Again， they put forth the pretext of the necessity of maintaining one's influence for important occasions. Occasionally， they affect to say， or say it in good faith， Let them (the extravagant) keep on， they will find each other out and use themselves up." -- Frequently， the motives alleged are scandalous or grotesque. According to Barbaroux， immediate execution must be voted， because that is the best way to exculpate the Gironde and shut the mouths of their Jacobin calumniators.[47] According to Berlier， it is essential to vote death for， why vote for exile？ Louis XVI. would be torn to pieces before reaching the frontier.[48] -- On the eve of the verdict， Vergniaud says to M. de Ségur： "I vote Death？ It is an insult to suppose me capable of such a disgraceful act！" And， "he sets forth the frightful iniquity of such a course， its uselessness， and even its danger." "Iwould rather stand alone in my opinion than vote Death！"[49] The next day， having voted Death， he excuses himself by saying "that he did not think he ought to put the life of one man in the scale against the public welfare."[50] Fifteen or twenty deputies， influenced by his example， voted as he did， which was enough to turn the majority.[51]
The same weakness is found at other decisive moments. Charged with the denunciation of the conspiracy of the 10th of March， Vergniaud attributes it to the aristocrats， and admits to Louvet that "he did not wish to name the real conspirators for fear of embittering violent men already pushing things to excess."[52] The truth is， the Girondists， as formerly the Constitutionalists， are too civilized for their adversaries， and submit to force for lack of resolution to employ it themselves.
"To put down the faction，" says one of them，[53] "can be done only by cutting its throat， which， perhaps， would not be difficult to do. All Paris is as weary as we are of its yoke， and if we had any liking for or knowledge how to deal with insurrections， we could soon throw it off. But how can we make men adopt such necessary atrocious measures when they are criticizing their adversaries for taking these？ And yet they would have saved the country." Consequently， incapable of action， able only to talk， reduced to protests， to barring the way to revolutionary decrees， to making appeals to the department against Paris， they stand as an obstacle to all the practical people who are heartily engaged in the brunt of the action. -- "There is no doubt that Carnot is as honest as they are， as honest as a fanatic spectator can be."[54] Cambon， undoubtedly with as much integrity as Roland， spoke as loudly up as he against the 2nd of September， the Commune， and anarchy.[55] -- But， to Carnot and Cambon， who pass their nights， one in establishing his budgets， and the other in studying his military maps， they require， first of all， a government which will provide them with money and with soldiers， and， therefore， an unscrupulous and unanimous Convention ； that is to say， there being no other expedient， a Convention under compulsion， i.e. a Convention purged of troublesome some， dissentient speakers；[56] in other words， the dictatorship of the Parisian proletariat. After the 15th of December， 1792， Cambon completely accepts this， and even erects the dictatorship of the proletariat into an European system. From that time[57] he preaches universal sans-culotterie， a form of government in which the poor will rule and the rich will pay， in short， the restoration of privileges in an inverse sense. The later expression of Siéyès which has already come true： the problem is no longer how to apply the principles of the Revolution， but the salvation of its men.
Faced with this more and more distressing imperative， many of undecided deputies go with the tide， letting the Montagnards have their own way and separate themselves from the Girondists.
And， what is graver still， the Girondists， apart from all these defections， are untrue to themselves. Not only are they ignorant of how to draw a line， of how to form themselves into a compact body： not only "is the very idea of a collective proceeding repulsive， each member desiring to keep himself independent. and act as he thinks best，"[58] make motions without consulting others， and vote as the occasion calls for against his party， but， through its abstract principle， they are in accord with their adversaries， and， on the fatal declivity whereon their honorable and humane instincts still retain them， this common dogma， like a concealed weight， causes them to sink lower and lower down， even into the bottomless pit， where the State， according to the formula of Jean Jacques， omnipotent， philosophic， anti-Catholic， anti-Christian， despotic， leveling， intolerant， and propagandist， seizes education， levels fortunes， persecutes the Church， oppresses consciences， crushes out the individual， and， by military foice， imposes its structures abroad.[59]
Basically， apart from the Jacobin excess of brutality and of precipitation， the Girondists， setting out from the same principles as the Jacobin "Mountain，" march forward to the same end along with them.
Hence the effect of ideological prejudice on them in weakening their moral attitudes. Secretly， in their hearts， revolutionary desires conspire with those of their enemies， and， on many occasions， make them betray themselves. -- Through these devices and multiplied weaknesses， on the one hand， the majority diminishes so as to present but 279 votes against 228.[60] And， on the other hand， through frequent failures， it surrenders to the besiegers one by one every commanding post of the public citadel. Now， at the first attack， nothing remains but to fly， or to beg for mercy.
IV. Jacobin victory over Girondin majority.
Principal decrees of the Girondist majority. -- Arms and means of attack surrendered by it to its adversaries.