English Caricature and Satire on Napoleon I. Volume I (of 2)

CHAPTER XX

There was very little caricature of Napoleon in the year 1800, for the best of reasons, that we had very little to do with him, as he was occupied till May in settling his Government, and then he left for his Italian campaign. But in this year (May 12) Gillray issued a series of eight plates, ‘Democracy, or a Sketch of the life of Buonaparte,’ of which I have already given three – ‘Democratic Innocence,’ ‘Democratic Humility,’ and ‘Democratic Religion.’ As four are not very interesting, I have not given them, only the last of the series, which, evidently, was meant to be extended.

Combe, even, had very little to say of this time, lightly touching the passage of the Alps, the occupation of Milan and Pavia, the defeat of the Austrians at Montebello, and the battle of Marengo, where he makes an assertion I cannot find elsewhere, nor trace to any French source, except De Bourrienne.

This scandalous accusation is too contemptible to be thought true for a moment; but I must reproduce it, to show what was said of Napoleon in England. Yet, in a portion of it, there is a small substratum of truth. Hear what De Bourrienne says: ‘The death of Desaix was not perceived at the moment it took place. He fell without saying a word, at a little distance from Lefebvre-Desnouettes. A battalion-sergeant of the ninth brigade of light infantry, commanded by Barrois, seeing him extended on the ground, asked permission to pick up his cap. It was found to be perforated behind; and this circumstance leaves it doubtful whether Desaix was killed by some unlucky inadvertency while advancing at the head of his troops, or by the enemy when turning towards his men to encourage them.’

Other accounts speak of his being shot in the breast.

How Napoleon loved Desaix, is best told by them who knew him well, and let them bear witness against this gross calumny. De Bourrienne says: ‘After supper, the First Consul dictated to me the bulletin of the battle. When we were alone, I said to him, “General, here’s a fine victory. You recollect what you said the other day, about the pleasure with which you would return to France after striking a grand blow in Italy: surely you must be satisfied now?” – “Yes, Bourrienne, I am satisfied. But Desaix!.. Ah, what a triumph would this have been if I could have embraced him to-night on the field of battle!” As he uttered these words, I saw that Bonaparte was on the point of shedding tears, so sincere and profound was his grief for the death of Desaix. He certainly never loved, esteemed or regretted, any man so much.’

O’Meara writes: ‘Asked him if it were true that Desaix had, a little before his death, sent a message of the following purport to him: “Tell the First Consul that I regret dying before I have done sufficient to make my name known to posterity.” Napoleon replied, “it was true,” and accompanied it with some warm eulogiums on Desaix.’

As a matter of fact Napoleon could not sufficiently honour the memory of his comrade, so highly did he estimate him. He spoke, in his bulletins, of the irreparable loss his death caused him; he took for his own aides-de-camp, Rapp, and Savary, who had acted in this capacity to Desaix. A medal was struck in his honour, his statue should have been erected on the Place des Victoires, solemn ceremonies were ordered, masses were said, and a monument was raised, by subscription, on the Place Dauphine, Paris.

It is amusing to read in the newspapers of the day (with the exception of the ‘Times’) the spiteful things said against Napoleon. But Cobbett, in the ‘Porcupine,’ outdoes them all, and spits his venom on the most harmless deeds. ‘The late establishment of Soup shops in Paris, naturally excites some curious ideas. Madame Bonaparte, their patroness, who is also a sprig of nobility, seems in no small degree attached to the ancient regimen; hence probably her wish to revive soup meagre, frogs, &c. Nor is it less remarkable that the French should wish to establish soup shops, just at the time when they were falling into disuse in this country.’54 ‘The Morning Post tells us that “the Chief Consul has taken a thousand subscription tickets for the soup establishments at Paris.” This is at once a proof of that plenty which we have been told exists in France, and of the Charity of the Chief Consul. If ever there was a country more degraded than all others, it is France. Should there be, amongst the people of that country, one man left, who entertains antient notions, what must be his mortification and shame to see his countrymen not only ruled, but actually fed like paupers, by a low bred upstart from the contemptible island of Corsica! And this, ye gods! is the Grand Nation! This is the nation who is to change the public law of Europe! This is the nation to whom Britons are requested to bow down their heads! To return to the “soup establishments,” we should be glad to know how the Corsican came by the money to purchase a thousand tickets. Was it part of the dower which Barras gave him with his bride? We rather think he wrung it from the hands of the sovereign people. What a base, what a despicable, race of slaves! They submit to assessments, forced loans, requisitions, and confiscations; they see their treasure seized on by millions upon millions, and they applaud the “charity and generosity” of the plunderer in chief, because he bestows on them the fractions in soup maigre!‘55

Cobbett did not write with ink, but with gall, and was not at all particular as to the veracity of his statements. Take the following examples:56 ‘Lucien Buonaparte is holden in detestation in France. His office, as Minister of the Interior, gives him the command of very large sums, which he wastes in every kind of dissipation, and in the most scandalous manner, in order, forsooth! to support his rank as a Prince of the Blood!!! He is protected by the whole power of his brother, whose vanity, the leading foible in his character, leads him to confer on the members of his family, all the advantages and prerogatives of Sovereign princes. This conduct has rendered him the object of incessant ridicule, and considerably diminished his popularity.

‘Another species of evil peculiar to a corrupt military government, prevails in a very great degree, and has become particularly offensive to the French, viz. the influence and insolence of generals.

‘All the generals attached to Buonaparte, those who supported him in his usurpation, and those who were with him in Egypt, bear an exact resemblance to the minions and favourites of the Roman Emperors. These men have the public treasure almost entirely at their disposal. General Lasnes, one of the Consul’s chief friends, spends the enormous sum of five hundred thousand livres (upwards of twenty thousand guineas!!!) a month, at Paris, where he and his aids de camp occupy one of the most magnificent hotels in that capital. Buonaparte, not being able to supply his favourites with sufficient specie for defraying their unbounded expences, grants them congées d’exportation, i.e. an exclusive permission to export various articles the exportation of which is prohibited by law; these congées are sold to mercantile men, who purchase them at a very high price.’

‘To the facts, which we stated on Monday, respecting the prodigality of Buonaparte and his creatures, we may add the instance of General Ney. This Republican Bashaw has fixed his head-quarters at Neubourg, at the expence of which place, his table is furnished at the rate of ninety pounds sterling a day! The French have a proverb, the truth of which they and their neighbours now experience to their sorrow: “Il vaut mieux qu’une cité soit brûlée, q’un parvenu la gouverne” – A city had better be burnt to ashes, than submit to the rule of an upstart vagabond.’57

CHAPTER XXI

The two plots against Napoleon’s life which occurred in this year must not be forgotten. Let us have Combe’s version, which does not much exaggerate the facts of the cases: —

The first plot was that of October 10, 1800, and it has, certainly, somewhat of a police ‘get up’ about it. The First Consul knew all about it through an ex chef de bataillon named Harrel, who used to come every night to De Bourrienne, and tell him what the so-called conspirators had done. He supplied Harrel, at Napoleon’s request, with money, &c. Napoleon was never in any danger, and four men perished by the guillotine.

Barre says: ‘Still the persons designed, and arrested, on the very spot of the premeditated murder, were strictly searched about their proper persons, and neighbouring places, and not an arm, nor even a pin, was found. With what, then, could those pretended conspirators commit a murder, since, at the very moment, and on the very spot where it was to have been perpetrated, no kind of arms were found about them?

‘That such was the case, it was asserted, and never denied, in the course of the trial.

‘The only witness was one Harel, an acknowledged spy of the police, holding the rank of Captain.

‘And on the single evidence of a spy, devoted to, and paid by, the police, four men (Arena, Ceracchi, Demerville, and Topino-Lebrun,) were condemned to death…

‘Those unfortunate men having appealed from such iniquitous judgment, as grounded on many erroneous statements, and irregular proceedings, the court of appeals divided, when it was found that eight judges were for repealing, and eight for confirming, the judgment.

‘The division being equal, five more judges were added to the sixteen, when the iniquitous judgment was confirmed.’

The other attempt upon Napoleon’s life was genuine enough. On December 24, 1800, Haydn’s Oratorio of the ‘Creation’ was to be performed at the Opera. He was sleepy, and disinclined to go, but was overpersuaded, and went. Luckily his coachman was drunk, and drove faster than usual. In the Rue St. Nicaise there was a loud explosion, two or three seconds after he had passed the place where it had occurred.

A barrel of gunpowder, surrounded by grapeshot, and pieces of iron, was fixed in a cart, and fired when Napoleon passed. He escaped, but twenty people were killed, and fifty-three wounded, including St. Regent who fired the train. The coachman was so drunk that he drove on, thinking it was only a salute that had been fired. There are several, and contradictory, versions of this event, but this seems to be the most authentic —

Cobbett, of course, improves the occasion.58 ‘Miserable slaves! For an instance of base flattery, surpassing anything we have hitherto seen, take the following from the Chef du Cabinet: “The explosion of the infernal machine broke twenty-nine pictures, out of thirty, which ornamented an apartment in the street of St. Thomas. The single picture which escaped, was that of the Chief Consul. One would be ready to affirm (mark this) that the same God, who watches over the life of the first Consul, protected even his likeness”!!! What Emperor was it that talked of making his horse a Consul? An English blood horse would be disgraced by becoming the successor of Buonaparte.’

And again:59 ‘Buonaparte’s embracing the Parisian addressers, puts us in mind of the good old ceremony of the thief’s kissing the hangman.’

CHAPTER XXII

It is sad to take up the very first number of the ‘London Gazette’ for 1801, and find ‘A Proclamation for a general Fast,’ which was to be held on February 13, the reason wherefore is stated thus: ‘We, taking into Our most serious consideration the heavy Judgments with which Almighty God is pleased to visit the Iniquities of this land, by a grievous Scarcity and Dearth of divers Articles of Sustenance, and Necessaries of Life &c.’

The war bore grievously on the Commons, and, consequently, Napoleon was in like measure abhorred. Nothing short of the thought of approaching famine could have caused Parliament to pass, and the king give his royal assent to,60 ‘An Act to prevent until the Sixth Day of November, One Thousand Eight Hundred and One, and from thence to the End of Six Weeks from the Commencement of the then next Session of Parliament, the manufacturing of any fine Flour from Wheat, or other Grain, and the making of any Bread solely from the fine Flour of Wheat; and to repeal an Act, passed in the Thirty-Sixth Year of the Reign of His present Majesty, for permitting Bakers to make and sell certain Sorts of Bread, and to make more effectual Provision for the same.’ This took effect on January 31, 1801.

‘An Act to prohibit, until the First Day of October, One thousand eight hundred and one, and from thence to the End of Six Weeks next after the then next Session of Parliament, any Person or Persons from selling any Bread which shall not have been baked Twenty-four Hours.’ This Act was 41 Geo. III. cap. 17, and it recites the reason in the preamble: ‘Whereas it is expedient to reduce as much as possible, at the present moment, the consumption of Wheat flour. And whereas it appears a considerable saving would arise if Bread was prohibited from being sold until it had been baked a certain time, &c.’ The penalties of non-compliance ranging from 5s. to 40s.

Here is a receipt given for adulterated bread: ‘Improvement of bread, with economy of flour, and saving of expense: – Take one pound of ground rice, put it in cold water sufficient to cover it, and something more, boil it, and it will absorb all the water, and weigh four pounds; mix four pounds of flour with it, knead them well together, and lighten them with yeast, like common bread, and they will produce ten pounds ten ounces of excellent bread, which will not cost more than twopence halfpenny per pound, and will save one half in the consumption of flour. N.B. this bread will keep moist a week.’

When we remember that bad bread was on January 1, 1801, 1s. 9¼d. per quartern loaf, on March 5, 1s. 10½d., and although it dropped after harvest as low as 10¼d., yet closed December 31 at 1s. 0¼d., and that this bad bread had to be eaten stale, all through Boney, we cannot wonder that the people did not love him. His direct presence was brought home to all and every one daily, by means of that most susceptible bodily organ, the stomach. It was hitting John Bull in a very vulnerable part.

The war in Egypt still kept on, and in February reinforcements of 15,330 men, under the command of Sir Ralph Abercrombie, set sail in a fleet of 175 vessels or ships. In March they defeated the French under Menon, the renegade, but at the cost of the life of the brave Abercrombie.

On April 19, Rosetta surrendered to our forces, and on June 27 Cairo capitulated, on condition that General Belliard, with all his troops, arms, and baggage, should be taken back to France. On their march back to the coast, Menon, finding his cause hopeless, surrendered on the same terms, and thus ended the French occupation of Egypt.

With Napoleon’s concordat with the Pope we have nothing to do, except that his satirists here did not forget to contrast his attendance at the solemn Te Deum at Notre Dame with his pseudo-Mahometanism in Egypt. What more affected us, was the arming along the Channel coast, and the Flotilla at Boulogne, which was to act as transport for the army for the invasion of England. The French themselves laughed at these little cockle-shells of boats, teste Madame Junot: —

‘Boulogne was designated from the year 1801, as the chief station of the enterprise against England. The greatest activity suddenly prevailed in all ports of the Channel; camps were formed on the coast, divisions of light vessels were organised, and multitudes were built. The Flotilla, as it was called, created apparently with the greatest exertion, and all the apparatus of preparation, spread, as was intended, alarm on the opposite shore. The Boulogne Flotilla was composed of extremely light boats, so small, that at Paris, where everything forms the subject of a jest, they were called walnut shells. Brunet, who at this time was a truly comic actor, performing in some piece which I do not remember, was eating walnuts, the shells of which, after a little preparation, he launched upon some water in a tub by his side. “What are you doing?” said his fellow actor. “Making des péniches,” replied Brunet. This was the name by which the flat-bottomed boats of the flotilla were known at Paris. But poor Brunet was made to atone by twenty-four hours’ imprisonment for his unseasonble joke on the Government; and the day after his release the same piece was performed. When Brunet should have made the interdicted reply, he was silent. The other actor repeated the inquiry as to what he was doing. Still Brunet made no answer, and the other with an air of impatience proceeded: “Perhaps you do not know what you are about?” “Oh yes!” said Brunet, “I know very well what I am about, but I know better than to tell.” The laugh was general, and so were the applauses; and, in truth, nothing could be more droll than the manner in which this was uttered; Brunet’s countenance in saying it was of itself sufficient to provoke universal hilarity.’

But, in very truth, John Bull was not much frightened: there was Nelson, and his fleet, and people had great faith in them. But Nelson could do little against this passive fleet. On August 3 he bombarded Boulogne, sunk five gunboats, and damaged others; and on the 15th of the same month he tried to capture, or destroy, these gunboats, but was unsuccessful in his attempt, as the French had chained them to the shore.

We now come to the principal event of the year, the Peace – over which there was much coquetting. As early as March, Lord Hawkesbury, the then Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, addressed a letter to M. Otto, signifying King George’s desire to enter into negotiations for the restoration of peace.

These negotiations for peace were naturally noticed, and one very good etching, by Roberts, ‘Negotiation See Saw,’ shows Napoleon and John Bull engaged in that pastime seated on a plank ‘Peace or War.’ Bonaparte says, ‘There Johnny, now I’m down, and you are up – then I go up and you go down Johnny – so we go on.’ John Bull does not enjoy the situation so much, but grumbles, ‘I wish you would settle it one way or other, for if you keep bumping me up and down in this manner I shall be ruined in Diachilem Plaster.’

A somewhat elaborate etching, also by Roberts (no date, 1801), depicts ‘John Bull’s Prayer to Peace, or the flight of Discord.’ He is on his knees praying the following to Peace: ‘Sublime Descendant of Happiness, incline thine ear to the Petition of thy poor Patient, worn out oppressed I. Bull, who humbly prayeth thee that thou would’st in the first place exert thy influence, and be the means of restoring to me again those lost Liberties and Privileges I have been so basely rob’d of, and that you would’st be pleased also to put a speedy stop to cruel monopolizing, and e’er it be long, send me thy attendant Plenty, to comfort me and my long suffering numerous Family, and may that horrid Demon Discord never return again.’ Peace, whom the eye of Providence watches over, replies: ‘Thy Prayer shall be fulfill’d, Plenty awaits thee with all her blessings, her pace is slow but sure.’ Bonaparte and Pitt, who is represented as covered with serpents, are retreating.

On October 1, preliminary articles of peace with France were signed at Lord Hawkesbury’s office at Downing Street, by his Lordship, and M. Otto on the part of the French Government, and great were the rejoicings at the event, although not so great as they might have been. The ‘Times’ of October 3 says: ‘The public were so impatient to express their feelings on the occasion of the News of the Preliminaries of Peace being signed, that almost all the public streets were illuminated last night. This was evidently not the wish of the Government, who have deferred a general illumination until the ratification of them comes back from France. Accordingly, none of the Public Offices were illuminated, nor either of the Theatres. The ratification of the Preliminaries is expected from Paris on Tuesday next.’

No wonder ‘the public were so impatient to express their feelings,’ their joy must have been so great. Long-suffering, they had borne the burden and heat of a long war, cheerfully too, and gladly must they have welcomed its conclusion.