Meeting of the Estates-General, 1780. 177 
_ matters relating to deputations had been submitted to the 
~ assembly itself.” 
Bouche of Provence is reported to have presented a rapid 
sketch of San Domingan conditions, in which he made it appear 
_ that the prohibitory laws were unfavorable to high, revenue. 
Then he proposed a scheme of reform which should place the 
colony on a much more just and prosperous basis.” For the 
term colony, he would substitute French-American isles or pos- 
sessions and would convoke the inhabitants just the same as all 
other Frenchmen. The prohibitory laws should be reformed 
and the imposts verified, while the complaints against ad- 
_ ministrators should -be examined.%* Clermont-Tonnerree ob- 
served that his cahiers asked that colonies be treated as provinces. 
The only consideration, to his mind, was whether the advantages 
were greater under colonial or under provincial relations.?’ 
Target merely stated the views of his constituents as his own 
on the question of admitting the deputies.?8 
There is no indication that Mirabeau participated in the 
debate, which he characterized as “superficial, devoid of vitality 
and foreign to the real questions at issue.’”” He did state his 
ideas on the matter in the following number of the Courrier de 
Provence. He considered that the question of admission had 
not been really discussed at all by the assembly. Rather, the 
affirmative of that point had been taken as self-evident. He 
refuted the assumption of such a view by showing that the 
colonies had never had representatives in the states general; 
consequently they could appear only by virtue of the king’s 
convocation. In so far then, the deputies from San Domingo 
had violated established precedent by their demand for admis- 
sion, in default of the royal sanction. Although he did not 
regard the illegality of their coming as a reason for refusal, still 
2% Assemblée nationale, I, 260. 
% Pont du jour, 1, 64; Moniteur, 1, 104. The first gives a very brief sum- 
mary; the full report is in the second. 
26 Point du jour, 1, 64. The proposals of Bouche are given only in this 
source. 
27 Moniteur, 1, 104; Duquesnoy, I, 140. The first supplements the second. 
*8 Moniteur, I, 104. 
2Q1 
