Page:Memoir, correspondence, and miscellanies, from the papers of Thomas Jefferson - Volume 1.djvu/100

 84

.

Archbishop of Bordeaux. I received from him, as chairman of the Committee, a letter of July the 20th, requesting me to attend and assist at their deliberations ; but I excused myself, on the obvious considerations, that my mission was to the King as Chief Magis trate of the nation, that my duties were limited to the concerns of my own country, and forbade me to intermeddle with the internal transactions of that, in which I had been received under a specific character only. Their plan of a constitution was discussed in sections, and so reported from time to time, as agreed to by the Committee. The first respected the general frame of the govern ment ; and that this should be formed into three departments, Executive, Legislative and Judiciary, was generally agreed. But when they proceeded to subordinate developements, many and various shades of opinion came into conflict, and schism, strongly marked, broke the Patriots into fragments of very discordant principles. The first question, Whether there should be a King ? met with no open opposition ; and it was readily agreed, that the government of France should be monarchical and hereditary. Shall the King have a negative on the laws ? shall that negative be absolute, or suspensive only ? Shall there be two Chambers of Legislation ? or one only ? If two, shall one of them be hereditary ? or for life ? or for a fixed term ? and named by the King ? or elected by the people ? These questions found strong differences of opinion, and produced repulsive combinations among the Patriots. The Aristocracy was cemented by a common principle, of pre serving the antient regime, or whatever should be nearest to it. Making this their polar star, they moved in phalanx, gave prepon derance on every question to the minorities of the Patriots, and always to those who advocated the least change. The features of the new constitution were thus assuming a fearful aspect, and great alarm was produced among the honest Patriots by these dissen- tions in their ranks. In this uneasy state of things, I received one day a note from the Marquis de la Fayette, informing me, that he should bring a party of six or eight friends, to ask a dinner of me the next day. I assured him of their welcome. When they arrived, they were La Fayette himself, Duport, Barnave, Alex ander la Meth, Blacon, Mounier, Maubourg, and Dagout. These were leading Patriots, of honest but differing opinions, sensible of the necessity of effecting a coalition by mutual sacrifices, knowing each other, and not afraid, therefore, to unbosom themselves mu tually. This last was a material principle in the selection. With this view, the Marquis had invited the conference, and had fixed the time and place inadvertently, as to the embarrassment under which it might place me. The cloth being removed, and wine