Tennis Court Oath Essay

687 Words3 Pages

In the Tennis Court Oath, the members of the National Assembly agreed to meet whenever they believed they must. In fact, the oath itself was a legally binding document, holding the members accountable for their attendance when they decided to meet again. The Tennis Court Oath stated, “[The National Assembly] decrees that all members of this assembly immediately take a solemn oath never to separate, and to reassemble wherever circumstances require.” This statement gave power to a group of individuals and once again demonstrated the Enlightenment idea of free assembly. The National Assembly, by agreeing to meet again and refusing to separate until a constitution was written, proved that their intentions were not for personal gain. The National Assembly stood for equal rights and the freedom to meet in order to guarantee those rights for everyone. The Constitutional Charter of 1814, while still including ideas of freedom of …show more content…

The chamber could only be called to meet as the king allowed them, as the Constitutional Charter of 1814 said, “Every meeting of the Chamber of Peers which may be held outside of the time of the session of the Chamber of Deputies, or which may not be ordered by the king, is unlawful…” This statement in the king’s charter directly opposed the purpose of the National Assembly. The king was not only given the power to create laws and appoint both legislative and judicial members, but also the power to decide when these members should meet. The Constitutional Charter of 1814 was comparable to the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen with many Enlightenment ideas. For example, both allowed French citizens the right to property and declare

Open Document