Paul I. fell by the hands of assassins on the night of the 24th of March 1801.  The First Consul was much shocked on receiving the intelligence.  In the excitement caused by this unexpected event, which had so important an influence on his policy, he directed me to send the following note to the Moniteur:—­

   Paul I. died on the night of the 24th of March, and the English
   squadron passed the Sound on the 30th.  History will reveal the
   connection which probably exists between these two events.

Thus were announced the crime of the 24th of March and the not ill-founded suspicions of its authors.

   —­[We do not attempt to rescue the fair name of our country.  This
   is one among many instances in which Bourrienne was misled.—­Editor
   of 1886 edition.]—­

The amicable relations of Paul and Bonaparte had been daily strengthened.  “In concert with the Czar,” said Bonaparte, “I was sure of striking a mortal blow at the English power in India.  A palace revolution has overthrown all my projects.”  This resolution, and the admiration of the Autocrat of Russia for the head of the French Republic, may certainly be numbered among the causes of Paul’s death.  The individuals generally accused at the time were those who were violently and perseveringly threatened, and who had the strongest interest in the succession of a new Emperor.  I have seen a letter from a northern sovereign which in my mind leaves no doubt on this subject, and which specified the reward of the crime, and the part to be performed by each actor.  But it must also be confessed that the conduct and character of Paul I., his tyrannical acts, his violent caprices, and his frequent excesses of despotism, had rendered him the object of accumulated hatred, for patience has its limit.  These circumstances did not probably create the conspiracy, but they considerably facilitated the execution of the plot which deprived the Czar of his throne and his life.

As soon as Alexander ascended the throne the ideas of the First Consul respecting the dismemberment of Poland were revived, and almost wholly engrossed his mind.  During his first campaign in Italy, and several times when in Egypt, he told Sulkowsky that it was his ardent wish to reestablish Poland, to avenge the iniquity of her dismemberment, and by that grand repertory act to restore the former equilibrium of Europe.  He often dictated to me for the ‘Moniteur’ articles tending to prove, by various arguments, that Europe would never enjoy repose until those great spoilations were avenged and repaired; but he frequently destroyed these articles instead of sending them to press.  His system of policy towards Russia changed shortly after the death of Paul.  The thought of a war against that empire unceasingly occupied his mind, and gave birth to the idea of that fatal campaign which took place eleven years afterwards, and which had other causes than the re-establishment of Poland.  That object was merely set forward as a pretext.