[Sidenote: Unification of France through the abolition of the ancient provinces and the creation of the present departments.]

This decree established the equality and uniformity for which the French people had sighed so long. The injustice of the former system of taxation could never be reintroduced. All France was to have the same laws, and its citizens were henceforth to be treated in the same way by the state, whether they lived in Brittany or Dauphiny. The a.s.sembly soon went a step farther in consolidating and unifying France. It wiped out the old provinces altogether, by dividing the whole country into districts of convenient size, called _departments_. These were much more numerous than the ancient divisions, and were named after rivers and mountains. This obliterated from the map all reminiscences of the feudal disunion.

[Sidenote: The Declaration of the Rights of Man.]

224. Many of the _cahiers_ had suggested that the Estates should draw up a clear statement of the rights of the individual citizen. It was urged that the recurrence of abuses and the insidious encroachments of despotism might in this way be forever prevented. The National a.s.sembly consequently determined to prepare such a declaration in order to gratify and rea.s.sure the people and to form a basis for the new const.i.tution.

This Declaration (completed August 26) is one of the most notable doc.u.ments in the history of Europe. It not only aroused general enthusiasm when it was first published, but it appeared over and over again, in a modified form, in the succeeding French const.i.tutions down to 1848, and has been the model for similar declarations in many of the other continental states. It was a dignified repudiation of the abuses described in the preceding chapter. Behind each article there was some crying evil of long standing against which the people wished to be forever protected.

[Sidenote: Contents of the Declaration.]

The Declaration sets forth that "Men are born and remain equal in rights. Social distinctions can only be founded upon the general good."

"Law is the expression of the general will. Every citizen has a right to partic.i.p.ate, personally or through his representative, in its formation.

It must be the same for all." "No person shall be accused, arrested, or imprisoned except in the cases and according to the forms prescribed by law." "No one shall be disquieted on account of his opinions, including his religious views, provided that their manifestation does not disturb the public order established by law." "The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, being responsible, however, for such abuses of this freedom as shall be defined by law." "All citizens have a right to decide, either personally or by their representative, as to the necessity of the public contribution, to grant this freely, to know to what uses it is put, and to fix the proportion, the mode of a.s.sessment and of collection, and the duration of the taxes." "Society has the right to require of every public agent an account of his administration." Well might the a.s.sembly claim, in its address to the people, that "the rights of man had been misconceived and insulted for centuries," and boast that they were "reestablished for all humanity in this declaration, which shall serve as an everlasting war cry against oppressors."

[Ill.u.s.tration: Louis XVI]

[Sidenote: Suspicion aroused against the court.]

225. The king hesitated to ratify the Declaration of the Rights of Man, and about the first of October rumors became current that, under the influence of the courtiers, he was calling together troops and preparing for another attempt to put an end to the Revolution, similar to that which the attack on the Bastile had frustrated. It was said that the new national colors--red, white, and blue--had been insulted at a banquet at Versailles. These things, along with the scarcity of food due to the poor crops of the year, aroused the excitable Paris populace.

[Sidenote: A Paris mob invades the king's palace and carries him off to Paris.]

On October 5 several thousand women and a number of armed men marched out to Versailles to ask bread of the king, in whom they had great confidence personally, however suspicious they might be of his friends and advisers. Lafayette marched after the mob with the national guard, but did not prevent some of the rabble from invading the king's palace the next morning and nearly murdering the queen, who had become very unpopular. She was believed to be still an Austrian at heart and to be in league with the counter-revolutionary party.

The mob declared that the king must accompany them to Paris, and he was obliged to consent. Far from being disloyal, they a.s.sumed that the presence of the royal family would insure plenty and prosperity. So they gayly escorted the "baker and the baker's wife and the baker's boy," as they jocularly termed the king and queen and the little dauphin, to the Palace of the Tuilleries, where the king took up his residence, practically a prisoner, as it proved. The National a.s.sembly soon followed him and resumed its sittings in a riding school near the Tuilleries.

This transfer of the king and the a.s.sembly to the capital was the first great misfortune of the Revolution. At a serious crisis the government was placed at the mercy of the leaders of the disorderly elements of Paris. We shall see how the munic.i.p.al council of Paris finally usurped the powers of the national government.[401]

[Sidenote: Unjust apportionment of the revenue of the church.]

226. As we have seen, the church in France was very rich and retained many of its mediaeval prerogatives and privileges. Its higher officials, the bishops and abbots, received very large revenues and often a single prelate held a number of rich benefices, the duties of which he utterly neglected. The parish priests, on the other hand, who really performed the manifold and important functions of the church, were scarcely able to live on their incomes. This unjust apportionment of the vast revenue of the church naturally suggested the idea that, if the state confiscated the ecclesiastical possessions, it could see that those who did the work were properly paid for it, and might, at the same time, secure a handsome sum which would help the government out of its financial troubles. Those who sympathized with Voltaire's views were naturally delighted to see their old enemy deprived of its independence and made subservient to the state, and even many good Catholics could not but hope that the new system would be an improvement upon the old.

[Sidenote: The property of the church confiscated by the government.]

The t.i.thes had been abolished in August along with the feudal dues. That deprived the church of perhaps thirty million dollars a year. On November 2 a decree was pa.s.sed providing that "All the ecclesiastical possessions are at the disposal of the nation on condition that it provides properly for the expenses of maintaining religious services, for the support of those who conduct them and for the succor of the poor." This decree deprived the bishops and priests of their benefices and made them dependent on salaries paid by the state. The monks, monasteries, and convents, too, lost their property.

[Sidenote: The _a.s.signats_, or paper currency.]

The National a.s.sembly resolved to issue a paper currency for which the newly acquired lands should serve as security. Of these _a.s.signats_, as this paper money was called, we hear a great deal during the revolutionary period. They soon began to depreciate, and ultimately a great part of the forty billions of francs issued during the next seven years was repudiated.

[Sidenote: The Civil Const.i.tution of the Clergy.]

The a.s.sembly set to work completely to reorganize the church. The anxiety for simplification and complete uniformity shows itself in the reckless way that it dealt with this most venerable inst.i.tution of France, the customs of which were hallowed not only by age, but by religious veneration. The one hundred and thirty-four ancient bishoprics, some of which dated back to the Roman Empire, were replaced by the eighty-three new departments into which France had already been divided.[402] Each of these became the diocese of a bishop, who was looked upon as an officer of the state and was to be elected by the people. The priests, too, were to be chosen by the people, and their salaries were much increased, so that even in the smallest villages they received over twice the minimum amount paid under the old regime.

This Civil Const.i.tution of the Clergy[403] was the first serious mistake on the part of the National a.s.sembly. While the half-feudalized church had sadly needed reform, the worst abuses might have been remedied without shocking and alienating thousands of those who had hitherto enthusiastically applauded the great reforms which the a.s.sembly had effected. The king gave his a.s.sent to the changes, but with the feeling that he might be losing his soul by so doing. From that time on, he became at heart an enemy of the Revolution.

[Sidenote: Harsh treatment of the 'non-juring' clergy.]

The discontent with the new system on the part of the clergy led to another serious error on the part of the a.s.sembly. It required the clergy to take an oath to be faithful to the law and "to maintain with all their might the const.i.tution decreed by the a.s.sembly." Only six of the bishops consented to this and but a third of the lower clergy, although they were much better off under the new system. Forty-six thousand parish priests refused to sacrifice their religious scruples, and before long the pope forbade them to take the required oath to the Const.i.tution. As time went on, the "non-juring" clergy were dealt with more and more harshly by the government, and the way was prepared for the horrors of the Reign of Terror. The Revolution ceased to stand for liberty, order, and the abolition of ancient abuses, and came to mean, in the minds of many besides those who had lost their former privileges, irreligion, violence, and a new kind of oppression worse than the old.

General Reading.--There are a great many histories of the French Revolution. The best and most modern account is STEPHENS, _The French Revolution_ (Charles Scribner's Sons, 3 vols., $2.50 each).

SHAILER MATHEWS, _The French Revolution_ (Longmans, Green & Co., $1.25), is an excellent short account. See also the brief but admirable chapters in ROSE, _The Revolutionary and Napoleonic Era_ (The Macmillan Company, $1.25). CARLYLE'S famous _French Revolution_ is hardly a history but rather a series of vivid pictures, valuable only to those who already have some knowledge of the course of events. For Mirabeau see WILLERT, _Mirabeau_ (The Macmillan Company, 75 cents).

CHAPTER x.x.xVI

THE FIRST FRENCH REPUBLIC

[Sidenote: The permanent reforms of 1789.]

227. We have now studied the progress and nature of the revolution which destroyed the old regime and created modern France. Through it the unjust privileges, the perplexing irregularities, and the local differences were abolished, and the people admitted to a share in the government. This vast reform had been accomplished without serious disturbance and, with the exception of some of the changes in the church, it had been welcomed with enthusiasm by the French nation.

[Sidenote: The second revolution.]

This permanent, peaceful revolution, or reformation, was followed by a second revolution of unprecedented violence, which for a time destroyed the French monarchy. It also introduced a series of further changes many of which were absurd and unnecessary and could not endure since they were approved by only a few fanatical leaders. France, moreover, became involved in a war with most of the powers of western Europe. The weakness of her government which permitted the forces of disorder and fanaticism to prevail, combined with the imminent danger of an invasion by the united powers of Europe, produced the Reign of Terror. After a period of national excitement and disorder, France gladly accepted the rule of a foreigner, who proved himself far more despotic than its former kings had been. Napoleon did not, however, undo the great work of 1789; his colossal ambition was, indeed, the means of extending, directly or indirectly, many of the benefits of the Revolution to other parts of western Europe. When, after Napoleon's fall, the brother of Louis XVI came to the throne, the first thing that he did was solemnly to a.s.sure the people that all the great gains of the first revolution should be maintained.

[Sidenote: The emigration of the n.o.bles.]

228. While practically the whole of the nation heartily rejoiced in the earlier reforms introduced by the National a.s.sembly and celebrated the general satisfaction and harmony by a great national festival held at Paris on the first anniversary of the fall of the Bastile, some of the higher n.o.bility refused to remain in France. The king's youngest brother, the count of Artois, set the example by leaving the country. He was followed by others who were terrified or disgusted by the burning of the chateaux, the loss of their privileges, and the unwise abolition of hereditary n.o.bility by the National a.s.sembly in June, 1790. Before long these emigrant n.o.bles (_emigres_), among whom were many military officers, organized a little army across the Rhine, and the count of Artois began to plan an invasion of France. He was ready to ally himself with Austria, Prussia, or any other foreign government which he could induce to help undo the Revolution and give back to the French king his former absolute power and to the n.o.bles their old privileges.

[Sidenote: The conduct of the emigrant n.o.bles discredits the king and queen.]

The threats and insolence of the emigrant n.o.bles and their shameful negotiations with foreign powers discredited the members of their cla.s.s who still remained in France. The people suspected that the plans of the runaways met with the secret approval of the king, and more especially of the queen, whose brother was now emperor and ruler of the Austrian dominions. This, added to the opposition of the non-juring clergy, produced a bitter hostility between the so-called "patriots" and those who, on the other hand, were supposed to be secretly hoping for a counter revolution which would reestablish the old regime.

[Sidenote: The flight to Varennes, June 21, 1791.]

The worst fears of the people appeared to be justified by the secret flight of the royal family from Paris, in June, 1791. Ever since the king had reluctantly signed the Civil Const.i.tution of the Clergy, flight had seemed to him his only resource. There was a body of regular troops on the northeastern boundary; if he could escape from Paris and join them he hoped that, aided by a demonstration on the part of the queen's brother, he might march back and check the further progress of the revolutionary movement with which he could no longer sympathize. He had, it is true, no liking for the emigrants and heartily disapproved of their policy, nor did he believe that the old regime could ever be restored. But, unfortunately, his plans led him to attempt to reach the boundary just at that point where the emigrants were collected. He and the queen were, however, arrested on the way, at Varennes, and speedily brought back to Paris.

[Sidenote: Effect of the king's flight.]

The desertion of the king appears to have terrified rather than angered the nation. The grief of the people at the thought of losing, and their joy at regaining, a poor weak ruler like Louis XVI clearly shows that France was still profoundly royalist in its sympathies. The National a.s.sembly pretended that the king had not fled, but that he had been carried off. This gratified France at large; still in Paris there were some who advocated the deposition of the king, and for the first time a _republican_ party appeared, though it was still small.

[Sidenote: The const.i.tution completed, 1791.]

The National a.s.sembly at last put the finishing touches to the new const.i.tution upon which it had been working for two years, and the king readily swore to observe it faithfully. A general amnesty was then proclaimed. All the discord and suspicion of the past months were to be forgotten. The National a.s.sembly had completed its appointed task, perhaps the greatest that a single body of men ever undertook. It had made France over and had given her an elaborate const.i.tution. It was now ready to give way to the regular Legislative a.s.sembly provided for in the const.i.tution. This held its first session October 1, 1791.[404]

[Sidenote: Sources of danger at the opening of the Legislative a.s.sembly, October, 1791.]

229. In spite of the great achievements of the National a.s.sembly it left France in a critical situation. Besides the emigrant n.o.bles abroad, there were the non-juring clergy at home, and a king who was secretly corresponding with foreign powers with the hope of securing their aid.

When the news of the arrest of the king and queen at Varennes reached the ears of Marie Antoinette's brother, the Austrian ruler, Leopold II, he declared that the violent arrest of the king sealed with unlawfulness all that had been done in France and "compromised directly the honor of all the sovereigns and the security of every government." He therefore proposed to the rulers of Russia, England, Prussia, Spain, Naples, and Sardinia that they should come to some understanding between themselves as to how they might "reestablish the liberty and honor of the most Christian king and his family, and place a check upon the dangerous excesses of the French Revolution, the fatal example of which it behooves every government to repress."

[Sidenote: The Declaration of Pillnitz, August 27, 1791.]

On August 27 Leopold had issued, in conjunction with the king of Prussia, the famous Declaration of Pillnitz. In this the two sovereigns state that, in accordance with the wishes of the king's brothers (the leaders of the emigrant n.o.bles), they are ready to join the other European rulers in an attempt to place the king of France in a position to establish a form of government "that shall be once more in harmony with the rights of sovereigns and shall promote the welfare of the French nation." In the meantime they promised to prepare their troops for active service.