The d'Enghien Affair: Crime or Blunder?
By Tom Holmberg
"In January 1804," Colin Duckworth wrote, "under the auspices of the comte d'Artois [the future Charles X], who regarded Bonaparte as the main obstacle to the Restoration, a plot to kidnap and assassinate the [First] Consul, foment insurrection, import a Bourbon Prince to direct the coup from Paris, then set up Louis XVIII on the throne, was it its final stages of elaboration." The British, who understood Napoleon's precarious position, had put up one million pounds, according to Duckworth, to finance the plot. It was Pitt himself who had told the French ambassador Otto, "What importance can be attached to a Government that depends on a pistol-shot?"
Georges Cadoudal and his fellow chouans slipped into France from Britain, on 30 August 1803 aboard the naval vessel of Capt. John Wesley Wright, a key player in the British part of the conspiracy. General Charles Pichegru, another key player in the plot, was also residing in England and arrived in France on 16 January 1804, also reportedly from Capt. Wright's ship. It was the Prince de Cond who had originally suborned General Pichegru. The British had provided the conspirators safe haven, training, money, documents, weapons and naval transport. The British agent Drake was simultaneously attempting to provoke an insurrection in the Rhineland.
Pichegru met with his former protg General Moreau on 28 January 1804. On 29 January 1804, the French arrested a British secret agent, Courson. Under interrogation Courson revealed details of a plot by Pichegru, Moreau and Cadoudal, the chouan leader, to overthrow the Consulate. Louis Picot, Cadoudal's servant had been arrested on 8 February 1804 and tortured to reveal additional details of the assassination plot.
According to Hebert Cole: "Murat ordered the gates to the city to be closed each night from 7 p.m. to 6 a.m. Sentries were stationed all round the outside of the walls, each within sight of the next, supported by detachments of cavalry from the Consular Guard. Sailors set up guard floats in midstream opposite the barriere de la Rape and the barriere de Passy. By day, all vehicles were searched and any persons whose papers were not in order were sent to the Pre-fecture of Police. Paris, in fact, was put in a state of blockade." Additional arrests followed. Moreau was arrested on 15 February and Pichegru on 28 February These further arrests lead to the discovery that a Bourbon Prince was involved in the plot. Cadoudal, when captured after a gun battle, had boldly, but, as it turned out, fatally revealed that he had only been waiting for the arrival of a Bourbon Prince before carrying out his attack on Napoleon.
Moreau's part in the plot, as Napoleon's aide-de-camp de Sgur explained, "was his cognizance of it, not daring to take any steps himself, but leaving the work to others and waiting till they had got rid of the First Consul." Pichegru exclaimed of his former protg, "That bastard is also ambitious; he wants to reign, a man who would not be able to govern France for twenty-four hours." Finally Cadoudal said of Moreau, "Usurper for usurper, I prefer Bonaparte to this Moreau! He has neither head nor heart!"
Both Fouch, who was telling Napoleon that "the air is full of daggers," and Talleyrand pointed fingers at Louis de Bourbon Cond, duc d'Enghien, who was presently residing, on a British pension, at Ettenheim just across the border from France, in a house a mere seven miles from France. Exactly why d'Enghien chose Ettenheim, so close to the French border, to rent a house at and to remain there even after details of the conspiracy were generally known for three weeks remains something of a mystery. The usual explanation that he wished to live there with his with his wife, Charlotte de Rohan-Rochefort, whom he had secretly married, does not explain why he chose to reside less than ten miles from the French border. (A point Thiers makes: "The prince after all was at Ettenheim, so near to frontier, under, similar circumstances, for some apparent motive. Was it possible, that cautioned as he had been, and letters found in his house proved it, was it possible that he remained so close to danger without any object? That he was no sort of an accomplice in the project of assassination? In any case he was certainly at Ettenheim, to second a movement of the emigrants in the interior, to excite a civil war, to carry arms again against France.")
General Leval, in command of a division stationed at Strasburg, wrote in early March to Regnier, the Minister of Justice and Grand Judge, "You have undoubtedly been informed of the intrigues which are being hatched at Offenburg, by six or seven hundred migrs who are living there." On 7 March Regnier wrote to Talleyrand informing him that migrs in English pay and "rebel bishops" at Offenburg were inciting rebellion and sending "infamous libels" into France. On 8 March reports from both Lamothe, an agent sent to Ettenheim to gather information on the Prince, and She, the prefect of the Strasburg region, confirmed (most likely erroneously) that the Prince was conspiring with his fellow royalists for a coup essential and that d'Enghien had on a number of occasions entered France.
Though Talleyrand had burned many of his papers in 1814, one from the period escaped the flames. In a letter dated 8 March 1804, only days prior to d'Enghien's arrest, Talleyrand wrote: "The First Consul must prevail against his enemies...As justice obliges him to punish rigorously, politics requires him to punish without exception....May I recommend M. de Caulaincourt to the First Consul, a man to whom he can give orders and who will execute them with as much discretion as fidelity." Both Chateaubriand and Mneval attested, separately, to this letter.
Fouch had a letter in which d'Enghien claimed to have worked at suborning French troops along the Rhine and another in which d'Enghien spoke of his desire to serve under the British flag and calling the French his "most cruel enemy." In a letter to the British government dated 15 January 1804, d'Enghien "begs His British Majesty to employ him, no matter how nor in what position, against his implacable enemies in case a continental war breaks out:-whether in allowing him to serve in the armies of the Powers allied with England; or to join the first English troops on the Continent wherever they might land." In this letter, according to Sidney Fay, the Prince also cryptically refers to his two years on the Rhine that had given him the opportunity to communicate with French troops stationed along the frontier. D'Enghien had borne arms against France in the Army of Cond that had been in the pay of France's enemies. Officers in Cond's army, despite assurances by the future King to the contrary, were still threatening as late as 1795, according to W.R. Fryer, "nothing better than the rope and the sword" on entering France. Abb Ratel, the go-between for the British and the Princes' court and also the British paymaster for royalist agents in France, had brushed aside any religious scruples about assassinating Napoleon.
As early as 1799 d'Enghien was put forth by many of the most active of the young men of the counter-revolution as a rallying point for the overthrow of the French government. Before the break-up of the Army of Cond, British spymaster, William Wickham was advising d'Enghien on the progress of various schemes for a counter-revolution and on 29 November 1799 the Prince was writing to Wickham for further information.
William Wickham, in a letter dated 7 April 1800 to Lt.-Colonel Wagner who was being posted as ADC to d'Enghien, described the young Prince: "You will find yourself under orders of a young Prince of the first House of Europe, who will give you the best example, not only of the virtues and qualities of which I speak, but also of the most touching sweetness and modesty, of an affability without familiarity to his inferiors, and a respect and submission the most marked to those whom he has pledged his sovereign to subordinate himself, whatever his own thoughts on their conduct and talents."
The duc d'Enghien had declared himself the eternal enemy of Republican France and had not changed his views with the advent of the Consulate. He was an migr in the pay of France's enemies and had declared himself ready to lead an armed invasion of France.
D'Enghien had, in a letter dated 23 Sept. 1803, expressed the hope that some "accident" would occur to Napoleon that would make possible the return of the Bourbons to the throne of France.
On 16 June 1803, rumors having reached the Prince of Cond that d'Enghien was entering France on some mysterious missions. Obviously d'Enghien's father believed his son capable of such rash acts. Cond wrote the Prince, "You must admit it was useless to risk your liberty and your life...Your position may be very useful in many respects, but you are very near; take care and do not neglect any precaution to get warning in time and make a safe retreat in case the Consul should take it in his head to have you seized." The Prince replied on 18 July 1803, "One must know me very little to be able to say or seek to make others believe that I have put my foot on republican soil, except with the rank and station to which the chance of birth entitles me...One may travel incognito among the glaciers of Switzerland as I did last year [Switzerland was a republic under French control at the time], not having anything better to do; but as for France, when I travel there, I shall have no need to conceal myself." D'Enghien added that, "There where danger was, was the post of honour for a Bourbon. That, at this moment, when the order of the Privy Council of His Britannic Majesty had summoned the migrs in retreat to the banks of the Rhine, he could not, whatever might happen, abandon these worthy and loyal defenders of the French Monarchy." The Prince's private secretary claimed, in 1823, that d'Enghien had never entered France while staying at Ettenheim and that the Prince told him, "I wish to be able, in case of need, to affirm on my honor that I have not been in France."
Napoleon only became aware of d'Enghien's presence at Ettenheim, in Baden, on 1 March, when informed by Talleyrand. Napoleon was told by his agents that d'Enghien had visited Paris to attend secret gatherings of conspirators, that he had with him At Ettenheim and English colonel named Smith and that Dumouriez had visited d'Enghien at Ettenheim. Charles Franois Dumouriez was a French general who had defected to the Austrians in 1793. It was believed that d'Enghien was associated with the Offenburg group, who was undertaking counter-revolutionary activities in Alsace. It was a certain General Thumery, who was mistaken, due to the similarity of the names when spoken with a German accent, for Dumouriez. The English Col. Smith turned out to be a German named Schmidt. Napoleon believed, at least as late as 12 March, that it had been Dumouriez who had met with d'Enghien. (De Sgur wrote that "Bonaparte may have believed in this complicity, but it never really existed....If any excuse could be found for such a barbarous act, it was in his real conviction, through a fatal concurrence of circumstances, that he was obeying political necessity, the right of personal defence, and that he was only punishing a conspirator;...As for us, in our ignorance at the time, the accusation brought against this unhappy prince seemed likely to be only too true. Looked at in this light, however fearful may have been the blow struck at Vincennes, was our much provoked chief the only, or the most guilty, one?")
On 10 March Napoleon held a council, attended by Talleyrand, Fouch, Cambacrs, Lebrun and Rgnier in which it was decided to send a force into Baden for the purpose of seizing the duc d'Enghien. He had told his brother Joseph, "I am a target alike for the followers of the Bourbons and for the Jacobins." When urged to moderation in dealing with those wanting to overthrow the regime, Napoleon replied: "Am I a dog, to be hounded down and killed in street...while my murders are to be regarded as sacrosanct?" To Cambacrs, who opposed d'Enghien's arrest, Napoleon said, "I would have you know that I refuse to spare those who are sending out assassins against me." Napoleon added, "You have grown very stingy with Bourbon blood." Then, according to Talleyrand biographer Jean Orieux, "On the tenth and eleventh of March, 1804, Talleyrand sent notes to the baron of Edeisheim, Baden-Baden's minister in Paris, advising him that the duc d'Enghien was on Badenese soil and would be arrested and forcibly removed by French troops." Fay states that on the night of the raid Talleyrand sent a note to the Elector stating, "In these extraordinary circumstances the First Consul has believed it his duty to order two small detachments to go to Offenburg and Ettenheim to seize there the instigators of a crime which, by its nature, puts outside the law of nations all persons who have clearly taken part in it..."
On the same day General Ordener was ordered to clear the migrs from Offenburg and capture the duc d'Enghien. Caulaincourt was put in charge of the operation at Offenburg while Ordener was to go to Ettenheim with 300 dragoons and a detachment of the gendarmerie to seize the Prince, his accomplices and his papers. In total about 1000 men were involved in the operation. Ordener, with General Fririon, Charlot from the gendarmes, and a German spy named Pfersdorf, serving as guide, crossed the Rhine at Rheinau on pontoons and rode by way of Kappel and Aldorf to Ettenheim. (Fririon later claimed to have sent a warning to d'Enghien about the raid, which the Prince ignored.)
D'Enghien was seized in his home on the night of Wednesday, 14 March, at 5 a.m. He spent the 16th in the fortress of Strasbourg and was sent by post-chaise to Paris, under the name of Plessis, on the night of the 17th. D'Enghien's papers were handed to Napoleon on the 19th, along with a report by Charlot which read, "The Duc d'Enghien has assured me that Dumouriez has not come to Ettenheim; that, however, it is possible that he had been charged to bring him instructions from England, but that he had not received them, because it was beneath his rank to have anything to do with such men." Though the papers contained no evidence of d'Enghien's complicity in the plot to murder Napoleon, the papers did show that the Prince had offered to serve with British forces, that he was in the pay of the British, that d'Enghien was involved in the paying of British pensions to other migrs in the area, and that he had made preparations to enter France the moment the Austrians declared war.
D'Enghien arrived at the barrire de la Villette at about 3 p.m. and was taken to Vincennes where the court-martial was to be held. Two of the Prince's ancestors had been imprisoned there: Henri de Cond had been imprisoned in 1627 by Richelieu and "le Grand Cond" in 1650 by Mazarin. Reportedly a grave had already been dug, but, according to Savary, the grave had been dug between the time of the sentence and its execution.
Savary, who commanded the Gendarmerie d'Elite, had been sent to Biville on the coast of Normandy to await the arrival of a Bourbon Prince aboard a British naval cutter. The landing didn't take place; either because of the weather or because the proper signals for a landing were not sent. After two fruitless months, Savary arrived back in Paris and went to Malmaison to report his failure. Napoleon ordered him to go first to Murat with orders and then to Vincennes. Savary wrote in his memoirs, "If I had been absent two days longer I should now have nothing to say upon the death of the Duc d'Enghien, and it would be absurd to suppose that it depended upon my return. Thus far I had remained a stranger to everything that had just taken place..." Upon arrival at Murat's house, according to de Polnay, "Murat told Savary that a military tribunal would judge Enghien, and he, Savary, was to guard the Prince, and see to the judgment being executed without delay."
According to Murat's biographer, he was not happy with this assignment. Cole writes that Murat, on receiving his orders, turned "to his private secretary, Agar, he burst out: 'Bonaparte is trying to bespatter my coat but he will not succeed.' He hurriedly dressed and then went to confront his brother-in-law. It was a violent interview. Bonaparte, 'his cheeks sunken and livid, his eyes hard, his complexion pale and blotchy, his appearance saturnine and frightening', eventually brought it to an abrupt end: 'If you don't carry out my orders, I'll send you back to your mountains in the Quercy,' he said, and dismissed him."
On Tuesday, 20 March, the following resolution was made: "The ci-devant duc d'Enghien, accused of bearing arms against the republic, of having been and being still in the pay of England and of being a party to conspiracies directed against the internal and external security of the republic, will be brought before a military commission composed of seven members, appointed by the governor-general of Paris, Murat, which will meet in Vincennes." The Senate had previously suspended trial by jury in cases of assassination attempts against the First Consul. The law of 25 Brumaire, an III, tit. 5, sect. 1, art. 7, also provided that "migrs who have borne arms against France shall be arrested, whether in France or in any hostile or conquered country, and judged within twenty-four hours..." In any case, the standard procedure in the case of death sentences by court martial was, according to de Polnay again, that the sentence would be carried out within twenty-four hours.
Dautancourt, a major of the gendarmerie, interrogated d'Enghien at the Chteau of Vincennes. The court-martial was presided over by General Pierre-Augustin Hulin, a hero of the fall of the Bastille, consisting of five colonels, Bazancourt, Ravier, Barrois, Guiton, Rabb, and Dautancourt. The court-martial was held in the great hall of the chateau. According to de Polnay, quoting Savary, "The Court Martial was composed of the colonels of the different regiments forming the garrison of Paris, decent officers who had 'no extravagant opinion', yet 'as well as all France were indignant at a project to assassinate the First Consul, and were persuaded that Georges [Cadoudal] acted under the direction of the Duc d'Enghien.'"
Napoleon drew up the list of questions to be put to the Prince. D'Enghien told of his desire to fight against France and his acceptance of money from Britain, France's enemy. D'Enghien stated, "My birth and my opinions will always make me the enemy of your government." D'Enghien told the court, "I had requested from England a commission in her army, and received for answer that she could not grant it, but that I should remain on the Rhine, where I should shortly have a part to play..." The Prince admitted to and was found guilty of being an "migr in the pay of England and of bearing arms against France." Both of these were capital offenses.
According to de Polnay, "Barrois and Bazancourt suggested imprisonment, the others too, but after two hours of deliberation they unanimously decided on the death sentence because of the Prince's declaration that it was his duty to his rank and blood to serve against the French Government. It did not occur to a single member of the Court Martial that they were not competent to judge a man brought by force from a foreign country." D'Enghien was sentenced to be shot by a firing squad. Savary, unwilling to postpone the execution of the sentence, told the court, according to Hulin, "Messieurs, your business is over, mine begins". Soldiers took d'Enghien and stood him in fosse of the fortress of Vincennes and at 3 a.m. 21 March 1804 had the Prince shot by a firing squad. The last prince of the house of Cond was dead.
Mme. de Rmusat reported that the following morning a stream of well-wishers
arrived at Napoleon's home at Malmaison. "Then came certain generals,
whose names I will not set down here; and they approved of the deed
so loudly that Mme. Bonaparte thought it necessary to apologize for
her own dejection, by repeating over and over again the unmeaning sentence,
'I am a woman, you know, and I confess I could cry.' In the course of
the morning a number of visitors came to the Tuileries. Among them were
the Consuls, the Ministers, and Louis Bonaparte and his wife. Louis
preserved a sullen silence, which seemed to imply disapprobation."
Savary was blunt about the affair, summing up the matter, "It was
Caulaincourt who kidnapped him, Murat who had him judged and I had him
executed." 150,000 copies of the judgment of the duc d'Enghien were sold and a police report stated, "Paris
has never been so utterly silent."
Cadoudal is reported to have said, We have done better than we hoped. We intended to give France a king and we have given her an emperor.' (Napoleon was proclaimed Emperor on 18 May 1804.) Cadoudal was tried along with eight of his companions and executed on 25 June 1804. A number of the aristocratic conspirators, including the Polignacs and M. de la Rivire, who had been sentenced to death had their sentences reduced by Napoleon to life imprisonment (which they spent on parole in a private hospital). General Pichegru committed suicide while in custody (the rumor that Pichegru was murdered has been largely rejected by modern historians). General Moreau was tried and exiled. On 8 May 1804, Capt. Wright was captured when his brig, Vincejo, ran aground on the coast of Brittany. He was imprisoned and kept in solitary confinement until Nov. 1805, when he either committed suicide in cell or was murdered by the French.
It has been said that Napoleon sent Ral, the Councillor of State in charge of police functions, to Vincennes to have d'Enghien examined further, but that by the time Ral had left Paris the Prince was already dead. On his way back to Malmaison, Savary met Ral on his way to Vincennes and informed him of the court's decision and the Prince's death. When the affair was over, Napoleon told the Council of State: "We had to make clear...to all the courts of Europe that this is not child's play."
The Elector of Baden, whose territory had been violated, did not complain to the Diet of Ratisbon of the French actions and merely sent a letter of protest to Paris. The Tsar of Russia had his court go into mourning. When he demanded an explanation of the Prince's execution, Talleyrand replied that no one had ever been punished for the murder of Tsar Paul, Alexander's father, which Alexander had been complicit to, nor had the French government intervened in the affair. Nor had Europe been particularly upset over the death or injury to the score of victims of the "Infernal Machine" attack or at the kidnapping of an Irish revolutionary from neutral Hamburg by the British.
"It may have stunned his admirers then and since," concludes historian D.M.G. Sutherland on the death of d'Enghien, "it may have made him a regicide after a fashion, but it worked. It was the end of the cycle of royalist assassination plots." As Napoleon stated, "My blood is worth as much as theirs." Miot de Melito reported that Napoleon said, "Those who plan assassination cannot claim the [protection of] the law of nations...They put themselves beyond the pale." Miot de Melito also reported that on 24 March 1804 Napoleon explained: "I ordered the prompt trial and execution of the duc d'Enghien so that the returned migrs should not be led into temptation." On St. Helena Napoleon said, "What I did was to silence the royalists and the Jacobins once and for all."
History has not been kind to Napoleon's actions. Paul W. Schroeder (Transformation of European Politics, 1763-1848. Oxford, Oxford Univ., 1996) has written, "For Bonaparte this was a normal, fairly routine act of state serving several purposes: revenge against the Bourbons, a salutary warning to the migrs and potential conspirators at home, and a further justification for making his rule hereditary to safeguard the regime....The Enghien affair did not keep him from posing as before, as the defender of international law against the British and their state-sponsored terrorism; he probably believed in the role himself and played it successfully, at least in France." Louis de Villefosse and Janine Bouissounouse (The Scourge of the Eagle. N.Y.: St. Martin's, 1972) have stated, "For a century and a half the whole world has considered the execution of the Duc d'Enghien as an indelible blot on the career of Napoleon. Any further censure would be superfluous..." Correlli Barnett (Bonaparte. N.Y.: Hill & Wang, 1978) has written, "Reverting to type as Jacobin mob politician, [Napoleon] dispatched an armed party to kidnap the young royal Duc d'Enghien from the neutral territory of Baden. It is possible that he sensed a personal rival in this able Bourbon prince..." Napoleon biographer, F.M. Kircheisen (Napoleon. N.Y.: Harcourt, Brace, 1932) offers one of the few defenses, "Only a few historians have had the courage to defend [Napoleon's] conduct. For a fair judgment of the case, it is essential not to regard it as an isolated event. One must, above all, attempt to recapture the atmosphere of the time. On every side, attempts were being made on the life of the First Consul....Every day, one might even say every hour, he had to reckon with the possibility of being shot down either in the streets or in his home, and he believed himself consequently to be surrounded by his enemies wherever he went. To deliver himself from this frightful situation, he had made up his mind to act with the utmost severity, and it was not out of the question that the innocent might have to suffer with the guilty."
Napoleon is often criticized by comparing his actions against d'Enghien, Cadoudal, Pichegru, etc. to a Corsican vendetta. Hubert Cole writes, "Certainty on this point was of little importance to him: reared in the tradition of the vendetta he was prepared to take revenge on any member of a family that attacked him, whether the attack was successful or not." But since in the case of at least some of these, who had already barely missed assassinating Napoleon with the "Infernal Machine" or other plots, Napoleon would be more than justified as seeing himself as the personal target of various conspiracies. Sidney Fay sums up the matter from Napoleon's point of view, "...it is possible to see how the First Consul, drawing his inferences from false evidence, and looking at things, not with the fair eye of a judge, but with an eye of a man full of anger at the discovery of a conspiracy against his life, decided to seize and court-martial immediately those whom he believed leagued against him. We may at least do Bonaparte the justice to suppose that on March 10, when he ordered the arrest of the Duc d'Enghien, he honestly believed that he was arresting a guilty conspirator..."
In his will, Napoleon wrote: "I caused the Duc d'Enghien to be arrested and judged, because it was necessary for the safety, interest, and the honour of the French people when the Comte d'Artois, by his own confession, was supporting sixty assassins at Paris. In similar circumstances I would act in the same way again.
The count of Mol said: "The duke of Enghien perished as result of an intrigue by Talleyrand and Fouch, who wanted to inveigle Napoleon and put him in their power, by putting him in complicity with them so that afterward he would not be able to reproach them for any aspect of their revolutionary life."
The baron of Vitrolles said, "it is Talleyrand who is guilty of the duke of Enghien's murder, by justifying it, if not by advising it. The voices that have accused him of being the first to have caused this violation of all human and divine rights, his position as Foreign Minister and the letters that he wrote in this capacity to justify the horrible assassination, are sufficient proof of participation in this crime."
Queen Hortense: "Murat accepted orders from M. de Talleyrand, who lingered at his place until 4:00 in the morning. All was forgiven him. He had absolution. Thus, he would never reproach him for the death of the duke of Enghien, of which he was one of the principal authors." Chancellor Pasquier: "The very same day that the news of the kidnapping came in, there was a ball at the hotel de Luynes. M. de Talleyrand was there. Someone asked him quietly, 'But what will you do with the Duke of Enghien?' He answered, 'He will be shot.'"
When the Moniteur announced the execution of the Prince, Talleyrand's aide, d'Hauterives was distressed. "Why are you standing there," Talleyrand scolded him, "with your eyes popping out of your head?"
"Why?" replied the distraught aide, "For the same reason that you would be, if you had read the papers. What a horror!"
Talleyrand replied coolly, "Well, well...are you mad? Is there any reason to make such a fuss? A conspirator is seized near the border, he is brought to Paris, and he is shot. What is extraordinary in that? Come on, d'Hauterives, that's business!"
Jean Orieux in his biography of Talleyrand states that "Talleyrand was the one who proposed abducting and executing the duc d'Enghien. 'When M. de Talleyrand, [Chateaubriand wrote] a priest and a gentleman, inspired and devised the crime by constantly igniting Bonaparte's fears, he was in dread of a possible Bourbon Restoration.'... With his talent for originating and justifying wholly unjustifiable events, he succeeded not only in selling the idea of this murder to the person who stood to benefit by it, but even in dulling the conscience of the murderers. Afterwards, safe from repercussions, he could stand back and indulge in some indignant name-calling." Both mile Dard and Lacour-Gayet accuse Talleyrand of complicity in the death of d'Enghien. Recent bibliographer and biographer of Talleyrand, Philip G. Dwyer takes the view that it is not very probable that we will never know definitively the role that Talleyrand played in this business. Talleyrand biographer Duff Cooper, on the other hand, while admitting that Talleyrand had "some share in the guilt," acquits him of being one of the principals.
Cole, Hurbert. The Betrayers: Joachim and Caroline Murat. New York: Saturday Review Press. 1972.
Cole, Hubert. Fouch: The Unprincipled Patriot. New York: McCall, 1971.
De Polnay, Peter. Napoleon's Police. London: W.H. Allen, 1970.
De Sgur, Philippe-Paul. An Aide-de-Camp of Napoleon. Felling, UK: Worley, 1995.
Duckworth, Colin. The D'Antraigues Phenomenon. Newcastle upon Tyne: Avero, 1986.
Fay, Sidney B. "The Execution of the Duc d'Enghien." American Historical Review. Vol. 3, nos. 4 & 5. July & Oct. 1898.
Fryer, W.R. Republic or Restoration in France? Manchester, UK: Manchester Univ., 1965.
Hall John. General Pichegru's Treason. N.Y.: Dutton, 1915.
Lombard, Paul. Vice and Virtue. N.Y.: Algora, 2000.
Madelin, Louis. The Consulate and the Empire, Vol. 1. Trans. By E.F. Buckley. N.Y.: AMS, 1967.
Orieux, Jean. Talleyrand: The Art of Survival. New York, Knopf, 1974.
Sparrow, Elizabeth. Secret Service. Rochester, NY: Boydell & Brewster, 1999.
Sutherland, D.M.G. France, 1789-1815. N.Y.: Oxford, 1986.
Placed on the Napoleon Series: September 2005
© Copyright 1995-2012, The Napoleon Series, All Rights Reserved.