have they not rendered to the public cause by their example and their sacrifices!  Have they not themselves abjured all their titles for one only—­that of citizen? and yet you propose to despoil them of it!  When you suppressed the title of prince, what happened?  The fugitive princes formed a league against the country; the others ranged themselves with you.  If to-day the title of prince is re-established, we concede to the enemies of our country all they covet; we deprive the patriotic relatives of the king of all they esteem!  I see the triumph and the recompence on the side of the conspiring princes; I see the punishment of all sacrifices on the side of the popular princes.  It is said to be dangerous to admit the members of the royal family into the legislative body.  This hypothesis would then be established, that every individual of the royal family must be for the future a corrupt courtier or factious partisan!  However, is it not possible to suppose that there are patriots amongst them?  Is it those you would thus brand?  You condemn the relatives of a king to hate the constitution and conspire against a form of government which does not leave them the choice between the character of courtiers or that of conspirators.  See, on the other hand, what may accrue if the love of country inspire them!  Cast your eyes on one of the branches of that race, whom it is proposed to you to exile.  Scarcely out of his childhood, he had the happiness of saving the life of three citizens, at the peril of his own.  The city of Vendome decreed to him a civic crown.  Unhappy child! is that indeed the last which thy race shall obtain?”

The applause which constantly interrupted, and for a long time followed this discourse, after the orator had concluded, proved that the idea of a revolutionary dynasty already tempted some imaginations, and that if there existed no faction of Orleans, at least it was not without a leader.  Robespierre, who no less detested a dynastic faction than the monarchy itself, saw with terror this symptom of a new power which appeared in the distant horizon.  “I remark,” he replied, “that there is too much reference to individuals, and not enough to the national interest.  It is not true that we seek to degrade the relations of the king:  there is no design to place them beneath other citizens—­we wish to separate them from the people by an honourable distinction.  What is the use of seeking titles for them?  The relatives of the king will be simply the relatives of the king.  The splendour of the throne is not derived from such vain denominations of rank.  We cannot declare with impunity that there exists in France any particular family above another:  it would be a nobility by itself.  This family would remain in the midst of us, like the indestructible root of that nobility which we have destroyed—­it would be the germ of a new aristocracy.”  Violent murmurs hailed these remarks of Robespierre.  He was obliged to break off and apologise.  “I see,” he said in conclusion, “that we are no longer allowed to utter here, without reproach, opinions which our adversaries amongst the first have maintained in this assembly.”