Influence of the Breton Deputation ' 77 



VII 



THE VETO — DISUNION AND WEAKNESS — END OF THE BRETON 



CLUB 



As long as the assembly had stood in danger of a de- 

 fective organization or overthrow by force, the Breton 

 deputies had won the admiration of a large number of 

 their colleagues by the extraordinary unity of their action 

 and the deliniteness with which they expressed themselves. 

 But when the power of the Ancient Regime seemed finally 

 destroyed by the July revolution and the remaining abuses 

 of the feudal system declared abolished by the decrees 

 of the 4th of August, and positive legislation began, dis- 

 unity became apparent almost at once. With the discus- 

 sion on the declaration of rights the members of the Na- 

 tional Assembly began to separate into parties, a process 

 which did not leave either the Breton Club or the Breton 

 deputation uninfluenced. Mounier had long ceased to be 

 in sympathy with the club. On August 3, Duquesnoy 

 wrote that Le Chapelier was moderate in liis views, being* 

 in this way distinguished from the rest of the Breton dep- 

 uties whom he believed very extreme, and that he had 

 been opposed in his election by his colleagues of the prov- 

 ince who were jealous of his reputation.^ But it was the 



^Journal, I, 263. Duquesnoy was certainly in error if he supposed 

 that the entire Breton deputation opposed Le Chapelier. Upon his 

 election the deputies of Nantes wrote: "La nomination de M. Le 

 Chapelier a la presidence a cause une veritable satisfaction. Cet 

 avocat breton dont le nom sera celebre dans I'histoire de notre Revo- 

 lution, s'est distingue jusqu'a present par un amour pour la liberte, 

 par une fermete inebranlable, par une tres grande justesse dans ies 

 vues, et par une modesfie rare encore." Kerviler, Recherches et n^ 

 iices. art. Le Chapelier. 



It does not seem, however, that either the Breton deputation or the 

 Breton Club had taken any preliminary resolution for the election, 

 nor that there was any unity among them during the first ballots, 

 for in that case Sieyes, Glezen, Le Chapelier, all members of the club, 

 would not have permitted their candidatures at the same time, since 



. 283 



