Jul 01 2011
The Best Army in Europe, part 2
Last month I looked at how the French army was perceived by a contemporary British writer. This month I want to summarise the same writer’s account of how conscription worked in practice.
French infantry in action at Waterloo
Obviously, any system of conscription presupposed an efficient bureaucracy because it could not be put into operation without an accurate list of the male population from which the new soldiers would be drawn. Consequently, all areas of Napoleon’s empire (as of 1810, the date of the article) were divided into departments, under a prefect, and sub-divided into districts, under sub-prefects. There were further sub-divisions: cantons and municipalities, under a mayor and a town court. Within his specific area of jurisdiction, each official was required to procure an accurate list of liable males. Furthermore, he was responsible for verifying such lists, which might be achieved by means of secret, unannounced visits. If he found any families that had not co-operated, he was to deliver them to the police.
The lists were drawn up in September of each year. On the 8th an order was published that all males between the ages of twenty and twenty-five should report to a nominated location on the 16th to enrol their names. It was the responsibility of parents or other family members to ensure that this enrolment took place and there was immediate prosecution for “fraudulent evasion of public duty”. Absence from home was no excuse for failure to enrol, since this could be done on the absentee’s behalf by another member of his family.
A French Tirailleur in action
The author of the article makes a telling comparison with Britain, where it was possible to avoid service in the Militia by moving to another parish. In France, anyone who tried this means of avoidance was likely to find himself enrolled in two places.
Once the list had been completed, the minister of war could then notify the senate that a designated number of conscripts were needed for the emperor’s armies. The senate voted for the required number (without question), leaving the minister to alert the departments to the number each would have to furnish, a process that was carried down through the various sub-divisions. Eight days later the municipalities had to conduct a ballot.
This was carried out by first assembling all the potential conscripts. Then the same number of pieces of paper as potential conscripts would be put into an urn, some of them numbered to the total of recruits required. Each man drew in turn, and those who drew a number were regarded as conscripted into the army. In addition, during the same draw, there were further numbered pieces of paper, which constituted those who would serve as a reserve. As the writer mordantly commented:
“The legal condition of the service of the reserve is to march only in cases of necessity; but it is unnecessary to say, that the convenience of government, and the wants of the armies, always constitute such necessity.”
No more than eight days after the ballot detachments were sent by the generals of districts to collect the conscripts. Significantly (if we are thinking of their willingness to serve), they were sent to departments other than their own and were, as far as possible, distributed individually to make sure neighbours did not serve in the same company, or even in the same battalion.
There were only three grounds for exemption from conscription, other than physical inadequacy: the eldest brother of an orphaned family; the only son of a widower or labourer who was over seventy; a military or civil dignitary of the Empire. There was the possibility of substitution, but only with the direct consent of the minister of war, and such consent was very rarely given. Should it be, the cost was beyond the means of all but the richest. As a result, very few sought to use it.
If a man were foolish enough to evade conscription, he would face the full force of the criminal law. For example, should he feign illness, mutilate himself or deliberately contract a disease, he would be sentenced to five years’ hard labour of a kind appropriate to his offence.
If a man marched off as ordered but then proved refractory, he could be sent to a garrison town where he would have to perform hard labour, wearing a uniform which proclaimed his disgrace, and with his head shaved.
The most extreme punishment, for the crime of desertion, was death.
The conscription law was contained in a series of articles, enacted in the days of the Republic, the first of which makes clear the thinking that underpinned the whole system:
“It is the duty of every French citizen to defend the territory of the French republic. This is the duty of every citizen, of whatever rank or condition. If he be poor, it is a duty which he owes his country. If he be rich, it is a duty which he owes to his country and to his property. If he be honourable by possession of any rank in the state, it is a duty which he owes to his country, his property, and to his dignity. The law declares, therefore, that, universally, it is the duty of every Frenchman to defend his country.”
The corollary of this, of course, was that the country had the right to call upon all its citizens, without exception or exemption.
Wellington was inclined to regret his scum of the earth and compare them unfavourably with the French army, where men of all classes served in the ranks. But it is unlikely that even he would have contemplated the application of such a system in Britain; at the very least he would have recognised that only draconian powers, which no parliament was ever likely to pass, would make it possible. And it can surely be argued that the scum of the earth did not disgrace themselves against their conscripted opponents.
1 Royal Military Chronicle, Volume I p.105
An original sabre of the Imperial Guard
_____________________________________________