times, progress is rapid, and all that seeks to check it is superfluous.
In England, the house of lords, although docile, was suspended during the
crisis. These various systems have each their epoch; revolutions are
achieved by one chamber, and end with two.

The royal sanction gave rise to great debates in the assembly, and violent
clamours without. The question was as to the part of the king in the
making of laws; the deputies were nearly all agreed on one point. They
were determined, in admitting his right to sanction or refuse laws; but
some desired that this right should be unlimited, others that it should be
temporary. This, in reality, amounted to the same thing, for it was not
possible for the king to prolong his refusal indefinitely, and the veto,
though absolute, would only have been suspensive. But this faculty,
bestowed on a single man, of checking the will of the people, appeared
exorbitant, especially out of the assembly, where it was less understood.

Paris had not yet recovered from the agitation of the 14th of July; the
popular government was but beginning, and the city experienced all its
liberty and disorder. The assembly of electors, who in difficult
circumstances had taken the place of a provisional corporation, had just
been replaced. A hundred and eighty members nominated by the districts,
constituted themselves legislators and representatives of the city. While
they were engaged on a plan of municipal organization, each desired to
command; for in France the love of liberty is almost the love of power.
The committees acted apart from the mayor; the assembly of representatives
arose against the committees, and the districts against the assembly of
representatives. Each of the sixty districts attributed to itself the
legislative power, and gave the executive power to its committees; they
all considered the members of the general assembly as their subordinates,
and themselves as invested with the right of annulling their decrees. This