that the Senate was the authority to which the whole of France would naturally cling in the time of trouble, and that I would be the first to place myself under its orders.  To such overtures made to a private individual, who wished to preserve no connection either with the army, of whom nine- tenths have served under me, or any constituted authority, the only possible answer was a refusal.  Betrayal of confidence I disdained.  Such a step, which is always base, becomes doubly odious when the treachery is committed against those to whom we owe gratitude, or have been bound by old friendship.

“This, General, is all I have to tell you respecting my relations with Pichegru, and it must convince you that very false and hasty inferences have been drawn from conduct which, though perhaps imprudent, was far from being criminal.”

Moreau fulfilled his duty as a public functionary by communicating to the Directory the papers which unfolded a plot against the Government, and which the chances of war had thrown into his hands.  He fulfilled his duty as a man of honour by not voluntarily incurring the infamy which can never be wiped from the character of an informer.  Bonaparte in Moreau’s situation would have acted the same part, for I never knew a man express stronger indignation than himself against informers, until be began to consider everything a virtue which served his ambition, and everything a crime which opposed it.

The two facts which most forcibly obtruded themselves on my attention during the trial were the inveterate violence of the President of the Court towards the prisoners and the innocence of Moreau.

     —­[It is strange that Bourrienne does not acknowledge that he was
     charged by Napoleon with the duty of attending this trial of Moreau,
     and of sending in a daily report of the proceedings.]—­

But, in spite of the most insidious examinations which can be conceived, Moreau never once fell into the least contradiction.  If my memory fail me not, it was on the fourth day that he was examined by Thuriot, one of the judges.  The result, clear as day to all present, was, that Moreau was a total stranger to all the plots, all the intrigues which had been set on foot in London.  In fact, during the whole course of the trial, to which I listened with as much attention as interest, I did not discover the shadow of a circumstance which could in the least commit him, or which had the least reference to him.  Scarcely one of the hundred and thirty-nine witnesses who were heard for the prosecution knew him, and he himself declared on the fourth sitting, which took place on the 31st of May, that there was not an individual among the accused whom he knew,—­ not one whom he had ever seen.  In the course of the long proceedings, notwithstanding the manifest efforts of Thuriot to extort false admissions and force contradictions, no fact of any consequence was elicited to the prejudice