Trials against admirals in France under Napoleon I: on the role of the Investigative Council

The proposed article examines the little-studied institute of the Investigative Council in France under Napoleon I. It was established as the "Fleet Council" by imperial decree of July 22, 1806, to investigate the behavior of senior naval officers if it aroused suspicion and could be considered criminal. The purpose of the work is to determine the role of the investigative council in the system of investigative bodies and the court of the French Navy during the First Empire. For this purpose, an analysis of the regulatory regulation of the Institute of the Investigative Council and its functioning was carried out using the example of the trials of two admirals of the imperial era – Rear Admiral Dumanoir and Vice Admiral Villare de Joyeuse (1809-1810). The subject of the study is the history of the formation of this institute in the era of Napoleon I. Published primary sources and handwritten materials (photocopies) from archival collections and the National Library of France were used in the work on the topic. When studying the material, methods of concrete historical and comparative analysis were used, and a structural and functional analysis of investigative councils was carried out. The following observations were made during the study. The Investigative Council can be defined both as a pre-trial investigation body and as an indictment body. Unlike the indictment jury, it consisted of appointed officers and conducted the preliminary investigation of the criminal case itself. He also evaluated the evidence gathered and made an accusation, which was submitted to the monarch for consideration. Based on the cases of Dumanoir and Villare de Joyeuse, the council appears as an organ of personal imperial power in France. It was created on the initiative of the monarch, the emperor determined its composition and the place of convocation. The sovereign considered the final conclusions of the investigation on the existence of evidence of a crime and decided to organize a trial of the accused. The use of the institute of the Investigative Council was not carried out in every case. In fact, it was seen as a special favor from the monarch, who allowed for a preliminary investigation of the sufficiency of evidence to bring charges and create some kind of pre-trial guarantees against arbitrariness. However, as the practice of using the institute shows, the council did not always cope with the task of uncompromising investigation.