Mechin was on a commission I think but I don't know about Faipoult. The finer points of the financial arrangements and the different sums demanded from the Neapolitans is something I have not unravelled. I believe the political commissioners did usually clamp down on the generals' board and lodging arrangements which you have highlighted. Championnet had been told that he had no authority to make political arrangements since that was the responsibility of the political commissioners, setting up a republic in Naples and demanding contributions was in direct contravention of his orders. Faipoult was an experienced commissioner who had been able to work with Bonaparte while he was at Genoa. There were doubtless faults on both sides but the classic view of the situation is definitely too one-sided.

Macdonald had clearly resented being superseded by Championnet at Rome, he should probably have been transferred at the same time but I suspect there was concern about the Neapolitans invading while there was no general-in- chief. Macdonald took a dim view of Championnet's conduct of the first campaign- at one point he requested 'lucid and intelligible orders' - and an even dimmer one of the second part leading to his resignation over the negotiations at Capua. He considered that his troops were being overlooked in the rewards apart from anything else and, from his own account, he was being annoying to the verge of insubordination. I believe this was creating factions in the army since, at that stage in his career, he was prone to sharing his opinions with his officers. When he resigned he returned to Rome and applied for a new posting, an appointment on the Rhine had been found for him but he was sent to Naples before taking it up. The fact that they had an experienced general to hand, and one with a record of cooperation with the civil commissioners, probably had some effect on the Directors' decision to remove Championnet though I have found no evidence that Macdonald had worked for it.

Susan