breast to direct the aim of the soldiers; that he gave a lock of his hair to one of the soldiers to carry to the princess de Rohan, and that an officer snatched it away with the words, "No one shall receive the commissions of a traitor," and many other particulars, some of which have been proved false, and some are not authenticated. Very different accounts have been given of the conduct of the first consul in this affair. Thus it has been said that Josephine and Hortense entreated him to spare the life of the prince; that Cambacères and Berthier represented to him, in the most pressing manner, the uselessness of this bloody measure, and that he seemed disposed to yield to them when the news of the prince's death arrived: according to others, he would not listen to the entreaties and representations of his wife and of his friends. (None of these statements are of authority. See the note contained on the following page.) On the other hand, it is known to every impartial investigator, that Napoleon was far from being of a cruel disposition, that he was never deaf to prayers for mercy, if the great interests of France allowed him to listen to them. He pardoned most of the persons implicated in the conspiracy of Georges; he pardoned the prince of Hatzfeld; he offered pardon even to Staps, the young assassin at Schönbrunn; in short, proofs enough exist to show that his disposition was the opposite of cruel. The narratives of several persons concerned in the duke's death, tend also to exculpate the chief consul. Savary, duke of Rovigo, informs us in his Mémoires, that the consul heard, through him, of the execution of the prince with amazement, and greatly regretted it. The count Réal, counsellor of state, then prefect of Paris, and therefore charged with the police of that city, declares the same. He has asserted in the U. States, where he has lived a long time,* that Napoleon did not know of the execution of the duke until after it had taken place, and that he learned it with amazement from Savary's mouth, and that the consul had intended to set the prince at liberty. This agrees with the following statement, which we have from the most authentic source. Joseph, the brother of the consul, found him, after this catastrophe, much affected, and highly indignant at those persons whom he accused of having occasioned this catastrophe. He regretted much that he had lost so fine * In presence of Joseph Bonaparte, count de Survilliers, Mr. Duponceau, general Lallemand, captain Sary and others.

an opportunity of doing an act of mercy. Even long after, in conversation with his brother, he frequently alluded to this sad event, and, with his usual vivacity, observed, "it would have been noble to pardon a prince, who, in plotting against me, avait fait son métier." "He was young," continued Napoleon, "my favors would have attached him to me; he would have become better acquainted with the state of France, and would have ended by entering my service; it would have been gratifying to have had the descendant of the great Condé for my aid-de-camp." This view is corroborated by Napoleon's own assertions, in Las Cases' Memorial, vol. vii. p. 437. The declarations of Napoleon himself, in his will, however, are at variance with this view of the subject. He there says, " I ordered the duke of Enghien to be arrested and executed, because it was necessary for the safety, the welfare and the honor of the French nation. Under the same circumstances I should act in the same way; the death of the duke of Enghien is to be imputed to those who plotted in London against the life of the first consul, and who intended to bring the duke of Berri by Beville, and the duke of Enghien by Strasburg, into France." Savary, who was himself a witness of the regrets of the consul on account of the death of the duke, gives the following explanation of this inconsistency;-that Napoleon, even on his death bed, preferred to take the charge of the duke's death upon himself, rather than to allow his power to be doubted; and that he acted thus from regard to the dignity of a sovereign, who, if he enjoys the credit of the good which is done in his name, would act unworthily in throwing the blame of the evil done in his name upon others. He says, when the emperor uses the words Le duc d'Enghien est mort parceque je l'ai voulu, his meaning amounts only to this: "When I reigned, no one dared conceive the thought of disposing of the life or liberty of any one. It might have been possible to impose upon me, but never for a moment to encroach upon my power." Las Cases, vol. vii. p. 418, gives a long passage, as containing the words of Napoleon himself on this subject. In this he says that France was infested with conspirators sent from London, that his life was in constant danger (a well known fact), and that he acted as in war, to put a stop to these outrages. He there goes only on the ground of justice, thinking it due to his honor to defend himself personally. It is certain, that in the critical situation in which he found

himself, walking upon volcanoes, still active, and ever ready for eruption, he could not have suffered it to be believed that such an act could be committed without his consent. A belief in his power was of the utmost importance to the peace and order of France. The welfare of France required that he should take upon himself the responsibility of every act done in his name. Another account of this catastrophe is given in Bignon's Histoire de France depuis le 18 Brumaire (November, 1799) jusqu'à la Paix de Tilsit (Juillet, 1807), Paris, 1829, with the motto, Je l'engage à écrire l'histoire de la diplomatie Française de 1792 à 1815. Testament de Napoléon. (See Bignon.) He says, among other things, such was the character of the first consul, that none of his acts can be taken from him-Le mal, comme le bien qu'il a fait, lui appartient et n'appartient qu'à lui—an assertion much too general, because the greatest man can build only with the materials which the time affords him. Napoleon himself often repeated-"I am no God; I do not do what I wish, but what I can." Bignon says that, in a note written by Napoleon himself, but not yet published, there is the following passage respecting the duke d'Enghien: "If guilty, the commission was right to sentence him to death; if innocent, they ought to have acquitted him, because no order whatever can justify a judge in violating his conscience.' He says, also, that at this time (before the execution), people who were near the first consul saw him internally struggling (livré aux angoisses les plus pénibles) between what he thought a fatal necessity, and what his own disposition dictated; but that no friend advised mercy. He then continues: "None of the statements given of the arrest and sentence of the duke of Enghien explain why there was no communication between the courtmartial and the superior authority, between Vincennes and Malmaison." And the question forces itself on our minds, Was every thing so preconcerted, was the sentence of death so certain, that it was not even sent to the first consul for consideration? Here we may add, at the same time, Why was the duke's request for an interview with the chief consul not reported to the latter, neither the petition which he presented to the court-martial, nor the letter which he wrote, some say from Strasburg, others from Vincennes? The answer is this: count Réal declared before the same persons, whom we have mentioned in a previous note, that, on the fatal night, a gendarme delivered a letter,

507

not knowing the import of it. Réal was asleep, and the letter was put on his mantel-piece. In the morning, when he opened the letter, he hastened to the first consul, but it was too late.* The fatal sentence had been executed. But who sends despatches of such a nature without orders to deliver them immediately and personally? In the whole of the process, there was an odious haste. Napoleon says, that when he was first spoken to of Enghien, all the orders for his arrest, &c. were already drawn up; and here is an unpardonable delay. Who is guilty of

* So we are informed, by good authority, count Réal declared himself in the U. States. Another account is given in an article, Napoleon and Bourienne, in the American Quarterly Review, September, 1830: September, 1830: "We have it, says the Review, in our power, from high authority (that of the duke of Rovigo was not aware of, the reason a person not now in this country), to state, what why the duke d'Enghien suffered death without the sanction or knowledge of the first consul. The prisoner, in extremity, asked to see the first consul, which was not permitted; but the judgeadvocate, Dantancourt, humanely suggested to him to write a letter; which was done, and the letter sent to Réal. During that eventful night, the first consul had been called up five times, on the arrival of as many messengers, with insignificant despatches. So often disturbed, he gave orders not to be called again, unless for a very serious occasion. M. Real sent the duke d'Enghien's letter to Malmaison by a private horseman of the gendarmerie, who, uninformed of its contents, gave no intimation that it required immediate attention. It was laid on a table, where it remained unnoticed till after the first consul had deliberately risen, and made his toilet as usual, without the least notion of its contents. In the meanwhile, indeed, before he got out of bed, the ill-starred writer of that neglected letter was shot. which immediately followed that between the first The interview between the first consul and Réal, consul and Savary, disclosed the deplorable cause, as Savary's prior tidings had revealed the catastrophe. Real's reception was that of a man who had been guilty of unpardonable negligence. He will, no doubt, at some proper time, submit his account to the world. But he knows that the duke d'Enghien was not sacrificed to a tyrant's passions, policy or fears; that the general agitation and tion and very natural misunderstanding which his family and friends had occasioned throughout the capital and the council, the over-zealous, perhaps treacherous advice of some, the over-active, precipitate despatch of others, and one of those misadventures, which are so common in the affairs of this world, are the causes to which this disaster was owing. Once done, however, nulla vestigia retrorsum, never to recant, or apologize or recede, was one of Bonaparte's imperious maxims. He felt the full force of the French proverb, that whoever excuses, accuses himself; and nothing would induce him to disown a deed done under his orders, though they were violated to his infinite injury and mortification in almost every stage of the proceeding." Perhaps both accounts are correct; at all events, both exculpate Napoleon from the haste of the process.

both? To whom is to be ascribed the irregularities in the whole process, which M. Dupin, in his publication on this catastrophe, proves to have existed, and which the duke of Rovigo acknowledges, and even imputes to certain individuals? We are far from pretending to be able to clear up this mystery. Individuals have accused cach other; but (according to the words of Louis Bonaparte, count de St. Leu, in his Réponse) cette affaire est loin d'être éclaircie. Count Hullin accuses Savary of the haste, and himself of the irregularity of the process, pleading ignorance respecting the forms of courts-martial. Savary accuses Talleyrand, most positively, of the whole crime, and, it cannot be denied, makes it plausible. His motive is said to have been to precipitate the first consul into an act which should stain him with Bourbon blood (with which Talleyrand and many others were themselves stained), so as to prevent him from becoming a second Monk, and restoring the Bourbons, which, of course, would have ruined Talleyrand. Talleyrand,on the other hand, defended himself in a letter to Louis XVIII, on this subject, with which the king was fully satisfied. History, we trust, will eventually fix the guilt on the name to which it belongs. As for Napoleon, we cannot but believe that he actually considered the duke of Enghien guilty of having plotted against France (he could not imagine him so insane as to live on the frontier of France without an object); probably, also, of having been concerned in, or at least acquainted with, the conspiracies of Georges, &c. at Paris; that he therefore believed the duke might be sentenced to death by the court-martial;* but, at all events, in

* We quote from the article of the American Quarterly Review, above-mentioned, the following passage: "The question, then, for the first consul's decision, was not, as Bourienne states it, with many odious surmises, whether the prisoner should be executed, but whether he should be tried by a military tribunal. Bourienne was no longer near the person of the first consul. All his revelations are hearsays. The duke of Rovigo's account is the most particular and authentic that has appeared. The explanations of the duke d'Alberg and baron Massias are but remote and argumentative. The memoirs of Cambacères, as we have said, will have very important bearings on this affair. We have not seen the duke of Otranto's memoirs, and do not know what he says; nor have we read M. Dupin's pamphlet, in which the case is professionally considered. Prince Talleyrand's memoirs will, no doubt, contain whatever may be his apology. The letter he addressed to the king concerning it remains unknown to the public; and all the documents connected with this proceeding have disappeared from the public archives, whichi Savary says were

tended to pardon him (for such a pardon would not only have accorded with Napoleon's disposition, but have been serviceable to his politics: he wanted peace); that, however, others, either from a criminal desire to please the first consul, and acting under the supposition that he wished the duke's death, or from some other motive, hastened the execution; that Bonaparte, justly, was then unwilling to have it supposed that such an act could be committed against his will, as he was just forming a government, and establishing order in its different departments, and the belief in his power was indispensable ; and that he finally thought it beneath his dignity to accuse his servants, on his death bed, preferring to take the odium upon himself, pleading in excuse the in the custody and power of Talleyrand, as secretary of that department. We can give assurance, on authority which cannot mistake or be mistaken (if wrong, it must be intentionally so, and we have been deceived ourselves, which we cannot believe), that the idea of the death of the duke d'Enghien never crossed the first consul's mind, till he was astonished and confounded by the tidings communicated to him by Savary of his execution. Whatever the precipitation of some of his ministers, or the intrigues of others, may have designed; however his own ideas may have been surprised, his measures hurried, and the result enchained, it is certain, unless we are grossly misinformed (and if we are, it is designedly), that the sudden, violent and impolitic death of the victim of various untoward circumstances, was as door it is laid as an unpardonable crime, as to any unexpected and as unwelcome to him, at whose one living. The question was, not whether he should be put to death, but whether he should be put on his trial. Joseph, Josephine, Cambacères, magistrate against it. Talleyrand was for strong Berthier, earnestly expostulated with the chie measures. He said he knew the Bourbons well; that they were insensible to every thing but fear. Joseph, who was living at Morfontaine, and transiently in town, the 20th of March, the day the duke d'Enghien was taken a prisoner to Paris, spoke to his brother in his behalf, warmly urging Condé, who, he reminded his brother, had seven the defence of the grandson of the prince of times crowned him for as many distinctious gained at the royal school of Autun: to which expostulation the first consul's reply affords a curious. proof of the state of his mind at the moment His answer was given by declaiming the following passage from a speech of Cæsar, i Corneille's tragedy of Pompey"

"Votre zéle est faux, si seul il redontoit

Ce que le monde entiér à pleins vœux souhaitoit ;
Et s'il vous a domé ces craintes trop subtiles,
Qui m'ôtent tout le fruit de nos guerres civiles,
Où l'honneur seul m'engage, et que pour terminer
Je ne veux que celui de vaincre et de pardonner,
Où ines plus dangereux et plus grands adversaires,
Si tôt qu'ils sont vaincus, ne sont plus que mes frères;
Et mon ambition ne va qu'à les forcer,
Ayant dompté leur haine, à vivre et m'embrasser.
Oh! combien d'allégresse une si triste guerre
Amait-elle laissée dessus toute la terre,

Si l'on voyoit marcher dessus un même char,
Vainqueurs de leur discorde et Pompée et César."

emergency of the times, rather than to throw it upon others, who could not plead this excuse, and who, probably, would find means to exculpate themselves after his death; particularly, as the chief accusation would probably have been against Talleyrand, who had just betrayed him, so that a charge then preferred might have looked like an act of revenge. As to the illegality of arresting a person on the territory of another and friendly power, the first consul must have thought himself sufficiently excused by the plots constantly detected against his life, and the immense danger in which he himself and the peace of France were placed. "This was a matter," says Napoleon at St. Helena, "between the French government and that of Baden."*

We will only observe, in conclusion, that the person who was supposed to be the duke of Enghien, and to visit Georges at Paris, was Pichegru. The consequences of the death of the young prince were not favorable for Napoleon, except, perhaps, that it struck the conspirators with fear, and may thus have prevented some new conspiracies. But in France, where the prince was respected for bravery, all classes were afflicted, and the friends of the first consul not the least; for he had arrived at, and thus far maintained, his high station without shedding blood, so that people had begun to feel secure, and now, all the former apprehensions were awakened. Foreign courts generally showed great reserve on this occasion, except those of Russia and England; but the higher classes, who were essentially opposed to a revolution, the chief trait of which was opposition to the feudal system, exclaimed loudly against it. The court of St. Petersburg went into mourning, and made the duke's death a point of diplomatic discussion. The execution of the duke of Enghien was a fruitful source of libels and falsehoods against Napoleon, repeated so often, that the opinion of many is still influenced by them; and we have given so much space to the consideration of the subject, from its important bearing on the history of

*A singular example of an arrest, attended with circumstances of the same illegality which

marked that of the duke, sometime since took place in Germany. During the prosecutions against the liberals in that country, the Prussian government wished to secure the person of M. Cousin (q. v.), the distinguished French metaphysician then in Saxony (1824), and Prussian officers were sent into Saxony to arrest him. This was in a time. of profound peace, when the government and its chief were in no danger.

509

Napoleon. After the restoration of the Bourbons, a monument was erected to the memory of the unfortunate prince in the chapel of Vincennes, by the king of France and the chambers.

The works which afford the most information respecting this event, are the Memoirs of the Duke of Rovigo; Examination of the Proceedings of the Courtmartial instituted to try the Duke of Enghien; A justificatory Memorial published by the duke de Vicenza (Caulaincourt), who was charged to coöperate in the arrest of the duke, and to deliver an explanation respecting the violation of the territory of the elector of Baden after the arrest; some Letters published by the duke of Dalberg, minister from the court of Baden to the French government, in the year XII (1804); Minutes made on the Exhumation of the Duke of Enghien in 1816; A Deposition of Sieur Anfort, brigadier of gendarmerie at Vincennes; A Note from Baron de Massias, then French minister at the court of Baden; the Memoirs of Las Cases and O'Meara. Cambacères's memoirs will probably contain important information on this point, as Rovigo says he charged him to give an account of it Sir Walter Scott's account of this subject in his Life of Napoleon Bonaparte, is a web of facts and unfounded rumors, and bears rather the stamp of the newspaper accounts published at the time when the events took place, than that of history. In the beginning of 1830, the baron de Matthias, who was French minister at Carlsruhe when the death of the duke of Enghien took place, addressed a letter to M. de Bourienne (author of the Memoires of Napoleon, which, in several instances, have been proved to deviate much from truth). In this letter, M. de Matthias, who was acquainted with many details of the duke's arrest, &c., asserts positively, that Napoleon was deceived respecting the duke's alleged crime, Dumouriez's stay at Ettenheim, &c. We refer the reader to the article Napolcon and Bourienne, already mentioned in the American Quarterly Review, September, 1830, to enable him to judge of Bourienne's authority.

ENGIA; an island near the coast of the Morea, in a gulf to which it gives name; anciently called Egina (q. v.), Enone and Myrmidonia; about 30 miles in circumference, but rendered by rocks nearly inaccessible, except on the N. W. It has no harbors, and but one town, which contains about 800 inhabitants. In it are seen the remains of a temple dedicated to Venus, and another dedicated to Jupiter.