Front Page Titles (by Subject) SUPPLEMENT * The Examination of Citizenness Roland at the Abbey, taken from Dulaure's paper called the Thermometre du Jour, of the 21 st and 22 d June, 1793. - An Appeal to Impartial Posterity, by Citizenness Roland
The Online Library of Liberty
A project of Liberty Fund, Inc.
Search this Title:
SUPPLEMENT * The Examination of Citizenness Roland at the Abbey, taken from Dulaure’s paper called the Thermometre du Jour, of the 21 st and 22 d June, 1793. - Jeanne Marie Roland de la Platière, An Appeal to Impartial Posterity, by Citizenness Roland 
An Appeal to Impartial Posterity, by Citizenness Roland, wife of the Minister of the Home Department, or A Collection of Pieces written by her during her Confinement in the Prisons of the Abbey and St. Pelagie, Part I (London: J. Johnson, 1795). Vol. 2.
About Liberty Fund:
Liberty Fund, Inc. is a private, educational foundation established to encourage the study of the ideal of a society of free and responsible individuals.
The text is in the public domain.
Fair use statement:
This material is put online to further the educational goals of Liberty Fund, Inc. Unless otherwise stated in the Copyright Information section above, this material may be used freely for educational and academic purposes. It may not be used in any way for profit.
I consider it as an indispensable duty, whatever may be the prejudices of the public, to afford to persons accused the means of making known their justification. This it is that induces me to publish the examination of citizenness Roland. None but cowards, and men strangers to all equity, can blame this conduct. Dulaure.
The 12th of June, Louvet, an administrator of the police, repaired to the Abbey to examine citizenness Roland.
Question. Are you not acquainted with the troubles which agitated the republic during and after the administration of citizen Roland, your husband?
Answer. These things were known to me, in like manner as to every one else, by conversations and the public papers.
Observed. That this negative manner of answering a question is not satisfactory, newspapers not giving that intimate knowledge which I must have had of public affairs.
Answer. I was not bound to acquire any such knowledge, since as a woman I had no business to interfere in them.
Question. Had you no knowledge of a plan for a federative republic, and for detaching the departments from Paris?
Answer. I never heard of any such thing: I can say, on the contrary, that Roland, and all the persons I was in the habit of seeing, constantly spoke in my presence of the expediency of maintaining the unity of the republic, as tending to give it greater force; of the consequent necessity of preserving an equilibrium between all the departments; of their with that Paris might do nothing to excite the jealousy of the rest; and of their desire to see justice and liberty prevail throughout France, and to concur in the maintenance of the same.
Observed. That if those persons spoke of justice and liberty without equality, their principles were reprehensible.
Answer. In my opinion, as well as in that of the persons in question, equality is the necessary consequence of justice and liberty.
Question. Who were the persons that composed Roland’s society and yours?
Answer. His old friends, and those with whom he had business to transact.
Observed. That it would be desirable to know the names of the citizens and citizennesses, with whom I was in the greatest habits of intimacy.
Answer. Those with whom I was most intimate are generally known, and most assuredly nobody came to my house in secret.
Observed. That I could certainly name those who the most frequently visited the minister, and formed his private parties.
Answer. As a man in office, Roland sometimes received a hundred persons in a day, not one of whom I saw. As to myself, I never had any extensive circle of visitors; but sometimes gave a dinner to my husband’s colleagues, and to the persons with whom they were any way connected.
Question. Had you no knowledge of writings sent to the departments to provoke them to rise against Paris?
Answer. I never heard of any such thing.
Observed. That Roland while minister had however set up offices of public opinion in the departments, and that it appeared that sums of money were set apart for that purpose.
Answer. The first part of the observation appears to me absolutely destitute of foundation. As to the second, every body knows that the minister of the home department was allowed a sum of money to disperse useful writings; and as Roland has given in his accounts, it is easy to see what writings were sent to the departments.
Question. Can you not name those writings? You must certainly know what they were.
Answer. The accounts being public, and having been posted up, any one may recur to them for a more exact list of those writings than I am able to give. As to their contents, it belongs to the public, and not to me, to decide upon their merit.
Observed. That Roland could not have given in his accounts, since he so earnestly solicited permission to do so, when desirous of leaving Paris.
Answer. Not wishing to suppose that the person who examines me has any bad intention, I can only attribute the present observation to an extreme ignorance of facts. Roland not only delivered a monthly account to the convention, but on going out of office, gave in a general account, in which every thing was detailed in the most particular manner. What he solicited was the passing of these accounts, that is to say, their investigation by the commissioners of the convention, and such a report of them to that assembly as they might appear to deserve. The committee of public accounts in consequence imposed this task upon several of its members.
I added, that I knew that they had come repeatedly to the hotel of the home department; that they had there examined the minutes and vouchers, that they had been edified, as they needs must, by the administration of a man whose integrity and courage would long be the theme of praise; that it was Roland’s most earnest desire, as well as mine, that the commissioners should make their report, and that I begged all good citizens to join me in my endeavours to obtain it.
[I was interrupted in this answer: it was thought too long; and I was accused of being acrimonious. I observed, that I availed myself of my rights, and that there was no acrimony in informing those, who were ignorant of Roland’s having given in his accounts, that he had done so long ago.]
Question. Among your acquaintances was there no friend of Dumouriez?
Answer. There was nobody intimate with him, to the best of my knowledge, among those I was in the habit of seeing.
Question. Have you had no connexion with traitors?
Answer. All the persons I was acquainted with, were so noted for their patriotism, that it was impossible even to suspect them of any intercourse with traitors.
Question. Do you know where your husband is?
Answer. I do not.
Question. Were you not privy to a plan for dissolving the popular societies?
Answer. Nobody in my presence ever disclosed such a plan, or opinions tending that way.
Here, after a confinement of twelve days, for which no motive had been assigned, ended my examination, without my being told of what I was accused or suspected, and consequently without my knowing as to what facts I was to be questioned.
Confident that I had nothing to lose by telling the truth concerning my sentiments, and concerning all the persons with whom I had been acquainted, I neglected to avail myself of my rights, and gave a plain and direct answer to every thing that was asked.
The examination was upon two sheets of paper: my signature was required at the end only. I demanded a copy, and was promised it on the next day: nine are however passed away, and I have not received it, although I have sent to ask for it four several times. But, on leaving the administrator, I committed to paper all that had passed; I am sure that I have exactly related every thing that was said; and I sign Roland, formerly Philipon.
End of the Supplement to the Second Part.
[* ]This piece probably was inserted in the part of the Historical Memoirs which was burnt. It has been thought proper to give it here by way of supplement.