The Uprising of June 20, jy(j2 33 



Many assertions have l;cen made regarding it for which no 

 evidence has been produced. The Jacobins and the Girondins, 

 collectively and individually, have been charged with being the 

 instigators of the movement and with associating their party cal- 

 culations with the popular excitement. The Jacobins Danton, 

 Robespierre, Chabot and Lasource, the Girondins Brissot, Gaudet, 

 Gensonne, Claviere, Roland and his wife, the municipal officers 

 I'etion and Manuel and the editor Gorsas are all charged by one 

 writer or another with being the leaders who remained in the 

 shadow, the brains that directed the movement.^" If these men 

 were the real leaders, they remained in the background, for there 

 is little or no evidence to place upmi tlicm responsibility for the 

 uprising. It is only their well-known revolutionary sentiments 

 and their power of leadership that has given rise to suspicion. 



The evidence seems to indicate that the leaders of the Jacobins 

 and the Girondins had in mind two distinct ideas of the advan- 

 tages which might be gained ];y the ujjrising. The Girondins hoped 

 to effect through this excitement the recall of their fallen ministry, 

 while the Jacobins did not wish the recall of the Girondist ministry. 



'" Ternaux says (I, 131) that orders were given out by Danton and by 

 other principal leaders who remained in the shadow; Louis Blanc, (VIII, 

 53), calls the Girondins, Roland, Claviere, Gensonne, Gaudet, Brissot and 

 Madame Roland, the instigators; Clapham, (112), charges the day to the 

 Jacobins; Robiquet, (483), calls Danton the great leader who gave orders 

 to the men who met at the home of Santerre; Martin, (24-28), indis- 

 criminately rails at Petion, Vergniaud, Robespierre, Chabot and the Gir- 

 ondins especially Madame Roland, Brissot and Gaudet for responsibility 

 in this uprising; Varenne, (19-20), calls Petion chief of the conspirators 

 and the editor Gorsas an instigator. Masson says, Petites histoires, I, 

 246-50, Petion was an accomplice of Alexandre and Santerre; Lareynie 

 says Petion was at the home of Santerre about midnight June i<j in secret 

 committee but this is hearsay evidence. Carro makes the same statement 

 but docs not give his authority. Documents show that Petion was in his 

 office from about nine o'clock till about two in the morning, as we shall 

 see later. An anonymous pamphlet of the time also accuses Petion of 

 meeting with the leaders of June 20 and of meeting with Orleans at 

 Rincy the morning of the 20th but the records show that he was in a 

 meeting of the municipal corps all morning, Description de la fete civique. 

 Royalist newspapers make similar statements, Journal royalist, No. 4, p. 3> 

 Nouvelle correspondance politique, XII, i, June 23, 1792. 



229 



