it settled the question. People did not stop to consider that it was
the dashing speech of an orator and not the matured judgment of a
financial expert; they did not see that calling Mirabeau or Talleyrand
to advise upon a monetary policy, because they had shown boldness in
danger and strength in conflict, was like summoning a prize-fighter to
mend a watch.

In vain did Maury show that, while the first issues of John Law's
paper had brought prosperity, those that followed brought misery; in
vain did he quote from a book published in John Law's time, showing
that Law was at first considered a patriot and friend of humanity; in
vain did he hold up to the Assembly one of Law's bills and appeal to
their memories of the wretchedness brought upon France by them; in
vain did Du Pont present a simple and really wise plan of substituting
notes in the payment of the floating debt which should not form a part
of the ordinary circulating medium; nothing could resist the eloquence
of Mirabeau. Barnave, following, insisted that "Law's paper was based
upon the phantoms of the Mississippi; ours, upon the solid basis of
ecclesiastical lands," and he proved that the _assignats_ could not
depreciate further. Prudhomme's newspaper poured contempt over gold
as security for the currency, extolled real estate as the only true
basis and was fervent in praise of the convertibility and
self-adjusting features of the proposed scheme. In spite of all this
plausibility and eloquence, a large minority stood firm to their
earlier principles; but on the 29th of September, 1790, by a vote of
508 to 423, the deed was done; a bill was passed authorizing the issue
of eight hundred millions of new _assignats_, but solemnly declaring
that in no case should the entire amount put in circulation exceed
twelve hundred millions. To make assurance doubly sure, it also
provided that as fast as the _assignats_ were paid into the treasury