CHAPTER XII

IN THE NORD--_continued_

LILLE

Thanks to Louis XIV., French Flanders became politically French more

than two centuries ago. But it still remains essentially Flemish. The

land has a life and a language of its own, like Brittany or Alsace. The

French Fleming is rarely as haughty in his assertion of his nationality

as the French Breton; but when a _Monsieur de Paris_, or any other outer

barbarian, comes upon a genuine _Flamand flamingant_, there is no more

to be made of him than of a _Breton bretonnant_, standing calmly at bay

in a furrow of his field, or of the bride of Peter Wilkins enveloped in

her graundee.

Even in the great and busy cities of Lille and Roubaix, the Flemish

tongue holds its own against the French with astonishing pertinacity.

But if French Flanders is still more Flemish than French, the Flemings,

I believe, are very good Frenchmen, just as I imagine the most

enthusiastic Welshmen of Mr. Gladstone's beloved little principality,

would be, after all, found, at a pinch, to be very good Englishmen.

Architecturally, their ancient Flemish capital, Lille, now the chief

town of the great Department of the Nord, is decidedly more French than

Flemish.

The seven sieges it has sustained have left it quite bare of great

historic monuments, and during the past thirty years millions of francs

have been spent upon its streets, squares, and boulevards, with the

result of giving it the commonplace and comfortable look of a growing

quarter of Paris. Its famous old walls have been improved off the face

of the earth; and I am glad to say that few if any of the noisome

cellars seem still to exist in which, when I first knew the place, not

so very long ago, thousands of its industrious working people used to

dwell like troglodytes.

Marlborough's cannon spared the fine seventeenth-century Spanish Lonja,

and there are traces still to be discerned about the modernised mairie

of the ancient palace of Jean Sans Peur and Charles the Fifth. But there

is no Flemish building here comparable with the Hôtel de Ville and the

Beffroi of Douai. Of old Flemish customs and traditions, however, there

is no lack in Lille, and I came upon a curious proof of the vitality of

its local patriotism. This was the regular publication, in the most

widely circulated morning newspaper, of a series of carefully prepared

articles on the archæology and antiquities, the legends and the archives

of the old Flemish capital. One of the editors of this journal showed me

in his office a collection of these articles, reprinted from the

newspaper, and now filling some twenty volumes.

I spent my first midsummer morning at Lille in the Musée which has been

installed in the Hôtel de Ville. The Wicar collection of drawings there,

I need hardly say, is of itself a 'liberal education' in art. During his

long residence at Rome in the Via del Vantaggio, the Chevalier

Jean-Baptiste Wicar wasted neither his time nor his money. What

treasures were then to be picked up by such a man--for Wicar died not

long after the Revolution of July 1830! Where he found his Masaccios,

Robert Browning told me that he knew; but where did he find that

incomparable bust in wax which charms with all the mystic feminine grace

and more than all the feminine beauty of the Mona Lisa? Possibly M.

Carolus Duran may be able to throw light upon this; for he was one of

the earliest beneficiaries who profited by the fund which the Chevalier

Wicar founded for the purpose, as he says in his will, of 'giving to

young men, natives of Lille, who devote themselves to the fine arts, the

means of sojourning at Rome for four years, under certain conditions.'

The Chevalier Wicar was a good Catholic, and he gave to his fund the

title of the 'pious foundation of Wicar.'

I suppose that under the Third Republic this monstrous recognition of an

unscientific emotion would have sufficed to vitiate the scheme, in which

case France would have lost the artistic achievements of M. Carolus

Duran.

The house in the Via del Vantaggio I believe still makes a part of the

'pious foundation,' and the municipality of Lille has very sensibly

added a yearly sum of 800 francs to the 1,600 francs allotted under the

will of the Chevalier Wicar to each beneficiary, together with a

travelling outfit of 300 francs.

Coming back from the Musée to breakfast in my very comfortable hotel

near the _gare_, I found there awaiting me M. Grimbert of Douai, who had

most obligingly come over to show me what the friends of religion and of

liberty are doing in Lille to prove that the religious sentiment is not

'dead' in this part of France, and that the Christians of French

Flanders do not intend to let their children be 'laicised' into the

likeness of M. Jules Ferry and M. Paul Bert, without an effort to

prevent it.

The Department of the Nord has long been conspicuous in France for the

number and the excellence of its educational institutions. The

statistics collected by M. Baudrillart show that it stands side by side,

in this respect, with the Department of the Seine. Of the 663 communes

which make up the Department of the Nord, only three in 1881 were

without a school. The department contains 1,680,784 inhabitants. Of

these, considerably more than one-third, or 680,951, live in the 17

cantons and 129 communes of the arrondissement of Lille, which includes

of course the city, and here we find 340 public schools, 1,038 classes

for instruction, and 116 free educational establishments. Over against

this organisation of education must be set a very notable development of

intemperance. I do not infer this from the extraordinary amount of

beer-drinking which goes on in the Nord, to the extent, according to M.

Baudrillart, of 220 bottles a year to every man, woman, and child in the

department, against 170 in the Ardennes and 153 in the Pas-de-Calais.

For, after all, it may be doubted whether habitual drunkenness is much

more common in beer-drinking than in wine-drinking countries; and there

can be no question, I think, that it is much less common in countries in

which wine is abundant and cheap, than in countries in which wine is an

imported luxury. But the consumption of alcoholic liquors is apparently

on the increase in this great department.

At the beginning of this century, long before Lille and Roubaix had

begun to draw into their factories such great numbers of the rural

population as now yearly throng into these prosperous cities, a prefect

of the department, M. Dieudonné, declared that it was not an unusual

thing to see workmen in Lille who worked only three days in the week and

spent the other four in drinking corn brandy and Hollands gin. At that

time the workpeople of the sister city of Roubaix had a much better

reputation, while of the rural populations of French Flanders Dr.

Villermé then affirmed, after a careful study of their habits, that

nothing was to be seen among them of the 'debauchery and the daily and

disgusting drunkenness prevalent in the large towns.'

Persons familiar with the rural aspects of the Nord assure me that this

can no longer be said with truth of the rural farm-labourers. It is,

probably, more true of the farmers and of their families than it was

fifty years ago, but it is, unfortunately, also less true than it then

was of the rural labourers. The number of small cabarets has quadrupled

during the last quarter of a century in the arrondissement of Douai

alone, which contains 6 cantons, 66 communes, and 131,278 inhabitants,

the majority of them occupied in agriculture; and, taking the whole

department, it appears that the consumption of spirits represents an

increase of 100 per cent. in the average consumption of pure alcohol in

the last forty years. It rose from 2.52 litres, in 1849, for every man,

woman, and child, to 4.65 litres, in 1869, and it is now estimated to

reach 6 litres, which would represent an annual consumption of about 16

bottles of brandy at 42 degrees, for every man, woman, and child in the

department. I did not happen to see any drunken women or children in the

department, but M. Jules Simon, in his work, _L'Ouvrière_, gives an

uncanny account of feminine drunkenness at Lille, where there are

special cabarets, it seems, for women. I believe no special estaminets

have yet been set up there for women addicted to tobacco, and, indeed, I

do not know that the civilisation of French Flanders has yet reached the

point of treating the question 'whether women ought to smoke' as a

practical question, worthy the grave attention of savants and

philosophers. Possibly, if England, like France, had enjoyed the

advantage of sixteen changes in her form of government, and of three

successful foreign invasions, during the past century, questions of this

sort might now subtend no greater an arc in England than they now

subtend in France. And it certainly ought to interest Englishmen to know

that the example of England is freely cited in Lille, Roubaix,

Tourcoing, and other centres of Flemish life and activity, to support

the 'noble and military' amusement of cock-fighting, to which the good

people of these regions are extraordinarily addicted. A law was passed

against this practice under the presidency of Prince Louis Napoleon in

1850, and many attempts have since been made to suppress it--but with

small success. A Republican prefect of the Nord, some years ago,

actually wrote to the President of the Society for the Prevention of

Cruelty to Animals that he would not hesitate to 'enforce the provisions

of the law against cock-fighting whenever the practice seemed to be

likely to become too general!' I do not know that I ever stumbled on a

more delightful recognition of the Eleventh Commandment of demagogism,

'_vox populi vox Dei_!' Naturally, with such encouragement as this, the

sport of late years has been assuming, I am told, a recognised place

among the amusements of the people. Fighting-cocks go into the arena as

champions of the towns in which their owners dwell; and if the feathered

Achilles of Roubaix does the feathered Hector of Tourcoing to death, the

spectators not unfrequently take up the quarrel, divide into two camps,

and have it out handsomely on the spot. These things I note because they

tend to show how difficult it is to develop an ideal civilisation in a

few years by the simple process of forbidding men to teach, or to

believe in, the existence of a Divine Ruler of the Universe.

For the same reason, and without unduly dwelling upon it, I may here

record the statement made to me by an editor of an influential journal

in Lille, that in no city in France has the evil of juvenile

prostitution taken such root as here. When I expressed my surprise at

this, the French law as to the _détournement de mineures_ being at least

as stringent as the English, he replied: 'How can you expect such a law

to be enforced under this Government?' and he then went on to show me in

an old file of his journal an account, now some years old, of the

adventures of a deputy from Versailles in the Palais Royal at Paris.

'Our Republicans,' he said, 'are firm believers in the great principle

of the solidarity of all the party with all the haps and mishaps of

every member of the party.'

A more confirmed pessimist, by the way, than this journalist I have not

seen in France. He was quite convinced that the Republicans would show a

majority in the seven circumscriptions or districts of Lille at the

elections in the autumn, and he criticised very severely the attitude of

the Catholics at Lille in regard to politics. 'They are excellent

people,' he said, 'but they think too much of the souls of the people

and not enough of their votes.'

I ventured to suggest that perhaps the picture which he had himself set

before me of the moral condition of the city of Lille, at least, might

be thought to afford some excuse for this preoccupation of the Catholics

with the spiritual rather than the political interests of the people.

But to this he would not listen for a moment.

'No, no!' he said; 'the first thing to be done for the souls of the

people is to get rid of these fellows at Paris! Are they not paganizing

the country? Here is this new law which is demoralising the army. Why do

they wish to force the seminarists into the service? Is it not avowedly

because they think this will stop the recruiting for the ranks of the

clergy? Why are they attacking the foundations of the magistracy? Is it

not because the French magistrates stand between them and the rights of

the French clergy as French citizens? How far off are we from a revival

of Danton's beautiful doctrine that, in order to consummate the

regeneration of society, all conditions imposed upon the eligibility of

citizens to act as judges ought to be immediately abolished, so that a

tinker, or a butcher, or a bootblack, or a chiffonnier might be made a

French magistrate just as well as a trained student of the laws? As you

know, one of the first things Danton, as Minister of Justice, did was to

carry through the Convention his famous decree making this doctrine law

in France!

'I am worn out,' he said, 'with trying to make our good people here

understand that they must go into the battle-field of politics and put

these fellows out of power at Paris if they mean to prevent France from

falling into absolute anarchy once more. I cannot make them move, and I

believe we shall be beaten in all the seven districts of Lille.'

I am glad to say the event proved that my pessimistic friend was by far

too pessimistic. Of the seven seats to which the arrondissement of Lille

is entitled, four were carried by the Monarchists--in two cases without

an attempt seriously to contest them; and if the seven candidates had

been voted for on a single list, that list would have been elected by

the arrondissement.

The Monarchists threw in the whole arrondissement 53,135 votes, the

Opportunist Republicans 31,019, the Radicals 9,191, and the Socialists

1,011. So that the Monarchists had a clear majority of 11,814 votes over

all the factions of the Republican party put together. In one district

of Lille, the 1st, the Boulangists threw 4,376 votes. If we put these

down, which we have no right to do, as Republican votes, the Monarchists

still show a clear majority of 7,438 in the whole arrondissement of

Lille, and, as I have said, if the representation of France by

arrondissements were really a representation by arrondissements and not

by circumscriptions, the seven hundred thousand people of this great and

prosperous department of North-Eastern France would now be represented

at Paris not by four Monarchists and three Republicans, but by seven

Monarchists. This may serve to show how exceedingly unsafe it is to

assume that the nominal party complexion of the majority in a Chamber

elected as the present French Chamber has been really gives foreign

observers anything like an accurate notion of the state of public

opinion and the drift of popular feeling in France at this time.

A friend to whom I am indebted for an analysis made with great care of

the electoral results, not in this very important department alone, but

throughout France, points out to me the exceedingly significant

difference between the majorities given to the Monarchists and to the

Republican deputies. In the 4th District of Lille, for example, M. des

Rotours, the Monarchist candidate, received 10,555 votes, being the

largest poll by far given to any candidate in the whole arrondissement,

and not one vote was thrown against him. In the 6th District the

Republican candidate was declared to be elected by no more than 199

majority in a total poll of 14,833 votes. In the 3rd District the

Monarchist was elected by a majority of 1,441 votes, in a total poll of

16,081 votes. In the 5th District the Republican was returned by a

majority of 281 votes in a total poll of 15,321 votes. In the 7th

District the Monarchist was returned by a majority of 237 in a total

poll of 14,463 votes. In the 1st District of Hazebrouck the Monarchist

was returned by a majority of 6,861, in a total poll of 11,129 votes,

and in the 2nd District of Hazebrouck by a majority of 5,269 in a total

poll of 10,291!

Hazebrouck is an essentially Flemish town of some 10,000 inhabitants,

and the arrondissement, which comprises 7 cantons and 53 communes,

contains 112,921 inhabitants, is absolutely Flemish. The early

sixteenth-century church of St.-Nicholas at Hazebrouck, with its lofty

and graceful spire, was begun about the time of the first voyage of

Columbus, and is one of the most beautiful extant Flemish buildings of

that time. The people of this arrondissement and their neighbours in the

arrondissement of Dunkirk were almost as famous before 1789 as the Dutch

for their skill as florists and their success in developing all manner

of eccentric varieties of roses, tulips, primroses, and pinks. I do not

know that they ever managed to produce a blue rose, but they came very

near it, and at the present time their rich and level country is gay

with cottage gardens. They are given to sociability also, for the

arrondissement possesses, I am told, at least one cabaret for every 70

inhabitants. But then the cabarets in the department at large average 1

to every 61 inhabitants, and in the thoroughly agricultural

arrondissement of Avesnes they number 1 for every 38 inhabitants. In the

arrondissement of Avesnes, a property of from five to twenty hectares is

called a small farm. In the arrondissement of Hazebrouck, a farmer

cultivating from six to fifty hectares passes for an agriculturist of

the middle class. The people are prosperous, and their hostility to the

Republic seems to have its origin chiefly in the intolerance and

extravagance of the Government. This is the case too, apparently, with

their neighbours in the arrondissement of Dunkirk. The 1st District of

Dunkirk elected a Boulangist Revisionist by a solid vote of 7,821

against 4,806 votes, given not to a Government Republican but to a

Radical, while the 2nd District of Dunkirk elected a Monarchist by a

majority of 5,036 votes in a poll of 11,168.

In the face of such figures as these it seems to me that the friends of

religion and of liberty in the Department of the Nord hardly merit the

reproach put upon them by my pessimistic journalist at Lille of

lukewarmness in the political battle of 1889.

Neither he nor any one can well accuse them of lukewarmness in any other

matter affecting the interests either of religion or of liberty. And I

cannot help hoping that my Northern pessimist may perhaps have

over-estimated the prevalence of juvenile prostitution in Lille as much

as he certainly underestimated the devotion of the Monarchists of Lille

to their political flag. His gloomy prognostications as to the issue at

the polls were probably enough inspired by his thorough knowledge of the

extraordinary preparations made by the authorities for manipulating the

returns. On this point he gave me some particulars which appear to be

borne out by subsequent events. It is curious for example to learn from

the analytical table to which I have already referred in connection with

the elections at Lille, that of the 164 Government candidates returned

as elected at the first balloting of September 23, 87 were returned as

elected by majorities of less than 1,000 votes, while of the 147

Monarchists returned as elected on the same day, only 48 were returned

as elected by majorities of less than 1,000 votes. Of the 164

Republicans, 20, or about one in eight, were returned as elected by

majorities of less than 200 votes; while of the 147 Monarchists, only

11, or about one in thirteen, were returned as elected by similar

majorities. When we remember that the machinery of these elections was

absolutely controlled by the prefects under instructions from M.

Constans, the Minister of the Interior, which were not made public,

this circumstance is certainly very significant. Some of the details

sent me by my analytical correspondent make it still more significant.

In the 2nd District of St.-Nazaire, for example, the Monarchist

candidate was elected without a competitor, receiving 16,084 votes. In

the 1st District of St.-Nazaire the Government candidate was returned by

a majority of no more than 6 votes, the returns giving him 8,458 votes

to 8,452 for his Monarchist opponent. This margin is almost as

suggestive as the majority of 9 votes by which M. Razimbaud, a

Government candidate for the district of St.-Pars, in the Department of

the Hérault, was declared three days after the balloting of October 6 to

have been returned over his Monarchist opponent, the Baron André Reille.

In this same Department of the Hérault, the Prefect and the

Councillors-General returned M. Ménard-Dorian, the Government candidate,

as elected, at Lodève, over M. Leroy-Beaulieu, the distinguished

political economist, by a majority of 67 votes. In this case it seems a

certain number of votes thrown in one commune for both candidates were

set aside, to be annulled for informality. When the returns went up to

the Council for revision, the informal votes cast for M. Leroy-Beaulieu

were declared invalid, the informal votes cast for M. Ménard-Dorian were

declared good and valid, and M. Ménard-Dorian was proclaimed to have

been elected. The Committee of the Chamber reported against the seating

of M. Ménard-Dorian, and tried to have this report accepted, but as I

write the Chamber has not accepted it, and the odds are that M.

Leroy-Beaulieu, who, though a Moderate Republican, has made himself

obnoxious to the Government by telling the truth about the financial

condition of France, will be kept out of the seat which it is tolerably

plain that he was elected to fill.

It is difficult for an Englishman, even for an American, to understand

the cynical coolness with which things of this sort are done in the

French Republic of the present time, and not very easy to understand the

apathetic way in which, when done, they are accepted by the French

public. There seems to be little doubt that in England of late years

ballot-boxes have been 'stuffed' only by the stupidity of the voters,

and not by the ingenious rascality of the political managers. I wish I

could with an easy conscience say the same thing of my own country. But

even in the United States deliberate tampering with the returns of a

political election has not, I think, been practised since the evil days

of Reconstruction at the South with the calm disregard of appearances

shown by the Government managers during the legislative contest of this

year, 1889, in France; and certainly there has been nothing known in the

Congress of the United States, since the days of Reconstruction, at all

comparable with the systematic invalidation by the majority in the

French Chamber of the elections of troublesome members since it

assembled on November 12. In the cases of General Boulanger and of M.

Naquet, the latter of whom resigned his seat in the Senate to stand as a

Boulangist candidate for the Chamber, this invalidation was carried out

openly as a party measure and precisely in the spirit of the famous or

infamous resolution which Robespierre made the 'Section of the Pikes'

adopt, to the effect that the electors of Paris must be protected

against their own incapacity to choose 'true patriots' by having the

'true patriots' chosen for them. If this be one of the 'principles of

1789,' it must be admitted that the Third Republic is consistently and

courageously acting upon it. It has undoubted advantages, but it has a

tendency, perhaps, to put in question the value of what are commonly

called representative institutions. Strike out of the theory of

representative institutions the right divine of the people to choose the

wrong men, and what is left of it?

At the close of the election of September 22, 1889, in Paris, the major

of the 2nd or Clignancourt District of the eighteenth arrondissement of

the Department of the Seine declared that General Boulanger had received

7,816 votes out of 13,611 cast, and that he was therefore elected. Of

his competitors, one M. Joffrin, described as a 'Possibilist,' had

received 5,507 votes; M. Jules Roques, a Socialist, had received 359

votes, and for a citizen bearing the gloomy but respectable name of M.

Cercueil, or 'M. Coffin,' one vote had been cast. Obviously General

Boulanger was the man whom a majority of the voters of Clignancourt

desired to represent them. If General Boulanger for their own sake could

not be allowed to represent them, why not M. Cercueil? They certainly

did not choose M. Cercueil to represent them. But as certainly they did

not choose M. Joffrin to represent them.

What really happened? The Prefect of the Seine, on hearing the result at

Clignancourt, notified the Minister of the Interior, and orders were at

once given to correct this egregious error into which the voters of

Clignancourt had fallen as to what their true interest required. It was

probably found that an 'informality' had occurred in certain communes,

and that through this 2,494 votes must be annulled. News of this

discovery was instantly sent to the Parisian newspapers. As it was

supposed that they would give M. Joffrin a plurality of the votes to be

recognised, sundry newspapers actually printed the name of M. Joffrin at

the head of the list of candidates in the place usually accorded by a

really enlightened press to the elect of universal suffrage.

Unfortunately the official calculator is not of the blood of Bidder. It

was found at the last moment that enough votes had not been 'annulled'

to put M. Joffrin at the head of the poll, so that his name actually

appears in sundry Parisian morning papers of September 23, first indeed

in position, but over against it are recorded 5,500 votes, while the

name of General Boulanger comes second with 5,880 votes! Clearly an

awkwardness! In the _Journal des Débats_, which is a serious Republican

journal of character, the election of General Boulanger by 7,816 votes

was quietly announced, with a postscript to the effect that 'the

Prefecture of the Seine' gave a different result, 'arising from the

circumstance that in certain sections 2,494 votes bearing the name of

General Boulanger had been asserted to be null and void,' and that,

therefore, there would be a second election, or 'ballottage,' on October

6!

There could hardly be a more pregnant commentary than this upon the

candid admission made by the most respectable and influential Republican

journal in Paris, the _Temps_, on October 17, 1885, that these 'second

elections,' or 'ballottages,' are simply a device by which the Central

Government at Paris is enabled to 'correct' the errors perpetrated by

the voters of France at the elections which precede them. 'To learn the

true sentiments of the country,' said the _Temps_, 'we must consult the

elections of the 4th. On that day _universal suffrage was allowed_ to

choose freely between the opposing parties and policies. The vote of

to-morrow will not be as clear and precise, for it will be determined by

_tactical necessities and by all sorts of combinations_.'

Perfectly true! But, this being true, what becomes of 'popular

sovereignty' and of the divine quality of the rights derived from

universal suffrage as contrasted with rights derived from inheritance,

or, for that matter, with rights derived from a dice-box or the

shuffling of a pack of cards? Considering what the usual origin is of

'tactical necessities' in politics, and what forces determine political

'combinations of all sorts,' is it going too far to say that the odds,

so far as public interests are concerned, are in favour of the dice-box

or the pack of cards--provided the dice be not loaded or the cards

specially packed?

Some years ago, in my own country, a well-known Austrian dined with me

one night, just before he sailed for Europe after a tour in the United

States. We spoke of a public man just then filling a very responsible

position at Washington, to which he had been named after a severely

contested and very costly election. 'I thought him a very pleasant,

intelligent man,' said my Austrian guest, 'but it struck me that you

spend too much time and trouble and money on getting just such men into

such places. We get very much the same calibre of men for the same kind

of work much more economically and easily by the simple process of

marrying a prince to a princess.'

What I have seen and learned this year of the working of the electoral

machinery in France under the Third Republic inclines me, as I have

already said, to think that the Catholic children of light in Lille and

in French Flanders generally may be doing better work both for Religion

and for Liberty than my pessimistic journalist was disposed before the

elections to believe. If they had given more time and thought and money

to 'tactical necessities' and 'political combinations,' and less to the

social and spiritual interests of the land in which they live, the

results even of the elections might perhaps have been less satisfactory

to them. For, as I have shown, the strength of the Monarchist vote in

this region proved to be much greater than my pessimist thought it

would be; and the Republicans of the Third Republic did a deal of

canvassing for the Monarchists by making it very hard for men who love

religion and liberty to vote for Republican candidates.

Lord Beaconsfield's saying, that the world is governed by the people of

whom it hears the least, is certainly not less true of the Catholic

Church than it is of the world. The Catholic stock in French Flanders is

as vigorous and full of sap as in Belgium or in Holland. It is

interesting to hear educated people talking glibly in London or Paris

about the decay of the Christian religion in the same breath in which

they profess their unbounded admiration of the heroism of Father Damien.

It was through no act or wish of Father Damien that the world at large

came to know his name, or to take account of a work which was done not

to be seen of men. He was simply a Flemish Catholic, doing what he

believed to be the will of God.

Throughout the broad rich plains of the great Department of the Nord,

and in its crowded busy towns and cities, this Catholic faith is

everywhere to be seen and felt--to be felt rather than to be seen in its

fruits of charity, self-denial, and devout self-sacrifice.

Nowhere in France is public charity, I am told, so extensively and

efficiently organised, and the demands upon public charity are

exceptionally great. The department is very rich and very prosperous,

but it contains, like all frontier regions, a large floating population;

and one of the best-informed men I met in Lille, a large landed

proprietor in one of the wealthiest communes of the department, told me

that there are probably more families or tribes of hereditary mendicants

scattered over French Flanders than are to be found in any other French

province.

These are not nomads addicted to wandering off into other regions, but

rather a kind of Northern lazzaroni. They do a little work occasionally,

but as little and as seldom as possible. They are inveterate poachers,

and the more industrious of them are habitual smugglers. In their way of

prosecuting this industry, however, they show their fine natural

instinct for avoiding labour. The most profitable trade they drive is in

tobacco. This they get over the frontier from Belgium, and to get it

they train a certain breed of dogs. They tie parcels of tobacco around

the throats of these dogs, and then proceed to have the dogs well

thrashed by one of their number dressed in the Custom-house uniform. A

few lessons of this sort suffice to develop in the dogs a strong

association of ideas between the odour of tobacco and the thwacks of a

cudgel, and a dog well educated in this way may be trusted, after he has

got his cargo in Belgium, to reach his master's den unvisited by the

French _douane_. Baudrillart confirms this account. He puts the number

of habitual applicants, largely from this mendicant class, for public

relief in the department at from two hundred to two hundred and fifty

thousand a year. Out of the 662 communes in the department there were

only twenty in 1888 without a 'Bureau de Bienfaisance,' and the

department spends five millions of francs a year on its charities,

independently of nearly twice that amount expended upon hospitals,

asylums, dispensaries, and the like, by private benevolence. Under the

French law, private donors can found charities to be attached to the

public 'Bureau de Bienfaisance,' and administered by the public

officers, and one of the many evil effects of the war declared against

Catholic France by the Third Republic is that it affects such charities

very seriously.

Even under the Empire trouble came of the occasional division of one

commune into two or more communes, a question then arising as, for

example, in a famous case of the communes of St.-Joseph and St.-Martin

in the Loire, about the division between the poor of the two communes of

three hospital beds left to the 'Bureau de Bienfaisance' of the original

commune of St.-Martin. It was easier for the military saint himself to

divide his cloak with the shivering beggar than for the commune which

bore his name to divide three beds into two equal portions! At Lille,

two or three years ago, a lady, Mme. Austin Laurand, the widow of M.

Laurand, in accordance with her husband's will, gave 30,000 francs to

the 'Bureau de Bienfaisance' of the city, the income thereof to be

applied, under the supervision of three commissioners, to encouraging

habits of thrift among the apprentices of Lille. Two hundred bank-books

of five francs each are annually given to apprentices in the first two

years of their apprenticeship, and the rest of the income is to be given

in prizes each year to those of the bank-book holders who shall be shown

to have been the most careful and thrifty in managing the results of

their labour during the year.

A law passed in 1874, before the 'true Republicans' of Gambetta and

Ferry came into power, provides for a medical inspection and record of

newly-born children, and this law puts infants, whenever it may be found

necessary, under proper hygienic conditions. It has been nowhere so

energetically carried out as in the Nord. Of course, such a law as this

flies directly in the face of the great gospel of the 'survival of the

fittest.' But though that gospel was introduced to Paris on the stage as

one of the curiosities of the Centennial Exposition of 1889, it has made

little progress as yet in Catholic France. Even at the theatres in

Paris, I am glad to say, the popular instinct still regulates the

_queue_ on principles quite inconsistent with the Darwinian maxims of

'every man for himself,' and 'the devil take the hindmost.' It will be

an evil day for invalids and cripples bitten with the drama when the

'struggle for life' comes to be logically developed into the right of

the strongest men to get first to the ticket office!

Throughout the Department of the Nord, primary schools exist for the

children who are taken in charge at their birth by public benevolence,

and those to whom they are confided are obliged to see that the children

attend these schools from the age of six to the age of twelve years.

Under the influence of the Church acting upon the naturally sociable and

gregarious temperament of the Flemish race, mutual aid societies have

become very numerous of late years in the Nord. A hundred and fifty-two

such societies now exist in the arrondissement of Lille alone. These

numbered, in 1888, 7,249 honorary members and 35,270 paying members, and

their assets were stated at about 3,000,000 francs. Only 3,649 women,

however, were enrolled on their lists. Is this a confirmation, I wonder,

of the theory entertained by Mr. Emerson and other philosophers, that

woman is not a 'clubbable' animal?

Putting this aside, however, for the moment as a more or less 'academic'

question, it is of interest to note the very considerable development

during the last few years of the principle of association among the

working-men and producers of France, under the influence of the Church

and of Conservative public men like M. Welche, one of the

extra-parliamentary Ministers of the Marshal-Duke of Magenta, who did

good service here at Lille as Prefect of the Department of the Nord, and

who has made the French law of 1881 affecting 'professional

syndicates,' so useful throughout the agricultural world of France.

It is one of the organic statutes of the Society of 'Foreseers of the

Future,' or 'Prévoyants de l'Avenir,' that all political and religious

discussions are forbidden at the meetings of the society.'

This society was established at Paris on December 12, 1880. On February

23, 1881, it was authorised to act as a 'Civil Society,' by the Minister

of the Interior and the Prefect of Police. Its object is to 'ensure to

all its members who shall have co-operated in maintaining it for twenty

years, the first necessaries of life.' I shall not attempt here to go in

detail into the statutes and organisation of the society. Suffice it to

say that the statutes are brief, clear, and sensible, and that the

organisation appears to be eminently practical. The members, to the

number of whom no limit is set, the only indispensable condition being

that they shall be in good health and actively employed in some trade or

calling, pay an entrance fee of two francs, and a monthly due of one

franc. This monthly due must be paid in advance, and a fine of 25

centimes is imposed for every month in arrears. Each member receives a

book containing the statutes, which establishes his title to its

benefits, and for which he pays 50 centimes. Donations may be received,

and under the authority of the officers entertainments may be given, the

profits of which go to the general fund. Any respectable person, no

matter what may be his calling, may become a member, if he has attained

the age of fifteen years, and women are not excluded. 'Having the same

duties,' say the statutes, 'they have the same rights,' but, despite

this, it is provided that women who are members shall not be fined if

they fail to attend the general meeting on the second Sunday in January

in each year, whereas men in the same case shall be mulcted in the sum

of one franc, unless they shall have previously by letter excused

themselves.

Every member at the expiration of twenty full years of membership shall

be entitled to his share of the interest earned during the twentieth

year of his membership by the property of the society, the funds of

which can only be invested in the three or five per cent. funds of the

French nation. His regular contribution to the society will still go on,

but he will receive his share of the interest earned thereafter

regularly every three months. Should a pensioner die, the year's

interest due to him shall be paid over to his heirs or assigns. The

pension cannot be transferred or alienated, and the relations of a

pensioner have no claim upon the amount of the payments made by him to

the society. Should a member become an invalid, incapable of work, after

fully paying up his dues to the society during five years, he may demand

to be kept upon the books as a full member, and as such he will be

entitled to his pension at the end of twenty years. The society can only

be dissolved by a unanimous vote of the members at a general meeting;

and if so dissolved the members must choose another society as nearly as

possible resembling this, to which the property of the dissolved society

shall be transferred.

The funds for current expenses of the society can never exceed 1,500

francs. This society, as I have said, was founded in 1880. Its success

has been really phenomenal.

On January 1, 1882, it comprised 757 members, and its capital amounted

to 6,237 francs. On January 18, 1886, it consisted of 15,008 members,

and had a capital invested in French consols of 361,003 fr. 99 c. On

April 1, 1889, it numbered 59,932 members, divided into 340 sections,

and it possessed an invested capital of 1,541,868 fr. 26 c.! Of course

the Tontine principle enters into the system, and it would be

interesting to compute the probable pensions in 1902 of so many of the

757 persons who were members of the society in 1882 as may then be

living to claim their share of the interest then earned by the then

capital of the society. The minuteness, precision, and practical common

sense with which the statutes of this organisation have been drawn up

and provision made in its regulations against all the probable

difficulties to be encountered in carrying it on, gives one a very

favourable notion of the business capacity and of the character of the

French working classes. No conditions as to sex or nationality are

imposed upon membership, the only necessary qualification being that the

person applying to be admitted shall be actively employed in some way,

be domiciled in France, and be sixteen full years of age. It strikes me

that organisations of this sort are more likely to promote a practical

solution of the Labour question than combinations to secure the passage

of laws fixing the number of hours for which a man shall be allowed to

work.

The Church has taken an active part in fostering the development of

these mutual aid societies throughout this great department, and

particularly in Lille and Roubaix. The disasters of the Franco-German

war gave a great impulse to them. These disasters did more to strengthen

and deepen than all the vulgar violence of the pseudo-scientific and

pseudo-literary atheism of parliamentary Paris has yet done to weaken

the religious sentiment in France, and the French Catholics cannot be

cited to illustrate Aubrey de Vere's noble saying that 'worse than

wasted weal is wasted woe.'

I spent a most interesting morning at Lille with M. Grimbert in visiting

the buildings and the collections of the great Catholic University which

has been founded here to meet the assault of M. Ferry and his allies on

the higher education in France. This Catholic University has been

endowed and is maintained entirely by the private liberality of the

Catholics of the Department of the Nord, and by the revenues it derives

from the students who attend its courses. It is a thoroughly equipped

university of the first rank. The Rector, Monseigneur Baunard, is a

Roman prelate, and of the two vice-rectors, one is a prelate and the

other a canon. These, with the Deans of the Faculties, and five

professors elected from the corps of instructors, constitute the

Academic Senate. The Administrative Council comprises the Archbishop of

Cambrai, the Bishop of Arras (to the benevolence of one of whose

predecessors France is indebted for the education which enabled

Robespierre to avenge upon the Church and upon his country what in one

of his letters he calls 'the intolerable slavery of an obligation

received'), the Bishop of Lydda, the Chancellor of the University, and

the Rector. The Theological Faculty comprises a dean and nine

professors; the Law Faculty a dean, the Comte de Vareilles-Sommières,

and thirteen professors. One of these gentlemen, M. Arthaut, was so kind

as to receive M. Grimbert and myself, and to show us over the whole

institution. The Medical Faculty comprises a dean, Dr. Desplats, and

twenty-three professors; the Faculty of Philosophy and Letters, a dean,

Dr. Margerie, and seven professors; the Faculty of Sciences, a dean, Dr.

Chautard, and nine professors.

The buildings of the University now occupy two sides of an immense

square in one of the finest quarters of Lille, and when fully completed

will occupy the whole square. As they now stand they are by far the

most striking edifices in Lille, and would do honour to any city in

Europe. The area covered by them, I should say, is larger than that

covered by the University of London, and certainly, from the

architectural point of view, they need fear no comparison with the

London establishment. The library, which is admirably arranged, already

contains about 80,000 volumes, and the apparatus of the scientific

schools is admittedly better than that of any institution in France. The

outlay already made here exceeds 11,000,000 fr., or about 240,000_l._

sterling, all of which has been contributed freely by the Catholics of

this region.

On the face of things it appears to me that the existence of this

University is somewhat inconsistent with the notion that 'the religious

sentiment is dead in France.' The classes are now attended by between

four and five hundred students, for whose accommodation three 'family

houses' have been already built, in which students are lodged at an

expense of from 1,000 to 1,400 fr. a year, and when the academic

buildings now in process of construction are completed, more than a

thousand students can be thus lodged. Two dispensaries, a Maternity

Hospital, under the charge of Sisters of Charity of St.-Vincent de Paul,

together with the large Hospital de la Charité, are directly connected

with the clinical service of the medical faculty, and are so

administered as to render the most important services to the industrious

population of the city. The Electrical Department of the Faculty of

Sciences is particularly well equipped, and one of the assistants in

charge of this department, who showed us some improvements recently

devised here in the working apparatus, surprised me by the extent and

minute accuracy of his information as to all the most recent progress

made in the applications of electricity to machinery, and to the arts on

both sides of the Atlantic.

I was not surprised, however, to learn from M. Arthaut that the

astonishing prosperity of this great institution is viewed with extreme

dissatisfaction by the authorities at Paris, and particularly by the

University of France, which has been confirmed again under the Third

Republic in the monopoly of academic privileges, of which it was very

sensibly deprived by the Assembly under the Government of the

Marshal-Duke of Magenta. By way of expressing this dissatisfaction with

dignity and emphasis, the Government of the Third Republic actually

forbids free Catholic universities to use the title of universities. M.

Ferry's Article 7 not being yet law in this best of all possible French

Republics, Catholics cannot be prevented from spending their own money

in founding institutions which are really universities. But, at all

events, they can be forbidden to give any one of them the title of a

university, that being reserved for the State establishment, which, from

Paris, extends its academic sway all over France.

I called the attention of M. Arthaut to the fact that a great Catholic

University has been this year founded in the capital of the Republic of

the United States, and that the President of the Republic, himself a

Protestant, not only attended the ceremonies of the foundation, but made

a brief speech, in which he expressed his best wishes for its progress

and prosperity. 'That, I am afraid,' said M. Arthaut, 'is a kind of

republic which we are not likely to see established in France.'

To measure the significance of this Catholic work in behalf of liberty

and religion here at Lille, it must be borne in mind that the very men

who are building it up with such splendid liberality and enterprise are

compelled by the iniquitous laws of the Third Republic to bear their own

share as taxpayers in supporting here at Lille another academic

institution of a similar scope, but of less importance, under the direct

control of the University of France, from all share in the

administration of which religion and the ministers of religion are as

rigidly excluded as that refugee of the First French Revolution, Stephen

Girard, intended they should be from the college which he founded at

Philadelphia. Of course the same thing is true of the Catholics all over

France. Out of their pockets must come nine-tenths of the enormous sum,

as yet quite incalculable, but certainly running far up in the hundreds

of millions of francs which is still to be expended by the Third

Republic upon its 'scholastic palace,' and the ever-increasing army of

'lay teachers,' male and female, whom it is yearly turning out of the

educational institutions of France to seek the employment which a vast

majority of them cannot possibly hope to find in the public schools, the

lyceums and 'faculties' of the nation.

On this point a Councillor-General whom I met here at Lille dwelt with

very grave emphasis. 'We are educating here in France,' he said to me,

'hundreds of young men and young women every year under false pretences

to enter a profession already overcrowded. For every post which now

exists or which can be created within the next ten years in the

educational system of these revolutionists at Paris, we are turning out

at least a hundred applicants each year of each sex, who must

necessarily be thrown upon the public. What will become of them? The

young men will go into Nihilism, as young men of the same sort do in

Russia; the young women will go upon the street. Only the other day at

Paris, the Government advertised a competition for about 70 positions in

the telegraphic service. How many young women applied? More than 800!

What is to become of the 730 unsuccessful competitors? And what right

has the State to flood the market thus, in advance of the necessities of

the country, and at the cost of the taxpayers, with male and female

teachers, any more than with carpenters, or with surgeons, or with

confectioners?'

One circumstance connected with the development of this great Catholic

University at Lille (as an American I permit myself to give the

institution its proper title) is of special significance. It is not the

only institution of the kind which has been called into existence in

France since the Third Republic began its war against religion in 1880.

There is a Free Catholic institution at Lyons, which consists of three

faculties under the administration of a company founded to receive and

administer all sums given or bequeathed to organise the institutes. The

Archbishop of Lyons is Chancellor of this institution, which has a dean

and seven professors of theology, a dean and eighteen professors of law,

with a secretary and librarian of that faculty, a dean and seven

professors of letters, a dean and nine professors of science. There are

similar institutions also at Angers and at Toulouse. All of these are

freely supported by the private subscriptions of Catholic France, as is

also the great Catholic Institute of Paris in the Rue Vaugirard, so

admirably conducted by Monseigneur d'Hulst, the Vicar-General of Paris.

Thanks to the law of July 12, 1875, and to the stand made by the friends

of liberty and religion when the law of March 18, 1880, was finally

enacted, the students of the Faculty of Law in these Catholic institutes

still have the right to present themselves with the certificates of

their several institutes at the public examinations for the diplomas of

the baccalaureate, the licentiate and the doctorate in law, and for the

certificate of capacity in the law, necessary to enable the successful

candidates to practise the legal profession in France. To maintain the

efficiency of the free Catholic institutions, the Catholics of France

have spared during the last few years neither labour nor money. More

than 17,000,000 francs have been contributed during that period to

establish the Catholic educational system in Paris alone, and more than

2,000,000 francs are yearly subscribed there to keep it up. As I have

already said, the University here at Lille represents an expenditure

during the same period of more than 11,000,000 francs and a still larger

prospective expenditure.

It would be interesting, if it were possible, to learn how much out of

their own pockets the propagandists of unbelief have expended during

this same decade upon the irreligious education of the children of their

countrymen! Were the truth attainable, the amount expended by them would

be found to bear to the amount received by them from their propaganda of

unbelief much less than the proportion of Falstaff's 'pennyworth of

bread' to his 'intolerable deal of sack!' While the Catholics of France

have been giving millions to defend the right of the French people to

protect the faith of their children, these men have been expending

hundreds of millions of the money of Catholic taxpayers upon school

buildings, the contracts for erecting which have been controlled by

themselves for their friends; they have been finding places in the

public educational service for their friends, dependants and allies, and

they have been comfortably drawing large salaries themselves from the

Treasury.

Set over against these incontrovertible facts, the fact, as

incontrovertible, for which I am indebted here to M. Grimbert, that of

the millions expended in defence of liberty and religion here at Lille,

a very large proportion has been contributed by one single Catholic

citizen of this ancient Flemish city, who has consecrated his life and

his fortune to his faith in the spirit of the earliest Christian times,

and I think my readers will agree with me, not only that the religious

sentiment is not dead in France, but that it never was more living and

more active in France, nor more full of promise for the social and

political regeneration of this great people.

I shall not run the risk of offending this good Catholic by naming him,

though his name and his work are an open secret for every intelligent

person in Lille. Suffice it that, coming of an old Flemish stock and

bearing an old Flemish name, this citizen (the title of citizen means

something respectable in these staunch old free cities) of Lille years

ago insisted to his brother, who was his associate in the ownership and

management of one of the largest commercial houses of this region, that

they should take regularly into the partnership account of their

business, for one-third of their annual profits, 'the work of God.' This

was done; and from that day to this the proportion thus set apart of

their profits has been regularly devoted to the service of the Church

and of charity. But this is not all. The brother, of whom I speak with

the reticence and the reverence due to a type of character not

absolutely common in this age of the Golden Calf, has systematically

limited his own personal expenses during the whole of these years to a

few thousands of francs, devoting all the rest of his income to

religious and benevolent objects.

I should really like to see a calm business-like estimate made of the

economical advantages likely to result to a country from extinguishing

at an expense of several hundreds of millions of francs a year the faith

which gives birth to characters such as this.

I visited, in one of the suburbs of Lille, the extensive manufactories

of another well-known house, the heads of which have worked out and

established an excellent system of 'mutual assistance' among their

employees, and built up a large and well-ordered _cité ouvrière_ on a

plan substantially resembling that of those which I saw at St.-Gobain

and at Anzin. A house for young girls established by this firm, very

near their main factory, struck me as particularly admirable. It is

under the management of the Sisters of St.-Vincent de Paul, who fill the

place with a pervading spirit of cheerfulness and animation, quite

indescribable. The dormitories were the perfection of neatness. The

gymnastic hall and the grounds were in apple-pie order, and as the lower

part of the large and airy building erected by the firm for this

domicile is used during the day as a kind of crèche by the married women

who leave their young children here while they are busy in the factory,

the whole place was alive with merry and laughing little imps. I heard

of other establishments of the same kind at and near Roubaix on a still

larger scale. These I unfortunately had not time to visit. Under the

Empire in 1865 a few energetic citizens of Lille induced the

municipality to guarantee five per cent, interest on a capital of

2,000,000 francs for the establishment of a company to construct, let

and sell houses for working-men under certain conditions as to the

isolation of each house and as to its proper ventilation and drainage.

The rental of these houses can never exceed eight per cent, on the cost

of erection, those of one story never to cost more than 2,400 francs,

and those of two stories more than 3,000 francs, including the cost of

the land. The houses are built of brick with foundations and sills of

Soignies stone. These were the original statutes, but the company is now

allowed to build single-story houses on a larger scale with cellars,

which may be rented for 400 francs a year or bought for 5,000 francs--a

first payment in the case of purchase to be made of 500 francs, and

after that the money to be paid in instalments of 40 francs a month over

thirteen years. All the wells and pumps are supplied by the

municipality.

The municipality also makes an annual grant in aid of a very useful

charity, founded under the Empire, and largely developed by private

gifts and legacies, called the 'Invalids of Labour.' This now secures

pensions to nearly a hundred workmen, disabled by serious accidents

incurred in their labour or through some effort to help others in peril.

It also gives temporary assistance in less severe cases. But the most

characteristic institution which I found flourishing at Lille has a

history worth telling. It strikingly illustrates the development under

the old _régime_ in France and Flanders of those public works of

benevolence of which we are so often and so audaciously asked to believe

that they had no existence before the benign 'principles of 1789'

bedewed the hearts of men, and it not less strikingly illustrates the

demoralising and destructive influence upon all manner of sound and

useful establishments throughout France of the headlong and reckless

administration of public affairs by the successive 'governments' of the

First Republic.

In the year 1607, on September 27, a worthy Catholic citizen,

Bartholomew Masurel, _bourgeois et manant_ of the city of Lille, came

before two notaries, and declared 'that to succour the poor people of

Lille in their necessities, and also for the salvation of his own soul

and the souls of his predecessors and successors, he wished to establish

a _Mont-de-Piété_, where money loans should be made without usury or

interest, and not as they were made by the Lombards.'

To this end Bartholomew Masurel gave, by a donation between living

persons, and irrevocable, to take effect after his death, all his lands,

fiefs, and houses which he owned at Lille, and in his country place, and

the value of which might be estimated at a hundred and fifty thousand

_livres parisis_, or in money of our day nominally 300,000 francs. In

fact, the gift, I am told, represented about half a million francs of

our days.

But the good '_bourgeois et manant_' could not hold out till his death

against the appeal which the sight of 'the poor people of Lille in their

necessities' daily made to his kindly heart. So in 1609 he agreed with

the Mayor, that he would turn over all these possessions at once to the

magistrates to be applied to the purpose he meant to effect, the

magistrates agreeing to secure to him an annuity out of the funds of the

city of 1,200 florins, or about 1,562 francs of our time. Thereupon he

went to work with the authorities to found his charity. From his

statutes we learn that foundations of this kind were then common in

French Flanders. He models them, as he says, upon 'those of similar

foundations in our neighbouring towns and elsewhere.'

No loans were to be made except to '_manants et habitants de la Ville

Taille et Banlieue de Lille_,' and only to 'poor and necessitous persons

who, not being able to gain their livelihood, were forced to borrow

money;' nor were loans to be made to 'persons prodigal, of evil life,

and accustomed to squander their goods.' For this due order was to be

taken by the magistrates. At first the loans were limited to 24 florins

(30 francs) to one person; the lowest sum loaned being 20 patars, or 1

fr. 25 c. of our times. So well had Bartholomew Masurel organised his

charity, and so many good Christian souls swelled its funds by gifts and

bequests, that within a year the maximum loan was raised to 50 florins,

in 1669 to 100 florins, and in 1745 it was fixed at 120 florins, or 150

francs. At this figure it stood when the First Republic began its

experiments. The fund was then known as 'the true Mont-de-Piété,' and

was carried on under letters patent granted in 1609 by the Archduke

Albert of Austria. When Lille became French in 1667, Louis XIV had to

recognise and confirm all the rights and titles of this benevolent

institution.

It had rendered great service to the industries of Lille during the

seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the growth of the funds enabling

the managers to lend sums to weavers on their goods when trade fell off,

and so relieving them from the necessity of parting with them for less

than their value. Just before the Revolution the Masurel Fund amounted

to 455,454 francs, of which 256,627 francs were in cash or in loans, and

the rest in state funds and houses, yielding a revenue of 8,307 francs.

On January 23, 1794, the National Convention coolly ordered that all

'objects of necessity deposited in any Mont-de-Piété for an amount not

exceeding 20 francs should be at once restored without payment to their

owners, and all such objects deposited for amounts below 50 and above 20

francs on payment, without interest, of the amount beyond 20 francs!'

This 'liberal' legislation had been preceded on August 24, 1793, by

another act of spoliation which ordered 'the payment of the capital of

all sums at interest to be made in _assignats_, and the conversion of

all the debts of the Communes, and of the suppressed public

organisations throughout France into State debts.

In consequence of these measures the whole property of the Masurel fund

was found in 1803, when Napoleon began to overhaul the chaos to which

the lunatics and plunderers of the Republic had reduced France, to

amount to no more than 10,408 francs in real estate. This was the way in

which the 'principles of 1789' developed the benevolent institutions of

France, and introduced a new era!

The authorities of Lille had the good sense and forecast thereupon to

suspend the operations of the true _Mont-de-Piété_, and to set about

restoring the fund as far and as fast as was possible. The Christian

institution of Masurel had fared better than the 'Lombards.' This latter

establishment had to be formally closed in 1796, as it was then found to

have no more than 86,000 francs in its treasury, and this in

_assignats_!

In 1857 the Prefect of the Nord reported that the Masurel fund might be

safely devoted anew to the purposes of its founder. It then amounted to

249,644 fr. By an imperial decree of 1860, all that remained of the

property of the 'Lombards' was amalgamated with the Masurel fund, and

the institution was put under the direction of the official

Mont-de-Piété of Lille, but with a separate system of accounts, and

began its operations again on the lines laid down by its founder in

1607. It has since worked so well that the maximum of the loans

reimbursable, without interest, has risen from 30 francs in 1860 to 200

francs.

In 1869, the maximum being 100 francs, the number of engagements and

renewals was 10,933--the money loaned amounted to 75,460 fr. 50 c., in

loans averaging 9fr. 14 c., and the capital of the fund to 257,231 fr.

27 c. In 1888, the maximum being 200 fr., there were 16,000 engagements

and renewals, the loans amounted to 136,663 francs in average loans of

8 fr. 54 c., and the capital of the fund to 334,726 fr. 57 c.

Of the 'similar foundations in other towns' which moved the pious

emulation of Bartholomew Masurel nearly three centuries ago, how many, I

wonder, still exist!

And with them how many other monuments of the Christian civilisation of

Flanders and of France were 'improved' off the face of the earth by the

'regenerators' of 1792?

It was not by accident that I learned of the Masurel Mont-de-Piété; but

when I went to the Municipal Secretary to ask him for some official

account of its condition and its operation, that courteous functionary

looked at me for a moment with astonishment and then said, 'I am

delighted to give you what you want, and I assure you that, with one

exception, you are the only foreigner who has ever asked for this

information in the last seven years! The other was the English

Protestant clergyman here in Lille, who happens to live or has his

chapel, I am not sure which, just opposite the Mont-de-Piété!'

I ought not to speak however of the Masurel foundation as 'unique.' I

hope there may be many more men like the good Bartholomew Masurel in our

time, and in other countries besides France, than we wot of. But the

only modern institution of a kindred spirit with this of which I have

any present cognisance began its career in England only fifteen years

ago, and was founded curiously enough like the Masurel fund by men of

the Low Countries. This is the 'Koning Willem's Fonds,' of the

Netherlands Benevolent Society of London. At a dinner given at the

Cannon Street Hotel on May 12, 1874, to celebrate the twenty-fifth year

of the accession of King William III under the presidency of the Dutch

Minister in England, the Count de Bylandt, the guests in a glow of

loyalty and good-fellowship proposed to raise a contribution to be spent

in the purchase of some handsome memorial of the occasion. A happy

inspiration came to the Chairman, and he suggested to his countrymen

that the best of all possible memorials of such an occasion would be to

establish a fund for the relief of poor and worthy Netherlanders in

London and to give it the name of their King. The suggestion was adopted

by acclamation, and the result the 'Koning Willem's Fonds,' from which,

as I find by examining its statutes and its records, gratuitous loans,

precisely identical in their object and under conditions not essentially

different, are made to deserving Hollanders in London.

The 'fonds' is connected with a society doing the usual work of all such

foreign benevolent societies in London. But it is a special fund, and as

I learn from the Annual Report of the Society for January 1889, it has

so far been administered with entire success, and with the result of

enabling not a few honest and industrious Hollanders stranded in London

to make a fair and prosperous start in life. That the fund is

administered in the true practical spirit of the old Low Country

benevolence, and its advantages appreciated as they ought to be, appears

from the statement made by the Treasurer, Mr. Maas, in the Report for

1889, that the number of loans is increasing and the number of donations

decreasing. In 1888 371_l._ were loaned as against 185_l._ in 1887, and

247_l._ given away as against 382_l._ in 1887. I observe, too, that the

Lord Mayor of London, Sir Polydore de Keyser, gave at this annual

meeting as his reason for joining the society which administers this

fund that it had the courage to spend 251_l._ in excess of its assured

income rather than send away the good which came to its door to be

done.

France and the Republic A Record of Things Seen and Learned in the French Provinces During the 'Centennial' Year 1889 · 第 13 / 17 章