Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 2.djvu/458

 BELGIUM

400

BELGIUM

to the Catliolics; concessions were even made to the prejudices of some, by rendering obligatory the pri- ority of civil marriage over the religious ceremony and commanding that no one should be forced to observe the religious holidays of any denomination. The Congress showed the same broad-mindedness in the choice of a sovereign. The first selection fell on the Duke de Nemours, son of Louis Philippe, but the French king, fearing the jealousy of the European powers, dared not accept the throne for his son. Then, after having given the regency for some months to Baron Surlet de Chokier, the Congress declared in favour of Prince Leopold de Saxe-Coburg Gotha, widower of the Princess Charlotte, heir presumptive to the Crown of England. Though a Protestant prince, Leopold I (1831-65) showed himself worthy of the confidence of a Catholic people; during his en- tire reign he maintained an even balance between the two parties, and never lost his solicitude for the moral and religious interests of the nation. Owing largely to Leopold's wise policy, Belgium successfully in- augurated free institutions, and showed the world that a Catholic people is capable of progress in every field.

During the early years of the new kingdom both sides remained faithful to the union of 1828, the ad- ministration being divided between the Catholics and Liberals. The dominant thought was to defend against Holland the patrimony of independence and of liberty won by the revolution, patriotism inspiring unanimous opposition to the foreigner. The ten- dency towards mutual conciliation was evident in the organic laws perfected during these early years, especially in that of 1842 on primary education which was passed unanimously by the Chamber, save for three blank votes, and received the unanimous vote of the senate. This law, the work of J. B. Nothomb, the minister, made religious teaching obligatory, but dispensed dissidents from attendance. King Leopold expressed his gratification on signing it. For thirty- seven years this remained the fundamental charter of public education. At this time, everyone of what- ever party was con\'inced of the necessity of religion in the education of the people. The clergy readily rallied to the support of the bill and even suffered a great number of the 2,284 private schools winch they had opened to be closed that they might co-operate in tlie establishment of the public schools.

Tlie law of 1842 was, in a way, the last product of Unionist principles. Since the treaty of 1839 had definitely regulated Belgium's position in regard to Holland, the fear of an outside enemy had been re- moved, and the Liberal party was convinced that there was no longer anything to hinder its political •doctrines from prevailing in the national government. This attitude was partly justified by the state of affairs. The Catholics were weak, without organiza- tion, without a press, without consciousness of their own strength; they had no relish for partisan contests, and they counted on l^nionism to maintain public life along the lines of 1830. In contrast to the Catholic masses who lacked cohesion, and consciousness of their strength, the Liberals formed a young, spirited, united party, gaining recruits from the iSourgeoisie and the learned classes alike, commanding much sym- pathetic support from official circles, in possession of a press with twenty times the influence of the Catholic press, in a word, master of the Belgian Gov- ernment since 1830. Paul Devau.x, one of the most remarkable men of this party and one of the orga- nizers of the Union in 1828, became the apostle of Liberalism in its later development, which implied the abolition of the Union and the \'ictory of a policy exclusively Liberal in character. The articles which, beginning with 1839, he published in the "National Review", founded by him, exerted an enormous in- flnence upon his party and even gradually won over to his ideas a large number of moderate Liberals.

While the Union of 1828 was being dissolved and some of its promoters were seeking to give a partisan predominance to mi.xed ministries, the dissenters, who cherished an implacable hatred for the Catholic Church, wished to profit by the new turn of affairs in Liberal ranks to avenge the defeat they had met wnth at the hands of the constituent Congress. The Masonic lodges entered on the scene with the avowed intention of forming the "conscience" of the Liberal party and of outlining its programme. They estab- lished a large society called "The Alliance", which soon numbered 1,000 members, and which was to serve as their agent and go-between with that part of the people in which Freemasonry awakened distrust- fulness. In 1846, the Alliance called together a Lib- eral Congress, presided over by Eugene Defacqz, the dissenter of 1830, now Grand Master of Belgian Free- masonrj'. The same secrecy was preserved in the deliberations of the Congress as in the Lodges, from which it originated, and the only knowledge of its proceedings was to be gained from the programme which it published. In this document, side by side with political reforms, appeared "the real in- dependence of the civil power", a mere formula sig- nifying systematic war on the Church, and " the organization of public instruction under the exclusive direction of civil authority, which should be granted legal means to maintain a competition with private establishments, without the interference of the clergy, on the ground of authority. At the time that this programme was being drawn up, the Congress made plans for a general confederation of Liberalism in Belgium, which with the Alliance as centre and type, was to establish in each district an association of free Liberal electors, bound in honour to vote for the candidates chosen by the Congress. There were also to be electoral divisions in every one of the cantons to extend the influence of the association. General reunions were to be held periodically to en- able the alliance to reach the members of the associa- tions and imbue them with the Masonic spirit. The Liberal Congress of 1846 brought the session to a close with "a resolution favouring the liberation of the lower clergy", wiiom they hoped to incite against the bishops by suggesting possibilities of bettering their condition. This resolution brought out strongly the true character of the Congress, as a reactionary move- ment against the work of the National Congress of 1830. It stands to reason that the strong impulse stirred up by the Congress in the ranks of the Liberal party, and the ardent hopes based on it reacted on the legislative elections, while the Catholics re- mained buried in their dream of LTnionism, then merely an anachronism. The elections of 1847 placed the Liberals in power.

The new Government brought together in the same ministry Charles Rogier, member of the Congress of 1830, and Frere-Orban, one of the promoters of the Congress of 1846. Under the influence of the latter, a man of great talent but extremely arbitrary, whose imperious will got the better of the Unionist scruples of his colleague, the Cabinet declared that it would inaugurate a "new policy" taking as its principle the "independence of the civil power". And as a matter of fact, from this time forth, war was made on religious influence with a bitterness destined to divide the Belgian nation into two hostile camps. De Haussy, the Minister of Justice, set about applying to charitable foundations the most unheard-of prin- ciples. According to him, only charitable (State) bureau.x could receive charitable bequests, and all en- dowments were to be turned over to them, even though the testator had made the selection of an administrator for the endowment an indispensable condition. On the other hand, the law of 1850 on middle-superior education was inspired by a spirit diametrically opposite to that of the law concerning