See Hans-Karl's posting for a general outline: OK, the need for violent repression of popular disorder in occupied territory was an accepted standard at the time - civilians were not allowed to take up arms - but it is Napoleon's demands for punishment over and beyond what the local commanders thought necessary that strikes a chill.

There were numerous political prisoners, many held without trial and some even held after acquittal, like the Abbe David - and often held in very poor conditions. Many unimportant people were held in detention outside their home areas - this did not need a court hearing it appears. Toussaint l'Overture may be a 'headline'case but he often seems to be forgotten; the 'Spanish ambush' at Bayonne; the invasion of Swedish Pomerania in 1812; the annexation of the kingdom of Holland - formerly the Batavian Republic; the deportation of the Jacobins: the list is not exhaustive and I'm sure other people can add to it.

Now I'm sure you, or more likely Tom, can come up with occasions when the British government behaved quite as badly (though not to quite the same extent in regard to political prisoners) but Napoleon held a much more direct responsibility for his actions than a faceless 'government': everything was done by his order, as his letters make clear and his actions were concentrated into a space of only 10-12 years, with every indication that he was getting worse rather than better. The fact that he was obliged to grant some civil liberties in 1815 tells you that his previous behaviour was not regarded as acceptable by the standards of the time.

Susan