182 ; Jeanette Needham. 
they did not come.*? Boullé supplies an explanation which has 
elements of plausibility in it. He states that Bailly had received 
warning that the clergy and nobles planned to defer their union 
until five o’clock in the hope of finding a moment when the 
session was suspended. On this pretext, they could postpone 
their union until Tuesday and so gain two days of grace, during 
which some change perhaps might yet occur. On the other 
hand, the stubborn resistance of the nobility and their un- 
gracious yielding even to the request of the Comte d’Artois 
would seem sufficient explanation of the long delay. Boullé, 
however, maintains further that the intention of the upper orders 
to catch the third estate off guard was what made Bailly suspend 
the session, but not adjourn it. He is said to have remarked 
that although the noble deputies and the separate ecclesiastics 
might not come before evening the most of the members of the 
assembly might go to secure some necessary refreshments, but 
the session would remain open nevertheless. 
XIX 
Whatever the reason, the assembly decided upon some sort of 
recess in the latter part of the afternoon, Jallet says from three 
to five o’clock,! and it was during this period that the upper 
The Courrier de Provence, Point du jour, and Assemblée nationale state that it 
was five, or nearly that. Jallet implies that it was during the recess. If the 
upper orders came at four, or shortly thereafter, the assembly must have had 
warning of the prospective union not later than three o’clock, especially if 
so long a delay followed that the national assembly felt called upon to suspend 
its sessions. 
#2 Etats-généraux, Extrait du journal de Paris, 1, 125; Boullé, Docs. inédits, 
Revue de la rév., XIV, 28. 
43 Boullé, Documents inédits, Revue de la rév., XIV, 29. 
1 Jallet, 107; Assemblée nationale, I, 262; ‘‘ La séance a été continuée a 5 
heures du soir;"’ Point du jour (I, 66) gives this: ‘‘ L’assemblée nationale, 
dont la séance avait été prorogée jusqu’au soir;”’ Bailly (I, 250) says there 
was a recess, but does not indicate the time. Boullé, Documents inédits, 
Revue de la rév., XIV, 29. Etats-généraux, Extrait du journal de Paris, I, 125. 
After stating the effect of the news that the upper orders were coming, the 
_ Journal adds: ‘‘ La nouvelle s'est confirmée, mais on s'est .assuré que la 
réunion ne se ferait pas dans l’instant méme et l’assemblée nationale s’est 
ajournée a l’aprés-dinée pour cinq heures.” 
296 
