58 Carl Christophelsmeier 



in every important matter, an interval of twenty-four hours 

 should intervene between the motion and the discussion, and pre- 

 paratory observations should be first listened to in the bureaus. 1 

 And according to the Journal des etats- gene rait. r, Tronchet read 

 an article from the cahiers of Paris in support of -his demand for 

 two considerations of every really important question before its 

 adoption. 2 The object of such demands as these was always 

 either to postpone action altogether or else to give every member 

 an opportunity to speak upon all motions after each reading and 

 thus prevent the assembly from passing any precipitous or dan- 

 gerous measures. 



Judging from the order of the speakers, so far as it may be de- 

 termined, it seems that this speech closed the morning session. 

 But there was another session in the evening of June 15 in which 

 the discussion was continued. More than thirty persons spoke 

 during the sessions of June 15 on the various motions. 3 Young 

 says : "More than once today there were more than one hundred 

 members on their legs at a time, and Mon. Bailly absolutely with- 

 out power to keep order." 4 Because of this confusion, an im- 

 perfect and incomplete account was kept. There occurred a 

 great deal of repetition in the debates ; men's minds tired of keep- 

 ing a record. 5 



During the evening session both Mirabeau and Sieyes spoke 

 again. Each developed his motion, each attempted to explain 

 away the objections made to it and to show the fallacies of the 



^iauzat, II, 117: "M. Treilhard, avocat au parlement." 



2 1, 96. 



3 Courrier de Provence, Lettre XI, 33: "Le debat de ces trois motions 

 (the motions of Mirabeau, Sieyes and Mounier), attaquees ou def endues 

 par plus de trente personnes, dans le premier jour, a prouve que notre na- 

 tion, quoique si long-temps etrangere aux deliberations publiques, est tres- 

 capable de saisir ce genre particulier, qui ne permet ni la precision de 

 l'ecrivain, ni la loquacite du barreau." 



4 Young, 165, 166. Young continues : "This arises very much from 

 complex motions being admitted ; to move a declaration relative to their 

 title, to their powers, to taxes, to a loan, etc., etc., all in one proposition, 

 appears to English ears preposterous." 



5 While we have a rather satisfactory account of the discussion of the 

 morning's session held on June 15, the record of the evening session and 

 the two sessions of the following day is very imperfect. Men either tired 

 of taking notes or few new ideas were presented. 



58 



