22 Jeanette Needham. 
Two explanations of this opposition are clearly stated in the 
reports of the session: (1) An urgent demand that the results of 
the voting on the previous Friday be announced before the’ 
declarations were examined; (2) an equally strong insistence 
that the king’s declarations be considered in a general assembly 
of the orders, instead of in the separate chambers.’ Jallet claims 
that it was the Archbishop of Vienne, leader of the majority, 
who thus stated the latter’s views. Both demands were per- 
fectly natural under the circumstances. To have proceeded to 
the reading and separate examination of the declarations would 
have invalidated the majority’s action on June 19, whereas, 
by returning to the deliberation of that date, they hoped to force 
the minority to recognize what they had done. 
A survey of the events of that hotly contested session is neces- 
sary to an understanding of the majority’s insistence upon the _ 
further consideration of the action of June 19 and the minority’s 
persistent refusal to entertain such a proposal. As previously 
stated the vote upon the question of verifying credentials oc- 
curred that day. Four different propositions touching the 
matter had resulted from the debate.® The first embodied the 
idea of verification by order, based on the plan of conciliation 
proposed by the king; the second was for verification in common, 
by going into the common hall of the estates-general; the third 
favored verification in common, but with the express condition 
that the members of the third estate recognize, by a preliminary 
declaration, the distinction and independence of the orders; 
finally, the fourth was for common verification only as a last 
resort, after every other possible means of conciliation had failed. 
Ea praryEs warwee Ne 
Wear" aes 
7 Jallet, 101; Coster, Récit, 339; Thibault, 247; Barmond, Réczt, 267-268; : | 
Récit, 262-265. i 
8 Jallet, ror. 
9 Thibault, 237-238; Récit, 257-260. The latter indicates that there were 
four different propositions, but does not give explicitly the terms of each. 
Grégoire in Etats-généraux, Extrait du journal de Paris, I, 90-91, gives the 
impression that there were four. He quotes the first in full. It varies in 
order from that given in Thibault, but the proposals which it embodies are 
the same in essence. 
10 Jallet, 91; Etats-généraux, Extrait du journal de Paris, I, 90; Histoire de 
la rév., 1, 208. 
136 
