CHAPTER II.

MILITARY OCCUPATION OF FRANCE

Termination of the war—Difficulties of the situation—The Allies occupy Paris—Dissolution of the Provisional Government—Entry of Louis XVIII. into the capital—New French Government formed—Blücher and the _Pont de Jena_—Arrival of the Allied Sovereigns—Reviews in France—Paris in the hands of the Allies—Treatment of the French by the Prussians; by the British—The wreck of the French Imperial forces disbanded—Life in Paris—The Louvre stripped of its treasures of art—Prosecution of Imperialist leaders—Labedoyère, Ney, Lavalette—Peace of Paris, November 20th.

The long period of the wars of the French Revolution, which devastated the continent of Europe for more than twenty years, had now definitely come to an end, and another era was about to dawn upon the civilized world. France, who had provoked the struggle and prolonged the strife to satisfy the craving of a restless ambition, was at last crushed; and the military chief, whose genius had called into activity the warlike character of her inhabitants, was captured. The common enemy was no longer to be feared; but the balance of power in Europe had been rudely shaken, and new ideas had taken deep root in France into the political and social life of the people. A government had to be established in Paris, of a nature calculated to repress disorder, to calm the natural turbulence of the nation, and to give the Allies pledges for future good behaviour. In short, the French were to be invited to re-enter into the European comity of nations, and to conform to the re-settlement which was rendered necessary after the general disturbance that had taken place. But, in effecting this, the interests of the enemy could not be taken into account. Once before, France had been subdued, and, in 1814, the Allies had expelled Napoleon, and sought to restore a general peace without unduly oppressing the people who had been the aggressors. The attempt failed, for the Emperor returned to Paris, and thereby he re-kindled the torch of war, and revived the baneful policy which threatened his neighbours with destruction. France had participated in Napoleon’s act, and had received him once more as her ruler; and, being defeated, she had little to expect from the forbearance of the victors. She was thus treated as a conquered country, and was subjected to some of the indignities which her soldiery had, in their turn, inflicted for so long a time upon her present masters.

And yet the task of a French reconstruction was by no means an easy one. The vitality of the nation, homogeneous and patriotic, at once forbade the Allies from any attempt to dismember it, even if their mutual jealousies had allowed them to adopt such a proposal. The only feasible plan was to give the people a ruler who could and would control the explosive forces which existed among them, and put an end to the dangers that menaced Europe by reason of the warlike and unscrupulous character they had displayed in the past. But the Allies, in carrying out this policy, forgot that it was of the first consequence to the future wellbeing of the Monarchy, to place Louis in an independent position, and, instead of restoring him to his kingdom by force of hostile bayonets only, to attain to the same end, by fostering the movement towards Royalism, which France began to develop after the battle of Waterloo. The downfall of Napoleon and the rejection of his dynasty had left three solutions, and only three, for the future government of the country. A Republic might have been formed; a popular King might be set up in the person of an Orleanist prince, who would accept the tricolor flag; and, lastly, the legitimate rule of Louis could be established. The first two solutions were contrary to the spirit of the age, they gave no security for future tranquillity, and the Allies set their faces firmly against either of them. There remained the third, which was the avowed object of the conquerors, and it was obvious that it could best be reached by causing the people to recall their King of their own accord. This had been the proposition of Marshal Davoût and of others; and, while their views were possibly more in advance than could have been agreed to without modification, yet, had the matter been left in English hands, there is little doubt that the King’s restoration would have been effected, with the least shock possible to French susceptibilities, and the new order based on a firmer foundation than was given to it. But the British Government had others to consult, and the Allies, smarting under the injuries to which they had been subjected for more than twenty years, were not inclined to be too conciliatory.

Nor was this the only difficulty; for the French themselves, hopelessly divided into two hostile camps, were unable to come to any satisfactory agreement. On the one hand, there were the followers of the King, reactionary in feeling, who remembered with bitterness the cruelties they had experienced during revolutionary times, and who, now that they were supported by victorious armies, demanded the revival pure and simple of the _ancien régime_. On the other hand, there was Imperial and Revolutionary France—the nation itself,—who, having irrevocably adopted new canons of social and political existence, endeavoured to make terms with the party in power for the protection of the people. There was little sympathy between the two; but the latter had no leader, and had placed themselves unreservedly in the unworthy hands of Fouché, who, having gauged the situation, deserted those he was bound to support, and sought his own personal aggrandisement by joining the party that attached itself to the King.

The keen anxiety of Louis XVIII. to save France from the humiliations that were to be imposed upon her was undoubted; so also was his earnest desire to reign in accordance with the liberal spirit which the times required. He hoped to reconcile all sections of the population, and to prove himself their deliverer, not only from internal disorder, but also from foreign oppression. But though his good will and generosity were unquestioned, his prejudices remained, and were not to be eradicated even by misfortune, and his followers and intimate counsellors were not endowed with a similar noble spirit of forgetfulness for past ill-treatment. France, therefore, by the will of the Allies and with the full consent of the Royalist faction, was again to be unconditionally placed in the King’s hands, his prerogative was to be unfettered, and his power was to be absolute. Nor were his first proclamations, issued to his subjects and dated the 25th and 28th of June, calculated to give much satisfaction to a people who dreaded his rule. The King’s party, in short, had not the wisdom to perceive that a stable Restoration must be accompanied by a complete amnesty in favour of those, at least, who had no further power to resist—and resistance to the old French Monarchy had entirely ceased in the country. Hence, although Louis repudiated all intentions of restoring feudal rights, or of dispossessing those who had illegally acquired lands during the Revolution, yet he did not hesitate to threaten with punishment the men by whose assistance he imagined Napoleon had been able to install himself once again as Emperor.[34]

Footnote 34:

The vengeance against Napoleon’s adherents was thus announced in the Royal proclamation of the 28th of June, which was countersigned by Prince Talleyrand, at one time a revolutionist, and afterwards Foreign Minister of the Emperor: “I wish to exclude from my presence none but those whose celebrity is a matter of grief to France and of horror to Europe. In the plot which they hatched, I perceive many of my subjects misled and some guilty. I promise—I who never promised in vain (all Europe knows)—to pardon to misled Frenchmen, all that has passed since the day when I quitted Lille, amidst so many tears, up to the day when I re-entered Cambrai, amidst so many acclamations. But the blood of my people has flowed, in consequence of a treason of which the annals of the world present no example. That treason has summoned foreigners into the heart of France. Every day reveals to me a fresh disaster. I owe it then to the dignity of my Crown, to the interest of my people, to the repose of Europe, to except from pardon the instigators and authors of this horrible plot. They shall be designated to the vengeance of the laws by the two Chambers, which I propose forthwith to assemble” (_Annual Register_ , 1815; _State Papers_ , p. 393).

“Up to the moment of the capitulation of Paris,” says a contemporary writer, “the Chambers continued their deliberations, and on the day when the humiliation of the country seemed complete, the national representatives issued a declaration of the rights of Frenchmen, resembling in its spirit and in its principal features the Bill of Rights claimed by the Parliament of England from William III., and it is surely a tribute of no ordinary value offered to the Constitution of England, that, at the very time when her army was at the gates of the French capital, our national institutions were the objects of the perpetual eulogy, and the subjects of the imitation, of the statesmen of the hostile nation. The constancy of the Chambers was put to a severe trial. The King had arrived at Compiègne, and nearly a million of foreign troops were hastening from every quarter to re-instate him on the throne, and yet not one member in either House thought proper to propose his restoration.... The national representatives also addressed the people with a firmness of tone, and in a spirit of independence, that will entitle them to the admiration of future ages:—'A Monarch,' say they, in language similar to that held by the Convention Parliament of England, 'cannot offer any guarantee, if he does not swear to observe the Constitution framed by the national representation, and accepted by the people; it hence follows, that any government which shall have no other title than the acclamation and the will of a party, or which shall be imposed by force, and every government which shall not guarantee the rights and liberties of a people claiming the privileges of freemen, will have only an ephemeral existence, and will neither secure the tranquillity of France nor of Europe.'”[35]

Footnote 35:

Edward Baines, _History of the Wars of the French Revolution, from the Breaking-out of the War in 1792, to the Restoration of a General Peace in 1815_ , ii. 488 (London, 1818).

How little the arrangements made in 1815 secured the permanent tranquillity of France, is shown by the history of that country during the last eighty years; but to these events it is not our intention to revert, for our object is only to give as faithful a picture as possible of what did occur at this crisis, to describe the part which was taken in these events by the Regiment whose annals we are engaged in recording, and to explain the condition of affairs which presented itself to both Officers and men during this moment of victory and of anxiety.

The barriers of Paris were placed in the hands of the Allies in the afternoon of the 6th—in accordance with the terms of the Military Convention—amid persistent cries from the populace of: “No Bourbons!” “The Representative Government for ever!” intermingled with some in favour of the fallen Emperor. On the 7th, the Prussians under Blücher marched into the town in force, and took possession of the Luxembourg and of other places. The Duke of Wellington, with the tact which distinguished his conduct during this moment of triumph, contented himself with taking part in this demonstration by despatching one brigade only into the city, “with orders to camp in the Champs Elysées, and near to the Place Louis Quinze, where the Duke of Wellington will have his head-quarters to-day.”[36] The main body of the British army were encamped in the Bois de Boulogne, to which place the Guards Division were also brought, without any display.

Footnote 36:

_Supplementary Despatches, etc._ , xi. 2.

As soon as Paris was occupied by foreign troops, the Provisional Government dissolved itself, on the plea that the country had been deceived by the conquerors! The message of dissolution communicated to the Chambers, written by Fouché himself, asserted that up to the 6th it had been believed that “the Allied Sovereigns were not unanimous upon the choice of a prince who was to reign in France;” that it was only then declared that “all the Sovereigns had engaged to place Louis XVIII. upon the throne.” The message went on to say that, as foreign troops had just occupied the Tuileries, where the Government was sitting, “we can only breathe wishes for our country; and, our deliberations being no longer free, we think it our duty to separate.” Upon receiving this news, the Chamber of Peers immediately followed the example given, and also dissolved. The Deputies, however, determined to show a bolder front; and proclaiming that they were at their posts by the will of the people, and that bayonets only could disperse them, they continued their deliberations upon the proposed Constitution, which they determined to offer to the King for his acceptance, as if there was still a government in the country, and as if nothing had happened to disturb their equanimity. But the following day (July 8th), the farce came to an end, and they were excluded from their place of meeting by the bayonet; the gates were locked, a body of the Garde Nationale warned them off and made them retire, and thus they too were obliged to dissolve.[37]

Footnote 37:

Baines, _Wars of the French Revolution_ , ii. 490.

Paris was now ready to receive Louis, and his public entry took place on the 8th. The tricolor flag was everywhere replaced by the white standard of the Bourbons, and the people, who had vociferously welcomed Napoleon on his return from Elba, not four months before, now came in immense crowds to greet the King, and acclaimed his restoration with enthusiastic joy. The scene was gay, and the sight that presented itself to the inhabitants such as they loved to behold; but, beneath the surface of these outward appearances, the minds of those who had any power of reflection were filled with depression and sadness. “Even the Royalists were downcast: their patriotic feelings were deeply wounded by the defeat of France; they augured ill of the restoration of the King in the rear of the English bayonets.”[38]

Footnote 38:

Archibald Alison, _History of Europe from the Commencement of the French Revolution in 1789 to the Restoration of the Bourbons in 1815_ , x. 964 (2nd edit., 1844). “No one who has not witnessed it, or who has not been convinced of it by the accounts of others, could form an idea of the rapidity with which the public cry can be changed in France. At nine in the morning of the day on which the King last returned to Paris, a man was torn to pieces in the Place Vendôme for wearing the white cockade; at one, a Marshal of France (Moncey or Mortier), riding into Paris with the white cockade, was pursued by the populace, and with difficulty saved himself; and, at three, the King entered the capital, accompanied by shouts of acclamation far greater than those which greeted him the year before. All those who in an adverse sense were clamorous in the morning, had changed or disappeared” (Mr. Arbuthnot to Lord Liverpool, October 30, 1815: _Supplementary Despatches, etc._ , xi. 220).

Next day, the new Government was formed, and announced to the public, at the head of which was Prince Talleyrand, who also became Minister for Foreign Affairs. It included, besides, men belonging to different parties, for Louis was anxious to get the confidence of all; and lastly, it contained the name of Fouché, who, having succeeded in shaping the anarchy, which followed the fatal 18th of June, to the benefit of the Royal cause, received, much against the King’s inclination, the portfolio of Minister of Police!

“Louis XVIII. was thus once more seated upon the throne of his fathers, but he reigned only in the Tuileries. To the foreign troops by which he was surrounded he was solely indebted for his elevation. The national will had not been consulted; and the same potent agency which placed him on the throne could alone maintain him in his present position. Indebted to the enemies of his country for his elevation, surrounded by a discordant ministry, compelled to impose heavy burdens upon his people as the price of his restoration, and forced to subscribe to conditions humiliating to the glory of France, the opening of his second reign was inauspicious in the extreme; but it was not utterly hopeless. Whatever might have been the errors of his former government, or however unpromising his present circumstances, he enjoyed personally the respect of the French nation. The people were wearied with revolutions. Their military passion, which, before the return of Napoleon, constituted the great danger of the French Monarchy, was subdued; and the nation wished for peace and a moderate share of freedom, both of which the King possessed the power and the inclination to confer.”[39]

Footnote 39:

Baines, _Wars of the French Revolution_ , ii. 491.

The difficulties of the situation were not lightened by the extraordinary conduct of Marshal Blücher at this juncture. That brave Commander could never forget the sufferings which the Imperial armies had caused in Prussia, nor the indignities imposed upon his country by the intolerance and the arrogance of Napoleon, when at the zenith of his power, in Berlin. He regarded the French nation as responsible for the outrages which had been inflicted, and, now that he was able to have his revenge, he determined to take it. He refused to hold any communications with the King, or with the new authorities who had been re-introduced into office by the co-operation of his own Government; and he desired Baron Müffling, appointed Military Governor of Paris, to levy a contribution of 100,000,000 francs on the town, as well as clothing sufficient for 110,000 men.[40] But not content, he went still further, and insisted that one of the bridges over the Seine, known as the bridge of Jena, should be destroyed, because it bore the name of the battle which had been so disastrous to Prussia. Wellington, informed of this mad project, endeavoured to intervene; but so blinded was his impetuous and hot-headed colleague, that he declined to listen to any remonstrance, and began forthwith to undermine the arches. The Duke thereupon placed a guard of British soldiers on the threatened bridge, with orders to drive away by force any one who should attempt to damage it; and he intimated his determination to prevent this senseless destruction by arms if necessary.[41] Blücher now at last was brought to reason, and gave way; and thus an act of vandalism was prevented which was not only a distinct infraction of the Convention of July 3rd, stipulating that all property was to be respected, but would also have cast a deep and lasting stain on the honour and good name of the Allies.

Footnote 40:

_Supplementary Despatches, etc._ , xi. 3.

Footnote 41:

It appears that a Battalion of the Grenadier Guards were employed upon this duty (_The Reminiscences and Recollections of Captain Gronow_ , i. 129, and ii. 39; London, 1892).

Shortly after this (July 11th), the Emperors of Austria and Russia and the King of Prussia arrived in Paris, when Guards of Honour were found by the Brigade of Guards.[42]

Footnote 42:

His Majesty, Alexander I. of Russia, expressly requested that he should be escorted and guarded by British troops (_Supplementary Despatches, etc._ , xi. 25).

About the same time, Lord Castlereagh and the other statesmen of the allied Powers reached the capital, to negotiate the terms of peace to which France was to be obliged to subscribe. The conclusions agreed to, and the incidents which took place during the occupation of Paris, will be noticed presently, but, meanwhile, we must make a short allusion to certain military displays made by the Allies during this period. On the 24th of July a celebrated review of the Anglo-allied army, which had just been reinforced by several regiments who had come to France from America—where peace had been concluded—took place near Paris, before the Emperor of Russia and the other Allied Sovereigns. There were as many as 60,000 British soldiers present, the whole of the troops being under the command of the Duke of Wellington.[43] The demonstration was more of a pageant than anything else, and as correct a representation as possible was given of the battle of Salamanca. It is perhaps worth remarking that, in the General Orders issued, dated July 22nd, these words occur, “The Field Marshal begs that Officers may be dressed uniformly, and, if possible, according to the King’s orders;”[44] while the following was also published in Battalion Orders of the 2nd Battalion Coldstream Guards: “Officers are to appear in plain grey overalls, jackets hooked and buttoned regimentally, sashes to be tied on the left side.” On the 10th of September, a great review, which seems to have created a considerable impression at the time, also took place of all the Russian troops that were in France, near Chalons, where 160,000 men (including 28,000 cavalry) and 540 guns were brought together.[45]

Footnote 43:

So critical was the situation in France considered to be, that the British Government sent large reinforcements to Wellington during the summer of 1815, with the intention of making him stronger at Paris than he had been at Waterloo. After that battle more than 20,000 English troops were sent to the Continent (Lord Liverpool to Lord Castlereagh, Aug. 11, 1815; see _Correspondence, etc., of Viscount Castlereagh_ , third series, ii. 477: London, 1853).]

Footnote 44:

_Supplementary Despatches, etc._, xi. 51.

Footnote 45:

Alison, _History of Europe, from 1789 to 1815_ , x. 973. Captain Gronow mentions a curious incident that occurred at one of the reviews held by the Russian Emperor of his own troops. The British Foot Guards found a Guard for Alexander I., at which a dinner was provided, similar to that at St. James’s. On one occasion the Captain of the Emperor’s Guard was informed that there were four Russian General Officers in his custody. The latter were asked to dinner, and as their health was drunk, they were invited to reveal the nature of their offence, which called for such a punishment to men of their military rank. In reply, they said that the Emperor had not been satisfied with the manner in which they had marched past that day; whereupon one of the British Officers present, filling his glass, drank “Confusion to all tyrants—Vive Napoleon!” “The poor Russians appeared thunderstruck, and observed that if they drank the toast proposed, it would cost them their heads.” It seems, this story came to the ears of Alexander, and the Duke had to explain it, for he sent for the Officers of the Guard, and begged them to repress their jokes for the future (Gronow, _Reminiscences, etc._ , ii. 19).

These displays, having as much for object an easy demonstration to the inhabitants that they were completely in the power of Europe, as an exhibition made for the purpose of satisfying the national vanity of the different armies concerned, were perhaps not necessary to prove to the French that their new Government rested only upon alien arms for support. Everywhere, except south of the Loire,—where the last remnants of Napoleon’s army had collected under Marshal Davoût,—was the country in the military occupation of foreigners; and in Paris especially, there were no regular troops to be seen, other than those of Great Britain, of Prussia, and of their allies. They guarded the King and the Royal palaces; they stood at the barriers of the town, and they performed all the military duties of the capital. They were to be seen at all the public buildings, at the various and numerous hôtels where the Allied Sovereigns and their Counsellors and principal Officers lodged, and even at the places of entertainment where the people flocked during the balmy weather of a French summer. Nor were these duties of a ceremonial character; for guard-houses were placed in nearly all the principal thoroughfares, the bridges were held by troops, there were chains of sentries everywhere, patrols were constantly on the move and on the alert, and guns were kept loaded and ready for any serious emergency.

Paris was placed under the command of Baron Müffling; his orders, dated July 23rd, for the preservation of order, were thus conceived:—

“The Garde Nationale will perform police duties, and the garrison, composed of the Allied troops, occupying the great centres of the town, will remain in reserve. In case the latter have to act, for the Garde Nationale may refuse to quell disturbances, guns will be fired, when the regular forces will assemble at their alarm posts. The British brigade will form up in the Avenue de Neuilly, one battalion in Place Beauveau, and another at the junction of the Boulevard de la Madeleine and Rue St. Honoré. The Austrian brigade will have two battalions and a battery in Place Vendôme, a battalion guarding the Emperor, and a fourth battalion in Rue du Montblanc, near the Boulevards des Capucins and des Italiens; the cavalry to be in the Boulevard de la Madeleine. The brigade of Prussian Guards will occupy the Esplanade des Invalides with two battalions; they will have a third battalion at the Quay d'Orsay, a fourth on the Pont Royal, a fifth on the Pont Neuf, a sixth in the Luxembourg, and a seventh, together with the cavalry and the artillery, in the Champs de Mars. The Prussian Grenadier brigade will occupy the Place de la Bastille, the Pont du Jardin des Plantes, and the Place du Panthéon, with a battalion each; and the Quai de la Tournelle and l'Ile du Palais with two battalions each; the cavalry and artillery to be posted in the Place Walhubert. Guards in the town and at the barriers to remain at their posts. The Governor’s head-quarters are in Place Vendôme; the Commandants of the north and south of the city, in Place Louis XV. and on Pont Neuf, respectively. Patrols to keep up communication between the different stations.”[46]

Footnote 46:

_Supplementary Despatches, etc._ , xi. 53.]

An English traveller who, having visited France in 1814, returned in 1815, thus describes some of his experiences:—

“The state of things had entirely altered, and plain indications were given on the road to Paris, and at its entrance, that the visitor in 1815 would find it placed in circumstances very different from those which it held in the preceding year. The time for the real humiliation and severe punishment of the nation had now arrived; there was no longer a disposition to save it from drinking out the bitter contents of the cup of defeat; in short, Paris, as representing France, was now in the condition of one that is beaten and bound, previously to being mulcted in a heavy forfeiture.... I found Paris in a state of very discomposed feeling and opinion. Every Frenchman seemed acutely alive to the calamity that had fallen upon France, and all diversities of political sentiment met in one point of union, namely that of indignation against those who acted as the conquerors of the country. A Royalist would say, 'Ah, it is very impolitic in the Allies to think of taking any territory or money from France, for good Frenchmen, united under the Bourbons, will become more formidable than the nation ever was under Bonaparte, and woe to Europe, in the course of a year or two, for what she now inflicts on us.' A military man would gurgle a _sacré_ out of his throat, and anticipate the day of revenge, under some new leader, when France would show that she had not been beaten, although she had been betrayed.... Going round, late in the evening, by one of the more unfrequented walks, running through the woods of Saint-Cloud, I came suddenly upon a strong column of British infantry, posted in silence and order among the trees, on the hill immediately above the amusements, that jingled upon the ear from below. The regiment was in complete order for action, the Officers were all at their posts; and as I passed them by in the deep shadow, I heard not a word or even a breath, though I was close to five or six hundred men. The Allied Sovereigns were seldom seen except at reviews, for they did not now, as at a former time, go about to public places to scrape acquaintance with the Parisians and keep them in good spirits. The aspect of the alliance, as it was now settled on the inhabitants of Paris, was clouded and severe; and a very considerable degree of reserve was maintained by the representatives of the various Powers. Even the Court of the Tuileries was not frequently visited by them; there were few or no courtly entertainments and ceremonies. However friendly the Allied Sovereigns might feel towards Louis personally, their determination to make France know that the consequences of war are sometimes serious, occasioned a sense of restraint, and an appearance of coolness, as between them and the Royal Family of the Bourbons.”[47]

Footnote 47:

John Scott, _Paris revisited in 1815_ , pp. 264, etc. (2nd edit.: London, 1816).

The military occupation of France, painful as it was to the inordinate pride of the people—especially after their armies had run riot in every capital of the Continent,—was rendered still more unbearable by the excesses which the Prussians indulged in. Following the example set by their gallant, but irrational, Commander, both Officers and men exercised their authority in a harsh and often in a brutal manner. Forgetful of what they owed to Louis XVIII., whose restoration absolved the French from past offences, and mindful only of the grievous tyranny which they had experienced, they made the unfortunate inhabitants feel the full measure of their revenge, by their arrogance and exactions.

“Blücher’s troops were billeted in every house; he obliged the inhabitants to feed and clothe them; and he issued an order (which I well recollect seeing), commanding the authorities to supply each soldier with a bedstead containing a bolster, a woollen mattress, two new blankets, and a pair of linen sheets. The rations per day, for each man, were two pounds of butcher’s meat, a bottle of wine, a quarter of a pound of butter, ditto rice, a glass of brandy, and some tobacco[48].... Blücher’s Generals occupied all the best hôtels in the Faubourg St. Germain; General Thieleman that of Marshal Ney, where he forcibly took possession of the plate, carriages, and horses. Other Prussian Generals acted in a similar manner. The Russian and Austrian armies with the two Emperors entered Paris soon after our arrival. The Emperors imitated Blücher in some respects; they refused to quarter their soldiers in the large and wholesome barracks which were in readiness to receive them; they preferred billeting them with the peaceable merchants and tradespeople, whom they plundered and bullied in the most outrageous manner.”[49]

Footnote 48:

It is said that the Prussians cost the French not less than three francs per day for each man (_Paris revisited in 1815_ , p. 361).

Footnote 49:

Gronow, _Reminiscences_ , i. 206.

It is pleasant to record that the Duke of Wellington adopted an entirely different system in his relations with the inhabitants; everything was paid for regularly, property was respected, and the people were unmolested. In short, the British army set an example of humanity, generosity, and forbearance, which not only did honour to their country and to their noble profession, but which also (notwithstanding national antipathies), gained them the respect and almost the affection of the French themselves.[50]

Footnote 50:

“The Prussians, who were in bivouac near us” (in the Bois de Boulogne, early in July), “amused themselves by doing as much damage as they could, without any aim or object; they cut down the finest trees and set the wood on fire at several points. There were about 3000 of the Guards there, encamped in the wood, and I should think about 10,000 Prussians. Our camp was not remarkable for its courtesy towards them; in fact, our intercourse was confined to the most ordinary demands of duty, as allies, in an enemy’s country” (Gronow, _Reminiscences_ , i. 81).

In this connection, a quaint conversation between the English traveller (already quoted) and some Highlanders he came across in Peronne, may be noticed here. The latter, bivouacked, not billeted,—they said they seldom troubled the inhabitants for billets,—had only one thing to regret, viz. that they did not get the liberty “that ither sogers get—the Prussians and them,” for “there’s nae use in our being mealy-mou’d, if the ithers are to tak' what they like, the d—d Prussians ken better what they’re about,” and although, “ilka body praises us, but very few gie us ony thing.” In reply to the question, whether the Duke of Wellington took severe measures to enforce his principles regarding the lives and property of the inhabitants at the seat of war, they said: “Na, sir, no here, for the men ken him gailies now; but in Spain we aften had ugly jobs. He hung fifteen men in ae day there, after he had been ordering about it God knows how long. And d—n me if he didna ance gar the Provost-Marshal flog mare than a dizen of the wimen; for the wimen thought themselves safe, and so they were war’ than the men. They got sax and therty lashes a piece on the bare doup, and it was lang afore it was forgotten on ’em. Ane o’ ’em was Meg Donaldson, the best woman in our regiment, for whatever she might tak’ she didna keep it a’ to hersel’.”[51]

Footnote 51:

_Paris revisited in 1815_ , p. 253.

The demeanour of the British troops was friendly to the French, and few brawls took place between them; this contrasted with what occurred to the Prussians, who had frequent and fierce encounters with the populace. The English soldiers were usually to be seen on the Boulevard du Temple, which at that time was an open space (but has since then been built over), and there they used to amuse themselves by watching jugglers, mountebanks, rope-dancers and other shows. A certain number of men of the armies of occupation were admitted free into the theatres; and we are told that a party of Guardsmen, headed by a sergeant, saw a piece admirably put on the stage, entitled _Les Anglaises pour rire_, in which Englishwomen were grotesquely caricatured. Not understanding the language, nor the acting, and being indignant at the insults they supposed were levelled against their countrywomen, the honest fellows stormed the stage, and drove off, not only the actors, but the police who attempted to arrest them. “It must be remembered that the only revenge which the Parisians were able to take upon their conquerors, was to ridicule them; and the English generally took it in good humour, and laughed at the extravagant drollery of the burlesque.” Notwithstanding these minor disputes, good feeling existed; and although numerous Prussians were assassinated in Paris and in the country, there was only one soldier of British nationality found dead in the streets of the capital, and, in his case, there were no signs of violence upon him.[52]

Footnote 52:

Gronow, _Reminiscences_ , i. 92.

That Wellington should be appealed to, to lighten the burden placed on the miserable people who groaned under the invader’s despotism, is natural enough; and there are petitions recorded on the part of the inhabitants of Le Cateau and Roye, asking that British troops might continue to garrison those towns, so that they might be placed under their protection.[53] But it was not always that he could do anything for them. We find, for instance, M. de Breteuil, who, according to himself, was “one of the most faithful subjects of Louis XVIII.” and who had “given the King proofs of devotion,” complaining bitterly that not only was his house and property, situated at three leagues distant from St. Quentin, pillaged, but that the town itself was mulcted in a sum of 1,200,000 francs, of which he had to pay 20,000 (£800), because he had a single house there, “which brings in nothing, and is, on the contrary, full of soldiers.” To this complaint, Wellington could only reply, “I have no troops in St. Quentin, and never had any in that town. I think you ought to address yourself to Marshal Prince Blücher.”[54]

Footnote 53:

_Supplementary Despatches, etc._ , xi. 85, 101.

Footnote 54:

_Ibid._ , xi. 19.

Nor was the King unmindful of what he owed to the British army for their discipline; for, having invited the principal Officers to the Tuileries, and having formed them in a circle about him, he told them, in broken English, in the presence of the Emperor of Austria, “I congratulate you, gentlemen, upon the result of your valour and conduct; but I am most grateful to you for your generosity and humanity towards my poor misguided people; the father and the family will for ever hold it remembrance.”[55]

Footnote 55:

Letter of Lieut.-Colonel Sir W. Gomm, who was present upon that occasion, to his Aunt, July 16, 1815, _Letters and Journals of Field-Marshal Sir W. Gomm, G.C.B._ , p. 376 (London, 1881). See also Alison’s _History of Europe_ , 1789-1815, x. 968. The Duc de Richelieu (Foreign Minister) wrote on this subject to the Duke of Wellington, January 19, 1816, “Sa Majesté m’a spécialement recommandé de saisir cette occasion pour faire connaître à Votre Excellence combien elle a été satisfaite de la conduite des troupes Anglaises dans la capitale, et du soin qui a été mis par les chefs à alléger les charges indispensablement attachées à la présence de ces troupes. Sa Majesté sait à cet égard tout ce qu’elle vous doit, My Lord; et elle a voulu que je vous donasse de nouveau l’assurance qu’elle ne perdrait jamais le souvenir des témoignages de déférence et d’affection qu’elle a reçus de vous” (_Supplementary Despatches, etc._, xi. 282).

In order to give employment to the men under his command, and to help the French peasants, at a time when labour was very scarce, the Duke of Wellington allowed British soldiers to reap the harvest. The owners of the harvest were to make their own bargains with the men direct, but application for labourers were to be made by the mayors of districts, and not by private individuals. Commanding Officers also were to know exactly where each soldier was employed; and the men were to return to their regiments every night, if possible, or at all events twice a week.[56]

Footnote 56:

_Supplementary Despatches, etc._ , xi. 73.

Towards the end of October, the Division of Guards, hitherto in the Bois de Boulogne, marched into Paris, and occupied on the 30th, the Casernes Rue Verte, Montblanc, and Rue Temple, the Palais Louis XV., and the Abbatoire de Roule. The 2nd Battalion Coldstream Guards were thus lodged in barracks in the capital; and the general alarm post for the Division was the Palais Louis XV.[57] At the same time, a general change of quarters took place among the whole of the British troops, and camps were abandoned for houses. Wellington issued on the 28th of October, strict orders for the protection of the inhabitants, to apply whenever men were to be billeted, or when they were marching through the country.[58]

Footnote 57:

_Orders for the Piquet_ : “In the event of any disturbance in the neighbourhood, the Piquet will fall in in front of the barrack gate, and detach a sergeant’s party to the right and left, if necessary, to observe what is going on. The Lieutenant on this duty will send an immediate Report to the Officer Commanding the Battalion. The Lieutenant inspecting the messes, at one o’clock, and the Ensign will inspect the barrack rooms at half-past twelve, and will take care to enforce the barrack regulations. The same to be mentioned in the report of the senior Officer at dismounting. The Battalion will assemble in the barrack yard, in case of any riots of a serious nature, and will wait the orders of a Field-Officer, who will cause it to move to the Place Louis XV., if it appears expedient. Officers on detached duties will, in case of serious disturbance, likewise move to the Place Louis XV.” (_Battalion Order_ , Paris, Nov. 3, 1815). The public duties in Paris, found by the two Guards Brigades and by the King’s German Legion on the 5th of November, amounted to 1 Captain, 12 Subalterns, 38 sergeants, 55 corporals, 13 drummers, and 587 privates.

Footnote 58:

Appendix No. II.

We left the wreck of Napoleon’s beaten army south of the Loire, where they were under the command of Marshal Davoût. There was nothing more for them now to hope, and their Commander soon persuaded them to conform to the circumstances of the hour, and, throwing aside their Eagles, to hoist the white flag of the Bourbons, and to adopt the white cockade. This they did, and shortly after, by Royal decree, dated the 23rd of July, they were disbanded. At the same time, a new army was forthwith to be formed, to consist of eighty Legions of infantry (103 officers and 1,687 men each), one to be raised in every Department, and to bear its name; forty-seven regiments of cavalry, and twelve regiments of artillery,—or a military force of some 200,000 regular troops. Disbanded Imperialists were allowed to engage after proper examination.[59] The command was entrusted to Marshal Macdonald, who had remained firm in his allegiance to the King, during the whole of the Hundred Days of the second French Empire; and he replaced Davoût, who resigned.

Footnote 59:

Baines, _Wars of the French Revolution_ , ii. 519.

Immediately hostilities came to an end by the Convention of the 3rd, a large number of English people went over to Paris, on business or pleasure, and settled in that gay capital, almost as if it had been their own. Coaches were soon brought over, and horse-racing introduced, contrasting very much in the disfavour of the native _sport_, which the King endeavoured to encourage, but which was then quite in its infancy. In short, the English made themselves thoroughly at home.

“Going along the _Rue du Faubourg St. Denis_, we saw many of the British privates sauntering with a lazy air of enjoyment, looking at the print stalls where they were caricatured, cheapening grapes with the fruit girls, or treating themselves to a glass of lemonade. Our Officers, too, swarmed about, mounted—some well, some very badly; for those who could not procure a decent animal, put up with almost any creature that had four legs. Contrasting remarkably with the heavy cabriolets and clumsy dirty coaches—the awkward calèches and grotesque voitures—English equipages, complete, light, and genteel, glanced rapidly by, spattering, as foreigners, mortification from their wheels on the vehicles of the country. To estimate this exhibition properly, it is necessary to fancy its counterpart displayed by Frenchmen in London; to imagine a Frenchman of fashion, vested with magnificent amplitude of box-coat and commanding longitude of whip, spanking his four blood greys down Bond Street and St. James’s Street, or drawing up smartly, in a knowing style of driving, to talk over the topics of the morning with the Officer of the French Guards, on duty at the Palace of the King of England!”[60]

Footnote 60:

_Paris revisited in 1815_ , p. 265.

All eyes were turned to Paris at that time. Many Sovereigns were living there—the Monarchs of Austria, Russia, Prussia, Holland, Bavaria, Wurtemburg, and France, and several independent Princes of Germany. They were accompanied by some of the most distinguished statesmen and diplomatists of the age; and military leaders were also present who enjoyed a European reputation for their achievements in the field. Events of transcendent importance were taking place in this capital; and the fate of a great and gallant nation, outlawed for a quarter of a century, and now reduced to submission, was being decided. Curiosity urged many to go to France, from all parts of Europe, at this historic juncture; the pleasures of society moved others, and duty took a still larger number there. “All the world’s in Paris,”[61] was indeed true, and crowds flocked to that city; while the discordant elements to be found there, and the strange medley of Frenchmen, Englishmen, and foreigners of almost every nationality, brought together and kept together, at such a time and at such a place, presented at once a scene that was both unique and remarkable.

Footnote 61:

Popular song of the day.

Paris was gay and dissolute, and the Palais Royal might be called the centre of dissipation.

“Mingled together, and moving about the area of this oblong square block of buildings, might be seen, about seven o’clock p.m., a crowd of English, Russian, Prussian, Austrian, and other Officers of the Allied armies, together with countless foreigners from all parts of the world. Here, too, might have been seen the present King of Prussia” (the late Emperor William I. of Germany), “with his father and brother, the Dukes of Nassau, Baden, and a host of Continental Princes, who entered familiarly into the amusements of ordinary mortals, dining _incog._ at the most renowned restaurants, and flirting with painted female frailty.”[62]

Footnote 62:

Gronow, _Reminiscences_ , i. 90.

The Palais Royal contained the principal, but by no means the only, gambling hell in Paris, and these constituted the “very fountains of immorality.” “There were tables for all classes; the workman might play with twenty sous, or the gentleman with ten thousand francs. The law did not prevent any class from indulging in a vice that assisted to fill the coffers of the municipality of Paris.”[63]

Footnote 63:

_Ibid._ , i. 87.

In such a society it was only natural that constant disputes should arise between men who gave way to dissipation, and who, full of life and spirits and of national prejudices, had little to occupy them beyond the mere routine of military duty. Men’s minds were in a state of excitement, and all were engaged in defending interests which frequently conflicted with those of their temporary companions. These disputes could only be settled at that time by the sword or pistol. Numerous duels accordingly took place, sometimes between Royalists and Imperialists, and often between Frenchmen and the representatives of the invaders. It is stated that in almost every case the aggressors were the French; and while the English Officers had sometimes to defend themselves against the insolence of the natives, it appears that the Prussians, who used to congregate at the Café Foy in the Palais Royal, were the principal victims of Gallic fury, and were assailed more pertinaciously than the rest by half-pay French Officers, who went on purpose to pick quarrels with them.

“Swords were quickly drawn, and frequently the most bloody frays took place; these originated, not in any personal hatred, but from national jealousy on the part of the French, who could not bear the sight of foreign soldiers in the capital.... On one occasion our Guards, who were on duty at the Palais Royal, were called out to put an end to one of these encounters, in which fourteen Prussians and ten Frenchmen were either killed or wounded.”[64]

Footnote 64:

Gronow, _Reminiscences_ , i. 106.

France was the possessor of the most extensive collection of works of art ever before known; acquired, not by the genius of her people, but by the grasping policy of her Imperial master. Napoleon, having taken possession of every large city in continental Europe, during the plenitude of his power, had systematically seized all that was remarkable therein, and had transferred his plunder to Paris. The French were inordinately proud of this vast and unique collection, which served to flatter their vanity and to form a lasting monument of their extraordinary military successes. It had been untouched by the Allies in 1814, but in 1815 the disturbers of Europe were to be severely punished, and the stolen property was to be restored to its former owners. Attempts having failed to effect a restoration amicably, owing to the opposition of Talleyrand, forcible possession of the Louvre was taken on the 23rd of September, by a body of British troops, and with the assistance of Austrians and Prussians, the splendid galleries of that palace were stripped of those treasures of art, which belonged principally to Italy and to the Netherlands. Out of fifteen hundred celebrated pictures, it is said that only seventy-four were left in Paris. The restoration of the statuary was not less complete; and the well-known antique Corinthian bronze horses, taken from Venice, to form, in the Place Carrousel, the supporters of the great monument, designed—but not finished—to perpetuate Napoleon’s fame, were taken down and conveyed back to that city. Nothing affected the Parisians so much as this act of strict justice; for it showed them their own absolute weakness and humiliation, and it wounded their pride in the most sensitive point.[65]

Footnote 65:

_Paris revisited in 1815_ , p. 312, etc.; Alison, _History of Europe, from 1789-1815_, x. 969.

The policy of revenge and proscription against persons who aided and abetted Napoleon in the early part of 1815, which had been announced in the proclamations issued by Louis at Cambrai before he entered Paris (June 25th and 28th), was not to remain a dead letter; and we have now to mention some of the saddest incidents which took place at this crisis in French history, and which were witnessed by the British army. Fouché had become Minister of Police. He justified his acceptance of that post by declaring that he wished to save the men who were threatened with vengeance.[66] Upon him it devolved to carry out this policy, and though he did so with outward reluctance, and told the King that there had been no conspiracy to dethrone him in favour of Napoleon—which appears to have been quite true, for all acted on the wild impulse of the moment,—yet still he was not ashamed to come forward in the odious light of an accuser against his former friends. On the 24th of July, two ordinances, countersigned by himself, were published, by which thirty-two Peers who had joined Napoleon’s Upper House, established since the 20th of March, were declared to have forfeited their rights to the French Peerage; twenty Officers and other Officials were at the same time ordered to be arrested, and brought to trial before a court-martial; and thirty-nine more were desired to quit Paris in three days, to places pointed out by the Minister of Police, and to remain there under his supervision, until the new Chambers should decide whether they were to be banished, or delivered over for trial to the tribunals.[67]

Footnote 66:

Thiers, _Histoire du Consulat et l'Empire_, xx. 516 (Paris, 1862).

Footnote 67:

Baines, _Wars of the French Revolution_ , ii. 517. It appears that these ordinances did not evoke dissatisfaction from the British Government, for Lord Liverpool, writing to Mr. Canning on the 4th of August, says, “One can never feel that the King is secure upon his throne till he has _dared_ to spill traitor’s blood: it is not that many examples would be necessary; but the _daring_ to make a few will alone manifest any strength in the Government” (_Supplementary Despatches, etc._ , xi. 95). On the other hand, they raised much indignation on the part of the friends of the incriminated persons, and several letters were written to the Duke of Wellington, to implore his powerful intercession in their distress. Apparently he could do nothing for them, except in the case of General Lobau (_ibid._, xi. 59, 101, 273). Marshal Davoût was not included in the list of proscribed persons, but he wrote to the War-Minister, Marshal Gouvion St. Cyr (July 27th), to protest energetically against the injustice, which he alleged had been done to such men as Gilly, Grouchy, Clausel, Laborde, and others, whose only fault was that they had carried out orders, which he had given them as Minister of War. He maintained that his own name ought to be substituted for theirs, and he drew attention to the assurances given by the King, that if the army made its simple and unconditional submission, His Majesty would show clemency and do more than was desired (_ibid._, xi. 70). Davoût was then near a somewhat exasperated and only partially converted force of Imperialists, south of the Loire, and, had his arrest been contemplated, the attempt to carry it out might have been accompanied by unpleasant consequences to the ultra-Royalists. Among the proscribed, there appeared the name of Carnot, colleague of Fouché in the Provisional Government, and like him a regicide and a man of the Revolution. Upon what principle Carnot should have been banished, and Fouché should have been made a Minister under Louis XVIII. is difficult to determine; but such was the policy of the reactionary party. Carnot, naturally indignant that he should have been marked out for vengeance by his colleague, wrote to him, “Où veux tu que je me retire, traître?” while the latter replied with equal brevity, “Où tu voudras, imbécile.” Fouché did not long survive the fate of those he had betrayed; driven from power in September, he was appointed minister at Dresden, but shortly afterwards he was exiled by a decree which was fulminated against all who had voted for the death of the unfortunate Louis XVI., and thus fittingly terminated his career of intrigue and treachery.

The first victim put upon his trial was General Labedoyère, who commanded the regiment at Grenoble that deserted its post and joined Napoleon in his famous march from Cannes to Paris. His defection had given the first signal to the universal revolt against the King’s authority that followed, and was one of the causes of the Emperor’s success; the partisans of the King were therefore more than ordinarily embittered against him. He admitted the facts of his treachery; he contented himself by defending his honour by declaring that, though he might have been misled by illusions, by recollections of his former master, and by a false idea of honour and of what was due to his country, he was no traitor or conspirator, and hoped that his death might atone his error. He was shot on the 19th of August.

Next day Marshal Ney, who had been previously apprehended in the Department of Lot, was examined at the Conciergerie; but his case was adjourned till later in the year. Meanwhile the King’s Government was overthrown, in September, and an ultra-Royalist Ministry established, with the avowed intention of showing no clemency to the proscribed. Ney’s trial accordingly took place early in November, and he was at first arraigned before a court-martial of four Marshals.[68] But the latter decided that the prisoner, being a Peer, was entitled to be judged by his peers, and it devolved upon the Upper House to do so. His guilt was clearly established, and it was rendered all the more heinous by the protestations of loyalty with which he quitted Louis when he left Paris to arrest the progress of Napoleon, promising to bring the latter back in an iron cage. For some days he remained true to his duty, but, though a brave man, he was singularly impulsive, and was not endowed with much discretion or judgment. A frenzy of delirium had seized hold of the Royal troops, who were flocking to Napoleon’s standards, and Ney began to fear that he had not sufficient force to resist his former master; his moral courage began to fail. Dreading, above all things, a civil war, he resolved that no step of his should precipitate such a calamity; believing that the cause of the Bourbons was irretrievably lost, and, carried away by the violent excitement of the moment, he forgot his promises and the trust reposed in him, and wildly threw in his lot with the Emperor.[69] Thereby he dealt a final blow to the fortunes of the King. For his defence, it was pleaded that the Military Convention of the 3rd, had guaranteed that no person in the capital should be disturbed or called to account, for his conduct or political opinions; but the Chamber refused to entertain the plea, and he was condemned to death by one hundred and thirty-nine votes against seventeen (December 6th). Strenuous efforts were made to obtain the prisoner’s release on account of the Convention, and applications were addressed to the Duke of Wellington, Lord Liverpool, and even to the Prince Regent on the subject. But these high authorities declined to do anything for him, on the ground that the Convention related only to the military occupation of Paris, and that, while the article in question prevented the Allies from adopting measures of severity towards persons in the capital, yet it did not, and could not, prevent the French Government from acting in this respect, as they might deem fit.[70]

Footnote 68:

Marshals Jourdain, Massena, Augereau, and Mortier (Baines, _Wars, etc._ , ii. 525).

Footnote 69:

1815. Henry Houssaye, _La Première Restauration, le Retour de l'Ile d'Elbe, les Cent Jours_, pp. 301-315 (3me edit.: Paris, 1893).

Footnote 70:

_Supplementary Despatches, etc._ , xi. 235.

The execution took place in the gardens of the Luxembourg palace, at nine o’clock in the morning of December 7th, when Ney met his death with calmness and courage. It shed a deep gloom over Paris, and did little, as might have been expected, to serve the King. Had Louis shown clemency to the man who had deeply wronged him, and whose reputation had thereby become sullied, instead of proceeding to extremities by violating the Convention of July 3rd, his credit would have been raised. While the justice of such action becomes all the more clear, since it was stipulated that, in the case of difficulties arising, a favourable interpretation was to be given to the claims of the French army and of the city of Paris. Further, as foreign armies have no right to punish the inhabitants of a conquered State for political opinions or conduct, the Convention either bound Louis, on whose behalf the capital was taken, or else it had no value whatsoever.[71]

Footnote 71:

Baines, _Wars of the French Revolution_ , ii. 527.

The third and last victim selected for vengeance by the ultra-Royal party was General Lavalette, a relation by marriage of the Emperor, and Director of Posts, who was convicted of having misused his power in favour of Napoleon, when the latter reached Fontainebleau in March. Having been in civil employ, he was condemned to death by the guillotine; and the sentence, in spite of appeals to the mercy of the King, was to be carried out on December 21st. In this case, however, the Government were baulked of their prey, and the prisoner made good his escape by the courage and devotion of his wife, with the assistance of three Englishmen. His wife having exchanged dresses with him, Lavalette got out of prison; but he remained in hiding in Paris for more than twelve days, not being able to leave the closely guarded city until the 8th of January; when, by the co-operation of Mr. Bruce, and Captain Hutchinson, Grenadier Guards (afterwards Earl of Donoughmore), he drove to Compiègne in an open carriage, disguised as a British Officer, and accompanied by General Sir Robert Wilson. It was with difficulty that the latter piloted him out of France, but this was at last managed successfully. Sir Robert then returned to Paris on the 10th, and the police, having received information of the facts of the case, he, Captain Hutchinson, and Mr. Bruce were immediately arrested and confined, awaiting trial, till the 22nd of April, 1816, when they were condemned to be imprisoned for three months. That a distinguished Officer of high rank in the British army, and well known in Europe for his personal animosity against Napoleon, should have actively interfered to save the life of one of the latter’s best friends, was a sufficient reason to put a stop to further acts of the bloodshed, which cast so unnecessary a shadow over the first months of the restoration of King Louis.[72]

Footnote 72:

_Ibid._ , ii. 527; Gronow, _Reminiscences_ , i. 100. See also _Supplementary Despatches_ , _etc._, xi. 275, 279, 333, 341; and _Annual Register_ , 1816, “Appendix to Chronicle,” p. 329.

The negotiations which had been going on continually between the Allied Sovereigns and Louis XVIII., ever since they and their counsellors arrived in Paris, terminated at last by a treaty of peace, dated November 20th. There were matters of considerable difficulty to be discussed, before a general agreement could be arrived at between so many independent nations, whose interests were not all identical. The situation, moreover, was somewhat complex, and this is shown by Lord Liverpool who, writing to Mr. Canning, on the 4th of August, says:—

“By demanding considerable sacrifices from France for the security of Europe, we unavoidably lower the character of the Government, which it is our wish to uphold; on the other hand, the stability of that Government, after the Allies shall have evacuated France, is so very problematical, that we should not do our duty to Europe if we looked to no other security than that which the legitimate government of the King of France could in itself hold out to us.”[73]

Footnote 73:

_Supplementary Despatches, etc._ , xi. 95.

By the Treaty, the eastern frontier, from the North Sea to the Mediterranean, was restricted generally, to the line that existed in 1790; and thus the French lost a strip of territory which, in 1814, had been ceded to them, including the fortresses of Landau, Sarre-Louis, Philippeville, and Marienburg. France had moreover to pay a war indemnity of 700,000,000 francs, for the expenses of the war. Further, an army of not more than 150,000 men, formed of British, Russian, Austrian, Prussian, and German troops, in about equal proportions, and under a Commander-in-chief appointed by the Allied Sovereigns, was to occupy seventeen fortresses along the northern frontier, from Condé, Valenciennes, Bouchain, and Cambrai, to the _tête de pont_ of Fort Louis on the Rhine. The occupation was to continue for three years certain, and might last for another two years. This mixed army was placed under the supreme command of the Duke of Wellington, and all the expenses incurred by it were to be defrayed by the French. It was understood that the primary object of these latter stipulations was to preserve Louis on the throne, and to give time for the consolidation of his government. Lastly, a sum of 835,000,000 francs was exacted by way of compensation to the Powers, for the spoliations and losses which they suffered during the Revolution, and to indemnify the minor States for their recent expenses. Thus, the French had to submit to the payment of more than sixty-one million sterling, as the result of their defeat; and this sum did not include the vast amounts which were otherwise taken from them, under the head of contributions for the armies that invaded their country, or that were to be maintained there, for the purpose of inducing them to conform to the new order which had just been established.[74]

Footnote 74:

Baines, _Wars of the French Revolution_ , ii. 529, 530, where the text of the Treaty is given; Alison, _History of Europe, 1789-1815_ , x. 972.