1835. CHAP. ment was experienced by the Crown officers how to proXXXIII. ceed. Out of several thousand persons in confinement, six hundred had been selected as fit for trial and worthy of punishment; and in order to render the proceeding more impressive, and convey a stronger idea of the extent of the conspiracy, it was resolved to bring them all to trial at one time, and under one indictment. As no hall, however, could be found adequate to contain such a multitude of accused persons, and no human strength was adequate to mastering or recollecting the evidence against 1 Ann. Hist. such a number, it was absolutely necessary very materially to reduce the number; and at length a selection was made of 164, deemed the most culpable, who were brought from various parts of France to Paris, and indicted together before the Chamber of Peers.1 xviii. 172, 174; L. Blanc, iv. 383, 387; Cap. viii. 81, 89. 17. Ruinous effects of ing. To any one who has been practically acquainted with the conduct of criminal trials, it must at once appear this mode obvious that a more absurd and hazardous mode of proof proceed- ceeding could not possibly have been adopted. To bring a vast number of prisoners to the bar at once, charged with accession in different degrees to the same conspiracy, is to confound those different degrees together, to incur the hazard to innocence of being included in the category of guilt, and to encourage audacity and provoke interruption from the number of those who will encourage its excesses, or profit by the delays it will occasion. This, accordingly, was exactly what happened. Two committees of the Peers were appointed; one to examine into the evidence, and prepare the indictment during the year which preceded the trial; the other to consider who should be discharged. No less than two thousand persons, against whom the evidence was not deemed sufficient, or who were not considered fit objects of trial, were liberated by their orders. A voluminous and very valuable report on the origin and progress of the secret societies was prepared by M. Girod de l'Ain, which contains a full and authentic account of their ramifications, pro XXXIII. 1835. ceedings, and designs.* The committees were composed CHAP. of men of the highest character in the magistracy, and their proceedings were conducted with calmness, moderation, and the most scrupulous attention to the evidence against each individual. M. Pasquier, who held the onerous situation of President of the Chamber, conducted the proceedings with a calmness and impartiality which extorted the admiration even of the accused themselves. But no sooner did the proceedings commence, than an 1 Rapport de unparalleled scene of violence and disorder ensued, which M. Girod protracted the trial to an extraordinary length, and would 22,36; Ann. have rendered it interminable, were it not for a fortunate 207, 231; event, which enabled the most guilty to escape from the iv. 383, 387. hands of justice.1 de l'Ain, Hist. xviii. L. Blanc, 18. ment of the contest with The excitement produced among all classes of Liberals by this "monster trial" was immense, and exceeded any- Commencething before witnessed, even in that land of vehement trial, and passion and strong emotion. Scarce any of the Republi- the Bar. cans but had a friend, a relation, implicated in its issue; March 31. scarce a Liberal but sympathised from the bottom of his heart in the fate of brave men, who had ventured their lives in the cause, as they deemed it, of national freedom. Immense crowds surrounded the court-house long before * "La Société des Droits de l'Homme, dont le programme avoué est une révolution politique et sociale, organise dans la capitale d'abord, puis dans plusieurs grandes villes, une armée en permanence pour marcher à son but par la révolte. Nous l'avons vue pousser à l'insurrection par les violentes imprécations, spéciales sur la misère du pauvre pour l'exciter contre l'aristocratie nouvelle qui s'est reconstituée sous le nom de bourgeoisie; organiser, puis étendre ces déplorables coalitions d'ouvriers, qui troublent si souvent notre industrie; persuader à tous les désordres, s'efforcer de corrompre et de pervertir la sagesse du peuple par les plus détestables pamphlets, systématiser la licence de la Presse, et préparer ainsi l'exécution des attentats qu'elle médite. A Paris le comité central demande et obtient de ses agens le contrôle de son armée, l'effectif de ses forces, et s'assure de l'éffet produit par le poison de ses doctrines; et lorsqu'il compte un assez grand nombre d'hommes prêts à marcher avec lui, il fait distribuer par ses agens sectionnaires des munitions destinées à mitrailler notre garde nationale et notre fidèle armée. A Lyon la même société suit la même marche, mais avec un succès plus rapide, et que vient expliquer l'immense population ouvrière de la seconde ville de France: l'Association Lyonnaise était directement sous la direction du comité central Parisien; elle a pris la part la plus directe et la plan active à l'insurrection qui pen XXXIII. 1835. CHAP. the doors opened, and the moment they were so, every corner was filled, and the most breathless anxiety was depicted on every visage. It soon appeared, however, that the proceedings were to be indefinitely protracted, and that the system of defence was by availing themselves of every imaginable point, and insisting on it at great length, to render the trial endless. This system had wellnigh succeeded. The first point taken was the selection of counsel to defend the accused, and this led to such a contest as nearly caused the trial itself, involving as it did the lives of an hundred and sixty persons, to be forgotMarch 30. ten. The King had issued an ordonnance on March 30, which allowed the accused to select their defenders from any bar in France; and in default of their doing so, the president was to choose them from the bar of the CourRoyal at Paris.* Nothing could be more liberal and just than this ordonnance; it merely confined the conduct of the defence to the bar of France, premising that, if counsel were not chosen from some of the provincial bars, the president would assign the prisoners defenders from the bar of Paris.1 1 Ann. Hist. xviii. 175; Cap. viii. 95, 96; L. Blanc, iv. 386, 391. This equitable arrangement, however, was far from meeting the views of the prisoners, or their coadjutors at dant six jours livré cette grande cité aux horreurs du pillage et de la guerre civile. A St. Etienne, Grenoble, Marseille, Arbois, Chalons sur Saône, partout où les troubles éclatent, nous avons vu la Société des Droits de l'Homme préparant et réalisant ces attentats, sous les inspirations et l'influence du comité central. Partout, les journaux de cette société sonnent le tocsin d'alarme et appellent les sectionnaires au combat; à Lyon, La Glaneuse, L'Echo de la Fabrique; à Marseille, Le Peuple Souverain; dans le Jura, Le Patriote Franc Comtois; à Paris, La Tribune, moniteur officiel du comité central."— Rapport de M. GIROD DE L'AIN; Ann. Hist., xviii. 171, 172. "Tout Avocat inscrit au tableau d'une cour, ou des tribunaux du royaume, pourra exercer son ministère devant la Cour des Pairs. Néanmoins les Avocats près la Cour Royale de Paris pourront seuls être désignés d'office par le Président de la Cour des Pairs, conformément à l'article 295 du Code d'Instruction Criminelle. Les Avocats appelés à remplir leur ministère devant la Cour des Pairs y jouiront des mêmes droits, et seront tenus des mêmes devoirs que devant les cours d'assises. La Cour des Pairs et son Président demeurent investis, à l'égard des avocats, de tous les pouvoirs qui appartiennent aux cours d'assises et aux présidens de ces cours."-Ordonnance du Roi, March 31, 1835, Moniteur; and Ann. Hist. xviii. 175. CHAP. XXXIII. 1835. 19. about the defenders. the bar, or in the public press. Their object was, by no means to have the defence of the accused conducted by barristers, or according to the forms, and under the responsibility of professional men, but by the most ardent Contest and eloquent Republicans of all professions; and thus choice of to convert the hall of justice into a forum of the most vehement political debate. In addition, therefore, to some eminent Liberal barristers, such as M. Michel de Bourges, whom they were entitled to nominate, the prisoners insisted upon being defended by men unconnected with French law in any department; such as the Abbé de Lamennais, MM. Armand Carrel, Raspail, Garnier Pagès, Audry de Puyraveau, and Daniel O'Connell. It was easy to foresee to what results the admission of such strange defenders would immediately have led, even in a country less excitable than France. Such as it was, however, the decree limiting the defence to the bar excited the most unbounded animosity in France, and was stigmatised as the most atrocious act of tyranny that ever had been perpetrated. Still more strange, the decree, which was perfectly in accordance with judicial procedure, and indispensable to the right conduct of an important state trial, was denounced by the whole bar of France, 96,97; Ann. metropolitan and provincial, as an unwarrantable stretch, 174, 176; wholly indefensible, and a direct violation of the consti- iv. 386, 388. tution.1 1 Cap. viii. Hist. xviii. L. Blanc, proceed The dispute about the counsel who were to defend the 20. accused soon assumed such proportions as almost to cause Commencetheir trial to be forgotten. It came on, however, at ment of the length, on the 2d May; and on the 5th of the same month ings. the proceedings commenced in a vast hall, specially erected for the occasion. The roll being called, only 164 Peers answered to their names: 79, on one pretence or another, had contrived to be absent. The accused, to the number of 121, were brought in together, and took their seats in the benches opposite to the Court. Only twelve gentlemen of the bar were present to assist the accused, chiefly XXXIII. 1835. CHAP. those assigned by the Court; so strongly had the supposed infringement of the rights of defence affected the feelings of that learned body. The utmost anxiety pervaded the whole audience and the immense crowd assembled round the doors. The leaders of the Republicans were there Government now no longer struck at a few wretched agents of insurrection, but was resolved to aim a blow at its chiefs. The most extensive preparations had been made to secure the public tranquillity during the proceedings. An immense body of police, with strong detachments of foot and horse, surrounded the building, and powerful reserves, with a large train of artillery, were xviii. 178, stationed at no great distance; and, to guard against all viii. 96, 98; eventualities, two other presidents were nominated to iv. 587,590. succeed M. Pasquier, in the event of his being cut off in the midst of his arduous duties.1 1 Ann. Hist. 180; Cap. L. Blanc, 21. to plead or til they got their own defenders. May 5. To conduct the defence of the accused, and watch over Refusal of the proceedings, a committee of the leading Republicans the accused in Paris had been appointed, and it sat in permanence. answer un- The Paris committee consisted of MM. Godefroi, Cavaignac, Guinard, Armand Carrel, Marrast, Lebon, Vignute, Landolphe, Chilman, Granger, and Péchonnier. In addition to this, the accused from Lyons, who were no less than fifty-nine in number, had a special committee of their own. By the joint advice of both committees, it was determined that the accused should, one and all, refuse to plead, or answer to their names when called on to do so, until they were assisted by defenders of their own selection. This was accordingly done; and a scene of matchless disorder and confusion ensued. Each prisoner, when called on by name, insisted upon the defender he had chosen being introduced, though a stranger to the bar: the ProcureurGénéral insisted that their choice should be confined to that learned body, and that the Court had exercised the powers conferred on them by article 295 of the Criminal Code, in regard to this matter, in a competent manner. So the Peers held; and as the refusal to plead continued, it |