[Footnote 282:  Madelin’s “Fouche,” vol. i., p. 368, minimizes Fouche’s role here.]

[Footnote 283:  Desmarest, “Temoignages historiques,” pp. 78-82.]

[Footnote 284:  “Alliance des Jacobins de France avec le Ministere Anglais.”]

[Footnote 285:  Brit.  Mus., “Add.  MSS.,” Nos. 7976 et seq.]

[Footnote 286:  In our Records (France, No. 71) is a letter of Count Descars, dated London, March 25th, 1805, to Lord Mulgrave, Minister for War, rendering an account for various sums advanced by our Government for the royalist “army.”]

[Footnote 287:  “Paget Papers,” vol. ii., p. 96.]

[Footnote 288:  “Parl.  Debates,” April, 1804 (esp.  April 16th).  The official denial is, of course, accepted by Alison, ch. xxxviii.]

[Footnote 289:  The expression is that of George III., who further remarked that all the ambassadors despised Hawkesbury. (Rose, “Diaries,” vol. ii., p. 157.) Windham’s letter, dated Beaconsfield, August 16th, 1803, in the Puisaye Papers, warned the French emigres that they must not count on any aid from Ministers, who had “at all times shown such feebleness of spirit, that they can scarcely dare to lift their eyes to such aims as you indicate. ("Add.  MSS.,” No. 7976.)]

[Footnote 290:  See in chapter xxi., p. 488.  Our envoy, Spencer Smith, at Stuttgart, was also taken in by a French spy, Captain Rosey, whose actions were directed by Napoleon.  See his letter (No. 7669).]

[Footnote 291:  “F.O.,” Austria, No. 68 (October 31st, 1803).]

[Footnote 292:  Lavalette, “Mems.,” ch. xxiii.; “Georges Cadoudal,” by Georges de Cadoudal (Paris, 1887).]

[Footnote 293:  See his letter of January 24th, 1804, to Real, instructing him to tell Mehee what falsehoods are to find a place in Mehee’s next bulletin to Drake!  “Keep on continually with the affair of my portfolio.”]

[Footnote 294:  Miot de Melito, vol. i., ch. xvi.; Pasquier, vol. i., ch. vii.  See also Desmarest, “Quinze ans de la haute police”:  his claim that the police previously knew nothing of the plot is refuted by Napoleon’s letters (e.g., that of November 1st, 1803); as also by Guilhermy, “Papiers d’un Emigre,” p. 122.]

[Footnote 295:  Segur, “Mems.,” ch. x.  Bonaparte to Murat and Harel, March 20th.]

[Footnote 296:  Letter to Real, “Corresp.,” No. 7639.]

[Footnote 297:  The original is in “F.O.” (Austria, No. 68).]

[Footnote 298:  Pasquier, “Memoires,” vol. i., p. 187.]

[Footnote 299:  The Comte de Mosbourg’s notes in Count Murat’s “Murat” (Paris, 1897), pp. 437-445, prove that Savary did not draw his instructions for the execution of the duke merely from Murat, but from Bonaparte himself, who must therefore be held solely responsible for the composition and conduct of that court.  Masson’s attempt ("Nap. et sa Famille,” ch. xiv.) to inculpate Murat is very weak.]

[Footnote 300:  Hulin in “Catastrophe du duc d’Enghien,” p. 118.]