duty as a man of honour by not voluntarily incurring the infamy which can
never be wiped from the character of an informer. Bonaparte in Moreau's
situation would have acted the same part, for I never knew a man express
stronger indignation than himself against informers, until be began to
consider everything a virtue which served his ambition, and everything a
crime which opposed it.

The two facts which most forcibly obtruded themselves on my attention
during the trial were the inveterate violence of the President of the
Court towards the prisoners and the innocence of Moreau.

--[It is strange that Bourrienne does not acknowledge that he was
charged by Napoleon with the duty of attending this trial of Moreau,
and of sending in a daily report of the proceedings.]--

But, in spite of the most insidious examinations which can be conceived,
Moreau never once fell into the least contradiction. If my memory fail
me not, it was on the fourth day that he was examined by Thuriot, one of
the judges. The result, clear as day to all present, was, that Moreau
was a total stranger to all the plots, all the intrigues which had been
set on foot in London. In fact, during the whole course of the trial, to
which I listened with as much attention as interest, I did not discover
the shadow of a circumstance which could in the least commit him, or
which had the least reference to him. Scarcely one of the hundred and
thirty-nine witnesses who were heard for the prosecution knew him, and he
himself declared on the fourth sitting, which took place on the 31st of
May, that there was not an individual among the accused whom he knew,--
not one whom he had ever seen. In the course of the long proceedings,
notwithstanding the manifest efforts of Thuriot to extort false
admissions and force contradictions, no fact of any consequence was