12} 
be adjudged guilty of the same 
crime: that such as should be con- 
victed during their absence, should 
forfeit their estates and property 
during their own lives, but not to 
the prejudice of their children; 
that all such persons holding offices 
should be adjudged to have for- 
feited the same: that all such be- 
ing officers in the army and navy, 
should be considered as deserters ; 
and that Frenchmen, enlisting men 
to attack the frontiers, should be 
adjudged guilty of high treason. 
It could not be expected that the 
King should ratify a decree so se- 
vere against men who had been 
guilty of no other crime than that 
of faithfully adhering to the mo- 
narchy and the monarch. He 
withheld his sanction for the pre- 
sent, and did that which any other 
just and humane prince would have 
done in similar circumstances. De- 
termined to support the constitution, 
to which he had sworn, he would 
not encourage or connive at pre- 
parations for war against it; but, 
concerned for the personal rights 
and safety of men whom he es- 
teemed and loved, lie resolved to 
attempt a reconciliation between 
the French government and. the 
emigrants, by the mild method of 
admonition and persuasion. He had 
dispatched letters again and again, 
even before the violent decree of 
the assembly, to all the princes, 
earnestly entreating them to re- 
turn; and used all his endeavours 
by a public proclamation, as well 
as by all the private influence he 
possessed, to recall the emigrants 
to the bosom of their country, and 
to retain those who were inclined 
to emigrate, 
ANNUAL REGISTER, 1792. 
Dec. 14, 1791. The King, om 
the same day that he refused his 
sanction to the decree against the 
emigrants, had previously given it 
to another decree of the assembly, 
requiring the Count of Provence, 
his eldest brother, to return to the 
kingdom within the space of two 
months. The French princes, in 
answer to the King’s repeated let- 
ters, persisted in their refusal to 
acknowledge the constitution ac- 
cepted by his Majesty, and de- 
clared their views to be the re-es- 
tablishment and respect of the 
Roman catholic religion and its 
ministers, and to restore to the 
King his liberty and legislative 
authority. The King would pro- 
bably have approved heartily of the 
constitution, had a few modifica 
tions been made to satisfy his con- 
science as to religion, and_ his 
feelings with regard to his family 
and the nobles. But still, harsh as 
it was in these respects, there was 
not any reason to doubt of his sin- 
cerity in his earnest and repeated 
letters to the princes. His piety, 
the sacrifices he had often made to- 
humanity, the gentleness and the 
timid hesitation and irresolution of 
his character, all conspire to pre- 
clude every idea of duplicity on the 
part of the King on this occasion. 
It is also to be observed, that what- 
ever repugnance may have been 
felt by their Majesties to so great 
a retrenchment of the royal au- 
thority, it could not be, and in 
fact it is well enough known, that 
it was not their wish that the an- 
cient monarchy should be restored 
by external force, under the direc- 
tion and auspices of the princes ; * 
whose victorious entrance and re- 
* The Prince of Condé, the Count de Provence, and the Count d’ Artois. 
establishment 
