164 Jeanette Needham. 
Evidently to reduce the chaotic discussion to order, opinions 
of the various deputies upon a series of motions were called for. 
The nobles were engaged in this task, which was nearing com- 
pletion, when the deputation came, bringing the decree of the 
clergy. The reading of the measure by the Bishop of Uzés 
apparently did not hasten the decision of the nobility. As soon 
as the clergy retired, they resumed the roll-call by which the 
members were stating their opinions on the various motions, 
‘‘when,’”’ to follow the proces-verbal, ‘‘a new invitation more 
urgent and decisive still permitted the order of the nobility to 
heed only its feelings and the fears of its heart for the king; 
the entire order without further deliberation resolved to yield 
to the wishes of His Majesty.’’® 
The ‘‘new invitation’? was a brief note from the Comte 
d’Artois, urging the nobility, because of his personal regard 
for them, to yield at once to the king’s request, and not to 
imperil his life and the welfare of the state by longer hesitation.?® 
grands débats et qu’il était question chez un assez grand nombre, d’une 
protestation, mais que cinquante membres, au moins, refusaient de la souscrire 
et allaient se rendre dans la salle.’’ Moleville says more than eighty per- 
sisted in remaining in their chamber. 
8 Proces-verbal . . . dela noblesse, 303. 
® Coster, Récit, 345-346; Letter of a deputy, Paris, le 27, 4 minuil, appendix; 
Duquesnoy, I, 140; Barentin, 249; Letter by Comte d’Artois in 1799 explain- 
ing why he wrote letter of June 27, given in Barentin, 282-284; Jefferson, II, 
488; Dorset, I, 226; Correspondance d'un député . . . avec la Marquise de 
Crequy, Revue de la rév., II, 38; Histoire de la rév., 1, 240; Moleville, I, 247. 
The first two sources give what purports to be the text of the letter of the 
Comte d’Artois, but they vary somewhat. The Histoire states that the 
Duke of Luxemburg read to the chamber fragments of a letter which he had 
received from the Comte d’Artois. Jefferson heard that notes which may 
not have been the same in content were written to several members. These 
statements may explain the variations in the available texts. Coster, who as 
a member of the clergy might have had a better opportunity to secure a 
copy of the letter, than the writer of the letter from Paris, who was a member 
of the third estate, gives this version: ‘‘ Vous connaissez, Messrs. tout mon 
attachement 4 la noblesse; je connais tout celui qu’elle a pour moi. Je vous 
conjure de vous réunir au tiers-état pour sauver le roi et l’état.’”” The other 
text is as follows: “‘Si mon nom a encore quelque ascendant dans votre 
chambre, je vous prie aujourd’hui et sans délai d’opérer votre réunion a 
l’assemblée nationale; le sort de l’état et le bonheur de mon frére en dépendent.” 
278 
