A NEW REIGN OF TERROR.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 5498, 25 February 1896, Page 2

A NEW REIGN OF TERROR.

The Lebaudy . scandal, or "incident," as it his been called in tlie French Chamber of Deputies, was - referred to in a cable despatch of a, few days ago, which stated that the trials arising out of the affair would begin on Monday next. The incident is rather a grim one; and it carries a "moral " for- all rich men who do not make wise use of their wealth. The Lebaudy who gives his name to the scandal was one of three millionaire brothers whose father had accumulated a fortune by sugar-making in France. He had to comply with the conscription laws and go into barracks for military training just as though he were an ordinary man. But the French Republican of today is as jealous of wealth as his forefather was of titles. The Socialist journals watched closely the career of M. Lebaudy; they predicted week by week that exceptional favour would be shown to the " millionaire conscript " in barracks ; they professed to anticipate medical certificates for him; and consequently doctors, commanding officers, and even the Minister of War, afraid of an accusation of bribery, refused him the sick-leaves and exemptions from barrack diet which would have been granted to any peasant or workman labouring under the same disqualifications from ill-health. He was forced into a military hospital full of fever-stricken patients from Madagascar, when any ordinary conscript would have been allowed to retreat to his cottage. In consequence of this, the unhappy millionaire died, and his persecution is viewed not only as a symptom of a wave of suspicion of pecuniary corruption, which is not unjustified by recent events in France, but also as the forerunner df a new Reign of Terror, under which men will be sentenced to social and political death because of their advantages. Already, in France, a legal disability rests upon all Princes in the Bourbon and Bonaparte succession, who may not even reside in their own country, serve in her armies, or enter her representative assembly. A writer in the Spectator alleges that wealth is also a disability in England, " if its owner happens to be accused of any offence, or to come into conflict with the police. 'Magistrates are so afraid of the charge of 'making distinctions' in favour of the fortunate, that they run some risk of making distinctions against them. The bad man of a vulgar French or American novel is almost always very rich; and the scoundrel of an English newspaper story is usually a baronet." There is a grain of truth in these statements ; but, nevertheless, there is no reason for apprehending a popular crusade against wealth. In M. Lebaudy's case his unpopularity was not due so much to the fact of his being wealthy as to the habit he had of flaunting his millions and' using them in defying or evading the law. It was a mild species of Nemesis that overtook him, certainly ; and if thero has been any. undue severity shown towards him it is to be hoped that at the coming trials the guilty persons will be made to suffer.