^{page 190 note 2} ‘Les curés et le patriotisme pendant la Révolution 1789–1792’ in Révolution Française n.s. xviii. 166. See also his ‘La composition des Éeats Généraux et de l'Assemblée Nationale’ in Rev. Historique, ccvi. 15—‘déjà sapé [l'ordre du Clergé] est sur le point de se désagréger, et la majorité de ses députés est toute prête à passer au Tiers Etat et aux “patriotes” ’.

^{page 190 note 3} As curé would have to be translated as ‘vicar’, and vicaire as ‘curate’, the French terminology has been preserved throughout.

^{page 190 note 4} Letter dated 13 March 1789 of the curé Pastoris to bishop Cicé of Auxerre, quoted by Porée, C., Les cahiers des curés …. d'Auxerre, Auxerre 1927, cliGoogle Scholar.

^{page 191 note 1} Extrait des délibérations et des arrêtés des curés d'Orléans relativement à la convocation des États Généraux, n.p., n.d., 20–1.

^{page 191 note 2} MS. Journal quoted by Mathieu, D., L'Ancien Régime en Lorraine et Barrois, Paris 1907 edn.Google Scholar, 422. Note the statements of the Abbé Morellet and of Sallier cited in Chérest, A., La chute de l'ancien régime, Paris 1884–86, ii. 308–9Google Scholar, 244–5.

^{page 191 note 3} Houtin, A., Les séances des députés du clergé aux Etats Généraux de 1789; Journaux du curé Thibault et du chanoine Coster, Paris 1916, vGoogle Scholar.

^{page 191 note 4} As Houtin says (p. vi with n. 4), diaries kept by the curés Genetet, Grégoire and Laurent seem to have disappeared.

^{page 191 note 5} Récit des principaux faits qui se sont passés dans la Salle de l'Ordre du Clergé, depuis le commencement des États Généraux, le 4 mai 1789, jusqu' à la réunion des trois Ordres dans la salle commune de l'Assemblée Nationale, Paris 1790Google Scholar.

^{page 191 note 6} Procès-verbal historique des actes du clergé député à l'Assemblée des Éitats Généraux des années 1789 et 1790, Paris 1791Google Scholar—anon.

^{page 191 note 7} Journal abrégé des séances des États Généraux tenues à Versailles en l'année 1789, printed by Letonnelier, G., in Bull, de l'Académie Delphinale, 6th series, xv–xvii (issued as one vol., Grenoble 1947), 249–78Google Scholar. I am indebted to M. Letonnelier for lending me his MS. copy of this ‘Journal’, the requisite copies of the Bulletin not being available in London or Paris. References to the ‘Journal’ are necessarily to Dolomieu's dated entries and not to the pages of the Bulletin.

^{page 191 note 8} This MS. diary is in the archives of the Schloss Moestroff, Luxembourg. I am greatly indebted to the Graf von d'Oberndorff for allowing me to consult these archives. It is hoped to publish the diary in due course.

^{page 191 note 9} See above, n. 3. References to Thibault and to Coster refer to this edition, and those to Houtin to the editor's notes.

^{page 191 note 10} Houtin, xx.

^{page 192 note 1} Journal inédit de Jallet, curé de Chérigné, député du clergé de Poitou aux États Généraux de 1789 …, ed. J. J. Brethé, Fontenay le Comte 1871.

^{page 192 note 2} Sicard, A., Le clergé de France pendant la Révolution: I. L'effondrement, ed. Paris 1912Google Scholar. The doctoral thesis of Heinrichs, K., Die politische Ideologic des französischen Klerus bei Beginn der grossen Revolution, Berlin 1934Google Scholar, being based upon insufficient sources (Jallet, Rangeard and Vallet are all ignored) can be discounted.

^{page 192 note 3} Lettres de l'abbé Barbotin député a l'Assemblée Constituante, ed. Aulard, F. A., Paris 1910Google Scholar.

^{page 192 note 4} Sicard, op. cit. 19, 20, 37.

^{page 192 note 5} 130 : 114 on 6 May (Coster, 82) and 137: 127 on 19 June (ibid., 133—see below p. 207).

^{page 193 note 1} See below p. 203, n. 6. For the bishop's unpopularity see below pp. 197 and 209–10.

^{page 193 note 2} Jallet, 91.

^{page 193 note 3} Memorial historique des états généraux pendant le mois de mai 1789, Paris 1789, 103Google Scholar; de Vieuzac, Barère, Le Point du Jour, Paris 1790Google Scholar, intro. vol. p. 24, in error sub 19 May; de Saultchevreuil, Le Hodey, Journal des États Généraux, Paris 1789, i. 47Google Scholar. These newspaper reports are probably based upon the same source.

^{page 193 note 4} Coster, 91.

^{page 193 note 5} Jallet, 53.

^{page 193 note 6} Ibid., 83–4. He published this pamphlet early in 1789 (n. p.).

^{page 193 note 7} It is difficult to say when these meetings began. Duquesnoy, sub 22 May, says that some sixty curés met daily (Journal d'Adrien Duquesnoy, député du tiers-état de Bar-le-Duc, ed. de Crèvecoeur, R., Paris 1894, i. 10Google Scholar). Jallet, 63–4, reporting a meeting on 23 May, gives the impression that this was by no means the first such occasion.

^{page 193 note 8} See below, p. 202.

^{page 193 note 9} Jallet, 69: Rangeard, 81–2.

^{page 193 note 10} Jallet, 64. See below p. 209.

^{page 194 note 1} 11 June being the feast of Corpus Christi the Clerical Order did not assemble.

^{page 194 note 2} Jallet, 83–4. Hitherto many curés had believed that to cross would please the king (‘Relation des événements depuis le 6 mai jusqu'au 15 juillet 1789’ printed by A. Brette in Révolution Française, xxiii. 522). The fact that Coster's brother held an important post Necker's office probably added weight to the canon's words (see Houtin, xvii–xviii).

^{page 194 note 3} Jallet, 84–5. Eventually Orléans and 46 other nobles crossed on 25 June. Jallet's speech, ‘Discours prononcé par M. Jallet … dans l'Assemblée de l'Ordre du Clergé, pour motiver les déclarations et protestations faites dans la Chambre par plusieurs Députés le 12 juin 1789’, is printed in Pièces relatives à la démarche de MM. les curés qui ont passés dans la Salle Nationale le 12 juin 1789 et les jours suivants, Paris 1789, 1–12Google Scholar.

^{page 194 note 4} Letter of J. P. Boullé to the municipality of Pontivy, dated 3 June 1789, printed by A. Macé in Rev. de la Révolution, xii. 9: Duquesnoy, Journal, i. 34, 50, 93.

^{page 194 note 5} The figure 203 includes 10 regular canons who were prieurs-curés and 4 curés who were archiprêtres. Houtin, 150–74 lists 303 deputies as having sat ‘during the Estates General proper and … up to the beginning of July’. This list includes bishop Villoutreix de Faye (but as president of the Clerical Order in the electoral assembly of the Pays de Soule he could not have left Mauléon until the sessions ended on 3 July—Brette, A. and Aulard, F. A., Receuil des documents relatifs à la convocation des États Généraux, Paris 1894–1915, iv. 151Google Scholar): bishop Nicolaî (noting that he may not have been able to attend): bishop Rohan-Guéménée (noting that he did not appear until 12 September—why then include him in the list as defined?): Peretti della Rocca, vicar-general of the diocese of Aleria, elected 1 June but who did not arrive at Versailles until 23 July (Casanova, S., Le Corse et les États-Généraux de 1789, Ajaccio 1931, 126 and 195Google Scholar): Expilly, recteur of St. Martin de Morlaix and Verguet, prior of the royal abbey of Relec, not elected until 3 August (Brette, Receuil, ii. 134, n. 2). It also includes Saurine and Julien, elected in Béam on 22 June (ibid., iv. 219). The possible number on 19 June is therefore not above 295.

^{page 195 note 1} It is more accurate to say this than that 35 per cent opposed the motion. All that is certain is that 65 per cent of those possibly present voted to cross.

^{page 195 note 2} Listed in Houtin, 148. These adhesions were, of course, made under pressure—see below p. 214, n. 2.

^{page 195 note 3} Note the story concerning Marolle told by Duquesnoy, Journal, i. 39.

^{page 195 note 4} Kemmerer, Histoire de l'île de Ré, ii. 166, cited in Audiat, L., Deux victimes des Septembriseurs, Paris 1897, 121, n. 1Google Scholar.

^{page 195 note 5} E. Welvert ‘Massieu’ in Rev. d'hist. de l'église de France, vii. 241–51. The curés Bluget, Desvernay, Dumont, Favre, Rabin, Rivière and Martin Thomas were all doctors of theology, or of the Sorbonne: Couturier, Ducret, Fleury, Guino, La Lande, Landrin, Lasmastres, Forest de Masmoury, Mayet and Thibault were all bachelors of theology or of the Sorbonne.

^{page 195 note 6} See L. Lévy-Schneider, ‘L'autonomie administrative de l'épiscopat français à la fin de l'ancien régime’ in Rev. Historique, cli. 1–33: but note the review by A. Mathiez in Annales Historiques de la Révolution Fran¸aise, iii. 206–7.

^{page 196 note 1} Procés-verbal de l'Assemblée Générate extraordinaire du Clergé tenue à Paris en 1788 (Bib. Sainte Geneviève MS. 199) 7–14 for the Assembly's members and ibid., 50, 57–60, for these prelates’ activities.

^{page 196 note 2} Procès-verbal de l'Assemblée des Notables tenue à Versailles en l'annee 1787, Paris 1788, 84–90Google Scholar, for list of members.

^{page 196 note 3} See the terms of its decision for the doublement in Procès-verbal de l'Assemblée des Notables tenue à Versailles en l'année 1788, Paris 1789, 101Google Scholar.

^{page 196 note 4} Mémoire sur les états généraux où l'on a réuni tons les détails relatifs à la convocation aux assemblées de baillages … au nombre et à la forme de délibération que làon suit dans les états…, Paris 1788Google Scholar. See also bishop Thémines, Instructions et cahier du hameau de Madon, Blois 1789, 14Google Scholar.

^{page 196 note 5} Mandements published by various prelates make this abundantly clear. See those of P-L. de la Rochefoucauld, dated Versailles 9 May, quoted by Audiat, Deux victimes des Septembriseurs, 132–6; of Boisgelin (dated Aix 27 March); of Clermont-Tonnerre (attacked by Mirabeau in his Quinzième lettre à mes commettans, Paris 1789, 14–27Google Scholar); of Juigné (dated Paris 1789)—see the comments of the Mémorial historique … pendant … mai, 8–9; and of Du Tillet (dated Orange 23 March).

^{page 197 note 1} Grégoire pressed this point: ‘Les évêques paraissent se confédérer avec la majeure partie de la Noblesse contre le Tiers-État’ in Nouvclle Lettre à MM. les curés, Paris 1789Google Scholar. 1. He published this pamphlet about 10 June: see Duquesnoy, Journal, i. 88.

^{page 197 note 2} Discours sur les principes des droits des Ordres dans les Etats Généraux, prononcé dans la chambre du Clergé le 17 juin …, n.p. 1789—the Paris 1791 ed. is much amended. See below 205. Coster, 129, notes that the ‘episcopal party’ did not begin to express forcibly its opinion until 13 June.

^{page 197 note 3} Creuzé-Latouche, J. A., Journal des États Généraux et du début de l'Assemblée Nationale, ed. Marchand, J., Paris 1946, 177Google Scholar. See Coster, 128, for his 12 June speech and (with Lavaquery, E., Le cardinal de Boisgelin, Paris 1921, ii, 13–14Google Scholar) for his 2 July speech. Journal des États Généraux de 1789 (Bib. Nat. MS. F. fr. 10, 883) fo. 63 recto and verso: ‘Sa voix sàest attendrie et on a vu couler des larmes de ses yeux’; Creuzé-Latouche, Journal, 177, and see below, p. 217 with n. 3.

^{page 197 note 4} Coster, 114 and 115. ‘Toujours appuyé sur Hincmar et les capitulaires, il aurait pu etre 1àoracle des pairs de la cour de Charlemagne, ou des chevaliers de la table ronde’: De Pradt, D. D., Les Quatre Concordats, Paris 1818, ii. 50Google Scholar.

^{page 197 note 5} The pamphlet (n.p. 1789), published on 11 May (Coster, 88), urged the Clergy and Nobles to merge to form a second chamber. Bicameralism on the English model was not generally popular, and such a union would destroy the curés’ influence (Jallet, 55). See the comments of Coster, 88, and of the Breton recteurs (L. Dubreuil ‘Le clergé de Bretagne aux États Généraux de 1789’ in Révolution Française, lxx. 498). See below pp. 209–10.

^{page 197 note 6} See Coster, 102, 111, 115, 122, and see below p. 2O1; Jallet, 66, 75, 80.

^{page 197 note 7} Réimpression de l'ancien Moniteur, Paris 1854, i. 35Google Scholar, says ‘legitimate’ (followed by Braesch, F., 1789 L'année Cruciale, Paris 1941, 114Google Scholar n. 1): Le Point du Jour, intro. vol. 107, has ‘honorary’ (followed by Egret, J., La Révolution des Notables, Mounier et les Monarchiens, Paris 1950, 57Google Scholar). The Mémoires de Malouet, 2nd ed., Paris 1874, i. 298Google Scholar, has ‘legitimate’.

^{page 198 note 1} See Schafer, B. C., ‘Quelques jugements de pamphlétaires sur le clergé à la veille de la Révolution’ in Annales Historiques de la Révolution Française, xvi, 110–22Google Scholar.

^{page 198 note 2} Duquesnoy, Journal, i. 50, and see i. 77. See A. Lods, ‘Làattitude du clergé catholique à l'égard des Protestants en 1789’ in Révolution Française, xxxiii. 123–37.

^{page 198 note 3} Doubtless published in Paris or Versailles about 1 June 1789, for Grégoireàs Nouvelle Lettre (see above, p. 197 n. 1) combatted it (see below p. 206). Duquesnoy (Journal, i. 77) says this fear caused Galland to hesitate about crossing; he did so on 22 June having voted against doing so on 19 June.

^{page 198 note 4} Creuzé-Latouche, Journal, 22. See below p. 202.

^{page 198 note 5} Duquesnoy remarked on this (Journal, i. 77), as did Talleyrand (Mémoires, ed. De Broglie, , Paris 1891, i. 31Google Scholar).

^{page 198 note 6} The Chamber did not assemble on Sundays and Mass was sung daily before discussions opened: Lefebvre, G. and Terroine, A., Receuil de documents relatifs aux séances des états-généraux mai-juin 1789, i, Les préliminaires, Paris 1953, 11 with n. 1Google Scholar.

^{page 198 note 7} For example such ceremonies as the burial of Héliand, a Third Estate deputy (Vallet, 10), the memorial service for Louis XV (Thibault, 9–10), the Corpus Christi procession (ibid., 38), the lying in state of the Dauphin (Coster, 122).

^{page 198 note 8} Coster, 96–7; see below p. 201 n.6.

^{page 199 note 1} Ibid., 101. See C. Constantin ‘Mgr. De La Fare aux États-Généraux de 1789’ in Annales Historigues de la Révolution Française, v. 24.

^{page 199 note 2} Coster, 91–2.

^{page 199 note 3} Speech on 18 May (Moniteur, i. 37) and see that on 27 May (ibid., i. 44).

^{page 199 note 4} Egret, La Révolution des Notables, 55. Boullé wrote to the municipality of Pontivy on 8 May that the curés were assuring the Third Estate they would cross (letter printed by Macé in Rev. de la Révolution, x. 170–1).

^{page 199 note 5} See letter of Gaultier de Biauzat dated 8 May (printed in Mège, F., G. de Biauzat… sa vie et correspondance, Paris 1890, 40Google Scholar—not 35 as Egret, loc. cit., has it). The scene is more fully described by a deputy of Anjou. ‘Sur cette assertion [by Mounier] les opinants pour la députation, ayané monté sur les banes, ont proposé de délibérer par oui ou non, en changeant de place, le non restant dàun côté, le oui passant de làautre; dàoù il a résulté un mouvement tumultueux qui, sans quàon eut bien entendre, sans quàon sut trop comment, a donné une apparence de majorité. Pendant quàune partie de l'asscmblée se recriait sur cette forme, des envoyés dont on ne savait ni le nom ni le nombre, sont allés dans les deux chambres de la noblesse et du Clergé, les inviter à se rendre à la salle des états, pour former l'assemblée générale’: J. B. Leclerc, Correspondance de MM. les députés des communes de la province dàAnjou avec leurs commettants, relativement aux États-Généraux tenants à Versailles en 1789, Angers 1789, i. 21–2.

^{page 200 note 1} Thibault, 4. The Nobles were not in session 7–10 May inclusive. They were told on 11 May of the Thirdàs deputation: Procès-verbal des séances de la chambre de l'ordre de la Noblesse aux États Généraux, Versailles 1789, 28Google Scholar.

^{page 200 note 2} Dolomieu, Journal, sub 7 May. For 6 May see above p. 192 with n. 5.

^{page 200 note 3} Jallet, Journal, 52. Surely Egret (loc. cit.) mistakes the significance of this entry?

^{page 200 note 4} Proés-verbal … de la Noblesse, 29–30. Unlike the Third Estate, the Clergy, although not constituted as an Order, did send official deputations to the other Orders, although they would not send messages signed by the President: see Vallet, 14–15.

^{page 200 note 5} Letter dated 24 May to Buissart in Correspondence de Maximilien et Augustin Robespierre, ed. G. Michon, Paris 1926, 37; Memorial historique … mai 1789, 62.

^{page 200 note 6} Coster, 83–4 (see Houtinàs n. 2 on p. 83). See letter of Gaultier de Biauzat dated 8 May printed by Mège, ii. 41–2.

^{page 201 note 1} Proès-verbal… de la Noblesse, 29–31. The marquis de Sillery gives the voting as 185 to 46: Journal des Éitats Généraux, Arch. Nat. KK. 641, 33.

^{page 201 note 2} Récit des Séances des Députés des Communes depuis le 5 mai 1789 jusqu’ au 12 juin suivant, ed. F. A. Aulard, Paris 1895, 24. Proposing delegates be appointed, Rabaut de St. Etienne had stressed on 14 May that his would be ‘sans se départir jamais du principe de l'opinion par tête, et de làindivisibilité des Éitats-Généraux’: ibid., 19. He and Mounier (see Egret, La Révolution des Notables, 51) were the Third Estateàs leading speakers in the conferences.

^{page 201 note 3} Proès-verbal des conférences sur la vérification des pouvoirs tenues par MM. les commissaires du Clergé, de la Noblesse et des Communes, tant en la Salle de Comité des États Généraux, quàen présence de MM. les commissaires du Roi, conformérent au désir de Sa Majesté, Paris 1789, 5–6Google Scholar. These minutes rarely name speakers, but they can be identified with the aid of the Le Point du Jour of Barère de Vieuzac.

^{page 201 note 4} Procès-verbal des conferences, 9, 18–9, 21.

^{page 201 note 5} Proès-verbal … de la Noblesse, 114. This was voted by ‘à la pluralité de deux cent voix’: Thibault, 23.

^{page 201 note 6} Coster, 105–6. ‘Un des évêques, avec qui je dinai chez M. de Montboissier, était encore tout ému en arrivant à table. Un curé avait osé dire à un abbé qui parlait insolemment: “Taisez-vous”; et ce crime qui compromettait une croix dàor, ne fut pas puni à làinstant par la foudre!’: letter of Gaultier de Biauzat dated 27 May printed in Mège, ii. 85. Thibault apologised next day: De Varicourt, Journal, fo. 17 marginal note.

^{page 201 note 7} ‘Le Tiers État compte autant plus sur la fermeté des curés, quàon leur a insinué que, sàils variaient dans leurs principes, ils feraient sagement de ne plus paraître dans leurs bénéfices’: report of a secret agent, dated 27 May, printed by Brette in Révolution Française, xxiii. 454–5. See also Rangeard, 70, and Vallet, 36.

^{page 202 note 1} See above p. 193 n. 7.

^{page 202 note 2} Brethé, p. 35 of intro. to Jalletàs Journal.

^{page 202 note 3} Essai sur la réforme du Clergé, Paris. Between items 10 and 11 in vol. F.R. 136 of the Croker Collection in the B.M. is bound an advertisement of Durand, bookseller, dated 20 May, announcing the publication of the Essai that day.

^{page 202 note 4} Dolomieu, Journal, sub 26 May; Barbotin, Lettres, 7. The latter, in a letter dated 23 May, says about 120 curés, 7 or 8 bishops and about 40 nobles were decided to cross if the conferences failed (ibid., 5).

^{page 202 note 5} Creuzé-Latouche, Journal, 21–2; Correspondence de MM. les députés … dàAnjou, i. 60. The day before Camusat de Belombre ‘announced that he was informed that a majority of the Clergy only awaited a fresh invitation to join up’ with the Third Estate: G. M. Sallier, Annales Françaises mai 1789–juin 1790, Paris 1832, i. 24; Moniteur, i. 43, names the speaker.

^{page 202 note 6} Target used the phrase ‘salle nationale’ when the deputation, 50 or 60 strong (Vallet, 39) first visited the Chamber. Objection was made, the deputation left and returned with ‘salle dàassemblée générale’ substituted: Coster, 107, and (fuller account) Journal des États Généraux de 1789, Tiers État (Arch. Nat. C 26, 180) sub 27 May.

^{page 202 note 7} De Varicourt, Journal, fo. 16.

^{page 203 note 1} ‘M. dàAilly était l'auteur de cette folie’ and led the ‘quelques effervescents’: Duquesnoy, Journal, i. 49–50.

^{page 203 note 2} For the debate see Coster, 107; Dolomieu, Journal; Jallet, 67–9; Duquesnoy, Journal, i. 49–50; J. S. Bailly, Mémoires dàun témoin de la Révolution, Paris 1804, i. 100–101. Dillonàs speech was printed: Discours prononcé en la Salle de l'Assemblée des États Généraux …, n.p.n.d.

^{page 203 note 3} See above p. 193.

^{page 203 note 4} Jallet, 71.

^{page 203 note 5} Voting was 197 : 44. Again (see above p. 200–1) this was a deliberate step taken after the kingàs letter had been read: Procès-verbal… de la Noblesse, 117–21. It was Bouthilier, one of the ‘commissaires conciliateurs’, who proposed the motion. See the comments of Bailly, i, 106–7. Speakers in the Nobles insisted it must be made perfectly clear at the conferences that they were irrevocably constituted as an Order: Journal des États Généraux, Noblesse (Arch. Nat. C 26, 180) sub 29 May.

^{page 203 note 6} Thibault, 26–7. This motion was proposed by Delettre, curé of Berny-Rivière (not Gausserand, curé of Rivière-en-Albigeois, as Letonnelier has it in his note to Dolomieu, Journal, sub 29 May) acting as a mouthpiece for La Luzerne, bishop of Langres: see Jallet, 72, n. 1. The chamber reserved the right to sanction any acceptance of proposals by its delegates.

^{page 204 note 1} Procés-verbal des conférences, 46–58.

^{page 204 note 2} Ibid., 150.

^{page 204 note 3} Ibid., 157–63. A. Brette notes that the ministers had always maintained that the king was the final arbiter in election disputes (‘La vérification des pouvoirs à 1'Assemblée Constituante’ in Révolution Française, xxv. 419–20). The reading of this plan was preferred to that of plans by jallet (held by Le Cesve-Jallet, 77; see below p. 211 n. 2) and Thibault (his second effort; see below p. 211 with n. 4).

^{page 204 note 4} Coster, 117.

^{page 204 note 5} Récit des Séances des … Communes, 82.

^{page 204 note 6} As opposed to ‘députations entières’: Procès-verbal… de la Noblesse, 187.

^{page 204 note 7} Récit des séances des … Communes, 101–12: see Creuzé-Latouche, Journal, 79–95.

^{page 205 note 1} See above p. 197 n. 1.

^{page 205 note 2} See above p. 194.

^{page 205 note 3} Jallet, 88.

^{page 205 note 4} See the speeches by Jallet on 13th (Jallet, 87); Dillon on 14th (Moniteur, i. 69–70); and on 16th Joubert (ibid., i. 79) and Laurent (Procès-verbal des séances des députés des Communes depuis le 12 juin jusquʼ au 17 juin, Paris 1789, 99–100). The bookseller diarist S. P. Hardy was present and records Laurent's ‘petit discours, parfaitement analogue à son ministère et aux circonstances’: Mes Loisirs, Bib. Nat. MS. F.fr. 6687, register 8, p. 354. The speeches of Marolle and Mougins de Roquefort on 15th and Bertereau on 16th (Moniteur, i. 70 and 78) were less exhortatory.

The anticipated (see Jallet, 88–90) attack on the three Poitevin curés by their codeputies the bishops of Poitiers and Luçon provided the opportunity for publishing a printed justification: ‘Les trois curés de Poitou, membres de l'Assemblée Nationale et de la Chambre du Clergé, à Messeigneurs les Prélats, députés du Clergé, in Pièces relatives à la démarche de MM. les curés, 17–33. Houtin, 147, lists the 19 who crossed before 19 June.

^{page 205 note 5} Barbotin, Lettres, 15. Strictly speaking the final debate began on the afternoon of 12 June, when 24 deputies spoke: Dolomieu, Journal, sub 12 June. There were no sessions on 14th (Sunday) or on 18th (the octave of the Feast of Corpus Christi).

^{page 205 note 6} See above p. 202–3.

^{page 205 note 7} Jallet, 86.

^{page 205 note 8} Discours sur les principes des droits des Ordres; note especially p. 2. Doubtless this was his theme on 12 June (Coster, 128).

^{page 206 note 1} Letter of 12 May printed by A. Corré and Delourmel ‘Correspondance de Legendre, député de tiers de la sénéchaussée de Brest…’ in Révolution Française, xxxix. 522 n. 3.

^{page 206 note 2} Thus Jallet on 19 May (Jallet, 60) and see Le Cesve (ibid., 89) and Grégoire, Nouvelle Lettre à MM. les curés, 3, 18–22. De Varicourt notes such a speech on 18 May (Journal, fo. 12 marginal addition). See also Jallet Première Lettre …, 7.

^{page 206 note 3} That is in the Nouvelle Lettre à MM. les curés: see above p. 198 with n. 3 and p. 197 n. 1.

^{page 206 note 4} Barbotin, Lettres, 7, and Coster, 109, express the general feeling of frustration. Grégoire pressed home this point that the people's misery was increasing because of the Estates General's inactivity (Jallet, 68).

^{page 206 note 5} Bailly, i. 226, comments that in this the 19 June vote was similar to that in the Third Estate on 10 June: see Récit des Séances des … Communes, 101–12.

^{page 206 note 6} The terms of the motions—the actual wordings are not recorded—are taken from the Récit de ce qui s'est passé dans l'Ordre du Clergé depuis le 19 juin jusquʼau 24 du même mois, printed by Houtin, 58–9.

^{page 207 note 1} Coster, 133; Rangeard, 121–3; Thibault, 47; Vallet, 78–9; Rouph de Varicourt, Mémoires, 39–42 (a copy of a fragment of the Memoirs, written in 1809, is at pp. 37–57 of vol. xii bis of the MS. Matériaux pour la vie de M. Emery in the archives of St. Sulpice Seminary, Paris).

^{page 207 note 2} Barbotin, Lettres, 15–16.

^{page 207 note 3} Jallet, 93.

^{page 207 note 4} According to all the authorities who were probably present on 19 June (with the exception of De Varicourt, whose account was written twenty years after the event) the total of voters for motions II and III exceeds that for motion I. Even the Récit of the Minority allows this, the figures it gives being 135 for I, 127 for II and 9 for III and 3 for IV (Houtin, 59).

^{page 207 note 5} Thibault, 48.

^{page 207 note 6} See Houtin, 145, n. 1.

^{page 207 note 7} Barbotin, Lettres, 15–16: Jallet, 93: Rangeard, 124: Thibault, 48: Vallet, 80.

^{page 208 note 1} See above p. 206, n. 6. Jallet, 124, noted on 8 July that some 2,000 copies of the Récit had been distributed.

^{page 208 note 2} Récit, printed in Houtin, 58–60. The former accusation is probably valid, but not the latter, unless perhaps Charrier de la Roche, Farochon and Samary are the signatories in question, for they did not cross on 24 June: see Houtin, 147.

^{page 208 note 3} Lettres et Bulletins de Barentin à Louis XVI avril–juillet 1789, ed. Aulard, F. A., Paris 1915, 38Google Scholar. The Journal de Paris gave a like account of the voting, thereby eliciting letters from two curés, Viochot and Grégoire (see numbers 172 for 21st, 174 for 23rd and 175 for 24 June). Both Bailly, i. 226, writing some two and a half years later (see F. M. Fling ‘The Mémoires de Bailly’ in University Studies of the University of Nebraska, iii. 5–6) and Dumont, in the Groenvelt Letters, 80–2, written in the early autumn of 1791, give these figures of 137 for motion I, 129 for motion II and 9 for various amendments, figures which seem to have borne the stamp of ‘official’ acceptance although none of the authorities who were probably present gives them. (Dumont based this passage on a letter to Romilly dated 21 June 1789, in which he says ‘Comment donner une suite à des opérations décourues? On blâmera le Journal [i.e. Journal de Paris?] et il ne faudrait blâmer que les Chambres’: Bib. Nat. et Universitaire de Genève, MS. Dumont 17, fo. 29. I am indebted to Mr. J. D. Jarrett for this information.)

^{page 209 note 1} See above p. 194, n. 5. It is doubtful if Saurine and Julien could have been present on 24 June; on this date Le Guen died (Brette, Recueil, ii. 212). The number possibly present on 24 June is therefore not over 294. Braesch, 1789. L'année cruciale, 136–7, follows Houtin and makes his calculations assuming 300 were present on 27 June.

^{page 209 note 2} See above p. 193.

^{page 209 note 3} Jallet, 64.

^{page 209 note 4} Rangeard, 109.

^{page 209 note 5} With the possible exception of Jallet (see below p. 211).

^{page 210 note 1} See above p. 197, n. 5. See the Réfutation de l'ouvrage de M. l'évêque-duc de Langres, ayant pour titre ‘Sur la forme d'opiner aux États Généraux’ par M.L.D.S.M.C.A.C. n.p.n.d., especially 41 f.

^{page 210 note 2} Pp. 7–8 of his speech (see above p. 194 n. 3). See also his Idées élementaires sur la Constitution, Versailles 1789, 10Google Scholar.

^{page 210 note 3} Motion de M. de Coulmiers, abbé d'Abbecourt, député du clergé de Paris extra muros: Sur l'urgence de la réunion des trois états—du 19 juin: sur la discussion faite pendant 5 jours au sujet de la vérification des pouvoirs, n.p. 1789, 11.

^{page 210 note 4} See Bailly, i. 190. The nobles who crossed did not dare to return to their chamber (Sallier, Annales Françaises, i. 7–8).

^{page 210 note 5} See A. Brette, ‘La séance royale de 23 juin 1789’ in Révolution Française, xxii. 125–6. Three of the 149 of 19 June (named above p. 208, n. 2) did not cross on 22 June, but four curés (Galland, Gibert, Malartie, Millet) did who were not of the 149: see Houtin, 147.

^{page 210 note 6} Oeuvres Complètes, ed. Migne, Paris 1855, ii. cols. 1078–80.

^{page 210 note 7} For example the Journal des États Généraux de 1789, Tiers État (Arch. Nat. C 26, 80) says, sub 22 June, the archbishop ‘a dit que cette réunion pour la vérification des pouvoirs était un prélude pour l'opinion par tête’.

^{page 210 note 8} Bailly, i. 257–8. As was Duquesnoy, Journal, i. 117.

^{page 210 note 9} Barbotin, Lettres, 7. See this implication also in his 23 May letter noted above, p. 202, n. 4.

^{page 211 note 1} Motion IV (see above p. 206) expresses this attitude exactly.

^{page 211 note 2} See above p. 204, n. 3. Jallet held that the king had a right to know if the deputies had been properly elected: so did all the deputies. Therefore a committee of representatives of the king and of the three Orders should check the returns (Jallet, 76–7).

^{page 211 note 3} Jallet, 87.

^{page 211 note 4} Procès-verbal des conférences, 35–6. Jallet, 66, suggests the plan was not of Thibault's invention.

^{page 211 note 5} For Le Cesve see Jallet, 91–92; and for Jallet, ‘Les trois curés de Poitou’, in Pièces relatives à la démarche de MM. les curés, 18.

^{page 211 note 6} Jallet, loc. cit.; Grégoire, Nouvelle Lettre à MM. les curés, 26–7. See above pp. 198–9.

^{page 212 note 1} See his Declaration dated Versailles 30 June 1789 (Arch. Nat. C 27 193).

^{page 212 note 2} Bishops Talaru de Chalmazel and Seignelay-Colbert de Castle-Hill also voted to cross. Little is known of either, save that the latter was optimistic that the revolution he saw approaching would turn out well in the end (letter to M. de Barneval, dated Rodez 14 March 1789, printed by G. Martin in ‘Les élections aux États Généraux dans le Sud-Ouest’ in Revolution Française, lxxxi. 236), and that he suffered from rheumatism so severely that he could not be present at the opening of the Estates General (Brette, Recueil, iv. 40: and see letters to Necker and Villedeuil dated Rodez 16 April 1789 in Arch. Nat. AA 62 1550, pieces 176–7).

^{page 212 note 3} Dumont, E., Souvenirs sur Mirabeau et sur les deux premières assemblées législatives, ed. Bénétruy, J., Paris 1951, 66–7Google Scholar.

^{page 212 note 4} See C. Bouvier, Une carrière apologiste du XVIII me. siècle, J. G. Le Franc de Pompignan 1715–1790, Lyon 1903. Emery's comment is in his introduction to Pompignan, Oeuvres Complètes, i. cols. 15–17. De Pradt says shortly ‘C'était un théologien de la grande force et rien au-delà’: Les Quatre Concordats, ii. 51–2.

^{page 212 note 5} De Pradt, op. cit., ii. 50–1. These words (with variations) are also ascribed to the abbé Sicaire de Chapt de Rastignac (Sicard, Le Clergé de France pendant la Révolution, i. 20—authority?) and to a courtier (Bouvier, Une carrière apologiste, 90). De Varicourt expresses a very similar idea: ‘Cet homme qui dans sa longue carrière épiscopale avait si bien mérité de l'Église, et qui ne sembla paraître dans celle de la politique que pour concourir à renverser la religion et à boulverser l'État … cet homme crut à son tour devoir mʼendoctriner …. Je ne sortis jamais de chez lui quʼavec un sentiment de surprise de voir sous ses cheveux blancs aussi peu de connaissance des hommes et de son siècle’: Mémoires, in MS. Matériaux pour la vie de M. Emery, xii bis 38–9.

^{page 212 note 6} At Bordeaux he had opposed a common verification of powers and had urged successfully that the cahiers of the Orders be drawn up separately: L. Lévy-Schneider, L'application du Concordat par un prélat d'Ancien Régime, Mgr. Champion de Cicé, Paris 1921, 28–8. The cahier he had signed there insisted that the three Orders should continue separate: Sicard, i. 9, n. 2.

^{page 213 note 1} See above p. 205, n. 5.

^{page 213 note 2} Coster, 133. Mirabeau, in his Douzième lettre à mes commettans, Paris 1789, 11, said that archbishop Juigné uttered this warning. Rangeard and Vallet do not mention this: perhaps Jallet refers to it when he says (p. 90) that the curés successfully resisted an attempt by the president to debate again the question that had already been discussed.

^{page 213 note 3} See above p. 210.

^{page 213 note 4} See the title of the pamphlet above p. 205, n. 4.

^{page 213 note 5} See his speech on 13 June, above p. 211. See his Idées … sur la Constitution, loc. cit. above p. 210, n. 2.

^{page 214 note 1} Coster, 138.

^{page 214 note 2} See above p. 219 with n. 2. Archbishop Juigné and bishop Beauvais were assaulted on 24 June (Coster, 136; Jallet, 102–3); abbé Maury had had a narrow escape the previous day: Correspondance inédite de C. Desmoulins, ed. M. Matton, Paris 1836, 10.

^{page 214 note 3} Coster, 135, says 25 to 30, though Jallet, 100, says 80 curés remained. ‘L'archevêque de Vienne eut la faiblesse de faire dire aux curés de venir le trouver. Quelques uns sortirent; mais nʼayant point eu de bonnes raisons de l'archevêque, ils voulurent rentrer; les gardes les en empechèrent’ (cited by Brette ‘La séance royale’ in Révolution Française, xxii. 418). Barbotin, Lettres, 22, agrees with Coster that about 30 curés remained, and confirms the latter part of Jallet's account thus: ‘On posta des gardes à toutes les portes. Jʼai du sortir pour besoin d'un instant: il ne me fut plus permis de rentrer’. It seems reasonable to discount Jallet's testimony as to numbers, especially as Barbotin (his letter is dated 25 June) and Coster (see Montjoie quoted by Houtin, xxi) were writing contemporaneously and Jallet somewhat later.

^{page 214 note 4} Jallet, 100–1. It had been the curé leaders, not the prelates (except Lubersac) who had been in favour of crossing on 22 June, before the Royal Session could take place (Jallet, 96) and Pompignan had urged obedience to the king's command that they leave the general assembly chamber at the close of the Session (Jallet, 100).

^{page 214 note 5} Jallet, 101.

^{page 214 note 6} Ibid., 101–2.

^{page 214 note 7} See Bailly, i. 283–4. Creuzé-Latouche says an underground passage was used (Journal, 150): on this see ‘Relation des événements’ ed. Brette in Révolution Française, xxiii. 70–3.

^{page 215 note 1} On 22 June (Thibault, 52)—which committee was immediately engaged on its task, for on 25 June a report was read on those returns of clerical deputies which had been checked (Journal des États Généraux, Tiers État, Arch. Nat. C 26, 180, sub 25); and see the letter of archbishop Cicé to the Keeper of the Seals dated 26 June (Arch. Nat. AA 62 1550, piece 110).

^{page 215 note 2} Thibault, 51. See the remarks of Coster, 134, 138, and of the secret agent (‘Relation des événements’, ed. Brette in Révolution Française, xxiii. 542).

^{page 215 note 3} Bailly, i. 311.

^{page 215 note 4} Réponse de M. Bailly, président de l'Assemblée Nationale, à l'ordre du clergé le 22 juin 1789, n.p.n.d., 2. Note the ‘ordre du clergé’. The passage quoted is not reproduced in the abbreviated versions (Thibault, 51–2; Moniteur, i. 91) of his speech.

^{page 215 note 5} Bailly, i. 292.

^{page 215 note 6} Ibid., i. 289–90. For Pompignan's 22 and 24 June speeches see his Oeuvres Complètes, ii. cols. 1079–80.

^{page 215 note 7} P. Caron, ‘La tentative de contre-révolution de juin–juillet 1789’ in Rev. d'hist. moderne et contemporaine, viii. 13.

^{page 216 note 1} Coster, 140–1; see Jallet, 105–7.

^{page 216 note 2} Récit of the Minority in Houtin, 75–9. On the Nobles' hesitation see Procès-verbal … de la Noblesse, 300–3, and Coster, 141–2.

^{page 216 note 3} Bailly, i. 318; Creuzé-Latouche, Journal, 163.

^{page 216 note 4} These and twenty other autograph protests made 30 June–3 July are in Arch. Nat. C 27 193. Houtin in his list of the protesters (op. cit., 149–50) omits bishop Béthisy de Mézières yet includes curé Benoît who signed the same document on 1 July. The bishop sent a copy of his protest to (?) the Keeper of the Seals on 2 July (Arch. Nat. AA 62 1550, piece 87). The deposition of these protests (with the exception of that of bishop Anterroche, dated 3 July) is recorded in the Procès-verbal de … l'Assemblée Nationale but there is no record here or in Arch. Nat. C 27 193 of protests by Breuvart, Martinet and Thomas (listed by Houtin, 150) or by archbishop Boisgelin—though perhaps Houtin takes his 2 July speech to be such (see below p. 217).

^{page 216 note 5} Lettre du clergé et de la noblesse des États Généraux de Béarn adressé à Mgr. le cardinal De La Rochefoucauld, président de l'ordre du Clergé, et à M. le Due de Luxembourg, président de l'Ordre de la Noblesse, n.p.n.d.—letter dated 1 July 1789. They kept to their decision (Brette, Recueil, ii. 439, n. 1, 538, n. 1.).

^{page 216 note 6} Talleyrand proposed on 7 July that the Assembly should declare imperative mandates annulled (Motion … sur les mandates impératifs, n.p. 1789). But the Assembly decided, following Sieyès—‘Les principes sur lesquels mon opinion est fondée ont déjà été consacrés par l'arrêté du 17 juin’—that there was no need to vote this (Moniteur, i. 135). The mandates were finally decreed null on 19 November 1789.

^{page 217 note 1} The Clerical Minority had recalled in a letter to the king that it was only on these conditions that they obeyed his letter of 27 June (Récit of the Minority in Houtin, 76–7).

^{page 217 note 2} The original document (Arch. Nat. C 27 193) is dated 30 June, on which date it was probably deposited (Bailly, i. 333), but was not read until 2 July (Moniteur, i. 115).

^{page 217 note 3} Défense de la protestation de l'ordre du clergé dans l'Assemblée des trois ordres réunis 1 juillet [sic] 1789, Paris 1789Google Scholar—‘un discours ou il a mis de l'âme et du sentiment’ (marquis de Sillery, Journal des États Généraux, Arch. Nat. KK 641, p. 275). See above p. 197, with n. 3.

^{page 217 note 4} Letter of Boullé to the municipality of Pontivy, dated 2 July, printed by Macé in Rev. de la Révolution, xiv. 46–7.

^{page 217 note 5} Comte de Castellane (author?), Journal des États Généraux, Bib. Nat. MS. nouv. acq. fr. 4121, fo. 55 (cited by Lavaquery, Boisgelin, ii. 14).

^{page 218 note 1} Pétion: ‘Et quel langage la minorité du clergé vient-elle tenir parmi nous?’ and Mirabeau: ‘On ne proteste pas, on ne fait pas de réserves contre la nation’. (Moniteur, i. 116: see 115–7 for the debate generally). In the pseudonymous Lettre de Mgr. l'archevêque d'Aix à Mgr. l'archevêque de Narbonne, n.p. 1789, Boisgelin, having regretted (p. 4) the days when ‘we were, you and I, kings in our provinces’, says (p. 21) that in the present circumstances (i.e. early July) Dillon would doubtless advise his party to protest. ‘Mais protester contre une Nation, contre 24 millions d'hommes, nʼest-ce pas tirer un coup de pistolet contre le tonnerre?: loc. cit.

^{page 218 note 2} Bailly, i. 332 and 333–4.

^{page 218 note 3} See Procès-verbal … de la Noblesse, ed. Paris 1792, 359–77 (the 1789 edition ends at 27 June).

^{page 218 note 4} Moniteur, i. 166.

^{page 218 note 5} See above pp. 194–5.

^{page 218 note 6} See above p. 193

^{page 219 note 1} See above p. 210.

^{page 219 note 2} Cited by Thompson, E., Popular Sovereignty and the French Constituent Assembly 1789–91, Manchester 1952, 120Google Scholar.

^{page 220 note 1} A date which, A. Mathiez taught, marks the split between the bourgeois patriotes and what he considers the once-patriote clergy: see La question religieuse sous la Révolution, being lectures he delivered in the Faculté des Lettres of Paris University in 1928–9.