Katana VentraIP

Revolutionary Tribunal

The Revolutionary Tribunal (French: Tribunal révolutionnaire; unofficially Popular Tribunal)[1] was a court instituted by the National Convention during the French Revolution for the trial of political offenders. In October 1793, it became one of the most powerful engines of the period often called the Reign of Terror.[2][3][4]

Operation[edit]

One of the earliest cases brought to the Tribunal led to its most famous acquittal. On 13 April 1793 Girondin deputés brought an accusation against Jean-Paul Marat. Crucially, this involved waiving the immunity enjoyed until then by members of the Convention (Marat was himself a deputé). Not only did the case against Marat collapse, but two days after his case was brought, members of the Paris Commune responded by bringing a case to the Tribunal against 22 leading Girondins. This case was dismissed, but the principle that Convention members could be tried by the Tribunal was an important one, and ultimately led to the Girondin leaders being tried and executed in October 1793.[27][28][29]


During the months when Montané served as its President, the Tribunal dealt with 178 accused. 53% of these were set free after initial examination by a judge, without a full trial, while a further 17% were tried and acquitted by a jury. 5% were convicted and sentenced to imprisonment or deportation, and 25% were sentenced to death.[30] From its formation up to September 1793, the Tribunal heard 260 cases and handed down 66 death penalties. As a result, it was criticized as ineffective by some Jacobins.[15] The Law of Suspects (17 September 1793) greatly increased the number of prisoners who were imprisoned and might be brought to trial.[14]: 257–258  Between October and the end of 1793 the Tribunal issued 177 death sentences.[15]


Similar tribunaux révolutionnaires were also in operation in the various French departments. However, on 16 April 1794 (27 Germinal Year II) the Convention approved a report by Saint-Just proposing the abolition of the existing revolutionary tribunals in individual départements and requiring all suspects to be sent to the main tribunal in Paris, due to reports of corruption in the provincial tribunals.[22]: 417  On 21 May 1794 the government decided that the judicial system would be centralized, with almost all the tribunals in the provinces closed and all the trials held in Paris.[31] The provincial tribunals which were allowed to continue their work were Bordeaux, Arras, and Nîmes in the south, as well as Arras and Cambrai in the north.[32]


Following the attempted assassinations of Convention members Jean-Marie Collot d'Herbois on 23 May and Maximilien Robespierre on 25 May 1794, on 10 June (22 Prairial Year II) the so-called "Prairial Laws" were passed. These limited trials in the Revolutionary Tribunal to three days.[22]: 426  They also prevented the Revolutionary Tribunal from calling witnesses, or from allowing defense counsel. Juries were to convict or acquit entirely on the basis of the accusation and the accused's own defense. Further, the new laws confined the Tribunal to only two possible verdicts – acquittal or death.[23]: 837  Finally, the law cancelled all previous legislation on the same subject. Without being explicit, this removed the immunity of members of the Convention which up till then had protected them from summary arrest and required that the Convention itself vote to send any of its members to trial.[33]


Three days after the Prairial laws were passed, the guillotine was moved out of Paris. It had previously stood on the Place du Carrousel, was then moved to the Place de la Revolution, and then again to the Place St Antoine and later to the Place du Trône-Renversé. As the Revolutionary Tribunal accelerated the pace of executions in Paris, it became impractical to have it in the city.[22]: 427 

Katana VentraIP

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#0__titleDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#0__subtitleDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

For other uses, see Revolutionary Tribunal (disambiguation).

Criticism[edit]

The powers of the Revolutionary Tribunal were granted by the Convention, and there was only limited criticism of it. Royalists, émigrés and federalists were clearly opposed to the Tribunal and its workings, but since public criticism in support of the monarchy in Paris or in the press would be regarded as treasonable, it barely existed. At the same time, there were periodic demands from Enragés[34][35] and Hébertists[23]: 806  that the Tribunal accelerate its work and condemn more of the accused.


Among the first to speak up publicly against the Tribunal was Camille Desmoulins in his short-lived journal, "Le Vieux Cordelier".[36] As a result of his criticisms he was expelled from the Jacobin Club. Later he was arrested, tried and executed together with Danton.[14]: 286 


On the eve of his execution, Danton expressed his regret for having advocated the Tribunal. "It was just a year ago that I was the means of instituting the Revolutionary Tribunal; may God and man forgive me for what I did then; but it was not that it might become the scourge of humanity."[37]

Assessment[edit]

From the beginning of 1793 to the Thermidorian Reaction, around 17,000 people were sentenced and beheaded by some form of revolutionary court in France (in Paris or in the provinces), in addition to some 25,000 others who were summarily executed in the September Massacres, retributions in the War in the Vendée and elsewhere. The Paris Revolutionary Tribunal was responsible for 16% of all death sentences.[22]: 437 


Of all those accused by the Revolutionary Tribunal, about half were acquitted (the number dropped to a quarter after the enactment of the Law of 22 Prairial Year II) (10 June 1794).[39] Before 22 Prairial the Revolutionary Tribunal had pronounced 1,220 death sentences in thirteen months; during the forty-nine days between the passing of the law and the coup of Thermidor, 1,376 persons were condemned (an average of 28 per day).[26]

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#1__titleDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#1__descriptionDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#2__titleDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#2__descriptionDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__titleDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__subtextDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__quote--0DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__name--0DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__company_or_position--0DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__quote--1DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__name--1DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__company_or_position--1DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__quote--2DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__name--2DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__company_or_position--2DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__quote--3DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__name--3DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__company_or_position--3DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__quote--4DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__name--4DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__company_or_position--4DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__quote--5DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__name--5DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__company_or_position--5DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__quote--6DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__name--6DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__company_or_position--6DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__quote--7DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__name--7DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__company_or_position--7DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__quote--8DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__name--8DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__company_or_position--8DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__quote--9DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__name--9DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__company_or_position--9DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__quote--10DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__name--10DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__company_or_position--10DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

Haydon, Colin; Doyle, William (2006). . Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0521026055.

Robespierre

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__quote--1DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__name--1DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__company_or_position--1DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__quote--2DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__name--2DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__company_or_position--2DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__quote--3DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__name--3DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__company_or_position--3DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__quote--4DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__name--4DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__company_or_position--4DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__quote--5DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__name--5DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__company_or_position--5DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__titleDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__subtextDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__quote--0DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__name--0DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__company_or_position--0DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

TABLEAU RECAPITULATIF DES JUGEMENTS RENDUS PAR LE TRIBUNAL

Actes du tribunal révolutionnaire, éditions Mercure de France, coll. « Le temps retrouvé », 2005, 640 p.  9782715225916.

ISBN

Archives parlementaires de 1787 à 1860 : recueil complet des débats législatifs et politiques des Chambres françaises, 1re série, 1787 à 1799. t. lx.

Jean-Baptiste Sirey, Du tribunal révolutionnaire, frimaire an III (1794), chez l'imprimeur Du Pont, Rue de la Loi (Paris), 104 pages.

Conspiracy and Terror in the French Revolution – Marisa Linton (Kingston University) Public Lecture