152 : Jeanette Needham. 
ask any thanks; it is its duty. But in dying, it will save the 
independence of the crown and render void the operations of 
the national assembly, which certainly could not be accounted 
complete, when a third of its members would have been turned 
over to the fury of the populace and the weapons of the assassin. 
I adjure Your Majesty to deign to reflect upon the considerations 
which I have had the honor to present to you.” 
But the king was unmoved by the stirring argument. ‘‘M. de 
Luxemburg, my reflections are made. I am determined upon 
every sacrifice, I do not wish a single man to perish for my 
quarrel. So, say to the order of the nobility that I invite it to 
unite with the other two. If that is not enough, I command it, 
as its king, I will it. But if there is a single one of its members 
who believes himself bound by his mandate, his oath and his 
honor, let me say, I would go to sit at his side, and I would die 
with him if necessary.”’ 
There is some indication that the Duke of Luxemburg may 
have retired when the Cardinal de la Rochefoucald, as well as 
the Archbishops of Rheims and Aix were called in by the king. 
Moleville gives in his Histoire de la révolution de France, what 
is said to have occurred in the colloquy.*. The king stated that 
the troops were in rebellion and that he was obliged to yield to 
the will of the third estate. ‘‘The troops in defection, Sire,” 
cried the Archbishop of Aix. ‘Since when, in what places? 
Are these body guards, are they Swiss? Your Majesty did not 
know of this yesterday! Is it the work of a day—of a moment? * 
The troops in defection, and Your Majesty learned it only today! 
The commanders, the officers, have they been in ignorance, or 
in the conspiracy? Have all betrayed the king? No, Sire, that 
is not possible, that cannot be true, they are deceiving Your 
Majesty, or they have been deceiving you for three months.” 
*1 Moleville, I, 245-246. The Histoire (I, 238) merely states that the 
Cardinal de la Rochefoucauld came next and says nothing of the conference. 
Barentin makes it appear, in his brief references to the conference (Mémoire, 
footnotes, 243) that whatever discussion there was, was heard in the presence 
of all the group, both the nobles and clergy, as well as the king, the queen, 
and the princes. Moleville gives the impression that there was first a private 
conference between the king and the representatives of the clergy and that 
this interview was concluded in the presence of all. 
266 
Eee 
