The SPY of the FRENCH REVOLUTION

CHAPTER 3

20

Convocation of the Estates General; quarrels between the three orders; awkwardness of the Nobility; clumsiness of the Clergy; Victory of the Third Estate.

The king had been given some good advice regarding where to convene the Estates-General. He was told to avoid the vicinity of Paris where the large population could give too much strength to the Third Estate. However, the softness of the courtiers choked the voice of reason and so, instead of holding the Estates-General in Orleans, Tours, Bourges, or even in Blois, it was decided they would be convened at Versailles, and that an armed force would be called out around Paris to maintain the peace.

The Estates-General of 1789 bore no resemblance to those which preceded them. This time it was not a Louis XI who wanted to withdraw the privileges given to the duke du Berry. And they were not those of Charles VIII, required by the lady de Beaujeu in favour of the duke d'Orleans, to dispute the royal authority.

21

They were also not those of Louis XII which were convened simply to ensure the marriage of his daughter with the duke de Valois.

This time they were being called to assemble to provide for the needs of the State and to calm the fears of the whole French population which had become agitated by the nation's precarious financial situation. The motives of the king were certainly pure. He was sensitive to the lame condition of his empire and in order to see a true restoration take place he wanted only to be identified with his subjects. Here is the paternal and touching appeal he made on this solemn occasion:

"We need the approval of our faithful subjects to establish a constant order within the various parts of government which would be of benefit to all. We desire that the three estates meet together to confer as well as to air their remonstrances and complaints, to provide a means whereby their opinions can be presented to the general assembly; so that deputies worthy of confidence can be elected; so that the deputies are provided with sufficient instructions and authority to propose, present, advise and approve all things that concern the needs of the State including the reform of abuses, the establishment of a fixed and lasting order in all parts of the administration, the general prosperity

22

of our kingdom, and the good of our subjects."

People of France, here is the beginning of all your misfortunes!

[Background Note:
The elections [for deputies to the Estates General] took place in March and April of 1789. Nobles met to elect nobles. The clergy, including ordinary parish priests, met in their own assemblies, choosing as deputies a number of bishops, especially the more liberally-minded bishops, and a great many cures of modest social origin who had their own grievances against the church and their own ideas on the country's needs, so that, as it turned out, the first estate felt sympathetic to the third.

The third estate met in some 40,000 assemblies, from the level of villages and guilds upward on a complex ladder, to choose some 600 national deputies. There was no isolated or individual voting, since in the absence of parties there were no known candidates or nominees. Each assembly debated the merits of persons proposed for election, and in addition, following the practice in effect in 1614-15 and before, discussed and drew up a 'cahier des doleances', or statement of its grievances, opinions, and wishes both on local matters and for the whole country, which the deputies were to take to Versailles.
- Source: "The World of the French Revolution" by R.R. Palmer, p54.]

Finally the deputies of the people arrived at Versailles. On May 1, 1789 the chief of the guards, preceded by four heralds, proclaimed in all the places of Versailles that the deputies of the nation would be presented to the king by the grand Master of Ceremonies. On the 3rd of the same month, the chief of the guards and his heralds announced to the people that the general procession would take place the following day, May 4th. And so it was.

The three estates met together in the same chamber in which the king and queen appeared in their most regal attire. The king sat on a throne while his majestic wife was seated in an armchair. Mr. Barentin, Minister of Justice, made a speech in which he exhorted the deputies to work together for the good of the people. Then Monsieur Necker spoke on the matter of finances and showed the deficit to be some 56,150,000 livres.

[Background Note:
By an absurd anachronism, protocol required that on the first day the nobles and prelates should appear in their respective finery, while the third estate wore the plain black costume of the historic "bourgeois". One may imagine the feelings of those required to obtain such court dress for use on this occasion.

A stalemate then developed in which the second estate insisted that meetings take place in three separate houses, with vote "by order," which the third-state refused, insisting that the three orders meet and deliberate together, as one house, with vote "by head." In that event, the third, with its double number of members and with its sympathizers among the clergy, would have a consistent majority. This in turn the nobles rejected. The third estate, losing patience, voted on June 17 to repudiate its old name and declared itself the National Assembly, which priests and nobles were invited to join. Here is the moment of defiance, with a kind of arrogation of sovereignty, from which, if one wishes, the French Revolution can be dated.
- Source: "The World of the French Revolution" by R.R. Palmer, p55.]

On the 6th, the clergy and nobility were assembled in particular rooms to deliberate and vote. Immediately the third-estate protested that this voting should be done jointly. They persisted

23

on both sides and bitterness ensued. It is probable that some twelve hundred elite individuals were meeting here for a common cause. This was an assembly in which the little love they had for each other could easily give way to noble dashes of patriotic fervor. By what fate did the discord and 'esprit de parti' seize the assembly? Groan, you Frenchmen! Your evils were born out of the disagreements amongst your own representatives! Initially it was astonishing to see the mass of dignitaries that the provincial deputies brought to Versailles. However, not one of these deputies arrived free of passions. One had a mortal hatred against the court; another against the priests; the priests themselves against the bishops; another hated the financial officals, while the man of the middle-class regarded the privileges of the nobles with jealousy.

All hatreds were based on personal reasons and each deputy burned with a desire to be avenged. Everyone forgot about the public interest as each devoted himself to his own parochial cause. I could detail some of these causes because some of these gripes I am perfectly well-acquainted with.

24

However, it is enough for me to keep these personal accounts to myself, and to focus on the facts.

If some peace-making genius had been able to make himself heard, he would have said to the nobility, "Be careful not to go up on your stilts, and do not fight against the third-state! It is flexing its muscles. It has turned sour and you would be risking too much! And you, clergy! Be prepared to make great sacrifices if you do not want to lose everything. The necessity of the third estate has bronze hands, and it is stronger than you are!

"You, representatives, invited here to cure the sick State! Think not that it needs violent remedies! You must fight your pride and avarice. Do not inflame these strong passions. Begin by being scrupulously right, and if you happen to be the strongest, do not misuse your victory but show compassion!"

Unfortunately this genius did not appear, but a genius of discord armed with all his torches to set ablaze the spirits of men did. Half his deputies were basically inert. Of the other half, you can subtract some 300 who were devoid of any character at all. Of the remaining 300, 200 at least (though

25

endowed with great vision) were not eloquent speakers or men of force (according to the expression used by Mirabeau) either because of timidity or owing to a lack of bodies in support of their viewpoint. Thus the fate of the whole of France was delivered to the whims, ambitions, and spite of some 100 individuals who formed the systems and the different parties.

Some wanted the Ancien Régime to remain as it was. Others wanted a monarchy modified so as to ease any fears regarding the possibility of having tyrants sitting on the throne. Still others wanted to give the people a large-enough degree of strength to balance that of the State, as in England, while still remaining under a royal authority.

This last class was regarded well by the national assembly but, if the State was completely subordinated to the people or the free will of the sovereign, then it would be difficult to establish a national harmony. This class also didn't want simple deputies to usurp all the powers of government because this usurpation would constitute an act of the most complete despotism.

So, how to come to terms with such a diversity of opinion? It was impossible. Everyone was determined to pursue his own formula and it

26

resulted in the destiny of France depending upon the intrigue, cabal, and empire of force.

The Estates-General opened with war cries. The three orders, like the triumvirs Caésar, Antoine and Lépide, baited one against the other, to the extent that combat and victories were essential. The third-estate squared-off with the clergy, the nobility, the courts, and finance. In fact, this body was able to muster the best heads. Lawyers, fully equipped with consummate skill in the art of persuasion, were given to it in abundance.

[Background Note:
The effect [of holding local assemblies to elect deputies from the third estate] was to produce not only the needed deputies but also an extraordinary heightening of political consciousness throughout the whole population. Every man on the tax rolls, and twenty-five years of age, had the right to attend the village assemblies. Never during the Revolution, nor after it for many decades, and nowhere else in Europe then or in former times, was there so "democratic" and universal a consultation of a whole people as that ordered by Louis XVI in 1789.

It is a mystery how a country of 25 million inhabitants - given the great diversity between regions, in the conditions of literacy, transport, and communications, and in the absence of any true guidance or agitation in prior years - could have become so alert, so politicized, so concerned with public questions. The explanation lies partly in the wave of pamphleteering that had arisen since the first announcement of Calonne's program, but mainly in these thousands of electoral assemblies in the spring of 1789.

Throughout the length and breadth of the land, at all social levels, including the most modest, men met to reflect upon their own and the country's troubles, and to choose deputies and send them off armed with a written statement of grievances. They then waited for the results.

The machinery of the election allowed the really popular classes to be aroused and involved, but it also enabled, through elimination in a rising series of electoral assemblies, the most articulate, determined and capable to emerge at the national level and to go to Versailles. Had actual peasants, shopkeepers, and workmen been elected, the third estate when it convened in May would have been more docile.

As it was, its 648 deputies included 278 men holding some kind of position in government, 166 lawyers in private practice, 85 merchants, 67 who lived from their property, and 31 of various professions, among whom doctors were prominent. They were of the very type least likely, at such a moment, to yield to a second estate of some 300 nobles, most of whom, apart from prominent liberals like Lafayette, were country gentlemen not much in tune with modern developments.
- Source: "The World of the French Revolution" by R.R. Palmer, p54-55.]

The debates were violent from the start. Forty-five days were lost simply in a discussion over the manner in which the votes were to be taken. Vanity, as entrenched as it was little reflected upon, moved the nobility away from the commoner's plight. In vain was it requested to empathize with them. It was futile to make it foresee the abyss into which it was about to plunge, for nothing could make the nobility give up its haughty pretensions and distinctions.

Amongst the representatives of the cities were young men, so organized so that to be true statesmen they didn't even have to have a grasp of sweeping issues.

27

They counted on some fraternal moral support but tasted initially nothing but scorn, contempt, sarcastic remarks and insults. Selfish interests do not forgive, and bitterness has no limits. The third-estate sensed its strength and rallied together to form a unified party which others were invited to join.

It decided that it would hold its own meeting and that votes would be taken without class distinction or any regard to 'order'. This was deemed suitable because the legality of the nominations was generally known, thus settling a very significant question.

The nobility and clergy vociferously opposed this initiative but any conciliation having become impossible, it came to pass. The third-estate, supported by public opinion and some nobles who had joined its ranks, declared that enough time had been spent disputing this issue while public matters were waiting to be actioned. And since the call of the baillages would be done the same day for the verification of the commoner's credentials, the thing took place under protest.

This victory of the commoners [communes, communists] animated the people singularly. "Long live the third-estate!" became the general outcry and the leaven that brought on the first acts of fury.

28

It was probable that the communes after this triumph would rally around the throne, but they didn't follow this noble and wise self-control. Dissidents, of which the most contentious had ascended to dominate the assembly, laid aside their patriotism. These were fiery young men who just the day before had left their school benches and whose ebullient heads were full of the grandiose ideas of Athens and Rome. To attack monarchs was for them the height of heroism. They believed themselves to be Démosthènes, Scoevola, or Brutus, having great visions of glory.

Meanwhile, by its haughty series of acts, the nobility provided the very weapon that would be used against itself. And the clergy, by its avarice and not wanting to make any sacrifice nor capitulate, finally had to submit to the imperial law of the conqueror.

Without the strange behaviour of the nobility, the ancient code of honor or prejudice on which its privileges were based would have been respected. Indeed, nobody intended to refuse them their customary esteem, nor to cut off from their class what centuries had affirmed and national mores had strengthened.

29

I also maintain that, without there haughty influence, the clergy which had punished with so much severity the two secular orders, since brought closer by the common cause, could have found infinite resources in many monks who had been looking useless for more than 50 years, but who still had methods drawn from humanity.

And without the meddling of the nobles and priests, abuses generally detailed in the books would have been pruned. One would have:
* destroyed the French enquiry under the name of 'lettre de cachets';
* attenuated the power of the courts [parlemens] so as to avoid having two engines in the machinery of State;
* corrected feudal laws;
* abolished the constraint;
* expelled the seigneurial justices, so meanly exercised by certain baillifs and tax prosecutors;
* amended the laws regarding hunting, as well as those affecting agriculture and properties in general
* perforated that rigid and unjust line of demarcation which prevented merit from penetrating the precincts of privilege in either the military, the navy, or the higher courts.

A rather incomprehensible awkwardness also pervaded the parlemens [courts]. This multi-headed hydra, while acknowledging that it didn't have the right to grant the easing of taxes, carried its own 12 heads under the axe that wanted to cut them down. Another error in judgment occurred when the nobility never forgave or

30

appreciated Mirabeau and left him time to contemplate his revenge against those who had expelled him from their class. Passionate as Demosthenes, skilful as Gracchus, and eloquent as Cicéro, this man was born to triumph by rising over any issue which he could support. [Here is the proof: when a veto caused a great schism, the torches of fury were lit. But when Mirabeau took part in the veto, all became calm.]

How is it that the court, so vigorously attacked, did not feel the need for this orator? He would have attached himself to it; he would have served as a minister; he wanted that. Furthermore, if it weren't for the awkwardness of the clergy, the court would have made the sacrifices which it had to make, and in so doing it would have preserved its dignity and reaped another fate than that to which it was inexorably destined.

There is overwhelming evidence that all the major mistakes were made by the nobility and the clergy. Everyone invited these two classes to join in the public debate, and to lend it all their force; and they were all

31

invited to meet with the third estates which were hugely popular. All invited them to declare that they would renounce their privileges and contribute to the needs of the state. But far from heeding these wise provisions, these two orders showed an astonishing death-wish and an obstinacy without measure. They missed absolutely the opportunity to be treated civily under the circumstances.

The extreme inflexibility of the nobility to the verification of credentials, lost it for them. This instigated the famous decree (proposed by the abbot, Sieyes) by which the third-state would form a National Assembly - a brazen act which destroyed the counterbalancing option of a monarchical constitution. Thus the first step of the States General of 1789 was a usurpation of powers, and this usurpation put an eternal dissonance between the members called to reform the monarchy.

Finally, without the combined non-cooperation of the nobility and clergy, the castles would not have been given up to plundering, and the priests would not have faced the alternative of committing perjury (lying to protect themselves) or dying from starvation. They were not born to commit anarchy, that most terrible of all political plagues.

32

A strange but remarkable fact, however, and one that must be believed with sorrow, is that the priests if mistreated, had supported the complaints of the people against the royal court.

On the surface, one would believe that the French revolution owed its horrors only to random or fortuitous circumstances. However, other evidence exists (which will be seen in the course of this work) which suggests that the plan of the Revolution had been in the works for some time. Louis XV knew about it because far-sighted and educated people had emigrated before 1789 with their fortunes. [Also, see the song of the 'Encyclopedists', second part. It is striking!]

If one analyzes the French revolution from afar, one sees only a foreign contest with laudable goals such as the convocation of the Estates General which was intended to relieve the people, check the national debt, balance receipts and expenditures, establish a fixed order in finances, and to improve the fairness of it. All of Europe gazed at this large and beautiful operation on which depended the rise of France or its total ruin.

33

There was a desire to have the duke d'Orleans named president of the Estates General, but the nobility opposed it and he himself declined (in spite of his desires) in order to endear himself to the people by a show of modesty.