any chance of success without the assistance of Moreau.  The moment was inopportune; but, being initiated in some secrets of the British Cabinet, they knew that the peace was but a truce, and they determined to profit by that truce to effect a reconciliation which might afterwards secure a community of interests.  Moreau and Pichegru had not been friends since Moreau sent to the Directory the papers seized in M. de Klinglin’s carriage, which placed Pichegru’s treason in so clear a light.  Since that period Pichegru’s name possessed no influence over the minds of the soldiers, amongst whom he had very few partisans, whilst the name of Moreau was dear to all who had conquered under his command.

Fauche Borel’s design was to compromise Moreau without bringing him to any decisive step.  Moreau’s natural indolence, and perhaps it may be said his good sense, induced him to adopt the maxim that it was necessary to let men and things take their course; for temporizing policy is often as useful in politics as in war.  Besides, Moreau was a sincere Republican; and if his habit of indecision had permitted him to adopt any resolution, it is quite certain that he would not then have assisted in the reestablishment of the Bourbons, as Pichegru wished.

What I have stated is an indispensable introduction to the knowledge of plots of more importance which preceded the great event that marked the close of the Consulship:  I allude to the conspiracy of Georges, Cadoudal, Moreau, and Pichegru, and that indelible stain on the character of Napoleon,—­the death of the Duc d’Enghien.  Different opinions have been expressed concerning Georges’ conspiracy.  I shall not contradict any of them.  I will relate what I learned and what I saw, in order to throw some light on that horrible affair.  I am far from believing what I have read in many works, that it was planned by the police in order to pave the First Consul’s way to the throne.  I think that it was contrived by those who were really interested in it, and encouraged by Fouche in order to prepare his return to office.

To corroborate my opinion respecting Fouche’s conduct and his manoeuvres I must remind the reader that about the close of 1803 some persons conceived the project of reconciling Moreau and Pichegru.  Fouche, who was then out of the Ministry, caused Moreau to be visited by men of his own party, and who were induced, perhaps unconsciously, by Fouche’s art, to influence and irritate the general’s mind.  It was at first intended that the Abbe David, the mutual friend of Moreau and Pichegru, should undertake to effect their reconciliation; but he, being arrested and confined in the Temple, was succeeded by a man named Lajolais, whom every circumstance proves to have been employed by Fouche.  He proceeded to London, and, having prevailed on Pichegru and his friends to return to France, he set off to announce their arrival and arrange everything for their reception and destruction.  Moreau’s discontent was