outrage in post-siege paris--12/24

24 Dec 2024

outrage in post-siege paris--12/24

0 COMMENTS

Today's selection-- from Paris in Ruins by Sebastian Smee. In early 1871, economic measures and controversial decisions by the National Assembly deepen the crisis, fueling public anger and unrest.

“Shuttling between Bordeaux and Versailles in early 1871, a distracted Adolphe Thiers was consumed by multiplying responsibilities. He had an entire nation to run. Jules Favre, however, could smell the coming storm. Unlike Thiers, Favre had spent the entire siege in Paris trying simultaneously to defend the city from the outside and to head off internal revolts. ‘You reproach me with thinking of nothing but Paris,’ he said to Thiers. ‘I reproach you with neglecting it.’

“In fact, Thiers was guilty of something worse than neglect. With potentially suicidal indifference, his new government had begun passing callous ordinances, each of which precipitously worsened the economic circumstances of Paris's poor. On March 7 the government ended the siege-period moratorium on debts; all debts were to be repaid within forty-eight hours. Another law ended the moratorium on rems; families who couldn't pay up were to be evicted. The government also ended a moratorium applying to items deposited at pawnshops, which had offered a lifeline to many; such goods could now be sold if they weren't reclaimed. Thousands of items—including 2,300 mattresses and 1,700 pairs of scissors—were now lost to their former owners. Most provocatively of all, the Assembly cut off the daily stipend of 1.5 francs for National Guardsmen. This left tens of thousands of families without enough money to buy food. Thiers needed to raise money from the banks to make the first payment of war reparations, and the banks demanded proof of financial stability and order. But the upshot of these decisions was disastrous. Within three days, 150,000 people were thrown into bankruptcy.

Portrait by Nadar, 1870s

“Of course, everyone was short of money, including landlords. Manet, for instance, who owned, with his brothers, properties to the northwest of the city, was out of cash. On March 6 he wrote to Duret from Arcachon, begging for help: ‘I thought I would have some coming in about now and would not have to ask before you offered it—but there are a few commitments I must meet and I'm very short!’ Other Parisians, however, were in much worse predicaments. They had no lifelines.

“And now, their outrage was palpable. At a moment when the government needed to create and maintain hope after a prolonged disaster, it had instead ignited panic. Blind to the damage it had wrought, the National Assembly, still convening in Bordeaux, continued to go about its business. On March 8, it voted to annul the election to the Legislative Assembly of Garibaldi. There was logic behind the decision: Garibaldi was not, after all, a French citizen. But he was a committed republican who had fought valiantly for the French against the Germans. What's more, he had broad appeal across the various leftist factions. (Louis Blanc called him ‘a soldier of revolutionary cosmopolitanism.’) His dismissal provoked Victor Hugo to resign. ‘I am bound to say,’ he told the Assembly, ‘that Garibaldi is the only general who fought for France and the only general who was not defeated.’”