France under the Republic

Preface To The Second Edition

The first edition of this volume was published at a time when Conservatives and Clericals in France were asserting and reasserting her decadence. The book was intended as an answer to these pessimistic charges. It was an honest attempt to inventory the constructive work of the nation under the Republic, to gauge French life, not by those rhetorical assertions so frequently made by its official defenders, but by a calm statement of facts. Though well received by the public at large, a few accused it of excessive optimism. The writer again and again reiterated that there were great evils in the land of his birth ; some of them he pointed out at length; others he assumed, perhaps without sufficient warrant, were known to his readers. To show the wholesome growth of the country, he produced a large array of evidence, very little of which has been contradicted, and all of which demonstrated the untenableness of the assertions of the opponents of the Republic. The terrible test of life and character to which vi PREFACE

the nation has been subjected during the last twenty months has more than confirmed his conclusions.

The writer has used the word "Republic" in a chronological and not in a causal sense, though the form of government has been a factor in the results which he sets forth. Following the example of biologists, he has taken a crosssection of the recent life of France, and has shown its healthfulness by its functions and growth. He never claimed that the progress indicated had existed only under the present government, but that the Republic helps this growth and, as an historical landmark, furnishes us with a definite sweep of time in which to measure it. With all its deficiencies, it is the government which, in the long run, has best furthered the development of the latent powers of the people.

Some important changes have been made in this edition involving the introduction of new matter. The extracts from moral text-books, showing their decided religious character, have been eliminated, now that the reasons which demanded their publication no longer exist, but the general structure of the book has not been disturbed. Wherever possible the facts given have been brought up to date; otherwise they

PREFACE vii

have remained untouched. The word now, used frequently, refers to the period immediately preceding the present war. The author gratefully acknowledges the many suggestions made by his colleague. Professor Burges Johnson, which he has incorporated in this text. He has nothing to change in his estimates of the illustrious land which he has ever defended. The conviction expressed in 1910 has become an absolute certainty in 1916. He feels that when the present conflict is over, France, her head high after her great victories — moral above all — will resume her march forward according to her humane genius, along the path of civilisation and peace.

Jean Charlemagne Bracq.

Vassab College, April 18, 1916.

Contents

CHAPTES PASB

Preface to the Second Edition .... v

Chronological Table xi

I. The Work of Political Reconstruction 1

II. The Transformation and Expansion of

France 31

III. The Development of Commerce and

Wealth 57

IV. The New Education in the New Life . 75

V. Changes in Literature, Art, and Philosophy 95

VI. The New Activity in History and Science 124

VII. Social Reform and Philanthropy . . . 152

VIII. Social Improvement and Morality . . 173

IX. Religious Doubt and Religion .... 190

X. The Contemporary Frenchman in the

New Life 207

XL Moral Instruction in French Schools 229

XII. The Dispersion of the Unauthorised ix

X CONTENTS

CHAPTKB PASS

XIII. The Separation of ChurCh and State . 280

XIV. The Crisis of the Separation of Church 307

AND State .....

XV. Contemporary French Protestantism . 329

Index 361

ILLUSTRATIONS

Louis Adolphe Thiers Frontispiece -

TAcma

PAQS

Mabshal Mac-M.ihon 12

JuimEs Gbevy , 60 ^

Jules Ferry 82

Leon Gambetta 98 '

Marie F. S. Carnot 140 '^

Raymond Poincaire 230 ^^

Jean Leon Jaures 312 ^

Chapter I The Work Of Political Recon- Struction

"XT^OUNG man," said Renan to Paul De- I roulede, ''France is dying; do not disturb her agony." ^ Thus at the end of the War of 1870 the French philosopher voiced not only his own feelings but also those of many other eminent French thinkers. Two beloved provinces had just been wrested from France, 1,900,000 of her subjects had been compelled to become Germans, twenty-six departments were occupied by the invaders, the Commune with its horrors, the disorganisation of public services, the lack of national coherence which Taine called "spontaneous dissolution"^ and "social decomposition,"^ the collapse of finances, the clamours of the clergy for a war with Italy, the petty intrigues of parties, the

* H. Taine, sa vie et sa correspondance, vol. Ill, p. 67.

I prevailing mistrust, all seemed to justify the pessimism of two of France's greatest men. Yet the people did not despair.

The Commune, that horrible misunderstanding — which impelled some men to take up arms for lofty social reasons, some for the defence of local liberties, and others from sheer love of disorder — was put down with great severity, tempered later on with mercy. ^ By a superb outburst of patriotism, long to be remembered, the French people, after having faced burdensome financial obligations and paid $400,- 000,000 to Germany, at the appeal of M. Thiers for $600,000,000 more to settle the war indemnity, came forward with $8,000,000,000.^ This enabled the provisional government, before the time appointed by the Treaty of Frankfort, to hasten the departure of German soldiers from France. No achievement of the Republic has ever received such co-operation of all classes and of all parties. The civil service, purged of many of the politicians of the Empire, was rapidly restored and efficiently reorganised, though it was impossible to eliminate from it

^ Bourloton et Robert, La commune et ses idSes a travers Vhistoire, Paris, 1872; Washburne, E. B., Recollections of a Minister to France, New York, 1887; Hanotaux, G., Contemporary France, New York, 1903, vol. I, p. 158.

2 Revue des Deux Mondes, Aug. 1, 1872, p. 696; Le Goff, The Life of Louis Adolphe Thiers, New York, 1879, p. 241.

POLITICAL RECONSTRUCTION S

that favouritism which has existed under all regimes.

The most difficult problem of all was to decide upon the character of the future institutions of the country. Various governments were possible. The Legitimists, posing as the makers of French history, sustained by the nobility as well as by the clergy, had a fair political outlook, for they appealed to the religious and to the political traditions of the country. They would have succeeded had not the Comte de Chambord clung to his Bourbon white flag and refused to accept the tricolour.^ The Orleanists were not without encouraging prospects, for they represented a popular form of monarchy, friendly to the Church, to progress, and to modern culture. They held up before moderate Frenchmen the not distant possibility of a constitutional government like that of Great Britain, while the Comte de Paris, by his past history, as well as by the signal beauty of his life, inspired the greatest sympathy. Moreover, his cause was sustained by men who were the most brilliant and popular opponents of the Empire in its last days. The Imperialists, on their side, could still depend upon all the beneficiaries of the previous

^ Hanotaux, G., Contemporary France, New York, 1903, vol. I, p. 256; Seignobos, Histoire politique de V Europe contemporaine, p. 184.

rule, upon those who had held important sinecures, upon men with dictatorial instincts, and upon those who still idealised the military achievements of the first Napoleon. Masses of toilers still recalled the days of exceptional prosperity — not those of adversity — under a government which had led France through the Crimean War, the War of Italy, the War of Mexico to Sedan. They remembered particularly the festivals, the brilliant pageants, but not the corrupt regime and its pitiful collapse. They would have been happy to try Napoleonic rule again.

The Republicans had a decidedly inauspicious outlook. They stood before the public as the political visionaries and Utopians of the land. Their principles seemed particularly idealistic and fanciful to those who posed as practical men. In Taine's eyes, the Republic was "less possible in France than anywhere else."^ Their conception of government was repugnant to the conservative masses who were essentially hostile to the idea of political progress. Their aspirations ran full tilt against the ideals of the CathoHc Church. The horrors of the French Revolution — not its beneficent effects — were still associated in the Catholic mind with a republican regime, while the blunders of the Republic of 1848 seemed to many inseparable from republican rule. The upholders of democratic ideals were maliciously made responsible for the Commune, and represented as leaning toward socialism, then the terror of all respectable Frenchmen. In such circumstances, a republic seemed but a distant possibility. Yet this was the government imposed upon the nation, not by a deliberate choice, but by a hard, harsh necessity.^ A republic had, at least, theoretic chances of stabihty for which the people greatly longed, while the triumph of the Monarchists would have doomed the country to an endless series of disturbances and revolutions. Again, any one of the three other parties, raised to power, would have removed all hopes from the opposition, while the Republic ■" — for a while at least — kept them alive. Multitudes rallied to this political experiment but without any enthusiasm, with the feeling that it was the only possible peaceful government, and the one they wanted.

A good constitution — not the wisest that

^ It is said that, on the evening when the National Assembly accepted the republican form of government, the wife of the President, MacMahon, said to some one sitting near her at dinner: "At last we have it, that rascally Republic." (Avenel, Comte Georges d'. Lea Frangais de man temps, p. 20.)

could be conceived but the best one for France, adapted to national needs, and capable of subsequent readjustments — was framed. It was not a high-sounding decalogue like most of its predecessors, but one susceptible of modifications which experience might suggest. The slight changes introduced into it, in 1875, 1884, 1885, and 1889, tend to show the wisdom of those who framed it. No country has elected its presidents more easily, more rapidly, or, as a whole, more successfully. The method of election provided by the constitution has proven a superb instrument of selection. Thiers, Mac- Mahon, Grevy, Carnot, Faure, Casimir-Perier, Loubet, Fallieres, and Poincare constitute a line of presidents of a fairly large mental calibre, of great dignity of life and eflSciency. Without being blind to some of their limitations, where is the land whose chief magistrates during the same period would offer a finer record ? So real have been the services rendered by them that no one now, as in the early days of the Republic, speaks of abolishing the oflSce of president.

In the executive machinery, also, a great change has taken place. Several ministers have been added to those already existing. Agriculture, the colonies, and labour came to have their distinct places in the administration of the country. The efficiency of the ministries has been increased by the gradual introduction of under secretaries of state, and by the co-operation of elected superior councils whose members are men of special competence chosen by their peers. The ministries thereby became to some extent representative institutions controlled by the Parliament. When this change took place for education, Jules Ferry rightly said that that ministry had ceased to be an administration, "to become an organised and living body."^ The ministries are not simply executive, but also agencies carrying on extensivb investigations and studies upon innumerable subjects affecting the national works and policies in many directions. The cabinets may change, but the regular officials of the ministries seldom do.

It is owing to this that one sees designs planned and carried out with remarkable continuity of purpose. The gradual control of North Africa by France is a notable illustration of this. The steady diplomatic policy since 1887 is another. Many other instances might be adduced to show the working of the permanent and unchangeable elements in the ministries. The cabinets, until recent years, were shortlived, and that was ascribed to French fickle-

* Rambaud, A., Jules Ferry, Paris, 1903, p. 102.

ness; but critics failed to recall that the ministries were not constituted so much with a view to longevity as to national security. French legislators wished to avoid the repetition of Napoleonic dictatorship and of coups d'Etat. Even from the point of view of duration there is progress. While there were fifteen different ministries during the first decade of the Republic, there have been only five during the last ten years -^ This increasing permanence of cabinets has often been secured at the cost of the favours of ministers to deputies who endeavour to obtain offices for their constituents; but even at this point the spoils system has never gone to the extreme which it has attained in some other countries. The wonder is that, with a system whereby a majority against one single proposal of a minister entails the overthrow of a whole cabinet, ministerial changes should not have been more numerous.

The Senate is perhaps the most perfect work of the Republic. It has had among its members scientists like Wurtz, Berthelot, Broca; philosophers like Littre and Jules Simon ; literary men like Scherer and Deschanel pere; religious men like Dupanloup and Edmond de Pressense; royal spirits representing all shades of political

1 Before 1910.

opinions, Laboulaye, Challemel-Lacour, d'Audiffret-Pasquier, Jaureguiberry, Haussonville pere, Grevy, and Francis Charmes, the editor of the Revue des Deux Mondes. It contains now the flower of French pohtical intelHgence. We see at its sessions de Freycinet, Berenger^ Bourgeois, de Marcere, de Lamarzelle, de Courcel, Delpech, Dupuy (Ch.), Mezieres, Clemenceau, Meline, Combes, Ribot, Siegfried, Rouvier, Ranc, Lintillac, Loze, d'Estournelles de Constant, Ph. Berger, and Trouillot. It would be difficult to find another upper house in the world representing so much personal and political worth.

In the intention of its founders the Senate was, above all, to be a conservative institution. Gambetta, who, like most of his followers, opposed it at the outset, came to recognise its importance; then he spoke of it as *'the Great Council of the Towns of France," a necessary check upon the Chamber of Deputies, the organ of French democracy as organised in cities.^ At first it owed its superiority to the fact that its members might be selected by the government from among the most distinguished sons of France, outside of the political machinery. Now it has the signal advantage of drawing its

* Adam, Mme. Ed., Nos amities politiqnes, Paris, 1908, p. 244, members mostly from the deputies. The elected are better senators because they have been deputies, and often because they have been good deputies. The experience gained in the popular Chamber brings its best fruition in the Senate. Deputies are naturally drawn to the Luxembourg by the longer term of office, nine years instead of four, by the greater independence which they enjoy from their constituents, by the more dignified function and the greater honour. Senators are more carefully chosen than any other French representatives and by a smaller, more intelligent and select electorate. Thus, of the following senators sent to the two houses, Meline had 8,238 votes as a deputy and 659 as a senator; Francis Charmes was sent to the Palais-Bourbon with 4,171 votes and to the Luxembourg with 288; Charles Dupuy was made deputy by 10,201 votes and senator by 480.^ The Senate has been all along an intelligent moderating and controlling power, often preventing hasty and unwise legislation. The slow ascent of its members from the Chamber of Deputies helps to create a homogeneity in Parliament which could not exist otherwise. It tends to eliminate the former aristocrats and

the ultra conservatives on behalf of more democratic and progressive elements.

The Chamber of Deputies has often voiced the political effervescence of the land and reflected the spirit of its politicians. It has demagogues, radical demagogues and clerical demagogues, but judged by its best it would still bear a favourable comparison with any popular house of representatives on the continent. It suffers unquestionably from the elimination of its ablest members through their promotion to the Senate, but the new men are in closer touch with national feelings, more alert and earnest. They are less likely to become fossilised. Many of the disturbances of this house have been due to the parliamentary inexperience of the country. When the National Assembly gathered at Bordeaux, in 1871, there were distinguished men in its midst, such as the Due d'Aumale, Thiers, Bishop Dupanloup, Prince de Joinville, General Chanzy, General Changarnier, Jules Simon, Leon Say, Gambetta, de Broglie, and Jules Favre — uncommon men, but as a whole not yielding the elements of a good national representation. Most of them were royalists incapable of reading aright the wants of the French nation. The Assembly was really composed of men unknown to one another and hardly acn FRANCE UNDER THE REPUBLIC

quainted with the real needs of France.* Contentions -without number have arisen because of the dual spirit of the members of Parliament, some representing the old spirit of the Church and the privileges of aristocracy, while the others were upholders of absolute political equality.

One other reason for the frequent turmoils in this house is that French legislators have a far more difficult task to perform than the legislators of the United States because they have to deal with questions which, in this country, are settled by the states. The commotions in the lower house are also occasioned by the importance of the issue discussed. Since the contentions over slavery, in the legislative halls of the United States, no such burning questions have been before American legislators as that of the secularisation of French schools, the dispersion of the unauthorised orders, and the separation of Church and State.

It should also be remembered that, as the Chamber of Deputies has the initiative in the matter of new laws, these are presented in a rough and indefinite form which is likely to excite bitter antagonism. Furthermore, the majority of deputies have the restlessness of progressive men. The so-called unruly elements

^ Scheurer-Kestner, Souvenirs de jeunesw, 1905, p. 241.

MARSHAL MAC-MA HON have been those which have forced the Parhament to devise and to do. As a whole, the Senate has represented a wise conservatism, not unfriendly to change; and the lower house, a fearless, if at times impatient, spirit of progress. The Senate is still, at least in part, inspired by the political liberalism of the French Revolution, but the House of Deputies has directed its efforts toward social legislation, and endeavoured to remove some of the traditional injustice in contemporary society. The deputies have their unworthy members, but as a whole they do not deserve the sweeping denunciations of their enemies. The charge made against them that they are hostile to religion and bitter against religious ideas may be applied to only a few of the members. M. Paul Sabatier mentions religious speeches made before the deputies and listened to with perfect courtesy.^ The interesting but long religious discourses of M. Eugene Reveillaud during the discussion of the Law of Separation would not have been heard so respectfully by American congressmen as they were by French deputies.^ As to those who have systematically opposed both houses, it is difficult to speak with much praise. They have all along

^ Lettre ouverte d S. E. Cardinal Gibbons, pp. 38 and 39. * Reveillaud, E., La separation des eglises de VEtat, Paris, 1901, pp. 239, 324, and 396.

betrayed the cause of true conservatism by a tactless opposition. They have never known how to defend their interests properly by making needful concessions to rising democracy. They have often joined their own bitterest enemies to overthrow a moderate cabinet, bringing thereby to power those from whom they had most to fear. Comte Georges d'Avenel, a distinguished member of the French nobility, does not hesitate to recognise this fact.*

The general councils {conseils generaux), or department assemblies, mere shams of local government under the Empire, have, with the Republic, become efficient instruments of provincial service and of decentralisation. Apart from their functions, which are constantly extended by new prerogatives, these councils have often voiced local feelings in such a manner and so concurrently with the Parliament as to leave no doubt as to the real state of the national mind upon any policy. Through these councils local interests have an organ of representation, and local ideas a voice, heard by the nation when necessary.

Though vexatious at times, the prefect is no longer the imperial satrap of Napoleon, before whom every one trembled. When he exceeds

^ Les Frangais de mon temps^ Paris, 1904, p. 41.

his rights, the representatives of local authority — now that there is a local independent authority — do not hesitate to remind him of it, or to have the matter brought before the Parliament. The prefect is still the representative of the central government, and, as a rule, a courteous and correct official. With the exception of Paris, which, like Washington, has a communalistic regime of its own, all municipalities are absolutely free in the choice of mayor, as well as in that of the members of their municipal councils. The towns have never had so much local government, and never have they devised more measures of local utiHty. With this has come a new municipal spirit of reform, progress, and enterprise. The writer could mention cities and villages, the progress of which reminds him of the advance of American communities.

One great change which has taken place is that the people are not at the mercy of public officials as under the Second Empire. There is nothing left of that awful hi de surete generate, whereby one could be arrested, exiled to other countries, sent to deadly penal colonies without any form of trial. ^ Exceptionally imperfect as

^ Rambaud, Histoire de la dvilisatiojn cdntemporaine en France, Paris, 1901, p. 520; Scheurer-Kestner, Souvenirs de jeunesse, p. 101; Seche, Leon, Jules Simon, Paris, 1905, p. 74; Adam, Mme. Ed., Nos amities 'politiques, p. 8.

the judiciary is at times, there recurs no such parody of justice as the famous Proces des Treize^ when the imperial government had thirteen hberals condemned under the most futile pretexts.^ Similarly has disappeared the Cabinet noir, in which the correspondence of suspected citizens could be, and was, examined by the government.^

All the changes which we have sketched have been encouraged and upheld by the suffrage of the nation, which has never been so free or so intelligent. Frenchmen in office, whether in politics or in the Church, have always used their influence at the ballot-box on behalf of their friends — they still do, and often with detestable methods — but the fact remains that the individual voter has never been so independent. Those who have known the candidatures officielles of Napoleon III smile when they hear criticism of the republican elections in which there is much, indeed, to condemn. Then, representatives of employers would visit the workingmen and practically give them orders to vote for the candidate patronised by the firm. Now, the workingmen may be bidden by labour-unions — these labour-unions aflfect only a lim-

^ Rambaud, Jules Ferry, p. 9.

* Scheurer-Kestner, Mes souvenirs, pp. 110, 115, and 117; Larousse, Grand dictionnaire universel, vol. XVI.

ited number of voters — to sustain some favourites. The beneficiary of the government does what he can to influence votes. The administration helps its favoured candidates, but the fact remains that the voter, even so, can dispose of his ballot more freely than ever before.

The idea of liberty for all free French citizens, which was opposed at every step by the Empire, has carried the day. This is evident if we consider four highly important laws conceding new liberties. There is the law of June 10, 1881, granting freedom to hold meetings; that of July 31, 1881, sanctioning the freedom of the press; that of March 21, 1884, allowing the organisation of trades-unions and of various labour societies; and that of July 1, 1901, conceding freedom to organise corporations and associations. It may be asserted that as a whole the Republicans, in the midst of men systematically opposed to their ideals, have endeavoured to secure for the greatest possible number of citizens a maximum of liberty and justice. In so doing conflicts have come. No live nation can advance without them, but in the struggles for better things these conflicts have scarcely interfered with good civil service and progressive life. Mr. Bodley, an English gentleman ever unfriendly to the Republic, was obliged to recognise its good government. *'I would be perplexed," lie says, "to mention three nations which on the whole are better governed than France."^

The increase of freedom for individuals has been, as just noted, extended to organisations. So great were the obstacles placed in their way, even during the last days of the Empire, that it was difficult to create any form of association, or to keep it alive. The consequence was that societies were few. Foreign ethnographers had noticed this, and ascribed it to racial traits — racial traits at that time explained everything. With the freedom of the Republic associations of all kinds sprang up in every direction. A little city that had two or three societies will now count them by the score. Commercial companies rose from 4,338 in 1884 to 7,133 in 1910; trades-unions from 175 to 14,842; mutual-benefit societies from 7,743 to 21,079.2 According to the Journal des Debats^^ co-operative

1 France, New York, 1898, vol. I, p. 44.

2 Annuaire statistique, 1913. This work, to which we refer so often, is prepared under the direction of most eminent and competent men such as F. R. Stourm, whom we would call the President of the Academy of Moral and Political Sciences; C. Colson, member of this same body and professor of political economy at the Paris Law School; the well-known J. Bertillon; the courageous and liberal economist, Yves Guyot, and other reliable members of the Council of General Statistics of France, having imder them well-trained scientific statisticians at the Ministry of Labour.

societies have increased in membership thirty-six times from 1870 to 1899.

This union and sociahsation of efforts has shown itself in a multitude of religious works, of philosophical, scientific, philanthropic, and artistic associations. As soon as Frenchmen were able they took advantage of their freedom to organise associations so essential to progress.

This associational movement is not without its dangers. The rise of great organisations will doubtless create frequent conflicts with the State, but national security will be found in the principles of political equality, which are sinking profoundly into the national consciousness. Be that as it may, it is strange to find that, at the beginning of this twentieth century, the old Napoleonic law of 1810, that no more than twenty persons could meet together without the permission of the government, was still on the statute book. This legal landmark of former despotism had been subjected to the attacks of liberals from the days of Louis-Philippe to our own. In 1901, Waldeck-Rousseau put an end to that anachronism. Freedom of association was fully granted to all groups of citizens, but not to unauthorised religious orders which, with the various monastic associations.

had been so constant in their opposition to popular Uberty.

It is probable that at no distant period even these restraints upon the orders will be removed. By the separation of Church and State, the country has also been freed from one of the most despotic political rules to which the clergy of the land was ever subjected, the Concordat. Whatever one may think of the manner in which it was abrogated, there can be no doubt as to the tyrannical character of that celebrated document, and of the Organic Articles that went with it, both of which were long and fully accepted by the Church.^ Now Catholic priests, as far as the government is concerned, are liberated from all the restraints of bygone days. Religious bodies, persecuted under the Empire, now enjoy the greatest liberty. Baptists, Methodists, Theosophists, Buddhists, and Comtists have the right to preach and practise their pecuhar tenets like Catholics, under the droit commun. Moslems are now building a mosque in Paris.

The development of the press, more than anything else, perhaps, enables us to gauge the extension of liberty. The harassed journalism of the Second Empire, daily exposed to ruinous

» See Chapters. XV and XVI.

fines, to the incarceration of the editor, seems to belong to another age than ours. Ranc was condemned to four months' imprisonment for an article not half so violent as those of the opposition to-day.^ The manager or the printer of a paper could be arrested with the editor. The paper might be suppressed, thereby bringing about the bankruptcy of the owner. An internalrevenue tax was collected upon each number of any paper issued. All this has been replaced by a thoroughly independent and often extremely reckless press. Through the sudden extension of liberty, whereby those who accuse the Republic of tyranny can assail it ceaselessly in their papers, the expansion of journalism has been rapid, not to say extraordinary. At the close of the Second Empire Paris had only twenty dailies, and their circulation was small. Even the Petit Journal had an issue of not more than sixty thousand. In 1898 the Parisian dailies had risen in number to one hundred and ten. The circulation of the Petit Journal has long ago passed the million mark, while some of its contemporaries have attained a corresponding increase.^ This development