Under him he appointed for each canton an officer called a sub-delegate {suhdelegue)^ who also held of- fice during good behavior. The intendant was usual- ly the first noble of his family; the sub-delegate was always a commoner, yet the latter was the sole repre- sentative of the government in his little sphere, as the intendant was in his province. He was subject to the intendant, himself subject to the minister.
The Marquis d'Argenson tells us in his Memoirs that one day Law said to him, " I never could have believed beforehand what I saw when I was comp- troller of finances. Let me tell you that this kingdom of France is governed by thirty intendants. You have neither Parliament, nor estates, nor governors; nothing but thirty masters of requests, on whom, so far as the provinces are concerned, welfare or misery, plenty or want, entirely depend."
These powerful officials were, however, outwardly eclipsed by the remains of the old feudal aristocracy, thrown into the shade by its lingering splendor; hence it was that even in their day one saw so little of them, though their hand was every where felt. Li society, the nobility took precedence of them in virtue of their rank, their wealth, and the respect always paid to what is ancient. In the government, the nobility surround- ed the king and constituted the court; noblemen led the armies and commanded the fleet; they performed those duties, in a word, which are most noticed by con- temporaries, and too often best remembered by pos- terity. A seignior of high rank would have felt him- AND THE EEVOLUTION. 55 self insulted by the offer of a place of intendant; the poorest gentleman of his house would have disdained to accept it. In their eyes the intendants were the types of usurped authority, new men, employed to look after burghers and peasants; at best, very poor com- pany. For all this, these men governed France, as Law said, and as we shall soon discover.
Let us begin with the right of levying taxes, which may be said to involve all other rights.
It is well known that a portion of the taxes were farmed out to financial companies, which levied them under the directions of the Eoyal Council. All other taxes, such as the taille^ capitation-tax, and twentieths, were established and levied directly by the agents of the central administration, or under their all-powerful control.
Every year the Council fixed and distributed among the provinces the amount of the taille and its numer- ous accessories. ^The session and decision of the Coun- cil were secret; the taille increased year after year, and no one was aware of it., The taille was a very old tax; in foniier times it had been apportioned and levied by local agents, who were independent of government, and held office in virtue of their birth, or by election, or by purchase. Such were the "seignior," the "parochial collector," the "treasurers of France," the "select-men" (elics). These titles were still in existence in the eighteenth century; but some of the persons who bore them had ceased wholly to have to do with the taille, while oth- ers were only concerned with it in a subordinate and secondary capacity. The whole real authority on the 56 THE OLD REGIME subject was in the hands of the intendant and his agents; it was he who apportioned the taille among the parishes, directed and overlooked the collectors, granted delays or remissions* More modern imposts, such as the capitation-tax, were regulated by government without interference from the surviving officers of the old system. The comptroller-general, the intendant, and the Council fix^ ed the amount of each impost, and levied it without the intervention of the taxables.
Let us pass from money to men.
Surprise has been expressed at the docility with which the French bore the burden of the conscription during and after the Revolution; but it must be borne in mind that they had long been used to it. The mi- litia system which had preceded it was more onerous, though the contingents raised were smaller. From time to time, in the country parts, young men were drawn by lot to serve in militia regiments for a term of six years.
As the militia was a comparatively modern institu- tion, none of the feudal authorities interfered with it; it was wholly under the control of the central govern- ment. The entire contingent, and the proportion to be borne by each province, were regulated by the Council. The intendant fixed the number of men to be furnish- ed by each parish. His sub-delegate presided over the lottery, awarded exemptions, decided who were to re- main at home and who were to march. It was his duty to hand over the latter to the military authorities. There was no appeal from him but to the intendant and the Council.
AND THE REVOLUTION. 57 It may be added here that, except in the jpays d^etats, all public works, including those which were exclusive- ly-local, were decided upon and undertaken by the agents of the central power.
Other authorities, such as the seignior, the depart- ment of finance, the road trustees {grands voyers), were nominally entitled to co-operate in the direction of these works. But practically these old authorities did little or nothing, as the most cursory glance at the records shows. All highways and roads from city to city were built and kept in repair out of the general public fund. They were planned and the contracts given out by the Council. The intendant superintended the engineer- ing work, the sub-delegate mustered the men who were bound to labor. To the old authorities was left the task of seeing to parish roads, which accordingly be- came impassable.
The chief agent of the central government for public works was the Department of Bridges and Roads {jponts et chaussees). Here a striking resemblance to our modern system becomes manifest. The establishment of Bridges and Roads had a council and a school; in- spectors, who traveled each year throughout France; engineers residing on the spot, and intrusted, under the orders of the intendant, with the direction of the works. Most of the old institutions which have been adopted in modern times — and they are more numerous than is generally supposed — have lost their names while re- taining then- substance. This one has preserved both — a very rare instance.
Upon the central government alone devolved the duty of preserving the peace in the provinces. Mount- G2 58 THE OLD REGIME ed police {marechaussee) were scattered over the king- dom in small detachments, ready to act under the or- ders of the intendants. It was with these troops, and, in case of need, with the aid of the regular armj, that the intendant met all sudden outbreaks, arrested vag- abonds, repressed mendicity, crushed the riots which the price of food constantly excited. It never happen- ed that the government was driven to call upon its sub- jects for assistance, as had been common enough at one time, except in cities, where there was usually a civic guard, composed of men selected and officers ap- pointed by the intendant.
The courts had preserved and frequently exercised the right of making police regulations; but they were only applicable to the territory within the court's juris- diction, and not unfrequently to a single place. They were liable to rejection by the Council, and were often so rejected, especially regulations made by inferior courts. On the other hand, the Council constantly made regulations that were applicable to the whole kingdom, as well on matters beyond the authority of the courts as on those which were within the scope of that authority. These regulations, or, as they were then called. Orders in Council {arrets du conseiV)^ were immensely numerous, especially toward the period of the Revolution. It is hardly possible to mention a branch of social economy or political organization which was not remodeled by Orders in Council during the last forty years of the old regime.
In the old feudal society, the seignior's extensive rights weie counterpoised by extensive obligations. He was bound to succor the indigent on his domain. A AND THE REVOLUTION. 59 trace of this principle is to be found in the Prussian code of 1795, where it is said, "The seignior must see to it that poor peasants receive education. He should, as far as he can, procure means of subsistence for those of his vassals who own no land. If any of them fall into poverty, he is bound to aid them."
No such law had existed in France for many years. When the seignior's rights were taken from him, he shook off his obligations. No local authority, or coun- cil, or provincial, or parochial association had taken his place. The law obliged no man to take care of the poor in the rural districts; the central government boldly assumed charge of them.
Out of the proceeds of the taxes a sum was annu- ally set apart by the Council to be distributed by the intendant in parochial charities. The needy were in- structed to apply to him. In times of distress, it was he who distributed corn or rice. Annual Orders in Council directed that benevolent work-houses should be opened at places which the Orders took care to in- dicate; at these, indigent peasants could always ob- tain work at moderate wages. It need hardly be ob- served that charity dispensed from such a distance must often have been blind and capricious, and al- ways inadequate. P ^ Not content with aiding the peasantry in times of distress, the central government undertook to teach them the art of growing rich, by giving them good advice, and occasionally by resorting to compulsory methods. With this view it distributed from time to time, by the hands of its intendants and sub-delegates, short pamphlets on agriculture, founded agricultural 60 THE OLD EEGIME societies, promised prizes, kept up at great expense nurseries for the distribution of seeds and plants. Some reduction of the burdens which weighed on agri- culture would probably have proved more efficacious; but this was never contemplated for a moment.
At times the Council endeavored to force prosperity- en the people, whether they would or no. Innumer- able Orders compelled mechanics to make use of cer- tain specified machinery, and to manufacture certain specified articles;^ and as the intendants were not al- ways able to see that their regulations were enforced, inspectors-general of industry were appointed to travel through the provinces and relieve them of the duty.
Orders were passed prohibiting the cultivation of this or that agricultural product in lands which the Council considered unsuited to it. Others required that vines planted in what the Council regarded as bad soil should be uprooted. To such an extent had the government exchanged the duties of sovereign for those of guardian.
AND THE REVOLUTION. 61 CHAPTER III.
THAT WHAT IS NOW CALLED "THE GUARDIANSHIP OF THE STATE" (tutellb administrative) was an institution of the old regime.
MUNICIPAL liberty outlived the feudal system in France. Long after the seigniors had ceased to administer the government of the rural districts, the cit- ies retained the right of self-government. As late as the close of the seventeenth century, several towns con- tinued to figure as little democratic republics, with magistrates freely elected by the people. Municipal life was here still active and public; the citizens were proud of their rights and jealous of their independence.^. 4 Elections were not generally abolished till 1692; after that date municipal business was transferred to offices i^nis en offices)^ that is to say, the king sold to \ certain citizens of each town the right of governing the others forever.
This was destroying, not the freedom of the cities alone, but their prosperity also y for, though the sale of offices has often been followed by happy results in the case of judges, whose independence is the first condition of their usefiilness, it has never failed to be most disastrous in every administrative branch of gov- ernment, because there responsibility, subordination, and zeal are the conditions of efficiency. The govern- ment of the old monarchy made no mistake in the mat- ter; it took good care to steer clear of the system it 62 THE OLD EEGIME imposed on the towns— it never sold posts of intend- ant or sub-delegate.
History may well note with scorn that this great revolution was accomplished without the least political design.* Louis XI. had curtailed municipal franchises "because their democratic tendency frightened him; Louis XIV. abolished, though he did not fear them, for he sold them back again to all the towns which could afford to purchase. His object, indeed, was less to destroy their liberties than to traffic in them. When he did abolish them, it was, so to speak, a mere financial experiment, and, singular to relate, the game was kept up for eighty years. Seven times during that period did the towns purchase the right of elect- ing their magistrates, and seven times was it taken away as soon as they had learned to appreciate its value. The motive of the measure was never varied or concealed. In the preamble to the edict of 1722, the king avowed that " the necessities of our finances compel "US to resort to the most effective remedy." The remedy was effective enough, but it was ruinous to those upon whom this new impost was laid. "I am struck," says an intendant to the comptroller-gen- eral in 1764, " with the enormous aggregate of the sums that have been paid from time to time for the redemption of municipal offices. Had these sums been laid out in works of utility in each city, the citizens would have been great gainers; as it is, the offices have only been a burden." I am at a loss to find an- other feature as shameful as this in the whole range of the old regime.
It seems difficult to tell precisely how towns were AND THE KEVOLUTION. 63 governed in tlie eighteenth century; for not only did the source of municipal power change continually, in the manner just described, but each city had preserved some shreds of its old constitution and its peculiar lo- cal customs. No two cities in France were, perhaps, alike in every respect, though the contrasts between them are deceptive, and conceal a general similarity.
In 1764, the Council undertook to make a general law for the government of cities. It obtained from its intendants reports on the municipal organization of each town within their province. I have discovered a portion of these reports, and a perusal has complete- ly satisfied me that municipal matters were managed very similarly in all. There are superficial and appar- ent diversities; substantially the plan was the same every where.
In most cases, cities were governed by two assem- blies. This is true of all the large cities, and of most of the small ones.
The first assembly was composed of municipal of- ficers, whose number varied in different localities. This was the executive of the commune, the city corpora- tion'(cot;^^ de ville), as it used to be called. When the city had obtained or purchased from the king its municipal franchise, members of this assembly were elected for a fixed term. When the king succeeded in selling the municipal offices (which did not always happen, for this kind of merchandise was cheapened by each submission of the municipal to the central au- thority), they had a life -interest in the posts they bought. In neither case did the municipal officers re- ceive a salary: in both they enjoyed privileges and 64 THE OLD REGIME exemptions from taxes. All were equal in rank; they discharged their functions collectively. No magistrate was charged with any particular supervision, authority, or responsibility. The mayor presided over the cor- poration, but did not administer the government of the city.
The second assembly, known as the "general as- sembly," elected the corporation (wherever elections were still held), and participated in the chief affairs of the city.
In the fifteenth century, the general assembly con- sisted of the whole population. One of the reports mentioned above observed that this usage was " in ac- cordance with the popular sympathies of our forefa- thers." Municipal officers were chosen by the whole people. The people were consulted from time to time, and to them account was rendered by outgoing officials. This custom is still occasionally met with at the close of the seventeenth century.
In the eighteenth century the people no longer con- stituted the general assembly. That body was almost invariably representative. But it must be carefully borne in mind that it was, in no single city, elected by the people generally, or imbued with a popular spirit. It was invariably composed of notables^ some of whom were entitled to seats in virtue of their individual sta- tion, while others were delegates from guilds and com- panies, and were instructed as to their course by their constituents.
With the advance of the century, the number of notables ex officio increases in these assemblies, while the deputies from industrial associations faU off, or dis- AND THE REVOLUTION. 65 appear entirely. But deputies from guilds are still present; that is to say, mechanics are excluded to make room for burghers. But the people are not so easily duped by sham liberties as many imagine; they cease to take an interest in public affairs, and live at home as unconcernedly as if they were foreigners. In vain do the magistrates endeavor to revive that patriotism which did such wonders in the Middle Age; no one listens to them. No one takes the least thought for the most momentous interests of the city. The polls — deceitful relic of departed liberty — are there still, and the magistrates would be glad if people would vote; but they resolutely abstain. History teems with simi- lar sights. Very few monarchs, from Augustus to our day, have failed to keep up the outward forms of free- dom while they destroyed its substance, in the hope that they might combine the moral power of public ap- proval with the peculiar conveniences of despotism. But the experiment has usually failed, and it has soon been found impossible to maintain a deceitful sem- blance of that which really has no existence.
In the eighteenth century, then, municipal govern- ment in cities had universally degenerated into oli- garchy. A few families controlled the public affairs in favor of private interests, without the knowledge of or any responsibility to the public. The disease per- vaded every municipal organization in France. It is perceived by all the intendants, but the only remedy they can suggest is the still farther subordination of local authorities to the central government.
They were already under pretty extensive subjec- tion. Not only did the Council modify city govern- 66 THE OLD EEGIME ments generally, from time to time, ^ but not unfrequent- ly the intendants proposed for particular cities special laws, which the Council passed without preliminary in- quiry, and often without the knowledge of the people; and these laws went into effect without the formality of registration. " This measure," said the inhabitants of a city at which such an Order had been leveled, "has astonished all classes; nothing of the kind was ex- pected."
Cities were prohibited from establishing town-dues, or levying taxes, or hypothecating, selling, leasing, or administering their property, or going to law, or em- ploying their surplus funds without an order in Coun- cil first rendered on the report of the intendant."^ All public works in cities were executed according to plans and specifications approved by an order in Council. Contracts were adjudged by the intendant or his sub- delegates; the state engineer usually exercised a gen- eral superintendence over all. Those who imagine that all we see in France is new will not read this without surprise.
But the Council had even a larger share of the di- rection of city affairs than might be inferred from these rules. Its power was, in fact, greater than the law al- lowed.
I find, in a circular addressed to intendants by the comptroller-general about the middle of last century, the following language: ' ' You will pay particular atten- tion to the proceedings of municipal assemblies. You will require a full report of all their proceedings and debates, and transmit the same to me with your ob- servations thereon."
AND THE EEVOLUTION. 67 The correspondence "between the intendants and their sub-delegates shows that the government had a hand m the management of all the cities in the king- dom, great and small. It was consulted on all sub- jects, and gave decided opinions on all; it even regu- lated festivals. It was the government which gave or- ders for public rejoicing, fireworks, and illuminations. I find it mentioned that an intendant once fined some members of the burgher guard twenty livt'es for absent- ing themselves from the Te Deitm, Municipal officers were impressed with a suitable consciousness of their nonentity. Some of them wrote their intendant, "We pray you most humbly, mon- seigneur, to grant us your good will and protection. We shall try to prove ourselves worthy of it by our submission to the orders of your highness." Others, who style themselves grandly " city peers," write to say that they "have never resisted your wiU, mon- seigneur."
It was thus that the burghers were being prepared for government, and the people for liberty.
If this close subjection of the cities had but pre- served their financial standing! But it did nothing of the kind. It is said that, were it not for centraliza- tion, our cities would ruin themselves. How this may be, I knpw not; but it is quite certain that, in the eighteenth century, centralization did not save cities from ruin. The financial history of the period is full of city troubles."^ Let us pass from cities to villages. We shall find new authorities, new forms, but the same dependence.
I have discovered many indications that, in the Mid- 68 THE OLD REGIME die Ages, the people of villages formed communities apart from the seigniors. The seigniors used them, superintended, and governed them; hut they owned property exclusively, elected their rulers, and admin- istered their government on democratic principles.
This old parochial system may be traced through all the nations which were once organized on a feudal ba- sis, even to the dependencies to which they transport- ed their decaying laws. It is easily discernible in England. Sixty years ago it was in full vigor in Prus- sia, as the code of Frederick the Great is there to prove. Some vestiges of it still lingered in France in the eighteenth century.
I remember that the first time I examined the ar- chives of an intendant's office, in order to discover what a parish really was under the old regime, I was quite struck with the discovery, in that poor enslaved com- munity, of several features which I had noticed in the rural districts of America, and erroneously considered as peculiarities of New World institutions. Both com- munities were governed by functionaries acting inde- pendently of each other, and under the direction of the community at large; in neither was there a permanent representative body, or municipal assembly proper. In both, from time to time, the people at large met to elect magistrates, and transact important business. They resembled each other, in fact, as closely as a liv- ing body resembles a corpse. Nor is this a matter of surprise, for the two systems, different as their des- tinies were, had the same origin.
When the rural parish of the Middle Ages was re- moved beyond the reach of the feudal system and left AND THE REVOLUTION. 69 uncontrolled, it became the New England township. When it was cut loose from the seignior, but crushed in the close grasp of the state in France, it became what remains to be described.
In the eighteenth century parochial officers diifered in number and title in the several provinces. Old rec- ords show that when the parishes were in full vigor, the number of these officers was greater than when the stream of parochial life became sluggish. In the eighteenth centur j we find but two in most parishes: the collector, and another officer usually known as the syndic. Generally speaking, these officials were elect- ed, really or nominally, but they served far more as instruments of the state than as agents of the commu- nity. Collectors levied the taille under the orders of the intendant. Syndics, receiving orders from day to day from the sub-delegates, acted as their deputies in all matters bearing on public order or government; such, for instance, as militia business, state works, and the execution of general laws.
It has already been observed that the seignior had no part in these details of government. He neither superintended nor assisted the officials. His real pow- er gone, he despised contrivances used to keep up its semblance, and his pride alone forbade him to take any share in their establishment. Though he had ceased to govern, his residence in the parish and his privileges precluded the formation of a sound parochial system in the stead of that in which he had figured. Such a personage, so isolated in his independence and his privileges, could not but weaken or militate against the authority of law.
70 THE OLD.EEGIBIE His presence drove to tlie cities all persons of means and information, as I shall have occasion to show hereafter. Around him lived a herd of rough, ignorant peasants, quite incapable of administering their collective business. It was Turgot who de- scribed a parish as "a collection of huts not more passive than their tenants."
The records of the eighteenth century abound with complaints of the inefficiency, the carelessness, and the ignorance of parochial collectors and syndics. Every body deplores the fact — ministers, intendants, sub-del- egates, even men of rank, but nobody thinks of look- ing for its true cause.
Until the Kevolution the government of rural par- ishes in France preserved some traces of that demo- cratic aspect which characterized it during the Middle Ages. When municipal officers were to be elected, or public affairs discussed, the village bell summoned the peasantry, poor and rich alike, to the church door. There was no regular debate followed by a vote, but all were free to express their views, and a notary, offi- ciating in the open air, noted, in a formal report, the substance of what was said.
The contrast between these empty semblances of liberty and the real impotence which they concealed furnishes a slight indication of the ease with which the most absolute government may adopt some of the forms of a radical democracy, and aggravate oppres- sion by placing the oppressed under the ridiculous im- putation of not being aware of their real state. The democratic parish meeting was free to express its wish- es, but it was as powerless to enforce them as the AND THE REVOLUTION. 71