Part 13
By that decree a depôt de mendicité was directed to be established in each department, at the expense partly of the nation and partly of the department. Within 15 days after its establishment, the Prefect of the department was to give public notice of its being opened, and all persons without means of subsistence were bound to proceed to it, and all persons found begging were to be arrested and taken to it.
By a subsequent arrêté of the 27th October, 1808, it was ordered that all beggars should on their arrest be placed in the first instance in the maison d’arrêt of the district; and transferred from thence, if guilty of vagrancy, to the maison de detention, or prison; if not vagrants, to the depôt de mendicité. In the depôt they were to be clothed in the house dress, confined to regular and very early hours, the sexes separated, subject to severe punishments (rising to six months’ solitary imprisonment (cachot) on bread and water) for disobedience or other misconduct, or attempts to escape; deprived of all intercourse, except by open letters with their relations or friends, and kept to work at wages to be regulated by the Prefect, two-thirds of which were to belong to the establishment, and the remaining third was to be paid to them on their quitting the depôt.
The conditions on which a person might obtain his release from a depôt de mendicité are not stated.
The provisions of the code pénal appear to leave that question to the discretion of the Executive.
Section 274 of that code enacts that every person found begging in a place containing a public establishment for the prevention of mendicity, shall be imprisoned for from three to six months, and then removed to the depôt de mendicité. Under section 275, if there be no such establishment in the place where he is found begging, his imprisonment is to last only from one to three months; if, however, he has begged out of the canton in which he is domiciled, it is to last from six months to two years.
After having suffered his punishment, he is to remain (apparently in the depôt de mendicité) at the disposition of Government.
BELGIUM.
Monts-de-Piété.
Such was the state of the law respecting purely charitable, and what may be called penal, relief at the time of the establishment of the kingdom of the Netherlands. We have stated these provisions at some length, because they form, with little material alteration, the existing law on the subject in France. No change of any importance appears to have been made by the late Government of the Netherlands, or by the present Belgian Government, with respect to the hospices or the bureaux de bienfaisance; but with respect to foundlings, an arrêté of the 2nd June, 1825, declared that the expense of their maintenance ought to be supplied by the hospices, and so far as these were unable to meet it, from the local revenues of the commune or the province in which they had been abandoned--a provision which has been the subject of much complaint, as imposing a heavy and peculiar burthen on the few towns which possess foundling hospitals. And with respect to monts-de-piété, an arrêté of the 31st October, 1826, directed the local authorities of towns and communes to prepare regulations for the management of their respective monts-de-piété, their support, and the employment of the profits, subject to certain general rules; among which are,--
1. That the administration shall be gratuitous.
2. That the interest shall not exceed 5_l._ per cent. per annum, and that no farther charge shall be made on any pretext whatever.
3. That they shall be open every day.
4. That the pledges may be redeemed at any time before their actual sale.
5. That they shall not be sold until the expiration of 14 months from the time of the loan.
Mendicity.
The following are the most material alterations made in the laws respecting mendicity. By a law of the 28th November, 1818, the period of residence necessary for acquiring a settlement, or domicile de secours, was extended to four years: and by a law of the 12th October, 1819, the expense of supporting a person confined in a depôt de mendicité was thrown on the commune in which he had his domicile de secours.
In 1823 the Belgian Société de Bienfaisance was established, on the model of that which existed in Holland, and contracted with the Government to receive in its colonies de repression 1000 paupers, at the annual sum of 35 florins (2_l._ 18_s._ 4_d._) per head. In consequence of this arrangement, all the regulations which required a beggar to be removed to a depôt de mendicité were varied by the introduction of the words “or to a mendicity colony;” and by an arrêté of the 12th October, 1825, the governors of the different provinces were directed to give notice that all persons in want of employment and subsistence would obtain them in the depôts de mendicité, or the mendicity colonies, and had only to apply to the local authorities in order to be directed to the one or the other; and that consequently no begging at any period of the year, or under any pretext whatever, could in future be tolerated. Persons arrested for begging were allowed on their own request, if their begging were not accompanied by aggravating circumstances, to be conducted to one or the other of these establishments without suffering the previous imprisonment inflicted by the penal code.
By another arrêté of the same date, the local authorities were directed to prepare new codes for the regulation of the different depôts de mendicité, based on principles of which the following are the most material:
1. That the depôts should be confined to the reception of those who, from age or infirmity, should be unfit for agricultural labour.
2. That all above the age of six, and under that of 70, and capable of working, should be kept to work, at average wages; that each person should be charged per day 17 cents (about 3½_d._) for his maintenance, being its average cost, and retain the remainder of his earnings; and be allowed nothing beyond strict necessaries (mere bread is specified for food), if his earnings were under that sum.
That a portion of each person’s surplus earnings should be reserved and paid over to him on leaving the house, and the other portion paid to him from time to time in a local paper money.
3. That cantines should be established in the house, to enable the inmates to spend their surplus earnings.
4. That those who had voluntarily offered themselves for reception should be at liberty to quit the house, after having repaid the expenses of their maintenance there.
5. That those arrested and sent thither as beggars should not be set free until, 1st., they had repaid all expenses; and 2ndly, had fitted themselves to earn an independent livelihood, or been demanded by their commune or relatives, and security given for their future conduct.
6. That in each house there should be an ecclesiastic to perform divine service, and give moral and religious instruction, frequently in private, and twice a week in public; and that, where the inmates should consist of Protestants and Catholics, there should be both a Catholic and a Protestant ecclesiastic.
7. That in each house there should be a daily school for the young, and a school for the adult, open for four hours on Sundays, and for an hour two evenings of the week. The attendance on these schools to be compulsory.
8. That so far as the confined paupers did not earn their own subsistence, each commune should pay for the support of those having in it their domicile de secours, at the above-mentioned rate of 17 cents. (3½_d._) per day, but be allowed a discount of 2 cents. per day (reducing the daily payment to 3_d._) on prompt payment.
A decree of the 9th April, 1831, by the Regent, abolished that discount, the sum of 3_d._ a day having been found insufficient, except in the depôt of Bruges, in which the decree states that it covers every expense.
The existing Government has passed two very important laws, dated the 13th & 29th of August, 1833.
The first of these enacts, that until the laws on mendicity shall have been revised, the daily charge for the subsistence of each detenu in the depôt de mendicité, instead of being fixed at 17 cents., shall be determined annually by the Government. The commune bound to repay the expense is to be assisted, if incapable of meeting it, by the province, the King deciding if the matter is disputed. If payment is not made, a personal remedy is given against the receiver of the commune.
By the second, a conseil d’inspection des depôts de mendicité is to be elected in each province. Each conseil is to propose a scheme,--
1. For dividing the inmates of the depôts into three classes, comprising, 1st, the infirm; 2d, the able-bodied who have voluntarily entered them; 3d, those sentenced to them as beggars or vagrants.
2. For obviating the abuses which might follow from the power given to the indigent of voluntarily entering the depôts.
And as a general rule, a pauper who requests admission without any authority from his commune, may be received; but in that case his commune is to be immediately informed of what has occurred. If it offers to support him at home, he is to be sent back to it: if it refuses, he is to remain in the depôt at the expense of the commune: and the communes are to be informed that it depends on themselves to diminish the expense of supporting their poor in the depôts, by the judicious distribution of out-door relief, by the organization of committees for the purpose of watching over the indigent, and inquiring into the causes of their distress; by the erection of asylums for lunatics, the deaf and dumb, the blind and the incurable; and by the establishment of houses of employment (d’ateliers libres de travail) in winter, and infant schools. For all which purposes they are recommended to assess themselves. M. Lebeau says in his report, “Enfin chez, nous nul ne peut exiger de secours en vertu d’un droit.”[14] (p. 594.) But it must be admitted that these provisions, if not constituting a right in the pauper to relief, give at least a right to the managers of the depôts to force the parishes to relieve, either at home or in the depôt, any pauper who presents himself: and M. Lebeau himself felt the danger to which the parishes are exposed. In his circular of the 13th September, 1833, addressed to the provinces in which depôts are established, he urges the importance of adopting regulations respecting the reception and dismission of the poor voluntarily presenting themselves, which may preserve parishes from “the indefinite burden which would follow the too easy admission of applicants.” “These establishments,” he adds, “must not be considered by the poor as places of gratuitous entertainment, (des hôtelleries gratuites.) One of the best methods of preventing this will be the strict execution of the law which prescribes work to all those who are not physically incapable of it; and for those who are incapable, the ordinary hospices and hospitals are the proper receptacles. It is true that in some depôts work has been discontinued, because the results did not repay the expenditure; but this consideration ought not to prevail over the moral advantages which follow its exaction. Labour is the essential condition which must be imposed on the pauper; and if it require the sacrifice of some expenditure, that sacrifice must be made.”
In a subsequent circular, dated the 4th July, 1834, and addressed to the governors of the different provinces, M. Lebeau states, that one of the causes assigned for the prevalence of mendicity, is the facility with which persons obtain release from the depôts. “I invite you, M. le Gouverneur,” says the Minister, “when a pauper requests his release, to consider his previous history, to ascertain whether he has the means of subsistence, or the local authorities have engaged to provide for him; and to treat with great suspicion the solicitations of parishes, as they are always interested in obtaining the release of the paupers for whose maintenance they pay.”
With respect to the general working of these institutions we have not much information. It appears from the report of M. Lebeau that there are in Belgium six depôts de mendicité; one at Hoogstraeten for the province of Antwerp, at Cambre for Brabant, at Bruges for the two Flanders, at Mons for Hainault, at Namur for Namur and Luxembourg, and at Reckheim for Limbourg and Liege; that the hospices for the old and impotent, and the hospitals for the sick, are very numerous, and that nearly every commune possesses its bureau de bienfaisance for the distribution of out-door relief. In 1832 the annual income of the different bureaux de bienfaisance was estimated at 5,308,114 francs (equal to about 212,325_l._ sterling), and that of the hospices at 4,145,876 francs (equal to about 165,835_l._ sterling), altogether about 378,160_l._ But the report contains no data from which the whole expenditure in public relief, or the whole number of persons relieved, or the general progress or diminution of pauperism, can be collected.
An important paper, however, is contained in the supplement to M. Lebeau’s report, stating the number of foundlings, deserted children and orphans, in the nine provinces constituting the kingdom of Belgium, in the years 1832 and 1833; of which we subjoin a copy, having added to it the population of the different provinces, as given in the official statement of 1830.
YEAR 1832.
+-----------+-----------+-----+-------+----------------------+-- Population. | | | | OBSERVATIONS. |PROVINCES. | | | | | | | Average | | | | | | number of | | | | | +-----+-----+ | | | | |Foundlings.| | | | | | |Deserted | | | | | |Children | | | | | |and | | | | | |Orphans. | | | | | | |TOTAL| | | | | | |NUMBER. | | | | | | |TOTAL | | | | | | |EXPENSES. | | | | | | | Subdivision of those | | | | | | | Expenses among | | | | | | +----------------------+ | | | | | |The Hospitals, | | | | | | |Charitable | | | | | | |Institutions, | | | | | | |or Foundations. | | | | | | | +---------------+ | | | | | | |Towns or | | | | | | | |Communes. | | | | | | | | +-------+ | | | | | | | Provinces. ---------+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-------+------+-------+-------+-- 354,974|Anvers | 886| 566|1,452| 71,300| .. | 31,300| 40,000| a | | | | | | | | | 556,146|Brabant |2,244| 286|2,530|197,550| .. |147,050| 50,500| b | | | | | | | | | 601,678|Flandre | 35| 461| 496| 34,123|15,600| 18,523| .. | c |Occidentale| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 733,938|Flandre | 688| 219| 907| 64,479| .. | ..| 64,479| d |Orientale | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 604,957|Hainault |1,870| 333|2,203|172,792| .. | 25,072|147,720| e | | | | | | | | | 369,937|Liége | 41| 153| 194| 15,550| 9,665| 4,694| 1,191|} | | | | | | | | |} 337,703|Limbourg | 11| 123| 134| 12,056|10,658| 1,398| .. |}f | | | | | | | | |} 292,151|Luxembourg | 13| 12| 25| 1,841| 232| 1,609| .. |} | | | | | | | | | 212,725|Namur | 653| 9| 662| 44,533| .. | 25,533| 19,000| g ---------+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-------+------+-------+-------+-- 4,064,209| TOTAL |6,441|2,162|8,603|614,224|36,155|255,179|322,890| ---------+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-------+------+-------+-------+--
(a) There is a tour at Antwerp, and also at Mechlin.
(b) A tour in Brussels and one in Louvain.
(c) No tour.
(d) A tour at Ghent.
(e) A tour in Mons, and one in Tournay.
(f) No tour.
(g) A hospital, but no tour.
N.B. There are tours at Antwerp, Mechlin, Brussels, Louvain, Ghent, Mons, and Tournay; seven in all.
N.B. A tour is a horizontal wheel, with a box for the reception of the infant, which, when empty, is open to the street, and when full is turned into the interior of the house.
YEAR 1833.
+---------------+-----------+------+-----------------------+-----------+ | PROVINCES. | Number of |Total.| Expenses of | TOTAL | | +-----+-----+ +-----------+-----------+ EXPENSES.| | |Foundlings.| |Foundlings.| | | | | |Deserted | |Deserted | | | | |Children. | |Children. | | | | | | | | | | +---------------+-----+-----+------+-----------+-----------+-----------+ |Anvers | 886| 578| 1,464| 37,107 65| 26,927 61| 64,035 26| |Brabant |2,648| 318| 2,966|182,321 69| 23,081 84|205,403 53| |Fl. Occidentale| 39| 460| 499| 3,258 67| 31,841 89| 35,100 56| |Fl. Orientale | 752| 242| 994| 49,874 81| 14,902 67| 64,717 48| |Hainault |1,969| 382| 2,351|123,368 71| 23,533 18|146,901 89| |Liége | 38| 162| 200| 2,899 0| 12,857 04| 15,756 04| |Limbourg | 14| 157| 171| 913 96| 11,054 44| 12,968 40| |Luxembourg | 7| 31| 38| 880 94| 3,212 80| 4,093 74| |Namur | 615| 7| 622| 41,082 0| 467 60| 41,549 60| | +-----+-----+------+-----------+-----------+-----------+ | |6,968|2,337| 9,305|442,647 43|147,879 07|590,526 60| +---------------+-----+-----+------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
Foundlings.
It appears from this statement that in the provinces of Antwerp, Brabant, and Hainault, containing a population of 1,514,072 persons, and possessing each two public receptacles for foundlings, the number of foundlings in 1833 was 5,404, or 1 in 278: that in Flandre Orientale and Namur, containing a population of 946,663, and possessing each a single public receptacle, the number of foundlings was 1367, or 1 in 699; and that in Flandre Occidentale, Liége, Limbourg and Luxembourg, containing a population of 1,601,469, but having no such establishment, the number of foundlings was 98, or less than 1 in 16,000. Nor does this difference arise from an increased number of deserted children in those provinces in which foundling hospitals do not exist: on the contrary, the numbers in the second column, comprising both orphans and deserted children, in the four provinces in which no foundling hospitals exist, amount to 910, out of a population of 1,601,469, being 1 in 1649, whereas those in Antwerp, Brabant and Hainault amount to 1356, out of a population of 1,514,077, or 1 in 116; and when it is recollected that the proportion of orphans can scarcely differ in the different provinces, and that in the second column they are mixed with the deserted children, the superiority of the four former provinces over the three latter will be found to be really much greater than it appears.
Nor does the difference arise from the prevalence of infanticide.
It appears from the statistique des tribunaux de la Belgique, that in the years 1826, 1827, 1828, and 1829, there were in the provinces of Antwerp, Brabant, Flandre Orientale, Hainault, and Namur, containing 2,450,740 inhabitants, and possessing foundling establishments, 13 convictions for infanticide; and in Flandre Occidentale, Liege, Limbourg, and Luxembourg, containing 1,601,469 inhabitants, and no such establishments, only nine convictions, being a proportion slightly inferior. So far, therefore, from foundling hospitals having had a tendency to prevent desertion of children, or infanticide, it appears that their tendency is decidedly to promote the former, without preventing in any degree the latter. The real infanticides, strange as it may sound, are the founders and supporters of foundling hospitals. The average mortality in Europe of children during the first year does not exceed one in five, or 20 per cent. In England and Holland it is less: in Belgium it is 22⁴⁹⁄₁₀₀, per cent. But in the foundling hospitals of Belgium (and their mortality is below the average of such establishments), it is 45 per cent.[15]
In the foundling hospital in Brussels it is now 66 per cent., having been from 1812 to 1817, 79 per cent.
Nor is the fate of those who escape from these receptacles much preferable to that of those who perish there. M. Ducpétiaux, the inspector of prisons, states that, small as is their number relative to the rest of the population, they form a considerable proportion of the inmates of gaols and prisons, and a still larger proportion of the prostitutes.[16]
Such having been the legislation, and such being its results, an attempt towards its improvement was made by a law, dated the 30th July, 1834. That laws enacts, that from the 1st of January, 1835, the maintenance of foundlings and of deserted children whose place of settlement is not known, shall be supplied one half by the communes in which they shall have been exposed or deserted, with the assistance of their bureaux de bienfaisance, and the other half by the province of which those communes form a part, and that an annual grant shall be made by the State in aid of this expenditure; and that the expense of maintaining deserted children whose place of settlement is known, shall be supported by the hospices and bureaux de bienfaisance of their place of settlement, with the assistance of the commune.
The object of this law is stated in a circular from the Minister of Justice, dated the 23d January, 1834.