The clerical party was undoubtedly justified in some of its points. The mediators, though their work was done by intrigue rather than by force or threats, were certainly guilty of partiality.1 The Minister of Justice, Duport, in a letter of August 14, although characterizing the attacks on the mediators. as exaggerated, admitted that their own correspondence evinced too great a desire to effect the union and too little impartiality. The Army of Vaucluse certainly committed excesses under their eyes, and in fact later became so unruly that it opposed union and wished autonomy as the best way of postponing the return of law. The mediators, however, appear to have favored the army for its Jacobinism rather than its pro-French sentiments, for they supported it against partisans of union also.

It is of some aid in unravelling the tangle of evidence to find that the solution of the question appears to have brought satisfaction, at least to the majority. The papal authorities admit that even the Comtadins who were most devoted to the Holy See had felt the need of union with France, and that the cleavage quickly ceased to be along the question of sovereignty and became one of class. In becoming French the Papal party became royalist. The line was still one of aristocrate and patriote. The violence which broke out again soon after the union did not extend to the Comtat, but was limited to Avignon and appears to have been due to local hatreds of incredible intensity and to delay in sending French troops and instituting French authority.

By the Treaty of Tolentino, signed February 19, 1797, the Pope finally relinquished all right to the cities and territories of Avignon and the Comtat Venaissin in favor of the French Republic. No mention is made in the treaty of the vote of the people of the territory.

in the parish church on July 24, continues, "They hasten to profit by the tranquillity promised by the return of peace, precious fruit of the wisdom and nobility of the French nation, and of the infinite care given by the mediators of France . . . and unanimously declare in the face of the universe in the manner ordered by the mayor, that their desire is to remain faithful to the Pope and the Holy See." Translation. For French text see Charpenne, vol. 1, p. 223. This is one of the communes which, Soullier says, the mediators were unable to master. Séguret, Grillon and Piolenc also gave thanks to the mediators in their formal minutes. The only minute containing any accusation against the mediators is that of the commune of Bollène which had voted for the Pope on July 7, 415 citizens being present. The minute recites that on August 10, Le Scène des Maisons appeared with troops and ordered them to vote for union or to remove the French arms which they had displayed for protection. The citizens voted to ask the aid of the Department of Drôme to induce the mediators to allow the arms to stay, and the vote for the Pope remained unchanged. Charpenne, vol. 1, p. 215, gives the text of this deliberation which is, however, unsigned.

1 Soullier, vol. 1, p. 246.

2 Charpenne, vol. 1, p. 237.

3" From now on we shall see only two parties, royalists and republicans. We were wholly French, and were arrived at a time when there was no more question of the court of Rome." Translated from Soullier, vol. 1, p. 73.

4 F. de Martens, Recueil de traités (2nd ed.), vol. 5, p. 241.

SAVOY, 1792

At the outbreak of the Revolution in France the duchy of Savoy, which had once formed part of the empire of Charlemagne, was part of the kingdom of Sardinia, to which sovereignty it had passed through the intermediate hands to the Counts of Provence. The duchy held 58 communes, grouped in seven provinces. It had at five different times been part of the French kingdom. The people were French in language and sympathy, and the principles of the Revolution found ready converts among them. The Turin court, by offering asylum to the émigrés and persecuting the patriotes of Savoy, alienated whatever loyalty might have remained. When, on September 19, 1792, Montesquiou, General of the Army of the Midi, entered Savoy with twelve battalions, he was received with the utmost joy by the inhabitants. The Sardinian troops abandoned all the fortifications and retired before the French with scarcely a shot. On September 24 the gates of Chambéry were thrown open by the Municipality and the keys presented to the General, the Syndic greeting him with the words "We are a people not conquered but delivered."

On September 24 Montesquiou sent a glowing description of his reception to Servan, Minister of War.1 In speaking of the welcome of the people he says that he has already heard suggestion of erecting Savoy into a department of the Republic and asks guidance as to how to use his great influence. The question was debated in the Convention at Paris on the 28th. Gratified as the deputies were at the friendship for France which their armies were at that time finding not only in Savoy but also in the country about Mayence, the suggestion of annexing Savoy without consultation of the people was repudiated absolutely. Neither the arguments of Danton nor of Louvet de Couvrai urging the need of defraying the expenses of the war and of ensuring a free government to the newly delivered Savoyards availed. Discussion on the question was closed.

Meanwhile the three commissioners who had already been sent by the Convention to keep watch over Montesquiou's devotion to revolutionary principles, had decided, on consultation with the clubs at Chambéry, to put the question of union to a vote. On October 6 the commissioners issued a proclamation to the Savoyard people announcing to them that the imprescriptible sovereign rights of the people were restored to them, and that they should have a free choice as to their future status. Should the Savoyards choose to return to their former despots the way would be open, but their choice must be by the majority of the people in primary assemblies "which are the 1 Documents, post, p. 270.

"1

only ones where the people can exercise sovereignty." The established authorities were continued in office until successors had been chosen by the people.

The communal elections were held on different days during the period before October 14. The procedure was similar to that of the assemblies of the Venaissin.2 The suffrage was probably on the same basis as that in France, where the distinction between active and passive citizens had been abolished. The decree of August 11, 1792, had introduced universal suffrage for all those male citizens, save domestics and indigents, who were over twenty-one years of age and who had been domiciled in the commune for six months and had taken the civic oath.3

Although the simplicity of the methods used in the communal assemblies reflects that of the votes of Avignon, the historians make no charge of outside influence or of intimidation by either party. Montesquiou had shown his good faith by withdrawing his forces from Chambéry and taking up his headquarters to the north at Carouge, near Geneva.*

On October 21 the deputies elected in the communes met in the Cathedral of Chambéry. After their powers had been examined it was found that only three of the 658 communes of Savoy had failed to assemble. These were the three near the Italian border and still occupied by Sardinian troops. Of those assembling, 583 had voted for immediate union, 70 had given full powers to their deputies, one had voted for an independent republic and one had failed to indicate an opinion. At the fourth session, on October 23, the deputies formed themselves into the "National Assembly of the Allobroges and proclaimed the deposition of the House of Savoy. After abolishing feudal rights and privileges, tithes, torture, and the salt and tobacco tax, and decreeing the return to the nation of the possessions of the clergy while reserving the right of usufruct to the ecclesiastical holders of titles, the Assembly cast a solemn vote of union with France.

9 6

The four delegates elected to carry the vote of union to the French Assembly appeared on November 21, with a copy of the formal minute of the Assembly containing the vote by provinces. The address was received with 1 Documents, post, p. 278.

2 See Documents, post, p. 281.

3 J. B. Brissaud, A History of French Public Law, §§ 491-494. Translation by Garner.

* Saint-Genis, Histoire de Savoie, vol. 3, p. 142. France was at the time contemplating an expedition against Geneva.

5 Cf. Address of the National Assembly of the Allobroges to the National Assembly of France. Documents, post, p. 289.

6 The Allobroges were a Celtic tribe which crossed the Alps with Hannibal and settled in what is now Dauphiny and Savoy. Traces of their language of Rhaeto-Romansch are still found in the Italian valleys of the Swiss Engadine.

'Saint-Genis, vol. 3, p. 147, gives an account of the proceedings.

8 Documents, post, p. 289.

enthusiasm and referred to the Diplomatic Committee. On November 27, Grégoire presented the report of the committee and a draft decree of union. The reporter recites that it is plain that in Savoy as in France the people are sovereign. France has sworn no conquests, but has not sworn to repulse those peoples already united to it by common principles and interests who, by a free vote, beg for union. After an enumeration of the mutual benefits to be expected, the decree was submitted and adopted. The preamble, as in the decree of union of Avignon and the later decrees, bases the union on the vote of the people cast in primary assemblies.1

The administrative changes were accomplished without disturbance. The people welcomed the French régime, the young men enrolled in great numbers in the Légion allobroge and formed battalions of volunteers.2 The troubles which came later were a consequence of the development of the revolutionary legislation. The clergy, who had welcomed the French troops and had not raised a voice against the abolition of their privileges, were deeply resentful of the civic oath. The lively fear felt by the Savoyard peasant for the growing movement against religion, and his resentment against conscription were made use of by the émigrés. There gradually arose a clearly separatist royalist movement. This does not, however, appear to have been so much a movement back to Sardinia as away from the Revolution.

Sardinia renounced all rights in Savoy and Nice by the Treaty of Paris of May 15, 1796. The second Treaty of Paris of May 30, 1814, divided Savoy, giving part to France and part to Piedmont. This division aroused unanimous protest in the duchy. The frontier of 1790 was restored by the Treaty of November 20, 1815, the French Constitution was taken away, and the exodus of Savoyard émigrés to France began again. The sixth annexation had lasted twenty-three years.

NICE, 1793

Nice, which had passed like a shuttle-cock back and forth from Sardinia to France since the Middle Ages, had been given, with its surrounding county, to Sardinia by the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle of 1748.

As a part of the military expedition into Savoy, General Anselme, a lieutenant of Montesquiou, with 3,000 men, crossed the frontier into Nice. The entrance into the city was made without a shot, the émigrés and the Sardinian troops fleeing as in Savoy. The Niçois, apparently as eager as the Savoyards for the termination of the Sardinian rule, received the French troops with rejoicing. Anselme, however, far from following Montesquiou's 1 Documents, post, p. 295.

2 J. Trésal, L'annexion de la Savoie à la France, p. xxxiii.

policy of preserving the already existing municipal bodies set up new ones of his own choosing. On October 24, Lasource, reporting for the Diplomatic Committee on the letter of Montesquiou referred to it by the Assembly,1 objected that Anselme had appointed tribunals and administrative bodies — a right, according to the committee, not possessed by France and therefore incapable of transmission to her generals.

On November 4, there was read in the Convention an official letter signed by the provisional administrative bodies of the city and county of Nice, appointed by Anselme, stating that the citizens desired union with France.2 The delegates carrying this were received with great enthusiasm, but a motion that the request of the citizens of Nice be acted on at once called forth a protest from Barère de Vieuzac who insisted on a free vote of the people in primary assemblies before any such action. The Convention thereupon closed the discussion, declaring that it could not deliberate upon the demand for union until the express wish of the people, freely uttered in primary assemblies, had been heard.3

The Niçois, accordingly, set about copying the procedure in Savoy and held elections for a "national convention." national convention." The primary assemblies were summoned by the mayor of the provisional government, in letters of convocation sent out on November 12, calling on the citizens to deliberate on the form of government suitable to a sovereign people for the securing of their liberty.*

The voting was by acclamation, as in Avignon and in Savoy. There were no votes against union from any assemblies as a whole, and few from individuals. There appears to have been a second convocation on December 16, in order to elect deputies to the "National Assembly."

On January 4, 1793, the delegates from the communes and the eight sectional assemblies of Nice, itself, constituted themselves as the National Assembly of the Colons Marseillais."5 After verification of powers and the taking of an oath of allegiance to the nation and to the principles of liberty and equality, a vote deposing the Sardinian King was passed, and two delegates were appointed, the same two who had already presented the address of the Municipality, to again present the wish of the people of Nice, now freely expressed in primary assemblies, for union with France."

1 Cf. supra, p. 8.

2 Documents, post, p. 285.

3 Cf. Documents, post, p. 285.

4 A note by the editors of the Archives parlementaires, series 1, vol. 56, p. 225, states that the summons was sent to only twenty communes, some having been inadvertently forgotten, some being still in the hands of Sardinia, but that the oversight was quickly repaired.

5 Nice was founded some time before the Christian era, by the Phocaeans of Marseilles. 6 Documents, post, p. 296.