

189 See Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol.
XLIX, pp. 999-1007.

140'See td., pp: 51, 131 e¢ seq:

141 See in particular zd., Vol. L, pp. 270-285; Vol. XLIX, pp.
99-107; Chronique universelle, 22-23 Prairial, Year VI; Décade
philosophique, 20 Thermidor, Year VI; Courrier universel, |
Vendémiaire, Year VII; Journal des Débats, 25 Pluviose, Year
VIL.

142 See Eclaircissements donnés par le Citoyen Talleyrand a ses
Concitoyens (Paris, Year VII).

143 See Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. EI,
PP: 49-51.

144 See zd., Vol. LI, pp. 311, 330, and 380-397.

145 See in particular L. Hauteval, Citoyen francais au Gouv-
ernement et au Peuple américain, Nouveau Tableau spéculatif
de V'Europe, by General Dumouriez (1798); Pacification de
Europe, by the Citizen Flassan (Paris, Year VIII), especially
pp. 65-67; Nécéssité de la Paix, by J. T. Bruguiére (Paris, Year
VIII), etc.

148 See La Clef du Cabinet, 13 Pluvidse, Year VIII, and Pars
sous le Consulat, by A. Aulard, Vol. I, p. 133.

147 See a typical example of this concept of Washington's
character in L’Historien, 10 Pluvidse, Year IV.

148 See, as example of Washington’s unpopularity, Paine’s pam-
phlet against him, Letter to Washington, in Writings of Thomas
Paine, Vol. III, pp. 213-252.

149 See Mémoires de M. de Bourrienne, Vol. II, pp. 183-185.

150 Félix Faulcon (Deputy to the States-General, in the Coun-
cil of the Five Hundred, and after the 18 Brumaire, in the Corps
Législatif) always showed himself to be a moderate monarchist,
and under the Directory came out clearly against the govern-
ment. For his speech and his motion, see Gazette de France, 20568 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Pluvidse, Year VIII; Journal des Hommes libres, 14 Pluvidse,
Year VIII, etc.

151 See Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Vol. LI, pp. 311-320.

152 See Mémoires de M. de Bourrienne, Vol. Il, pp. 183-185;
Paris sous le Consulat, by A. Aulard, Vol. I, pp. 149 and 267.

153 Qn Elisa Bonaparte’s relations with Fontanes, see Bzogra-
phie des Contemporains (Paris, 1836), Vol. II, under the name
of Fontanes, p. 1713.

154 See Eloge funebre de Washington (delivered in the Tem-
ple of Mars by Louis Fontanes, Year VIII), pp. 28-29.

155 See Journal des Débats, 14 Pluvidse, Year VIII.

156 See Gazette de France, 20 Pluviose, Year VIII; Journal
de Paris, 9 Fructidor, Year VIII.

157 See Paris sous le Consulat, by A. Aulard, Vol. I, p. 284;
Clef du Cabinet, 8 Ventose, Year VIII, etc. See also Eloge de
Washington, by G. F. Dubroca (Paris, Year VIII). Dubroca,
born in 1757, was a bookseller and writer. He had a mystic and
religious temperament and assisted in founding the Theophilan-
thropic Church.

188 See Archives des Affaires étrangéres, Etats-Unis, Vol. LI,
pp- 380-397. Concerning Otto’s attitude, see zd., Vol. II, Supple-
ment 1, pp. 130-152. For the attitude of Hauterive, see his book,
De l’Etat de la France, pp. 91, 144, 145, etc.

189 Concerning this celebration, see Albert-Firmin Didot’s Souw-
venir de Jean-Etienne Despréaux (1894), p. 48, and Napoléon
et Marie-Louise, Souvenirs historiques de M. le baron de Méne-
val (Paris, 1844), Vol. I, pp. 33-39; Journal du Comte Roe-
derer (Paris, 1909), pp. 21-23; Journal de Paris, 10 Vendémiaire,
Year IX, etc.

160 See in Napoléon mconnu, by F. Masson, the notes that Na-
poleon took on the United States and the documents that he cop-
ied from the newspapers when he was a young man, pp. 461, 471,
500, and 503.

161 See, for example, what Jefferson himself said on this sub-
ject: Writings of Jefferson, Vol. X, pp. 311-313 and 315.

162 Concerning this campaign against Jefferson, see Writings

of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. X, p. 77; Life and CorrespondenceNOTES
of Rufus King, Vol. III, p. 299. See also, as a typical example

of what was being written at the time, the long series of articles
published from June to September in The Columbian Centinel
(Boston) under the title “Jeffersoniad”’ and signed “Demos.” All
the newspapers of the period discussed this question, but those
of New England were the most relentless.

163 This attitude on the part of the American democrats is well
defined by Jefferson; see Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. X,
p. 145; Vol. XIII, pp. 236-238.

164 Concerning Volney, see Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol.
X, p. 35; The Russels of Birmingham, by J. Jeyes, p. 270 et
seq.; Volney’s book entitled Tableau du climat et du sol des
Etats-Unis d’ Amérique (Paris, 1803). See the preface, pp. i-xvi,
which contains his judgment on the United States.

165 Concerning the Duc de La Rochefoucauld Liancourt and his
travels in America, see Journal dune Femme de cinquante Ans,
Vol. II, pp. 60-62, and Liancourt’s own book, Voyage dans les
Etats-Unis d’ Amérique, especially Vol. I, p. 87; Vol. III, pp. 49,
E18, 119, 140, 71594, and 2603 Vol. IV, p. 275; Vola V, pp-12ss
175, and 235; Vol. VI, pp. 206 and 207; Vol. VII, p. 109. See
further Voyage de Moreau de Saint-Méry, pp. 243-246.

166 See Writings of Thomas Paine, Vol. IV, pp. 236-246, 304-
355, etc.; Paris sous la Réaction thermidorienne et sous le Di-
rectoire, by A. Aulard, Vol. I, pp. 159, 163, and 176-178; Paris
sous le Consulat, by A. Aulard, Vol. I, p. 295; Journal de Paris,
13 Ventose, Year VIII. For the extracts from the works of
Franklin or articles concerning him, see, for example, Journal du
Bonhomme Richard, Year III and IV, passim (in particular 3
Complémentaire, Year III). Décade philosophique, 10 Prairial,
Year V, p. 483; 20 Prairial, Year VI; 10 Vendémiaire, Year
VII; Journal d'Economie politique, 10 Ventose, Year V, pp. 25-
38, 10 Fructidor, Year V, p. 36; Messager du Soir, 1 Vendémi-
aire, Year V; Journal de Paris, 2 Nivose, Year IV; Gazette na-
tionale, 2g Messidor, Year VI, etc.

167 See preceding note, and for the citation, Journal du Bon-
homme Richard, 3 Complémentaire, Year VIII.

168 See Mémoires du Duc de Montpensier, preface, pp. XI-xv,

. yt: : tear eel BY
Seseet aw eter 2 ees FS = 28 at

ery? en
=SS55 2494525

rerer yes

+2 5 5

eS eslel se Zlers

ed

Re ete te eer ee re eo te.

me ot ee

= ORL SY570 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

 

and pp. 210-215; Antoine-Philippe d’Orleans, Duc de Montpen-
sier (1755-1807). He distinguished himself at Valmy, was im-
prisoned at Marseilles, and emigrated to America and later to
England. His brother, the Comte de Charolais, and his other
brother, Louis Philippe, Duc d’Orléans (1773-1850), accompa-
nied him to America.

169 Abbé J. L. Bonnet de Fréjus emigrated during the Revo-
lution. He was naturalized as an American citizen, but returned
to France under the Consulate. He published various works in
favor of Bonaparte and the Bourbons, of whom he believed him
to be a partisan.

170 See (Euvres completes de M. le Vicomte de Chateaubriand
(1834), Vol. VII, pp. 22-26.

171 See zd., pp. 279 et seg. and 290-291.

172 See Voyages dans la haute Pennsylvanie, by an adopted
member of the Oneida Nation (Paris, Year IX)—in reality by
Créveceur—Vol. II, pp. 183-184.

113 See (Euvres completes de M. le Vicomte de Chateaubriand
(1834), Vol. X, p. 139, and zd., Vol. X, pp. 5-6.

114 See The Teaching of Modern Languages in the Unijed
States, by Charles Hart Handschin, pp. 19-20; for the discon-
tinuing of the announcements of French professors in the Amer-
ican papers, see Porcupine’s Gazette, in which the only adver-
tisements of French professors or translators are accompanied by
the assurance that said Frenchman is not a democrat (for ex-
ample, May 24 and 25, 1797). For attacks against French pro-
fessors and the ways in which they were intimidated, see The
Gazette of the United States during December, 1799. See, fur-
ther, Harvard Records of the College Faculty under the dates
June 22 and 23, 1798, Nov. 9, 1798, etc.

175 See The Russels of Birmingham, by J. Jeyes, pp. 270-2725
Tableau du Climat et du Sol des Etats-Unis, by C. F. Volney,
pp. x-xii; An Oration, by Leonard Woods; Life and Letters of
Simeon Baldwin, p. 418.

178 See Porcupine’s Gazette, Aug. 1, 1798, and Education, a
Poem, Spoken at Cambridge, July 18, 1799, at the Request of
the Phi Beta Kappa, by William Bigelow, p. 12.NOTES 571

117 See Harvard Records of the College Faculty, dated June 23,
1798, and The Teaching of Modern Languages in the United
States, by Charles Hart Handschin, pp. 19-22.

178 See 2d. \p- 20.

179 See in History of the Harvard Law School, by C. Warren,
the very faithful picture of the conditions under which law was
studied from 1770 to 1800 in the United States (Chapters VI,
VIII, and IX-XIII). Concerning the study of medicine, see Theo-
dore Harrington, Harvard Medical School, a History, passim,
and in particular pp. 340-380 and 431.

180 See Early Proceedings of the American Philosophical So-
ciety under the dates of April 15, 1796; Jan. 20, 1797, and April
18, 1800.

181 See Mémoires du Comte de M. (Moré de Pontgibaud), pp.
236-240.

182 See Journal of the Friends’ Historical Society (1919), Vol.
XVI, pp. 18-22 and 81-90, and Marsillac’s manuscripts in the
Library of the Friends at London. See also Journal of Eliza
Drinker (edited by H. D. Biddle), under the dates of May 4,
1797, and June 19, 1798. See what the American newspapers
hostile to France said of this affair: Porcupine’s Gazette, June 7,
1798.

188 Concerning the Tilly-Bingham scandal, see:

Printed sources: Journal of Eliza Drinker, April 27, 1799;
Philadelphia a Century ago, by K. M. Rowland (Lippincott's
Magazine, Vol. LXII, pp. 804-808); The Life and Letters of
H. G. Otis, by S. E. Morison, Vol. I, pp. 125-145.

Manuscript sources: Brief of the Tilly-Bingham case in the
archives of the Philadelphia Historical Society. This is the most
fruitful source, and I am very grateful to the administration
of the Philadelphia Historical Society for having allowed me to
see and make use of these unpublished manuscripts.

184 See, for example, the description of this contrast in the let-
ters of Mrs. B. Stoddert, which K. M. Rowland quotes in Phila-
delphia a Century ago.

185 See the catalogues of the Library Company of Charleston
(1770, 1772, 1811); A Supplementary Catalogue of the Books572 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Belonging to the New York Society Library, Which Have Been
Added Since the Year 1793 (New York, 1800); Catalogue of
the Library of the Late J. Buckminster (Boston, 1812). The
catalogues of the booksellers are also very interesting. Those of
M. Carey, the principal importer of French books, appeared fre-
quently in The Aurora. The catalogues of Nancréde, the French
bookseller at Boston, appeared in the newspapers of that city
and also in Porcupine’s Gazette, which published one on Feb. 20,
1799. Concerning Carey and his trade in French books, see
Mathew Carey, Editor, Author, and Publisher, by Earl I. Brad-
sher, passim, and especially pp. 17-21. Concerning Nancrede, see
Federal Gazette (Boston), Jan. 2, 1798; the article by Mr. Bal-
densperger in The Harvard Advocate, Dec. 5, 1913; that of Pro-
fessor Schinz in Modern Language Notes, Vol. XXXYV, pp. 10-
18. Moreau de Saint-Méry was also an active importer and
printer of French books; Professor Schinz has published an ar-
ticle on him, La Librarie francaise en Amérique au Temps de
Washington, in La Revue d’Histoire littéraire de la France, Vol.
XXIV, pp. 568-584.

186 See this fact in Chapter II.

187 See History of the American Theatre, by William Dunlap
(London, 1833), pp. 65, 105 e¢ seg., and 163.

188 See Voyage de Moreau de Saint-Méry, pp. 267-270;
Charleston City Gazette, Feb. 6, 1798; Dunlap, History of the
American Theatre, under the date Nov. 20, 1793. See also South
Carolina State Gazette, Oct. 17, 1794, and passim for 1795.

189 Alexandre Duval (1767-1842) was a sailor, soldier, en-
gineer, architect, secretary to the States of Brittany, and actor.
He wrote many plays which enjoyed success at the time. Con-
cerning Dunlap, see Tell Truth, A Comedy (New York, 1797),
and The Wife of two Husbands, by W. Dunlap, etc.

190 See Female Patriotism, or the Death of Jean d’Arc, an
Historic Play in Five Acts, by John Burk (New York, 1798).
The verses quoted are from Act IV.

191 Charles Brockden Brown (1771-1810), novelist and pub-
licist. To form an idea of the productions of the time and the
imitations of the French, see The Nightingale, or a Mélange ofmeer heed iecbinhs EE

 

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    

Literature, edited by John Lathrop, Jr. (Boston), especially
May, June, and July, 1796, in which months extracts from
Bernardin de Saint-Pierre, Marmontel, and Descartes were pub-
lished regularly. See also The American Universal Magazine,
1797-1798, and The New York Magazine, especially July, Sep-
tember, and December, 1797.

192 See Poems of Philip Freneau, Vol. IV, pp. 202-250. The
verses on Washington quoted here are taken from this volume,
PP: 234-237:

193 Freneau was often inspired by Rousseau; the 1786 edition
of his poems contains one entitled “Saint-Preux to Eloisa.”

For little verses imitated from the French, see, for example,
Poems on Several Occasions, by John Swanick (Philadelphia,
1797), pp- 17, 38, 45, and 120; and Miscellaneous Works of D.
Humphreys (New York), p. 222, etc.

194 See Writings of Jefferson, Vol. VIII, p. 234.

195 From this point of view, the correspondence of Jefferson
that has been published cannot afford an exact idea of his rela-
tions with France. It would be necessary to make a calendar of
his papers, as has been done for Franklin. But my studies at the
Virginia Historical Society and in the Archives of the State of
Virginia, which contain an enormous collection of the letters of
Jefferson, permitted me to acquaint myself with the general con-
tents of these files.

198 See “Popular Churches after the Revolution,” by J. S. Bas-
sett, in Massachusetts Historical Society Proceedings, Vol.
XLVIII, pp. 254-268.

197 See The Temple of Reason, Nov. 8, 1800.

198 See The Sulpicians in the United States, by Charles G.
Herbermann, pp. 39-75:

199] owe this information to Prof. Barrett Wendell, who, a
few months before his death, was kind enough to go through
his family papers with me and show me letters dated from the
beginning of the nineteenth century. He even told me that he
would like to make a study of the influence of French Catholi-
cism on the cultured society of Boston from 1800 to 1815. I have
done nothing here save to take over the ideas which he voiced at

573

sets be te tecetntetabate
Perel Pero The ere Sse ed

T+ 333

reer re yyy

oa eet

errr ty tots te Poe

ee eee

eT

es574. THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

that time and supported with a bulk of local manuscript docu-
mentation. I cannot pass over this opportunity of mentioning the
inexhaustible kindness of Prof. Wendell to any student who ap-
plied to him, and the personal gratitude that I owe him.

200 See “Popular Churches,” by J. S. Bassett, same pages as
those cited above.BIBLIOGRAPHY
PERIODICALS IN ENGLISH

American Advertiser (Richmond), 1783-1786.
American Antiquarian Society Proceedings (Worcester), 1913

and 1920.
American Historical Review (New York and Chicago), 1898 and
1921. |

American Magazine (New York), 1787-1788.

American Museum (Philadelphia), 1787-1792, 1797-1798.

American Surgical Association Proceedings, 1904.

American Universal Magazine (Philadelphia), 1797-1798.

Argus (New York), 1791-1797.

Aurora (called at first General Advertiser; Philadelphia), 1790-
1800.

The Bee (New London), 1797-1800.

Boston Continental Journal (Boston), 1778-1787.

Boston Evening Post (Boston), 1771-1782.

Boston Gazette (Boston), 1770-1800.

Boston Independent Chronicle (Boston), 1777-1800.

Boston Post Boy (Boston), 1779-1775:

City Gazette (Charleston), 1789-1800.

Columbian Centinel (Boston), 1793-1800.

Columbian Magazine (Philadelphia), 1787-1792.

Commercial Advertiser (New York), 1797-1800.

Connecticut Courant (Hartford), 1774-1800.

Diary or Loudon’s Register (New York), 1792-1797:

Freeman’s Journal (Philadelphia), 1781-1788.

Gazette of the United States (New York and later Philadel-
phia), 1789-1900.

Georgia State Gazette (Augusta), 1785-1789.

The Harvard Advocate (Cambridge), 1913-1914.

Herald of Freedom (Boston), 1788-1791.

Independent Gazetteer (Philadelphia), 1795-1797-

The Journal of the Friends’ Historical Soctety (London), 1905,
1910, 1918, 1919.

575THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

   

576

Lexington Kentucky Gazette (Lexington, Ky.), 1787-1800.

Lippincott’s Magazine. |

Magazine of American History (New York and Chicago), 1881.

Maryland Journal (Baltimore), 1773-1797:

Massachusetts Sentinel (Boston), 1788-1800.

Massachusetts Historical Society Proceedings (Boston), 1915-
1916.

Massachusetts Mercury (Boston), 1799.

Massachusetts Spy (Boston), 1770-1789.

Mississippi Valley Historical Review, Vol. I and II.

Modern Language Notes (Baltimore), 1920.

Modern Philology, 1917.

National Gazette (Philadelphia), 1791-1793.

New London Connecticut Gazette (New London), 1770-1800.

Newport Mercury (Newport), 1772-1800.

New York Daily Advertiser (New York), 1785-1800.

New York Gazette (New York), 1770-1772.

New York Gazetteer (New York), 1784-1787.

New York Journal (New York), 1770-1776, 1791.

New York Magazine (New York), 1795-1797:

New York Packet (New York), 1776.

New York Weekly Mercury (New York), 1770-1783.

New York Weekly Museum (New York), 1788-1800.

The Nightingale (Boston), 1796.

Norfolk and Portsmouth Journal (Norfolk, Va.), 1787-1789.

Northampton Hampshire Gazette (Northampton), 1786-1795.

Ohio Company Series (Marietta, Ohio), 1915.

Pennsylvania Chronicle (Philadelphia), 1770-1773.

Pennsylvania Gazette (Philadelphia), 1770-1799.

Pennsylvania Journal (Philadelphia), 1770-1793.

Pennsylvania Ledger (Philadelphia), 1775-1778.

Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer (Philadelphia), 1782-1792.

Porcupine’s Gazette (Philadelphia), 1796-1799.

Providence Gazette (Providence), 1774-1800.

Rights of Men (Paris, Ky.), 1797-1798.

Rivington’s Gazette (New York), 1773-1783.

Salem Gazette (Salem), 1789-1800.

South Atlantic Quarterly (Durham, N. C.), 1914.

South Carolina Gazette (Charleston, S. C.), 1772-1775:

Stockbridge Western Star (Stockbridge, Mass.), 1789-1797-

The Temple of Reason (New York), 1800.BIBLIOGRAPHY 577

Transactions of the American Philosophical Society (Philadel-
phia), 1789.

The United States Chronicle (Providence), 1798-1800.

Virginia Gazette (edited by Dixon), 1771-1796.

Virginia Gazette (edited by Purdie), 1776-1777.

Virginia Gazette (edited by Pinkney), 1772-1786.

Virginia Independent Chronicle (Richmond), 1785-1789.

Washington Mirror (Washington), 1797-1798.

William and Mary Quarterly (Williamsburg), 1905-1906.

Yale Review (New Haven), 1894.

BOOKS AND PAMPHLETS IN ENGLISH

A History of Columbia University (New York, 1904).

An Impartial Review of the Causes and Principles of the French
Revolution (Boston, 1798).

A View of the New England Illuminati (Philadelphia, 1799).

Catalogue of the Library Company of Charleston, 1770-1772;
1811.

Catalogue of the Library of Harvard University, 1773.

Catalogue of the Library of the late J. Buckminster (Boston,
1812).

Catalogue of the Philadelphia Society Library, 1789.

Catalogue of the Society Library of New York, 1779, 1791, 1792;
1793, 1800.

Debates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States
(Washington, 1832-1862). The ten first volumes.

Early Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society (Phila-
delphia, 1884).

Historical Catalogue of Brown University (Providence, 1914).

Journal of the Continental Congress (Ford and Hunt edition,
Washington).

Old Family Letters, 2 vol. (not dated).

Salisbury Family Memorial (not dated).

The Charter, Bye-Laws of the New York Society Library (New
York, 1789).

The Democrat, or Intrigues and Adventures of Jean le Noir
(New York, 1795).

The Devil Let Loose (Boston, 1799).

The Motley Assembly, A Farce (Boston, 1779).578 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

The Order of the Exercises of Commencement (Cambridge,
Mass., 1791)-
The Revolution in France, Considered in Respect to its Progress

(New York, 1794).

Apair, Joun, The History of the American Indians (London,
1775):

Apams, Henry, The Life of Albert Gallatin (Philadelphia and
London, 1886).

Apams, Joun, Works, edited by C. F. Adams (Boston, 1855),
10 vol.

Apams, J. Q., Writings, edited by P. L. Ford (New York, 1914),
Vol. I and II.

Apams, R. G., Political Ideas of the American Revolution (Dur-
ham, 1922).

ApAMs, SAMUEL, Writings, edited by H. A. Cushing (New
York, 1906), 4 vol.

Apams, ZABDIEL, A Sermon Preached at Lexington (Boston,
1783).

ALLEN, ErHan, Reason the Only Oracle of Men (Bennington,
1784).

Atsop, Ricuarp, The Political Greenhouse for the Year 1798
(Hartford, 1799).

Barrp, American Philosophy, Early Schools.

Batpwin, S. F., Life and Letters of Simeon Baldwin (New
Haven, no date).

Bartow, JoeEt, Letters from Paris (London, 1801).

, The Political Writings (New York, 1796).

——, The Second Warning (Paris, 1798).

——, The Vision of Columbus (Hartford and London, 1787).

, Columbiad (Philadelphia, 1807).

Bassett, J. S., Popular Churches after the Revolution, Mass.
Hist. Soc. Proceedings, 1914, 1915.

Bayray, R. A., History of National Loans (Washington, 1881).

BELKNAP, JEREMY. A Sermon Delivered on the 19th of May,
1798.

___. Dissertation on the Character, Death and Resurrection of
Jesus Christ (Boston, 1795).

, The Foresters, an American Tale (Boston, 1791).

Betote, The Scioto Speculation (Cincinnati).BIBLIOGRAPHY 579

——, Selection of the Gallipolis Papers (Hist. and Phil. So-
ciety of Ohio, 1907), 2 vol.

Bemis, S. F., Jay’s Treaty (Macmillan, 1923).

BEVERIDGE, ALBERT, The Life of John Marshall (Boston and
New York, 1916-1919), 4 vol.

BicELow, WiLLiam, Education, a Poem (Salem, no date).

BrackenripcE, H. H., Modern Chivalry, 1796.

BrapsHER, Ear S., Matthew Carey, Author, Editor, and Pub-
lisher (New York, 1912).

Brown, C. B., The Novels (Boston, 1827), 7 vol.

Bucktey, J., A History of the Methodists (New York, 1896).

Burk, J. D., Female Patriotism (New York, 1798).

Byars, Life of Saugrain (St. Louis, no date).

Campan, Mapame, Memoirs on Marie-Antoinette and her Court
(Millet, 1909).

Canpipus, Plain Truth (Philadelphia, 1771).

Carrot, H. K., The Religious Forces of the United States (New
York, 1893).

Crarrac, CHEVALIER DE, L’Ingénieur de Campagne (Philadel-
phia, 1776).

CoomsBE, THEoporE, The Harmony between the Old and New
Testament (Philadelphia, 1774).

Creveceur, Hector SAIntT-JOHN DE, Letters of an American
Farmer (Philadelphia, Carey, 1793).

Deane, S., Deane Papers (published by C. Isham, New York,
1886-1890), § vol.

Dennis, Jonn, An Address to the People of Maryland (Phila-
delphia, 1798).

Devux-Ponts, G. pz, My Campaigns in America (Boston, 1868).

Dickinson, J., Writings, edited by P. L. Ford (Philadelphia,
1895), and also the edition of 1801 (Wilmington), 2 vol.

Dove, JoHNn, Proceedings of the M. W. Grand Lodge of Ancient
York Masons of the State of Virginia (Richmond, 1784).

Drinker, Exizasetu, Journal of Eliz. Drinker, edited by H. L.
D. Biddle (Philadelphia, 1889).

Dunsar, L. B., A Study of the “Monarchical” Tendencies in the
United States ... Univ. of Illinois Studies, Vol. X.
Dun ap, W., History of the American Theatre (London, 1833).

——, Tell Truth, a Comedy (New York, 1798).
—, The Wife of Two Husbands (no date).580 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Dwicnt, Rev. Trmotuy, The Duty of Americans (New Haven,
1798).

Eppy, G. S., A Project of Peace by P. A. Gargaz (New York, ~
1922).

ELLiotT, JONATHAN, Debates in the Several State Conventions
(Philadelphia, 1881), § vol.

Fitson, JoHN, Beginnings of Kentucky (Lane, 1910).

FLEMING, R., A Discourse on the Fall of Papacy (Boston, 1794).

Forp, P. L., Bibliography of Benjamin Franklin (Brooklyn,
1889).

—, Pamphlets on the Constitution of the United States
(Brooklyn, 1888).

Forp, E. F., Notes on the Life of Noah Webster (New York,
1912), 2 vol.

ForMAN, S. E., The Political Activities of Philip Freneau (Balti-
more, 1902).

FRANKLIN, B., Works, edited by A. H. Smyth (New York, 1907),

10 vol.

, The Way to Wealth (Paris, 1795).

FRASER, CHARLES, Reminiscences of Charleston (Charleston,
1854).

FRENEAU, Puitip, The Poems, edited by Fred Lewis Pattee
(Princeton, 1902), Vol. I-III (see also under R. Slender, a
pseudonym of Freneau).

Frost, JOHN, Lives of American Merchants (New York, 1844).

GaLitoway, J., A Candid Examination of the Mutual Claims of
Great Britain and the Colonies (New York, 1775).

——, Ihe Churches’ Flight into the Wilderness (New York,

 

1774).
Gorpy, Political History of the United States (New York, 1904),
2 vol.

Guitpay, Rey. Peter, Life and Times of John Carroll (New
York, 1922).

Hate, Franklin in France (Boston, 1888), 2 vol.

Hamitton, A., Works, edited by H. C. Lodge (New York,
1904), 12 vol.

Hanpscuin, C. H., The Teaching of Modern Languages in the
United States (Washington, 1913).

Harper, R. C., Observations on the Dispute between the United
States and France (Philadelphia, 1797).

——, Speech on the Foreign Intercourse Bill (1798).BIBLIOGRAPHY

Harrincron, THeopore, Harvard Medical School. A History
(New York, 1905).

Hayes, I. M., Calendar of the Papers of Benjamin Franklin
(Philadelphia, 1908), 5 vol.

Hazen, C. D., Contemporary American Opinion of the French
Revolution (Baltimore, 1897).

Heap, D., The Harvard Medical School in 1788-1789 (Boston,
1910).

HERBERMANN, G., The Sulpicians in the United States (New
York, 1916).

Hitcucocx, Gap., A Discourse on the Man of Sin (Boston,
1799).

Homes, AsiEL, A Family Tablet (Boston, 1796).

, A Sermon on the Freedom and Happiness of America

(1795).

Hopkinson, JoserH, What Is Our Situation? (no date).

Humpureyrs, Davin, Miscellaneous Works (New York, 1804).

—, The Anarchiad (New Haven, 1861), in collaboration with
J. Barlow, J. Trumbull, L. Hopkins.

Incuis, CHaries, The Letters of Papinian (New York, 1779).

Izarp, R., Correspondence (New York, 1844), Vol. I and II.

Jay, Joun, Correspondence and Public Papers, edited by H. FE
Johnston (New York, 1890), 4 vol.

JEFFERSON, THoMAS, Notes on the State of Virginia.

, Writings, Monticello edition (Washington, 1924), 20 vol.

JELLINEK, G., Declaration of the Rights of Man and of Citizens
(Holt, 1910).

Jeves, J., The Russels of Birmingham (London, 1911).

JussEranp, J. J., Rochambeau in America (Washington, 1912).

Kapp, Friepricu, Life of Johann Kalb (New York, 1881).

Kine, Rurus, Life and Correspondence (New York, 1894), 3 vol.

LAMONT, DE, The Art of War (Philadelphia, 1778).

Lez, R. H., Memoirs of the Life of R. H. Lee (Philadelphia,
1825).

Leonarp, D., Massachussettensis (Boston, 1776).

Linn, J. B., Miscellaneous Works (New York, 1795).

Linn, Witiiam, Discourse on the National Sin (New York,
1798).

Maciay, Wittiam, Journal (New York, 1890).

Mackenziz, H., Answer to Paine’s Rights of Man (Philadel-

phia, 1796).

 

 

ore}582 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Manson, JAMES, Notes on the Proceedings of the Federal Con-
ventions (Washington, 1897).

—., Writings, edited by Gaillard Hunt (New York and Lon-
don, 1900-1902), 6 vol.

Pan, Matiet pu, The Dangers Which Threaten Europe (New
York, 1795).

Matuer, S., The Dying Legacy (Boston, 1783).

MayruHew, J., Papist Idolatry (Boston, 1765).

Meapg, Bisuop, Old Churches and Families of Virginia (Phila-
delphia, 1861), 2 vol.

Mittrr, S., A Brief Retrospect of the Eighteenth Century (New
York, 1803).

Minot, G. R., History of the Insurrections in Massachusetts
(Worcester, 1788).

MitcuHett, J. P., Saint Jean de Créveceur (New York, 1916).

Monroz, J., Writings, edited by E. M. Hamilton (New York,
1903), Vol. I-III.

Moors, FRANK, Songs and Ballads of the American Revolution
(New York, 1856).

Morison, S. E., The Life and Letters of H. G. Otis (Boston
and New York, 1913), 2 vol.

Morris, GouvERNEUR, Diary and Letters (1888), 2 vol.

Morse, A. E., The Federalist Party in Massachusetts (Prince-
ton, 1909).

Morse, JEDEDIAH, The American Geography (1789).

, The Present Situation of Other Nations of the World Con-

trasted with Our Own (Boston, 1795).

——, A Sermon Preached at Charlestown (Boston, 1798).

, A Sermon (Hartford, 1799).

Morton, Mrs. S. W. A., The Power of Sympathy (Boston,
1789). ,

Newman, A. H., A History of the Baptist Church in the United
States (New York, 1894).

OcpENn, J. C., A View of the New England Illuminati (Philadel-
phia, 1794).

Oscoop, Davin, A Discourse Delivered (Boston, 1795).

, The Wonderful Works of God (Boston, 1794).

Paine, THomas, Complete Works of Thomas Paine (Chicago,
Belford, 1885).

PELLEw, G., John Jay (Cambridge, 1898).BIBLIOGRAPHY 583

Perkins, J. B., France in the American Revolution (Boston,
1911).

Puiturps, Paut, The West in the Diplomacy of the American
Revolution. University of Illinois Studies (1913).

Porcupine, Peter, The Political Censor (Philadelphia, 1796).

Porter, EvipHALET, A Discourse (Boston, 1798).

, A Sermon Delivered in the First Religious Society in Rox-

bury (Boston, 1784).

Ramsay, D., History of the American Revolution (Philadelphia,

Aitken, 1789).

, Life of George Washington (New York, 1807).

RayNaL, ABBE, Philosophical and Political History of the Settle-
ments and Trade of the Europeans in the East and West
Indies, translated by J. O. Justamond (London, 1776).

—, The American Revolution (Philadelphia, Bell, 1782).

——, Sentiments of a Foreigner on the Disputes of Great Brit-
ain with America (Philadelphia, 1775).

Rotcu, Wiii1am, Memorandum (Boston, 1916).

Rowson, Mrs., Charlotte, a Tale of Truth (Philadelphia, 1794).

RozENGARTEN, J. G., The Early French Members of the Amer-
ican Philosophical Society (Philadelphia, 1907).

——, French Colonists and Exiles in the United States ( Phila-
delphia, 1907).

Sepcwick, TuHropore, A Memoir of the Life of William Liv-
ingston (New York, 1833).

SuarF, T., and Westcott, T., The History of Philadelphia
(Philadelphia, 1884), Vol. I-III.

Sura, J. G., History of the Catholic Church in the United States
(New York, 1892), Vol. I, II.

SHERWOOD, SAMUEL, An Address (New York, 1776).

SLENDER, Rosert, Letters on Various Interesting Subjects
(Philadelphia, 1799).

Smitu, Cor. James, Account of the Remarkable Occurrences in
the Life and Travels of Col. James Smith During his Cap-
tivity with the Indians (1790), 2 vol.

Stanspury, J., The Loyal Verses of John Stansbury and S.
Jonathan Odell (Albany, 1860).

STAUFFER, VERNON, New England and the Bavarian Illuminati
(New York, 1918).

Stites, Ezra, The Literary Diary, edited by F. B. Dexter (New

York, 1901), 3 vol.

 

 

<ai>
J : aa
pow ae,

rte584 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

STILLMANN, SAMUEL, Thoughts on the French Revolution. A
Sermon (Boston, 1794)-

Suiiivan, The Altar of Baal Thrown Down, or the French
Nation Defended Against the Pulpit Slander of David
Osgood (Boston, 1795)-

——, An Impartial Review .. . of the French Revolution (Bos-
ton, 1798).

SwANICK, JOHN, Poems on Several Occasions (Philadelphia,
1797)- | ,

TocQUuEVILLE, COMTE DE, Democracy in America (Cambridge,
1862).

Turner, F. J., The West in Diplomacy, American Hist. Rev.,
Vol. III, 1898.

TruMBULL, JoHN, Autobiography (New York and London,
1841).

Warren, C., History of the Harvard Law School (New York,

1908).

, Warren-Adams Letters. Mass. H1st. Soc. Collections, 1917.

WasHincton, Writings, Collected by W. C. Ford (New York,
1889-1893).

Wesster, Noan, A Collection of Essays (Boston, 1790).

WessTER, PevatiaH, Essays on the Free Trade (Philadelphia,
1779).

West, S., A Sermon (Boston, 1795).

WITHERSPOON, JOHN, The Works (Edinburgh, 1804), 9 vol.

Woops, Lronarp, An Oration (New York, 1798).

 

PERIODICALS IN FRENCH

Actes des Apétres (Paris), 1789-1790, 1796-1797:

Affaires de | Angleterre et de Amérique (Paris), 1776-1780.
A ffiches de Province (Paris), 1777:

L’Ami du Peuple (Paris), 1790.

Les Annales patriotiques (Paris), 1789-1797:

L’Année littéraire (Paris), 1770-1789.

Bibliotheque britannique (Geneva), 1796-1800.

La Bouche de Fer (Paris), 1790-1791.

Le Carnet de la Sabretache (Paris), 1896.

Chronique de Paris (Paris), 1789-1793:
Chronique universelle (Paris), Year VI.BIBLIOGRAPHY

La Clef du Cabinet (Paris), Year V-Year IX.

Le Conservateur (Paris), Year V.

Courrier d Avignon (Avignon), 1770-1789.

Le Courrier de l Amérique (Philadelphia), 1784.

Le Courrier de l'Europe (London), 1776-1792.

Le Courrier de Provence (Paris), 1789-1791.

Le Courrier des Départements (Paris), 1791-1792.

Le Courrier de Versailles a Paris (Versailles and Paris), 1789-
1793;

Le Courrier francais (Paris), 1789-1795.

Le Courrier francais (Philadelphia), 1797.

Le Courrier républicain (Paris), Year I1I-Year V.

Le Courrier universel (Paris), Year I-Year VIII.

La Décade philosophique (Paris), Year IlI-Year IX.

Les Ephémérides du Citoyen (Paris), 1770-1776.

L’Esprit des Journaux (Paris), 1770-1800.

La Feuille du Jour (Paris), 1790-1792.

Feuille hebdomadaire de la Généralité de Limoges (Limoges),
1777-1782.

La Feuille villageoise (Paris), 1790-1793;

Les Folies d’un Mors (Paris), 1790-1792.

Le Fouet national (Paris), 1789-1790.

La Gazette de France (Paris), 1770-1800.

La Gazette de Leyde (known also as Nouvelles extraordinatres
de Leydes) (Leyden), 1770-1793.

La Gazette de Paris (Paris), 1789-1792.

La Gazette francaise (New York), 1797.

La Gazette nationale (Paris), 1789-1890.

Gazette ou Journal politique des Deux Ponts (Deux Ponts),
1770-1789.

L’Historien (Paris), Years III-IV.

Journal d’ Agriculture (Paris), 1770-1783.

Journal d’Economie politique (Paris), Years IV-V.

Journal général de France (Paris), 1785-1790.

Journal de la Cour et de la Ville (Paris), 1790.

Journal de Lyon (Lyons), 1784-1788.

Journal de Paris (Paris), 1777-1800.

Journal de Politique et de Littérature de Bruxelles (Brussels),
1776-1778.

Journal des Débats (Paris), 1789-1800.

Journal des Hommes libres (Paris), Years II-VIII.

kde |586 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Journal des Savants (Paris), 1770-1789.

Journal des Sciences et des Beaux-Arts (Paris), 1770-1783.

Journal du Soir (Paris), 1790-1800.

Journal encyclopédique de Bouillon (Bouillon), 1770-1793-

Journal général de la Cour et de la Ville (Paris), 1790-1791.

Journal historique et politique de Geneve (Geneva), 1770-1792.

Journal universel (Paris), 1789-1795.

Le Logographe (Paris), 1789-1792.

Mélanges publiés par la Société des Bibliophiles (Paris), 1903-

Mémoires de l'Institut National des Sciences et Arts (Paris),
Wear Til.

Mercure de France (Paris), 1770-1800.

Mercure universel (Paris), 1791-1800.

Le Messager du Soir (Paris), Years II-VI.

Le Niveau de l’Europe et de Amérique septentrionale (Phila-
delphia), 1794-1796.

Nouvelles de la République des Lettres (Paris), 1777-1786.

Nouvelles éphémérides économiques (Paris), 1776-1786.

Nouvelles politiques (Paris), 1797.

Observations sur la Physique (Paris), 1770-1790.

Paris pendant 1796, Paris pendant 1797, Paris pendant, 1798
(London).

Le Patriote francais (Paris), 1789-1793, Years VI-VII.

Le Pére Duchéne (edited by Hébert; Paris), 1789-1793;

Le Pére Duchéne (edited by Lemaire), 1790-1792.

Le Postillon (Paris), 1790.

La Quotidienne (Paris), 1792-1797:

Le Rédacteur (Paris), 1798-1800.

Le Républicain francais (Paris), 1792-1798.

Revue d’ Histoire littéraire de la France, 1917.

Revue de Paris, 1898-1923.

Revue des Etudes historiques (Paris), 1923.

La Revue rétrospective (Paris), 1889.

La Sentinelle (Paris), 1792-1797:

Le Spectateur du Nord (Hamburg), 1798-1800.

La Suisse universitaire, 1901.

Le Tableau de Paris (Paris), 1796.

Tribut de la Société nationale des neuf Seurs (Paris), 1790-91.

L’Union (Paris), 1790.BIBLIOGRAPHY 587

BOOKS AND PAMPHLETS IN FRENCH

Adresse aux Anglais par un Représentant de la Nation frangatse
(Paris), 1791.

Alphabet des Sans Culottes (Paris), Year II.

Amélie, Anecdote anglaise (no date).

L’Ameéricain aux Anglais (Philadelphia), 1781.

A Monsieur le Comte de Lally Tollendal, en Réponse a sa Lettre
a ses Commettants (no date).

L’A pocalypse britannique (London, 1782).

Articles de Confédération et d’Union perpétuelle des Colonies
anglaises de l' Amérique (1776).

Au Peuple francais sur les Assignats, par un Citoyen des Etats-
Unis (Paris, 1790).

Aux Emigrés de toutes les Contrées de l'Europe (Philadelphia,
1784).

Les Aventures politiques du Pére Nicaise (Paris, 1793).

Biographie des Contemporains (Paris, 1836), 5 vol.

Calendrier de Philadelphie (Paris, 1778).

La Cassette verte de M. de Sartines (The Hague, 1774).

Catalogue des Noms de Villes, Villages, Rivieres . . . contenus
dans la Carte de lV Amérique septentrionale. ... Chez le
Rouge (1777).

Le Chansonnier de la Montagne (Paris, Year III.)

Le Comte de Vergennes cause des Etats généraux (Paris, 1788).

Conseil des Cing Cents. Opinion de Boulay Paty. Session of 3
Prairial, Year VI.

Considérations sur le Mémoire adressé a L. L. H. H. P. P., by
John Adams (no date).

Considérations sur les Fonds publics, le Climat des Etats-Unis,
d’ Amérique (Paris, 1793)-

Considérations sur les Fonds publics des Etats-Unis (Paris,
1793). |
Convention entre la République francaise et les Etats-Unis de
l Amérique, 8 Vendémiaire, Year IX (Paris, no date).
Correspondance qui dévoile la Trahison du Sénateur américain,

W. Blount (Philadelphia, no date).
Correspondance du Lord Georges Germaine (Berne, 1782).
Correspondance secréte publiée par M. de Lescure (Paris, 1866),
2 vol.588 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Déclaration des Droits du Roi et de la Nation frangaise (no
date).

Deécret du 7 Juillet, 1791 (Paris, no date).

De l’ Amérique et des Américains (Berlin, 1771).

De la République et de la Monarchie (Paris, 1789).

Description topographique de 600,000 Acres de Terres (Paris,
1792).

Le Despotisme des Parlements (no date).

Deux Francais aux Etats-Unis. Mélanges publiés par la Socveéte
des Bibliophiles francais. Series 2, Document 6.

Dictionnaire social et patriotique.

Discours composé en 1788, qui a remporté le Prix a lAcadémie
francaise en 1792 (Paris, 1792).

Dissertation sur les Suites de la Découverte de l Amérique... .
Par un Citoyen, ancien Syndic de la Chambre de Commerce
de Lyon (1787).

Entretiens de Guillaume de Nassau, Prince d’Orange et du
Général Montgomery (London and Paris, 1780).

Etablissements francais dans les Etats-Unis d’Amérique (Paris,
no date).

Etrennes a la Nation (Paris, no date).

Extraits des Gazettes américaines (Paris, 1786).

Extrait du Journal de la Société de 1789 (Paris, 1799). This is
La Rochefoucauld’s speech on Franklin.

Le Financier philosophe et patriote, by M. C. J. B. (Paris, 1790).

Frankliniana. ... Par un Américain (Paris, 1800).

Histoire de la Guerre d’Amérique (London, 1783).

Histoire d’un Pou francais (Paris, 1781).

L’Indépendance absolue des Américains des Etats-Unis prouvée
(Paris, 1798). !

L’Intérét de la France a une Constitution monarchique (Berlin,
1790).

Je crains la Banqueroute (no date).

Journal d’un Voyage dans l’Amérique septentrionale, traduit de
l Anglais (Paris, 1793), 2 vol.

Journal d’un Officier de ’Escadre de M. le Comte d’Estaing
(Paris, 1782).

Lettre adressée a l’Abbé Raynal (Paris, 1791).

Lettre circulaire du Congrés des Etats-Unis d’ Amérique (Paris,

Year IIT).BIBLIOGRAPHY 589

Lettre de M. Bergasse a ses Commettants (no date).

Lettre de M. de V. a M. le C. D. M. (Paris, 1790).

Lettre de M. R. esquire au Lord Comte de D. (Amsterdam, 1779).

Lettres du Comte d’Albany au Lord Bute (1780).

Lettre d’un Correcteur des Comptes a M. le Marquis de La
Fayette (1788).

Lettres d’un Membre du Congrés américain (Paris, 1779).

Lettre d’un Quaker américain a un Républicain francais (Paris,
1792).

La Lyre républicaine (Paris, Year IIT).

Les Négociants armateurs et marins de la Commune de Nantes
au Conseil des Cing Cents (Year VIII).

Notes sur les Défrichements en Amérique a (Usage des Euro-
péens (no date).

Le Nouveau Mississippi (Paris, 1790).

Observations sur le Scioto (no date).

Pamphlet programatique (Geneva, 1780).

Le Parlement de Paris établi au Scioto (Paris, 1790).

Paul Jones ou Prophéties sur l Amérique (no date).

Pétition respectueuse des Amis de la Société chrétienne, appeles
Quakers, prononcée a lV Assemblée Nationale, le Jeudi 10
Février 1791 (no date).

Plan de Vente de 300,000 Acres de Terres situées dans les Comtés
de Nortumberland et de Huntington (Philadelphia, 1794).

Premiers Mouvements de Bretagne (1789).

Le Procés des trois Rois (London, 1780).

Réclamation du tiers Etat (1788).

Recueil Clairembaut Maurepas, Raunié edition (Paris), 10 vol.

Recueil des Lois constitutives des Colonies anglaises confédeérees
sous la Dénomination d’Etats-Unis (Philadelphia and
Paris), 1778.

Recueil d’Estampes représentant différents Evénements de la
Guerre qui a procuré l'Independance aux Etats-Unis (Paris,
no date).

Réflexions impartiales sur les Conséquences gui dowent résulter
pour la Grande-Bretagne de ’'Indépendance des Américains
(London, 1780).

Réflexions impartiales sur Amérique (Amsterdam and Paris,
1781).

Réflexions sur la Dette publique exigible (no date).

- eee Hy me Dares, é _ eee ey
Oe ee el a eel aed ek $2r2e oho ee}

Peer sf,590 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Réponse a la Déclaration du Congrés américain (London, 1777).

Réponse de l Amérique septentrionale a la Lettre écrite du Palais
Royal (Philadelphia and Paris, 1785).

Réveries d’un Suisse (London, 1781).

Roman politique sur Etat présent des Affaires de l Amérique
(Amsterdam and Paris, 1779).

Songe dun Habitant du Scioto (Paris, 1790).

Tableau de la Situation actuelle des Etats-Unis de l Amérique
(Paris, 1795).

Théorie des Etats Généraux (Paris, 1789).

Traité d’Amitié et de Commerce conclu entre le Roi et les Etats-
Unis (Paris, 1778).

La Trompette du Pére Duchéne (Paris, 1792).

Vie privée et politique de J. L. R. Hébert (Paris, Year II).

Vie privée, impartiale, du Marquis de La Fayette (Paris, 1790).

Le Veu de toutes les Nations (1778).

ALEMBERT, D’, Giuvres (Paris, 1822), § vol.

ALLONVILLE, CoMTE D’, Mémoires secrets (Paris, 1836), 6 vol.

AMABLE, Louis, Une Loge maconnique d avant 1789 (Paris,
1897).

ARNAULT, Ciuvres de M. Arnauld (Paris, 1803), 11 vol.

AUBURNET, Voyages dans les Parties intérieures de l Amérique
septentrionale (Paris, 1790), 2 vol.

AvuLarp, Recueil de Documents pour l’Histoire des Jacobins

(Paris, 1889-1897), 6 vol.

» Paris pendant la Réaction thermidorienne et sous le Di

rectowre (Paris, 1898), § vol.

, Paris sous le Consulat (Paris, 1903-1909), 4 vol.

, Histoire politique de la Révolution Francaise (Paris, 1909).

AuTREY, Fasry vp’, Les Quakers a leur Frére Voltaire (1768).

BacHauMont, Mémoires secrets (Paris, 1771-1787), 36 vol.

BaRBIER LE JEUNE, H. S. Le, Asgill (Paris, 1785).

Barere, Mémoires (Paris, 1842), Vol. I-III.

Barras, Mémoires (Paris, 1895), Vol. I-IV.

Barron, Histoire de la Fondation des Colonies des anctennes
Républiques (Utrecht, 1778).

BaRRUEL, ABBE, Mémoires pour servir a l’ Histoire du Jacobin-
asme (Hamburg, 1797).

Bartram, W., Voyage dans les Parties sud de l Amérique septen-

trionale (Paris, Year VIII), 2 vol.BIBLIOGRAPHY 591

Bayarp, F. M., Voyage dans 'Intérieur des Etats-Unis (Paris,
Year VI).

Bzaumarcuals, Observations sur le Mémoire justificatif de la

Cour de Londres (London and Philadelphia, 1779).

, Cuvres completes (Paris, 1835).

Bercer, Eucene, Le Vicomte de Mirabeau (Paris, 1904).

BERNARDIN DE SAINT-PIERRE, CEuvres complétes (Paris, 1830),
12 vol.

BEsNARD, YVES, Souvenirs d’un Nonagénaire (Paris, 1880).

Biackrort, D. pve, Précis de l’Etat de ! Amérique (Milan, 1771).

Burn, M., Lettre a Monsieur Mounier (Paris, 1789).

Bonnet DE Frejus, J., Réponses aux principales Questions qua

peuvent étre faites sur les Etats-Unis (Lausanne, 1795), 2

vol.

, Etats-Unis de ’ Amérique a la Fin du xvi siécle (Paris,

no date), 2 vol.

Bossu, Nouveaux Voyages dans l Amérique septentrionale (Am-
sterdam, 1778).

Bostet Dumont, Voyage a la Louisiane (Paris, 1802).

Bouitie, Marguis ve, Mémoires (Paris, 1821).

Bourpon, L. C., Voyage d’Amérique (London and Paris, 1786).

BourRIENNE, DE, Mémoires (Paris, no date).

Brion pE LA Tour, Almanach intéressant (Paris, 1780).

Brissot, J. P., Mémoires publiés par Claude Perroud (Paris,

1910), 2 vol.

, Correspondance, publiée par Claude Perroud (Paris, 1912).

Brissor p—E Warvittz, J. P., Bibliotheque philosophique de
Jurisprudence (1782-1786), 10 vol.

——, Examen critique des Voyages de M. le Marquis de Chas-
tellux (London, 1786).

—— , Nouveau Voyage dans les Etats-Unis (Paris, 1791), 3 vol.

, Testament politique de l’ Angleterre (1780).

Brissot DE WarVILLE ET CLAVIERE, J. P., De la France et des
Etats-Unis (London, 1787).

Bruciere, J. P., Nécessité de la Paix (Paris, Year VIII).

Burrenorr, Hippotyte, La Comtesse d’Houdetot (Paris, 1901).

Burron, uvres complétes (Paris, 1846), 3 vol.

Burnasy, A., Voyage dans les Colonies du Milieu de l Amérique
septentrionale (Lausanne, 1778).

Burk, W., Histoire des Colonies européennes dans l Amérique

(Paris, 1767).

 

 

 

 

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
   

Pee Bt ey Sa SE . =<» = " ee)
aHeSssssssagszgagipigss tr erers sss ss te

Setter er rel

3t2t3

dase segs592 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

CAMPAN, MapaMe, Mémoires sur la Vie privée de Marie-
Antoinette (Paris, 1822), 3 vol.

Cari, J. R., Lettres américaines (Boston and Paris, 1788), 2
vol.

Carver, J., Voyage dans les Parties intérieures de l Amérique
septentrionale (Paris, 1784).

Cerisier, Le Destin de l’Amérique (London, 1780).

Crrutti, Lettre a M. le Vicomte de Noailles (Paris, 1789).

, Idées simples et précises sur le Papier Monnaie (Paris,

1791).

Cuas, Histoire philosophique et politique des Révolutions de
l Angleterre.

Cuas ET Lesrun, Histoire philosophique et politique de la Révo-
lution de Amérique (Paris, Year IX).

CHASTELLUX (7%), Discours sur les Avantages et les Désavantages
qui résultent pour Europe de la Découverte de l Amérique
(Paris, 1787)).

CHASTELLUX, CHEVALIER DE, Voyage de Newport a Philadelphie,
Imprimerie de |’Escadre (no date).

——, Voyage de M. le Chevalier de Chastellux en Amérique
(Cassel, 1785).

CHASTELLUX, Marguis beg, Voyage dans l’Amérique septentrion-
ale (Paris, 1786).

CHATEAUBRIAND, ViCOMTE DE, Mémoires d’Outre-tombe (Paris,

1898-1901, Edition Biré), 6 vol.

» Guvres completes (Paris, 1831), 31 vol.

CHENIER, A., Qiuvres (Edition Dimoff, Paris, no date), 3 vol.

CHAVANNE DE LA GIRAUDIERE, L’Amérique délivrée (Amsterdam,
1783), 2 vol.

CHINARD, G., L’Amérique et le Réve exotique (Paris, 1913).

» L’Exotisme américain dans I’GEuvre de Chateaubriand

(Paris, 1918).

ComBeEroussE, MicHEL DE, (sometimes written Decomberousse),
Asgill (Paris, Year IX).

ConporceT, Marguis vr, Eloge de Franklin, Paris, 1791.

» Lettres d'un Citoyen des Etats-Unis a un Francais (Phila-

delphia, 1788).

——, Cuvres, publiées par Condorcet O’Connor (Paris, 1847-
1849), 12 vol.

Cooper, Tuomas, Renseignements sur l’Amérique (Hamburg,

1795).BIBLIOGRAPHY 593

Coste, J. F., De antigua Medico-Philosophia orbit novo adap-
tanda (Lyons, 1783).

CreveceurR, Hecror Saint JoHN DE, Lettres dun Cultiwateur
américain (Paris, 1784 and 1787), 3 vol.

—, Voyage dans la Haute Pennsylvanie (Paris, Year IX),
2 vol.

Croy, Duc pr, Journal inédit (Paris, 1907), 4 vol.

Daymon, F., Le Réglement militaire (Philadelphia, 1776).

Deracrorx, Constitutions des principaux Etats de l Europe et des

Etats-Unis de l’ Amérique (Paris, 1791), 4 vol. Numerous

other editions. There is one in 6 vol. (1801).

, Des Moyens de régénérer la France (Paris, Year V).

DemeEusNiER, L’Amérique Indépendante (Ghent, 1790), 3 vol.

, Essais sur les Etats-Unis (Paris, 1786).

DESLANDES, Discours sur la Grandeur et ’ Importance de la Revo-
lution qui vient de s’opérer dans l'Amérique (Paris and
Frankfort), 1785.

Divot, Précis sur la Révolution et le Caractére frangais, adressé
aux Citoyens des Etats-Unis d’ Amérique (Year If).

Divot, ALBERT Firmin, Souvenirs de J. E. Despréaux (Paris,
Year Vill).

Dontot, Henry, Le Comte de Vergennes et P. M. Hennin.

, Histoire de la Participation de la France a l Etablissement

des Etats-Unis (Paris, 1899), 5 vol.

DreyrrFus, F., Un Philosophe d’autrefois (Paris, 1903).

Dusroca, Y. F., Eloge de Washington (Paris, Year VIII).

Dusuisson, Abrégé de la Révolution de l Amérique anglaise
(aris, 1770).

Ducuer, Nouvelle Alliance a proposer entre les Républiques
francaise et américaine (no date).

Ducray Duminit, Lolotte et Fanfan (Paris, 1788).

DEFFANT, MarouiseE DU, Correspondance complete (Paris, 1767),
3 vol.

— , Lettres 4 H. Walpole (Paris, 1824), 4 vol.

Dumas, Comte M., Souvenirs (Paris, 1839), 3 vol.

Dumont, ETIENNE, Souvenirs sur Mzrabeau (Paris, 1832).

Dumouriez, GENERAL, Nouveau Tableau spéculatif de l Europe

(1798).

, Suite des Mémoires (Paris, 1848).

Duranp, Asse, Le Franklinisme réfuté (Paris, 1788).

 

 

 

 

rye

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    

2geee>

e3sstgagizag

eh ststcbstsece

os

, siatziez

et geet

2 ad

SS ae ee eee

ns = tt

Fey ere

oe

oe594 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

Dutens, Mémoires d’un Voyageur qui se repose (Paris, 1806),
3 vol. :

Duval, A., Hieuvres completes (Paris, 1822), 2 vol.

DuvaL, GrorcEs, Souvenirs de la Terreur (Paris, 1841).

Eprnay, MapaME pv’, Mémoires et Correspondance (Paris, 1818),
3 vol.

Eustace, JEAN SKEY, Traité d’ Amitié et de Commerce entre S.
M. Britannique et les Etats-Unis (Paris, Year IV).

—, Le Citoyen des Etats-Unis, Jean Skey Eustace a ses Freres
d’ Armes (Paris, 1793).

FAaucHET, CLAupDE, Coup dil sur la Situation des Affaires entre
la France et les Etats-Unis (Paris, 1798).
FaucHET, ABBE, Eloge civique de B. Franklin (Paris, 1790).
FERSEN, CoMTE DE, Le Comte de Fersen et la Cour de France
(Paris, 1877), published by M. de Klinkowstrom, 2 vol.
Feucere, A., Bzbliographie critique de Abbé Raynal (Angou-
léme, 1922).

——, Un Précurseur de la Révolution, TAbbé Raynal (Angou-
léme, 1922).

Fiassan, Pacification de l Europe (Paris, Year VIII).

FRANQUEVILLE, CoMTE DE, Le premier Siécle de l'Institut (Paris,
1913).

FrevittE, Les Droits de la Grande-Bretagne établis contre les
Prétentions des Américains (The Hague, 1776).

FonTANES, Eloge funébre de Washington (Paris, Year VIII).

GALIANI, ABBE, Correspondance inédite (Paris, Year VIII).

, Lettres (Paris, 1881), 2 vol.

GaraT, Mémoire sur Suard et le xvu1® siécle (Paris, 1820), 2
vol.

GENLIS, CoMTESSE DE, Mémoires inédits (Paris, 1825), 10 vol.

Genty, Asse, Influence de la Découverte de l Amérique sur le
Bonheur du Genre humain (Paris, 1787).

GeorcEL, J. F., Mémoires (Paris, 1817-1818), 6 vol.

Grraup, Nouvelles Etudes sur Chateaubriand (Paris, 1912).

GoparD, P. S., Influence de la Révolution de l’ Amérique septen-
trionale sur les Opinions et la Législation de l'Europe. (In
reality by Condorcet. No date.)

Gorey, Les Torts apparents (Paris, 1787).

Grasset SAINT-SAUVEUR, Description des principaux Peuples de

Amérique (Paris, Year VI).BIBLIOGRAPHY 595

—, Tableau cosmographique de lEurope, de TlAsie, de
l Afrique et de l Amérique (Paris, 1787).

Grimm, Correspondance (Edition Tourneux, Paris, 1877), 16
vol.

GuILLarD DE Beaurieu, L’Eléve de la Nature (Lille, 1783), 3
vol.

Gustave III, Lettres a la Comtesse de Boufflers (Bordeaux,
1900).

Havusset Du, Mémoires (Paris, 1825).

HAutTERIVE, ComTE p’, De l’Etat de la France (Paris, Year IX).

Havteval, L., Hauteval Citoyen francais au Gouvernement et au
Peuple américain.

Hixtiiarp D’AUBERTEUIL, Essais historiques et politiques sur les
Anglo-Américains (Bruxelles, 1782), 2 vol.

—, Essais historiques et politiques sur la Révolution de l Ameér-
ique septentrionale (Paris, 1783), 3 vol.

— ., Histoire de l’ Administration du Lord North (Paris, 1784).

, Miss Mac Rae (Philadelphia, 1784).

Hoxsacu, vd’, Le Systéme de la Nature (1770), 2 vol.

Hornot, Anecdotes américaines (Paris, 1776).

IsnarD, Observations sur le Principe qui a produit les Révolu-
tions de France, de Genéve et d Amérique (Evreux, 1789).

JEFFERSON, T., Observations sur la Virginie (Paris, 1786).

JELLINECK, G., La Déclaration des Droits de Homme (Paris,
1901).

JUMELIN, J. B., Lettre écrite au Bonhomme Richard concernant
les Assignats (no date).

KacENneEcK, M. pk, Lettres (Paris, 1874).

La Cuaisz, M. P. pe, Lettre dun Américain aux Citoyens
francais sur la Représentation (Paris, 1789).

La Cuanontz, G. pe, Mémoires politiques et militatres du Gén-
éral Tercier (Paris, 1902).

LacomsBE, BEerNarD DE, La Vie privée de Talleyrand (Paris,
1910).

La CreEPINIERE, A. DE, Lettre écrite du Palais Royal aux quatre
Parties du Monde (Paris, 1785).

La Fayette, Marouis pe, Mémoires, Correspondance et Manu-

scrits du Général Lafayette (London, 1837), 6 vol.

, Correspondance, éditée par Jules Thomas (Paris, 1903).

La Harpe, J. F., Ouz on Non (no date).596 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

LAMBERT, BARONNE (née PANNELLIER D’ARSONVAL), Souvenirs
(Paris, 1902).

LAMETH, TH. DE, Mémoires (Paris, 1913).

La REVEILLERE Lepaux, Mémoires (Paris), 3 vol.

La Rocueroucautp Liancourt, Des Prisons de Philadelphie
(aris, Wear VIID):

—, Extrait du Journal de la Société de 1789 (no date).

—, Voyage dans les Etats-Unis d’ Amérique (Paris, Year
VII), 8 vol.

La RocHEJACQUELIN, Marouise DE, Mémoires (Paris, 1826), 2
vol.

La RocHetiLHac, P. pre, Almanach américain (Paris, 1783).

Laureau, L’Amérique découverte (Autun, 1782).

Lauzun, Duc pr, Mémoires (Paris, 1880), 2 vol.

LavissE, Histoire de France (Paris, 1910), Vol. IX.

LEBOUCHER, OpEetT JULIEN, Histoire de la derniére Guerre
(Paris, 1787).

Lenoir Larocue, De l’Esprit de la Constitution qui convient a
la France (Paris, Year III).

Le Roy, Seconde Lettre a M. Benjamin Franklin (no date).

, Suite de la Lettre adressée a M. Benjamin Franklin

(Rouen, 1787).

LetomBE, Mémoire et Projet concernant les Agences, la Résidence
et la Navigation des Francais dans les Ports des Etats-
Unis (no date).

Lezay MarnesiA, Marours C. F. ApriENn DE, Lettres écrites des
Rives de L’Ohio (Paris, Year IX).

Lezay Marnesia, ComMTE ADRIEN DE, Considérations sur les
Etats de Massachusetts et de Pennsylvanie (no date).

Levis, Marouis DE, Souvenirs et Portraits (Paris, 1813).

Lint, DE, Réponse a la Déclaration du Congrés américain (Lon-
don, 1777).

Livincston, WiLL1AM, Examen du Gouvernement d Angleterre
(London and Paris, 1789).

Locxroy, Epwarp, Journal d’une Bourgeoise pendant la Révo-
lution (Paris, 1881).

LoMENIE, DE, Beaumarchais et son Temps (Paris, 1856), 2 vol.

Lonccuamps, ABBE PrERRE DE, Histoire impartiale des Evéne-

ments politiques et militaires de la dermére Guerre (Amster-

dam, 1785).BIBLIOGRAPHY 597

Louver pu Couvray, Les Amours du Chevalier de Faublas
(Paris, 1789), 2 vol.

Mas.y, ABBE DE, Observations sur le Gouvernement et les Lows
des Etats-Unis (Amsterdam, 1784).

Maite, Discours qui a remporté le Prix a Académie des Jeux
floraux (Toulouse, 1784).

Maistre, ComTE JosEPH DE, Considérations sur la France (Lon-
don, 1797)-

Matouet, Mémoires (Paris, 1868), 2 vol.

ManprILiton, Recherches philosophiques sur la Découverte de
l Amérique (Amsterdam, 1784).

——, Le Spectateur américain (Amsterdam, 1784).

, Le Voyageur américain (Amsterdam, 1752).

MariE-ANTOINETTE, Correspondance secréte de Marve-Antoinette
et de Mercy (Paris, 1874).

MaRsSILLAC, JEAN DE, Le Principe ou la Regle de Vie des premiers

Chrétiens (Amsterdam, 1791).

, La Vie de Guillaume Penn (Paris, 1781).

Marsocuier, J. B., Asgill (Paris, 1793).

Masson, F., Napoléon inconnu (Paris, 1895).

Matusz, ALBERT, Les Origines des Cultes révolutionnaires
(Paris, 1904).

Maurin, Les Entretiens d’un Citoyen de Philadelphie (no date).

Mayer, ve, Asgill (Amsterdam and Paris, 1784).

Mazzet, Recherches historiques et politiques sur les Etats-Unis
(Paris, 1788), 4 vol.

Menevat, Baron ve, Napoléon et Marie-Louise (Paris, 1844).

Metra, Correspondance secréte (Neuwied, 1774-1793), 19 vol.

MiraBEAvu, Considérations sur l’ Ordre de Cincinnatus (London,

1784).

, Mémoires biographiques (Paris, 1834), 8 vol.

MontTBARREY, Prince DE, Mémozres autographes (Paris, 1826),
3, vol.

Mon TpENSIER, Duc pr, Mémoires (Paris, 1837).

Moreau, J. N., Mes Souvenirs (Paris, 1898), 2 vol.

Moreau pE Satnt-Mery, Voyage aux Etats-Unis (New Haven,

1913).

, Extraits d’un Ouvrage manuscrit (no date).

More tet, ABBE, Avis aux Fatseurs de Constitution (Paris,

1789).

 

 

 

 

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
   

PEPE SSrerro re ery? eee
SPSS cS ZIFF TSISSF5SSFF53 E584

be a

fae

me ee te eT

et

he te A te ee eee oe ee 2 al

ba Sets is sete tr seoschaset598 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

——, Lettre écrite a l’Occasion de l Ouvrage intitulé, “Examen
du Gouvernement de l’Angleterre”’ (no date).

——, Mémoires sur le xvu1® siécle et la Révolution (Paris,
1821), 2 vol.

MoreEL ty, Le Code de la Nature (1755).

Mounier, Considérations sur les Gouvernements (Paris, 1789).

, Adolphe (London, 1795).

——, Recherches sur les Causes qui ont empéché la France de
devenir libre (Geneva, 1792).

Mu tot, ABBE, Journal intime (Paris, 1902).

NANCREDE, L’A belle francaise (Boston, 1792).

Necker, Du Pouvoir exécutif dans les grands Etats (1792).

NoeEt, Journal dun Voyage fait dans l’Intérieur de l Amérique
(Paris, 1793), 2 vol.

Pauw, Der, Recherches philosophiques sur les Américains (Ber-
lin, 1770 and 1771), 3 vol.

PEeRNETTY, Dom, Dissertation sur l’Amérique et les Américains
(Berlin, 1770).

PHILADELPHE, CHARLES, Pamphlet programatique (Geneva,
1780).

Pictet, C., Tableau de la Situation actuelle des Etats-Unis
ad’ Amérique (Paris, 1795).

Pinto, Isaac, Lettre de M. S. B. au Sujet des Troubles qui agi-
tent actuellement toute l’Amérique septentrionale (The
Hague, 1776).

—, Réponse de M.I. de Pinto aux Observations d'un Homme
wampartial (The Hague, 1776).

—, Seconde Lettre de M. de Pinto a I’ Occasion des Troubles
des Colonies (The Hague, 1776).

PotssonniER, Discours sur la Naissance de Mgr. le Dauphin
(Paris, 1782).

PontTcGiBAuD, CoMTE DE More DE, Mémoires (Paris, 1828).

Pownall, THEoporE, Pensées sur la Révolution de l’Amérique
(Amsterdam, no date).

—, Mémoire adressé aux Souverains de l'Europe (London and
Brussels, 1781).

QueERARD, La France littéraire (Paris, 1833), 11 vol.

QUESNAY DE BEAUREPAIRE, Mémoire sur l’Académie des Sciences
et des Beaux-Arts des Etats-Unis (Paris, 1788).

RABAUT SAINT-ETIENNE, Adresse aux Anglais (Paris, 1791).

Racine, ABBE, Discours sur la Paix (Toulouse, 1784).BIBLIOGRAPHY 599

Ramsay, D., Histoire de la Révolution de Amérique (Paris,
1787), 2 vol.

— ., Vie de George Washington (Paris, 1811).

Raynat, G. T., Considérations sur la Pax de 1783 (Berlin,
1783).

— , Histoire philosophique et politique des Etablissements et
du Commerce des Européens dans les deux Indes (Amster-
dam, 1770), 6 vol. (For the other editions, see Chapter I.)

—., Révolution de l’Amérique (Dublin, 1781).

——, Tableau et Révolution des Colonies anglaises de Amérique
septentrionale (Amsterdam, 1781), 2 vol.

Rosert, F., Le Républicanisme adapté a la France (Paris, 1790).

Rosertson, G., Histoire de l’ Amérique (Maestricht, 1777), 4 vol.

RoBESPIERRE, MAXIMILIEN, Le Défenseur de la Constitution

(Paris, 1792).

, CEuvres complétes (Paris, 1912), 3 vol.

Rosin, Asse, Nouveau Voyage dans l Amérique septentrionale
(Philadelphia and Paris, 1782).

RocHaMBEAU, Marouis pe, Mémoires (Paris, 1809), 2 vol.

Roeperer, Du Gouvernement (no date).

Roranp, Mapame, Lettres publiées par Claude Perroud (Paris,
1900), 2 vol.

——., Lettres Nouvelle Série (Paris, 1913), 2 vol.

, Lettres aux Demoiselles Cannet (Paris, 1867), 2 vol.

Romain, ComTE DE, Souvenirs d'un O fficier royaliste (Paris,
1824), 3 vol.

Rousaup, Asse, Histoire générale de l’Asie, de lV’ Afrique et de
Amérique (Paris, 1770-1775), 14 vol.

Royer, AsBe, Discours prononcé dans lEglise N. D. de Provins
(Faris, 1775):

Rupter, La Jeunesse de Benjamin Constant (Paris, 1908).

SAINTE-BEUVE, Causeries du Lundi (Paris, no date), third edi-
tion, Vol. VII.

SarntE-Crorx, Baron DE, Observations sur le Traité de Paix
conclu & Paris le 10 Février 1763 (Amsterdam, 1780).
SALADIN, Cures, Coup d’Oeil politique sur le Continent (1800).

SaurIN, B. J., L’Anglomane (Paris, 1772), comedy in one act.

Sauvicny, B. pE, Washington ou la Liberté du Nouveau Monde
(Paris, no date).

Secur, Comte pve, Mémoires ou Souvenirs et Anecdotes (Paris,

1824-1826), 3 vol.600 THE REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT

   
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

 

SERVAN, Projet de Déclaration des Droits de 1Homme et du |
Citoyen (1789).
SouLaviE, Mémozres historiques et diplomatiques de Barthélemy.
, Mémoires sur le Regne de Louis XVI (Paris, 1801), 6 vol.
Soutes, F., Hzstowre des Troubles de Amérique (Paris, 1787),
4 vol.
STAEL, MADAME DE, Considérations sur la Révolution francaise
(1818), 3 vol.

SwAN, CoLoneEL, Causes qui se sont opposées au Progrés du Com-
merce entre la France et les Etats-Unis (Paris, 1790).
TALLEYRAND PeERiIGORD, Maurice beg, Eclaircissements donnés

par le Citoyen Talleyrand (Paris, Year VII).

» Mémoires, Lettres inédites et Papers secrets, publiés par le

Duc de Broglie (Paris, 1891).

—, Mémoires sur les Relations commerciales des Etats-Unis
avec (Angleterre (Paris, 1799).

Tancuy La BoissiEre, Mémoire sur la Situation commerciale de
la France avec les Etats-Unis (no date).

——, Observations sur la Dépéche écrite le 16 Janvier 1797, par
M. Pickering (Philadelphia, 1797).

TocQgurvILLE, ComMTE vE, La Démocratie en Amérique (Paris,
1880), 3 vol.

Tour pu PIN DE GouVERNET, MARQUISE DE La, Mémoires d'une
Femme de cinquante Ans (Paris, 1913), 2 vol.

Touron, Pere, Histoire de l’Amérique (Paris, 1768), 4 vol.

Tucker, Cuz bono? (London, 1782).

VASSE, BARONNE DE, Mémoires pour servir a l’Histoire de la
Révolution de l’ Amérique (1787 { ?]).

VERGENNES (?), Mémoire historique et politique sur la Loutst-
ane (Paris, 1802).

VERRIER, Atlas ou Recueil de Cartes détaillées des Provinces de
l Amérique septentrionale (Paris, 1784).

Vicg p’Azyr, CEuvres (Paris, 1805), 6 vol.

ViLLiERS DU TERRAGE, Marc pe, Les derniéres Années de la
Louisiane Francaise (Paris, 1903).

VincENT, Lettres d'un Membre du Congrés américain (Paris,
1779)-

VoLNEY, CHASSEB@UF DE, Tableau du Climat et du Sol des
Etats-Unis (Paris, 1803), 2 vol.

VoLTAIRE, CEuvres (1877-1882), 50 vol.L’Abeille francaise, 342

Abrégé de la Revolution de
Amérique anglaise, 158

Académie des Jeux Floraux, Tou-
louse, 198

Academy of Arts and _ Sciences,
Boston, 129

Academy of Lyons, 194, 197

Academy of Sciences, Paris, 148,
212, 213; commemoration of
Franklin, 290

Academy of Sciences, Philadelphia,

214

Adams, John, 27, 35, 41, 52, 63, 74;
76, 130, 276, 406; wife’s view of
French classics, 39; induces Dutch
government to declare in favor of
America, 118; demands Newfound-
land fishing privileges, 120; mem-
ber of peace commission, 165;
Davila, 279; aristocratic attitude,
310; elected president, 373; sends
envoys-extraordinary to France,
404; public opinion in support of
411; makes advances to France,
425; sends ministers to France,
1799, 429; imbued with French
ideas, 440

Adams, John Quincy, 313

Adams, Samuel, 30, 32; comment on
French aid, 105; supports Repub-
lican cause, 360

Address to the Privileged Orders,

301

Adelaide, Madame, 92

Adet, as minister to the U. S., 370;
advice to the French government,
396

Adresse aux Anglais, 319

Advice to the Privileged Classes,
318

Affaires de JUVAngleterre et de
lV’ Amérique, 89, 90, 142, 150

Age of Reason, The, 365

d’Aiguillon, Minister of Foreign Af-
fairs, 5

d’Albany, Comte, 498

d’Alembert, Jean Le Rond, 68

Allen, Ethan, 228

Alliance, Franco-American, 135, 164,
175, 309, 312; desire for, 755
terminated by Jay, 170; attacked,

363 Pe ang
Almanach américain, 187

INDEX

pete Linhen athe SEE Et Pe Pt Oe Ore Meike ake SO

 

 

 

Alsop, Richard, 416

Amélie, 189

America, glorious future depicted by
Raynal, 12, 13, 16, 17; considered
Utopia, 22, 23, 55; French propa-
ganda against, 65, 66; influence on
French Revolution, 250; as refuge
for émigrés, 317; origin and age,
479

L’Américain aux Anglais, 143

L’Américain sensé par hazard en
Europe, 14

American Crisis, 318

American delegates honored by
Napoleon I, 437

American life as depicted by Créve-
coeur, 233

American Museum, The, 341

American Philosophical Society, 174,
454; admired in Europe, 20, 34,
4!

American Revolution, 26, 33; fre-
ligious aspect, 64, 74; spiritual
effects on France, 183; as model
for French Revolution, 257; moral
influence in France, 335

American tradition, influence in
France, 428, 442, 444, 450; in-
fluence on Chateaubriand, 447

Americans, account of Abbé Robin,
177.

Americanus, 111

L’Amérique indépendante, 297

L’Ami des Patrtotes, 315

Anarchiad, 218

d’Anglas, Boissy, 362

Anglomane, Saurin’s, 4

Anglomania, ridiculed in Paris, 1770,
4; Voltaire’s, 13, 53, 65

Annales, 45

Annales  patriotiques, 258, 278,
319

Année Littéraire, 248

Anti-Federalists, 227

Antilles, French, commerce with
WU. S3e273

Argus, The, 358

d’Arnauld, Baculard, 5, 189

Art study in France, 212

Articles of Confederation, 150

Asgill, 188

Assemblée des Savants et Artistes,
154

Atticus, 359

601

Bsrszagizapigiges it~ eser2eess

ad

eee

oe

ee ee

siss

ne ie Ae

se2age

—S3a-

aeduseseeotesree

rae

7x

Eee te et tot to ee

a

ETE Te TT os tt tt ee602

Auburnet, 260

Aurora, The, publishes text of Jay’s
treaty, 356; assails government,
358; defends France, 414

Austria, attitude toward American
insurgents, 100

d’Autrey, Fabry, 14

Avis aux Faiseurs de
282

Constitution,

Bache, Franklin, 414

Bailly, Jean Sylvain, 317

Baker, Polly, invented by Franklin,
II

Baltimore, Lord, 2

Baltimore, Sulpician colony in, 318

Bancal des Issarts, 296

Bandole, Abbé, 130, 176

Baptists, 31, 219

Barbé-Marbois. See Marbois

Barber of Seville, 56

Barbeu-Dubourg. See Dubourg

Barlow, Joel, 216; 217, 301; 9422);
and land speculation, 260; voted
French citizenship, 315

Barnave, Antoine P. J., 256

Barruel, Abbé, Memoirs on
Jacobism, 365

Bavarian Illuminati. See Illuminati

de Beaumarchais, Caron, 56, 57, 98,
405; influence on Louis XVI, 58,
59; American activities, 60, 61, 83,
Drs, 142

Beaumets, 317

de Beaurieu, Guillard, 19

Belisarius, 359

Bellini, Charles, 129

Benezet, Anthony, 131, 171

Bentley, William, 470

Bergasse, 240, 279

Berthier, Father J. E., 21

Bibliotheque de Jurisprudence, 239

Boinod, 170

417;

Bingham family and the _ Tilly-
Bingham scandal, 456

de Boismartin, 85

La Boissiére, Tanguy. Sce Tanguy

La Boissiére

Bonaparte, Elisa, 434

Bonaparte, Jerome, 436

Bonaparte, Napoleon. See Napoleon I

Bonnet de Fréjus, Abbé, 446

Bonneville, Nicolas de, 2y6

de Bonvouloir, Achard, 39, 51, 74

Books, on U. S. by Frenchmen, 184;
picture presented by, 1770-75, 3, 4,
Be Oy 174 On Gp tOy ik) FZ, 135, 145
N55) LOs) 174 Os X01 20, 22; 23, 355
39, 40, 41, 44, 66; popularity of
French ones in America, 39

Bossuet, Jacques, 41

Boston, port closed, 30; Tea Party,

47
Boston Gazette, 41, 75

INDEX

  

 

Botanical garden at Harvard, 211 ;
La Bouche de Fer, 295
Bourdon, L., 235
Brackenridge, H. H., 375
Brillon, Madame, 148
Brissot de Warville, Jean-Pierre, 89,
237, 238, 239, 242, 243, 249, 278,
296, 300; engaged in land specu-
lation, 260; on religion in U. S.,
285; on Franklin, 291; plan for
exile of King, 320; fall, 333
British West Indies, American trade
with the, 355
de Broglie, C. V., Count, 124
de Broglie, Marshal, 67, 85
Brown, Charles Biockden, novels of,
462
Buffon, 18, 41
Burgoyne, 60;
toga, 98
Burk, John Daly, 461
Bute, Lord, 29, 483, 498

surrender at Sara-

Le Calendrier de Philadelphie, 245

Calonne, 191

Calvert, George, 23

Camillus, 360

Canada, scheme to unite with U. S.,
322

Caricature of Devil-Directory circu-
lated, 414

Carra, 278; quoted, 258

Carriére, Bonne, 321

Carroll, Charles, 35, 51

Carver’s Travels, 185

La Cassette verte de M. de Sartines,

140

Castorland, New York, 317

Catherine the Great, 78

Catholic church, Quakerism used as
weapon against, 245

Catholicism, attacked by Voltaire, 13,
14; by Raynal, 14, 15; in Amer-
ica, 23, 36, 220, 468, 469, 471

Celuta, 10

Cato and Decius, 359

Cercle Social, 294, 295

Cerisier, 143

Cérutti, 269, 296

Champlain de la Blancherie, 154

Chappe, 21

Charleston, S. C., French revolution-
ary activities in, 323

de Charlus, Count, 124

Chas, J., 443

Chase, Samuel, 52, 74

Chassanis, 317

de Chastellux, Chevalier, 124, 197;
description of Washington, 181

Chateaubriand, 468, 477; influenced
by Raynal, 10; voyage to U. S.,

262, 263; enthusiasm for America,

385; on Washington and America,

446; genius of, 448INDEX 603

Chatham, 7, 8, 53

Chatterton, 7

Chénier, André, 244

Chesterfield, Lord, 40

de Cheverus, Mgr., 469

Choiseul, Claude Antoine G., 51, 92

Church of England in America, 24,
31, 64

Churches in the U. S. (see also
Religion in the U. S.); take up
Franco-American quarrel, 417

Cincinnati, Order of the, 204, 205

Civil Code adopted by France, 454

Claviere, Etienne, 239, 243

Clergy, American, attack France as
anti-religious, 363

Cloots, J. B., Baron, 319

Cobbett, 411, 423; attacks Jacobins,

361

Cockades, French, worn in America,
360; discarded, 411

Code de la Nature, 215

Colleges, American, 34, 35, 37, 38,
127, 174; French language taught
in, 209, 340; books given by Louis
meV. 212

Colonies, ancient and modern, 489

Colonies, English, 12; European
interest in, 17, 23; character of
members, 25, 26, 32; bond with
England, 27; growth, 28, 32; pro-
test against taxes, 29, 30, 44

Colonies, French, 24; reason for fail-
ure of, 27, 74; take arms against
England, 48, 55, 69, 70, 71

Commerce, American, measures detri-
mental to, adopted by France, 403,
405

Commerce with French Antilles, 173

Commercial relations between France
and U. S., 303

Common Sense, 90, 318

Comte de Vergennes, cause des
Etats généraux, 253

Condorcet, 197, 198, 215, 298; rallies
to Quakerism, 246; eulogy of
Franklin, 290

Confessions of Rousseau, 215

Congregationalism, 31

Congress, Continental, 30, 39, 47; 48,
65, 76, 78; diplomatic representa-
tions to France, 83; weakness of,
109; dissensions in, I12; discus-
sion of peace terms, I19

Congress, U. S., Franklin’s move for
single house, 225

Considérations sur V Ordre de Cincin-
natus, 204, 230

Conspiracy of Kings, 302

Constant, Benjamin, 236, 244, 317

Constitution of Maryland, 266

Constitution of Massachusetts, 266

Constitution of Pennsylvania, 131,
155}; printed by Brissot, 239

Constitution of U. S., 207, 441;
Paris editions, 149; adopted, 308;
ambiguity, 312

Constitution of Virginia, 266

Constitutional Convention, 223; de-
fense of, 227

Constitutions des principaux Etats de
VEurope et des Etats-Unis de
lV Amérique, 297

Constitutions of American states as
inspiration of the Declaration of
Rights, 264

Contat, Mlle., 437

Convention adopts measures detri-
mental to American commerce, 403

Cooper, Samuel, 133

Cooper, Thomas, 317

Correspondance littéraire, 155

Corruption of English Court, 7

Coste, Pastor, 323

Courrier d’ Avignon, 54, 68

Courrier de l Amérique, 170

Courrier de Europe, 81, 89

Courrier de Provence, 278

Créveceeur, Hector Saint-Jean de,
211, 216, 232, 446, 449

Crisis, 133

Croy, Duke de, 67, 95, 231

Cult of Reason, 14, 43, 80, 364

Cult of the Supreme Being, 335

Cults, religious, in France, 335

Culture in the U. S., French in-
fluence on, 459

Dalibard, 21, 148

de Damas, 124

Dartmouth College, French language
ats 220

Daire, William Richardson, sent as
envoy to France, 429

Davila, 279

Daymon, Francis, 38, 39, 52

Deane, Silas, 82, 101, 113; proposes
chair of French at Yale, 127

Les Débats, 435

Debelloy, 5

Debt, American, Claviére’s plan, 242

La Décade, 445

Decadence, European, depicted by
Raynal, 16; French, 36

Decadary cult, 335

Decius and Cato, 359

Declaration of Independence, origin
and character, 78-81; analysis in
Les Affairs de VAngleterre et de
Vv Amérique, 90; French enthusiasm
for, 94; attributed to Franklin,
155; French influence on tone of,
268; defined, 473

Declaration of the Rights of Man,
263; comparison with preamble to
American constitutions, 266; de-
fined, 474

du Deffant, Madame, 52, 68, 86

 
  
 
 
  
 
 
  
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
  
 
 
    
  
 
 
  
 
  
 
   
 
  
 
 
   
 
 
 
  
 
  
 
 
 
  
 
 
  
 
  
 
 
 
  
 
     

eee pe ee

Freee ee eT tT eat te.)

Pee eet eer ars:

Ee SL er ry ey ly

+455

Sree resve!

See ee ae604.

Deism, in New England, 220; French
influence toward, 344

de Kalb, Johann, 51, 66

Desjardins, 450

Delacroix, 297

Delille, Louis, 38

Demeusnier, 201, 297

Democrat or The Intrigues and Ad-
ventures of Jean le Noir, The, 362

Democratic influences, 1770-1800,
471

Democratic Republicans. See Re-
publican party

Democratic societies, campaign

against, 357, 360
Desfontanes, 292
Le Destin de l Amérique, 143
Deux Ponts, Prince Max de, 141,

180

Devil-Directory, caricature  circu-
lated, 414

Dickinson, John, 30, 374; in

favor of abolition, 226 ; he Letters
of a Pennsylvania Farmer, 359
Dictionnaire social et patriotique,

4,5

Dillon, Henriette-Lucie, 384

Directory, attempts to influence Mon-
roe, 378; refuses to receive min-
ister of U.S., 392; seeks to arouse
Americans against their govern-
ment, 394

Discours sur le Sacre de Louis XVI,
44

Disturbances, in France, 1770, 4; in
America, 30

du Barry, Mme., her connection with
spirit of time, 7, 36

Dubourg, Doctor Barbeu,
292

Dubroca, 436

Ducher, Jacques, 318, 380

Dupont, 21

Dubuisson, 158

Duminil, Ducray, 189

Dunkirk, American settlers at, 175

Dunlap, dramas of, 461

du Pan, Mallet, 52

Dupont, 215; helps Talleyrand, 427

Duport, 256

Du Portail, 122

Du Pouvoir exécutif, 316

Duval d’Espremesnil, patron of
colonizing enterprise, 261, 262

Duverney, Paris, 56

Dwight, cited, 363

21, 155,

Economics, treated by Raynal, 8

Economists, 131; their respect for
Europeans in America, 20; Frank-
lin’s relations with, 21-22, 45, 47,

72
Education, European, attempts to in-
troduce, into America, 340

INDEX

  

Education in the U. S.,
French influence, 452

L’Eléve de la Nature, 19

Elizabeth, Queen of England, con-
duct toward United Provinces, 490,
491; and Philip II of Spain, 491

Ellsworth, Oliver, sent as envoy to
France, 429

Emigrés in the U. S., 317, 342, 383,
387

Emile, 40

Encyclopédie, 5, 7

Encyclopédie methodique, 201

Encyclopédistes, 6, 23, 46

England, moral change if -1770;° 72
her persecution of Anglo-Ameri-
cans unpopular in Europe, 21, 22;
subtly attacked, 37; considered by
Americans inferior to France, 41,
42; international importance, 46,
69, 70; defensive alliance with,
355, 360; Favier on French propa-
ganda against, 481

d’Eon, Chevalier, 57, 58

Ephémérides du Citoyen, 20, 22

Episcopal Church, 219

Epistle to the Bostonians, 86

“Equal liberty,” 358

L’Espion anglais, 215

Esprit des Lots, 210

Essai historique, politique et moral
sur les Révolutions anciennes et
modernes considérées dans leur
Rapport avec la Révolution fran-
¢atse, 385

Essai sur les Meurs, 13

Essats historiques et politiques sur
les Anglo-Américatins, 159

d’Estaing, 123, 138

Eugenie, 131

Examination of the Government of
England, 279

208,

209 ;

Fabius, 374

Family Pact, 102

Faublas, 189

Fauchet, Abbé, 296;
Franklin, 288

Fauchet, Claude, chosen as minister
to the U. S., 336; difficulties of his
position, 338; as minister to the
U. S., 368; report to French gov-
ernment, 395

Faulcon, F., 432

Favier, 68, 142; on French inter-
vention in America and propaganda
against England, 481

Federalism, newspapers reopen fight
against, 423

Federalist, The, 318

Federalist literature and propaganda
from 1788 to 1800, 415

Federalist party, 332; victory over
Jefferson, 373; in control of

eulogy ofpublic opinion, 412; defeated, 439

Federalists, 26, 311, 312; defend
Jay’s treaty, 357, 360

Fénelon, 37, 215

Fenno, 271

Fersen, 180

Feuille hebdomadaire de la Généralité
de Limoges, 155

La Feuille villageoise, 296, 315

Feutry, 230

Filson, John, 185

Fleurieu, 436

de Fontanes, makes oration on Wash-
ington, 434

Foreigners, power voted President to
expel, from American territory,
413

Fourcroy, 21!

France, American antipathy against,
36, 37; sympathy with, 38; pre-
ferred to England by America, 41,
42; her lost prestige, 46; conflict
of opinion re America, 52, 53,54;
intervention, 60, 61; attacked by
Tories, 64; influence for American
independence, 77, 78; recognition
of U. S., 99; relations with Eng-
land, 109; financial aid to Wires
1173; as a nation, admired by U. S.,
271; identifies herself with democ-
racy, 314; toasts to, 360; dissatis-
faction of public with policy in the
New World, 382; growing senti-
ment for the U. S., 383; adopts
measures detrimental to American
commerce, 403; sentimental attach-
ment of Americans for, 410; atti-
tude after publication of
correspondence, 425; advances to
U. S., 427; Consulate succeeds
Directory, 429; negotiations of
Napoleon with U. S., 436; honors
Washington, 432; sentiment
toward U. S., 440; part played in
the life of U. S., 1770-1800, 471;
constitution, 488, 489; Favier on
intervention in America and propa-
ganda against England, 481

Franco-American alliance. See Al-
liance, Franco-American

Franklin, European administration
for, 20, 21; works translated into
French, 21, 27, 35, 37, 38, 39) 41)
Gis O3- 74; diplomatic mission to
France, 83; influence_on French,
95, 96; presented at French court,
101; and _ Voltaire, 108; sends
French books to Harvard, 128; at-
tacks on, secretly circulated, 140;
French opinion, 144-147; way 0
living in France, 148, 149; Ceuvres
completes, 155; asks for certificate
of loyal services, 172; as high
priest of philosophy, 156; starts

INDEX

movement of intellectual collabora-
tion, 214; moves for single house,
225; activities after the war, 229,
230; departure from Paris and
arrival at Philadelphia, 231; name
used to hamper revolutionists in
France, 282; effect of death in
France, 286; ceremonies in his
honor, 287; eulogies, 288, 289,
290; disciples in France, 293;
Robespierre’s veneration for, 333;
moral influence in France, 335;
statue excluded from Tuileries,
433; honored in France, 444;
Philosophical Society of Philadel-
phia founded by, 454

Frederick, 40, 68, 78; attitude
toward American independence,

99
Freemasonry, 6; Franklin’s activi-
ties in, 150; denunciations of, 417,
419. See also Masonic lodges
French Benevolent Society of Phila-
delphia, 344

French books in American libraries,
34% a ; :
French fleet in American Revolution,

117

French ideas defended by Republi-
cans, 420

French immorality shocks America,

455

French influence in America, 340;
on religion, 344, 468; rejected by
colleges, 452; on culture, 459; on
politics, 465

French language, study of, in U. S:
127, 209, 340

French officers in American army,
179

French sentiment for U. S., 383-

93

French Revolution, begun in 1788,
249; American reports of, 272,
306, 307; American opinion of,
325, 326; attitude of Puritans
toward, 363; defined as Antichrist,

365 5 .
French soldiers in American army,

121

French teachers, 38, 39, 210

“French Washington, The,’ 43!

Freneau, Philip, 216, 217, 218, 313;
346, 360, 410, 421; French in-
fluence on, 463

Fullarton, 496

Gage, 47
Gaillard, 170 5
Gallatin, Albert, 128, 414; cited,

409

Gallo-American Society, 240
Galloway, 5!

Gargoz, 194, 230

5943532349254 372 84647

Pease te ee

-

$sic837z

ee tees et

ee ee

ee ee et te a ee ese tees ee Poe

=e Re YY

eo

oe ee606

Garnier, 88
Gazette de France, 22, 55, 81, 215»

435

Gazette de Leyde, 54, 68, 215

Gazette de Paris, 281

Gazette des Deux Ponts, 141, 184

Gazette d’Utrecht, 81

Gazette of the United States,
312, 360

de Gébelin, Court, 128, 152

Genet, pére, 88, 141

Genet, Edme, 88; appointed minister
to U. S., 321; mission to U. S.,
322, 323; arrival in Philadelphia,
326; activities, 328, 329; recall,
330; commission instructed to dis-
avow, 336; publishes his instruc-
tions, 337; Jacobin influence
spread by, 357; anti-Christian
speeches of, 364; publishes instruc-
tions from France, 367

de Genlis, Mme., 318

Genty, Abbé, 197, 198

Gérard, 83, 87, 113, 131, 1323 in-
structions from Vergennes, 102;
reception in U. S., 105; relations
to France, 114; ideas on French
intervention in America and propa-
ganda against England, 482, 485,
488-490, 495-497 :

German Illuminati. See Illuminati.

Germany, attitude toward American

272,

insurgents, 100; propaganda
against U. S., 140
Gerry, Elbridge, appointed envoy-

extraordinary to
negotiates

France, 404;
with Talleyrand, 405,

425

Gibraltar, 166, 168
Ginguené, Pierre Louis, 296
Giraut, 38

Girondists, 293, 296; international
ideals, 319; desire for union with
S., 320
Gorgy, 235

Government, theories of, 28,
45, 48, 71, 72, 79, 80

de Grasse, 117

Greenleaf assails government, 358

Grégoire, 295

Grenville, Lord,

Grimm, aedack utcnion 155

Grotius, Hugo, on ancient colonies,

32; 44;

469
Guiana, slaves freed in, 172
de Guibert, Mme., 297
Guillotin, Doctor, 244
Gustave III, King of Sweden, 82

Hamilton, Alexander, 224, 225; de-
fense of Constitutional Convention,
227; monarchic ideas, 310; de-

fends alliance with England, 360;
intrigues of,

407; ihe . Stand,

INDEX

    

and

him

416; rivalry between
Adams, 440

Hammond, 369; assists Federalists,
361

Hancock, 359

“Hartford Wits,” 218

Harvard College, instructor of
French chosen, 128; French taught
at, 211; and Unitarianism, 470

Harvard School of Medicine, 211

Hatred, tendency from, to love, 8

Haumaid, John, 38

d’Hauterive, Count, 408

Hébert, Religion of Reason, 335

Helvetius, his plan to unite writers
and savants, 6

Helvetius, Madame, 148,

Hennin, 49, 87

Henry IV, proposed federation, 227

Henry, Patrick, 51, 104

Hilliard d’Auberteuil, 154, 159, 160,
185, 189

Historie abrégée des _ principaux
Evénements arrivés dans le Nou-
veau Monde, 10

L’ Histoire de la derniére Guerre, 186

Histoire des Troubles de l Amérique
anglaise, 186

L’Histoire d’un Pou francais, 140

Historie générale de VAsie, de
Vv Afrique et de l’ Amérique, 10

Histoire impartiale des Evénements
militaires et politiques de la der-
niére Guerre, 185

Histoire philosophique et politique
des Etablissements et du Com-
merce des Européens dans les deux
Indes, 8, 9; success of, 10; in-
accuracy, 10, 11; essential thesis,
16, 17, 41. See Raynal

History of the American Revolution
in. South Carolina, 185

Holback, 6

Holland, 67;
WES rag:

Hornot, 10

Hottoman, Francois, 483

Houdetot, Madame, 232

Houdon, Jean Antoine, 287, 433

Huger, Isaac, 325

Huguenots, 23, 170

Humphreys, David, 216

I51I, 230

declares in favor of

Illuminati, 365, 423; denunciations
of the, 417, 419

Immorality of the French
America, 455

Impartial Review of the Causes and
Principles of the French Revolu-
tion, An, 421

L’Imprimeur ou la Féte de Frank-
lin, 292

Independence, urged by De _ Bon-
vouloir, 74, 75; Adams’ resolution,

shocksINDEX 607

“6, 77; influenced by French
opinion, 78
Independence, Declaration of. See
Declaration of Independence
Independent Gazetteer, 171, 359
Indians, hated by colonists, 24, 25
International federation, 319
Izard, Ralph, 118

Jacobin clubs, proclamation against,

357

Jacobins, international ideals, 319;
attitude toward federalism, 334;
imprisonment of Paine, 334; at-
tacks upon the, 361, 362, 365;
changes among the, 394; denuncia-
tions of, 417, 419; against Talley-
rand, 425; attitude toward Amer-
ica, 432, 442

Jacobism, Memoirs on, 365

Jay, John, antipathy to France, 165;
appointed Secretary of State, 169;
defense of Constitutional Conven-
tion, 227; sent to England to regu-
larize relations with the U. S.,
349; involves the U. S. in a policy
of rapprochement with Great
Britain, 353; mistrust of France,
3533; substitutes defensive alliance
with England for the one with
France, 355

Jay’s treaty, published by The
Aurora, 356; tatified, 373; true
nature hidden from Monroe, 378

Jefferson, 18, 39, 76, 78, 79, 80, 81,
129, 201, 439; creates chair of
French at William and Mary Col-
lege, 128; friendship with de
Chastellux, 182; sends books from
France, 214; influence of French
philosophers on, 222; letter to
Brissot quoted, 242; part in
French politics, 247; activities in
French Revolution, 254; friend-
ship with La Fayette, 255; style
in Declaration of Independence,
268; doctrines concerning liberty,
270; interprets French Revolution
to America, 274; leader of demo-
cratic spirits, 311; Rights of Man
doctrine, 424; French influence on,
465, 475; as president, 467; in-
fence on French-American rela-
tions, 467

Jesuits, 25

Journal d’ Agriculture, 20

Journal de Bruxelles, 248

Journal de Lyon, 246

Journal de Paris, 246, 435

Journal des Médecins militat
Cais, 211

Journal des Savants, 20, 142

Journal d’un Officer de la Flotte de

M. le Comte d’Estaing, 138

res fran-

Journal général de la Cour et de la
Ville, 282

Journal général de Europe, 294

Journal historique de Geneve, 68

Journal historique et politique, 52

Journal universel, 316

July fourth, early celebrations, 81

King, Rufus, 223
Knights of Corsica, 37
Kosciusko, 427

La Fayette, 67, 85, 97, 264, 474; ef-
forts for America, 122, 190; ac-
tivities in French Revolution, 249,
254, 276, 277; friendship with
Jefferson, 255; relation to Declara-
tion of Rights, 268; organizes
French National Guards, 269;
avoidance of statements on fre-
ligious questions, 284, 285; oppor-
tunism, 301; imprisonment, 325;
known as “French Washington,”
431; in Revolution of 1830, 445

Lalande, 151

Lally, 256, 279

La Luzerne, Count de, 116, 121, 128,
130, 133, 174; attachment to
Americans, 173

Lameths, The, 256

Land speculation, 260

Lanthenas, 236, 244, 296

La Ray de Chaumont, 317

de La Rochefoucauld d’Einville, Duc,

gI, 150

de La Rochefoucauld Liancourt, Duc,
270, 390; eulogy of Franklin, 287;
on America, 442

La Rouێrie, 122, 207, 257

Laszwinski, 189

La Tour du Pin de Gouvernet, Hen-
riette-Lucie Dillon, 217, 384, 446,
450

Laurens, Henry, 35, 106

de Lauzun, Duc, 124

de La Vauguyon, 118

Laws adopted by France and Wess,
454

Learned societies, 214

Lebarbier Le Jeune, J. L., 188

Leboucher, Julien, 186

Lebrun, 443

Lee, Arthur, 58, 60, 63, 118; diplo-
matic mission to France, 83

Tee, Ri H 74

Lees of Virginia, 113, 114, 115, 136

Lemaire, 316

“Teonidas,” 132

Lerebours, 317

LeRoy, 21, 148

de Lescure, 245

Letombe, 408

Letter to the Convention, 315, 318

Letter to the Hessians, 150

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
    
 
 
   
  
  
 
  
  
  
 
 
  
  
  
 
 
   
 
 
 
  
 
 
  
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
  
 
 
 
   
 
      

gies:

Ss dsb see Fods FS rs SSRSES Ee

2 5

cP = |

ee ee ee

es608

Letters from Paris, 422

Letters of a Pennsylvania Farmer,
359

Letters on Various Interesting and
Important Subjects, 421

Lettres de M. R.au Lord D. touchant
le Traité de Commerce conclu
entre la France et les Etats-Unis,
143

Lettres du Comte d’Albany au Lord
Bute, 142

Lettres dun Membre du
americain, 143

Lettres d’un Citoyen des Etats-Unis
a des Frangats sur les Affaires pré-
sentes, 246

Lettres dun Cultivateur américain,
232, 260

Lettres sur les Anglais, 13

Le Veillard, 148

Levy, Samson, 457

Lexington, battle of, 48, 54

de Lezay Marnésia, Marquis, 236,
244, 387, 446, 450; patron of
colonizing enterprise, 261, 262

de Lezay Marnésia, Count, 390

Liberty, inseparable from America,
belief of Europeans, 1774, 22; re-
ligious, sought, 23, 44, 51, 71;
character of American, 79

Liberty of conscience, 268

Libraries, 34

Linguet, 45, 67, 92, 94

Literature, American, French in-
fluence on, 342, 459, 462

Literature, French, influx into U. S.,
215, 342

Livingston, B. and R. R., 279, 350,

369

Locke, 79, 80

Lodge of the Nine Sisters, 151, 154,
176, 230, 293

Logan, George, 427

Lolotte et Fanfan, 189

London, 5, 7

London Company, 23

Long, 260

de See aDs: Abbé Pierre, 185,
186

Congres

Louis XIII, 492

Louis XIV, 36, 492

Louis XV, 45 5, 7, 41, 43,..56, 57

Louis XVI, 43, 44, 45, 47, 56, 58,
59, 60, 98; attitude toward Amer-
ican independence, 91, 92; held up
as benefactor of U. S., 208; de-
throned, 314; plan to send him to

S., 320, 321; feeling in Amer-

ica concerning his execution, 324,
325; false arraignment of, 367

Louisiana, 102, 274; rumor of
France’s plan to seize, 362; claims
of U. S. and France, 438; French

laws in, 454

INDEX

     

Louvet, 189, 316

Love, tendency from hatred to,
1770-5, 8

Lutheran Church, 219

Lycée de Paris, 153

Lypus, center of American liberalism,
24

Mably, Abbé, 199, 200, 2o1

MacPherson, 7

MacRea, Miss, 189

Madison, James, 223; defense of the
Constitutional Convention, 227;
Rights of Man, 424

Maison’s puppet show, 408

de Maistre, Joseph, 392

Mallet du Pan, 248, 361

Malonet, 68

Mandrillon, Joseph, 184, 187

Mangourit, 323

Manners, American, French in-
fluence on, 126; described by Abbé
Robin, 177

Marat, on Franklin, 291

Marbois, de Barbé-, 116, 128, 166
169, 174

Maria-Theresa, 78, 93

I

Marie Antoinette, 92; hostility
toward Americans, 172

Marmontel, 5, 39

Marshall, John, appointed envoy-

extraordinary to France, 404; re-
port to Adams published, 411; wel-
comed in the U, S., 413

de Marsillac, Jean, 244, 455; activi-
ties in behalf of Quakers, 294

Maryland, constitution, 266

Mason, Thomas, gives text of Jay’s
treaty to The Aurora, 356

Masonic lodges, 365; of Santo
Domingo, 344. See also Free-
masonry

Masons, French, honor Washington,
436

Massachusetts, constitution, 266

Massachusetts Sentinel, 220, 361

Materialism, reaffirmed by Holbach,
1770, 6; defended by Raynal, 8

de Maurepas, Count, 44, 47, 52, 98;
attitude toward American aid, 88

de Mayer, 188

Mazzéi, 203

Medicine, French influence on, 211

Mémoire justicatif de la Cour de
Londres sur la présente guerre,
139

Memoirs on Jacobism, 365

Memoranda on the Commercial Rela-
tions of the United States with
England, 399

Mercier, Louis Sébastien, 278

Mercure de France, 22, 54, 55, 90,
142, 248, 249, 294

Mercy, 93Methodism, 32

Michaux, 328

Middle Class, French, excited against
government, 5, 277

Milhaud, 293

Miller, Samuel, 464

“Millions for defense and not one
cent for tribute,” 412

de Mirabeau, Vicomte, 150, 183, 204,
219, 230, 270, 278

de Miralles, Don Juan, 220

Mississippi River, navigation privi-
leges, 120

Modern Chivalry, 375

Moliére, 39

Monarchy, overthrow of, 314

Le Monde primitif, 128

Monroe, James, mission to France,
349, 369, 3773; recalled, 381

de Montbarrey, Prince, 52, 67

Montesquieu, 40, 210, 215, 224

Montgolfiers, 218

de Montmorin, 117, 170, 174, 254

Moral force of America influences
actions of France, 428

Morality, change in, 1770-5, 7, 39

Moreau, 68

Moreau de Saint-Méry, 272, 317;
396, 443.

Morellet, Abbé, 282

“Mores,” 46, 222, 286; American,
194

Morris, Gouverneur, 120, 303, 305;
arranges Genet’s recall, 330

Morris, Robert, 209; antipathy to
French, 305

Morse, Jedediah, 276, 418, 423;
cited, 366

Mounier, 256, 263, 279

de Moustier, 172; project concern-
ing Louisiana, 274; friendship for
Washington, 275; not sent back
to America, 303

Murray, J., 31

Murray, Vans, 428; sent as envoy
to France, 429

Musée de Paris, 153

de Muy, Count, 44

Nancréde, 211, 244, 342

Nantucket whalers, 175, 191!

Napoleon I, 429, 430; honors Wash-
ington to strengthen his position,
432; negotiations with the U. S.,
436; admiration for Washington,
438; effect of policies on the
S., 441

National Gazette, 313, 346

National Guards, French, 269

Nations, universal confederation of,
discussed, 319

“Nature,” 18, 19, 24, 26, 53, 183

Naval reverses in the American

Revolution, 138

INDEX

weed ota

Peres ier eT:

Necker, 141, 316

Nelson, 414

New England, inaccurately depicted
by Raynal, 11, 12; character of
colonists of, 25, 26; assists Eng-
land and the Federalists, 362

Newfoundland fisheries, 84, 120

New Haven, mayor appoints illus-
trious Frenchmen as citizens, 208

New London Gazette, 36, 40

New Orleans, Genet’s projected ex-
pedition against, 328

Newspapers, picture presented by,
1770-5, 3, 4) S» 6, 7, 19, 20, 22,
35, 36, 40, 41, 54, 55, 56, 68, 75,
76. See also Press

Newspapers, American, 33, 34, 346;
reopen fight against Federalism,
423; religious views, 468

Newspapers, French, on American
affairs, 89; in the U. S., 345;
criticize the U. S., 401; on death
of Washington, 435

New World, wonder of, depicted by
Raynal, 9, 13; inferiority of, de-
picted by De Pauw, 17; considered
a danger, 66

New York Daily Advertiser, 209

New York Journal, 40

de Noailles, Vicomte, 124, 269, 270;
escape to America, 317

Noailles family, 85

Nobility, Mirabeau’s attack on, 205

Nobles, activities at beginning of
French Revolution, 254, 278

North, Lord, 52

Northwest Passage, 10

Notes on Virginia, 18, 129, 202

Nouveau Voyage, by Abbé Robin,

- ee ere ee ts ter Pe he ee ed el

Cee ee a eS ee

Poe

ie a a em

177

Nouveau Voyage dans les Etats-Unis,
285

Nouvelle Alliance a proposer entre
les Républiques francaise et amért-
caine, 318

Nouvelle Heloise, 215

Nouvion, 366

‘es

tte

Observations d’un Voyageur anglais
sur la Maison de force de Bicétre,
230

Observations on Civil Liberty, 91

Observations sur la Physique, 20,
211

Observations sur le Mémoire justifi-
catif de la Cour de Londres, 142

Observations sur le Traité de Paix
de 1763, 143

Ogden, J. C., 423

Orléans, Duke of, sons of the, 446

Osgood, David, 366

Oswald, Richard, 165, 166

Otis, James, 29

Otto, 174, 304

? eee eee oe ip Gs deen

tes)

oo ee610

Pahin de Champlain de la Blancherie,
244

Paine, Thomas, 90, 114, 134, 365,
444; reply to Abbé Raynal, 196;
pamphlet against paper money
quoted, 281; republican activities
in France, 299, 300; elected to
French Convention, 314; plan for
sending King to U. S., 320, 321;
imprisoned by Jacobins, 334; shat-
ters Monroe’s work in France,
379; attack on Washington, 380;
suggests pretexts for returning
Pinckney to U. S., 404

Le Pamphlet programmatique, 143

Paper money, American, 139; ques-
tion of use in France, 280

Parliament, English, 28, 29, 40, 72;
dissensions in, 4

Parliaments, French, exiled, 5

Parny, 86

Pastoret, 392

Patriote frangais, 278, 315

Patriot’s party, 271

de Pauw, Abbé, 17, 22, 41, 219;
refuted by Jefferson, 130; on
origin and age of America, 479

Peace of treaty of 1763, 4

Peace terms, 165, 1

Penn, William, 13, 23

Pennsylvania, 11; Raynal’s ideal, 15,
16; constitution of, 131, 155, 239

Pennsylvania Gazette, 5

Pére Duchéne, 316

Periodicals, French, criticize U. S.,
401

Perlet, 316

Eernetly Dom, advocate of Nature,
I

Persecution, 23, 24

Le petit Code de la Raison, 293

Philadelphia, 11

Philadelphia General Advertiser, 329

Philip II, of Spain, and Queen Eliza-
beth, 491

Philosophers, 40, 44, 78, 80

Philosophical literature in American
libraries, 215

Philosophical Dictionary, 13

Philosophical Society of Pennsyl-
vania, See American Philosophi-
cal Society

Philosophical Society of Philadelphia.
See American Philosophical Society

Phlipon, Manon. See Roland,
Madame

Pickering, Thomas, 470

Pictet, .C., 3&8

Pilgrims, 23

Pinckney, C. C., Directory refuses to

receive, as U. S. minister, 392,
404; appointed envoy-extraordi-
nary to France, 404; report to

Adams published, 411

INDEX

 

    

Pinto, Isaac, 66

Pitt, 31

Pittachus, 359

Poetry, American, French influence
on, 463

de Polignac, Diane, 92

Political intrigue in 1794, 349

Political parties in U. S., 311

Pollier, 194

Poncelin de la Roche, Tilhac, 187

de Pontleroy, 51

Poor Richard’s Almanac,
318

Portique républicain, 436

Poullin, 128

Pownall, Theodore, 139

Press. See also Newspapers, gag-
ging of the, 414

Price, Richard, 91, 204

Princeton University, 212

Le Principe ou la Régle de Vie des
premiers Chrétiens, 294

Proces des trots Rois, 143

Progress, American, depicted by
Raynal, 16; sought in France, 45,
46

Propaganda, English, against France,
170, 171, 207; in America, 361

Protestants, La Fayette’s campaign
in behalf of, 191

Publicola, 313

Pulawski’s Legion, 122

Puritans, 23; 31, 32; 363 atutade
toward French Revolution, 363

155, 230,

Quakers, 19, 140, 144; praised by
Raynal, 12, 14, 15, 16; a weapon
against Catholicism, 13, 245, 246;
character, 26; relations with Con-
gress, 131; defended by Abbé
Robin, 178; in France, 192, 244,
245, 293, 2904; depicted by Créve-
ceur, 233; relations with de
Marsillac, 455

Quakers a leur Frére Voltaire, Les, 14

Quarrel, between Pervetty and De
Pauw over America, 18

Quesnay de Beaurepaire, a, 131,
212, 340, 760

Qvesnay,Frangets, >!

Rabaut Saint-Etienne, 256, 273, 286,

319
Racine, Abbé, 178
Ramsay, David, 174, 185, 216
Randolph, influence on Fauchet, 369
Raynal, Abbé, 8, 9; his creation of
new marvelousness, 9; his talent,
9; imaccuracy, 10, I1; contradic-
tions, 11, 12; dogmatism, 12; his
comparison of Quakerism and
Catholicism, 14, 15; of Europe and
America, 16, 22, 40, 41, 78, 81;
work published in America, 129;
praised by Courrier de l’Amérique,171; establishes literary contest at
Academy of Lyons, 194; popu-
larity in America, 215; wane of
popularity, 260

Rayneval, 166

Reason, the Only Oracle of Man, 221

Reason, cult of, 14, 43, 80, 364

Recherches historiques et politiques
sur les Etats-Unis, 203

Recherches philosophiques sur_ les
Anglo-Américaims, 17} refuted by
Pernetty, 18

Rédacteur, 429

Réflexions itmpartiales sur lV Amér-
ique, Les, 143

Refugees, French. See Emigrés

Regnault de Saint-Jean d’Angely,
315

Reguier, 38

Religion in America, 219, 284;
changes, 31, 32; French influence
on, 346, 468

Religion in France; 335; sentimental
recrudescence of, 1770-5, 6-8

Religion of Reason, 335

Republican party in the iW, ‘Ss ruse
made of Genet’s services, 327;
sympathy for French Revolution,
331; growing strength, 374

Republican propaganda in France,
Americans blamed for, 300

Republicanism, example of we Ss
297; in France, 297, 298, 299,

314

Republicans, defend democratic so-
cieties, 358; assail government,
359; demand diplomatic docu-
ments, 411; defend French ideas,
420

Réveries d’un Promeneur solitaire, 6

Revolution, American. See Ameri-
can Revolution; French. See
French Revolution

Rhode Island College, French taught
at, 129

Richelieu, 50

Richmond, project of a Franco-
American university at, 212

Rights of Man, 299, 313, 314, 318,

424

Rights of Man, doctrine of, 424

Rights of the British Colonists As-
serted and Proved, 29

Rittenhouse, David, 214

Rivington, James, 110

Robespierre, 157; veneration for
Franklin, 333; cult of the Supreme
Being, 335; plans_ to win back
Americans, 336; instructions to
Fauchet, 368

Robin, Abbé, 176

Robison, 417

Rochambeau, character, 181; army,

179

INDEX

Roderigue Hortalez and Co., 59

Rodney, Admiral, 109

Roederer, Pierre Louis, 436

Roland, J. M., address to the Acad-
emy of Lyons quoted, 258

Roland, Madame, 10, 296

Rolands, The, 244

Rollin, 39, 215

Rotch, William, 294

Roubaud, Abbé, 10

Rousseau, 5, 6, 40, 46, 53, 78, 215,
483; his lessons bearing fruit, 6;
influence on European view of
America, 19; connection with
Declaration of Independence, 79,
80, 81

Royalist émigrés, sentiment for the
U. S., 383, 387

Royer, Abbé, 44

Rush, Benjamin, 130

de Saint Germain, 52

Saint-Ildefonse, treaty of, 438

de Saint-Pierre, Bernardin, 236

de Saint Pry, 38

de Sainte-Croix, Baron, 143

Saladin, Charles, 443

Saratoga, victory of, effect on
French aid to the colonies, 98

de Sartines, 159

Saugrain, 244

de Sauvigny, Billardon, 436

Savary, 246

Sedition Act, 413

de Ségur, Louis Philippe, 393

Senate, American, aristocratic strain
in, 309

Sentiment, rise of, 1770-5, 6, 7; 8

de Sevigny, Abbé Colin, 176

Shays’ Rebellion, 221

Ships, American, 428, 436; subjected
to depredations of French priva-
teers, 403, 405

Siéyés, Emmanuel Joseph, Count,

00

SEGeny: Dickinson for abolition of,
226

Slaves in Guiana freed, 192

Smith, Col. James, 260

Society of 1789, 287, 288

Society of the Friends of the
Negroes, 240, 241

Society of the Wooden Sword, 151

Soulés, Francois, 186

South, character of colonists, 25, 26;
French teachers in, 210

Souvaroff, 414

Spain, 68, 69; interests safeguarded
by Vergennes in treaty with
S., 102; distrust of Americans,
117

Le Spectateur américain, 187

Speculation in American land in
France, 260

Sekt tT ee te

eee ee ee ee ee re

eet. 2 S|

SIT Pt ae Te eee - o .
s¢ : Ee eee er eT ee Oe ee eed

Se et ee > YT gS612

Spies, 51, 57, 58

Spiritual union of countries, 318

Stamp Act, 29

Stand, The, 416

Stansbury, 35

States-General, 243; influence of
Vergennes and American ideas in
convening, 253

Steuben, Baron, 122

Stiles, ‘Ezra, 36, 38) 75, 127, 176;
210

de Stormont, 65

Suard, 53

Suffrage, universal, 281
Sullivan, James, 366, 421
Sullivan, General, 135

Sully, 39

Sulpicians, French, in America, 318,
344, 468

Systeme de la Nature, Le, Hol-
bach’s, 6

Tableau de la Situation actuelle des
Etats-Unis d’Amérique, Le, 388

Tableau de Paris, 215

Talleyrand, escape to America, 317;
activities in America, 398; criti-
cism of Americans, 399; appointed
Minister of External Relations,
404; attempt to extort money from
American envoys-extraordinary,
405; arouses indignation of Amer-
ican people, 406; after publication
of X Y Z correspondence, 426; in
Philadelphia, 455

Talon, Omer, 317

Tanguy La Boissiére, 371

Target, 194

Taxation, protested by colonies, 29

Télémaque, 39

de Ternant, 304

Terray, Comptroller-General, 5

de Tessé, Madame, 297

Tétard, Rev., 38

Thayer, John, conversion to Catholi-
cism, 220

Theater in the U. S., French in-
fluence on, 460

Theophilanthropy, 436, 444

Thévenot de Morande, 89

de Tilly, Alexandre, Count,
ham affair, 456

de Tocqueville, Alexis, 475

Tolerance, general absence of, in
America, 24; growth, 32; sought
in France, 46; disapproved by
Abbé Robin, 178

Tories, 26, 64, 74, 110, III

Les Torts apparents, 235

Traité sur la Tolérance, 13,

Treaties with France desiaret null
and void, 413

‘Treaty; of 1763, 4, 27;

chance to revise, 49, 65

Bing-

France’s

INDEX

    

Treaty of alliance between France
and the U. S., 101, 105

Treaty of 1783, 164

Trudaines, The, 297

Tucker, George, 139

Turgot, 6, 47, 52, 63, 66, 148; char-
acter, 49; reasons against inter-
vention, 69, 70, 71; attitude
toward America, 72, 73; book on
the U. S., 204

Two-house legislature, principle of,
279

Unitarianism, 31, 469

United Provinces, Elizabeth’s con-
duct toward, 490, 491

United States, 71; attitude toward
French aid, 104; in peace negotia-
tions, 166-169; stirs French imagi-
nation, 193; books on the, 194; as
model for other nations, 206; as
inspiration of French Revolution,
258; inaccurate pictures of, 260,
302; proclaims neutrality, 326;
moral influence in France, 336,
428; political situation in 1794,
348; French advances after publi-
cation of X Y Z correspondence,
428; negotiations with Napoleon I,
436; sentiment toward France,
440, 451; Constitution, 441; part
played in life of France, 1770-
1800, 471; under Jefferson, 467;
Favier on French intervention in,
481

United States
Paris editions,
ambiguity, 312

United States constitutions, 297; as
inspiration of the French Declara-
tion of Rights, 264

United States Gazette.
of the United States

University of Maryland, 209

University of Pennsylvania, 212

Constitution, 441;
149; adopted, 308;

See Gazette

Valerius, 359

La Vallée de Shénandoah en Vir-
ginie, 259

Valnais, 128

Vandal, 128

Vergennes, Gravier de, 51, 52, 55,

56, 58, 59, 60, 61, 63, 65, 67, 68,
71, 98, 116; character, 49, 50; at-
titude toward America, 73, 74, 77;
82, 87, 119, 173, 174; relations
with Franklin, 96, 146; counsels to
American ambassadors, 118; cabal
against, 141; suspected of duplicity
by American peace delegates, 166,
167; indignant at American atti-
tude, 168, 169; death, 170; parti-
san of tolerance, 191; appreciation
of his services to U. S., 208;American sympathies not trans-
mitted to successors, 253; on
French intervention in America
and propaganda against England,
SI

Veto power in America and France,
282

de Viart, 38

Villette, 299

Virginia, religious confusion in, 129;
constitution, 266

Vision of Columbus, 217

Volney, Count, 317, 427, 455, 458;
on America, 452

Voltaire, 5, 6, 39, 40, 78; his praise
of Quakers, 13, 14; rebuked, 14,
36; crowned at Comédie Fran-
caise, 107; blesses Franklin’s
grandson, 108; admitted to Ma-
sonic lodge, 152; popularity in
America, 215

Voyage d’ Amérique, 235

Le Voyageur américain, 184

War, fostered by Catholicism, 14,
15; feared by Turgot, 69, 70, 71;
rumors of, 1798, 410

Warren, J., 211

Washington, 28; appointed com-
mander-in-chief, 48; on French
aid, 105; on reception of French
nobles, 126; French opinion of,
144, 180; La Fayette’s love for,
190; Moustier’s opinion of, 275;
attitude toward French Revolution,
306, 307; proclaims neutrality of

U. S, in French war, 326; resent-
ment of Genet’s activities, 327;
perils of his position, 339; sends
ministers to England and France,
349; accepts text of Jay’s treaty
with England, 356; effect of his
death in France and America, 431 ;
honors paid him in France, 432;
lauded by Chateaubriand, 447

Webster, Noah, 329, 332, 341, 364

Weekly Register, 307

Whigs in America, 29, 30, 48, 75,
76, 77, 79

Whigs in England, 31, 48, 55, 112,
250, 251; violence of, 7,

Wilkes, 7, 53, 112

Willard, President of Harvard, 470

Willcox, William, 332

William and Mary College, 128,
212

Williams, Roger, first to define in a
social contract right of liberty of
conscience, 268

Witherspoon, John, 37, 212

Women, American, 180

Worship, urge to, 1770-5, 8

Writers, French, excited against gov-
ernment, 5; plagiaristic customs
of, 10

X Y Z correspondence, 412; circu-
lated by English, 425; effect of, in
France, 426; influence on Ameri-
can sentiment for France, 45!

Yale College, chair of French at, 127

a

ey
<
Ti

=e

ied
re
*

ree res

=a4~eeccaie

Tere Te Tere res et
ee a ee ee ee aed eee

Se peeree eres + le st.

ee

Re ee eee ee ee es

a dps 25 tessa Sag S33 4485

Past

ap SR agine

eeeoe

os cee
ory

rhea

beet eo
nee

ys <T

Sao

eer

- —s ate
toe et} Se” ioraigsucs
were Ly coe peer eee

2
cer

Coreen 4

Pr.

Tr

ee

cet et et tt} Paha e

eo gs oe -= ee

Pyaer ee

RrecseltaspveALDERMAN LIBRARY
The return of this book is due on the date
indicated below

DUE DUE

 

HARGE CARD
[015140
Og 4 use

 

 

Usually books are lent out for two weeks, but

ions and the borrower should

note carefully the date stamped above. Fines

are charged for over-due books at the rate of

five cents a day; for reserved books there are

special rates and regulations. Books must be
presented at the desk if renewal is desired.

L-1nT aI % 5 * SUA ERP On LCS
snaesens ie Nese y Nndstwusunita aes
atten Pte ht bh thee E 2

sere rire sah a

|
+
‘
ol