NOTES.

No. 1.-Page 8. The reader may be persuaded of this by consulting in the Moniteur, the addresses at that period from the sections of Paris.

The most zealous friends of Louis XVI. cannot deny that he was at least a weak sovereign; but a weak monarch is often as formidable as a bad one: the one does the mischief himself, the other tolerates its commission by his confidents.

They who pretend that Louis XVI. was only sentenced by a small majority, deceive the public: this is to convey a totally false impression of facts, for it occasions a belief that he was found guilty by that small majority only; but on the contrary he was condemned almost unanimously it was but in regard to the punishment, that opinions differed, from motives of policy.

The emigrants, to justify the king and themselves, say that he was not free, and, by consequence, he could not infringe laws that he had been compelled to accept. Let me ask, if we were less under control than himself. Who then are the criminals? Those who caused

the revolution-our accusers themselves.

In the outset, those only who gave their voice for his death, are attacked, with a view not to provoke too many adversaries at one time but when these shall have once been disposed of, do those who voted for imprisonment or exile, or other punishments more degrading than death-imagine that they will escape? Afterwards, those who signed the addresses of protestation, of recognition, of congratulation, will come in due course: the families of above two millions of citizens will be outlawed. Then will be persecuted, the grantees of national lands, the nobles who remained at home, and lastly the defenders of their country, who will be charged with the unavoidable guilt of bearing arms against their legitimate sovereign. In fact, all France will swarm with expatriated natives. In sober sadness, is it believed that the conquerors of Europe will submit to be thus trampled on? Have their enemies so soon forgotten how powerful is the rising of an oppressed nation?

2.-Page 9. Certain persons, styling themselves ancient members of the parliament of Paris, are contravening the national charter, by secretly distributing in manuscript some very humble remonstrances, which are the very climax of absurdity, madness, and contempt of the royal authority. These gentry already declaim, like maniacs, about vengeance, scaffolds, their Solicitor-General, the restoration of the national lands, the necessity of a Catholic religion, and absolute intolerance. They think themselves under the reign of Charles IX. The Parliament would act wisely in remembering, and in suffering others to forget, if possible, that the torch of discord was first lighted by themselves when they called for the assembling of the States General.

In the memoir alluded to, the Parliament talk highly of their ancient allegiance to kings: they must imagine us ignorant of all history. The Parliament, like every other public body, has always yielded to events. When Charles VI. lost his senses, did not the Parliament pass that famous decree, termed by M. de Boulainvilliers the eternal disgrace of the Parliament of Paris, and which perpetually banished Charles VII. then Dauphin, sanctioned the treaty of Troyes, and, in exclusion of the prince, acknowleged Henry V. king of England, as heir to the French crown? Was it not this very Parliament of Paris, which, by its decree of 5 March, 1590, expatriated Henry IV. who had been already denounced by a decree of the Sorbonne ?

The President Henault did not wish to state such facts in his Chronological Abridgement, since they discredited his own compeers; but they are recorded in all other histories, and proved by authentic documents.

3.-Page 11. Is it," (he says elsewhere)" considered a crime to kill a tyrant, who may have been once on terms of friendship with us? The Romans, at all events, do not think thus: on the contrary, they are convinced, that it is a most praiseworthy act !"

For myself, I own, that my principles are less republican than those of Cicero.

4.-Page 11. "Act as he will," Plutarch makes him observe, “ a king is always by nature ravenous, and a beast of prey; nor has there been any king, however praised and esteemed, who could be compared with Epaminondas, Pericles, Themistocles, or Marcus Curius, or Amilcar surnamed Barca."

5.-Page 11. See, in the Bible, the Book of Kings; especially what concerns the prophets Samuel and Jehu.

I refer unwillingly to these abominable passages: but we may as well show these gentry that their own books will exculpate us, though assuredly they cannot vindicate their believers.

Priests have uniformly tried to employ the popular credulity for the degradation of kings. What indignities have not the Popes imposed on kings in all ages! Does not the blood of the Bourbons glow with resentment at the ignominious penance exacted from the great Henry by the bishop of Rome? In every point of view, can there be

a more disgraceful history than that of the vicars of Jesus Christ? What religious wars have they not instigated! Are not the Crusades, the Inquisition, the massacre of St. Bartholomew, imputable to them? Were not the horrors of the League directed from the pulpit? Did not the priests canonize their holy brother James Clement? Did not the Sorbonne take the lead in denouncing Henry IV.? Finally, has there been any conspiracy against Sovereigns, without monks and Jesuits? Fanaticism and hypocrisy have flooded the earth with more blood, than all the contests of political warfare. Is it then surprising, that these traitors are so hostile to all that may disclose their infamies, and release mankind from the thraldom in which they hold them? Judge, they exclaim, by the revolution, of the benefits of that proud philosophy which proscribes religion. We might retort, judge by the revolution of that priestly avarice, which preferred the commission of so many crimes to the happiness of their country. True philosophy has never proscribed true religion; but profligate priests are friends to neither: blood and lucre are their only objects.

6.-Page 26. The restraint of communication by the press deprives the public of one of its most valuable rights--that of being informed with certainty of the truth: it may be told officially, without obtaining credit: unless it be transmitted through a pure medium, it will be thought that one half is suppressed; the limitation of the press, as we have been told and as we feel daily, is the exclusive privilege reserved by government of vilifying, hunting down, and traducing, any one at pleasure, without leaving to the party who undergoes this moral death, even the liberty of complaint.

In one of those pamphlets which seem to have been planned in hell, the king is presented with a very dexterous expedient, for discharging at once all the responsibilities towards the French people, by which his majesty acquired the throne of his ancestors: he is advised to declare, that he said, but that he did not promise. It must be confessed, that this legerdemain is not unworthy the genius of the Reverend Father Escobar; and it is to a king of France, a Bourbon, a descendant of St. Louis and Henry IV. that this odious step is impudently recommended in the sight of the world!

Authorities.

Louis XVIII. to the French.

The time is at length come, when Divine Providence seems bent on destroying the instrument of its wrath; the usurper of the throne of St. Louis, the desolator of Europe, in his turn, experiences defeat.

Shall it only serve to aggravate the misfortunes of France, or will she not dare to subvert a hateful despotism, no longer disguised by the pageantry of success? What prejudices or fears can interpose to detain her from the arms of her king, and from accepting his legiti mate authority, as the only pledge of concord, peace, and happiness, which he has so often held forth to his oppressed subjects?

Neither desiring, nor being able, to secure his rightful throne but by their exertions, and attachment, what reason can there be to oppose his constant wishes? With what justice can his paternal views be doubted?

In his former manifestos, the king has said, and he now repeats it, that the administrative and judicial authorities shall retain their full powers, that such as take the oath of allegiance, shall be maintained in their present offices and employments, that the legal tribunals shall abstain from all inquiry relative to those unhappy times, for which his Majesty's return will confirm a perpetual amnesty.

Proclamation of Monsieur, brother to the King.

We, Charles Philip of France, the son of France, Monsieur, Count of Artois, Lieutenant-General of the Kingdom, &c. &c. &c. to all Frenchmen, greeting;

Frenchmen, the day of your deliverance draws near, the brother of your king is among you: in the heart of France, he desires again to unfold the ancient banner of lilies, and to promulgate the return of happiness and peace, under a reign auspicious to law and public liberty.

Tyranny, war, conscription, and consolidated taxes, are no more: at the voice of your sovereign and your father, let hope dispel your misfortunes, and amnesty cancel your errors: let your disputes give way to that concord, which your father guarantees.

He burns to effectuate those promises which this day he solemnly renews he is eager to distinguish by his love and his kindness this happy period, which restores him to his subjects, and assembles them round their father.

The King's answer to the Prince Regent of England.

I request your Royal Highness to accept of my sincerest and most grateful acknowlegements for the congratulations you have addressed to me: I return them particularly, in behalf of the constant attentions I have experienced, as well from your Royal Highness, as from every member of your illustrious house. To the counsels of your Royal Highness, to this eminent country, and to the confidence of its inhabitants, I shall ever, under the blessing of Providence, attribute both the restoration of our house to the throne of its ancestors,

and that happy state of affairs which seems destined to heal the wounds, to calm the passions, and to re-establish the peace and happiness, of all nations.

Answer of Monsieur, the King's brother, to the Senate.

I thank the Senate for its regard to the happiness of France, in recalling her legitimate sovereign. The king and his family will spend their lives for the happiness of the French people: one feeling must be common to us all; the past is forgotten: we are now a nation of brethren. So long as I shall remain at the head of the government, which will be, I trust, but a short time, I will exert myself to the utmost for the public weal.

Answer of Monsieur, the King's brother, to the Legislative

Assembly.

We are all Frenchmen, we are all brothers. The king has just arrived among us: it will be his chief gratification to uphold the prosperity of France, and to obliterate past evils. Let us think only of the future. The king and myself have deeply felt the merit of your brave resistance to tyranny, at a crisis when it was highly dangerous to withstand the cruel oppression which ground down our country: once more, we are all Frenchmen.

Articles 8, 9, and 11, of the Constitutional Charter.

Art. 8. The French nation have the right of printing and publishing their opinions, in conformity to the laws which prevent the abuse of this privilege.

Art. 9. All property is inviolable, without exception of that which is called national, as the law acknowleges no difference.

Art. 11. All cognisance is remitted, of opinions or votes before the Restoration; this caution is applicable alike to the tribunals and to citizens.

THE END.