Chapter XVII
Political Life and Thought
Holland is a democratic kingdom. Democracy was born there in the sixteenth century, and is still unquestionably thriving. But democracy was born in peculiar circ.u.mstances; it was reared by men whose ideas of democracy differed, for, while the leaders of the nation consistently worked for popular government, they did not all or always mean exactly the same thing by the word "people," and hence did not aim at exactly the same goal. The French Revolution of the eighteenth century upset the outward form of the Dutch Commonwealth; it did away with ancient and more or less obsolete fetters, which proved no longer strong enough to support the growth of political life, though still sufficiently strong to hinder it. It could do nothing for, and add nothing to, the profound love of liberty and the pa.s.sion for independence which are dearer to every Dutchman than life itself, but it could and did extend the blessing of political and religious freedom to a greater number of people. Love of liberty brought about the disestablishment of the Church, and love of toleration made Holland follow this measure in the fifties by the emanc.i.p.ation of the Roman Catholics.
Every one who is acquainted with Dutch history understands that these two things have as much meaning for Dutch political as for Dutch religious life. But side by side with religious and political freedom came also economic freedom. The guilds were abolished, and so the bonds by which the handicrafts had been prevented from moving with the movements of the times, and thus of living a healthy life, were swept away. The social revolution acted like the doctor who enters a close and stuffy sick-room and throws open the windows and door, so that the invalid may get the very first necessity of life--fresh air. So it was with a sigh of relief that the Dutch--and not they alone--said, "No State interference in matters of trade and industry, let us keep open the windows and doors!"
No doctor, however, will compel his patient to live in a constant draught, winter and summer, since upon one occasion a liberal admission of fresh air was necessary to save that patient"s life. There can be no doubt that during the nineteenth century the doors and windows were kept open rather too long. The great employers of labour were strong enough to stand the draught, for centuries of prosperity had made them a powerful cla.s.s; but their men had no such advantages, and they were worse off when steam power brought about another revolution by creating the so-called system of "capitalistic production" and the growth of the large industries. Hence it comes about that Holland, like all civilized countries, is now trying to find out how far the windows and the doors must be closed, so as to allow the men to live as well as the masters. This, in few words, characterizes Dutch party politics from the social and economic side.
Political parties in the Netherlands obviously differ not only in their views upon political, religious, and economic issues, but also as to the degree of precedence to be allowed to each of these three departments of national life and thought. The Liberals say, "Politics first; if these are sound and religion and commerce are free, everything will be right." The Social Democrats reply, "Politics only concern us as a means of obtaining real and substantial economic liberty and material equality; religion does not affect us at all, and certainly does not help to solve the practical problems of human life." Differing from both, the Anti-Revolutionists a.s.sert, "Whosoever leaves the firm ground of G.o.d"s Word, the Holy Scriptures, as the only true basis for public and private action, can have neither sound politics nor sound economics." The Roman Catholics also put religion on the first plane, but they are in the most difficult position of all. They are a minority, even a decreasing minority, and know perfectly well that they will never be a majority; so they recognize that in the first place they must try to be good Dutchmen, faithful, loyal citizens of the State, while in the second place they must not give up one single ideal of their Church. Their faith in the eternal existence of their ecclesiastic system enables them on the one hand to be patient and to wait, just as on the other hand it teaches them not to sit still, but to act, to work, either by themselves or conjointly with any party that may a.s.sist them to realize, or even to get nearer to, any of their religious ideals.
When the Liberals, in the middle of the nineteenth century, did an act of great toleration by emanc.i.p.ating the Roman Catholic Church, the Protestants threw over the Liberal Cabinet, and the Liberal leader, Thorbecke, was returned to Parliament by the most Catholic town of Holland, Maestricht, in Limburg. But afterwards the Anti-Revolutionists raised the cry for denominational education, and the Dutch Liberals were rather sore to find their former friends join their antagonists. The soreness was in consequence of a miscalculation; the Liberals had forgotten that in becoming emanc.i.p.ated the Roman Catholics did not become Liberals, but remained Roman Catholics as before, faithful to their creed, and to their ideals, even at the cost of political friendship.
The common ground upon which Anti-Revolutionists and Roman Catholics meet is the conviction that religion must in everything be the starting-point.
The Anti-Revolutionists take the Scriptures as such; the Roman Catholics accept the Pope"s decisions, given _ex cathedra_, as inspired by the Holy Spirit and transmitted to him by Conclaves and Councils. For the rest, Rome"s creed is sheer idolatry to the Anti-Revolutionist Protestants, whereas Rome looks upon ail Protestants as lost heretics. But both, again, consider such Protestants--the so-called "Moderns"--who reject the Trinity, the miracles, the Divine origin of the Bible, and certain other dogmas, as simple atheists, and as most "Moderns" are Liberals, and _vice-versa_, they proclaim the Liberal State to be an atheistic State.
Strictly speaking, there is really no Conservative party in Holland, for it ceased to exist in the beginning of the seventies. After Thorbecke gave Holland the Liberal const.i.tution of 1848, the Conservatives tried for a time to obstruct the country"s political development, but ultimately they gave up the attempt, and their best and ablest men, Mr. J. Heemsherk Azn and Earl C. Th. van Lynden van Sandenburg, headed Liberal Cabinets as men professing very moderately progressive views, yet openly opposed to the restoration of the somewhat autocratic and aristocratic conditions which prevailed before 1848 in consequence of the reaction against the chaotic era of the French Revolution and Napoleon Bonaparte. Yet though there is no Conservative party in Holland, there are, none the less, Conservatives in every party.
The Liberal party counts three sections, the Old Liberals, the Radico-Liberals, and the Liberal Democrats. The Old Liberals adhere to Thorbecke"s principles, and maintain that it is the primary business of a Liberal State to promote individuality and to create on this basis the general conditions by which social development can be achieved. According to them the State has no right to interfere in everything, to cure everything, to provide everything, as the collectivist would like; on the contrary, its first duty is abstinence--simply to preserve a fair field and to show no favour. These Old Liberals, in fact, regard the State as a legal corporation which exists merely to administer justice and to guard the const.i.tutional rights of its citizens.
Their political friends and next-of-kin are the Radico-Liberals of the "Liberal Union," who form, for the present, the bulk of the party. They admit the value of individual energy and enterprise, and hold that unlimited scope must be allowed to these; they even contend that, on the whole, the system of unfettered individualism proved to be more in the workman"s favour than the opposite; but they also admit that this condition is not such as it might and ought to be, and in consequence they do not object to social legislation wherever individual efforts fail.
The advanced Liberal Democrats ("de Vryzinnige Democraten") differ fundamentally from both the foregoing parties. They give prominence to political rights and franchises, and hence fall foul of a leading clause (clause 80) of the const.i.tution, which confers electoral powers upon only such adult male inhabitants as "possess characteristics of capability and prosperity." The members of the "Liberal Union" admit that the requirement of a certain measure of prosperity withholds from numbers of citizens the right to influence their country"s affairs by their votes. They admit also that the const.i.tution ought to be altered on this point, but they doubt whether it is sound practical politics to put this item in the foreground.
They say, in effect, "We can quite well provide the country with adequate social legislation either with or without the help of the disfranchised section of the population, for if we propose measures dealing with social problems, even the more Conservative amongst us will not object, and those measures will come on the statute book. But there is not the slightest chance that we shall ever get the Old Liberals to give the franchise to poor and dest.i.tute people, who have no financial stake whatever in the country. So by insisting upon adult suffrage you merely postpone social legislation indefinitely. Moreover, the object of our social legislation can only be to make the poorer cla.s.s more capable and more prosperous, and as soon as that end is gained they get the franchise automatically, without any change of the const.i.tution." To this the Liberal Democrats reply: "Social legislation must not be regarded as a grudgingly admitted necessity, it is the paramount duty of the State, and as social legislation princ.i.p.ally affects those who are now disfranchised, it is only just to begin by affording them the opportunity of expressing their opinions upon the subject, and hence to alter the const.i.tution so as to give them votes, for they know best what they want."
The Liberal Democrats deny, in fact, that the State can make any laws that do not affect the social life as well as the legal position of its citizens, and contend that those who hold that natural laws rule the social relations of man with man, and that on this ground the State ought to refrain from interference, merely allow the State to protect the stronger against the weaker cla.s.ses, whereas its duty is the contrary.
Positive interference in social matters is, according to them, the State"s duty, and it may only refrain when the free operation of social forces creates no conditions or relationships which offend modern ideas of justice and equity.
The Democrats have, unquestionably, by their secession, greatly crippled the strength of the Liberal party, and it will be long before the younger generation of Liberals can take the places thus vacated and a rejuvenated and unanimous party can issue from the present dissensions.
The only other political party in Holland who do not accept religion as the one safe starting-point for politics are the Social Democrats. When the German Socialists of the school of Marx discovered how the sudden development of steam and machinery was followed by a vast amount of distress amongst the labouring cla.s.ses, affecting also such of the lower middle cla.s.s as princ.i.p.ally traded with workpeople, they at once jumped at the conclusion that the same thing was bound to go on for ever.
Perhaps it was with a feeling of despair, therefore, that the father of Dutch Social Democracy, F. Domela Nieuwenhuys, gradually drifted into anarchism, or, as he prefers to call it, Free Socialism, and finally abandoned all political action. The younger generation, led by F. van der Goes, H. van Kol, and, last but not least, P. J. Troelstra, still vigorously carry on the fray, however, and a very considerable number of Dutch workmen follow them. Their ambition is to conquer political power in Holland, and as soon as they have it to revolutionize, not the country, but the statute-book, in such a manner that they may acquire the economic power as well. Of course, they wish to abolish individual property in all the means of production, and to make the State the owner of all these; and it is their hope that a general love for the commonwealth, and zeal for the general welfare of all, may take the place of the present egotism and sordid pursuit of wealth.
[Ill.u.s.tration: Parliament House at the Hague. View from the Great Lake.]
The Anti-Revolutionists also have their Conservatives and Progressives.
Dr. Kuyper always speaks of a "Left" and a "Right" wing of his party, and as the Conservative "Right" is largely composed of the members of the Dutch n.o.bility, he once sneeringly called this fraction "the men with the double names." Their proper t.i.tle is "Free Anti-Revolutionists," and their leader, Jhr. A.F. de Savornin Lohman, who in 1888, with Baron Ae. Mackay (Lord Reay"s cousin), led the first Anti-Revolutionist-Catholic majority in the Second Chamber of the States-General.
The third faction is headed by Dr. Bronsveld, and is called the "Christian Historicals," who differ on one great principle from the two others, inasmuch as they seek the re-establishment of the Netherlands Hervormde Kerk as State Church.
But, however much they differ in practical measures, their common ground is the recognition of the Holy Scriptures as the only right basis for statesmanship, and their conviction that the present modern State is merely a pa.s.sing, non-Dutch consequence of the French Revolution and its disastrous teachings. They all agree that the Netherlands should be governed according to the principles that made Holland great and powerful ever since the Reformation of the sixteenth century. Dr. Kuyper is fully convinced that the French Revolution thrust Holland off its historical line of development, and he wants to return, as near as possible, to the point reached before that event, or, at any rate, to lead the State forward in the old direction.
All Anti-Revolutionists hold that their first civic duty is obedience to G.o.d;--if conscience requires resistance to the authorities, resist them, whatever you may suffer. At the same time they eschew clericalism and object to every form of State Church. Hence one of their chief antipathies is clause 171 of the const.i.tution, which continues in the same way as before the disestablishment of the Church the payments by the Exchequer to various clergymen of all denominations. In opposition to this they demand entire and absolute liberty and equality for all churches and confessions, and, theoretically, admit that one can be a member of their party without being of their creed. With regard to education, they do not desire to subst.i.tute denominational State schools for the present neutral ones, but they object that at present the State compels parents, who desire religious schools for their children, not only to find all necessary money for these "free schools," but to contribute in addition to the school taxes, to the advantage of such parents as hold that secular and religious education are better disconnected, since religious education must needs be dogmatical and sectarian, and that the churches and not the State should look to this, whereas school education can quite well be given without reference to religion at all.
The Anti-Revolutionist position, on the other hand, is that it is not the State"s duty to provide school or any other education, all education being a matter of private concern for the individual family, and not a public business at all; though they allow that where parents are unable to maintain them schools may be erected by the taxpayers" money. They also deprecate legislation against intemperance, immorality, and prost.i.tution, because they think such laws do not remove the evils themselves, but merely attack their visible signs, and relieve moral trespa.s.sers of part of their responsibility by protecting them against certain consequences of their acts. They are opposed to the legal and compulsory observance of the Sabbath, holding this to be an affair of the churches and of individuals; but they support laws to compel employers to allow their men a sufficient weekly rest on Sundays. They admit a limited State interference in social matters, but contend that it must not discourage individual effort, or create a host of officials, inspectors, and controllers. The franchise must, according to them, never enable one section of the nation to supersede the other by sheer force of numbers; they do not admit that the majority System is the ultimate and only criterion of legality and justice; moreover, the family being the unit from which the commonwealth has grown into existence, they contend that heads of families are the natural electors. Where the Old Liberals say that the financial test is the right one for voters, the Anti-Revolutionists hold that no one has a real stake in the country who has not a family and knows nothing of the responsibilities involved thereby. Dr. Kuyper is the democratic leader of what he calls, in cla.s.sical but antiquated Dutch, the "Kleine luyden" (the "Little people") amongst the Anti-Revolutionists. He knows that the "double-named" Free Anti-Revolutionists have little sympathy with his social programme, but this does not matter, since they are perfectly well aware of the fact that they owe everything, as far as political power goes, to the "Little people."
Finally, there is the Left Wing of the Roman Catholic party, who derive their social convictions from Pope Leo"s Encyclica "Rerum Novarum," which affords a great many points upon which joint action is possible, for Leo XIII. is often called in Holland "the Workmen"s Pope." Both Anti-Revolutionists and Roman Catholics entertain entirely different political ideals, but they agree upon this, that the modern Liberal State is not really neutral in religions matters, but is "Modern Protestant,"
and "Modern" Protestantism spells atheism in their eyes; and both regard a weak and fragile Christian as a better citizen than the best atheist or agnostic. For this reason they are combined in hostility to the existing System of elementary education, which they suspect of an atheistic tendency. These two questions, religion and the schools, virtually exhaust the vital points of agreement between the Anti-Revolutionists and the Roman Catholics, though in an emergency they might possibly unite on social legislation or some mild form of Protection. The latter would, however, have to be very mild indeed, for Dr. Kuyper is a Free Trader, and the "Little people" like cheap bread just as well as other folk. For Holland it might be a matter of great importance if progressive social legislation became Kuyper"s chief work.
There is no doubt a great drawback in this mixing up by ail parties of politics and religion. Kuyper, the Calvinist; Schaepman, the Catholic; Drucker, Treub, and Molengraaf, the Liberal Democrats; Goeman Borgesius, the man of the "Liberal Union;" and Troelstra, the Socialist, all have many common ideas on social questions, although they may differ in principles and seek different aims. Each of them, however, has Conservative opponents in his own party, and there is just a possibility that the next few years may bring about not only a healthy measure of social development, but also a much-desired readjustment of parties, on non-theological, undogmatical lines.
Chapter XVIII
The Administration of Justice
There are two very marked differences between the administration of justice in Holland and in England. The first is that what are called "petty offences" are not tried and disposed of summarily in the former country. There the offender in such cases is subjected to a process known as "verbalization"--that is, his name, address, age, and all particulars of the offence are noted by the police; and he is thereupon informed that he will be called upon to give an account of himself later. A week or two may pa.s.s before the offender receives verbal or printed notice requiring his presence before the Court of the Cantonal Judge, which answers somewhat to the English Police Court. This delay in the administration of justice is regarded as a great defect even in Holland, and one which is more and more being recognized. The establishment of the Police Court as known and conducted in England is felt, therefore, to be a great _desideratum_, and it is by no means unlikely that it may be introduced before long, since the Dutch have always shown themselves ready to adopt any modification of their own inst.i.tutions which the experience of other countries may prove to be clearly desirable.
The second difference is that trial by jury as Englishmen understand it does not exist in the Netherlands. But here the Dutch are not likely to abandon their own tradition. The jury in Holland is composed of experienced and qualified judges, who are not apt to modify their opinions as to the guilt or innocence of accused persons owing to the tears of the latter or the pa.s.sionate appeals of their advocates. Rightly or wrongly, the most eminent lawyers in Holland ascribe the often-recurring cases of miscarriage of justice in some countries which have adopted the jury system to this system itself, and it is very improbable, therefore, that in this respect the Dutch will copy any of their neighbours.
The organization of justice in Holland originated in the Code Napoleon, which was introduced shortly after the country"s annexation to the French Empire. In the judicial system in vogue to-day, which is the result of modifications introduced at various times during last century, and particularly by a law of the year 1895, the administration of justice is vested in the High Court (_Hooge Raad_), the Provincial Courts of Justice (_Gerechtskoven_), the Arrondiss.e.m.e.nts (_Rechtbanken_), and the Cantonal Courts (_Kantongerechten_).
The High Court consists of a President, a Vice-President, from twelve to fourteen Councillors, a Procurator-General, three Advocates-General (who form, with the Procurator-General, the "Public Ministry" or Office of Public Prosecution), also a Greffier, or Clerk of Court, and two deputy Greffiers. Most of the appointments are made by the Sovereign, and are for life. The High Court is situated at The Hague, and its princ.i.p.al duty is to control the administration of justice by the lower Courts, a process known as "ca.s.sation." If, for example, one of the lower Courts has p.r.o.nounced a sentence from which there is no appeal in that Court, and one of the contending parties is of opinion that the sentence is excessive, that party may require the High Court to cancel or annul (_ca.s.seer_) the verdict. When an appeal for ca.s.sation or annulment is thus made, the High Court has not to go into the question of the guilt or innocence of the contending parties, but merely into the question whether the lower Court has judged rightly or whether it was competent to judge the case at all. Such "ca.s.sations" occur almost daily, not because the High Court has a reputation for reversing the verdicts given below, but because the process offers at least a good chance of getting a sentence reduced. The Public Prosecution, however, has power to set in motion the process of ca.s.sation without being called upon so to do if the interests of justice should in its opinion require it. To the jurisdiction of the High Court belong also piracy cases, the apportionment of prizes made in war, and the determination of accusations against State officials of abuse of power.
Of Provincial Courts there are five, each composed of officials similar in name, though not in rank, to those of the High Court, and they, too, are for the most part appointed by the Crown, though not all for life. These Provincial Courts p.r.o.nounce judgment in the second instance--that is, when the decision of a lower Court has been appealed against. This is, in fact, their princ.i.p.al function, though they also p.r.o.nounce judgment in the first instance in cases of difference between the Cantonal Courts or Arrondiss.e.m.e.nt Courts. The latter are so named from the divisions into which the country was split up for administrative purposes during the Napoleonic _regime_, for the existing arrondiss.e.m.e.nt boundaries are virtually the same as those of ninety years ago.
There are twenty-three Arrondiss.e.m.e.nt Courts, thirteen of the first-cla.s.s and ten of the second cla.s.s. Their princ.i.p.al business is to p.r.o.nounce judgment in the first instance, even in criminal cases, but they also decide in the final instance in cases of dispute between the Cantonal Courts, which are under their jurisdiction. They likewise adjudicate upon claims for compensation up to a certain amount, upon disputes regarding the boundaries of land and property, and upon complaints relating to water-supply, drainage, and the like, while cases of mendicancy, vagrancy, and evasion of taxes are decided by these Courts summarily.
The Cantonal Courts are, as already stated, the nearest equivalent in Holland to the English Police Courts. Their members, however, are legally trained and salaried men, though attached to each Court are several unsalaried deputies. The Judges of these Courts are appointed for life by the Crown, and the minor officiais for a term of years. All the petty cases which in England come before the Police Court are in Holland adjudicated upon by the Cantonal Courts. Poaching, personal violence, cruelty to animals, damage done to dwellings, trees, or crops, are all cases for these Courts, and so long as the fines imposed do not exceed two guineas, their judgment is final, but in other cases the right of appeal exists.
Mention has just been made of the fact that even from the lowest Court of Law in Holland the amateur judge is rigidly excluded. No one who has not acquired the diploma of Doctor of Laws from one of the Dutch Universities is allowed to a.s.sume any responsible duty a.s.sociated with the administration of justice. The same severe requirement is imposed upon the legal profession in general. The possession of the diploma of Doctor of Laws and Letters alone ent.i.tles a man to practise as advocate. Amongst themselves the members of the legal profession also exercise a sort of mutual surveillance by means of their Councils of Supervision and Discipline, whose duty it is to take care that nothing is done by an advocate which is contrary to the law or to the honour of the faculty.
These Councils are chosen from amongst the lawyers themselves in all towns where there are more than fourteen resident advocates, but in smaller places their duties are discharged by the Provincial or Arrondiss.e.m.e.nt Courts. Should a lawyer be guilty of any serious misdemeanour he is promptly expelled from the Community of Advocates, and he may be even refused the right to plead in any of the public Courts. In pa.s.sing, it is an interesting feature of the Dutch judicial system that in every place where there is a Court of Justice, higher or lower, there exists a Consultation Bureau where people without means may obtain gratuitous advice in legal matters. Unless a charge laid before this Consultation Bureau appears on the face of it to be unsustainable, the Bureau appoints one of its members to act as legal adviser and counsellor to the applicant free of cost. In criminal cases the President of the Court concerned appoints a legal adviser for the accused, though the latter may choose another advocate if he pleases.
It will be interesting to enter one of these Dutch Courts of Law, and a Cantonal Court may perhaps best serve as an example, since that resembles most closely the English _forum_ of the people--the Police Court. Let us a.s.sume that we are privileged persons, though engaged in serious legal business. We are bidden to make an appearance at a quarter to eleven o"clock in the morning, and, presenting ourselves at that hour, we take our seats on comfortable chairs, ranged round a long square table in the large public waiting-room. As many other people are coming in, and the room threatens soon to be crowded, a considerate attendant, knowing that we are in favour with the grave and reverend seigniors who preside over the Court, shows us into another and smaller room, where one of the deputy Clerks (Greffier) is seated working at his books. One by one other persons come in, pay small sums of money, of which the deputy Clerk evidently keeps an exact account, together with the names and addresses of the payers, the amounts yet remaining due--everything, in fact, relating to each person"s case. We note that some of the payers inquire how much they yet owe, and the sum being told them, they forthwith take their departure.
We learn that these are all people who were fined some time ago for petty offences, and who are, or pretend to be, unable to pay the full amount at once. Hence they are allowed to pay by instalments, and it is the duty of the Clerk to keep an accurate account of their contributions.
Our own turn having come round, we are now ushered into the Court, where we see His Worship the Judge seated at the head--which happens to be the middle--of a long table, covered by the inevitable green cloth. Papers, ink-stands, and pens are before him; at his left hand sits the Clerk, and next to him the first deputy Clerk. We observe, too, how carefully the proprieties are observed in the matter of dress. All the judicial functionaries present wear a costume consisting of a black toga reaching to the heels, with a white "bef," or collar-band, hanging in front halfway down to the waist, and also a black _barrette_, or square cap, as in France.
Five persons are seated in the chairs next to ours and opposite to the Judge. They have just testified that the last will of their parent has been duly carried out, and that each of them has received his share, being in this case "3887 guilders 7 cents". (don"t forget the half-cent, for attention to minutiae is one of those characteristics of the Dutch which strikes us at every turn). Presently the Judge asks the eldest of the party whether his name is not "So-and-so." The answer being in the affirmative, His Worship nods to the Clerk, who begins to read out in clear and measured tones--
"I, So-and-so (description and address follow), hereby declare and testify to have received as my share in the heritage of my parent the sum legally apportioned to me, being 3887 guilders 7 cents."
Then the Judge asks: "Are you prepared to swear that this is true, and that as far as you know nothing is kept behind so that justice is not fully carried out?" This is the legal formula in use upon such an occasion, and it produces the expected reply. "Very well, then," proceeds the Judge, "repeat after me, "So truly help me G.o.d Almighty!"" The familiar words of the Dutch oath are accompanied by the uplifting of the right hand and the pointing to heaven of the first two fingers. Then follow the other four members of the family in order of age. All of them swear in the usual words, except the second daughter, who demurs, on which the judicial eyebrows are raised in surprise. It appears that the maiden suffers from religious scruples, being firmly of opinion that swearing an oath is forbidden by Holy Scripture. The Judge listens respectfully, and simply answers, "Then repeat after me, "I hereby solemnly declare that the words read out to me just now are the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth."" The conscientious witness having no objection to a simple affirmation, the words are promptly repeated, the business is completed, and the party are all allowed to withdraw.
Now our own turn has come. One of our party, we will a.s.sume, has been appointed by the Cantonal Judge to be guardian over a minor son of another of our number. All declare who, what, and whence they are, and that the guardian has received his appointment with their common consent, while the guardian himself makes formal declaration of accepting the duty. He is thereupon sworn by the Judge in the occupation of his office, promising "to act in all things as a true and faithful guardian should act, so truly help me G.o.d Almighty." These several incidents are fairly typical of the sort of business which occupies the attention of these minor Courts. As we leave the building, however, we learn another piece of interesting information in the course of conversation with the deputy Clerk whose acquaintance we first made. It is that the principle of "punishment by instalments" is applied in the case of the poorer cla.s.ses, not merely in the matter of fines, but also of imprisonment, save in criminal cases.
Many a poor man, for instance, who shortly after being sentenced to, say, a week"s or a fortnight"s imprisonment has happened to find employment would be ruined if compelled to go to prison at once. He is therefore allowed, as in Russia, to select his own time for surrendering himself to the prison authorities, and if, as often happens in poaching cases, two different offences have brought upon him two terms of imprisonment, he is allowed to come before the Judge, with the request that he may combine these two terms, beginning his incarceration at a fixed date. The Court to whose clemency he thus appeals generally grants the request, and the man is thus enabled to work for his livelihood whilst the demand for labour is general, and to go to prison when he happens to be out of work, and would only be one mouth more to feed at home, where his wife and children already find difficulty enough in making both ends meet. When imprisonment is thus post-poned the offender receives from the Court a doc.u.ment, on the presentation of which at the prison door the Master of the prison will admit him as a temporary occupant of one of the cells. Old gaol-birds, however, are not treated so tenderly, but the Judges soon learn by experience when and how to apply this merciful arrangement, and when to refuse it altogether.
In general the statistics of crime give Holland a decidedly favourable reputation. Serious misdemeanours are comparatively rare. Crimes like burglary, theft, and the like, are certainly committed often enough, but there is no evidence to show that they are on the increase, while life and property are at least as secure in the large Dutch towns as anywhere else in Europe. The Hague, though a city of 220,000 inhabitants, is sufficiently protected by the comparatively small number of 220 policemen.
Rotterdam and Amsterdam both have a larger number of policemen per thousand inhabitants than The Hague, but this is natural, owing to the more heterogeneous character of the population of these great commercial centres. It is a notable fact that in every town in Holland the Burgomaster or Mayor is the supreme head of the police, and that the Chief Commissary of Police must not merely co-operate with him, but is in the last resort subject to his direct command.
In spite of the fact that Courts of summary jurisdiction of the English type do not exist in Holland, the police authority possesses a considerable amount of power. Mention has been made of the process of "verbalization" as applied to common misdemeanours. In the case of drunkenness or fighting, however, the offenders are at once taken before the Commissary of Police, who promptly deals with them. Offences against which the police are entirely powerless are those of adulteration of food, household quarrels so long as they remain within certain bounds, and an offence of quite modern origin known as "bottle-drawing" (_Anglice_, "long-firm frauds"). This last is an ingenious species of fraud which has become very common in Holland of late years. A person orders a quant.i.ty of goods from merchants of various towns on the pretence of opening accounts, which he promises will quickly a.s.sume large dimensions. Consignment after consignment of wares is sent, but never paid for, and when at last the too trustful merchant discovers that he has been playing into the hands of a swindler he gets no redress, for the artful schemer has disappeared, taking with him the proceeds of the goods received. For a time this sort of fraud was quite popular, but then the eyes of the business community were opened, and the strong hand of the law fell upon several offenders with crushing weight, after which "bottle-drawing" lost in attractiveness.
On the whole, the police in Holland are commendably energetic as well as dutiful, and the relationship between the police authority and the public is generally a friendly and trustful one.