tions made by Barthou. The findings of that committee, and the censure passed upon Monis and Caillaux, were approved by the House after stormy debate. The parliamentary session ended on April 4, and from that date to May 10, when the second ballots determined the composition of the new Chamber, politicians in vain tried to stir the electorate from its indifference. Even the Calrnette murder, the Three Years' Service controversy, and the income tax aroused but few people from their apathy. None re- gretted the deceased Chamber, and few were sufficiently awake to the growing dangers in Europe to take much interest in the election of deputies who were destined to form the French Lower Chamber throughout the war.
Elections of 1(114. A clear-cut issue between opposing parties is found but seldom in French elections, but the general tendency of the 1914 elections could be discerned. They were a fight be- tween the Moderate Republican elements who elected Poincare to the presidency of the republic, and who voted for the Three Years' Service bill and the Socialist-Radical and Unified Social- ist groups. The political composition of the new Chamber was : Unified Socialists, 102; Independent and Republican Socialists, 30; Unified Radicals, 136; Alliance Democratique, 100; Indepen- dent Radicals and Left Republicans, 102; Progressists and Re- publican Federation, 54; Action Liberate, 34; Right, 36; Inde- pendents, 16. The only marked change was in the Socialist party. They made an electioneering pact with their neighbours, the Socialist- Radicals, by which they gained many seats in the first ballot; and where Catholics saw their candidate badly placed in the second ballot, and opposed to a Socialist and a Radical, their votes were transferred to the Socialist rather than to the anti- clerical Republican. Thanks to these two factors, as well as to a slight growth of Socialism in the country, the Socialist party made a net gain of 35 seats. The general effect of the elections was to strengthen the advanced Radical and Socialist bloc at the expense of the Briandists and the electors of M. Poincare. This bloc of Socialists, Caillautists, Radicals and Independent Radicals numbered 226, and, although not an absolute major- ity in the House, Government without it was impossible.
Viviani Prime Minister. In accordance with custom, Dou- mergue resigned before Parliament reassembled on June i. It was found exceedingly difficult to replace him. The ministerial crisis lasted a fortnight, and more than one ministerial combina- tion came to grief on the Socialist-Radical refusal to subscribe to a programme which did not include an early return to two years' service, or at least a drastic modification of the Three Years' law. It was on this point that M. Viviani's first attempt failed. The President of the republic, who had openly declared his inten- tion to safeguard the new military law, then tried to bring about a Cabinet free from Socialist-Radical influence. M. Ribot rashly undertook to form such a ministry. It was boycotted by the bloc, and did not live a full 24 hours. The Chamber refused, by a majority of 44, to give it a vote of confidence, after hearing the ministerial declaration of policy. During the debate which led to this division advanced Radicals gave clear proof of their deter- mination to reject any. Government which was not in its essence recruited from their ranks. These circumstances led M. Poincare again to summon Viviani, who, after this demonstration of Radi- cal strength, and in view of the necessity of closing rapidly a ministerial crisis which had already lasted too long, found no difficulty in forming a ministry, and in finding a formula with re- gard to the Military Service law which, by its ambiguity, was acceptable to all save the extreme Left. It was composed as follows: Rene Viviani, prime minister and Foreign Affairs; Bienvenu-Martin, Justice; Malvy, Interior; Noulens, Finance; Messimy, War; Gauthier, Marine; Augagneur, Public Instruc- tion; Rene Renoult, Public Works; Gaston Thompson, Com- merce, and Posts and Telegraphs; Fernand David, Agriculture; Raynaud, Colonies; Colyba, Labour; and, as Under-Secretaries, Abel Ferry, Foreign Affairs; Dalimier, Fine Arts; Lauraine, War; Jacquier, Interior; Ajam, Mercantile Marine.
During, the debate upon the ministerial declaration policy, the premier strengthened those passages in the Government programme which dealt with the Military Service law. He gave
some content to critics of that measure by announcing the Gov- ernment's intention to introduce a number of bills providing for the military training of the young, and for the better utilization of reserves, but was firm in saying that until that new legislation had shown its efficiency in practice, there could be no question of reducing the term of military service. This programme was far from satisfying the Socialists and some disgruntled Radicals, but they only mustered on the vote of confidence which ended the debate 139 votes to 362. The ministerial crisis was thus ended, but, more important, an end had been put to the agitation for a repeal or revision of the Service law.
Three Years' Service Law. All possibility of tinkering with this law was abolished by the proceedings of the Senate on July 13, on which date the European outlook was overcast, when Charles Humbert made a sensational speech revealing the pov- erty of the French army in artillery and war material of every kind. Clemenceau supported him in his demand for an inquiry. Messimy, Minister of War, admitted that while the French field gun was superior to that of Germany, the French heavy artillery- could not compete with that of her neighbour; that Germany was far ahead of France in the supply of engineering materials; that frontier fortresses were but poorly equipped; that bridge- building material was lacking; and that the French soldier would have practically but one pair of boots at his disposal on the day of mobilization. He pointed out that Germany had spent between 1900 and 1905 28,000,000 on her army, as com- pared with French expenditure of 11,230,000. From 1906-10 Germany had spent 37,200,000, and France 19,000,000; from 1911-13 German military outlay had been 23,400,000 and French 16,500,000. Messimy maintained that the ground lost could be made good by 1919, and that the first step towards doing that could be taken by the Senate in passing the military credits for 56,320,000 which were then before it. This Parlia- ment did, before adjourning on July 15.
It is difficult to estimate to what extent the public revelation of French military unpreparedness made during this debate en- couraged the Central European States in their bellicose designs. Certain it is that both from Berlin and from Vienna the French ambassadors reported to their Government that the proceedings in the Senate had had a deplorable effect upon public opinion, and had considerably strengthened the hearts of the jingo parties in both states. Although the French Foreign Office had in its archives despatches from more than one of its ambassadors warn- ing it in the most urgent manner of the perilous condition of European affairs, or perhaps because it was deemed advisable to remind Germany of the solidity of the Franco-Russian alliance, the French President's visit to Russia was carried through accord- ing to programme. Poincare left at midnight on July 15 1914, accompanied by the premier and Foreign Minister Viviani.
Madame Caillaux's Trial. From the point of view of internal politics, it was undoubtedly desirable that the trial of Madame Caillaux for the assassination of Calmette should take place dur- ing the parliamentary recess, and while the Chief of State was abroad. Caillaux, who, in spite of the sensation caused by his wife's action, had again been returned to Parliament for Mamers, had lost no opportunity of giving to the whole affaire its full polit- ical flavour, and saw quite clearly that in court not only would his wife be on trial for her life, but he also and the whole of his policy and party would be arraigned. He subsidized newspapers and inspired campaigns, some of which were but thinly veiled threats of blackmail upon the President of the republic. He succeeded in making of his wife's trial the all-absorbing question of the day. The assassination of the Archduke Francis Ferdi- nand, the thunderclouds in the East, and revelations as to French unpreparedness, all failed to distract public attention from the Caillaux drama. The trial opened on July 20, and for a week France gave herself up to morbid contemplation of the rottenness of the social and political life of many of her leading men and women. The greatest lawyers of France were engaged in the case: Maltre Ferdinand Labori for Madame Caillaux, and Maitre Chenu for the Calmette family. Both defence and prosecution sought for mud with which to bespatter those con-
