Constitutional Laws of 1875

the constitutional laws of 1875 are a modest work, resulting from concessions mutuelles.
L' experiment showed that they were more viable than other more ambitious constitutions.

New Illustrated Larousse , 1898-1907, article “France”, paragraph “Constitutions”.

The constitutional Lois of 1875 are the laws voted in France by the National Assembly between February and July 1875 which founds definitively the {{IIIe}} République (before it had been only outlined by laws which answered specific problems - Loi Rivet, or Loi of November 20th, 1873 for example).

Three constitutional laws come to organize the republican mode:

the law of February 24th, 1875 , on the organization of the Senate;
the law of February 25th, 1875 , on the organization of the public authorities;
the law of July 16th, 1875 , on the relationship between the public authorities.

These three laws will be slightly amended thereafter. It is the first and the last time that a République in France definite and is not organized by true a Constitution.

They were juridically repealed only during the promulgation of the Constitution of October 27th, 1946. However their application was suspended de facto between the July 10th 1940 - date of the vote of the full powerss with Pétain which was to set up besides, according to the terms of the constitutional Loi of July 10th, 1940 a news Constitution which was born however never - and the promulgation of the Constitution of the {{IVe}} République. The constitutional Loi of November 2nd, 1945 establishes a provisional government indeed, maintaining the Laws constitutional of 1875 in their non-application.

Historical context of the vote of the laws

In 1875 the France saw in a provisional mode since 1870 and the fall of the Second Empire.

A provisional mode while waiting better

The National Assembly elected in 1871, only legislative and constituent assembly, is made up with majority of Monarchiste S (on 675 seats provided in 1871 there were approximately 400 monarchists), this is why one speaks about “République of the dukes”. These monarchists, for the majority favorable to peace with the Prussia, want the return of the royalty but remain divided on the applicant to relate to the throne. There are indeed 180 Légitimiste S favorable to Henri d' Artois and 220 Orléaniste S favorable to Philippe of Orleans. The question of the mode remains outstanding because none the solutions - republic, monarchy orleanist favorable to an alliance of the Royauté and Libéralisme, monarchy legitimist hoping for the return to the Ancien Mode - reaches the majority. The qualification of “republic” is thus a provisional term; from where anecdote celebrates it which says that each time the word “republic” was marked at that time somebody answered “provisional! ”.

The gap in the law left by the fall of the Empire was not filled. Thiers was appointed “chief of the executive power of the French Republic” then “President of the Republic”, but the mode does not have anything a République, except with the ancient direction of the term: LMBO publica , literally " the thing publique" , i.e. the common thing which binds people. The decree of the February 17th 1871 shows it well:

the National Assembly, agent of the sovereign authority,

Considering that it is essential, while waiting for that it is ruled on the institutions of France, to provide immediately for the needs with the government and control with the negotiations,

Décrète:

Mr. Thiers is named chief of the executive power of the French Republic

“ While waiting for ” says the decree. The question of the nature of the future mode is left outstanding. It will take four years to solve it.

The preserving republic

The new French Republic does not have anything revolutionary. It is “preserving, wise”, like said it Thiers. The repression of the Commune of Paris showed that the Republic could defend the order. The by-election of April 1871 gives 99 seats to the Republicans on the 114 who were to be provided: the Republic knew to show that it was preserving and this is why the France, preserving in majority, not elected monarchists but republicans.

The preserving and parliamentary republic

The laws Rivet (August 1871), of Broglie (March 1873) and known as of the septennate (November 1873) modify the face of the mode which becomes little by little parliamentary, by removing the presidential responsibility with the profit for the ministerial responsibility.

Thiers, old a Orléaniste which served under Louis-Philippe I {{er}}, is joined the stammering republic, which causes the anger of the monarchists, who end up reversing it. He made in particular a famous speech, in November 1872:

the Republic exists, it will be the legal government of the country, to want another thing would be the new revolution and most frightening of all. Let us not waste our time to proclaim it, but employ it to print its desirable and necessary characters to him. A commission named by you a few months ago gave him the title of preserving Republic. Let us seize this title and try especially that it is deserved. Any government must be preserving, and null company could not live under a government which would not be it. the Republic will be preserving or will not be . France cannot live in continual alarms.

Indeed Thiers, put in minority in May 1873 by the National Assembly, resigns. The Parliament elects in her place Mac-Mahon, a Monarchiste. The restoration of the Royauté seemed very close but the firmness of Henri d' Artois in the business of the white Flag ruins the hopes. One then votes the law of the septennate which while prolonging the lifespan of the provisional Republic until 1880 (term of the office of Mac-Mahon), removes the responsibility for the president in front of the room - no means of revoking Mac-Mahon was envisaged, contrary to Thiers which worked " under the authority of the National Assembly ". Mac-Mahon was not Thiers, it did not have anything a speaker, and besides it did not use its right to communicate with the Parliament, leaving with her vice-presidents of the Council the government and the discussion in front of the room. Albert de Broglie summarizes the place that the Monarchiste S hoped to make play marshal Mac-Mahon:

the throne remained vacant and I had succeeded in making there sit, under the name of president, a true lieutenant general of the kingdom, ready to yield the place, the day when the king would have been in measurement to take it.

The restoration was only pushed back, in the spirit of those which called it their wishes: it could occur without difficulty during the seven years of the mandate of Mac-Mahon (see below).

The question of the mode is finally put and solved

Commission of preparation

The Parliament, through the Law of Broglie, had decided (article 5):

The National Assembly will not separate before to have ruled:

on the organization and the mode of transmission of the legislative powers and executive;
on the creation and attributions of one second room having to take up duties only after the separation of the current Parliament;
on the electoral law.
The government will submit to the Parliament bills on the objects enumerated above.

For this purpose a commission of thirty members, known under the name of Commission of the Thirty, was indicated to prepare the new institutions, in November 1873, by the National Assembly. This Commission takes its time, by hoping that the restoration of monarchy would intervene. It ends however up returning his report/ratio to the beginning of the year 1875.

The foundation of the Republic: January 30th, 1875

The January 21st 1875 starts the discussion on the draft prepared by the Commission, which is very neutral, not wishing to engrave in the marble a constitution but to organize the mode temporarily, in the line of the laws already voted before by the National Assembly. The word “republic” does not appear there, one carefully eluded it. It is precisely on this point, to found the Republic, that the discussions and the fights begin. Laboulaye proposes an amendment with the 1st article of the specifying project: the government of the Republic is composed of two rooms and a President . The proposal is disallowed by 359 votes against 336. It is with Henri Wallon that it belongs to find the formulation which will make rock the National Assembly. Walloon explains his proposal as follows: If monarchy is possible, if you can show that it is acceptable, propose it… If on the contrary, it does not appear possible, eh well, I do not say to you: proclaim the Republic. But I say to you: constitute the government which is now established. I do not ask you to declare it final; what is final? But do not declare it either provisional. Made a government which has in him the means of living.

The Walloon Amendement consisted of this sentence:

the President of the Republic is elected in the majority absolute of the votes by the Senate and the House of Commons joined together in National Assembly. He is elected for seven years. He is re-eligible.

It is the first sentence of this proposal which founds the Republic, and made of Henri Wallon the “father” of this Republic. The amendment is voted the January 30th 1875 by 353 votes against 352. One glosé much on this very small voice which makes the difference, but most important was not as well the vote of this Amendement as that of the whole law, adopted remainder largely. However, the Walloon Amendement allows a thing: the Republic is constitutionally rested by the national representation thanks to him.

The three laws are then voted:

the law of the February 24th 1875 (organization of the Senate) by 435 votes against 234:
the law of the February 25th 1875 (organization of the public authorities) by 425 votes against 254 - it was the promulgated first;
the law of the July 16th 1875 (relationship between the public authorities) by 520 votes against 84.

Historical importance of this day

The National Assembly separates then the March 8th 1876, her work having been carried out: she temporarily founded a republic which lasts sixty-five years, which survives the First World War but crumbles in 1940, after however having brought several capital reforms (separation of the Church and the State, right of association, public education, etc). It also returns to the Third Republic to have legitimated the republican mode by removing it from its revolutionary excesses, by making of him a mode able to last. The republican school contributes finally to enraciner the republican mode in the people so much so that, when the French State is put at bottom by the release of the France, the question of the mode does not arise (does not require one of de Gaulle, at the time of the Libération of Paris in 1944 of To proclaim the Republic ?) There is no tergiversation on the mode to adopt as it could there have had some the shortly after the defeat of Sedan, it is finally this legitimation of the republican mode which is the great success of the Third Republic.

In 1884, the Républicains with the capacity make add to the law of the July 25th 1875 that the republican shape of the government cannot be the subject of a proposal for a revision. . Thus end eighty years of constitutional gropings which brought the Convention, the Empire, the Restauration, etc

Originality of this constitution

This Constitution is original at the same time by its form and its bottom.

The form

The constitution is initially original by its form: it is short (34 articles on the whole), without Préambule nor statement of principle or rights, without philosophical reference either. It is thus a procedural Constitution compromise, which in “is more badly arranged”: the articles are followed without too much logic - they were voted as soon as a compromise was found - and one needed three laws to set up the mode completely - one realized shortly after the vote of the first two laws that there were gaps, from where the law of July…

The style is dry, functional, no dream brings and lets sting the resignation of the Monarchiste S with this inevitable République preserving, or that of the republican conceding the Sénat, the Upper House, when they wished a Parlement monocaméral. Each party made concessions while hoping well to take them again when it would have the capacity. The procedure of revision (to see low) is extremely simple besides. Nobody seeks to sacrilize the constitution, it is only a compromised .

It is a compromise of the Républicains which accept a strong president, but irresponsible, i.e. a hidden King. The Constitution awaits only the heir to the throne of France to moult itself in third Charte. Albert de Broglie itself said it:

president is a covered chief of all the attributes of the royalty, a chief-king without the name and the duration .

In theory the president reigns and controls. However, with the parliamentary orientation of the mode the president becomes an inactive symbol without capacity. The Républicains were also inclined in front of the majority monarchist by conceding a second room which must be a preserving bastion, monarchical, according to the theory of the constitutional laws, even a referee in certain cases (that of dissolution for example).

The Constitution is also a compromise on behalf of the Monarchiste S which concede the “République” certainly removed from its revolutionary attributes, but a republic remains a mode without king.

It is finally a compromise of the republican the most vigorous which concede a République wise and preserving far from their ideals inherited 1789.

Bottom

The constitution of the {{IIIe}} République is original by its contents. It is indeed the first to interfere republican form Gouvernement and mechanisms of the parliamentary Monarchie , thus mixing the heritages with the Révolution and the Monarchie of July.

One thus finds with a text strongly orleanist, i.e. very inspired by the Charte of Louis-Philippe I {{er}} which uses the mechanisms installed at the time of the Monarchy of July, like the principle of the responsibility for the ministry out of the responsibility for the King, or the principle of the interpellation of the ministry by the rooms. The name House of Commons adopted for the Lower House itself was created as of the Restauration, and taken again by the Monarchy of July. The fact that the texts are short leaves with the Coutume the care to regulate the difficulties which will arise, but it also makes it possible to return to the practice of the Charte S.

Fruit of the negociations, called not to last, the Constitution did not last indeed, without to be removed. Such as she is written, she should organize a parliamentary Régime dualistic where Executive power and Legislative power would be balanced. However, as the Républicains seize the institutional bodies (the Parlement then presidency of the Republic) they model the operation of the mode according to their ideas without to change the contents of the laws: the weakening of the president, then Government, with the profit of a very powerful assembly is a result of the practice of the institutions and not of the letter of the constitution.

Contents of the laws: theory and practical

Note : one will find at the end of this detailed article a synthesis of the capacities and prerogatives of each institutional body for those which wish to go to essence.

Executive power: duality and inequality

Under the {{IIIe}} République the executive power is held by two elements: the President and the Government, at the end of the constitutional laws.

The President of the Republic

The theory of the law: a “monarch”

Elected official for 7 Years, re-eligible immediately and ad infinitum by the Parliament joined together in National Assembly , it has extended capacities, as shows it article 3 of the law of the February 25th 1875:

the President of the Republic on the initiative of the laws, jointly with the members of the two rooms. He promulgates the laws when they were voted by the two rooms; he supervises some and the execution ensures some.

It has the right to make grace; the Amnistie S can be granted only by one law.

It has the armed force.

It names with all civil and military employment.

It governs national solemnities; the envoys and the ambassadors of the foreign powers are accredited near him.

Each act of the President of the Republic must be contresigned by a minister.

He thus does not have any real popular weight (one feared since the Plébiscite S of Napoleon III the public opinion), and one also ensures by there a certain stability of the function since the people cannot claim to want the resignation of a man whom he did not elect. From its possibility of dissolving the House of Commons, the president has a very important capacity, which makes counterweight in article 6 of the law of February 25th which establishes the ministerial responsibility and thus the possibility for the Parliament of reversing the Government. It can propose laws with the rooms, and can also (article 8) propose a revision of the constitution.

Head of the State, the President is thus also the chief of the executive since it can protect the government from the Parliament. Two other articles come to reinforce that. Article 2 of the law of the precise July 16th 1875:

the President of the Republic pronounces the session closure. He has the right to convene the rooms extraordinarily. He will have to convene them if the request is made by it, in the interval of the sessions, by the absolute majority of the members composing each room.

the President can defer the rooms. However, the adjournment cannot exceed the one month term nor to take place more twice in the same session.

The president can thus convene the rooms, or defer them one month before the legal purpose of the session. Article 7 of this same law lays out:

the President of the Republic promulgates the laws in the month which follows the transmission to the Government of the definitively adopted law. It must promulgate in the three days the laws whose promulgation, by a express vote of the one and the other rooms, will have been declared urgent.

Within the time allowed by the promulgation, the President of the Republic can, by a justified message, to require of the two rooms a new deliberation which cannot be refused.

It thus has the possibility of refusing the Promulgation of a law, except in the case of an urgent law, and of returning the rooms to work, which constitutes a provisional example of veto.

A big role is also reserved for him in foreign politics by article 8 of the law of the July 16th:

the President of the Republic negotiates and ratifies the treaties. He makes known of it to the rooms at once that the interest and the state security allow it.

the peace treaties, of trade, the treaties which engage the public purses, those which are relating to the state of the people and the property right of the French abroad, are final only after being voted by the two rooms. No transfer, no exchange, no addition of territory can take place only under the terms of one law.

It thus carries out the negotiation of the treaties, and can even ratify some without the rooms not approving it. The majority of the treaties must however be voted by the two rooms.

Politically, the President of the Republic is irresponsible (just like a King would be it) ( the President of the Republic is responsible only in the case of high treason. , article 6, law of February 25th), and its acts must all be contresigned by a minister who takes the responsability for it. It is thus a magistrate having wide prerogatives that it can in theory use freely (except already explained particular conditions), thus being able to cause the dissolution of the national representation, a new deliberation of a law, or a advanced adjournment of the Parliamentary session. The extent of its capacities vis-a-vis the absence of counterweight on its person give him appearances of a truth republican Monarque. The constitutional laws of the {{IIIe}} République resemble by certain sides the Charte of 1830, i.e. with a royal charter.

The president, one month before the end of his functions, must invite the room to elect his successor in order not to have Interrègne. If it does not do it, the National Assembly meets automatically fifteen days front. In the event of abnormal holidays (death, resignation, etc) the two rooms meet as quickly as possible automatically.

Practice of the institutions: total obliteration

the Presidency of the Republic is deprived of means of action and control. I do not resign myself to compare the weight of the responsibilities morals which weigh on me and the impotence to which I am condemned.

Jean Casimir-Perier, speech of resignation of the presidency (1895)

First of all, the president under the {{IIIe}} République seems to have wide capacities: initiative of the laws, right of dissolution, nomination of the cabinet, which thus made him true a republican monarch - more especially as it cannot be reversed by the Rooms. The right of dissolution, particularly, was seen like a counterweight to the ministerial responsibility.

However, in practice of the institutions, the president “inaugurates the chrysanthemums”, according to the devoted formula: its role is reduced to the symbol, a certain influence in foreign politics and in the nomination of the president of the Council sometimes - although the opinion pushes it to choose a precise man, as Clemenceau was imposed on Poincaré in 1917, and although it is almost obliged to choose a member of Parliament -, and with the moral weight which it can have from his own personality. What will make say to Clemenceau with its usual direction of the witty remark: the life taught me that there are two things which one can do very well: presidency of the Republic and the prostate. …

It is the behavior of Mac-Mahon which explains for a good portion this irrefutable fact: supported by the Senate, he had sought to dissolve the House of Commons (Crise of May 16th, 1877), while using of one of his prerogatives. That was done, but the elections carried to the capacity a new Republican majority, hostile with a strong executive (in the revolutionary tradition ). In 1879, Jules Grévy is elected by the National Assembly; it founds what one calls the constitution Grévy , i.e. a practice of president-symbol rather than of president-actor in the policy without for all this the law is not amended. In its thanks with the Room for its election, Grévy known as:

Subjected with sincerity to the great law of the parliamentary mode, I will never enter fights about it against the national will expressed by his constitutional bodies

It marks by there its hostility with the principles of 1848, with an executive strong (or even authoritative - Second Empire), with the profit of a parliamentary Régime absolute where the governments are without defense in the event of hostilities of the Parlement. It is the triumph of the ideals of 1789, i.e. of a weak executive controlled by a powerful legislative power, which can seem normal since the Room proceeds of the will of the People. Its successors will not try any more to dissolve the Room (operation become in any event difficult because the Senate rocked quickly in the camp of the republicans, hostile with dissolution), and for the majority will be erased, incarnating more than directing the Republic - some exceptions, like Casimir-Perier or Alexandre Millerand however, but that never lasted a long time.

The Government

The president of the Council: large absent from the law

The term, or the function of president of the Council ( of the ministers under being heard) is mentioned in none the constitutional laws: until the March 9th 1876, the chiefs of the government (Armand Dufaure, Albert de Broglie, Ernest Courtot de Cissey, Louis Buffet) carry the official title of vice-president of the Council , in reference to the fact that the Council of Ministers is chaired by the President of the Republic.

However, the title of president of the Council is instituted by a Décret, the March 9th 1876. On this occasion it is covered by Dufaure for the first time since 1849, date on which the function had been abolished. If the constitutional laws do not mention a clean Head of government, other that the president, they imply it because, because of irresponsibility of the Head of the State, there must necessarily be a “person in charge” to represent it in front of the opinion and the Rooms (specify that the president cannot enter the hemicycle; article 6 of the law of the July 16th 1875 specifies how it can communicate with the Parliament: the President of the Republic communicates with the rooms by messages which are read with the platform by a minister. .)

The president of the Council, just like the government, theoretically are named and revoked by the president, under the terms of article 3 of the law of the February 25th: It names with all civil and military employment . The texts do not grant to the president of the Council any specific capacity since it is not even mentioned.

Reality: the president of the Council leads the policy of the nation

In front of the obliteration of the president, following the constitution Grévy , it is to the president of the Council that échut the direction of the businesses of the France. Named certainly by the President of the Republic, it actually proceeds of the Parliament, and more still of the House of Commons. It chooses its ministers by consulting the President of the Republic sometimes, and follows then its policy under the only control of the Parliament.

In the {{IIIe}} République the president of the Council is the key of the institutions since it is the only one to assume the reality of the Executive power, whereas it is not mentioned in the constitutional laws and that it does not have any clean service (let us recall that it has another wallet in order to have a legal existence and administrative means). But, this situation gradually will disappear: during the First World War a general secretary is created by Painlevé to provide documentation to the president of the Council. Clemenceau place at its head an under-secretary of State. It is the first time that the president of the Council sees himself equipped into clean with an attached service. After the war it was sometimes maintained and sometimes removed. The Finance law of 1934 authorizes in its article 23 qu ' a sum is allocated with the president of the Council so that it can be surrounded by collaborators. A Décret of the January 31st 1935 specifies the composition of the presidency of the Council, which is installed with the Hôtel Matignon (head clerk, typists, clerk, ushers).

The Government itself

The Council of Ministers is him mentioned four times in the constitutional laws, contrary to the president of the Council. The term the Council of Ministers means the whole of the ministers brought together in only one place under the presidency of the President of the Republic. It is at least the theory, since, once again, it frequently happens that are held of the Conseils of Cabinet where the president is not present. There is no limitation of the number of members of the Government (the president Doumergue in 1934 proposed to limit them to twenty but its text was never voted).

Article 6 of the law of the precise July 16th 1875:

the ministers have their entry in the two rooms and must be heard when they ask it. They can be made assist by appointed police chiefs, for the discussion of a determined bill, by Presidential decree of the Republic.

This article makes Government the body of connection between the executive theoretically held by the President of the Republic (which cannot enter the rooms) and the legislature.

The Government is responsible collectively in front of the rooms (article 6, law of the February 25th 1875):

the ministers are jointly responsible in front of the rooms for the general policy of the government, and individually of their personal acts.

It is the first time that a French constitutional text mentions the principle of the ministerial responsibility explicitly (the use had been introduced under the Monarchie of July but the Charte of 1830 did not mention it).

This principle of ministerial solidarity has several consequences. First of all, it poses that the Government must be plain by a common political program, and it supposes then a homogeneous Government and not simply a meeting of ministers who would act according to their goodwill. The decisions taken by each minister must be discussed in the Council of Ministers so that the ministerial solidarity can play.

The other fundamental consequence of this article 6 it is the equality of the rooms: is responsible in front of the rooms . By a plural in an article, it is marked that the House of Commons but also the Senate can control and thus reverse the Government - although at the beginning there was a debate to know if the Sénat could really reverse a government, discusses distinct in 1896 by the affirmative.

The methods to reverse a Government are not mentioned by the texts. The components let the habit decide some, but they probably had with the spirit the practice of the Charte of 1830, and of the first true French parliamentary mode, the Monarchie of July. But the fact that the Government strictly does not have any means of dissuading one or the other from the rooms to make it fall - since the successive presidents of the Republic gave up the right of dissolution - made {{IIIe}} République a Régime from assembly, i.e. a parliamentary Régime where executive balance between and legislative is not ensured, with the profit it Legislative power.

Legislative power: levelling bicameral system

The legislative power is held by a Parlement, Bicaméral and is composed thus of the House of Commons and Sénat (article first of the law of the February 25th 1875):

the legislative power is exerted by two assemblies: the House of Commons and the Senate.

The House of Commons

Of all the constitutionally instituted bodies, the House of Commons is that which is mentioned the least. Whereas the Sénat is governed by a whole law, the Lower House is treated only incidentally in the constitutional laws. It is necessary to see there a consequence of the republican compromises Monarchiste S , and heritage of the constitution of 1848. The theory of the constitution of 1875 is to more or less completely neutralize the House of Commons, which the practice reverses by making some the center of the République.

Mode of recruitment

the House of Commons is named by the vote for all, under the conditions determined by the electoral law.

Article first of the law of the February 25th 1875.

As regards the recruitment of the Lower House, it is thus necessary to refer to the “electoral law” (organic law of the November 30th 1875) which lays down the methods of the election of the deputies. They are thus elected for four years with the male universal direct suffrage, by a majority Uninominal system with two turns, the Circonscription being the Arrondissement. The age of eligibility is fixed at 25 years.

The number of deputies varies throughout the {{IIIe}} République according to the laws which fixed it: 533 in 1876, 554 in 1881, 584 in 1885, 597 in 1910, 612 in 1928, 615 in 1932 then 617 in 1936.

Specific capacities

The , House of Commons by law February 24th 1875 vote the first the finance laws (article 8):

However, the finance laws must be, initially, deposited with the House of Commons and voted by it. .

It also has the capacity to put in charge the President of the Republic for high treason, or the ministers for crimes committed in the performance of their duty (article 12 of the law of the July 16th):

the President of the Republic can be put in charge only by the House of Commons. The ministers can be put in charge by the House of Commons for crimes committed in the performance of their duties

However, nowhere it is not mentioned what high treason was the or how was to be made this committal for trial.
The specific capacities of the Lower House are very reduced. In the letter of the constitution, it is, although proceeding of the Vote for all, much weaker than the Sénat.

The Senate
Second room of the Parliament, the Sénat is a concession of the Républicains to the Monarchiste S, which wished a Upper House which would be like said it Albert de Broglie a room of resistance against the torrent of the bold innovations , i.e. a rampart against the House of Commons. In the letter of the constitution, the Sénat is a key body; its importance is much larger in the institutional play than that of the House of Commons (Dufaure said Third Republic who it was before all a “Senate”). It is indeed the showpiece of the compromise between the various currents of the National Assembly and it is not innocent that the first of the three voted laws is that which relates to it.

Mode of recruitment
In order to make Senate this preserving rampart, it was necessary to adapt the mode of recruitment. Also T it has lengthily discussed.
The Senators are elected by department, with the list system. The electoral College (the whole of the electoral colleges represents approximately seventy-five thousand people in all the France) is composed of the deputies of the department, the general advisers, the advisers of districts, and a delegate elected by each Municipal council among the voters of the commune (article 4, law of the February 24th 1875). The electoral college meets in the chief town of the department. It is thus an election with the indirect vote for all.
It is in the geographical distribution that still the will appears more to maintain a Senate preserving. Indeed the distribution of the two hundred and twenty-five elected senators privileges the rural world - that one even which constituted the preserving electoral compost of the Second Empire (article 2, law of the February 24th):

the departments of the Seine and North will elect each one five senators;

* departments of Seine-Lower, Pas-de-Calais, the Gironde, the Rhone, Finistere, Coast-of-North, each one four senators;
* the Loire-Inférieure, Saône-et-Loire, Ille-et-Vilaine, Seine-et-Oise, Isere, Puy-de-Dôme, Somme, Rhone delta, Aisne, the Loire, Handle, Maine-et-Loire, Morbihan, the Dordogne, Haute-Garonne, Charente-Lower, Apple-brandy, the Sarthe, Herault, the Low-Pyrenees, Gard, Aveyron, the Vendée, Flowering ash, Oise, the Vosges, To combine, each one three senators;
* All other departments, each one two senators.
* the territory of Belfort, the three departments of Algeria, the four colonies of Martinique, of the Guadeloupe, of Reunion and the French Indies will elect each one a senator.

Any department elects at least two senators, and the two only more populated five. One sees obviously that does not take account of the inequalities between the departments, supporting the campaigns - in this respect the principle of the municipal delegate to the electoral College in fact as much since it puts on an equal footing big city populated and common of a few hundreds of hearts. The Sénat appears as the “Large Council of the common Frenchwomen” like said it Gambetta. These two hundred and twenty-five senators are renewed per third every three years, the mandate of only one senator is thus nine years (article 6).
The other innovation which is seen by the Monarchiste S like another guarantee of conservatism, they are the irremovable senators , then removed at the time of the constitutional reform of 1884 (to see low). The seventy-five irremovable senators are elected with life by the National Assembly before her dissolution - the latter being with majority Monarchiste, the senators with life will be a true “garrison” Monarchiste in the Upper House. More especially as article 7 stipulates:

In the event of vacancy by death, resignation or other causes these senators , it will be, in the two months, provided for the replacement by the Senate itself.
It is thus with the Senate, that one envisaged with preserving majority, to replace itself its senators with life.

Specific capacities
Most important of the capacities which were constitutionally reserved for the Sénat is without any doubt its role in the procedure of Dissolution of the House of Commons (article 5 of the law of the February 25th):

the President of the Republic can, on the assent of the Senate, to dissolve the House of Commons before the legal expiry of its mandate.
This “assent” is an authorization that the Sénat gives the president to dissolve the Lower House. If, according to Mac-Mahon, this opinion were used to support the president in his decision, it is actually likely to turn into to Sénat the referee of the conflicts between the President of the Republic and the House of Commons. As the Sénat cannot be to him dissolves, this constitutional provision devotes the preeminence of the Upper House on the Lower House. Let us moderate that by saying that the Sénat, if it is solidarized with the House of Commons and delivers an adverse opinion, makes impossible the Dissolution.
The Sénat also has specific legal competences, from articles 9 of the law of the February 24th 1875:

the Senate can be made up in court of justice to judge, either the President of the Republic, or the ministers, and to know attacks made against the state security.
whose range was specified by article 12 of the law of the July 16th 1875:

the President of the Republic can be put in charge only by the House of Commons, and can be judged only by the Senate.

the ministers can be put in charge by the House of Commons for crimes committed in the performance of their duties. In this case, they are judged by the Senate.
the Senate can be made up in court of justice by a Presidential decree of the Republic, returned in the Council of Ministers, to consider any person warned of attack against the state security.
If the instruction is started with ordinary justice, the decree of convocation of the Senate can be returned until the stop of reference.
a law will determine the mode to proceed for the charge, the instruction and the judgment.

It is thus with the Sénat to judge the President of the Republic if he is shown of a high treason (only political responsibility which the constitution concedes to him) while constituting himself in court of justice. In the same way, so of the ministers crimes committed during the performance of their duties by the House of Commons are shown, it is then with the Senate to judge them. Finally the Sénat can be made up in court of justice by Presidential decree, in order to consider a person marked of attack against the state security. It is seen, his legal powers are very wide. The constitution leaves a blur as for the procedures to be followed to implement this article, preferring to return to a later law.
The specific last capacity of the Senate: when the two rooms are assembled in National Assembly, it is the office of the Sénat which is used as office with the Parliament.

Prerogatives common to both rooms
Let us start by specifying the conditions of the meeting of each room. The article first of the law of the July 16th explains as follows:

the Senate and the House of Commons meet each year second Tuesday from January, with less than one former convocation made by the President of the Republic.

the two rooms must be meeting at least five months each year. The session of the one starts and finishes at the same time as that of the other.
Sunday which will follow the re-entry, of the public prayers will be addressed to God in the churches and the temples to call its help on work of the assemblies.

Concerning the last paragraph, it should be remembered that the Separation of the Church and the State had not intervened yet. The Parliamentary session lasts five months full thus - what is little since during half of the year there is neither control of the government nor vote of the laws. This article also poses that the two rooms must sit at the same time, because (article 4 of the same law):

Toute assembled one of the two rooms which would be held out of the time of the common session is automatically illicit and null, except the case envisaged by the preceding article and that where the Senate is joined together like court of justice; and, in this last case, it can exert only legal functions. .

Article 5 finally indicates that the rooms meet in public session except if a request for meeting in secret committee is made by a number fixed by the payment of the room.

The vote of the laws
The first article of the first promulgated law, that of the February 25th, precise:

the legislative power is exerted by two assemblies: the House of Commons and the Senate.
Article 8 of the law of the February 24th affirms him:

the Senate has, jointly with, the initiative House of Commons and clothes industry of the laws.
Is thus posed the principle of the strict equality (except as regards finance laws) of the two rooms of the Parlement. Each room on the initiative of the law, which she discusses in the methods envisaged by her rules of procedure. The bills of the Government can be deposited at the office of any of the two rooms, it will be discussed, sent to the other room which will be able also to return it to the first, etc the parliamentary shuttle does not have any time limit in the {{IIIe}} République. Thus, the two rooms do not manage to agree on the same text, the law is not voted. The Sénat can thus perfectly make obstruction with a law which is not appropriate to him. The Monarchiste S hope thus that the Sénat, which they think of remaining preserving, will be able to block the laws too progressists. It is for example because of the opposition of the Sénat that the Right to vote of the women was not implemented under the {{IIIe}} République, whereas the House of Commons had accepted the principle of it.

The control of the Government
The second fundamental role reserved for the two rooms in the same methods by the constitution is the control of the government. With the passing of years, the Mode of assembly substituent with the parliamentary Mode, the role of control will become most important so much so that the Parliament will not succeed in even any more voting the laws necessary (leading to the practice of the Orders in Council).
Article 6 of the law of the February 25th 1875 poses the principle of the ministerial responsibility:

the ministers are jointly responsible in front of the rooms for the general policy of the government, and individually of their personal acts.
As there is no explanation of the rules defining this responsibility, the Parlement does not see any limit with its influence, interpreting with broadest the responsibility.
The first method is that of the interpellation . It consists of a request for explanation of a deputy or a senator, who can be caused at any moment, generating a debate which is closed by the vote of about a day, i.e. a distrust or vote of confidence with respect to the Government. This procedure is started by an individual and not by the very whole room. It thus happened that only one man makes fall a whole ministry.
The second method is that of the question of confidence , very frequent. Clemenceau said the question of confidence is always posed , i.e. contrary to other parliamentary modes, the government is unceasingly responsible for its policy, and gives it concerned to each vote, even minor. Thus, an ambiguous vote of the Parlement can be interpreted like a refusal of confidence, thus involving the fall of the ministry.

Other prerogatives
In the field of the foreign politics, it constitutionally belongs to the Parlement to vote certain treaties, and to authorize a national modification of the territory (article 8 of the law of the July 16th):

the peace treaties, of trade, the treaties which engage the public purses, those which are relating to the state of the people and the property right of the French abroad, are final only after being voted by the two rooms. No transfer, no exchange, no addition of territory can take place only under the terms of one law.
The declaration of war is also spring of the two rooms which authorize the President of the Republic to declare it (article 9 of the same law).
In interior policy, the rooms are each one responsible for the election of their members as well as theirs resignation (article 10).
The parliamentary Immunité is also specified in the last two articles - 13 and 14 - law of the July 16th. The opinions and the votes expressed in the exercise of the functions of deputy or senator cannot thus give place to legal proceedings. One also needs the agreement of the room to which a man belongs to continue it or stop it out of criminal matter, except in the event of red-handed. The room can even make suspend the continuations or detention against one of its members.

Conclusion on the organization of the mode

See also: Third Republic
There exist truly two {{IIIe}} République: that of the texts and that of the facts. If the first could not last it is because each political party of the National Assembly hoped, once the capacity taken, to change the text according to its wishes. When the Républicains had entirely conquered the mode, they made only one small modification, the constitutional revision of 1884, because the texts, adapted by the constitution Grévy , agreed completely at their sights.
Absence of jurisdiction of control constitutional, as the Constitutional council in the France of the {{Ve}} République made it possible moreover the institutional practice to entirely derogate if she wished it with the letter of the law, which she did.
In this flexibility of the operation, which one leaves in 1875 mainly determine by the Coutume, and in the absence of ideological proclamations which could have pushed back part of the opinion, it is necessary to see probably one of the causes of exceptional longevity in France of these three texts voted afterwards of the debates, of the negociations, baited, voted not to last and be replaced by other thing.
One will restrict oneself in this article to recall that the 3rd Republic despite everything his defects, is at the origin of good number of successes, such as the school obligatory, laic, whose “black hussards ” contributed to make penetrate the republican mode into the most moved back campaigns.
It is advisable to conclude that the 3rd Republic died because its strong point appeared him also weak: by assuming the capacities with the detriment of the Executive , the Parliament, incompetent to control like the national Convention before him, weakens the mode at the time when the difficulties worsened, after 1918, and had to thus resort to the famous Orders in Council which, if they are not condemnable in themselves, remained unconstitutional, dangerous - because by deprive itself one ends up more not having capacities - and especially symbolic systems of a republic where it was necessary to reinforce the executive for stage the incurie legislature when it was the latter which had done everything to take then to keep the capacity.
By its incapacity to rationalize its work, to make it more efficient, and to correctly manage the country by giving him stability, the Parliament of the 3rd Republic carries the heavy burden to have returned to certain French the parliamentarism unbearable, hateful, capsizable, from where for example the February 6th, 1934 or, with final, the Régime of Vichy, which is the revenge of those which this representative Régime despaired:

Anarchistic of nature, the inorganic vote calls, almost necessarily, corruption and the fraud, followed soon dislike and indifference, themselves generating the abandonment of the public interest to the profit of the trade unions of private interests, the exploitation of the country by coteries, the gradual lowering of the policy, the final lowering of the nation among the nations.
Charles Benoist, the organization of the democracy , 1900.

The revision of the constitutional laws

Procedure of revision
It is article 8 of the law of the February 25th 1875 which describes the procedure of revision of the constitutional laws:

the rooms will have the right, by separate deliberations catches in each one in the majority absolute of the voices, either spontaneously, or on the request of the President of the Republic, to declare that it is necessary to revise the constitutional laws.

After each of the two rooms will have taken this resolution, they will meet in National Assembly to proceed to the revision.
the deliberations revising constitutional law, in all or partly, will have to be taken in the majority absolute of the members composing the National Assembly.
However, throughout capacity conferred by the law of November 20th, 1873 on Mr. marshal of Mac-Mahon, this revision can take place only on a proposal from the President of the Republic.

It is necessary to note the simplicity and the character rather not very democratic of this article: indeed, at no time the people must be consulted. The simplicity of the revision, like its range ( revision in all or partly ) comes obviously owing to the fact that the constitutional laws of 1875 were a compromise between Monarchiste S and Républicains. The idea to revise the totality of the constitution left the open door to a change of the shape of government towards monarchy. But by the law of August 14th, 1884, the door is definitively closed.
With regard to the procedure, the standard is that the President of the Republic or the rooms themselves has the initiative of the revision of the constitution - an exemption was made for the septennate of Mac-Mahon since until the end of its mandate, i.e. until in 1880, the revision could be done only on the initiative of the president, that in order to give time to the restoration to be done all while guaranteeing it against any reinforcement of the republican character of the mode. The rooms are, in the normal procedure, equal as out of legislative matter: they must both vote for a resolution separately declaring that it is necessary to revise the laws; if the initiative thus belongs to the Head of the State and at the Parliament is with the latter to open the revision indeed.
The vote of the revision occurs to Versailles, the two rooms joined together in National Assembly - with the office of the Senate, according to article 11 of the law of the July 16th - having to vote the revision in the majority absolute of the members, i.e. in the majority absolute of complete manpower of the Parlement, without taking into account absent the, vacant ones, the abstentions and blank votes. To vote white is thus the only means of really making obstacle with a constitutional revision which would be likely to pass.

Constitutional revisions
One can on the whole count three revisions of the Loi S of 1875: two relatively minor, and a third of more important nature. The constitutional Loi of July 10th, 1940 is also a constitutional law voted by the National Assembly, but it does not revise the mode, it authorizes that is set up by Philippe Pétain a new political regime. This last law will not be treated here.

June 21st, 1879: minor revision
After the return of the Parliament to Paris (it had sat up to that point at Versailles), a constitutional revision ratifies the change of localization of the rooms. The constitutional law of the June 21st 1879 carries as follows:

article 9 of the constitutional law of February 25th, 1875 is repealed.
Let us point out the article in question:

the seat of the executive power and the two rooms is in Versailles.

The conditions of meeting, as well as the final equipment of the buildings, are specified later on by an ordinary law of the July 22nd 1879. That has its importance, because certain people, Edgar Faure at the head, will support that the constitutional Loi of July 10th, 1940 - that which gives the full powerss to Pétain - unconstitutional because was voted apart from Paris.

See also: Law of July 22nd, 1879

August 14th, 1884: major revision
The idea to reform the second room belongs to Gambetta. But it did not have time to concretize it, and it is thus with Jules Ferry to undertake it under its second ministry. Avoiding the idea of the constitutionalization of the election of the deputies whom Gambetta wished to make, it avoids the confrontation with the Lower House by concentrating the reform only on the Senate; the National Assembly vote thus by 519 votes against 172 the revision.
The revision of the August 14th 1884 mark final victory of the Républicains which make add to article 8 of the law of the February 25th 1875 (treating article of the methods of the constitutional revision):

the republican shape of the government cannot be the subject of a proposal for a revision.

the family members having reigned on France are ineligible with the presidency of the Republic.

The République is thus perennialized with the eyes of its defenders, and the spectrum to see the presidency of the Republic invested by an applicant with the throne, this why this station had been designed by the Monarchists, moves away definitively.
The law on the Senate (that of the February 24th) is also amended, in the direction of the Républicains which allow a simple modification of its recruitment:

articles 1 to 7 of the constitutional law of February 24th, 1875, relating to the organization of the Senate, will not be any more constitutional.
Are thus déconstitutionnalisés the articles which organize the methods of election of the Upper House, and those which create the irremovable senators. A later law - the law of the December 9th 1884 - finalizes this revision. It was the subject many debates in the two rooms of the Parliament, where one saw returning in particular the idea of the election of the senators by the vote for all. With final the Loi of the December 9th 1884 makes two major modifications which aim at democratizing the Upper House, desired like a preserving bastion.
Thus the seventy-five irremovable senators are removed, whose seats are redistributed at the most populated departments. The senators with life remain in place, but when they die and that their seat becomes vacant, a drawing lot determines which department will receive the new seat. The replacement is thus progressive. It will be necessary to await 1918 so that dies the irremovable last, Marcère. In addition, the composition of the senatorial college is modified, in order to remove the absolute equality between villages and big cities, which benefitted the rural world, in conservative majority. The number of municipal delegates by common energy to elect the senators becomes more or less proportional with the number of inhabitants of the city (in fact with the number of city council men but that returns to same). Here the table of the report/ratio deputy senatorial/many inhabitants:

Summary table of the modifications of the number of senatorial delegates

Paris is the exception, since it obtains thirty senatorial delegates. If the system is righter, it now supports the medium-sized cities (two towns of a little more than ten thousand inhabitants weighing as much as a town of sixty thousand) with the detriment of the big cities. Democratization remains careful. It is in 1891 that the first elections took place according to this new system.
Finally the constitutional revision operates a modification which illustrates the laic orientation well mode:

paragraph 3 of the article first of the constitutional law of July 16th, 1875, on the reports/ratios of the public authorities, is repealed.
Which paragraph specified:

Sunday which will follow the re-entry, of the public prayers will be addressed to God in the churches and the temples to call its help on work of the assemblies.
It is a first step towards a separation of the Church and the State.

August 10th, 1926: minor revision

In August 1926 is voted a constitutional revision which states:

the constitutional law of February 25th, 1875, relating to the organization of the public authorities is supplemented by an article thus designed:

"The autonomy of the case of management of the goods of national defense and damping of the national debt is constitutional.
will be assigned to this case, until the complete damping of the goods of national defense and the titles created by the case:
# net prices of the sale of the tobaccos;
# the product of the complementary and exceptional tax on the first change of the death taxes and the voluntary contributions; the product of the resources enumerated above during the first exercise which will follow the promulgation of this law, constitutes the annual equipment minimum of the sinking fund.
# In the event of insufficiency of the resources to above ensure the service of the goods managed by the case and the titles created by it, a annual installment at least equal, entered to the budget."

After the First World War, the catastrophic financial position brought the government Poincaré to measurements of strict budgetary policy and increase in the taxes, extremely unpopular obviously. Many shareholders were ruined by it. That brought the victory of the Cartel of the lefts, which controlled 1924 with 1926. It could not succeed in rectifying finances: inflation continued, the prices increased. It was necessary to point out Raymond Poincaré, which, to restore confidence, proposed and obtained the creation of an autonomous case of management of the treasury bills and damping of the constitutional national debt, at the same time as a devaluation of the frankly germinal which became the frank Poincaré.

Synthesis of the institutions of the 3rd Republic
Here, summary, real operation of the {{IIIe}} Republic, i.e. the operation of a parliamentary Mode monist become after 1918 a Mode of assembly.
The executive

the President of the Republic (elected for seven years by the meeting of the two rooms in National Assembly):

governs “national solemnities”, i.e. with the commemorations, festivals, events, celebrations, of the Republic;

calls a member of Parliament with the presidency of the Council when this station becomes vacant;

promulgates the Loi S;

has the right of reprieve;

negotiates the treaties and ratifies them, with the agreement of the Parliament for most important;

is politically irresponsible, each one of its acts must be contresigned by a minister.

the President of the Council (named by the President of the Republic but invested by the Parliament):

names with civil and military employment;

has the regulatory Pouvoir;

can propose laws with the Parlement;

can receive the legislative power in certain fields and temporarily (Décret-loi);

is invested by the Parlement, is controlled by him and is capsizable by him;

leads the policy of the country with its Government.

The legislature

the House of Commons (elected for four years with the male universal direct suffrage, by District):

can propose laws;

vote laws;

examines in first the finance laws;

control the government, can reverse it;

vote the declaration of war;

authorizes the ratification of certain treaties (peace treaty, of trade, those engaging the public purses, those which are relating to the state of the people and the property right of the French abroad, those which modifies the borders of the country);

can put in charge the President of the Republic as well as the ministers

the Sénat (elected for nine years, renewed per third every three years, with the male indirect vote for all, by department):

can propose laws;

vote laws;

control the government, can reverse it;

vote the declaration of war;

authorizes the ratification of certain treaties (the same ones as above)

is constituted in High-Court of Justice to judge the President of the Republic in the event of high treason or the ministers when they committed crimes during the exercise of their functions or in the event of lawsuit for attack with the safety of the State.

See too

Random links: Richard Price | List sovereigns of Mantoue | Léo (footballer) | Acquisition of the language | County of Eastland | Chinzei,_saga