Historical voices

A Declaration of Rights is, by reciprocity, a Declaration of Duties also.

It Should be the same to all, whether it protects or punishes; and all being equal in its sight, are equally eligible to all Honours, Places, and employments, according to their different abilities, without any other distinction than that…

It is the faculty of the human mind to become what it contemplates, and to act in unison with its object.

This is the general character of aristocracy, or what are called Nobles or Nobility, or rather No-ability, in all countries.

It lost ground from contempt more than from hatred; and was rather jeered at as an ass, than dreaded as a lion.

The more aristocracy appeared, the more it was despised; there was a visible imbecility and want of intellects in the majority, a sort of je ne sais quoi, that while it affected to be more than citizen, was less than man.

On the other hand, the Nation disowned knowing anything of them but as citizens, and was determined to shut out all such up-start pretensions.

The Aristocracy had hitherto opposed the despotism of the Court, and affected the language of patriotism; but it opposed it as its rival (as the English Barons opposed King John) and it now opposed the nation from the same motives.

It was become evident, that no constitution, worthy of being called by that name, could be established on anything less than a national ground.

It was Government dethroning Government; and the old one, by attempting to make a new one, made a chasm.

It was a sort of new form of government that insensibly served to put the old one out of sight and to unhinge it from the superstitious authority of antiquity.

But the spirit of the nation was not to be overcome, and it was so fully sensible of the strong ground it had taken--that of withholding taxes--that it contented itself with keeping up a sort of quiet resistance, which effectually…

The thing, in many points, contained better principles than those upon which the Government had hitherto been administered; but with respect to the Cour Pleniere, it was no other than a medium through which despotism was to pass, without…

The Parliaments on their part insisted that they had not only a right to remonstrate, but to reject; and on this ground they were always supported by the nation.

Man cannot, properly speaking, make circumstances for his purpose, but he always has it in his power to improve them when they occur, and this was the case in France.

A knowledge of the practice was then joined to the theory; and all that was wanting to give it real existence was opportunity.

The American constitutions were to liberty what a grammar is to language: they define its parts of speech, and practically construct them into syntax.

Many of the facts were in themselves principles; such as the declaration of American Independence, and the treaty of alliance between France and America, which recognised the natural rights of man, and justified resistance to oppression.

The mind of the nation had changed beforehand, and the new order of things has naturally followed the new order of thoughts.

It has apparently burst forth like a creation from a chaos, but it is no more than the consequence of a mental revolution priorily existing in France.

All circumstances taken together, the French Revolution is the most astonishing that has hitherto happened in the world.

It cannot be ingrafted on a good one; and wherever the forms in any government are bad, it is a certain indication that the principles are bad also.

It is impossible to practise a bad form on anything but a bad principle.

Forms grow out of principles, and operate to continue the principles they grow from.