Thomas Paine’s Relations to the French Revolution of 1789

Chicago daily tribune (Chicago, Ill.), August 29, 1880

THOMAS PAINE: His Relations to the French Revolution of 1789

Very Interesting Paper by the Hon. E. B. Washburne

In Scribner’s Magazine.

• Paine’s French Career Eminently Creditable in Many Respects
• How He, Washington, Hamilton, and Madison Were Made French Citizens
• Paine’s Determined Opposition to the Execution of Louis XVI
• He Openly Denounces Robespierre, Is Arrested, and Imprisoned for Several Months
• Undoubtedly Destined to Be Guillotined, He Is Saved by the Fall of Robespierre, and Is Finally Released upon the Intervention of the American Minister, James Monroe

The relations which Thomas Paine held to the French Revolution of 1789 do not appear to have ever been very widely treated upon in all that has been written and said of that remarkable man. It is not the purpose of the present paper to touch upon the controversy in regard to his personal character and habits, his writings, and his alleged want of religious belief, which has to some extent agitated public opinion for three-quarters of a century. Setting aside all the heated discussion in relation to him, both in England and in our country, it is simply proposed to review his career in France in the midst of the most stupendous events ever laid down in the annals of any nation.

A somewhat extended study of the French Revolution, during the extraordinary period in which Paine was so intimately connected with it, fails to show anything to the prejudice of his personal or political character, but, on the other hand, reveals many things eminently creditable to him.

Paine was in Paris in the earlier days of the Revolution and at the time of the flight of Louis XVI and his family, and when they were brought back to that revolutionary city. He was soon heard of as a member of a little society which took the name of the “Société Républicaine,” and which was composed of only five members. Three of them, including Paine, afterward became members of the National Convention.

Taking the ground that the flight of the King should be deemed an abdication, this society was formed for the purpose of opposing the re-establishment of Louis XVI, “not only in reason of the faults which were personal to him, but for the purpose of overturning entirely the monarchical system and establishing the republican system and equal representation.”

As the organ of this society, and in elaboration of its views, Paine drew up in English a manifesto to be placarded on the walls of Paris. It was translated into French, and, as the law required that all handbills should be signed by a citizen before they were posted, Achille Duchâtelet, a member of the society and afterward Lieutenant-General of the armies of the French Republic, affixed his name thereto.

The appearance of the handbill created great sensation.

Malouet, a Royalist member of the National Assembly, tore it down with his own hands and proposed that the author (Paine), the signer (Duchâtelet), and their accomplices should be prosecuted. Montlosier, also a Royalist member of the Assembly, vehemently demanded the arrest of all the parties connected with the handbill and denounced as infamous the proposition made in the Assembly to “pass to the order of the day” on the subject.

After an excited debate the motion to pass to the order of the day was carried and the matter dropped.

Some time after this, Paine, deeply impregnated with the doctrines of the French Revolution, returned to England.

The publication in 1790 of Burke’s Reflections on the Revolution in France produced great excitement throughout England. Up to that time, while there was intense interest concerning events in France, distinctive parties had not been formed. The immediate consequence, however, of Burke’s work was the formation of parties friendly and unfriendly to the French Revolution.

Fox and Sheridan antagonized Burke.

The publication of Burke’s work was soon followed by the first part of Paine’s great work, The Rights of Man.

This publication added fuel to the flame.

It was disseminated by all the democratic societies in England, and particularly among the lower classes. The excitement increasing, Paine was finally indicted for a “wicked and seditious libel” by the British Government.

He had by this time become intensely unpopular with the ruling classes of England. Prosecuted under the indictment, he was defended by Erskine, then in the zenith of his glory as an advocate, in a speech of marvelous power and eloquence.

After Erskine had concluded his magnificent effort, the Attorney-General rose to reply. The jury informed him that they did not desire to hear him, as they had already made up their minds, and without leaving their seats brought in a verdict of guilty.

Paine was not present at the trial, but made his way to France.

Paine was followed to France by an avalanche of detraction which showed how deeply he had wounded the British Government. Not only The Rights of Man, but also his pamphlet on The Decline and Fall of the English System of Finance, afterward published as Agrarian Justice, helped raise the storm against him.

The part he had taken in the American Revolution had much to do with the resentment excited against him in England. His Common Sense, translated into French, had created a profound impression in France. French admirers claimed that it had exercised greater influence than many battles.

When Paine returned to Paris after leaving England, The Rights of Man had already been translated into French and published there. Burke’s Reflections had enraged revolutionary opinion almost beyond measure, and Paine’s reply was regarded as a triumphant and masterly production.

It circulated everywhere and was read with avidity by all classes. He at once became a hero in France and was received with enthusiasm. The doors of the salons and clubs were opened to him, and he soon became one of the prominent figures of the Revolution, standing beside Brissot, Condorcet, Bonneville, and other leading reformers.

It is perhaps not surprising that such a reception made him somewhat vain and egotistical. France magnified his importance. Although he had merely served as Clerk to the Committee of Foreign Affairs in the old Continental Congress, he often styled himself “Secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs in America,” thus giving himself an air of greater official distinction.

His bearing during this period appears not always to have pleased Madame Roland, who speaks of him in her Memoirs in terms that are by no means complimentary. He affected a certain contempt for books, implying that he considered himself above what had been written by others. It was even reported that if he possessed the power, he would destroy all the libraries in the world in order to rid mankind of accumulated error.

Meanwhile the Revolution moved steadily forward.

The National Assembly, composed of some of the most distinguished men France had ever produced, came to an end and was succeeded by the Legislative Assembly. Robespierre had secured the adoption of a rule preventing any member of the former Assembly from serving in the latter. As a consequence, the Legislative Assembly, though enthusiastic and revolutionary, lacked experienced legislators.

It soon proved itself utterly incapable of meeting the frightful emergencies confronting France.

The monarchy was collapsing. Foreign armies threatened invasion. Political passions rose to unprecedented heights.

Then came the terrible Tenth of August, 1792.

On that day the people of Paris attacked the Tuileries. The King and Queen, with their children, sought refuge in the Legislative Assembly while the Swiss Guards were slaughtered. The city was in a state of supreme agitation. Revolutionary enthusiasm had reached its highest pitch.

The Assembly, weak and vacillating, attempted by every means to strengthen itself in popular estimation. One result was the decree conferring the title of French citizen upon several distinguished foreigners.

It is commonly supposed that Thomas Paine was made a French citizen specifically to qualify him for membership in French legislative bodies. This is not entirely correct. What is less generally known is that the same decree conferred French citizenship upon several other Americans, including George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison.

The decree was adopted on August 26, 1792.

Presented by Guadet, deputy from the Gironde, it declared that men who had advanced liberty by their writings, courage, and public service could not be regarded as foreigners by a free people.

The decree stated that the title of French citizen should be conferred upon:

Joseph Priestley, Thomas Paine, Jeremy Bentham, William Wilberforce, Thomas Clarkson, Sir James Mackintosh, David Williams, George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, Tadeusz Ko?ciuszko, Johann Klopstock, Pestalozzi, and others.

The decree is particularly noteworthy because it extended honorary French citizenship to Washington, Hamilton, and Madison alongside Paine.

The author of the decree, Guadet, would himself become one of the tragic victims of the Revolution.

A brilliant lawyer from Bordeaux and one of the leading Girondins, Guadet opposed both Robespierre and the radical Commune of Paris. After the overthrow of the Girondins he was declared an outlaw, hunted across France, captured, and eventually guillotined.

When sentenced, he displayed remarkable courage. Addressing his judges, he reportedly declared:

“I am Guadet. Butchers, do your duty.”

He was executed on June 18, 1794.

Thus the man who had helped make Thomas Paine, George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison citizens of France ultimately perished beneath the blade of the Revolution he had served.

Among all the foreigners who received French citizenship under the decree of August 26, 1792, only two ultimately became members of the French legislative bodies: Thomas Paine and Anacharsis Clootz.

Clootz was a wealthy Belgian nobleman, eccentric in character and extravagant in his political enthusiasm. Calling himself the “Orator of the Human Race,” he traveled through Europe proclaiming revolutionary doctrines and presenting himself as a spokesman for universal liberty.

In 1790 he appeared before the National Assembly at the head of a delegation of supposed foreigners representing the nations of the world. It later emerged that many of these “foreigners” were simply Parisians dressed in exotic costumes that Clootz had paid for himself.

Following the decree conferring French citizenship upon him, Clootz appeared before the Assembly and thanked it in a speech filled with cosmopolitan rhetoric. He proclaimed his devotion to liberty, equality, and the sovereignty of humanity.

Soon afterward he was elected to the National Convention.

The Revolution, however, consumed even its most ardent supporters.

Clootz became associated with the Hébertists and was eventually accused of participating in a conspiracy involving foreigners. The evidence against him was absurdly weak, but in the atmosphere of the Terror it was sufficient.

Brought before the Revolutionary Tribunal, he defended himself calmly. He pointed out that he had spent years advocating universal peace and liberty and that no one could seriously accuse him of being a partisan of kings.

It was all in vain.

He was condemned and sent to the guillotine on March 24, 1794.

Clootz met death with remarkable composure. He reportedly requested permission to be executed last so that he could continue discussing philosophy while the heads of the others were falling.

His courage at the scaffold impressed even many of those who disagreed with his ideas.

The significance of Clootz in this narrative lies chiefly in the fact that he and Thomas Paine were the only naturalized citizens serving in the National Convention and that both would later be arrested under the same warrant and confined together in the Luxembourg Prison.

The Legislative Assembly, which had conferred French citizenship upon Paine, came to the end of its existence in September 1792. It was succeeded by the National Convention.

During the elections for the Convention, Paine’s popularity in France was extraordinary.

Although still in England at the time, he was elected by several departments of France. The Department of the Oise chose him as one of its representatives.

A remarkable letter survives from this period, written by Hérault de Séchelles, President of the Electoral Assembly.

The letter informed Paine of his election and invited him to France.

It declared:

“France calls you, sir, to her bosom to fulfill the most useful and consequently the most honorable of functions—that of contributing by wise legislation to the happiness of a people whose destinies interest and unite all who think and all who suffer in the world.”

The letter continued by praising Paine as the man who had first boldly developed the principles of the Rights of Man and who had explained them with a common sense accessible to ordinary people.

France, the writer declared, wished to number him among her legislators.

The letter concluded by inviting Paine to witness the spectacle of a nation struggling to establish liberty against tyranny and calling together the most enlightened minds of the world to help shape a new government.

The letter was signed:

Hérault, President of the National Assembly

and dated:

Paris, September 1792

Hérault de Séchelles himself was one of the most striking figures of the Revolution.

Elegant, wealthy, highly educated, and personally charming, he seemed an unlikely revolutionary. Yet he embraced the popular cause and became one of the leading figures of the Mountain.

His career eventually ended like that of so many others.

After serving on the Committee of Public Safety and helping direct the Revolution, he fell victim to the Terror and was guillotined alongside Danton in April 1794.

When he reached the scaffold he displayed great calm and courage.

According to contemporary accounts, he attempted to exchange a final farewell with Danton before execution, but the executioner’s assistants prevented it.

Danton is said to have responded:

“Imbeciles! In a few moments our heads will meet in the basket.”

Both men died shortly afterward.

Meanwhile Thomas Paine accepted his election.

He crossed the Channel and traveled to France.

His arrival was celebrated enthusiastically.

The Moniteur, the official journal of the Revolution, reported that the author of Common Sense and The Rights of Man had received a brilliant reception upon reaching French soil.

The revolutionary public viewed him not merely as a foreign sympathizer but as one of the intellectual fathers of republican liberty.

Soon after arriving, he took his seat in the National Convention—the body that would abolish the French monarchy, proclaim the Republic, and shape the most dramatic phase of the Revolution.

Paine Takes His Seat in the National Convention

When Thomas Paine entered the National Convention, France stood on the edge of a political and social abyss. The monarchy was collapsing, foreign armies threatened invasion, and revolutionary passions were reaching a fever pitch.

Paine labored under one immense disadvantage:

He neither spoke nor wrote French fluently.

Very few members of the Convention spoke English. Among those who did were Danton, Marat, Lantheunas, Garan-Coulon, and Bancal. Consequently, Paine was often dependent upon translators and intermediaries in order to communicate his ideas.

Despite this obstacle, the Convention quickly showed the high regard in which it held him.

One of its earliest acts was the appointment of a committee of nine charged with preparing a constitution for the Republic. The committee included some of the most distinguished men in France:

• Condorcet
• Thomas Paine
• Brissot
• Pétion
• Vergniaud
• Barère
• Danton
• Coustard
• Abbé Sieyès

The inclusion of Paine in this body demonstrated the confidence placed in him by the revolutionary leadership.

Sieyès, perhaps the most famous constitutional theorist of the Revolution, was widely known as the “Constitution-Maker.” Wits of the day joked that he always carried a constitution in his pocket ready for use whenever circumstances demanded.

The fate of this committee was tragic.

Several of its members—including Brissot, Vergniaud, and Danton—would later perish on the guillotine. Condorcet died while in flight from the authorities. Only a few survived the Revolution’s most violent years.

Paine and Danton

Because Danton was one of the few members of the Convention who spoke English well, he became an important intermediary for Paine.

Although the two men would eventually differ on many questions of revolutionary policy, their personal relations remained cordial.

Years later, both found themselves imprisoned in the Luxembourg and apparently destined for execution.

During one of their conversations there, Danton reflected bitterly on the course of events.

According to Paine’s recollection, Danton told him:

“What you have done for the happiness and liberty of the people in your own country, I have vainly endeavored to do in mine. I have been less fortunate than you. They are going to send me to the scaffold; very well, I shall go gaily.”

These words acquired an almost prophetic quality.

Danton soon mounted the scaffold.

Paine narrowly escaped sharing his fate.

The Trial of Louis XVI

The defining moment of Paine’s political career in France came during the trial of Louis XVI.

Proceedings began before the Convention in December 1792.

The former king’s fate divided the revolutionary movement.

Many members of the Mountain demanded immediate execution. Others believed that France should proceed more cautiously.

Paine belonged firmly to the latter group.

Although he had spent years attacking monarchy as an institution and had repeatedly denounced kingship as incompatible with liberty, he opposed putting Louis XVI to death.

His position astonished many radicals.

Paine explained that hatred of monarchy did not require vengeance against an individual.

As he declared:

“My contempt and hatred for monarchical government are sufficiently known. My compassion for the unfortunate, friends or enemies, is equally profound.”

He reminded the Convention that he had long maintained that Louis XVI had effectively abdicated when he attempted to flee France.

Yet even after recounting the King’s political failures, Paine urged mercy.

He argued that France could rid itself of monarchy forever without staining its new Republic with blood.

Paine Proposes Exile Instead of Execution

Paine’s proposal was straightforward.

Louis XVI should be imprisoned until the conclusion of the war and then permanently banished.

More remarkably still, Paine suggested that the former king be sent to the United States.

He reminded the Convention that France had assisted the American Revolution and that Americans remained grateful for that aid.

The United States, he argued, could provide Louis with a safe asylum where he would learn an important lesson:

that representative government was superior to monarchy.

Paine declared:

“The United States should be the safeguard and asylum of Louis Capet.”

He believed that exile would be both more humane and more politically wise than execution.

A Dramatic Appearance Before the Convention

When debate turned to whether execution should be suspended, Paine appeared before the Convention to speak.

The scene was extraordinary.

The galleries were crowded with spectators. Paris was consumed by political excitement. Every speech carried immense consequences.

Because Paine could not address the Convention in French, he spoke through an interpreter.

The moment he began, opposition erupted from the radical benches.

Marat, already one of the most feared and extreme figures in France, attempted to prevent Paine from speaking.

He argued that Paine should not even be permitted to vote.

According to Marat, Paine’s humanitarian views disqualified him from judging the King’s fate.

The attack produced uproar.

Members shouted objections from all sides of the chamber. Appeals were made for liberty of opinion. Eventually Paine was allowed to proceed.

The disturbance grew so intense that Marat even challenged the accuracy of the translation being read to the Convention.

For a time confusion reigned.

Standing quietly at the tribune in his plain Quaker-style clothing, Paine remained calm while the storm raged around him.

Eventually another member verified that the translation was accurate and the speech continued.

Paine’s Appeal for Humanity

The speech became one of the noblest moments of Paine’s life.

He warned the Convention that execution would appear to future generations not as justice but as revenge.

He urged France to demonstrate the superiority of republican principles through mercy rather than bloodshed.

In words that profoundly moved many listeners, he declared:

“My language has always been the language of liberty and humanity.”

Then he appealed directly to the friendship between France and America:

“I can assure you that his execution would produce universal affliction in America.”

Finally he added:

“If I could speak the French language, I would descend to your bar, and in the name of all my brothers in America I would present to you a petition to suspend the execution of Louis.”

The Beginning of Paine’s Downfall

The speech permanently damaged Paine’s standing among the most radical revolutionaries.

From that moment, many members of the Mountain regarded him with suspicion.

His opposition to the King’s execution brought him closer to the Girondins, the moderate republican faction that would soon become the principal target of Robespierre and the Jacobins.

According to Washburne, it was at this point that Paine effectively signed his own political death warrant.

The radicals never forgave him.

Robespierre, in particular, would eventually mark him for destruction.

Marat Turns Against Paine

Thomas Paine’s opposition to the execution of Louis XVI placed him in an increasingly dangerous position within revolutionary politics.

His speech before the Convention had angered the most radical Jacobins, particularly Jean-Paul Marat.

Although Marat spoke English and served with Paine in the Convention, there was little sympathy between them.

Washburne portrays Marat as both insincere and ruthless. According to his account, Marat privately mocked republican idealism even while publicly presenting himself as one of its fiercest defenders.

On one occasion Marat is said to have approached Paine in the corridors of the Convention and remarked sarcastically:

“And it is you who believe in a republic; you have too much sense to believe in such a dream.”

Whether reported exactly or not, the anecdote illustrates the hostility that existed between the two men.

The bitterness first became publicly visible during the debate over the fate of Louis XVI, when Marat repeatedly interrupted Paine’s speech and attempted to prevent him from influencing the Convention.

From that point forward, relations between the two deteriorated rapidly.

The Trial of Marat

In the spring of 1793, Marat himself was placed on trial.

His newspaper, L’Ami du Peuple (“The Friend of the People”), had repeatedly called for violence, executions, and revolutionary terror.

Even many revolutionaries had become alarmed by the extremity of his rhetoric.

Marat appeared before the Revolutionary Tribunal in April 1793.

Instead of behaving like a defendant, he transformed the proceedings into an attack upon his enemies.

One of the incidents raised during the trial involved a young Englishman named Johnson.

Johnson had reportedly become so horrified by the state of France that he attempted suicide.

An article concerning the incident appeared in a newspaper associated with the Girondins.

The article ended with a note allegedly left by Johnson:

“I came into France to enjoy liberty, but Marat has assassinated it. Anarchy is yet more cruel than despotism.”

This infuriated Marat.

Determined to find enemies behind the publication, he sought to connect Thomas Paine with the article.

Paine Appears as a Witness

During the proceedings Paine was summoned to testify.

Through an interpreter he explained that he had little connection with the matter and could not understand why it was being introduced into a trial concerning Marat’s conduct.

Witnesses testified that Johnson had been deeply distressed and had feared violence against Paine and other moderate deputies.

One witness claimed that rumors were circulating that foreigners—and especially Englishmen—might be massacred.

Paine testified calmly.

He explained that Johnson had become mentally disturbed and fearful after hearing threats allegedly connected with Marat’s followers.

The exchange between the two men became heated.

Marat attempted to turn the testimony against Paine.

Paine answered with restraint and dignity.

The entire episode revealed how poisonous revolutionary politics had become.

The question before the tribunal was supposedly Marat’s incitement to violence.

Yet much of the proceeding devolved into personal attacks against political opponents.

Marat’s Triumph

The outcome was never really in doubt.

Marat was acquitted.

The verdict produced scenes of wild enthusiasm among his supporters.

He was crowned with laurel and carried in triumph through Paris.

For the Jacobins, the acquittal represented a great victory.

For moderates such as Paine, it was a warning.

The Revolution was moving steadily toward extremism.

Violence increasingly enjoyed public approval.

Political moderation became dangerous.

The triumph of Marat gave fresh momentum to the revolutionary passions already consuming France.

The Fall of the Girondins

Only weeks later came one of the decisive turning points of the Revolution.

On June 2, 1793, the Convention—surrounded by armed forces and pressured by the Paris mob—ordered the arrest of the leading Girondin deputies.

Many of the most eloquent and capable men in France were removed from public life.

Some fled.

Others were imprisoned.

Many would eventually mount the scaffold.

Paine sympathized strongly with the Girondins.

His friendships, his political moderation, and his opposition to arbitrary violence all drew him toward them.

As the Girondins fell, Paine’s own position became increasingly precarious.

Foreigners Expelled from the Convention

Soon afterward the Convention adopted another measure that directly affected him.

Foreigners were excluded from membership.

Although framed as a general rule, Washburne argues that the measure was aimed largely at two men:

• Thomas Paine
• Anacharsis Clootz

Both were naturalized citizens.

Both had become politically inconvenient.

Both were increasingly viewed with suspicion by the dominant Jacobin faction.

As a result, Paine effectively lost his seat in the Convention.

He was no longer able to participate in debates or defend himself publicly.

Charlotte Corday and the Death of Marat

On July 13, 1793, the young Norman woman Charlotte Corday assassinated Marat.

Believing she could save France by removing one of the principal advocates of terror, she stabbed him while he sat in his bath.

The consequences were the opposite of what she intended.

Marat instantly became a martyr of the Revolution.

His death unleashed an even greater wave of fanaticism.

The Jacobins used the assassination to justify harsher measures against their opponents.

The Girondins, already under attack, found themselves completely doomed.

One deputy reportedly observed that Corday’s dagger had prepared the road to the scaffold.

Events soon proved him correct.

The Law of Suspects

In September 1793 the Convention adopted one of the most notorious measures of the Terror:

The Law of Suspects.

The law was drafted largely by Philippe-Antoine Merlin de Douai and gave authorities sweeping powers to arrest virtually anyone suspected of insufficient revolutionary zeal.

Its definitions were so broad that almost anyone could be imprisoned.

Neighbors could denounce neighbors.

Political enemies could destroy one another through accusation.

The machinery of the Terror now possessed legal form.

Thousands would suffer under its provisions.

Paine Denounces Robespierre

Unlike many others who remained silent, Paine openly criticized Maximilien Robespierre.

He condemned the growing tyranny of the Jacobin leadership and objected to the direction in which the Revolution was moving.

This required considerable courage.

By late 1793 Robespierre’s influence was enormous.

Opposition could easily lead to prison—or worse.

According to Washburne, Paine’s fate was effectively sealed from the moment he publicly denounced Robespierre.

The revolutionary leader never forgave criticism.

Evidence discovered after Robespierre’s death would later suggest that Paine had indeed been marked for destruction.

Arrest

On December 27, 1793 (7 Nivôse, Year II), the blow finally fell.

The Committee of General Safety issued a warrant ordering the arrest of:

• Thomas Paine
• Anacharsis Clootz

The warrant described them as former deputies and directed that they be imprisoned as a measure of public safety.

Their papers were to be seized and examined.

No meaningful crime was specified.

No serious evidence was produced.

The arrest was fundamentally political.

Paine was taken into custody and delivered to the Luxembourg Prison.

Clootz accompanied him.

For Clootz, imprisonment would end at the guillotine.

For Paine, the ordeal was only beginning.

The Luxembourg Prison

The Luxembourg Palace had been transformed into one of the principal state prisons of the Terror.

Thousands passed through its gates.

Many never emerged alive.

It housed nobles, deputies, military officers, intellectuals, former revolutionaries, and ordinary citizens.

The prison was crowded, unhealthy, and haunted by constant fear.

Every day prisoners waited for their names to be called.

Every day carts departed carrying victims to the Revolutionary Tribunal and then to the guillotine.

No one knew when his turn would come.

Paine entered this world in late 1793.

For the next eight months he would live under the shadow of death.

Inside the Luxembourg Prison

The Luxembourg Palace, originally constructed by Marie de’ Medici in the early seventeenth century, had become one of the principal prisons of the Terror.

By the time Thomas Paine arrived there in December 1793, it contained prisoners from every rank of society. Aristocrats, former ministers, military officers, deputies, scholars, and common citizens were crowded together under conditions of uncertainty and fear.

The prison had already housed many of the Revolution’s most famous victims.

From its gates had passed:

• Georges Danton
• Camille Desmoulins
• Hérault de Séchelles
• numerous Girondins and political prisoners

Most left only to proceed to the Revolutionary Tribunal and then to the guillotine.

A former prisoner later described conditions in vivid detail.

The inmates were treated not as human beings but as animals awaiting slaughter.

No one knew when his name would appear on the next list.

Newsboys would gather beneath the prison windows shouting the latest reports from Paris.

They would cry:

“Here is the list of those who have drawn tickets in the lottery of the holy guillotine!”

The phrase perfectly captured the atmosphere of dread.

Every day prisoners waited to learn whether they would be called before the Tribunal.

Constant Fear and Surveillance

The prison was filled with informers.

Government agents mingled among the prisoners, pretending friendship while secretly reporting conversations.

Men became afraid to speak openly.

Many reduced their conversations to a few cautious words.

Even innocent remarks might later be twisted into evidence of conspiracy.

The food was poor and often barely edible.

Hundreds of prisoners ate together in large halls.

Meals generally consisted of thin soup, coarse bread, vegetables boiled in water, and occasionally pork.

The daily routine combined physical discomfort with psychological torture.

The greatest burden was uncertainty.

At any hour guards might arrive with orders for arrest, transfer, or execution.

Paine’s Position

Thomas Paine had committed no crime recognizable under any ordinary standard of justice.

His imprisonment rested largely upon two facts:

1. He was a foreigner.
2. He had opposed the Jacobin leadership.

The charge of being a foreigner was particularly absurd.

Paine had been formally invited to France, granted French citizenship by decree, elected to the National Convention, and entrusted with constitutional responsibilities.

Yet during the Terror even such distinctions offered little protection.

His friend Anacharsis Clootz, arrested with him, would soon be executed.

Paine knew that his own turn might come next.

Robespierre’s Hidden Intention

After the fall of Robespierre, investigators examined papers discovered among his possessions.

One of the most revealing discoveries was a notebook written in Robespierre’s own hand.

Among its entries appeared a directive concerning Thomas Paine.

According to Washburne, the note read:

“Demand that Thomas Paine be decreed in accusation.”

The wording leaves little doubt about Robespierre’s intentions.

Paine had already been imprisoned.

The next logical step would have been formal accusation before the Revolutionary Tribunal.

That path almost invariably ended at the scaffold.

The evidence strongly suggests that Robespierre intended eventually to send Paine to the guillotine.

Months of Silence

Paine remained imprisoned for approximately eight months.

During this period he refrained from petitioning the Convention or its committees.

He later explained why.

Robespierre’s power had become so overwhelming that any appeal for justice would likely have worsened his situation.

Tyranny, Paine argued, generally responds to resistance by striking harder.

Consequently he endured imprisonment in silence.

The silence was not resignation.

It was survival.

Illness and Despair

While confined in the Luxembourg, Paine became seriously ill.

His physical condition deteriorated badly.

For a time he hovered near death.

Later he recalled that he had become almost unconscious of his own existence.

The combination of disease, confinement, and constant anxiety nearly destroyed him.

At the same time he watched friends and colleagues disappear one after another.

Anacharsis Clootz went to the scaffold.

Then came Danton.

Then Camille Desmoulins.

Then Hérault de Séchelles.

Each execution reminded Paine that his own fate might soon follow.

By the summer of 1794 there seemed little reason for hope.

The Fall of Robespierre

Then events suddenly changed.

On 9 Thermidor, Year II (July 27, 1794), the political coalition that had long feared Robespierre finally struck.

The Convention turned against him.

Robespierre was arrested.

The next day he was executed.

His fall transformed the atmosphere of France almost overnight.

Thousands of prisoners who had lived under the shadow of death suddenly glimpsed the possibility of survival.

Among them was Thomas Paine.

Washburne emphasizes that Robespierre’s downfall almost certainly saved Paine’s life.

Had the Terror continued only a little longer, Paine would probably have joined the long procession to the guillotine.

Paine Breaks His Silence

Ten days after Robespierre’s fall, Paine finally wrote to the National Convention.

The letter, dated 19 Thermidor, Year II, is one of the most moving documents of his French career.

Weak from illness and imprisonment, he began by apologizing for the condition in which he wrote.

He reminded the Convention that this was the first communication he had sent since his arrest nearly eight months earlier.

Then he reflected upon the loss of liberty:

“Eight months’ loss of liberty seems almost a lifetime to a man who has been, as I have been, the unceasing defender of liberty for twenty years.”

The statement carried special weight coming from the author of Common Sense and The Rights of Man.

A Condemnation of Robespierre

Paine spoke with unusual frankness regarding the fallen dictator.

He declared:

“Robespierre was my inveterate enemy, as he was the enemy of every man of virtue and humanity.”

He accused Robespierre of hypocrisy, cruelty, and personal persecution.

The atmosphere created by Robespierre, Paine explained, had made any appeal for justice impossible.

To complain would only have invited harsher treatment.

Now that the tyrant was gone, Paine believed he could finally speak freely.

Paine’s Appeal to the Convention

Continuing his letter of 19 Thermidor (August 6, 1794), Thomas Paine reminded the Convention why he had remained in France after first arriving there during the Revolution.

He wrote that when he left America in 1787 he had intended to return within a year. Instead, he had stayed in Europe because he hoped to see a free republic established in France that might serve as an example to the rest of the world.

He emphasized the sacrifices he had made:

“This long sacrifice of private tranquillity, especially after having gone through the fatigues and dangers of the American Revolution, deserved better fate than the long imprisonment I have silently suffered.”

Yet Paine carefully distinguished between France itself and those who had persecuted him.

One of the most striking passages in the letter declares:

“It is not the nation, but a faction, that has done me this injustice.”

This distinction was characteristic of Paine. Even after months of imprisonment and the threat of execution, he refused to condemn the French people as a whole.

Instead, he blamed the tyranny of a political faction.

Defending His Conduct

Paine reminded the Convention that he had avoided factional struggles whenever possible.

His principal concern, he said, had been the establishment of a sound constitution.

He noted that his constitutional proposals remained available for examination and that his conduct throughout the Revolution could be judged by his public actions.

Then he addressed the official reason for his arrest.

The warrant had treated him as a foreigner.

Paine pointed out the absurdity of this justification.

He had been:

• Invited to France by formal decree.
• Granted French citizenship.
• Elected to the National Convention.
• A citizen of the United States, France’s ally.

He therefore argued that he could not reasonably be included among the foreigners against whom the revolutionary decrees had been directed.

Yet under the Terror, he observed, any pretext could be used to justify persecution.

A Final Appeal

The letter closes with remarkable restraint.

There is no demand for vengeance.

There is no expression of bitterness.

Instead, Paine simply asks that justice be done.

He concludes:

“I have now stated to you my situation, and can have no doubt but that your justice will restore me to the liberty of which I have been deprived.”

The letter is signed:

Thomas Paine
Luxembourg Prison
19 Thermidor, Year II

Washburne regards it as one of the most dignified documents of Paine’s career.

Friends Intervene

Even before Paine’s own appeal reached the Convention, efforts had already begun to secure his release.

One of the most important came from François Lantheunas, a member of the Convention and a personal friend of Paine.

Lantheunas spoke English and had maintained close relations with him throughout the Revolution.

On 18 Thermidor, only one day before Paine wrote his own letter, Lantheunas appealed to Merlin de Thionville on Paine’s behalf.

He urged that the reasons for Paine’s imprisonment be reexamined.

Lantheunas argued that every sincere friend of liberty understood Paine’s importance and would recognize the injustice of his confinement.

He further offered to appear before the authorities and answer any questions concerning Paine’s conduct.

The appeal was thoughtful, measured, and persuasive.

The Political Climate Changes

The fall of Robespierre had fundamentally altered the political atmosphere.

The machinery of the Terror was still functioning, but its authority had been broken.

Men who only weeks earlier would have been sent to the scaffold now found themselves receiving hearings.

Prisoners began to hope.

Former victims of the Terror gradually emerged from confinement.

Paine benefited from this change.

The danger that had hung over him for months began to recede.

James Monroe’s Intervention

An important role was also played by James Monroe, then serving as American minister to France.

Monroe took a strong interest in Paine’s case.

Unlike his predecessor, who had done little to assist Paine during imprisonment, Monroe acted energetically.

He emphasized Paine’s services to both America and France and pressed for his liberation.

Washburne notes that Paine’s final release was due in significant measure to Monroe’s intervention.

The American minister treated Paine not as an outcast but as a distinguished citizen whose contributions deserved recognition.

Freedom Restored

Eventually the efforts succeeded.

After months in the Luxembourg Prison, Thomas Paine was released.

He had escaped a fate that had overtaken many of his friends and colleagues.

Danton was dead.

Desmoulins was dead.

Hérault de Séchelles was dead.

Anacharsis Clootz was dead.

The Girondins were dead or scattered.

Paine alone survived.

His survival was due partly to chance, partly to the fall of Robespierre, and partly to the efforts of friends who worked for his freedom.

Washburne’s Judgment

The central purpose of Washburne’s article is clear.

He wishes to challenge the common image of Paine as reckless revolutionary agitator.

After examining Paine’s conduct during the French Revolution, Washburne reaches a different conclusion.

He finds:

• No evidence of cruelty.
• No support for the Terror.
• No sympathy for political murder.
• No approval of arbitrary power.

Instead, he finds a man who consistently defended:

• Constitutional government.
• Representative institutions.
• Civil liberty.
• Humanity and mercy.

Most importantly, Washburne emphasizes Paine’s courageous opposition to the execution of Louis XVI.

At a moment when many politicians followed the passions of the crowd, Paine stood almost alone in pleading for clemency.

That stand cost him politically.

It may very well have nearly cost him his life.

Yet Washburne regards it as one of the most honorable acts of Paine’s career.

Conclusion

The story of Thomas Paine in revolutionary France is not merely the story of a foreign observer.

He became:

• A French citizen.
• A member of the National Convention.
• A constitutional legislator.
• A defender of republican principles.

He opposed monarchy but also opposed vengeance.

He supported revolution but resisted terror.

He denounced tyranny whether it appeared in kings or revolutionaries.