The First Revolutionary Step 31 



fitting phaseology. Sieves readily consented to these rational 

 changes. 1 



But the assembly of the commons was not even yet a complete 

 unit on this question of organization. There were opponents, 

 though but few, who caused more or less agitation. At first they 

 had kept silent; then they attempted to impede the action of the 

 assembly by keeping up the debate. But they made themselves 

 obnoxious ; they exhausted the patience of the deputies ; they 

 were violently and systematically attacked, hissed, and their voices 

 even drowned by the clamor of the vast majority. 2 The opposi- 

 tion began by the declaration of a member that the motion was 

 dangerous. He advised the adoption of the king's ouverture de 

 conciliation, but this opinion found no support; it met with an 

 organized attack. A Breton deputy said that it was a question 

 of the very greatest importance to depart from a laisscz fairc 

 policy, and it was folly to propose a course which must come 

 to nothing since the nobility had rejected the ouverture. The 

 request that the ouverture should be considered by the assembly 

 was answered from all parts of the hall by the assertion that the 

 discussion could lead to nothing, that it was entirely useless. 



A deputy from Artois said 3 that he favored Sieyes' motion, 

 but added that it should contain the refutation of some of the 

 principles expressed in the preamble of the ouverture against 

 which an express protest seemed indispensable. He was an- 

 swered that such objections were unnecessary as the proces-verbal 

 of the conferences had taken account of those principles in the 

 most satisfactory manner. But the deputy from Artois insisted ; 

 his amendment was supported by several members. Two other 

 deputies urged that the assembly should wait until the clergy 

 made reply to the last invitation of the commons. 4 But the 



1 Recit, 104, 108; Journal des etats-generaux, I, 58-60; Biauzat (II, 103) 

 says that he suggested the changes and the Recit that it was "un depute 

 de Bourgogne." See motion as adopted, Recit, 110-12. 



"Courrier de Provence, Lettre X, 11; La revolution franqaise, XXIII, 

 526; Duquesnoy, I, 84; Recit, 104-9; Revue de la revolution, XII, Docu- 

 ments incdits, 53, 54. 



3 Rccit, 105, 106; Biauzat says (II, 103) that M. Camus, a deputy from 

 Paris, made this amendment. 



*Recit, I, 84-87. The invitation of June 6, that was called out by the 

 clergy's deputation in regard to the relief of the poor. 



