[Footnote 758: This is true also of the Senate.]

The Belgian electoral system at the present day is noteworthy by reason of three facts: (1) it is based upon the principle of universal manhood suffrage; (2) it embraces a scheme of plural voting; and (3) it provides for the proportional representation of parties. Under the original const.i.tution of 1831 the franchise, while not illiberal for the time, was restricted by property qualifications of a somewhat sweeping character. Deputies were elected by those citizens only who paid yearly a direct tax varying in amount, but in no instance of less than twenty florins. In 1848 there was enacted a series of (p. 540) electoral laws whereby the property qualification was reduced to a uniform level of twenty florins and the number of voters was virtually doubled. With this arrangement the Liberals were by no means satisfied, and agitation in behalf of a broader electorate was steadily maintained. As early as 1865 the Liberal demands were actively re-enforced by those of organizations of workingmen, and in 1870 the Catholic ministry found itself obliged to sanction a considerable extension of the franchise in elections within the provinces and the communes. After 1880 the brunt of the electoral propaganda was borne by the Socialists, and the campaign for const.i.tutional revision was directed almost solely against the 47th article of the fundamental law, in which was contained the original stipulation respecting the franchise. Since 1830 the population of Belgium had all but doubled, and there had been in the country an enormous increase of popular intelligence and of economic prosperity.

That in a population of 6,000,000 (in 1890) there should be an electorate of but 135,000 was a sufficiently obvious anomaly. The broadly democratic system by which members of the French Chamber of Deputies and of the German Reichstag were elected was proclaimed by the revisionists to be the ideal which it was hoped to realize in Belgium.

*595. The Electoral Reform Act of 1893.*--In 1890 the Catholic ministry, recognizing in part the justice of the demand, and preferring, if there were to be revision, to carry it through, rather than to incur the risk of having it carried through by a radical cabinet, yielded to the pressure and consented to the formal consideration of the electoral question upon the floors of the two chambers. Three years of intermittent, but animated, discussion ensued. At length, in May, 1892, the chambers were able to agree upon the primary proposition that some sort of revision was necessary. Then came the dissolution which is required by the const.i.tution in such a case, followed by a general election. The newly chosen chambers, which for the purpose in hand comprised virtually a const.i.tuent convention, entered upon their task later in the same year. In both the Catholics maintained a majority, but by reason of the requirement of a two-thirds vote for the adoption of a const.i.tutional amendment, they were none the less obliged to rely upon the Liberals for a certain amount of support. In the scheme of revision which was finally adopted all parties had some substantial share.

No fewer than fourteen distinct programmes of reform were laid before the chambers.[759] The Conservatives, in general, desired the introduction of a system based upon occupation combined with the (p. 541) payment of taxes; the majority of the Liberals sought to secure special recognition for electors of approved capacity--in brief, an educational qualification; the Radicals inside, and the Socialists outside, Parliament carried on a relentless propaganda in behalf of universal, direct, and equal suffrage. The rejection in committee (April, 1893) of a plan of universal suffrage occasioned popular demonstrations which required the calling out of the military, and when it was proposed to stop with a reduction of the age limit for voters there were threats of a universal industrial strike. In the end all elements wisely receded from their extreme demands and it was found possible to effect agreement upon a compromise. A Catholic deputy--Albert Nyssens, professor at the University of Louvain--came forward with a scheme for manhood suffrage, safeguarded by the plural vote, and September 3, 1893, the plan was adopted.[760]

[Footnote 759: It will be remembered that for the purpose of considering const.i.tutional amendments the chambers meet in joint session.]

[Footnote 760: The Nyssens scheme was brought to the attention of the Belgian people through the medium of a pamphlet ent.i.tled "Le suffrage universel tempere."]

*596. The Franchise To-day.*--By the terms of the law of 1893, one vote is allotted to every male Belgian citizen who has attained the age of twenty-five years, who is in unrestricted enjoyment of his civil and political rights, and who has been resident at least one year in a given commune. There is nothing whatsoever in the nature of either an educational or a property qualification. Having conferred, however, upon the ma.s.s of male citizens the right to vote, the law proceeds to define the conditions under which a citizen may be ent.i.tled to two votes, or even three. One supplementary vote is conferred upon (1) every male citizen over thirty-five years of age, married or a widower, with legitimate offspring, and paying to the state as a householder a tax of not less than five francs, unless exempt by reason of his profession, and (2) every male citizen over twenty-five years of age owning real estate to the a.s.sessed value of 2,000 francs, or possessing income from land corresponding to such valuation, or who for two years has derived a minimum interest return of one hundred francs a year from Belgian funds, in the form of either government bonds or obligations of the Belgian government savings-bank. Two supplementary votes are conferred upon citizens over twenty-five years of age who (1) hold a diploma from an inst.i.tution of higher learning, or an indorsed certificate testifying to the completion of a course of secondary education of the higher grade; or (2) occupy or have occupied a public office, hold or have held a position, practice or have practiced a profession, which presupposes the knowledge imparted in secondary instruction of the higher grade--such offices, (p. 542) positions, and professions to be defined from time to time by law.[761]

[Footnote 761: Art. 47. Dodd, Modern Const.i.tutions, I., 132-133.]

What, therefore, the law of 1893 does is, broadly, to confer upon every male citizen one vote and to specify three princ.i.p.al conditions under which this basal voting power may be augmented. As the head of a family, the citizen's suffrage may be doubled. By reason of his possession of property or of capital, it likewise may be doubled. On the basis of a not unattainable educational qualification, it may be tripled. Under no circ.u.mstances may an individual be ent.i.tled to more than three votes. The plural vote of Belgium differs, therefore, from that of Great Britain, not only in that it is based upon a variety of qualifications of which property ownership is but one, but also in that there is fixed an absolute and reasonably low maximum of votes.

It is of interest further to observe that voting is declared by the Belgian const.i.tution to be obligatory. Failure to appear at the polls, without adequate excuse made to the election officer, is a misdemeanor, punishable by law. The citizen may, if he likes, evade the law by depositing a blank ballot. But he must deposit a ballot of some sort.[762]

[Footnote 762: On the earlier aspects of Belgian electoral reform see J. Van den Heuvel, De la revision de la const.i.tution (Brussels, 1892); L.

Arnaud, La revision belge, 1890-1893 (Paris and Brussels, 1894); La reforme electorale en Belgique, in _Annales de l'ecole Libre des Sciences Politiques_, July, 1894; E. Van der Smissen, L'etat actuel des partis politiques en Belgique, ibid., Sept., 1898. An important work by a leading socialist and a deputy from Brussels is L.

Bertrand, Histoire de la democratie et du socialisme en Belgique depuis 1830, 2 vols.

(Brussels and Paris, 1906-1907). Mention may be made also of E. Vandervelde et J. Destree, Le socialisme en Belgique (2d ed., Paris, 1903) and the older work of E. de Laveleye, Le parti clerical en Belgique (Brussels, 1874). A careful study is J.

Barthelemy, L'organisation du suffrage et l'experience belge (Paris, 1912). In 1910-1911 the number of parliamentary electors was 1,697,619, of whom 993,070 had one vote, 395,866 had two votes, and 308,683 had three votes.]

III. PARTIES AND ELECTORAL REFORM SINCE 1894--PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE

*597. The Adoption of Proportional Representation, 1899.*--The first election held under the law of 1893, that of October 14, 1894, demonstrated that by that measure the number of electors had been multiplied almost exactly by ten. The total number of voters was now 1,370,000; the number of votes cast was 2,111,000. Contrary to general expectation, the election gave the Catholics an overwhelming majority in the lower chamber. They obtained 105 seats, the Socialists 29, and the Liberals only 18. The elections of 1896 and 1898 gave the (p. 543) Catholics a still more p.r.o.nounced preponderance. At the beginning of 1899 the parties of the opposition could muster in the lower house only forty votes and in the upper only thirty-one. The Liberal party was threatened with extinction. Its popular strength, however, was still considerable, and from both Liberals and Socialists there arose an insistent demand for the adoption of a scheme whereby the various parties should be accorded seats in the law-making bodies in proportion to their popular vote.

The idea of proportional representation was not at this time in Belgium a new one. It had been formulated and defended in the lower chamber as early as 1866. Since 1881 there had been maintained a national reform organization whose purpose was in part to propagate it; and it is worthy of note that at the time of the revision of 1893 the ministry, led by the premier Beernaert, had advocated its adoption.[763] In 1895 the principle was introduced in a statute relating to communal elections. Following a prolonged contest, which involved the retirement of two premiers, a bill extending the plan to parliamentary elections was pressed upon the somewhat divided Catholic forces and, December 29, 1899, was enacted into law. Under the provisions of this measure deputies and the popularly elected senators continue to be chosen within the arrondiss.e.m.e.nt by _scrutin de liste_.

Within each arrondiss.e.m.e.nt the seats to be filled are distributed among the parties in proportion to the party strength as revealed at the polls, the allotment taking place in accordance with the list system formulated by Victor d'Hondt, of the University of Ghent. The number of deputies elected in an arrondiss.e.m.e.nt varies from three to twenty-one. When an elector appears at the polls he presents his official "summons" to vote and receives from the presiding officer one, two, or three ballot papers according to the number of votes to which he is ent.i.tled. He takes these papers to a private compartment, marks them, places them in the ballot-box, and has returned to him his letter of summons stamped in such a way as to show that he has fulfilled the obligation imposed upon him by law. The candidates of the various parties are presented in lists, and the task of the elector is merely to indicate his approval of one list for each of the votes to which he is ent.i.tled. This he does by pencilling white spots contained in the black squares at the head of the lists or against the names of individual candidates. He may pencil only the spot at the (p. 544) head of a list, thereby approving the order in which the candidates have been arranged by the party managers; or, by marking s.p.a.ces opposite names of candidates, he may indicate his preference for a different order.

[Footnote 763: Another interesting proposal in 1893 was that at the discretion of the crown a legislative measure might be submitted to direct popular vote. By reason of the fear that such a scheme would vest in the crown an excess of power the experiment was not tried.]

*598. How Seats Are Allotted.*--The process of the apportionment of seats may be ill.u.s.trated by a hypothetical case. Let it be a.s.sumed that within a given arrondiss.e.m.e.nt four lists of parliamentary candidates have been presented and that at the polls an aggregate vote of 33,000 is distributed as follows: Catholics, 16,000; Liberals, 9,000; Socialists, 4,500; and Christian Democrats, 3,500. Let it be a.s.sumed, further, that the arrondiss.e.m.e.nt is ent.i.tled to eight seats.

The total number of votes for each list is divided successively by the numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, etc., and the results are arrayed thus:

_Christian_ _Catholic_ _Liberal_ _Socialist_ _Democrat_ _List_[764] _List_ _List_ _List_

Divided by 1 16,000 9,000 4,500 3,500 Divided by 2 8,000 4,500 2,250 1,750 Divided by 3 5,333 3,000 1,500 1,166 Divided by 4 4,000 2,250 1,125 875 Divided by 5 3,200 1,800 900 700

[Footnote 764: In point of fact, the lists as published and as placed before the voter are indicated merely by number.]

The eight highest numbers (eight being the number of seats to be filled) are then arranged in order of magnitude as follows:

16,000 9,000 8,000 5,333 4,500 4,500 4,000 3,500

The lowest of these numbers, 3,500, becomes the common divisor, or the "electoral quotient." The number of votes cast for each list is divided by this quotient, and the resulting numbers (fractions being disregarded) indicate the quota of seats to which each of the parties is ent.i.tled. In the case in hand the results would be:

16,000 divided by 3,500 = 4 Catholic seats 9,000 divided by 3,500 = 2 Liberal seats 4,500 divided by 3,500 = 1 Socialist seat 3,500 divided by 3,500 = 1 Christian Democrat seat

*599. The Making up of the Lists.*--Lists of candidates are made (p. 545) up, and the order in which the names of candidates appear is determined, by the local organizations of the respective parties. In order to be presented to the electorate a list must have the previously expressed support of at least one hundred electors. A candidate may stand as an independent, and his name will appear in a separate "list," providing his candidacy meets the condition that has been mentioned; and it is within the right of any organization or group, political or non-political, to place before the electorate a list. The power of the organization responsible for the presentation of a list to fix the order of candidates' names is not a necessary feature of the proportional system and it has been the object of much criticism, but it is not clear that serious abuse has arisen from it.

Candidates whose names stand near the top of the list are, of course, more likely to be elected than those whose names appear further down, for, under the prevailing rules, all votes indicated in the s.p.a.ce at the head of a list form a pool from which the candidates on the list draw in succession as many votes as may be necessary to make their individual total equal to the electoral quotient, the process continuing until the pool is exhausted. Only by receiving a large number of individual preferential votes can a candidate be elected to the exclusion of a candidate whose name precedes his.[765]

[Footnote 765: Valuable books dealing with proportional representation in Belgium are G.

Lachapelle, La representation proportionnelle en France et en Belgique (Paris, 1911); F. Goblet d'Alviella, La representation proportionelle en Belgique, and La representation proportionelle integrale (Paris, 1910); Barriety, La representation proportionelle en Belgique (Paris, 1906); Dubois, La representation proportionelle soumise a l'experience belge (Lille, 1906); and J.

Humphreys, Proportional Representation (London, 1911). A careful account is contained in the Report and Evidence of the British Royal Commission on Electoral Systems (1910), Report, Cd. 5,163; Evidence, Cd. 5,352. Useful articles are: E.

Mahaim, Proportional Representation and the Debates upon the Electoral Question in Belgium, in _Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Science_, May, 1900; E. Van der Smissen, La representation proportionnelle en Belgique et les elections generales de mai 1900, in _Annales des Sciences Politiques_, July-Sept., 1900; and J.

Humphreys, Proportional Representation in Belgium, in _Contemporary Review_, Oct., 1908.]

*600. The Elections of 1906, 1908, and 1910.*--The first parliamentary election following the adoption of the proportional system--that of May, 1900--left the Catholics with a larger preponderance in the lower chamber than they had dared expect.[766] None the less, the effect of the change was distinctly to revive the all but defunct Liberal party, to stimulate enormously the aspirations of the Socialists, and, in (p. 546) general, to replace the crushing Catholic plurality of former years by a wide distribution of seats among representatives of the various parties and groups. Prior to the election of 1890 the Catholic majority was 32. The election of 1900 left it at 16; that of 1902, at 26; that of 1904, at 20; that of 1906, at 12; that of 1908, at 8; and that of 1910, at 6. Following the elections which took place in five of the nine provinces in 1906, party strength in the Chamber was as follows: Catholics, 89; Liberals, 46; Socialists, 30; Christian Democrats, 1. After the elections in the other four provinces in 1908, it was: Catholics, 87; Liberals, 43; Socialists, 35; Christian Democrats, 1.

[Footnote 766: It will be recalled that the term of deputies is four years, half retiring every two years. There is, therefore, a parliamentary election, but not throughout the entire country, every second year.]

The elections of May, 1910,[767] were contested with unusual keenness by reason of the fact that the Liberal-Socialist coalition seemed to have, for the first time in a quarter of a century, a distinct chance for victory. The Catholics were notoriously divided upon certain public issues, notably Premier Schollaert's Compulsory Military Service bill, and it was believed in many quarters that their tenure of power was near an end. The Liberal hope, however, was doomed to disappointment; for, although both Liberals and Socialists realized considerable gains in the popular vote in some portions of the kingdom, in only a single const.i.tuency was the gain sufficient to carry a new seat. The consequence was that the Catholic majority was reduced, but not below six, and party strength in the Chamber stood: Catholics, 86; Liberals, 45; Socialists, 34; Christian Democrats, 1.

Among reasons that may be a.s.signed for the Liberal failure are the fact that the country was prosperous and not disposed to precipitate a change of governments, the alienation of some voters by the working relations that had been established between the Liberals and the Socialists, and the advantage that regularly accrues to the Catholics from the plural vote.

[Footnote 767: In the five provinces of Brabant, Anvers, Namur, West Flanders, and Luxemburg, the term of whose deputies was about to expire.]

*601. The Catholic Triumph in 1912.*--During the years 1910-1912 the Catholic tenure of power, prolonged uninterruptedly since 1884, seemed more than once on the point of being broken. Most of the time, however, the legislative machine performed its functions sufficiently well with a majority of but half a dozen seats, and the drift of affairs operated eventually to strengthen the Catholic position. In March, 1911, Premier Schollaert introduced an education bill looking toward the placing of church schools upon a footing financially with the schools maintained by the communes, and the opposition to this measure acquired such intensity that the author of the bill was forced to retire. But his successor, De Broqueville, a man of conciliatory temperament, formed a new Catholic cabinet which, by falling back (p. 547) upon a policy of "marking time," contrived to stave off a genuine defeat. In the munic.i.p.al elections held throughout the country October 15, 1911, the Liberal-Socialist candidates were very generally successful, but the parliamentary elections which took place June 2, 1912, had the unexpected result of entrenching the Catholic party more securely in power than in upwards of a decade. The combined a.s.sault of the Liberals and the Socialists upon "clericalism" fell flat, and against the Government's contention that the extraordinary and incontestable prosperity of the country merited a continuance of Catholic rule no arguments were forthcoming which carried conviction among the voters. The Catholic vote showed an increase of 130,610, the Liberal and Socialist opposition an increase of 40,402, and the Christian Democrats a decrease of 4,692. The new chamber consists of 101 Catholics, 45 Liberals, 38 Socialists, and 2 Christian Democrats, giving the Government a clear majority of sixteen. The elections were marked by grave public unrest, involving widespread strikes and anti-clerical demonstrations, with some loss of life. More clearly than before was exhibited in this campaign the essentially bourgeois and doctrinaire character of the present Liberal party. The intimate touch with the ma.s.ses which in the days of its ascendancy, prior to 1884, the party enjoyed has been lost, and more and more the proletariat is looking to the Socialists for propagation of the measures required for social and industrial amelioration.

*602. The Demand for Further Reform.*--A project upon which the Socialists and Liberals in the last election, as upon several former occasions, have found it possible to unite is the abolition of the plural vote. Almost immediately after the adoption of the amendment of 1893 the Socialists declared their purpose to wage war unremittingly upon this feature of the new system. In its stead they demanded that there be subst.i.tuted the rule of _un homme, un vote_, "one man, one vote," with the age limit reduced to twenty-one years. Following the triumph of the Catholics in 1900, the agitation of the Socialists was redoubled, and in it the Liberals very generally joined. Between the two groups there arose seemingly irreconcilable differences of method, the Liberals being unable to approve the obstructionism and other violent means employed by their allies. In time, however, the Socialist methods became more moderate, and the realization on the part of both elements that only by fighting together might they hope to win induced a fuller and more durable co-operation between the two.

For the time being the Socialists have subordinated to the establishment of universal and equal suffrage all other features of their political and industrial programme.[768] Upon the desirability of maintaining (p. 548) proportional representation all parties are agreed, and it is probably but a question of time until the principle will be applied fully, as it is not to-day, in the elections of the provinces and communes.

[Footnote 768: August 15, 1911, Socialists and Liberals combined in an anti-plural-vote demonstration in Brussels in which 150,000 people are estimated to have taken part. For an able defense of plural voting under the system prevailing in Belgium see L. Dupriez, L'Organisation du suffrage universel en Belgique.

Cf. E. Van der Smissen, La question du suffrage universel en Belgique, in _Annales des Sciences Politiques_, Sept., 1902. On recent aspects of Belgian politics consult L. Dupriez, L'evolution des partis politiques en Belgique et les elections de mai 1906, ibid., Sept., 1906; A. Kahn, Les elections belges, in _Questions Diplomatiques et Coloniales_, June 16, 1910; and J. Van den Heuvel, Les elections belges, in _Le Correspondant_, June 25, 1912. J. H. Humphreys, Proportional Representation in Belgium, in _Contemporary Review_, Oct., 1908, contains a concrete account of the elections of 1908. A useful volume is A.

Fromes, Code electoral belge (Brussels, 1908).]

*603. The Legislative Chambers: Organization and Procedure.*--The two houses meet by established right on the second Tuesday in November of each year, at the Palais de la Nation, in Brussels. A regular session must continue through a period of at least forty days. The king may convene the chambers in extraordinary session. He may adjourn them, save that in no case may an adjournment exceed the term of one month; nor may it be renewed during the same session, without the consent of the houses. Finally, the king may dissolve the chambers, or either of them; but the act of dissolution must include an order for an election within forty days and a summons of the newly elected parliament to meet within two months.[769]

[Footnote 769: Arts. 70-72. Dodd, Modern Const.i.tutions, I., 137.]

Each house judges the qualifications of its members and decides all contests arising in relation thereto; each elects, at the opening of a session, its president, vice-president, secretaries, and other officials; each determines by its own rules the manner in which its powers shall be exercised. Sessions are normally public; but by vote of an absolute majority, taken at the instigation of the president or of ten members, either body may decide to consider a specific subject behind closed doors. Votes are taken _viva voce_ or by rising, but a vote on a bill as a whole must always be by roll call and _viva voce_.

Except on propositions pertaining to const.i.tutional amendments and a few matters (upon which a two-thirds vote is required), measures are pa.s.sed by absolute majority. They must, however, be voted upon article by article.

From the essentially democratic character of the Belgian government, it follows that the powers of the legislative chambers are comprehensive.

The functions of legislation are vested by the const.i.tution conjointly in the king and the two houses, but in practice they are exercised (p. 549) in a very large measure by the houses alone. Each house, as well as the crown, possesses full rights of legislative initiative, though it is required that all laws relating to the revenues or expenditures of the state, or to military contingents, shall be voted first by the House of Representatives. Authoritative interpretation of measures enacted is confided exclusively to the legislative power, and each house is guaranteed the right to inquire into the conduct of public affairs and to compel the attendance of ministers for the purpose of interpellation, although the lower house alone is given power to formulate charges against public officials and to arraign them before the Court of Ca.s.sation.

IV. THE JUDICIARY AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT

*604. The Courts.*--Aside from special military, commercial, and labor tribunals, the courts of Belgium comprise a symmetrical hierarchy modelled upon that created under the Code Napoleon. At the bottom are the courts of the 222 cantons, each consisting of a single justice of the peace, vested in ordinary breaches of police regulations with sole authority, though in more serious cases a.s.sociated with the burgomaster of the commune. Next above are the tribunals of first instance, one in each of the twenty-six arrondiss.e.m.e.nts into which the kingdom is divided, and each consisting of three judges. The court of first instance serves as a court of appeal from the decisions of the cantonal tribunal, and at the same time it possesses original jurisdiction in more serious cases of crime and misdemeanors within the arrondiss.e.m.e.nt. Above the courts of first instance stand the three courts of appeal, sitting at Brussels, Ghent, and Liege. That at Brussels consists of four chambers. At the apex is the Court of Ca.s.sation, sitting at the capital. In this supreme tribunal there is but a single judge, but a.s.sociated with him is a large staff of a.s.sistants. The function of the Court of Ca.s.sation is to determine whether the decisions of inferior tribunals are in accord with the law and to annul such as are not. It is of interest to observe, however, that it is the Court of Ca.s.sation that tries a minister upon charges preferred by the House of Representatives, and this is the only circ.u.mstance under which the tribunal exercises any measure of original jurisdiction. The creation of the Court of Ca.s.sation and of the three courts of appeal is specifically provided for within the const.i.tution. All inferior tribunals are created by law, and none are permitted to be established otherwise. For the trial of criminal cases there are special tribunals, in three grades: police courts, correctional courts, and courts of a.s.size.

All judges and justices of the peace are appointed by the king for life. Members of the courts of appeal and the presidents and (p. 550) vice-presidents of the courts of original jurisdiction are selected from two double lists presented, the one by these courts and the other by the provincial councils. Members of the Court of Ca.s.sation are selected from two double lists presented, the one by the Senate and the other by the Court itself. All other judicial officers are appointed by the crown independently. Except for urgent reasons of public order or morals, sessions of all tribunals are public, and every judgment must be p.r.o.nounced in open court. Unlike Holland, Belgium has a well developed system of trial by jury. Jury trial is guaranteed by the const.i.tution in all criminal cases and in all cases involving political or press offenses. As in England and the United States, it is the function of the jury to determine whether or not the accused is guilty and that of the court to explain the law and to p.r.o.nounce sentence. A jury consists regularly of twelve members.[770]

[Footnote 770: Arts. 92-107. Dodd, Modern Const.i.tutions, I., 140-142. Roubion, La separation des pouvoirs administratif et judiciaire en Belgique (Paris, 1905).]