CHAPTER IV

THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE MARECHAL DE MAC-MAHON

May, 1873, to January, 1879

[Illustration: EDME-PATRICE-MAURICE DE MAC-MAHON]

"L'ordre moral," such was the political catchword of the new

administration. Just what it meant was not very clear. In general,

however, it was obviously intended to imply resistance to radicalism

(republicanism) and the maintenance of a strictly conservative policy,

strongly tinged with clericalism.[5] The victors over M. Thiers had

revived their desire of a monarchical restoration and many of them hoped

that the marechal de Mac-Mahon would shortly make way for the comte de

Chambord. But though an anti-republican he was never willing to lend

himself to any really illegal or dishonest manoeuvres, and his sense

of honor was of great help to him in his want of political competence.

So he did not prove the pliant tool of his creators, and his term of

office saw the definite establishment of the Republic.

The first Cabinet was led by the duc de Broglie who took the portfolio

of Foreign Affairs. The new Government was viewed askance by the

conquerors at Berlin, who disliked such an orderly transmission of

powers as an indication of national recovery and stability. Bismarck

even exacted new credentials from the French Ambassador. Meanwhile, the

Minister of the Interior, Beule, proceeded to consolidate the authority

of the new Cabinet by numerous changes in the prefects of the

departments, turning out the "rascals" of Thiers's administration to

make room for appointees more amenable to new orders.

The time now seemed ripe for another effort to establish the monarchy

under the comte de Chambord. It culminated in the "monarchical campaign"

of October, 1873. The monarchical sympathizers were hand-in-glove with

the Clericals and for the most part coincided with them. The Royalists

were inevitably clerical if for no other reason than that monarchy and

religion both seemed to involve continuity, and the legitimacy of the

monarchy had always been blessed by the Church. The revolutionary

Rights of Man were held to be inconsistent with the traditional Rights

of God and the monarchy. Moreover, the founders of the third republic

had, with noteworthy exceptions like the devout Trochu, been mildly

anti-clerical. They were for the most part religious liberals and

deists, rarely atheists, but that was enough to array the bishops, like

monseigneur Pie of Poitiers, against them. Indeed, a quick religious

revival swept over the land, as was shown by numerous pilgrimages,

including one to Paray-le-Monial, home of the cult of the Sacred Heart.

France herself should be consecrated to the Sacred Heart, and the idea

was evolved, afterwards carried out, of the erection of the great votive

basilica of the Sacre Coeur on the heights of Montmartre.

The first step toward the restoration of "Henry V" was to persuade the

comte de Paris to make new efforts for a fusion of the two branches.

Swallowing his pride, the comte de Paris generously went to the home of

the comte de Chambord at Frohsdorf, in Austria, in August, and paid his

respects to him as head of the family. As the comte de Chambord had no

children, it was expected that the comte de Paris would be his

successor. But the old difficulty about the white flag cropped up, and

the comte de Chambord stubbornly refused to rule over a country above

which waved the revolutionary tricolor.

Matters dragged on through the summer, during the parliamentary recess,

and the conservative leaders were outspoken as to their plans to

overthrow the Republic. It was hoped that some compromise might be

reached by which could be reconciled, as to the flag, the desires of the

Assembly which was expected to recall the pretender and those of the

comte de Chambord who considered his divinely inspired will superior to

that of the representatives of the people. It was suggested that the

question of the flag might be settled _after_ his accession to the

throne. The embassy to Salzburg, in October, of M. Chesnelong, an

emissary of a committee of nine of the Royalist leaders, achieved only a

half-success, but left matters sufficiently indeterminate to encourage

them in continuing their plans. Matters seemed progressing swimmingly

when, on October 27, an unexpected letter from the pretender to M.

Chesnelong categorically declared that _nothing_ would induce him to

sacrifice the white banner.

The effect of this letter was to make all hopes of a restoration

impossible. Everybody knew that the majority of Frenchmen would never

give up their flag for the white one, whether this were dignified by the

name of "standard of Arques and Ivry," or whether one called it

irreverently a "towel," as did Pope Pius IX, impatient at the obstinacy

of the comte de Chambord. In the midst of the general confusion only one

thing seemed feasible if governmental anarchy were to be avoided,

namely, the prorogation of Mac-Mahon's authority, as a rampart against

rising democracy and a permanent republic. This condition the Orleanist

Right Centre turned to their advantage. By a vote of November 20, the

executive power was conferred for a definite period of seven years on

the marechal de Mac-Mahon. Thus a head of the nation was provided who

might perhaps outlast the Assembly. The vote might be interpreted either

as the beginning of a permanent republican regime, as it proved to be,

or as the establishment of a definite interlude in anticipation of a new

attempt to set up a monarchy, this time to the advantage of the younger

branch. Many hoped that the comte de Chambord would soon be dead, his

white flag forgotten, and the way open to the comte de Paris. The

Orleanists were pleased by this latter idea, the Republicans were glad

to have the republican regime recognized for, at any rate, seven years

to come, accompanied by the promise of a constitutional commission of

thirty members. The Legitimists alone were disappointed, and, oblivious

of the fact that the comte de Chambord had lost through his folly, they

were before long ready to vent their wrath on Mac-Mahon and his adviser,

the duc de Broglie, who was responsible for the presidential

prorogation.

The pretender had been completely taken aback at the impression produced

by his letter. Convinced of his divinely inspired omniscience, and

certain that he was the foreordained ruler of France, he had thought

that the Assembly would give way on the question of the flag, or that

the army would follow him, or that Mac-Mahon would yield. His state

coach had been made ready and a military uniform awaited him at a

tailor's. He hastened in secret to Versailles, where he remained for a

while in retirement to watch events, and where Mac-Mahon refused to see

him. Then, after the vote on the presidency, he sadly returned into

exile forever.

Never was a greater service done to France than when the comte de

Chambord refused to give up his flag. Completely out of touch with the

country through a life spent in exile, inspired with the feeling of his

divine rights and their superiority to the will of democracy, he would

scarcely have ascended the throne before some conflict would have broken

out and the history of France would have registered one revolution more.

The duc de Broglie had considered it good form to resign after the vote

of November 20, but Mac-Mahon immediately entrusted to him the selection

of a second Cabinet. In this Cabinet the portfolio of Foreign Affairs

was given to the duc Decazes, a skilled diplomat, but the Legitimists

were offended by some of the cabinet changes and their dislike of the

duc de Broglie gradually became more acute. Finally, after several

months of parliamentary skirmishing the second Broglie Cabinet fell

before a coalition vote of Republicans and extreme Royalists with a few

Bonapartists, on May 16, 1874. The Right Centre and Left Centre had

unsuccessfully joined in support of the Cabinet. The nation was taking

another step toward republican control and the overthrow of the

conservatives.

From now on, Mac-Mahon's task became increasingly difficult. After the

split in the conservative majority it was necessary to rely on

combination ministries, representing different sets and harder to

reconcile or to propitiate. The result of Mac-Mahon's first efforts was

a Cabinet led by a soldier, General de Cissey, and having no pronounced

political tendencies.

Party differences were becoming accentuated. The downfall of the Broglie

Cabinet had been largely due to the extreme Royalists and the Orleanists

could not forgive them. The situation was made worse by differences in

interpretation of the law of November 20, establishing the "septennat"

of the marechal de Mac-Mahon. Some of the Monarchists maintained the

"septennat personnel," namely, the election of one specific person to

hold office for seven years, with the idea that he could withdraw at any

time in favor of a king. Others interpreted the law as establishing a

"septennat impersonnel," a definite truce of seven years, which should

still hold even if Mac-Mahon had to be replaced before the expiration of

the time by another President. Then, they hoped, their enemy Thiers

would be dead. The Republicans were, of course, desirous of making the

impersonal "septennat" lead to a permanent republic, and declared that

Mac-Mahon was not the President of a seven years' republic, but

President, for seven years, of the Republic.

In this state of affairs the Bonapartists now became somewhat active

again. Strangely enough, the disasters of 1870 were already growing

sufficiently remote for some of the anti-Republicans to turn again to

the prospect of empire. This menace frightened the moderate Royalists

into what they had kept hesitating to do; that is to say, into spurring

to activity the purposely inactive and dilatory constitutional

commission.

The stumbling-block was the recognition of the Republic itself and the

admission that the form of government existing in France was to be

permanent. There was much parliamentary skirmishing over various plans,

rejected one after the other, inclining in turn toward the Republic and

a monarchy. Finally, some of the Monarchists, discouraged by the rising

tide of "radicalism," and frightened lest unwillingness to accept a

conservative republic now might result still worse for them in the

future, rallied in support of the motion of M. Wallon, known as the

"amendement Wallon," which was adopted by a vote of 353 to 352 (January,

1875): "The President of the Republic is elected by absolute majority of

votes by the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies united as a National

Assembly. He is chosen for seven years and is re-eligible."

In this vote the fateful statement was made concerning the election of a

President other than Mac-Mahon and the transmission of power in a

republic. The third Republic received its definite consecration by a

majority of _one vote_.

The vote on the Wallon amendment dealt with only one article of a

project not yet voted as a whole, but it was the crossing of the

Rubicon. The other articles were adopted by increased majorities.

The Ministry of General de Cissey had already resigned upon a minor

question, but had held over at the President's request. Mac-Mahon now

asked the Monarchist M. Buffet to form a conservative conciliation

Cabinet, which was made up almost entirely from the Right Centre

(Orleanists) and the Left Centre (moderate Republicans) and accepted at

first by the Republican Left. By this Cabinet still one more step was

taken toward Republican preponderance.

During the Buffet Ministry three important matters occupied public

attention. One was the completion of the new constitution. A second was

the creation of "free" universities, not under control of the State.

This step was advocated in the name of intellectual freedom, but the

whole scheme was backed by the Catholics and merely resulted in the

creation of Catholic faculties in several great cities. A third matter

was the intense anxiety over the prospect of a rupture with Germany.

Bismarck was renewing his policy of pin-pricks. The French army had been

strengthened by a battalion to every regiment, and so Bismarck

complained of the strictures of French and Belgian bishops on his

anti-papal policy. Whether he only meant to humiliate France still more,

or whether he actually desired a new rupture so as to crush the country

finally, is not clear. At any rate, with the aid of England and

especially of Russia, France showed that she was not helpless, and

Bismarck protested that he was absolutely friendly.

By the close of 1875, the measures constituting the new Government had

been voted and, on December 31, the Assembly, which had governed France

since the Franco-Prussian War, was dissolved to make way for the new

legislature. During the succeeding elections M. Buffet's Cabinet,

antagonized by the Republicans and rent by internal dissensions, went to

pieces, M. Buffet personally suffered disastrously at the polls. The

slate was clear for a totally new organization. The Assembly had done

many a good service, but its dilatoriness in establishing a permanent

government, its ingratitude to M. Thiers, its clericalism, and its

stubbornness in trying to foist a king on the people made it pass away

unregretted by a country which had far outstripped it in republicanism.

The "Constitution of 1875," under which, with some modifications, France

is still governed, is not a single document constructed _a priori_, like

the Constitution of the United States. It was partly the result of the

evolution of the National Assembly itself, partly the result of

compromises and dickerings between hostile groups. Particularly, it

expressed the jealousy of a monarchical assembly for a President of a

republic, and the desire, therefore, to keep power in the hands of its

own legislative successor. The Assembly took it for granted that the

Chamber of Deputies would have the same opinions as itself. As a matter

of fact, the political complexion of the legislature has been

consistently toward radicalism, and the result has hindered a strong

executive and promoted legislative demagogy.

The Constitution of 1875 may be considered as consisting of the

Constitutional Law of February 25, relating to the organization of the

public powers (President, Senate, Chamber of Deputies, Ministers,

etc.); the Constitutional Law of the previous day, February 24, relating

to the organization of the Senate; the Constitutional Law of July 16, on

the relations of the public powers. Subsidiary "organic laws" voted

later determined the procedure for the election of Senators and

Deputies. The vote of February 25 was the crucial one in the definite

establishment of the Republican regime. The Constitution has undergone

certain slight modifications since its adoption.

By the Constitution of 1875 the government of the French Republic was

vested in a Senate and a Chamber of Deputies. The Senate consisted of

300 members, of whom 75 were chosen for life by the expiring Assembly,

their successors to be elected by co-optation in the Senate itself. The

other 225, chosen for nine years and renewable by thirds, were to be

elected by a method of indirect selection. In 1884, the choice of life

Senators ceased and the seats, as they fell vacant, have been

distributed among the Departments of the country. The Deputies were

elected by universal suffrage for a period of four years. Unless a

candidate obtained an absolute majority of the votes cast, the election

was void, and a new one was necessary. Except during the period from

1885 to 1889, the Deputies have represented districts determined, unless

for densely populated ones, by the administrative _arrondissements_.

From 1885 to 1889, the _scrutin de liste_ was in operation: the _whole_

Department voted on a ticket containing as many names as there were

_arrondissements_. The prerogatives of the two houses were identical

except that financial measures were to originate in the Chamber of

Deputies. As a matter of fact, the Senate has fallen into the

background, and the habit of considering the vote of the Chamber rather

than that of the Senate as important in a change of Ministry has made it

the true source of government in France. The two houses met at

Versailles until 1879; since then Paris has been the capital, except for

the election of a President. After separate decision by each house to do

so, or the request of the President, they could meet in joint assembly

as a Constitutional Convention to revise the constitution.

The Senate and Chamber, united in joint session as a National Assembly,

were to choose a President for a definite term of seven years, not to

fill out an incomplete term vacated by another President. The President

could be re-elected. With the consent of the Senate he could dissolve

the Chamber, but this restriction made the privilege almost inoperative

in practice. He was irresponsible, the nominal executive and figurehead

of the State, but all his acts had to be countersigned by a responsible

Minister, by which his initiative was greatly reduced. In fact the

President had really less power than a constitutional king.

The real executive authority was in the hands of the Cabinet, headed by

a Premier or _President du conseil_.[6] The Ministry was responsible to

the Senate and Chamber (in practice, as we have seen, to the Chamber),

and was expected to resign as a whole if put by a vote in the minority.

By custom the President selects the Premier from the majority and the

latter selects his colleagues in the Cabinet, trying to make them

representatives of the wishes of the Parliament. The French Republic is

therefore managed by a parliamentary government.

The first elections under the new constitution resulted very much as

might be expected: the Senate became in personnel the true successor of

the Assembly, the Chamber of Deputies contained most of the new men. The

Senate was conservative and monarchical, the Chamber was republican.

Therefore, the President of the Republic entrusted the formation of a

Ministry to M. Jules Dufaure, of the Left Centre, the views of which

group differed hardly at all from those of the Right Centre, except in a

full acceptance of the new conditions. Unfortunately, M. Dufaure found

it impossible to ride two horses at once and to satisfy both the

conservative Senate and the majority in the Chamber of more advanced

Republicans than himself. He mistrusted the Republican leader Gambetta,

though the latter was now far more moderate, and he sympathized too much

with the Clericals to suit the new order of things. So his Cabinet

resigned (December 2, 1876), less than nine months after its

appointment, and the marechal de Mac-Mahon felt it necessary, very much

against his will, to call to power Jules Simon. He had previously tried

unsuccessfully to form a Cabinet from the Right Centre under the duc de

Broglie.

The duc de Broglie remained, however, the power behind the throne. The

President was under the political advice of the conservative set, whose

firm conviction he shared, that the new Republic was advancing headlong

into irreligion. The course of political events now took on a strong

religious flavor. Jules Simon was a liberal, which was considered a

misfortune, though he announced himself now as "deeply republican and

deeply conservative." But people knew his unfriendly relations with

Gambetta, which dated from 1871, when he checkmated the dictator at

Bordeaux. It was hoped that open dissension might break out in the

Republican party which would justify measures tending to a conservative

reaction, and help tide over the time until 1880. Then the constitution

might be revised at the expiration of Mac-Mahon's term and the monarchy

perhaps restored.

Gambetta was, however, now a very different man. Discarding his former

unbending radicalism, he was now the advocate of the "political policy

of results," or _opportunism_, a method of conciliation, of compromise,

and of waiting for the favorable opportunity. This was to be,

henceforth, the policy closely connected with his name and fame. So

Jules Simon soon was sacrificed.

The efforts of the Clerical party bore chiefly in two directions:

control of education and advocacy of increased papal authority,

particularly of the temporal power of the Pope, dispossessed of his

states a few years before by the Government of Victor Emmanuel. This

latter course could only tend to embroil France with Italy. So convinced

was Gambetta of the unwise and disloyal activities of the Ultramontanes

that on May 4, in a speech to the Chamber, he uttered his famous cry:

"Le clericalisme, voila l'ennemi!"

Jules Simon found himself in a very difficult position. Desirous of

conciliating Mac-Mahon and his clique, he adopted a policy somewhat at

variance with his former liberal religious views. On the other hand, he

could not satisfy the President, who had always disliked him, or those

who had determined upon his overthrow. The crisis came on May 16, 1877,

when Mac-Mahon, taking advantage of some very minor measures, wrote a

haughty and indignant letter to Jules Simon, to say that the Minister no

longer had his confidence. Jules Simon, backed up by a majority in the

Chamber, could very well have engaged in a constitutional struggle with

Mac-Mahon, but he rather weakly resigned the next day.[7] Thus was

opened the famous conflict known in French history, from its date, as

the "Seize-Mai."

No sooner was Jules Simon out of the way than Mac-Mahon appointed a

reactionary coalition Ministry of Orleanists and Imperialists headed by

the duc de Broglie, and held apparently ready in waiting. The Ministers

were at variance on many political questions, but united as to

clericalism. The plan was to dissolve the Republican Chamber with the

co-operation of the anti-Republican Senate, in the hope that a new

election, under official pressure, would result in a monarchical lower

house also. The Chamber of Deputies was therefore prorogued until June

16 and then dissolved. At the meeting of May 18, the Republicans

presented a solid front of 363 in their protest against the high-handed

action of the marechal de Mac-Mahon.

[Illustration: LEON GAMBETTA]

The new Cabinet began by a wholesale revocation of administrative

officials throughout the country, and spent the summer in unblushing

advocacy of its candidates. Those favored by the Government were so

indicated and their campaign manifestoes were printed on official white

paper.[8] The Republicans united their forces to support the re-election

of the 363 and gave charge of their campaign to a committee of eighteen

under the inspiring leadership of Gambetta. In a great speech at Lille,

Gambetta declared that the President would have to "give in or give up"

(_se soumettre ou se demettre_), for which crime of _lese-majeste_ he

was condemned by default to fine and imprisonment. In September, Thiers,

the great leader of the early Republic, died, and his funeral was made

the occasion of a great manifestation of Republican unity. Finally, in

spite of governmental pressure and the pulpit exhortations of the

clergy, the elections in October resulted in a new Republican Chamber.

The reactionary Cabinet was face to face with as firm an opposition as

before.

The duc de Broglie, in view of this crushing defeat, was ready to

withdraw, and Mac-Mahon, after some hesitation, accepted his

resignation. Mac-Mahon's own fighting blood was up, however, and he

tried the experiment of an extra-parliamentary Ministry led by General

de Rochebouet, the members of which were conservatives without seats in

Parliament. But the Chamber refused to enter into relations with it, and

as the budget was pressing and the Senate was not disposed to support a

second dissolution, Mac-Mahon had to submit and the Rochebouet Cabinet

withdrew.

Thus ended Mac-Mahon's unsuccessful attempt to exert his personal power.

The Seize-Mai has sometimes been likened to an abortive _coup d'etat_.

The parallel is hardly justifiable. Mac-Mahon would have welcomed a

return of the monarchy at the end of his term of office, but he

intended to remain faithful to the constitution, however much he might

strain it or interpret it under the advice of his Clerical managers, and

though he might have been willing to use troops to enforce his wishes.

One unfortunate result ensued: the crisis left the Presidency still more

weak. Any repetition of Mac-Mahon's experiment of dissolving the Chamber

would revive accusations against one of his successors of attempting a

_coup d'etat_. There have been times when the country would have

welcomed the dissolution by a strong President of an incompetent

Chamber. Unfortunately, Mac-Mahon stood for the reactionaries against

the Republic. His course of action would be a dangerous precedent.

The new order of things was marked by the advent of another Dufaure

Ministry, very moderate in tendency, but acceptable to the majority.

Most of the high-handed doings of the Broglie Cabinet were revoked, much

to the disgust of Mac-Mahon, who frequently lost his temper when obliged

to sign documents of which he disapproved. Finally, in January, 1879, in

a controversy with his Cabinet over some military transfers, Mac-Mahon

resigned, over a year before the expiration of his term of office.

Moreover, at the recent elections to the Senate the Republicans had

obtained control of even that body. Thus he was alone, with both houses

and the Ministry against him.

In spite of the unfortunate endless internal dissensions, France made

great strides in national recovery during the Presidency of Mac-Mahon.

His rank and military title gave prestige to the Republic in presence of

the diplomats of European monarchies, the German crisis of 1875 showed

that Bismarck was not to have a free hand in crushing France, the

participation of France in the Congress of Berlin enabled the country to

take a place again among the European Powers. Finally, the International

Exhibition of 1878 was an invitation to the world to witness the

recovery of France from her disasters and to testify to her right to

lead again in art and industry.

The Presidency of Mac-Mahon shows the desperate efforts of the

Monarchists to overthrow the Republic, and then to control it in view of

an ultimate Restoration, either by obstructing the vote of a

constitution or by hindering its operation. Throughout, the Monarchists

and the Clericals work together or are identical. The end of his term of

office found the whole Government in the hands of the Republicans.

FOOTNOTES:

[5] Clericalism does not imply political activity on the part of the

clergy alone, but quite as much of laymen strongly in favor of the

Church.

[6] Before the Constitution of 1875, the Premier was only

_vice-president du conseil_.

[7] The Chamber, on May 12, had expressed itself in favor of the

publicity of meetings of municipal councils, during the absence of the

Minister of the Interior. On May 15, it had passed the second reading of

a law, opposed by Jules Simon, on the freedom of the press.

[8] In France only official posters may be printed on white paper.

A History of the Third French Republic · 第 4 / 10 章