32 Mae Darling 



the Vicomte de Castellane, the Due de Liancourt and the Marquis 

 de la Fayette. 



After having settled the question of the verification of cre- 

 dentials, the nobles adjourned until IMonday, May ii, in order to 

 give the committee on verification time to inspect the credentials.*^ 



Thus the first day had placed the nobility and the third estate 

 in open opposition to each other, the third estate insisting that 

 unless the credentials were verified in the states general, com- 

 posed of the three orders united, no legal organization was pos- 

 sible and emphasizing its principles by adopting a policy of inac- 

 tion ; the nobility, on the other hand, having decided that the 

 credentials should be verified by each order separately, had taken 

 the steps necessary to carry out its decision. The clergy, mean- 

 while, stood on the middle ground, pledged to neither party. 

 Was there any way of bringing about a reconciliation between the 

 opposing forces, the commons and the nobles? The events of 

 the following days were largely the result of attempts to answer 

 this question. 



The adjournment of the nobility until May ii left affairs in 

 the hands of the third estate from May 7 to May 11. The third 

 estate met again on the morning of May 7. Matters were in no 

 better shape than they had been in the previous session. The 

 other orders were still absent, and the confusion had lessened 

 but little.*' Biauzat asserts that speeches were made by those 

 who had voices strong enough to make themselves heard in the 

 uproar.*^ Malouet renewed his motion to send a deputation to 

 invite the other two orders to join the third estate.*^ The Recit 



46 Proces-verhal de la noblesse, 5 ; Duquesnoy, I, 10. 



4^ Biauzat, II, 38; Duquesnoy, I, 10. 



48 Biauzat, II, 38. 



4^ Biauzat, II, 38; Rccit des seances des deputes des comniiines, 7; Du- 

 quesnoy, I, 10. Biauzat alone states that it was Malouet who again brought 

 up this motion. The Rccit, however, says that a deputy from Auvergne 

 advocated this action, and as Malouet came from Riom, a city in Auvergne, 

 it is safe to say that he is the deputy who is meant here. Duquesnoy says 

 concerning the events of the day : " Meme impossibilite d'etabHr de I'ordre, 

 meme fureur du comte de Mirabeau, meme sagesse, meme raison, meme 

 moderation de M. Malouet." 



234 



