FRANCE. (BEFORE THE REVOLUTION.) 



281 



and giving a great extension to the judicial power. 

 A sentence of death could be passed on the slightest 

 grounds, perhaps from some preconceived opinion of 

 the judge ; and several acknowledged instances of 

 injustice (as in the cases of Lebrun, Langlade, Galas, 

 Montbailli, Laberre, Desrues, Lalli, &c.), rendered 

 the administration of criminal justice an object of 

 distrust and horror. In the administration of civil 

 justice, the processes were slow, loaded with for- 

 malities, and extremely expensive. The salaries of 

 judges were small, but they received fees, which 

 consisted originally, of presents of fruits, sweatmeats, 

 spices (hence the fees were called epices), &c., but 

 gradually became obligatory, and were changed into 

 considerable sums. The account was made up 

 according to the working-days (vacations), for each 

 of which a counsellor of parliament received 19 

 livres ; and it was not uncommon to charge from two 

 to three hundred working-days. The first president 

 was considered, by a legal fiction, present at all the 

 business which came before the parliament, and re- 

 ceived his fees accordingly. It was calculated that 

 D'Aligre, the last president of parliament but one, 

 who was celebrated for his avarice, had from 1768 to 

 1783 received fees for 400 years. Of course, this 

 was in favour of the most laborious counsellors ; but 

 the place of member of parliament carried with it so 

 many privileges, nobility, numerous immunities, and 

 so much dignity, that it was much in request, and 

 was usually sold for 60,000 livres. The office of 

 president in Paris brought 500,000 livres. Besides 

 the parliaments, there were, also, boards for the 

 examination of the accounts of the treasuries (cham- 

 bres des comptes), at Paris, Dijon, Grenoble, Aix, 

 Nantes, Montpellier, Blois, Rouen, Pau, Dole, and 

 Metz, all with numerous officers ; and for the de- 

 cision of revenue cases, thirteen cours des aides, of 

 which, however, only those of Paris, Montpellier, 

 Bourdeaux, Clennont, and Montauban formed sepa- 

 rate boards ; the other eight were united with the 

 parliaments and chambres des comptes. From these 

 tribunals there was no appeal; they stood on the 

 same footing with the parliaments. These offices 

 had also the same privileges attached to them ; and 

 the cours des aides at Paris was highly popular, 

 because it had always protected the nation against 

 the oppressions of the revenue officers and the 

 farmers-general. The same cannot be said of the 

 chambres des comptes, in which the places were, 

 generally, bought by rich citizens for their sons, to 

 procure for them a respectable rank as well as a 

 good income. The counsellors of these chambers 

 were not in high repute for learning or talent. Eh ! 

 messieurs, si favais eu de Vesprit m'aurait-on mis 

 parmi vous, one of the candidates is said to have 

 exclaimed, when he was reproached for his ignorance. 

 As the independence of .officers was much too great, 

 so that they could easily impede the measures of 

 government, so also was the power of government 

 too great in the administration of justice. Com- 

 plaints against the inferior courts could be brought 

 before the intendauts, and justice was often com- 

 pelled to yield to private interests. The crown in- 

 terfered with the administration of justice, by the 

 right it assumed of issuing lettres de cachet, which 

 enabled it to exercise an arbitrary power over the 

 persons of the subjects, and which were often em- 

 ployed to imprison the innocent, and to deliver the 

 guilty from the hands of justice. If the government 

 desired to manage a trial to further its own views, 

 a special commission was appointed ; though this, 

 it must be acknowledged, had become rare in later 

 times. Petitions for annulling the decisions of parlia- 

 ments could be received by the royal council (conseil 

 du rot), and were generally received with pleasure. 



The conseil (that division of it which was called 

 conseil prive, and was composed of twenty-one coun- 

 sellors of state, the maitres de requetes and the 

 intendants of finance, under the presidency of the 

 chancellor or keeper of the seals) often reversed the 

 decisions of the superior courts ; but their arret* 

 were held in so little esteem, as to give rise to the 

 proverb, il raisonne comme un arret du conseiL 

 The maitres des requetes, of whom, in 1789, there 

 were seventy- eight, and who served par guarlier, 

 brought forward all propositions in the conseil prive. 

 The most injurious consequences arose from this 

 eternal conflict of the superior courts and the crown ; 

 the public authority was weakened, and all respect 

 for the laws annihilated. The voice of the nation 

 accused the parliaments of partiality in all cases in 

 which the interests of rank were involved. One of 

 the most profound inquirers into the French adminis 

 tration, Pfeffel, attributes to them the failure of all 

 schemes of financial reform, and particularly of the 

 cadastres, because they had the richest landed pro- 

 prietors among their members, and well knew how 

 to relieve themselves and their relations from the 

 taxes which they were legally bound to pay. France 

 groaned under two insufierable burdens an anti- 

 quated feudal system, and the venality of offices 

 the consequence of which was, that all the superior 

 courts were in the hands of the richest landholders. 

 Another consequence of the venality of offices, as- 

 sisted by the exertions of the parliaments to prevent 

 the entrance of new families into their corporations, 

 was, that the majority in these bodies, at least, was 

 always preserved to that class. Besides this, the 

 parliaments meddled with every thing. They pro- 

 tected the Jansenists against the archbishop of 

 Paris, Christophe de Beaumont (died 1784). The 

 archbishop prohibited the Jansenist priests from 

 administering the sacraments ; the parliament is- 

 sued threats of punishment against the priests who 

 should obey the archbishop ; the council of state 

 annulled the decrees of the parliament, which 

 repeated them on the next day. " This anarchy," 

 said Voltaire, in 1775 (Histoire du Parlement de 

 Paris), " cannot last. Either the crown must resume 

 the necessary power, or the sovereignty must pass 

 to the parliaments." The first did not succeed ; 

 the second led to the revolution, which therefore 

 originated with the higher classes. 



Organization and Administration of Government. 

 Although the power of the government was limited 

 by the aristocracy of the parliaments and of the 

 nobility, yet, as there was no legal organ to ex- 

 press the wishes of the nation, in this view the 

 government must be called absolute. The despotic 

 power of the government is shown, 1. in the aboli- 

 tion of all independent municipal administration, so 

 vitally important in every well regulated govern- 

 ment, monarchical or republican. When the kings 

 of France, of the third dynasty, had found in the 

 growing liberty and consequent power of the cities, 

 means of effectual opposition to their aristocratic 

 vassals, the municipal governments were developed 

 for some time without restraint. They chose their 

 own magistrates, in most cases, without being sub- 

 ject to the royal approbation ; they made their own 

 laws ; they exercised the right of self-defence, and 

 occupied an important station among the lords of 

 the soil ; they were more important to the kings 

 than the nobility and clergy, on account of their 

 contributions of money and men; they were con- 

 voked as the third estate in the states-general from 

 the fourteenth century. Francis I. and Henry II. 

 made the first encroachments on the liberties of the 

 cities. The reign of Louis XIV. was fetal to them. 

 Hereditary and venal offices were erected in the 



