80 Jeanette Needham. 
chief cause for the flood of documents containing declarations, 
protests and explanations, was the prospect of vote by head, 
implied in the decree accepting the king’s declaration. 
On this ground, deputy after deputy qualified his vote for 
the decree or refrained from voting at all. Many were bound by 
their constituents not to consent to vote by head in any case.* 
A few were restricted, not only to vote by order, but also to the 
further condition that two orders had no power to bind the 
third. A few others might vote by head—the estates being 
united—provided that their chamber, by separate action, con- 
sented thereto.2” Others were under obligation to protest if 
ever voting by head occurred during a union of the orders.”® 
Still another group was bound by their cahier to uphold vote by 
order constantly and as long as the most imperious necessity 
did not force them to abandon it. But these deputies agreed 
that the moment of “‘imperious necessity’ had arrived. Hence, 
they fell back upon an apparently novel alternative permitted 
by their constituents, namely, the reduction of the three orders 
to two.” Evidently some sort of bicameral arrangement was 
intended, whereby the conservatives of clergy and nobility 
united might act as a check upon the radical third estate, even 
though voting were by head. 
In view of the limitations upon their action, a large number 
could accept the decree only with the reservation that their 
constituents grant them a sufficient extension of power,®° while 
constitution of the assemblies ought to claim the attention of the estates 
general; they shall make known to his majesty the dispositions of justice and 
wisdom that it is suitable to adopt to establish a fixed order in the administra- 
tion of these same provinces.” 
5 Nos. 4, 7, 8, 9, II, 15, 16, 22, 26, 29, 38, 43, 46. 
26 Nos. 4, 16, 49. 
27 Nos. 17. 
28 Nos. 8, 46. 
29.No. 7. Jefferson, who was the American ambassador in Paris during 
the period of the strife among the orders, says there was some talk that the 
nobility and the higher clergy might be induced to unite in one house while 
the third estate and lower clergy formed another. The third estate, however, 
was unalterably opposed to this solution of the problem. Vol. II, 456, 461, 470. 
80 Nos. 13, 14, 19, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 31, 33: 34, 35, 37; 38, 39, 41, 44) 45, 
48, 50. 
194 
A 
k 
<] 
t 
= } 
i 
J 
aI 
4 
zi 
7 
=) 
| 
“4h 
j 
< 
a] 
| 
Pie 
