Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

means of a referendum that they could now ask for the country's reply. As representatives of universal suffrage it was for them. to stand firm and declare that they had not been misled as to the feelings of the country, and were fully convinced that those feelings had not changed. He would like to know whether, in case the vote were again rejected by the Senate, they intended then to ask for a further referendum so as not to disturb the various parliamentary groups.

On the eve of the last elections, M. Briand said, he had told them that the problem of universal suffrage to be laid before the electors was a delicate one, and that it must be settled by them on the understanding that there must be no coalitions. These coalitions had, nevertheless, been formed, and he wanted to know whether this most essential parliamentary reform was going to be abandoned, and whether those who had said at the public meetings that nothing in the way of political progress could be accomplished without electoral reform, were now going to abandon their ideas of such reform in favor of new combinations, or for the sake of electoral convenience and custom. If they were going to do this the country alone could judge them.

It was for these reasons, the speaker said, that he would not vote for a referendum which could only be humiliating to the representatives of universal suffrage. On putting the bill to the vote it was rejected by 385 votes to 175, the latter figure representing the votes of the Socialists and the members of the right.

THE PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM.

"The theory of the parliamentary system is based upon the idea that the government of the country is entrusted to a committee the members of which are jointly responsible to the popular chamber for the whole conduct of the administration, so that a hostile vote on any question is a condemnation of each and all of them. Hence the theory implied that the ministers must cling to each other and present to the chamber a single front and a consistent policy."

"In almost all the states on the continent this is true to some extent; and various methods of parliamentary procedure already mentioned, together with certain peculiarities of condition and temperament among the people have tended to foster it."

"The English parliamentary practice has been generally followed so far as the form is concerned and the whole cabinet habitually resigns on a hostile vote of the chambers; but in substance the ministers are by no means jointly responsible, because as soon as they have resigned a new cabinet is formed which

often contains several members of the old one. (Governments of Continental Europe, Lowell, page 213, Vol. 1.)

The great distinction between a constitutional monarchy and a constitutional representative republic is in having a monarch or king in the executive chair who holds his office for life and passes it on to his successor, while a president is elected by the people for a limited term of years.

The king or emperor claims the divine right to rule and places himself upon a pedestal above the people and assumes a superiority over them which he seldom earns, or attains by his own ability.

THE CODE CIVIL OR CODE NAPOLEON.

Napoleon, when First Consul, appointed a special commission to draft a code. Difficult questions were referred to the Council of State over which Napoleon often presided. A new Code Civile de Francais was promulgated March 31, 1804. Consequently it has been in operation 110 years.

Since September 4, 1870, it has been called the code civil. It is patterned after the Institutes of Justinian in some respects. Many changes have been made since 1871. A commission was appointed in 1904 to revise the code, containing 2,281 articles. (See La Code Civil, livre due Centenaire, Paris, 1904.)

There are four other codes.

The Code Civil Procedure, of 1,042 articles.
The Code of Commerce, 648 articles.

The Code of Criminal Instruction, 648 articles.
The Penal Code, 284 articles.

"In accordance with the French interpretation of the theory of the separation of powers, it is the general rule on the continent of Europe that the ordinary courts administer only private laws between citizens and the questions affecting the rights and status of public officials are withdrawn from their jurisdiction." (A. Lawrence Lowell, Government of England, Vol. 1, p. 7.)

"In France there is a distinction between public law and private law. There are ordinary administrative courts. Each maintains exclusive jurisdiction. There is one law for the citizen and another for the public official. The judges of the administration courts can be removed by the president; the ordinary judges cannot be removed without the consent of the Court of Cassation. These are appointed by the President on the recommendation of the minister of justice.

"A tribunal is appointed to settle questions of jurisdiction, composed of the minister of justice, of three members of the highest Court of Cassation, of three members of the highest administration court.

"All the members are chosen for three years except the minister of justice, who presides." (See Prof. Dicey's Law of the Constitution, Chap. XII., Comparison English and French Systems).

History shows that the vacilating methods in France were brought about mostly during the period in which the monarchical system of government prevailed. The success of any republic rests upon the belief in a Divine Ruler, above the government, not in the divine right of earthly kings as claimed by monarchies; and upon universal compulsory education and loyalty to the constitution, which should be regarded with more respect than any king, because it is the great charter of the people's liberty.

The French republic has in some measure gained prestige since 1871, and eight presidents have managed under many difficulties to continue the republican form to the present time. Louis Adolphe Thiers 1871-1873; Marshal MacMahon, who favored a monarchy, 1873-1879; Jules Grevy, 1879-1887; F. Sadi-Carnot, 1887-1894, murdered at Lyons by an anarchist 1894, Casimir-Perier, June 1894-June 1895, Resigned; Felix Faure, 1913, and Raymond Poincare, January 17th, 1913. Elected for seven years.

Instead of paying 25,000,000 francs to a king or emperor, the republic now pays its president, equally if not more competent to rule, the sum of 1,200,000 francs a year, half as his salary and half to cover traveling expenses and the outlays incumbent upon him as the official representative of the nation.

FRENCH MINISTRY RESIGNS; AND ARISTIDE BRIAND FORMS NEW MINISTRY: FOREMOST FRENCHMAN ON LIST.

1916.

Aristide Briand, premier and minister of foreign affairs; Charles De Freycinet, vice president of the cabinet and minister of state; Gen. J. S. Gallieni, minister of war; Rene Viviani, minister of justice; Louis J. Malvy, minister of the interior; Rear Admiral Lacaze, minister of marine; Alexander Ribot, minister of finance; Prof. Paul Painleve, minister of public instruction and inventions concerning national defense; Marcel Sembat, minister of public works; Etienne Clementel, minister of commerce; Gaston Dumergue, minister of colonies; Jules Meline, minister of agriculture; Albert Metin, minister of labor; Emil Combes,

Leon Bourgeois, Denys Cochin, and Jules Guesde, ministers. without portfolio.

PRESIDENT POINCARE PREDICTS THE END OF THE WAR.

A Paris dispatch says: "Nineteen hundred and sixteen will be our year of victory," says Monsieur Poincaré in a New Year message to "The Officers and Soldiers of France," which was distributed along the the whole front.

Everywhere it is the same, he says, a determined resolution to hold fast, to endure and to vanquish. Shall we tomorrow be the vassals of a foreign empire? Shall our industries, our commerce, our agriculture be placed forever under the influence of a power which openly flatters itself on aspiring to universal domination, or shall we safeguard our economic independence and national autonomy?

This is a terrible problem, which admits of no halfway solution. Any peace which came to us with suspicious form and equivocal purpose would bring us only dishonor, ruin and servitude. The free and pure genius of our race, our most venerated traditions, the ideas which are dearest to us, the interests of our citizens, the fortunes of our country, the soul of the nation, everything which has been left by our ancestors and all that we ourselves own would be the prey of Germanic brutality.

No French persons desired this war. All the governments since 1871 have endeavored to avoid such a war. Now that it has been declared against us in spite of ourselves, we must carry it on with our faithful allies until we have gained victory, the annihilation of German militarism and the entire reconstitution of France.

You will win, the message concludes. The year which is beginning will bring you, my friends, elation of heart for having accomplished the defeat of the enemy and the joy of returning to your homes, there to celebrate the victory calmly with those whom you love. (Christian Science Monitor.)

FRANCO-PRUSSIAN WAR ANNIVERSARY.

July 24, 1915 was the forty-fifth anniversary of the declaration of war by France against Prussia, which took place July 19, 1870. It had been reported that war was declared on the 15th, and indeed ever since that day war had been certain, but each side put off the formal break in the hope of gaining a slight moral advantage by forcing the other to make it, and not until July 19 did Napoleon III. definitely announce a state of war.

On July 15, 1870, the New York Times said editorially: "It is still neither war nor peace. The Emperor is like a man on the verge of taking a step which must be irrevocable and may overwhelm him in disaster." These remarks could have been paralleled from any New York paper during the last week of July, 1914. The Emperor here referred to, of course, is Napoleon III. Further on in the same article occurs the passage: "M. Prevost Paradol insisted two years ago that it was the destiny of France to crush the colossus which threatened to bestride Europe. * * * But the Emperor has allowed no one to suspect his plans, preferring to let his project break upon the world like a thunderbolt from a clear sky. * * * Before many people understand what it all about two vast armies will have met in the shock of battle.

Indeed, it was not till a long time later that people understood just what it was about; the pretext was the candidacy of a Hohenzollern Prince for the throne of Spain, but the candidacy was withdrawn on July 12. War was precipitated by Bismarck's editing of the famous telegram from Ems describing the interview between the King of Prussia and Count Benedetti, the French Minister, in which the latter presented Napoleon's demand that the candidacy should not recur, and was politely refused. Bismarck so altered the news message as to make it appear that there were practically reciprocal insults. The fundamental cause, however, was the rivalry between France and Prussia for the dominant position on the Continent, with which was bound up the German desire to unify the nation and Napoleon's unwillingness to see this great power grow up on his frontier, and the constant series if irritations which had grown up out of Napoleon's vain attempt to get "compensation" for the successive gains of Prussia in the previous decade.

On July 18, 1870, The New York Times quoted The London Times as saying: "France without a shadow of excuse or justification plunges Europe into a war of which no living person may see the end," and continues: "The proofs increase every hour that this will be a war of colossal magnitude. It is said that the United States cannot possibly be drawn into it. But how can there be any certainty of that? A misunderstanding with regard to an American vessel, intercepted on the high seas by a belligerent power, might compel us to take an attitude which would end the war." And on the same page there is an editorial with the familiar heading: "Where Are Our Merchant Ships?" The war which followed lasted about seven months, saw the overthrow of the French Empire after the first month of disasters, the rebuilding of a provisional Government which heroically defended Paris in a long siege and raised enormous volunteer

[ocr errors]
« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »