ak OTS 
Meeting of the Estates-General, 1780. 161 
and who had despatched copies of the declaration to each cham- 
ber. Finally, it was contrary to the declaration itself, to de- 
liberate upon its acceptance in a form which it repudiated. 
From all these arguments, the Récit concluded that the decree 
of June 19 was still valid and formed the law according to which 
the clergy should verify its credentials and continue its sessions, 
despite the voluntary absence of some of its members. The 
chamber approved this justification of its own conduct and 
ordered the secretary to have the document printed, while the 
original was to be preserved with those of the procés-verbaux in 
the archives of the clergy. Coster adds that it, as well as printed 
copies of all the other acts of the clergy, were to be distributed 
in all the provinces.“ 
On the face of things, it appears glaringly inconsistent that, 
after passing a decree to join the other orders and as their last 
act before carrying that decree into effect, the clergy should 
have ratified a document of such tenor. In reality, however, 
their union with the other orders was in complete harmony 
with the Récit, which fully admitted the binding force of the 
king’s declaration. The king merely took the initiative in 
proposing a joint assembly of the estates on a certain date; 
the clergy exercised its privilege of consenting, but with full 
reservation of all its rights as guaranteed in the declaration. 
There was no intention of going to verify credentials, far less of 
accepting the revolutionary doctrine of vote by head with no 
distinction of orders. It was fully in harmony with the king’s 
declaration, also, that the clergy should have made their action 
conditional upon similar action by the nobility. 
But not until practically all their own unfinished business 
was completed did the clergy learn that the nobility was about 
to act favorably upon the king’s request. The word may 
have been brought by the Archbishop of Aix and the Abbé de 
Montesquiou, who had been sent to confer with the nobility. 
The clergy sent a delegation composed of eight members, of 
whom the Bishop of Uzés was chief, evidently to communicate to 
the nobility the decree of the clergy in regard to the matter 
14 Barmond, Récit, 282; Coster, Récit, 348. 
16 Barmond, Récit, 282. 
275 
