VI.
The laws against vagabonds have always been very rigorous in England.England, in her Gothic legislation, seemed to be inspired with thisprinciple, _Homo errans fera errante pejor_. One of the special statutesclassifies the man without a home as "more dangerous than the asp,dragon, lynx, or basilisk" (_atrocior aspide, dracone, lynce, etbasilico_). For a long time England troubled herself as much concerningthe gipsies, of whom she wished to be rid as about the wolves of whichshe had been cleared. In that the Englishman differed from the Irishman,who prayed to the saints for the health of the wolf, and called him "mygodfather."
English law, nevertheless, in the same way as (we have just seen) ittolerated the wolf, tamed, domesticated, and become in some sort a dog,tolerated the regular vagabond, become in some sort a subject. It didnot trouble itself about either the mountebank or the travelling barber,or the quack doctor, or the peddler, or the open-air scholar, as long asthey had a trade to live by. Further than this, and with theseexceptions, the description of freedom which exists in the wandererterrified the law. A tramp was a possible public enemy. That modernthing, the lounger, was then unknown; that ancient thing, the vagrant,was alone understood. A suspicious appearance, that indescribablesomething which all understand and none can define, was sufficientreason that society should take a man by the collar. "Where do you live?How do you get your living?" And if he could not answer, harsh penaltiesawaited him. Iron and fire were in the code: the law practised thecauterization of vagrancy.
Hence, throughout English territory, a veritable "loi des suspects" wasapplicable to vagrants (who, it must be owned, readily becamemalefactors), and particularly to gipsies, whose expulsion haserroneously been compared to the expulsion of the Jews and the Moorsfrom Spain, and the Protestants from France. As for us, we do notconfound a battue with a persecution.
The Comprachicos, we insist, had nothing in common with the gipsies. Thegipsies were a nation; the Comprachicos were a compound of allnations--the lees of a horrible vessel full of filthy waters. TheComprachicos had not, like the gipsies, an idiom of their own; theirjargon was a promiscuous collection of idioms: all languages were mixedtogether in their language; they spoke a medley. Like the gipsies, theyhad come to be a people winding through the peoples; but their commontie was association, not race. At all epochs in history one finds in thevast liquid mass which constitutes humanity some of these streams ofvenomous men exuding poison around them. The gipsies were a tribe; theComprachicos a freemasonry--a masonry having not a noble aim, but ahideous handicraft. Finally, their religions differ--the gipsies werePagans, the Comprachicos were Christians, and more than that, goodChristians, as became an association which, although a mixture of allnations, owed its birth to Spain, a devout land.
They were more than Christians, they were Catholics; they were more thanCatholics, they were Romans, and so touchy in their faith, and so pure,that they refused to associate with the Hungarian nomads of the comitateof Pesth, commanded and led by an old man, having for sceptre a wandwith a silver ball, surmounted by the double-headed Austrian eagle. Itis true that these Hungarians were schismatics, to the extent ofcelebrating the Assumption on the 29th August, which is an abomination.
In England, so long as the Stuarts reigned, the confederation of theComprachicos was (for motives of which we have already given you aglimpse) to a certain extent protected. James II., a devout man, whopersecuted the Jews and trampled out the gipsies, was a good prince tothe Comprachicos. We have seen why. The Comprachicos were buyers of thehuman wares in which he was dealer. They excelled in disappearances.Disappearances are occasionally necessary for the good of the state. Aninconvenient heir of tender age whom they took and handled lost hisshape. This facilitated confiscation; the tranfer of titles tofavourites was simplified. The Comprachicos were, moreover, verydiscreet and very taciturn. They bound themselves to silence, and kepttheir word, which is necessary in affairs of state. There was scarcelyan example of their having betrayed the secrets of the king. This was,it is true, for their interest; and if the king had lost confidence inthem, they would have been in great danger. They were thus of use in apolitical point of view. Moreover these artists furnished singers forthe Holy Father. The Comprachicos were useful for the _Miserere_ ofAllegri. They were particularly devoted to Mary. All this pleased thepapistry of the Stuarts. James II. could not be hostile to holy men whopushed their devotion to the Virgin to the extent of manufacturingeunuchs. In 1688 there was a change of dynasty in England: Orangesupplanted Stuart. William III. replaced James II.
James II. went away to die in exile, miracles were performed on histomb, and his relics cured the Bishop of Autun of fistula--a worthyrecompense of the Christian virtues of the prince.
William, having neither the same ideas nor the same practices as James,was severe to the Comprachicos. He did his best to crush out the vermin.
A statute of the early part of William and Mary's reign hit theassociation of child-buyers hard. It was as the blow of a club to theComprachicos, who were from that time pulverized. By the terms of thisstatute those of the fellowship taken and duly convicted were to bebranded with a red-hot iron, imprinting R. on the shoulder, signifyingrogue; on the left hand T, signifying thief; and on the right hand M,signifying man-slayer. The chiefs, "supposed to be rich, althoughbeggars in appearance," were to be punished in the _collistrigium_--thatis, the pillory--and branded on the forehead with a P, besides havingtheir goods confiscated, and the trees in their woods rooted up. Thosewho did not inform against the Comprachicos were to be punished byconfiscation and imprisonment for life, as for the crime of misprision.As for the women found among these men, they were to suffer thecucking-stool--this is a tumbrel, the name of which is composed of theFrench word _coquine_, and the German _stuhl_. English law being endowedwith a strange longevity, this punishment still exists in Englishlegislation for quarrelsome women. The cucking-stool is suspended over ariver or a pond, the woman seated on it. The chair is allowed to dropinto the water, and then pulled out. This dipping of the woman isrepeated three times, "to cool her anger," says the commentator,Chamberlayne.
PART I.
BOOK THE FIRST.
_NIGHT NOT SO BLACK AS MAN_.