« PreviousContinue »
To the north of the Gardens of the Tuileries there formerly existed a convent of Feuillants, and adjoining it the manège, famous in history. It was here that in 1790 the Constituent Assembly terminated its session, here that the Legislative Assembly commenced and ended its career, and here that the Convention held its sittings till the spring of 1793, when it removed to the Tuileries. There was also a revolutionary club which took the name of Feuillants, from its place of meeting, precisely as the celebrated Jacobins assumed that of the monks, whose cloisters, once the abode of pious contemplation, became the very furnace of the Revolution, where the patriotism of Republican France was assayed, and all alloy of moderate-ism fiercely rejected. It was on the site of these Gardens of the Feuillants, and of the adjacent buildings, that Napoleon commenced in 1802 the Rue de Rivoli, so called in honour of the victory of that name gained by the French over the Austrians in 1797. Number one in the new street, (which 'under Napoleon extended only from the Place de la Concorde to the Place du Carrousel) was inhabited by the celebrated Talleyrand, and still bears his name. It was at the same time, and on the same site, that was begun the Rue de Castiglione, which joins the Rue de Rivoli to the Place Vendóme, and which was continued, under the name of the Rue Napoléon, as far as the Boulevard de la Madeleine. Since 1815, that portion of this splendid street which connects the Place Vendôme with the Boulevard, has borne the name of the Rue de la Paix. It was on the site of the present Place Vendôme, that the Duke de Retz built a hotel in the time of Charles the Ninth. It was sold in the beginning of the 17th century, to the Duchess de Mercoeur, and afterwards became the property of César, Duke de Vendôme (son of Henry the Fourth). The minister Louvois, to flatter the pride of Louis the Fourteenth, devised a plan for building a great “ Place,” in the midst of which the statue of the King might claim the homage of his subjects. The Hôtel Vendôme, with its gardens and dependencies, was considered to offer an eligible site, and was accordingly purchased for the crown in 1685. The façades of the buildings which encircled the new Place were completed, and this last was to have been adorned with a magnificent suite of edifices, such as a Royal Library, a Mint, and a Hôtel for the foreign ambassadors, when the death of Louvois caused the works to be sus. pended. They were, however, resumed under the direction of the
celebrated architect Mansard, and were completed in 1701. This square was at first named Place des Conquetes (which you must not confound with the Place des Victoires); but when the equestrian statue of the King was placed in the centre, it took the name of Place Louis le Grand, which it retained till the Revolution, when it received from the suns-culottes a new appellation, to wit, Pikeplace! But all this time, its old designation continued to be partly used, and has outlived all the others to day, as in the time of Henry the Fourth, it bears the name of his son, the Duke of Vendôme. In like manner, you constantly meet people here, who, in conversation, call the Place de la Concorde by its first name, the Place Louis Quinze. This little trait of popular manners is merely one indication, amongst many, of the strong feeling of conservatism, the vis inertiæ, which underlies the foundations of human nature. Society prates of progress, but does not like to be pushed on. Call the Place Vendome, then, by what name you will, it was there that was erected in 1699 a splendid bronze equestrian statue of Louis the Fourteenth, annidst a pomp and cere. mony which surpassed everything of the kind which had before been witnessed. Previous to this time a general and growing discontent had been excited by the lavish expenditure of the King in peace as in war, and Paris was subject to frequent famines, and to the diseases which follow in their train. In 1698-9, suffering was extreme, and the government was forced to have recourse to extraordinary finan. cial measures. Pride accords ill with misery, and the inauguration of the statue in the Place des Conquetes excited the gravest censures. The Duke de Bourgogne refused to take part in the ceremony. “How can one amuse one-self,” he exclaimed, “when the people are suffering ?" And even the King himself could not forbear a mild rebuke to the promoters of the ceremony. He was not, how. ever, easily put in a passion by so trifling a fault as an excess of homage, and he was never at a loss for a scape-goat. Blamed by Madame de Maintenon for the extravagant expenditure which had characterized from the beginning this Place Vendome, and all that had reference to it, he burst out with, “I tell you it was Louvois who did it all in spite of me.” Here I close, but in my next I shall tell you more of these streets, and all about the Palace of Industry
QUARTERLY RECORD OF THE PROGRESS OF RE
FORMATORY AND RAGGED SCHOOLS, AND OF THE IMPROVEMENT OF PRISON DISCIPLINE.
One of the most important movements during the quarter, amongst the friends of Reformatories, was the Meeting of the Managers and friends of those Institutions held in the month of March last, at the house of Mr. R. Hanbury. Of this Dieeting we find the following Report in that excellent and useful Journal The Philanthropist for April 14th, 1855.
"The meeting was attended by the following representatives from the institutions named :-Mr. C. B. Adderley, M.P., The Reformatory, Saltley ; Mr. W. D. Atwood, Secretary of the Hill-street Female Refuge : Mr. T. B. H. Baker, Hardwick Court Refuge, Gloucester ; Mr. Henry Bowker, Metropolitan Industrial Reformatory, Brixton ; Mr G. J. Bowyer, Reformatory Institution, 19, New-road, St. Pancras ; Rev. Thomas Carter, Liverpool Reformatory; Mr. E. W. Challoner, Newcastle, Northumberland, and Durham Reformatory; Lord H. Cholmondeley, M.P., Hampshire Reformatory; Mr. J. Crane, The Home in the East; Mr. J. G. Gent, Secretary of the Ragged School Union ; Dr. Thomas Guthrie, Original Ragged School, Edinburgh ; Mr. Robert Hanbury, jun., Treasurer of the Boys' Refuge, Whitechapel ; Mr. W. H. Houldsworth, Ragged and Reformatory School, Manchester : Mr. J. Leyland, Boys' Home, Wandsworth ; Mr. J. Macgregor, Field-lane Ragged School and Night Refuge ; Mr. W. J. Maxwell, Lissonstreet Refuge; Mr. I. A. Merrington, Albert-street School and Refuge; Mr. Charles Nash, London Reformatory, Westminster; Mr. G. H. H. Oliphant, Carlisle Reformatory ; Mr. J. Playfair, House of Refuge, Glasgow; Mr. Charles Ratcliffe, Birmingham Reformatory for Girls; Mr. Russell Scott, Kingswood Reformatory School ; Mr. J. Thompson, jun., Aberdeen House of Refuge and School ; Rev. Sydney Turner, Philanthropic Farm School, Red Hill; Rev. H. Whitehead, Belvidere-crescent Reformatory, Lambeth; Mr. W. Williams, St. George's and St. Giles's Refuge, Bloomsbury; Mr. Samuel Wise Colchester-street, Whitechapel ; Mr. J. Wright, Buxton Industrial Training School. Captain Williams was present during the afternoon meeting.
Twenty-eight reformatory institutions sent representatives to the conference; nine besides had been invited ; nine were omitted ; and nine are in course of formation, making a total of fifty.tive centres of reformation in the United Kingdom.
Before the Conference assembled, some statistical information had been furnished in answer to inquiries, addressed to the institutions from which representatives were invited to attend.
The conference being assembled, the Earl of Shaftesbury took the chair, and the Rev. Dr. Guthrie opened the proceedings with prayer.
Mr. R. Hanbury stated the object of the conference, and invited free discussion, on the understanding that all communications made to the meeting were to be considered private.
It is consequently not advisable to set forth with particularity much of the most interesting part of the proceedings, but the following general outline, while omitting the names of persons and places, may sufficiently indicate the nature of the topics considered, and which were carefully discussed for about six hours, with the most satisfactory and practical results.
1. Government aid and inspection.-Several gentlemen gave their experience of the working of Government aid and inspection in particular instances. The Privy Council aid was for industrial instruction ; that under Lord Palmerstou's Act was for board, lodging and mere support. Fears had been entertained on both sides as to the connexion of private reformatories with the Government. On the one hand, the Government did not wish to be made responsible for the buildings of the institutions; and on the other, the managers of the institutions were jealous of interference, especially in the matter of religious teaching, &c. It was not, however, Government inspection, but Government interference, which created apprehension.
A. had applied to the Privy Counsel, who sent an inspector, and on his report made a liberal grant; there was no interference of any kind. B. received visits from the Government inspector for four years, and considered inspection beneficial. No interference with religious instruction had taken place, though the Government had sent gentlemen of different religious views to inspect. C. had received some excellent practical suggestions from the inspector sent to his institution, and another inspector from the Privy Council had advised him to increase the time allotted to instruction, which he agreed to do, but there was no interference. D. had been twice
The printed questions so forwarded were intended only as preliminary, and were found to be susceptible of beiter arrangement when more complete information may be sought by the committee, at a future time. The following are some of the particulars gathered from the above returns. They relate to scarcely one-half only of the institutions in existence, and are consequently imperfect as a record of the statistics of the whole.
Number of institutions furnishing returns, 22. Of these, one was founded in each of the years, 1788, 1838, 1841, 1843, 1846, 1847, 1849, 1850, 1851, 1854 ; two were founded in 1848, five in 1852, and five in 1853 (in 1854 there were probably ten founded). The age of admission varies from four to twenty years. There were in February, as inmates, 1,196 boys, and 349 girls. The average number of hours employed in education was as follows : in religious education, one hour; in secular instruction, three hours; in industrial occupation, six and a half hours.
The number absconding each year, from all the institutions, 117; number discharged, 43 ; obtained situations, 244; emigrated, 171.
visited by the inspector without inconvenience. E. had observed no unnecessary interference on the part of the inspector during the year his institution had been under the Act. F. stated, that so far from experiencing undue interference from the inspector, he had been obliged to incite the Government to more frequent visitation. G. corroborated these statements, speaking for an old and important institution. After some conversation on the nature of the grant from the State, it was agreed that Government aid ought to to given in annual grants, which do not bind either party for more than a year, rather than in sums contributed for building, which might necessitate a continual charge upon the Government for the supervision of the institution.
II. Further legislation. The necessity of supplementing, or amending the “ Youthful Offenders' Act was acknowledged, and Mr. Adderley stated that suggestions in relatlon to this would be valuable, as he bad given notice of his intention to bring in a bill, which would be circulated for consideration when read a first time. H. believed dine out of ten parents of the children, sent under this Act, could
the expense of their children's maintenance at the reformatory. Many of such parents were receiving wages from 20s. to 50s, per week. J. thought the parish ought to pay at first, but the difficulty of obtaining the repayment by the parents was owing chiefly to the absence of a power to imprison them on refusal. It was stated that all the London police magistrates had expressed decided opinions in concurrence with that just mentioned as to the mode of enforcing the responsibility of parents.
Only two cases were mentioned of attempts to put in force the power given by the Act for compelling parents to support their abandoned children, and in both cases the efforts were in vain.
K. had summoned a parent who negleeted his child ; the magistrates could not agree in their construction of the Act, and adjourned
A new bench of magistrates was present at this adjournment, and, after a second discussion, the case again stood over. The leading witness was absent on the third hearing, and when the secretary of the institution attended for the fourth time to take out a new summons, he found the man had absconded.
It was generally admitted that the defect in this part of the Act was serious, and particularly so in devolving upon the officers of charitable institutions the invidious duty of recovering money by legal process, without supplying distinct directions as to how or by whom it was to be performed. It appeared to be generally agreed that a police officer, especially designated for the purpose, would, at least, in large towns, be the proper person for attending to this duty, and that his very presence and authority, and successful performance of his duty, would materially dininish the number of parents who at present, without any check, abandon their children to the care of others.
L. said that in Scotland, under the “Vagrant Act,' the magistrates sent the boys to the reformatory, and the secretary of the institution, without difficulty, convicted the neglectful parent. Every person inciting a child to beg or steal incurred a penalty of