34] 
will: by physical force, to pursue 
the means of physical gratification. 
Though the Jacobins on the whole 
preponderated greatly, and swayed 
the Assembly, yet still there was 
room for avowed dissension, debate, 
and division in all questions; in the 
discussion and decision of which 
they were not under the influence 
of terror. On a motion for accus- 
ing M. de la Fayette, there appear- 
ed.244 for the question, and 406 
against it. But when they were 
threatened with common and im- 
mediate danger, then, and then 
only, they were unanimous; of 
which they hadsoon occasion to give 
a very striking proof and example. 
The people, irritated at the ac- 
quittal of M, de la Fayette, deter- 
mined to have ample amends and 
satisfaction, by taking proper mea- 
sures for securing unanimity on 
the important question for the 
deposition of the King (August 
9, 1792) though this pious and 
pacific prince had done every 
thing in his power to dissuade 
the emigrants and foreign princes 
from making war against the new 
order of things, proclaimed their 
hostile preparation again and again, 
and called on the French nation to 
defend the liberty and independence 
of the country. In consequence 
of the manifesto of the Duke of 
Brunswick, he addressed a letter to 
the president of the National As- 
sembly, August 3, 1792; in which 
jhe said that the Duke’s declaration 
seemed to him ‘to require a new 
declaration of his own sentiments. 
Never, he declared, should he be 
‘seen compromising the glory or the 
interests of the nation, or receiving 
‘the law from foreigners, or from a 
‘party:—it was to the nation he 
owed himself, and he was one and 
ANNUAL REGISTER, 1792. 
the same with her. The usual 
motion that the King’s letter should 
be printed and sent to the eighty- 
three departments, was negatived. 
M. Isnard asserted that the King’s 
letter was only a heap of falsehoods, 
without being rebuked for the in- 
decency of the expression. Thus 
the rulers of the Assembly, while 
they industriously misrepresented 
the whole conduct and designs of 
the King, intercepted the natural 
mode of communication between 
his Majesty and the nation, and de- 
prived him of the best means of 
explaining and justifying himself. 
This perhaps was not one of the 
least severe among all the acts of 
tyranny and injustice with which 
they oppressed and overwhelmed 
their unhappy sovereign. On the 
same day (August 3, 1792) a de- 
putation from the general council 
of the municipality of Paris, at the 
head of which was Petion, ap- 
peared at the bar, and demanded 
in the name of the forty-eight sec- 
tions, that the King should be ex- 
cluded from the throne; and. that 
the management of affairs, during 
the inter-regnum, should be en- 
trusted to responsible ministers, 
until the election of a new King in 
a national convention, Other de- 
putations, with petitions to the 
same purpose, followed from. parti- 
cular sections; and a few days 
thereafter, August 7, 1792, several 
citizens were admitted to the bar 
of the Assembly, bearing a Pevaoe 
also to the same effect, and signed 
by many thousand persons in the 
Champ de Mars. This was a multi- 
tude of passive citizens, or those 
who had no votes by the first con- 
stitution in the elections of repre- 
sentatives: it was headed by the 
comedian Collet d’Herbois. ‘They 
were > 
’ 
