monarchy, and the plots and intrigues of their own courts, he ought to be, and must be tried.

"If the crimes for which Louis XVI. is arraigned, were absolutely personal to him, without reference to general conspiracies, and confined to the affairs of France, the motives of inviolability, that folly of the moment might have been urged in his behalf with some appearance of reason; but as he is arraigned not only on the part of France, but for having conspired against all Europe, we ought to use every means in our power to discover the whole extent of that conspiracy. France is now a republic: she has completed her revolution; but she cannot earn all the advantages arising from it, as long as she is environed with despotical governments; their armies and marine oblige her likewise to keep troops and ships in readiness. It is, therefore, her immediate interest, that all nations be as free as herself; that revolutions be universal; and since Louis XVI. can serve to prove, by the flagitiousness of government in general, the necessity of revolutions, she ought not to let slip so precious an opportunity.

"The despots of Europe have formed alliances to preserve their respective authority, and to perpetuate the oppression of nations; this is the end which they. proposed to themselves, in

making an invasion on the French territory. They dread the effect of the French revolution in the bosom of their own countries; and in hopes of preventing it, they are come to try to destroy that revolution, before it should have attained its perfect maturity.-Their attempt has not been attended with success: France has already vanquished their armies; but it is left to her to sound the particulars of the conspiracy, to discover, to expose to the eyes of the universe those despots who had the infamy to take part in it; and the universe expects of her that act of justice.

"These are my motives for demanding that Louis XVI. be judged; and it is in this sole point of view, that his trial appears to me of sufficient importance to attract the attention of the republic.

"As to what regards inviolability, I would not have such a motive to be mentioned. Seeing no longer in Louis XVI. but a weak-minded and narrow-spirited individual, ill-bred, like all his colleagues, given, as it is said, to frequent excesses of drunkenness, and whom the national assembly raised again imprudently on a throne which was not made for him, if we shew him hereafter some pity, it shall not be the result of the burlesque idea of a pretended inviolability.

"THOMAS PAINE."

I have before had occasion to notice that absurd and contemptible production entitled "Cheetham's Life of Paine," and as the following correspondence will in some degree serve as a refutation of that work, its insertion here may not, perhaps, be considered unnecessary. It will likewise serve another and more important purpose, namely, that of shewing, without disguise, the opinion entertained by one of the most enlightened men of the age of Mr. Paine's writings and character. No person who reads the following letters, can accuse Mr. Barlow of any undue partiality towards the subject of them, and when we consider the relative situation in which the respective parties were placed, we must regard his account as one of the most interesting sketches which has hitherto appeared on the subject.

SIR,

TO JOEL BARLOW.

1

Nor having the honour of a personal acquaintance with you, the trouble this note will occasion will require some apology; and the only one I can offer regards the subject of it, and the readiness with which your character persuades me that you will furnish me the information

required as soon as your leisure permits you to do so.

I am preparing to write the life of Thomas Paine, author of Common Sense, &c. As you were acquainted with him in Paris, and as he mentions you in his "Age of Reason," your opinion of his manners and habits, the company he kept, &c. would be very acceptable. He was a great drunkard here, and Mr.

M

a merchant of this city, who lived with him when he was arrested by order of Robespierre, tells me he was intoxicated when that event happened,

Did Paine ever take an oath of allegiance to France? In his letter to the French people in 1792, he thanks them for electing him a member of the Convention, and for the additional honour of making him a French citizen, In his speech on the trial of the King, he speaks, he says, as a citizen of France. There is some difference between being a member of a Convention to make a constitution, and a member of the same body to try the King and transact other business. I should imagine that in the latter capacities the oath of allegiance would be necessary.

Any other information you would be pleased to communicate, which in your judgment would be useful in illustrating his character, will

e

I HAVE received your letter calling for information relative to the life of Thomas Paine. It appears to me that this is not the moment to publish the life of that man in this country. His own writings are his best life, and these are not read at present.

The greatest part of the readers in the United States will not be persuaded as long as their present feelings last, to consider him in any other light than as a drunkard and a deist. The writer of his life who should dwell on these topics, to the exclusion of the great and estimable traits of his real character, might, indeed, please the rabble of the age who do not know him; the book might sell; but it would only tend to render the truth more obscure, for the future biographer than it was before.

But if the present writer should give us