THE NEW GRIEVANCE OF THE FRENCH CHURCH.
In France the present object of penal taxation is not a class but an institution. The Church is hateful to the Radicals, therefore the Church must be made to contribute more than her share to the national revenue. This is the meaning of the new tax on the religious Orders,—the droit d'accroissement of which so much has been heard in France during the last few months. It is a special tax, created for a special purpose,—the impoverishment of an institution which French Radicals hold in special detesta- tion. No doubt the Government want money. The national expenditure is very large, and it is constantly growing. But this is no justification for subjecting the Church to a fiscal burden over and above what is paid by the lay taxpayer. This can only be defended on the theory that the Church is a wealthy wrongdoer whom it is fair to deprive of some of his ill-gotten gains. Of course, the Government do not put forward this view. Their explanation of the tax is, that it is a rough equivalent for other taxes which the laity pay, and from which the religious Orders go free. It is hard, however, to believe that anybody in France is paying without complaint an Income-tax of is. 8d. in the pound, which, as nearly as we can calculate, is the amount of the new impost on the religious Orders. The Extreme Left, who in this particular support the Government, do not so much as talk about equivalents. Their view of the tax is that the religious Orders ought to be thankful that they are allowed to go on a little longer. In a really well-ordered society there would be no place for them, and even in a transitional society they must pay heavily for the per- mission to live. The imposition of this tax is thus one of the two sacrifices -which the present Cabinet have made to the principle of Republican concentration. It was to rehabilitate this principle that IL Ribot took office, and in order to do so he had to conciliate the Socialists by an amnesty and the Radicals by a piece of anti-clerical legis- lation. The former expedient perhaps gave him some annoyance, but where the Church is concerned M. Ribot, as we have often pointed out, is always ready to listen to Radical suggestions. Several lines of anti-ecclesiastical tradition meet in his person, and the deference he pays to them is the chief thing that differentiates him from the Moderate Republicans, among whom, but for this charac- teristic, he would naturally be ranked.
The effect of the new tax upon the ecclesiastical politics of France has been extraordinary. Nothing more is heard of the reconciliation between the Church and the Republic. The tax is treated as an open declaration of war on the part of the State, and nearly every ecclesiastical personage, including every Bishop except one, is busy in preaching resistance. The contention set up on behalf of the Orders is that there is nothing to be gained and much to be lost by submission. The tax is so crushing, that if it is paid it must before long involve the community that pars t in ruin. It is with this motive that it has been imposed, and. an Order which thinks that payment can be attended by any other result must be living in a, fool's paradise. We confess that we do not quite understand this contention. That the State should demand little less than a tenth of your income in a single tax —without reckoning what it may exact in other ways—is grossly unjust when no similar demand is made upon other citizens ; but we cannot see that it is ruinous. It may compel many of the Orders to curtail their expenditure in charitable work, or to make an increased charge for their educational work ; but annoying and inconvenient as this may be, it is not tantamount to the confiscation of the remaining nine-tenths of their income. Perhaps, however,' the real explanation of the passive opposition the Orders talk of offering to the collection of the tax, is somewhat different from the explanation actually put forward.' Frenchmen generally have a very great dislike to be known to be rich. - They are afraid that the envy excited by the possession of wealth will somehow find means of expres- sion. This is the secret of the hostility that the idea of an Income-tax has always excited in France. For an Income- tax necessitates some approximate estimate of what an income really is, and whether this estimate is demanded from the taxpayer or made by the taxgatherer, the notion is equally distasteful. Now, in the present case the religious Orders have the same dislike to their incomes being known that all Frenchmen have, and they have special reasons for disliking the particular method in which this knowledge will be arrived at. Though we have spoken of the new tax as an Income-tax, in order to make its amount more intelligible, it is really a property-tax, and the process of calculating it will involve an official valuation of the whole property of a religious Order,— taken, we imagine, if the Government think proper, every year. In this way, not merely the present wealth, but the whole financial history of the Orders will be known to the Government, to the Budget Committee, and very possibly to the whole country. Now, if French- men generally think that it is dangerous to let the amount of their incomes be known, with how much more reason may not the religious Orders think it dangerous ? The imposition of the tax being in itself an act of hostility, it is probable that the machinery by which it is levied and. collected will be worked in the same spirit. If the pro- ceeds prove less than they were expected to be, the Orders will be accused of concealing their wealth, and new and more inquisitorial means will be devised in order to ascer- tain it. If the proceeds prove more than they were expected to be, the rapacity of the Anti-Clerical party will be whetted, and a demand will at once be made that a larger contribution towards the needs of the State shall be exacted from these cumberers of the ground. It is best, therefore—this is the practical conclusion from the argument—to fight first rather than last, to resist the first essay of injustice, instead of waiting for its complete development. The suggestion which seems to find the most enthusiastic welcome among the friends of the Orders is that they should absolutely refuse to pay, and leave the Government to get the money it wants in the best way it can. The tax-gatherer will thus be replaced by the man in possession ; the process of collection will be of the kind with which the getting in tithe in Wales, or rent in Ireland, has made Englishmen but too familiar.
It is a bold counsel, and we can understand that for militant spirits, it has decided attractions. They have viewed with irritation the change of attitude towards the Republic which Leo XIII. has imposed upon the Church, and now they regard almost with joy the failure they have all along expected. But is it a wise counsel ? Is there any reason to believe that its adoption will lead to anything more than the collection of the tax in the most wasteful way possible ? The advocates of resistance are understood to build their hopes upon the favour with which the Orders are regarded in their own neighbour- hoods, Either, they argue, the Government will be afraid to break open monasteries and convents, and then the tax will remain uncollected, and the Orders be as rich as before ; or the Government will push matters to es- t .emities, and thereby incur an amount of unpopularity which will be fatal to them at the next Election, if not sooner. The French Bishops and the Superiors-General of the several Orders ought no doubt to be the best judges of what is likely to follow upon a policy of passive resistance; but somehow we do not feel at all assured that they are so. We do not question the popularity of the Orders, but we do question the probability of its making itself felt in either of the expected ways. The tax may be collected with more or less of discretion, but in the end, as we believe, it will be collected. The peasantry or the townspeople may sympathise with the monks or nuns whose goods are seized and put up to auction ; but it is still to be seen whether their sympathy will make them support a " reactionary " or even a " rallied " candidate at the General Election. A good many hopes have from time to time been built upon this foundation, but they have never yet come to anything. The French elector is an inscrutable person, and the more he dislikes the existing order of things the more obstinately he seems to stay away from the poll. The utmost we should ourselves expect by way of result would be a larger number of abstentions on the part of moderate men, and the consequent return of a more Radical Chamber representing a smaller majority of the electorate. The method of resistance to bad Governments which to English- men is the most natural one, seems, unfortunately, to have no charms for Frenchmen. They will not set to work to build up an opposition in the constituencies as a prelude to building up one in Parliament. With so good a case as that with which the unjust taxation of the religious Orders supplies them, there ought not to be much difficulty —supposing the Orders to be really popular—in making the wrong done them the theme of speeches and meetings which the Government could not put down without giving offence to a large number of usually well-affected Re- publicans. If the electors do not feel indignant at the treatment to which the Orders are subjected, when it is put plainly before them in speech and writing, we greatly doubt whether they will feel any more indignant when they see the goods of the Orders seized in consequence of their refusal to pay the tax.
Previous page
