idea of the sovereignty of the principal over the delegate made rapid
progress. Those who had no share in authority, formed assemblies, and then
gave themselves up to discussion; soldiers debated at the Oratoire,
journeymen tailors at the Colonnade, hairdressers in the Champs Elysees,
servants at the Louvre; but the most animated debates took place in the
Palais Royal. There were inquired into the questions that occupied the
national assembly, and its discussions criticised. The dearth of
provisions also brought crowds together, and these mobs were not the least
dangerous.

Such was the state of Paris when the debate concerning the veto was begun.
The alarm which this right conferred on the king excited, was extreme. It
seemed as though the fate of liberty depended on the decision of this
question, and that the veto alone would bring back the ancient system. The
multitude, ignorant of the nature and limits of power, wished the
assembly, on which it relied, to do all, and the king, whom it mistrusted,
to do nothing. Every instrument left at the disposal of the court appeared
the means of a counter-revolution. The crowds at the Palais Royal grew
turbulent; threatening letters were sent to those members of the assembly,
who, like Mounier, had declared in favour of the absolute veto. They spoke
of dismissing them as faithless representatives, and of marching upon
Versailles. The Palais Royal sent a deputation to the assembly, and
required the commune to declare that the deputies were revocable, and to
make them at all times dependent on the electors. The commune remained
firm, rejected the demands of the Palais Royal, and took measures to
prevent the riotous assemblies. The national guard supported it; this body
was well disposed; Lafayette had acquired its confidence; it was becoming
organised, it wore a uniform, submitted to discipline after the example of
the French guard, and learned from its chief the love of order and respect
for the law. But the middle class that composed it had not yet taken