Abstract
The first reaction of the Committee of Public Safety to the outcome of the crisis of July 1794 was to present it as the product of another plot. Now that Robespierre had gone the way of his predecessors Hebert and Danton, the normal business of revolutionary government could be resumed. On 29 July Barère, in typical form, treated the Convention to a melodramatic account of the conspiracy, and read out the names of half a dozen nominees who would bring the Committee back to full strength. This time, however, the Assembly had had enough of being terrorized by its own committees. It voted to restrict the power of the Committee of Public Safety to war and diplomacy, to change three of its members every month, and to deprive it of the power to order the arrest of deputies.
Keywords
Public Safety British Government General Security French Coloni Republican GovernmentPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
- 2.See E. Adams, The Influence of Grenville on Pitt’s Foreign Policy, Washington, 1904, passim.Google Scholar
- 3.Historical Manuscripts Commission, The Manuscripts of J.B. Fortescue, 1894, vol. II, pp. 457–61.Google Scholar
- 4.André Doyon, Un Agent royaliste Pendant la Révolution, 1969, p. 70.Google Scholar
- 17.A. Cobban, The Debate on the French Revolution, 1950, p. 304.Google Scholar
- 18.Journal de Guittard de Floriban, edited by Raymond Aubert, 1974, pp. 554–7;Google Scholar
- 19.see Harvey Mitchell, The Underground War against Revolutionary France, Oxford, 1965,Google Scholar
- and W.R. Fryer, Republic or Restoration in France, Manchester, 1965.Google Scholar
- 29.A. Mathiez, La Conspiration de l’Etranger, 1918, p. 120.Google Scholar
- 31.Quoted in Audrey Williamson, Thomas Paine, His Life, Work and Times, 1973, pp. 202, 296.Google Scholar
- 32.Lettres d’André Morellet, 2 vols, edited by D. Medlin and J.-C. David, Oxford, 1994, vol. II, pp. 216, 410–12.Google Scholar