tions, at least forty years of age and the payment of $400 in direct taxes to the state. The pecuniary qualification for voters, that is $8.50 of direct taxes, has limited the voters to 135,000 in a population of more than 6,000,000, a fact which, whatever else may be said of it, makes government much easier. Up to 1830 the resistance to the supremacy of Holland held all the Belgians together. The Liberals supported the freedom of worship, of education, and of association demanded by the Catholics, and these in turn aided the demand of the Liberals for liberty of the press, ministerial responsibility, and the institution of the jury. After the establishment of the new kingdom, again, the state of foreign relations held the parties together and led to the formation of mixed ministries, made up from both parties. But the plan did not work smoothly, and this period was distinguished by the frequency and intensity of ministerial crises. With 1839 began the division of parties and the creation of accordant ministries, and in 1846 a congress at Brussels fully established the Liberal party with a definite programme.

Parties in Belgium are distinguished by their strong cohesion and strict discipline. No doubt a certain degree of independence and initiative is left to each member, and there are even groups of different shades and tendencies. But these differences are seldom shown in parliamentary discussions and still more rarely in the votes. Opposing views are almost always reconciled in what we should call party caucuses. A deputy who does not wish to follow the line adopted by his friends prefers to avoid a quarrel by intentional absence. This union and discipline of parties are explained by their organization. Each party is represented in every electoral district by a permanent association which looks after the registration of voters, chooses the candidates, determines the programme, disposes of all the means of influence and especially of

the press. These local associations, federated among themselves, obey the impulse of a central committee, which includes the chiefs of each party. There are thus two hierarchies of rival associations, outside of which it is extremely rare that a candidate can hope to secure a seat in the Parliament. A comparison with party organization in the United States at once suggests itself. The difference in result is to be sought in the organization and leadership within the chambers, both of the government and the opposition. Since 1846 the cabinets have been especially stable. Although the king, and therefore the ministry, have the right of dissolving the chambers, it is not exercised, because the chambers do not overthrow ministries, but leave that duty to the electors, in the regular periods of two years, when the popular house is renewed by halves, though the term of senators is for eight years. Of course, if the electors return a majority adverse to the ministry the latter must resign. This leaving of the change of executive to the people instead of the chambers is of interest in relation to the United States.

The Belgian ministers have, ex officio, the right of entry into both chambers and can take part in all discussions, but have a vote only in the assembly of which they are members. They must be heard whenever they demand it, while, on the other hand, the chambers can demand their presence and explanations as to resolutions which have been sent to them. They have the right of being present even in secret sessions of the whole body; but they have no particular right relatively to the meetings of the sections and committees. It is not necessary that the ministers should be members of either house. In fact the minister of war is always a soldier, a general in actual employment, and though the others are usually taken from the houses, there is nothing to prevent the whole

ministry from being made up of outside men of business, their right of entry into both houses being held to cover all requirements, — again a circumstance of importance in relation to the United States.

The king has the right of dissolution of one or both chambers, though he must at the same time order a new election within forty days and assemble the chambers within two months. Evidently this right much surpasses that of the Crown and ministry in Great Britain, who can dissolve only the House of Commons, and forms a powerful instrument which may explain the control over the legislature, notwithstanding the power exercised through its committees. As the king retains and sometimes exercises the right of dismissing single ministers, a defeat of one does not involve the resignation of the whole to the same extent as in Great Britain, a further precedent of interest to the United States.

In Belgium, as in France, Italy, and the United States, and in direct contrast to Great Britain, the struggle for power is between the executive and the committees of the legislature.

The Belgium Chamber of Representatives is divided into six sections, of which the members are renewed every month by drawing lots. They discuss the proposals which are laid before them, but their deliberations are not generally very profound. Each of them names a reporter who represents it in the central section. The latter makes a study of the proposals in detail, and presents to the Chamber a report to serve as a basis for its deliberations. At the commencement of each session the Chamber elects by general ticket two permanent commissions, composed of at least seven members: a commission upon finances and accounts, and one of agriculture, industry, and commerce. Each section names every month one of its members as a delegate to the committee on petitions. Finally, the chambers can establish special committees, whether elected by general ticket, or selected by lot, or named by the president, to deliberate on propositions submitted to it.

The Senate has not adopted the same organization. From the opening of the session it divides itself into seven committees, of

which the members are elected on general ticket, and which correspond each to a ministerial department. It is these committees which prepare the scheme of a proposed law, and name a reporter for each subject. Each committee names two of its members to form a budget committee, and in like manner a member of the standing committee on petitions and naturalization. A standing committee of agriculture, commerce, and industry is elected directly by the Senate, the nine members who compose it being chosen in such a manner that each province may be represented.1

It will be seen that the Senate committees resemble more closely those of the United States.

2

The Belgium chambers have most extensive and thoroughly protected rights; legislative power with the right of initiation and amendment; annual vote of budgets, of all taxes, loans, and every grant of money at the cost of the treasury. The right of initiative belongs both to the government and to every member of Parliament, except that laws relating to the finances or the army contingent must be voted first by the Chamber of Deputies. The ministers never present their plans in their quality of senators or representatives, but always in the name of the king, and generally before the Chamber of Representatives.3

All propositions, whether from ministers or members, are referred first to the sections, and by them after a cursory examination to the central section.

The sessions of this section are private, the only exception being in favor of the authors of propositions who may appear to submit their arguments. The government is not represented there, and takes no part in its labors, even when they are given to ministerial plans. The ministers are excluded from its meetings and are only admitted at the expressed request of the section, when it desires to receive from them information or explanations. They then appear as simple witnesses without taking part in the discussion, and retire as soon as they have answered the questions put to them.4

It is evident that here are two rival powers, involving a permanent struggle for mastery; and although "between these two authorities which it has elected and in

1 Dupriez, Vol. I., p. 232. 2 p. 234.

8 p. 241.

4 p. 243.

VOL. II - P

which it has confidence, the ministry and the central section, the Chamber hesitates and follows one or the other, according to circumstances," yet if in fact the ministry retains the advantage, and does not become the sport of groups, as in France or Italy, it must be either on account of the degree of influence retained by the king, or of the very restricted suffrage and consequent severity of party discipline already alluded to.

But this last element promises very speedily to be put to a test. The agitation for a wider suffrage began in 1870 and resulted in the change of the Constitution finally adopted on September 2, 1893. According to it the voters in the first election were increased to 1,363,733, or fully tenfold. A vote was given to every Belgian twenty-five years old, having resided a year in the same voting district, and not disqualified by law. But with this was adopted a system of plural voting. An additional vote was given: I, to every male of thirty-six years of age, married or a widower, and having legitimate children, and paying to the State at least five francs of personal taxation; 2, to every male twenty-five years old, an owner of real property valued for taxation at 2000 francs, or public debt paying an income of 100 francs, or having certain educational qualifications. But no one was to have more than three votes. Voting was further made compulsory, with results, according to one writer,1 very much as has been indicated to be probable in a former chapter of this work.2

The returns of the first election in 1894 are of interest.

1 Luis de Lorac, "The Political Situation in Belgium," National

Review, November, 1894.

2 Chap. XXVI.