The same opinion was also entertained by a great part of the most influential Sections of Paris, both as to the possession of property and talent.  These Sections declared that, in accepting the new constitution, they rejected the decree of the 30th of August, which required the re-election of two-thirds The Convention, therefore, found itself menaced in what it held most dear—­its power;—­and accordingly resorted to measures of defence.  A declaration was put forth, stating that the Convention, if attacked, would remove to Chalons-sur-Marne; and the commanders of the armed force were called upon to defend that body.

The 5th of October, the day on which the Sections of Paris attacked the Convention, is certainly one which ought to be marked in the wonderful destiny of Bonaparte.

With the events of that day were linked, as cause and effect, many great political convulsions of Europe.  The blood which flowed ripened the seeds of the youthful General’s ambition.  It must be admitted that the history of past ages presents few periods full of such extraordinary events as the years included between 1795 and 1815.  The man whose name serves, in some measure, as a recapitulation of all these great events was entitled to believe himself immortal.

Living retired at Sens since the month of July, I only learned what had occasioned the insurrection of the Sections from public report and the journals.  I cannot, therefore, say what part Bonaparte may have taken in the intrigues which preceded that day.  He was officially characterised only as secondary actor in the scene.  The account of the affair which was published announces that Barras was, on that very day, Commander-in-chief of the Army of the Interior, and Bonaparte second in command.  Bonaparte drew up that account.  The whole of the manuscript was in his handwriting, and it exhibits all the peculiarity of his style and orthography.  He sent me a copy.

Those who read the bulletin of the 13th Vendemiaire, cannot fail to observe the care which Bonaparte took to cast the reproach of shedding the first blood on the men he calls rebels.  He made a great point of representing his adversaries as the aggressors.  It is certain he long regretted that day.  He often told me that he would give years of his life to blot it out from the page of his history.  He was convinced that the people of Paris were dreadfully irritated against him, and he would have been glad if Barras had never made that Speech in the Convention, with the part of which, complimentary to himself, he was at the time so well pleased.  Barras said, “It is to his able and prompt dispositions that we are indebted for the defence of this assembly, around which he had posted the troops with so much skill.”  This is perfectly true, but it is not always agreeable that every truth should be told.  Being out of Paris, and a total stranger to this affair, I know not how far he was indebted for his success to chance, or to his own exertions, in the part assigned to him by the miserable Government which then oppressed France.  He represented himself only as secondary actor in this sanguinary scene in which Barras made him his associate.  He sent to me, as already mentioned, an account of the transaction, written entirely in his own hand, and distinguished by all the peculiarities of—­his style and orthography.