Our author himself, indeed, is not satisfied with this cause of the downfall of the French monarchy; and in the prosecution of his work he assembles such a variety of confederate instigations, that it would be impossible even for Bonaparte, the hero of the day, though gifted with ten times the powers he has evinced, to resist their aggregate efforts. A debauched court, an enslaved people, an exhausted treasury, grounds uncultivated from the excess of taxes, philosophy, infidelity, the charlata nism of Mesmer and other impostors, all contribute to undermine the government within;-while, without, England, Austria, Prussia, and Russia, are perpetually attacking it with open hostilities or concealed circumventions. Of these different exter. nal powers the first is the object of our author's perpetual animadversion; and it should seem, from this narrative, that there has never been an evil in France for many centuries past, either of smaller or larger magnitude, which has not been excited or countenanced by the British government.

SOULAVIE. In the memorable reign of the king you mention, so devoted to the Jesuits, and so violent against the protestants, it was the chiefs of the latter party that England employed for the purpose of a revolt in the Cevennes. The prophet Jurieu, in 1689; the English emissaries in 1702; Cavalier, the leader of the Cami sards in 1703; Ravanel, in 1705; Dupont, four years afterwards, and Justet of Vals, received and distributed the sums set apart by England for encouraging the armed insurrection's that ensued. The disturbances at Vernoux, in 1740, had the same origin; but, under Lewis XIV., it was the insurrection and independence of republicans that was aimed at.

• FRANKLIN. —I shall expect from you a letter to M. de Ver gennes on this topic.

The letter was given, a few days after this conversation, by Dr. Franklin to Vergennes; and the latter expressing a desire to be acquainted with the work, Soulavie sent him the following account.

"When I was studying the natural history of our mountains in the south, I did not forget to extend my inquiries to the historical records, ancient and modern, which I conceived might be of service to the history of this part of France. My local researches were the means of bringing to light a series of original manuscripts, relating to our civil wars, and containing many circumstances hitherto unknown, and of great importance to our history, From these manuscripts I shall extract, in haste, a few anecdotes respecting the enterprises of Great-Britain, which will not fail to remind you of the system constantly followed by the English for more than a century, to produce a rebellion in these provinces.

From 1627 till the beginning of the eighteenth century, they (the English) lost no opportunity of sowing dissensions there. In 1627 the protestant general, in their pay, published a printed manifesto, wherein he endeavoured to justify himself for having had recourse to the king of England, and taken arms for the defence of the

reformed church. It is well known, that the English then made a descent upon the island of Rhé, besieged the fort and citadel of St. Martin, and were defeated in 1628.

"In 1629, the king, through the mediation of the republic of Venice, made peace with England: but, irritated against the spirit of revolt evinced by the Cevegnols and the inhabitants of Vivarais and Languedoc, he laid siege in person to Privas, the capital of the district of Boutieres, an almost inaccessible spot, where the protestants had entrenched themselves. He kept the treaty he had entered into with the English secret, till his arrival at the camp before Privas, where he had peace proclaimed on the spot, and, to induce the inhabitants to surrender, informed them they had no longer any expecta tion of relief from the English. The town was sacked and burnt, and the king proceeded to the siege of Alais, and other places in Languedoc.

Cromwell afterwards kept up an intercourse, more peaceable it is true, with the heads of the protestant party, who, having revolted and being threatened with punishment, had recourse to him to mediate their pardon; and the monarch, obliged to yield to the wishes of the Protector, recalled the order he had issued against them. ›

"The court of London, towards the close of the century, maintained with them a much more dangerous correspondence. The celebrated prophet and protestant minister of Geneva, Jurieu, was the emissary and instrument of that court in 1689, and sent apostles into the Cevennes, on whom he found means to bestow the gift of prophecy or rather of fanaticism, and began the war of the Camisards, the plans of which he formed and conducted.

"In 1702, the same system was pursued by the court of London, and a hundred emissaries in its pay traversed the mountains, and sowed the spirit of the rebellion, which took place there in that year.

I

"In 1703, Cavalier put himself at the head of the revolted troops, and was, even so daring as to assume the title of prince of Cevennes. He became the general of an army he had himself formed, and was assisted by the English.

"In 1705, Lewis XIV., who had given law to all Europe, tired of fighting with rebels, was obliged to make peace with this 'too famous general, to whom he gave a colonel's commission, the privi lege of enlisting his troops in the regular service, and a pension. Ca valier ended his career in London, where the history of his adventures was printed.

In the same year Ravanel put himself at the head of the malcontents, still at the instigation of the English; and a gentleman of the name of Desollier received a pension of six hundred florins. The queen of England sent over a considerable sum of money. I have a paper containing all the particulars of this business.

"In 1709, the English sent three Camisard refugees, Gui, Dupont, and Mazet, to stir up the people once more. They had a conference with a gentleman of Vals, named Justet, who was the exciter of it. I am in possession of his correspondence, both with the Dutch and English.

"The Camisards were, however, defeated by the duke of Roques

laure; but the English still encouraged the spirit of rebellion. They exhorted the protestants not to lose their courage; they promised shortly to make a descent in their fayour in Languedoc; and Holland and England together contributed sixty thousand florins to support the revolt.

"The chief object in these commotions was to fix on a spot in France noted for its attachment to the protestant worship, and to make that spot the central point of an independent republic, to be divided into provinces, and to have cities, and a capital, at the expense of the rest of the kingdom.". Vol. v. P. 168.

For ages past, the cabinets of London and Versailles had carried on two kinds of war; the one open, and the other concealed.

The nature of the latter was such, that, notwithstanding an official peace, the intestine war of louis-d'ors and guineas was constantly carrying on. Peace had been signed in 1714; yet France, who had not forgotten the good understanding between the English and the protestants, annually expended immense sums in the support of the Jacobite party. Peace was again signed in 1748; and England did not then forget that France had raised Edward Stuart and his party, against the house of Hanover, constitutionally established on the throne. France paid an army in Scotland, which would have dethroned the king, but for the prudent conduct of the duke of Cumberland. England was without an army in the interior; and the young pretender had spread such terror through the nation, that the royal army, the court, and constitutional party, in their alarm had recourse to acts of cruelty against the conquered Jacobite party, highly unworthy a nation that boasts, with reason, of its philosophy and humanity. Scarcely was England recovered from her terror, or had put a stop to her cruelty, than she seised the first opportunity of avenging this outrage of the house of Bourbon. She surprised it in its state of degradation, sleeping in the lap of pleasure, under the government of madame de Pompadour, and she compelled us to carry on a war, and sign a dishonourable peace.

France, indignant at the peace she had made, resolved, under the ministry of M. de Choiseul, to be revenged in her turn, for a treaty which all Europe regarded as ignominious. She had failed in her plans during the war of 1741, against the reigning family of England: the Jacobite party in Scotland, and the catholic party in Ireland, had been subdued. She then attached herself to the party of the patriots in America, and succeeded in dethroning the English monarch in the new world.

England was truly sensible of an injury, which was so much the greater, as France had thus given the neutral powers an idea of arming indirectly against her; and had gone so far as even to reproach her, in its manifestoes, for the execution of Mary Stuart, and Charles I., and the expulsion of their lawful king. At this conjuncture, the observers of the open and secret misunderstandings of the two nations made no hesitation to compare their situation to that of Rome and Carthage, fighting for their preservation, and even for their very existence. The dismemberment of the British empire in

spired its cabinet with the desire of recovering its strength, and making use of that strength to support its last public quarrel against the house of Bourbon; and soon it ransacked Europe for recruits, gained from among the individuals and parties inimical to France, for the purpose of declaring the most deadly of all wars, that of anarchy. It was not without reason, that the mother-country abandoned the loyalist party in America in the last treaty. This party, which had been indirectly dispossessed of its property by France, became a useful tool in her hands. In Holland, the English redoubled their endeavours to secure the attachment of the stadtholder's party that of the anarchists at Geneva had long been devoted to them. We shall soon have an opportunity of seeing the latter one of the chief agents of the social disorganisation directed by England against France. I have said, that England had beaten up for recruits all over Europe, among the individuals and parties inimical to France. I ought to give, at least, one example as to individuals the parties and factions she enlisted and paid, the course of history will naturally exhibit. In 1770, the court recalled M. de Modave from Madagascar, where he had formed a settlement. Beniousky was appointed to succeed him. Instead of fixing on a spot free from foreign influence, and favourable to commercial intercourse, this Beniousky, notwithstanding all the remonstrances of the colonists, fixed on the most unhealthy part, and treated the neighbouring natives with the utmost tyranny, so that they fled into the interior of the country. After having ruined the colony, Beniousky returned to France, to boast of the success of his plantations. M. Laserre being sent out to take the command, and to inquire into the truth of these representations, he found, instead of such settlement, the most complete disorganisation effected in the space of two years. His perfidy being thus revealed, Beniousky left France; and, going to London, sailed from thence to found an English colony in Madagascar, and achieve the destruction of the few remaining settlements of the French, which had survived his treachery and his government. The French settlers, seeing him return, were obliged to take arms against his anarchical proceedings and hostilities. Beniousky, at the head of the English, armed on his side, and marched to combat; but he died in the first action, without having succeeded in establishing an English colony, or entirely destroying ours. Alas! there were many Beniouskys in the French government, even during the American war. If men like these had not neutralised the most brilliant expeditions, at a time when the English were without friends or allies, either by sea or land, how great had been the glory of France!' Vol. v. P. 183.

In the revolt throughout the provinces, which was produced by the grant of a free exportation of grain in September 1774, the English are stated to have excited the riot. When M. Turgot gave his advice against assisting the American colonists, he is said to have been stimulated by the cabinet of England. It was England who gave energy to the malcontents of Bretagne, and offered them an army to support their traitorous purposes, when they proposed the French crown to the duke of Orleans,

father of Philip Egalité. The successive derangements of the finances under the Genevese administrators, Turgot and Necker, are attributed to English influence. When, in 1781, the Genevese representatives, as they were called, were exiled from France by the count de Vergennes, for attempting to obtain that which was afterwards fully accomplished by M. Necker-the delegation of an equal share of power to each individual,-they are said to have been received in England, to have become the pensionaries of George III, to have been the administrators of a subsidy of fifty millions sterling, exclusively granted by an act of the council, (What does our author mean by this expression ?) to this cabal of anarchists."

These men,' continues he, dishonoured by their crimes and revolutionary tumults, hastened to France on the first appearance of a storm, there to practise their fatal doctrine, and teach it to our ignorant constituents. At Geneva, they had been called the represen tatives, from their having frequently made representations to the legislative bodies. Now they persuaded the leading revolutionists in France to assume the title of representatives of the French people. They carried into the constituent assembly their intriguing influence, and shortly began the revolution they wished to effect." Vol. vi. P. 283.

Duroveray, Clavières, Mirabeau, Marat, and Brissot, are all de→ clared to have been agents of the English government, who purchased from Mirabeau his famous journal entitled the Courier de Provence, or rather paid him for its conversion to the side of the anarchists; and assisted in secret all the different and successive leaders of the popular party, till the moment the unfortunate Lewis XVI. was on the point of being condemned.

"In this situation of things, how do the English and Spanish act? The latter, undertaking in a high tone to defend the king, inspired new courage in the party which opposed Marat, and gained the accused monarch a few votes from the deputies of the provinces on the Spanish borders. There is no doubt, that had England shown the same solicitude, it would have produced many more from those of the western coast. Mr. Pitt afterwards thought it no disgrace to Great-Britain to arm the royalists to destroy. Why then did he think it degrading to take a few political steps for the preservation of the monarch? The decree for the king's death passed only by a majority of five: three more negative votes would accordingly have been sufficient to save him; and Mr. Pitt was well acquainted with the art of gaining in a great assembly those whom money can purchase. But naturally of a gloomy disposition, and a profound calculator, he rejected the generous opinion of Mr. Fox, and eluded all measures favourable to the king, even those official steps of friendship and protection to which the opposition, and the English in general, were inclined in this fatal juncture. Mr. Pitt might ina moment have destroyed all the revolutionary and preparatory mea