The First Revolutionary Step 61. 



Thouret favored Mounier's motion and spoke against the titles 

 presented by Mirabeau and by Sieves. 1 He said that if pcuple 

 stood for plebs the title admitted distinction of orders, but if for 

 populus, "you increase the rights and the claims of the commons 

 too much." He maintained that "it is necessary to constitute 

 ourselves in such a manner that, when the clergy and the nobility 

 have united with us, change in the constitution will be found 

 unnecessary." 2 



"M. Malouet expressed himself with much force. He main- 

 tained with sound arguments that the assembly could take no 

 other title than that of represcntants du peuplc." z In supporting 

 Mirabeau's title, Malouet made use of some of Mirabeau's argu- 

 ments. 4 He said : "I adhere to the proposition which proclaims 

 us exactly what we are, represcntants de la majeure partie de la- 

 nation, or representants du peupie. . . To constitute ourselves 

 a national assembly without reference to the clergy and to the 

 nobility, will cause a disastrous schism which will produce the 

 dissolution of the states general." The assembly should never 

 recognize the separation of the orders, nor their pretensions of 

 possessing a veto power. He favored, also, the proposal that an 



'■Journal des etats-generaux, I, 103. Biauzat (II, 118) states that the 

 speech of Thouret influenced him to withdraw his motion. Courrier de 

 Provence, Lettre XI, 36, 46, 47. 



2 After the union of the three orders, the phrase representants de la 

 majeure partie de la nation would certainly be no more applicable than the 

 titles proposed by Sieyes and Mirabeau. 



3 Courrier de Provence, Lettre XI, 32-34. The motion of Malouet is 

 given in a note on page 215. His speech as given in the Moniteur (I, 76- 

 78) is found in the Point du jour, introductory volume, 384-90. The Jour- 

 nal des etats-generaux, I, 104, 105, does not reproduce the speech or mo- 

 tion. It says that the deputies did not listen to his reading and Biauzat 

 states (II, 118) that he was interrupted several times. The Courrier de 

 Provence and the Moniteur do not agree. 



*The speech of Malouet shows that he was a man of great ability. He 

 was yet young and very ambitious. His forwardness and his readiness to 

 take part in the discussions had made him many enemies. His seat had 

 been contested. He was thought by some deputies to be in league with the 

 court. He had on May 15 advised that, in order to persuade the deputies 

 of the clergy and of the nobility to common verification of credentials, 

 their property and social prerogatives should be guaranteed and that com- 

 mon verification should not prejudice the question of a single or separate 

 chambers. See Biauzat. II, 33, 38, 39, 48, 63, 114, 115; Duquesnoy, I, 9, 10;. 

 12, 23, 24 ; Proces-vcrbal, I, 73 ; Journal des etats-generaux, I, 27-29. 



6i 



