The Salvation Army in Switzerland
Date: 2026-09-15T04:00:00+00:00
Rights: Public domain in the USA.

The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Salvation Army in Switzerland

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.

Title: The Salvation Army in Switzerland

Author: Josephine Elizabeth Grey Butler

Release date: September 15, 2026 [eBook #79586]

Language: English

Original publication: London: Dyer brothers, 1883

Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/79586

Credits: Richard Tonsing and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This book was produced from scanned images of public domain material from the Google Books project.)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE SALVATION ARMY IN SWITZERLAND ***

Transcriber’s Note:

New original cover art included with this eBook is granted to the public domain.

THE

SALVATION ARMY

IN

SWITZERLAND.

BY

JOSEPHINE E. BUTLER.

London:

DYER BROTHERS,

AMEN CORNER, PATERNOSTER ROW;

PEWTRESS AND CO.,

28, LITTLE QUEEN STREET, LINCOLN’S INN FIELDS, W.C.

1883.

LONDON:

PRINTED BY PEWTRESS & CO.,

Steam Printing Works,

28, LITTLE QUEEN STREET, LINCOLN’S INN FIELDS, W.C.

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER I  .

The Author’s Reasons for taking up the Question of Legal Justice in connection with the Salvation Army.—Opinions of M. Sautter de Blonay and others.—Evangelizing of the Masses.—Salvation by the Police.—Salvation through the Preaching of the Gospel.—Attitude of the Evangelical Alliance in Switzerland.

CHAPTER II  .

Narrative of the Work in Geneva.—Ringleaders of Disturbances.—Protection of Vice.—M. Héridier and the Genevan Government.—Madame de Gasparin.—Decree Closing the Meetings.—Petition of Genevan Citizens.—Falsification of a Cantonal Regulation.—Expulsion of Miss Booth and Miss Charlesworth.

CHAPTER III  .

More detailed Account of the Spiritual Work in Geneva.—The Public Ministry of Women.—Meetings in the Hall of the Reformation, &c.—Encounter between the Powers of Light and Darkness.—Testimony of Converts and Others.—Prolonged Conflict.

CHAPTER IV  .

Miss Booth’s Appeal to the Geneva Council of State.—Its Rejection of her Appeal.—The Appeal to the Federal High Council.—Reply of the Federal Council to her Appeal.—Remarks thereon.—Work in the Canton de Vaud.—Continuance of Persecution.

CHAPTER V  .

Noble Proclamation of the Grand Council of Neuchâtel.—Speedy Departure of that Government from Just Principles.—Meetings in the Hotel Mont Blanc.—Persecution.—Rowdyism.—Houses of Private Citizens Attacked.—Report of the Neuchâtel Council of State on the Salvation Army.—Petitions and Counter-Petitions.—Debate in the Grand Council.—The Unjust Decree.

CHAPTER VI  .

The Work Extended to other Cantons.—“It is John the Baptist whom I Beheaded.”—A Vital Warfare.—The Baptism of Fire.—Great Meeting in the Jura Forest.—Arrest of Miss Booth and Capt. Becquet.—Re-entrance of the Canton of Geneva.—Funeral of Wyssa.—The Arrest in the Cemetery.—Sent Across the Frontier.

CHAPTER VII  .

Imprisonment of Miss Booth and Capt. Becquet at Neuchâtel.—The Trial.—M. Cornaz, Minister of Justice and Police, endeavours to intimidate the Jury.—Popular Excitement.—Crowded Court.—Telegraphic Message from Lord Granville.—Speeches of the Public Prosecutor and the Lawyers for the Defence.—Miss Booth’s Defence.—Verdict of Acquittal.—Public Meeting to demand expulsion of Salvationists.

CHAPTER VIII  .

M. Audeoud defies the Genevan Authorities.—He reads aloud from the Penal Code, and they retire, defeated.—Petitions and Protests.—Switzerland inundated by Foreigners.—Difficulties of true Swiss Patriots in the present times.—Justice.—The Hope of the Future.

THE

SALVATION ARMY IN SWITZERLAND.

CHAPTER I.

It was the hand of a woman which struck the first blow in Switzerland against the work of the Salvation Army, resulting in a course of action on the part of the authorities of that country which has produced astonishment and a righteous indignation in every breast in which there is any sense of justice and of respect for liberty. If, as a woman, I can in any degree vindicate the cause of justice outraged in the person of a fellow woman, a compatriot, I shall be relieved of a solemn sense of responsibility.

I can, in fact, no longer hold my peace. I have withheld any expression of opinion hitherto, because of the love and respect I have for Switzerland, the country in which I have been so frequently resident. In common with all my countrymen and women we love that land, not only because of its unparalleled beauty and the health and repose we have so often sought and found here, but because we believed it was a free and a God-fearing and a law-abiding people, into whose midst strangers were constantly welcomed. We believed that it was a land in which liberty and human dignity were respected, a land where the extremes of wealth and poverty being unknown, there was an absence of many ills and sorrows which afflict our own country; a land in which, since it was penetrated by the light of the Reformation, absolute religious liberty had secured the free evangelising of the people, as well as open discussion of all important questions.

This was the general impression among my countrymen concerning Switzerland. The events which have recently transpired have opened our eyes to the fact that the elements above mentioned, forming some of the essential conditions of a nation’s welfare, have been undergoing a gradual process of undermining and decay; and we are forced to look back over fifty years or more of the past history of that country in order to read rightly the meaning of these startling events. Such a retrospect reveals above all things a decay of religious faith. This in itself is sufficient to account for the undermining of liberty, of respect for individual right, and of reverence for womanhood. These are followed by violations, repeated and persisted in, not alone of the written Constitution of the country, but of the first principles accepted by republican peoples—the principles of justice, and of equality of all citizens before the law, as well as the principles of international honour in the maintaining inviolate of treaties made with foreign nations in the interests of freedom and of peace.

A few words of personal explanation seem to be expedient, in respect to my own participation in the present conflict. For fourteen years I have been engaged in a work, now sufficiently widely known, a conflict in which the opposing parties respectively attack and defend the identical principles which are now at stake in the legal conflict into which the Salvationists have been forced to enter. The Federation for which I work, primarily the opponent of officially legalised vice, has found itself inevitably drawn into the sacred duty of publicly defending throughout the world the highest principles which govern human society,—constitutional liberty, the rights of the individual, respect for law, equality of all citizens before the law, and just and impartial administration of the laws. The Federation, so far as its representatives are Christian, holds up everywhere and on all occasions the principle of individual right and personal dignity on the basis of Christ’s teaching concerning the value of the individual soul, a value to be measured only by the price paid for its redemption. The difficulty which the Federation has met with in the propagation of the above-named great principles lies chiefly in the fact that we have been ordained, so to speak, to contend for them in the case of individuals who are the least interesting of all human beings to society, in the person of the most despised, the weakest, and, as men of the world express it, the most worthless of human creatures, namely, the outcast woman. Nevertheless, (or perhaps by the very reason of the low and despised estate of her whose defence the Federation has undertaken), the conflict on behalf of great principles fought out in her case has been extraordinarily fruitful, and has carried its vitalizing influence more or less into every civilized country. We expected such a result, because we took our stand on eternal and undying principles of truth and of justice.

On re-visiting Switzerland this year, I saw the very principles for which we have so long contended, violated in the person, not of one of these poor outcasts, but in that of a young English woman of pure and holy character and life, a friend, a sister in Christ, one whose only motive of action is a deep compassion for our poor sinful and suffering humanity, and a desire to give her whole being for the fulfilment of her portion of responsibility in the gathering in of the harvest of souls for which the Lord of the harvest is waiting. I asked myself, “can I stand still, silent, in the presence of such a collision as this between the great principles I have been accustomed to defend, and the egotism and injustice of those who have openly violated them, of those Christians even who being ‘at ease in Zion,’ are,—unconsciously it may be,—abetting the betrayers of liberty of conscience in this land?” I have said that I hesitated to speak, because the facts to be recorded are not honourable to Switzerland. But is it the true heart of Switzerland, is it the worthy portion of Swiss citizenship which are represented by those at present in possession of political power? No. There are leading men, and many men and women of every class there who have not forgotten the honourable traditions of their noble past. There has been a terrible decay of religious faith, but there are yet believers; there is a great increase of the class of “jouisseurs,” of those who live for material ends alone, of drunkards, of careless livers, of cynics, of vicious and sensual men; yet there is a people within this people who are as a salt to prevent universal corruption. My respect and love for this true people of Switzerland embolden me to expose without mercy the violations of justice, the infidelity, and the unworthy spirit of those who at this day are misrepresenting that country before the world. Again, I have hesitated somewhat to speak, because of the counsels of some of my fellow-workers in the Federation who, strongly objecting to the methods of evangelizing adopted by the Salvation Army, or not fully believing the message delivered by them, judge that it might be disadvantageous to the work of the Federation for one of its prominent members to be identified with them even to the extent of protesting against an injustice from which they are suffering. With all respect for the advices of certain members of our league, I have yet to learn that any good cause has ever suffered on account of the truthfulness of its advocates, and I am convinced that it is now my duty to record my deep personal convictions both on the legal and the religious side of the matter before us. I desire, however, while doing so, emphatically to declare, that I here speak as an individual only, and that I do not in the smallest degree implicate in what I say, the international Federation for which I labour, nor any single individual belonging to it. Above all, I wish it to be understood that what I now do is done without the concurrence, and, I may even say, without the knowledge, of those members of the Federation who reside in Switzerland, the country which is the seat of its Continental Administration.

One word further, expressive of my personal appreciation of the subject before us. I am not a member of the Salvation Army; I speak as an outside observer—an impartial observer so far as all questions of the methods and administration of the Army are concerned. The adoption of military titles seems to me open to objection; but I do not feel any duty imposed on me at this moment to criticize the methods employed. I believe—with a well-known and distinguished Swiss gentleman, M. Sautter de Blonay—that these things are external to the real and essential work of the Army. Madame de Gasparin endeavoured to prove that the military character of the Army identifies it with Jesuitism. M. Sautter replies: “The success of Jesuitism is not due alone to its military character, nor to the passive obedience required of its adherents in every act of life; but much more is it due to the absolute subjection imposed in matters of thought and of faith. Herein lies the strength of Jesuitism, but herein also lies its criminality. The Salvation Army is entirely Protestant—so entirely Protestant, that it imposes no special form of belief on its converts, (beyond the broad, essential doctrines of our Christian faith), but leaves them free to attach themselves to any among all the different religious denominations around them.” The outward organization may be modified, or even abandoned in its present form. It is the spirit and the essential work of the Army of which alone I desire to speak.

In respect to these I may be said to be a partizan. I am content, nay proud, to be one, in this sense. I thank God for the honour granted to me of being permitted, in however feeble a manner, to plead the cause of these evangelists. If we regard truly, and without prejudice, their motives of action, their spiritual power, and the astounding success which has been granted to them in their efforts for the lost, lapsed classes of society, we Christians may well fear to lift our hand or our voice against them; for God is with them. That they sometimes make mistakes, all must confess. Where do we find a church, a missionary agency, a Christian organization on the earth which is perfect, or which stands clear of blame in all respects, either as regards the occasional scandals caused by some of its individual members, or the doubtful tendency of some portion of its own practical direction? To me it has ever seemed to redound to the honour of God that He can and does make use of imperfect instruments in working out His perfect designs for the good of man. It is true, He requires His instruments in spiritual matters to be perfect in one sense—in one sense only—that is in the will to be His instruments, and to bear and to do His will in all things. He requires absolute sincerity and whole-hearted self-surrender in this respect; but beyond this, where shall we find among earth’s records of holy and vital work done for God, anything like perfection? Errors of judgment, and imperfections of many kinds have entered more or less into the work of all God’s chosen instruments since the days of the Patriarchs and Apostles. In the perfection and simplicity of a whole-hearted devotion to the world’s salvation, it seems to me, few, if any, Christians have ever excelled those of the despised and much criticized Salvation Army. What is their aim? To quote again M. Sautter de Blonay[1]—“As I understand it, their great thought is this:—the world is being lost, in a great revolt, ever more and more violent, against God. The Gospel of our Salvation, that restorer of the individual man, and, through the individual man, of Society, is unknown to the great mass of human beings, in spite of the efforts made, up to the present time, by Christians. The masses know only, on the one hand, what a materialistic science may have imparted to them; and, on the other, what they may have learned from a corrupt Roman Catholicism. At all costs, the Gospel—the glad tidings of Salvation—must be proclaimed to all the poor, and if the churches are not sufficient for the task, we must do it; and, if it is necessary, in order to speak to the Chinese, to dress as the Chinese dress, we will adopt that dress, &c.... It cannot be too much insisted upon, that what they offer is not offered to us—Christians—but to those who remain to this day outside the reach of all religious influences.”

As one who has seen something of the miseries and sorrows and degradation of humanity in the persons of the most disinherited of God’s creatures, it is impossible that I should not from the first moment have hailed with joy the advent of this advanced guard of God’s great “company of preachers” of the latter days by whom the gospel shall be announced to “every creature!” It is impossible but that my sympathies should go with them, and that I should praise God, daily, as I do, because the dark lot of the world’s outcasts is now beginning to be illuminated by a fuller ray of light and hope, because more of the hungry multitudes are beginning to be fed, and because the rebels begin to lay down their arms and to be reconciled to their God. I marvel how anyone whose heart has bled for the woes of humanity, and whose desire, (far above and beyond his loyalty to any particular sect or form of worship), is that this poor humanity may find God and be at rest, can fail to rejoice in what our eyes are at this day permitted to see. I fail to understand how such can find the heart or the leisure for endless criticism and reiterated attack on points which seem secondary and minor. I speak with all respect for those who differ from me, or who proclaim themselves at variance in matters of grave and primary import with the Salvation Army. I bear in mind also while I write, and thank God for, every Christian effort made and for all the noble work done by those whom He is calling to harvest work in every church and sect, even in those which most disapprove the methods of the Army.

For myself, however, I am prostrated in humiliation before God, because, (albeit this new evangelizing force was a dream of my childhood, and has been at all times the desire of my heart), I have, through the weakness of my faith, so late in life, recognised the possibility of its fulfilment, and only recognised that possibility when it is presented to me in part as a realized fact. But now I rejoice and thank God.

No doubt many of the ways of the Army are very repugnant to the more refined classes of Society; yet, in general their manner of dealing with the people appears to be excellently and beautifully adapted to win, comfort, instruct and control the classes whom they seek to save. I have been especially struck with their humanness; a quality much wanting in some Christian workers. It has been lately said, “Preachers and Christian workers are so busy about saving souls, that they forget that those whom they have to save are men and women.” Our Saviour, Jesus Christ, presented Himself to those who sought Him as a most complete Saviour, the Saviour of the soul and the body, of the whole being. He freed and blessed the whole man, woman, or child, who sought His aid.

We may imagine, a poor, uncared-for, perhaps guilty and police-hunted creature of our streets entering a church, and hearing a discourse concerning pardon and peace. He is touched; he feels that the preacher is full of concern and love for souls, for the souls of all those before him; and he has spoken of One who gave His life for the lost. The poor outcast of society leaves the church and mingles again in the crowd; he feels again that he, personally, is of no account to anyone, and is never sure after all that the message was for him, or that it is possible for anyone to care for him. He needs a human encounter, a living hand to grasp his, a personal recognition, in order to force into his dark and hopeless soul the knowledge that God loves him; he needs in fact that the assurance should come to him from the Eternal Father, as to the prophet of old, “thou hast found grace in My sight, and I know thee by name.” This, the human side of the work of ministering to souls, the Salvation Army understand well. They open the door of hope to the poor, to sinners, criminals, rebels, outcasts, by proclaiming the worth, the dignity, the preciousness of each individual man and woman among them. Their kindly smiles are ever ready, their friendly hands are always held out to grasp the hands of the dirtiest toilers in the holes and corners of our cities, hands stained with crime, even with blood! “Come! You are welcome! God loves you, God needs you,” is the word addressed to each and to all. Rude rebuffs and insulting conduct do not discourage them. They are ready with good-natured banter and repartee, with a humorous sally, or homely persuasion, as the case may be.

That exquisite gift of God to human nature—a sense of humour,—prevails largely among them, and is recognised by them as one of the attributes of human beings which is to be purified and made use of in His service. The solemn fears of some persons concerning the “eccentricities” of the Salvation Army may be attributed to some extent to their absolute incapacity for comprehending this almost universal attribute of at least the lower classes of human beings—this humorousness, this playfulness, which, delicately handled, aids and softens all our dealings with our fellow men. It is a quality which has undoubtedly a tendency to run to levity and coarseness, but on the other hand it is intimately allied with all that is most tender and sweet in human nature. Solemnity is not necessarily reverence. It required in my own case an effort of many years to emancipate myself from the dismal and repelling impression made upon me in childhood by attending some services in a Scottish Presbyterian Church. The very walk of the churchgoers as they approached the church, the artificially solemn manner and peculiarly lugubrious tones of the preacher, the slowness of utterance, the heavy hymn tunes!—these may be acceptable to persons of one character or age, peculiarly constituted; but the gloom, and estrangement, for a time, from all religious teaching that they worked in myself as a child lead me to think it probable they have had the same effect on many others—children not perhaps in age, but in knowledge and in judgment. On this subject, M. Sautter de Blonay writes:—“Now, in every nation the proportion of children is great. It is not only those who are yet immature in age who are in reality children, but all those may be called so in all classes of life, who in the domain of religion are novices in the higher gymnastics of the intellect and the conscience. It is these that the Salvation Army seeks to reach.... They have even expressed regret that believers, spiritual adults, have come, through curiosity, or some kind of sympathy to their meetings, for they felt that they had nothing to give to these.... It is undoubtedly a fact that in our churches, and even in our evangelizing fields of labour, we frequently understand very little how to speak to children in spiritual matters a language which they can understand. How often, I myself, who however am not altogether a child in this respect, after having listened in one of our places of worship, to a good and beautiful Christian dissertation, have left the place wearied, exhausted. I wanted a little fortifying, a little consolation, a little pure milk; and they gave me for nourishment a dish of arguments which my weak intelligence or my lassitude made me incapable of digesting. A child in music, I am unable to comprehend the high harmonies of the German masters; but the simple song of an Italian, with few notes, moves and charms me. Have we not often heard at the foot of our Jura some honest peasant woman declare that she liked much better to go to the little meetings of Madame —— than to the church or the chapel, because there she could understand at least what was said? In thus speaking, I do not attack the preaching which is in vogue in our churches: it is the fruit of our wholesome traditions; it must be respected, and may not be attacked without danger. I only maintain that though that teaching may nourish and edify the churches, it does not tend to enlarge them, and but very feebly attracts towards them the mass of our population. Those stragglers, wanderers, rebels against the religion of the churches are precisely the people whom the Salvation Army hope to attract by their innovations, (in form and method). It is possible that this reaction may go beyond what is just or useful. But when I look at the activity, the love of souls, the gentleness, the spirit of self-consecration of these our brothers—not only, as has been said, to the Army, but to God—when, on the other hand, I look at my own inactivity, and the comfort in which I live, I blush for myself, not for them.”

The Army no doubt owes some portion of its success in arresting the attention and awakening the interest of the lower classes to the fact that they never allow dullness to reign in their assemblies. Joy is permitted to have free expression among them. Gladness of heart on account of a newly found salvation, or of full soul-freedom gained, is more unconventionally expressed among the inhabitants of our city slums than it would be in a drawing-room conference or a cathedral or church filled with refined and educated people. The cry against the Army for its “irreverence” is often uttered in entire ignorance of the facts of that human society into the midst of which their influence has come as a light in a dark place. They are simple, ignorant people, those who scandalize us; they are a literal people; they interpret the Scriptures perhaps too literally. They read our Saviour’s words to His disciples, “rejoice ye, and leap for joy.” They read in the Hebrew prophets the reiterated call to sing and “make a noise,” to “shout for joy,” because “great is the Holy One in the midst of thee!” Moreover, they are actually filled with joy, with the irrepressible mirthfulness of prisoners loosed, of bondmen set free; they have no high poetic speech at command, they are not practised as we, in a more refined class, are, in the polite repression of every natural or spiritual emotion; and I, for one, neither blame nor wonder, therefore, when I see the pleasant quickening of the pulses induced by joy of heart, develop into some energetic physical movement, or a shout of praise set to an old familiar, rapid song-tune hitherto devoted to the service of folly or evil only. Can we justly blame the leaders of this great movement because they do not succeed in forming, or do not even think it wise to attempt to form out of these children of nature, (a very rough and unpolished nature), polished gentlefolks, or even such men and women as we meet in the decent lower middle class in England? It is the spontaneity, however, alone of all such outward expressions of the spiritual life which is their apology and raison d’être, and which alone gives them the genuine grace, which, in my eyes at least, they possess. If once they are studied for a certain rude effect, or are announced as something to be performed, they become puerile, unmeaning, and misleading. So far, however, as the leaders of the Army meetings give full permission for the spontaneous expression of feeling, I take it they are wise,—wise in respect of that portion of the people whom they chiefly desire to save.

Our fellow Christians in Switzerland may possibly be scandalized by the latitude granted in England to the eccentricities of revivalists. Although my main object here is to present a true picture to English readers of what has recently occurred in Switzerland, on the other hand, I wish that what the Salvation Army has done for England, should also be known in Switzerland. If an adequate conception could be formed by the religious teachers in Switzerland of the actual condition of our great cities, they would cease, I think, to condemn any methods by which the awful problems presented by it may be brought nearer to their solution. The population of London exceeds that of the whole of Switzerland. We have, besides, our immense industrial cities of the provinces with their teeming populations. Every evil, every difficulty of modern life is proportionately magnified, and the sources of true life are choked, so to speak, by the very exuberance of life itself, the seething, straining human life, which has become a mere desperate or sullen struggle for its own existence, and for defence against insupportable pressure on every side. Christian effort has been put forth constantly and vigorously. Much good work is done among the poor. The churches have taxed their ingenuity in many directions. But below the stratum of the decent, struggling poor, is a lower stratum still of beings who are scarcely reached at all by Christians of the better classes: these are below poverty, and beyond the pale of all civilizing influences. Again, beneath this, deeper down still, is another stratum of humanity—a class of beings of whose very existence statesmen and philanthropists only become aware at long intervals, when some shock and upheaving of the political or social ground brings up to the light of day these thousands of miserable beings—unwashed, uncombed, scarcely clothed, hungry, violent, revengeful, sullen, and only subdued for long periods, not by any principle of self-restraint, but by the weight of a dull despair. We have wondered, perhaps, in passing through the streets when some great public event had called up to the light this underground population, whence they come, how they live, where it is that these multitudes are stowed away, above all, what is their future, and the future of the nation which harbours them. There are among them men scarcely human in appearance, birds of prey, bull-dogs, low-browed, and cunning; wrinkled and old and careworn even in youth; full of deadly hatred against their fellow men and against society. Can we wonder at it? If such were our own condition, and our hearts had never been visited by a ray of heaven’s light, should not we also hate? These men are the terror of the police at all times; of our statesmen and political men occasionally. We walk and live above a volcano which may burst forth, nay will burst forth, one of these days, unless these incipient elements of impending revolution can be cleared away; and how is this to be done? The Salvation Army has given us an answer; it has brought to us at least the hope of a solution. It is these dangerous, degraded and forgotten beings, these haters, these violent spirits, to whom, first, the Salvationists addressed themselves. They have sought them out in the lowest and most dangerous of their haunts; they have tried the power of the name of Jesus, and invoked the transforming influence of the Holy Ghost where they had never been so fully tried before; and they have seen the wild beast changed to the lamb, the hater filled with kindness and pity, the coarse and low and vicious become pure and gentle and holy in life. There is no testimony in favour of the Salvation Army half so powerful or so eloquent as the testimony of these transfigured lives and faces. Those who have not seen them can scarcely imagine them. I have seen them.

It happened that I passed one day by the door of a hall in a crowded part of London where Salvationists of the humblest class were praying. I entered. At the moment my mind was burdened by thoughts connected with the difficulty and sadness of my own special mission. I kneeled in a corner, endeavouring to free myself of the burden, in prayer. I suppose that some tears or look of sadness attracted the attention of some of those near; for I became aware that around me there was a little group, who, although I was a perfect stranger to them, had taken my burden on their own hearts, and were pleading for me. “Hear her, Lord,” they said, “O give her all her heart’s desire! Lord, we don’t know what she is wanting; but O give her all she asks, and that soon.” Wonderful kindness! blessed ministering! And who were these ministers? The poorest of the people, men and women who had been unearthed from those dark dwellings of that lowest stratum of society I have spoken of. One of the group was a young “jail-bird,” a discharged prisoner, of perhaps eighteen or twenty years of age, lean, lantern-jawed, gaunt, clothed almost in rags, with that look of prematurely developed acuteness and sorrowfulness which stamps the countenances of the young in that class. Years of misery and crime had set their mark on his poor features, but through and above all shone the new-found happiness. The expression of his lean, sunken face as he raised his eyes in prayer for me, a stranger to him, reminded me of pictures I have seen, in Italian galleries, of St. Francis, the apostle of poverty, in rapt communion with God. It was a brightness such as one may see among the Alps when the glory of the setting sun shines upon some worn and storm-blasted peak, and it stands out radiant, as one of “God’s sentinels” bathed in a light not of earth. Parenthetically I may remark that if I—who am not friendless or lonely—was so deeply touched by the loving intercession on my behalf of these poor saved outcasts, these strangers, how much must such ministering attract and win converts to God and adherents to the Army from among those who have not my advantages, and who perhaps have never met with a word of true sympathy before?

“But,” I hear many say, “is not this a temporary emotion? Does it last?” “Yes, it lasts;” I reply. None can say that there is never any falling away; but there are solid and lasting results which can be given to those who doubt;—facts and figures in abundance. There are magistrates and judges finding little or nothing to do at assizes, in towns where crime had before been rife; whole streets reformed; salvation, spiritual, moral and social—granted to families, and to entire neighbourhoods.

The modern fetishism, faith in the police, and in government by police, is a danger and delusion towards which all civilized nations are rushing more or less rapidly. It is a tyranny which establishes itself no less under the shelter of a liberal or democratic Government, than under an autocracy or empire. It has become in some nations a standing menace to liberty, and an embarrassment even to the governments which, having once given way to its encroachments, in vain attempt later to restrict its functions. This is the power by which it is imagined that society may be controlled and governed, and by which virtue and morality may be secured. Fatal delusion! England herself is blinded as much as any other nation to the dangers of this police rule. She is forging, link by link, a chain for her own enslavement, which she will find it difficult to break when she awakes to the fact that in forging it she has cast down constitutional safeguards, and abandoned true self-government. There is a cry arising from the nations, “What must we do to be saved,” politically and socially saved? For the most part they have recourse in their extremity to their fancied saviour, the police. New laws are created and placed entirely for their execution in the hands of the police. The power of the police is re-enforced continually. The most august functions are exercised by it; the most delicate problems of our social and domestic life are abandoned to it for solution. It can make “regulations which have the force of law,” may interpret law without recourse to legal authority, and exercises over a vast portion of the citizens a power (a tyranny, rather) which is practically irresponsible.

Against this encroaching fetishism, this darkening tyranny of the future, this hopeless attempt to regenerate and rule society by outward compulsion, what have we to set? Nothing, nothing, except a return to first principles, to the inflexible rule of justice, to the respect of man by man; nothing except a renewal of faith in divine and eternal truth, a moral regeneration, a practical return to the simplicity of Christ; nothing except the preaching of the everlasting gospel to every creature, and a full realization of the gift of the Spirit bestowed at first on the day of Pentecost, and to be bestowed again in like manner when there shall be found faith in the earth to claim the full accomplishment of the promise.

If God who uses the weak, the foolish things of this world, the things that are not, to do what the strong, the wise, the firmly established cannot do, shall we murmur against Him, or refuse to rejoice in His work? If He pleases to rebuke His Church and people, and to “provoke them to jealousy by a people that are no people,” shall we suffer our jealousy to express itself by criticism, blame, bitterness, persecution, violation of law, illegal judgments and interdictions?

The appearance in our days of this wonderful Salvation Army is a crucial test above all things of the existence among Christians of true love for humanity and zeal for the salvation of men. How is it that in certain parts of Switzerland, where there are the most perfect schools of Theology, ministerial training and doctrinal teaching the most careful and complete, so few are gathered in daily from the multitudes who are living merely for this world’s interests or for gross pleasures? I think it is because the hearts of the pastors and other Christians are not filled with that holiest passion, that unquenchable fire of love for souls which “beareth all things, endureth all things,” which literally gives up all for Christ, and is able to do and to dare all things, even unto death.

It would scarcely have been possible for injustice to have been pushed so far as it has been against the Salvationists in Switzerland, had not the Churches largely given their sanction to that injustice by their attitude of silence, or of displeasure against what they may have deemed an impertinent or needless encroachment on their own spiritual territory. It is difficult to express the sorrow of heart, the consternation which the contemplation of this part of the question has awakened in some souls. The spirit manifested by many professing Christians is very far from the spirit of Christ. “We saw one casting out devils in Thy name,” said the disciples, “and we forbade him, because he followeth not with us.” “Forbid him not,” was the Master’s reply, “for he that is not against us is for us,” and, “there is no man that casteth out devils in My name that can lightly speak evil of Me.” This selfsame sign does follow the Salvationists; in His name they do cast out evil spirits. It cannot be denied. In the spiritual power that has been granted to them consists the rebuke given to professing Christians out of whom the life has died. In this matter judgment has begun at the household of God, and no sentence of expulsion against the evangelists will cause that judgment to cease.

The antagonism of the Christian portion of the community to the Salvation Army has been much more marked in Switzerland than in our own country. Nevertheless there is much to take to heart in this matter among us, English. It has been said that the concurrence of three social Powers is necessary for the suppression of the messengers of an unwelcome truth, viz., the Government, the rough, and the religious professor. Solemn and painful thoughts are suggested by the fact that there are Christians in Switzerland, (happily with many marked exceptions,) who have, more or less unconsciously, aided their godless Government and the mob of persecutors in this matter. The greater their success in driving out from their midst the foreign evangelists, the greater will be the loss to souls and the ultimate dishonour to the authorities who, encouraged by the tacit sanction of Christians, have committed an injustice, the sound of which will ring throughout Christendom. It seems that so great has been the “ease in Zion” in that country, that no attack could have been made upon the kingdom of darkness, without a general uneasiness, excitement and resentment being felt, not only among the irreligious, but among Zion’s watchmen who have slept. Nevertheless, the very baptism of suffering through which the persecuted Salvationists have passed, may be the precursor of renewed spiritual life for that nation. Such is our hope and confidence. The Salvationists (I do not speak of the English, but of the Swiss promoters of the movement,) are becoming stronger every day; while a movement is already in course of inauguration in those very cantons whose governments have united in an act of injustice, with the view of establishing a league in defence of civil and religious liberty.

Before quitting this portion of my subject, it is just that I should record the fact that a number of respected citizens of Geneva, who were members of the “Evangelical Alliance,” have resigned their membership of the Genevan Committee of that league on account of the refusal of that Committee to act, in this instance, in favour of religious liberty.

The Evangelical Alliance was founded in 1846, one of its first objects being the defence of religious liberty.[2] It does not impose on its members any sacrifice of their private religious views, but it holds them to an engagement not to depart, in any discussion of their views, from the true spirit of Christian brotherhood. It has interposed in favour of persecuted Christians in Europe and elsewhere, sending deputations to various Governments to demand the repeal of oppressive laws or the liberation of prisoners confined for conscience sake. Rarely have these interventions been unsuccessful. The Alliance interposed on behalf of the Madiaï in Florence, of Matamoros and his companions in Spain, of Missionaries and of converted Musselmans in Turkey and in Syria, of persecuted Lutherans in the Baltic provinces of Russia, of Lutheran Pastors at Hesse-Darmstadt, of Baptists in Germany, Russia, Sweden and Switzerland, of French Missionaries among the Basutos, of English in New Caledonia, of Nestorians in Prussia, of the Mortara family in Rome, of Jews in Russia, of Communities founded by American Missionaries in Upper Egypt, of a Pastor imprisoned in Spain, of Reformers in Bohemia, &c., &c. There are Committees of this Association at Geneva, and several other Swiss towns, these different Committees forming a special branch of the Evangelical Alliance with its centre at Berne. The refusal of this Swiss branch of the Alliance to act on the occasion with which we are dealing was so great a shock to certain members of those Committees that they saw there was no mode of action open to them except to resign their membership of that branch. Their resignation was couched in the following terms:—

“Geneva, March 22nd, 1883.

“TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE EVANGELICAL ALLIANCE AT GENEVA.

“DEAR SIR,—The decision which was taken in the meeting of March 15th by the Geneva Committee of the Evangelical Alliance, lays upon us the painful duty of withdrawing from this society in accordance with a formal vote.

“At a meeting on March 12th, the Committee, after two long deliberations, at a three weeks’ interval, resolved first, to address an appeal to the Council of State of our canton in favour of religious liberty, which had been violated in connection with the Salvation Army. Secondly, to send an address to the Rev. W. Booth in order to express to him in a friendly way the objections and fears which several of the regulations and proceedings of his association are raising in the minds of most of the members of the Committee, and also to let him know that an appeal in favour of liberty for his work had been made to the cantonal authorities.

“In the meeting of the 15th, same month, the Committee, in consequence of several facts which had occurred in their midst, no important outward circumstance having changed the question itself, repealed the resolution of the 12th, and decided that nothing should be done. We are convinced that in acting thus, the Committee has failed to see the duties which are laid on the corps representing in Geneva the great and noble idea of the Evangelical Alliance. All the traditions of this association, its former achievements, the spirit even which called it to life, constitute it the faithful watchman of religious liberty.

“The general conference held at Geneva in 1861, had even passed a resolution which has been referred to, both in the motion presented to the Committee by one of us on February 19th last, and in the draft of the letter to the Council of State proposed the 12th of March by another member of the Committee.

“This resolution runs as follows:—

“‘The Committee of the Evangelical Alliance established in the various countries of the world are invited to watch over the interests of religious liberty, to look carefully to any breach it might suffer, to examine thoroughly all communications made on this subject, and to correspond at once with the other Committees of the Alliance, to deliberate on the best means of re-establishing or maintaining this precious liberty.’

“Now we have seen with our own eyes, in this our town, so proud of its light and its liberties, in this our country open to the free expounding and discussion of all ideas, even of the newest, the strangest, the most anti-Christian, the most anti-social—we have seen religious meetings exposed to violent and rude attacks, and finally prohibited by the Government. Harmless persons have been persecuted, insulted and ill-treated for the sake of religion; strangers have been brutally expelled by the police without having been guilty of any other fault than that of holding their own opinions and their own religious practices. And the Geneva Committee of the Evangelical Alliance considers it right to maintain silence before such facts!

“What then will be the attitude of the Alliance, if called upon in future as it has already been in the past, to make common cause with some of its members in a delegation in order to remonstrate with some Sovereign who may have tolerated such enormities on the part of some of his governors of provinces, prefects or pachas? As for us, we believe that we must cast out the beam in our own eye before trying to pull out the mote or even the beam which may be in our brother’s eye.

“Is it possible to say that religious liberty is not at stake? Perhaps not our own religious liberty. And yet, are there any among us Geneva people who do not feel that a blow has been struck at their own right of seeking edification where they choose to find it?

“True, our religious liberty remains untouched for the present; but is our own liberty the only liberty to be respected? None can deny that the prohibited meetings were religious meetings. Whatever efforts may be made to attribute another character to these meetings, this point is indisputable.

“Opinions on the doctrines and proceedings of the Salvation Army may vary, and they do vary; but religious liberty is not defined only as liberty for doctrines and religious forms which are approved of and sufferable; it also means liberty for doctrines and forms which are disapproved. So long as there is no crime, no contravention of the laws, full liberty is granted. Crimes and contraventions of law come within the province only of the tribunals. Religious liberty then, has been violated; it is still violated, and it will continue to be violated so long as either the decrees which prohibit the meetings of the Salvation Army or those which have ordered the expulsion of some of its members continue to exist.

“England, with its Established Church, France, with its tendencies so unfavourable to Christianity, both tolerate the Salvation Army; Geneva, with its pretensions to largeness and to liberality, refuses to tolerate it! The Committee of the Evangelical Alliance ought not to have passed over in silence such a state of things.

“Our Committee ought also to have acted from another point of view. The Evangelical Alliance has intervened in favour of Jews, Roman Catholics, and many others. How much more important are the duties entailed on such a league when the liberty at stake is that of brothers who boldly hold aloft the standard of Jesus Christ, and whose faith and hope are the same as our own.

“We take objection to several points in their method of evangelisation, perhaps also to several secondary points of doctrine held by them; these objections are felt more strongly by some of our members than by others; but we cannot deny that the Salvationists whom we have seen at work at Geneva all bear the character of faithful, convinced and devoted Christians. This being so, the Evangelical Alliance which exists precisely for the purpose of manifesting to the world the essential unity existing among all the disciples of Jesus, our Saviour and our God, a unity which rises above all the diversities which, under the name of churches or sects, have been created by human weakness; the Evangelical Alliance which professes to gather into one group all who seek their salvation at the foot of the cross, is silent in face of this prohibition of meetings for prayer! It contemptuously passes by, under the pretext that many of its members have no sympathy with these people,—the Salvationists,—or that they even entirely disapprove their mode of action. We cannot, we will not, follow the Alliance in adopting such an attitude. It is true that we, the undersigned, have no authority to speak in the name of the Evangelical Alliance; but since the Geneva Committee, who alone could have done it, refuses to protest, we do so in the only way in our power;—we withdraw from the Geneva Committee.

“But on leaving the Geneva Committee, we declare openly that we do not mean to leave the Evangelical Alliance itself. On the contrary, our wish is to be faithful to the spirit of the Alliance. We remain members of it, and we remain attached to it with all our heart. Nor do we mean to break the bonds of fraternity and of co-operation which unite personally several of us with many members of your Committee. A clear position taken on the ground of principles can only make us more desirous of showing our personal sympathies to brothers with whom we are separated on a special point.

“Yours respectfully, &c.,

[Signed]      “TH. AUDEOUD, J. P. DARDIER, FR. DE MORSIER, A. DE MEURON, JAMES BALMER, D. LENOIR, P. BOURNE, GD. FILLIOL, G. TOPHEL, PH. PRIVAT.”

The “Inner Mission” of France holds much the same position in regard to this matter as the Swiss branch of the Evangelical Alliance. One of its members having become an “Auxiliary” of the Army, was requested by the authorities of that Association to sign a paper promising that he would “request to have his name erased from the list of the Auxiliaries, and that henceforth he would take no part in any of their meetings public or private.” He declined to surrender his liberty to the extent of so doing, and in consequence was obliged to send in his resignation to the Committee of the Inner Mission.

I have here dwelt chiefly on the attitude of the religious world towards the invading army of Evangelists. Of the deadly hatred on the part of those outside all religious communions which they have encountered in Switzerland, I shall speak in the course of the subsequent narrative, in presenting the facts of the official and governmental action in the matter. With regard to the latter, English readers may be assured that there are many Swiss who are now fully awakened by the tyrannous conduct of the Cantonal and Federal Governments in this direction, to the extreme dangers of the “Radicalisme Autoritaire,” of which they have long been suspicious. They are asking themselves how long their political independence and unity are likely to last, or ought to last, under such conditions. The persecution of the Salvation Army presents itself to them as a question above all the minor and petty objections raised by the persecutors to excuse their own action—i.e., as a plain question of religious liberty of the most elementary kind. A Swiss gentleman writes:—“To my mind, this persecution aims at the suppression of all religion, not at one form of it alone. It is a pure piece of dogmatic atheism. France will not probably go so far as Switzerland seems now to be going. The suppression of the Salvation Army is only one step in the series which tends to the suppression of the Christian morality.”

But we have confidence, that whatever of tribulation and conflict may be at hand, these gloomiest predictions will not be fulfilled. For the work of the new Evangelists is prospering and progressing daily, both outside and in the Churches, even while its leaders are banished, or forbidden to meet and to speak.

Such has ever been the effect of attempts to stamp out a divine seed once sown, or to extinguish the spark of divine fire once kindled in the souls of God’s people. Go on, if you will, police, mobs and Governments, in the way on which you have entered! Persecute, forbid, spy, hunt, fine, insult and slay! You will only fortify the movement which you hate, and help to build up, on the strongest foundation which can be laid, the living Church of the future in Switzerland.

CHAPTER II.

NARRATIVE OF FACTS.

I ask a patient perusal of the following facts. After such a perusal, I believe that the conviction of every reader will be, that the legal position of the Salvation Army in Switzerland is absolutely unassailable.

Neither the Federal nor the Cantonal Governments have succeeded—though straining the text of their laws to the uttermost in their endeavour to do so—in proving a single breach of the Law, properly understood, against the Army since it entered Switzerland in December, 1882. I shall comment later on the degree of the responsibility of the Army in the breach of Cantonal Orders acknowledged by Swiss Jurists themselves to be illegal in the sense of their being a violation of the Constitutional Laws of the Country.

It may be well at the outset to mention a few plain facts in order to disabuse the minds of the English public of a number of erroneous ideas which seem to be generally current with reference to the action and methods of the Salvation Army upon the Continent, and in Switzerland in particular.

1. Not a single placard or notice was ever posted in the Canton of Geneva which was not first approved and passed by the Police authorities themselves in conformity with their regulations. It was for the Swiss authorities to say whether any of the placards thus submitted to them were calculated unduly to excite the public mind. 2. Street processions, such as those which take place in England, being prohibited by the Genevese law, the Salvation Army never once even attempted to have such a procession, or any collective manifestation in the public streets. It is therefore needless to observe that no band of music belonging to the Salvation Army ever paraded the streets. Madame de Gasparin’s book, as well as the religious and secular Press, made frequent mention of drums, bands, &c. What is the fact? The only instruments ever used (in part due to the fact that the Salvation Army had not had time to form a band) were a cornet, two violins, and a piano, which were used in the private halls hired by the Salvation Army for its meetings.

From the commencement the leaders of the Salvation Army were very careful to observe the laws of the land; and since the persecutions, they have frequently challenged the authorities to prove them guilty of a single breach of their laws. Through the force of circumstances arising from the strong prohibitory laws created in the Canton of Geneva for the suppression of the Jesuits, the outward manifestations of the Salvation Army work were altogether devoid of some of the external features which characterize it in England.

The uniforms—very plain and inoffensive—and the Army titles, were retained; and women continued to preach the Gospel in meetings large and small.[3] These latter points have been eagerly seized upon by the opponents of the Army to swell the cry against them; but these do not afford any grounds of banishment and interdiction; they are not contraventions of any law.

The “Avant Courriers” of the Salvation Army arrived in Geneva in December, 1882. Mr. Clibborn held some preliminary Conferences in the Hall of the Reformation and in the Casino.

A Citizen of Geneva wrote:—“The rumours which had preceded the advent of the Salvation Army had excited some apprehensions among those who have at heart the interests of religion. But these apprehensions were for the most part allayed by the favourable impressions received at the meetings held by Mr. Clibborn. His object in holding these meetings was to lay before our public a simple account of the principles and aim of the Salvation Army; but the ardour and zeal of that true servant of God urged him from time to time to go further, and to address urgent appeals to the conscience of his hearers.”

The way being thus prepared, Catherine Booth arrived, accompanied by several friends, men and women. Opinions for and against the teaching and methods of the Army began now to be more strongly pronounced. Turbulent spirits in large numbers appeared on the scene, encouraged, as it is now well known, by the inactivity and even collusion of the police, and by the secret approval, well known to the mob of disturbers, of individuals in authority who, having been elevated to positions of power on the shoulders of this very mob, have undoubtedly sought to make capital, in their own interests and in the interests of the most unworthy of their electors, out of the persecution of the Salvation Army. The evening meetings began to be besieged by savages, the deadly enemies of all religion, seconded by a number of insolent youths to whom noise, especially if seasoned with personal insults, seemed to be a congenial amusement. The meetings were frequently broken up, by threats and uproar which endangered the personal safety of their promoters and the quieter part of the audience, who were consequently obliged to retire to smaller halls and less accessible localities. One of the journals of Geneva wrote thus of Miss Booth’s first meeting:—“Miss Booth was listened to with the greatest attention, and by the men present in the audience with respectful emotion. It would have required a heart of stone not to have been touched with the ardent piety, the deep love of souls, the joyful spirit of sacrifice which breathed and throbbed in the words of this noble young lady. One would have said it was a new Joan of Arc preaching against the Prince of this world a holy war of liberation and conquest.” The Geneva Citizen above quoted says:—“The police seemed from the beginning powerless to maintain order. At first it may have been supposed that this powerlessness was real and involuntary; but subsequent events have proved that there was a positive disinclination on the part of the police to suppress the disturbances, and that there was no real incapacity for doing so, if they had been so minded.” This was the moment in which the principle of religious liberty received its first deadly wound in Geneva. A kind of tremor seems to have been felt throughout the better instructed part of the population, when that blow was about to fall. Some endeavoured to throw off their uneasiness by declaring that the foreign visitors alone could be held responsible for any violation of religious liberty, and that they alone would feel the penalty. But far more numerous were the Genevan citizens who complained that they were prevented from receiving the spiritual help and blessing which they desired and had begun to find at the meetings, and more numerous still was the crowd of poor people attracted by simple curiosity to those meetings whose souls might have responded to the call to a better life.

As British subjects provided with passports and permits of residence in the Canton of Geneva, the members of the Army were entitled to all the benefits guaranteed in the “Treaty of Friendship, Commerce and Establishment” of September 6, 1855, now in force between Switzerland and England.

The following are extracts from that Treaty:—

“The subjects of Her Britannic Majesty shall be admitted to reside in each of the Swiss Cantons on the same conditions and on the same footing as citizens of the other Swiss Cantons. In the same manner Swiss citizens shall be admitted to reside in all the territories of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, on the same condition and on the same footing as British subjects.”

“Consequently the subjects and citizens of either of the two contracting parties shall, providing they conform to the laws of the country, be at liberty, with their families, to enter, establish themselves, reside and remain in any part of the territories of the other.

“They may hire and occupy houses and warehouses for the purpose of residence and commerce, and may exercise, conformably to the laws of the country, any profession, business or occupation.”

In conformity with the provisions of this Treaty, full liberty has always been accorded to British subjects to hold evangelistic meetings in all parts of Switzerland, and the same holds good for the Swiss in England.

The meetings which the Salvationists had held for six weeks before objections were raised, were strictly within the bounds of the law. The placards announcing them were passed by the Municipal authorities before being affixed. There were no processions.[4] Politics were not touched in the meetings, and nothing was said which could provoke the hostility of any right-minded person. From the first, when the disturbances commenced, Colonel Clibborn took frequent occasion to consult with the Director of the Police, having always gone to his office when requested, and given him timely notice of all the meetings, and (as the Director himself admitted), having invariably fallen in with his counsel upon points which would facilitate the task of keeping order.

Several persons can be adduced as witnesses to the fact that the ringleaders in the disturbances were paid to act this part by several noted traffickers in vice in the city, and the latter were themselves frequently seen in the meeting inciting part of the audience to riot.

I cannot forbear remarking here on the grotesquely horrible and almost incredible fact that while the Government of Geneva suppresses religious meetings and forbids the poor and ignorant classes of the people to come in contact with a power which has already redeemed and elevated thousands in other lands who had formerly been the pests of society, it continues to grant licenses to the keepers of houses of debauchery, and to shield these diabolical institutions with its own august protection, well knowing them to be strongholds of Satan within whose walls every crime is perpetrated, and whose poisonous influence is extending like a deadly cancer throughout the whole population, and to the very heart of their family life. It is no matter of surprise to us to recognise among the foremost opponents of courageous preachers of repentance and rebukers of sin, our old familiar foe, whom we have fought through Europe, which still holds up its hideous head, albeit beginning to be aware that its time is short. Some faint echoes of the blessed word Salvation had found their way, it appears, even into the darkened chambers where crouch the slaves and victims of State-protected vice, and had resuscitated hopes long dead in some poor hearts. A few of the slaves escaped or succeeded in obtaining release, and once more in the light of day, they listened to the glad tidings of salvation. They joined the ranks of their deliverers. Their desertion of their former life represented so much loss to the keepers. Like the sellers of the shrines of Diana, fearing that the hope of their gains was threatened,—not so much by the escape of a few prisoners as by the falling off of a portion of their clientèle,—the officially-recognised traffickers in vice became furious. They have gold in plenty at their disposal, as well as “agents” and “bullies” professionally trained in the service of their abominable traffic, and with these it was easy to win a temporary and dishonorable triumph over God’s messengers of peace and of holiness. Public authorities accustomed to consign women, and girls of tender age, to the officially superintended service of vice, and a police accustomed to see the rights of debauchery recognised and respected by those same authorities as those of an honourable industry, are not likely to prove themselves impartial judges of the value of a revival movement embodying a stern moral and spiritual teaching, nor to show in their conduct any respect for the persons of the teachers or for the sanctity of Law. Such has proved to be the case.

A marked increase in the daring and violence of the bands of roughs was observed, subsequent to a public threat made by the President of the Department of Justice and Police, to withdraw all protection from the meetings, and an expressed desire on his part to expel Salvationists from the Canton, if in his power to do so.

The President of the Department of Justice and Police above-named is M. Marc Héridier, a high functionary and a Councillor of State, elected by the people. As an individual, he is more responsible probably than any other person in Geneva for the violations of the first principles of justice and of law which have been perpetrated there.[5]

“In the sitting of the Grand Council on the 27th January, 1883, in reply to a question asked of the Council of State by the Deputy Odier concerning the tumultuous scenes which had taken place in the public halls, and concerning the duty of the police to suppress these scenes,—

M. Héridier said: “We have been petitioned to call out a company of gendarmerie, sword in hand, to protect these foreigners, and to prevent brawls and rows. I will never consent to take such a step! There are already eight police agents in these places every evening who have a very hard time of it, while these people (the Salvationists) are pleased to amuse themselves by stirring up these scandalous scenes. These agents might be doing more useful work elsewhere, and I am just about to withdraw them. * * * * Do you wish that our military department should enter on a campaign to defend the Salvation Army? (Loud laughter.) Gentlemen, I am not the friend of disorder, and if my view of this matter were only shared by others I would have restored order long ago. M. Odier says that he would have liked to have seen these people sent off on their journey back to England. That is my own feeling also, and for my part I never would have signed the passports of these foreigners. (Loud cheers.)”[6]

On Thursday, 1st February, the office which the Salvationists had taken, 6, Place Longemalle, was attacked, the windows broken, and other damage caused by efforts to force an entrance when the doors were closed. The proprietor of a house of ill-fame, a notorious character in the city, was active in the crowd which blockaded the building, inciting the lowest fellows to violence. The same day Colonel Clibborn and a French officer of the Armée du Salut were stoned through the main street of the city in broad daylight. The life of another officer, Thonger, was seriously imperilled, the police refusing protection. “Their courage and their patience,” writes M. Audeoud, “testified to the sincerity of their faith.” The Geneva Government now judged that the moment for action had arrived, and in this they were certainly right; only they overlooked the fact that it was the authors of the public disturbances whom it was necessary to rebuke, and not the victims. Instead of taking prompt and energetic measures to check the assailants, they issued their famous decree, of the 2nd February, ordering the meetings to be closed. It is important to notice that this measure was denounced as illegal by the leading journal of Geneva, the Journal de Genève, and by a large number of the citizens—jurists, advocates, and authors.

The following is the text of the decree of the Government which was publicly posted on the 2nd February:—“In consequence of representations which have reached the Department of Justice and Police, whence it is understood that religious meetings held by a group of persons calling themselves the Salvation Army and acting under the direction of foreigners not established in the Canton, have been preceded by advertisements of a nature to agitate the population; and seeing that the exercises and operations of the above individuals give rise to energetic protests, and that the public peace is daily troubled in a grave and disquieting manner—Be it decreed: In virtue of Article 9 of the law of 11th March, 1816, on the duties of the administrative police; and under the seal of the Department of Justice and Police, that the exercises of the Salvation Army be temporarily suspended.”

A gentleman of Geneva remarks on this:—“We might well criticise the style and the logic of this singular document; but we limit ourselves to its condemnation as manifestly illegal. The Council of State has undoubtedly gone beyond its powers in the matter. Its mandate is to enforce the execution of existing laws, and not to make new ones. It is bound, also, whenever it adopts any administrative measure, to quote the law on whose authority it does so.” Now the only legislative proposition which the Council of State were able to find, after searching through their law books dating as far back as the first years of the present century, was Article 9 of the Law of March 11, 1816. The Article is as follows:—“They (the lieutenant of police and his staff) are charged with the inspection of shows, dancing saloons, cafés, billiard-rooms, cabarets, wine cellars, and all other places of public gatherings, as well as public-houses and inns. The Council of State has the exclusive right to close these different establishments. There are in this same law, clauses which might have seemed a little more applicable to the circumstances of the present case; such, for instance, as Article 2, which directs the same magistrates to protect the persons of the citizens; Article 5, which enjoins them to maintain order, and free circulation for passengers in the streets; and Article 3, which recommends them to see that the peace of worshippers be not disturbed either inside or outside the churches. But in reading these articles, the Council of State seem to have judged them too antique or too characteristic of an epoch of absolutism in Government to be applicable to the present times. They eagerly, however, availed themselves of the authority conferred on them by Article 9 of this antique law for the shutting up of shows, dancing saloons, cafés, &c., and armed with this authority they immediately ordained the closing of meetings which they themselves call “religious,” held in rooms and halls where dancing, drinking and the playing of theatrical pieces were certainly never carried on! On the strength of this article they ultimately forbade all the “exercises” of the Salvation Army in the Hall of the Reformation, in the Chapel Buis, in private houses, in woods or fields, and generally in every place where they could possibly be held. They might indeed have sought in vain in their “Collection of Laws” for any legal utterance authorizing them to apply such an interdiction to the private houses of citizens and to their places of worship. To find such they would have been obliged to carry their researches a few centuries backward, perhaps to the period, for example, of the Inquisition.”

A petition against the measure for closing the meetings was signed by a large number of citizens, from which I extract the following:—“The undersigned Geneva citizens are profoundly grieved in reading this decree. It affords a dangerous precedent in thus endorsing acts of violence which might easily have been put down, and which were chiefly perpetrated by boys and strangers.”

It is a serious breach of the Constitutional rights of the citizens.

It is in opposition to the principles of our Cantonal and Federal laws which guarantee the free exercise of religion, and the personal liberty of the citizens. Those citizens possess the right to attend any and all public meetings, (and still more, private meetings,) without molestation from persons who may happen to dislike the special ideas, beliefs or practices presented at such meetings.

It is a violation of all the ideas of freedom and of religious toleration enshrined not only in our laws but in all our customs, and of which the people of Geneva are justly proud.

“The State Council would have met with the unanimous approval and support of the citizens in adopting energetic measures to preserve order in the streets; but we deem it disastrous to have attempted to attain this end by suppressing the free expression of opinion, and the right to attend meetings which have presented nothing in any way whatever contrary to public order or good behaviour.[7]

“The decree in question professes to be based upon the law of the 11th of March, 1816. Now this law simply confers upon the State Council the right to order the closing of certain public establishments. It cannot be construed to authorise the suppression of a series of meetings. But even supposing it to be susceptible of such an interpretation, that law was virtually abrogated by the Constitution of 1848, which guarantees individual liberty, and liberty of worship.... The decree is a fatal encouragement to violent disturbances and riotous manifestations in the public streets.... It is a dangerous precedent in interfering with the free exercise of the liberty of assembly.

“Wherefore the undersigned earnestly pray that the State Council will at once withdraw this measure, a measure contrary to the liberal principles which form the basis of Republican Government, and to the constitutional rights of the citizens.—February 3, 1883.”

This petition was, in the space of twenty-four hours, signed by nine hundred citizens of Geneva and of Switzerland, representing all classes of society without exception. Among the signatures are found those of thirty Pastors (almost all of the National Church), eight Professors at the University, twenty-one Judges, Advocates, and Doctors of Law, fourteen Doctors of Medicine, several medical and other students, &c.

In the decree closing the meetings the State Council, as we have seen, instead of clearly defining the extent of the prohibition simply inserted the indefinite words:—“Resolved to suspend temporarily the exercises of the Salvation Army.” Although Miss Booth demanded, on the first occasion on which she was summoned to the police-office that she should be distinctly told what was meant by the word exercises, in order that she and her friends might know what was permitted and what was not, and although she subsequently repeated this demand, no answer has ever been given.

As the inviolability of the private houses of the citizens is guaranteed by Swiss law,[8] this decree (even supposing it to have been legal) could not with any shadow of justice be construed to render illegal private gatherings in private houses to which the members of the Salvation Army might be invited. This was the positive opinion of all those who were consulted on the question. If the word “exercises” could be construed to mean an acceptance of a private invitation to visit friends in their private houses for prayer and religious interchange of thought, then it might with equal justice, include every movement which could be made, such as walking and conversing in the street, or consultation among two or three, no matter where or how.

In the first week of February appeared the “Letter” of Madame de Gasparin, already sufficiently known in England as well as in Switzerland. M. Sautter de Blonay, it seems to me, has so well represented the influence of that publication on the whole controversy that I cannot do better than again quote his words:—“The Salvation Army,” he says, “comes to Paris, the most police-ridden of cities, among a mocking, jesting people, of lax morality. Criticisms become more sharp, and fears arise. But in spite of all, the Army are able to carry on successfully their work in France for several months. Having so far succeeded in France, they very reasonably imagine they can safely come to Switzerland, the most ancient Republic of modern times, who proudly professes herself to be the initiatrice of Republican principles, and a model of liberty to the world. Is it not in Switzerland that those who propound the necessity of the destruction of the whole existing social order are tolerated and protected in their persons and in the meetings, and justly so, so long as they do not by their actions break the law or violate the rights of others? Is it not in Switzerland that all patriotic orations turn upon the theme, ‘Liberty for all opinions?’ The Salvation Army hear this, and believe it. Trusting our outward professions, they imagine they will find again on our soil the freedom of old England, and respect for the persons of all. They arrive, and immediately fall into a veritable ambuscade, as has been said. Insults and threats are showered upon persons who are seen coming to their private meetings, held in closed rooms; and the assailants are not rebuked. In short, they are persecuted, and crushed, and even those who plead their cause as a question of justice do so in terms of contempt for themselves. And this alas! is the moment, Madam, when you choose to come to the help of the persecutors.

“Your letter was written, it has been said, before the persecutions began. Yes, before the issue of the dictatorial police order, but not before the personal outrages. Now these personal outrages, not having been judicially repressed or reproved, led on naturally to the persecution. I know you too well, Madam, not to be aware that these were unfortunate coincidences for which you are not responsible; but I cannot refrain from asking why you did not write much earlier, some months ago, or why you did not write in a different manner? for you cannot deny, and the fact must be grievous to yourself, that your letter contributed, more than any other thing, to impart to M. Héridier the unfortunate courage to act as he has done. You have thus aided the violation, in your own country, of that which you yourself hold most dear, next to the Gospel—religious liberty. You might have written your protest and announced it as about to appear, adding that it should not however see the light until the Salvation Army was placed in possession of all the rights which our laws confer, and that you declined to attack an adversary already beaten. Better still, you might have written twice; first, in order to defend the civil rights of the members of the Salvation Army, and secondly in order to attack its organization; but this ought to have been later, when through your influence, justice would have been done. How noble a part might you have acted! As the defender of justice, you would have been the more powerful in your refutation of error; as the opponent of error, you, more successfully than others, could have insisted on right and justice. It is thus that the Christian Chevalier, whose name you bear, the noble Count de Gasparin would have acted. From the first moment, from the first outrage perpetrated, he would have perceived that the peculiarities of the Salvation Army were a secondary question, and that that which is at stake is the cause of religious liberty in Switzerland, that sacred cause to which he had consecrated his life. You well know, Madam, that he never would have lifted his hand against the vanquished, against young girls, foreigners and defenceless, against Christian brethren who had been misled.... I grieve the more for the inopportuneness of your attack, because it has caused you to play into the hands of our enemies, the enemies of religious liberty.”

A gentleman of Geneva, criticising the action of the Department of Justice and Police in the matter of the closing of the meetings, in which the Department, as we have seen, had fallen back on an old law of 1816, says:—“The magistrates of the early part of this century nevertheless understood that it was their duty to maintain the liberty of those who were regarded as the most dangerous sectaries. It was not granted to them to make the discovery of the astonishing proposition which gains ground in our day, namely, that if there were no victims of outrage, outrages would not exist; and that in consequence it is the victims who are the authors of the mischief and the really guilty persons. They obeyed the law under their hand of 1816, without dreaming of the triumphant application which would be made of it against religious liberty by their successors some sixty years later. Order was maintained by them, and the liberties of a contemptible minority were protected. Our ancient magistrates consulting neither their sympathies nor their antipathies, nor even their sincere convictions concerning what they believed to be for the public good, held it to be a matter of honour and of conscience to fulfil the first duties of their position, that of causing the rights of all, including those of the weakest portion of the community, to be respected. A party Government, on the contrary (such as is at present in power), does not scruple, in order to excite and maintain the zeal of its present supporters, to cultivate irritating questions, and even to create them if necessary. It is ready to gratify the passions of the people on any question where there is a chance of making use of them in their own interests, against persons whose insignificant number makes them in no way dangerous. Herein we find the distinction between a Government which is truly National and a Government by a party.”

To return to the legal validity of the decree of the 2nd February;—not only is there no law upon which it could have been substantially based, but it actually violates in the most open manner the Constitutional Guarantees which lie at the foundation of the political life of the country. Article 2 of the Constitutional Law of the 26th August, 1868, pronounces: “Liberty of worship is guaranteed throughout the whole extent of Swiss territory. All forms of worship have an equal right to the protection of the State.” This law, accepted by the people, is binding not only upon the executive, but on the legislative power itself. The duty of the Council of State was to have enforced respect for it at all costs. The Council of State preferred to violate it, and in doing so has by the same blow struck at the principles of the inviolability of domicile, of freedom of speech, and freedom of public meeting.

The following remarks on the subject appeared in the Journal de Genève of February 3, 1883:—

“We published yesterday a proclamation of the Geneva Government closing the meetings of the Salutists; to-day we receive the text of a proclamation of the Government of Neuchâtel on the same subject. These two proclamations present a great contrast the one to the other. That of Neuchâtel is founded on the text of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of public meeting and freedom of worship. It reminds the authors of the disturbances, of the law against such outrages, and threatens punishment if they disobey. The Genevese Government, on the contrary, entirely ignores the Constitution. It does not contain a single word of blame for the individuals who for a fortnight past have been disgracing our town, breaking up meetings held in private houses, attacking inoffensive people in the streets, and perpetrating every kind of violence. It reserves its severity for the victims of these acts of violence, for the foreigners or Genevese citizens alike who have been attacked, insulted, hunted, and maltreated by bands of roughs who have remained, and evidently will remain, unchecked and unpunished. The victory which these bands of roughs have obtained over our laws is decisive and complete. The Government whose duty it is to enforce respect for the laws has lowered its flag in the presence of these rioters, and has made itself the executor of their will. Truly we blush for shame in reading this proclamation and in comparing the language of our Genevan Council of State with that of Neuchâtel. Is it possible that on this question in which are involved freedom of speech, and of meeting, individual liberty, the rights of citizens to go where they please, to listen to whom they please, and to be free from attacks in the streets, our Government has nothing to say? It seeks a miserable excuse for the disturbances in the text of an advertisement of the meetings which was previously submitted to its own judgment and the placarding of which it authorised. This advertisement was a very small affair indeed to justify not only the interference of the mob, but an assault by our Government itself on liberty of opinion.... If it presented the character which they now attribute to it, it was in the power of the police to have interfered, and everyone would have been satisfied with its decision. But six weeks have passed since it appeared, and if it was so dangerous as it is now asserted for the public peace, it is rather late to condemn it only to-day. All that has occurred confirms our suspicions on the more than equivocal part which the police have played since the commencement of these events, and proves almost to a certainty its complicity with the rioters. If from the first the police had seriously and sincerely wished to hinder the disturbances, they had abundant power to do so. They might then have brought into play Article 9 of the law of March 11th, 1816, but instead of this they tolerated and encouraged the rioters with the motive of reaching the end which M. Héridier confessed in the Grand Council he had in view, namely, of driving out of our midst people whose religion does not please him. Doubtless their religion does not please; but what merit would there be in tolerating it if it entirely pleased us? and what motive would there have been for inscribing this guarantee in our Constitution if it were only meant to be applied to cases in which it would be manifestly useless? The game is played! but now we must see that we do not any longer deceive foreigners, who, in the faith of our Constitution, may imagine that Geneva is a country of religious liberty. It will be necessary to change the text of the articles of the Constitution in which this mention of our rights is found. It must in future run thus:—‘Freedom of meeting is guaranteed; nevertheless, persons who know how to persevere in making sufficient noise, coupled with abuse and personal assaults, shall always be able to obtain from the Government the closing by the Police of any meeting whatsoever, even in a private house, which happens to displease them.’ Such is the régime which the manifesto of the Geneva Government has inaugurated. There is not much in it to make one proud of one’s country. It is the true arbitraire, and the most wretched form of it, namely, that which is born of weakness and cowardice.”

On the 8th February, after having spent some time quietly at the house of M. Lenoir in the neighbourhood of Geneva, Miss Booth was summoned to the Police Court and subjected to a lengthy cross-examination. Numberless questions were asked of her, and afterward of Miss Charlesworth, which were of a personal and utterly unjustifiable nature, some of them being of a significance better understood perhaps by men of the character of their questioners than they could be by refined Christian ladies. The following day Miss Booth was again called before the Police, and was then suddenly requested to produce the account books of the Salvation Army in Switzerland. Little imagining that this was the point upon which was to be based her illegal expulsion from Geneva, Miss Booth frankly and unsuspectingly replied: “It is impossible for me to do so, as I am not the treasurer, and my secretary who has the books is now absent from Geneva. But,” she added, “you shall have them as soon as she returns.”

It was now that the monstrous charge was made against Miss Booth of having broken a cantonal law which has no existence, but which was improvised by the Chief of the Department of Justice and Police in order to afford an excuse for the complete suppression of the Salvation Army in Geneva. It is with shame and grief that the chronicler of these events feels obliged to publish the plain fact that M. Héridier falsified a cantonal law of Geneva, apparently deliberately, since the falsification was repeated at a later date as we shall presently see, in order to get rid of this person whose Christian courage and unflinching attacks on the sins of the day appear to have excited his anger or his fears. In the absence of recorded facts we are left to imagine what may have passed in the minds of some of the authorities of Geneva during those few days between the closing of the meetings and the accusation and expulsion of Miss Booth. Readers of this story will naturally ask—“What had occurred in the interval?” They have an answer from the Federal Council itself, which when citing these circumstances in the month of July following, declares that Miss Booth had during that period gone into retirement, and that she had herself advised other officers of the Army to abstain from any act which might seem like a contravention of the decree forbidding the meetings. Much, however, had evidently occurred in the hearts and consciences of certain persons at Geneva. It is no doubt convenient to throw off the guilt of such miserable transactions as we are now obliged to criticize upon the ignorant and misguided mob. But the act which is now under consideration was not that of the people. It appears to have been conceived in the private chamber of some unhappy being whose own life and character may have been presented to himself in a new light by the severe teaching of the Salvationists, and who, lacking the courage to face the truths announced by them, took the ill-starred resolution to get rid of them by whatever means.

M. Héridier having found it necessary to make diligent search for some charge against Miss Booth, appears to have ransacked the Penal code and the police regulations of the city for this purpose. He finds Article 27 of the police regulations concerning the discipline to be applied to foreigners, which runs thus: “If subsequent to the granting of a permission to reside in the canton, the Department of Justice and Police learns that there has been anything which could have been laid to the charge of the foreigner (to whom the permission was given) in the matter of facts which, had they been previously known, would have caused him to refuse that permission, the said permission may be withdrawn.” M. Héridier recollects to have heard that collections of money had been publicly made at the close of Salvationist meetings, and he lays his hand on the cantonal law of March 4, 1879, concerning collections made “from house to house.” This appears susceptible of being made to serve the purpose in view. The title of the law is perhaps a little embarrassing; it is this: “Règlements de la Police sur les collectes à domicile.” Nevertheless he makes use of it.

M. Héridier then summons Miss Booth to appear at the police office. She is charged with having broken a law which has no existence, and is expelled from the canton. A double charge was now made against her, which was brought up in the replies to her two appeals; not only had she, according to M. Héridier, infringed the regulation concerning the collection of money, but she had refused, they said, to show her accounts when asked to do so. The demand to show her accounts was in itself an illegal one, and therefore had she refused distinctly to comply with it, she would not have been guilty of any illegal act. At the time, Miss Booth, probably not knowing the text of the regulation cited against her, supposed that her questioners were acting legally in demanding to see the account books. She therefore, as we have seen, offered to satisfy them in that respect as soon as she received the books. In order to be doubly sure of these circumstances, I wrote to Miss Booth early in July, and asked her the simple question, “Did you, or did you not refuse to show your accounts?” The circumstances which immediately prompted me thus to write to her was an interview which I had on the 25th of July, with the Chancellor of the Confederation in the Federal Palace at Berne. I had called to ask if he would oblige me by letting me have a copy of the printed reply of the Federal Council to Miss Booth’s appeal, as our Ambassador at Berne informed me that he had sent his copy to the Foreign Office in London. In the course of my conversation with the Chancellor I mentioned the matter of the accounts. He then stated abruptly that Miss Booth had positively refused when legally required to do so, to submit her accounts to the Genevese Department of Justice and Police. Knowing to the contrary, I replied: “Pardon me, sir, she was willing to show them, but time was not given her to do so.” The Chancellor with some indignation then asked: “Have you come here to dispute with me on a matter of fact?” That not being the object of my visit, I retired, and having written to Miss Booth I received the following from her:—“On the 8th and 9th of February I was summoned to the Hotel de Ville to be cross-examined. Among many other questions I was asked to produce on the spot the accounts of all money received and spent in Geneva, or to show them at the house where I was staying. I told them it was impossible for me to show them then and there, as the friend who kept them was absent from Geneva and had the books with her. I added that for myself I had nothing to do with the keeping or the immediate expenditure of the money, neither could I answer their questions as to the amount received by the collectors, as I did not know what it was. My examiner said, ‘Very well, Mdlle., you refuse then to show your accounts;’ and he was about to write that down. ‘No,’ I replied, ‘I do not refuse to show the accounts, but they are not in my hands; I ask time to recall my secretary, when you can see them.’ It was with the utmost difficulty that I prevented him from writing down that I had definitely refused to show the accounts, which he appears to have done notwithstanding. It is our rule to publish our accounts, audited by some one outside the Army, annually. But in this case of Geneva I made an exception and told my examiner that they would be published at the end of the first three months, and then all the world could see them. On the 12th I was cross-examined again, M. Lenoir being present. Being again asked for the accounts, I told them that the day previously, the 11th, they had expelled Miss Charlesworth, and that my secretary was still absent. Miss Charlesworth had the petty cash-book and had taken it with her. M. Lenoir, banker, M. Pictet, lawyer, who are friends of justice, bitterly lamented this action which their native country had taken. They, together with M. Audeoud, also a lawyer, and M. Naville, all assured me that such a thing had never been done before, that the police authorities had no legal right at all to ask me such a question, and that I was not in any way bound to answer them. That same day, the 12th, I was expelled, and left Geneva before six o’clock that night.

(Signed)      “CATHERINE BOOTH.”

In consequence of the publication in the Government organ, the Genevois, of a number of anonymous letters, some of which were of a shameful and slanderous character, and one of which contained the statement that the Salvation Army were robbing the country and had already forwarded enormous sums of money to London, the officers had publicly announced that they would publish their balance-sheet of receipts and expenditure at Geneva, at the end of the quarter instead of at the end of the year, as was their usual custom. Every collection had been carefully registered in their books.[9] It was further stated by Miss Booth when she was questioned, that all the accounts of the Army were under the inspection of a well-known firm of public accountants in London, under whose signature they were published. The conduct of the Geneva authorities in demanding to have the account books of the Army submitted to their scrutiny is, besides being illegal as judged by their own laws, a breach of the “Treaty of Friendship, Commerce and Establishment of 1855” between Switzerland and England. Article 3 of that Treaty runs thus:—

“The dwellings and warehouses of the citizens or subjects of either of the two contracting parties, in the territories of the other, and all premises appertaining thereto, destined for purposes of residence or commence, shall be respected. No search or examination of such dwellings and premises, and no examination or inspection of the books, papers, or accounts of the respective citizens and subjects shall be arbitrarily made; but such measures shall be executed only in conformity with the legal sentence, warrant, or order in writing of some Tribunal or Magistrate having competent constitutional or legal jurisdiction.”

I could multiply testimonies to the illegality of these proceedings, but will only cite one more, that of a Swiss lawyer, given in reply to a question which I asked him in writing:—“The Geneva Government,” he says, “and subsequently the Federal Government, have cited against Miss Booth a Cantonal regulation of the 4th March, 1879, upon public collections of money. Now no such regulation exists in the Canton of Geneva; for the regulation of the 4th March, 1879, is entitled, ‘A regulation concerning house to house collections of money,’ and contains no article whatsoever on the subject of collections made in either private or public meetings, which are placed on a footing of complete liberty. There is no Genevese regulation which bears the title of ‘Regulation concerning public collections;’ consequently we are driven to the conclusion that this title was invented for the necessity of the case in hand.”

In regard to the collections of money, it is to be noted that the collections in Geneva had been made for several weeks previously to the 29th January, at which date the Department of Justice and Police had given Miss Booth an official permission to reside in the Canton, and that those collections had been made in public, under the eyes of the police, during all those weeks previous to the illegal order to stop the meetings. No question whatever as to their legality was raised at the moment when Miss Booth received in exchange for her passport the permission to reside in the Canton.

On the 11th of February, Miss Charlesworth was expelled from the Canton. The grounds of her expulsion and the circumstances connected with it will be given later. At half-past twelve on the following day (the 12th) Miss Booth received the warrant of expulsion, commanding her to leave the Canton before 6 o’clock the same day upon pain of imprisonment. The officer who delivered to her the warrant, turned back after having left the door, to impress upon her the fact that if she did not leave before 6 o’clock she would incur the penalty of imprisonment. It is worthy of remark that common felons are allowed twenty-four hours’ notice of expulsion, whereas this lady was only given five and a-half hours’ notice.

I have now passed in review the three illegal or immoral acts of which the authorities at Geneva were guilty since the entrance of the Salvation Army into their city, namely:—1. The closing of the meetings. 2. The falsification of the police regulation concerning collections of money. 3. The expulsion of the officers.

Those who took part in these events, Swiss and English alike, are anxious that the public should, however, clearly understand that these illegal acts were those of a mere handful of men openly at war with all religion, and that such a course of conduct is as repugnant to the minds of all the true Swiss citizens as they can be to our own countrymen. Many indignant protests have been made against these measures both in the Swiss Press and in numerous pamphlets published in Switzerland, of which my space allows only meagre extracts.

I give the account of Miss Charlesworth’s arrest and expulsion in her own words:—

“On Saturday, the 10th February, I was summoned to appear at the Police Court. M. Lenoir, a gentleman of Geneva, accompanied me, and asked permission to go with me before the officials who had instructions to cross-examine me. I wished to have a friend present, being a minor, and not knowing the language perfectly. We waited half-an-hour while Mr. Cuenod[10] tried to induce M. Héridier to allow M. Lenoir to go with me. M. Héridier persisted in refusing, and I was conducted into a little office in the remote part of the building. Here I was kept from 3.30 till 7.30, being questioned sometimes by three, and sometimes by five officials. After asking my age, birthplace, nationality, &c., they began to speak on personal subjects, about which I know they had no right to ask me. They asked me whether, being a minor, I had my father’s permission to be in Geneva with Miss Booth. I answered that I had, and that Miss Booth had letters in her possession to prove it. Nevertheless, the chief charge subsequently adduced for my expulsion was that I produced no authorization from my parents. I was asked how I lived, whether we received much money from the Army for our board, what sort of food we had, &c. I answered that I received nothing from the Army. I was asked if I had a passport and a permission to reside. I answered that my passport was deposited at the Town Hall in exchange for my permit of residence. The inspector, who had been told I had no papers, was enraged at this, and did not try to conceal or restrain his passion. He sent for another official who found my passport and proved my papers to be all right. I was asked many questions about the meeting I had attended at Cologny. They said I had done so contrary to the decree. I answered that I was invited by letter, and I went to the meeting as a guest, and on being asked, I spoke and prayed. Others also spoke who had nothing to do with the Army. The police detectives went to this private meeting; they slipped in after it had begun, and not having been asked at the door whether they were invited guests, they reported it to be a public meeting. I protested that being only guests we could not be responsible for the door-keeping, and that we knew none of those invited. They made a number of charges against us with respect to this meeting, which I contradicted. I was asked how I dared to wear my uniform in a meeting after having been told of the law forbidding religious dresses. I answered that the law only specified that religious costumes were not to be worn in the public highway, and that it could not be applied to private houses or a private gathering in the kitchen of a private house. Moreover, I wore no uniform, but an ordinary dress.... I was at last allowed to leave the office where I had spent four hours. We were told to appear the next morning, but on leaving we recollected it would be Sunday, and we wrote a letter saying we could not conscientiously go on that day.[11] At half-past twelve on Sunday I received an official warrant, which informed me that I must be out of the Canton in five hours.... I was sent away alone; for they had taken care to hurry off the French and German officers without giving them time to communicate with their comrades. The warrant stated that I was expelled for (1) having disobeyed the proclamation of the Cantonal Council suspending temporarily the exercises of the Salvation Army; (2) for having produced no authorisation from my parents giving me leave to reside in Geneva, and (3) for having refused to present myself on the Sunday.”

Let us suppose this case reversed, and imagine a young Swiss lady of seventeen suddenly called up before the police authorities in London, no other lady, no friend, no witness, allowed to be present, taken to Scotland Yard, and into a small room at the remote end of the building, cross-questioned alone by five men in a foreign language (her only crime being that she had accepted an invitation to a prayer meeting in a private house), and expelled on a Sunday within five hours’ notice. It is difficult to imagine such a possibility.

During the first cross-examination, Miss Charlesworth had said that Miss Booth had in her possession letters from her father authorising her to reside in Geneva, but she was not asked to produce these letters then or at any subsequent time. On the Sunday, however, she was suddenly and summarily expelled, one of the grounds of her expulsion being that she had never shown these letters. She was sent off (as has been said) alone, the authorities having taken care a few days previously to expel the officers of the Salvation Army who had been her companions, and in some sort her protectors. She was thus also forcibly separated from Miss Booth, her constituted guardian, and from all her other companions, and this in spite of her own earnest protests. No words of mine surely are required to increase the feeling on the one hand of pity and on the other of indignation which must arise in the minds of English readers on perusing this narrative. One cannot fail, also, to be struck with the cowardice (for it is impossible to give it a gentler name), manifested by the authorities in availing themselves of the moment when Mr. Clibborn, the business head of the Salvation Army work, was absent at Berne, where he had gone to claim the protection of the Federal Council on their behalf, in order to attack these gentle and unoffending girls. When Miss Charlesworth was called up the second time, Miss Booth wrote a letter of remonstrance, saying she did not think she ought to be submitted to a second cross-examination. The officials, however, overcame Miss Booth’s objection by insisting that M. Héridier himself wished to see her personally. She did not see M. Héridier, but only a number of his subordinates.

The following is the letter referred to by Miss Charlesworth when questioned as to whether she had her father’s permission to reside abroad. Miss Booth received it from the Rev. S. Charlesworth in reply to one from herself asking if he would permit his daughter to stay in Geneva during her projected visit to England:—

“January 31, 1883.

“I will leave entirely to your judgment and the convenience of your arrangements whether my child remains in Geneva or at Paris during your absence. Let her be where she will be most helpful to you and most useful in the Lord’s service. If you intend to return to Geneva, her remaining there will save both the fatigue and the expense of a long double journey.

(Signed)      “SAMUEL CHARLESWORTH.”

The following letter, written by Mr. Charlesworth, seventeen days later to the British Ambassador at Berne, further confirms the fact that Miss Charlesworth was in Switzerland with her father’s consent. (She never took the character in Switzerland of an officer in the Salvation Army; but, in accordance with her father’s wish, accompanied and aided Miss Booth as a friend.)

“Clapham Common, London, 17th February, 1883.

“SIR,—At the request of Miss Booth and of my daughter, Maud Elizabeth Charlesworth, I write to mention to your Excellency, that my daughter has accompanied Miss Booth to Switzerland with my full concurrence. She will be 18 years of age next September.

“I am anxious to have it understood that my daughter is not officially connected with the Salvation Army, but is only with Miss Booth as a young friend and visitor, taking much interest in the work carried on amongst the poor in England and on the Continent.

“I have the honour to be your Excellency’s very obedient servant,

(Signed)      “SAMUEL CHARLESWORTH.”

Even had her father’s authorisation been wanting, neither this nor the fact of her age afforded just grounds for Miss Charlesworth’s expulsion, as the Department of Police had given her the permit of residence with a full knowledge of her age and without asking her to produce her father’s authorisation. It is certain there are many young persons in Switzerland of both sexes who live and travel in the country without ever being asked to produce an authorisation from their parents.

The Geneva correspondent of the Times (February 19, 1883) published a letter from Miss Charlesworth on the subject of her appearance before the police, in a paragraph headed “A Lamb among Wolves.” This letter was written by Miss Charlesworth to a private friend in England, and was never intended by her for publication. She was much surprised to see it in the Times. She had handed it to some one who asked her in a friendly manner for some details, saying, “You can gather something from this.” No serious blame, however, in regard to this mistake, need be imputed to the Geneva correspondent of the Times, who had generally represented in their true light the injustices committed by the Genevan authorities at that time. This letter, having once become public, may naturally take its place in the present narrative. The Times correspondent prefaces it with the remark:—“Miss Charlesworth’s artless narrative is both interesting in itself and valuable for the vivid light which it throws on the ways of Genevan justice—to foreigners. According to the Journal de Genève, M. Héridier, Councillor of State charged with the Department of Justice and Police, was present at Miss Booth’s and Miss Charlesworth’s examinations, but behind a curtain.”

“‘On Saturday afternoon,’ says Miss Charlesworth (who, it may be well to mention, is only seventeen years old), ‘a man came to the house of M. Lenoir, where we were staying, and said that Maud Charlesworth, aide-de-camp to Miss Booth, was to go at once and see the Chief of Police at the Hôtel de Ville. I went at once, taking M. Lenoir with me, as I did not like to go alone. When we arrived, M. Lenoir sent in to ask the Chief of the Police, M. Héridier, if he might be allowed to accompany me. We waited half-an-hour, and then the answer was that I must go alone. So there was nothing else for it, and I had to follow a savage-looking magistrate up stairs into a small and very hot office, where I was asked to sit down. I suppose they thought that this exceedingly cross-looking officer was not enough to question me, for two others, with equally unsaved-looking faces, came in to help him. I had been with Katie (Miss Booth) both the times when she had to appear before the police, so I was quite prepared for the sort of questions they were going to ask me. The last thing Katie said to me was, “Do not sign anything,” and I answered that I would sooner let my right hand be cut off; and when I got into that little room I made up my mind that when they came to the end and asked me to sign I would refuse unless they would allow M. Lenoir to come up and read the paper through.’

“‘Well, they began and asked me about the private meeting at which I had been present. They said it was a public meeting, because three detectives had got in without being asked at the door for their cards of invitation. I denied the false statement, and made them write down my answer plainly. The point on which I laid the most stress was that we, the four Salvationists, had been invited to a private meeting in a private house, to which others (strangers to us) had also been invited; that we spoke, prayed, and sang, as did others who did not belong to the Salvation Army, and that if people who were not invited made their way in it was not our fault; we were only guests. Then they asked me how I dared to wear my uniform at the meeting when I had been told of the law forbidding the wearing of a religious dress. Now, I know this law by heart. It says that no one is to wear a religious dress on the public highway. My answer was that I did not think the words “public highway” could apply to the kitchen of a cottage in which a private meeting was held. I must here tell you that my questioners, or rather persecutors (of whom most of the time there were five) were very unsaved and all possessed very quick tempers. Their object was evidently to frighten me so as to make me answer unwisely, and catch me in my speech. But they were disappointed, for they had never had to do with a Salvationist before, and could not make out why I was so calm and answered so clearly. They were also disappointed to find that I understood their language, and no matter how fast they read I was always ready with an answer. Every now and then one or another went into a passion. But the worst was to come.

“‘Have you got a passport or “leave to stay” in Geneva;’ asked one of the crossest of the examiners (with whom I was now quite alone); and I could see by his manner that he thought that I had not got my papers. I answered that I had my leave to stay; and that my passport was in the hands of the police. You should have seen the rage he got into. He rose, threw down his chair, stamped out of the room, shouted for some under officer, and asked the man what he meant by having said that I was not provided with a passport. This man also lost his temper, went off to look for the passport, and in a few minutes returned and saw I was quite right, that they had my passport and I my ‘leave to stay.’ The inspector then flew into a greater rage than before, and scolded the man who had misled him. When he was more composed he continued. But now he came to personal questions, which I told him he had no right to ask, and I inquired what law authorised him to ask them. He said that was not his affair; he had been told to ask these questions, and I must answer. He asked me if I had my father’s leave to remain at Geneva, and when I said “Yes,” he wanted letters to prove it. I asked him how he dared to doubt my word, and told him to write down that Miss Booth had letters from my father authorising me to stay. A little later he said that I had prayed in a private meeting according to the form of the Salvation Army. I insisted that the Salvation Army had no form of prayer, and asked him in what way their prayers differed from other prayers. He said they differed very much, but he could not tell me how; he repeated that we had a form of prayer, and began to storm and rave so loudly that an inspector ran in from the next room, saying, “Gently, gently, there is somebody outside.” ... At last, after a great deal more questioning my paper was finished. I knew all my answers were true, and that there was no harm in putting my name to it; but then I remembered my promise to Katie, so I refused, unless I might go down and fetch M. Lenoir, and I said I would not sign the paper until he had read it. Of course they raved at me, but it had no effect; so they went for M. Lenoir, but unfortunately he had gone away, as they came back in triumph to tell me. I still refused to sign, and said I would not sign until Captain Bouillat (a member of the Salvation Army) had read it through. They were angry, and tried to frighten me, all talking as fast as they could at the same time. Then they said they would read the paper all through again, which they did three times; but nothing could move me. I said I would go with Zitzer and fetch Bouillat. They answered that I might go, but not with Zitzer (a Salvationist, who was waiting to be examined), but I said I could not think of such a thing—that it would be very improper for a young lady to walk through the streets after dark, especially as I knew there was a plot on foot to do us harm.’ In the end two gendarmes were sent for Bouillat; I and Zitzer waiting meanwhile in the little hot office.

“‘All at once it struck me that we would have a prayer meeting. “Zitzer,” I said, “we will pray. Let us go down on our knees and pray for these people, for if ever we wanted the Lord with us, it is now.” So down we went, and prayed out loud for about ten minutes, and it did us good. The inspector was much surprised; he cleared his throat, grunted, and finally got up and went to the door of the outer office. Then four of the men came back. I said to Zitzer that we would tell the correspondent of the Times, and that I wondered what the English would think of the way in which their countrywomen were being treated. This was overheard, and seemed to make an impression, for two men came and said I was quite free to go if I liked, or if they could fetch me anything they would do so. I wanted to fetch Bouillat, but when I found that I should either have to go alone or walk between two policemen I preferred to wait. At length Bouillat came, and on his recommendation I signed the deposition.

“‘The great fun was that all these cross magistrates and inspectors were kept from their dinners. So were we; but, as I told them, that was a very secondary consideration to us. We left that office at half-past seven, singing, “Glory to His Name.” I had been there four hours. The whole town knew it. A Swiss lawyer at once took all that had passed down in French, because he was so indignant.

“‘On Sunday I received a paper which told me that before 6 o’clock I was to be out of the Canton, because, first, I had broken the law by speaking in a public meeting (lie No. 1); secondly, because I had nothing to show that my parents consented to my being with Miss Booth (lie No. 2); thirdly, because that morning I had not appeared when sent for by the police. (We sent a letter to say that we could not go on Sunday.)

“‘Before the man who brought this letter went away I made him tell me who else was expelled, and I found that Bouillat, Zitzer, and Emile (all foreigners) had shared the same fate. We sent for them to come up that we might arrange where to go, but they did not come, and we found that they had been fetched out of their room, put into a cab with a policeman, and driven away without a moment’s notice. So these three are gone, I know not whither, and Miss Booth sent a Swiss lass with me, as, of course, I could not go alone.’”

Some of the Geneva journals stated that on the Sunday on which Miss Charlesworth was expelled, several—probably a majority—of the Genevan Government had gone to the country for the day, or were otherwise absent. There is some ground for believing that there are persons in that Government who from the first have disapproved of the harsh and unlawful measures for which M. Héridier had made them responsible by these expulsions. The Journal de Genève, after an ironical notice of the rapid interrogations and sudden expulsion at the same moment of the other officers of the Salvation Army—German and French—and of M. Héridier’s secret attendance at all these examinations “behind a curtain, after the manner of all grand inquisitors,” adds: “The public interest was lately awakened in the matter of a Russian prince who was expelled our country. To-day it is the case of two young foreign girls, of honourable character, whose only crime is that they have held religious services of a rather eccentric nature. They have complied with every police rule, and so far from attempting to break the Cantonal decree, they have requested to be more definitely instructed concerning the actions they were to avoid. No answer is given to them, and they are expelled from our HOSPITABLE Genevese soil at six hours’ notice! The Genevois (the Government organ) congratulates the Council of State on its ‘energy.’ It has ‘saved the country; Vive Dieu!’ And what courage did it not require to accomplish such a coup!! We find all this contemptibly ridiculous, shameful, and opposed to all our habits and traditions. For never have foreigners—young girls, almost children one may say—been treated in such a manner among us—in the way in which sharpers and swindlers and women of bad character are treated! By whom are we governed? Into whose hands have we fallen? And what new experiences of madness and folly shall we be called upon to take part in?”

Another journal wrote:—

“When M. Héridier has a motive for attacking our modern liberties he falls back upon a law or regulation of 1816. His political creed goes no further back than that date. Like the ultra-Royalists of the Restoration he ignores all that succeeded the regime of the Constitution of 1814. We do not, however, believe that even in 1816 the Government of our Seigneurs, the Syndics, would have dared to proclaim the principle that the violence of the one party is a justification for the suppression of the rights of the other. And we should like to ask whether the majority of the Council of State who follow M. Héridier perfectly understand that in suspending the meetings of the Salvation Army and expelling its leaders they did not attack only a few foreigners who were here without protection in the midst of us, but that they attacked at the same time the right which every citizen has of using his faculties and liberties as he pleases within the limits of the laws. According to the system now inaugurated the employment of this right is absolutely at the mercy of those who may be displeased by the use made of it at any given time.”

The following letter, addressed to citizens of Geneva by a Swiss gentleman residing in London, indicates some of the secret springs of action whence the unjust expulsions and other events just recorded took their rise:—

“In opening the Times of this morning, my attention was directed to the correspondence from Geneva, followed by a telegram, which opened my eyes in a painful manner. For the first time in my life I felt ashamed of being a Swiss. I said to myself, If my people are autonomous, if every man can make his opinion felt, how can such an infamy be perpetrated? Is it possible that two ladies have been banished from your midst? And why? Have they broken any law? I will speak boldly. It is not for this that you have driven them out ignominiously. I can believe many things, but not this. You have driven them out, or permitted them to be driven out, which comes to the same thing, because you felt impelled to get rid of them, and because you dared not burn them, as would have been done in the old times. You have driven them out because you felt that they have had more real power, more noble virility than all of you put together; because you could not drive them away by ridicule and mockery, that weapon which you have hitherto considered all-powerful, nor even by brutal violence. I picture to myself these young girls leaving all—father, mother, family, country—in order to go forth into the wide world. And for what? Was it in order to make a little money? I cannot understand how people calling themselves men dare to insult them by such an insinuation, which would be ridiculous if it were not so basely cruel. Was it their object to make a noise in the world? Was it notoriety, or the desire of praise, or to have some adventures to record when they returned home? No, you know perfectly well it was not so. Your conscience tells you it was not so. These girls’ souls were filled with one single thought, with one immense desire, which communicated to them an unquenchable zeal, a courage which nothing on earth can shake, a dignity which you may endeavour in vain to lower. What they desired with their whole souls was and is the eternal salvation of their persecutors. It was for you, citizens of Geneva, when you yourselves were wholly indifferent about it, that they sacrificed themselves from day to day, for you who have heaped upon them ridicule which they have borne without complaint, and calumny and insults of such a nature as it seems it has been the lot of the Genevese only to invent. And it was not in order to gain you for the Salvation Army that they entreated you to have pity on yourselves. You know well that they have fought with the energy of despair, that they are ready even at this moment to give their lives, because the one end of all their efforts and sufferings and prayers is to save you from eternal ruin, you who wish to root them out not only from Geneva, but out of the world of the living. You say you do not believe in eternal ruin. But if it were even proved that there is no such thing as a future punishment, would this be a reason for reversing the Christian rule which you cannot but admire, and for saying, ‘Hate your friends, curse them who bless you, do evil to them who love you, persecute and despitefully use those who pray for you?’ May there not be in this fury which possesses you a sign that you are not quite so sure about your own beliefs, and that this makes you dislike those who come to trouble your mental security, to awaken certain doubts, and to cause some still living chords in your deadened consciences to vibrate? You say you do not believe in a Saviour; but is this any reason why you should furiously persecute those who come to announce to you that perhaps there is still a Saviour ready to receive even you? Is it not true that you feel instinctively that the Saviour of whom you speak wishes to deliver you from the power of sin, and that in your secret hearts you do not wish to give up sin. You would be very glad to escape eternal ruin if there is such a lot in store for you, but none the less do you desire to escape from the dreadful necessity of giving up the enjoyment of vice, and consequently you are furious with those who come to say to you ‘make your choice.’ But perhaps you will reply ‘No, it is not that; what we reject is not the Gospel, it is the Salvation Army and its eccentricities.’ You speak falsely. If certain women had brought to you heaps of gold, of treasures, not invisible, but palpable and tangible, in good ringing metal, would you take offence at the colour or the shape of their dresses? Would you not be ready to listen to their harangues, their prayers, their singing, to excuse their English accent, and to bear with all imaginable eccentricities in order to have your share of that treasure? But here are handmaidens of the Lord who offer you neither silver nor gold, which they neither possess nor wish to give, but who hold out to you that which they have to give, the glad tidings of Salvation. This they offer you gratuitously, with joy, with love, with pity, and what have you done in return? You have endeavoured to crush them; you have expelled them ignominiously. Yet you have succeeded only in bringing shame upon yourselves. You have shown to the world that Switzerland, the cradle of modern freedom, may very soon become its grave.

“But no! a thousand times no! It is not too late. Post tenebras lux.[12] Citizens of Switzerland, if you have any drop of Swiss blood left in your veins, if you still have in you the hearts of men, wake up and act!”

On Miss Booth’s arrival very late on the 12th February at Lausanne, she went with two other ladies to an hotel, which out of consideration for the proprietors I shall not name. Having in a state of extreme exhaustion mounted the stairs to the fourth story, the porter who was carrying their luggage was called to from below by the proprietor through the communicator, when Miss Booth and her companions heard the following words: “Send those people down at once.” The porter asked why, and remonstrated. The answer was, “They are Salvationists; you must send them down at once, we will not have them here.” Therefore, Miss Booth and her companions, almost fainting from suffering and exhaustion, were expelled the hotel. They were, however, hospitably received at the Hotel des Trois Suisses, whose proprietor has never allowed blind popular prejudice to prevent him from showing kind hospitality all along to the Salvationists.

In a letter to her friends on these events, Miss Booth said: “Everybody considered that the decree forbidding the ‘exercises of the Army’ referred to public meetings, and as every Swiss person’s house is inviolable according to the law, our officers accepted private invitations to take part in private prayer meetings called by Swiss citizens. But here also persecution followed us. Detectives dogged our every step. Spies watched our every movement. On Thursday evening I was suddenly called up by the police. My comrade, Miss Charlesworth, was sent for a day later and questioned for four hours by a number of men—sometimes three and sometimes five taking part in the cross-examination. A gentleman of Geneva who has proved a true friend from the first, protested that it was neither seemly, humane, nor just, that a young lady of seventeen, a subject of another nation, and not possessing a perfect knowledge of the language, should be subjected to such a cross-examination without the presence of a witness or anyone to represent her father.

“Colonel Clibborn had gone to Berne to see the President of the Republic and the British Ambassador, and to claim protection.

“At one o’clock on Sunday an official appeared with a document expelling Miss Charlesworth. Captains Zitzer and Bouillot, and Lieutenant Emile were suddenly taken up by the police and hurried off to the frontier....

“Next day I was expelled. On the way out of the town some fifty of our brave soldiers who had learned the fact met us on the road. Never shall I forget the scene! There were many tears and prayers. But I told them it was but the old story—the devil defeating himself, and that all his efforts and all the power of hell combined could not stop the work; that God had begun to work; that this fire would only purify and strengthen; that justice and right would triumph and we should return. Meanwhile I charged them to carry out the war boldly as true Swiss soldiers. Then all broke out into a ringing hymn, and sang until their faces shone again.”

Miss Charlesworth, who had gone to Coppet, joined her friend again at Lausanne.

CHAPTER III.

Leaving the banished Salvationists for a moment, I go back in my narrative in order to bring before the reader some slight picture, imperfect as it must be, of the great spiritual work which was accomplished without intermission in Geneva during the heat of the persecution. This might be illustrated by hundreds of personal testimonies and incidents, from among which I can only select a few.

In reply to a request which I made to Colonel Clibborn to give me some information concerning the motives which led him and his companions to go to Geneva, and concerning the beginning of the work there, he wrote to me as follows:—

“You say you have all the newspapers, secular and religious, published in the early part of the year, and you have therefore sufficient record of the sad and dark side of the history—the triumph of the powers of darkness. I shall, therefore, as you ask, try to give you some slight details of the brighter side, showing the glorious operation of the spirit of God and the triumphs of the Kingdom of Light. I feel sure that the facts which I state will be found to be in harmony with the information you have received from your numerous acquaintances in Switzerland during your visit this summer. You ask how we entered the country.

“A Swiss citizen of note said to me not long ago in conversation:—

“‘When the Army first came to Switzerland I thought it had made a mistake, and that we did not need it; but as I have watched late events my opinion has entirely changed. I now believe the Army was sent of God, and at the chosen time. It was needed not only in order to reach the masses, but to show us the actual state of our country. We could not have believed that such an awful state of godlessness and cruel wickedness existed under the surface, and that infidelity and vice had made such frightful progress. But above all has been the terrible revelation of the real state of our so-called Christianity. Yes, our eyes have been opened, and it is high time. Many of us are humbled in the dust, acknowledging the hand of God in the awakening sent to us. But also many refuse to do so and are hardening their hearts. There is no doubt the Army has already wrought a great and needed revolution in the minds of a great mass of Christians with reference to vital aggressive religion.’

“Had this gentleman known all the circumstances which combined to direct the march of the Army to Geneva he would have found further confirmation of his opinion.

“Desiring to extend its work into the Provinces of France the Armée du Salut had searched successively three Roman Catholic towns for a hall, without succeeding in finding any that was suitable. Meanwhile warm and pressing invitations had come from various parts of Switzerland. The following is an extract from one of them which appeared in the French organ of the Salvation Army in October of 1882:—‘I wish to tell you that your paper En Avant makes me see more and more clearly how much Christians need to come out of their state of langour in order to become true soldiers, and to fight as you do. Believe me that I indeed make it a subject of prayer before the Lord. My friends join me in assuring you of our fullest sympathy with your great and glorious work; we unite in asking the best blessings of God upon this war which you have undertaken. Our greatest wish is to see you soon cross our frontier. God grant that we may ere long clasp hands!’”

On Monday, the 4th December, Colonel Clibborn came to Switzerland to “view the land,” as the Army phrase it, intending to spend a week in reconnoitring Geneva and two other towns, hold several explanatory meetings, and, if possible, hire and commence the fitting up of a hall. On the day after his arrival he received a message, saying that several pastors wished him to meet them. They seemed uneasy at the arrival of the Army, and asked that it should not come to Geneva, or at any rate that it should postpone its arrival for some months, as they intended after the approaching fête to have several special meetings weekly, such as had just been held by Pastor Theodore Monod with much blessing. The present time seemed “inopportune.” He asked if there was not abundance of work for all among the masses of their city, as in every other city of Europe. Could they say, he asked, that enough was being done for these masses, or that even one-third of them were reached by the Gospel message. In advising the Army to stay away from Geneva, he continued, were they prepared to take upon themselves the responsibility before the Judgment Throne in the last great day, of all the souls which the Army might be the means of saving, out of the 40,000 people in the city who never entered any place of worship. He added that he did not see what they had to fear from the arrival of the Army. In England it had been said that it had helped the churches and congregations in which there was spiritual life. Life could not hinder, hamper, or destroy life. They had opportunity and external advantages vastly greater than the handful of officers would have who might enter the city. They were in great numbers, they knew the city, the language, the people; they had, besides all their churches, a number of halls, among which were four capable of holding respectively 300, 500, 600, and 3,000 people. Surely there were men, means, and places enough to set the city in a blaze (spiritually speaking) in a few weeks if they were all baptized with the Holy Ghost; and so to outstrip anything the Army could do, or to counteract anything in its influence which they might consider harmful.[13] After this conversation the pastors parted from Colonel Clibborn with expressions of kindness and goodwill.

Colonel Clibborn continues:—“I proceeded to give three lectures upon ‘The aims, methods, and organization of the Salvation Army;—incidents of the work, women’s ministry, &c., &c. These meetings were instrumental to the awakening and conversion of many souls. I was a second time asked to meet a number of pastors and others. Many questions were put, and many objections were made to the Army and its methods. All these I patiently endeavoured to meet, but said that I did not at all expect to be able to satisfy them, nor was it necessary that they should agree with all the Army did. There were ‘differences of administration and diversities of operation’ in the divine economy. I explained that the Army having brought into prominence some great principles which had lain comparatively in the dust for centuries, it was not to be wondered at that strong opposition arose where these principles ran counter to existing religious traditions and customs. We consider the prophesy of Joel to be the key-note of the New Testament Dispensation, having been quoted by the apostle Peter on its inaugural day. The great design of the Army in its organisation and methods is to give the fullest scope to the accomplishment of that prophesy, which expressed the Divine intention that the Spirit should come upon ‘all flesh,’ and that all, young as well as old, women as well as men, uneducated as well as learned, should, under the energising, vitalising power of that spirit take part in the war for the salvation of the world.[14] One great aim of the Army is therefore that all the gifts of all its converts may be called out at the earliest moment, and have the fullest scope for exercise;—that, as in the good old days, the fisherman, the artizan, or the seamstress, may become the evangelists of their fellow workmen or women, without having to spend three or four years in college; that the Salvation Army evangelist might, like David, employ any and every instrument in praising his God, after his day’s work, and find joyful recreation in leading his fellows to the fountain of Life; that like the early Christians he might be ‘instant in season and out of season,’ exhort his fellow men ‘daily,’ go out into the streets and lanes and compel them to come in, and in his service for his Lord have the fullest opportunity to rise into the highest position of usefulness for which his gifts might qualify him, and thus become a blessing to thousands.

“The prevalent religious customs on the contrary restrict the joy of preaching the Gospel to the few—to educated persons of a certain age and of one sex—thus excluding more than half the human race.

“The Army was not the result of any preconceived plan, or of careful invention, but simply the gradual development of these and other great principles in active operation. The chief instrument which God had used in its formation,—Mr. William Booth,—had worked as an evangelist among the masses in all parts of England from seventeen years of age. Wholly consecrated to God, his efforts had been blessed to an extraordinary degree. Years of devoted labour among the working classes had gained him a profound acquaintance with their ideas, habits, likings, and antipathies, and had shown him that the prevailing modes of evangelisation were but imperfectly adapted to the end in view. They left a great section of the population comparatively untouched, and the good that was done was, he conceived, in great measure lost through the want of a system in which it could be perpetuated and multiplied by engaging in the work those who had been already won. God had granted to him a willingness to unlearn and to abandon any preconceived idea or theory, no matter how dear, which did not seem to conform to the great original Pentecostal idea, or to the stern facts realised in practical labour among the people.”

The following quotation from the writings of one well acquainted with the Army’s works from the first, may throw light on its origin:—

“Feeling a special call to Evangelistic work, Mr. William Booth resigned in 1865 his position and salary as a minister, and casting himself upon God, he began his work in the east end of London. Determined to follow the Spirit of God in all its leadings and at all costs, that he might be guided into the solution of the great problem of how to reach the masses with the Gospel, he commenced alone, Bible in hand, in an open space beside a crowded thoroughfare. The men and women of that poor quarter who grouped around him each day in the open air were invited to follow him to a little hall—thus began the processions. Transformed in character, under the powerful operation of the Spirit, these men, testifying publicly, in their rough dress, straight from their work, became the Evangelists of their fellow-workmen. The masses hated both the name and sombre garb of “religion,” but Salvation from sin was a practical thing which workmen or the loafers could understand and appreciate when manifested daily in the changed lives and homes, and happy testimony of their former mates or pals.

“The path thus entered upon was of necessity often a solitary and rugged one, beset with stupendous difficulties. Each new departure or novel method to attract the godless masses generally brought with it the estrangement of some of the friends who gave the work their pecuniary aid. Misrepresentation, misunderstanding, imputation of selfish or vainglorious motive succeeded. Nights of earnest prayer and painful thought and moments of extreme financial difficulty marked the track. But the cry of dying millions ever impelled him forward, and for seventeen years God had never failed to keep his promise, though faith was often tried to the utmost.

“Experience had convinced him of the true principle of evangelisation, and that in face of the great degraded masses a central direction in each meeting and in each department of work was an indispensable necessity to united and successful effort. As the artisan preacher dared not assume the name of clergyman or clergywoman, “captain” sprang into use as the easiest name by which to designate the leader of a meeting—a word very constantly used among the people to designate a leader—whether of a ship’s crew, a troop of soldiers, a fire brigade, or a pit gang. ‘General Superintendent of the Christian Mission’ was gradually abbreviated into ‘General.’ ‘Headquarters’ became substituted for ‘Central Office.’ The command of the Master, ‘Go ye out into the streets and lanes and compel them to come in,’ had in its practical working created the processions. The necessity of a head to the procession, visible from a distance in a crowded thoroughfare, had developed the flags. The principle of the employment of all the gifts of all the converts had developed the bands of all kinds of instruments. To the common people the drum did not seem less suitable or reverent as a call to prayer than the bell in the steeple.

“And finally, the Christian Mission, which had been described in one of its reports as a volunteer army of men and women banded together in efforts for the salvation of their fellow-creatures, adopted the name of the Salvation Army and rapidly assumed in all its various departments that form which has been in all ages found to be the best for the prosecution of a war. The simple uniforms were adopted not only as a guarantee of plainness of dress and as a safeguard against changes of fashion, but as a means of continually bringing the idea of salvation before the eyes of the public, and of giving it the opportunity of narrowly watching the movements of Salvationists.”

“Sunday the 10th of December,” wrote Colonel Clibborn, “was a great day of fête in commemoration of a victory over the Catholic Savoyards some two hundred years ago. It was the great annual carnival of the city in which the greater part of the population turned out into the streets in the masquerade, and the merrymaking was kept up for a week.

“The walls announced in great placards that according to the usual custom Pastor —— would give the popular lecture in the Great Reformation Hall, upon ‘the Escalade,’ on Sunday afternoon. On enquiry I ascertained that the hall would be unused all the rest of the day and all the following week on account of the fête. I was also told that it was largely used for fashionable concerts. This splendid hall, which seats 2,700 people, was built for evangelistic meetings, one-third of the money having been subscribed in England.

“The thought of that grand building remaining silent and empty during the Sunday evening and during all those days of the fête while the giddy multitude thronged the streets as in Vanity Fair, filled my heart with the intense desire to do something for the Lord at such a moment, when the emissaries of Satan would be let loose. It was said that it would be dangerous to hold a meeting that Sunday night, as the bands of masqueraders would probably try to enter and upset it, and that so entirely was that part of the city under the reign of the carnival that night that respectable people would not like to attend. The Committee, however, granted me the hall for the Sunday and Tuesday.

“Seeing that there would be many attractions of a worldly kind in the streets that evening, I endeavoured to make my placard particularly attractive by adding the statistics of the Army! And in order to be sure that all should understand that it was a spiritual war which was in question, I concluded it with the text, ‘Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.’

“In the afternoon the hall was crammed to its utmost standing capacity. As the aged Pastor told the oft-told story of how the Catholic Savoyards had attempted to enter the Protestant city in the night; how the alarm had been given and how they had been caught and killed; how old Madame ——, of unfading memory, had dropped the iron pot of boiling soup upon the head of the leader,—loud and prolonged applause rang through the building. Then a number of young men in white gloves stepped forward on the platform and sung a song composed for the occasion, and which praised God for the deliverance of their city out of the hand of the enemy upon that day so many years ago.

“I seized the opportunity, while they were getting into choral order, of handing a note to the Pastor, requesting him to announce my meeting in the evening; he tore it to pieces before the whole audience with a disdainful gesture. The great sacrifice made on Calvary was not a worthy subject to follow ‘the Escalade’ on that Sunday evening in the Reformation Hall! About eight hundred however, came in the evening.”

The earlier meetings held in the Reformation Hall were crowded generally, and always accompanied with that fulness of blessing which had been asked in prayer, and was expected by those who asked. The following is the testimony of a Pastor, concerning one which he attended:—

“I should like to give you my impressions of the Conference at the Reformation Hall, last Wednesday, on the subject of the work of the Holy Spirit. Those who were present soon became aware that the speaker was not about to give them a theological dissertation; but they felt that they were in the presence of a solemn reality, so much so as to recall the words: ‘Put thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground.’ I shall make no analysis of the discourse to which we listened. It had indeed nothing in it of an exceptional nature, and, reported verbally by another not so fully penetrated with the spirit of the subject, would have no remarkable effect. But vivified throughout by the vital and profound convictions produced by the Spirit of God itself, the word spoken possessed a force which went direct to many consciences; one may say, it ran throughout the meeting like a volley of artillery. We well know that quite ordinary words spoken under such circumstances may strike to the soul like a sharp arrow. To this end, they must proceed from a heart entirely consecrated and filled with the Holy Spirit. How shall I tell you of my own experience as I left this meeting? I felt as one broken, burdened, annihilated. Never did I experience so deep and intense a feeling of my own complete misery and of the need that I had of the help of the Holy Spirit. I am convinced, if we were filled with that Spirit, He would work miracles in us and all around us. Why not? The promise is distinct, and the command positive—‘If ye being evil know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask Him?’ And the command is, ‘Be filled with the spirit.’ We are constantly praying for the Holy Spirit, but we do not receive it; there is something amiss in our prayers. We ask, perhaps, as certain professional beggars ask, who go from door to door begging bread, but who, well fed at home, do not for a moment care whether their petition is rejected or not. It is very different with those who ask as shipwrecked people crying for help, as they who are dying of hunger and thirst, beseeching a morsel of bread or a cup of water, or as miners buried under the earth by some terrible accident, sighing for air and light. We must ask with conviction, with faith, with constancy. It was only after nine consecutive days of unceasing prayer that the Apostles received this gift. So long as our prayers are unbelieving or languid they will remain sterile, and ourselves useless, unprofitable servants, however great our outward activity.

“To return to our brothers of the Salvation Army. May God keep and bless them! Let us pray much for them; for it is exactly those who are walking upon heights who are the most in danger of falling.”

A record of the struggle in Geneva would hardly be complete without allusion to the subject of the famous placard which gave offence to many, and which has been frequently discussed as among the doubtful means employed by Salvationists to attract to their meetings those classes of the people who are strangers to all religion and indifferent to any appeal addressed to them in the ordinary manner. This placard announced that at a meeting about to be held the “devise” of the Salvation Army, “Sang et Feu” would be explained; and that the Maréchale would open the attack. The promise here made was fulfilled, simply by an earnest address, first, on the words, “the blood of Christ Jesus His Son cleanseth us from all sin;” and secondly on those others, “He shall baptise you with the Holy Ghost and with fire,” bringing into view the full Salvation offered to all—absolution from the guilt of sin, and inward purification. I was present at a conference of friends in Switzerland, where the expediency of such a method of attracting the attention of masses was warmly discussed, and will endeavour to reproduce the impression which that discussion left on me. On the one hand, it was argued that such an announcement was calculated to “scandalize” the serious, the reverent, the refined and sensitive portion of the public, and thus must have done harm; on the other hand, the facts which followed the putting out of the placard were simply stated. These facts said more, it seemed to me, than any arguments. “True,” said Miss Booth, “this announcement seemed to you startling and perhaps bordering on the profane; but, fellow-Christians, our mission is not directed to you, but to a class of people whose views, tastes, ideas and habits are wholly different from yours. Now, what did that placard accomplish? It did for us exactly what we hoped. It brought up from the depths, so to speak, from the cellars and slums and hells of your city, a vast crowd of beings whom no ordinary call would have reached, whom no ordinary evangelizing efforts have yet won. They were struck by the words; seized with wonder and curiosity; even amusement was awakened; and they came with a great rush to see this novelty—to hear what these strange words might mean. They came with every motive except the right ones; but they came; and, thanks to our God, many of these demoniacs are now sitting clothed and in their right minds at the feet of Jesus. If there had been any other way, not offensive to the more refined classes, by which this mass of human beings could have been brought together, we would have adopted them: but other means had failed.”

I give the two views of the matter. Probably those who condemned the placard will continue to do so. Yet, after all, there is that mass of people. We cannot cart away human rubbish as we do refuse from a quarry or a coalpit. It will not lie passive where we place it, nor remain a harmless detritus beneath and behind our streets, in the cellars and dark quarters of whose existence we are scarcely aware. That rubbish is palpitating with life—with human, terrible, infinite, unquenchable life. There are hearts down there, hidden in those cheerless rooms, squalid offices or unwholesome kennels—hearts that beat, that love and hate and hunger and break; there are brains that work and invent and contrive to the imminent peril of society;—souls without hope, and lips that pour forth blasphemy.

You cannot reach these, Christian people, by the same appeals which are understood by civilized men and women; and will you not bear a little what wounds your sense of propriety, or even of what seems to you irreverence, in order to achieve the task of furnishing yourselves with the opportunity of reaching these masses? “Let all things be done decently and in order,” is a wise and useful counsel which, like many others, is applied sometimes at the expense of other truths. Decency and order and reverence are things unknown, in connection with the worship of God, or in any connection, to many of the persons of whom we are speaking. They may please and attract you; they are a necessity to you; but to reach those lower regions, what is wanted is rather a harsh trumpet call, an electric flash, the sound “as of a rushing mighty wind.” And as to Christians themselves! Can we say that they also do not need at times these disturbing influences to shake them out of the security or inactivity into which they may have lapsed in the midst of all their privileges, of all that is decent, orderly, reverent, and beautiful in ritual and religious observance?

The circumstances which preceded and followed the incident of the publication of the objectionable announcement may be briefly recounted. Miss Booth had addressed a meeting attended by a large number of the better-class people of Geneva, members of churches, and others, generally seriously disposed. An impression was made, and many tears shed during her address. But on leaving the meeting, troubled thoughts arose in her mind. “I am not satisfied,” she said, “this is all very well; but these are not the persons we came to Geneva to seek. We must reach that other world of human beings by whatever means.” And thus the idea arose of an announcement which would bring forward those beings. The expedient was successful. A meeting was held in the Casino Hall on the 22nd of December. That night the powers of light and darkness met with a crash that shook the city. On this occasion Miss Booth, standing at an open window looking upon the street where the crowds had gathered, called her companions to look down upon a motley gathering of human beings, the like of which she had not seen even in Paris or London, “a howling, biting, cursing mob,” impossible to describe. Some imagined the announcement was a challenge to a physical conflict; others that Geneva was to be attacked, that blood was to be shed, and the city set on fire! An old woman, it is said, expressed to one of her friends the hope that the taxes would not be raised by the invasion of this army which was spoken of.

The hall was crowded to its utmost capacity a quarter of an hour before the time, and the broad stone staircase was soon filled with a mass of people crushing for entrance. A band of students in coloured caps had come early and taken possession of the front of the galleries and other prominent positions in the hall. It was soon evident that an organised disturbance had been planned by them. The first hymn was interrupted by cries and ribald songs, which continued, almost drowning the prayer which followed.

But through and above the storm many a burning word or earnest invitation was launched forth in the All-powerful name, which found its way straight to hearts and consciences. The little band on the platform, confident in God, remained perfectly calm, delivering in the intervals of comparative stillness, the message of salvation with the power of the Spirit of God. The tempest began to be assuaged; by nine o’clock victory was evidently on the side of the Salvationists. Many who at first had been the most wild and noisy in the disturbances were listening attentively. Words of life, cutting through the uproar, had reached their hearts. Certain citizens of Geneva who were present have said that they never fully realised before that night the reality of the conflict between the powers of light and darkness. The leaders of the meeting appeared as persons girded with divine armour, wielding the sword of the spirit in such a way that the fiercest shafts of ridicule opposed to them by the bands of mocking students and others fell harmless to the ground. Now, at last, the invitation is given out to those who desire salvation, to come forward. A strong faith and a holy boldness indeed were needed for this letting down of the net into such troubled and raging waters. One after another bold scoffers of half an hour ago left their places, some trembling visibly under the power of that divine influence which had subdued them, and under the sense of personal guilt; and as they kneeled down (for the first time perhaps in their lives) there rose sweet and low, the beautiful hymn:—

Reviens, reviens, pauvre pécheur!

Ton Père encore t’attend.

Veux-tu languir loin du bonheur

Et pécher plus longtemps?

Chœur. O! reviens à ton Sauveur

Reviens ce soir,

Il veut te recevoir,

Reviens à ton Sauveur.

The power of music in aiding a holy cause is beginning to be better understood. Many hearts have been and are daily moved, stirred to godly sorrow, or to hope, by the message of peace and love conveyed in song. I have been struck by the effect produced in such meetings by the words of a hymn begun so softly that one could scarcely mark the moment at which the silence was broken by the first word, and gradually rising in clearness and power until it swelled into a full chorus. St. Augustine records the fact that the first sense of relief to his burdened soul, bowed down under the crushing sense of sin, came to him through the sweet singing of a little child in a garden,—“Take up the book, take up and read.” He obeyed the angelic summons, took up the book, and read those words which opened for him the gates of the Kingdom of Heaven.

To return. Now a divine influence seemed to steal over the meeting, hushing the crowd into a profound silence, while the pleading words of the chorus were repeated again and again. As the last verse was sung,

Reviens prodigue à la maison,

Reviens, ne sois pas sourd,

Après la mort plus de pardon,

Le jour de grâce est court—

the faces of many young and careless men betrayed signs of deep distress. A part of the audience now began to disperse. A tall man, a German workman, approaches the platform, and, with tears flowing fast, cries in broken French, “O pray for me, pray for me. I see my sins to-night; I am lost; I know not what to do; I was too cowardly to come forward; I feared to be laughed at. Will you not pray for me?” A few nights afterwards this man came out and gave himself to God. His testimony in the subsequent meetings was sublime; he has stood forward on the platform of the Reformation Hall, and told how he had been plunged in every abyss of degradation—how he formerly drank to a frightful excess—played cards till the small hours of the morning with debased comrades, and how his life had become a burden to him through sin. Now all was changed. The light of a glorious Salvation shone upon his path, and God had given him a joy above all others in working for the salvation of his comrades, though abuse and ridicule were often all he received in return.

The next night a similar meeting was held in the Casino. The hall again filled to its utmost capacity, while crowds stood in the street; other souls again seeking salvation. The following is from a French pastor, whose son, a student in Geneva, was one of those who were at this meeting.

“I cannot resist the pleasure of telling you how thankful I am towards God and the Salvation Army for all the good my dear son ... a student of theology, has received in your meetings at Geneva. The letters which he sends us make us weep for joy.

“On the 4th of January he wrote:—

“‘The Salvation Army will continue to do great good in Geneva. I passed a long night of watch with them on the 31st of December, which I shall never forget. Since then I am always happy, and can say, “Glory to God!” every hour throughout the day. There is much disturbance caused for the purpose of preventing the Army in its work, but every day it gains new converts. One of the leaders of a band of roughs does not fear, for the last week, to say that he is saved; also many others. I help these dear friends as much as possible, although at times it is very difficult....

“‘We have several meetings during the day. I can not, unfortunately, attend all of them, as my studies prevent me, but when I can, it is always with a new pleasure. I love you with all my heart; also my dear mother and brothers. I beseech these last to give themselves promptly to the Saviour, and not to do it as I, their eldest brother, did, for I remained a long while before I could dare to pronounce the name of Jesus.”

“Help us to bless the name of the Lord for such a result! To show my gratitude towards the Salvation Army, which does so much good among us, by the grace of God, I ask you to enter my name, through Mr. Herbert Booth, as a member of the Auxiliary of the Salvation Army. For this purpose I send you an order for twenty-six francs fifty cents., which I believe is equivalent to one guinea. This will be my subscription for 1883. I authorise you to make what use you like of this letter for the glory of God. Give my best wishes to Miss Booth. En Avant goes well here.—Believe me to be, dear Sir and brother, your devoted friend in Christ Jesus, the Great Captain of our Salvation,

“E. V., Pasteur.”

It was to this meeting that Charles Wyssa came, whose death occurred in September of this year, and at whose grave the arrest of Miss Booth and her companions took place. He wrote: “I was passing through the streets of Geneva, and my eye fell on the placard of the Salvation Army. That looks lively, I thought, and I went in.”

“That night Charles left the hall with the arrows of conviction sticking fast in his heart. Three days afterwards (Christmas Day), in the Reformation Hall, he rose and came forward with forty others and gave himself to the Lord. He immediately became the target for the fire of the whole atelier in which he worked. But so noble and so powerful was the testimony of his life, and so cheerfully and patiently did he bear all their mockery, that they were forced to acknowledge the reality of his salvation.

“One day, when violently attacked by his fellow-workmen, the foreman, though himself an infidel, approached and called out to them to cease their mockery, adding, ‘It would be better for you all if you were like him. You are a shame to our firm!’ (alluding to their dissipated lives).

“Many of his fellow-workmen came to hear him give his testimony in the great Reformation Hall. One night while a volley of mockery was poured forth, Charles stepped forward upon the platform, pale, but firm as a rock. ‘Ah!’ he said, ‘I now understand all this uproar and opposition. Why, if you pinch even a dog’s tail he will growl or bite. Somebody has got pinched since the Army came to Geneva, and of course he is angry. That “somebody” has been cast out of me, you know who he is—le demon!’ and then he went on to speak of the blessed Jesus who had come to live in his heart instead. Throughout those dark days, before and after the closing of the meetings and the expulsion of the Maréchale and officers, Charles was among those who stood the firmest and laboured the most actively as sergeant.

“He suffered through the consequences of the persecution. The cold which brought on his consumption dates from a Sunday morning in March when the soldiers of the Geneva corps gathered in the chill shadow of Salève cliff on the French frontier, before the mist had lifted from the valley, in order that they might worship God, as they were forbidden to do upon their native soil. His great desire during his long illness seemed to be to lose no opportunity of speaking of salvation to those who came to see him. I have sat by many a death-bed, seen many a triumphant death, but never have seen a face more radiant at the thought of the nearness of Heaven.”

It was Christmas Eve. The Salvationists had no hall. The officers went to the Committee of the great Reformation Hall, and pressed upon them the responsibility of allowing it to remain idle, while the attention of thousands was now aroused to the question of salvation. It was granted for two nights. A dense throng poured into the building each evening, filling every space. The scene of the Casino was repeated on a larger scale. The audience was for the greater part composed of people who never entered a place of worship. This evening was a marvellous revelation to some Christians present. For the first time, many of them afterwards said, they realized the awful state of the great mass of the population; they confronted the terrible fact that tens of thousands of persons, with eyes closed to the light, and strangers to the joy of salvation, were rushing down headlong to destruction. The cabarets, the dancing saloons, the drinking hells, the rendezvous of prostitution, and the theatres had poured their contents into the Reformation Hall. Socialists—men of every nationality—who had found refuge in Geneva came en masse. It must not be supposed that these audiences consisted mainly of the miserably poor; these, the poorest of the people, are probably less cynical and less formidable in their attitude towards spiritual truth than are the classes to whom the Gospel appeal was now mainly addressed in Geneva as also in Paris. There is a portion of the population of Geneva which is perhaps even more disintegrated and demoralized than that of Paris, owing to the admixture of international elements, possessing no common traditions of law or religion or national history, to which an appeal can be made. They are the refuse of the earth, so to speak, loosely thrown together, without guiding principles, absolutely without public spirit, unconscious of the existence of any common weal to be sought, lacking any kind of cohesion, and eager only in the pursuit of some isolated, individual, material interest. The editor of le Témoignage, who was present at one of the services at the Rue Oberkampff, in Paris, wrote:—

“There is one point of view from which one cannot but render an unanimous homage to the Salvation Army, that is, its ardent and devouring compassion for the wandering multitudes. That this Army may be very wrong, may itself paralyse its means of action in holding itself too much outside of the Church, is evident; but what is no less evident is that it reaches and takes hold of the masses upon whom I say that not only the Church, but the generous efforts of private persons, had little or no hold up to this time. In this respect its success seems to me striking. Every time I have attended other meetings of a religious character, it has never been without experiencing a piercing feeling of deception and regret. Always the same audience.... But the public which it was the object to gain, I said to myself—the public notoriously hostile—the public of our atheist press—the public of the great political meetings, in whose eyes Victor Hugo himself would pass for a clerical!—that public! Were is it? How is it to be acted upon? Very well; this public I have at last seen, I have seen it with my own eyes, at the meetings of the Salvation Army. And I have been rejoiced and moved, beyond all expression, to see it. In all my life I shall not forget the scenes at the opening of a new hall in Rue Oberkampff. My heart was divided between the very opposite sentiments of sorrow and joy in hearing these blasphemies and songs and cries, because at last! at last! the assault has been delivered, and the enemy struck in the face! And I had a very lively impression that my sentiments were partaken of by the members of the Army, to whose cold blood, energy, and, I will say, clever strategy, one would not know how to render sufficient homage in this emergency. They did not cease to repeat with a tone of conviction, ‘Your tumult will be appeased; one day, you, who blaspheme the most at this moment, will perhaps be the first to surrender. This is the position on which we wish to plant our standard, and we will plant it here.’”

These words apply equally to the case of Geneva.

To return to the meeting in the Hall of the Reformation, a large part of the audience (of the nature described above) were so entirely strangers to the idea of worship or of an Invisible Being to be addressed in worship, that the sound of prayer called forth loud, derisive laughter, with questions and cries of surprise and scorn. This would have been enough to daunt any evangelists except those who, strong in faith in the miracle-working power of the Holy Ghost, fear nothing, neither the loud blasphemy of the multitude, nor the powers of hell let loose in their midst. Every lull in the uproar was taken advantage of by the speakers to fling some javelin from the armoury of God’s Word into the midst of the opposing and surging host. The uproar itself even seemed at times to render more pointed the words spoken in a clear unfaltering voice which cut their way through it. Many an arrow went home, as subsequent histories—not only told in words, but acted out in changed and holy lives—have abundantly testified.

A more select meeting for prayer followed. In order to hold this in a calmer atmosphere, the members of the Army retreated to the smaller hall behind the platform. A crowd followed, and in a few moments the place was filled to suffocation. The impression of what followed can never be forgotten by those who witnessed it. While the roar of voices gradually died away in the larger hall, a feeling of deep solemnity fell upon those assembled for the prayer meeting. They had seen the collision between the powers of light and darkness; and the stillness which followed resembled the silence which succeeds a storm, in which clouds full charged with electric fire had met in the midst of the hissing and smoke and roar of the warring elements. To the faith of some it might have seemed that they saw again in anticipation the vision granted to Our Saviour, when he said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.”

Some of the ringleaders of the disturbance had pushed their way into the smaller hall; but there they remained perfectly still, subdued and overawed, with an expression on their faces of intense interest, which showed that they felt that they were in presence of a reality in religion which they had not before encountered. The officers did not fail to take advantage of the scene which had just been witnessed to urge their hearers to flee from the wrath to come, and be as decided for Christ as the rioters were against Him. The presence of God was realised in an extraordinary degree. The hymn was sung—

“Tel que je suis, pécheur rebelle,

Au nom du Sang versé pour moi,

Au nom de ta voix qui m’appelle,

Jésus, je viens à toi.”

The resolution expressed in these words found an echo in many hearts; and then there followed a scene such as, it was said, had never been witnessed in Geneva. More than forty persons (careless or mocking, a few minutes before), arose, and one after another came forward, and kneeling down, surrendered themselves to God, before the whole meeting. The officers of the Army spoke to one and another of “the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world;” and again arose the chorus of the hymn—

“Ôte tous mes pêchés

Agneau de Dieu, je viens a Toi;

Ôte tous mes pêchés.”

The following is the experience, given by himself, of one who had gone with the herd of cynics and sceptics to the meeting at the Casino, and now came to the Reformation Hall:—“I was like the demoniac of Gadara. I can say I was possessed; I was chained for fifteen years to a frightful life. I was lost, my health ruined, my nerves shattered. I gave myself up to despair. Everyone shunned me like a leper; but I refused to go to the Great Physician of my soul, for in spite of all I clung to my sin, and sacrificed everything to it. I contemplated suicide. It was then that you arrived. I was at first astonished; then remorse seized me. Then followed a frightful torment in my soul,—a real hell. I resolved to put an end to it one way or another. Yet I thought I would go and hear you once more.

“I had been in darkness and anguish since the day of the first meeting,—on the point of committing suicide. No word had I been able to recall of that day’s teaching,—nothing remained in my memory, except the words of the sacred song, ‘Ôte tous mes pêchés’—(‘Take all my sins away.’) These sounded in my heart and brain through the day and the sleepless night—these, and these only. Bowed down with grief and despair, again I came to the Reformation Hall, and to the after meeting. The first sounds which fell on my ear, were again those very words, ‘Take all my sins away,’ and then you (to Miss Booth) spoke on the words, ‘though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow;’ you seemed to speak to me alone, to regard me alone,—and I felt it was God who had sent me there to hear those words.”

When, Christian, in the “Pilgrim’s Progress,” came to a certain place where there was a cross and a tomb, his heavy burden rolled away and he was free. Such a place of deliverance did this burdened soul now find on that Christmas Day, the anniversary of the Saviour’s birth, the birthday of that Swiss Salvation Army. “Oh! if you knew,” he said, “the struggle I had to go through. I spent a night in prayer to God which I shall never forget. At last I came off with victory. Ah! yes, my God, Thou art good, Thou didst uphold me. Now all is well. I shall have to pass through much trial, but I am so happy now to be saved; I have thrown behind me and forsaken all my sins.”

New Year’s Eve was marked by a fresh baptism of spiritual life. The day is still spoken of as an era in the spiritual history of many, and allusions to it occur in the letters of many of the converts, who then consecrated themselves afresh to God’s service and prayed to be made willing and able to suffer all His will. The clouds of persecution were already gathering black and gloomy around them; and there, at the foot of the Cross, they felt and confessed that nothing but the spirit and power of early Christianity could fit them for the conflict. Hour after hour their fervent prayers arose as they remained prostrated before the Lord. This young band of new-born souls entered the New Year upon their knees.

Evidence now began to come from all sides of blessing received in many homes, of wild sons reclaimed, of drunkards and vicious men transformed by the power of God, of light and joy brought into families over which a cloud had hung. In several cases husbands and wives who had separated were re-united, old enmities were forgotten, and enemies reconciled. A workman who had come under this transforming influence came to confess to his employer that he had stolen some materials from his atelier for his own use, and to make restitution.

Meetings for consecration were held in the early mornings, before the dawn of day. Often as the gas was turned out at dawn, giving place to the gray light of the morning which fell upon this crowd of kneeling people, or upon those who had found the full freedom they had sought, and were now rejoicing in the Saviour, it seemed an image of the spiritual change,—the dull light of self disappearing, and the dawn of the true light arising upon their souls.

One of these morning meetings was thus described by an aged Genevese gentleman of ripe experience:—

“I was present at seven a.m. on Sunday morning. Oh, it was a Pentecost! hundreds kneeling—children, men, and women. I cannot express what I experienced. I never passed such moments. I was melted down before the Lord. I could only cry, ‘This is Thy Spirit, O Lord! this is Thy Spirit!’... The tongues of flame alone were wanting to show us by our bodily vision the presence of the Holy Spirit. But they were not absent; our hearts saw them. The language of my heart was, ‘Lord, now lettest Thou Thy servant depart in peace; for mine eyes have seen Thy Salvation.’”

Another Genevese thus wrote of the early morning meetings:—

“Such a Sunday morning as we have witnessed to-day will by many never be forgotten. It has been said that there has never been seen anything like it since the time of Calvin. Oh, with what divine influence were we surrounded. While singing the hymn—

‘Accept my sacrifice,

’Tis on Thy altar laid,’

we believe many truly laid their all on the altar. The attention of that vast audience was concentrated on Jesus. We drew nigh unto Him, and He drew nigh unto us. The intense earnestness of those prayers was such that many unconsciously spoke at the same time, acknowledging their unfaithfulness with tears of repentance. Jesus Himself was there, pardoning, and breathing peace into their troubled hearts. The meeting closed with a song of triumph in which heart and voice united....

“It is with joy we learn from all sides that the Spirit of God is working among the Churches; special meetings are now being convened for the purpose of drawing in the unconverted; and we receive striking testimonies of God’s power. One cannot be astonished that the devil is doing all he can to injure us. But, forward, comrades! Walk in the light—have no fellowship with the works of darkness. Live to please God—to realise each instant the sweetness of His approval. Know nothing among men but Christ Jesus, and Him crucified; then victory is yours.”

Personal testimonies must have a force far beyond that of mere general statement, for all who believe that God has made the true progress of mankind to rest upon the quickening of the individual soul. I give a few such, selected with some difficulty (owing to the embarras de richesse) from many hundreds.

A Correspondent of foreign journals who had come to the meetings with the sole intention of turning them into ridicule, and who till then had professed to believe that all religion was a hypocrisy and a mockery, wrote:—

“Thanks be unto God, even I am saved! For a long time I had wished to find the light, but could not find it. I imagined I could correct evil by evil, but never reached my object. I saw the evils of the world, and looked out for truth and justice, but found no impersonation of them. I thought that the Christian religion was a kind of madness, or a collection of mysteries. I should like to have had all its representatives burnt—churches, priests, books—all! When I first attended the meetings of the Salvation Army, I was struck by the sincerity of the character of its officers. I perceived that they possessed something which I did not possess. But I said to myself at first, ‘it is only the phlegmatic English temperament.’ But, by-and-bye, my whole being was turned upside down. I could no longer think, read, nor write. In fact, I had been shot through! I had no more peace. I could do nothing, and thus I decided to give myself up entirely and without reserve to the Saviour.”

The Federal Council, in its rejection of the appeal of Miss Booth at a later date, cites the opinion of a medical man, who asserted that persons in a weak or melancholy state of mind had been driven into greater darkness or madness by the influence of the Salvation Army. From a large collection of testimonies which tend in the very opposite direction, I may give the following:—

“To the glory of our God I am able to say that I have passed from darkness to light! My life—hitherto without hope, without aim, and utterly useless—is transformed. I lived in rebellion against God. He sent me many trials, but I constantly hardened myself against His will; I tried to be sufficient for myself. Falling at last under a burden which was too heavy for me, I wrapped myself in my solitary pride, and lived alone. In spite of many hard lessons and the reiterated calls of my Saviour, to which I refused to respond, I hardened my heart. What I have suffered it is impossible for me to express. I locked myself up in silence and reserve, sometimes endeavouring to put on a smiling face, sometimes seeking a moment of oblivion in recreations of one kind or another. At times I was tempted to fling myself into the intoxications of the world in order to deaden my misery, but I hated the world as much as I fled from God. It was too noisy for my broken heart. But now darkness is turned into light.”[15]

A man of fifty years of age rose in one of the meetings, and said:—“I have been an unbeliever, estranged from God, living honourably according to the world, but caring nothing for spiritual things. I came to these meetings, and to the knowledge and love of Jesus Christ. It was at a meeting at seven in the morning that I first felt my sinfulness and saw my life as a failure (vie manquée), and Jesus has pardoned me. O! what joy have I missed throughout my whole life!”

Another thus speaks:—“The first time I came to hear you, I left the meeting with very different feelings to those with which I entered; your beaming countenances, in which one saw expressed a happiness beyond anything earth can give, made so great an impression on me. Then I said to myself, here is the religion which I need; it is not sad or gloomy.” Again another:—“In the face of all the calumnies spread abroad against the Salvation Army, I feel it my duty to declare publicly that, so far as I have seen for myself, all that is said against them is absolutely false. I have followed almost all their meetings at Geneva, and had opportunities of observing the officers closely. I found the Salvation Army a true family, whose members are bound together by the strongest ties of Christian friendship. To those who call them hypocrites I would say, ‘come and see for yourselves. Question them, live with them as I have done, and if you can then discover that their lives or conduct are not just and upright, you can blame or accuse them at your ease. But take care not to judge them until you know them.’ Each time that I came in contact with the Salvation Army, I experienced a happiness and joy of which I had had no knowledge before; and while I lived among them I learned how complete is their disinterestedness, and how great their courage in supporting the grossest insults for their Master’s sake.”

Another independent witness says.—“One did not need to be a profound psychologist in order to foresee that the Salvation Army would draw its most hearty converts and its best supporters from the ranks of the very persons who at the first met it with the most violent, gross, and deep-seated opposition. These persons could not fail, sooner or later, to be struck with that ‘demonstration of the Spirit and of power’ which accompanies the appeals of these sincere and joyous evangelists. Wherever the Army has passed, it is from the benches of the mockers that they have the most largely recruited the benches of the penitents.” It is impossible not to remark in connection with this indisputable statement, on the suicidal folly of the men at present in positions of power in Switzerland, in forbidding access for the people to this powerful influence. Is not the power of the Holy Spirit the one and only influence which is able to transform that mass of miserable humanity, these “dangerous classes,” into good citizens and subjects; the only influence which can avert the moral and political bankruptcy apparently impending for their country? The sorrowful words have often risen to our lips, in connection with that fair city, “Oh, Geneva, if thou hadst known, even in this thy day the things that belong to thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes.”

The following is a testimony of another kind, but not less powerful. It is an extract from La Scène, a theatrical gazette of Geneva, of February 6th, 1883, before the expulsions:—

“The Department of Justice and Police has just issued a warrant forbidding the exercises of the Salvation Army. We congratulate the Department and the Federal Council without reserve upon this measure. But what would have been still more simple would have been expulsion in regular form. People do not spare the parasites who live and fatten on the public credulity; why spare those who open a shop to sell righteousness just as formerly indulgences were sold; persons from whom are not even demanded the necessary passports and papers, and who did not even pay for their permit of residence, nor for the police license to exercise their trade of public cheats? Popular good-sense has meted out the proper measure of justice to these cynical play-actors who parody religion, and we believe that it was high time that the Department of Justice and Police should appear on the scene, otherwise the people themselves would have scourged these sinners from the temple.”

The same paper, on Monday, 19th February (after the expulsions), has the following, under the heading “Theatrical Chronicle”:—

“Since the departure of the Salvation Army our theatre has lost a formidable rival, and the crowd are beginning to find their way back to us. The most terrible blow received by these speculators was the pamphlet of Madame the Countess de Gasparin. This courageous writer, in language elegant, modest, and full of conviction, has well defended religious Geneva, so outrageously insulted. She has fought step by step, entrenchment by entrenchment, these sorry soldiers, male and female, who make use of the name of God in order to live by their speculations. She has exposed, in a careful verbal translation whose exactitude a few cowards have dared to doubt, the cleverly designed plan of campaign of the bank of Booth & Co. In short, she has opened the eyes of those who only saw in the Salvation Army a religious sect which our laws should protect, and which should be allowed to carry on its work. All honour to Madame de Gasparin, and hearty thanks!”

To return to the experiences of the Army previous to the expulsions. At one of the evening meetings a Salvation soldier came to ask Colonel Clibborn to speak to a young man at the further end of the hall. On going down he found a man of about thirty years of age leaning against the wall, with tears in his eyes, and his whole appearance indicating deep emotion. He said, “Oh, I am so wretched; I cannot sleep, I cannot rest, I don’t know what to do. I see I shall have to give up my present employment; and yet to do that is to sacrifice all I have.” He said he was a Greek, and that his employment was that of a correspondent of newspapers in Greece and Constantinople, for which he was expected to write flippant and scoffing articles. When the Army first came to Geneva he had written articles turning it to ridicule, in a style which would suit the taste of those papers. But while attending the meetings in order to get material for his articles, he became thoroughly convinced of the sincerity and disinterestedness of the Army workers, which surprised him, as he had always looked upon all religion as a hypocrisy and a swindle. A Greek newspaper editor having asked him to send extracts from “La Verité à l’egard de l’Armée du Salut,” he began the translation of that work. He had not gone far before he became completely convinced of the truth of all he read. “The book,” said he, “when rendered into Greek was like an exquisite poem! Ah! I used to believe in dynamite as the remedy for social wrongs, but now I see that there is another power which can turn the world upside down and set all wrong things right.” Colonel Clibborn pressed him to submit to that power at once, to obey his conscience, and give his heart to God. A terrible struggle was going on in his soul. He said that after conviction had come upon him he had written an article defending the Army, and had at once received an angry letter from the editor. His companions, seeing the change, also wrote to Constantinople saying that he had sold himself to the English for 5,000 francs. His conscience did not allow him either to continue his employment, or to ask for the money owing to him, as he felt he had earned it wrongly; and yet he could find no other work. At times the temptation was strong to stifle his convictions. The old scoffing spirit and unbelief would struggle for the mastery; his great spiritual enemy suggesting to him that he was a weak fool, and that all his convictions about God and salvation were a delusion. Colonel Clibborn pressed him to put the matter to the test there and then by a whole-hearted surrender; but he said the sacrifice was too great; he could not take such a leap in the dark, or trust God when he saw starvation before him, having already failed in every effort to get other employment. But God did not let him go. As he continued to read the Bible and attend the meetings his conviction strengthened and deepened. One evening he had fallen into a state of almost complete despair. He had been obliged to sell his watch and other things in order to buy food, and he seemed weak, as if he had scarcely eaten anything for several days. “Oh!” he said, “I am lost, lost! I have left the service of the Devil, and yet God won’t have me. I have fallen between the two.” Again he was pressed to trust. He said he could not trust God in the way described to him. He could not trust blindly. If he only had employment then he could believe. They showed him that it was just this entire abandonment of himself to God that was necessary. Colonel Clibborn knelt down with him, and after a time while they were praying, the poor Greek broke forth, saying, “There! I can’t hold out any longer. I give myself to God. He can do with me what He likes. It’s done. He may have me!”

“It was dinner time when he was about to leave,” wrote Colonel Clibborn. “Oh, how hard I felt it not to be able to ask him either to have some dinner with me or to give him something with which to buy himself food. I dared not even give him a few francs from my own money, so gross had been the falsehoods in circulation about our giving money to people to bribe them to speak in our meetings. I knew also that his own independent spirit would prompt him rather to starve than to allow even the shadow of a pretext for such stories by even taking a mouthful of food. Alas! how cruel is the world. A gentleman had openly stated a few days before that we paid four francs each to our converts, and this had gone all over the town and into the papers with the usual additions, and had excited the rage of the people against us. He subsequently wrote the same to Neuchâtel, with a like result, and yet never had a centime been given to one of our converts from the very first. We even decided once not to employ one of our converts who was out of work for the moment, when we had some work which he might have done, lest the enemy should have a pretext for such stories. The next time I met the Greek, he was, as I expected, enjoying the full assurance of salvation; all his burden gone. Though an educated man, he had (like a true Salvation soldier) accepted an offer of employment as a labourer in the fields in order to earn his living.” This man had formerly been under police surveillance as a dangerous socialist, but had now placed himself en regle as a peaceful and law-abiding citizen. All the conflicts and despair of soul had gone, and the peace of God was in his heart.

He afterwards rose in one of the meetings, and stated that, “when they spoke to me of Jesus Christ, I replied, ‘Don’t talk to me of Him; He was a vagabond and a wild fanatic.’ When I was young my mother gave me a Bible, and I threw it into the river in a rage.” Some time after the expulsions, when the Geneva soldiers crossed the frontier to meet their leaders in Savoy or Vaud, the Greek would also come, when it was evident from his speech and countenance that he was “continuing steadfast in the faith.” During the persecutions he had much to suffer. On one occasion he was savagely attacked, knocked down, and cruelly beaten.

The following is extracted from a letter published by a Genevan lawyer, in reply to a hostile criticism:—

“When the Salvation Army arrived amongst us, preceded as it was by the reputation which the newspapers had already made for it, there were but few Christians who were not troubled or hurt. But these impressions were singularly modified among the best part of those who, having seen the work, followed it without taking any part, anxious to form their judgment upon what they heard and saw, and not upon what they had merely read.

“Several have even gone so far as to consider that they were witnessing a work which brought them back, in a greater degree than any one would have imagined possible in this century, to what must have taken place in the primitive Church at the time and during the preaching of the apostles.

“It is an incontestable fact that under the action of the Salvation Army a powerful movement the like of which has never been before witnessed among us, has been produced in Geneva. An evident action of the Holy Spirit has manifested itself. The question which is called ‘exciting par excellence,’ that of perdition or salvation, has been placed before a multitude of men and women of all classes; it is a question which up to the present they have succeeded in avoiding; and it has not been put forward, as your correspondent is pleased to say, ‘under a form more or less grotesque,’ but under a form most serious and incisive. Hence this display of unheard of anger on the part of a population which has felt itself wounded in its pride, disturbed in its false security, troubled in its conscience, and obliged to face a question which it found most irksome.

“As to the opposition of Christians, it is kept up undoubtedly by many who do not render the full sense of the word conversion as meant in the Bible, and therefore do not attach sufficient importance to it; whilst others will only hear of one sort of conversion, namely, that of people well placed, of good education, grave, instructed, and with whom the question is well thought out. But there is not, thank God, only that one kind of conversion for people who receive an independent income and who are well educated. That which is adapted for some may not suit others.”

The Swiss adherents of the Army in Geneva continued to increase daily after the expulsions and during the heat of the persecutions. Many interesting extracts might be made from a mass of correspondence which has been placed at my disposal, between these hunted but happy people, the reading of which transports one in imagination to the times of the persecutions of the Huguenots in France or the Covenanters in Scotland. The “kitchen meetings” were very much frequented. A soldier writes of one:—“We ended our meeting by thanking God for His presence, and asking Him to be with us the remainder of the day. We then left our Hallelujah kitchen to meet again at three in the afternoon; for, although we have no halls, we manage to meet in kitchens and parlours, kindly lent us by friends of the Army. Some of us met in a parlour; the others with Lieutenant Thonger in the open-air. They all had a great blessing; and although we were not all together, we felt we were all with the same God. We closed our meeting at half-past four to meet again at eight in a Hallelujah shop, where we thought there would be room enough for all who knew we had a meeting; but when we arrived there at five minutes to eight we found everything full, kitchen, stairs, shop, and all, and lots unable to get in; so Lieutenant Thonger walked off with a detachment to another Hallelujah kitchen. We had a splendid day. Six meetings altogether. Our soldiers here are a brave set; some of them know what it is to go through the fire; some are very much persecuted, but in spite of it all they are faithful soldiers of the Cross.”

One result of the persecution became now sadly visible at Geneva, and later at Neuchâtel, in the breaking down of the health of officers and soldiers and friends in consequence of the choking atmosphere of the meetings, which they were obliged to hold only in small, out-of-the-way, and sometimes unwholesome rooms. At Geneva no private rooms could be found large enough to hold the little army, and though the town was divided into four districts, each to have its meeting, the same state of things repeated itself everywhere, and the windows having to be kept shut, in order to avoid attracting the attention of the police or populace, the result soon became painfully visible.

Colonel Clibborn was obliged to remain a month absent in the north of Switzerland through illness (his lungs having been most seriously attacked from this cause). “It made my heart bleed,” he says, “on returning to Geneva to find two of our devoted Swiss friends, who had opened their houses to the meetings, completely broken down, and, though strong, robust men of middle age, bent and feeble through the violence of the malady in their lungs.”

Shortly after the closing of the meetings, the following letter, signed by seventy-two mothers of families, was received by Miss Booth:—

“We, the undersigned mothers, desire to give our testimony and to prove by many facts to all the persons with whom we have any influence—

“1. That the Salvation Army since its arrival in Geneva has been, under the powerful hand of God, the blessed instrument of the salvation of our children.

“2. That we have no fears in regard to the influence of the Salvation Army upon our children; seeing that its officers draw their teaching, exhortations, and encouragements from the Bible alone, whence also they draw the force which animates them, and according to which they rule their lives and conduct.

“3. That, as mothers and as women who love their families and their fatherland, we can only bless the Lord for the good which he has brought to us and our children by means of the Salvation Army. We ardently desire that those of our families who have not yet embraced salvation may do so; and we pray that they may become the faithful disciples of Jesus Christ and valiant soldiers of the Salvation Army.”

(Here follow seventy-two signatures.)

A similar letter was received by Miss Booth a few days later, signed by upwards of thirty more mothers of families.

Throughout the period of the persecutions the chief weapons of attack were furnished by the religious press of Switzerland. The first personal attack upon Miss Booth—and the only one of this kind which appeared, reproduced in the secular press—was signed “A Woman.” This anonymous writer was the first to apply the epithet of saltimbanques (mountebanks) to the Salvationists; a name at once caught up by the comic and worldly papers, and afterwards constantly applied to them.[16] It was a religious paper of Geneva which gravely suggested that an explanation of the power exercised by the Salvation Army might be found in mesmerism. This idea also was caught up by the secular press. Sceptics, and Christians who have forgotten that we are living under the dispensation of the Holy Spirit, may well be perplexed to account for the spiritual power which is working marvels in our day, not among one class, or one Salvation Army alone, but among all Christians whose eyes are enlightened to read the signs of the times and the will of God. The unbelievers of Judea said of Christ, “He casteth out devils by the prince of devils,” and of the inspired band on the day of Pentecost they said, “These men are full of new wine.” Translated into the language of modern cynics or roughs, we have here a repetition of the same accusations in the attribution to the instruments of God’s loving will of a force called animal magnetism. “They mesmerise the people,” said the polite critics. “They are drunk,” said the roughs. Alike strangers to the spiritual world, it was impossible for them to understand this mysterious power under which the strongest men, hardened in vice, or confirmed in unbelief, were broken down under the hand of God—the God who “woundeth and maketh whole,” who “killeth and maketh alive.” This charge of magnetism or mesmerism prevailed to such an extent for a time, that the Salutists found their every movement, every glance of their eyes, suspiciously watched in the meetings, while even Christians shrunk from their approach with a vague dread. Others asked, however:—“Can magnetism save the drunkard from the dominion of his ruling passion, break the chains of habit for the profligate and set him free to live a life of purity, convince the materialist of the existence of God, restore concord and love to families long blighted by selfishness and sin, bring the lost prodigal back to his father’s house, reconcile deadly enemies, and, in a word, work miracles of transformation in hearts, lives, and homes?” “Mesmerism!” said a mother of a family. “If mesmerism can work such a change as has been worked in my house, and turn a dissolute, cruel-hearted son into a sober, affectionate and happy man, then I wish all Geneva were mesmerised.” Not the smallest of the trials of those dark days was the consciousness of distrust and superstitious dread with which this charge of mesmerism for a time surrounded the Salvationists.

Among the letters which Miss Booth received after her expulsion, was one signed, “A mother whose family has been restored to her by the Salvation Army.” A poor woman, the mother of an invalid son, wrote that since he had become a convert, his peevish spirit had changed to one of patience and joyfulness; “formerly he always grumbled about his food; nothing pleased him; but now he is always satisfied.” A young man of weak mind, whose mental infirmity had taken the form of dislike, or rather positive hatred, to his brother and the rest of his family, became so changed that he could now never do enough, he deemed, for his family, and for that brother in particular. His limited powers and intelligence forbade his doing anything great, but he would show his love by brushing his brother’s clothes, blacking his boots, and watching every opportunity of serving him. How lovely are the “peaceable fruits of righteousness” in the weakest and most despised, as well as the highly gifted!

On an occasion when it was impossible to have the Reformation Hall for mixed audiences, Miss Booth obtained it for a meeting of women. It was filled with women only; three thousand being present. A great number of letters pouring in subsequently, proved the vital work which was accomplished in many hearts on that day.

The following is from an old citizen of Geneva:—

“On Sunday last the Salvation Army held a meeting at 5 o’clock in the morning at the Casino. The meeting was led by Miss Wallis, who made a simple but very impressive address upon several Biblical passages. There is in the early hours of Sunday morning a peculiar solemnity which inclines us more than at other times to heart-searching. I can never forget the moment when all were invited to consecrate themselves entirely to the Saviour. I saw advance and kneel down, one by one, no inconsiderable portion of the audience until there was no longer any more room for them. The little platform and pulpit were surrounded by a crowd of people in earnest prayer. One could not move, and those who were still seated had to rise to make way for the numbers who continued to press forward to kneel in their turn, and to testify publicly their determination to serve God faithfully. Among them were many men, and all ages were represented; but there was no trace of ephemeral excitement. I stood by the side of the platform, and handed one chair after another, as I contemplated with deep emotion this assembly on its knees. Prayers followed each other so spontaneously and rapidly that they sometimes became almost simultaneous. One of the last of those who spoke was a man well known, addicted to drunkenness, who after having signed the pledge, had been again on the point of falling. A hindrance of another kind had also held him enchained. He felt that this Sunday was the day of sacrifice, and testified publicly of his resolution to give up all in order to win all, and in that hour his heart was filled with joy.

“Oh, joyful day! Every one seemed to have forgotten that the instrument which God had made use of was the Salvation Army. The human no longer pre-occupied their minds—each soul was face to face with God alone. Church of Geneva, awake! Forget the instrument of which God in these days avails Himself to call thee to a new and perhaps glorious destiny! Let us recognise that we have allowed ourselves to be swallowed up by considerations of forms, of ministries, of orthodoxy, and by jealousies of congregations, by doubt, by lukewarmness, by coldness. Do not let us lose our time in learned criticisms. Let us break through these old barriers—let us confess that we have SOMETHING TO LEARN!

(Signed)      “AN OLD GENEVAN GENTLEMAN.”

M. Favre, who has a number of mission halls in Geneva similar to those of Mr. M‘Call in Paris, publicly stated at his annual meeting that his work, far from having been injured by the army movement had been greatly helped, and though he had had a little more disturbance in consequence of a larger attendance of the more turbulent class, the blessing had increased in proportion. This fact will interest those who have read the charges against the Army of fettering the work of others.

The following was received by Miss Booth after her expulsion:—“We ask ourselves still, even to-day, can it be true that all these events which have just taken place are indeed a reality? Is it really possible that they have driven from among us the friends who have done us so much good? Something tells me they shall come back again. Oh, what a blessed thing it is to know that nothing happens without the permission of God, and that He brings good out of evil! For this, as for all else, we cast ourselves into His arms, and all will be well.”

Also the following:—

“Dear Maréchale,—I must tell you, with the expression of my sincere gratitude, how we thank you. Thanks to you and to all, for the good which has come to our families since we attended the meetings of the Salvation Army. Our house was indeed before a Christian house, but everything has been changed since we understood the work of sanctification. That teaching needs to be restored to the place where God put it in His word. I am now astonished not to have earlier understood these truths. I now understand why we did not go forward; or rather how it was that we went backward, dragging ‘this body of death.’...

“I take up my letter again, where I stopped eight days ago. How many sad things have happened since. How much we have suffered; how much must your heart be torn in seeing so much evil, so much iniquity, so much sin. And what must make your heart bleed most must be the false accusations of those so-called Christians who use their high social position in favour of the work of God’s enemies.

“I think, dear Maréchale, that you suffer less than we do, because you have come to give up all. Indeed, it must be so, else how could anyone support such a terrible weight? But we know that God is strongest, and that He can open the doors which Satan is trying to shut.”

I give the following, from a number of letters I have been allowed to read, showing the loving and simple relation in which her girl officers and workers stand to Miss Booth. Some of these epistles are full of brightness and wit, as well as fond affection.

“My darling Maréchale, M. Audeoud has been fined 50 francs for letting us have meetings in his own grounds. Shameful! But he will not pay it; so what will be done I don’t know....

“I went to ——, and we had a blessed meeting amongst all the girls there. I like ——; but she is not properly saved, but still I believe she soon will be. She goes to the meetings with her mother. I like her mother, too, but she is one of those who talk a good deal too much, a thing I hate with all my heart. Her little girls are good—they come to our soldiers’ meetings. Oh, we are working for the salvation of the young and the old, that we may raise up a blessed army to serve God with all their might.

“Precious Maréchale, we all pray for you, and believe hard for your return to Geneva; it must be soon; the Lord will answer, and that very soon. I often think your crown will be very bright when you go home to the Lord, for you have gone through so much fire—fire that purifies and makes bright; and those very people that caused you to pass through such fire will envy you then. I pray that I may have a little place at your feet there, and as near the dear Lord as I can get. I cannot help praising Him for all the trouble, for I know that blessed are they who suffer for His name’s sake. Oh, that He should think us worthy to suffer for Him; to be despised as we are for the name of Christ! Jesus is at our head. The dear Lord will help you. It will be victory! all along the line!

“Accept a heart full of love, and believe me ever yours, to live fighting by your side, fighting for the salvation of the world, and to go from your side to be with Him in heaven, where we shall never part.”

A Swiss citizen wrote at this time:—

“In face of all the wicked things that are being said and printed with reference to the work of the Salvation Army in our dear land of Switzerland, I feel the obligation incumbent upon me as a Christian of Switzerland to express to you for my own part my whole-hearted thanks and most sincere affection for the great spiritual good that you are doing here in Geneva, not only in bringing a great number of sinners to repentance, but in reviving and refreshing a great number of Christians who were altogether asleep with reference to their state. I am one of the latter number, but I feel,—by the contact with your burning love for souls, your heroic devotion to the cause of Christ, your holy enthusiasm for the conquest of the world to the Kingdom of our Divine Redeemer—I feel again burning in my own soul the flames of my first love for my Master, and the desire to consecrate myself anew to the service of my Saviour.”

A Pastor wrote:—

“The spirit of God has been working in a marvellous way all round my parish, unknown to you. Many husbands who have been separated from their wives have been re-united to them by the influence of your meetings and our visits, all inspired by the holy fire lit in my heart by the Army. On all sides I am now called to minister to broken hearts.”

The following from a mother concludes these extracts:—

“The Lord, who knows all things, saw at Geneva that there were souls thirsting and famishing for truth and light. He sent His servants to do more in two months than has been done in long years. I was very unhappy in my soul when they came. But their entire consecration, the complete abandonment of their will, made me understand in the depths of my heart all that my life lacked. Glory to God, I am now assured that I am fully saved through the blood of Jesus Christ, and by His Holy Spirit sanctified each day, and kept each hour to do the will of my Heavenly Father upon earth as it is done in Heaven. Five of my children have passed from darkness to light, and are ready to give their testimony in witnessing to other souls what the Saviour has done for them. Their life is transformed; I can affirm it—I, their happy mother.

“I can affirm again, to the glory of God, that it is no delusion; it is not imagination; still less is it by mesmerism or other such influences that my children and I have been converted. But for us, as for many others, consecrated lives, and hearts filled with the love of souls, have spoken more clearly than ten thousand discourses.

“Oh! may the Lord give to those who have brought us so much good in spite of persecution and the calumnies of their enemies, blessing upon blessing, that they may reap in our dear Switzerland an abundant harvest of saved souls. Amen!”

An idea of the solid respect and sympathy which the work had gained in Geneva, may be gathered from the fact that on the 11th of January upwards of 50 Swiss citizens, many of them gentlemen of position and influence in the city, enrolled themselves as officers of order and posted themselves at the doors in the passages and various parts of the Reformation Hall each evening when the meetings were held there. They continued their generous services in the most kind and courteous manner (though often having rather rough work) until the meetings were closed.

CHAPTER IV.

On the day of her expulsion, Miss Booth addressed an appeal to the Grand Council of Geneva against the decree of M. Héridier. The following is the text of the Appeal:—

“TO THE PRESIDENT AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL OF STATE.

“GENTLEMEN,—I have to-day received notice of the decree of the Department of Justice and Police, withdrawing from me the permission to reside in the Canton of Geneva, and enjoining my departure from that Canton this day before 6 o’clock in the evening. The one reason alleged for this decision is that the Salvation Army has made several collections of money the use of which has not yet been accounted for in spite of the summons which I received from the authorities. My reply is, I have never myself made any collection, and have never touched the money collected. I am not the Treasurer of the Salvation Army, and the accounts are not in my hands. It was thus impossible for me to respond up to this moment to the demand which was made of me. I gave the fullest explanation to the persons who interrogated me. The only collections which were made were those made at the doors of our meetings. There has never been any collection made from house to house by members of the Salvation Army. I have not been guilty of any act whatsoever which would justify my deprivation of the permission to reside in Geneva, consequently, strong in the sense of right and my own conscience, I come to request you, gentlemen, to annul the decree of expulsion published against me to-day by the Department of Justice and Police.

“Yours respectfully,

(Signed)      “CATHERINE BOOTH.”

In conformity with the Genevese law the Council of State appointed one of its members to hear Miss Booth on the subject of her appeal. She therefore came back from Lausanne to Geneva under a safe-conduct, in order to appear before the Councillor of State delegated to hear her. This took place on February 26th. The British Consul at Geneva supported her by his presence at the interview. Miss Booth pleaded before the Councillor of State, with clearness and earnestness, against the reasons alleged for her expulsion. She reiterated the fact that the meetings of the Salvation Army had always been held in private halls, that is to say, halls belonging to private persons, or to societies, such as the Salle de la Rive Droite, du Casino, de la Reformation, du Terraillet, des Grottes, &c.; entrance to the former was entirely free, and for the others cards of invitation were given, showing that they were private meetings. They were never closed to the representatives of the public authorities. The meetings, she avowed, had been several times interrupted by noise and uproar; personal assaults even had been made in the street. Miss Booth distinctly asserted that she had never been the means, by a single word or act, of stirring up such manifestations. She appealed to the fact of her permission of residence having been granted for a year by the Council of State at the end of this long series of meetings in connection with which these very disturbances had taken place. Had they thought her responsible for the disturbances, they might then and there have withheld the permission. It was only four days, she reminded them, after this permission that the Council of State issued its decree for closing the meetings. That decree had been scrupulously respected by members of the Salvation Army, and since its publication Miss Booth asserted she had lived in a most retired manner, having accepted the hospitality of the family of M. Lenoir, in whose house she was at the moment she received the warrant of expulsion. Concerning these statements of Miss Booth in her own defence, the Federal Government itself in its rejection of her appeal four months later says, “The accuracy of the facts here recorded by Miss Booth to the Council of State of Geneva cannot be disputed.” The Councillor of State appointed to hear Miss Booth apparently assented to the justice of these arguments. With a shrug of the shoulders he replied that these grounds alleged by the Department of Justice and Police for her expulsion were “only pretexts.” “It is not in truth for these reasons that you have been expelled; it is on account of the noise you have made” (bruit). Miss Booth, astonished, asked, “Do you then tell me, sir, that false pretexts were made use of for my expulsion?” The Councillor replied hesitatingly, and somewhat apologetically, “These were only pretexts.” He then spoke of Madame de Gasparin ... “a most distinguished lady, belonging to one of the most ancient families of Geneva,” ... &c., &c. Was the opinion expressed by Madame de Gasparin the true pretext then for the expulsion? It would seem so in some degree. “You are young women,” said the Councillor: “it is not in accordance with our ideas and customs that young women should appear in public. We are froissés by it.” To this Miss Booth replied, with a sorrowful earnestness, and using great plainness of speech, “Listen to me, I beg of you, sir. It is contrary, you tell me, to your sense of what is right and becoming that young women should preach the Gospel. Now, if Miss Charlesworth and I had come to Geneva to act in one of your theatres, I have no doubt we should have met with sympathy and approval from your public. We could have sung and danced on your stage; we could have dressed in a manner very different from, and much less modestly than you see us dressed; we could have appeared before a miscellaneous audience, men and women, young and old, and of every class; members of the Grand Council, M. Héridier himself, and others, would have come to see us act; we should have got money; Geneva would have paid ungrudgingly in that case; and you would all have sat and approved; you would have clapped your hands and applauded us; you would have brought your wives and daughters to see us, and they also would have applauded. There would be nothing to froisser you, no immorality in all that, according to your ideas and customs. The ‘noise’ we would have thus made would not have been a cause of our expulsion. But when women come to try and save some of the 40,000 or 50,000 of your miserable, scoffing, irreligious population who never enter any place of worship, when they come with hearts full of pity and love for the ignorant and sinful, and stand up to tell the glad tidings of salvation to these rebels, this mob among whom many accept the tidings with eager joy,—then you cry out that this is unseemly and immodest; you would not bring your wives and daughters to hear us speak of Jesus, though you would bring them to hear us if we danced and sang upon the stage of your theatre. Now you have expelled us; but still there are these multitudes in Geneva who are dark, lost, unsaved; and you know it. There they are; they exist. What will you do with them? Say—what will you do? Are they not a danger? Does not their lost condition cry out against you?” The Councillor of State was silent; he sank into his chair in a state of temporary collapse. For the moment, at least, the reality of the picture presented to him had touched his heart; his manner was softened, though perturbed.

I may be permitted to commend the above arguments to others besides this Genevan Councillor. Fathers and mothers have said, “We cannot approve of, or think it right, that young women should come forward as evangelists in that way;” and some have expressed a fear lest their daughters should attend any meeting addressed by Miss Booth, or be dangerously attracted by her example. These same parents, in some cases professedly Christian parents, are in the habit of taking their daughters to the theatres; in those theatres they may often see girls younger than our young Evangelists, in every kind of attire—in male dress, or scarcely any dress at all—performing their part in passionate love scenes, it may be, for the amusement of the public. “Do you, then,” I would ask these parents, “approve of young women coming forward publicly in this way?” If you reply “No”—(and probably you would not desire your daughters to follow that example),—then I ask, “How is it that you can take your daughters to witness performances by young women which you disapprove?” If you answer, “Yes,” then I would only ask you,—What is your religion? Whence do you derive your principles of right and wrong? As Christians who read the Bible, do you find anything in the words or acts of Christ which enables you to conclude that He approved of young women ministering to the pleasure of the public,—even, we will suppose, in the highest and best exhibitions of histrionic art,—while he condemned their giving any public testimony for Him and for the Gospel? I do not find any hostile criticism dictated by an inspired teacher, upon the bold and practical application of the prophesy of Joel, by St. Peter, on the great day of Pentecost which ushered in the New Dispensation of Liberty and of Power. He stood forth and reiterated the startling and solemn words, in his address to the assembled thousands:—“This is that which was spoken of by the Prophet Joel; and it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy; and on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my spirit; and they shall prophesy.” And later, at the close of that address, he said, very explicitly; “this promise is unto you and to your children.” Never was the truth more clearly implied, or with greater apostolic authority, that in “Christ Jesus there is neither male nor female,” and that the Spirit of the Lord bloweth “where it listeth,” producing outward manifestations, many and various and wonderful.

In spite of the explanations which Miss Booth was able to make, strong, as she said, in the sense of right and her own conscience, the Council of State rejected her appeal.

The following is the text of the reply published by them to her appeal, and which only appeared many weeks later:—

“The Council of State, on the appeal addressed to them by Miss Catherine Booth against the decree of the Department of Justice and Police of February 12, 1883, withdrawing from her the permission to reside in the canton:

“Considering that Miss Booth declares openly that she occupies in the Salvation Army in Geneva the highest hierarchical position;[17]

“Considering that in virtue of this position she is responsible for the actions of the association which works under her orders;

“Considering that the Salvation Army has been the cause of grave disturbances in Geneva, and that several of its members have disobeyed the decree of the 2nd February suspending its exercises;

“Considering Article 28 of the Law of February, 1844, which runs thus: ‘The Council of State, in virtue of its supreme administrative power, always possesses the right of sending out of the canton foreigners whose presence may be a danger to the interests of the country or to the safety of the State!’

“Having heard the report of the Commissioner appointed to obtain the information required, in conformity with Article 5 of the Law referring to the discipline of Foreigners, February 9, 1844;

“Be it decreed: To reject the appeal of Miss Catherine Booth.”

I have underlined the words “a danger to the interests of the country, or to the safety (or security) of the State,” in order the more emphatically to draw attention to the extraordinary change of attitude, (shuffling it may be called), of the Genevan authorities.

It is a significant fact that in rejecting Miss Booth’s appeal, the Grand Council entirely ignored, and by implication rejected as without foundation in law, the ground of accusation brought against her by the Department of Justice and Police. That ground was the so-called irregular collection of money. These Councillors of State had probably turned to the text of the law on collections of money, and finding that it had been falsified on the responsibility of M. Héridier, they seemed to have considered it more prudent to bury in oblivion, so far as they were able, the past grounds of accusation? The irregularity of the whole proceedings of the Geneva authorities in this matter, the vagueness and astonishing absence of definitions in their accusations against the Salvation Army come out strikingly in the course of the narrative, and I venture to ask the patient consideration of the reader for the facts which elucidate this. In bringing forward a fresh accusation, as the Council of State does in its rejection of Miss Booth’s appeal, they ought legally to have given her previous notice of the accusation, in order to have given her time and opportunity for explaining herself. This they did not do; and she thus found herself suddenly with a fresh accusation brought against her of which she had no previous knowledge or suspicion whatever, and at the same time an accusation so grave, yet so vague, and so utterly unsupported by facts, that it was all but impossible for her to refute it.

The law cited by the Genevan authorities confers on the administration a power of the nature of such as, in our own country, has been occasionally and rarely exercised, under extraordinary circumstances which seemed to justify the suspension of Habeas Corpus, or some extra-legal arrest, in the face of treasonable plots, threatened insurrection, or discoveries of dynamite! Defenders, however, of dynamitic measures for the reform of society, nihilists, and many other dangerous persons drawn from the malcontent population of all lands into free Geneva, have been allowed to write, to publish journals, and to harangue meetings in peace in that city. The authorities only make use of their exceptional powers under the influence of terror, in the presence of two young girls who come saying, “Repent, for the Kingdom of God is at hand,” and promptly secure for years to come (so they hope) the “interests of the country,” and the “safety of the State,” by the expulsion of the preachers!

In order the more clearly to place under the eye of the reader the whole of the legal case referring to the expulsions from Geneva, I must take a step forward in the narrative in the matter of dates, by introducing at this point the appeal made by Miss Booth a few months later to a higher tribunal, to the Federal Council itself, at Berne. It seems desirable to give the whole of this rather lengthy document and of the reply to it of the Federal Council, for those—and there are not a few—who have so far had only a fragmentary, and sometimes a garbled account of the case presented to them, and who desire to know on which side justice is to be found:—

TO THE HIGH FEDERAL COUNCIL OF THE SWISS CONFEDERATION.

TO MM. THE PRESIDENT AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL:

GENTLEMEN,—Catherine Booth, eldest daughter of William and Catherine Booth, the latter living at 114, Clapton Common, London, subject of Her Britannic Majesty, has the honour to appeal to your high authority against:

1.

A Judgment of the Council of State of the Canton of Geneva, bearing date 2nd of last March, rejecting her appeal against a decree of the Department of Justice and Police of the same Canton, of the date 12th February, last, which withdrew from her the permission to reside in the Canton of Geneva, and directed her to quit the territory.

2.

Against the above-mentioned order of the Department of Justice and Police itself.

The rejection of her appeal to the Genevese Council of State not having been communicated to the Appellant until the date of the 25th March, the lateness of the presentation of the present appeal is thereby explained.

Miss Booth grounds her appeal upon the following facts and arguments:—

(Here follows an explicit statement of the facts and events, which have already been described in this narrative, after which the appeal is continued.)

The Appellant as a subject of Her Britannic Majesty claims the privileges of the Treaty of Friendship, Commerce, and Establishment drawn up the 6th September, 1855, and ratified 8th February, 1856, between the Swiss Confederation and Her Majesty the Queen of Great Britain and Ireland. “This Treaty is based on the principle of a complete reciprocity between the ressortissants of each country.[18] It gives to the subjects of Her Britannic Majesty, the right of residing in any Swiss Canton on the same conditions and on the same footing enjoyed by the citizens of every other Swiss Canton. Consequently, British subjects are, together with their families, free to enter, to establish themselves, and to reside in any and all parts of the Swiss territory, on the same condition on which the Swiss themselves are permitted to enter, establish themselves, and reside in the United Kingdom of Great Britain, that is to say, on condition that they conform to the laws of the country.” The State Council of the Canton of Geneva appears to have misunderstood the terms of this International Treaty, since it withdrew from the Appellant on the 12th February, 1883, the permission to reside in the Canton of Geneva, which permission had been granted her on the preceding 29th January. Neither the decree of the Department of Justice and Police of the 12th February, nor that of the Council of State of the 2nd March following, pointed out any infraction whatsoever, on the part of the Appellant, of the laws of the Canton or those of the Swiss Confederation. The sole reason advanced by the Department of Justice and Police was the fact that the Appellant did not give an account to the authorities of the use of the money collections which were made in the meetings of the Salvation Army. Now, in the first place, the Appellant has never had the charge of the money, nor any charge whatever in connection with these collections. In the second place, the Genevese laws impose no obligation to render any account to the authorities of such collections. The Police Regulation of the 4th March, 1879, only places under this obligation those persons who have received from a competent authority a license to make collections of money from house to house or in the public streets. Such collections as these have never been made by the Appellant or by any member of the Salvation Army. The Council of State have in fact acknowledged the invalidity of this ground of accusation by refraining from reproducing it (in their rejection of the appeal of the Appellant), and by substituting in its place an accusation of an entirely different nature, in regard to which alone the Appellant has now to render her reply. The ground of expulsion now alleged by the Council of State of the Canton of Geneva may be examined from seven points of view (to which the appeal presently refers).

The Appellant, it appears, then, was expelled from the Canton, not for any personal acts of her own, but for the actions of a group of persons, as it is professed, for which the Council of State hold the Appellant responsible. It is important to understand clearly that the Council of State does not lay to the charge of the Appellant any personal act whatsoever. This is most important from the point of view of the interpretation and application of the Treaty of Friendship and Establishment, for it results on the confession even of the Genevese authorities themselves, that the Appellant has never broken any of the laws of the country, and that consequently she has the right to place herself under the protection of the above named Treaty. The ground upon which the Council of State rests her expulsion is, the responsibility of the Appellant to the Genevese authorities concerning the action of a group which receives its orders from her in virtue of the “lofty hierarchical position” which the Appellant occupies in the Salvation Army at Geneva.

I.

Is the Council of State of Geneva qualified to appreciate officially the degree of responsibility of such and such members of the Salvation Army resulting from the internal organization of that Society?

No.

Because, First: The Council of State evidently possesses no documents sufficient to enable it to establish the degrees of subordination, to which members of the Salvation Army may be required to submit, and the amount of responsibility which the leaders of that Army are charged with in regard to those under them.

Secondly: Does the Council of State possess such documents? If it does it is at least doubtful whether it would be justified in giving them an official sanction, and attributing to them legal consequences. It would be thus giving to them an importance which no Government has ever yet attributed to them.

II.

Even admitting a certain responsibility on the part of the Appellant in regard to the actions of members of the Salvation Army, it remains yet to be proved of what nature the acts are to which this responsibility applies. It is evident that they can only be acts which have been ordered to be performed by the Appellant. Even if the most complete and official resemblance were to be admitted between the Salvation Army and that which is commonly called an Army, and even supposing the Appellant were the General-in-Chief of that Army, it is clear that it would be impossible to lay to her charge the private acts of the soldiers under her. No general of an army has ever been held personally responsible for individual crimes or offences perpetrated by his soldiers. It is not therefore sufficient in order to prove the responsibility of the Appellant toward the Genevese Government that it should be proved that members of the Society in which she occupies a high position, should have rendered themselves guilty of a contravention of a Governmental regulation. It must be established that that contravention was perpetrated on her own order. Now the Council of State never asserts that this has been the case.

III.

Moreover, the Council of State does not define any one of the acts of which it makes the Appellant responsible. It neither indicates the persons whom it holds guilty nor the circumstances in which they have committed any offence. It is left to be understood only that there has been a contravention of the order by which the Council of State, on the 2nd February, temporarily suspended the exercises of the Salvation Army. No other act whatsoever is attributed to the persons for whose conduct the Appellant is held responsible. It is essential to note this point. Now, in coming to the question of these contraventions of the decree of the 2nd February, it is very difficult to give any exact definition of their nature. First of all, it is necessary to know what it is which the Council of State wished to suspend temporarily. Secondly, whether it had the right to order this suspension. When the Council of State was questioned by the members of the Salvation Army and other persons on the former point, it never gave any definite or categorical explanation which could serve as a rule of conduct; and with regard to the second point it is evident that the decree could not claim to extend to meetings held in a private house in which certain members of the Salvation Army may have taken part. Now it is a matter of public notoriety in Geneva that since the issue of the decree of the Council of State the public “exercises” of the Army have completely ceased throughout the Canton. The Appellant defies the Council of State to establish the contrary. It is very possible that certain members of the Salvation Army may since then have participated as individuals in religious meetings to which they have been invited by private persons at their own private houses; but there is no contravention of the decree of the Council of State in such an act; and, further, these are private actions for which the Appellant is in no way whatever responsible.

IV.

But if it were established that this order had been contravened, and that the Appellant herself was responsible for this, that would not suffice to justify her expulsion. The Treaty of Establishment guarantees to the subjects of Her Britannic Majesty free residence throughout the extent of the Swiss territory, the only condition being that they shall conform to the laws of the country. Now what is the sense and the exact meaning of this condition? Would the breaking of a law, or of a simple police regulation be sufficient to deprive a Swiss of the right of residing in England, or a subject of Her Britannic Majesty from the right of residing in Switzerland? Evidently not. To justify such a punishment, it is necessary that there should be a certain character of grave and persistent resistance of the law. The decree of the 2nd February does not cite any penal clause whatsoever authorising the execution of its order, so that in the case of any contravention of the decree on the part of a Swiss citizen no ground would exist for a prosecution against such. How, then, can it be admitted that when the offence is committed by a foreigner, that foreigner can be punished by expulsion—a penalty much heavier than a fine or certain days of imprisonment? The Treaty of Establishment lays it down as a principle, in its first Article, that British subjects may be permitted to reside in every Swiss Canton, on the same condition and on the same footing as citizens of other Swiss Cantons. British subjects, then, cannot be expelled from any Canton except under the same circumstances in which a Swiss citizen could be so expelled. These circumstances are all specified by Article 45 of the Federal Constitution; but the Geneva Council of State does not cite any one of them to the charge of those who are expelled by it. The fact then even of a contravention of the temporary police order of the 2nd February, would be for those who have been guilty of it, an insufficient reason for expulsion.

V.

The Council of State is itself so convinced of the insufficiency of this ground of accusation, that it has deemed it necessary to cite against the Appellant an article of the Genevese law of the 9th February, 1844, concerning police regulations in regard to foreigners, in the terms of which “the Council of State in virtue of its supreme administrative power has always the right to send out of the Canton foreigners whose presence there may imperil the interests of the country or the security of the State.” This declaration is analogous to that of Article 70 of the Federal Constitution, in which it is stated that “the Confederation has the right to expel from its territory foreigners whose presence may compromise the internal or external security of Switzerland.” These are measures of public safety which every State has maintained the right to take in circumstances of a character eminently exceptional. Now what amount of weight has this article of the Genevese law in the presence of the Anglo-Swiss Treaty of Establishment? This declaration of the Genevese law bears the date of 1844. At that epoch the Swiss Confederation did not possess the legal competence which it possesses to day, nor did international relations at that period rest on so sound a basis. The maintenance of treaties with foreign States is a matter for which the Confederation is alone responsible. In any case of an appeal on the part of a foreigner against a breach on the part of the Cantonal Government of the International Treaty, which protects him in Switzerland, it is the Federal authority alone which is competent to take in regard to the foreigner and of his own Government the responsibility of the incriminated act, and of the grounds upon which that act rests. Under these circumstances, it is allowable to ask oneself if the declaration pronounced in the Genevese law of 1844, founded upon the supreme administrative power of the Council of State and anterior to the Federal Constitution of 1848, has not somewhat lost its significance. It must be noticed besides that this declaration is also anterior to the Anglo-Swiss Treaty which is based upon the Federal Constitution of 1848.

But whatever may be said of this point of law it is not at all necessary to insist upon it in the presence of the inability of the Council of State of Geneva to establish or even to explain in what manner the presence of the Appellant and a few of her friends upon Genevese soil has imperilled “the interests of the country or the security of the State.” In so grave a question involving the application of an international treaty whose stipulations are reciprocal, it is not sufficient to quote a single article of a law, or simply to express an opinion. It is necessary that facts should be brought forward and proved. The Council of State of Geneva is bound therefore—First, to define the facts to which it alludes, and then to furnish the proof of the existence of such facts. Secondly, it is bound to demonstrate the manner in which these facts have “imperilled the interests of the country or the security of the State.” Until the moment when it shall have defined these facts and demonstrated their existence, the grounds upon which it bases its decree of expulsion cannot be admitted by any reasonable person.

In fact, no one can believe, unless furnished with distinct proof of the same, that the few adherents of the Salvation Army, whose actions have been limited to the announcement at Geneva in private houses of the same evangelistic truths which are daily preached in all the Reformed Churches of Switzerland, and who cannot be accused of any want of regard toward the Constitution, the Government, or the people of Switzerland, can have placed in peril the interests of any part of Switzerland or the security of any part of the State; while the things which may indeed injure the interests of Switzerland are, the absence of any security for the foreigner who may be dwelling here; public disturbances which are allowed to continue unchecked; the prevalence abroad of the idea that any foreigner coming here is, without appeal and without mercy, at the disposal of the police.

But the Appellant has too much confidence in the wisdom of the Federal High Council to suppose that it is needful to point out to it that neither she nor her friends can be held responsible for the troubles which accompanied their residence in Geneva, and of which they themselves have been the chief victims. It would be as true to say that a person robbed is responsible for the robbery committed to his injury, or a murdered person for the crime which has cost him his life.

The Appellant can confidently affirm that she and her friends have conformed to every direction which has been laid down for them by the authorities; that the two or three advertisements placarded on the walls at the beginning of their sojourn in Geneva received, as the law prescribes, the sanction of the police; that these advertisements were put aside the moment it was stated that they had had a bad effect, and that the same was the case in regard to the musical instruments commonly in use among them in England, as soon as it was perceived that these instruments produced a painful effect upon Genevese ears.

VI.

The weight of the allegations concerning “grave disturbances,” and in general concerning the fatal consequences to the interests of the country brought about by the presence in Geneva of certain members of the Salvation Army, is considerably lessened by a close examination of certain dates. It has already been said that the Salvation Army held in Geneva during the months of December and January, seventy-three meetings, a certain number of which were accompanied by disturbances in the halls or in the streets. Let it be remembered, however, that it was on the 29th January that the Department of Justice and Police granted the Appellant her permission to reside in Geneva for a year. The exercises of the Salvation Army were suspended on the 2nd February, and the Appellant was expelled on the 12th February. Now, between these two dates (the 29th January and the 12th February) no disturbance had occurred of greater gravity than those which preceded those dates. A comparison of these dates shows that the disturbances mentioned by the Council of State in order to justify the expulsion of the Appellant had existed in the same degree before the 29th of January, the day on which her official permission of residence was granted to her. That is to say, that identical circumstances had not been previously judged by the Council of State to be of a nature to justify the withdrawal of her permission to reside in the Canton. The only new fact which had occurred was the pretended contravention of the decree of the 2nd February. (The Appellant refers to what has been already said on this subject.)

The Council of State then is found to be speaking in contradiction to itself in supporting a measure so grave as expulsion from the Canton on the ground of facts which before seemed to it insufficient to justify the withdrawal of the permission of residence. Thus we have the true measure of the value of the ground of accusation cited by the Council of State.

VII.

The Geneva law of February, 1844, which grants to foreigners to whom the Department of Justice and Police refuses the permission of residing in the Canton, the right of appeal against this measure to the Council of State, secures to them at the same time the right of being heard by a member of that body specially delegated to that end, and of giving personally to the Council of State every explanation which they may believe useful in order to justify their appeal. (Article 5 of the above law.) This guarantee evidently is intended to allow the foreigner to explain himself with regard to the grounds alleged for his expulsion. Can this Genevese law be considered to have been fully executed when the Council of State, abandoning the grounds of accusation alleged by its own Department of Justice and Police, bases the expulsion upon entirely new grounds with regard to which it gave the foreigner no opportunity to explain herself? It is difficult to admit this. Such, however, is precisely the case of the Appellant, who finds herself confronted with new grounds of accusation in regard to which she has not been allowed to give any explanation before the Cantonal Authorities; whereas this would not have been the case had these grounds of accusation been mentioned (as they ought to have been) in the decree of the Department of Justice and Police. It is evident that in this matter the security granted to foreigners by Article 5 of the Law of 1844 has not been extended to the Appellant. It follows from the facts and reasons above mentioned:—

1.

That the Appellant as a subject of Her Britannic Majesty is shielded by the Treaty of Friendship and Establishment of September 6th, 1855, between the Swiss Confederation and the Queen of Great Britain and Ireland.

2.

That under this Treaty she has continually the right to reside in any Swiss Canton, on the same condition and on the same footing as a citizen of other Swiss Cantons.

3.

That in virtue of this right she received on January 29, 1883, from the Geneva Council of State, the permission to reside in the Canton for a year.

4.

That on the 12th February, 1883, the Department of Justice and Police of the same Canton gave her notice of the withdrawal of the above permission and of an order immediately to quit the Canton.

5.

That upon the Appellant having recourse to the Council of State, this authority, on the 2nd March, 1883, confirmed the decision of its Department of Justice and Police, while changing the grounds of accusation.

6.

That this judgment of the Geneva Government is in open contradiction to the declaration of the above-mentioned Treaty.

7.

That it is not founded upon any personal act of the Appellant of a nature to justify the withdrawal from her of the securities of that Treaty.

8.

That according to the terms of the said Treaty, the Appellant having the right to reside in the Canton of Geneva on the same conditions, &c., cannot be expelled except in such a case as would justify the expulsion of any Swiss citizen of another Canton.

9.

That the Appellant is not in a case to become amenable to such expulsion, and that the Council of State does not even profess that she is so.

10.

That a legal responsibility cannot be founded upon pure suppositions concerning her hierarchical position; and that, moreover, such a responsibility could not refer to any acts except those which the Appellant has herself commanded.

11.

That, moreover, the Council of State neither defines nor establishes any of the actions concerning which it undertakes to impose a responsibility on the Appellant.

12.

That neither has the Council of State established that the Appellant has contributed to “imperil the interests of the country or the security of the State.”

13.

That the “grave disturbances” indicated in the decree, besides being in no degree to be imputed to the Appellant, took place previous to the date on which the permission to reside in the Canton had been granted to her; and not having been judged then of a nature to justify the refusal of that permission, they cannot possibly serve to justify its withdrawal.

14.

That the grounds of accusation alleged by the Council of State not being the same as those advanced by its Department of Justice and Police, and not having been communicated to the Appellant, she has been deprived in this respect of the securities granted to an expelled person by Article 5 of the Genevese law, February 9th, 1844. That (to sum up) the decree of the Council of State of Geneva, March, 1883, withdrawing from the Appellant the right to reside in the Canton, is contrary to the stipulations of the Treaty of 1855, between Switzerland and England, and ought, in consequence, to be annulled.

For the above reasons stated the undersigned appeals to the High Federal Council, and petitions that it will please that Council to annul the above-mentioned decree.

(Signed)      CATHERINE BOOTH.

Here follows the Reply of the Federal Council to the above appeal, which should be patiently read throughout.

REPLY OF THE SWISS FEDERAL COUNCIL TO THE APPEAL OF MISS BOOTH.

In re the report of the Department of Justice and Police to the Swiss Confederation, and the other documents, whence are derived the following facts:—

In re the appeal of Miss Catherine Booth, born 1859, at Gateshead, England, daughter of William and Catherine Booth, now living in London (she being at this time in Neuchâtel, Switzerland), against her expulsion by the Council of State of the Canton of Geneva, 2nd March, 1883.

Miss Catherine Booth came to Geneva in the month of December of last year. In accordance with the Genevese law of February 9th, 1844, concerning foreigners, she obtained from the Department of Justice and Police, on January 29th, 1883, and in exchange for the deposit of her passport, a permit to reside in the canton of Geneva for a year. On the 12th February following, the Department of Justice and Police gave her notice of the withdrawal of this permission, and ordered her to quit the canton of Geneva on that same day before six o’clock in the evening. Legally this decision is founded upon number 5 of the Article 27 of the Genevese law concerning foreigners, according to which the permission to reside may be withdrawn if the Department of Justice and Police learns that there exists anything which can be laid to the charge of the foreigner, which—had it been known in time—would have justified the refusal of the permission to reside. This decision is based in fact:—

1.

Upon what came to the knowledge of the Department subsequently to the date of the permission given, namely, that the so-called Salvation Army had organized upon Genevese territory collections of money, of the use of which they had not furnished any account, in spite of the summons which had been given by the authorities to do so, and in spite of the fact that such an account could have been given, since these collections were entered in a book the existence of which Miss Booth acknowledged, but which she refused to produce.

2.

Upon the fact that such a proceeding constitutes a grave infraction of public order and cannot be tolerated.

Before quitting Geneva on the 12th February, Miss Booth addressed to the Council of State of the Canton an appeal against the Department of Justice and Police. She professes in this appeal never to have personally made any collection of money, nor to have held or had in her own hands the accounts of the Salvation Army, which indeed she had also stated before her interrogators. According to her the collections had only been made at the doors of the places of meeting, and never from house to house. Believing in consequence that she could not have come under any law in virtue of which the authorities could refuse her the permission to remain in the Canton if she had had previous notice of the ground of their accusation, she demanded that the decree of expulsion should be annulled. Conformably with Article 5 of the Geneva law concerning foreigners, the Council of State appointed, in view of an interrogation of the Appellant, a Commissary in the person of one of its own members, chosen, as the law requires, from outside the personnel of the Department of Justice and Police. Miss Booth, who had after her expulsion retired to Lausanne, was invited to appear before this Commissary, and her interrogatory took place on the 26th February. The Council of State published on the 2nd March the following decree upon the appeal of Miss Booth. (Here follows the reply of the Council of State, which has been already cited.)

Other foreigners had also arrived in Geneva about the same time as the Appellant, that is to say, on the 10th to 15th December.

All these persons are members of a religious society, bearing the name of the Salvation Army, which originated in London in 1865, and was founded by William Booth, the father of Miss Booth, formerly a minister of the Wesleyan Church. The Society is under the Generalship of Mr. William Booth. Its organization is copied from that of a military corps. According to the indications furnished by the Appellant to the Sub-Inspector of Police at Geneva on the occasion of her interrogatory on the 8th February, the above-named persons occupy in the Salvation Army, or in the group of this Army now at Geneva, the following military ranks:—

Miss BOOTH, Marshall.

Miss CHARLESWORTH, her Aide-de-camp.

Mr. CLIBBORN, Colonel.

M. BOUILLAT, his Aide-de-camp.

M. ZITZER, Captain.

Mr. THONGER, }

M. VINOT, } Lieutenants.

Mlle ANNA FURRER, }

Numberless meetings and public assemblies (the Appellant says 73) were held in Geneva by these persons, in large halls belonging to private persons or to societies. The advertisements used, the devotions, and the practices of the Salvation Army provoked some vigorous protests on the part of the population, and the public peace was daily troubled in a serious manner. For this reason the Council of State of Geneva, on the proposition of its Department of Justice and Police, decreed on the 2nd February the temporary suspension of the exercises of the Salvation Army. In reply to a letter from Miss Booth inquiring whether this prohibition applied also to religious meetings which might take place in private houses at the invitation of the inhabitants of those houses, the Department of Justice and Police made it clear[19] that the declaration of the Council of State was formal, and that the Department charged with the execution of it would not tolerate in any fashion whatsoever any participation of members of the Salvation Army in the proscribed exercises; adding that all those who should contravene the decree, or had contravened it, would be expelled from the Canton. Following up this announcement the Department ordered on Sunday, 11th February, the expulsion of four dignitaries of the Salvation Army, i.e., that of Bouillat, Zitzer, Vinot, and Charlesworth. As far as we can judge, the Appellant took no part in any religious assembly of the Salvation Army after the 2nd February, the date of the decree of the Council of State. This is not the case with regard to the four members above named. Meetings in which these assisted took place on the 5th, 7th, and 8th February, in private houses, and according to the statement of Miss Booth, in response to private invitations. Free access to the meetings, however, was granted, and the invitations for the meeting of the 7th February, held at Cologny, were even given from house to house by a servant of the proprietor of the house where the meeting was held. The assurance given on the 8th February by the Appellant to the Inspector of Police that the chiefs of the Army would abstain thenceforward from meetings even in private houses for religious purposes appears to have been observed. It has at least been officially stated by the police that Miss Booth had the evening of that very day engaged Captain Zitzer to retire from a meeting to which he had been invited in a private house at Eaux-vives, and where he had gone.

With regard to the collections of money made at the end of the meetings, the Appellant stated in her interrogatory of the 9th February, to the Sub-Inspector of Police, M. Benoit, that the accounts would be published at the end of the three months of her residence at Geneva, and that the account books would be submitted to the scrutiny of the Department of Justice and Police as soon as her Secretary, temporarily absent, should have returned. She added that the sums collected had been used exclusively for general expenses, such as hire of halls, the necessary personal expenses of the officers, printing, &c., and that no one in the Army received pay. In a subsequent interrogatory, on the 12th February, before Police Inspector Müller, Miss Booth declared that it was impossible for her to furnish further information on this matter, as her secretary was still absent, that she did not know when she would be able to return, and that in fact she (Miss Booth) personally had nothing to do with the keeping of accounts, and in consequence could not give information on the subject. She added that the collections had always been made in the presence of the police, and that they had ceased to be made from the time when she was informed of the Geneva law upon the subject.[20]

Several of the police reports demonstrate, as the Council of State has shown in its decree of the 2nd February, that the methods and meetings of the Salvation Army had stirred up during the month of January great popular agitation, and had daily troubled the public peace, while at the same time they seemed to threaten in the first instance the personal safety of the chiefs of the Army who had frequently been attacked. A letter from Dr. Olivet, Professor of Psychology at the University of Geneva, and Director of the Lunatic Asylum called l’asile des Vernaies, in a letter addressed to the Chief of the Department of Justice and Police of Geneva, dated February 11th, says, that in two recent cases of mental aberration which had attacked women at Geneva the cause of the malady was their participation in the exercises of the Salvation Army. This expert, as well as the Inspector of Public Health of the Canton of Geneva, Dr. Vincent (in a communication addressed to the Director of Justice and Police of the 12th February), declare it as a certainty that the religious exercises practised by the Salvation Army must have unfavourable effects upon the mental state of “nevropaths” or of persons simply of a nervous constitution, from among whom the recruits of such religious exhibitions are generally made.

Miss Booth has appealed to the Swiss Federal authority against the decision of the Geneva Council of State. In her memorial addressed from Neuchâtel to the Federal Council and to the President of the Swiss Confederation, through the medium of the British Legation at Berne, the Appellant attaches great importance to the stipulations of the reciprocal treaty of “Friendship, commerce, and establishment” concluded on the 6th September, 1855, between the Swiss Confederation and Her Majesty the Queen of Great Britain and Ireland. In virtue of the declaration of that international agreement British subjects possess the right of residing in any Swiss Canton on the same conditions as the citizens of other Swiss Cantons. Now the Appellant does not consider that she has rendered herself legally liable to expulsion. She does not consider that she would be found in such a position as that which would authorise the expulsion of a Swiss of another Canton, even if it were admitted that she were really and personally responsible for all which the Genevese authorities have laid to the charge of the members of the Salvation Army. She thinks that they cannot justly impose on her such a responsibility. She rejects the idea of the system which the Genevese Council of State have endeavoured to conjure up with regard to her upon purely hierarchical suppositions in order to make her responsible for acts of which she was not personally cognisant, and which she had not commanded. She adds that the authorities moreover have never defined nor established the acts of the members of the Salvation Army alluded to, and that they have no ground whatsoever for accusing her of having contributed to imperil the interests of the country or the security of the State. Moreover she asserts that the events characterised by the Council of State as “grave disturbances” had all without exception taken place previous to the date, 29th January, on which the permission to reside had been officially granted to her. They could not, therefore, seeing they had occurred before that event, adduce them after that event as a ground for the withdrawal of that permission. Finally, she alleges that the grounds of accusation against her alleged by the Council of State, being altogether different from those advanced by the Department of Justice and Police, and not having been communicated to her, she was thus deprived of the guarantees which Article V. of the Genevese law of February 9th, 1844, concerning foreigners, would have extended to her. In regard to the equality of treatment guaranteed to British subjects and to Swiss citizens of other Cantons by the Treaty of 1855, and in presence of the Articles 45 and 70 of the Swiss Federal Constitution, she considers she has the right to demand whether the expulsion of British subjects can be decreed by a simple decision of a Cantonal authority, and if an article of the Cantonal Police law is applicable in the case.

The Genevan Council of State has confined itself in replying to this appeal of the 23rd May, to the presentation of a summary exposé of facts, the substance of which is as follows:—“The Salvation Army lives by the exploitation[21] of credulous persons. In its Orders and Regulations, pages 61 and 64, it gives to this exploitation a character which is regular and permanent. Undoubtedly, the Salvation Army must, in the name of the public interest, come under the Cantonal Regulation of the 4th March, 1879, on the subject of the public[22] collections of money. The Appellant, in her position of Marshal in the Salvation Army, a position which she has always defended, is responsible in the highest degree, as much for the infraction of this Cantonal Regulation as for the continual disturbances which have arisen.”

After having further in a few words refuted the erroneous statements of the Appellant in regard to the question of her rights based on the Anglo-Swiss treaty, the Genevese Council of State concludes its reply by demanding the maintenance and confirmation of the decree issued 2nd March, 1883.

1.

In accordance with generally acknowledged principles of public law, principles to which the Swiss Federal Council adheres in theory and in practice, the declaration of a treaty between two countries ought to be looked upon as the international law according to which the condition of the rights of citizens and subjects of the one or other territory or State must be governed. The Appellant, as a British subject, has thus the indisputable right to claim all the advantages which the reciprocal treaty of Friendship and Commerce of the 6th September, 1855, between Switzerland and Great Britain assures to British subjects sojourning in Switzerland.

2.

Although the treaty in question has formulated as an international law, the principle of equality in the matter of residence and domicile between the subjects of either country, we must not lose sight of the fact that this equality is not meant to be of unlimited application. The citizens or subjects of one or other of the two countries cannot be admitted to enter, establish themselves, or reside upon the territory of the other except on the condition that they conform to the law of the other country. Moreover, it is expressly provided that the citizens or subjects of the one or other of the contracting parties residing or established in the territory of the other State may be expelled, or returned to their country by a judicial sentence or by a police regulation legally adopted and executed.

By these clear and explicit reservations, contained in all treaties of establishment down to the most recent times which Switzerland has concluded with foreign States, the principle of equality in matters of establishment and residence between foreigners and Swiss citizens has been restricted in a most decided manner.

3.

The argument on which the Appellant endeavours to demonstrate that since the Confederated States in 1848 placed exclusively in the hands of the Confederation the charge of their international relations, and that having regard to the positive declarations of Article 70 of the Federal Constitution, 1874 (Article 57 of the Federal Constitution, 1848), the power of expelling citizens of the contracting States from Swiss territory can no longer be exercised by the Cantons;—this argument, we say, rests on an erroneous conception of the legal position in which foreigners resident in Switzerland are placed. In fact there cannot be any doubt whatsoever that the Cantons have the right, side by side with the Confederation, to exercise freely police control over foreigners on their territory. Moreover, the exercise of Cantonal authority in police matters in regard to foreigners has come to be even the rule, while the exercise of such police authority on the part of the Confederation is only the exception. It is a principle strongly rooted in both the doctrine and the practice of the Swiss Federal public law, that the Cantons in virtue of their sovereignty have the right of expelling strangers by an order of police, and particularly in cases of disturbance of public tranquility and order.[23]

4.

On the other hand, it is true that the supremacy of the Cantons in matters relating to foreigners is limited by the Treaties, and more especially by the Treaties of Establishment which the Swiss Confederation has concluded with foreign States. In this respect the Constitution and our Legislation oblige the Federal Council to exercise vigilance in order that the Cantons may not make an arbitrary and improper use of their powers, or act in defiance of the treaties, in police matters relating to foreigners who may settle on our territory.

5.

It cannot be doubted, after having established these points of law, that the police control over foreigners in the Canton of Geneva, established by the law of the 9th February, 1844, has been in no degree curtailed, either by the Federal Constitutions of 1874 and 1878, nor by the Anglo-Swiss Treaty of 1875. There may, however, be room to enquire whether the application which the Cantonal authorities of Geneva have made of that law in the present case in the expulsion of the Appellant, is justified or not by the facts, and whether, under these circumstances, these authorities have sufficiently respected the legal forms and guarantees.

6.

With regard to this matter it is necessary in the first place to settle a question of form. In her appeal Miss Booth complains, among other things, that the reasons alleged by the Council of State for maintaining her expulsion were not communicated to her before the decision, in order that she might have been heard on the matter, and that thus the Council have not acted in conformity with Articles of the law in question. This objection does not seem to be well founded, because the expulsion was decreed by a Departmental decision for reasons known to the Appellant, and the Council of State was perfectly free in virtue of its administrative power, and in order to support the decree of compulsion in conformity with Article 5 of the law already cited, to base its own action on motives of public interest and the repose and security of the State. It had no obligation to observe in this matter, the formality prescribed by Articles 4 and 5 of the law concerning the procedure which is to be observed in any matter of appeal against a Departmental decision.

7.

In the main it must be acknowledged that the authorities of the Canton of Geneva had the right to decree the expulsion of the Appellant. Miss Booth has declared herself that she holds, as Marshal of the Salvation Army, the highest position among the members of it which have been acting at Geneva. Now, the organization of that army is designed after that of a military corps. In virtue of that position, Miss Booth is therefore responsible for the acts and movements of a group of that army which is under her orders. Consequently, it undoubtedly was her duty to give an account in a complete manner, and without reserve, to the police authorities, of the collections made in Geneva in public meetings organized by the Salvation Army. Notwithstanding, this she neglected to do in spite of reiterated[24] notices given to her, and she has never explained her conduct in a satisfactory manner. There is no need to inquire here whether the notices in question were given to the Appellant by the authorities in virtue of a police regulation applicable to this particular case, or in virtue of the right of surveillance and police control over public collections, which belongs incontestibly to every political authority. The reasons alleged by the Department of Justice and Police of Geneva in support of its decree of expulsion (reasons confirmed by the Council of State) being a sufficient justification of the measures against which the appeal is lodged, the Federal Council abstains from entering into the ulterior reasons set forth in the decree of the Council of State of Geneva.

DECREED:

1.

That the appeal of Miss Catherine Booth be dismissed as groundless.

2.

That the present decree be communicated to the British Legation at Berne, for transmission to the Appellant, and that it be also communicated to the Council of State of the Canton of Geneva.

Decreed at Berne, 24th July, 1883, in the name of the Swiss Federal Council.

(Signed)      L. RUCHONNET, President of the Confederation.

(Signed)      — RIGNIER, Chancellor of the Confederation.

Intelligent readers scarcely require to have it pointed out to them how hopelessly self-contradictory the whole action of the Swiss Cantonal and Federal authorities has been in this matter up to this point. We have seen, first, that the pretext invoked in the warrant of expulsion of the Department of Justice and Police could not stand examination, but was proved to be entirely unjustifiable; secondly, that the State Council of Geneva found themselves forced to abandon that pretext (resting, as it did, on a falsified regulation), and that they did abandon it in their reply of March 2nd to Miss Booth’s appeal, and adopted other grounds for the maintenance of those warrants, viz., that the presence of these foreigners (two ladies) endangered the interests and safety of the State! We now see, thirdly, that the Federal Council at Berne, in its rejection of Miss Booth’s appeal, in its turn abandoned as indefensible the new ground adopted by the Genevan Grand Council, and actually re-adopted the false pretexts concerning the collections of money which had been abandoned by the Genevan Council as untenable.

It is impossible to follow the whole of this extraordinary transaction without a feeling of astonishment and regret. It is difficult to believe that we are reading a record of Governmental proceedings in a free and enlightened country in the nineteenth century. If such documents had been turned out by some inexperienced junior clerk in a public office, it would have been characterized as showing culpable carelessness, a want of education, or an extraordinary absence of clearness of reasoning, or all three. One cannot help asking—are there not on the bookshelves of that capacious Federal Palace at Berne collections of the different Cantonal laws and police regulations? If so, what fatality, we may ask, prevented those Ministers of State, MM. Ruchonnet and Rignier, from referring to copies of the laws and regulations of Geneva, in order that they might verify the statements of M. Héridier, and clearly understand the legal grounds upon which they themselves, as well as the Cantonal authorities, stood, before committing themselves to the publication of a document which was likely to be widely read, and has been read with surprise and bewilderment by lawyers and others of foreign States as well as in their own country. Had the Federal Council called for a copy of the law sur les collectes, they would have seen at once that nothing less than a deliberate falsification of that law had served to furnish the Chief of the Genevan Department of Police with an excuse for expelling Miss Booth. It is worthy of note that in dropping the vague charge made by the Geneva State Council against her of being a danger to the State, the Federal Council—whether consciously or inadvertently—plead the cause of Miss Booth, establishing in their reply the validity of a great portion of her statement in her own defence. In doing so, they are obliged to fall back only the more completely on the broken reed of the falsified law concerning collections of money. It would seem, however, that some suspicion of the inadequacy of that ground of expulsion (the collections) may have crossed the minds of the experts who, we must suppose, drew up this reply for the President and Chancellor of the Federation to sign. This may be gathered from the following sentence in the reply, which I reproduce:—

“There is no need to enquire whether the notices in question (to produce the accounts) were given to the Appellant by the authorities in virtue of a police regulation applicable to this particular case, or in virtue of the general right of surveillance and police control over public collections which belongs incontestibly to every political authority.”

It is a most startling statement which is propounded in the sentence given in italics. Every novice in politics is aware that no political authority in any modern free State has, or would dare to assume, a right of “surveillance and police control over public collections.”[25] The Federal Council show here an extraordinary want of appreciation of the guarantees of individual freedom provided by their own excellent Constitution. They have also forgotten or they ignore the clause of the Anglo-Swiss Treaty of Friendship, Establishment and Commerce already quoted, which makes it illegal to search for, or examine or demand the production of the books or accounts of those persons of either country residing in the other. A well-known Swiss lawyer, of whom I asked information on these points, informs me that no right whatever of police control or surveillance of public collections exists in Switzerland. Further comment on this subject is needless; and, indeed, it would be a relief if the whole of the miserable business could be buried in oblivion.

“Oh! what a tangled web we weave,

When first we practice to deceive.”

The little town of Rolle in the Canton de Vaud, on the shores of the Lake of Geneva, now became a centre of the work for a portion of that Canton. The first meeting, conducted by a few of the “Invincibles,” the persecuted Salutists from Geneva, was held in a sort of greenhouse, which was crowded in every corner. The florist to whom the house belonged, said he trusted God with his glass house, and if it should be broken he thought he had faith enough only to say “Amen!” A powerful influence was felt here. The sound of prayer and of weeping filled the crowded place from end to end. One of those present wrote, “the people had only read books of falsehoods, and ridiculous newspaper articles against us. But the God of truth will open their eyes. One poor old Christian gentleman, who had been in this way deceived about us, was moved to tears, and begged us to come in the afternoon to his house.”

The Vaudois government, following the example of that of Geneva, now lost no time in putting out a decree forbidding the meetings. Owing to the difficulty of finding private rooms, many meetings were held in the open air. The English tourist indulging in memories of a Swiss summer, may imagine that such meetings for worship in the open air must have been very delightful, in the midst of fragrant pine forests, on mountain sides, or in meadows richly carpeted with summer flowers, and in sight of the dazzling snow of the distant mountains, suggestive of all that is purest and fairest in the natural or spiritual world. And so indeed it was at times, as, for example, on Ascension Day, when Miss Booth was met by a number of her friends from Geneva, and a joyous gathering was held by the shores of the lake, near Rolle. The whole day was spent in prayer, thanksgiving, and the relation of God’s dealings with one and another, until the sun declined towards the west, and the company separated, returning homewards “with great joy,” even as the disciples returned from Olivet after that prolonged gazing up into heaven after their ascended Lord, who had “gone up on high, leading captivity captive and receiving gifts for men”—the supreme gifts of the Holy Ghost—even for the rebels who should one day lay down their arms and become His disciples. But not always was it so pleasant or so easy to achieve a Sunday gathering for worship and personal communion. Some self-denial is required in the case of the hardworked man or woman who leaves the house before sunrise to walk a long distance in inclement weather. “Yesterday,” a soldier wrote from Rolle, in April, “we had a good open-air meeting in spite of the police and the rain. We left the town in small groups, like people going out for a stroll, having decided to meet in a little path where we should have to walk in single file. All went well and the column moved onward, everyone looking very happy at the thought of meeting together with the Lord, although it was in secret and at great risk. After some time of climbing and searching for a suitable place in which to pitch our camp, we found a corner in the brushwood among the long wet grass. We began to sing, when we were interrupted by a whistle from one of our sentinels. We sent off a scout to hear what it was. He reported that our friends the police were on our track. We were quite on the mountains, and the showers of rain which fell now and again, did not improve the rugged paths, when there were any paths at all. But it mattered not; we all began climbing again to find another spot; young and old, fathers, mothers and children, all climbing up the slippery slopes together, helping each other, or pulling themselves up by the branches of the trees, while the leaders in front directed them by an occasional shrill whistle. At last we halted, our feet wet and our garments draggled. We placed two sentinels on the heights above, but we had no more alarms, and had a splendid meeting.”

Another wrote:—“Our Rolle comrades are obliged now to meet at three o’clock in the morning; but even at that hour they have not been allowed to worship God in peace, the night watchman having called up the police to disperse them. Pray for our Rolle comrades; for it is almost impossible for them to meet to pray without being hunted and stopped by the police. As the lake is neutral ground, we are in treaty for the hire of a large barge which we can anchor off the shore, reaching it by a boat from the land, manned by strong salvationists....” “The power of God was strongly felt at these Rolle meetings. A tall powerful man who came to the meetings in the first instance in order to break them up, was cut to the heart by some words spoken, and fell on his knees, and another who had been a smuggler joined the ranks of the Salvationists, and both became firm and devoted Christians.”

Towards the summer the spirit of persecution began to rage in the Canton de Vaud, as it had done in Geneva. The meetings had ceased to be held openly; small gatherings in private houses were all that could be attempted. On the first of July the house of a Rolle citizen, in which it was suspected that a few persons had assembled to pray, was attacked by a large and riotous mob. As those within left the house, bucket after bucket of water was poured upon them—men and women alike—drenching them to the skin. At ten o’clock in the evening, a systematic bombardment of the house was begun, and lasted till past midnight. Large stones were thrown, and the doors forced open; windows and shutters were broken and the front of the house seriously damaged. The Rolle Salvationists and their leaders were obliged to conceal themselves as they could in holes and corners during the whole night. The police were absolutely inactive. Two days later several of the Salvation officers were threatened with instant death if they attempted to meet for prayer. Fire engines were brought out to play upon the poor worshippers as they came and went. Another meeting was thus described.

“We began our meeting at six o’clock in the morning, on Sunday. There were only a few old people gathered together. However, the Lord was in our midst and blessed our souls. We met again at one o’clock to start for an open-air meeting. We had two hours walk before us in the broiling sun, but we felt the Lord was with us. We at last arrived at the village, where we found the people gathered together waiting for us by the side of the lovely lake. About 220 country people came from the different villages around the place. They listened to every word, as one after another spoke of salvation. We had not long commenced when a terrible thunderstorm came on. We all went into a barn which a dear friend lent us. The power of the Holy Spirit was here among us. When the invitation was given to all who wished to give their hearts to God to come forward, one big man came forward; then came another, and another. There were six of them, who all fell on their knees at the feet of Jesus, while we sang,

“Reviens, reviens, pauvre pécheur!

Ton Père encore t’attend.”

A Salvationist day’s work in the Canton Vaud is thus described:—

About seventy of us went by steamer to the little town of Nyon, some miles higher up, on the shores of the lake.

As a specimen of the kind of justice we receive at the hands of some here who have authority, we have only to cite the following incident: As soon as we started from the pier we all placed ourselves in the fore part of the steamer, and there began to sing some of our favourite hymns. We had not been long so engaged before the captain of the steamer sent word that he would not allow us to sing; so the rest of the voyage had to be spent in silence. An old Genevese who was with us told us that he had been in the habit of travelling on the boats for the last twenty years, and yet had never before seen any singing of any kind stopped. It is needless to add that had we been a band of ordinary tourists, however worldly or foolish our songs might have been, we should have been able to sing to our hearts’ content; but because we happened to be a band of Salvationists, and our songs were the songs of Zion, we were forbidden to sing them; and yet this is a country where people are so fond of boasting of freedom and liberty of conscience!

On arriving at Nyon we had the pleasure of seeing Capt. Becquet and Lieut. Patrick, from Neuchâtel. We had not been long in the place before the whole town turned out to see these strange “Salutistes,” and of course the devil did what he could to annoy us, in the shape of four drunken men, who, poor fellows, did all they could, in their blindness, to do the devil’s work well, but, as might be imagined, with but little success.

Means and opportunities for meetings with the dear friends of the Geneva portion of the Salvation Army were rare, and often accompanied with difficulties. The open-air gatherings, necessarily arranged with care and prudence, were often very delightful, and the memory of them will never cease to dwell in the hearts of those who shared in them. Under the fire of persecution, and in the pursuit of a common, arduous and holy work, the firmest friendships are formed, and the richest memories are stored up. Some of the poor converts of Geneva said they would be glad to walk eight leagues to greet their leaders once more. One wrote: “I walked that distance one day and I was not in the least fatigued, although I had only a slice of bread from six o’clock in the morning until five o’clock in the evening. God gave me strength to walk and to go on in my hunger.” Having received information in the first week in March that certain roughs in Geneva meant to organize themselves on the following Sunday to disturb a private meeting of the Salvationists, it was decided to worship upon a mountain in Savoy on the French side of the lake of Geneva, where there were a number of quarries. The arrangements were kept strictly secret, and the place of meeting only made known to the soldiers the evening before at all the outposts of the Army in the various districts. The weather was now beautifully fine, perfect for open-air meetings—a cloudless sky during the day and a full moon at night. Miss Booth, who was still residing at Lausanne, crossed the Lake with a few of her friends on Saturday afternoon to the Savoy shore, and went thence by rail to a village near the Swiss frontier. The necessary notice of the intention to hold a meeting had been given to the French authorities, the Prefect of the locality being thoroughly friendly, and affording every facility for a meeting. The spot chosen was a hollow in the cliff of the Grande Salève, which towered up a thousand feet above the spot where the meeting assembled. It was early morning, and the grey morning mist had not yet lifted, when a number of adherents and officers of the army appeared along the road leading from Geneva, with faces full of joyful expectation. Troop after troop was now seen defiling along the paths on the slopes of the mountain, their faces ruddy with the sharp morning air, waving signals of recognition and loving greeting. Sentinels were posted at various parts of the roads in the valley below to direct the worshippers to the spot. Great enthusiasm prevailed at the thought of meeting once more with their exiled leader, Catherine Booth, and all seemed justly proud to be able to give her the assurance by their unbroken ranks that the power of God is sufficient, not only to save but to keep, in the hour of the fiercest trial. A circle is formed, and all the voices are raised in a beautiful hymn of praise. Now all are kneeling upon the stones, and prayer rises to God—such prayer as only such surroundings and such influences can inspire. The blue lake lies below, flashing in the early sunshine; the assembled group is still, however, in the chill shadow of the mountain; but the mark of light advances rapidly. It was here, in the pure but chill air beneath the shadowy cliff, that poor Charles Wyssa caught the cold which attacked his lungs, and from which he never recovered. He had come, exhausted by his labours, to the place of meeting. One who was present wrote “Never can I forget the scene as, while one of our brave men was telling how God had guarded him and kept him safe through a storm of opposition, the first ray of sunlight broke suddenly across the precipice above, and fell on the assembly, bathing us all in light. We felt that the light of fully-restored liberty would be all the brighter for the temporary shadow and gloom.” A very solemn and happy influence pervaded the meeting as the Maréchale spoke of what God expected from that band, and of all He had already done for those who had dared to follow him at all costs. During her address a number of persons friendly to the Salvation Army, and who had been let into the secret of the meeting, continued to arrive. Some boys, sons of Roman Catholic parents, were seen setting fire to the underwood near where the assembled worshippers were gathered, and carefully feeding the flame. Then the meeting learned that the smoke which arose straight and blue, heavenward, was the appointed signal that a meeting of the Salvation Army was being held. This had been planned by the friendly country people and excursionists to the Grand Salève; so that when the afternoon meetings began a large crowd had gathered. The sound of the singing re-echoed along the cliffs, bringing other stragglers from all sides. “Among those assembled were the poor Greek of whom we have already spoken, and many, if not all, of those whose testimonies have already been quoted.”

In order to secure quietness, and to escape being hunted by the police, the meetings in the Canton Vaud were held at 5 o’clock in the morning. When even this early hour was found to be too late to avoid disturbance, it was changed to 3 o’clock in the morning. These harmless worshippers were literally hunted “like a partridge on the mountains,” as King David in his dark days phrased it. The difficulties and toil of climbing over rocks and through forests did not daunt the hunters, who appeared to follow up their prey with ever increasing zest. No bitter feeling was ever expressed, or even felt, however, by the Salvationists against the persons who thus persistently troubled their peace. All they ever said of them was—“They know not what they do. They have been blinded and deceived in regard to our true character and motives.” It was arranged on one occasion to meet at a certain spot at the edge of a remote wood in the Canton Vaud. On reaching the place it was found to be occupied by a tall man in the dress of a tourist. He was surveying the landscape through an opera-glass, but as the whole of the lake and the view to which he had directed his glass was obscured in a thick mist, some of the party suspected a trap, and one of them went forward to speak to him. The man appeared confused, and after a time slipped away. The next day the same salvationist met his friend the tourist on the platform of the railway station in the uniform of a policeman!

The work of winning souls went forward. I take the following individual cases from the records of one of the workers, giving them in his own words:—

“There was X., the bootmaker of Rolle, a notorious infidel, who used often to stand on the step of his shop and insult the Pastor of the place as he passed by, converted one night at a little meeting where he had come out of curiosity. He immediately testified for Christ, for which cause most of his customers left him, many coming to take away work which they had given him. But he never wavered, trusting in his newly-found Saviour. There was that wild girl who had brought such sorrow and disgrace upon her family, and whose remarkable conversion was the means of bringing father and brothers and sisters all to the Saviour’s feet. When the mother, who had been absent for a time, returned, great was her astonishment to find all the family thus changed, and praising God. In such a circle, and before such a transformation, conviction was immediate, and the mother also gave her heart to God. What a change in that formerly wretched, godless home. The sad-hearted mother, the drinking husband, the lost girl, the careless sons, all turned into praying and godly people!

“A Vaudois being asked how he came to be an adherent, replied, ‘Ah! well, like everyone else around here, I was strongly opposed to the Armée du Salut, having believed the newspaper statements that it was a band of “purse cutters” and comedians who drove people crazy, and I had forbidden all my family to attend any of the meetings. My wife greatly wished to go, but I prevented her by violent threats. Hearing that there was to be a meeting of the Army in a wood on the shore of the lake, I went myself, however, out of curiosity and to pass time. I should tell you that I would not admit that women had a right to preach; nevertheless, it was by a woman’s preaching that I was converted. When I arrived at the meeting, instead of finding a crowd of long-faced melancholy people, I found a number of such happy-looking beings, that I forgot all my prejudices, and listened without even realising that I was listening.

“‘The Maréchale explained with great clearness how a sinner could come to Jesus just as he was. Her words made such an impression upon me that from that moment I had no more rest of mind. Though a Protestant, I had never before realized how a man could be converted to God. When I returned home, I said to my wife (who had not dared to go to the meeting for fear of me), “Well, I for one will never speak against these ‘salutistes’ again.”

“‘Notwithstanding I tried to resist my conviction; but it became all the deeper. I was miserable. The next day, while planting “haricots,” I was praying in an agony to Jesus to receive me just as I was, and take away all my sins, when suddenly a bright light seemed to flash into my heart. I saw my sins thrown behind me, and as if hidden by a thick veil. Such an immense joy filled my soul that I felt as if I should eclater, and I immediately praised God for having saved me. My old mother who had prayed for me ever since my childhood, and who was lying upon her death-bed, had the unutterable joy of seeing me converted and saved. How often she had said to me, “Thou wilt be converted yet! God has promised it to me! Thou art kicking against the pricks now! Thou art afraid of the Armée du Salut. Yes! I know why. Thou art afraid to have to give up thy worldly pleasures!” O! I do praise God that he has saved me and my whole family as well.’”

Meanwhile the Maréchale and her friends continued to be cheered from time to time, by good news of their Geneva converts. The following is from the mother of a family at Geneva.

“MY DEAR MARÉCHALE,—It is most interesting to note day by day the progress that our young soldiers make, and the power with which they proclaim salvation to sinners. Each week new recruits are added to our ranks. Ah! if all the powers of hell rise up, and if earthly authorities refuse us protection, we will lean all the more upon the Rock of Ages, who will never fail us in the day of distress.

“The mothers whose children have been transformed know that the Spirit of God alone can have worked this miracle; and they can reply with joy, ‘Far from estranging our children from us, the Salvation Army restores them to us in leading them to Christ.’ It is the world that takes them away and destroys them body and soul, restoring them to us neither in this world nor in the next. Dear Maréchale, all the soldiers pray for you that the Great Captain may supply all your needs. We are sadly beset on every side; the enemy gives us no rest; but, glory to God, we are fighting and not discouraged. Yesterday, Sunday, we had six meetings. At eight o’clock in the evening the congregation was too large for the place, and we had to have an overflow meeting. It was a blessed day for many. We shall continue to pray and believe.

“A MOTHER TO WHOM THE ARMY HAS RESTORED HER CHILDREN.

“Geneva, 9th April, 1883.”

It may be interesting to compare for a moment some past outbursts of intolerance in Switzerland with the present events. The following is extracted from the records of the Council of State of the Canton Vaud, in the year 1824. It is a decree against the Momiers,—revivalists of that period:—

“Considering that reports have reached us for several years concerning the conduct of a new religious sect vulgarly called Momiers, introduced into our Canton, and also concerning meetings of that sect which took place occasionally, even during the hours of public worship in the churches:

“Considering that the erroneous and exaggerated opinions professed by the above-named assemblies are absolutely subversive of social order, as much from the point of view of the unity of the family as from that of their influence on civil and religious institutions:

“Considering, also, that the above-named sectaries have placed themselves by their discourses, their actions, and their propagandism in a position of open aggression against the National Church:

“Be it decreed,

“That the meetings above-mentioned shall be expressly forbidden as being opposed to public order and religious peace.

“All persons whose conduct tends to the gaining of proselytes to this new sect in a manner opposed to public order and religious peace shall be prosecuted and punished in conformity with Article 58 of the Correctional Code; and every person furnishing any building or room whatsoever for the holding of these prohibited assemblies shall be regarded as accomplices, and prosecuted as such.

“Every person having permitted or directed such an assembly, or seen to have acted as its president, shall also be prosecuted....

“Given under the seal of the Council of State, 15th January, 1824.

(Signed)

“CLAVEL.

“BOISOT.”

This decree was powerless to arrest the religious revival of that period. On the contrary, it gained for the Momiers the sympathy of many persons who otherwise would have remained neutral. The decree was only revoked in 1834, and during the whole of that time the Salutists of the period never ceased to cry “Forward!” And God blessed them abundantly. On the 22nd November, 1846, the Oratoire of Lausanne, the locality of the meeting of the Momiers, having been attacked by rioters, a new decree was issued, dated 2nd December, in which the Council of State forbade every religious assembly whatsoever outside the National Church. On the 5th February, 1847, the Council of State called out the military force, in order to put a stop to every religious meeting whatsoever outside the worship acknowledged by the Constitution, and ordained that those who transgressed this order should be visited with heavy fines, imprisonment, and other punishments, threatening to drag them quickly before the Tribunals; for now the war of the Sonderbund had kindled a still greater popular hatred against the Momiers. In June, 1849, the Grand Council again put forth a decree forbidding all the meetings. All magistrates or functionaries of the Government who took any part in them were dismissed from their posts. The sixth decree of interdiction continued in operation for ten years, and was repealed in 1859 by the Grand Council. In 1862 the Council of State established the principle of religious liberty which is now guaranteed by the existing Constitution of the Canton De Vaud, as well as by the Federal Constitution.

It is instructive to compare all this with the facts occurring in the present year, 1883. The following is an extract from a letter addressed to the Vaudois Council of State, November 4th, 1823, by a native of Vaud, Mr. Jacques Magnin, of Mont la Ville.

On Sunday, 2nd of November, certain Christians of Mont la Ville and the neighbourhood having assembled themselves together, as their manner is in a room which they had hired, in order to read together the Word of God, to sing His praises, and to exhort each other to a holy, just and religious life,—during our service, and while we were singing the 5th Psalm, a stone was thrown which broke two panes of the window, and which struck one of the worshippers. On going out of the meeting we were stoned by a great crowd of persons of all ages and of both sexes. One of my brothers and myself were pursued along the road with blows; stones and sticks being flung at us. We were knocked down and dragged along the road, and thrust into a ditch. In this condition, when I began to address my prayers aloud to God my Saviour, they filled my mouth full of mud, beat me in the face, and seizing me by the hair of the head struck my head on the ground several times, crying, “Pray now to your Saviour, and see now if He will come and deliver you.” The crowd shouted “kill him,” and other voices said, “No, don’t kill him, but mutilate him.” We were also robbed. They found in my pocket a Testament, and considering it quite worthless, they returned it to me. Then we were dragged to the Mont la Ville, an hour’s journey, the mob frequently repeating its outrages against us with fury, inventing also other modes of torture, such as tying us together, and also tying us to a block of wood which they forced us to drag after us, continually beating and kicking us, scourging us with rods, mocking us in every way, and pronouncing every kind of blasphemy against the Eternal God.

As for me and all true Christians, this is not the kind of treatment which would induce us to renounce the Saviour who redeemed us. We are ready to seal with our blood the righteousness and truth of the Word of God, and as for you, honourable sirs, we warn you that you take good care that our blood be not upon your heads.

A WITNESS OF THE VAUDOIS MOMIERS, 1823.

Many years have passed since the deposition of this witness; but the true witnesses ever and again renew their youth like the eagle.

CHAPTER V.

Allusion has already been made to the proclamation of the Grand Council of Neuchâtel, on the 30th January. The news of this proclamation was telegraphed to England, and cheered the hearts of all lovers of liberty here, who rejoiced to think that while Geneva was acting in so arbitrary a manner, in regard to religious and civil liberty, the Canton of Neuchâtel, faithful to its great traditions, had opened its doors to strangers guiltless of breaking any law, and had spoken publicly in the tone with which we are familiar as emanating from free Switzerland. The following is the text of the proclamation:—

“TO THE CITIZENS RESIDENT IN THE CANTON.

“DEAR CITIZENS,—

“For several days past disturbances of a grave character have taken place on the occasion of certain religious meetings. At la Chaux de Fonds as well as Neuchâtel, public meetings have been disturbed, inoffensive persons assaulted in the streets, and windows broken by projectiles. At Neuchâtel the worship of a church, long established in our Canton, has been violently broken in upon.

“The Council of State is determined to enforce respect for public order, liberty of meeting and liberty of worship. It has nothing whatever to do with the particular tendencies of this or that public assembly, or of this or that form of worship. It does not regard the doctrines professed in these places. Its duty is to protect the liberties and security of all. It will not fail in this duty. But before taking exceptional measures for the re-establishment of public order and liberty of meeting, which up to this date had been respected in our Canton, we desire to appeal to the Republican sentiments of our fellow citizens. One of the most glorious conquests of our Revolution of 1848, was the securing of liberty of public meeting, and absolute liberty of worship. These liberties are enshrined as follows in our Cantonal Constitution:—

“‘Article 11.—Public Assemblies, as well as Associations, which, in their object and in their methods have nothing illegal, cannot be either restrained or forbidden;

“‘Article 13.—Every profession of faith, and every form of worship alike shall enjoy full liberty, and shall have an equal right to protection, on the condition that those who profess and follow such forms of faith and worship conform to the law for the regulation of the external exercises of public worship.’

“Up to the present time no special action has been judged necessary to put in force the law on the external and public exercise of worship. Absolute liberty is given to all churches and to all religious societies. Why should we now abandon this liberal practice so honourable to our Canton?

“We appeal, dear citizens, to your feelings of justice and toleration. Let us give full liberty to the manifestation of all opinions, and of all creeds. Let us discuss them, if we will, and even judge them severely; but let us beware of seeking to suppress them. Let us avoid even the appearance of persecution. If that which you may hear in some public assemblies is repugnant to your feelings, avoid these meetings, and cease to support their promoters. It may be that these people are seeking to advertise themselves by an unwholesome notoriety. You can refuse then to give them the pleasure of creating such notoriety for them. If you wish to protest, convene yourselves public meetings. Discuss these matters, and manifest your opposition by reasoning and argument, and not by noise, mockery, and acts of violence. We have a confident hope, dear citizens, that you will respond to our appeal, and will again assume the calm and dignified attitude so appropriate to free Republicans. Do not let it be said that the right of meeting and liberty of worship guaranteed by our constitution are a dead letter.

“Citizens of Neuchâtel, we boast of being a free and civilized people; let us show that we know how to respect the public manifestation of convictions, religious or otherwise, however absurd they may appear to us. Let us carefully guard all our liberties, and let us not destroy them for ourselves by ceasing to respect them in others. Let us know how to be tolerant, if we desire that others shall be tolerant to us.

“In the name of the Council of State,

(Signed),

COMTESSE, President.

GILLAUME, Secretary.

“Neuchâtel, 30th January, 1833.”

The reign of justice and of liberty, however, in this Canton was but too brief. The evil influences which had been at work in Geneva appear to have travelled with telegraphic swiftness, and swept down on Neuchâtel like a storm from the Jura. The letter of Mme. de Gasparin was in the hands of all, as soon as an intimation reached the Geneva authorities of the probability of the persecuted Salvationists taking refuge in the neighbouring Canton. The evil seed found only too many minds well prepared to receive it and to develop rancorous fruits “after its kind.” It is said also that M. Héridier was at this time in communication with his friend M. Cornaz, who occupies a similar position with himself as head of the Department of Justice and Police in Neuchâtel. As kindred spirits, probably they found it not difficult to agree as to the continuance of the extraordinary measures already familiar to the public of Geneva. The Salvationists—who had been invited to come to Neuchâtel, by a letter signed by a certain number of the citizens—in the hope and faith that their work would be now carried out under conditions of freedom, had engaged the great rooms at the Hotel de Mont Blanc, the proprietor of which, M. Elskes, had shown himself liberally disposed, in this as well as in other matters, towards English visitors. In January, the first pioneers of the Salvation Army arrived in Neuchâtel, and, though welcomed by many, were assailed from the first with opposition from the most noisy and degraded of the population.

In giving the sequence of the events which ensued, M. Du Pasquier spoke as follows,—at the trial at Bondry:—“The Council of State, repudiating the principles set forth in its firm and noble proclamation of the 30th January, and allowing itself to become the docile instrument of certain rioters, who could have been promptly brought to reason by a little vigorous action, entered on a false path by partially putting a stop to the Salutist meetings. The disturbances were the more encouraged by the voluntary inactivity of the police, and their development led to the Decree of the 15th of June, forbidding all meetings whatsoever of the Salvation Army, until such time as it should have received the authorization of the State; this prohibition being based on the assumption that the Army was a ‘religious corporation,’ in the sense laid down in Article 72 of our Neuchâtel constitution.”

A few friends subsequently opened their houses for private meetings, as there was no prohibition to such. This, however, as we shall see, did not prevent the roughs from persecuting and ill-treating all who were seen attending such meetings.

One of the Salvation Soldiers wrote thus at the time of the earlier meetings at the Mont Blanc:—

“I cannot describe to you all that has passed during this day. Two hundred and fifty people in the Hall at half-past seven in the morning to sing and pray. At three o’clock the Hall was more than full. There are 500 seats, but there were more than 1,000 people crushed into the Hall, and several hundreds in the corridors. But in the evening, what a crowd when we came to open! Cries from all sides from those who were being almost suffocated in the crush. The movement in the crowd was at times like the waves of the sea. They say that never has Neuchâtel seen such a crowd at a meeting, either religious or political. The people in the houses opposite lit up the street and the crowd by coloured Bengal fire, which they lit in their windows. I could see that there were souls there who were thirsting for Salvation.”

A little noise commenced, when at once one of our Neuchâtel friends rose up, and speaking to the meeting, said—“In the name of Neuchâtel I protest against this noise!” Then about 500 persons rose up and seconded the speaker, and out went the disturbers.

When the invitation was given for those who desired Salvation to come forward and give themselves to God, two young men came out. One of these came forward hurriedly from his place, and threw himself down, saying, “I will! I will!”

Another soldier wrote at this time:—

“Hallelujah, for all the Saviour has done in Neuchâtel during my absence. What a change! When I left there were only a few soldiers upon a very small platform, and now the platform is three times as large as that of Paris, and yet it is too small. On my arrival I attended a Holiness meeting for soldiers. What a joy to find myself amongst these redeemed of Jesus, won through the instrumentality of the Army which has been so despised, and where the devil has so furiously endeavoured to hinder the work of our brothers. Certainly Satan has not been dethroned from all hearts, but glory to God he has from many. Many souls have been rescued, and others who slept in false security had been awakened.

“Yes, He manifests His power here, and if His servants have had to suffer persecution, and will have to suffer it, yet they begin now to rejoice over the fruit of their labours. The Saviour is faithful to His promises.

“Since Saturday we have had two meetings—one on Sunday morning at 7, and another at 3. The hall was crowded, and many had to be sent away—but more than all was the blessing received. God alone knows how many have been blessed besides those who testified.... Tuesday at 3 o’clock another meeting. On Wednesday morning at 6 o’clock again another, at which at least 400 were present. What slaughter in the ranks of the devil!

“The Lord bless the Salvation Army at Paris. Amen!

“Neuchâtel.

“C. H.”

The storm, which had been daily gathering strength, now burst forth first more openly at a meeting in the Hotel Mont Blanc at which Miss Booth was present. The Neuchâtel authorities pretended that their police force was insufficient to keep order. It is impossible here to refrain from a brief criticism in advance. When Miss Booth was arrested in September following, in the forest at a considerable distance from Neuchâtel, the journey to which place involved rough work for those who arrested her, there appeared on the spot the Prefect of Police with two of his police staff and fifteen Gendarmes. Now if it was possible to provide at a short notice so strong a force, in order to arrest an unresisting girl in a remote forest, it surely would have been equally possible to have supplied a sufficient force to prevent the disgraceful outrages committed by the mob night after night in the streets around the Hotel Mont Blanc, in the city itself. On the occasion of the meeting referred to, the noise and disturbances within the hall were so great that the words spoken could only be heard, as in the first meeting in Geneva, in the intervals of uproar. The chief disturbances came, however, from the outside. In an open space surrounding the Mont Blanc there was a surging mass of rude noisy people. In the hope of quelling the uproar, and of winning some of those souls, Miss Booth left the hall and presented herself among them in the open air. She gained their attention in a few moments, and spoke gently but firmly of the aims of the Salvation Army, and their desire to win the people to true happiness and peace. A ringleader of the mob, a man of some intelligence and of powerful appearance, rudely interrupted her, and, holding up his pipe, cried, “This is my god.” Then there came a wild response from the people—“And the money-box is their god”—meaning that the object of the Salvationists was to gain money. Confusion and uproar followed. But once more Miss Booth gained a hearing, and then with much power she argued as a messenger of Christ. “I appeal to you,” she said, “as intelligent men, as men able to reason. Do you really believe that we would have left our homes, our friends, our country, to come to Switzerland to be treated as we have been treated, to be hooted, pelted, ill-used and blamed in every way, in order to get money? No; I believe you have more good sense than to believe such folly as this. You know what our motive is—that we wish to see you delivered from the slavery of sin, and brought into the glorious liberty of the children of God.” The man with the pipe stared at her open-mouthed as she spoke. Looking at him she said, “You will follow me into the hall, and you will listen to me?” She retired, and this leader of the roughs quietly followed her accompanied by many others. He put his pipe in his pocket, sat down, and listened with wondering attention. With the ordinary protection which justly they ought to have had from the authorities, and with liberty to make such appeals as these in the midst of the storms of noise, blasphemy, and ridicule they were accustomed to meet, there can be no doubt that the Salvation Army would have won its own way, peace would have been restored, and much blessing would have been the result for the population of that Canton, concerning whom we hear the constant lament of demoralization and lawlessness through habits of drink, and other vices.

On such occasions as the above, Miss Booth said to me,—“I was powerless; there was no one there to enforce order; and I just threw myself on God, asking Him to silence the people for a moment. He heard my cry; He did it for me; He held the people in silence and attentive suspense until I had given them His message.”

The following extracts from letters (the originals of many of which I have seen) will give some idea of the work accomplished in spite of the interdictions of the authorities and the violence of the mob:—

“Although the hall of Mont Blanc is still closed at night, and we are pulling against wind and tide, we are conquering, for the ‘Lord of Hosts is with us.’ It is easy enough to write pamphlets against us; easy to close halls; quite easy for the ‘enemies of the cross of Christ’ to hinder work in many ways, but when the Holy Spirit works in hearts and consciences, who shall hinder? And, bless His name! He is working here.”

Another wrote:—

“For many weeks I have wanted to tell you of the happiness I have in my heart since Jesus is mine. Blessed be the day when you came to our country; it had need of some ardent servants of God who would proclaim without fear His salvation. I know that I am not magnetised, as some here say; but I have found the way to true happiness. And you, dear friends, take courage; yours is the King’s work, and you, will be ‘more than conquerors’ through Him who has loved us.”

Another says:—

“Before the Armée du Salut came to Neuchâtel I wanted to be saved, but I always fell again into sin and had lost courage. I praise Him that He sent you here to touch my heart. I had heard the Gospel often, but it now seemed new to me. I could not keep away from the meetings, and one day I resisted no longer, and gave myself to God. Since then the chains that held me to sin are broken, and my heart is at peace.”

“How often I am asked,” wrote another Neuchâtel citizen, “What do you think of the Salvation Army? I should like to give you the answer from my own experience. I am sure it is just the sort of people we need in Neuchâtel. We are tired of studied sermons, most of which do not come from the heart, and therefore do not reach it. We need the Word of God with power, and the Holy Spirit. We are not at all surprised to see these dear friends amongst us; it is an answer to the prayers of many a child of God; but we are grieved indeed to see what hard work they find, and much of it because of the so-called Christians. The devil, too, sees he has already lost some of his slaves, and is raging.”

A girl soldier wrote:—

“Last afternoon meeting (Saturday), they locked us into the hall with an immense chain and padlock, and after some time only we succeeded in getting free through another door, having made it known to the proprietor. The mob followed us home, throwing stones, mud, &c., and saying the most awful things. Few of our friends come now to the afternoon meetings, as there is always a crowd, and they don’t like stones and mud thrown at them, and some declare they are afraid of being blown up, as dynamite stories are still being circulated!”

After a meeting in which the danger of harbouring bitterness in the heart had been dwelt upon, a soldier wrote:—

“A man came to see me next morning, and said he had kept rancune in his heart against a man; he must go and put things square or else no peace for him. A testimony from a thief, who told of deliverance from sin, stirred the whole meeting, and as Captain Becquet talked of the ‘love that thinketh no evil,’ hearts darkened by jealousy and hatred were broken down, and many were those who for the first time could honestly pray, ‘Forgive us, as we forgive others.’ On Sunday morning the hall was full at seven, and many standing. A powerful meeting. In the afternoon, 1,000 people in the open air. A young German, who has been one of the worst of our persecutors, gave his testimony for the first time, to the wonderment of his old comrades, some of whom have since followed his example in giving themselves to God. Glory to Jesus. Although surrounded by difficulty, we are marching forward; gentlemen and ladies have offered their houses for evening meetings.

“Few of the Neuchâtelois Christians probably guessed that sin existed to such an extent so near their peaceful dwellings until its originator was openly attacked in the Salvation Hall, but they are fully alive to it now, and most anxious that war should be waged. Although all the public evening meetings have been forbidden by the police authorities, every afternoon sees a goodly congregation of men and women assembled together to hear of full salvation. The dear Lord meets with them, and sin-weary souls find rest in His presence. Most of these are women, of all ages. The tales they tell us of long unfaithful years spent in silence, and Divine calls to testimony to Jesu’s saving power which have been quenched, stifled, and unheeded, because of the universal tradition handed down from their fathers which shuts their mouths, calling them disobedient children if they dare to praise their Lord openly, have made us shudder for the responsibility the authors of these traditions have taken upon themselves.

“Every day fresh cases come to our knowledge of this description. At last they are hearing and heeding their Saviour’s voice, saying, ‘Ye are my witnesses.’”

Two of the officers who had been walking through the streets on a Sunday evening, wrote:—

“The streets were mostly deserted at that hour, but the first band of people we met was a dozen or so of roughs, who not being able to disturb a Salvation meeting, were singing Salvation songs as an amusement—

‘I do believe, I will believe,

That Jesus died for me;

That on the Cross He shed His blood,

From sin to set me free.’

“Oh, how we longed that the words they idly and mockingly sung might sink into their hearts and awaken their slumbering consciences? Perhaps they did; who knows? We walked on through one street and another, longing to find an opportunity of inviting sinners to Jesus. Loud talking in a room with partly closed shutters attracted us. We peeped in; and there we saw several small tables surrounded by groups of sturdy fellows, just the kind the Lord wants, drinking freely, and spending their Sabbath evening in coarse talking and jesting.

“We longed to go in, but, alas! we must not.”

From another Neuchâtel Salutist:—

“The infidel doctor, with two other men of the same character, was at the afternoon meeting. I feel sure he will be saved. He listened to all that was said, and never smiled; had not even the courage to light his cigarette, but kept rolling it all the time between his fingers. Pray for the doctor—he is miserable. I wish you had seen him. O Lord, save our enemies, we constantly pray!”

Miss Booth thus wrote herself of one of the meetings, which were still allowed to be held on Sunday, being forbidden during the week:—

“On Sunday morning the meeting lasted from seven until a quarter to eleven. It was raining hard, yet the hall was quite full, and it was one of the most blessed meetings I ever attended. After singing and some prayer from two or three soldiers, the meeting was opened for testimony; and having so rarely a chance to testify in these times, they rose three and four at a time; although the meeting lasted four hours, they had not nearly all an opportunity....

“A sister said that it was her wish that the Army should go all over Switzerland to bring the same happiness it had brought to her heart.

“And then followed our French version of—

‘I mean to fight for Jesus,’

and certainly, judging from the way our Neuchâtel comrades joined in that song, there is no doubt about their determination.

“Here a man rose, who I was told could neither read nor write. There was perfect stillness when he told us how God had saved him, what he and his wife were, and what they are now. I was much struck, as was everybody, with his earnestness, and the power in his prayer afterwards, showing that he had received the Holy Ghost, which had done more for him than all the education in the world could do. Then rose Jacques. Everybody knows him; a very big powerful man. He told us how he was scoffed at and persecuted, but how happy he was in spite of all. A sister followed who has been suffering much from friends who ought to have been the first to pray for her. She said—‘You can take all away—reputation, everything—but you cannot take Jesus, who lives in my heart. He is everything to me. I can suffer all while I have Him.’

“I cannot but glorify God for the wonderful things He has done in Neuchâtel when all has been, and is, in the dark. Our hall shut up—forbidden even to meet to pray; opposition of the bitterest kind and from all sides to contend with; yet on Sunday morning I felt like Miriam, after hearing those wonderful testimonies, taking a tambourine, and saying, ‘Sing unto the Lord, for He hath triumphed gloriously.’”

Extract from the Journal L’Aurore, March, 1883. Special correspondence from Neuchâtel:—

“The great news of the day is the presence of the Salvation Army. They have hired an immense hall in the Hotel Mont Blanc. Their meetings have been often disturbed from the outside by a noisy and evil-disposed crowd. There has been an outburst of hatred and exasperation, such as one would not have thought possible in our little town—windows broken, blows, ribald songs, and savage cries. Everything has been done to upset the meetings, which have, however, continued with calmness and courage, God being evidently with these people.

“I was, for my part, much prejudiced against the Army and their manner of working. But since I have seen them at their work, and witnessed their ardent love for souls, and the strength and power which this consecration of body and soul to the Saviour gives them (the sacrifice even of their lives), I am fully persuaded that their work will be blessed to many. Immense crowds rush to their meetings—men in rags, poor women, porters, workmen, together with altogether different classes. These evangelists present an immediate, present salvation, with much power and with so much simplicity that every child can understand it.

“They have already many converts and many testimonies. We are not accustomed here to these public testimonies, and this habit shocks many people; but it certainly gives to those who testify a decided position as converts, and a great blessing accompanies it.”

I make no apology for the introduction here of a letter written to me by Miss Patrick, the gallant little Salvation soldier at Neuchâtel, who patiently endured insult and even personal violence, in the course of the campaign at Neuchâtel, and who asked to be allowed at the end to share Miss Booth’s imprisonment in order to minister to and cheer her,—a favour which was granted to her. She wrote as follows:—

“DEAR MRS. BUTLER.—I will give you as well as I can, the principal facts of our Neuchâtel warfare. Our first meeting was held on Sunday, January 21st, at 7 a.m., attended by a good number of Christians, most of whom gave us a welcome as servants of God, although many of them are now our opponents. It was a blessed time of consecration, and of supplication that the blessing of God might rest on our future work. The afternoon and evening services were very short, difficulty presenting itself in an overcrowded hall and a few disturbers. On Monday evening, amidst much crowding and confusion, God helped us to hold a Salvation meeting, several gentlemen of the town offering to keep order in the hall. After a powerful address by Captain Becquet, specially bearing upon the necessity of instant decision, and concluding by the question ‘who will give himself to God now?’ two young men sprang out from among the audience with the words—‘Je veux, je veux,’ and knelt down to implore mercy and pardon. These two are good soldiers under the banner of Christ to-day. The next evening the first serious disturbance occurred, a rush to the hall beginning an hour or two before the time for opening, and we soon saw that mischief was contemplated. When once the hall was full, the doors were closed, the police having arrived to quiet the impatient mob outside; but from the first it was easy to see their power was little or nothing. This night a band of organized roughs had entered the hall, the meeting was rendered impossible by laughing, shouting, whistling and song-singing, and although by far the greater part of our audience were anxious to listen, it was useless; we therefore cleared the hall as quickly as possible and passed out, followed by a howling mob, who laughed at the police, calling them ‘old women.’ No announcements of our meetings having been published, we were surprised at the rush of people.

“Anxiously wishing to avoid any ‘scandale,’ we decided to close our hall for a few evenings, and continue only day meetings. A few nights later we opened with admission tickets. Storming, window-breaking etc., followed, which might with a little firm dealing on the part of the police, have been stopped at once, the rioters being chiefly boys from 16 to 20 years of age. The police however only proved useful in walking with drawn swords home with Captain Becquet, cries of ‘Au lac, au lac,’ resounding from all sides. Surprised and startled at this reception from the so-called Christian town of Neuchâtel, and surrounded by many Neuchâtelois who confessed their shame of these proceedings, we expected some means would be taken to render our meetings practicable. Instead of this, we received an order to close our hall at nights. This we did, although sadly enough, as the class we wished to reach and lead to the Saviour could not come until working hours were over. Still, God blessed our day meetings, especially one just then held for young women, when thirty-eight professed to give themselves to God. Our morning meetings also, often commencing at 6 a.m. were abundantly owned by God.

“Slander and calumny was our next difficulty. A dear old French lady working with us was the first object of attack. Her character was called in question, and falsehoods set adrift, and after a few weeks, when leaving Neuchâtel for another field of labour, she remarked, ‘My people (in France) laugh at God; but this is worse; these people are too cruel!’ Cruel, indeed, was the pamphlet which a few days after was scattered through Neuchâtel, i.e., that of Madame de Gasparin, a book which will have to bear the light and judgment of eternity. ‘I will repay, saith the Lord.’ The charge of Jesuitism there brought against us, spread like poison; we were met by it in the streets, even in little children who shrank from us as if we would do them harm.

“In visiting houses, door after door was shut in our faces; former friends were now foes, and would cross the street to avoid us; a tide of opposition swept against us; our friends were the omnipotent, the unchanging God, and a handful of those who dared to go against the tide, to stand with us in the dark, feeling that the King of Glory was our guide.

“About this time our dear Maréchale, Miss Booth, arrived. In the evening we held many meetings in a crowded hall, with wondrous power and blessing. On Sunday, special meetings. But presently another arrêté came forbidding these meetings on Sunday, as the report was circulated that some roughs from Geneva intended to ‘blow up our hall!’ Once more these rioters were encouraged, and we were forbidden to hold meetings. I cannot remember the dates, but from this time one ‘decree’ followed another; forbidding first Sunday meetings, and then afternoon meetings, and then every meeting whatsoever at our locale. During this time many friends had thrown open their houses to us, and we accepted their invitations gratefully; every evening in crowded rooms of private houses we worked on. Many a happy, holy gathering we have had in tiny rooms and passages, many a sinner has ‘crossed over the line’ and is on God’s side to-day as a result of these meetings; so we praised God and took courage. Still papers, secular and religious, rained accusations upon us, the latter more bitterly than the former.

“One Sunday evening—our hall being closed, and we longing for a united prayer-meeting with our soldiers (many of whom had been discharged from good situations because they were Salutistes)—we received an invitation from one of the leading members of a Christian Church to join with all our soldiers in their evening service. It was accepted—a prayer meeting was announced—a wonderful time followed—tears and prayers were mingled. Amongst others, led by the Spirit of God, our beloved Maréchale prayed. God was not angry, for he answered in filling us all with joy and strength. But, as a result, a confused, divided church followed. We stood and wondered! What had we done? A woman had prayed in a chapel! Just now a large meeting was held at a café against us; the avowed enemies of Jesus joined hands with His professed followers in order to have us sent away. A petition was started against us, to be signed at all the cafés; dear Miss Booth was struck in the street; ink, water, &c., were showered upon us from the windows of private houses;—in the streets, sticks, blocks of wood, mud and stones. Anonymous letters, threats and curses met us at every turn.

“One evening our soldiers were attacked when leaving one of the private houses after a small meeting, and only because God kept us, did we escape and got home without anything serious. On June 12th, the house of Monsieur Aimé Humbert was assailed while a few friends were met for prayer;—from the Salvation band only myself and two soldiers being present. On Wednesday, June 13th, the house of Monsieur Convert was besieged by hundreds of infuriated people who stoned and yelled, smashing all the windows within reach, until after midnight, our soldiers escaping by means of a ladder.

“This brought not a single reprimand for one of our assailants, although the ringleaders must have been recognised by the police who were present looking on; but it brought a prohibitory decree against all meetings in any place whatsoever, ‘even forbidding a Swiss citizen to receive us in his home for singing and prayer.’ The people, excited and led on by those who should have protected us, proceeded to all lengths. Some, we know, were paid to give us blows; and so many pints of beer were given for panes of glass broken, &c. After all my comrades had left Neuchâtel I stayed to cheer and encourage the Swiss soldiers; and the fire was hotter than ever. As I walked down the street, windows were thrown open, and I was hissed and spit upon, pushed off the pavement and followed by the police. One day I was chased partly through the town by a man who held a huge hatchet over his head, threatening to bring it down on mine. He said, ‘If you are saved you are ready to die, you say! Then death to the Jesuits!’ Praise the dear Lord, it did not come down, although I was ready. At other times we heard from bedroom windows schemes to do us harm, and especially the English girl who would not go away. Never, perhaps, have we had such deadly opposition; never, perhaps, lighter and brighter hearts; for God was with us at Neuchâtel, and we are convinced that His work there shall never fall.

“I write to you about these little sufferings for Christ’s sake, because I was told you wished to hear; but they are so little, and have been so outweighed by the blessing and joy by their side that they are as nothing, and we can only look back on these months with thankfulness for many lessons learned in the darkness.—Dear Mrs. Butler,

“Yours’ fighting for Jesus,

KATE H. PATRICK.”

Miss Charlesworth also wrote to me as follows:—

“Miss Booth and Miss Patrick were both struck in the streets of Neuchâtel. We were kicked almost every day in the streets, in broad daylight, pelted with stones, sticks, mud, glass, &c., &c., and even had ink thrown over us. Miss Patrick was struck in the face, and so were some of the soldiers.”

Miss Booth wrote to her friends about this time from Neuchâtel:—

“I snatch a moment in the midst of numerous occupations to send you a line. This town is in a state of great agitation. Meetings are held against us to consider how to put an end to the Salvation Army. A very crowded meeting was held the other night. The leader spoke of expelling us, saying that we got money and brought disunion into families, and that we must be hunted out. Here a gentleman of the town, who stands up for liberty, defied them to expel us under their present constitutional laws, and said that liberty of conscience and meeting existed among them. The speaker was interrupted with cries of ‘To the lake, to the lake!’ Another meeting is to be held to-night to vote against us. A petition is also being signed against us; one is also being signed for us.

“I feel impressed that God is about to undertake for us in a wonderful manner. The spirit of prayer has specially come upon me lately. If we only had a barn to meet in—any place for prayer. On Sunday evening I went to hear a pastor in the Eglise Libre; a great number of our soldiers present. When the preaching was over, a gentleman rose and said that he wished to continue the prayer meetings, such as he had held last year. I had before expressed to him a wish that, our hall being shut up, our soldiers could meet somewhere to pray, and he had asked me to attend this meeting, and ‘I was glad when they said unto me, let us go up into the house of the Lord.’ My soul longed for united prayer at this moment. The pastor left, and the after prayer meeting was opened by this gentleman, who asked that the prayers might be short and to the point. One after another prayed, our soldiers also and Captain Becquet, and, although I had not intended to do so, I followed. It was a blessed meeting, and I felt it very good to be there. One has since remarked, ‘Oh, I felt impressed that we should have stayed all night before the Lord. I can understand your all-night meetings now, and my spirit longed for one.’ And so did mine, but the devil, who knows too well the force of prayer, is doing his utmost to stop us.

“The next morning (Monday) I hear a Council of the Church was called. It appears I should not have prayed; but the Holy Spirit led me and I dared not disobey; besides, great blessing was given.

“Well, I am grieved to tell you that the church is closed against the night meetings. It is one of the saddest things I have heard of. But we must go on praying and believing. Meetings are being held in drawing-rooms of different friends every night; but the rooms are crowded and very hot, and it tries our strength very, very much. Just now is a critical moment with us. I do hope you pray.

“Next Sunday morning we are going to have a special prayer meeting at six a.m. Expectation runs high. Oh, my soul, believe for great things!

“CATHERINE BOOTH.”

I received from a citizen of Neuchâtel the following account of some of the scenes already mentioned:—

“On the 8th May, some sixty persons were assembled in a private room for prayer, when a great noise was heard in the street, and stones were thrown against the doors and windows. The persons leaving the meeting later were insulted, pursued in the streets, and pelted with stones and mud. Four windows were broken, and it was with the greatest difficulty that members of the Salvation Army at this private meeting succeeded in escaping by means of a back door. The mob seemed bent on their extermination. A complaint was lodged with the Prefect by the master of the house (M. Aimé Humbert), but with no result whatever. The same house (in the Rue du Château) was a second time attacked.

“On the 12th June thirty persons were assembled for prayer in response to special personal invitations. They were nevertheless attacked by a part of the population.” (A crowd of men stationed themselves around the house, and when one of the young daughters of M. Humbert went to the door to entreat them to desist, they assailed her with weapons which she herself said were far more intolerable than stones or mud—that is, with the most gross and indecent language, mixed with reproaches against her father on account of his noble work for the abolition of the institution of patented vice. Before these she felt compelled to retire, though difficulties of another nature would not have daunted her). “Again was heard the cry of the crowd, ‘We have our pastors—our good pastors—we have no need here of salvation.’ It was generally, alas! in the name of the pastors that they perpetrated the most illegal and outrageous deeds. One of the Municipal Guards happened to pass at this moment, without interfering or even noticing the violence of the mob. They cried after him, ‘There is a meeting of the Salvation Army here, and these are forbidden by the Council of State.’ ‘You can arrange the matter with Mademoiselle,’ the officer calmly replied, and passed on. Shortly afterwards a great crash was heard as an immense stone was flung into the court, breaking several panes of glass, and covering the outside roof of the court with the fragments. Several other windows were also broken. This state of siege lasted till 11 o’clock at night, when the mob, tired out, dispersed.

“Two days previously to this a similar private meeting had been arranged by a well-known citizen of Neuchâtel, M. Convert, at his own house, where the same kind of scene had been enacted. A crowd of three hundred men surrounded the house, and bombarded it with stones and other heavy missiles, yelling furiously. Above all the noise was heard the familiar cry, ‘We have our pastors; we want no Salvation.’ The front door was broken to pieces, and several windows were destroyed. M. Convert, who had gone to make an application to the Prefect of Police, arrived, and was pelted, and received with yells and groans from the populace. M. de Montmollin, the chief of the Municipal Police of Neuchâtel, always the friend of justice and order, endeavoured, but without success, to disperse the mob and restore quiet. Two of his gendarmes who were present endeavoured to the best of their power to quell the disturbance, and were furiously threatened with being thrown into the Lake. The persons attending the meeting only escaped by means of a ladder hastily planted against a window opening on a small back court. M. de Montmollin received them in a room of the Municipal Hotel, which stands at the other side of the said court. The rioters having discovered their successful flight, moved round and renewed their attack on the Municipal Hotel itself. It was after midnight when, wearied out with this coarse and illegal amusement, they retired, and the persons who had attended the meetings were able to return to their homes. Private meetings in houses were from this time almost abandoned, as it seemed useless to endeavour to hold them without the smallest assurance of police protection and at hazards so great as these.”

In regard to the pastors whose names have been so unhappily used as a rallying cry by the enemies of religion and justice, it is certain that they also will have to suffer persecution in their turn if they are absolutely faithful to the trust now committed to them. Their sorrow must have been great in witnessing the manner in which their own work for the Master had been placed in direct opposition to a work equally undertaken in His name. The mob, however, who thus professed loyalty to their ‘beloved and honoured pastors,’ had probably never seen their faces, nor ever heard the gospel message from their lips, and are as ready at this moment to stone and insult these very men whose names they have dishonoured, the moment they perceive that their teaching also strikes directly against all the vicious habits and institutions to which they are in their secret hearts so deeply pledged.

During the earlier days of this agitation in Neuchâtel, M. Aimé Humbert[26] wrote in a brochure published at that time:—

“For several years past my educational work has led me to inquire into certain economic questions, amongst which that of the influence of spirituous liquors and narcotics has presented itself in relation to its effect on families and on society. I was struck with the severity of the judgment which came under my eyes of one of the greatest historians of France—the Freethinker and Democrat, Jules Michelet. He says that, ‘in 1610 men began to have recourse more and more to the brutalizing habit of drowning their senses in drink, and soothing themselves into oblivion with tobacco. Two new devils then appeared in the world—alcohol and tobacco. Nations and entire races have been since enfeebled by them, losing themselves in this silent abyss, the depths of which means the annihilation of love?’ Nothing has given me so much pain as a recent report from the Director of the Normal School of Hindelbank upon the degeneracy of the youth of the Canton of Berne. The Educational Synod of Berthoud has expressed the same opinion. Amongst the principal causes of the degeneracy of the race, formerly so strong, all who have anything to do with schools and all the friends of the people write down on the first line—bad nourishment, whiskey, and the immoderate use of tobacco.”

M. Humbert goes on to record the fact that the first temperance society in Switzerland, was formed in 1877 (during the session in Geneva of the first Congress of the British and Continental Federation) and reminds his fellow-citizens that when a law was framed by the Neuchâtel Government for the repression of drunkenness, it passed to the Referendum, and was rejected by the people. He observes that the Salvation Army requires of its adherents abstention from drink and tobacco. Will the people again protest against a moralizing influence, so much needed, by driving out these new reformers? M. Aimé Humbert, was one of the combattants in the struggle which preceded 1848, and one of the chief actors in the deliverance of the Canton of Neuchâtel from the Prussian yoke. He continues to be ever watchful for the true interests of his country. He concludes his careful examination of the legal aspect of the question of the Salvation Army as follows:—“The fall of Neuchâtel will be all the greater from the fact that no State in Europe has occupied so advanced a position since 1848, from the point of view of the great principles of the common law. It would not be difficult to demonstrate this by citing a whole series of legal measures of our Canton. I need only, however, mention that which refers to religious liberty. No commentary can be stronger on the spirit in which that article was conceived, than the fact that although it has been put in practice since 1848, up to the present day, the final clause, “freedom of worship is guaranteed on condition that the worshippers conform to the legal regulations on its external observance,” has been practically a dead-letter; for our authorities have never found it necessary, nor have they had the desire, to regulate the external exercise of forms of worship. They have justly felt that the common law offers at all times, and in all places, the best and surest guarantees.... I have set forth the constitutional principles concerning liberty of thought, of belief, of speech, of meeting &c., under which we have lived, and which have been observed, whether they please every one or not. In this respect Neuchâtel and Switzerland itself are only acting conformably with the general law of progress, which constantly tends towards the elevation of the intellectual standard of humanity. This law is inflexible; it does not fail to come to the aid of peoples and governments who are faithful to it; while it comes in open contact with all retrograde tendencies, whatsoever may be their origin. The Federal Constitution of 1848 was a work of progress, resulting from the Pact of 1815. Ancient prejudices and selfish interests however, had succeeded in limiting the guarantee of freedom of worship to the Swiss who belonged to one or other of the Christian professions of faith. According to Articles 41 and 42 of the above Constitution, Jews, even if they were Swiss, were on these points excluded from the common law of the Federation. The great law of progress was, so to speak, endangered by these two articles. The people, it is said have sanctioned them. This is true; but liberty must be made to enter Switzerland by another door; and the Spirit of progress set to work simply to conclude the treaty of commerce between France and Switzerland, which placed reciprocally on a footing of perfect equality the rights of the citizens of these two nations, abstraction made of all considerations of religious faith; and shortly afterwards (January, 1866), the Swiss ratified a new edition of the defective articles, which the Federal Assembly were asked to revise in accordance with the spirit of progress. It is absolutely useless to endeavour to promote a retrograde movement in Switzerland, in this domain, or in any other whatsoever. Just as well might we attempt to return to the days of diligences. For those who complain of the inconveniences which steam presents as a motive force, progress has no consolation to give. Rather she warns—‘Wait a moment, and you shall have electricity!’ Let us get out of this retrograde agitation as out of a bad dream; let us follow on the path which our liberal institutions have indicated to us, outside of which there is nothing for us but confusion and anarchy. Thus alone can we work for the maintenance of our good reputation, and the uninterrupted reign of peace and purity in our own dear country.... Instead of repressing and silencing the agitation around us, we must let the steam escape, open the safety-valves, and bring all to the light—the full light—of rational discussion. In the presence of every new problem which arises in our troubled epoch we must never forget that in liberty alone we have the key to every solution. To sum up:—The impressions which I carried away from the meetings at the Hotel Mont Blanc, and which were subsequently confirmed, are that the Salvation Army must rank amongst the list of the strangest phenomena of our great social, political, and religious crisis, while it is one of those enterprises which neither ridicule nor violence will succeed in annihilating. Here, if ever, the saying of the wise Gamaliel ought to be remembered:—“If this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to naught; but if it be of God ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found to fight against God.”

The Council of State having received certain petitions for and against the continuance of the Salvation Army in the Canton, and a further petition signed by pastors who, while not sympathising with the methods of the Army, claimed liberty for it as for all, proceeded to draw up a report on the whole question to be presented to the Grand Council. It seems desirable to give large extracts from that Report as follows—

“Report upon the three petitions presented, namely:

“That containing 9,944 signatures, demanding severe measures against the Salvationists.

“That containing 163 signatures, claiming for the Salvationists freedom of worship and of meeting, and

“That signed by 56 pastors and ministers of the Canton which, while condemning the practices of the Salvation Army, pray, that its adherents may be allowed freedom of action so long as their practices have nothing in them contrary to law and good behaviour, and demanding the continuance of religious liberty.”

The report gives a complete history of the action of the Salvation Army in Neuchâtel, and from it I take the following extracts:—

“It was on the 21st January that this sect held its first meeting at Neuchâtel in a hall which some one had let to them. Preceded by its renown for eccentricity, and accustomed to stir up noise and scandal wherever it gives its representations, the Salvation Army could not fail to attract the curiosity of a number of Neuchâtel idlers. Very soon the peculiarity of their proceedings, the erection of a platform, and the monotonous repetition of mystical hymns sung to vulgar airs, allocutions, appeals to come to public confessions, sale of songs and pamphlets, and repeated collections of money served to stir up opposition of different kinds. Many turned these proceedings into ridicule, while others were indignant, looking on the whole thing as a profanation of religion. Others, however, already accustomed by the practices of the Methodist sect to mystical exhortations, stood up energetically in defence of the Salvationists. Hence arose conflicts, and on the 25th January a window at the Hotel Mont Blanc was broken, on the 27th a tumult occurred inside the hall, and on the 28th the disturbances were repeated.

“... The Council of State therefore has thought it desirable to refer to the constitutional principles by which it is guided in the matter of freedom of worship and public assembly. An appeal was made to the population to abstain from attending the meetings, but this was not heeded. The crowd continued to frequent the Hotel Mont Blanc, the tumult becoming so great that the gendarmerie, although reinforced, found itself powerless to repress the disturbances without resorting to force.... The Prefect of Neuchâtel received on the 2nd February an order to notify prohibition of the meetings to the Chiefs of the Salvation Army residing in Neuchâtel. Up to that time the Salvation Army had been looked upon as one of the numerous Methodist sects which under different names have invaded French Switzerland for fifty years past. We esteemed it right to follow in regard to them Article 13 of the Constitution. We acknowledged that by that, all Christian sects ought to enjoy equal liberty and protection, provided that they do not offend against public order and good behaviour.”

(After considering the question as to whether these conditions had been observed, the report goes on to say):—

“But in the meantime an unexpected event occurred; the publication of the Orders and Regulations of the Salvation Army by the Countess de Gasparin, from which we learned that this Army is not a simple sect or religious association, but that it possesses very much more the character of a religious corporation. The Council of State therefore put out on the 9th February the following decree:—

“‘Considering the establishment at Neuchâtel of a sect known as the Salvation Army;

“‘Considering the extracts from the Orders and Regulations of the Sect published at Geneva by Madame de Gasparin;

“‘Considering Article 72 of the Cantonal Constitution, which prescribes that no religious corporation shall establish itself in the Canton without an express and always revocable authorisation of the Grand Council;

“‘Considering that it is necessary to decide by a formal inquiry whether the Salvation Army does possess the character of a religious corporation before calling upon it to claim the authorisation of the Grand Council;

“‘The Council decrees:

“‘That it charges the Department of Public Worship to proceed to the above-mentioned inquiry.’

“The different documents treating of the Salvation Army were consequently collected and studied by the Department of Public Worship, which, on the 14th March, addressed a succinct report to us, accompanied by the original documents. This report concludes that the Salvation Army constitutes really a religious Corporation, and that in order to establish itself in the Canton it must have the authorisation of the Grand Council. Just at this moment, however, the Army seems to have been forgotten; its meetings were not attracting any except a few devotees and inquisitive persons, and, after having consulted our Department of Public Worship, we did not think it expedient to attract public attention again to the question. We therefore reserved the right to act on the opinion of the Department of Public Worship until fresh disturbances should call for action. The Salvation Army was not, however, satisfied that its scandals should cease. New leaders presented themselves in order to stimulate the zeal of their adherents, and re-excited the curiosity which had partly died out. Miss Booth, the Maréchale, appeared in person, accompanied by her faithful adjutant, Miss Charlesworth. The meetings were now more frequented than ever, and were organised in the houses of private persons, to which the audience was invited by cards. After this certain persons of Neuchâtel were elevated to the rank of officers, and received the distinctive signs of this new religious order. The disturbances in the streets recommenced. The chiefs of the Army having attempted to recommence the meetings at the Hotel Mont Blanc, the Council of State thought it right to confirm its previous order, by a letter addressed to the Prefect of Neuchâtel on the 29th March.

“... Although the chiefs of the Army had promised to conform to the order transmitted to the Prefect, we soon learned that meetings were continued. There was a meeting held in the open air at Pierre a Bot on the Sunday afternoon. Private meetings became more frequent, and invitations were so numerous that the enemies of the Army came to know of them. Complaints were made apropos of broken windows and other damages, but nothing could be done, seeing that no one was able to indicate the authors of these excesses. The report of the Council of State goes on to describe another order given to the Prefect on the same subject, much in the same sense as the previous one. The Salvation Army now gave up all meetings except those in the open air, or those which were strictly private in the houses of friends.

“‘Private meetings,’ says the report, ‘continued as usual, and we received a petition signed by Edward Becquet, Anna Furrer, and Kate H. Patrick, in the following terms:—

“‘To the Republican Canton of Neuchâtel.

“‘Gentlemen,—

“‘The undersigned officers of the Salvation Army present in Neuchâtel, have received from the Prefect a communication concerning the letter you addressed to him on the 14th current, and take the liberty respectfully to present to you the following observations:

“‘The Council of State forbade the public meetings in the evening and those on Sunday held by the Salvation Army, and embraced in this prohibition even meetings which might be held in private houses. The Council of State grounds its prohibition on Article 72 of the Cantonal Constitution, which runs thus:— “No religious corporation may establish itself in the Canton without an express and always revocable authorisation of the Grand Council.” Now, if we mistake not, this article was introduced to forbid the establishment in the Canton of religious Orders, but it never had in view religious associations which might hold meetings in the Canton. This may be proved by the fact that no religious association independent of the State has ever been called upon to demand the authorisation of the Grand Council. The State ignores them, or only accords to them the protection which it accords to all the other inhabitants of the country, as your proclamation of the 30th January so well sets forth. The Salvation Army is not a religious corporation, nor does it seek to be recognised as such. Hence we do not understand in what manner the Council of State is able to attribute to it that character. The Salvation Army is simply an association of persons who enter it and leave it freely at will, and who never take any vows of obligation. As such it has a right to the protection of Article 11 of the Cantonal Constitution, since it is impossible to find any proof that there is anything contrary to law either in its aims or the means it employs. Now such proof has not been adduced, and in the letter addressed to the Prefect of Neuchâtel the Council of State alleges absolutely nothing which could justify the exceptional measures adopted against us. Our meetings take place in private houses, and they have not in any way troubled public order or tranquillity. Consequently, basing our appeal upon Articles 49, 50, and 56 of the Federal Constitution, and Articles 11 and 13 of the Neuchâtel Cantonal Constitution, we respectfully beg you, gentlemen, to be so good as to annul the decree which you published on the 14th of this month, and to give us freedom of meeting.

(Signed)

“‘EDWARD BECQUET.

“‘ANNA FURRER.

“‘KATE PATRICK.

“‘April 20th.’

“We cannot conceal our astonishment, Gentlemen, at the sight of two foreigners and a young lady of Lausanne taking upon themselves to give us a lesson in Constitutional law! It is true, however, that the same persons take upon themselves to preach lessons of Christianity to our pastors. The population of Neuchâtel continued to be agitated by the persistent presence of the Salvation Army. The Sunday morning meetings began again to be disturbed, and on the 4th May the popular meeting held on the Place du Port appointed an Active Committee which drew up the petition (against the Salvationists), which is now before us signed by 9,944 persons. The Council of State, after having examined again the publications relating to the Salvation Army, became more and more convinced of the special character of that association, which undoubtedly has the character of a religious corporation. Consequently, on the 22nd of May, the Council of State issued the following decree:—

“‘Having received a request from the officers of the Salvation Army residing at Neuchâtel, demanding of the Council of State to repeal its decree of the 14th April forbidding the meetings of the Army in the evening, and on Sunday, and to authorise again freedom of meetings as often and whenever the Army may please to hold them.

“‘Seeing that in accordance with the result of the inquiry made by the Department of Public Worship, the Council of State deems that the Salvation Army has the character of a religious order or corporation, being constituted upon a military basis, and placed under the authority, unlimited and uncontrolled, of a General, to whom all the officers of the Army owe absolute obedience; that such an institution cannot be compared to any simple association freely pursuing a religious end, and not interfering with the rights of the citizens or of society, but must be looked upon as a corporation such as is contemplated by Article 72 of the Cantonal Constitution, and the establishment of which cannot take place in the Canton without the authorisation of the Grand Council—

“‘Seeing, moreover, that a petition is being signed in the Canton demanding of the Grand Council to take such measures as are necessary against the Salvation Army,

“‘The Council decrees:

“‘1. That it cannot grant to M. Becquet and his companions calling themselves officers in the Salvation Army the permission which they demand in their letter of the 20th April;

“‘2. That the Council forbids provisionally for as long time as the officers of the Salvation Army shall not have received the authorisation prescribed by Article 72 of the Constitution, all meetings whatsoever and wheresoever of the Army.’

“Since the publication of this decree the Salvation Army seems to have beaten a retreat. Occasionally some timid attempts have been made to hold meetings, but we have undertaken that all such meetings shall be repressed until the Corporation in question has received from the Grand Council the authorisation which is requisite.

“After this historical exposition of the facts, it may seem useful to examine into the causes why the population of Neuchâtel, generally indifferent spectators of all such things, have been so much agitated with regard to the Salvation Army’s meetings. If this agitation had not existed, and if the authors of the disturbances in the streets had not felt themselves supported by the inward convictions of the great majority of the population, it is very clear that the public peace would not have been troubled as it has been. We shall endeavour to explain the matter. For several years past we have seen passing through our Canton missionaries of every kind and of both sexes, who, with the object of rekindling religious zeal, have organised meetings under different names. Our population, frequently annoyed by the intrusions of these modern apostles, and irritated at seeing themselves treated by them as if they were pagans, have not until now, however, disturbed their assemblies. Nevertheless complaints have been frequently heard on the part of those who found it disagreeable to see their wives and daughters leaving the domestic hearth in order to go to these meetings. Others were indignant, and justly so, on finding that secrets which ought to have remained restricted to the family circle were divulged in confessions publicly organised by the missionaries in question. Seeing that these so-called religious meetings were only temporarily maintained, those who suffered on account of them exercised patience; but now that the Salvation Army has published its intention to establish itself at Neuchâtel in a permanent manner, and to hold three meetings a day, and to introduce, so to speak, an element of permanent trouble among our families, our population have revolted. Three facts principally tended to exasperate the public: The frequency of the meetings; the manner of conducting them; and the collections of money. When a father of a family sees his wife or daughter leaving his house at half-past six in the morning, only to return at eight or nine o’clock, and then going out to a prayer-meeting at three or four o’clock in the afternoon, and perhaps also to a religious meeting in the evening, he may well ask himself, ‘What will become of the housekeeping, and what will the children do in the absence of their mother?’ Also there are women to whom it is necessary to earn money for the support of their families, and who must consequently sacrifice their work to join the mystic worship of the Army. It is not to be wondered at that the indignation felt at these things should overflow, and that anger should be kindled against those who thus draw away mothers of families from their domestic duties. Religious fanaticism evidently cannot become the ideal of modern society, and if we see violent manifestations against the attempt to introduce it into our midst we must not be astonished. We are accustomed to simple and dignified religious ceremonies, and our inward sentiment is wounded when we see sacred things lightly treated. We are not accustomed to see the state of souls and consciences paraded outwardly. A certain instinctive modesty tells us that the religious man must always remain modest and reserved. We would stamp under our feet these habits and sentiments of the Salvation Army. Their worship seems to us a vulgar parade. They think it necessary to cultivate a noisy style of music, to sing mystical hymns adapted to vulgar tunes, and incessant repetitions of the same cries and the same phrases. Their object is to produce excitement, madness, religious hallucination. They see that, rendered by their influence more or less unconscious of what they are doing, those who assist at their meetings will more readily give themselves up to pantomime and acting, will jump on the platform and confess their sins and the sins of their neighbours. Is it strange that those who desire to increase respect for religion, and not make it an object of derision should protest? and those who do not wish that such practices should lead to hysteria and madness, can they be said to be in the wrong?... And when we hear it asserted that that is the true Christian worship, that outside of these practices there is no serious religion, and when one sees people who pass for coryphites of the purest churches attending and supporting these practices of the Salutists, may there not be a temptation in the minds of many to take exception to Christianity itself, and to turn every kind of worship into ridicule? Truly it is an astonishing thing to have seen the pastors of our different churches taking under their protection a sect which despises them.

“But the essential object of the Salvation Army is to collect money. Its publications turn continually on this point. The sale of pamphlets and journals in order to realise money, repeated collections, reiterated appeals for funds, &c., make it clear enough that the good things of this world have a great attraction for them. A book of hymns edited by Miss Booth, the Maréchale, concludes thus:—‘Funds are always needed.’ The report of the Salvationists war in 1882, published by their General-in-Chief, terminates with a subscription form in favour of the above-mentioned leader. Readers are invited to fill it up.... On account of these incessant appeals for money, the Salvation Army realises large receipts. The effect produced on its friends is so powerful that they will go through all kinds of hardships to increase the collections. As the Salvation Army has a good end in view, they say the money originally destined for the support of the family may as well go to enrich the Army. The end, which is the sanctification of souls, will sanctify the means—that is to say, domestic robbery. Hence furious discussions, quarrels, and troubles brought into the midst of the family.

“It is worthy of remark, that the Salvation Army began its operations in Neuchâtel on a ground which was well prepared. We have already said that for many years past, meetings of different kinds had led the way. Moreover, for a long time certain pastors of our churches have emulated each other in their zeal in organising outside of the regular forms of worship, meetings of every kind. They seem to have imagined that religion consisted essentially in going constantly to these extraordinary services, and those who took part in them did not hesitate to speak of themselves as the only true Christians. ‘Oh, he is a good man, he goes to the prayer meetings,’ we have frequently heard it said. Following the natural bent of the human mind, these Christians have been superceded by others professing to be still more Christian than themselves, who brought these meetings to perfection, adding to them more fervent prayer with the addition of groans and tears. Others followed with new hymns of a somewhat mystical nature, then a form of confession made its appearance, at first timid, but afterwards growing in publicity. Professions of faith were demanded; and last of all the Salvation Army arrived, outstripping all these in its practices, so much so that even some of the ‘mystics’ thought they went too far. No doubt the Salvation Army will in its time find another sect which will profess to be still more Christian than itself. We can only hope that the example the Salvation Army has given, will cause those persons who carry religion to extremes to pause and reflect. It is to be hoped that they will see that nothing can be more hurtful to the cause which they defend than to choose in place of a simple and dignified public worship which is open to all, and at which everyone may find himself at his ease, conventicles frequented by persons believing themselves more religious than their neighbours, and who unfortunately are very far from proving by their conduct that their religion has moralised them. The Salvation Army is the last drop in the already over full cup of popular indignation swelling day by day against those who by their religious exaggerations bring trouble into families. Though we may have to regret the unfortunate manifestations of this indignation, we must remember that those whom we blame are persons not accustomed to moderate their feelings. True indignation ought never to excuse violence, and it is a pity that certain of our citizens have not more self-control. A dignified and calm protest would have brought about more quietly the result we all desire.

“It now remains for us to justify the last measure we have taken in regard to this question.... We are at liberty to examine how far the presence of this Salvation Army as a religious corporation is compatible with public order and good behaviour. In what sense do we call the Salvation Army a religious corporation? The special character of a corporation is that those who are adherents of it are placed under the discipline of, and are dependent entirely on the authority of a chief, while devoting their activity to the service of this corporation. We observe also that all religious corporations occupy themselves in amassing capital.”

(The report goes on to argue further that the Salvation Army must be regarded as a corporation.)

“All that we have stated appears sufficient to prove that the Salvation Army certainly constitutes a corporation, and we are of opinion, gentlemen, that you will approve of our having made reference to the necessity of your authorisation before permitting the continuation of meetings which we should not have forbidden if it had been the case of an ordinary sect. If this corporation demands your authorisation, we beg leave to pronounce our opinion on that head; it will be our duty to decide whether the existence of this corporation in our Canton is compatible with public order, and whether anything in its proceedings and manner of worship is an offence against decency and good behaviour....

“Consequently, we propose to you, gentlemen, the adoption of the following decree:”—

(The decree has been cited before, and ends thus):—

“The Grand Council approve of the action of the Council of State in having forbidden the meetings of the Salvation Army until the authorisation for establishing itself in the Canton has been granted, and charges the said Council to take care that this decree is observed by all whom it may concern.

(Signed),

“COMTESSE, President,

“G. GULLAUME, Secretary.

“13th June.”

This decree was adopted and published throughout the Canton.

One of my objects in this narrative being to present a true picture of the state of feeling on each side concerning the events which occurred in Switzerland in relation to the question before us, I think it well to give to the reader, as much as possible, the documents and written testimonies referring to them, rather than to tell the story throughout in my own words. These testimonies and documents speak for themselves with no uncertain sound.

Here follows one of the petitions upon which the Grand Council based the judgment and decree of June 20th, on the report presented to it by the Council of State:—

“MM. President and Gentlemen,—

“At the beginning of this year a corporation called the Salvation Army entered our Canton professedly in order to preach the Christian religion. This corporation, organised in England, has produced amongst us a great perturbation, public order has been troubled at Neuchâtel, families are divided, and the peace of the country is compromised. The Salvationists as they are called make public collections of money, the employment of which it is impossible for us to control; and certain facts lead us to believe that our fellow-citizens have been more or less the victims of their speculations. Our population is excited, our youth above all are subjected to an evil influence, religion is profaned, and the great majority of the people are agreed in testifying that the manœuvres of the Salvation Army are a cause of demoralisation and of the negation of all the principles which lie at the root of our Neuchâtel constitution. Paternal authority is undermined, social ties are relaxed, the indigent classes instead of being succoured, suffer from this state of things; and in spite of all this, regardless of the maintenance of public peace, this corporation continues its agitation. Several citizens of Neuchâtel have taken the initiative of this petition, hoping that the whole Canton will join in it. The undersigned address themselves to the Grand Council with full confidence, entreating it to take into consideration the ways and means necessary for restoring order, by causing these speculators to cease their operations. In one word they pray that the practices of the Salvation Army may be put a stop to as quickly as possible. While bearing in mind Article 13 of our Constitution, we take the liberty, gentlemen, to draw your attention especially towards Article 72 of the same Constitution, which treats of the formalities to be observed by religious corporations.”

Here follow 2,278 signatures.

It should be observed that a large number of these signatures were collected in the country villages of the Canton, and are those of persons who had probably never seen or heard the Salvation Army, and who readily adopted the views concerning it expressed by the zealous collectors of the names. How many of these persons really regarded as a grievous thing the “profanation of religion” referred to in the petition, it would be difficult to estimate; certainly it could not be said of the drinking, vicious, and irreligious portion of the people that any feeling of respect for religion prompted their protest against the Salvation Army.

The following counter-petition was presented by citizens of Neuchâtel, which only received sixty-three signatures, some of those being, however, names of weight:

“M. President and Gentlemen,—

“The undersigned citizens of Neuchâtel, or Swiss living at Neuchâtel, having learned that a petition is in course of being signed in our city praying the Grand Council to take measures in respect of the Salvation Army in order to forbid their meetings, feel it to be their duty to claim, on the other hand, from the Grand Council, that it shall respect the right of meeting and the law of the constitution by which it is conferred.

“The undersigned are strangers to the Salvation Army, and reserve their judgment of it from a religious point of view, but they claim for its adherents, as they would claim for others and for themselves, the right of meeting, and of continuing their religious worship according to their own views; for this is a Constitutional right which cannot justly be either restricted or violated, even as the Council of State itself acknowledged in its proclamation of the 30th January.

“Therefore the undersigned are persuaded that the Grand Council, acting now upon the same principles, will exercise in this particular case, as in every other, its high authority in order to maintain them, and in this persuasion we beg you to receive the expression of our profound respect.”

The third petition addressed to the Grand Council was from 59 pastors of the Canton of Neuchâtel, who, while expressing disapproval of the methods and action of the Salvation Army, besought for them, as for all, freedom of meeting and of worship, pleading on behalf of complete liberty of conscience.

A curious view of the duties of the Police in those troubled days was expressed in M. Cornaz’s organ, Le Reveil, of May 14th, as follows:—

“Some of our journals are raising a hue and cry about the inactivity of the police. It seems to us that they have a false notion of the duties of the police in a free country. The public force has no business to interfere for the protection of persons who exercise their functions in the etat major of the Salvationists. It has no business to be accompanying the Maréchale wherever she pleases to walk, following her at a distance as though she were a Princess of the blood royal. It is not the business of the police to stand in the evening before the houses where the Salvation Army are pleased to hold their private meetings, which, however, strongly resemble public meetings, and at which are found persons who had no previous knowledge of each other. If these meetings are private, those who convene them have no more right to the protection of the police than a person who asks a few friends to take tea.[27] If, on the contrary, these meetings may truly be called public meetings, owing to the number of those attending them, they are illegal, and a violation of the formal decree of the Council of State. The police have no right to take any steps for the protection of an illegal thing. The Salvation Army is in our Canton a permanent occasion of scandal and disorder. Excepting a few honest persons like Colonel de Perrot, the greater number of its adepts are very worldly people who simply wish to give themselves the airs of religious folk. They think they have found a means, for want of any other, of distinguishing themselves from the vulgar mob. They have a jargon, a fashion of their own; they are a mixture of vanity and false humility, of mimicry and false education. For a long time past we have been disgusted with British importations of this character, which so strongly savour of base speculation that the most improbable thing that could happen (even in the opinion of the Salvationists themselves) is that they should voluntarily and spontaneously give up collecting money, amassing large sums, and living at the expense of the public like any wretched mountebanks who might visit our town. Our people who toil from morning till evening do not quite understand that there is any obligation to show any particular respect to people without education and without talent, who pay themselves out of their pockets for gesticulating for two or three hours a-day, and shouting ‘hallelujahs’ and ‘amens.’ They think that the Maréchale and her female companions would be better employed—and more usefully—knitting stockings or studying a cookery book. Some of our contemporaries have come to the conclusion that it would be well to ask for the establishment of special constables, who would be a kind of body guard for Miss Booth, and sentinels at the Mont Blanc. We doubt if they would find many persons willing to carry out this brilliant idea, and we think that, if carried out, it might only prove the signal for street brawls in which the Salvationist acrobats might come badly off. And after all, what right would these gentlemen have to act as police against their fellow-citizens? and what measures could they take to prevent the formation in turn of a special batallion opposed to them, who would make short work of their usurpation of public police functions? There is no doubt that the Salvation Army in coming here has greatly shaken and shattered the nervous system of our population, who are naturally very impressionable. If it has succeeded in exalting some, however, it has completely exasperated others; and herein it has obtained what it sought. ‘Those who sow the wind, must reap the tempest.’”

The Evangeliste referred to the same events in the following remarks:—

“The town of Neuchâtel continues to be greatly agitated on the question of the Salvation Army. The meetings which the English Evangelists held on Sunday, 6th May, at the Hotel Mont Blanc, were violently assailed, and people going out from these were grossly insulted and maltreated. The Federal Colonel, M. de Perrot, instructor of artillery, who was present in uniform, kept order to the utmost of his power in the hall. He was himself assaulted and abused by the rioters,—‘indignant,’ as certain of the journals say, ‘at seeing an officer in active service, fulfilling the functions of a policeman amidst a troop of mountebanks, who have made such a ridiculous noise in the world.’ The same day Colonel de Perrot wrote to the Gazette of Lausanne a letter, in which he complains of the attitude of the religious journals, and declares that the Salvationists are Christians such as have never yet been seen, who are not content with fine words and phrases, but who practice the Gospel in the manner of the Christians of the Primitive Church.”

Colonel de Perrot, a member of one of the ancient families of Switzerland, is instructor in musketry practice of the Swiss troops. The discipline and influence he exercises in that capacity cannot be too highly commended. In conversation with him one is reminded of our historical portraits of some of Cromwell’s Ironsides. A man of fervent and practical piety, great simplicity of character, and with a short brusque mode of expressing himself, even in religious exercises, he appears a thorough type of the old-fashioned Christian soldier.

The following is the letter of Colonel de Perrot alluded to; addressed to the Gazette de Lausanne.

“I ask for a small space to protest publicly against the infamous treatment and calumnies to which the members of the Salvation Army are exposed at Neuchâtel. I know these people personally; I have both seen and heard them in public. I have had the honour and privilege to receive them at my table, and even to offer to one of them hospitality for a short time. I have read all the polemical arguments of Madame de Gasparin, &c., all the attacks of the so-called religious journals which, with an exception here and there, have scattered these calumnies broadcast, while never yet have they shown the common fairness of openly retracting the infamies they have published. “Every day one hears these clever writers and pious orators attack the Salvation Army in public. But has anyone ever heard or seen them speak or take up the pen to claim the protection of the laws in favour of these persecuted brothers and sisters? No! these good people in clerical garb, and these well-known writers busy themselves only, like many others, in the ignoble work of throwing stones at two men and two women! They say it is a foreign importation, and must be expelled! It is too late! The truth has burst upon us! We have seen these simple, modest, fearless, loving Christians at work. If they are expelled, there will be hundreds of persons who must be expelled with them.

“The Salvation Army is exposed at Neuchâtel to the insults, the hatred, the contempt, of a certain number of blackguards who, feeling themselves supported by an approving silence on the part of their betters, take the liberty, and are permitted in broad daylight, to attack and burst in the doors of the Hotel Mont Blanc—to throw mud and offal at the officers, and even to strike women. How is it that these people enjoy full liberty for this, whilst their victims are deprived of the protection of the laws? Is it right that a troop of boys, or a few savages, should make the laws and form the police of the town? If the authorities are powerless now to enforce respect for the law in favour of the Salvation Army, they will in like manner plead that they are powerless to protect us in our houses from being assaulted and broken into one of these days. If the police were only to claim the assistance of fifty citizens, we should soon see whether, in twenty-four hours, all these disturbances could not be brought to an end. I declare openly, and after all that I have read and heard against the Salvation Army as it appears at Neuchâtel, that there exists in my mind only one thought ... and it is this: Here are Christians such as I have never yet known, who are not content with words and phrases, but who practice the gospel as in the times of the primitive Church, and this is the reason why I love them.

(Signed)      “DE PERROT, Colonel.”

Among the various testimonies cited, the following, emanating from a public-house organ, may be interesting:—

“These new visitors to our town have from the first aroused the most complete and unmistakeable antipathy of our citizens. How could it be otherwise? for their conceit, self-sufficiency, &c., are not at all in harmony with our simple and laborious life? These enlightened preachers do not seem to make a sufficiently careful choice of their expressions; for example, they say, ‘the devil is among the public-house keepers, the devil is in the whiskey, the devil in the wine, &c.’ You can very well understand that preaching like this is not at all to our taste. Do they wish us to be plagued with a new Phylloxera? They come to tell us that our vineyards are our enemies, that the vines must be pulled up! Surely it is already quite enough to have two Protestant churches in our midst which hold exactly the same dogmas. It has already been rather more than we could bear to have for several years past acrimonious conflicts going on upon grounds of faith and religious practice. These modern warriors might have done better to leave us at peace. They would, in doing so, have better followed the advice of Christ, who said: ‘Peace on earth and goodwill toward men.’ But now we see what is the end of the work of these marplots, these meddlers with our enjoyments, in regard to our city which was so quiet before these new preachers came to make a revolution among us. Now what is the remedy? When a troop of comic actors, mountebanks, or vagabonds of any kind come to a town, and trouble the public peace, the authorities—that is to say, the Prefect of Police—takes care that they are immediately sent away. This is what we demand in the interest of our good and honest population. Let these comedians—(with all due regard to their high profession)—be thanked for the services they have rendered us, and requested to return to us that which they have taken from us—peace.”

Previously to the publication of the decree of the 20th June, forbidding all meetings of the Salvation Army, and, subsequently to a decree of the 22nd May, closing the meetings held on the week days in the evening, M. Convert, being convinced of the illegality of that decree, continued to invite the Salvationists to his house, using his freedom and rights of citizenship as he and his fathers before him had ever done. In consequence of this, the following correspondence took place between the head of the police and M. Convert and others:—

“To Mr. Robert Convert.

“SIR,—I have the honour to inform you that the Council of State has this day ordered me to keep a very strict watch over the carrying out of its decree of the 22nd May last, a copy of which has been supplied to Mr. Becquet, captain of the Salvation Army, and to bring up to the Tribunals all those who shall be found disobeying it. I therefore invite you to abstain henceforward from calling together at your house any members of the Salvation Army, either Swiss or foreign, or to take part in any meeting of this kind, whether in a private house or in public. Trusting that you will take this warning into your serious consideration, I am, Sir, &c.,

(Signed)      “For the Prefect, C. GERSTER.

“June 16.”

To what an extraordinary state of siege freedom had been reduced, at this date, in Neuchâtel, when a citizen, a man of high character and respectability, could be forbidden to take part in a private meeting in a private house!!

The following is M. Convert’s reply:—

“To the Prefect of the District of Neuchâtel.

“SIR,—The undersigned have received the letter which you have done them the honour to address to them of the 16th June, in which letter occurs the following passage:— ‘I invite you to abstain henceforward from calling together at your house any member of the Salvation Army, either Swiss or foreigner, or to take part in any meeting of this kind, whether in a private house or in public.’ They consider that the above invitation is contrary to the declaration of Articles 49, 50, and 56 of the Federal Constitution, as well as of the 11th and 13th of the Cantonal Constitution, and they protest against this restriction imposed upon their Constitutional rights. They take, moreover, the liberty, Sir, of begging you to observe that, according to the terms of your letter every meeting whatsoever which may have a religious, moral, or philanthropic character is rendered impossible, if it is made compulsory to prove that no member of the Salvation Army has taken part in it.

“We have the honour to remain, Sir, &c.,

“CONVERT and NIESTLE.”

Rejoinder to the above:—

“To Mr. Convert,

“SIR,—I have received the protest which you have addressed to me this day in your name, and in that of Mr. Niestle, against the invitation contained in my letter of the 16th. This protest leads me to think that I have not clearly explained myself, or else that you wilfully fail to understand me. That being so, I will endeavour to be more clear. The decree of the Council of State of the 2nd May, to which I called your attention, does not, as you appear to think, contemplate interference with all meetings whatsoever which have a religious, moral, or philanthropic character, but the meetings of the Salvation Army, or (in order to be still more explicit) such meetings as those which have taken place at the houses of M. Aimé Humbert, M. Coulin, and more recently at your own house, Sir, and which have been occasions of tumult and disorder, of which you are cognizant. This decree is perfectly consistent with Article 50 of the Federal Constitution, to which you draw my attention, and which only guarantees the free exercise of public worship within limits compatible with public order. Now it is incontestible that public order has been greatly disturbed on these occasions, and that the superior authority has the right, as the Grand Council lately stated, to take measures to prevent the renewal of such scandals, and to secure that the tranquillity of the town be not imperilled without any reason for the same, by a limited number of citizens, however honourable they may be, who only look at one side of the question, braving public sentiment, and persisting in claiming rights which are disputed by the majority of the population. There are circumstances, and this is one, in which men should know how to give way, and to wait patiently rather than to run counter to public opinion, or to wait till time has done its work and modified that public opinion if at present it is erroneous. Be so good as to communicate this letter to Mr. Niestle.

“I am, &c.,

“CORNAZ.”

“22nd June.”

The three petitions before alluded to, and the report of the Council of State, of which extracts have been already given, having been considered by the Grand Council, the public discussion of the same took place in the Council Room of Neuchâtel. Strangers are admitted to those debates. Several ladies attended on this occasion. The debate lasted many hours.

The following is an abridged report of portions of that debate, which produced at the time such a melancholy impression on many of our minds and stirred up our forebodings for the future.

It took place on the 15th June; M. Cornaz, Director of the Department of Justice and Police at Neuchâtel, taking up the question in opposition to M. Jacottet, “according to his custom when answering that Deputy, began with a series of personal attacks.” He acknowledged that the question before the Council was a very grave one. That was the first time it had been submitted to the Council in a practical form. Nevertheless he besought the Grand Council to cut it short at once; for in his opinion, as Director of Police, it was absolutely necessary that he should know what he was expected to do. “What must I do (he asked) pending the decision? For example, suppose the Salutists continue their meetings and provoke new disturbances?” The Canton of Neuchâtel, was not, he declared, a police-governed State. It had a gendarmerie of ninety men, eight of whom were stationed at Neuchâtel. Those eight were manifestly powerless to protect the Salvation Army. The chief of the Council of State even, had declared that order could not be maintained without resort to force. Did the Council wish that these gendarmes should use their swords and revolvers against the people? Did they propose to form a troop of soldiers to protect the Salvation Army? Let M. Jacottet answer. M. Jacottet had declared that they had to do not only with foreigners but with Neuchâtel citizens, who were then making use of their constitutional rights by having Salutist’s meetings in their private houses. He (the speaker) asked how far those people of Neuchâtel, who knew their country, and were perfectly well aware that their conduct was a braving of public opinion, deserved sympathy? He insisted upon an immediate decision of the question.

M. Alphonse Du Pasquier declared that the responsibility of recent events undoubtedly lay at the door of the citizens who invited the Salvation Army to come to Neuchâtel. He had been at some of the meetings at the Hotel Mont Blanc, and observed that the disturbances were at first caused by eight or ten children or young men. The other persons assembled were listening quietly. It would only have been necessary to make an appeal to the quiet part of the auditory in order to give effect to the action of the gendarmes. He regretted for the honour of the Canton that the police had shown itself so powerless to quell the disturbances. If it had taken up the matter at the beginning it would have found no difficulty in fulfilling its duties. He could scarcely believe the sight before him. The Council of State sitting to forbid private meetings! If the Neuchâtel citizens then had no longer any right to invite to their houses whom they pleased, and if gendarmes were sent to interrupt private meetings, what became of the inviolability of domicile, guaranteed by the Constitution? The Council regarded the Salvation Army as a corporation because its members obeyed a chief. According to that theory the whole Roman Catholic Church would be entitled a corporation, seeing that all its members were obedient to a chief also. Among us we have no official definition of a religious corporation, and the question has never been raised practically. M. Du Pasquier considered the question ought to be examined by a Legislative Commission. It seemed to him that there were times when Republican magistrates, in spite of the unpopularity which they might risk in doing so, ought boldly to do their duty in defence of the Constitution, whatever might be the consequences.

M. Comtesse, President of the Grand Council, made merry over the question, regretting that the eccentricities of the Salvation Army had not been treated by the people of Neuchâtel as a simple religious epidemic, after the passage of which it would be necessary to disinfect the town. Unfortunately, the matter was too grave for that, and the disturbances had been so serious that the police had been powerless to repress them. A good deal had been said about the advisability of having special constables[28]—a voluntary police—but such special constables would be impossible at Neuchâtel. Their presence would inevitably have given rise to conflicts and rows, and perhaps even to bloodshed. The very sight of such constables would have created disturbances. The Government had been obliged to take account of the facts, and it was impossible to remain indifferent to them. The inquiry which they had instituted concerning the Salvation Army, had brought out the fact that it is a religious corporation, and even styled itself a corporation. Its primary motive, he said, was to make money—to amass a great fortune; it rested on the principle of absolute obedience to a chief, no discussion or voting being allowed. If it was not a corporation, what was a corporation? Hence the Council of State was forced to impose upon it the conditions of Article 72 of the Constitution, and to forbid its meetings. He assured M. Du Pasquier that he had no idea that the Council of State would send gendarmes to violate the houses of private persons: but if the police should hear that meetings were held in spite of the prohibition of the authorities, it would report to the magistrates, and the delinquents would be prosecuted.

M. Jacottet, in reply to the question of M. Cornaz, “What was to be done in the meanwhile?” said the Council of State would no doubt cause its decree of prohibition to be respected as soon as it was pronounced. But in the meanwhile, was it not necessary to defend the right of meeting and the right of association?

M. Cornaz: By no means.

M. Jacottet (with a shrug of the shoulders): Have we come to that? Does the Council of State, he asked, declare itself powerless in the presence of these disturbances, and pretend to have no means of protecting private houses, religious liberty, personal liberty, and the right of public meeting against such attacks as occurred the other evening? In one word, has the Council of State professed itself too weak to uphold the Constitution?—for it was the Constitution which was imperilled, not the Salvation Army. The police had been very weak, no doubt, simply because the police had not been backed up; but if it were necessary, the Militia might be called up, and they could not be better employed, or in a nobler cause than in defending the liberty of the citizens. He was as much a friend of the people as M. Cornaz, but he would never sacrifice his convictions to the desire of popularity.

M. H. Morel spoke strongly of the restrictions to religious liberty in the Article of the Constitution, in which it is stated that the liberty of worship could only be claimed if the worship was carried on in a manner not contrary to “public order and good behaviour.” He maintained that the Salvation Army had disturbed public order. M. Jacottet had spoken of calling out the troops. He (the speaker), was shocked to hear such words. Might not this lead even to civil war? Moreover, where would they find soldiers willing to defend the Salvation Army?

M. Cornaz accused M. Jacottet of being a doctrinaire, and wishing to kindle a civil war. Replying to M. Du Pasquier, he said special constables were one of those importations from Great Britain which they in Switzerland did not want to have anything to do with. The Salvation Army, the British and Continental Federation, and a Special Constabulary! The people of Neuchâtel wished nothing better than that they should all be packed off again across the English Channel, whence they came!

M. Jacottet said he was accused of wishing to kindle civil war, when he said the first duty of the State was to guarantee the rights of citizens, and if necessary even to employ public force. He maintained that opinion. M. Cornaz had called him a doctrinaire; so he was, and he hoped to remain so. Everyone needed a doctrine—that is to say, a principle—and he who was without one was like a mariner without a compass.

M. Jeanrenaud maintained in the name of the people, to whom he was attached, that he had no sympathy with the handful of cowards who caused the disturbances in the streets. There would have been no need of gendarmes to keep order if the Council of State had accepted the offer made by a certain number of citizens belonging to all classes and to different political and religious parties to form themselves into a band of special constables. Order would then have been promptly re-established. In support of the motion of M. Jacottet, he proposed that all the petitions relative to the Salvation Army should be placed on the same footing, and that the Council should not pass to the Orders of the Day upon the two latter only.

The debate being closed, the voting began.

A motion of M. Jacottet was rejected by 50 votes against 15.

M. Jeanrenaud’s motion was rejected by 43 votes against 14.

An amendment proposed by M. Morel was adopted.

The decree of the Grand Council, forbidding the meetings of the Salvation Army, was then carried by 57 votes against 14.

A Swiss friend, who was present at this debate, wrote to England as follows:—

“The debates were most interesting, but very, very sad; for only two or three speakers dealt with the question from the point of view of principle. Liberty and justice were represented in this Council by a minority of 14 against 57, and a revolting resolution was passed, proclaiming that all religious exercises connected with this movement should be stopped, whether conducted by English or Swiss people, in private houses or anywhere else. All persons who have taken part in such meetings received a circular the next day from the Prefect of Police, forbidding them not only to hold any such meetings again, but never again even to attend any such meetings in any place whatsoever.”

A correspondent of the Christian wrote:—

“The tremendous significance of such an attack on freedom and personal rights must surely be evident to every man and woman who understands the merest elements of justice. This precedent will serve as a justification for the tyrannical suppression of any movement in future which may not happen to please the dominant party of the day in Switzerland—a party hostile to religion, and leaning towards a strongly centralized and despotic form of Government.”

The final decree of the Council of State forbidding all Salvationist meetings was published, as has been said, on the 20th of June. M. Cornaz, the President of the Department of Justice and Police, gave thanks for this event in his own fashion in his organ, the Reveil, and in the following words:—

“It is finished! Thank God! For some years past from time to time the good city of Neuchâtel has been visited by those talkers and workers of miracles, who appeal to the nervous sensibilities of certain people, and to those depths of human folly, to which, a philosopher has said, there are no limits. We had the Missionary Havich, then Donato; and now we have the Salvation Army. There is a family likeness amongst all these invasions. The same infamous quackery on the one side, the same inexhaustible credulity on the other. It makes one doubt whether a portion of the citizens retain any remnants of good sense. Every one who attends these representations is doubtless placed in a dilemma—they must either figure as dupes or as accomplices. It does not surprise us to see the persons who are possessed of a religious monomania going in for the eccentric practices of this new sect. They are all marching along the highway to Prefargier. The lunatic asylums will have a large number of additional inmates presently. Public opinion has been grieved, on the other hand, to see a man whose name is connected in the most honourable manner possible with the establishment of our Republic, entering into the debates relative to the Salvation Army. An experienced patriot, and a just and high-minded magistrate as he was in the most difficult and agitated times in our history, the Canton of Neuchâtel owes him a great debt. We speak of M. Aimé Humbert. But has not his judgment been warped by the British and Continental Federation (for the Abolition of Regulated Vice) for whose presence amongst us there is not the shadow of an excuse? Their advent here was already too much, and the more recent advent of the Salvation Army is the consummation.”

After the Grand Council’s decree of the 20th June, M. Convert continued, as before, to maintain his rights as a Swiss citizen, and to open his house to whom he pleased. Others did the same. The more violent portion of the population, under the influence of their sympathising leaders in authority, seeing that even this measure did not prevent the Salutistes from being received by Neuchâtel citizens, and from worshipping God after their own manner, formed themselves into a sort of police, and, stationing themselves every night at the corners of all the principal streets, they watched for the appearance of Salvationists; as soon as one was perceived, a signal was given by a whistle, the steps of the Salvationist were dogged, and a watch was posted at the door of any house he or she was seen to enter. If other persons were seen to enter also, the alarm was raised, a crowd collected, and speedy notice was given to the police to come to the spot. This self-constituted anti-Salvationist police on one occasion perceived several friends of the Army entering a house. They immediately collected a crowd, which besieged the house, and the Prefect was sent for in all haste. He arrived with two gendarmes. On entering the drawing-room, they found half-a-dozen people quietly chatting together. The Prefect immediately charged them with the offence of holding an illegal Salvation meeting. They replied that they were not members of the Salvation Army, and were only having a simple conversation. But the Prefect, pointing to a bible which lay upon the table, declared that that furnished proof that the meeting was a Salvation meeting, and therefore illegal. The inmates of the house having at last succeeded in satisfying him that their little gathering was not such as to endanger the interests of the State, he left. On going out into the street, he was grossly insulted by the mob, enraged at finding themselves disappointed of their prey.

A similar incident had occurred at la Coudre, a village between Neuchâtel and St. Blaise. A band of roughs attacked a private house in which a few persons, strangers to the Salvation Army, had assembled for reading and prayer. The windows were broken, several of the persons present were assaulted and hurt, and the bible which they had been reading was trampled under foot.

In the month of July, being at Neuchâtel, I attended a meeting (in the Temperance Hall in the Rue du Château), of members of the British and Continental Federation for the Abolition of the State-Regulation of Vice. The weather was intensely hot, and the windows were of necessity kept wide open. The proceedings had been very quietly conducted, and the suspicions therefore of the Salutist-hunters had not been excited. But at the close of the meeting, a venerable pastor, moved, as were many others, by the contemplation of the subject which had been treated—the prevalence of impurity and its sanction, in Switzerland as well as elsewhere, as an organised institution of the State—offered a fervent prayer for the purification of his country, and for the youth of his own and all lands. He raised his voice in the earnestness of his pleading and was heard in the streets. The ringleaders of the opposition to religion and law were skulking in the neighbourhood, according to their wont, watching the movements of those suspected of being about to meet to pray. The voice of prayer is to them the signal to be on the alert, and they rush upon those who are heard as worshipping God outside a church, like bloodhounds upon their prey. On this occasion we caught the sound of their deep-throated growlings under the windows, and I then realized more fully than before the folly of the authorities of that city, in thus permitting the worst passions and prejudices to rule, and freely to run riot among the liberties of the people. Some explanation adroitly given by a young lady from a window above us, concerning the object of the meeting, in the course of which she remarked, “certain of your own pastors are there,” had the effect of allaying the suspicions of these wretched men, and they retired. There were present amongst us “tall Jacques” and several other Swiss Salvationists, converts from a life of sin or carelessness, and now ready to help the work of the Federation, seeing it to be a part of the great world-wide conflict against the powers of darkness. On retiring to my hotel that night I found rest and sleep prevented until the morning by the continued wild cries and coarse songs of drunken men,[29] whose voices, singly or in chorus, echoed through the streets and open spaces of the city as they reeled along or hung about in groups. There was no police to interfere with these, although their ribaldry might strike on the ears of many a pure woman or child, or Christian man on his knees at the midnight hour. But a voice raised in prayer to God is so discordant in the ears of the party which now reigns, that it must be silenced; and if silenced by violence, it may be “regrettable,” but cannot be interfered with by the police.

Happily now for the Salutistes the summer was at hand. Meetings were held in the Canton, in forests, and on the Jura slopes, where no annoyance could be caused to M. Cornaz and his friends the roughs, by their fervent prayers or their glad songs of praise. Probably at the early hours when they met, most of the public functionaries and rioters were still in their beds. Captain Becquet continued his labours for the salvation of souls with his usual indomitable cheerfulness. A little man, of sprightly bearing and character—humorous, playful, courageous as a lion, lythe as a squirrel, he seemed the very man for such times. His constant joy of soul won many to inquire concerning the salvation which had thus set him free from all care, while it seemed to aggravate the hatred of his enemies. He was often attacked and pursued. On one occasion gendarmes surrounded a house in which Becquet was with others at prayer, in order to arrest him. His friends considered, and Becquet agreed, that he could be of more use to the cause for the present if free, than he could be in prison. He ran upstairs, crept out upon the roof of the house, scrambled across several roofs, first taking an amused and furtive look down over the eaves at the gendarmes waiting below for their escaped victim, and then scrambled down without much difficulty to his own dwelling, and was in bed and fast asleep when the police came round to enquire for him. The possibility of so nimble an escape did not occur to them, and he was left unmolested. Miss Patrick wrote at this time:—

“We have marched through difficulty after difficulty in Neuchâtel, and at this moment if our trust were not in God we should be without hope. But we know that at one word from Him all our enemies would be confounded. He does not, perhaps, pronounce this word now, in order to prove us; but we have the conviction that the Lord of Hosts will not permit His work to be destroyed. It would be impossible to give here all the details of what has passed during the last few weeks. Those whom we have sought to rescue from evil have been deceived, prejudiced by our enemies, who have succeeded in making them believe that we seek our own interests, and thus they are furious against us. The troubles occasioned by the last private meeting have manifested this. On Wednesday evening the house of one of our friends was besieged by a band of roughs, who hurled against it a torrent of stones, even tearing up the pavement to furnish missiles. (And this occurs in the nineteenth century, and in a free country so-called.) We attended the sitting of the Grand Council, which reminded us forcibly of the times when the Apostles appeared before the Sanhedrim; there was the same hatred, the same false accusations, the same evident purpose to stamp out these people ‘who exceedingly trouble our city,’ (Acts xvi., 20). Our enemies do not hesitate to say boldly that we bring divisions into families, that our end is to amass a great fortune, &c., &c., &c. We put all that into the hands of our God, who searches all hearts, and before whom these men will have to appear face to face with us. I ask myself if our persecutors can think as calmly of that moment as we do. One thing which has pained us is to see how little they understand the Gospel, how little they know Him who is the friend of publicans and sinners. They show this in accusing us of trailing religion in the mud, of exhibiting upon our platforms jail birds and drunkards, who say they are saved. The result of this is not only that the English are forbidden to hold their meetings, but that a Swiss in his own country and in his own Canton must not pray and sing with whom he likes.

“God keep our soldiers in all these storms! We believe they will come through the fight as gold proved by fire—more independent of man, more dependent upon God—sanctified soldiers, filled with the Holy Ghost. Pray for us, and bless God for all that He has done, and all that He will do at Neuchâtel.

“Yours, fighting for Jesus,

K. H. PATRICK.”

Another writes:—

“Our friends who used to receive us have been notified by the Prefect that they must cease to receive the Salutistes. X. (a man high in the country ) says that law is set aside just now; the roughs are masters; what they ask they must have. Our brave soldiers are like fishes out of water—they cannot assemble anywhere to pray; they are spied upon and hunted like brigands. I tremble for Neuchâtel. They have been unwise not to accept the Saviour. What folly to reject their best friend! If they only knew how good He is! We will continue to put our trust in Him.”

From the same officer:—

“The soldiers meet in groups of half-a-dozen in their own houses, and must take great care not to be spied. This time the authorities show themselves in their true colours; hatred of the Gospel, and of Jesus the Crucified. There in two words is the whole of the cause of the persecution which rages at this moment. If there were no converts they would have left us perfectly quiet. But the Prince of this world is roused when he sees his kingdom attacked. It is not over—he still roars, and he will roar again; for the ranks of Christ are preparing for a lutte acharnée against the principalities and powers and the evil spirits which are in the air. Our God and His Christ shall have the victory. We are persuaded that neither persecution nor affliction, nor prison nor sword, nor Councils of State, can separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

I conclude this portion of my narrative with the following beautiful testimony from a Neuchâtel convert:—

“I render thanks to God for what He has done for me. At the age of thirteen I was apprenticed. I remained four and a-half years with my master, during which time I went through my religious instruction. What a sad time was that! I am ashamed when I think of it. Religion was for me a mere show by which I obtained a reputation. My life in the world was a deception. I was honest in the world’s eyes, but God alone knows what was in my heart. My body a temple of the Holy Spirit! No, it was the temple of a LEGION OF DUMB DEVILS. I was restrained in my outward life. I went to church; I went there voluntarily, and was indeed a pillar of it. The Christian Union also counted on me as one of its most assiduous and Christian members. All that did not hinder me from being the slave of my earthly desires and lusts. What a sad life! I wished to be saved by faith, but I kept my pleasures. I was saved in hope, but not in reality—not from sin. When the Salvation Army arrived in Geneva they spoke of it in Neuchâtel, both good and evil. It was at a moment when I was most discouraged, and most miserable spiritually; it was also a moment when my sins weighed most heavily on me, and I thirsted for salvation. At last the blessed Army came to Neuchâtel. At first sight I thought it was eccentric. But when I heard its members speak with such force of persuasion, and such love, and above all such faith in the efficacy of the blood of Jesus to purify, to save, to deliver, to vivify, I was irresistably impelled to accept this salvation, this complete deliverance from sin. I resisted for three days—pride kept me back. It was on the 24th January, 1883 (happy day), when Jesus Christ saved me from my sins, and cleansed me for His service.

“Now, my only wish is to do the will of my Heavenly Father, that He may be glorified in me.

“HENRI ——

“Neuchâtel, June, 1883.”

CHAPTER VI.

Meanwhile, the work began to take root in other parts of Switzerland. Several of the Salutistes, crossing the Lake of Neuchâtel to the Canton of Fribourg, were there received without hostile manifestations by the Roman Catholic populations of the neighbouring villages. In one Sunday’s evangelistic excursion they passed through six or seven villages, and in some of these the poor people met them with gladness. In one, the pastor came out of his house and invited them into his garden to take some refreshment. He knew, he said, that their object was to drive “the demon” out of the hearts of his people; to which truth, the Salutistes responded with a hearty “God bless the pastor.” A journal of this Canton (a Roman Catholic Canton) published, a week later, an earnest invitation to the Salutistes to come among them.

Several indignant protests had been made in the press of Zurich against the action of the authorities of Geneva and Neuchâtel. The following was written from a friend of the cause in Zurich:—

“For some time I have been impelled to tell you that I also belong to these soldiers, who have decided to fight valiantly against sin and Satan, and to live and die for Jesus. Yes, praise God, I also belong to this flock; and, even if I lose all, NOTHING shall separate me from Him. My heart breaks—my eyes fill with tears when I see my brothers and sisters suffer for Christ. Yet they are happy, and they never open their mouths to complain.”

Another wrote:—

“Having learned that a meeting of the Salvation Army was to take place at Buchillon, I engaged with a number of blackguards to make a row. When I got inside the hall I asked for and obtained permission to speak for a short time. I was, however, stopped in my discourse, not by any physical force; but my mouth was closed, and I could not speak another word. I was obliged to retire without having been able to carry out my intention. The next day I was completely upset. I saw and felt that it was God who had prevented me from fulfilling that wicked intention. I prayed all day while at my work, and I had no rest until I gave my heart entirely to the Saviour who had been proclaimed at that meeting. Now I desire to be thoroughly consecrated. Formerly I was the terror of the country. I led a life which even the world condemned. But now my desire is that all men, whatever they may be, should possess this salvation, and give themselves to the Saviour while there is time.

“F. —.”

John Wyssa, the Brother of Charles Wyssa, who had been brought to Christ through that brother’s influence and example, accepted an engagement to work at the Zurich Exhibition of this year, and might there have been seen by visitors, wearing the S. on his collar while at work. This mark of being one of the despised people brought upon him some ridicule and annoyance, yet it helped him also in maintaining the high standard of conduct expected from a Salutiste and any lapse from which would be quickly observed by watchful and critical eyes.

A cheering sign for the future of Switzerland may be found in the fact of certain Resolutions which were passed this summer at the annual fête of Swiss students, held at Zofingue. During a six hours’ conference on one day, the questions of liberty of worship and the right of meeting were discussed in relation to the Salvation Army. Two theses on the subject were read, one in German and the other in French. The former strongly combated the objects and methods of the Salvation Army, and approved of the measures recently taken by the Cantonal governments against it. The latter, on the contrary, claimed liberty for all, spoke in reproachful terms of the Councils of State of Geneva, Neuchâtel and Vaud, accusing them of having violated the Constitution in order to win popularity with a certain class of people who were fanatically opposed to the Salvationists. In the discussion and voting which followed, the latter view obtained an immense majority; two speakers alone were found to defend the opposite opinion. These students represent the future fathers, magistrates, &c., of the country, and it would seem that there is more to hope from them than from some of the older generation.

The persecution in Rolle had the result of spreading the work to eight villages in the Canton de Vaud, and the converts of Rolle itself became some of the firmest adherents of the Salvation Army, labouring continually for the salvation of their friends and neighbours.

In Geneva, the persecution had somewhat abated. Miss Patrick wrote thus of a visit paid to Geneva during the summer:—

“This is a change after Neuchâtel—no scheming and planning to escape roughs, no stones, ink, wood, water, curses, &c. We miss them all, and here walk through the streets in full uniform, which seems to offend no one, and better than that, we walk into halls and have meetings without being slowly smothered. On Wednesday evening, on our arrival, we found some Neuchâtel friends already here, and also our friend Monsieur Valès from Cannes, so the evening meeting was a fête. Many spoke and prayed, and the Lord was ‘All and all’ to each one of us. On Thursday we met the Serjeants, who visit others, look up sick or weak soldiers, &c., and together we took fresh strength for service, and promised God to run more quickly than ever on His messages. On Friday evening we held a holiness meeting in the blacksmith’s forge.” “The old forge,” situated a little out of Geneva, in the country, is a place of sweet and sacred memories to many who were accustomed to resort thither in order to find the peace and quiet in worship which was denied them in the city.

Adelaide Cox, who has laboured through the persecutions, and up to the present time in Geneva, with a wonderful calmness, courage, and untiring perseverance, wrote as follows of a united meeting of Genevan and Neuchâtel Salutistes held according to previous arrangement in the country just outside the frontier:—

“‘Shahut!’ ‘Shahut!’ were the first words we heard as we entered the station at Geneva some ten days ago, accompanied by a hearty laugh from some thirty porters who seemed highly amused. But a second greeting reaches us from behind a mass of people all trying to get out of the doorway at the same moment. ‘Hallelujah! Amen!’ Ah! that sounds more friendly, and soon we are pushed and hustled along to find ourselves with our dear comrades, and we repeat the loved Army watchword.

“Since then we have heard and seen so much that we scarcely know where to begin, but all we have seen and all we have heard makes our hearts well up with joy and thankfulness to Him who has led us up the hill Difficulty, and will bring us soon into the ‘wealthy place.’ We thank Him for that hill, for as we mount we command such wonderful views, and catch such glimpses of the King in His beauty. Captain Becquet comes with an invitation to meet the Neuchâtel soldiers in the open air on Sunday. All arrangements are made and everything is ready. Morning comes, and with it the call of a comrade, ‘En Avant! It is time to start.’ So down the stairs to the boat, from the boat to the train we hurry, and, after a long journey, we get to our destination. Up with the cock-crowing next day. It feels like Sunday, and Sunday generally means a great blessing, and so it proved this time.

“Something delays the soldiers—but a little patience, and here they are. One, two, three, and now a whole rush of them. What Hallelujahs! what grasping of our hands! in their glee some dear fellows literally jump for joy. This is a welcome indeed! But there is no time to be lost—the forest must be reached, for there we are to spend the day. This means a long walk, for we are told we must not stay in this Canton! Onward then, though we can’t see what harm we should do the trees, the fields, and the few travellers along the road; but it is best to find a quiet nook where we shall not be disturbed. We soon come to it, and sit down in a ring under the shade of some forest trees, whose thick boughs entwine and cover us in, as in a room. This, indeed, is the ‘place prepared,’ where Jesus Christ will meet with us to-day. And he did meet with us. There were there men who had been in prison many times; many who had lived beneath the weight of dark sins were there rejoicing in a full salvation, and all our hearts beat high as we sang of the redeeming grace which had reached even to us. The day passed quickly, and we leave with happier hearts, our strength renewed, our courage greater.”

I think it well to mention here that during her stay at Lausanne in the spring Miss Booth received a visit from the father of her friend and companion, Maud Charlesworth. He came from England with the intention of taking his daughter back with him; but on seeing and hearing of the good work being done in Switzerland, he was satisfied that it was well that she should remain longer. He returned alone, committing his daughter once more to the care of her friend. The following letter was published in several foreign journals, addressed by him to Pastor Theodore Monod, of Paris:—

“Lausanne, March, 1883.

“MY DEAR SIR,—Miss Booth has placed before me a number of Le Christianisme of this week, in which there are statements very painful to her, not so much as affecting herself personally, as in being prejudicial to the work in which she is engaged. These statements are founded on assertions in the London journals, which, since I came to Switzerland, have been explained to me by Miss Booth and my daughter as having originated through ignorance of the true circumstances of the case.

“My daughter has not been acting in the capacity of secretary or aide-de-camp to Miss Booth, and she has at no time worn the uniform of the Salvation Army, but only a simple dress made in England, of which I approved, she also wearing the initials ‘S.A.’ When Miss Booth found it necessary to go to Geneva, she did right in taking my daughter with her, as I had stipulated that they should not be separated; and my daughter so being at Geneva, it was with my consent she remained. Miss Booth has watched over her and cared for her, and the unfortunate circumstances which have occurred in Geneva have arisen from the action of the police authorities there, and not from any disregard by Miss Booth of the terms upon which my child had been left in Paris under her care.

“All these painful misunderstandings seem to have originated through the letter written by my daughter, as she informs me, to General Booth, intended by her to be seen by him alone, but which through inadvertence was made public in the Times.

“You have my authority to use this letter, in justification of Miss Booth.

“I have the honour to be, my dear Sir,

“Yours very faithfully,

(Signed),      “SAMUEL CHARLESWORTH.”[30]

Hearing during the summer that Miss Booth was suffering and ill, I obeyed my own heart’s impulse and her invitation to come to her at the Château G——, in the Canton de Vaud. She there expressed to me her surprise—a surprise which I shared—that the Foreign Office in London had not in any way taken notice of the illegal treatment to which she and her companions had been subjected for seven months, although all the facts had been communicated to it by our Ambassador at Berne. This surprise was still more strongly expressed by several well-known Swiss gentlemen who had arrived at the Château G—— to confer with each other and with us as to the steps to be taken to obtain redress and to bring the matter more effectively before our Foreign Office. “Your Government,” said one of these gentlemen, “could with so good a grace and with so much dignity address a grave remonstrance to ours. England is so great and powerful, and Switzerland so small. That attitude of admonition and warning on the part of your country would be natural and just in such circumstances, and would be most useful in strengthening that portion of public opinion here which is on the side of liberty and the Constitution against the tyranny and lawlessness which now rule—a Government, in fact, by emeutes.” The opinion of all present was that an interposition of this character on the part of our Government at that time would have been a strength to right principles all round, and a moral gain far beyond that reaped by the individual victims of illegal decrees and of the mob violence encouraged by those decrees.

It was at this pleasant Château, standing in a lovely park at the foot of the Jura slopes, that an incident occurred showing how childishly Governments may act and how ridiculous they may make themselves when once they have entered on a false route. Having obtained information that the lady of the Château, in obedience to the impulses of her kind and maternal heart, had invited Miss Booth to be her guest, and to rest awhile in this retreat from her heavy labours and anxieties, the Department of Police of Lausanne sent a detective to ascertain if such was the fact. This functionary after having to walk a considerable distance from the nearest railway station, crept round the terrace, and peered in at all the windows, including those of bedrooms on the ground floor. He then came to the front entrance, and demanded an interview with Madame. “You have Salutistes, here,” he said. She replied, “I have several friends in my house, whom I have invited to stay with me for a little repose.” He went to the nearest village, and telegraphed to head-quarters, “Send a sufficient force to suppress reunion at Château G——.” When this was told to the gentlemen above mentioned, who were conversing in the drawing-room, the effect it produced was an irresistible peal of laughter, which, however, gave way to yet graver and more anxious discussion. Such “fantastic tricks” played by those in authority are symptoms of the decrepitude of the Government.

From the Château G——, Miss Booth, Miss Charlesworth, and others, started very early on a brilliant and beautiful morning, to meet a large gathering of friends on the Savoy side of the Lake of Geneva. It was a Saint’s day, a holy-day, when all the ateliers are closed, and a good opportunity, therefore, for a meeting. The Geneva and other Salutistes arrived at an early hour at Tougues in Haute Savoie. The Mayor of Tougues had invited them to occupy a spacious piece of grassy ground among shady trees, and came out himself on horseback to meet them, treating them with much courtesy. The day was passed in prayer, and praise, and exhortations, with intervals for refreshments and social intercourse. It was a delightful sensation to be able to meet in peace, free from the dogging steps of police spies and the gross insults of a wretched mob encouraged by their rulers to consider themselves emancipated from moral and legal obligations. I was unable to be present at that happy gathering, but awaited at Lausanne the return of my two young friends whom I had invited to come to be under my protection for the brief period of their stay there. They landed from the boat at Nyons. There a crowd followed them to the railway station for Lausanne. “Salut! Salut!” was shouted along the streets; a few stones greeted the Salutistes, but without injuring them. Miss Booth turned round and said, with a smile, to her friends, “What wonderful opportunities God gives us in this way to speak of salvation to the people!” They reached the train, the crowd following, some even pressing their faces against the carriage windows, curious to observe their conduct under this fire of salutations not by any means respectful. When I met my young friends at the Gare of Lausanne, their faces were full of happiness and peace, although they were overcome by the fatigues of the long day. In the morning when I entered their room to call them, they were still sleeping. I wish that I could convey to others the thoughts which presented themselves so vividly to me at that hour, as I looked at those gentle sleepers, that they seemed the full solution of a question which had taken possession of my mind, and upon which light had been gradually dawning throughout the summer. The sunlight shining through the half-closed shutters fell upon faces so pure, so innocent, so youthful, and so peaceful, and the murmured morning greetings, as I kissed the forehead of each in turn, were so childlike in their simplicity and fullness of love, that it was difficult to realise for the moment that these were the instruments chosen of God to lead an attack against the kingdom of darkness with such a divinely-inspired energy as to embarrass the Governments of the world and to stir up the bitterest rage of the emissaries of Satan. “Oh! God, how wonderful are Thy works,” I said. I could only stand and contemplate in silence and awe His ways and His thoughts, which are as far above and removed from our ways and our thoughts as the heavens are above the earth, and are all beautiful and admirable to those to whom He grants humility to read them aright.

I take this opportunity of turning straight round, so to speak, towards my fellow-workers in the Abolitionist crusade, now well-known throughout the world, and of addressing them, face to face, in regard to the interests of our own great cause, in the present connexion.

As I travelled with Miss Booth, or sat alone with her in our room, she frequently related to me her experience—not the experience which finds its way to the public eye alone—in Paris, Geneva, and elsewhere. Seeing me sometimes in deep thought, she would ask me concerning my thoughts. I could only reply: “I am contemplating with the deepest interest the path in which God has been leading you, and the work to which He has appointed you, because I see its intimate connection with the work to which I have been devoted for many years.” It is needless to say that I refrained from imparting to her—so young and already so heavily charged with a great and difficult mission—the most painful experiences attaching to my own special work. But she had observed and thought for herself, and a very few words on my part were sufficient to show her my meaning. Her true woman’s heart was not slow to feel, and her keen woman’s instinct to perceive, that which some of my fellow-workers, much older than she, have failed to perceive.

We have sometimes asked ourselves “how and by what instruments will this work of moral purification and of conflict with the most desolating of human vices be carried on in the future?” In our conferences and publications it is almost universally taken for granted that this crusade must be carried on by persons of mature age; that when women take part in it, they must be married women, mothers, or (if unmarried) they must be of a certain age, &c., &c. The thought of consecrating the grace, the beauty, the charm of youth, especially of young womanhood to such a terrible work would fill us for the most part with horror and dismay. But “as the heavens are high above the earth, so are His thoughts above our thoughts.” Unconscious indeed, blessedly unconscious of the horror and magnitude of the evil against which they have been warring, these girl warriors, clad in the armour of the most exquisite purity, have been wielding a two-edged sword, the tremendous force of which they themselves did not know, against a monster almost entirely concealed from their eyes,—an evil whose proportions and true nature they had no conception of. These little “handmaidens of the Lord” have done, under His guidance, what none of us older persons have done or can do, for we have not the same mysterious and special position. “Strangely and dangerously chosen instruments,” I think I hear you exclaim. Do not be alarmed. I would never advocate the deliberate enlistment in the war against the social vice, of our young and delicate daughters. I see as well as you do the unsuitableness, the dangers, and even the cruelty that there would be in such a course. I only call upon you to regard with unprejudiced eyes what God has done, or if you like it better so expressed, the facts of the case. How shall I put before you in a way to be understood, these facts of the case? I will endeavour to do so by an illustration. When it was told to the wicked King Herod, that Jesus was at hand, in the streets, near his palace gates—and that the people were attentive to the words and acts of this Jesus, he started, paused, trembled, and then shrieked in horror “it is John the Baptist whom I beheaded! it is his ghost! he is risen from the dead!” It is not uncommon for murderers to think they see even in some heaven-sent messenger of warning, the ghost of their dead victims. Now you, my fellow-workers in our great abolitionist and anti-slavery cause, do not need to be told again of generations, past and present, of murdered or still living victims of the deadly conspiracy of greed and lust which has established its vast and diabolic organization throughout Europe. You do not need to be told that, besides those who choose evil of their own free will, there are thousands and tens of thousands of the young daughters of the people bought and sold in the vice markets of the world, caught when young, mere children, and forced into the State accredited bastilles of vice, imprisoned, degraded beyond hope of redemption, murdered, body and soul. Who are their murderers? Some of them might have been seen among the violent opponents of the work of God in Geneva; or, perhaps, not seen, but only felt as an occult influence; for these murderers prefer to work in the dark, and to pass on their “blood-money” through other hands, while they themselves reap its price in the gratification of their dark and cruel passions. There are others, also, accessories to these murders, and these I hold to be the most guilty of all. I mean the State officials who license, superintend, and cover with their protection these horrible bastilles. Let it be well understood that I have no word to say against the private character and honorabilité of certain individual administrators of this cruel and immoral régime. They may be all that can be desired in their private characters and in domestic life; but they cannot on this account escape the guilty responsibility with which we openly and justly charge them. They have signed the death-warrant of these young girls, of whose existence they are daily aware, and whose places, when delivered from their earthly slavery by death, are at once filled up by others brought into the same bondage under the seal of their own official permission.[31] Is it to be wondered at that the murderers of the young, the weak, the poor, the stranger and the fatherless who fill these State-protected lupanars, are literally aghast at the sight of a young girl who cries to them in the name of the God of Justice, “Repent! for the kingdom of heaven is at hand;” and who, with divinely imparted power, strikes, unconsciously it may be, at the very heart of the secret covetousness or vileness which lies concealed beneath the exterior of the respectable citizen or man of the world who abets and permits this evil. We have seen men with heads lowered and averted eyes, as Catherine Booth reasoned of “temperance, justice, and judgment to come.” We have seen their faces grow pale, and their whole conduct become like that of men who see in the slight youthful form and pure face before them the spectre “risen from the dead” of other youthful forms and other faces which might have been transformed as these, and served their God in liberty and light. Their consciences cry out, “It is John the Baptist whom I beheaded;” “It is the womanhood, the pure girlhood which I destroyed, or to whose destruction I consented.” We have already seen who were the chief instigators of the opposition in Geneva to the young evangelists. Miss Booth received—when in prison at Neuchâtel—a letter from a Genevan convert, who had been an actor on the stage. He wrote:—“Tell Mrs. Butler that I now understand and rejoice in her work against the institutions of immorality. When she first came to Geneva, I did not understand it; but now I understand it.” For the light had entered his own soul, by which alone we are able to see all evil things in their true colours. It will be remembered by some that my first utterance on the Continent, nine years ago, was styled the “Voice of one crying in the wilderness.” It did not long remain a solitary voice, or without response, for its echoes were soon heard from all sides. Yet the thought has ever been deeply buried in my heart, that our, or rather God’s great work of abolition and purification would not be accomplished, or even very markedly advanced, until the baptism of water, (the moral purifying,) was crowned by the baptism of “fire and of the Holy Ghost;” and I have waited and watched for this fuller baptism, as “those that watch for the morning.” Those who are called to work for the consummation of this reform must be persons wholly consecrated, and filled with the Spirit of God. So far as we have been practically and radically successful in the work, it has been through such power and such instrumentality; and our God will not fail us in bestowing still further grace in the future. I commend the above considerations to my abolitionist fellow-workers, in the hope that they will see that, both as an old defender of the great legal principle of the rights and freedom of the individual, and as a believer in God and in His Christ, I could not refuse to obey the call of conscience in coming to the side of those in whose case these principles have been openly violated, and in pleading the cause—too little understood as yet—of those who, having wholly abandoned themselves to God and His service, have been directed by His unerring hand to the attack of the strongest fortresses of evil to which we can point in the world around us.

Sunday morning, September 9th, the morning of the memorable day on which the arrest in the Jura Forest took place, was one of those bright September mornings without a cloud in the sky, clear and crisp, in which all nature seems to be rejoicing and praising God. I had previously been in communication with the lessees of the Reformation Hall in Geneva, in order to engage the hall in my own name, with the purpose of holding a night of prayer on Monday (the following night). We much desired, on the eve of the departure of Miss Booth and Miss Charlesworth from Switzerland to have such a meeting, to pray for a blessing on that land which we all love so much. The meeting in the Jura woods was to be Miss Booth’s farewell meeting with friends in Switzerland. We did not imagine at that moment that our plans for prayer in the Reformation Hall, and hers for a farewell conference with her friends previous to her journey to Paris, would all be changed, and that God had other plans for us. I had risen early that day, and was walking down the hill with a friend to the station, when we met a young Swiss officer, a messenger of the Salvation Army, whose face I did not know, but who recognised me; he put into my hand a letter from Col. Clibborn at Geneva. I stopped and read: “Our dear Wyssa died yesterday. The funeral will be to-morrow.” The death of Wyssa had been long expected; nevertheless it came suddenly at the last; and as at almost the same time I received information that the Reformation Hall could not be granted to me if Salvationists were to come there, it was decided that our gathering should take place instead around the grave of our friend. The messenger pursued his way with Mdlle. H. and others to Neuchâtel, and I took the early boat on the lake to my sister’s home near Rolle.

On this day, September 9th, the memorable meeting took place at Prise-Imer, in the Jura forest, some five miles above Neuchâtel. Miss Booth wrote:—“It was a day never to be forgotten. Long before the hour the people began to gather; several hundreds were assembled. The weather was beautiful. After so much trouble, fatigue and a long journey, we could meet to talk of the things of God. Hearts and voices rose together, and it cheered me much to look into the faces of our brave soldiers. There was no mistaking their zeal and determination to go forward. I was soon informed that the Prefect was present with the Chief Inspector of Police. There was a movement through the audience, but I continued to speak.”

The Prefect of Police appeared with the Chief of the Gendarmerie, and fifteen gendarmes (having had to scramble through the forest all that distance), bearing orders to break up the meeting and bring away Miss Booth by force. But they paused, overawed, touched—as anyone must be who has not a heart of stone—at such scenes as these meetings present. For nearly two hours those seventeen officers listened respectfully to the appeals of Catherine Booth, who, filled with the spirit of our Lord, was speaking such words of power and of holy compassion as few are able to resist. When she prayed, they stood with heads uncovered, and faces bent, joining silently. She prayed for the Prefect of Police, asking for him blessings, temporal and spiritual, with such sincerity and simplicity that he wept. She prayed also for the Government and nation of Switzerland. At the close several of the converts, who had formerly been criminals, gave their testimony, mentioning the fact that the police there knew them. One said, “I was in prison three years,” and he produced a little sensation in the assembly by pointing to one of the police, a detective in plain clothes, and saying, “that policeman knows me well; he took me to jail; but now I am another man.” The completely changed appearance of these men, and their open, joyous faces, impressed the Prefect more than all; these were “living witnesses.” He said to Miss Booth:—“This is a magnificent work, if it does but last; you do nothing but good. I beseech you not to hold me responsible for this act; I cannot bear to be held responsible for it. I, like others, had judged you without seeing or hearing you.”

As they left that pleasant place, Miss Booth said spontaneously, “How strange that we cannot worship God in these woods! What a pity to see all those fine trees standing idle, those beautiful forests silent and unused!” Captain Becquet was also arrested. M. Convert publicly stated at the arrest the Army had been a great blessing to himself and family. He said he had had Captain Becquet four months in his house, and he considered it an honour to have him; he loved him as a son; he had observed narrowly his life and conduct, and could testify to their being true to the Name which he professed.

At M. Convert’s house, the Prefect informed his prisoners of the warrant which had been issued for their arrest and the order to bring them immediately to Neuchâtel. Being a man of heart and kindly feeling, he refrained from telling them of the imprisonment which awaited them, leaving that for its instigator, M. Comtesse. The Prefect informed M. Convert that he had orders so harsh that he could not and would not carry them out.

Miss Booth asked if she and her companions might be allowed to retire for that night. The Prefect replied, “No,” though he was very considerate, seeing that she was much exhausted. But he was obliged to fulfil his duties as a servant of Government, and reminded her that he had not interrupted the meeting as he had orders to do.

Miss Booth and Captain Becquet were then taken to Neuchâtel to the house of M. Comtesse, President of the Conseil d’Etat, who had illegally ordered their arrest and imprisonment, the competent authorities having refused to do so. The prisoners having arrived at his house, M. Comtesse entered the room and said with an air which savoured of exultation, “YOU ARE MY PRISONERS, AND IT IS MY DUTY TO HAVE YOU LOCKED UP THIS NIGHT!” M. Convert pleaded that Miss Booth was his guest, and that he alone had called the meeting, deliberately, and with full consciousness of what he was doing. He asked to be allowed to bear the penalty. This was refused. Miss Booth desired to be allowed to attend a funeral at Geneva on the following day in fulfilment of a promise, and gave her word of honour to appear when the law should demand her presence. He replied—“Words of honour have no value with the Neuchâtel Government, but if M. Convert likes to stand bail for Miss Booth and Captain Becquet he can do so.” To this suggestion of M. Comtesse M. Convert assented, having obtained from the prisoners their promise to appear after the funeral. Miss Booth never having been in circumstances of the kind before, was not at all aware that “standing bail” meant a money guarantee, and was surprised to learn subsequently in Geneva that M. Convert had signed for 6,000 f. (£250), and had already paid down 300 f.

While absent, she received a telegram from a friend in Neuchâtel to say that unless she immediately presented herself to the authorities M. Convert would probably lose the money of his “caution.” Realising then for the first time that the burden and consequences of her illegally executed arrest and imprisonment were resting upon M. Convert and not upon the authorities (the real authors of these illegal and harsh measures), she felt—first, that she could not conscientiously allow the “caution” to remain; and, secondly, that she ought not in the interests of civil and religious liberty to relieve the authorities from any part of the consequences of having illegally arrested and imprisoned a British subject for the performance of an act of Divine worship, for which the fullest liberty is guaranteed not only by the Cantonal and Federal Constitutions, but also by the Treaty of September, 1855. She, therefore, with Captain Becquet, presented herself on Saturday morning, the 15th September, at the Hotel de Ville, Neuchâtel, saying that they were ready to meet the demands of the law, and desired that the responsibility of their acts should no longer remain upon their friends.

We must now go back, however, to the day following the arrest, Monday, September 9th, the day of Wyssa’s funeral.

Doubts have been expressed as to Miss Booth having acted wisely in re-entering the Canton of Geneva on this occasion. The step was taken with deliberation, however. We had obtained the opinions of Swiss gentlemen, old and tried friends, and among whom were some lawyers. It was generally agreed that it would be now not amiss to challenge the illegal decree of expulsion by acting as if it had no existence. At the same time this return for an hour or two to Geneva was not in any degree carried out by Miss Booth and her friends in a spirit of bravado; so far from that, it was her intention only to remain an hour or two to fulfil the dying request of her friend. She had a carriage in waiting, in which it was her intention to drive straight across the frontier again as soon as the interment was over; and she had made no provision for remaining in the Canton for a moment longer than was necessary for her to attend the ceremony, and speak some words over the grave of this, her son in the faith. On the other hand, the question had been for a long time discussed among Genevan citizens, defenders of law and constitutional right, as to the best means of bringing these illegal decrees of prohibition of meeting and of expulsion to the bar of the public opinion of the more enlightened classes, and of testing them by the law of the land. The only means of doing this effectually, it was agreed, was by having the question brought before the tribunals in some individual case. Never yet had this been done. Miss Booth and her companions had been judged and punished as criminals, without ever having been brought before any Tribunal. They were the victims of “summary jurisdiction” in its most extreme form. Happily the tribunals are not yet corrupted; this statement has been verified by the verdict of the jury at Boudry. On the one and only occasion on which the Salvationists have appeared before a regularly constituted tribunal of the country, they were pronounced not guilty. M. Audeoud at Geneva, and M. Convert at Neuchâtel, have on several occasions, deliberately and with grave intent and purpose, set aside the illegal decrees forbidding the meetings, in the hope that by so doing the matter might be forced before the tribunals, and that thus, by the simplest legal means in their power, they might bring to an end the present tyrannical, vexatious and immoral suspension of their ancient rights and liberties. It may be difficult for friends in England entirely to understand this position. Happily our respect for law in general makes us shrink from the idea of defying anything which has the smallest semblance of law; this is chiefly the case however with those persons who are so placed as never to feel any law pressing upon them at all uncomfortably, or who can peaceably buy off the obligation to obey it, if it should do so. The most wretched little police regulation fabricated in Scotland Yard seems to most Englishmen to have something of the sacredness of law about it. This is a result of a wholesome national education in the past, while it ought to be an indication to our legislators and police rulers of the greater danger they will ultimately incur if they take advantage of the law-abiding character of our people, in order to encroach upon their dearly prized liberties.

Before his death Charles Wyssa had asked that his body might be carried into the Reformation Hall, and the funeral service held there—in the place of his spiritual birth. But this request was refused. He was a “Salvationist,” sufficient reason why his desire that his mortal remains should there bear a last testimony to his Redeemer, should be refused.

But he had made another request, which was granted. He had asked that the Maréchale might speak at his grave; and though arrest and imprisonment might be the consequence, the dying request was too sacred to be weighed against the illegal degree of expulsion, which it was the deliberate opinion of many ought to be challenged.

About ten o’clock on the Monday morning the Salutistes began to gather at the farmhouse about a mile from Geneva, where their comrade had died. Members of the Salvation Army had arrived from Paris, Nîmes, Italy, and various parts of Switzerland. I was present, and was struck by the great affection which was felt by these fellow-workers for each other, and at the same time by the quiet and restrained manner in which they expressed their feelings. Those of Geneva greeted each other and their friends in short and condensed phrases. Few words, and brief and calm adieus were spoken, though the separations to follow might be long. They had the air of persecuted people, who have a great work on hand, and who look to the far future.

A circle was formed in front of the house of M. Wyssa, in the bright sunshine. The coffin was placed in the centre of the group, the father, mother, sisters, and brothers of the deceased being gathered round it. The Salvation Army flag was spread upon the coffin, surmounted by a branch of palm, sent by a friend from a tree just brought from Jericho to the Botanical gardens. Miss Booth and Miss Charlesworth crossed the frontier at nine, reached the house in a closed carriage just as all was ready, and having spent a few minutes with the sorrowing family, accompanied them into the circle, followed by the officers. The service was opened with the hymn, “Plus que vainqueurs.” A blessed influence fell upon the whole assembly as we sang, like a soft breath from the world of glorified spirits where Charles had gone. We seemed in that hour separated from all the world. Col. Clibborn spoke briefly on the words, “we shall not all sleep; we shall all be changed in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye.” Prayer was offered up; there was perfect tranquillity. Presently a slight movement was perceptible among those assembled, caused by the sudden appearance of the Mayor of the Commune at the outer edge of the circle. He declared that this was a reunion of the Salvation Army, and pronounced it to be dissolved, ordering us to disperse. It was striking to see the perfect calm with which the whole company received this challenge. No one moved; scarcely a head was turned to notice these words, which seemed to fall into that peaceful, solemn funeral circle as from another world—not the world into whose glories our spiritual eyes were following Charles. One could not help a feeling of sorrow and pity at the sight of that pale, agitated face, which looked over the heads of the group from the shadow of the trees, and which betrayed a state of soul so little in harmony with that world of light.

(This act of the Mayor in interrupting a funeral ceremony in the grounds of a private house, and without having his official badge, was a violation of the Swiss laws, and a formal protest was lodged the same evening by Madame Wyssa.)

Col. Clibborn explained, “We are about to bury a friend;” to which the Mayor replied, in tones which must have grated harshly on the ears of the weeping mother, “bury him then!” Col. Clibborn simply replied that “the earth is the Lord’s,” we had a right to bury a comrade in God’s earth, and that we would shortly proceed to the cemetery, (the time being limited by the law). Whereupon the Mayor withdrew, saying as he left that he would bring armed force unless the singing was discontinued. The following is from the report given in the Continental organ of the Army.[32] “Several voices then invited Mrs. Butler to continue the service.... She said she had watched with deep sympathy and interest the work in Switzerland. From the knowledge she had acquired in the course of her work against organized vice in its most terrible forms, she was not the least surprised at the treatment the Army had received; it was exactly what she would have expected in view of its open war with the terrible vices of the age. The day was coming when these hidden things of darkness would be revealed, and when things which were now whispered in secret would be proclaimed on the house-tops. ‘Take courage;’ she said, ‘you are now passing through a time of trial in which you are forbidden to proclaim the glad tidings of salvation freely. Remember Paul and Silas in the prison of Philippi. Their feet are bound with chains, the doubly-bolted door of their cell is strictly guarded. It is midnight, the darkest, coldest hour. They cannot escape. They can no longer carry abroad the good news, the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Sad and melancholy thoughts must surely have taken possession of their minds. Listen! they are singing—they, prisoners, bound, and at the dark midnight hour, are singing the praises of God. Those who hear them are amazed, for to rejoice and to sing at such a time and in such a place they must be madmen—or Christians! Follow their example, friends and comrades, rejoice and praise the Lord, even in your darkest hour, and the result will be the same for you as for them. As they sang, the prison doors were opened, and the chains of the prisoners fell to the ground; and mark this—not only were the apostles themselves free, but the chains of their fellow-prisoners were also loosed. So it will be with you. By your rejoicing faith, by your perseverance, by your fidelity unto death, not only the prohibitions which bind you will be withdrawn, but you shall see the liberation even of many around you who are tied and bound with the chains of their sins. It may be that God will grant you to deliver from a miserable bondage those very persons who now forbid you to preach Jesus in their midst, those rulers in Geneva who are yet strangers to the true liberty of the children of God, and who are miserable in their bondage.’ Turning to the mother of Charles Wyssa, she addressed to her some words of sympathy. She also had known a mother’s sorrow. She had given the name of Evangeline to her dear child—her only daughter—for it had been the desire of her heart that she should be a messenger of the gospel of peace to others. But God had taken her early to Himself.... She concluded by urging the members of the Salvation Army to be of good cheer. There might be much yet to suffer; but she believed that Switzerland was to be won for the Lord.”

It being a Salvationist’s funeral, the undertakers refused to send a bier and the customary mourning paraphernalia. The relatives had asked for the former, having never seen an Army funeral before. To them it was a new and touching spectacle to see the coffin of their comrade, still covered with the flag and palm, raised and placed upon the shoulders of six of Charles’s fellow-soldiers. Four members of the Geneva Corps and two of the Neuchâtel Corps were the bearers.

About three hundred persons had now collected, many of them external to the Salvation Army, and some strangers, attracted by sympathy. We moved on in a line very quietly from the house to the cemetery along the open high road, in the midst of many tokens of respectful sympathy from country people and others on the road. Before reaching the gate of the cemetery a police officer ran to meet us, and when we entered, the Mayor again appeared, and stood during the proceedings opposite to Miss Booth and her group of friends at the other side of the open grave. The coffin was lowered, while all stood around in perfect silence. Miss Booth then spoke on the beautiful words from the Revelations: “Who are these which are arrayed in white robes, and whence came they?” “Charles is now in that white-robed throng. He has passed through the tribulation. He has been faithful unto death. Every one who does anything worth doing must pass on through desperate struggle, pain, and tribulation. I wish this to be a day ever to be remembered by our Genevan soldiers. I desire and pray that fresh life, a Resurrection life, may be granted at this tomb for every soldier, that we may here this morning consecrate anew our lives and our all to rescue the perishing millions.”

“We are now passing through a tunnel in a rock, as it were, but light is on before, and if we go on without faltering or calculating consequences we shall come out into the light. Calvary seemed a dire defeat, but it was the grandest victory the world ever saw. Victory is ahead for us also if we are but faithful.” Then followed a powerful appeal, which moved almost all who heard it to tears. Even the Mayor, who had retired a little into the background, seemed touched. A few English travellers, who had gathered round from curiosity, appeared surprised and solemnized. Curiosity gave place to looks and attitudes of reverence and to signs of deep emotion as Miss Booth concluded with a prayer which seemed to bring us into the unseen world. As it ended, a softly chanted chorus rose round the open grave, “Courage, soldats, vers le ciel avançons!”

John Wyssa, the younger brother of Charles, then came forward to the edge of the open grave, and in a loud voice, trembling with emotion, said, “I give Charles’ dying message to all his fellow workmen, that they choose the better part, and meet him in heaven. It was through his prayers that I was won to choose that better part; his life drew me nearer to the Saviour, and his death has confirmed and strengthened me.” He then threw a handful of earth on the coffin with the words “au revoir, my brother.” It was just at that moment, and with the solemn penetrating words of the prayer Miss Booth had offered still ringing in the ears of all, that the Mayor with his Marshal approached, and arrested Miss Booth and Miss Charlesworth,—there, in the presence of the dead. They having made their formal protest against the illegality of their expulsion, and having been told in reply by the police officer that armed force would be employed if necessary to bring them before the authorities, were conducted to the carriage which they had come in, and which was waiting to take them across the frontier. A large crowd had gathered, all in strong sympathy with the persons arrested. The coachman, who had been deeply impressed by the funeral service, refused to mount the box when he received the order to drive us to the Hotel de Ville, and it was not until we had told him positively to do so that he would move. The Salvation soldiers gathered round the carriage, proclaiming their determination to be faithful unto death. There was, in the midst of the enthusiasm, an entire absence of anything like hostility towards the authorities, although there was a movement of confusion and conflict owing to the crowd which had assembled, and the Mayor and his Marshal were for a moment hustled. The countenance of the former betrayed feelings of displeasure and distress; he appeared conscious that he was performing an unpopular, even an unjust act. A few Swiss Salutistes raised a shout of encouragement for us, and were arrested for doing so. We were driven to the Hotel de Ville, Col. Clibborn accompanying us. Clarke also, the faithful and loving attendant of Miss Booth, was allowed to come, and to remain with her during the time that she was detained. We reached the Hotel de Ville, and were passed on from room to room, having to wait a certain interval in each.

It cannot be said that we were treated with much courtesy during our detention (until the arrival of M. Cuenod). M. Héridier, whose part it should have been to be present on this occasion, again found reasons for not coming face to face with the persons whose arrest he had commanded. According to the Journal de Genève he was communicating, however, during the whole time by means of a telephone from his own house, with the officials with whom we were shut up. The British Consul kindly came and remained with us.

I could not but admire the steadfastness of Miss Booth and Miss Charlesworth under the questioning they underwent; Miss Charlesworth declined to sign the first form of deposition put before her. The officials became irritated, and complained of the trouble given them in re-writing it, expressing their irritation in a somewhat coarse and noisy fashion. Her countenance never changed. Her replies were uniformly gentle, but she was firm as a rock, calm, and at her ease, as though momentarily engaged in silent prayer to One whom she felt to be by her side. Surely these men—if they have any perception of degrees of moral worth—must have felt pained by the sense of their own immense inferiority to this gentle child. Miss Booth was, of course, asked why she had re-entered the Canton without permission. She replied by affirming, categorically, first, that her expulsion was illegal, she not having been guilty of any offence which could justify it; secondly, that it was a breach of the Treaty of Friendship, Commerce, and Establishment between England and Switzerland (she held in her hands at the time a copy of the Constitution of Geneva, and of the above Treaty); and thirdly that the Chief of the Department of Justice and Police had falsified a Cantonal police regulation in order to furnish an excuse for expelling her. The surprise and anger of her questioners on hearing this arraignment of their own acts and of their government were beyond description. For a moment Miss Booth was herself surprised when she saw the effect of her own words. She came through the open door to where I stood, and begged me to “look at these men!” asking, “What had I better say next?” I considered the effect on these officers of her just and courageous challenge so salutary that my advice was: “Go in and say the same words over again.” Having at first prompted Miss Booth to accuse her accusers thus, I told her at the time that I wished to share any responsibility with her for so doing, and that I hoped shortly to be able to prove all the assertions made by her, as above quoted. That engagement I have endeavoured to fulfil in the present narrative.

The arrival, after a considerable time, of M. Cuenod (the Chief of the Cantonal Police), a benevolent man, and a true gentleman, brought about a decision in her favour. We were dismissed. The two banished ladies were ordered at once to be conveyed to the frontier, while Col. Clibborn, whose only offence was that of joining in a funeral “procession”—a thing allowed every day—was warned not to do so again. A crowd awaited us as we left the Hotel de Ville. M. Cuenod said, in a very decided tone, to the police agent who was to conduct us to the frontier, “see that these ladies are treated with every possible courtesy.”

I cannot help mentioning what struck me, both in the course of our long, slow drive from the cemetery to the Town Hall, and also on leaving that office on our way to the frontier. In passing through the streets of Geneva, I took occasion to observe the nature of any expression of popular opinion which might be evidenced. I saw nothing hostile. Many poor people were passing along the streets, and amongst them continually one or another would turn to greet the Salutiste party, with a word of sympathy or a wave of the hand. One very poor woman, bonnetless and miserably dressed, gazed after us with much sympathy in her face. I observed one who was running up a passage as if to get out of sight, but on observing Miss Booth and her friends, she turned, and with a glowing face, shouted, “Salvation; Hallelujah; The Lord be with you,” and then disappeared into a cellar. There were also many poor men who raised their hats respectfully and silently. My general impression was that either there were not present here any of the roughs who had played such a disgraceful part in the winter, or else that the tide had somewhat turned in the popular mind. On the country road as we passed, there was nothing but respect and sympathy evident among those who passed, and those who straggled after us. Several gentlemen of our acquaintance, M. Lenoir and others, seeing us as we left the Hotel de Ville, engaged the first carriage they could find, and accompanied us to the frontier, so that our exit resembled rather a joyous procession than an expulsion. The police agent who accompanied us sat on the box of our carriage. In the carriage which preceded us was a company of merry Salvationists, who struck up one of their joyous hymns. It was really an invigorating drive along that beautiful road towards the Grand Salève, with the exquisite view of Mont Blanc all draped in dazzling snow, in front of us, and the afternoon sun throwing clear blue shadows from the nearer cliffs. The air seemed full of fragrance, and the song of the Salvationists as it rose and fell was in harmony with everything around.

When we arrived at the frontier we alighted at a little wayside house or inn, where a company of members or friends of the Army were already waiting, and still gathering from different parts. It was a pleasant and joyful meeting. I could not but observe, what indeed deserves to be constantly remembered, the utter absence of anything like anger or resentment, or any signs of recrimination on the part of the Salvationists toward those who oppose or illtreat them. They had endured insults enough “to provoke a saint,” as the saying is; but in this I think they bear the mark of true saints, inasmuch as they do love their enemies, bless them that curse them, and pray for them that despitefully use them and persecute them. The Marshal of the Mayor, who had accompanied us, lighted his cigar as he got down from the carriage, and was starting on his homeward road to Geneva in a dégagé manner; (he had not looked at all at his ease during the whole day). I admired, and I hope he too was touched by the gentle farewells which were addressed to him. “May God bless you,” “God be with you,” “We pray for you,” &c. This is constantly the language addressed by Salvationists to those who assail them, and to subalterns who, in their official capacity, are obliged to deal severely with them.

The only allusion which Miss Booth has ever made to Mme. de Gasparin, was in a letter written from Lausanne on the 16th February, 1883, just after her expulsion. She wrote:—

“Oh, my comrades, stand firm! Dare to obey your conscience. Follow Christ—the same Christ who is despised, hated, and rejected to-day as he was nearly nineteen centuries ago. As to the book of Mme. de Gasparin, I confine myself to pointing out the following facts:—(1.) This lady who has had the time to write a long brochure, has not been able to spare a moment to receive me. She put me off for fifteen days, the necessary time for the publication and circulation of her work. (2.) Mme. de Gasparin has not attended any of our meetings, and yet she attempts to describe them. (3.) Mme. de Gasparin has never spoken with any officer of the Salvation Army. The spirit which animates the garbled translation made by her of our orders speaks sufficiently. The day will come when all things will be revealed. I have a conviction, an assurance, that Mme. de Gasparin will regret then having written against a work that God has owned by so much blessing, and which has been in His hands the means of leading thousands of souls to the Saviour.”

I have seldom seen a more complete illustration of what is called English pluck than I have done while in company with the Salvationists. The ordinary English idea of courage is too generally connected with a readiness to resort to physical force; how often one hears the saying, “Why did he not knock the fellow down?” when telling of any particular insult sustained by the Salutistes. The courage exercised by these people is much greater than any which expresses itself by the exercise of muscular prowess. They are absolutely good tempered and calm in the midst of the most provoking and exasperating circumstances, and undaunted when facing the roughest mob. The following quotation may serve to represent the view taken of this matter by a Swiss looker-on.

“What strikes me most about these people is an extraordinary impression of power. I have felt this power on every side. In the first place, in the absolute sincerity of the personal testimonies given. Those who accuse these people of acting a part can never have seen them near. Secondly, I find this power in their perfect calmness, which never varies in the midst of the greatest noise, nor even in the midst of opposition and mockery all around, or of laughter, which is more difficult to bear. I am certain that those who imagine that they can trip them up have made a bad calculation. These soldiers are at home in an atmosphere of war as fishes are in the water. What chiefly produces this is their constant determination to put forward the person of the Saviour, to bring all the world to him, and, to that end, to forget themselves entirely. These men have left their country and every comfort, and for what human end? The power which they possess has its root in the unfeigned joy which pervades their whole being. It is this joyfulness which expresses itself in the words of Captain Becquet, spoken with that mixture of seriousness and jocularity too entirely English to be understood among ourselves: ‘Amen! my friends. When one is in Christ one feels oneself perfectly free and joyous. It is a grand thing to be entirely independent of public opinion. Hallelujah! As for me, let the journals say what they like about me. It runs off me like water off a duck’s back.’ When he said this, if I had not been afraid of being taken for one of the rioters, I should have been inclined to shout, ‘Right you are, Captain!’ Yes, no doubt, this Salvation Army has a wonderful power, and amongst all the criticisms which have been made of it there is one which certainly is most unsuitable. Their Christianity has been spoken of as ‘unmanly and effeminate.’ I find this rather too much. Just look at these people, many of them of naturally timid constitutions, inspired by their convictions with a courage to brave not only the fear of the mob—that is very little to them—but the daily opposition which results from such a witness as their lives present. Look at those men and women whom we saw the other day at Paris, who are constantly seen in England, knocked about, their heads broken, their lips bleeding, yet conscientiously persevering through all in observing the article of their rules which commands them in every such case to put their fists in their pockets. There is more still. There are men amongst them whose word seems to challenge and change the most degraded drunkards, and to bring them by dozens, nay, by hundreds, to repentance, conversion, and sobriety; who restore (this is not sentiment, it is simple history) to the wife and her children, the father transformed from a brute into a man. In the face of such things, can anyone speak of a morbid, effeminate Christianity? There is only one thing to reply to such accusers—‘Do as much yourselves, friends, with your manly Christianity.’ The rowdy and bitter opponents have been more clear-sighted than the critics it seems in this matter; for they have at least given their testimony that the Salvation Army is one of the greatest powers of the time.”

Col. Clibborn had had several interviews with the British Ambassador at Berne during the spring, and deposited with him a written demand on behalf of Miss Booth and Miss Charlesworth for justice and protection as British subjects, strongly urging upon him the necessity of immediate intervention. Thinking that by acting at the centre of Government, he might succeed in arresting the progress of persecution at Geneva, Miss Booth asked him to remain and see some influential people. He saw Col. von Buren and the President of the Republic; the latter advised him to send to him an appeal, which proved of no immediate use. Col. Clibborn had not the least idea when leaving Geneva that the police would at once be upon his track; they came to his house the next day, and not finding him, they then went to Miss Booth’s house. He heard nothing of their search for him till afterwards.

He was himself expelled from the Canton of Geneva about a week after the funeral of Charles Wyssa; his offences being that he had walked in a funeral procession (a thing allowed and practised continually), and that he had written an article on Arnold von Winkelried. This article was a very beautiful call to the exercise of a spirit of self-sacrifice, illustrated by the brave act of that Swiss hero.

I give the following comment on Col. Clibbon’s expulsion in the original from En Avant:—

“L’arrêté d’expulsion en date du 18 Septembre est basé sur les trois motifs suivants:

“1o Sa ‘conduite donnerait lieu à des plaintes.’

“Le seul point qui a été signalé dans l’interrogatoire est d’avoir écrit l’article: ‘On demande des Arnold de Winkelried’ dans le numéro de En Avant! du 1er juillet.

“2o D’avoir ‘contrevenu à l’arrêté du Conseil d’Etat interdisant les exercices de l’Armée du Salut.’

“C’est-à-dire d’avoir, au commencement du mois d’août, deux dimanches, à 7 heures du matin, dans le local privé, présidé deux réunions de prière et d’y avoir lu la Bible, parlé, prié Dieu et chanté. Il ne fut question dans l’interrogatoire que de ces deux réunions.

“3o D’avoir ‘violé la loi sur le culte extérieur.’

“Le seul fait qui lui a été reproché sous ce rapport, est d’avoir pris part au cortège funèbre de Charles Wyssa et d’avoir chanté un cantique sur la route.

“Il n’existe aucune loi en Suisse interdistant de chanter sur la voie publique; pas plus qu’il n’en existe qui défende de prendre part à un cortège funèbre.

“D’ailleurs les chants ont cessé à la première sommation.”

CHAPTER VII.

Miss Booth and Capt. Becquet repaired to Neuchâtel on the 15th September, where they presented themselves for interrogation by the Juge d’instruction (Police Magistrate) with reference to the meeting at the Prise-Imer, (in the forest).

Miss Booth stated that she had held the said meeting on Sunday afternoon, the 9th inst., and that she was aware that in so doing she had violated the decree forbidding the meetings of the Army.

The Magistrate: What explanation have you to give?

Miss Booth: The decree is illegal, it is a violation of the Constitution.

The Magistrate’s Secretary demurred to enter this reply, upon which Miss Booth, addressing the Magistrate, asked:

Is it I who am writing this document, or is it you?

The Magistrate: Certainly, Mdlle., it is you.

Miss Booth: Then I request that you will put down what I say textually, or I cannot sign.

Miss Booth here repeated Article 49 of the Federal Constitution, “Liberty of conscience and worship is inviolable,” adding: “This is true or it is false. We are also under the protection of Article 11, as our methods had nothing illegal in them. We could not, as a religious association, be legally restricted or forbidden.”

The Magistrate: Do you intend to continue to hold your meetings?

Miss Booth: Yes.

The Magistrate then remarked that he would consult other parties, seeming much perplexed to know what to do with his prisoners.

No further attempt being made to detain them, Miss Booth and Captain Becquet walked out.

On the following day, Sunday, Miss Booth took part in another private meeting near the same spot in the forest of Rochefort, and although two policemen were present no official notice was taken of this meeting. She accepted the hospitality during the two following days of the family of M. Aimé Humbert. The Val de Ruz stated that “the Magistrate sent her to the Public Prosecutor, and that he, unwilling to take upon himself the office of conducting her to prison, sent her in turn to M. Comtesse, President of the Council of State, who accepted the responsibility.”

On the 17th, the Secretary of the Parquet waited upon her therefore at M. Humbert’s and requested her to walk to the prison, as she had freely constituted herself a prisoner, and the bail had been withdrawn.

(The following is related in a letter from a lady of Neuchâtel.) “Miss Booth was a little reluctant to follow this officer, and asked why they did not send gendarmes to fetch her. It was explained to her, however, that it was much better for her to go at once without waiting for the gendarmes, as she would have been obliged to be marched by them through the streets to the Préfecture, there to be questioned and searched (her pockets emptied, &c.), which was too revolting to think of. After a few moments’ hesitation, Miss Booth made up her mind to follow the secretary to the prison, which is in the Rue du Château. My sisters and I accompanied her, and Miss Patrick, who was allowed to share her cell in the prison. The jailer’s wife received us rather kindly, and said she had prepared the best cell for these ladies. The police officer then left us after having delivered his prisoner to the care of the jailers. We ascended silently three stories, following the woman with her great keys. Miss Booth was grave and somewhat impressed, having never seen a prison before. We stopped before a huge door, which the woman unlocked with a great noise; this door led to a little passage, in which was a table. The woman took another large key out of the drawer, and unlocked another door, saying, ‘This is the cell, mesdames.’ It was 14 feet by 7—two little windows high up, doubly barred,—no chance of getting too much air, as they can only be reached by climbing on a chair. By doing this one can get a view of the lake, mountains, and part of the town. It was nearly six o’clock when we entered, almost dark, and the place looked very dismal—the walls quite bare, and dirty. A table, a few wooden chairs, two little beds with straw mattresses and coarse brown blankets, were all the furniture. (We brought her a few cushions and a piece of carpet.) Our little company looked round, not much comforted, and the tears came to our eyes as we thought of the frail being who would have to live in this place for days, perhaps weeks. ‘Let us pray,’ suddenly said Miss Booth. We all kneeled down, and the first words which were uttered in this cell were addressed to the Throne of God, to the Father of all mercies, on behalf of His beloved child who had been called to suffer for His name. As we were concluding our little prayer-meeting, the jailer’s wife entered, and requested the demoiselles to leave the cell. As we went out, sadly saying good-bye to our dear prisoners, we noticed that it was not without emotion that Miss Booth realised that she would be locked up, with no chance of stepping out of her cell. Twelve long days have been spent there by her and her companion. A few friends had the privilege of seeing her sometimes. Whenever I went I always found her perfectly peaceful, even cheerful, happy in the Lord and working for Him all the day. Prayers and hymns have been echoed from these walls, and could tell many a tale. ‘O! how I love these walls,’ said Miss Booth one day, patting them with her hand, ‘I could kiss them, they have been such friends to me. Jesus has been with me here. He fills the place with His presence.’”

Knowing the intense anxiety felt on her account by her parents in England, Miss Booth most carefully abstained from mentioning, or allowing to be mentioned by her friends, certain facts connected with her imprisonment. She represented her position in the brightest possible colours, for their sake. She had nevertheless to endure a good deal, which only came to our knowledge later. She was in very weak health at the time, and suffered extremely from sickness, brought on every day by the unwholesome odours and other discomforts of the prison, so much so, that at one time fears were entertained that she would not have sufficient strength to appear at the trial. When very faint and sick, she could only obtain a little air by standing up on a chair and stretching upward towards the small barred window. The journal, the Val de Ruz, had the following remarks on her case:—“Our prisons were made for locking up malefactors, and all in them, is in uniform harmony with this object—discipline, utensils, régime. To throw into such prisons young English ladies accustomed to care that is not given to criminals, and especially accustomed to perfect cleanliness—to make them lie upon a palliasse upon which has lain who knows who, and put their heads upon a sack of straw, eat from a rough platter the ordinary food of malefactors—(Miss Booth has not wished to be given better food than the other prisoners)—certainly that is not all very cheerful for them, nor is it for the honour of the Canton.[33] Regard for England and for these young ladies, who have committed no other fault than to obey their consciences—a new crime which had to be coined in order to imprison them—might have prompted a more gentle treatment of them.”

On the evening of the third day of her imprisonment a few Salvationists, wishing to give her a glad surprise and a sign of their loving remembrance of her, gathered in a group on the terrace of the prison, about 300 feet below her cell, and sang together one of their familiar hymns:—

“Soldats du Christ, le Maître nous appelle!

Serrons nos rangs, que chacun soit fidèle!

Si de Satan la force est redoutable,

Le Dieu des Cieux est puissant, secourable.”

At that moment Miss Booth was on her knees, seeking renewed force, during one of those moments of sadness and darkness which are permitted sometimes to those who labour for souls; permitted indeed to a degree at times which seems momentarily to justify the mocking assertion, “He saved others; himself he cannot save.” The sweet sound of this singing far below, falling and rising on the breeze, was to her at that moment a message of reassurance and joy. She stood upon her chair, and reaching up, waved her white handkerchief[34] from the small barred window, as a sign of recognition. To this sign the singers replied by a fervent Amen! and again they sang: “Jesu, seul refuge de mon âme.” M. Cornaz, whose residence is in the neighbourhood of the prison, hearing the sound, called for the police, who took the names of those who sang. They and the prisoners were accused of having arranged this previously as a kind of challenge to the authorities, which was not the case at all. The next morning the jailor threatened to padlock the windows, which would have prevented the only means of obtaining a little fresh air. Police were placed around the prison on the following night to prevent a repetition of the singing; but they did not prevent the gathering round the walls of a formidable band of roughs, who yelled and hooted, and shouted threats and curses which fell painfully upon the ears of the poor prisoners. At one time the violence of the crowd was so great that a kind of trembling came over Miss Booth; it seemed as if, but for the prison walls, she would have been given up to these people, as to a pack of wolves, to be devoured. There seemed to be no police interference in this case, and the disturbance continued to a very late hour, when their wild songs and cries were heard dying away in the distance.

This incident caused the jailer and his wife a good deal of annoyance, and they allowed their irritation to express itself in rough and uncivil language to Miss Booth who was in no way responsible in the matter. The jailer came with a placard containing the prison rules, which he nailed up, commanding her to note its contents. It related to singing, smoking and other matters. Miss Booth fastened up under this a paper with the words: ‘My peace I give unto you; not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.’ When the jailer next entered, he stood opposite these words, staring at them for some time. But he did not appear to conclude that there was anything in them dangerous to prison discipline, and left them there. The worst undoubtedly of the discomforts Miss Booth had to suffer, and that which seriously affected her health, was the horrible odour which arose at certain hours from the passage. This brought on violent retching every morning, and made eating out of the question.

After a few days, Miss Booth observed, however, a marked change in the conduct of her keepers. This was probably owing in part to external influence. It is said that the visit of Mr. Wilbraham Taylor from England had something to do with this amelioration. Mr. Taylor holds an office in the Queen’s household; he visited Neuchâtel, and asked to see Miss Booth’s cell, taking notes of all he observed. It is stated, also, that the Prefect about this time summoned the jailer and said to him “Are you aware that you have distinguished prisoners in your charge? There is a report in the town that you act as a veritable demon towards them.” Miss Booth speaks gratefully of the jailer’s daughter, who waited on her and Miss Patrick; she ministered to their comfort in such small ways as she was able. Her father’s manner also became respectful, so much so, that it began to be said that “the jailer’s family had been converted through the influence of the Salutiste prisoners.”

It was touching to many of us who were present at the meeting for prayer called at Exeter Hall on the 25th September, to hear the prison song of our friend sung by the vast throng assembled on that occasion. They were simple words, composed by her in her prison, and echoed in London by some thousands of voices from hearts in sympathy with her own.

“First Beloved of my soul,

I am here alone with Thee,

And my prison, ’tis a heaven

Since Thou sharest it with me.”

I venture to give a few sentences from one of her letters to me at this time, reserving what is more confidential.

“In Prison. Neuchâtel. Sept. 19. Your letter reached me by the hands of Mdlle. Humbert, who has permission to enter once a day. I am most thankful for this. It was the Lord Jesus who prompted you to write as you did. It was such a comfort to me.... Yesterday I was in great sadness. Many things pressed on my heart in connection with His business and touching His kingdom. Satan attacked me sorely; thick darkness surrounded me; my body was wearied out, and my spirit was overwhelmed within me.... I cried out of the depths, and He heard me.... All at once I heard singing. It was our people! The singing sounded glorious in the silent night, and the burden fell from my heart as I listened.... Your sympathy and help, above all, your mother’s heart towards me, are a great consolation to me. I see in you an answer to many prayers offered so long. You understand our aims; your work is our work—one. It is all to bring home the lost, to save the nations, the world. Jesus has wonderfully upheld me since I left my home and country. I have been led by a way I knew not, or ever dreamed of. He has pointed the way, guided me, and given power to endure reproach for His name’s sake. Our one desire is to get at the masses, the lost, the outcast, the rejected, the vile, the chained, the prisoners of sin and misery—to break their chains and proclaim deliverance to them in the name of Jesus. To speak out the whole truth, to open their eyes. In doing this, we must expect to meet all the fury of hell and of wicked men, who find their gains lessened and their interests endangered by our warfare.... May I, like Paul, not be ‘disobedient to the heavenly vision,’ but go on. It is heartrending to see how ‘all men seek their own,’ and how frightened they are to risk anything for God!... Pray for me during the Trial. God will teach me what to speak; I will not fear.... Surely God has a great work in these latter times for women to do. We need an army of holy, consecrated, brave women who will dare to obey God. What a shaking the world would have!... I slept last night, and am thankful, so thankful. I thought of you, and of what you said about her—your ‘Evangeline,’ and of all your words.... My prison is all brilliant with the presence of Jesus.... My dear mother has been so comforted because you were with me.—Your loving CATHARINE.”

The following, written by Mrs. Booth to her daughter, in prison, I am permitted to publish.

“114, Clapton Common, London, E.

“September 19th.

“My Precious Child,—

“Words cannot convey what I have suffered about you during the last twenty-four hours, only hearing that you were in prison and not knowing whether anyone was with you, or how you were being treated. This is a test of one’s consecration certainly; still I can say my soul does not draw back, and I know yours does not. I am now relieved to find that Patty is with you, and that friends are allowed to see you. I do hope you are not so ill as when I heard last, though I fear all this strain will bring a fearful reaction. Oh! how gladly would I change places with you if I could. I feel that I could bear it more easily than you, although I am worse than usual just now. I would come if I could be of any use, but I am so poorly that I should be compelled to take three days for the journey, and by that time I hope you may be at liberty. Be sure to insist on having comfortable food and bedding. Give those officials to understand that although we do submit to suffer for the sake of Christ, nevertheless we have influence in this country which will make itself felt if they treat you unreasonably. Even if your imprisonment was legal you have a right to be treated as a State prisoner before trial. Take care you insist on your right, and don’t suffer unnecessarily, because of your health. Paul said when his persecutors wanted to hide their shame, ‘Nay verily, (Acts, xvi. c., 37 v.) There are times when it is as needful to claim our rights as it is at others to sacrifice them. The Lord wants you to fight another day, and perhaps for other nations besides Switzerland; so take all the care you can. It is an unspeakable comfort to me to know that Patty is with you; give her my tender love. You must solace yourself by thinking of the deliverance which God will work out for many of the ignorant and oppressed and lost by your sufferings. The more I see of the world, the more I am sure that the redemption of the people from all forms of oppression and suffering, can only be accomplished by saving them from their sins, and they can only be saved from sin by people called and energised by the Holy Spirit; and on such people the Devil and his agents will always set to do them hurt as far as the Lord permits. Saviours must be sufferers, and sufferers just to the extent in which they are given up to be saviours. We must fill up that which is behind of the sufferings of Christ. It is hard work to flesh and blood, especially when our bodies are so weak; but, dearest girl, His grace is sufficient, and it shall be sufficient, both for you in the prison and for me lying awake in the night imagining what you are passing through, which latter I sometimes think is the hardest of the two. Do let me know the particulars. Instruct some one outside to write me daily; I cannot endure suspense if it is possible to avoid it. Be sure we are all praying for you, and doing all we can also. Your darling father is much harassed in many ways, but he talks about you continually when at home. He says he fears nothing but your health; if you can only be calm and confident, he is sure that God means to work out great results from all this. He comforts me continually by showing me that this is only what is involved in full consecration, and, praise the Lord! though my heart bleeds at every pore, I am able to keep it on the altar for Christ and the world. Pray for me also that my faith fail not. Dear Mrs Butler! how remarkable that God should send her to you just then! If she is near you, give her my tenderest love, and tell her that I admit her claim to be mother No. 2.

“Give my love and mother’s gratitude to all the dear friends who have stood by you in this your ‘first answer.’ How much better off after all were you than poor Paul, whom ‘no man’ stood by. The Lord knew your weakness, and so He found you a supporter. May He reward all who helped you for His sake! HE WILL! They also shall be partakers in the reward!

“To Him who hath loved you with more than a mother’s love, and to whom I gave you fully in the first hour of your life, I now commend you in the love that knows no change.

“Your mother,

“CATHARINE BOOTH.”

Captain Becquet was absent at Berne on the Tuesday on which Miss Booth went to prison. He was summoned by letter to come, but owing to a delay in the post, he did not arrive until Thursday night a little before midnight. He walked in with the cheerful air of a man returning home after a brief absence, rather than of one going to prison, apologizing gaily and courteously for being so late! The jailer afterwards acknowledged that he never in his life had had to do with prisoners like these—so peaceful, happy and lighthearted; never was a complaint heard from their lips of anything. Becquet’s cell was a small, poor one on the ground floor. A little incident worthy of being recalled occurred in connection with his imprisonment. During the meetings held at Neuchâtel, one of the foremost of the ringleaders of the roughs who broke in and insulted the Salutistes was a young German, about twenty years of age, who understood no language except his own. This poor fellow had behaved shamefully, covering the speakers with mud, and insulting them in his rough and brutal manner. At one of the meetings at which Captain Becquet was speaking in French, he appeared to be in some degree affected, although he did not understand a word. Captain Becquet observed this, and proposed to pray for him. As he did so, the face of the young German began to wear a subdued expression. Towards the close, again prayer was offered for him; and such was the spiritual power present in that place, that, though the poor fellow did not understand a word of French, he was seized with remorse for his sins, and with a strong desire for deliverance from them. He followed Becquet from the door, and addressed him pleadingly with tears in his eyes. Becquet, not being able to speak a word of German, but seeing how the matter stood, took him by the arm in a friendly way, and marched him along the street to a German evangelist, who could speak to him in his own tongue. The youth became quiet and gentle, and afterwards asked the forgiveness of those whom he had treated injuriously. Hearing, in September, that his friend and teacher was in the prison, he came day after day, after his work was over, and stood near the window of his cell, which was on the basement floor, calling to him in the two only words he could say in French, “Hallelujah; Amen!”

Capt. Becquet knew his voice, and responded. In this way alone was the young German able to express his gratitude and sympathy for his friend; but it was eloquent enough to Becquet’s ears—eloquent indeed to the ears of all who could discern the beauty of the transformation through which that poor soul had passed.

Mrs. Booth reminded her daughter that she ought to claim the treatment due to a State prisoner before trial. In connection with this “prison préventive,” to which she was subjected, the following facts should be here recorded.

The meeting in the forest was a private gathering of the soldiers and friends of the Army. Being at some distance from the town, and in a secluded place, it would, in all probability, have passed off undiscovered and undisturbed but for an act almost deserving the name of treachery. The meeting had been convened by private interviews and by letters. One of these letters was addressed to a Mr. Touchon, the envelope bearing his full address and his occupation. There was no other person of the same name in his street; notwithstanding this, the letter was delivered by the postal carrier to a member of the Council of State, of the same surname, but having a different business, and living in another part of the town. This Councillor handed it to the President of the Council of State, although perfectly aware for whom the letter was really intended. This fact he subsequently admitted to Mr. Touchon in a reply to his demand made for the surrender of the letter.

The President of the Council of State having thus received information of the meeting, and going altogether out of his province and beyond his authority, issued a warrant ordering the Prefect of the village of Boudry to arrest Miss Booth and Captain Becquet, and have them immediately imprisoned. The Suisse Libérale of the 27th September, contains the following remark:—“According to our laws, imprisonment, prior to trial for contraventions et délits, is not inflicted in the case of contraventions. It is an exceptional penalty inflicted when the facts considered as delinquencies present a special and extreme character and gravity, or when the person has not a fixed domicile; then imprisonment before trial MAY be ordered.”

In the latter case, of a person having no fixed domicile, the accused is imprisoned before trial under the law of vagabondage. Miss Booth therefore was considered as a vagabond. It was stated in several of the public journals that the Juge d’Instruction and the Public Prosecutor alike, declined to take the responsibility of this act. M. Comtesse therefore took upon himself the whole responsibility, and acted singly.

The Suisse Libérale, of Sept. 25, had the following:—

“We have received the following article, and though we do not care to make ourselves the defenders of the proceedings or opinions of the Salvation Army, we give the article below because we consider it our duty to defend the principles which are dear to us as Swiss citizens. ‘Miss Booth is in prison, and will shortly appear before the Tribunal with Mr. Becquet and others. Some persons are glad of it, others are deeply afflicted.... For ourselves that which troubles us and that which ought, we think, to trouble every citizen, whatever his religious or political opinions, is the fact itself, independent of the consequences which may accrue, that at this hour in our country there are persons in prison for conscience sake; persons dragged before the tribunals for having held a religious meeting, not in a town where it might have been said that they disturbed the quiet of the inhabitants, but at a distance, in a forest, without noise, in an entirely private if not secret manner. They tell us, of course, that this is not altogether a question of religious liberty, and that Miss Booth is imprisoned not for religious reasons entirely, but for having contravened the decree of the Government. We wish to emphasize the fact that in no religious persecutions recorded in history has the question been presented in any other manner. Protestants who were imprisoned in Spain and in France in the last century, or who were sent to the galleys, were never thus punished on account simply of their opinions, but for an infraction proved of certain royal edicts, or decrees of Parliament, or even Constitutional laws of the State forbidding their assemblies. If persecution could be made lawful, or legitimized by a decree, or even by a law, it may be asserted that with very few exceptions there has never been in this world a religious persecution, and that the word ‘persecution’ should be struck out of history, and if necessary, out of the dictionary. If we still continue to blame the condemnations pronounced against Christians in the time of the Roman Emperors, or of the Reformers of more modern times, we cannot consistently do so in the matter of the punishments inflicted. We might occasionally deplore the severity of those punishments, but we should be obliged, according to this newly-expressed view, to acknowledge them as legal. How often has it been repeated as an incontestible verity that it is a just and wise policy to avoid all appearance of persecution. This verity seems to be forgotten now amongst us. What we are witnessing at present is something more than an appearance of persecution, it is in good sooth the beginning of a real persecution. We should take care not to attenuate the gravity of an injustice of which we ourselves may not be the object. If we do not take alarm at these positive manifestations of religious persecution, we shall probably be obliged to face much greater ones in a short time. ‘That which is called persecution,’ said Bossuet, in speaking of the ill-treatment of the French Protestants. Such was then, and such is, alas, now also the power of self-deception, even in noble minds, leading them, instead of looking straight at principles, to allow themselves to be biased in their action by their sympathies or their antipathies. Is it needful to remind Christians of that word of Christ, ‘All that you would that men should do unto you, do ye also unto them;’ or to remind the citizens of a free country of the saying of Montesquieu, ‘An injustice done to the meanest citizen is a danger to all.’ Can we continue to contemplate calmly the rising tide of intolerance, and phlegmatically to say, ‘Why should we trouble ourselves about all this? it is only an affair of the Salvationists, and does not hurt us.’”

The following are extracts from a letter, written by Miss Booth while in prison, to the members of the Salvation Army in Switzerland and France:—

“MY DEAR COMRADES,—Within the four walls of my prison I have time to contemplate our present position, and perhaps in my solitude it is easier to do so than when in the midst of the battle. I feel it a duty to communicate to you some of my thoughts. Far from being discouraged by the difficulties which we are now encountering, we ought to be more determined than ever to go forward under the banner of Jesus Christ. But in order to go forward with success, the first thing needful is that we should be ‘Saints according to the will of God’—that is to say, freed from the power of sin. Think well what this means. Never forget that the war in which we are engaged is against sin only, and if you desire to be strong in this war it is absolutely necessary that you should first be pure. Purity and power go hand in hand. Hence we must give no quarter to the enemy, no, nor yield by one hair’s-breadth. Let us have done with all excuses in favour of our defects. Sin is sin, by whatever name it is called, and whether open or concealed in the heart. Dear officers and soldiers, it is necessary that you should be delivered from all the power of sin. Then, and only then, will you be able to accomplish your work as true soldiers. You must have a cleansed heart in which Jesus Christ may himself speak, think, and reign. All must see that you indeed walk with God, that you have the spirit of Christ, that your words, your actions, and your whole life announce him and proclaim him again in the flesh....

“It is not enough, however, to be holy. You must be militant. It is an excellent thing to be a saint, it is very good to enjoy perfect peace in one’s soul, and to look forward to an entrance into the golden city. This is indispensable, but it is not enough. It would be an egotistical religion which stopped there. It is a contemptible thing to try to load oneself with every blessing, while one is doing very little for the outer world. It was not thus with Jesus. He was a saint and a soldier. And if you wish to do your duty to a perishing world you must become like him. Let it be well understood that our army has no place for drones, and that it needs courageous men who are not afraid to fight, to suffer, and to die; men and women who will abstain from weeping over their own sufferings, and who are resolved to hold on to the end, come what may, and to die at their post.

“In the midst of this fiery opposition you should not lose sight for a moment of the fact that these men who are against us—our sworn enemies—are just the men whom it is our duty to gain for Christ Jesus, who lived, suffered and died for those who cried ‘crucify him!’ You also must be ready to suffer and to die for the salvation of these rebels. We must show to the world a reality. We see how little these poor masses of the people are reached by any good influences; that they are without God and without hope in the world, the slaves of sin and Satan. Oh comrades, rush to the rescue! I find no words in which to express my conviction of the greatness of the opportunity now presented to us if we are faithful to God and to our principles. Public attention is directed towards us. Ears are opened. ‘Salvation!’ that is a word of which they do not yet understand the meaning though it is always in their mouths; but they will understand it. In the presence of all difficulties then let us be up and doing, to declare to those that are ignorant of its meaning the great deliverance through Jesus Christ. We must look far beyond and below the external manifestations of this popular anger. This crowd which howls and rages, these men who swear at and curse us, only reveal by their attitude the desolate, troubled and unhappy state of the hearts and consciences underlying this tumult. Look always below this rugged envelope to the starving souls which it clothes. The other evening in contemplating them I could only cry to Jesus through my tears. It seemed to me that in place of their howling and cursing I heard a cry for mercy and pardon at the moment of death. I seemed to see their faces blanching before the tribunal of the Supreme Judge, and my own heart was shaken in realising the anguish of theirs at such an hour.

“Only one word more. Look towards Calvary when you feel yourselves weak. When you are slandered,—when you suffer, look to Calvary. All these things will fall back into their proper dimensions, and into oblivion in the dazzling light of the cross. March straight forward, as our great captain did, faithful to the end. Be deaf, blind, dead to all except the will of our Father.

“This is the message I send you from my prison. The eyes of God are upon you. The great ‘cloud of witnesses’ is regarding you.

“Yours devotedly,

“CATHARINE BOOTH.”

Many of the journals had asked the question why it was that only six persons were summoned to the trial (four Swiss had been arrested as well as the two English), when several hundreds of others were equally guilty, and why only two out of the six were selected for imprisonment. A cry of indignation, however, rang through the country when a violent article appeared in M. Cornaz’s paper, dictating, in despotic and threatening terms to the jury, concerning the verdict he desired them to return. I quote the following passage:—“Those who are charged with the judgment of these guilty persons must take care that they act in harmony with public opinion, and that they do not attempt to brave that opinion. To do so would be more than impolitic, it would be immoral.” “Is it possible,” remarked the Suisse Libérale, “that a jury can thus, in our day, be so intimidated? If, as it is stated, the Director of the Department of Justice and Police (M. Cornaz) is the director of this journal (the Reveil), it ought to be thoroughly understood that the tribunals, according to him, exist not to perform public services, but to pronounce decrees at his dictation.”

The Nouvelle Gazette, of Zurich, had an ironical article on the same subject. It reported what M. Cornaz deemed a most shocking fact, namely, that certain persons sang before the prison of Miss Booth, and that the prisoners made a sign from their window with their handkerchiefs. “The Reveil adds, with a comic seriousness, that measures have been taken to prevent the repetition of such a scandal. We earnestly hope that the trial of Boudry will put an end to the scandal of these prosecutions by a victorious acquittal; for, far above the decision of the Grand Council which has authorised these prosecutions, there stands the Judge, the Constitution itself, and the Supreme Law of our country. It is impossible to reconcile with the guarantees of religious liberty which the Canton of Neuchâtel enjoys, such intolerance as the present, worthy of the dark ages.”

The Journal de Genève wrote:—

“It is well that we should call to mind the words of the oath which the Neuchâtel jury and judge have at this moment taken: ‘I swear before God to respect the rights and liberties of the people and of the citizens, rigidly to observe the Constitution and the laws which conform to the Constitution, and to fulfil faithfully and conscientiously the duty of my charge.’ The Legislature which indicted in this manner the expression of the duty of the Justiciary power, had no doubt before its eye the motive of preventing the suspension at the good pleasure of any particular party in any given case or under any pretext whatsoever, the permanent guarantees which are the birthright of the people and each citizen.” (The Genevois itself testified to the fact that a violation of the law in our day is an infinitely graver matter than it was in the time of Louis XIV., and says that the law was formerly the expression of the arbitrary will of the despot, while now it is the expression of the deliberate will of the people.) “This is very well said,” wrote the Journal de Genève; “but why then does the Genevois forget that in Geneva as well as in Neuchâtel, and throughout Switzerland, the laws which are the expression of the deliberate will of the people, are precisely those which proclaim and guarantee the right of meeting, the liberty of the press, and the free exercise of public worship. The measures which violate these emanate not from the people but from the Council of State, which is not at all the same thing. This prosecution at Boudry has an immense political significance in the highest sense of that word, and the decision, whatever it may be, will take its place in the history of Republican public rights. Even if that jury at Boudry, yielding to the injunction of a journalist who is none other than the Director of the Department of Justice and Police of Neuchâtel, should consent to render to him the service so odiously demanded, the question could not be thus set aside. There remains an appeal to the Federal Tribunal, and it may be hoped for the honour of Switzerland that such an appeal would not be addressed in vain to that high authority. This prosecution at Boudry also has great importance in the matter of showing to what point official pressure is allowed to influence the administration of justice in quarters where authoritative radicalism rides triumphant.... We see young girls of irreproachable conduct shut up in a common prison for a crime which no penal code in any civilized country has ever punished. But the greatest shock of all (proving that people never stop when once they begin to descend on a wrong path) is the article in the Reveil, in which the chief of the Neuchâtel police calls on the jury of Boudry to give a verdict of condemnation in language the cynicism of which has awakened throughout the whole of Switzerland a cry of astonishment and indignation. Surely this fatal succession of arbitrary acts ever becoming more and more unjust will contain a serious warning for those who in the future may be tempted to enter upon such a dangerous course. The first false step was in allowing the police to remain inactive in the presence of violence which it might have stopped. The next was the violation of private houses in order to hunt up suspected persons, and the last is a private order given to a jury to punish offences which are not mentioned in any penal code. From the very beginning of this terrible Governmental campaign we exposed this series of injustices, but truly we never pretended to aspire to prophecy, for the end was only too easy to predict. We learned long ago that liberty and justice avenge themselves on those who violate them, in forcing them, so to speak, to push on to the last extreme of tyranny.”

On Saturday, September 29th, Miss Booth and Captain Becquet, were conveyed from prison to the court-house at Boudry under the charge of a jailer. Miss Patrick was not allowed to accompany them, but managed alone to reach the court-house in time. Many Salvationists filled the entrance an hour before the opening.

A number of persons had begun to arrive at the Neuchâtel railway station very early in the morning, among them being several jurists, advocates, and well-known literary men from different parts of Switzerland. The doors of the court-house were soon surrounded with a dense crowd of persons eagerly awaiting the beginning of the trial. It was said that the English language was heard almost as much as the French in that crowd. According to the Neuchâtel custom, the doors were only opened to the public after the jury, the accused, the witnesses, and the advocates had taken their places. After this there was a great rush, and the gendarmes could only just manage to keep order. The first day was occupied by a revision of the list of jurymen. It was contested that the jury had been irregularly constituted, and that it would be necessary to eliminate from the preliminary list of nineteen men from which the choice was to be made, all those who had signed the famous petition against the Salvationists, because, in doing so, they had expressed an opinion hostile to the accused, and could not be expected to judge with impartiality. Finally, the jury was constituted of persons who had not signed the petition, but had been neutral.

Two able lawyers of the Neuchâtel bar, Messrs. Monnier and Du Pasquier, had been engaged for the defence, and had thrown themselves into the question heart and soul during the week. Two long sittings on Saturday were chiefly occupied with the discussion of the protests of these lawyers, in which they exposed the succession of illegalities and the measures of unnecessary harshness which had marked the arrest and imprisonment. 1st. The arrest had been performed by a functionary of the Government acting entirely beyond his powers and out of his department. 2nd. Though the order to seize and imprison Miss Booth and Captain Becquet had been issued on Sunday, the 9th, it had not received until the 17th the official signatures necessary to make it of any value. 3rd. Even then it was a measure of extreme harshness not required by the law, and not authorised save in cases of the greatest emergency. 4th. The knowledge of the intended meeting in the forest had been betrayed to the authorities by the violation of a letter. It had been given into the hands of a Councillor who hated the Army. The Juge d’Instruction having refused to order the imprisonment, the matter was sent to the Procureur-Général. He having also refused, the Councillor beforenamed, breathing out vengeance against these people who dared worship God in a forest contrary to his decree, illegally ordered their imprisonment himself.

The lawyers for the defence also declared an appeal to the Federal Council against the decree of the 16th July forbidding the meetings, which was in violation of the Cantonal and Federal constitutions.

During the morning adjournment of the Court, the Salvationists spent a pleasant time in quiet conversation. Mr. Herbert Booth, brother of Miss Booth, arrived from England at this moment, and there was great joy when he appeared amongst them.

At a second adjournment the Hotel de Ville was immediately invaded by the former occupants of the Court, to such an extent that there was scarcely a vacant seat. In the dining-room there was assembled a motley group of literary men, advocates, reporters, witnesses, &c., and, according to the correspondent of one of the local papers, one of the accused Salvationists also figured among this crowd. The remainder of the accused, however, were together apart in a private room, where they sang hymns and were perfectly at their ease.

The Public Prosecutor had shown much unwillingness to perform the duty imposed on him of being the accuser of the Salvationists. It is said that he had even protested that he would resign his post rather than accept that duty. His conduct throughout the trial was that of an honest man endeavouring to make the best of a situation in which he felt embarrassed, and of a cause with which he had no real sympathy. His wife had shown some gentle attentions to Miss Booth, sending her flowers and grapes while she was in prison.

He began his speech for the prosecution by a description of the antipathy felt for the Salvation Army among all classes of the people, chiefly the most cultivated, and those who formed and guided public opinion, and then said:—

“If the common people have been shocked there are also élite spirits who have shared these feelings. We may remember the opinion fulminated by that eminently Christian woman, Mme. de Gasparin, in a passionate pamphlet, but in which, as we might expect from her generous character, she does not go beyond the truth. (I see a smile on the lips of the Maréchale.)”

Opening the book of Mme. de Gasparin: “Listen,” said he, “to the passionate words of a lady, a Christian, if there ever was one. Listen to the charges which she fulminates with a quivering pen against these ‘saltimbanques’ (clowns). He then read for about twenty minutes from that book. It was thought that he could not have helped the cause in the eyes of every right-minded man in a better way; all felt how utterly flat fell those furious, passionate phrases and descriptions, and how utterly opposed they were to truth.”

He then continued:

“If cultivated and refined persons have expressed so strong an antipathy as this, how can one expect the mass of the people to remain calm? It is too much to ask of them. Our people, however, are not so very intolerant. We remember the crisis of 1873, when there was a division in our church. At that time, however, there was no violence nor great disorder in our streets. From this we may gather that the Army inspires a most special horror. At Paris, they do not care much about it, for on the one hand the people are sceptical, and on the other hand they are Catholics.... But our people have seen in the Salvation Army the caricature of that which they hold dearest in the world, and therefore they have risen against it. The Council of State began by proclaiming the true principle in a manifesto which is recorded to its honour. The people, however, refused to listen to it, and from one end to the other of the country there has been an ever-increasing agitation. Then came the great petition. It is not known how it took its birth. It was first begun by young men not publicly known, and yet it was rapidly filled with signatures. Public opinion is evidently exasperated. What could the Government have done? Call out the troops and fire on the people? Could we consent to have corpses in our streets? What a cry of vengeance there would have been against the authorities responsible for a massacre! Our Government is a Government of public opinion. If it had acted in this manner it would have been swept away. There are necessities of Government, and one of these necessities was to re-establish order in the streets. The Council of State fulfilled that duty as well as it could. It proposed the decree which has been voted by the Grand Council. Miss Booth declares this decree to be unconstitutional, and refuses to obey it. This decree has been examined and resolved upon by competent authorities. The people have not claimed for it the Referendum, nor has there been any appeal against it. Even the minority of the Grand Council did not declare it to be contrary to the Constitution, but only asked that article 72 might be examined a little more closely. And this is the moment in which a young English woman chooses to fling this insult in the face of the Grand Council, saying to them, ‘You violate the Constitution.’ It was necessary, they said, to appeal to a superior authority, and they invoked the authority of conscience against a law legally resolved upon. This is the more surprising because the English never rebel against law, however unjust the law may be. Miss Booth and Mr. Becquet have not therefore even the excuse that they would have acted thus in their own country.... Would the Salvationists, I should like to know, themselves make any protest against Governmental interference supposing that the unedifying worship of the Goddess Reason were to be restored amongst us, and that it provoked disturbance? Or would they complain if the Government were to forbid a Congress of atheists whose presence aroused general reprobation? The Salvationists are fanatics, consequently they are intolerant. Their pretended Constitutional zeal is only adopted for self-defence, but it is impossible for them to transform their violation of a law into a Constitutional question. They say that the decree violates the Constitution; but that is not the question. The question is, Miss Booth and her friends have disobeyed a decree—are they aware that they have done so? The reasons for their doing so do not concern us. The religious person cannot supersede the citizen, so as to get rid of an obligation to obey the laws. A religious man must like others pay taxes, go through his military service, and take his place as a witness, or on a jury, &c. (Here the speaker made a considerable digression concerning religious fanaticism.) Fanaticism contributed one-third of the patients to the lunatic asylums. If the Army were not suppressed they would have to enlarge their asylums. Calvin was a fanatic of the worst type. As for himself (prosecutor), he was against all religious associations. Voltaire and Rousseau, and the enlightened nineteenth century had put all these things right.” Concerning public prayer, he said: “I would substitute for it my ideal—solitary and individual adoration. Christ, who was perhaps the most religious man who ever lived (here Capt. Becquet laughed) advised men to retire into their closets in order to pray to God. He who lifts up his soul in this manner is more religious than he who thumps on the pulpit, or shrieks ‘I am saved!’ Miss Booth who thinks she has more science than our Constitutional authorities, places herself above the law. Now, no one is above the law. The President of the Council of State is as much bound to obey the law as the lowest of the people. The Queen of England herself (who is not, however, a Marshall of the Salvation Army), is obliged to submit to Acts of Parliament. The law may be bad, but no human being can rise against it. It never entered the ideas of the conquered minority in the country to adopt such an attitude as that. The jury may possibly resolve in a negative fashion the question of culpable intention, by proving that the Salvationists have acted in good faith in ignoring the decree. But they did not ignore it; they deliberately violated it. They must bear the consequences, and no doubt they will be very happy to receive the baptism of martyrdom.”

The great point, however, made by the speaker was that upon which the decree had been based, i.e., that the Army was a “religious corporation,” and, therefore, must have a special authorization for its meetings. But this plea, (previously fully discussed, and its falsity exposed in the press), was utterly annihilated by a telegram received during the trial, addressed by Lord Granville to the British Ambassador at Berne, as follows: “The Salvation Army is not a Corporation.” This message fell like a bomb-shell into the midst of persons assembled at the trial at Boudry. It completely cut from beneath their feet the false ground upon which the persecutors and prosecutors of the Salutistes had stood.[35]

The policy, however, of the opposition seemed to be to endeavour to ignore even that authoritative decision of the English Foreign Office.

Towards six o’clock in the evening the atmosphere of the Court became so suffocating that many persons were almost overcome, and Miss Booth appeared very faint. She and Captain Becquet were set at liberty for the following day (Sunday) on the condition that they should present themselves before the Court on Monday morning, and that no meeting of the Salvation Army should take place in the interval. Col. de Perrot had his carriage in waiting, and took them to his residence in the vicinity.

When this permission was declared there arose in the Court a hoarse cry of “back to prison with her” frequently repeated. It took some considerable time for the gendarmerie to empty the Court, which was crowded to excess. The benches, also, were so battered and damaged by the scrambling of the crowd that it was necessary to replace them by new ones on the following day, by order of the municipality.

During the day one or two incidents had occurred—trifling in themselves, but which seemed to produce a certain impression. In the morning, when the Prosecutor was at the climax of one of his most scathing denunciations of the fanaticism of the Army, the window near him burst open with a sudden gust, sending his papers flying in all directions, and drowning his last words in the general hum of voices. A disorderly voice dared to say—“It was from heaven!”

When the Judge had pronounced the sitting adjourned, a dissipated-looking man, who had mounted upon a sort of shelf in a corner, cried out, “Au clou!” “To the lock-up!” He had scarcely uttered the words when the fixture came down with a crash, striking upon the head of an officer of the court, and precipitating the man himself to the floor, where his name was taken by a gendarme.

On Monday, the jury—grave, respectable-looking men—took their places. The Court was again filled to overflowing by a rush of people waiting for the moment when the doors should be opened. The proceedings began by the examination of the accused. Captain Becquet was called:—

Q. Do you acknowledge to having broken the decree of the Grand Conseil of 15th June last?

A. Yes!

Q. You knew that decree?

A. Yes!

M. Monnier (one of the lawyers for the defence): What caused you to feel that decree not binding upon you?

A. I thought it a violation of the Constitution.

The Judge: You therefore took upon yourself to judge the Neuchâtel authorities.

Captain Becquet remained silent.

M. Monnier: Did you not consider that in acting according to your conscience you were not committing a punishable act?

Captain Becquet: I considered that the Constitution gave me this right. I acted according to my convictions after as I did before the decree.

The Judge: The decree was one of police administration, which did not touch the question of conscience.

Captain Becquet: I prayed to God after my fashion. The police forbade me. I continued to do so notwithstanding.

Miss Booth was then called. Complete silence was observed.

The Judge: Do you acknowledge to have broken the decree of 15th June?

Miss Booth (slowly and distinctly, in a calm, clear voice): It is true that we have prayed and spoken in the name of Jesus, notwithstanding the decree of the Conseil d’Etat. We esteemed the Federal and Cantonal Constitutions, which guarantee religious liberty, to be above any decree framed in violation of those Constitutions. The Conseil d’Etat by its decree created, and the Grand Conseil established a state of things in which it was absolutely impossible for us to obey God without disobeying these councils. Our reply is that of the early Christians before the Council of Jerusalem, “WHETHER IT BE RIGHT IN THE SIGHT OF GOD TO HEARKEN UNTO YOU MORE THAN UNTO GOD—JUDGE YE!”

Q. Your violation of the decree was therefore wilful?

A. We had not, and we have not, any wish to break a law. In obeying this decree, we should have been unfaithful to God, to our convictions, and to our consciences.

These answers fell upon the most profound stillness, and evidently made a great impression. Many felt that before such answers, given by one of God’s chosen messengers, with all the calm, penetrating power of the spirit world, they themselves were summoned before the great Tribunal of the King of Kings, and that the accuser had become the accused.

Madame Boillot, a Swiss, and a sergeant in the Salvation Army, was next called. She replied when questioned: I am aware that there is a decree which forbids us to meet to pray. Our Constitutions guarantee liberty of conscience and of meeting, and the decree violates the Constitutions. The dwelling of the citizen is inviolable in Switzerland (alluding to a Salvation Army meeting held in her house). I have a right to ask my friends to meet at my house. As a Swiss I shall never renounce my rights, or obey such a decree.

The Judge: You therefore set yourself up as a judge of the Neuchâtel authorities?

Madame Boillot: It is not for me to enter into that question. All I know is that, keeping the Lord before my eyes, I cannot obey that decree.

The Procureur-Général: Are you a member of The Army?

Madame Boillot: Yes! I have the honour to be one! (Sensation.)

Monsieur Robert Convert was called, and made a spirited statement of some length: “I had knowledge of the decree. It was especially notified to me by a letter from the Prefect. Immediately upon the reception of the order, forbidding me to hold any meetings in my house, I protested, appealing to the Constitution which guarantees the inviolability of the citizen’s dwelling. I received no reply. I took part in the meeting at the Prise-Imer, and prayed to God and sang with the others, and as I am here to-day for serving God, it is to God I shall have to answer for my acts. I glory in being a Swiss and a Neuchâtelois, in belonging to a country which imposes upon its every citizen the duty of respecting the conscience of his neighbour.”

Q. Do you belong to the Salvation Army?

A. No.

M. Monnier: Did your father suffer formerly for his religion?

A. Yes; in 1832 he was condemned by the Quatre Ministraux to three days and three nights of prison for being a Mômier.

M. Monnier: Did you not consult Jurists, who told you you were within your right?

A. Yes.

Sergeant Cost, when questioned, replied that he had attended the meeting, and as Sergeant he had called the Soldiers of his district to it.

Sergeant Hess was next called.

Q. Are you in the Army?

A. Yes; I have that honour, and as was my duty as Sergeant, I called the soldiers of my division.

The Public Prosecutor: “Hess, have you not appeared on that seat before?”

Sergeant Hess: Yes, Sir, I was here once before and for a different cause! As painful as is to me the thought of having been here before for serving the devil, my former master, so happy am I to be here to-day for having served Christ, my new Master. I was then a drunkard, now I am a total abstainer, and by the grace of God I shall be faithful until the end.

This reply, pronounced in a cheerful firm voice, made a great impression in Court.

The Foreman of the Jury wanted to be clear on one point: Did not Mr. Convert declare that he had consulted jurisconsults, who told him he acted within his rights in persevering in spite of the decree?

Mr. Convert: Yes; I consulted three or four. They all told me that a special and exceptional law could not supersede the Constitution.

M. Monnier then spoke in the defence.

The following is an abridgment of his speech:—

“The great question before us to-day is the existence or not of a law which we are alleged to have disobeyed. If a law is unconstitutional it is no law, and ought not to be obeyed. In the present case there are two laws which are in contradiction to each other. The choice had to be made which was to be obeyed; and from the moment the accused persons made the choice they made, they must be considered to have been acting in good faith. We fall back on the Constitution itself, before which every law should bend. The jury, I acknowledge, is not a competent authority to decide a Constitutional question, but it will have to examine it, since it is necessary to know exactly whether we have infringed a legally imposed prohibition. (M. Monnier then read again the decree of the Council of State, followed by the decree of the Grand Council, forbidding the meetings of the Army, down to the words “seeing that any corporation.”) The decree and the warrant of arrest are based therefore upon Article 72 of the Constitution which refers to corporations. Now this Article 72 was absolutely abandoned on Saturday by the Public Prosecutor. With a loyalty which is to his credit, he threw overboard this article. From that moment the whole groundwork of the decree is overthrown. Article 72 being suppressed, the restrictions imposed on the rights of the Salvation Army are worthless, and the decree falls to the ground. What follows? Our judges are no longer bound by it, and no citizen can be held guilty for transgressing it.

We come now to the Federal Constitution. This guarantees the right of Association (Article 56), liberty of conscience, and of creed. This latter M. Jeanhenry[36] carefully distinguishes from liberty of public worship, as if the external exercise of worship was something superfluous. But does he not see that liberty of conscience and belief only come into effect when men unite in order to exercise the same form of its outward expression? What meaning would liberty of conscience have without this outward expression? It would only be the power of having one’s own opinion in one’s inmost soul. In this case the Constitutional law would be superfluous, for nothing can touch the inner conscience of any human being. The only thing which the authorities can guarantee is the safe expression externally of a man’s views. Moreover, the fundamental article, is Article 49, concerning freedom of conscience. Article 50, concerning liberty of public worship, is only the practical application and corollary of the former. (On this point M. Monnier cited the authority of Blumer, showing that Articles 49 and 50 are inseparable.) True freedom of public worship can only be exercised within the limits of public order and good morals. I ask has the Salvation Army offended against good morals? On the contrary it would have been much better received in Switzerland if it had less openly attacked immorality. And with regard to public order, it is said the Army is an occasion of disturbance. Are we to allow, then, that freedom of public worship is to be at the mercy of rowdies in the street? Our legislation on the subject means that the forms of public worship themselves may not be a contravention of public order. The Salvation Army itself does nothing which disturbs public order! This is in no way interfered with except by those who violently disturb the meetings. If the Cantons had the power of restricting according to their own fancy the free exercise of worship, the Federal Constitution would become the plaything of the caprice of the cantonal authorities. In England they understand perfectly the liberty of meeting and worship. There was formed there, in opposition to the Salvation Army, a ‘Skeleton Army’—(I see Miss Booth smiles)—which has collisions with the processions of its rival in the streets. A magistrate in England had put down the processions of the Salvation Army on one occasion, but the Judge of Assize, on the contrary, condemned the ‘Skeletons’ as the aggressive parties, and gave a verdict for the Salvationists, who had been disturbed in the exercise of their right. Now, in Neuchâtel, who are the disturbers? Is it the Army or the rowdies? The Army is but a sect, a little more eccentric, perhaps, than others. Those persons who do not like its methods need not go to witness them. Certain persons have only gone there in order to make a noise. Are we to give way to the corrupt proverb: ‘The beaten party must pay the fine?’ No; it is the roughs who ought to pay the fine.

“We come now to the Cantonal Constitution. It is clear that this ought to harmonize with the Federal Constitution. The latter gives us a restraining declaration of rights for the whole of Switzerland; the Cantons on the other hand may go further, but without encroaching on the Federal declaration. Well, our Constitution in Article 11 guarantees the right of meetings which present nothing illegal in their object nor in their methods. It moreover guarantees, in Article 13, the freedom of worship; but it goes even further than the Federal Constitution; it assures to forms of worship an unlimited liberty without applying to them the restrictions of the Federal Article 50. And how was it that this Article 13 came into existence?” (Here the Speaker read the debates of the Constituante of 1848, which are full of striking allusions.) “From this it would appear distinctly that our Neuchâtel Constitution tends to prevent all interference of the State in the exterior exercise of forms of worship. The Constitution forbids us also to make any distinction between the different citizens in relation to the worship they may profess. If this were not so the principle of equality and not only of liberty would suffer. Why, then, did you treat the Salvation Army differently from other sects? The decree of the Grand Council has endorsed the most flagrant inequality, not only in its spirit but in its practice on this occasion. For example, why do you prosecute only six of the accused, whereas there were three hundred persons in the forest of Prise-Imer? If you are convinced of your ground and wish to be logical, you should prosecute them all. I know your prisons would not be large enough; well then, knock them down and build new ones. When once you have entered upon the path of religious persecution you will want many more prisons than those you now have. In fact you will require immense barracks for your prisoners. (Sensation and laughter.) I speak thus in order to lay my finger on the inequality of your proceedings. The accused here are simple soldiers of the Army, and Mme. Boillot—”

Mme. Boillot (interrupting with eagerness): “Pardon me, sir, I am a Sergeant.” (Laughter.)

M. Monnier (continuing): “I repeat that you must make your choice. Either strike out all the fine Articles which adorn our Constitution or withdraw your decree. If our Constitution is a real thing and not a simple document which can be claimed or rejected at will, then you must change all its noble texts in conformity to the wishes and the fancies of the people and re-write them in the spirit of your own decree. If you cannot do this, you must punish everybody, and you must even include in your prosecutions the jurists who, we have heard, advise the members of the Salvation Army to resist your decree. I have no doubt you would have on your side that public opinion which you rely upon, but you would continue to sink and fall miserably before the world.”

Some excitement began at this point to prevail in the Court, and M. Cornaz, the Chief of the Department of Justice and Police becoming furious, charged the gendarmerie to suppress the demonstrations, declaring aloud that he would clear the Court. This was an assumption of authority to which he had no claim. Only the President can clear the Court. In the midst of this excitement, M. Monnier continued: “The Council of State had imagined it had a way of escape in the discovery of Article 72. This Article had long ago fallen into oblivion, the oblivion which in fact it deserved; but it has been disinterred in order that it might serve as a left-handed weapon to the Grand Council in place of that which the Constitution refused them. The Grand Council said to itself, ‘now is the moment to apply this Article, the utility of which has been up to the present day almost unknown.’ But alas, since last Saturday this weapon has no longer any existence. For what is a Corporation? The Council of State has adopted the meaning which it looked up in Littré’s Dictionary. An unlucky choice! According to Littré a Corporation is defined as a body having ‘particular and special rights and privileges.’ Splendid things they are, these rights and privileges of the Salvation Army! the privilege of having been interrupted in their worship, and of having had to submit to imprisonment before trial!” (M. Monnier here read again the telegraphic message addressed by Lord Granville to Mr. Adams, the British Ambassador.) “Now, therefore, nothing remains of all your unfounded structure. The whole merit of your argument was based upon your right to deprive us of our liberties until we should be authorized as a Corporation. This was your plea; but Article 72 now falls to the ground. Oh, if the Grand Council had only had the prudence to take another evening for consultation! But they were in such terrible haste to press on this affair. They said to themselves, ‘We have no need to talk any more about it; see how it will succeed!’ Why did not they listen to the advice of their Liberal Deputies, men of good sense, not leaning in their sympathies more to the Army than the Radicals, but who would have advised a little reflection and delay? See how the weapons of our Government fly out of its hands. Public opinion is constantly thrown in our teeth, and the terrible ten thousand! Truly the danger has been greatly exaggerated. If the Council of State and the Grand Council had acted in a legal manner they would still be sitting comfortably in their armchairs. But now public confidence has been withdrawn from them.

“The agitation which they continually spoke of was manufactured. If the police had had permission (I will not even say had had the order) to act, it would have been strong enough to have enforced tranquillity, but there never was any serious desire to see the law enforced. The people have sufficient instinct to know what they may do, and when the police was not there to maintain order, they did not distress themselves about their responsibility. We are quite aware who it is that organized the disturbances. They are people very well known at the Castle (the prison); they are people well experienced in helping on the interests of the Government, above all at election times! (Sensation, applause, and groans.) The mob said to themselves, ‘Here we are with a good comedy to play out;’ and the serious and sensible part of the population was entirely quiescent, understanding nothing about it. For my part I should wish to have seen the Prefect of Police and two or three Councillors of State present themselves in front of the Hotel Mont Blanc. There they should have beaten the roll-call drum, and read the proclamation of the Council of State; made, in a few calm words, an appeal to common sense, and then all would have been at an end. There would then have been no need for the famous petition of the ten thousand, signed outside the city by the rural population, who had never even seen the Salvation Army. At St. Gall, they seem to have understood repressing disturbances on a recent occasion. The magistrates themselves had to confront them in their own persons. At Basle, also, quiet was restored on such an occasion, and the armchairs of the Councillors were not in the least shaken. (Laughter.) Do not let us have any nonsense about public safety. M. Dubs (one of the highest legal authorities) has written: ‘Behind the pretence of public safety there is always found a private interest.’ Let us beware of panics! They tell us the people wished these measures to be taken, and that they claimed them in their petition. It is a most curious thing indeed that in the decree one finds almost the identical terms used as in the petition, and it would seem as if the pens which indicted the two documents must be in near relation. Is it right that the Government should follow the people in this manner in all its caprices? No, the people are themselves bound to obey the Constitution. It is not possible that they can annul it by a petition. They understood this on another occasion, for in 1873, 10,000 petitioners demanded that the Ecclesiastical law should be submitted to the people. On that occasion people were reminded of the respect due to the Constitution, and were told that an imperative mandate could not be proclaimed by them, and the petition was rejected. There was another way in which the case before us might have been dealt with, and that was by revising the Constitution itself, which at present seems to be too liberal in tolerating us, and in doing so they would have only pandered to the imperial will of the mob. You are men of judgment, we have had plenty of proofs of that lately. (Laughter.) Why do not you do this? And then you might have taken into your counsels the authors of the petition themselves, amongst whom there are several advocates. (I regret it for the honour of the Neuchâtel bar.) But no, you do not venture to revise the Constitution, and why? Because you like sometimes to quote these beautiful inalienable rights the existence of which attracts foreigners to our country, and which have been so prominently exhibited, framed and glazed, at the Zurich Exhibition. Yes, it was necessary to hold to these fine rights of the Constitution, and yet to stick to our friends! (Sensation.) Thus they try to find a middle course, and in doing so they fall into a quagmire and everybody, jury, president, lawyers, accused, everybody in fact now plays at hide-and-seek, out and in, amongst the Articles of the Constitution. (Laughter.) We are reminded continually that a law even if it is unjust, ought to be obeyed. This is a convenient doctrine for the Government, who if it could be only sure of our obedience, could, by a sudden decree, suspend the Constitution itself. But in doing so they are guilty of an aberration which debases the Constitution to a lower level than an ordinary law. When two laws are in distinct contradiction to one another, one cannot be held guilty for choosing one in preference to the other. But on the other hand one is certain to be in the right if one has on one’s own side the Constitution, which is above the Cantonal law. Every persecution which has taken place in the past has pleaded legality in its favour. Every past persecution has been based upon texts of law and excellent decrees; such texts and decrees as you have allowed to prevail against the Constitution, which is itself the source of all law and the source of your own authority, you magistrates! In such a case as this, a high authority tells us we have the right of legal resistance. Authors are agreed in saying that under such circumstances a rebellion, such as M. Audeoud of Geneva has raised, is legitimate. Our resistance (that is to say, the resistance of the Salvation Army) is passive, limiting itself to the continuation of the exercise of the right of which it is desired to deprive it. Finally, by the oath which Judges take, they are themselves deprived of the power of making an application of an unconstitutional law. If you find, therefore, that this law is unconstitutional you have no right to apply it.” (The speaker concluded by demanding the acquittal of all the accused.)

To this address, of which no adequate idea is given by the above, the Procureur-Général declined to reply, and the prisoners were each asked in turn whether they had anything to say in their defence.

Captain Becquet, called upon first, pointed out how the disturbances at the commencement had been a “got-up affair” by people who had never seen the Army. As to its methods, which the Procureur had talked so much about, though they had never used a drum or cornet at Neuchâtel, yet he thought they had as much a right to use every instrument as David had. He would give them a specimen of old-time religion, and as the Procureur-Général had quoted largely from a pamphlet, he asked to be allowed also to make a quotation. He then opened his bible and read the 150th Psalm! Cries of derision were heard from some in the audience while the Captain read and commented. “The Army had attacked sin and the devil—that was why it was attacked and ill-used, but nothing in earth or hell would stop its progress.”

Miss Booth then made her defence. A defence it could hardly be called. It now seemed as if it was not the Salvationists, but the authorities who were on the defensive.

(The Procureur-Général had himself remarked in his speech: “What do we find before us? People who show the slightest sign of repentance?... No! no! but a handful of people who come here with a coolness, and aplomb simply superb, to tell us that they have done nothing wrong, who presume to talk to us about ‘law,’ and to declare they are in their rights and mean to stick to them!” And he was right, for certainly prisoners at the bar never seemed more at ease nor more calmly trustful.)

As she rose, calm and self-possessed, and faced the President, none but her intimate friends understood the wonderful God-given power of spirit and soul required in that moment to enable Miss Booth to triumph over the exhaustion and acute suffering of those two long days following twelve of imprisonment. She said:—

“I have no need to enter upon the legal aspect of this question; that has been ably dealt with by M. Monnier. Yet as M. le Procureur-Général himself went off the ground of law to discuss at great length the doctrines and methods of the Army, I feel I cannot for truth’s sake be silent; although I am fully aware that we are not here to enter upon a disquisition about Christianity.

“Permit me first to say that if the Conseil d’Etat had any doubts or misgivings concerning the methods and end of the Salvation Army, the honourable members should have sought information from competent judges, that is to say, from those who know us, who had both seen and heard us, before accepting the opinions of persons who had done neither one nor the other.

“What is the need for the Salvation Army? Allow me to read an extract from one of your own journals:—‘Cantonal Governments, the Federation, neighbourhoods and families see with alarm the flood of demoralisation rising menacingly higher and higher; and instead of seeking to destroy the causes of this deluge, they only take away the remaining dams.’ Can you deny the existence of the state of things described by this paper?

“It is needless to enlarge upon the necessity for a Salvation Army in the face of these facts.

“The Procureur-Général has said, in speaking of the work, that it moved the entire population, and that there must be a cause for this. He has reason to say so. I agree with him; there is a cause, far deeper than any that has been mentioned here to-day. It is at this cause we strike—which exists in the heart of man.

“As to our aim, we are trying to bring these people who outrage your laws, who fight against God, to the feet of Him who alone can change them, to the only hope that exists for them, the Saviour of the world! We work, we live, we suffer to do this. This is our one and only object—to bring the world to the Great Deliverer, Jesus Christ!

“Our only message has been, ‘Repent and turn ye to the Lord that your sins may be blotted out.’ We want to see the drunkards, the thieves, the outcasts washed in the precious blood of Jesus, and changed into peaceful, loyal citizens.

“This being our end, it is to the interest of all Governments to protect us; and in protecting us they protect themselves.

“In our efforts to attain this end we have met with the bitterest opposition in Switzerland, because our motives have been wilfully misrepresented. Lies, as absurd as untrue, have been circulated about us; and we have been bitterly persecuted—first by those who resist the light, and secondly by those who have been misled, and will one day regret their action.

“The great accusation against us is that we disturbed the public peace; in a word, we were the cause of scandal. If to preach the Gospel, to denounce sin, and to pray over the masses is a scandal, then we are guilty of a scandal, even as Christ and Paul were. The Procureur-Général has attempted to describe in detail our proceedings, yet this gentleman has avowed that he has never attended a single meeting, never put his foot inside the Mont Blanc; he cannot, therefore, be considered capable of judging since he has never seen them! (Laughter.)

“M. le Procureur-Général has said we attacked the town with drums, and trumpets, and other extravagant things. I ask M. le Procureur-Général how many drums he has seen in Neuchâtel, or trumpets? Not one. What is the truth? No musical instrument, with the exception of a piano, has been employed. No flag, no processions. The only bill that has been issued I hold in my hand, which simply announces that the Salvation Army will hold meetings at seven, three, and seven.

“M. le Procureur-Général has referred to the language of the Salvationists. He says we teach that all that is necessary for Salvation is for one to jump on the platform and say, ‘Je suis sauvé’ (‘I am saved’) after five minutes’ self-examination. No one in Switzerland has ever heard us make such an outrageous statement. It is not true.

“Notwithstanding, there may come a day when M. le Procureur-Général and others would give all the world to be able to say, ‘Je suis sauvé!’ The time will come when he will have to face the great unknown future, appear before another tribunal, to face another Judge! Then he with others will prove the value of those words, ‘Je suis sauvé!’

“But what are our proceedings? (1.) We have sung hymns in the hall that we had hired. Everyone can procure a little book of the hymns we use, and judge for themselves. Here is a specimen:—

‘Seul refuge de mon âme,

Je veux m’appuyer sur Toi;

La paix que mon cœur réclame

Est à Tes pieds, ô mon Roi!’

(2.) We read the Bible. Switzerland has not waited till the Salvation Army came to read the Bible. You know this Book already. (3.) We pray, and (4) we persuade men to leave the road of sin and death—to renounce evil, and give their hearts and lives to the Saviour. And God is our witness that we have done nothing more.

“Is that a scandal? To sing, and speak, and pray in the name of Jesus? It is not we that throw stones, that break windows, that howl and hoot after respectable people in the streets. It is not we who violate domiciles. It is against all logic to say that we are the scandal of your country.

“Ah! the question of all questions, the question which every intelligent man ought to face, is—What are we to do with the masses? If they are not reached by the power of the Gospel—if they are not won from sin and the power of Satan—a day will come when they will turn round against you, occasioning terrible trouble and disorder, and awful will be the consequences. Then, Messieurs, you may have reason to regret your action in this matter. If these disturbers are capable of manifesting such hatred, such rage against citizens who pray to God, they will also be capable of manifesting the same rebellious spirit against any other opinion, or any other law, which may not please them.

“We have not made your people like this. Bear in mind that we have not created this terrible state of barbarism which was let loose around that Hall, and which has made my heart bleed many times in witnessing. Who is responsible for this? We cannot be, for we have only been in your town a few months.

“There are people also in Switzerland who have followed our meetings and know that we are on the side of law and order, and that our only end is to stop vice, to empty the prisons, and to save souls out of the grasp of the devil. And it is those who are interested in, and gain by sin, who fight against us!

“Although we have suffered terribly through misrepresentations that have been wilfully circulated about us, we are not discouraged! we know that truth and justice will soon triumph. I love Switzerland all the more for what we have endured. A little while and Switzerland will love us. We shall win thousands to righteousness, peace, and heaven. (Cries of assent and dissent.)

“Further, we have broken no law since we entered your country. The Prefect admitted to me that Capt. Becquet had all along strictly obeyed his orders and counsels with reference to the Mont Blanc. We have submitted and submitted again and again, until you have taken away from us the right to meet to pray. This lands us on another platform altogether. We have now no more any choice. There is but one course open to us—we must follow that. We must obey God; we must be in harmony with the laws of Heaven. We are not here to plead ‘Not guilty.’ No! Like Daniel and Paul, and the early Christians, we weighed this matter. I weighed it in my room on my knees. We have all told you that we did violate the decree. We have no wish to hide it. I note, however, that the enemy of souls has full liberty. He can do his work without hindrance. He can lead to perdition thousands of victims. He is permitted to drink, and shout, and sing, and dance, and make all the noise he likes without the least interruption on the part of the authorities, while we are made prisoners for praying in a wood! I was struck the other night when in my prison by the howling and singing of bands of roughs, which continued till past midnight, without any interruption that I am aware of from the police, while our people were followed home because they had sung a hymn, and strict watch was kept that they should not do it again.

“I fear there is reason to believe that personal feeling and prejudice have somewhat taken the place of justice in this matter. Permit me, Messieurs, to say that on the ground we occupy to-day, where liberty and truth are at stake, all prejudice and personal and vindictive feeling should be banished; that justice, and justice alone, should have full and fair play.

“I ask why the meetings were stopped at the Mont Blanc at the moment when there was no noise? I was in Neuchâtel when the order came from the Prefect to stop the evening meeting after a certain Friday night, at which there had been no disturbance. The same thing occurred with reference to the afternoon meeting. Why were the afternoon meetings closed when there was no noise? And again with the Sunday morning meetings. Neither is the law in execution to-day on account of noise, since perfect order reigned on the 9th September at the Prise-Imer. The meeting lasted from two to six, and hundreds of people, including policemen and the Prefect of Boudry, witnessed the solemnity of that occasion. And I ask further, is it just to shut up our hall on account of the noise outside? If a man took a shop for his business and people chose to break his windows, would the Conseil d’Etat shut his shop up to satisfy the roughs outside—would they be guilty of such injustice? Then why has it shut up the hall which we had taken, and which was our property? They did not even offer to pay the rent. All we demand is that which is guaranteed by your Constitution—religious liberty.

“M. le Procureur-Général referred to our Queen, saying that even she was subject to the decrees of Parliament, but that I placed myself above her in refusing to become subject to the decrees of the Grand Conseil. There is no parallel between Her Majesty and myself. No Act has been passed to forbid her praying in a wood, or I think her Majesty would have something to say on the subject! (Sensation.)

“M. le Procureur-Général has spoken in a way that has astounded me on public opinion, which, he says, they cannot afford to treat lightly. Let me remind M. le Procureur-Général and all here that it was public opinion that crucified Jesus Christ. The rulers and the people all joined together to put him to death. Do you justify that action? That was public opinion.

“The Government in England protects us. The Queen, John Bright, and others of the most intelligent and influential men in our country, have publicly expressed their sympathy. They appreciate and understand the end and aim of the Army.

“One word in conclusion. You can punish us; you can imprison us; you can persecute us (as long as you are permitted); but what you cannot do is to stop this work—to suppress it. I warn you. Beware what you do, for your country’s sake, for Jesus Christ’s sake; and as you value the peace of your soul in a dying hour. Take care that in banishing us you don’t banish the light, that you do not banish Jesus Christ, and in that great day when you are called to give an account you be found guilty of fighting against God.

“You can laugh at me; you can mock me; but you cannot deny what I have said. God is with us!”

M. Convert, being asked if he wished to add anything, said:—

“The Procureur-Général has spoken in unsparing terms of our madness and fanaticism. I shall not reply to this. History will judge between us. The great future will show who is right—the Government accuser or the Salvationist accused.

“When I heard of the coming of the Salvation Army I was extremely anxious to assume the true attitude towards them, and therefore I immediately wrote to friends in London and other places who had opportunity of seeing and studying the work and the workers. I had heard many strange reports; among others that the work was full of irreverence; but I wished to have exact information from people who had seen, and heard, and studied for themselves, and not mere hearsay; and I am glad of the opportunity of stating publicly that all the information I thus received was such as to reflect the highest credit upon the Army and its officers. I have since had the opportunity of seeing them personally, and my experience has more than confirmed the information received. I consider it an honour to be here to stand by them to-day, whilst at the same time protesting as a Swiss and a Neuchâtelois, against a decree which forces me to stand at this bar as an accused. It is a post of honour; but I ask why was I chosen for this honour among two hundred other Salvationists who attended the meeting? The two hundred would have been happy to have been here at this bar to-day.”

The same question was then asked of Mme. Boillot, who said: “The Procureur-Général had accused the Army of being a scourge to the country. I reply, if you want to abolish something, abolish the real scourges. Shut up the houses of ill-fame which are licensed by the State, and the public-houses, and then you will have less need of your prisons and of the Salvation Army!” (Sensation.)

Sergeant Cost then said: “All I have to ask, Mr. President, is that if you punish our dear English Officers, you will give me the same sentence as you give them!”

Sergeant Hess asks the same.

The Jury retire, and while the murmur of conversation rises all around, the word is passed along the line of the accused, and among the Salvationists in the audience, “Let us all pray!” In that moment of crisis, from the midst of the excited throng, many prayers are rising to the Eternal Throne.

During the whole of those two days, unseen and unknown to that earthly tribunal, an appeal had been unceasingly going up to the Supreme Court of Justice above, winged by the prayers of multitudes in other lands—

“And thus the whole round earth

Was every way bound by golden chains

About the feet of God!”

After a time the President resumed his chair: “Silence! Messieurs! The Jury is about to enter. I call upon this audience now to maintain the attitude of respect due to the dignity of this tribunal. Upon the slightest disturbance I shall have the hall cleared.”

A moment of breathless suspense followed.

The door opens, and the foreman of the jury advances to the table, followed by his six colleagues.

With a manner full of courageous dignity, he reads:

First Question: Did the accused take part in a meeting?—Yes.

Second Question: Was this meeting in violation of the decree?—Yes.

Third Question: Did they act with culpable intention?—No.

The Judge pronounces:

“In consequence of this verdict, the accused are acquitted.”

Fervent “Amens;” burst spontaneously from the Salvationists in the audience.

The following remarks on the events of those few days from Mlle. ——, may be interesting.

“On Saturday morning a carriage came to fetch Miss Booth and Mr. Becquet, who, accompanied by the jailer, drove to Boudry, a little country town at five miles distant from Neuchâtel, where the trial was to take place. We ourselves left the station at Neuchâtel at 7 o’clock in the morning; a great many Salutistes were gathered there, and as soon as they were in the train began singing their cheerful hymns of victory, and never ceased till the train arrived at Boudry. A crowd of Neuchâtel people marched in, and found this quiet little place already filled with people. The windows, doors, and streets were filled with faces looking eagerly at the anxious throng who flocked towards the Hôtel de Ville. It did require strength and patience to stand for two hours for the doors to be opened. But the subject was too intensely interesting to consider the fatigue or the inconvenience of being crushed in the crowd. Meanwhile a few friends gathered together in a little upper room in a friendly house opposite, and many fervent prayers were offered concerning this most important day. This little room became quite a sanctuary during the two days of the trial; many a time we saw it filled with earnest Christians, several of the prévenus joining us to gather strength from on high. Luther’s hymn, “C’est un rempart que notre Dieu” was a favourite one, and brought comfort to many; we sang, however, also a good many Salvation songs in spite of the judges opposite who might have heard us! The jury assembled at 9.30 a.m.; then the prisoners were called in. Miss Booth entered first; she looked very pale and suffering. Many saw her then for the first time, and no doubt many thought she looked more like an angel than a criminal! Captain Becquet next entered; he, too, bore on his face traces of his hard work, and of the privations of the prison; he looked worn and very pale, but as joyful as ever. His peace is unalterable; loss of comfort, trials, persecution, difficulties, are nothing to him. When I asked him during the day how he was, he answered cheerfully: ‘Very well indeed; there is only one thing which can make me unhappy, that is sin.’ Some hearing this said: ‘One must confess these people do not look unhappy.’ It was indeed a very striking sight to observe the faces of the six ‘culprits.’ The perfect calm and peace which shone on their faces was in itself eloquent enough. They seemed quite unconcerned and perfectly at their ease in the midst of the crowd of people glaring at them. No nervousness, no agitation; they knew that the Lord Himself would speak through their lips; yea, that He was in the midst of them—what then could they fear? they were not their own, they had acted in obedience to their Master, and He had called them to be witnesses for Him before this Court, and here they were for His sake. M. Convert sat beside Miss Booth. He is a worthy Christian, of mature age, and a faithful follower of Christ. His father many years ago had also had to appear before the tribunals for his faith, and was sentenced to three days of prison for having held a religious meeting. Mme. Boillot is a young lady only 25 years old. Although a Christian woman before, she had been greatly blessed through the Salvation Army in Neuchâtel, and had been very bold and determined in holding meetings at her own house, and attending as many others as she could, without neglecting her family duties. Cost is a gardener who was converted in one of the meetings at the Mont Blanc Hall. He, too, has been a good faithful soldier, holding meetings every week at his house without fear. Hess, a good-looking young man, carpenter, had been a drunkard for many years, had signed and broken the pledge many a time, but only since the Army came to Neuchâtel did he obtain sufficient strength and blessing to keep it, and to be a new creature. His testimony was very remarkable.

“So much for the criminals. I will not enter into the details of the debates which you will be able to read fully in the papers. A few things were particularly striking. The Procureur-Général is a man who professes to be a Freethinker, far, far above the narrow-minded people who call themselves Christians; yet, in his pleading against the accused, his strongest argument was, that almost all the pastors and ministers of religion had expressed their feelings and opinions, either in the press or pulpit, against the Salvation Army. ‘An eminent Christian lady, also a famous authoress, had written such revelations against this association that there could be left no doubt in the minds of every thoughtful person that this Army was nothing but a lot of Saltambanques, who, instead of promoting religion, did only injure and profane it, &c., &c.’ Then the Procureur quoted several pages of Mme. de Gasparin’s brochure. It made everybody shudder, who loved the name of Jesus, to hear that blessed name uttered in such a tone, quoting the disgraceful passages where Mme. de Gasparin represents Jesus as the bitterest judge of the Salvation Army, tearing their banners, crushing their platforms, &c., &c. (Awful language.) I was ashamed for all our pastors to have to have their names quoted in the cause of the unbelievers against the true followers of Christ.

“The powers of darkness were certainly well represented in this tribunal; we could feel the conflict between the two powers very strikingly; but, thank God, our faith never faltered, and we knew that the Lord was the strongest and that the victory would be His.

“A few illustrations come to my memory of this fact. At the end of the first day a few roughs had climbed on the high brick stove at the end of the room, when the President declared that the prisoners would be released until Monday, when the debates would be continued. One of these men shouted at the top of his voice: ‘Au clou,’ which means in slang, ‘To the prison with them.’ At this very moment there was a great crash and the man fell down the stove, breaking off a whole corner of it. He was himself much hurt by his fall, so that he stopped shouting, and the accused could freely leave the hall without molestation.

“Another incident I noticed;—a rough-looking woman in the crowd who seemed all rage and anger against the Maréchale, swearing and threatening to kill her with her pitchfork if she was released; she kept following the debates eagerly. To our great surprise we noticed that a considerable change took place in her when the Maréchale spoke; at last her face changed completely—she was quite silent and grave looking—tears rolled down her checks, and it was exactly as if a tiger had been changed into a lamb. To God be all glory.

“I must not forget to tell you that very few persons, in fact nobody expected the acquittal of the accused. The advocate whom I had questioned a few days before said that it would be a miracle if they were acquitted, that everything was against them, the fact even of having to go to Boudry was most unfavourable—all these country people were rough, and opposed to religious questions, and that they were determined to put an end to these manifestations, &c. But God overruled all! Our advocate suddenly recollected that petition of the 10,000, and he remembered that the jury which was to judge the Salutistes could not be composed of men who had signed this petition; this would be enough to make them unfit to judge impartially, having expressed their opinion against them in signing the petition. The accused are allowed to choose their jury, therefore when the members were proposed, the advocate went to the chateau where the petition-lists were examined, and there more than half the names were found of the proposed jurors, as signatories. The debates of the first day bore on these preliminary questions, which ended in the composition of a new jury, none of whose members had signed the petition, and were in fact all good men. This was God’s hand. Still, even on Monday when the question de fond really began to be treated, people did not know what the end would be. It was very interesting to observe the different faces in the crowd. Some anxiously hoping and fearing, others waiting like wild beasts to devour their prey. The crowd was much greater than on Saturday, and the air so bad, so intensely hot, that it was almost impossible to bear it. Of course, the great attraction was to hear the defence of the prisoners, and it was a remarkable thing to hear from these lips the confession of the name of Christ made without fear. I could not stay the whole time, and remained a little outside to get fresh air; a great many big fellows were assembled there drinking and using bad language. One rough-looking man quite drunk, lifted his hand shouting, ‘If you want an executioner, here I am, take me, we don’t want these English; I follow the advice of our pastor, we have our pastors!!’ Some others went to the Temperance Hall, emptied the chocolate cups on the floor, and took out of their pockets bottles of eau-de-vie, which they began drinking in that place! They said, ‘In these times of trouble, nobody knows what poison is in this chocolate, we must drink better stuff!!!’ Altogether there was a very uncomfortable presentiment of some outbreak in the evening. The suspense was very great. We kept believing and praying, but I must confess not without fear. When at last, towards 8 o’clock at night, the jury gave the verdict of acquittal, and the words ‘sans intention coupable,’ were pronounced, there was a momentary dead silence like the calm before the storm. M. Cornaz, the director of police, then ordered his police to withdraw, so the poor accused were at the mercy of the mob. Miss Booth was protected by her advocate, M. Monnier, and Professor Kœnig, of Berne, and reached her carriage, but the shouts and shrieks were awful, worse than those of wild beasts. ‘A l’eau, à l’eau,’ they shouted, and followed the carriage en masse, trying to upset it. But the coachman succeeded in getting out of the crowd; then the roughs attacked the other Salvationists who had to walk, pelted them with mud and stones, howling and blaspheming, so much so that we could only pray and thank God that they were not more hurt. Oh! how we sang in our train coming back! such joyful songs of victory; we did praise the Lord, and made a joyful noise unto the Lord.”

Great assistance was rendered to the accused by M. Professor Kœnig, of Berne, a distinguished Swiss lawyer, and legal adviser to the British Embassy. Dr. Kœnig had had the case before him for some time previously, had studied it thoroughly, and watched the trial on behalf of our Foreign Office.

Much indignation was felt throughout Switzerland, and found its expression also in the English Press, at the conduct of M. Cornaz in ordering the police to leave at the moment the verdict of acquittal was pronounced, the moment in which the disappointed roughs might be expected to break out in vengeance against the acquitted persons.

The Suisse Libérale had the following on the subject:—

“After the conclusion of the trial, the crowd, which disperses slowly, appears tumultuous enough in the neighbourhood of the building, and threats are heard against the acquitted. The Brigadier of Gendarmes approaches M. Cornaz to take his orders for the protection of the persons whom the jury have just acquitted, and receives this answer, made in an exasperated tone by the Director of Justice and Police—an answer with which I remain astounded, but which I give textually:—

“‘We have nothing more to do; you may retire.’

“The brave gendarme does not understand. He has not even strength to articulate the usual word, ‘Director, you are right,’ and goes silently away with his comrades. I leave without comment this little episode to the reflection of those who still think several things which I do not think any more at all. Miss Booth, jostled and pressed in the most painful way by a hostile crowd, gets into a carriage with her advocate and M. Kœnig. The carriage drives off in the midst of hisses and hooting. The crowd is very discreet on the whole, as it had just been given carte blanche.”

M. Cornaz’s face was white with passion when he heard the verdict of acquittal. During Miss Booth’s defence he had stood facing her with “an evil grin” on his face, as one of the papers expressed it, and on one occasion rudely interrupted her, saying, “Silence her; Shut her mouth!” He subsequently distinctly and publicly denied having dismissed the police at the moment when most required for the protection of the accused. This led to a correspondence in the press. M. du Pasquier stated that he had distinctly heard the words spoken. M. Kœnig also, and many others, attested the fact. The astonishment of the honest policeman under him when ordered to retire was also witnessed by many persons. Further comment is needless.

In the turbulent rush from the Court-house of Boudry, a fierce-looking man approached Capt. Becquet, and gave him notice, with a clenched fist, that “his flesh and blood would pay for it,” if he persevered in holding meetings.

The other Salutistes were followed by a crowd of roughs along the country road, and those who brought up the rearguard were savagely kicked and pelted.

The not unfriendly feeling of the Public Prosecutor towards those against whom he reluctantly took part may be illustrated by a little incident. At the close of the trial, Capt. Becquet went up to him, and held out his hand, saying, “I have no bitterness against you, sir.” The Prosecutor responded heartily; patting Becquet on the back, he said, “Nor have I against you and your comrades.” Miss Booth and her English friends left Neuchâtel the same evening for Paris.

On the 3rd of October, certain persons who had formed themselves into a committee for the organization of a public meeting to demand the expulsion from the Canton of the English Salutistes, issued the following address:—

“FELLOW CITIZENS,—The jury of Boudry has given its verdict. The Salvationists are acquitted. As signatories of the anti-Salvationist petition you demanded that measures should be taken to put a stop to the action of the Salvation Army in your Canton. Your Council of State and your Grand Council have granted the desire of the ten thousand petitioners. A decree was published forbidding the meetings of the Salvation Army upon the whole of the Republican territory of the Canton of Neuchâtel. This decree was violated. The popular will has not been respected. The decision of the jury of Boudry has rendered that decree a dead-letter. Fellow citizens, it is incumbent now on the people to demand of the Council of State a measure of Police and Public Order which would put an end to the whole scandal, namely, the expulsion of the foreign Salutistes. The resolute measure adopted by the Constituted Authority upon the petition of ten thousand citizens must not be allowed to be trampled under foot. We adjure you, therefore, to come together on Sunday, at 3 o’clock in the afternoon, on the Place du Gymnase, to discuss publicly the urgent measures which are required. We count upon the presence of all citizens who regard the dignity of the country and respect our laws.

“Signed by the Committee of Organization of the Meeting.”

A novel spectacle presented itself at Neuchâtel on that Sunday, i.e., that of a large meeting of people demanding the immediate expulsion of certain foreigners who had already crossed the Jura, and were some hundreds of miles away.

A special cheap train service had been organized to tempt people from la Chaux du Fond and other towns to come. The Committee of organization, followed by about two hundred citizens, with a military banner and music, marched to the station to meet those who were to arrive. On returning, the procession, it is said, numbered about two thousand. At the head of it marched M. Schmidlin, proprietor of the Café of the Trocadero, and a veterinary surgeon of Boudry. Several members of the Grand Council are said to have been present. Having marched round the town, they halted at the Place du Gymnase.

M. Gehrig addressed the meeting, and enjoined the order suitable for a Republican assembly worthy of the name. He thanked the citizens who had replied to the appeal of the committee, for having come together to demand respect for the rights of the Government, and for the will of the majority of the people. They could not, he said, be satisfied with the position in which the verdict of Boudry had left them. They demanded expulsion—(prolonged cheers)—the immediate expulsion—(renewed cheers)—of the foreigners who had brought disturbance amongst them.

M. Max Diacon, advocate, then spoke:—That was the first time, he said, in the history of their country that such an immense concourse of people had assembled to demand that the Government should enforce respect for the law. The meeting had assembled to claim from the Council of State a measure which would restore peace to their country. That day, which would be a marked one in the history of the country, would, he was sure, pass off with that order and dignity from which their people had never swerved. They could do there what could not be done under a monarchy, namely, demand through the voice of the whole people, not violence, but justice. (Cries of “Yes, yes, it is true.”) He could not say all that was on his heart, but he must reply to the accusations which had been brought against the 10,000 petitioners. They had been reproached for giving too much importance to a few English men and women. But the question was not that. The motive which urged them was the sentiment that in a Republic the laws must needs be respected.

M. Cochard then spoke:—The question, he said, was whether the people should continue to be masters or not. The Salvation Army, by planting its flag in their midst, had stirred up the indignation of the people. Those mountebanks—(vociferous cheers)—trampling on all religious principles, had tried to introduce their new religion into their country. But for themselves, they had their own pastors, their beloved and respected pastors. They did not need any comedy-players to teach them, and they repudiated the Salvation Army, whose grand principle was “Pay down money, and you shall be saved.” The decree of the Grand Council had been violated by the decision of the jury. They (the meeting) had a right to expel those who had brought disunion into the families of the people. It could not be allowed that a few English people should violate their laws under the pretext that they had consulted Swiss advocates. They had held a meeting in violation of the decree, and this they did (he blushed for the Canton of Neuchâtel) under the auspices of a Neuchâtel citizen. It was said that these English were already gone; but, he said, they might come back again! (The speaker concluded by reading a resolution as follows:) “The Council of State of Neuchâtel is respectfully requested to satisfy the wish of the people expressed in the popular assembly of the 7th October, and to decree the immediate expulsion from our Canton by a measure of police and public order, of the foreign Salvationists, who have been the cause of scandals among us, and who have permanently troubled the public peace.

“This resolution shall be conveyed to the Council of State at the Castle by a deputation from the meeting. All citizens are invited to accompany the deputation in procession.”

About seven hundred men then ascended the hill to the Chateau, followed by a crowd of spectators. The gate of the Court was closed. The terrace of the College was crowded with spectators. When the procession reached its destination the gate was opened, and then the crowd poured into the narrow passage with a great rush. Women groaned, children screamed, and at last the Court was filled.

A correspondent of the Suisse Libérale wrote:—“When I had at last entered the Court with great difficulty, having just missed the harangue of the speaker who presented the resolution to the Government, M. Comtesse, President of the Council of State had begun to speak, and was complimenting the people. The people of Neuchâtel, he said, were the friends of order. (Cheers.) They did not wish to be troubled in their family life by foreigners who came to embitter them in the name of a religion which they perverted and dishonoured. (Cheers.) They (the Swiss) had always shown hospitality to foreigners who came peaceably to enjoy their institutions; but those who came to speculate on their hospitality and resist their laws they would drive out of their country. The Council of State would show that it knew how to do its duty, and to enforce respect for the popular will. It was well that that dignified demonstration had been organized, in order that they who had calumniated the country by predicting a disorderly meeting that day would have the lie given to them. They were a people jealous of good order, and they did not require any lessons from foreigners, and still less from haughty advocates of their own country. (Prolonged cheers.)”

M. Cornaz, Chief of the Department of Justice and Police, then addressed the people. He complained of having been calumniated in the matter of his having withdrawn police protection from the accused at the trial. His concluding words were, “This day it has been the people who have spoken. The powerful breath of the people has dissipated all these infamies and calumnies. Let us give three cheers for the Neuchâtel Republic.”

M. Diacon said he would propose, in that Castle which their ancestors had re-conquered on two occasions, one more cheer for the Neuchâtel Republic and Government.

The procession then returned to the town, where speeches were again made on the Place du Gymnase.

A Zurich newspaper remarked: “The committee for the formation of this meeting was composed of an obscure post-office official and a couple of young lawyers strongly attached to the chief of the Department of Justice and Police (M. Cornaz). The head of the procession, it is said, was formed by a band of good-for-nothings, such as those who distinguished themselves in Geneva in the persecutions of the Salvation Army. M. Cornaz, surrounded by his friends and brethren, stood upon a balcony, in a position to be well seen by the people. On the two occasions when the procession was obliged to pass along the Rue du Chateau, in front of the house of M. Aimé Humbert, the grossest abuse was showered upon its occupant by the roughs in passing.”

La Nouvelle Gazette said: “This meeting has been pronounced a success. To us it does not appear so. It was an occasion for Sunday excursionists to amuse themselves, and the manifestations were absolutely wanting in everything like seriousness and dignity.”

A correspondent from Switzerland to the Globe (London), wrote as follows of the address made on the occasion of the popular meetings:—

“Especially telling was the hit directed against the Salvationists on the ground that they were mountebanks, who were seeking to get money out of the pockets of the people. To the average Helvetian mind, this charge is quite sufficient to justify their expulsion. Never had the well-worn proverb—‘Point d’argent, point de Suisse’—a fuller illustration. In trying to get hold of some Swiss money, the Booths have committed an unpardonable sin. The ingenuous inhabitants of these valleys and mountains have so long been accustomed to relieve the English traveller of his gold, that they bitterly resent the introduction of the converse process....

“Amid vociferous cries of ‘Au Chateau,’ it was announced that the cortège would be reformed and would proceed to the Castle—the seat of the Cantonal Government—for the presentation of the demand. Hurrying there before the crowd, I secured a place in the inner court, and was presently witness to a scene which, magna componere parvis, would be paralleled if Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Chamberlain came out into Palace Yard on a Sunday evening to address congratulatory speeches to the leaders of a mob-meeting which had marched from Hyde Park to Westminster Palace. When the orators and the bands of music arrived they were warmly received—evidently in accordance with a pre-arrangement—by MM. Comtesse and Cornaz, leading Radical members of the Council of State. These distinguished gentlemen told the crowd that they had done perfectly right in organising a noisy demonstration in order to try to upset the decision of a properly constituted court of justice. There was much said by these responsible administrators about the necessity of making all foreigners as well as Neuchâtelois obey the law, which in this case, be it remembered, is an edict of the Council, which a court of justice has declared to be in opposition to the law of the land.”

The following circular to the Prefects of Police was issued by M. Cornaz on the 10th October.

“GENTLEMEN,—Now that we have expelled Miss Booth and Mr. Edmund Becquet, there is no longer, properly speaking, any Salvation Army in the Canton of Neuchâtel. This corporation has failed to strike any firm roots amongst our people. It was an exotic importation, and seems to me to be fated to disappear, together with those who introduced it. Any foreigner in Switzerland who may attempt to revive its existence will come under the decree of expulsion of the 8th October. This measure must be sternly enforced in regard to such persons. In order then that a religious assembly held by people of Swiss nationality should come within the application of the decree of 15th June, 1883, it must advertise openly and as in defiance, the name and exterior signs of the Salvation Army. Now, therefore, we have re-entered our normal state. The Canton of Neuchâtel is the country of religious liberty, where everyone possesses the right freely to carry out his own form of worship, and to unite with others under the protection of the Constitutional, Cantonal, and Federal guarantees. All that has recently passed in relation to the Salvation Army testifies to the serious interest which our people take in spiritual questions. In demanding its expulsion the Neuchâtel people have not manifested any intolerance toward any religious opinion, seeing that the Salvation Army, in its dogmas, does not essentially differ from the Protestant sects which enjoy among us complete liberty. But public sentiment was shocked by the jugglery and shows which the Salutistes mix up with religion.[37] An irresistible current of opposition arose amongst the population. There is every reason to hope that the spirit of justice, of moderation and liberty which distinguishes our people, and that the most complete liberty will continue to be respected, as it has ever been since 1848. Liberty of conscience is a sacred thing in the Republic, and the opinions of a minority have the same title to respect as those of a majority. The public authorities rely on the good will of all the citizens in carrying out this respect. So far from interfering in any fashion whatever with meetings which are not directly interdicted by the late decree of the Grand Council, our duty is, on the contrary, to defend them against all attacks, as certainly the Grand Council and the Council of State desire should be the case.

“Accept, gentlemen, the assurance of my distinguished consideration, in the name of the Department of Police.

“CORNAZ.”

There appears in this address to his subordinates a rising fear in the mind of M. Cornaz, lest he and his adherents should be on the verge of becoming the minority whose rights he now calls upon the police to respect. Possibly he also fears that his subordinates, (often, probably, men of greater dignity of character than himself), might be too ready to imitate the imprudence (to call it by a very gentle word) of which he himself was guilty at the close of the Boudry trial, and that they might carry out once too often in their official acts the principle of non-interference in scenes of violence which may take place in future.

The Continental Times of the 20th October contained the following observations on M. Cornaz’s circular to the Police:—

“Having exercised the law in an arbitrary manner and expelled two inoffensive English subjects from a country that is remarkable for harbouring insurgents of all nations, the Neuchâtel Government applies a salve to its conscience by publishing the above letter, signed by Councillor of State Cornaz, and addressed to the Prefects of the Canton:—It would be difficult to find a circular more abounding in lame excuses, in unreasonable reasons, in poor attempts to explain away tyranny and hide a cowardly subservience to the compulsion of a party that objects to any religious body which seeks to empty cafés and brasseries, or of one which accustomed to live on the money brought into Switzerland by foreigners, has a quaking in the pockets at the idea of subscriptions being made among the Swiss by foreigners who may carry the proceeds away with them. No! M. Cornaz, your Canton has not returned to its normal state. Such oppressive acts as have been performed in Neuchâtel leave their mark on men’s minds. The attempt to excuse a tyrannical decree while boasting of religious liberty, is a sign of weakness, and the day is not far distant when the same party that urged you to the expulsion of Miss Booth and Mr. Becquet may demand of you acts more difficult to condone than the persecution of a few helpless members of the Salvation Army.”

In the Courrier de Neuchâtel, which published this circular of M. Cornaz, there stood, rather strikingly, side by side, in the next column, the following earnest appeal from certain Christian men of the Canton of Neuchâtel, following immediately upon the departure of the acquitted Salvationists:—

“DEAR FELLOW CITIZENS,—Not being able to present ourselves personally to give you this invitation, we do it by means of this advertisement. On Sunday, the 14th October, at eight o’clock in the morning, there will be a meeting to which we invite all persons who love the truth. At this meeting the subject treated will be that of the slavery to sin which is eating into the heart of our dear Helvetia. We shall treat of the youth of our country, which is given up, bound hand and foot, to prostitution, a vice which is practised in our country on such an enormous scale. We shall take into consideration the ways and means which may be employed in order to prevent the hope of our country from being polluted and corrupted throughout, soul and body. Above all will be brought forward the one efficacious remedy, through which, thanks be to God, already many among us have been saved. It is in the name of Jesus that we invite you. Come in great numbers—fathers and young men.”

CHAPTER VIII.

The Times of September 26th, 1883, remarks, concerning the scene which I am about to describe: “There is a curious old-world look in a telegram which we publish this morning from Geneva, relating how a citizen of that Canton has braved the authorities in vindicating the principle of religious liberty.”

M. Audeoud, one of those citizens of Geneva who hold fast all the good traditions of liberty and of justice, has played a prominent part in the late conflict, and will probably continue to do so; for the present history of the events I have been describing must close shortly after his challenge has been given to the illegal decrees of the Geneva Government, and before the record can reach us of the succeeding acts of the drama which will have to be played out. On Sunday, 23rd September, a large meeting of Salvationists and others was held in the house of M. Audeoud, who has a country residence about two miles from Geneva, with extensive wooded grounds. A report had been current during the previous week that such a meeting would take place; it had, indeed, been announced at several private meetings of the Salutistes. The police in consequence made their plans. At half-past two in the afternoon a number of Salutistes were seen gathering in the grounds at Conches, or pursuing the road from Florissant in that direction. There were many young men among them, most of them having the “S.” on their collars. The drawing-room and dining-room on the ground floor of M. Audeoud’s house were occupied by this assembly, which, however, afterward became so numerous as to form an audience also in the grounds immediately around the house.

The proceedings had scarcely begun when the Mayor of Chêne Bougeries, M. Aubert (the same who had arrested the Salutistes at the cemetery, at the funeral of Wyssa), arrived with a company of his agents at the house of M. Audeoud. The latter, with his wife, Mme. Audeoud, were in the drawing-room. The Mayor presented himself, and explained to the master of the house the motive of his visit, demanding, in a judicial manner, that the meeting should be dissolved. M. Audeoud persisted in declaring his intention to show hospitality to the members of the Salvation Army. A long discussion ensued. M. Audeoud then opened the Penal Code, which he held in his hand, and read before the Mayor and his attendants several of the articles concerning religious liberty and freedom of meeting. The only reply which the Mayor made was to open and display a placard, bearing the decree of the Council of State, of the 2nd February of the same year, forbidding the Salutistes’ meetings. He then asked M. Audeoud if this was a public meeting, and received the following reply:—“I shall admit to this meeting all who present themselves with a proper motive, while I maintain my right to dismiss from this meeting all who come with the purpose of disturbing our proceedings.” Upon this, the Mayor and his companions retired. During the hour which followed the attendance increased greatly, and now numbered about three hundred persons. At three o’clock, while they were on their knees in prayer, hasty footsteps were again heard upon the gravel walk outside; the Mayor and his attendant again presented themselves, accompanied by three gendarmes, an agent of the rural police, and an agent de la Sûreté.

M. Audeoud now stood surrounded by several friends, prominent citizens of Geneva, MM. Alfred and Edmund Pictet, jurists, M. Lenoir, banker, &c. The Salvationists did not cease their singing, but continued the joyous chorus of one of their hymns—

“Les Salutistes sont toujours en fête.”

The Mayor again addressed M. Audeoud, and said: “M. Audeoud, you are aware why I have come here. I have already told you my object an hour ago. I come to dissolve this meeting.” In a voice much more calm, and quite as firm, M. Audeoud replied: “Sir, in the name of the three following rights, I forbid you to dissolve this meeting: The right of freedom of assembly; of liberty of worship; and of the inviolability of domicile.” Standing before that large and quiet concourse of people, animated by one steady principle and fixed purpose, M. Audeoud, taking off his hat in token of respect for the law, again opened the Penal Code, and slowly and clearly read out to the magisterial and police forces before him as follows: “Article 108 of the Penal Code. Every magistrate, administrative or judiciary, or agent, or officer of justice or of police, every agent of the public police force who, acting in his official character, shall enter the house of any citizen against the will of him who occupies it, except in cases clearly defined by the law, and without all the formalities prescribed by the law, shall be punished by imprisonment of from eight days to six months, and by a fine of from thirty to three hundred francs.” He also read Article 107: “Whosoever by threats or violence shall in any way attack the freedom of worship and freedom of teaching or the liberty of the press or of meeting, shall be punished with the same penalty.” “Therefore,” said M. Audeoud, looking at the Mayor, “I request you to retire.”

The Mayor then read aloud the decree of the Council of State of the 2nd February, which suspended the exercises of the Salvation Army, adding: “In pursuance of this decree I must dissolve this meeting, which is a public meeting as you yourself have allowed.”

M. Audeoud: “Pardon me, I did not allow that. I am free to admit to my house all persons who wish to take part in this meeting, but I reserve the right of refusing entrance to the meeting to those who come here with the manifest intention of interrupting it.”

The Marshall attending the Mayor: “This a public meeting.”

M. Audeoud: “I forbid you to go a step further!” So saying, M. Audeoud placed himself resolutely in front of the Mayor to prevent his further entrance, and added, “I call these gentlemen around to witness. I have a legal case against you.”

The Mayor: “Under these circumstances I will force my way in.”

M. Audeoud: “You mean to push me aside?”

A policeman: “Yes, we shall force an entrance.”

M. Audeoud: “Then you will have to walk over my person.”

The Mayor, who had taken off his scarf, his badge of office, waved it so as to display it to the citizens assembled, and said “With this can I not pass?”

At this moment Madame Audeoud came to the side of her husband, the brothers Pictet and M. Lenoir being also around him, filling the entrance. The Mayor, however, pushed his way through the group, followed by his chief agent, and made an attempt to approach the door of the salon whence the sounds of prayer were proceeding. M. Audeoud and his wife, however, slipped past them and reached the door before them, stationing themselves upon the threshold. M. Audeoud said in a loud voice, “You will not proceed a step further; I am master of my own house!”

The Mayor confronting M. Audeoud shouted with a loud voice which could be heard by all present: “In the name of the decree of the Council of State I declare this meeting dissolved.”

It was a remarkable scene. At the moment when the Mayor with agitated countenance called out these words looking over the shoulder of M. Audeoud, the assembled worshippers, led by a young man of Neuchâtel, were singing one of the Salutiste’s hymns:—

“Les Salutistes sont toujours vainqueurs.”

Their voices sounded in joyous and harmonious accord, contrasting strangely with the harsh, troubled tones of the Mayor. Several could be heard praying aloud, asking the presence of God in the midst of this strange scene, and expressing confidence in Him.

When the Mayor had made his proclamation sufficiently heard, M. Audeoud replied firmly: “I resist your authority” and then the whole police force retired. Some of those present believed they heard the Mayor say to the agents as they left the garden, “We are not sufficiently numerous, we must return in force.”

In dealing with this strange scene the Times again remarks:—

“The Mayor, who entered that gentleman’s house, seems to have been disconcerted when M. Audeoud told him that he was liable to be sued in damages for having violated the domicile of a Swiss citizen; and the scene was rendered additionally impressive by M. Audeoud removing his hat in token of respect for the law, as he read the articles of the Constitution which guarantee to every citizen liberty of conscience. Geneva is the last place in which one could have expected to hear of such an episode as this; and it must be hoped that now the question of religious liberty has been mooted, the Swiss will seriously reconsider the position which they have taken up as regards the Salvationists.”

The Mayor having retired, the meeting continued as if nothing extraordinary had happened. Until half-past five in the evening there was a succession of addresses, testimonies, prayers and hymns. Great calmness and a feeling of confidence prevailed. Not one word was heard against the public authorities. On the contrary, in their prayers petitions were addressed to God for a blessing upon the police, the Council of State, the Mayor, &c.

The only consequence which immediately followed was a proclamation against M. Audeoud for non-compliance with the decree of 2nd February.

During a former meeting at his own house, M. Audeoud discovered a member of the police force lying upon the ground behind a tree in a copse, at a point from which he could watch the house and all who approached it. When discovered he pretended to awake out of a heavy sleep, but M. Audeoud recognised him, and seeing that, the spy ran off, scrambling rather ignominiously through a hedge, and joined the rest of the “armed force,” who were waiting outside the grounds, ready to come down upon any meeting suspected of containing Salutistes.

The Evangelical Alliance of Switzerland having been awakened, though somewhat tardily, to the full significance of the attacks made in Switzerland on religious liberty, addressed an appeal to the Swiss people, from which the following are extracts:—

“DEAR FELLOW-CITIZENS,—For some time past events have been passing in Switzerland which we cannot but regard with much regret. Religious meetings have been violently disturbed. Those who attended them, sometimes defenceless women, have been the butt of insults and even of personal assaults. Private houses, the refuge of every citizen, have not always been respected. The occasion of all these outbreaks of violence has been, as all are aware, the arrival of the Salvation Army in Switzerland. We can understand that its methods of action displease some, but this is no justification whatever of persecution in a free country which glories in its liberty. We are convinced that the great majority of the Swiss people deprecate persecution as only worthy of an age of gross ignorance and brutality. It is with confidence therefore that we address you, free citizens, counselling you to hold firmly the religious liberty which the Federal Council has so distinctly guaranteed. Claim it for yourselves, claim it for foreigners, claim it for all.... Has not our country been a refuge where those persecuted for their religion or for their politics have found safety? Have we not opened our doors to thousands of fugitives? Let us recall our past history. It is because our fathers have so freely opened their doors to fugitives to our land, that Switzerland has received the blessing of God, and the esteem and gratitude of other nations.... Many times already the Evangelical Alliance, whom we have the honour to represent, has raised its voice in favour of religious liberty. In Spain, in Italy, in Sweden, in Russia, in Bohemia, &c., it has intervened in favour of unprotected men persecuted for their religious convictions. It cannot, therefore, be silent when in Switzerland itself religious liberty is threatened. It does not, however, desire to instigate the general intervention of this vast association; but we esteem it is the imperious duty of the Swiss Branch of the Alliance to protest solemnly against this violation of the most sacred rights; and that which binds us to such a course of action is not only the obligation imposed on every free citizen to watch with jealous care that no one lays hands on his liberty, but it is still more the higher law, which is binding on every Christian, that law of grace and love which Jesus Christ came to bring into the world, and for which he shed his blood on the cross. We earnestly deprecate, therefore, all violence, and every attempt to extinguish by brute force the liberty of those who think differently from ourselves. We may strive against error, but only with a spiritual arm. We must respect all religious convictions so long as they do not offend against morality or the law.

“Freedom of conscience is one of the noblest acquirements of civilization, and the nation which allows it to be curtailed is in the position of seeming to doubt the power of truth. Let us arouse ourselves to the work as fellow citizens; let us unite our efforts in order that in every part of Switzerland religious liberty shall be respected and enjoyed by all and for all without distinction.

“May God continue to protect our beloved country, and preserve to us the most precious of gifts—justice and liberty.

“Signed for the Swiss branch of the Evangelical Alliance.”

According to the usual custom, the authors of this appeal prepared to placard it in the conspicuous places used for advertisements, having only to go through the formality of giving notice of the same to the Department of Police. To their great astonishment they received from M. Héridier the following message forbidding them to publish their appeal: “You attack us in it. The public pillars (advertising stations) are ours; we cannot grant them to you in order to attack us.”

About the same date the following petition was addressed to the Council of State of the Canton of Geneva:—

“We, the undersigned, all Genevese or citizens of other Swiss Cantons, electors, and domiciled in the Canton of Geneva, come before you respectfully to submit the following:

“Possessed of our right to the free exercise of our judgment, ... we have become members or adherents of the Salvation Army, whose doctrine and practices have appeared to us conformable to the truth, and responding to the aspirations of our souls. We possess, consequently, the right of following their methods of worship, and of uniting ourselves together toward this end, without being hindered by any restriction beyond that which can be legally imposed on the exterior exercises of our worship. The State owes us not only tolerance, but protection. This obligation is formally expressed in our Constitutional Law of the 26th August, 1868, Article 2.

“Individual liberty is guaranteed to us as it is to all other citizens by Article 2 of the Constitution, and that liberty has always been considered amongst us to carry with it the right of association, and consequently of meeting.

“All Genevese are equal before the law, as proclaimed by Article 2 of our Constitution. We come to claim this equality in practice, and we refuse to admit that the right of meeting and of association, for every kind of object which is not illegal, can be limited in what specially concerns ourselves.

“Since the time when we began to follow the religious assemblies of the Salvation Army up to the present moment, we have been disturbed, and hunted from place to place, by enemies whom we need not specify, and even by the agents of authority themselves. Such a fact can only arise from a false application of your decree of the 2nd February last. It is impossible that this decree could take upon itself to deprive citizens of their constitutional rights; nevertheless, since that time we are not allowed to unite, are constantly disturbed, and our constitutional rights violated in the most serious manner.

“Under these circumstances, we, the free citizens of a free country, address ourselves to the Government of our country. We now have recourse to you gentlemen, praying you publicly to recognise that we ought not to be deprived of the rights guaranteed to every citizen, and in consequence to take such measures as may be needful in order to assure to us the free exercise of these rights, and in particular to cause to be removed every prohibition against uniting to worship together, and for that end to make use of buildings and places which may appertain to us or be placed at our disposal.

“Whatever you do, do justice.

“Geneva, 4th October, 1882.”

(Here follows a long list of signatures of citizens of Geneva.)

Many persons of Geneva and other parts of Switzerland had waited in anxious suspense for the reply of the Genevese Government to this appeal, and also for its appreciation of the address of the Evangelical Alliance.

The Journal de Genève remarked:—“If we may judge by the past, the Government will give no reply whatever, and the petitioners will be forced to carry their appeal to the Federal Tribunal. The right of meeting is now in Geneva nothing more than a favour to be accorded on the permission of M. Héridier, if it pleases him to grant it, as was done in France under the Second Empire.”

The same journal, of a later date, speaks of certain ideas opposed to Constitutional principles, borrowed from Imperial France by M. Héridier, which are gradually accumulating in Switzerland. “The protest of the Evangelical Alliance,” it goes on to say, “is drawn up with great firmness, but also with great moderation, and contains not a single word which could be taken exception to. It is purely defensive; the Governments of Geneva and Neuchâtel are not even mentioned by name. It is simply a question of principles, and an appeal to citizens to uphold those principles.”... “The authors of the appeal of the Evangelical Alliance never doubted for a moment that they would be able, according to custom, to placard their bills on the walls. To their extreme astonishment, the Chief of the Department, after having perused the document, refused the authorization desired; and yet this was not the case of an anonymous placard, but one bearing some of the best known and most honourable names of the City of Geneva, among whom M. Héridier might have observed that of a member of the National Council. It contained nothing insulting, no attack on any one at home or abroad, nothing whatever to cause its suppression in this manner, M. Héridier, however, gave as his reason for its quasi-suppression, ‘You attack us in it, and as the public advertising stations belong to us, we do not permit you to make use of them in order to attack us.’”...

“‘The public advertising stations belong to us!’ says M. Héridier. Who, then, is this ‘us’ who take upon themselves to monopolise in their own interests the walls of houses which abut on the streets by calling them public advertising stations? Is it the Council of State, the police, or the entire radicale autoritaire party which so acts? Is it not simply M. Héridier himself?”... “The right to discuss the public acts of the Government by means of placards has been long enjoyed by the citizens of Geneva. The only right the police has to suppress such is when they contain slanders against private persons, or threats of public disturbance or violence; but never in any other case has this right of public criticism been denied. This, then, is a fresh step in the downward path of arbitrary Government.” “We are now at the summit (says another Geneva paper) of this frightful edifice in the law of terrorism, which calls upon the tribunals to punish those who desire to be a little more free than it suits his Majesty M. Héridier to allow them to be. Certainly there is in all this a grotesque side which might excite laughter; but it is we who have to pay the price of this hilarity, we who have to submit to the humiliation of being ruled over by a chief of police who does not even understand his own business. It is too grave a matter for laughter.”[38]

Evidence has been given in the course of this narrative of the revived faith and zeal of many individuals and of some of the churches of French Switzerland during these troubled times. M. Vernier, a French pastor, visited Neuchâtel subsequently to the division which took place in the Eglise Libre, in the Place d’Armes, and on the invitation of members of that Church, filled for a time the place of the minister who had resigned his office as its pastor. M. Vernier wrote the following from Neuchâtel to a friend in Drôme, the Editor of La Chambre Haute:—

“DEAR BROTHER,—A letter in your last number depicts the future of the evangelisation of our dear Drôme in rather dark colours. It seems to your correspondent that the work of revival would be compromised, if not entirely ruined, by the appearance among us of the Salvation Army. Allow me to express here an entirely different opinion. I have been present in several religious revivals in Switzerland, but none has seemed to me more thorough and more likely to be durable than the revival which we now see. Three precious elements are prominent in it—the joy of pardon, an ardent thirst for holiness and constant communion with Christ, and a fervent desire to bring perishing souls to Him. I wish you could have been present when more than two hundred Christians of our neighbourhood were re-baptized by the Holy Spirit, their faces illuminated by the Sun of Righteousness, their hearts filled with love to God and man. It would have shown you that we have no reason to give way to fears and discouragements; but on the contrary, that we have a thousand reasons to praise God. From my heart I pity those who cannot see in the present movement an accomplishment of the prophesy of Joel, which we are told will be fulfilled in the last days. Our theologians may dispute other texts of the Word of God, but it is impossible for them to annihilate this. This promise is now being realised, and we ourselves are witnesses of it. And this is just the moment, unhappily, when several amongst us who are regarded as servants of God have chosen to protest, in season and out of season, against the ministry of women, discouraging to some extent the zeal of God’s servants, and alienating the sympathies of others who might have gone forward in their ranks. In my humble opinion it is neither the work of revival nor of evangelisation which is imperilled—for the Lord has given the word, and great is now the company of the preachers—but that which I think are imperilled are our organisations, our forms, our official rules. The Church of God, that company of faithful people, has never had before it so glorious a future. The true Church does not shut its doors to the servants and handmaids of the Lord, nor command silence to the children who shout Hosannas. On the contrary, it says, ‘Come, ye blessed of the Lord of Hosts, let us rejoice together, for our Redeemer cometh to judge the earth, and to be glorified in his saints.’”[39]

In order justly to appreciate the present condition of Switzerland, and the difficulties which the Constitutional party there may have to encounter in the future, we must look a little below the surface of the social life of that country. An intelligent inhabitant of Eastern Switzerland said to me last summer, “the old Swiss stock is dying out, or rather it is being thrust out by the perpetual and increasing influx of foreigners pressing in on every side. What is happening to us is in fact what happens when a country is overrun by an invading and conquering army, the process only being much slower. We are being invaded and gradually superceded by an army of foreigners perpetually immigrating towards this centre. The old traditions are passing away; the old stock is less pure, or dying out, and if it continues in this way we shall soon have no nationality of our own.” At Basle the railway station is periodically crowded with Germans entering Switzerland. Many Germans leave home through their dislike of the conscription, and on account of the present poverty-stricken state of a portion of the population resulting from the dominant influence of the military spirit since the Franco-German war, an influence opposed to industrial prosperity and to liberty. From the southern side of the Alps there continues to arrive an unceasing stream of indigent Italians, who form a considerable proportion of the working class in the departments of terrace and bridge builders, road repairers, etc. France, Alsace, Bavaria, and Austrian Hungary contribute also their stragglers, for the most part leaving their country from reasons of discontent, ill-success, or even worse. A calculation has been made with regard to the Canton of Neuchâtel which shows that if the present inundation of foreigners continues for seven years longer at the rate at which it is at present going on, the result will be that in the year 1890, only one-third of the whole population will be natives of the Canton. This state of things must enlist our sympathy and respect for that band of true Swiss leaders of thought and of action, who see with sorrow the good traditions of their country passing into oblivion. The men of 1848, trained to a real strength and nobility of character by the severe discipline of the troubled times which preceded that epoch, are dying out, and there remains now little that is homogeneous amongst the people whom we call Swiss. There is, in fact, little to which to appeal, for those who desire to train the better instincts of the masses. For such a conglomeration of international elements, (and by no means always the best elements of the different nations) there is no national tradition possible, no common principle of action, no past to point to, and, in fact, no knowledge for the most part of the great principles which formerly inspired and guided the men who made the country what it was. It is a problem of great difficulty, and not without danger, which the present generation of the true Swiss have to solve.

That Switzerland has been for some years past socially and politically sick, to a dangerous degree, has been well-known to those who have watched carefully the signs of the times. What is the meaning of the fact of the frequent suicides, the record of which has startled us in recent years, amongst those called to offices of responsibility? Does it arise from a sense of their own unworthiness to fill such offices, or of a certain despair in encountering the conflict which conscience tells them is approaching for those called to judge and act publicly in accordance with principles which have been secretly violated in their own inner being and life? Or does it point to a loss of moral faith, of hope, of the sense of human dignity; or perhaps sometimes to a secret and unconquerable feeling of disgust and disappointment in having missed the true aim of life? It is scarcely two years since we heard of the suicide of M. Anderegg, the elect of the people, called to fill the highest place in the Republic—that of President of the Confederation. It was on the eve of the day of his installation when, walking up and down the promenade by the side of the Bernerhoff and Federal Palace, he sat down on a bench, and apparently overcome by some strange and deep melancholy at the thought of what awaited him on the morrow, or perhaps by some thought of pain unshared by any human friend or counsellor, he put a pistol to his head, and blew his brains out. M. Lambelet, President of the Grand Council of the Canton of Neuchâtel, ended his own existence by taking poison. M. Vuithier, his successor, and President of the same Grand Council, a man of wealth and apparently possessing every outward advantage which the world can bestow, disappeared from his home, and after a long search his body was found in the deep waters at the foot of the cascade of the Doubs in the Jura. We recollect, too, Colonel Ott, National Councillor at Berne—the great engineer—who drowned himself in the river at la Matte, at Berne.[40]

The Swiss patriot of to-day may thus have serious grounds for sadness or apprehension in considering the actual state of his country, in the centre of Europe, as it is, and surrounded by nations, whose overflowings, so to speak, are continually invading his land. How is anything like nationality to be preserved? The difficulties of this subject have urged some of the best men of Switzerland towards the idea so well enunciated by some of them, that their future hope must lie in international action. Already that country has the honour of having been the cradle of useful, progressive, international ideas, such as the Universal postal system, the Croix Rouge, Arbitration, &c. This fact may indicate perhaps the path of the future. We live in international times. In England, insularly situated as we are, and of a character still exclusive, we are less conscious of this than are the inhabitants of Continental nations. The energy which is wanting to combat the surging tide of demoralising influences partly derived from other lands, which is now invading Switzerland, may be evoked by co-operation with those in other countries who still remain faithful to the highest principles. I do not here in any sense imply a necessity on the part of the constitutional and law-loving portion of the Swiss population to have recourse to external help in the re-establishment of respect for law and for liberty in their own nation. All that is aimed at is that moral force derived from a sense of a community of interests of the highest kind and in the highest degree, among persons of all lands, from the constant interchange of ideas, from the propagation and popularising in many languages of true and living thoughts and principles. Principles are of world-wide application, and those members of the present Cantonal Governments of Switzerland who have shown themselves so unworthy of their great traditions of the past, cannot, even if they would, repel from their soil the steady, silent, irrepressible inroads of the truth, though they may persecute and expel certain individuals of their own or other nationalities who have brought home to their consciences the disagreeable fact of their own degeneracy.

I cannot conclude the present record without an expression of the grief and dismay with which I have observed, during the past few years, the decay amongst educated—and unhappily amongst Christian—people, both at home and abroad, of the sense of justice. I speak of justice pure and simple, justice in the abstract. The idea of justice in this sense appears to be a thing past the comprehension of many persons. I may illustrate what I mean by the following quotation from the Standard of Feb. 10, 1883. It is a case brought before Lord Granville in a correspondence which passed between the Foreign Office and Messrs. Raphael, Tuck and Son, in reference to the expulsion of their representative from St. Petersburg on the 15th August previously. “Messrs. Raphael and Tuck ask the favour of a definite reply as to whether it was in the power of Her Majesty’s Government to secure a permit for their representative from the Russian Government, such permit authorising him to prosecute his journey southward en route for the Bosphorus, or ‘whether they must abandon all hope of securing for Mr. Marcuse, a British subject, the protection of Her Majesty’s Government, because of his profession of a faith, the disqualification attending which an advanced civilization was supposed to have swept away.’” We have here the astounding fact of a man’s religious opinions publicly suggested as a possible hindrance to the success of his appeal for legal justice from our Government. I may further illustrate my meaning by recalling an incident of my stay in Switzerland during the past summer. In the presence of several jurists and others, who were consulting together concerning the treatment of the Salvation Army in their country, one of these gentlemen said, “if England has begun to deal out legal justice in proportion to her sympathies and antipathies, she has entered upon the fatal, downward path.” Another gentleman said to me, with some indignation, “It is very strange to us to see the utter inaction of your people in England, and of your Government, in the case of so gross an injustice as Miss Booth has suffered. We suppose that this is owing to the absence of sympathy for her religious opinions. It is generally felt here that if it had been Mr. Charles Bradlaugh who had suffered such an injustice—or, indeed, a much less one—there would have been no lack of English defenders to come forward on his behalf.” My reply to this was not, perhaps, such as the speaker expected. “You give my countrymen too much credit, Sir—(I was obliged, with much regret, to say). Indeed I do hope that they would have arisen in defence of Mr. Charles Bradlaugh in any case of his having suffered a legal injustice; but I fear that a large party would have been as indifferent to any injustice inflicted on him as at the present a large party is indifferent to an injustice inflicted on Miss Booth, simply for the reason that our people in England have, unhappily, begun to slide into the downward path which has been designated by one of yourselves just now—that of allowing justice to be dealt forth in proportion to their sympathies or antipathies, religious, social, or political.” I was grieved to find that the truth of what I feared had been so quickly appreciated by those Swiss gentlemen, that England has forgotten to some extent the sound traditions by which we were taught to apply to all alike the great principles of justice and of the common law. But, I seem to hear you say, “Such an one being anti-Christian is the enemy of the Cross of Christ, and therefore my enemy! ought I to incur trouble and effort on his behalf in case he were denied justice before the law?” Do I need to remind you—Christian—of the words; “If thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink?” Perhaps you assent, however, to that; you would supply his bodily needs, were he in extremities. But hear again;—“Man does not live by bread alone.” Stronger than all bodily needs, deeper even than the love of kindred and country, and of freedom itself, lies buried in the heart of man the desire for justice. The cry for justice is rising on every hand. You must give to your greatest enemy that which his soul craves.

It is especially disastrous that religious and Christian people should have allowed this sense of justice to have become enfeebled; for from them above all others the maintenance of the sternest principles in this respect should be expected. I do not like to appeal in addressing Christian people to so low a motive as that of self-interest; yet it is impossible not to remind them that while through an enfeebled sense of justice, and the letting go of the principles of legality, they are allowing wrongs to be inflicted on persons with whose religious opinions they have no sympathy, (they standing by as indifferent spectators); the time may come—nay it assuredly will come—when they themselves will be bereft of the safeguards of justice, in like manner, and on account perhaps of the very opinions which they hold as Christians; and then with what force can they appeal to the great idea of abstract justice, they themselves having cast it under their feet? A lady to whom I had recited recently some details of the outrages against the great principles of justice and law which had been perpetrated in Switzerland, naïvely asked the question: “But had not Miss Booth and her friends done some things in Switzerland which are contrary to good taste—had they not shown themselves wanting in tact in their mode of procedure?” Astonishment prevented my replying. I could only say to myself: “Is it possible that we have come to this, that not only the holding of religious opinions, or the observance of religious practices from which we differ, weakens our sense of responsibility towards our fellow-men in the matter of legality, but that even a want of good taste or of tact is to be a excuse in our eyes for the relaxation of the great principles of justice?” Have we forgotten that still in our own country the law, in theory at least, is so strict, so absolute in its declarations of the inviolability of the person, and the sacredness of individual liberty, that if we dared to touch the person of a criminal on his way to execution or in his prison cell in an insulting or injurious manner, we should be considered ourselves criminal. The person of the lowest felon condemned to death is before the law sacred even to the last moment. It is not for the virtuous nor for the orthodox, nor for those who never offend against “good taste,” that the common law guarantees its protection, but for all alike, of whatever character.

To those among us who have studied the history of our own country, the growth and expansion of its liberties, the various attacks upon those liberties, and their re-establishment by the sufferings—even unto death—of those who defended them, the last year’s events in Switzerland have a great significance. We have had the opportunity of observing the acting out before our eyes, on a comparatively small national platform, that which we always knew, from our deep study of those principles, must occur. So much so, that as one violation of liberty took place, we could, almost with certainty, prophecy what the next would be, and in what manner it would come about. We have seen that when the evil passions of men—in all ages and all countries the primary and intimate cause of the destruction of liberty—increase and run riot in the community, political freedom becomes an impossibility. We have seen surging up from underneath the elements which have brought about the ruin of peoples, namely, the wide-spread drunkenness, increasing in all classes of the community, leading to delirium, to the casting off of all self-restraint, and to every murderous and evil impulse;—moral impurity, expressing itself in the grossest forms, the repudiation of family ties, contempt for women, and the acceptance of the public official patronage of organised prostitution. Arising out of this, also, we see political corruption in every department, beginning with the miserable necessity which short-sighted aspirants for office believe themselves to be under, of relying for success on the votes of the most degraded and brutalised amongst the people, bribery in its worst forms, and flatteries of the most disgusting kind interchanged between the vicious and drunken class and their representatives. We have seen Governments chaining up liberty, and giving the reins to license. When the conflict for Governmental offices is surrounded with such a miasma of immoral elements as this, it is not surprising that the best men, the true Swiss, those who have not forgotten their past history, should hold back and refuse to enter into such an arena. From this point, those who understand something of the great principles now at war, will watch, with deep anxiety, the efforts made by those persons who constitute the leaven to keep their country from corruption. There is a saying that “unfinished questions have no mercy for the peace of nations.” Swiss citizens are in the presence of a great unfinished question at the present time. Every principle dear to a free people has been violated in their midst. These principles will avenge themselves sooner or later, but through whom, and by what means? There can be no peace in Switzerland while these “unfinished questions” are allowed simply to lapse. They must be fought out to the end.

What is our hope? It is in the revival among the masses of the people of the fear of God, of the belief in the vital truths of Christianity, and of those habits of virtue and self-restraint which grow up as the inevitable fruits of the Spirit of God, in those who are enlightened by it. We have heard it remarked: “It is not surprising to hear of such things happening in Switzerland. Democracy will, of course, always produce such results.” Such judgments are exceedingly childish. He must be a very poor historian or observer of men and principles, who can attribute to the outward forms of government alone all the complicated movements which we see among the mass of men in all lands, the suffering and restlessness, and the rebellion, more or less repressed now, but which is preparing for a future manifestation. The greatest instance in modern history—perhaps in the world’s history—of the horrors of mob rule, the French Revolution, was not the natural outcome of Democracy. The Reign of Terror followed swiftly upon centuries of monarchical rule, aristocratic privileges and the suppression of popular liberties? In Germany and in Russia the same fierce elements are at work;—the same dissatisfaction, the same rebellion against the religion of those who monopolise all earthly advantages. These elements are only restrained for the present by the heavy hand of Imperial power. The inward transforming influence which alone can truly restrain, is wanting. It is only a question of time. The longer these elements—call them what you will, Socialism, Nihilism, &c., are violently held in check, without the application of the true remedy, the greater and more terrible will be their ultimate expression. The outward repression having been slight in Switzerland, the overflowings of the evil have come early, and have been more rapid and evident. But under every form of Government there are, more or less, the same elements at work. The only true solution of the problem is to be found in the revival of the true life of the immortal beings who compose this volcanic substratum of humanity. If this judgment of the case is true, in how grave and awful a light must appear the deliberate rejection of influences which tend towards the revival of that spiritual life. The Gadarenes prayed our Lord to depart out of their coasts; Jerusalem would have none of Him; and speedy and swift was the vengeance which fell on those nations who judged themselves unworthy to receive the message of eternal life.

But we hope better things for Switzerland. The following testimony is borne by a correspondent of “Evangelical Christendom” (Nov. 1):—“The appearance of the Salvation Army in Switzerland has brought out the hidden, or smouldering enmity against vital, vivid Christianity as strongly as did Vinet and the Free Church movement in 1845–7, and the visit of the Haldanes and the quickening of religious life and doctrine twenty years before that.... Neuchâtel has the reputation, I believe justly, of being the most pious and gospel-loving city in French-speaking Switzerland, in which the National Church and the Free Church vie with each other (with little exception) as to which shall give the clearest gospel. Yet beneath all those who attend church, chapel, and school, there seems to have lain, in darkness and the shadow of death, one of the most compact masses of unknown or untouched ruffianism, that could be found anywhere. It is well that this be brought to light. It is turning serious minds, in all the churches, whatever may be their opinion about the ‘Army,’ towards the undiscovered fields of mission labour that lie beneath their very feet.”

During the publication of this record, the “Bitter Cry of Outcast London” has sounded through the length and breadth of our land, and we are reminded that not from Switzerland alone, or from London alone, there is arising an exceeding bitter cry, and that in the midst of the greatest activity applied to outward reforms, in the matter of dwellings, wages, education, &c., the “heart-leverage,” as it has been called, is still the first and the only efficient remedy.

As watchmen on their watch-towers, as the “King’s remembrancers,” those who have faith in God must cry night and day to Him that He will send forth the Mighty Spirit to “breathe on these slain that they may live.”

THE END.

APPENDIX

I. The persecutions are continued in Switzerland, not now against the English alone, but against the Swiss Salvationists. The events which have transpired since the trial at Boudry would themselves till a small volume, as a sequel to the above narrative; but it is necessary to close the first act of this drama, already too lengthy perhaps, even in order to resume with deliberation the study of the conflict which is going on, and which will probably not be quickly ended. There has been a trial of Salvationists at Rolle, and another at Morges, the details of which are significant. The harmless and unoffending young wife of Capt. Becquet, whom he had left behind him for a time in Switzerland, and who is not an officer in the Salvation Army, was brutally attacked in the street of a Swiss town, while passing with her baby in her arms. A friend, witnessing this attack, came forward to defend her, and drive off her assailants. He was arrested and made prisoner for a night, and fined eighteen francs for doing so. Lieutenant Thonger is in prison, and others are fined, or expelled.

(II.) I give here, in the original, the Balance Sheets of the expenditure of the Salvation Army in Geneva and Neuchâtel, as mentioned in the narrative:—

BILAN

Des recettes et dépenses de l’Armée du Salut à Genève, du 4 décembre 1882, jusqu’au 12 février 1883—jour de l’expulsion.

R  ECETTES. | | | D  ÉPENSES. | |
Collecte à la sortie des réunions | 2677 | 45 | Frais de voyage | 796 | 80
[41]Dons divers | 4128 | | [42]Frais d’entretien des officiers | 1178 | 30
Vente de publications (En Avant! brochures, etc.) | 831 | 59 | [43]Loyers de salles et d’un bureau, concierges, surveillance des portes | 1002 | 95
| | | Affranchissemt   et télégrammes | 350 | 70
| | | Matériel pour ameublement d’un bureau et réparations faites à un local de réunion | 524 | 75
| | | Affiches, annonc. et frais d’imp | 577 | 55
| | | Fournit. de bureau, port de paquets et autres frais de bureau | 210 | 40
| | | Avancé au dépôt de Paris à cpte sur publications reçues (En Avant! brochures, etc.) | 1052 |
| | | Avancé au poste de Neuchâtel | 170 |
| | | Solde | 1773 | 59
| 7637 | 04 | | 7637 | 04
J’ai vérifié le compte ci-dessus, et je l’ai trouvé d’accord avec les pièces qui m’ont été produites.
D. LENOIR, agent de charge, Genève.

BILAN

Des recettes et dépenses de l’Armée du Salut à Neuchâtel, pour le trimestre du 19 janvier au 19 avril 1883.

R  ECETTES. | | | D  ÉPENSES. | |
Avancé par le poste de Genève | 170 | —— | Entretien des officiers | {473 | | |
Collecté à la porte de la salle | 1739 | 97 | Loyer de leurs appartemts | {116, | 20 | 589 | 20
Dons | 965 | —— | | —— | —— | |
Vente de publications | {Cantiques | 306, | 10 | | | Loyer de la salle | 1000 |
{En Avant! | 171 | | | | Dépenses de voyage | 360 | 20
{Brochures | 78 | | 555 | 10 | Bancs, estrades et fortification de la salle | 932 | 80
| | —— | —— | | | Port de paquets | 79 | 50
| | | | | | Dépêches et timbres postes | 123 | 08
| | | | | | Papeterie et imprimerie | 95 | 30
| | | | | | Gaz | 36 |
| | | | | | Instrument de musique | 15 |
| | | | | | Documents d’établissements | 20 |
| | | | | | Avancé à Paris à compte sur publication reçues | 100 |
| | | | | | Solde | 78 | 99
| | | | —— | —— | | | | —— | ——
| | | | 3430 | 07 | | | | 3430 | 07
| | | | —— | —— | | | | —— | ——
| | | | | | Vérifié et reconnu juste, le 20 avril 1883.
| | | | | | (signé) R  . CONVERT.

(III.) The following is a statement which will sufficiently prove the absurdity of the assertions which have appeared in the Press, that there is a mystery about the disposal of the finances of the Salvation Army. The balance-sheets may be seen at Gresham Buildings by those who desire to see them.

“The income of the Salvation Army is arranged in two distinct divisions:—

“1st.—There are the amounts sent direct to head-quarters by subscribers and others.

“The particulars of this amount and of the expenditure of the same, with summary of the trade accounts, are published in the annual balance-sheet, which may be had on application to us, or to the head-quarters of the Army.

“The books at head-quarters are not only audited by us, but are under our direct and continuous control, so that we have the full knowledge of all income and expenditure of every kind whatsoever relating to this division.

“From none of these sources of income does the General or Mrs. Booth draw any moneys for their own personal income, nor have they done so for the fourteen years during which we have had the audit of the accounts.

“2nd.—The second division of income of the Army consists of the local contributions.

“These amounts are raised and spent locally by the duly appointed treasurers and secretaries of each separate corps for their own local expenses, under the direction of the officers, they are examined by local auditors, and are under the direct supervision of head-quarters.

“(Signed)      JOSIAH BEDDOW & SONS, Chartered Accountants.

“2, Gresham Buildings, Basinghall Street, London, E.C.

March 8, 1882.”

ENDNOTES

1. Lettre à Madame la Comtesse de Gasparin.

2. “Brief Sketch of the Evangelical Alliance.” By Mr. Arnold, Secretary to the English Branch.

3. I do not intend to enter upon the great question of the public ministry of women. It is too large a question for the compass of this paper. Its solution is at hand. It is one of the questions of the day which are pressing at our very door. I will only say here one word, namely, that God has evidently, and in the face of the whole world, signally blessed and honoured the public ministry of women in the Gospel, and no doubt He will know how to justify Himself in so doing.

4. I find no question so frequently asked in England in reference to this matter as the following: “but have not the Salvation Army given ground in Switzerland for the attacks made on them, by their processions, obstructions in the streets, noisy music, &c.?” I think it well, therefore, to further emphasize my reply to such enquiries by giving the following testimony, in the original, of a gentleman, an independent observer, in Geneva. He says, “Un des principaux reproches qu’en Angleterre on adresse à l’Armée du Salut ce sont des processions dans les rues, avec accompagnement de musique ou de chants. Jamais, à Genève, l’Armée du Salut ne s’est montrée sur la voie publique; et, en ce qui concernait, soit ses affiches, soit sa musique dans l’interieur des locaux, elle s’est promptement conformée aux observations qui lui ont été adressées à ce sujet.”

5. A Swiss lawyer writes:—“The words spoken by M. Héridier in the sitting of the Grand Council on the 27th of January, in reply to a question asked by Deputy Odier, were the expression of the most direct encouragement to mob disturbances which has probably ever been heard from the lips of a magistrate.”

6. Extract from the official reports of the sittings of the Grand Council of Geneva.

7. See Article 50 of the Federal Code

8. Constitution de la Republique et Canton de Genève; Titre II., Article 4, page 4.

9. In the Appendix I give the balance-sheet for that three months, handed to me by Miss Booth, who further gave me proofs that all the monies collected in Switzerland were also spent in Switzerland, with the exception of 1,000 francs (£40) which was a gift from a gentleman deeply interested in the work in France, and which he asked her to dedicate specially to that work. I append also a statement concerning the accounts in England which it would be well that readers should mark.

10. M. Cuenod, the chief of the Cantonal Police of Geneva, has on several occasions acted a very kind part towards the English officers of the Salvation Army.

11. In its report of these events, the Journal de Genève remarked: “As the following day was Sunday, Mdlle. Charlesworth in true English fashion believed and said that she could not go to the Police Court. The police, proud of the success of its little stratagem, at once seized upon this ground in order to expel her from the Canton at six hours’ notice.”

12. The motto of the city of Geneva.

13. Colonel Clibborn, who was a member of the Society of Friends, speaks thus further on these points:—“My attachment to our Society remains as deep and strong as ever, while at the same time the conviction of being in the place where the Lord would have me is equally strong. The grand characteristics of early Quakerism will prove to be again the power of this work upon the Continent—the belief in and the enjoyment of a full salvation; the baptism of the Spirit; the ‘annointing’ of that Spirit, the one qualification for service; opportunity for all to ‘prophesy’ in the Spirit; liberty for the exercise of all gifts; open and avowed separation from the world, and confession of Christ; the right of women to preach. Almost all the best known Evangelistic movements on the Continent refuse women this right, or at most barely tolerate women’s ministry; and here is just one of the great advantages of the Army work. It seems to me strange that so many are blind to the fact that any day a great war may break out, which will claim all the French men evangelists. Our perfect liberty for all, calls out all the gifts of all the converts at the earliest moment, and thus raises a band of workers which no war can drain, and no persecution exterminate. And now, when the cruel war laws of these nations claim the bodies of all their young men from three to five of their most vigorous years, and maintain the right to send nearly all their able-bodied men to be food for powder, God is raising up a band of women in our Army who can carry on the work without interruption, come war or peace. Mrs. Booth’s pamphlet on Women’s Ministry is now being sold all over the land, and has already produced a marked effect. The prejudice against women’s ministry was one of the chief sources of the ‘religious’ opposition which our work met with in Switzerland.”

14. For readers who are not familiar with that great prophetical word, the fulfilment of which is now beginning to be accomplished before our eyes, I give it in full:—“And it shall come to pass afterward that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, and your young men shall see visions: and also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out the Spirit.”—Joel II., 28, 29.

15. I have seen the originals of a considerable number of the testimonies which are quoted in the course of this narrative. All are well attested, and it has been carefully ascertained that those who uttered them are standing firm in the faith, and in the new life.

16. It was a religious paper in Neuchâtel which published that the Salvation Army work in Switzerland had cost 60,000 francs, making this the basis for a long article accusing the Army of draining the resources of other missions. This article furnished the Conseil d’Etat of Neuchâtel with one of its pretexts for closing the hall, viz., that the Salvationists were amassing a fortune. What was the truth? The Swiss work had not cost even 10,000 francs.

17. Miss Booth had never made such a declaration; she admitted simply her title of Maréchale.

18. This word ressortissants which frequently occurs cannot easily be translated into one word in English. It signifies the persons who have recourse to the tribunals in either country.

19. This is not true, no clear reply was ever given to Miss Booth on this subject.

20. The reader is now aware that no such law exists.

21. It is difficult to render in English the force of this word, the use of which implies an accusation against the Salvation Army of making capital out of the credulity of weak-minded people.

22. We have already seen that no such regulation exists. The following is the text of the regulation made use of by M. Héridier in the expulsion of Miss Booth:—

Police Regulation upon House to House Collections, March 4th, 1879.

The Council of State, upon the proposition of the Department of Justice and Police decrees:—

Article I. That no collection from house to house or in the streets shall take place on behalf of a religious establishment, public, charitable or beneficent institution, or other, &c., &c., nor to the profit of a legal foundation, nor of any association whatever, without the authorization of the Council of State....

Article II. Any private person desiring to make a collection from house to house, in his personal interest, must previously obtain in writing the authorization of the Department of Justice and Police.

Article VII. Anyone contravening this regulation will be punishable by Police penalties indicated in the law 23rd October, 1876, &c.

Signed by the Chancellor,

ETIENNE PATRU.

23. A number of legal authorities are here quoted to substantiate this statement. The same authorities have been studied and quoted by persons who hold a view opposed to that of the Federal Council.

24. We have seen that only one such notice, and that a verbal one by the police before whom she was called, was ever given to her.

25. The Daily News remarked in reference to this, that “every English Chaplain in Switzerland must now consider himself liable to be called to account for any collection made in the churches among the Alps frequented by English and American tourists.” But beyond this, the inhabitants of every European country are now informed by the Swiss Federal Council that they are not free, as they imagined themselves to be, to ask for money in public meetings, for every kind of social, political, or religious enterprise. They must henceforth understand that the authorities of the State have “incontestibly” the right to send a policeman to look into the money-box or purse of the collectors, and count up the amount, limit, or prohibit, as the case may be!

26. The following appears in the Nouvelliste, April, 1883:—“I read among your correspondence from Neuchâtel, published yesterday, that the whole population observes with pain the attitude taken by M. Aimé Humbert in the matter of the Salvationists. This certainly is so false and outrageous that I cannot let it pass without a protest. Certainly it is not my mission to speak for other people, and I will not say, as your correspondent does when speaking of himself alone, ‘the people of Neuchâtel;’ but I will say, in my own name, that I am very happy to see M. Aimé Humbert—one of the founders of our Republic, and one of the defenders of liberty of conscience in our Canton—once more supporting so good a cause, while the men now in power are endeavouring to stifle religious manifestations which are distasteful to them, after the manner of the ancient régime. M. Aimé Humbert is not, moreover, the only one of our ancient magistrates who continues to be the partizan of religious liberty. M. Eugene Borel, late Councillor of State and Federal Councillor, expresses the same sentiments. He recently wrote that he considered liberty of worship as one of the most precious conquests of the Revolution of 1848, and that there was no legal ground for depriving the Salvation Army of that liberty.”

27. Persons meeting privately to take tea, have, then and at all times, a right to the protection of the police against violent assaults from persons in the streets.

28. A number of respectable citizens of Neuchâtel had voluntarily proposed to act as special constables. There is no doubt that the result would in that case have been very different to that which actually took place. The proposal was rejected by the majority of the Council of State, to whom it was not pleasing, and it was especially distasteful to M. Cornaz, the head of the Department of Justice and Police.

29. The influence of the drinking habits of the people on the fierceness of the opposition to Salutistes is illustrated by the following facts:—

During the first week of the work at Neuchâtel two men were observed in the meetings who manifested extreme opposition. One evening while Mme. Chabal was speaking, one of them jumped up in a towering rage, and, shaking his fist at her, cried, “You old viper! I shall make you pay dearly for that!” and left the hall in a violent passion, still shouting his threats in the street. This poor man lost his place as bailiff through drunkenness a few days later, and on Sunday, 26th August, he fell from the second story of a house in Beaume, and died several hours after from the injuries received in his fall.

A workman who had distinguished himself by his furious attacks upon the Salvationists and those who attended the meetings in the Mont Blanc Hall, several weeks after, when ascending a flight of steep stone steps in a state of intoxication, fell backwards, broke his neck, and was taken up dead.

30. I am aware that other letters have been addressed by Mr. Charlesworth to the public journals, which seem to invalidate the above. I do not consider, however, that I am called upon to explain any apparent inconsistencies in this matter which may have come before the public. My duty is, in the course of this narrative, merely to present to the reader the grounds which Miss Booth had for believing that her young companion was in no way quitting the path of duty in remaining by her side.

31. At the Annual Conference of the Federation held last year (1882) at Neuchâtel, an old and respected citizen of Geneva spoke as follows of the institution of legalised vice in Geneva:—

“Even under the rule of the most honest and estimable of men, M. Cuenod, these evils go on, with all the horrible consequences which are involved in the principles of legalized prostitution. Let me tell you a fact which will show the truth of my assertions. M. Camperio, head of the Department of Justice and Police, promised our Committee to frame a Regulation expressly stipulating that every girl was free to leave a Maison Tolerée at any time. This Regulation was printed, and a copy given to each keeper, with an order to placard it up in his establishment. A fortnight after, a member of our Committee obtained permission from M. Camperio to go into some of the houses with a Police agent, in order to see with his own eyes that the order had been carried out. He went into fourteen of them: not a single one of them had executed the order of the Department of Police. I am wrong! one of the keepers had placarded the new Regulation on the wall behind a picture, by which it was completely hidden!

“During this month a Prussian woman wrote to me begging me to get her daughter out of one of these houses. This was at last contrived. That young girl said that she had frequently attempted to get out, but the door was always fastened by a solid padlock. Another girl had succeeded in escaping, by taking the impression of the lock with orange peel, and thus getting a false key made through the help of a visitor at the house. I have the conviction that a thorough search would discover terrible things in Geneva precisely similar to those discovered in Brussels.

“Let me speak to you now of a thing which has deeply wounded my heart as a Swiss citizen. Recently a fête took place at Geneva on the occasion of a musical contest which attracted a vast number of persons, foreigners, as well as Swiss, to our town. The town was illuminated and decorated with flags. Know you, ladies and gentlemen, what houses were decorated with the greatest taste and expense? which were the most splendidly illuminated, so splendidly as to eclipse all the others? They were two Maisons de Tolérance. Yes, throughout all those days of festival we beheld floating from the windows of these dens of infamy our Federal flag, the flags of our Cantons, the flags of Vaud, Geneva, your flag of Neuchâtel, these emblems of our Fatherland. The grand word LIBERTAS streamed along the front of these houses, attracting the eyes of all passers by. I will suppose you indifferent to the sufferings of the victims of vice; I will even suppose you guilty of vice yourselves, but no citizen should endure such things: You are Swiss citizens: respect the honour of your national flag!”

At the period of which I am writing, M. Héridier fills the post of Minister of Justice and Police, and consequently administers the system of legalised vice in Geneva. M. Cuenod, assisted, perhaps, by M. Camperio had endeavoured to introduce some alleviations (as indicated above) of the sufferings of the girls immured in these houses. M. Héridier, on the contrary, is responsible, for having taken a step backward; and, as Professor Hornung, a well-known jurist of Geneva, has said, has placed the matter in worse position than before. Is it to be wondered at that M. Héridier, with the consciousness of having thereby increased the darkness of the dark lot of these slaves, should have constantly avoided the sight of our girl evangelists, sitting “behind a curtain” when they were questioned. Those eyes directed to his would alone have said, without the aid of words, “Thou art the man.”

32. En Avant! published at 187, Quai Valmy, Paris.

33. In justice to the jailer it should be stated that clean straw and better plates were provided for her.

34. Miss Booth was not aware in the least that this was an infringement of the prison rules.

35. “A Corporation has a separate legal existence not dependent on the legal position of its members. Every Corporation has a seal, and that is its signature. For if there are several individuals in the Corporation it boots not for each to sign their name; that is not considered by the law as the signature of the Corporation. But when the seal is affixed to a document no further writing is necessary, for the Corporation is deemed to have signed.”

36. The Public Prosecutor.

37. In the interest of accuracy it is necessary to repeat again here that the proceedings of the Salvation Army were conducted without any bands, or processions, or demonstrations of any kind. When, therefore, M. Cornaz speaks of “shows,” he knows there were none. As to the “jugglery,” its only existence is in M. Cornaz’s own mind; by the aid of it he distorts the text of his country’s laws, his own utterances, and the transparent speeches and actions of the members of the Salvation Army.

38. While quoting the above the Geneva journals come to hand which give the results of the elections for several of the Cantonal Governments. M. Héridier has not been re-elected. It is reported that even his own supporters have found some of his recent acts too authoritative, while his illegalities and tyrannies have been pronounced by the Constitutional party to be beyond endurance. This is followed by his election by the Grand Council of Geneva as one of the two deputies which the Canton returns to the Swiss Conseil des Etats (a body answering to the American Senate). This election is in direct defiance of the previous popular vote, and proves that the governing persons now in office are more in favour of arbitrary government than the common people.

39. Since the return of M. Vernier to France this little church has been without a pastor, “as sheep without a shepherd.” Its members had recourse only the more directly to the “Shepherd and Bishop of their souls,” and great blessing, it is said, has attended the gatherings there. The Elders of the church and others lead the devotions, and address the congregation. The Church is now crowded, as never before, in a great measure by the very poor, the “outcast” population, whose usual habit it is to abstain from church-going altogether. This fact gives rise to ridicule on the one hand, to rejoicing and thankfulness on the other; for these are the very persons whom it is acknowledged are the hardest to reach. In a recent meeting of members of that church a grave discussion took place on the question whether women should be allowed to pray in the church in the evening or “after meetings.” (It will be remembered that it was the prayer of a woman in one such after meeting which was the occasion of the rupture in that church, followed by the retirement of its pastor.) The question was referred to M. Aimé Humbert, whose brief and pregnant answer seems a prophesy of the future solution not of this alone, but of many other questions—“Where the SPIRIT OF THE LORD is, there is LIBERTY.”

40. The drinking habits of the Swiss people extend unhappily much above the poorer and working classes. The fact that the Canton de Vaud is sometimes styled “le pays des veuves” (the country of widows), has a melancholy significance. It is said that the evil institution established by certain vineyard proprietors of the Cave, or cellar, well fitted up, to which the master of the house retires with his male guests after dinner to drink until a late hour, has found its way to Berne, and that the degrading custom is even encouraged by some official persons, as a help to the attainment of personal political ends.

41. Pour ceux qui auraient ajouté foi au dire des journaux religieux, que l’Armée aurait depuis son arrivée à Genève reçu et dépensé fr. 60,000, il est bon de faire savoir que depuis l’expulsion les recettes ayant atteint le chiffre de fr. 660, le total des recettes (ventes de publications non comprises) s’élèvent à fr. 7370.

42. Deux des officiers sont absolument indépendants de l’Armée quant à leurs frais personnels, les autres ne reçoivent aucun salaire, mais il est pourvu à leur strict nécessaire.

43. Cette somme eût été plus forte, si quelques loyers de salles n’avaient été acquittés directement par des amis de notre œuvre.

TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES

Page | Changed from | Changed to
70 | Seeing that there would be many attractions of a wordly | Seeing that there would be many attractions of a worldly
227 | a few wooden chairs, two little beds with straw mattrasses | a few wooden chairs, two little beds with straw mattresses
262 | afford to treat lighty. Let me remind M. le Procureur-Général | afford to treat lightly. Let me remind M. le Procureur-Général

- Fixed typos; non-standard spelling and dialect retained.

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE SALVATION ARMY IN SWITZERLAND ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG™ LICENSE

PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg License available with this file or online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg electronic works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project Gutenberg electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg name associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg License when you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg License must appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg electronic works provided that:

- • You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the use of Project Gutenberg works calculated using the method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg trademark, but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”

- • You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.

- • You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of receipt of the work.

- • You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg

Project Gutenberg is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg and future generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 41 Watchung Plaza #516, Montclair NJ 07042, USA, +1 (862) 621-9288. Email contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg eBooks are often created from several printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg, including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.

Table of Contents

THE SALVATION ARMY IN SWITZERLAND.

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER I.

CHAPTER II. Narrative of Facts.

CHAPTER III.

CHAPTER IV.

CHAPTER V.

CHAPTER VI.

CHAPTER VII.

CHAPTER VIII.

APPENDIX

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG™ LICENSE