To Shining Sea - Chapter 5
Talleyrand Becomes French Foreign Minister, July 15th 1797
The Unveiling of Canadian History, Volume 4.
To Shining Sea – Ireland, Haiti, and Louisiana, and the Idea of a Continental Republic, 1797 – 1804.
On November 7th 1805, Meriwether Lewis and William Clark, and the Corps of Discovery Expedition, would reach the American shore of the Pacific Ocean – thus asserting the reason for ‘the very name given to those fighters for independence: the Continental Army’.
Part 1 – The Irish Frontier
Chapter 5 - Talleyrand Becomes French Foreign Minister, July 15th 1797
Talleyrand became the new foreign minister of France, and to see Talleyrand’s new foreign policy, we must look into the mind of Talleyrand, of his disdain for the Americans, of his plan for a colonial empire in Africa, and of his plan of pillage to raise funds.
Charles Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord
Talleyrand had lived in the United States from the summer of 1794 until the summer of 1796, when, with the assistance of Madame de Stael, the National Convention struck his name from the list of emigres and he was then allowed to return to France.
In January 1794, while living in London, he was informed that he must leave the country or be deported. Fearing that were he to return to France, he would face the guillotine, he sought refuge in the United States – along with the thousands of other French emigres who emigrated to America in the 1790’s. During his time in Philadelphia, Talleyrand could frequently be found with other French emigres who would gather at the bookstore of Moreau de St. Mery. Talleyrand also made two trips to New York, where he was the house guest of Aaron Burr.
Arriving in Philadelphia in April 1794, he stayed at the home of Theophile Cazenove, who had lived with Talleyrand in Paris in the 1780’s, and as his financial adviser, had advised him on speculations in land and currency in the United States. Cazenove was now the American agent of the Holland Land Company, a syndicate of Dutch banking houses – one of which was Van Staphorst and Hubbard, a firm that financed the debt of the United States, and one of whose partners was Nicholas Hubbard – who will later become known as ‘Mr. W’.
Talleyrand formed a partnership to purchase land with Cazenove and Jean Conrad Hottinguer – who will later become known as ‘Mr. X’. Hottinguer was a former Zurich banker, who had set up his own bank in Paris in the 1780’s and who also fled from Paris in 1793 to avoid the guillotine. Hottinguer moved to London, where he married an American, and then emigrated to Philadelphia in 1795. Later, he would move to Hamburg, where he formed a land company that sold land in America to French emigres. Hottinguer returned to Amsterdam and then to Paris to raise money for the company and later opened his own bank in Paris in 1798.
The secretary of the land company was Pierre Bellamy, of the banking firm of Bellamy and Ricci, who will later become known as ‘Mr. Y’. Bellamy had been a banker in Geneva, but after the revolution in 1794, had fled to Hamburg where he formed a new bank with his partner, Gabriel-Marie Ricci, another French émigré.
When Talleyrand returned to Europe in 1796, he was met in Hamburg by Ricci. Talleyrand then travelled to Amsterdam, where he conducted business with Hubbard on their American investments, and then Talleyrand returned to Paris, with Hottinguer – to continue their business ventures.
When Talleyrand had learned of his possible return to France, in November 1795 he sold to the Spanish envoy in Philadelphia, British plans for an attack on Spanish possessions in South America that he had secured while he had earlier lived in London, for $8,000.
Now back in Paris, Talleyrand was made a member of the Institut National, where he gave his views on America in two public lectures – a ‘Memoir concerning the commercial relations of the United States with England’ (April 4th 1797) and an ‘Essay upon the advantages to be derived from new colonies’ (July 3rd 1797).
In Talleyrand’s ‘Memoir concerning the commercial relations of the United States with England’, he asserts that:
“there is no science more dependent on facts than political economy. Indeed, the art of collecting, arranging, and drawing conclusions from them, constitutes almost the whole of the science. And, in this point of view, it has, perhaps, more to expect from observation than from genius …
When, after that bloody struggle, in which the French defended so well the cause of their new allies, the United States of America were free from the dominion of the English, every reason seemed to unite for the dissolution of those commercial connexions which had before existed between two portions of the same people …
Whoever has observed America, cannot doubt, that still she remains altogether English in the greater part of her habits; that her ancient commerce with England has increased, rather than declined in activity, since the epoch of the independence of the United States; and that, consequently, that independence, far from being of disadvantage to England, has benefited her in many respects …
Hence, there has been, on the side of England, an increase in the exportation of her manufactured goods, and an exemption from the expence of the American government …
The immense quantity of manufactured goods which are sent out of England; the division of labour, at the same time a cause and consequence of their immense production, and particularly the ingenious employment of the mechanical powers, adapted to the different processes of the manufactures, have enabled the English manufacturers to lower the price of all the article of daily use, below the rate at which other nations have hitherto been able to afford them.
Further, the great capitals of the English merchants enable them to give more credit than those of any other nation; this credit is at least for a year, often for a longer time. The consequence is, that the American merchant who receives his wares from England, employs scarcely any principal of his own in this commerce; but trades almost entirely upon English capitals. Therefore, it is in fact England that engrosses the commerce of American consumption.”
But Talleyrand’s conclusions would come from his romantic view of Americans and from his pessimistic conception of man, that:
“If we consider those populous cities filled with English, Germans, Irish, and Dutch, as well as their indigenous inhabitants; those remote towns, so distant from one another; those vast uncultivated tracts of soil, traversed rather than inhabited by men who belong to no country; what common bond can we conceive in the midst of so many incongruities? It is a novel sight to the traveller, who setting out from a principal city, where society is in perfection, passes in succession through all the degrees of civilization and industry, which he finds constantly growing weaker and weaker, until in a few days he arrives at a mis-shapen and rude cabin, formed of the trunks of trees lately cut down. Such a journey is a sort of practical and living analysis of the origin of people and states … and it appears as if we travelled backwards in the history of the progress of the human mind …
In many districts the sea and the woods have formed fishermen, and wood-cutters. Now such men, properly speaking, have no country; and their social morality is reduced within a very small compass …
The American wood-cutter does not interest himself in anything; every sensible idea is remote from him – Those branches so agreeably disposed by nature; beautiful foliage; the bright colour which enlivens one part of the wood; the darker green which gives a melancholy shade to another: these things are nothing to him; he pays them no attention; the number of strokes of his axe required to fell a tree fills all his thoughts. He never planted; he knows not the pleasures of it. A tree of his own planting would be good for nothing, in his estimation; for it would never, during his life, be large enough to fell. It is by destruction that he lives; he is a destroyer wherever he goes. Thus every place is equally good in his eyes: he has no attachment to the spot on which he has spent his labour; for his labour is only fatigue, and is unconnected with any idea of pleasure. In the effects of his toil he has not witnessed those gradual increases of growth, so captivating to the planter; he regards not the destination of his productions; he knows not the charm of new attempts; and if, in quitting the abode of many years, he does not by chance forget his ax, he leaves no regret behind him.
The vocation of an American fisherman begets an apathy, almost equal to that of the wood-cutter … In America, with the exception of the inhabitants of Nantucket, who fish for whales, fishing is an idle employment. Two leagues from the coast, when they have no dread of foul weather, a single mile when the weather is uncertain, is the sum of the courage which they display; and the line is the only instrument with whose use they are practically acquainted. Thus their knowledge is but a trifling trick; and their action, which consists in constantly hanging one arm over the side of the boat, is little short of idleness. They are attached to no place; their only connexion with the land is by means of a wretched house which they inhabit. It is the sea that affords them nourishment: hence a few cod-fish, more or less, determine their country. If the number of these seems to diminish in any particular quarter, they emigrate, in search of another country, where they are more abundant … All the qualities, all the virtues, are wanting in the man who lives by fishing. Agriculture produces a patriot in the truest acceptation of the word; fishing can alone succeed in forming a cosmopolite.
I have, perhaps, dwelt too long on a sketch of these manners: it may seem foreign to this memoir; and yet it completes the object of it; for when I had to prove that it was not merely by reason of their origin, of their language, and of their interest, that the Americans so constantly find themselves to be Englishmen – an observation which applies more especially to the inhabitants of the cities. When I cast my eye upon those people wandering amongst the woods, upon the shores of the sea, and by the banks of the rivers, my general observation was strengthened, with regard to them, by that indolence and want of a native character, which renders this class of Americans more ready to receive and to preserve the impression of a foreign one. Doubtless the latter of these causes will grow weaker, and even disappear altogether, when the constantly-increasing population shall, by the cultivation of so many desert lands, have brought the inhabitants nearer together. As for the other causes, they have taken such a deep root, that it would, perhaps, require a French establishment in America to counteract their ascendency with any hopes of success. Undoubtedly such a political project should not be overlooked …”
Talleyrand then draws out his facts to his desired conclusion, abandoning, it seems, any thoughts of spreading the ideas of liberty, but proposing, instead, new methods of establishing an empire. He says that:
“in fine, to arrive at a complete proof of the fact which I advanced concerning the relations of the Americans with Great Britain, it was necessary to reject probabilities, and to discard analogies …
The knowledge of this fact itself might lead to false conclusions; it might give reason to believe that the independence of colonies was an advantage to their mother-countries. But when we revert to its real causes, the consequence is reduced within narrower limits. At present we can perceive in it nothing more than that the independence of the United States has been useful to England, and that it would be so to every state of the continent which, on the one side, should offer the same advantages to colonies of the same nature, and on the other should be seconded by similar faults in its neighbours. The development of the causes of this fact has led to many ulterior consequences.
In enumerating these causes, we have found reason to conclude successively:
1st, that the first years which follow peace decide upon the commercial system of states; and that if they neglect to seize the moment to draw their advantage from it, it turns out almost inevitably to their loss:
2dly, that commercial habits are more difficult to break through than we imagine; and that interest brings together in one day, and often for ever, those whom the most ardent passions had armed against each other for a series of years:
3dly, that in the calculations of the relations of every kind which may exist amongst men, identity of language is one of the most binding:
4thly, that religious toleration, in its fullest extent, is one of the most powerful guarantees of social tranquility: for where liberty of conscience is respected, every other right cannot fail to be so:
5thly, That the spirit of commerce, which renders man tolerant through indifference, tends also to render him selfish through avidity; and especially that a people whose social character has been shaken by long agitations, ought, by means of wise institutions, to be drawn towards agriculture; for commerce always keeps the passions in a state of effervescence, and agriculture uniformly calms them:
Finally, that, after a revolution which has changed every thing, we should know how to forego our hatreds, if we would not for ever renounce our happiness.”
Next, in Talleyrand’s ‘Essay upon the advantages to be derived from new colonies’, he elaborates on his amoral attitude towards slavery and his new proposed colonial policy. He said that:
“those men who have meditated upon the nature of the relations which unite metropolitan countries to their colonies, those who are accustomed at a distance to read political events in their causes, have long been aware that the west India colonies will one day separate themselves from their mother countries; and by a natural tendency, which the vices of Europeans have but too much accelerated, will either unite among themselves, or will attach themselves to the neighbouring continent.
The idea of putting men into their proper places is, perhaps, the first in the science of government; but that of finding the proper place for the discontented is, assuredly, the most difficult; and the presenting to their imagination distant objects, perspective views, on which their thoughts and their desires may fix themselves is, I think, one of the solutions of this difficulty …
This may be easily perceived in Louisiana, which remains French, although it has been under the dominion of the Spaniards for more than 30 years; and in Canada, although in the power of the English for the same length of time; the colonists of these two countries were Frenchmen; they are so still, and an obvious bias inclines them always towards us …
Upon the supposition that our West India islands should be exhausted, or that they should throw off our subjection, some establishments along the coast of Africa, or rather in the islands which border upon it, would be easy and convenient …
M. le Duc de Choiseul … who so early as the year 1769 foresaw the separation of America from England, and feared the partition of Poland, was endeavouring by means of negotiations at that time to pave the way for the cession of Egypt to France, in order that he might be ready to replace, by the same productions, and by a more extended commerce, the West India colonies, at the time that they should be lost to us …
The question, so injudiciously agitated, respecting the liberty of the Negroes, whatever may be the remedy which wisdom may bring for the evils which have been the result of it, will introduce sooner or later a new system in the cultivation of the colonial products. It is politic to be before-hand with these great changes; and the first idea which offers itself to the mind, that which brings with it the greatest number of favourable suppositions, appears to be, to attempt this cultivation in those very places where the cultivator is born …”
Shortly afterwards, on July 15th 1797, Talleyrand, as Director Barras’s candidate, became the new foreign minister for the French Republic, and this group of returning French emigres (W, X and Y) now sought to rebuild their fortunes.
However, at the same time that Talleyrand was conducting his diplomacy with the Americans, he was also strategizing with Napoleon Bonaparte.
Talleyrand and Bonaparte:
On December 5th, Bonaparte, who had now been made commander of the Army of England, returned to Paris and after first meeting with Talleyrand, they both met with the Directory.
Talleyrand stated that:
“as money is the sinew of war, he took the liberty to call the attention of the Directory to the relative situation of neutral states. They were formerly poor, but were now enriched by the distresses of France and her revolutionary war. They could not therefore complain of injustice, if she reclaimed a part of these extorted and ill-gotten treasures. He did not mean to propose a direct warfare with neutral nations, but such severity and restrictions on their navigation and trade, as would, in our turn, procure us opportunities to use the right of our actual power gives us of seizing, capturing, and confiscating, together with their cargoes, all vessels sailing contrary to our regulations: this. While it compensates the losses we have suffered, may even augment our future resources.
To attain this desirable object, a decree of the Directory should immediately declare every neutral ship trading with England, or having English property on board, a legal prize. Such a decree would not only be political, and advantageous to France, but detrimental and destructive in the highest degree to England …
I submit to the wisdom of the Directory the following calculation, as to the amount which each neutral government may be asked to repay; and how much the subjects of each can, without causing their utter ruin, by captures, restore to the French Republic.
From the American government may be claimed one hundred millions of livres; from the American citizens may be captured as high as to five hundred millions; from the Danish government may be claimed 50 millions: and from the Danish subjects may be captured as far as to 200 millions; from the Prussian government, as an ally, whose commercial navy is vastly inferior to her military strength, may be claimed 24 millions of livres; and from the Prussian subjects may be captured as far as 60 millions; from the Swedish government may be claimed 30 millions; and from the Swedish subjects may be captured as far as 100 millions; from the senate of the imperial cities and Hanse towns may be claimed 80 millions; and from their citizens may be captured as far as 200 millions; from the king of Naples may be claimed 24 millions; and from his subjects may be captured up to 50 millions; from the grand duke of Tuscany 30 millions may be claimed; and from his subjects may be captured to the extent of 70 millions; from the king of Spain may be claimed 150 millions; and from his subjects may be captured as far as 300 millions; from the Pope may be claimed 12 millions; and from his subjects may be captured as far as 24 millions.”
The directory unanimously assented that:
“this proposal, with regard to neutral nations, should be immediately changed to a decree, and its contents communicated to all neutral ministers and consuls resident in France, and by couriers sent to all the diplomatic and commercial agents of the French Republic, accredited to neutral states.”
In proposing this decree against the neutrals, Talleyrand could have no other object in view but immediate, though temporary, pillage.
This should also be seen in view of Bonaparte’s earlier conquest (pillage) of Italy.
Bonaparte had signed an armistice with Piedmont and with Parma in April 1796, and sent back to Paris, paintings and manuscripts for the Musee Central des Arts (later called the Musee du Louvre); upon entering Milan in May, he levied a 20 million franc contribution from Lombardy; after signing an armistice with the Pope in June, he levied a 15 million franc contribution, and negotiated the handing over of hundreds of pictures, vases, busts or statues plus 500 manuscripts from the Vatican library; and after signing a peace treaty in February 1797 with the Pope, he was promised a contribution of 30 million francs and 100 works of art.
After the successful invasion of Piedmont, and the hard-fought, eight-month-long series of battles ending in the successful siege of the Austrian garrison at Mantua in February 1797, Bonaparte launched an invasion of Vienna, causing the Austrians to sue for peace. On April 18th, Bonaparte signed a preliminary peace treaty at Leoben with Austria – that was about to receive a loan from the British government of 40 million francs, whereby Austria ceded the Austrian Netherlands to France, and renounced all its Italian possessions west of the Oglio river, but in compensation Austria would receive the mainland territories of Venice.
Earlier, on April 17th, Verona, a part of the Venetian Republic, had staged an uprising that killed over 300 Frenchmen, and later, on April 20th, the Venetians fired on and killed a French sea captain (who had illegally moored his vessel near the powder-magazine). Bonaparte declared war on Venice and inspired a coup d’etat – the doge and the senate abolished themselves, and in the treaty with the new government, it promised to furnish 3 battleships and 2 frigates to the French navy; to pay a contribution of 15 million francs; to provide 20 paintings and 500 manuscripts; and hand over its mainland territories. The massacre at Verona was punished with a payment of 1.7 million francs from the city.
After Bonaparte had aided the triumvirate’s coup d’etat in September 1797 (the 18th of Fructidor), the new Directory ratified Bonaparte’s Treaty of Campo-Formio with Austria, on October 26th, and also appointed Bonaparte the Commander of the Army of England.
Bonaparte was now back in Paris by December, and after evaluating the chances of a successful invasion of Britain, (including a meeting with Tone) he concluded that it was too hazardous and should not be attempted. Talleyrand and Bonaparte had earlier been discussing the idea of colonising Egypt.
Bonaparte reported to the Directory on February 23rd 1798, that:
“whatever efforts we make, we shall not for some years gain naval supremacy. To invade England without that supremacy is the most daring and difficult task ever undertaken …
If, having regard to the present organization of our navy, it seems impossible to gain the necessary promptness of execution, then we must really give up the expedition against England – be satisfied with keeping up the pretence of it – and concentrate all our attention and resources on the Rhine, in order to try to deprive England of Hanover … or else undertake an eastern expedition which would menace her trade with the Indies.”
A conquest of Egypt would protect France’s traders on the Nile river and would undermine Britain’s trade with the East Indies. Bonaparte promised the Directory that as soon as he had conquered Egypt, he would establish relations with the princes of India and together they would attack the British possessions there.
On April 12th, Bonaparte was made commander of the Army of the Orient and secretly began to prepare for an invasion of Egypt – sailing from France on May 19th, conquering the island of Malta on June 11th, and landing at Alexandria on July 1st. Bonaparte’s army captured the ports of Alexandria and Rosetta, then marched south and at the Battle of the Pyramids defeated the Mamluks, who surrendered the city of Cairo on July 22nd.
But, the British navy, under the command of Horatio Nelson, found and attacked the French warships that were anchored in the bay of Abukir – capturing or destroying 11 of the 13 French ships-of-the-line and 2 of the 4 French frigates (the 4 remaining French ships fled to France).
Upon receiving news of the French fleet’s destruction, the Ottoman Sultan in Constantinople prepared two huge armies to attack Bonaparte’s forces now stranded in Egypt – one army to attack from Syria, the other to be sent by sea from Rhodes to attack at Alexandria. Learning of the Ottoman movements, Bonaparte left Cairo with a 13,000-man army on February 5th, 1799 and marched into Syria to attack the Ottoman army – capturing El-Arish, Gaza, Jaffa, Haifa, Nazareth and Tyre, but after a failed siege of Acre (from March 18th to May 10th) Bonaparte withdrew back to Egypt – having lost 1800 men and with 1800 wounded.
Bonaparte now learned that 100 Ottoman ships were off Aboukir, and marched to Alexandria, and attacked the 18,000-man Ottoman army garrisoned at the fort at Aboukir – 10,000 Ottomans drowned, and the rest were captured or killed. This was Bonaparte’s last land battle in Egypt. Shortly before this battle, on July 15th, while strengthening the defences at their fort near Rosetta, French soldiers uncovered a slab with inscriptions on one side (with 3 different scripts – hieroglyphic, demotic and Greek), now called the Rosetta Stone.
During a prisoner exchange with the British at Aboukir, Bonaparte learned of events in France, and decided to return to France. On August 21st, Bonaparte secretly left Egypt and without meeting a single enemy British ship[!!!], landed in France on October 8th 1799.
Note: The French army that was left behind, remained in Egypt until finally surrendering to the British on September 2nd, 1801 – signing over to Britain the priceless hoard of Egyptian antiquities that the French had collected (including the Rosetta Stone).
[next week - chapter 6 - The Despatches of the American Commissioners arrive in Philadelphia, March 4th 1798]
*************
For those who may wish to support my continuing work on ‘The Unveiling of Canadian History’, you may purchase my books, that are available as PDFs and Paperback (on Amazon) at the Canadian Patriot Review :
Volume 1 – The Approaching Conflict, 1753 – 1774.
Volume 2 – Forlorn Hope – Quebec and Nova Scotia, and the War for Independence, 1775 – 1785.
And hopefully,
Volume 3 – The Storming of Hell – the War for the Territory Northwest of Ohio, 1786 – 1796, and
Volume 4 – Ireland, Haiti, and Louisiana – the Idea of a Continental Republic, 1797 – 1804,
may also appear in print, in the near future, while I continue to work on :
Volume 5 – On the Trail of the Treasonous, 1804 - 1814.