: 
: 
: 
| 
the most 
“quiescence in the orders of the con. 
*-vention, and their advice prevailed. 
HISTORY OF EUROPE, 
text of obviating dangers and dif- 
ficulties, to perpetuate their power 
against the sense and consent of their 
constituents, over whom they as- 
sumed the most despotic sway that 
could be exercised; but of requiring 
them, without the least authority for 
such an att, to pay implicit obedi- 
ence to the will and pleasure of an 
assembly, that was, by that very 
deed, subverting the fundamental 
Jaws of the republic. 
The Parisians were so exasperated 
at this illegal assumption of power, 
that they seemed tohave lost ali re- 
spect for the convention, and tocon- 
sider itas having forfeited all title 
to any farther obedience. In de- 
fiance of the orders it had issued, 
the eleétors of Paris assembled, by 
their own appointment, before the 
day fixed upon for that purpose, 
The primary assemblies at Paris in. 
sisted, that having chosen their 
electors, these being the direct re- 
presentatives of the people, had a 
right to consult together as soon as 
they judged it necessary. About 
ene hundred of them assembled ac. 
cordingly. The convention, alarm- 
ed at this bold step, and fearing that 
if it seemed intimidated, and suffered 
a measure of such audacity to pass 
unnoticed, the Parisians might next 
proceed to pronounce the conven- 
tion no longer the representatives 
of the nation, resolved to strike at 
once such a blow, as might terrify 
all that were inclined to be refrac. 
tory; it immediately ordered a 
military force to disperse this meet- 
ing. From the discontent which 
had been expressed by the Parisians, 
it had been expeéted that they 
would have made resistance; but 
rudent advised an ac- 
[101 
The example of the capital did not 
fail to influence other places, where 
the conventional decrees, relating to 
the elections, were condemned in 
ungualified terms. ‘The majority, 
in the mean time, were not explicit 
and precise in their acceptance of 
either the constitution or the de- 
crees. ‘The former was universally 
teceived by the capital and the 
whole nation; but the latter met 
with many dissentient voices. The 
convention carefully published every 
day the majorities that appeared in 
their favour: but the citizens of 
Parisasserted that froman inspection 
of the records sent up from the dif. 
ferent places of election, it would 
appear that the real meaning of the 
majority extended to an entire reno- 
vation of the legislative body, The 
want of perspicuity in the accounts 
transmitted trom the various depart. 
ments, was, it has becn said, favoure 
able to the pretensions of the con- 
vention, Irritated by the attempts 
of the Parisians to disparage themby 
invalidating their credit, thisassem- 
bly treated them with much slight 
and contempt, frequently refusing 
to give audience to. thetr deputies. 
Provoked at this asage, from those 
whom they had rescued from the ty- 
ranny of Roberspierre, and had. 
jately saved from the fury of the 
jacobins, the citizens vented their 
indignation in the bitterest terms, 
and uttered menaces of resentment 
and revenge that indicated a de 
termined resolution to resist the 
measures jmended by the conven. 
tion. 
‘This body of members was now 
in as Critical a position as it had 
ever experienced, It had lost the 
aff-¢tion of those who had constantly 
proved their firmest friends, and 
had carriedthem successfully through 
fH 3] pe 
