was determined on, and attempts made to separate them, first by etiquette,
then by intrigue, and lastly, by force. The recollection of the ancient
states-general prevailed in the court; it thought it could regulate the
present by the past, restrain Paris by the army, the deputies of the third
estate by those of the nobility, rule the states by separating the orders,
and separate the orders by reviving ancient customs which exalted the
nobles and lowered the commons. Thus, after the first sitting, it was
supposed that all had been prevented by granting nothing.

On the 6th of May, the day after the opening of the states, the nobility
and clergy repaired to their respective chambers, and constituted
themselves. The third estate being, on account of its double
representation, the most numerous order, had the Salle des Etats allotted
to it, and there awaited the two other orders; it considered its situation
as provisional, its members as presumptive deputies, and adopted a system
of inactivity till the other orders should unite with it. Then a memorable
struggle commenced, the issue of which was to decide whether the
revolution should be effected or stopped. The future fate of France
depended on the separation or reunion of the orders. This important
question arose on the subject of the verification of powers. The popular
deputies asserted very justly, that it ought to be made in common, since,
even if the union of the orders were refused, it was impossible to deny
the interest which each of them had in the examination of the powers of
the others; the privileged deputies argued, on the contrary, that since
the orders had a distinct existence, the verification ought to be made
respectively. They felt that one single co-operation would, for the
future, render all separation impossible.

The commons acted with much circumspection, deliberation, and steadiness.
It was by a succession of efforts, not unattended with peril, by slow and