14 Carl Christophelsmeier 



third estate, appealing to justice and reason, claimed that a na- 

 tional assembly was indivisible, that the credentials ought to be 

 verified in common. 1 The discussion turned, therefore, alto- 

 gether about the question of verification of credentials, for the 

 commissioners had been instructed to confine themselves to it 

 wholly. They were not permitted to touch the real question at 

 issue — vote by head or by order. This command, together with 

 the choice for commissioners of uncompromising deputies, shows 

 that nothing good was expected from the conferences as far as 

 the question under discussion was concerned. 2 The results of the 

 conferences were foreseen. Duquesnoy wrote: "It is very evi- 

 dent that these conferences can produce no other effect than to 

 cause greater irritation and antagonism." Again, "The nobility 

 will never adopt the vote by head, the tiers-etat never vote by 

 order, and the nobility will refuse the common verification of 

 credentials. The nation alone has the right to verify them; it is 

 therefore necessary for the tiers to declare itself the nation." 3 

 Another writer, a close observer, wrote: 4 "If this conciliatory 



1 Recit, 36-37; Duquesnoy, I, 45-47; Courrier de Provence, Lett re VI, 2; 

 Biauzat, II, 80-82. 



2 The commissioners of the commons were in order named: Rabaut de 

 Saint-Etienne, Target, Chapelier, Mounier, Dupont, D'Ailly, Thouret, Le 

 Grande, Milscent, Salomon, Volney, Redon, Viguier, Garat l'aine, Ber- 

 gasse, Barnave. See Recit, 25 ; Duquesnoy, I, 27-28 ; La revolution fran- 

 caise, XXIII, 443-44 ; Biauzat, II, 70-71. Those of the nobility : Bouthilier, 

 le due de Luxembourg, La Queuille (de), d'Antraigues, de Pouille, le due 

 de Mortemart, de Cazales, de Bressand. See Courrier de Provence, Lettre 

 IV, 19 ; Biauzat, II, 72. Those of the clergy : L'archeveque de Bourdeaux, 

 l'eveque de Langres, Coster, chanoine de Verdun, Dillon, cure, Richard, 

 Thibault, cure, Lecesve, l'archeveque de Vienne. See Courrier de Provence, 

 Lettre II, 10. Biauzat, II, 72. 



3 Duquesnoy, I, 32, 33, 37. Bulletin written on May 22. 



*La revolution frangaise, 367. Under the date of May IS. Also on May 

 23 (488), the writer expresses the same idea: "Tous les partis ne pensent 

 et ne s'occupent dans ce moment- que de la question qui divise les trois 

 ordres. Celui du tiers parait reunir la tres grande majorite des citoyens 

 et l'on pense generalement que les deux premiers ordres seront forces de se 

 reunir a lui. . . . En tout evenement, on assure que le tiers se con- 

 stituera en corps national et que la noblesse jouera un mauvais role. On 

 dispose les provinces d' apres ce principe et ceci merite l'attention la plus 

 serieuse." Herault de la nation, vol. for 1789, no. 46. In the Herault de la 

 nation of May 22, after the motion of Chapelier is discussed, the writer 

 says, "D' apres l'exposition de leur marche, et si la reunion desire n'a pas 

 lieu, les communes sont, a ce qu'on assure, determines a se declarer l'en- 



14 



