Constitution of 1791

France faced many problems in 1791 including a King who had recently made every effort to flee his subjects.  Some of these subjects presented a petition for the King’s removal on his return only for this peaceful demonstration to end in a massacre at the Champs de Mars.  However the Constitutional Assembly created a Constitution cementing they hoped their achievements of recent years.

The drafting of the Constitution started on the 14th of July 1789 just as the Bastille was stormed.  Difficulties arose after the Declarations of the Rights of Man was accepted.  The text suggested that “men are born and remain free and equal in rights,” would this follow through to the constitution in terms of political rights?  Much to the disquiet of many it was agreed that there would be active citizens who would be over the age of 25 and paid taxes who would have full political rights.  Passive citizens referred to all others who would enjoy civil but not political rights.  Women enjoyed no political rights and very little in the way of civil rights either.

The finalised Constitution was created by a range of factors.  It was created as much as by the many who sat on the various committees to draft it such as Barnave, Duport, Talleyrand and Abbé Sieyès.  As well as the prevailing debates of the day into which was the superior system the American or British model?  The principles of Montesquieu were adopted as there was a separation of powers between the King and his ministers acting as the executive, the Assembly performing the role of the legislature and an independent and neutral judiciary.  It was perhaps the events of the day which had the biggest impact the rise of numerous factions and clubs and the bloody events of the massacre of the Champ De Mars created a Constitution which is surprisingly conservative in outlook.  With the Feuillants in the ascendancy the King was allowed to maintain many powers such as appointment of ministers and generals and significantly the power to veto laws.  

Germaine De Staël considers the Constitution of 1791.  Taken from Considerations on the Principle events of the French Revolution, Germaine De Staël, Liberty Fund, Indianapolis (2008) p282

The ill-fated constitution, so good in its foundation and so bad in its superstructure, was presented to the acceptance of the King.  He certainly could not refuse it, as it put an end to his captivity; but the public flattered itself that his consent was voluntary.  Fetes were held as if for a season of happiness; rejoicings were ordered that people might persuade themselves that the danger was over; the words “King,” “Representative Assembly,” “Constitutional Monarchy” corresponded to the real wishes of all the French.   They thought they had attained realities when they had acquired only names.

The Marquis de Bouille’s opinion on the Constitution of 1791.  Taken from Memoirs Relating to the French Revolution by the Marquis de Bouille, Cadell and Davies, London (1797) p268

This constitution was in itself so defective, so incomplete, and discovered daily so many errors in its formation, that to maintain and execute it was impossible, as events have since proved ; besides, the constitutionalists being all men of intriguing, turbulent characters, it was impossible to be faithful to their constitution without being continually on your guard against their schemes and machinations, and this again exposed you to their jealousy and hatred. Respect and attachment to the king, though ordered by the theory of the constitution, were considered by them as criminal. If then the situation of the king was painful and trying, mine was likewise irksome in the extreme. What must be the feelings of a man of honour compelled, by conscience and his duty, to act constantly in opposition to his principles, and obliged to appear in a feigned character before the different factions, who called perfidy whatever tended to oppose their madness and villany?