As a background to this, while there was no conflict of faiths (the vast majority of French being devoutly Catholic) and most of the clergy was committed to reform, the state had problems with the Church. It had been always linked to the crown and thus anti-monarchist views were often manifested in anti-established church views. In addition the national Assembly now viewed itself as the sovereign body in France and thus wanted control over the church. The civil constitution of the Clergy resulting from this desire to bring the church under the same system demanded the clergy swear an oath to the regional government. This split the clergy, as it asked they put the Assembly before the Vatican, and thus many did not sign. These so called Refractory Priests were viewed as enemies of the state and treated with suspicion by the Assembly and thus those who did not swear an oath were suspended form their roles. This had a knock-on effect of a large group of clergy, focused around the southeast and Brittany preaching anti-revolutionary views. The refractory priests were associated with the monarchy, as generally anti-revolutionary and thus were figures of suspicion routed in paranoia of counter-revolution. The National Assembly appropriated church land to pay off creditors and agreed to look after certain church interests, specifically healthcare, education and poor relief. They sold the land in the form of Assignats, a type of bond, which represented entitlement to land, to the bourgeoisie. This currency however was produced more and more and thus resulted in high inflation and more significantly for those already worried about bread prices, a rise in prices. This added to the public dissatisfaction, and thus helped create the environment and circumstances of the failure of the monarchy.
After 1791, tensions increased due to the public dissatisfaction over the peasantry, inflation and the issue of active and passive citizenship, where a large majority were still unable to vote in the ‘democracy’. The sans-culottes, who felt they had played a great part in the revolution specifically after the October days and the Bastille, were angered and thus the debate over passive rights raged in the political clubs, which had become forums for people to express their opinions. While the Jacobins tended to be more conservative and initially supported the limited monarchy, the Cordelier club, which had unrestricted access was more radical and as support for it increased, thus did the anti-monarchy sentiment. The peasants in particular were disgruntled over the buying back of feudal rights (implemented in the August Decrees) and wanted them banned. In addition to this bread prices had become very high and the dissatisfaction led to rural revolution in Brittany and the rising prices and low wages due to high inflation led to protests in Paris. In reaction the Assembly outlawed Trade Unions and the right to strike, under Le Chapelier Law, and closed down charity organisations worried that too many people convening to volunteer in one place could cause trouble. This decreased further the tensions and support for the establishment.
The sans-culottes, voicing their views through the Cordelier Club, wanted the abolition of the monarchy as well as repeal of the recent laws and an active response to the bread problem. The worry that the Assembly was ignoring their views was echoed through an organised demonstration on the champs de Mars, 17th July 1791. The mayor wanted the crowd dispersed and threatened martial law under advice from the Commune and Assembly. In response to the crowd’s refusal to leave, Lafayette opened fire on them and killed about fifty people. The effect of this was that the public were angered and the radicals were alienated. The fear of some effective ‘purge of Paris’ can be reflected in Hebert and Marat’s going into hiding. While the rest of France felt in many ways distanced themselves from the happenings in Paris, it was nevertheless there that the power lay, and thus as fear of a counter-revolution increased the people became more and more suspicious. Along with the refractory priests, the émigré, particularly escaped members of the royal family were treaded as a whole with suspicion, accused of plotting to reinstate Louis’s previous power. The fears were very much exaggerated by his association with Marie Antoinette. As an Austrian Queen she had always been a much-hated figure, but fear of an external Austrian-Prussian invasion increased the concept in the public’s minds that she was an Austrian spy - she was a major instrument in the downfall of the monarchy. When the Assembly labelled all the refractory priests and émigrés as suspects, Louis inadvisably vetoed the measure and thus this seemingly overly frequent use of his veto helped only to heighten suspicion of the King being part of a counter-revolutionary plot.
Lafayette himself was a much-hated figure, seen as perhaps overly ambitious and trying to establish some sort of military dictatorship – a concept that would mean merely replacing the old regime monarchy with a new type of exclusive rule. This combined with the Champs de Mars Massacre helped add to the paranoia of a possible military intervention with the people’s wishes. He was also a Royalist in nature, and thus was associated with Louis; suspicion of him was further reflected in hatred of the monarchy and damaged the prospects of a limited monarchy being successful.
In April 1792 war broke out after Francis II threatened to invade to secure the status and safety of the King. Initially both royalists and anti-royalists supported it, the royalists hoping that an unsuccessful France would bring about the reinstatement of the monarchy, and thus Louis backed it. The latter hoped that it would allow them to flush out the traitors and counter-revolutionaries. Lafayette, the General of the Army supported it and hoped to boost his own profile on the road to establishing a discipline enforced by him. The war was however unsuccessful, and thus created a great deal of satisfaction amongst the people. Suspicion, much justified, of Marie Antoinette as a spy accused of conspiring with the Austrians to overthrow the revolution, was much emphasised and thus Louis’ reputation was further knocked.
The war effort required a call to arms to all Frenchmen to combat the shortage of soldiers immediately facing the Assembly. A fundamental problem here was that the men felt that if they were asked to fight, they should all receive the right to vote. Thus the sans-culottes and particularly the Federes – provincial revolutionaries who became the main body of the National Guard and were strictly anti-monarchy - pored into Paris and demanded that a republic be set up alongside a direct democracy. The National Assembly was by now very desperate and could do little but agree, thus the monarchy was abolished. It seems that while the war was the event upon which the monarchy was abolished, and thus is a major factor, it seems that the build up of anti-monarchy sentiment between 1789 and 1792 was fundamental. The combination of an unwise and unusually old-fashioned king with a dissatisfied public feeling the need for a change, all to a background of difficult economic and social situation helped create the setting. The great suspicion of the monarchy and particularly the Queen, and the paranoia associated with anyone deemed counter-revolutionary (the refractory priests and émigrés) all led to the failure of a limited monarchy.
