162] 
stances were duly considered, it 
must appear that the repeal of the 
law in question would be attended 
evidently with so many inconyeni- 
ences, that no judicious and un- 
biassed person could require it. 
The interest of the public was not, 
jn truth, more concerned in main- 
taining that Jaw in its full vigour, 
than that of private families : both 
would equally suffer from its abo- 
lition. It would often*happen that 
justice would not be done to the 
public, or that by doing it, men 
would embitter the remainder of 
their lives, and become’ objects 
either of general resentment or com- 
passion. It being clear, therefore, 
that much more evil than good 
must flow from the repeal of the 
law; and the security of the state 
being, at the same time, a motive 
that ought to supersede all others, 
that law could not with any pro- 
priety be abrogated. It was, at the 
same time, much to be suspected, 
that many of those, who recom- 
mended such a measure, acted from 
sinister motives, as nothing could be 
a stronger proof of its impropriety, 
than the satisfaétion universally ex- 
pressed, by the royalists, at such a 
question being brought before the 
“two councils. 
A multiplicity of other argu- 
ments were alleged by the contend- 
ing parties, in which the public 
joined with an earnestness that 
shewed how much all men were 
convinced of the importance of the 
subject in debate, But the report 
of the committee seemed to carry 
an influence that could not, and 
ought not to be resisted. ‘This was 
the opinion of the people at large, 
even morethan of the council of 
five hundred, as the question against 
ANNUAL REGISTER, 
1796. . 
the repeal was carried by a majority 
of only forty-four. 
The minority, encouraged by this 
evidence of their strength, resolved, 
if it were not able to compass the 
repeal of the law of the third of 
Brumaire, (25th Oétober, 1795,) so 
to modify its provisions, as to direét 
them equally at the partisans and 
instruments of the terrorists and ja- 
cobins ; and the royalists, who, after 
taking up arms against the republic, 
had submitted and been pardoned. 
The proposal of such an amendment 
proved highly exasperating to the 
supporters of that law, who asserted, 
that sufficient moderation had been 
shewn in exempting from its opera | 
tion the aétors and abetters in the 
insurreétion against the conventional 
decrees for the re-cleétions. But 
the general disposition of the coun- 
cil was so strongly marked by im- 
partiality on this occasion, that the 
amendment was carried, to the | 
great surprise of the public; the ma- 
jority of which, though decidedly 
inclined to measures of lenity, was 
fearful of that preponderance of 
jacobinism, which had hitherto ex- 
erted so irresistable an influence 
over all the proceedings of the legis- 
lature. 
The council of elders would wil- 
lingly have consented to the total 
repeal of the law of the third Bru- 
maire,and embraced, therefore,with | 
readiness, an opportunity of mitiga- 
ting its severity, by assenting to the 
amendment made by the council of 
five hundred. 
This alteration of that severe 
law proved a matter of unexpected 
triumph to the moderate party, | 
which constituted a large majority 
of the nation. The exclusion from 
posts of emolument, or of power, 
was 
