The Brissotes, of course, were not going to sit idly by, and they first proposed a plan to expel all the Bourbons from France.

This plan was not so much for Louis XVI as for the Duke of Orléans, who by this time had changed his name to Philippe Equality, and his son, the Duke of Chartres. They were still from Robespierre's side at this time. In the eyes of the Brissotes, Robespierre would certainly defend them, and then they could put the label of "royal party" and "attempt to overthrow the republic" on Robespierre's head.

But this was no longer the case, and the Duke of Orleans' position in the Jacobin Club had declined considerably. Although the Duke of Orleans changed his name. But the current bigwigs in the club actually know that what the Duke of Orleans wanted was never a republic, but the Orleans dynasty. Although they stand together today, they are not fellow travelers. So it takes too many political resources to defend them, and Robespierre doesn't do that.

The Duke of Orleans himself knew that his status was declining, and in order to increase his weight, he had his son, the Duke of Chartres (the only king of the original historical "House of Orléans", Louis Philippe I), join Dumourieux's army with a group of volunteers he had paid for. And the Duke of Chart did not perform well in the army, and his name can always be seen in the good news sent back by Dumourier. (Of course, there are also jealous people who say that it was because Dimourier took his money)

The Duke of Orleans, no, should be called "Philippe Equal" by now. Philip Equality must not be exiled again now. Because of the last exile, the loss to him was too great. Now, since Robespierre and the others are unwilling to speak for themselves, Philip Equality must feed himself a bag of salt. He took the lead in proposing that the king, no, there was no king left, and now the trial of Louis Bourbon for his treason. For if this were to be done in this way, Louis XVI would have lost his head, but he would certainly not have been expelled.

The Brissoites were well aware that, because the evidence was conclusive, it was almost impossible for the king to be acquitted as long as he was on the bench. And once convicted, there is only one punishment for treason, and that is to go to the guillotine.

The Brissotes did not really attach much importance to the question of whether or not to cut off Louis XVI's head, but they knew that doing so would lead to a more intense struggle that would follow: the kingdoms of Europe might unite to besiege France; And within France, there is no longer any room for compromise between the conservatives and the republic. And once the struggle becomes fierce, all the so-called "moderates" and "centrists" will be abandoned. Therefore, for the Brissotists, sending the king to the guillotine is equivalent to sending the radical mountain faction, or the conservative royal party, to the throne of power.

Since the Duke of Orleans can't contain the mountain faction, then the Brissos can only use the whole of Europe to intervene, which may lead to a long war to avoid the king's trial.

But as soon as this reason was raised, it was ridiculed by Robespierre. Wasn't it the Brissotes who wanted to start a war in the first place? Are they peace-loving now? What's more, the previous wars have shown that the armies of those feudal lords in Europe are not anything to fear, if they really dare to interfere in France, then France will export the revolution and let them all finish! By the way, this was also said by Brissot himself!

In short, it was Robespierre who slapped Brissot's face with the words that Brissot had said back then. Of course, this is not the most fatal thing, generally speaking, the strongest part of the whole body of politicians is the face, and this part is beaten, but it doesn't really have a big impact.

But what is terrible is that this incident caused a storm on the side of the Paris Commune.

The Paris Commune fell into the hands of the republicans after Bay's departure from the town hall, and after the August 10 uprising, the Montagnards dominated the Paris Commune. In the September massacre, those in the Commune were more or less implicated in the atrocities, and some were even directly responsible for the initiators and organizers of the violence.

After the victory at the front, the constitutional monarchists were completely finished, and the Brissos were ready to purge their former allies, the radical mountain faction. One of the breakthroughs they chose was the Paris Commune. Because many people in the Commune were able to find out what was wrong with the September massacre.

But with the revelation of the Safe, the situation was completely reversed, and the citizens of Paris, who had already been in the propaganda that they or someone else had gone too far during the September massacre, but as soon as these documents were revealed, their attitude immediately became: "If it weren't for the decisive action of the Lao Tzu, the Republic would be gone!" ”

In this mood, the Brissotes were immediately seen as royal elements who defended the king and tried to overthrow the republic. If the king could not be judged, then the Paris Commune could well revolt again with the citizens and the National Guard.

Under such circumstances, the National Assembly had to decide to put the king on trial.

On 11 December, Louis XVI went to trial for the first time. He denied all the charges against him in court.

Louis XVI's defense lawyer, De Chechet, questioned the power of the National Assembly: "Under the Constitution, the National Assembly does not have the right to try the king, because the constitution provides that the king is inviolable. If we had to put the king on trial, that would lead to a problem. If we can violate the law today for this reason, then we will violate the law tomorrow for that reason, and then the law will become a dead letter, and then the legitimate rights and interests of each and every one of us, including you and me, will not be protected......"

This statement did speak to the hearts of some people, and they applauded him warmly.

After the applause slowly stopped, a young man stepped out. He said to the host, "I have something to say, can I tell you about it?" ”

"Citizen, your name?" The host asked.

"The representative of the province of Aisne, Louis Antoine León Floret de Saint-Just." The young man replied with a handsome face raised.

"Okay!" The moderator said, "Citizens of St. Just, please come to the podium......"

Saint-Just stepped up to the podium, looked around the scene, and then spoke:

"That gentleman just now gave a wonderful speech on legal issues. But I think he's probably mistaken about the essence of the matter. Indeed, as far as the law is concerned, the king cannot be judged. But what we are now engaged in is not a legal case, but a political matter. Louis Bourbon was not a defendant, he was an enemy. To him can be adapted to only one law, the law of interethnicity, in other words, the law of war. Louis had fought with the people, he was conquered. He is a barbarian captured by us, he is a defeated foreign prisoner! You have known his unfaithful plan, and you have seen his army! He was a massacre in the Bastille, Nancy, Maas, Tournay and Tuileries. What other enemy, what foreigner, has done you more harm?

Indeed, in law, the king is inviolable, and the law, which is so important, is the guarantor of the rights of each and every one of us, that it cannot be broken. But, gentlemen, do not forget that there is a more inviolable and supreme object in law than the king, and that is the people of France! What was Louis doing when he colluded with foreigners, when he conspired with our enemies to conspire with those horrific plans of betrayal and massacre? He is violating the more supreme and inviolable object - the people of France. From the moment Louis Bourbon committed a crime against the French people, he ceased to be a king, but an enemy, an enemy of the whole of France......"

Saint-Just stepped down from the podium to the applause of the Montagnard councillors, and sat back down at his place, Robespierre.

"Louie, your speech is excellent." Robespierre said, "And it inspired me a lot." ”

"Yes, that's a great story!" Danton also applauded, "It's hard to imagine, this is your first public speech." ”

"But my speech didn't change their attitude." Saint Just glanced to the right, then said.

"They? They couldn't defend the king because the people weren't on their side. Robespierre affirmed.

In the days that followed, the National Assembly began several rounds of debate on what to do with the king. Robespierre famously gave the debate "Louis deserves to die, for the fatherland must live". His speech was immediately printed and widely disseminated by the Paris Commune. More and more people came to the vicinity of the National Assembly spontaneously. Whenever a councillor who supported the guillotine of the king passed by, the people cheered at him; And when a councillor who advocated tolerance and pardoned the king passed by, everyone booed him and threw all kinds of garbage at him.

Time passed day by day, and finally it was time for everyone to vote.

"Joseph, how are you going to vote?" The famous philosopher Condorcet, a member of the Brissot parliamentarian, asked Joseph Fouché, a member of the Brissoe sect who was also in a carriage with him.

"In favor of forgiveness, of course." Fouché replied without hesitation, and with a glance of his eyes, through the car window, he saw that, on the road leading to the National Assembly, a group of citizens had erected a one-to-one model of a guillotine......