A Political and Social History of Modern Europe Part 50

What does it desire? To be something!"

[Sidenote: Meeting of the Estates-General (May, 1789)]

[Sidenote: Const.i.tutional Question Involved in the Organization of the Estates-General]

The position of the Third Estate was still officially undefined when the Estates-General a.s.sembled at Versailles in May, 1789. The king received his advisers with pompous ceremony and a colorless speech, but it was soon obvious that he and the court intended that their business should be purely financial and that their organization should be in accordance with ancient usage; the three estates would thus vote "by order," that is, as three distinct bodies, so that the doubled members.h.i.+p of the Third Estate would have but one vote to the privileged orders' two. With this view the great majority of the n.o.bles and a large part of the clergy, especially the higher clergy, were in full sympathy. On their side the commoners began to argue that the Estates-General should organize itself as a single body, in which each member should have one vote, such voting "by head" marking the establishment of true representation in France, and that the a.s.sembly should forthwith concern itself with a general reformation of the entire government. With the commoners' argument a few of the liberal n.o.bles, headed by Lafayette, and a considerable group of the clergy, particularly the curates, agreed; and it was backed up by the undoubted sentiment of the nation. Bad harvests in 1788 had been followed by an unusually severe winter. The peasantry was in an extremely wretched plight, and the cities, notably Paris, suffered from a shortage of food. The increase of popular distress, like a black cloud before a storm, gave menacing support to the demands of the commoners.

[Sidenote: The King Defied by the Third Estate]

[Sidenote: The "Oath of the Tennis Court," 20 June, 1789]

Over the const.i.tutional question, fraught as it was with the most significant consequences to politics and society, the parties wrangled for a month. The king, unwilling to offend any one, s.h.i.+lly-shallied.

But the uncompromising att.i.tude of the privileged orders and the indecision of the leaders of the court at length forced the issue. On 17 June, 1789, the Third Estate solemnly proclaimed itself a National a.s.sembly. Three days later, when the deputies of the Third Estate came to the hall which had been set apart in the palace of Versailles for their use, they found its doors shut and guarded by troops and a notice to the effect that it was undergoing repairs. Apparently the king was at last preparing to intervene in the contest himself. Then the commoners precipitated a veritable revolution. Led by Mirabeau and Sieyes, they proceeded to a great public building in the vicinity, which was variously used as a riding-hall or a tennis court. There, amidst intense excitement, with upstretched hands, they took an oath as members of the "National a.s.sembly" that they would not separate until they had drawn up a const.i.tution for France. The "Oath of the Tennis Court" was the true beginning of the French Revolution. Without royal sanction, in fact against the express commands of the king, the ancient feudal Estates-General had been transformed, by simple proclamation of the nation's representatives, into a National a.s.sembly, charged with the duty of establis.h.i.+ng const.i.tutional government in France. The "Oath of the Tennis Court" was the declaration of the end of absolute divine- right monarchy and of the beginning of a limited monarchy based on the popular will.

What would the king do under these circ.u.mstances? He might overwhelm the rebellious commoners by force of arms. But that would not solve his financial problems, nor could he expect the French nation to endure it.

It would likely lead to a ruinous civil war. The only recourse left open to him was a game of bluff. He ignored the "Oath of the Tennis Court," and with majestic mien commanded the estates to sit separately and vote "by order." But the commoners were not to be bluffed. Now joined by a large number of clergy and a few n.o.bles, they openly defied the royal authority. In the ringing words of Mirabeau, they expressed their rebellion: "We are here by the will of the people and we will not leave our places except at the point of the bayonet." The weak-kneed, well-intentioned Louis XVI promptly acquiesced. Exactly one week after the scene in the tennis court, he reversed his earlier decrees and directed the estates to sit together and vote "by head."

[Sidenote: Transformation of the Estates-General into the National Const.i.tuent a.s.sembly]

By 1 July, 1789, the first stage in the Revolution was completed. The n.o.bles and clergy were meeting with the commoners. The Estates-General had become the National Const.i.tuent a.s.sembly. As yet, however, two important questions remained unanswered. In the first place, how would the a.s.sembly be a.s.sured of National freedom from the intrigues and armed force of the court? In the second place, what direction would the reforms of the a.s.sembly take?

[Sidenote: The Court Prepares to Use Force against the a.s.sembly]

The answer to the first question was speedily evoked by the court itself. As early as 1 July, a gradual movement of royal troops from the garrisons along the eastern frontier toward Paris and Versailles made it apparent that the king contemplated awing the National a.s.sembly into a more deferential mood. The a.s.sembly, in dignified tone, requested the removal of the troops. The king responded by a peremptory refusal and by the dismissal of Necker [Footnote: Necker had been restored to his office as director-general of finances in 1788] the popular finance- minister. Then it was that Paris came to the rescue of the a.s.sembly.

[Sidenote: Popular Uprising at Paris in Behalf of the a.s.sembly]

[Sidenote: The Destruction of the Bastille, 14 July, 1789]

The Parisian populace, goaded by real want, felt instinctively that its own cause and that of the National a.s.sembly were identical. Fired by an eloquent harangue of a brilliant journalist, Camille Desmoulins (1760- 1794) by name, they rushed to arms. For three days there was wild disorder in the city. Shops were looted, royal officers were expelled, business was at a standstill. On the third day--14 July, 1789--the mob surged out to the east end of Paris, where stood the frowning royal fortress and prison of the Bastille. Although since the accession of Louis XVI the Bastille no longer harbored political offenders, nevertheless it was still regarded as a symbol of Bourbon despotism, a grim threat against the liberties of Paris. The people would now take it and would appropriate its arms and ammunition for use in defense of the National a.s.sembly. The garrison of the Bastille was small and disheartened, provisions were short, and the royal governor was irresolute. Within a few hours the mob was in possession of the Bastille, and some of the Swiss mercenaries who const.i.tuted its garrison had been slaughtered.

[Sidenote: Revolution in the Government of Paris: the Commune]

The fall of the Bastille was the first serious act of violence in the course of the Revolution. It was an unmistakable sign that the people were with the a.s.sembly rather than with the king. It put force behind the a.s.sembly's decrees. Not only that, but it rendered Paris practically independent of royal control, for, during the period of disorder, prominent citizens had taken it upon themselves to organize their own government and their own army. The new local government--the "commune," as it was called--was made up of those elected representatives of the various sections or wards of Paris who had chosen the city's delegates to the Estates-General. It was itself a revolution in city government: it subst.i.tuted popularly elected officials in place of royal agents and representatives of the outworn gilds. And the authority of the commune was sustained by a popularly enrolled militia, styled the National Guard, which soon numbered 48,000 champions of the new cause.

[Sidenote: Temporary Acquiescence of the King]

The fall of the Bastille was such a clear sign that even Louis XVI did not fail to perceive its meaning. He instantly withdrew the royal troops and recalled Necker. He recognized the new government of Paris and confirmed the appointment of the liberal Lafayette to command the National Guard. He visited Paris in person, praised what he could not prevent, and put on a red-white-and-blue c.o.c.kade--combining the red and blue of the capital city with the white of the Bourbons--the new national tricolor of France. Frenchmen still celebrate the fourteenth of July, the anniversary of the fall of the Bastille, as the independence day of the French nation.

[Sidenote: Renewed Intrigues of the Royal Family against the a.s.sembly]

For a while it seemed as though reform might now go forward without further interruption. The freedom of the a.s.sembly had been affirmed and upheld. Paris had settled down once more into comparative repose. The king had apparently learned his lesson. But the victory of the reformers had been gained too easily. Louis XVI might take solemn oaths and wear strange c.o.c.kades, but he remained in character essentially weak. His very virtues--good intentions, love of wife, loyalty to friends--were continually abused. The queen was bitterly opposed to the reforming policies of the National a.s.sembly and actively resented any diminution of royal authority. Her clique of court friends and favorites disliked the decrease of pensions and amus.e.m.e.nts to which they had long been accustomed. Court and queen made common cause in appealing to the good qualities of Louis XVI. What was the weak king to do under the circ.u.mstances? He was to fall completely under the domination of his entourage.

[Sidenote: Demonstrations of the Parisian Women at Versailles, October, 1789]

The result was renewed intrigues to employ force against the obstreperous deputies and their allies, the populace of Paris. This time it was planned to bring royal troops from the garrisons in Flanders. And on the night of 1 October, 1789, a supper was given by the officers of the bodyguard at Versailles in honor of the arriving soldiers. Toasts were drunk liberally and royalist songs were sung.

News of the "orgy," as it was termed, spread like wildfire in Paris, where hunger and suffering were more prevalent than ever. That city was starving while Versailles was feasting. The presence of additional troops at Versailles, it was believed, would not only put an end to the independence of the a.s.sembly but would continue the starvation of Paris. More excited grew the Parisians.

On 5 October was presented a strange and uncouth spectacle. A long line of the poorest women of Paris, including some men dressed as women, riotous with fear and hunger and rage, armed with sticks and clubs, screaming "Bread! bread! bread!" were straggling along the twelve miles of highway from Paris to Versailles. They were going to demand bread of the king. Lafayette and his National Guardsmen, who had been unable or unwilling to allay the excitement in Paris, marched at a respectful distance behind the women out to Versailles.

By the time Lafayette reached the royal palace, the women were surrounding it, howling and cursing, and demanding bread or blood; only the fixed bayonets of the troops from Flanders had prevented them from invading the building, and even these regular soldiers were weakening.

Lafayette at once became the man of the hour. He sent the soldiers back to the barracks and with his own force undertook the difficult task of guarding the property and lives of the royal family and of feeding and housing the women for the night. Despite his precautions, it was a wild night. There was continued tumult in the streets and, at one time, shortly before dawn, a gang of rioters actually broke into the palace and groped about in search of the queen's apartments. Just in the nick of time the hated Marie Antoinette hurried to safer quarters, although several of her personal bodyguard were killed in the melee.

When the morning of 6 October had come, Lafayette addressed the crowd, promising them that they should be provided for, and, at the critical moment, there appeared at his side on the balcony of the palace the royal family--the king, the little prince, the little princess, and the queen--all wearing red-white-and-blue c.o.c.kades. A hush fell upon the mob. The respected general leaned over and gallantly kissed the hand of Marie Antoinette. A great shout of joy went up. Apparently even the queen had joined the Revolution. The Parisians were happy, and arrangements were made for the return journey.

[Sidenote: Forcible Removal of the Court and a.s.sembly from Versailles to Paris]

The procession of 6 October from Versailles to Paris was more curious and more significant than that of the preceding day in the opposite direction. There were still the women and the National Guardsmen and Lafayette on his white horse and a host of people of the slums, but this time in the midst of the throng was a great lumbering coach, in which rode Louis and his wife and children, for Paris now insisted that the court should no longer possess the freedom of Versailles in which to plot unwatched against the rights of the French people. All along the procession reechoed the shout, "We have the baker and the baker's wife and the little cook-boy--now we shall have bread." And so the court of Louis XVI left forever the proud, imposing palace of Versailles, and came to humbler lodgings [Footnote: In the palace of the Tuileries.] in the city of Paris.

Paris had again saved the National a.s.sembly from royal intimidation, and the a.s.sembly promptly acknowledged the debt by following the king to that city. After October, 1789, not reactionary Versailles but radical Paris was at once the scene and the impulse of the Revolution.

The "Fall of the Bastille" and the "March of the Women to Versailles"

were the two picturesque events which a.s.sured the independence of the National a.s.sembly from the armed force and intrigue of the court.

Meanwhile, the answer to the other question which we propounded above, "What direction would the reforms of the a.s.sembly take?" had been supplied by the people at large.

[Sidenote: Disintegration of the Old Regime throughout France]

[Sidenote: Peasant Reprisals against the n.o.bility]

Ever since the a.s.sembling of the Estates-General, ordinary administration of the country had been at a standstill. The people, expecting great changes, refused to pay the customary taxes and imposts, and the king, for fear of the National a.s.sembly and of a popular uprising, hesitated to compel tax collection by force of arms.

The local officials did not know whether they were to obey the a.s.sembly or the king. In fact, the a.s.sembly was for a time so busy with const.i.tutional questions that it neglected to provide for local government, and the king was always timorous. So, during the summer of 1789, the inst.i.tutions of the "old regime" disappeared throughout France, one after another, because there was no popular desire to maintain them and no competent authority to enforce them. The insurrection in Paris and the fall of the Bastille was the signal in July for similar action elsewhere: other cities and towns subst.i.tuted new elective officers for the ancient royal or gild agents and organized National Guards of their own. At the same time the direct action of the people spread to the country districts. In most provinces the oppressed peasants formed bands which stormed and burned the chateaux of the hated n.o.bles, taking particular pains to destroy feudal or servile t.i.tle-deeds. Monasteries were often ransacked and pillaged.

A few of the unlucky lords were murdered, and many others were driven into the towns or across the frontier. Amid the universal confusion, the old system of local government completely collapsed. The intendants and governors quitted their posts. The ancient courts of justice, whether feudal or royal, ceased to act. The summer of 1789 really ended French absolutism, and the transfer of the central government from Versailles to Paris in October merely confirmed an accomplished fact.

[Sidenote: The Revolution Social as well as Political]

Whatever had been hitherto the reforming policies of the National a.s.sembly, the deputies henceforth faced facts rather than theories.

Radical social readjustments were now to be effected along with purely governmental and administrative changes. The Revolution was to be social as well as political.

THE END OF THE OLD ReGIME: THE NATIONAL CONSt.i.tUENT a.s.sEMBLY, 1789-1791

[Sidenote: Achievements of the National a.s.sembly, 1789-1791]

By the transformation of the Estates-General into the National Const.i.tuent a.s.sembly, France had become to all intents and purposes a limited monarchy, in which supreme authority was vested in the nation's elected representatives. From October, 1789, to September, 1791, this a.s.sembly was in session in Paris, endeavoring to bring order out of chaos and to fas.h.i.+on a new France out of the old that was dying of exhaustion and decrepitude. Enormous was the task, but even greater were the achievements. Although the work of the a.s.sembly during the period was influenced in no slight degree by the Parisian populace, nevertheless it was attended by comparative peace and security. And the work done was by far the most vital and most lasting of the whole revolutionary era.

Leaving out of consideration for the time the frightened royal family, the startled n.o.blemen and clergy, the determined peasantry, and the excited townsfolk, and not adhering too closely to chronological order, let us center our attention upon the National a.s.sembly and review its major acts during those momentous years, 1789-1791.

[Sidenote: 1. Legal Destruction of Feudalism and Serfdom]

The first great work of the a.s.sembly was the legal destruction of feudalism and serfdom--a long step in the direction of social equality.

We have already noticed how in July while the a.s.sembly was still at Versailles, the royal officers in the country districts had ceased to rule and how the peasants had destroyed many _chateaux_ amid scenes of unexpected violence. News of the rioting and disorder came to the a.s.sembly from every province and filled its members with the liveliest apprehension. A long report, submitted by a special investigating committee on 4 August, 1789, gave such harrowing details of the popular uprising that every one was convinced that something should be done at once.

[Sidenote: "The August Days"]

While the a.s.sembly was debating a declaration which might calm revolt, one of the n.o.bles--a relative of Lafayette--arose in his place and stated that if the peasants had attacked the property and privileges of the upper cla.s.ses, it was because such property and privileges represented unjust inequality, that the fault lay there, and that the remedy was not to repress the peasants but to suppress inequality. It was immediately moved and carried that the a.s.sembly should proclaim equality of taxation for all cla.s.ses and the suppression of feudal and servile dues. Then followed a scene almost unprecedented in history.

n.o.ble vied with n.o.ble, and clergyman with clergyman, in renouncing the vested rights of the "old regime." The game laws were repudiated. The manorial courts were suppressed. Serfdom was abolished. t.i.thes and all sorts of ecclesiastical privilege were sacrificed. The sale of offices was discontinued. In fact, all special privileges, whether of cla.s.ses, of cities, or of provinces, were swept away in one consuming burst of enthusiasm. The holocaust lasted throughout the night of the fourth of August. Within a week the various independent measures had been consolidated into an impressive decree "abolis.h.i.+ng the feudal system,"

and this decree received in November the royal a.s.sent. What many reforming ministers had vainly labored for years partially to accomplish was now done, at least in theory, by the National a.s.sembly in a few days. The so-called "August Days" promised to dissolve the ancient society of France.

It has been customary to refer these vast social changes to the enthusiasm, magnanimity, and self-sacrifice of the privileged orders.

That there was enthusiasm is unquestionable. But it may be doubted whether the n.o.bles and clergy were so much magnanimous as terrorized.

For the first time, they were genuinely frightened by the peasants, and it is possible that the true measure of their "magnanimity" was their alarm. Then, too, if one is to sacrifice, he must have something to sacrifice. At most, the n.o.bles had only legal claims to surrender, for the peasants had already taken forcible possession of nearly everything which the decree accorded them. In fact the decree of the a.s.sembly const.i.tuted merely a legal and uniform recognition of accomplished facts.

The n.o.bles may have thought, moreover, that liberal acquiescence in the first demands of the peasantry would save themselves from further demands. At any rate, they zealously set to work in the a.s.sembly to modify what had been done, to secure financial or other indemnity, [Footnote: The general effect of the series of decrees of the a.s.sembly from 5 to 11 August, 1789, was to impose some kind of financial redemption for many of the feudal dues. It was only in July, 1793, almost four years after the "August Days," that _all_ feudal dues and rights were legally abolished without redemption or compensation.]