One institution, however, was nowhere attacked or discussed.  It is not true,” says M. Malouet, “that we were sent to constitute the kingship, but undoubtedly to regulate the exercise of powers conformably with our instructions.  Was not the kingship constituted in law and in fact?  Were we not charged to respect it, to maintain it on all its bases?” Less than a year after the Revolution had begun, Mirabeau wrote privately to the king:  “Compare the new state of things with the old regimen, there is the source of consolations and hopes.  A portion of the acts of the National Assembly, and the most considerable too, is clearly favorable to monarchical government.  Is it nothing, pray, to be without Parliaments, without states-districts, without bodies of clergy, of privileged, of noblesse?  The idea of forming but one single class of citizens would have delighted Richelieu.  This even surface facilitates the exercise of power.  Many years of absolute government could not have done so much as this single year of revolution for the kingly authority.”

Genius has lights which cannot be obscured by either mental bias or irregularities of life.  Rejected by the noblesse, dreaded by the third estate, even when it was under his influence, Mirabeau constantly sought alliance between the kingship and liberty.  “What is most true and nobody can believe,” he wrote to the Duke of Lauzun on the 24th of December, 1788, “is that, in the National Assembly, I shall be a most zealous monarchist, because I feel most deeply how much need we have to slay ministerial despotism and resuscitate the kingly authority.”  The States-general were scarcely assembled when the fiery orator went to call upon M. Malouet.  The latter was already supposed to be hostile to the revolution.  “Sir,” said Mirabean, “I come to you because of your reputation; and your opinions, which are nearer my own than you suppose, determine this step on my part.  You are, I know, one of liberty’s discreet friends, and so am I; you are scared by the tempests gathering, and I no less; there are amongst us more than one hot head, more than one dangerous man; in the two upper orders all that have brains have not common sense, and amongst the fools I know several capable of setting fire to the magazine.  The question, then, is to know whether the monarchy and the monarch will survive the storm which is a-brewing, or whether the faults committed and those which will not fail to be still committed will ingulf us all.”

M. Malouet listened, not clearly seeing the speaker’s drift.  Mirabeau resumed:  “What I have to add is very simple I know that you are a friend of M. Necker’s and of M. de Montmorin’s, who form pretty nearly all the king’s council; I don’t like either of them, and I don’t suppose that they have much liking for me.  But it matters little whether we like one another, if we can come to an understanding.  I desire, then, to know their intentions.  I apply to you to