“Gare la Lanterne,” alluding to the use of the chains to which the street-lamps were suspended as gibbets.
 Madame de Campan, ch. xxi.
 Dumas, “Memoirs of his Own Time,” i., p. 353.
 To be issued by the foreign powers.
 Feuillet de Conches, vi., p. 192, and Arneth, p. 265.
 The day is not mentioned. “Lettres de la Reine Marie Antoinette a la Landgravine Louise,” etc. p. 47.
 The bearer was Prince George himself, but she does not venture to name him more explicitly.
 Lamourette might correspond to the English name Lovekin.
 Letter of the Princess Elizabeth, date July 16th, 1792, Feuillet de Conches, vi., p. 215.
 It is remarkable, however, that, if we are to take Lamartine as a guide in any respect, and he certainly was not in intention unfavorable to La Fayette, the marquis was even now playing a double game. Speaking of this very proposal, he says: “La Fayette himself did not disguise his ambition for a protectorate under Louis XVI. At the very moment when he seemed devoted to the preservation of the king he wrote thus to his confidante, La Colombe: ’In the matter of liberty I do not trust myself either to the king or any other person, and if he were to assume the sovereign, I would fight against him as I did in 1789.’”—Histoire des Girondins, xvii., p.7 (English translation). It deserves remark, too, if his words are accurately reported, that the only occasion 1789 on which he “fought against” Louis must have been October 5th and 6th, when he professed to be using every exertion for his safety.
 M. Bertrand expressly affirms the insurrection of August 10th to have been almost exclusively the work of the Girondin faction.—Memoires Particuliers, ii., p. 122.
 Memoires Particuliers, ii., p. 132.
 “Memoires Particuliers,” p. 111.
 See ante.
 “Histoire de la Terreur,” par Mortimer Ternaux, ii., p. 269. For the transactions of this day, and of the following months, he is by far the most trustworthy guide, as having had access to official documents of which earlier writers were ignorant. But he admits the extreme difficulty of ascertaining the precise details and time of each event. And it is not easy in every instance to reconcile his account with that of Madame de Campan, on whom for many particulars he greatly relies. He differs from her especially as to the hour at which the different occurrences of this day took place. For instance, he says (p. 268, note 2) that Mandat left the Tuileries a little after five, while Madame de Campan says it was four o’clock when the queen told her he had been murdered. Both, however, agree that it was soon after eight o’clock when the king left the palace.