¹ Full proceedings are to be found in Union interparlementaire: Compte rendu de la XXIII^e conférence tenue à Washington du 1^er au 7 octobre et à Ottawa le 13 octobre 1925 (Lausanne, Genève, Neuchatel, Vevey, Montreux, Berne, 1926)Google Scholar.

² See Union interparlementaire: XXIII^e conference etc. Documents préliminaires (Genève, 1925), t. II. Rapports, pp. 171–180 Google Scholar. See also Compte rendu, pp. 285–294.

³ M. Horace Micheli.

⁴ See Compte rendu, p. 684.

⁵ For the text see Documents préliminaires, t.I. Orde du jour, projets de résolutions, No. 9, p. 28; p. 50; t, II. pp. 178–179; Compte rendu, pp. 40–41, pp. 61–62, pp. 292–293.

⁶ Various authorities will from time to time be cited. It is fitting at the outset, however, to make some short personal acknowledgments. M. André Siegfried, professor at the École des Sciences Politiques in Paris, in addition to sending a personal copy of his book, Tableau politique de la France de l'ouest sous la III^e République (Paris, 1913)Google Scholar, very kindly wrote out in a letter views on the parliamentary crisis which he had advanced to the writer in conversation at Geneva during the summer of 1926. These views will be cited only with the name of the distinguished author. M. Joseph-Barthélemy was also good enough to write about the parliamentary crisis and, among other things, to point out a series of articles in the Prager Presse of January 1, 1926. M. Gaston Jèze, professor in the Faculté de droit at Paris, took the trouble to collect and to send several articles from the Progrès civique, including a most valuable one by himself on La crise du parlementarisme et les finances publiques.

⁷ In his report M. Micheli suggests that the most important critic of the parliamentary system is M. Charles Benoist. The latter has contributed to the Revue des deux mondes (7^e période, t. 26, mars-avril 1925, pp. 761–774)Google Scholar an extremely interesting article entitled La Parlementarité. The author says that he comes back to the subject of the ills of the parliamentary system after five years of silent meditation. A few sentences may be quoted. “Si l'on admet que l'état normal ou de santé est le régime représentatif modéré, intermittent, limité, le régime parlementaire permanent, continue, prépotent marque déjà de la température; le parlementarisme, exagération du régime parlementaire, est la fièivre; et la parlementarité, état aigu du parlementarisme exaspéré, est le dé1ire. Lorsque, dans un pays, les choses en sont venues à ce quatrième degré, il y a crise ouverte ….” (p. 761); and again “…. à présent, il serait difficile de nier que le mal règne effroyablement au Palais-Bourbon” (p. 763). An especially interesting criticism is Chéradame, André, La crise française (Paris, 1925), pp. 189–195 Google Scholar. Cf. also Esmein, , Eléments de droit constitutionnel (7 ^e éd., Paris 1921), t. I, pp. 258 et s.Google Scholar; Duguit, , Traité de droit constitutionnel (2 ^e éd., Paris, 1921–1926), t. II, p. 659 Google Scholar, Manuel de droit constitutionnel (4 ^e éd., Paris, 1923), p. 205 Google Scholar; Hauriou, , Précis de droit constitutionnel (Paris, 1923), pp. 387 et s.Google Scholar; Joseph-Barthélemy, , Traité élémentaire de droit constitutionnel (Paris, 1926), p. 168, pp. 184–185 Google Scholar, et passim; Foignet, , Manuel de droit constitutionnel (13 ^e éd., Paris, 1925), p. 107 Google Scholar.

⁸ M. Siegfried is particularly emphatic about this. Joseph-Barthélemy, M., in his article Das parlamentarische Regime muss sich umbilden in the Prager Presse of January 1, 1926 (mit Beilage: Demokratie und Parlamentarismus)Google Scholar, utters the same warning.

⁹ Thus M. Léon Blum, in an article entitled Die Lösung der französischen Krise, which appeared in the issue of the Prager Presse already mentioned, ascribes French troubles wholly to the war. The Socialist leader clearly appears interested principally in defending his party. He agrees that the present situation in France is the worst since the Revolution. However, he can scarcely admit adverse criticism of a parliament faced by this situation; for a large part of such criticism would accrue to the Socialists. Cf. also Joseph-Barthélemy, loc. cit.

¹⁰ Cf. M. Joseph-Barthélemy, loc. cit. Hubert, M. René, Le Principe d'autorité dans l'organisation démocratique, warns (p. 4)Google Scholar: “Mais un jour peut venir, qui est peut-être proche, où le torrent grossissant entrainera dans son tourbillon toutes nos habitudes et tous nos préjugés.” So likewise M. Chéradame, op. cit., p. 677.

¹¹ See Union interparlementaire: Documents préliminaires, t. II, p. 171 Google Scholar. Cf. Charles Benoist, op. cit., t. 26, p. 762; Chéradame, op. cit., pp. 11–13, pp. 229 et s.

¹² See the opinion of M. Joseph-Barthélemy, loc. cit.

¹³ M. Siegfried has this to say: “L'influence du député,…. est énorme, et si l'on ne peut dire qu'il soit populaire, on peut dire que la démocratie tient à lui. La bourgeoisie se passerait avec joie des députés, mais pas le peuple.”

¹⁴ Cf. Charles Benoist, op. cit., t. 26, p. 765.

¹⁵ Cf. Union interparlementaire, loc. cit.

¹⁶ See Seignobos, Ch., Histoire politique de l'Europe contemporaine (7 ^e éd., Paris, 1924), t. I, p. 246 Google Scholar; and Lavisse, E., Histoire de France contemporaine, t. VIII^e, l'Évolution de la III^e République, par Seignobos, Ch. (Paris, 1921), p. 133 Google Scholar. Cf. also Siegfried, , Tableau politique de la France, pp. 486–491 Google Scholar.

¹⁷ Ch. Seignobos, op. cit., pp. 257–258; and E. Lavisse, op. cit., pp. 197–198. Cf. also Siegfried, op. cit., p. 492; Carrère, et Bourgin, , Manuel des partis politiques en France (Paris, 1924), p. 41 Google Scholar; Chéradame, op. cit., pp. 204–208.

¹⁸ See the analysis in Yves-Guyot, , Politique parlementaire, politique atavique (Paris, 1924), pp. 327, et sGoogle Scholar. Cf. also Carrère et Bourgin, op. cit., pp. 53–57.

¹⁹ See the daily press of Paris for July and August, 1926. Of particular interest is a series of four articles in the Journal de Genive, des 18, 20, 23, et 26 aout 1926. These articles of the Paris correspondent, signed P. B., are called Deux années d'histoire politique française. In the result, says M. Jèze, Parliament in August, 1926, abdicated in favor of the executive. See the extremely interesting article in Le Progrés civique already mentioned (1926, No. 372).

²⁰ In his report M. Micheli says of those favoring direct action, and of the parliamentary system: “Ils le représentent comme une machine lourde, lente, impuissante par sa lenteur même, embourbée dans les formalités du règlement et dans les scrupules de la légalité.”

²¹ This is expressed simply by M. Siegfried, who says: “…. ni à droite, ni à l'extrême gauche, on n'aime d'amour le régime parlementaire.” Cf. also the report of M. Micheli.

²² French parties, as distinguished from groups, are not conspicuous in the center of the Chamber.

²³ For this “mince phalange,” see Carrère et Bourgin, op. cit., p. 31 et n. So also M. Siegfried: “Les bonapartistes sont peu puissants comme tels, mais l'esprit bonapartiste est vivant en France et inspire bien des manières de voir et de faire.” Chs. XLIV and XLV of M. Siegfried's Tableau politique de la France are of extreme interest and importance.

²⁴ See Siegfried, op. cit., p. 473.

²⁵ Cf. Siegfried, op. cit., p. 475. As the alternative title Plébiscitaires suggests, the responsibility of these men, in so far as it would exist, would be to the mass of the people. It is important in this respect to distinguish with M. Siegfried (op. cit., p. 478) the democratic and the reactionary aspects of bonapartism.

²⁶ For this party, see Carrère et Bourgin, op. cit., pp. 32–52. With respect to the relationship with the bonapartist spirit, M. Siegfried writes: “Au fond, les royalistes de l'Action française me paraissent assez proches de la tradition bonapartiste, par leur sentimentalité, par leurs procédés.” That is to say, the royalists make the adhesion of the bonapartists possible by having themselves approximated to the bonapartist tradition. Thus M. Siegfried says (op. cit., p. 450): “Un régime royaliste sous la noblesse et appuyé directement sur le peuple par voie de plébiscite deviendrait bien semblable à un régime impérial. C'est ce que, dans leur désir de concilier le trône et le peuple, les agitateurs de l'Action française semblent ignorer; ils se croient traditionallistes, ils sont césariens!”

²⁷ Carrère et Bourgin, op. cit., p. 32.

²⁸ Ibid., pp. 47–48. In the first place, there is the Ligue d'Action française, foundedin 1905 and composed of all the militant members of the party. The younger of these form the Fédération nationale des Camelots du Roi et commissaires, founded in 1908. Its members “se chargent d'organiser les manifestations publiques, d'assurer l'ordre dans les réunions par des moyens énergiques, et de pratiquer la, propagande par le fait' et les ‘violences nécessaires’.” In addition, there is the Alliance d'Action française, the members of which, although they profess the same general ideas and theories as the party, cannot sign its declaration, since they do not believe it opportune or possible to restore the monarchy. Thus, even communists may be members.

²⁹ Ibid., pp. 48–49. First mention should be made of the daily newspaper, the Action française, and of the Action française du dimanche. A magazine, the Revue universelle, although not official, is directed by an eminent theorist of the party, M. Jacques Bainville, and the majority of the contributors are members. The Nouvelle librairie nationale publishes the works of distinguished writers of the party, as does the Almanach royaliste. Lastly may be mentioned the Institut d'Action française and a Groupe des anciens étudiants d'Action française, the former organizing courses of instruction and lectures.

³⁰ A few words uttered by M. Maurras at the congress of the Action française in June, 1923, are of interest. They are quoted by Carrère et Bourgin (op. cit., p. 51) from the A. F., 21 juin 1923. “Nous ne sommes pas caractérisés par une attitude, mais par la volonté de renverser la République et de faire la monarchie …. Vous savez bien que nous ne voulons pas mettre à la République le bonnet fleurdelysé. Nous voulons lui couper le cou.”

³¹ Cf. Carrère et Bourgin, op. cit., p. 32. Concerning the members of the Action française, M. Siegfried says: “Ce qu'il y a de vivant en eux, c'est moins Maurras que Daudet, c'est-à-dire une sorte d'esprit fasciste d'action directe.”

³² In a manifesto of 1899, written in agreement with other royalists, M. Maurras formulated this political program: “l'institution d'une monarchie traditionnelle, héréditaire, antiparlementaire et décentralisée..…” Cf. Carrère et Bourgin, op. cit., p. 37.

³³ Ibid., p. 50.

³⁴ Those inscribing themselves in the Groupe des Indépendants in the Chamber number approximately thirty, i. e., about five per cent of the total membership. The Groupe de la Droite in the Senate has ten members. Their influence is greatest with the so-called young intellectuals (Cf. report of M. Micheli), with the bourgeoisie, and in certain parts of Paris. Cf. Joseph-Barthé1emy, loc. cit. M. Siegfried speaks of “quelques milieux agités de Paris;” but with respect to the country in general, and to the west in particular, he offers (op. cit., p. 451) extremely pertinent comment. The whole third book of the work cited is of great interest.

³⁵ The bibliography is, of course, enormous. For a short account of the parties of the Extreme Left see Carrère et Bourgin, op. cit., pp. 154–188. In English, the reader may consult the appropriate chapters in Pipkin, , The Idea of Social Justice (N. Y., 1927)Google Scholar.

³⁶ At present, their number is in the neighborhood of thirty.

³⁷ Since the last elections, the Socialist party numbers about one hundred.

³⁸ Cf. Carrère et Bourgin, op. cit., p. 18.

³⁹ Cf. ibid., p. 160 et passim.

⁴⁰ This subject could by itself be developed into a study of considerable proportions. The following words of M. Siegfried are of especial interest: “Je crois qu'on ne peut comprendre la politique française si l'on ne se rend compte de ce qu'est le comité, un petit groupe de gens passionés, actifs, souvent doctrinaires, qui prétendent gouverner au nom de leurs principes sans trop se préoccuper de représenter la majority.” He sees “au fond pénétré de l'esprit des comités” the Communist party, the Socialist party, and the Radical Socialist party. Quite possibly the influence of the spirit reaches even farther away from the Left. The organization of the chambers into the “grandes commissions permanentes” is not far removed from a system imbued with the “esprit des comités.” The word comité may be avoided in Parliament in order to mollify those who appear horrified by the excesses of the Revolution; but a reference to the great authority of Pierre, Eugène, Traité de droit politique, électoral et parlementaire (6 ^e éd., Paris, 1924)Google Scholar, No. 737, will show that the definition of a comité exactly fits a grande commission. In this connection, see also Esmein, op. cit., t. I, p. 260. Mention of the importance of this question is made in the writer's article “Eugène Pierre,” PoliticalScienceQuarterly, Vol.XLI, No. 3 (Sept., 1926), pp. 447–449 Google Scholar. Admirers of the Convention may, of course, say that what is needed is one directing comité, the Committee on Public Safety. To this M. Joseph-Barthélemy (loc. cit.) replies that a definition of this committee is not different from a definition of the cabinet under the English system of parliamentary government. This does not appear accurate enough to be altogether convincing. Advocates of the “régime conventionnel” do not propose a cabinet on the English model, and they would scarcely be satisfied with it.

⁴¹ In his article already several times cited, M. Joseph-Barthélemy gives an interesting sketch of the position of the moderates.

⁴² Redslob, M., in his Régime parlementaire (Paris, 1924)Google Scholar, speaks of the French system as “le régime parlementaire dans sa forme inauthentique,” calling the English system “sa forme véritable.”

⁴³ This is in essence the view of M. Siegfried.

⁴⁴ M. Siegfried may be quoted once more. He says: “…. la masse du pays, tout en se plaignant, ne préférera pas sincèrement un autre régime. Elle a trouvé, dans ce régime, une forme de gouvernment adapté maintenant à ses désirs, qu'elle ne souhaite pas changer.” M. Joseph-Barthélemy (loc. cit.) associates himself with this sentiment. “Zweifellos-und ich bin der erste, es zu sagen—ist der französische Parlamentarismus weit von der Vollkommenheit entfernt. Wenn meine Zuneigung für ihn ins Wanken gerät, sobald ich ihn an sich betrachte, festigt sie sich, sobald ich ihn vergleiche.”

⁴⁵ Cf. Ch. Benoist, op. cit., t. 26, p. 761. He several times repeats the inevitability of one of this trinity.

⁴⁶ This is the deliberate opinion of many. E.g., M. Siegfried says: “La France n'est ni communiste, ni royaliste, ni en faveur d'un régime autoritaire …. Je ne vois pas, en France, de mouvement ou surtout d'organisation fasciste digne de retenir l'attention.” M. Joseph-Barthlémy (loc. cit.) speaks with no uncertainty. Cf. also Chéradame, op. cit., pp. 618–619. Opinions on both sides have been recurring with considerable frequency in recent years in the American periodical press.

⁴⁷ See Yves-Guyot, op. cit., pp. 392–393. Cf. also in this respect, M. Joseph-Barthélemy (loc. cit.).

⁴⁸ Joseph-Barthélemy (loc cit). “Ich möchte an dieser Stelle von einer Würdigung des faszistischen Regimes Mussolinis absehen. Festzuhalten wäre bloss, dass Italien in einen Abgrund von Anarchie gestürzt war, den Frankreich nicht kennen gelernt hat und nicht kennen werden wird..…”

⁴⁹ Cf. Ibid.

⁵⁰ Cf. M. Ch. Benoist (op. cit., t. 26, pp. 767–768): “Il s'y découvre, si ce n'est proprement une intention commune, une tendance qui peut se définir en gros: la revanche du ‘génie’ latin contre le parlementarisme anglo-saxon.” M. Benoist does not anticipate a dictatorship in France. Nevertheless, he was surprised, he says (op cit., t. 27, p. 558), to find in the program of Mussolini, after three years of power, suggestions identical with his own. He had reached the conclusions by pure theory; and between theory and practice there was Mussolini.

⁵¹ Cf. Joseph-Barthélemy, loc. cit.

⁵² Cf. Ibid.

⁵³ M. Ch. Benoist perceives none. M. Joseph-Barthélemy (loc. cit.) sees no lack of them, but finds them a nondescript lot. “Sie haben nicht einmal das Prestige, neue Manner zu sein: sie haben eine Vergangenheit Napoleons zu Ende des Direktoriums. Es sind Journalisten der zweite Garnitur, Schriftsteller, die nicht von erster Grösse sind, Politiker, denen es nicht gelungen ist, die Schwelle des Parlaments zu über-schreiten.”

⁵⁴ M. Ch. Benoist advises (op. cit., t. 26, p. 774) that “l'on ne doit pas oublier que les révolutions ne se font pas par les hommes d'ordre.”

⁵⁵ This is the opinion of M. Joseph-Barthélemy (loc. cit.): “Wenn es für sie eine wirkliche Gefahr gibt, so ist es die Gefahr der sozialistischen oder kommunistischen Diktatur. Ich bin übrigens überzeugt, dass sie nicht länger als einem Tag dauern würde. Aber ich würde Wert darauf legen, meinem kriegswunden Lande die Gefahr einer Konvulsion zu ersparen.”

⁵⁶ Cf. Ibid.

⁵⁷ Mention may be made of a warning sounded by Carrère et Bourgin, op. cit., p. 32 n: “Il va sans dire que le révisionnisme plébiscitaire apparenté au révisionnisme bonapartiste ou boulangiste, n'a rien de commun avec le révisionnisme de quelques parlementaires, comme M. J.-L. Bonnet, qui veulent simplement améliorer, sur divers points, les lois constitutionnelles de 1875 (Matin, 29 janvier 1924); il s'est ainsi constitué un groupe révisionniste à la Chambre (Journal des Débats, 28 février 1924).” A document of great interest is “Docs. Ch., No. 1334, annexe au procès-verbal de la 2^e séance du 27 février 1925: Proposition de résolution ayant pour objet la révision de la Constitution, présentée par M. J.-L. Bonnet.” The resolution is the simple one that “la Chambre décide qu'il y a lieu de reviser les lois constitutionnelles.” The exposé des motifs consists of 106 pages. Cf. also Guyho, , Parlementarisme et république (Paris, 1924), pp. 30 et sGoogle Scholar; Chéradame, op. cit., pp. 619 et s; and, in opposite sense, Yves-Guyot, op. cit., pp. 13–19.

⁵⁸ The personal estimates of M. Esmein and M. Duguit are of especial interest. The former says this of the system (op. cit., t. I, p. 270): ‘Nous continuons cependant à avoir en lui la foi la plus profonde. Non seulement c'est la forme la plus souple et la plus perfectionnèe du gouvernement représentatif, mais c'est aussi la seule sous laquelle la France ait vraiment connu la liberté réglée.” Says Duguit, M., Traité, t. II, p. 663 Google Scholar (cf. also Manuel, p. 207): “Après mûre réflexion, malgré les déclarations assurément troublantes des deux hommes éminents qui ont occupé la magistrature suprême [Casimir-Perier et Paul Deschanel], je persiste à penser que notre système politique est encore le meilleur que puisse pratiquer un état républicain et que la manière dont il s'est comporté pendant la période la plus tragique de notre histoire en est une éclatante démonstration. Qu'il soit sans défaut, personne ne le prétend. Qu'il soit le système qui en a le moins, c'est ce que je ne puis me tenir de croire.” Very able support of the parliamentary system is to be found in Moreau, , Pour le régime parlementaire (Paris, 1903)Google Scholar.

⁵⁹ Cf. Duguit, op. cit., t. II, p. 658 (see also Manuel, p. 203). Reference has already been made to M. Redslob and his characterization of the French system as “le régime parlementaire dans sa forme inauthentique.” For his expression of the ideal see op. cit., p. 1. Cf. also Hauriou, , Précis, p. 413, p. 422 Google Scholar; Joseph-Barthélemy, , Traité, p. 163 Google Scholar; Moreau, op. cit., p. 163.

⁶⁰ E.g., M. Benoist (op. cit., t. 26, pp. 764–765) says of the members of the Chamber: “Leur domaine est universel, leur domination accablante.” Says Leyret, M. Henry, Le gouvernement et le parlement (Paris, 1919), p. viii Google Scholar: “Intérêts généraux et libertés publiques, tout va à la dérive sous le despotisme d'un parlement aussi omnipotent que désordonneé.” Cf. also the report of M. Micheli; Guyho, op. cit., pp. 23–29; Dupriez, , Les ministres dans les principaux pays d'Europe et d'Amérique (Paris, 1893), t. II, p. 397 Google Scholar.

⁶¹ Mention of these matters, with full references, may be found in the writer's article on Eugène Pierre, already cited.

⁶² Cf. the report of M. Micheli.

⁶³ Cf. the same report. M. Ch. Benoist (op. cit., t. 26, pp. 763–764) is especially severe. He holds that those who “make the law” know nothing about what they are doing, and that four-fifths do not even suspect that they are thus ignorant. The whole question of competency under democratic conditions is of great interest. It is raised by Faguet, M. Émile in The Cult of Incompetence (trans. London, 1911)Google Scholar. Of especial interest is Joseph-Barthélemy, , Le problème de la compétence dans la démocratie (Paris, 1918)Google Scholar. Cf. also Chéradame, op. cit., pp. 216–225.

⁶⁴ See Carrère et Bourgin, op. cit., pp. 20–22. Cf. also Moreau, op. cit., pp. 280–281; Redslob, op. cit., p. 200, pp. 207–208.

⁶⁵ Cf. e.g., Joseph-Barthélemy, , Le rôle du pouvoir exécutif dans les républiques modernes (Paris, 1906), p. 682 Google Scholar: “…. la première préoccupation du cabinet n'est pas la réalisation d'un programme mais la conservation des portefeuilles.“ Cf. also Guyho, op. cit., p. 16.

⁶⁶ Cf. Ch. Benoist, op. cit., t. 26, p. 765.

⁶⁷ Cf. Guyho, op. cit., p. 17: “…. la responsabilité émiettée des ministres parlementaires passe à l'état de mythe constitutional.” M. Joseph-Barthélemy in his article in the Prager Presse says: “Der Parlamentarismus der Gegenwart leidet an einer Krise der Regierungsautorität, einer Krise des Leadership.” Cf. also Hubert, op. cit., pp. 137–138.

⁶⁸ Esmein, op. cit., t. I, pp. 470 et s; Duguit, , Traité, t. II, p. 663 Google Scholar; Hauriou, , Précis, pp. 412–413 Google Scholar. Cf. Yves-Guyot, pp. 20–50.

⁶⁹ However, as M. Ch. Benoist says (op. cit., t. 26, p. 773): “Le malheur est que la réforme ne pourrait venir que de la Chambre elle-même, et que c'est justement la Chambre qu'il est urgent de réformer.

⁷⁰ See Chéradame, op. cit., pp. 641–644. Cf. Duguit, , Traité, t. II, pp. 664–667 Google Scholar.

⁷¹ This is a much discussed possibility. Cf. Duguit, , Traité, t. II, pp. 660–662 Google Scholar; Hauriou, , Précis, p. 432 Google Scholar.

⁷² An interesting work is Joseph-Barthélemy, , L'Introduction du régime parlementaire en France sous Louis XVIII et Charles X (Paris, 1904)Google Scholar. Cf. also hia Traité, pp. 173 et s.

⁷³ At the same time, Joseph-Barthélemy, M. says (Traité, p. 183)Google Scholar: “Certains libéraux du XIX^e siècle ont eu une foi ardente dans le gouvernement représentatif, et plus spécialement dans sa forme la plus pure, le parlementarisme.” Cf. also his article in the Prager Presse.

⁷⁴ Cf. note 44 supra.

⁷⁵ “De la manière dont est réglé le suffrage dépend la perte au le salut des États.” (Esprit des lois.)

⁷⁶ Cf. Carrère et Bourgin, op. cit., p. 14.

⁷⁷ Cf. Esmein, op. cit., t. II, pp. 298–299; Duguit, , Traité, t. II, pp. 564 et sGoogle Scholar; Hauriou, , Précis, p. 535 nGoogle Scholar; Joseph-Barthélemy, , Traité, p. 338 Google Scholar.

⁷⁸ See Ch. Seignobos, op. cit., pp. 273–275; Lavisse, op. cit., pp. 269 et s. Cf. also Esmein, op. cit., t. I, pp. 326 et s, t. II, pp. 300 et s; Duguit, , Traité, t. II, pp. 571 et sGoogle Scholar, Manuel, pp. 174 et s; Hauriou, , Précis, pp. 535 et sGoogle Scholar; Joseph-Barthélemy, , Traité, pp. 308–334 Google Scholar.

⁷⁹ Hauriou, , Principes de droit public (2 ^e ed., Paris, 1916), p. 705 Google Scholar: “Nous ne prétendons pas que ces ingéences du pouvoir électif soient regulières, mais elles se régulariseront parceque la logique démocratique le demande. Il ne faut pas nier, il faut organiser.”

⁸⁰ M. Ch. Benoist (op. cit., t. 26, p. 761, p. 771) considers universal suffrage definitely responsible for existing parliamentary troubles. He treats this specific question in an article already cited, entitled L'électorite (op. cit., t. 27). Closely related to such considerations is the fact of the greatly increased sphere of activity of legislatures in general since the Industrial Revolution. Hoped for remedy has been suggested in the form of what is called federal devolution in England and régionalisme in France. Consideration of this question would too much enlarge the scope of the present study. While it is doubtless true that one reason for the desire of Parliament to keep the ministry in subjection in France is the extreme centralization prevailing in that country, it must be clear that even if many matters were removed from the sphere of the central government the balance between the legislative and executive branches would not necessarily be righted.

⁸¹ Joseph-Barthélemy, (Traité, p. 292)Google Scholar: “Nous avons la conviction profonde que le suffrage universel individualiste et égal est, à l'heure actuelle, la grande, la seule force conservatrice (dans le sens le plus élevé de cette expression).” Cf. also his article in the Prager Presse.

⁸² Cf. Joseph-Barthélemy, , Traité, pp. 290–292 Google Scholar; Foignet, op. cit., p. 46. An account of this subject, with full references, will be found in the writer's Family Voting in France, in this Review, Vol. XX, No. 2 (May, 1926), pp. 299 ff.Google Scholar

⁸³ Esmein, t. I, pp. 312 et s, pp. 391 et s; Duguit, , Traité, t. II, pp. 596 et sGoogle Scholar, Manuel pp. 183 et s; Hauriou, , Précis, pp. 616 et sGoogle Scholar; Joseph-Barthélemy, Traité, pp. 285–290 Google Scholar. Cf. also Hubert, op. cit., pp. 167–173. M. Georges Scelle, in a series of articles in Le progrès civique (4, 11 et 18 septembre 1926) entitled Les déformations du régime parlementaire, concludes his vigorous views on the incompetence of the deputies and on their shortcomings as a body, with the suggestion that the real cure is to be found in professional representation. These articles provoked an answer from M. Gombault (2 octobre 1926) which gave rise to a reply by M. Scelle (16 octobre 1926), this being followed by a second answer from M. Gombault (30 octobre 1926). These articles, taken together, present various aspects of the arguments for and against professional representation.

⁸⁴ The student may consult a long series of interesting and instructive reports made on behalf of successive committees on the règlement by various reporters. Special interest attaches to more recent reports, since they are the work of M. Joseph-Barthélemy. These reports almost invariably give evidence of painstaking care. When time has been found for debate upon them, the speeches usually give an interesting insight into the spirit of the working of the parliamentary system. The reports may be unearthed without great difficulty in the volumes of the collected documents of Parliament. An account of the various suggestions for reform may be found in Pierre, op. cit. The student may also consult Breton, André, Les commissions et la réforme de la procédure parlementaire (Paris, 1922)Google Scholar. Of special interest, since the anonymous author is known to be Blum, M. Léon, is Lettres sur la réforme gouvernementale (Paris, 1918)Google Scholar. M. Joseph-Barthélemy, in his article in the Prager Presse, suggests two somewhat unusual defects, one being the public voting of members of Parliament, and the other the reëligibility of deputies. The author is not willing to advocate specific changes in these respects; but he says that reëligibility of deputies is one cause of the paralysis of Parliament, and that if the deputies could vote secretly, a parliamentary crisis would be over in a few days. The most important part of procedure is, of course, that connected with public finance. Though the present financial crisis in France involves many other and much wider questions than that of parliamentary procedure, the Report of the Experts contains sections definitely connected with procedure. They are principally Rapport du comité des experts, décret du 31 mai 1926 (Paris, 1926), pp. 15–20, 82–113 Google Scholar. M. Jèze, in his article cited, complaining that at present there is a “régime des décrets,” in which a fait accompli is put before Parliament, and wishing to avoid “le fascisme ou la dictature,” gives his preference to “le régime de la procédure parlementaire d'extrême urgence, permettant au Parlement de discuter au moins le principe d'une réforme, avant que eette réforme soit appliquée.”

⁸⁵ The chambers, of course, make their own règlements. See Esmein, op. cit., t. II, p. 306; Duguit, , Traité, t. II, p. 315 Google Scholar, Manuel, pp. 430–431; Hauriou, , Précis, pp. 556–557 Google Scholar; Joseph-Barthélemy, , Traité, pp. 481 et sGoogle Scholar.

⁸⁶ J.-L. Bonnet, op. cit., Ch. XI, pp. 48–50; Ch. Benoist, op. cit., t. 27, p. 557 n; Guyho, op. cit., p. 22, pp. 139–144.

⁸⁷ An interesting French study of this American institution is Lambert, E., Le gouvernement des juges aux États-Unis (Paris, 1921)Google Scholar. Cf. also Esmein, op. cit., t. I, pp. 568 et s. Reference may likewise be made to a short account in the writer's “Modern French Views on the Doctrine of the Separation of Powers,” Political Science Quarterly, Vol. XXXIX, No. 1 (March, 1924), pp. 32–34 Google Scholar.

⁸⁸ Cf. Hauriou, , Principes, p. 722 Google Scholar.

⁸⁹ J.-L. Bonnet, op. cit., Ch. VIII, p. 41; Chéradame, op. cit., pp. 645–646.

⁹⁰ Cf. in this respect the article of M. Jèze already cited.

⁹¹ Esmein, op. cit., t. II, p. 167, p. 172; Duguit, , Traité, t. II, pp. 644–645 Google Scholar, Manuel, pp. 200–202; Hauriou, , Précis, pp. 506–507 Google Scholar, Principes, pp. 723–724; Foignet, op. cit., pp. 137–140. However, Parliament, being in the ascendancy, is not likely soon to consent to a diminution of its power. Nevertheless, as M. Hauriou (Principes, loc. cit) says of this reform, with which he includes one or two others: “…. c'est un programme pratique à faire pénétrer dans les esprits. Si ce programme devenait dominant dans la région des idées, il finirait bien par descendre dans celle des faits.”

⁹² This important fact, so often alluded to (e.g., Duguit, , Traité, t. II, p. 659)Google Scholar, is not admitted by M. Ch. Benoist. He agrees grudgingly (op. cit., t. 26, pp. 772–773) only that the war was not lost under the parliamentary system. Cf. also Guyho, op. cit., p. 4.

⁹³ Cf. Joseph-Barthélemy, Prager Presse.

⁹⁴ Cf. Chéradame, op. cit., pp. 661 et s: “les ressources infinies dont dispose notre pays” (p. 678); and Joseph-Barthélemy (loc. cit.): “Unser Land hat immer unvermutete Reserven.”

⁹⁵ This is the expression employed in the debate before the Interparliamentary Union by the two French speakers, Dr.le Chassaing, M. (Compte rendu, p. 672)Google Scholar: “La crise du régime parlementaire …. n'est qu'une crise de croissance”; and M. Capgras (ibid., p. 681). Cf. also Hauriou, , Principes, p. 774 Google Scholar. M. Hubert (op. cit., p. 1) varies the expression when he says: “La France est à l'état de crise politique: crise sourde, qui ne date point de la guerre, et dont les chocs parlementaires et les bouleversements ministeriels ne sont que les fulgurations douloureuses..… Cette crise est une crise de conscience.”

⁹⁶ Cf. Interparliamentary Union, Compte rendu, p. 682 Google Scholar. This is the thesis of M. Hubert, who says (op. cit., p. 3): “C'est l'esprit public qui importe, et auquel il faut toujours remonter. Rien ne sera fait, tant qu'on n'aura pas atteint cette source première de tous les biens et de tous les maux.” Cf. also Joseph-Barthélemy, , Le problème de la compétence, pp. 215–216 Google Scholar.

⁹⁷ M. Lindhagen.

⁹⁸ Interparliamentary Union, Compte rendu, pp. 665–668 Google Scholar.

⁹⁹ Pott, W. S. A., Chinese Political Philosophy (N. Y., 1925), pp. 93–94 Google Scholar.