the cause of freedom, and wished the people should have the public
enjoyment of their just and national principles. And he was equally
desirous, that his royal master should still retain such a portion of
authority, as would be requisite to the dignity of the first magistrate of
a great nation.--But the accomplishment of such generous sentiments was
utterly impossible. Neither Louis, nor his courtiers could consent to the
limitations of the royal authority, proposed by the reformers, and which
were necessary to a just exercise of power in the people, whose
representatives should share in the administration of the government. And
many of the leaders in the revolution, even in its incipient stage, on the
other hand, had such ambitious views, or visionary projects, that nothing
would satisfy them, but an entire relinquishment of power long claimed and
exercised by the Kings of this ancient nation.

In 1789, the new constitution was proposed by the National Assembly, by
which the distinct and independent power of the monarch was almost
annihilated; and the whole legislative authority was given to the
representatives of the people. That Lafayette, and some others who
advocated this instrument, were actuated by a disinterested love of the
people, and believed that sufficient power was reserved to the King to
secure respect for him, as the political head of the nation, cannot be
doubted. We have only to lament, that subsequent events afforded proofs of
the unfitness of the French people, at that period, for the blessings of a
more popular government. It must also be admitted, that many who professed
republicanism, and boasted of their regard to the people's rights were
unprincipled and ambitious men, whom power had intoxicated, or who
entertained views of government utterly inconsistent with the just
authority of the laws, and the safety of individuals. Lafayette offered the
declaration of the rights of man, at this period, for the sanction of the
assembly: And though he was accused by the anti-revolutionists, as the