of the States General, conveys his advice, in an emphatic manner, accompanied by a Charter of Rights, prepared by himself on the basis of the King's propositions :

"After you quitted us yesterday evening, we continued our conversation (Monsieur de la Fayette, Mr. Short, and myself) on the subject of the difficulties which environ you. The desirable object being to secure the good which the King has offered, and to avoid the ill which seems to threaten, an idea was suggested, which appearing to make an impression on Monsieur de La Fayette, I was encouraged to pursue it on my return to Paris, to put it into form, and now to send it to you and him. Is is this; that the King, in a seance royale, should come forward with a Charter of Rights in his hand, to be signed by himself and by every member of the three orders. This charter to contain the five great points which the Resultat of December offered on the part of the King; the abolition of pecuniary privileges offered by the privileged orders, and the adoption of the national debt, and a grant of the sum of money asked from the nation. This last will be a cheap price for the preceding articles; and let the same act declare your immediate separation till the next anniversary meeting. You will carry back to your constituents more good than ever was effected before without violence, and you will stop exactly at the point where violence would otherwise begin. Time will be gained, the public mind will continue to ripen and to be informed, a basis of support may be prepared with the people themselves, and expedients occur for gaining still something further at your next meeting, and for stopping again at the point of force. I have ventured to send yourself and Monsieur de La Fayette a sketch of my ideas of what this act might contain, without endangering any dispute. But it is offered merely as a canvass for you to work on, if it be fit to work on at all. I know too little of the subject, and you know too much of it, to justify me in offering any thing but a hint. I have done it, too, in a hurry: insomuch, that since committing it to writing, it occurs to me that the fifth article may give alarm; that it is in a good degree included in the fourth, and is, therefore, useless. But after all, what excuse can I make, Sir, for this presumption. I have none but an unmeasurable love for your nation, and a painful anxiety lest despotism, after an unaccepted offer to bind its own hands, should seize you again with tenfold fury."

The Charter of Rights accompanying the above letter was a judicious compromise between republicanism and monarchy. It was to have been signed by the King, and every member of the Assembly, individually, in his presence. The rights which it contemplated, embraced the ultimate point, in the opinion of Mr. Jef. ferson, to which the patriots could go in safety, without producing

violence; and with the possession of these powers, he most eagerly and eloquently contended they could obtain, in future, whatever might be further necessary to improve their constitution, and perfect their freedom and happiness. "They thought otherwise, however," says he, "and events have proved their lamentable error. For, after thirty years of war, foreign and domestic, the loss of millions of lives, the prostration of private happiness, and the foreign subjugation of their own country for a time, they have obtained no more, nor even that securely. They were unconscious of (for who could foresee?) the melancholy sequel of their well-meant perseverance; that their physical force would be usurped by a first tyrant to trample on the independence, and even the existence, of other nations; that this would afford a fatal example for the atrocious conspiracy of Kings against their people; would generate their unholy and homicide alliance to make common cause among themselves, and to crush, by the power of the whole, the efforts of any part, to moderate their abuses and oppressions."

In the evening of August 4th, on motion of the Viscount de Noailles, brother-in-law of La Fayette, the Assembly abolished all titles of rank, all the abusive privileges of feudalism, the tythes and casuals of the clergy, all provincial privileges, and, in fine, the feudal regimen generally. Many days were employed in putting into the form of laws, the numerous revocations of abuses; after which, they proceeded to the preliminary work of a Declaration of Rights. An instrument of this kind had been prepared by Mr. Jefferson and La Fayette, and submitted to the Assembly by the latter, on the 11th of July; but the 'sudden occurrence of acts of violence, had suspended all proceedings upon it. There being much concord of opinion on the elements of this instrument, it was liberally framed, and passed with a very general approbation. They then appointed a committee to prepare a projet of a Constitution; at the head of which was the archbishop of Bordeaux. From him, in the name of the committee, Mr. Jefferson received a letter, requesting him to attend and assist at their deliberations. But he excused himself, on the obvious considerations, that his mission was to the King, as Chief Magistrate of the nation, that his duties were limited to the concerns of his own country, and forbade his intermeddling with the internal transactions of France, where he had been received under a specific character only.

The plan of the Constitution was discussed in sections, and so reported from time to time, as agreed to by the committee. The principles of the general frame of the government, proposing the division of its powers into three departments, executive, legislative, and judiciary, were accepted with great unanimity. But when they proceeded to subordinate developments, many and various shades of opinion came into_conflict, and broke the patriots into fragments of very discordant principles. The questions, Whether the king should have a negative on the laws? whether that negative should be absolute, or suspensive only? whether there should be two chambers of legislation, or one only? if two, should one of them be hereditary? or for life? or for a fixed term only? whether named by the king, or elected by the people? These questions encountered strong differencies of opinion, and produced repulsive combinations among the patriots. The aristocracy were cemented by a common principle of preserving the ancient regime, or whatever should be nearest to it. Making this their polar star, they moved in phalanx, gave preponderance to the minorities of the patriots, and always to those who advocated the least change.

In this critical state of things, Mr. Jefferson received a note from the Marquis La Fayette, informing him that he should bring a party of six or eight friends, to ask a dinner of him the next day. He assured him of their welcome. When they came, there were La Fayette himself and seven others, leaders of the different fragments of the reform party, but honest men, and sensible of the necessity of effecting a coalition by mutual sacrifices. Their object in soliciting this conference, was to avail themselves of the counsel and mediation of the American minister, to effect a reconciliation upon the terms which he should decide. The discussions began at the hour of four, and were continued till ten o'clock in the evening; during which Mr. Jefferson was witness to a 'coolness and candor of argument unusual in political conflicts, to a logical reasoning, and a chaste eloquence, disfigured by no gaudy tinsel of rhetoric or declamation, which he thought worthy of being placed in parallel with the finest dialogues of antiquity, as handed to us by Xenophen, by Plato, and Cicero.'

The result of this conference decided the fate of the French Constitution. It was mutually agreed, on the advice of Mr. Jefferson, that the King should have a suspensive veto on the laws;

that the Legislature should be composed of a single body only; and that it should be chosen by the people. This concordat united the patriots on a common ground. They all rallied to the principles thus settled, carried every question agreeably to them, and reduced the aristocracy to impotence and insignificance.

son.

But duties of exculpation were now incumbent upon Mr. JefferHe waited the next morning on Count Montmorin, Minister of foreign affairs, and explained to him, with truth and candor, how it happened that his house had been made the scence of conferences of such a character. Montmorin told him he already knew every thing which had passed; that so far from taking umbrage at his conduct on that occasion, he earnestly wished he would habitually assist at such conferences, being satisfied he would be useful in moderating the warmer spirits, and promoting a wholesome and practicable reformation only. Mr. Jefferson told him he knew too well the duties he owed to the King, to the nation, and to his own country, to take any part in the transactions of their internal government; and that he should persevere, with care, in the character of a neutral and passive spectator, with wishes only, and very sincere ones, that those measures might prevail, which would be for the greatest good of the nation. "I have no doubt, indeed," says Mr. Jefferson, "that this conference was previously known and approved by this honest minister, who was in confidence and communication with the patriots, and wished for a reasonable reformation of the constitution."

At this auspicious stage of the French Revolution, Mr. Jefferson retired from the scene of action; and the wisdom and moderation of his counsels ceased with the opportunities of imparting them. He left France, with warm and unabated expectations, that no serious commotion would take place, and that the nation would soon settle down in the quiet enjoyment of a mass of liberations, to go on improving its condition, in future, by future and successive ameliorations, but never to retrograde. The example of the United States had been viewed as their model on all occasions, and with an authority like that of the bible, open to explanation, but not to question. The King had now become a passive machine in the hands of the National Assembly, and had he been left to himself, would unquestionably have acquiesced in their determinations. A wise constitution would have been formed, hereditary in his line, him

self placed at its head, with powers so large as to enable him to execute all the good of his station, and so limited as to restrain him from its abuse. This constitution he would have faithfully administered, and more than this he never wished. Such was the belief and the hope of Mr. Jefferson; and to one, mortal source, he ascribed the overthrow of all these fond anticipations, and the deluge of crimes and cruelties which subsequently desolated France. To the despotic and disastrous influence of a single woman, he attributed the horrible catastrophe of the French Revolution!

"But he had a Queen of absolute sway over his weak mind and timid virtue, and of a character the reverse of his in all points. This angel, as gaudily painted in the rhapsodies of Burke, with some smartness of fancy, but no sound sense, was proud, disdainful of restraint, indignant at all obstacles to her will, eager in the pursuit of pleasure, and firm enough to hold to her desires, or perish in their wreck. Her inordinate gambling and dissipations, with those of the Count d'Artois, and others of her clique, had been a sensible item in the exhaustion of the treasury, which called into action the reforming hand of the nation; and her opposition to it, her inflexible perverseness, and dauntless spirit, led herself to the Guillotine, drew the King on with her, and plunged the world into crimes and calamities which will for ever stain the pages of modern history. I have ever believed, that had there been no Queen, there would have been no Revolution. No force would have been provoked, nor exercised. The King would have gone hand in hand with the wisdom of his sounder counsellors, who, guided by the increased lights of the age, wished only, with the same pace, to advance the principles of their social constitution. The deed which closed the mortal course of these sovereigns, I shall neither approve nor condemn. I am not prepared to say, that the first magistrate of a nation cannot commit treason against his country, or is unamenable to its punishment: nor yet, that where there is no written law, no regulated tribunal, there is not a law in our hearts, and a power in our hands, given for righteous employment in maintaining right, and redressing wrong. Of those who judged the King, many thought him wilfully criminal; many, that his existence would keep the nation in perpetual conflict with the horde of Kings, who would war against a regeneration which might come home tothemselves, and that it were better that one should die than all. I should not have voted with this portion of the legislature. I should have shut up the Queen in a convent, putting harm out of her power, and placed the King in his station, investing him with limited powers, which, I verily believe, he would have honestly exercised, according to the measure of his understanding. In this way, no void would have been created, courting the usurpation of a military