oppression; the citizens, in short the whole population, became united in support of the government, whose benefits and whose services were duly appreciated, after twenty years of civil commotion, bloodshed, and plunder. Such proved the state of France about the year 1380.

This fortunate posture of affairs might, indeed, have increased, since Charles V., to whom it was due, still continued in the prime of life.-Alas! the prosperity of millions is frequently dependent on the life of one individual! The king died; the administration of public affairs devolved to a regent; † and almost immediately a series of evils deluged reviving France, during a longer period of time than that sedulously occupied by Charles in re-establishing her prosperity. The experience acquired from the last regencies to which France was subjected, rendered the then state of affairs so familiar to the public mind, that the idea of a regency is, even to the present day, obnoxious to a Frenchman's

* Charles V. was born on the 21st January, 1337; he ascended the throne on the 8th of April, 1364; and died on the 16th September, 1380.-See Laboureur, Introduction, page 3 and 4; Villaret, xi. 101; Thomassin, 86.

+ Charles VI. at this period was only eleven years old, being born on the 3d December, 1368; and, from an ordinance issued in 1374, it appears that the king did not enter into his majority until the age of fourteen. - See Laboureur, Introduction, pages 4 and 5.

ear: a sentiment, perhaps, better founded in justice in the age of Charles VII., than at the present time. According to the existing state of European government, a regent can only be regarded as the, first subject of the king; but at the period on which we are writing he was sometimes the monarch. At the present day he may be tempted to increase his fortune at the expense of the revenues of his prince; whereas, formerly, he was prompted to augment his authority by the aid of his wealth and the forces of the state. Charles V. had been fearful of the first inconvenience; but he was not sufficiently awake to the danger of the second, or, perhaps, the generosity of his own heart had concealed from him the extent of the danger: besides, are we now aware whether the laws and public opinion, at that period, might have sanctioned or tolerated those measures that would have been necessary to prevent the evil? Be this, however, as it may, Charles had recourse only to timid, and consequently inefficacious precautions. He never made mention of the word regency in the ordinance which he published concerning the future government of the kingdom; all that he prescribed on this subject was, fixing the data of his successor's majority, such being the only act passed in regard to his survivor. The first care of the regent duke of Anjou, younger brother of the king, was to take possession of the treasures of the monarchy, upon which had been founded the hopes of future pro

sperity; and with the greater semblance of reason, as the finances of all the neighbouring states were in a most impoverished condition. It would be futile to suppose that these riches were carefully hoarded up by a man whose boundless pride was solely bent on his own aggrandizement. The rank of first prince of the blood, and the eminent post of regent, did not satisfy his inordinate vanity, -a crown could alone satiate his ambition; and the hope of effecting the conquest of Naples, in his opinion, sanctioned the attempt to gain it. To accomplish this scheme, after having exhausted the royal treasures in the short space of two months; in order to make good the deficit, he became as cruel as rapacious in pillaging the people, rendering himself equally dreaded by his subjects as by the enemies of the state. New imposts were imperiously called for to augment the scanty supplies exacted from the public; these measures fomented revolts,* and forced

Le Laboureur speaks positively respecting these popular tumults, at page 50 of his introductory matter; and in regard to the rigorous measures pursued, as well as for a detail of such commotions, see the same history, pages 6, 13, 15, 35, and 41. It was, above all, in the month of February, 1384, at the return from the expedition which had been undertaken to Flanders, that these coercive measures were in particular resorted to. Many of the Parisians, in easy circumstances, were punished with death, and thousands of the citizens condemned to pay penalties which ended in their complete ruin, without the public treasury being in any degree benefited.

the government to adopt those rigorous proceedings which very soon terminated in alienating the affection and respect of the citizens.

The regent had not yet completed the preparations for his expedition, when, as a just punishment for his crimes, he lost his life; upon which Philip le Hardi, duke of Burgundy, one of his brothers, hastened the young king, Charles VI., into a fresh war, from motives of self-interest. Flanders, which was one day to become his territory, in right of his wife, only gave him a precarious power; because the Flemish, enriched by their commerce, were incessantly struggling against their sovereigns: and it was, therefore, upon this account that Philip le Hardi impelled the French monarch to march with a formidable force, for the purpose of reducing that people to subjection. The victory of Rosbecq, obtained by the French, on the 11th November, 1382,* inflicted a blow from the effects of which the Flemish could not recover: this event strengthened the au

The above date of the battle of Rosbecq, which is omitted by Villaret, is in the history of Laboureur, page 63.

Notwithstanding the Flemish revolted several times, this victory was certainly a decisive blow; in proof of which, a conclusive authority may be found in the discourse delivered by the ambassadors of Louis XI. to Charles le Téméraire, great grandson of Philip, in 1470. Never," said they, "would the dukes of Burgundy have enjoyed such uninterrupted good fortune, had not Charles VI. humbled the Flemish, and re-established your grandfather in the possession of his estates."-See Villaret, xvii. 387.

thority of the counts of Flanders, and subsequently that of the house of Burgundy. Thus, the revenues of the French monarchy, and the blood of the people, served to cement an empire, which, in less than thirty years afterwards, had very nearly overturned its own government. Philip was not destitute of virtues, or attachment to France; but the pernicious impulse of ambition stifled every nobler sentiment: nor was he, when invested with authority, very scrupulous in his measures, provided he could by any means. enrich his own family.*

Although the second brother of Charles V., John, duke of Berri, did not thirst after a diadem, he no less contributed to increase the public calamities.† His whole life was one tissue of such extravagant

And it might also be said, to satisfy his own inclination for magnificence and ceremony; since the attendants on Philip's court were far more numerous and splendid than those of the French king, as will be found from a list of such personages, which does not occupy less than 91 pages: this document is to be found in the continuation of the Journal de Paris, as well as in Choisy, page 222. The duke also caused every thing to be paid him, even to the expedition undertaken against Flanders for his own particular interest; yet, notwithstanding these enormous exactions, he died insolvent. See the Introduction of Laboureur, page 90, &c., who recites a number of exactions of Philip le Hardi.

↑ John, duc de Berri, voluntarily renounced all idea of governing, that he might enjoy the right of pillaging the people. He pretended that the provinces were indebted to him in all that his