20] ANNUAL REGISTER, 1797. 
‘could not avoid feeling for their 
country, and being desirous of its 
welfare and reputation. Though 
‘it had banished them, through ap- 
prehensions of danger from their 
principles, yet the present measure 
shewed that it had not divested it- 
self of all consideration for them. 
The priests did not forget the ser- 
vice thus rendered them. However 
averse to the system established in 
‘their country, they still evinced, on 
several occasions, an attachment to 
_its interests, and a readiness to for- 
ward them as far as their consci- 
ences would permit. 
But while Buonaparte was intent 
on mitigating the rigour exercised on 
the non-juring clergy, the French di- 
rectory took noless care tolay before 
_the inspection of the public, sundry 
objectsof thesuperstitious veneration 
of those ignorant and credulous mul. 
‘titudes, over whom they still re- 
tained so much influence. Those 
objects were the principal relics con- 
tained in the church of Loretto, 
_ They were transmitted to France, in 
_order to be exposed to derision, and 
tolessen, by their evident absurdity, 
the respect and creditof the Romish 
clergy, as abettors, either through 
bigotry or hypocrisy, of those 
_equally shameful and ridiculousim- 
positions. 
In the mean time, the rejoicings 
_and exultation of the French, atthe 
capture of Mantua, and the con- 
tinual successes of their arms in 
_Ttaly, filled every part of the French 
republic. The speeches that were 
. pronounced on this occasion, in the 
council of five hundred, and in that 
of the ancients, contained all the 
applause of their soldiers and com-. 
_manders that enthusiasm could in- 
spire, and all the reprobation of 
their enemies that thirst of revenge 
could produce. 
There was, however, a circum- 
stance that diminished the satis- 
faction, enjoyed by the people, atthe 
triumphs of the French armies. It 
was in the contemplation of many, 
to bestow upon the commander-in- 
chief, such aremuneration, as might 
conspicuously perpetuate the re- 
membrance of his victories. ‘This 
was to confer upon him the title of 
Italicus, in imitation of the prece- 
dents in ancient Rome, and insome 
modern states. All parties agreed in 
acknowledging the extraordinary 
nierit of Buonaparte, and the won 
derful actions he had performed. 
But there was also a party, which, 
though it did notdeny the greatness 
of his exploits, did not however co- 
incide in the propriety of such a re- 
compence. They either thought, 
or pretended to think, it inconsist- 
ent with those maxims of simplicity 
in rewards, that had hitherto distin- 
guished the republican government. 
This surmise was deemed, byagreat 
part of the public, to be founded in 
envy more than in truth, and pro- 
ceeding from the royal rather than 
the republican party. The hopes 
of those that longed for the return 
of monarchy were so enfecbled by 
the events of the campaign of 
Italy, that they could not disguise 
their grief. It was not from them 
the author of these eyents could ex- 
pect to be rewarded for what they 
would have been better pleased 
that he had ‘never performed. 
‘Thus a distinction, which the ma- 
jority of people asserted he had high- 
ly deserved, was withheld from 
him through resentment and envy, 
by the intrigues of the enemies to 
the republic, under pretence of 
aching 
