Inftuence of the Breton Deputation 59 



the king and the court — between the king and the "gov- 

 ernment." Too frequently, in their minds, the acts of the 

 government were the results of deceit, of intrigues of the 

 ministers, of the court, or of the Nobility.^ For the lat- 

 ter, their distrust and hatred was as deep-seated and bit- 

 ter as the persistency with which they clung to their be- 

 lief in their king was pathetic. Nor did the letter of the 

 king on the 28th of May, the orders of the Koyal Session, 

 and the concentration of troops in July cause any essen- 

 tial change in this sentiment.^ Just what they meant by 



I'assemblee sous le titre d'assemblee des setils representants veri- 

 fies et connus." (Ill, 120, 121.) On the contrary, as has been shown 

 above, Sieyes, so far from being under the necessity of fearing that 

 he would shock the moderation of the members of the club, was 

 merely renewing, under different circumstances, the very demands 

 the Breton deputies had fought for for almost a full month, and that 

 with an intolerance and vigor which had led to the suspicion that they 

 wished to disrupt the States General by the confusion resulting from 

 their violence. Under these circumstances, but little credit of initi- 

 ative is due to Sieyes, nor is it even certain that his motion of the 

 10th of June was introduced in the assembly of the TTiird Estate in 

 the form in which he had originally drawn it, for it was debated at 

 the club for at least two evenings, and it finally entered the assembly 

 as much the motion of the club as that of Sieyes. The same thoughts 

 arise relative to the motions of the 15th and the 16th. To represent 

 Sieyes as the important element in the acts which constituted the 

 National Assembly is to misrepresent the relative value of the forces 

 at work. 



^This feeling is expressed upon numerous occasions. See espe- 

 cially the letters of the deputies of Saint-Brieuc, of April 28, July 

 19; of Boulle of June 3, 10, 13, 23, 24, and 28; of Le Roulx, June 5, 21, 

 23; and of Pellerin, July 10. 



= Boulle, after the Royal Session, when in the most terrible excite- 

 ment, could find in his heart no other feeling for the king except that 

 of pity or sympathy for the misfortunes brought upon him by his evil 

 counselors. "L'on est separe en gemissant sur les maux que pouvait 

 entrainer un coup aussi funeste et sur le malheur d'un bon roi dont on 

 a si cruellement tronipe la religion, qu'on I'arme contre son peuple dans 

 le temps qu'il en etait adore." June 23. On the same day: "Ce 

 n'est pas au cceur du roi que tout ceci est impute; on lui rend encore 

 justice; on n'en veut qu'a ceux qui Font trompe. Serait-il possible 

 qu'un seul jour souillat pour jamais toute la gloire de son regne?'*^ 

 On the 26th: "Oh! que les rois sont malheureux! le notre allait re- 

 cevoir les plus grandes preuves de notre amour; sa puissance allait 

 s'accroitre et s'affermir et c'est dans ce moment qu'on lui fait pro- 

 noncer le malheur de la nation." 



Le Roulx could write on June 21, after the announcement of the 



265 



