nuance of the war overpowered all pacific considerations. Whatever might be the hopes or secret views of that court, the refusal of the ratification was intimated in a note from the British government, who insisted that a minister should be sent to the congress at Luneville, conjointly with the plenipotentiaries of the emperor. The French and imperial armies were new preparing to open the campaign a second time. The imperial army had concentred its forces between Wassenburg and Alt-Oatting, having its advanced' guard on the left side of the Inn, stretching its right wing to Braunau, and its left to Kufstein, where it formed its junction with the army of the Tyrol. A few corps of cavary skirted the Inn, below Braunau, to preserve the communication with the division of general Klenau on the left side of the Danube. The whole of this force consisted of about 60,000 men: the army on the Tyrol amounted to 10,000, who were seconded by an equal number of volunteers of the country. The right wing of the French army was about 36,000 men. This wing skirted the mountains of the Tyrol on the north side, which it menaced with three columns of 12,000 men each by the passes of Ehrenberg, Scharnitz, and Arleberg. The centre was composed of nearly an equal number, and was posted in a line of eight or ten leagues beyond the Iser, facing the centre and left wing of the imperial army. The left of the French army consisted of 25,000 men, stretched along the river Vils, and threatened to hem Braunau, and 'cut off the imperial army from its magazines on the Danube and the division of general Klenau. The changes which had been made in the imperial armies, in consequence of the late defeats by the French, boded still less good for the future. The generals Kray, Hanendorff, Schmit, and Chateler, who were the most distinguished of the imperial officers, and who had yielded only to a valour and impetuosity which commanders more able would have had diffi,' culty in stemming, were replaced by others whose names had scarcely been heard of, and in whom little confidence could be reposed. The court of Vienna had thought fit, however, to dispense with the services of men whose misfortunes were imputed to their own mistakes rather than to the enterprise of the enemy, and whose sentiments respecting the final issue of the war were but little in correspondence with its own. The dismission of these officers was followed by the resignation of general Kinks, commander of Vienna, who alleged, that he could not answer for the tranquillity of the capital, since the garrison was withdrawn to be sent to the army. The state of the imperial forces in Italy at this period was scarcely more favourable for the successful continuance of the war. This army had received reinforcements of 25,000 men but as it was found necessary to leave 10,000 men in Vienna to secure the tranquillity of the city, there were scarcely 40,000 more left to keep the field, The generals Ott and Hohenzollern had sent in their resignations; and the only officer of distinguished talent that remained at his post was general Wackassowich. This situation of affairs, which carried apprehension into the minds of every person interested in the safety of the imperial court, roused it to a seeming temporary effort of personal R 2 personal courage. In a rescript notified to the diet of Ratisbon, by the imperial minister, the rupture of the negotiation with the French, and the conclusion of the armistice, were declared. His imperial majesty informed them, that, seconded by the fidelity and love of his people, he had determined to put himself, with his brother the archduke John, at the head of the army; hoping that this example, as well as the general danger, would reanimate the ancient courage of the Germans, and engage the subjects of the empire to join themselves to his majesty, to secure an honourable peace. Agreeable to the rescript of the imperial minister to the diet, the emperor, and his brother the archduke John, repaired to the army, where the latter entered on his office as commander-in-chief. On his arrival in this quality, he received a letter from general Moreau, inclosing the instructions which had just been transmitted from Paris, and which he thus literally transcribed:-"Inform the general who commands the Austrian army, that the emperor refuses to ratify the preliminaries of peace; and that you are obliged to ecommence hostilities. You may, however, agree to an armistice of a month, on condition that places of surety be immediately-put into your possession." Moreau sent at the same time an officer to state the terms of this new armistice, or notify the commencement of hostilities the following day. Whatever might have been the intentions of the emperor on leave ing Vienna, of tempting once more the fortune of war, a nearer review of the state of his forces, and the peremptory demand of general Moreau, led him to favor more pacific sentiments. The interview between the archduke John and general Laborie ended in an arrangement for another armistice, of which the principal conditions were the delivery of the three fortresses of Ulm, Ingoldstadt, and Philipsburg, into the hands of the French; and the sending M. Lehrbach as plenipotentiary to Luneville from his imperial majesty. The lines of demarcation for both armies continued to be the same as were fixed by the last armistice. The present armistice, which included also the armies in Italy, was to terminate in forty-five days, if no definitive arrangements were taken in the mean time. This treaty was signed at Hohenlinden, the 20th of September, 1800. The great probability of an approaching peace, not more from the splendid victories which had been obtained by the French in the course of this campaign than from the total inability of the imperial court to carry on the war, afforded the French government the means of reviewing and correcting still further the internal evils of the state. One of the greatest abuses of the revolution during its various phases, and particularly in the reign of terror, had been the facility with which one part of the inhabitants of the French republic had consigned the other to misery and ruin, by inscribing their names on registers which were called lists of emigration. The general list of emigrants, such as it was printed, presented a nomenclature of 155,000 individuals, or collections of individuals, such as whole families, without distinction of names; which general list was formed from partial lists framed by local authorities, such as the departmental and municipal administrations; and to which was added a supplement which had not been printed, making together the complete list of those who were accused of emigration. The legislative assembly, the national convention, and the committees of legislation of the convention, had struck off definitively a considerable number of those who were inscribed: the directory had annulled 13,000 names; and since the revolution of the 18th of Brumaire 1200 more had been excepted. Such was the state of the list when the minister of police made a report to the consuls, in which he represented the various abuses of power which had contributed to the formation of this neral list, and pointed out the means by which they might be remedied. In consequence of this report, the government, by a decree, reduced this formidable prescription to a very moderate size, by confirming all that had been done by antecedent authorities, and by striking out of the list all individuals who were inscribed under the qualifications of labourers, journeymen, workmen, artists, and all others exercising mechanical professions, servants and others receiving wages, and the wives and children of all persons thus qualified. Of these descriptions the number was very considerable, amounting according to different statements, to upwards of forty thousand. The next class was that of persons who had been inscribed collectively, and without individual denomination; such as those who had been indicated in general as heirs or children of some person whose name had been inserted, women emigrants who had abandoned their husbands, minors, knights of Malta, such persons as had left France before the 14th of July, 1789, the names of such as had been executed by judgment of the revolutionary tribunal, ecclesiastics who had been banished, and all such persons as had been continued on the list after prece dent revisions of commissions, were included in this act of elimination, and definitively struck off. New lists were ordered to be formed, in which were inscribed as real emigrants, and definitively expelled from the territory of the French republic, those who had borne arms against France; such as since the departure of the French princes had continued to make part of their civil or military establishments; such as had accepted from these princes, or the persons at war with France, places of ministers, embassadors, negotiators, or agents; such as had been preserved on the list by the present government, on the report of the commission established for the examination of claims; and, finally, such as had made no reclamations previous to the establishment of the said commission, in consequence of the proclamations and invitation which had been made by the government. By this decree, which on various points was in contradiction with that article in the constitution which. respects emigration, the frontier towns of France were soon crowded with persons of every description of emigrants, demanding passports for the interior; and as the flood-gates of mercy were thrown so wide open, numbers availed themselves of the general disposition which had been evinced in their favour who had no right by the decree to participate in the indulgence. This decree was however accompanied by restrictive articles, such as the injunction on the emigrants to take the oath of fidelity to the government; to remain during the war, R 3 and and a year after the peace, under the inspection of the constituted authorities of the places where they 'should reside: but as they brought with them for the most part the same dispositions of hostility against the republic which they had been habituated to feel while absent, these restrictions were in general but very little attended to; and though some received the proffered boon with thankfulness, the greater part, as was naturally to be expected, found new causes for discontent on seeing their confiscated estates in possession of others; since the law, though it admitted their return, confirmed the confis cation, except of such domains as had not been sold, and which were returned to the former owners. The negotiation between the diplomatic agents of the United States and the French government, which had lasted several months, was now brought to a termination. By this treaty, which was negotiated as if a regular war had taken place, it was agreed among the other, articles, that henceforth a firm, inviolable, and universal peace should take place between the two countries; the restitution of captured vessels should be made on both sides; the debts contracted by the individuals of both nations should be paid, as if no misunderstanding had taken place; the commerce between the two nations should be free, and their vessels respectively treated like those of the most favoured nations; and the citizens of each should enjoy all the rights, privileges, and immunities of the respective countries. This reconciliation was celebrated by unusual demonstrations of amity in a magnificent fête given to the American ministers at the country seat of Joseph Bonaparte, one of the negotiators, which was attended by the first consul, and other distinguished members of the French government. The French ministry, which since the consulship of Bonaparte had been less subject to vacillation than ̧under former administrations, underwent at this period a partial change, by the removal of Carnot from the superintendence of the war-office, and of Lucien Bonaparte, the brother of the first consul, from that of the interior. By the skill, and particularly the probity with which Carnot had conducted this vast machine, he had not only redeemed his reputation, sullied by his association with the members of the committee of public safety under the reign of terror, but had acquired so much the confidence of the nation, and of the army, that his removal was considered as a public calamity; nor was this sentiment alleviated from the nomination of his successor Berthier, who had no such claims to general respect.But if public opinion on this occasion did not justify this act of consular power, it sanctioned loudly that which was manifested in the removal of Lucien Bonaparte, who, though he had discovered at periods of difficulty and danger, much courage, ability, and strength of character, had nevertheless during his ministry, and particularly near the close, indulged dispositions of dissipation and rapacity almost beyond any of his predecessors.His mal-administration became at length so notorious, that the consul caused his dismission to be signified to him; but, desirous of saving him from open disgrace, sent him on an embassy to the Spanish court. While the French were seeking peace by conquests in Germany, a nego. a negotiation for the same end was opened at London. In the beginning of August, 1800, M. Thugut had addressed a note to M. Talleyrand, in which he sent, by order of the emperor, an invitation to the first consul to name respective plenipotentiaries to treat on this subject; declaring at the same time, that his Britannic majesty was disposed to concur in this negotiation, as had been announced in a note of lord Minto's, the English minister at Vienna; which note was included in the baron Thugut's letter. M. Thugut proposed choosing for the place of negotiation, Schalestadt, Luneville, or some other central town of France, to facilitate the communications with England. Lord Minto, in his note, declared that his Britannic majesty was ready to send his plenipotentiaries to treat of peace in concert with the emperor, as soon as the French government should have signified its intention of entering into negotiation with the cabinet of St. James's. The French government dispatched immediately to M. Otto, commissary for the exchange of prisoners in England, a copy of the propositions made by the cabinet of Vienna, with instructions to enter into a negotiation with the English ministry. M. Otto, in conformity to his instructions, addressed to lord Grenville a note, in which he declared himself authorised to demand from the ministers of his Britannic majesty further explanations with respect to the proposition communicated to the court of Vienna; observing at the same time, that it appeared impossible that at the moment when England and Austria took a common part in the negotiations, France should have a suspension of arms with Austria, while she continued hostilities with England. He declared himself authorised at the same time to propose and conclude a general armistice between the armies and fleets of the two states, by adopting measures with respect to the places besieged and blocked, analogous to those which had taken place in Germany relative to Ulm, Philipsburg, and Ingoldstadt. Lord Grenville named captain George to treat with M. Otto. These commisaries met in conference (28th August), when the former confirmed the assurance that his Britannic majesty was disposed to enter into negotiations for peace, and to send a plenipotentiary to Luneville; but that as to the armistice, he had orders to declare that such a measure, applied to naval operations, had never taken place between Great Britain and France during negotiations for peace, or even till the preliminaries were signed; that such a measure could not be looked upon as necessary; and that the disputes which must inevitably take place in the execution would rather impede than facilitate the success of the negotiations in short, that no determination could be taken with respect to this object before the French government had previously explained how the principles adopted in the German armistice relative to the blockade of towns could be applied to ports and arsenals of France, so as to be executed in the manner required. The French agent, in reply to these objections, observed, that he had every reason to believe that the continuation of the armistice in Germany depended on the conclusion of the armistice with England; since the French government regarded the advantages of the maR4 ritime |