Chapter 6

SeeTrade Organization;Economics;Commercial Treaties, and the sections under the headings of countries.

COMMERCE,the name of a card-game. Any number can play with an ordinary pack. There are several variations of the game, but the following is a common one. Each player receives three cards, and three more are turned up as a “pool.” The first player may exchange one or two of his cards for one or two of the exposed cards, putting his own, face upwards, in their place. His object is to “make his hand” (see below), but if he changes all three cards at once he cannot change again. The next player can do likewise, and so on. Usually there are as many rounds as there are players, and a fresh card is added to the pool at the beginning of each. If a player passes once he cannot exchange afterwards. When the rounds are finished the hands are shown, the holder of the best either receiving a stake fromall the others, or, supposing each has started with three “lives,” taking one life from the lowest. The hands, in order of merit, are: (i.)Tricon—three similar cards, three aces ranking above three kings, and so on. (ii.)Sequence—three cards of the same suit in consecutive order; the highest sequence is the best. (iii.)Flush—three cards of the same suit, the highest “point” wins,i.e.the highest number of pips, ace counting eleven and court-cards ten. (iv.)Pair—two similar cards, the highest pair winning. (v.)Point—the largest number of pips winning, as in “flush,” but there is no restriction as to suit. Sometimes “pair” and “point” are not recognized. A popular variation of Commerce isPounce Commerce. In this, if a player has already three similar cards,e.g.three nines, and the fourth nine comes into the pool, he says “Pounce!” and takes it, thus obtaining a hand of four, which is higher than any hand of three: whenever a pounce occurs, a new card is turned up from the pack.

COMMERCIAL COURT,in England, a court presided over by a single judge of the king’s bench division, for the trial, as expeditiously as may be, of commercial cases. By the Rules of the Supreme Court, Order xviii. a (made in November 1893), a plaintiff was allowed to dispense with pleadings altogether, provided that the indorsement of his writ of summons contained a statement sufficient to give notice of his claim, or of the relief or remedy required in the action, and stating that the plaintiff intended to proceed to trial without pleadings. The judge might, on the application of the defendant, order a statement of claim to be delivered, or the action to proceed to trial without pleadings, and if necessary particulars of the claim or defence to be delivered. Out of this order grew the commercial court. It is not a distinct court or division or branch of the High Court, and is not regulated by any special rules of court made by the rule committee. It originated in a notice issued by the judges of the queen’s bench division, in February 1895 (see W.N., 2nd of March 1895), the provisions contained in which represent only “a practice agreed on by the judges, who have the right to deal by convention among themselves with this mode of disposing of the business in their courts” (per Lord Esher inBarryv.Peruvian Corporation, 1896, 1 Q. B. p. 209). A separate list of causes of a commercial character is made and assigned to a particular judge, charged with commercial business, to whom all applications before the trial are made. The 8th paragraph is as follows:—

Such judge may at any time after appearance and without pleadings make such order as he thinks fit for the speedy determination, in accordance with existing rules, of the questions really in controversy between the parties.

Practitioners before Sir George Jessel, at the rolls, in the years 1873 to 1880, will be reminded of his mode of ascertaining the point in controversy and bringing it to a speedy determination. Obviously the scheme is only applicable to cases in which there is some single issue of law or fact, or the case depends on the construction of some contract or other instrument or section of an act of parliament, and such issue or question is either agreed upon by the parties or at once ascertainable by the judge. The success of the scheme also depends largely on the personal qualities of the judge to whom the list is assigned. Under the able guidance of Mr (afterwards Lord) Justice Mathew (d. 1908), the commercial court became very successful in bringing cases to a speedy and satisfactory determination without any technicality or unnecessary expense.

COMMERCIAL LAW,a term used rather indefinitely to include those main rules and principles which, with more or less minor differences, characterize the commercial transactions and customs of most European countries. It includes within its compass such titles as principal and agent; carriage by land and sea; merchant shipping; guarantee; marine, fire, life and accident insurance; bills of exchange, partnership, &c.

COMMERCIAL TREATIES.A commercial treaty is a contract between states relative to trade. It is a bilateral act whereby definite arrangements are entered into by each contracting party towards the other—not mere concessions. As regards technical distinctions, an “agreement,” an “exchange of notes,” or a “convention” properly applies to one specific subject; whereas a “treaty” usually comprises several matters, whether commercial or political.

In ancient times foreign intercourse, trade and navigation were in many instances regulated by international arrangements. The text is extant of treaties of commerce and navigation concluded between Carthage and Rome in 509 and 348B.C.Aristotle mentions that nations were connected by commercial treaties; and other classical writers advert to these engagements. Under the Roman empire the matters thus dealt with became regulated by law, or by usages sometimes styled laws. When the territories of the empire were contracted, and the imperial authority was weakened, some kind of international agreements again became necessary. At Constantinople in the 10th century treaties cited by Gibbon protected “the person, effects and privileges of the Russian merchant”; and, in western Europe, intercourse, trade and navigation were carried on, at first tacitly by usage derived from Roman times, or under verbal permission given to merchants by the ruler to whose court they resorted. Afterwards, security in these transactions was afforded by means of formal documents, such as royal letters, charters, laws and other instruments possessing the force of government measures. Instances affecting English commercial relations are the letter of Charlemagne in 796, the Brabant Charter of 1305, and the Russian ukase of 1569. Medieval treaties of truce or peace often contained a clause permitting in general terms the renewal of personal and commercial communication as it subsisted before the war. This custom is still followed. But these medieval arrangements were precarious: they were often of temporary duration, and were usually only effective during the lifetime of the contracting sovereigns.

Passing over trade agreements affecting the Eastern empire, the modern commercial treaty system came into existence in the 12th century. Genoa, Pisa and Venice were then well-organized communities, and were in keen rivalry. Whenever their position in a foreign country was strong, a trading centre was established, and few or no specific engagements were made on their part. But in serious competition or difficulty another course was adopted: a formal agreement was concluded for the better security of their commerce and navigation. The arrangements of 1140 between Venice and Sicily; the Genoese conventions of 1149 with Valencia, of 1161 with Morocco, and of 1181 with the Balearic Islands; the Pisan conventions of 1173 with Sultan Saladin, and of 1184 with the Balearic Islands, were the earliest Western commercial treaties. Such definite arrangements, although still of a personal character, were soon perceived to be preferable to general provisions in a treaty of truce or peace. They afforded also greater security than privileges enjoyed under usage; or under grants of various kinds, whether local or royal. The policy thus inaugurated was adopted gradually throughout Europe. The first treaties relative to the trade of the Netherlands were between Brabant and Holland in 1203, Holland and Utrecht in 1204, and Brabant and Cologne in 1251. Early northern commercial treaties are those between Riga and Smolensk 1229, and between Lübeck and Sweden 1269. The first commercial relations between the Hanse Towns and foreign countries were arrangements made by gilds of merchants, not by public authorities as a governing body. For a long period the treaty system did not entirely supersede conditions of intercourse between nations dependent on permission.

The earliest English commercial treaty is that with Norway in 1217. It provides “ut mercatores et homines qui sunt de potestate vestra liberè et sine impedimento terram nostram adire possint, et homines et mercatores nostri similiter vestram.” These stipulations are in due treaty form. The next early English treaties are:—with Flanders, 1274 and 1314; Portugal, 1308, 1352 and 1386; Baltic Cities, 1319 and 1388; Biscay and Castile, 1351; Burgundy, 1417 and 1496; France, 1471, 1497 and 1510; Florence, 1490. The commercial treaty policy in England was carried out systematically under Henry IV. and Henry VII. It was continued under James I. to extend to Scotland English trading privileges. The results attained in the 17th century were—regularity in treaty arrangements; theirdurable instead of personal nature; the conversion of permissive into perfect rights; questions as to contraband and neutral trade stated in definite terms. Treaties were at first limited to exclusive and distinct engagements between the contracting states; each treaty differing more or less in its terms from other similar compacts. Afterwards by extending to a third nation privileges granted to particular countries, themost favoured nation articlebegan to be framed, as a unilateral engagement by a particular state. The Turkish capitulations afford the earliest instances; and the treaty of 1641 between the Netherlands and Portugal contains the first European formula. Cromwell continued the commercial treaty policy partly in order to obtain a formal recognition of the commonwealth from foreign powers. His treaty of 1654 with Sweden contains the first reciprocal “most favoured nation clause”:—Article IV. provides that the people, subjects and inhabitants of either confederate “shall have and possess in the countries, lands, dominions and kingdoms of the other as full and ample privileges, and as many exemptions, immunities and liberties, as any foreigner doth or shall possess in the dominions and kingdoms of the said confederate.” The government of the Restoration replaced and enlarged the Protectorate arrangements by fresh agreements. The general policy of the commonwealth was maintained, with further provisions on behalf of colonial trade. In the new treaty of 1661 with Sweden the privileges secured were those which “any foreigner whatsoever doth or shall enjoy in the said dominions and kingdoms on both sides.”

In contemporary treaties France obtained from Spain (1659) that French subjects should enjoy the same liberties as had been granted to the English; and England obtained from Denmark (1661) that the English should not pay more or greater customs than the people of the United Provinces and other foreigners, the Swedes only excepted. The colonial and navigation policy of the 17th century, and the proceedings of Louis XIV., provoked animosities and retaliatory tariffs. During the War of the Spanish Succession the Methuen Treaty of 1703 was concluded. Portugal removed prohibitions against the importation of British woollens; Great Britain engaged that Portuguese wines should pay one-third less duty than the rate levied on French wines. At the peace of Utrecht in 1713 political and commercial treaties were concluded. England agreed to remove prohibitions on the importation of French goods, and to grant most favoured nation treatment in relation to goods and merchandise of the like nature from any other country in Europe; the French general tariff of the 18th of September 1664, was to be again put in force for English trade. The English provision was at variance with the Methuen Treaty. A violent controversy arose as to the relative importance in 1713 of Anglo-Portuguese or Anglo-French trade. In the end the House of Commons, by a majority of 9, rejected the bill to give effect to the commercial treaty of 1713; and trade with France remained on an unsatisfactory footing until 1786. The other commercial treaties of Utrecht were very complete in their provisions, equal to those of the present time; and contained most favoured nation articles—England secured in 1715 reduction of duties on woollens imported into the Austrian Netherlands; and trading privileges in Spanish America. Moderate import duties for woollens were obtained in Russia by the commercial treaty of 1766. In the meanwhile the Bourbon family compact of the 15th of August 1761 assured national treatment for the subjects of France, Spain and the Two Sicilies, and for their trade in the European territories of the other two states; and most favoured nation treatment as regards any special terms granted to any foreign country. The first commercial treaties concluded by the United States with European countries contained most favoured nation clauses: this policy has been continued by the United States, but the wording of the clause has often varied.

In 1786 France began to effect tariff reform by means of commercial treaties. The first was with Great Britain, and it terminated the long-continued tariff warfare. But the wars of the French Revolution swept away these reforms, and brought about a renewal of hostile tariffs. Prohibitions and differential duties were renewed, and prevailed on the continent until the sixth decade of the 19th century. In 1860 a government existed in France sufficiently strong and liberal to revert to the policy of 1786. The bases of the Anglo-French treaty of 1860, beyond its most favoured nation provisions, were in France a general transition from prohibition or high customs duties to a moderate tariff; in the United Kingdom abandonment of all protective imposts, and reduction of duties maintained for fiscal purposes to the lowest rates compatible with these exigencies. Other European countries were obliged to obtain for their trade the benefit of the conventional tariff thus established in France, as an alternative to the high rates inscribed in the general tariff. A series of commercial treaties was accordingly concluded by different European states between 1861 and 1866, which effected further reductions of customs duties in the several countries that came within this treaty system. In 1871 the Republican government sought to terminate the treaties of the empire. The British negotiators nevertheless obtained the relinquishment of the attempt to levy protective duties under the guise of compensation for imposts on raw materials; the duration of the treaty of 1860 was prolonged; and stipulations better worded than those before in force were agreed to for shipping and most favoured nation treatment. In 1882, however, France terminated her existing European tariff treaties. Belgium and some other countries concluded fresh treaties, less liberal than those of the system of 1860, yet much better than anterior arrangements. Great Britain did not formally accept these higher duties; the treaty of the 28th of February 1882, with France, which secured most favoured nation treatment in other matters, provided that customs duties should be “henceforth regulated by the internal legislation of each of the two states.” In 1892 France also fell out of international tariff arrangements; and adopted the system of double columns of customs duties—one, of lower rates, to be applied to the goods of all nations receiving most favoured treatment; and the other, of higher rates, for countries not on this footing. Germany then took up the treaty tariff policy; and between 1891 and 1894 concluded several commercial treaties.

International trade in Europe in 1909 was regulated by a series of tariffs which came into operation, mainly on the initiative of Germany in 1906. Austria-Hungary, Belgium, Bulgaria, Germany, Italy, Rumania, Russia, Servia and Switzerland, were parties to them. Their object and effect was protectionist. The British policy then became one of obtaining modifications to remedy disadvantages to British trade, as was done in the case of Bulgaria and Rumania. An important series of commercial arrangements had been concluded between 1884 and 1900 respecting the territories and spheres of interest of European powers in western, central and eastern Africa. In these regions exclusive privileges were not claimed; most favoured nation treatment was recognized, and there was a disposition to extend national treatment to all Europeans and their trade.

The TurkishCapitulations(q.v.) are grants made by successive sultans to Christian nations, conferring rights and privileges in favour of their subjects resident or trading in the Ottoman dominions, following the policy towards European states of the Eastern empire. In the first instance capitulations were granted separately to each Christian state, beginning with the Genoese in 1453, which entered into pacific relations with Turkey. Afterwards new capitulations were obtained which summed up in one document earlier concessions, and added to them in general terms whatever had been conceded to one or more other states; a stipulation which became a most favoured nation article. The English capitulations date from 1569, and then secured the same treatment as the Venetians, French, Poles and the subjects of the emperor of Germany; they were revised in 1675, and as then settled were confirmed by treaties of subsequent date “now and for ever.” Capitulations signify that which is arranged under distinct “headings”; the Turkish phrase is “ahid nameh,” whereas a treaty is “mouahedé”—the latter does, and the former does not, signify a reciprocal engagement. Thus, although the Turkish capitulations are not in themselves treaties, yet by subsequent confirmation they have acquired the force of commercialtreaties of perpetual duration as regards substance and principles, while details, such as rates of customs duties, may, by mutual consent, be varied from time to time.

Themost favoured nationarticle already referred to concedes to the state in the treaty with which it is concluded whatever advantages in the matters comprised within its stipulations have been allowed to any foreign or third state. It does not in itself directly confer any particular rights, but sums up the whole of the rights in the matters therein mentioned which have been or may be granted to foreign countries. The value of the privileges under this article accordingly varies with the conditions as to these rights in each state which concedes this treatment.

The article is drafted in different form:(1) That contracting states A. and B. agree to extend to each other whatever rights and privileges they concede to countries C. and D., or to C. and D. and any other country. The object in this instance is to ensure specifically to B. and A. whatever advantages C. and D. may possess. A recent instance is Article XI. of the treaty of May 10, 1871, between France and Germany, which binds them respectively to extend to each other whatever advantages they grant to Austria, Belgium, Great Britain, the Netherlands, Russia and Switzerland.(2) The present general formula: A. and B. agree to extend to each other whatever advantages they concede to any third country; and engage that no other or higher duties shall be levied on the importation into A. and B. respectively of goods the produce or manufacture of B. and A. than are levied on the like goods the produce or manufacture of any third country the most favoured in this respect. There is a similar clause in regard to exportation.(3) The conditional or reciprocity formula, often used in the 18th and in the early part of the 19th century, namely, that whenever A. and B. make special concessions in return for corresponding concessions, B. and A. respectively are either excluded from participation therein, or must make some additional equivalent concession in order to participate in those advantages.It may further be observed that the word “like” relates to the goods themselves, to their material or quality, not to conditions of manufacture, mode of conveyance or anything beyond the fact of their precise description; small local facilities allowed to traffic between conterminous land districts are not at variance with this article.A recent complete and concise English formula is that of Article 2 of the treaty of commerce and navigation of the 31st of October 1905, with Rumania. “The contracting parties agree that, in all matters relating to commerce, navigation and industry, any privilege, favour or immunity which either contracting party has actually granted, or may hereafter grant, to the subjects or citizens of any other foreign state, shall be extended immediately and unconditionally to the subjects of the other; it being their intention that the commerce, navigation and industry of each country shall be placed, in all respects, on the footing of the most favoured nation.”

The article is drafted in different form:

(1) That contracting states A. and B. agree to extend to each other whatever rights and privileges they concede to countries C. and D., or to C. and D. and any other country. The object in this instance is to ensure specifically to B. and A. whatever advantages C. and D. may possess. A recent instance is Article XI. of the treaty of May 10, 1871, between France and Germany, which binds them respectively to extend to each other whatever advantages they grant to Austria, Belgium, Great Britain, the Netherlands, Russia and Switzerland.

(2) The present general formula: A. and B. agree to extend to each other whatever advantages they concede to any third country; and engage that no other or higher duties shall be levied on the importation into A. and B. respectively of goods the produce or manufacture of B. and A. than are levied on the like goods the produce or manufacture of any third country the most favoured in this respect. There is a similar clause in regard to exportation.

(3) The conditional or reciprocity formula, often used in the 18th and in the early part of the 19th century, namely, that whenever A. and B. make special concessions in return for corresponding concessions, B. and A. respectively are either excluded from participation therein, or must make some additional equivalent concession in order to participate in those advantages.

It may further be observed that the word “like” relates to the goods themselves, to their material or quality, not to conditions of manufacture, mode of conveyance or anything beyond the fact of their precise description; small local facilities allowed to traffic between conterminous land districts are not at variance with this article.

A recent complete and concise English formula is that of Article 2 of the treaty of commerce and navigation of the 31st of October 1905, with Rumania. “The contracting parties agree that, in all matters relating to commerce, navigation and industry, any privilege, favour or immunity which either contracting party has actually granted, or may hereafter grant, to the subjects or citizens of any other foreign state, shall be extended immediately and unconditionally to the subjects of the other; it being their intention that the commerce, navigation and industry of each country shall be placed, in all respects, on the footing of the most favoured nation.”

Colonies.—The application of commercial treaties to colonies depends upon the wording of each treaty. The earlier colonial policy of European states was to subordinate colonial interests to those of the mother country, to reserve colonial trade for the mother country, and to abstain from engagements contrary to these general rules. France, Portugal and Spain have adhered in principle to this policy. Germany and Holland have been more liberal. The self-government enjoyed by the larger British colonies has led since 1886 to the insertion of an article in British commercial and other treaties whereby the assent of each of these colonies, and likewise of India, is reserved before they apply to each of these possessions. And further, the fact that certain other British colonies are now within the sphere of commercial intercourse controlled by the United States, has since 1891 induced the British government to enter into special agreements on behalf of colonies for whose products the United States is now the chief market. As regards the most favoured nation article, it is to be remembered that the mother country and colonies are not distinct—not foreign or third—countries with respect to each other. The most favoured nation article, therefore, does not preclude special arrangements between the mother country and colonies, nor between colonies.

Termination.—Commercial treaties are usually concluded for a term of years, and either lapse at the end of this period, or are terminable then, or subsequently, if either state gives the required notice. When a portion of a country establishes its independence, for example the several American republics, according to present usage foreign trade is placed on a uniform most favoured nation footing, and fresh treaties are entered into to regulate the commercial relations of the new communities. In the case of former Turkish provinces, the capitulations remain in force in principle until they are replaced by new engagements. If one state is absorbed into another, for instance Texas into the United States, or when territory passes by conquest, for instance Alsace to Germany, the commercial treaties of the new supreme government take effect. In administered territories, as Cyprus and formerly Bosnia, and in protected territories, it depends on the policy of the administering power how far the previous fiscal system shall remain in force. When the separate Italian states were united into the kingdom of Italy in 1861, the commercial engagements of Sardinia superseded those of the other states, but fresh treaties were concluded by the new kingdom to place international relations on a regular footing. When the German empire was established under the king of Prussia in 1871, the commercial engagements of any state which were at variance with a Zollverein treaty were superseded by that treaty.

Scope.—The scope of commercial treaties is well expressed by Calvo in his work on international law. They provide for the importation, exportation, transit, transhipment and bonding of merchandise; customs tariffs; navigation charges; quarantine; the admission of vessels to roadsteads, ports and docks; coasting trade; the admission of consuls and their rights; fisheries; they determine the local position of the subjects of each state in the other country in regard to residence, property, payment of taxes or exemptions, and military service; nationality; and a most favoured nation clause. They usually contain a termination, and sometimes a colonial article. Some of the matters enumerated by Calvo—consular privileges, fisheries and nationality—are now frequently dealt with by separate conventions. Contraband and neutral trade are not included as frequently as they were in the 18th century.

The preceding statement shows that commercial treaties afford to foreigners, personally, legal rights, and relief from technical disabilities: they afford security to trade and navigation, and regulate other matters comprised in their provisions. In Europe the general principles established by the series of treaties 1860-1866 hold good, namely, the substitution of uniform rates of customs duties for prohibitions or differential rates. The disadvantages urged are that these treaties involve government interference and bargaining, whereas each state should act independently as its interests require, that they are opposed to free trade, and restrict the fiscal freedom of the legislature. It may be observed that these objections imply some confusion of ideas. All contracts may be designated bargains, and some of the details of commercial treaties in Calvo’s enumeration enter directly into the functions of government; moreover, countries cannot remain isolated. If two countries agree by simultaneous action to adopt fixed rates of duty, this agreement is favourable to commerce, and it is not apparent how it is contrary, even to free trade principles. Moreover, security in business transactions, a very important consideration, is provided.

Our conclusions are—

(1) that under the varying jurisprudence of nations commercial treaties are adopted by common consent;

(2) that their provisions depend upon the general and fiscal policy of each state;

(3) that tariff arrangements, if judiciously settled, benefit trade;

(4) that commercial treaties are now entered into by all states; and that they are necessary under present conditions of commercial intercourse between nations.

(C. M. K.*)

See the British parliamentaryReturn(Cd. 4080) of all commercial treaties between various countries in force on Jan. 1, 1908.

COMMERCY,a town of north-eastern France, capital of an arrondissement in the department of Meuse, on the left bank of the Meuse, 26 m. E. of Bar-le-Duc by rail. Pop. (1906) 5622. Commercy possesses a château of the 17th century, now used as cavalry barracks, a Benedictine convent occupied by a training-college for primary teachers, and a communal college for boys. A statue of Dom Calmet, the historian, born in the vicinity, standsin one of the squares. The industries include iron-working and the manufacture of nails, boots and shoes, embroidery and hosiery. The town has trade in cattle, grain and wood, and is well known for its cakes (madeleines). Commercy dates back to the 9th century, and at that time its lords were dependent on the bishop of Metz. In 1544 it was besieged by Charles V. in person. For some time the lordship was in the hands of François Paul de Gondi, cardinal de Retz, who lived in the town for a number of years, and there composed his memoirs. From him it was purchased by Charles IV., duke of Lorraine. In 1744 it became the residence of Stanislas, king of Poland, who spent a great deal of care on the embellishment of the town, castle and neighbourhood.

COMMERS(from Lat.commercium), the German term for the German students’ social gatherings held annually on occasions such as the breaking-up of term and the anniversary of the university’s founding. A Commers consists of speeches and songs and the drinking of unlimited quantities of beer. The arrangements are governed by officials (Chargierte) elected by the students from among themselves. Strict rules as to drinking exist, and the chairman after each speech calls for what is called a salamander (ad exercitium Salamandris bibite, tergite). All rise and having emptied their glasses hammer three times on the table with them. On the death of a student, his memory is honoured with a salamander, the glasses being broken to atoms at the close.

COMMINES, PHILIPPE DE(c. 1445-c. 1511), French historian, called the father of modern history, was born at the castle of Renescure, near Hazebrouck in Flanders, a little earlier than 1447. He lost both father and mother in his earliest years. In 1463 his godfather, Philip V., duke of Burgundy, summoned him to his court, and soon after transferred him to the household of his son, afterwards known as Charles the Bold. He speedily acquired considerable influence over Charles, and in 1468 was appointed chamberlain and councillor; consequently when in the same year Louis XI. was entrapped at Péronne, Commines was able both to soften the passion of Charles and to give useful advice to the king, whose life he did much to save. Three years later he was charged with an embassy to Louis, who gained him over to himself by many brilliant promises, and in 1472 he left Burgundy for the court of France. He was at once made chamberlain and councillor; a pension of 6000 livres was bestowed on him; he received the principality of Talmont, the confiscated property of the Amboise family, over which the family of La Trémoille claimed to have rights. The king arranged his marriage with Hélène de Chambes, who brought him the fine lordship of Argenton, and Commines took the name d’Argenton from then (27th of January 1473). He was employed to carry out the intrigues of Louis in Burgundy, and spent several months as envoy in Italy. On his return he was received with the utmost favour, and in 1479 obtained a decree confirming him in possession of his principality.

On the death of Louis in 1483 a suit was commenced against Commines by the family of La Trémoille, and he was cast in heavy damages. He plotted against the regent, Anne of Beaujeu, and joined the party of the duke of Orleans, afterwards Louis XII. Having attempted to carry off the king, Charles VIII., and so free him from the tutelage of his sister, he was arrested, and put in one of his old master’s iron cages at Loches. In 1489 he was banished to one of his own estates for ten years, and made to give bail to the amount of 10,000 crowns of gold for his good behaviour. Recalled to the council in 1492, he strenuously opposed the Italian expedition of Charles VIII., in which, however, he took part, notably as representing the king in the negotiations which resulted in the treaty of Vercelli. During the rest of his life, notwithstanding the accession of Louis XII., whom he had served as duke of Orleans, he held no position of importance; and his last days were disturbed by lawsuits. He died at Argenton on the 18th of October, probably in 1511. His wife Hélène de Chambes survived him till 1532; their tomb is now in the Louvre.

TheMemoirs, to which Commines owes his reputation as a statesman and man of letters, were written during his latter years. The graphic style of his narrative and above all the keenness of his insight into the motives of his contemporaries, an insight undimmed by undue regard for principles of right and wrong, make this work one of the great classics of history. His portrait of Louis XI. remains unique, in that to such a writer was given such a subject. Scott inQuentin Durwardgives an interesting picture of Commines, from whom he largely draws. Sainte-Beuve, after speaking of Commines as being in date the first truly modern writer, and comparing him with Montaigne, says that his history remains the definitive history of his time, and that from it all political history took its rise. None of this applause is undeserved, for the pages of Commines abound with excellences. He analyses motives and pictures manners; he delineates men and describes events; his reflections are pregnant with suggestiveness, his conclusions strong with the logic of facts.

TheMemoirsdivided themselves into two parts, the first from the reign of Louis XI., 1464-1483, the second on the Italian expedition and the negotiations at Venice leading to the Vercelli treaty, 1494-1495. The first part was written between 1489 and 1491, while Commines was at the château of Dreux, the second from 1495 to 1498. Seven MSS. are known, derived from a single holograph, and as this was undoubtedly badly written, the copies were inaccurate; the best is that which belonged to Anne de Polignac, niece of Commines, and it is the only one containing books vii. and viii.

The best edition of Commines is the one edited by B. de Mandrot and published at Paris in 1901-1903. For this edition the author used a manuscript hitherto unknown and more complete than the others, and in his introduction he gives an account of the life of Commines.

Bibliography.—TheMemoirsremained in MS. till 1524, when part of them were printed by Galliot du Pré, the remainder first seeing light in 1525. Subsequent editions were put forth by Denys Sauvage in 1552, by Denys Godefroy in 1649, and by Lenglet Dufresnoy in 1747. Those of Mademoiselle Dupont (1841-1848) and of M. de Chantelauze (1881) have many merits, but the best was given by Bernard de Mandrot:Memoirs de Philippe de Commynes, from the MS. of Anne de Polignac (1901). Various translations of Commines into English have appeared, from that of T. Danett in 1596 to that, based on the Dupont edition, which was printed in Bohn’s series in 1855.

(C. B.*)

COMMISSARIAT,the department of an army charged with the provision of supplies, both food and forage, for the troops. The supply of military stores such as ammunition is not included in the duties of a commissariat. In almost every army the duties of transport and supply are performed by the same corps of departmental troops.

COMMISSARY(from Med. Lat.commissarius, one to whom a charge or trust is committed), generally, a representative;e.g., the emperor’s representative who presided in his absence over the imperial diet; and especially, an ecclesiastical official who exercises in special circumstances the jurisdiction of a bishop (q.v.); in the Church of England this jurisdiction is exercised in a Consistory Court (q.v.), except in Canterbury, where the court of the diocesan as opposed to the metropolitan jurisdiction of the archbishop is called a commissary court, and the judge is the commissary general of the city and diocese of Canterbury. When a see is vacant the jurisdiction is exercised by a “special commissary” of the metropolitan. Commissary is also a general military term for an official charged with the duties of supply, transport and finance of an army. In the 17th and 18th centuries thecommissaire des guerres, orKriegskommissärwas an important official in continental armies, by whose agency the troops, in their relation to the civil inhabitants, were placed upon semi-political control. In French military law,commissaires du gouvernementrepresent the ministry of war on military tribunals, and more or less correspond to the British judge-advocate (seeCourt-Martial).

COMMISSION(from Lat.commissio,committere), the action of committing or entrusting any charge or duty to a person, and the charge or trust thus committed, and so particularly an authority, or the document embodying such authority, given to some person to act in a particular capacity. The term is thus applied to thewritten authority to command troops, which the sovereign or president, as the ultimate commander-in-chief of the nation’s armed forces, grants to persons selected as officers, or to the similar authority issued to certain qualified persons to act as justices of the peace. For the various commissions of assize seeAssize. The word is also used of the order issued to a naval officer to take the command of a ship of war, and when manned, armed and fully equipped for active service she is said to be “put in commission.”

In the law of evidence (q.v.) the presence of witnesses may, for certain necessary causes, be dispensed with by the order of the court, and the evidence be taken by a commissioner. Such evidence in England is said to be “on commission” (see R.S.C. Order XXXVII.). Such causes may be illness, the intention of the witness to leave the country before the trial, residence out of the country or the like. Where the witness is out of the jurisdiction of the court, and his place of residence is a foreign country where objection is taken to the execution of a commission, or is a British colony or India, “letters of request” for the examination of the witness are issued, addressed to the head of the tribunal in the foreign country, or to the secretary of state for the colonies or for India.

Where the functions of an office are transferred from an individual to a body of persons, the body exercising these delegated functions is generally known as a commission and the members as commissioners; thus the office of lord high admiral of Great Britain is administered by a permanent board, the lords of the admiralty. Such a delegation may be also temporary, as where the authority under the great seal to give the royal assent to legislation is issued to lords commissioners. Similarly bodies of persons or single individuals may be specially charged with carrying out particular duties; these may be permanent, such as the Charity Commission or the Ecclesiastical and Church Estates Commission, or may be temporary, such as various international bodies of inquiry, like the commission which met in Paris in 1905 to inquire into the North Sea incident (seeDogger Bank), or such as the various commissions of inquiry, royal, statutory or departmental, of which an account is given below.

A commission may be granted by one person to another to act as his agent, and particularly in business; thus the term is applied to that method of business in which goods are entrusted to an agent for sale, the remuneration being a percentage on the sales. This percentage is known as the “commission,” and hence the word is extended to all remuneration which is based on a percentage on the value of the work done. The right of an agent to remuneration in the form of a “commission” is always founded upon an express or implied contract between himself and his principal. Such a contract may be implied from custom or usage, from the conduct of the principal or from the circumstances of the particular case. Such commissions are only payable on transactions directly resulting from agency and may be payable though the principal acquires no benefit. In order to claim remuneration an agent must be legally qualified to act in the capacity in which he claims remuneration. He cannot recover in respect of unlawful or wagering transactions, or in cases of misconduct or breach of duty.

Secret Commissions.—The giving of a commission, in the sense of a bribe or unlawful payment to an agent or employé in order to influence him in relation to his principal’s or employer’s affairs, has grown to considerable proportions in modern times; it has been rightly regarded as a gross breach of trust upon the part of employés and agents, inasmuch as it leads them to look to their own interests rather than to those of their employers. In order to suppress this bribing of employés the English legislature in 1906 passed the Prevention of Corruption Act, which enacts that if an agent corruptly accepts or obtains for himself or for any other person any gift or consideration as an inducement or reward for doing or forbearing to do any act or business, or for showing or forbearing to show favour or disfavour to any person in relation to his principal’s affairs, he shall be guilty of a misdemeanour and shall be liable on conviction or indictment to imprisonment with or without hard labour for a term not exceeding two years, or to a fine not exceeding £500, or to both, or on summary conviction to imprisonment not exceeding four months with or without hard labour or to a fine not exceeding £50, or both. The act also applies the same punishment to any person who corruptly gives or offers any gift or consideration to an agent. Also if a person knowingly gives an agent, or if an agent knowingly uses, any receipt, account or document with intent to mislead the principal, they are guilty of a misdemeanour and liable to the punishment already mentioned. For the purposes of the act “consideration” includes valuable consideration of any kind, and “agent” includes any person employed by or acting for another. No prosecution can be instituted without the consent of the attorney-general, and every information must be upon oath.

Legislation to the same effect has been adopted in Australia. A federal act was passed in 1905 dealing with secret commissions, and in the same year both Victoria and Western Australia passed drastic measures to prevent the giving or receiving corruptly of commissions. The Victorian act applies to trustees, executors, administrators and liquidators as well as to agents. Both the Victorian and the Western Australian acts enact that gifts to the parent, wife, child, partner or employer of an agent are to be deemed gifts to the agent unless the contrary is proved; also that the custom of any trade or calling is not in itself a defence to a prosecution.

Commissions of Inquiry,i.e.commissions for the purpose of eliciting information as to the operation of laws, or investigating particular matters, social, educational, &c., are distinguished, according to the terms of their appointment, asroyal,statutoryanddepartmental. A royal commission in England is appointed by the crown, and the commissions usually issue from the office of the executive government which they specially concern. The objects of the inquiry are carefully defined in the warrant constituting the commission, which is termed the “reference.” The commissioners give their services gratuitously, but where they involve any great degree of professional skill compensation is allowed for time and labour. The expenses incurred are provided out of money annually voted for the purpose. Unless expressly empowered by act of parliament, a commission cannot compel the production of documents or the giving of evidence, nor can it administer an oath. A commission may hold its sittings in any part of the United Kingdom, or may institute and conduct experiments for the purpose of testing the utility of invention, &c. When the inquiry or any particular portion of it is concluded, a report is presented to the crown through the home department. All the commissioners, if unanimous, sign the report, but those who are unable to agree with the majority can record their dissent, and express their individual opinions, either in paragraphs appended to the report or in separately signed memoranda.

Statutory commissions are created by acts of parliament, and, with the exception that they are liable to have their proceedings questioned in parliament, have absolute powers within the limits of their prescribed functions and subject to the provisions of the act defining the same. Departmental commissions or committees are appointed either by a treasury minute or by the authority of a secretary of state, for the purpose of instituting inquiries into matters of official concern or examining into proposed changes in administrative arrangements. They are generally composed of two or more permanent officials of the department concerned in the investigation, along with a subordinate member of the administration. Reports of such committees are usually regarded as confidential documents.

A full account of the procedure in royal commissions will be found in A. Todd’sParliamentary Government in England, vol. ii.

COMMISSIONAIRE,the designation of an attendant, messenger or subordinate employé in hotels on the continent of Europe, whose chief duty is to attend at railway stations, secure customers, take charge of their luggage, carry out the necessary formalities with respect to it and have it sent on to the hotel. They are also employed in Paris as street messengers, light porters, &c. The Corps of Commissionaires, in England, is an association of pensioned soldiers of trustworthy character, founded in 1859 by Captain Sir Edward Walter, K.C.B. (1823-1904).It was first started in a very small way, with the intention of providing occupation for none but wounded soldiers. The nucleus of the corps consisted of eight men, each of whom had lost a limb. The demand, however, for neat, uniformed, trusty men, to perform certain light duties, encouraged the founder to extend his idea, and the corps developed into a large self-supporting organization. In 1906 there were over 3000 members of the corps, more than 2000 of whom served in London. Out-stations were established in various large towns of the kingdom, and the corps extended its operations also to the colonies.

COMMISSIONER,in general an officer appointed to carry out some particular work, or to discharge the duty of a particular office; one who is a member of a commission (q.v.). In this sense the word is applied to members of a permanently constituted department of the administration, as civil service commissioners, commissioners of income tax, commissioners in lunacy, &c. It is also the title given to the heads of or important officials in various governmental departments, as commissioner of customs. In some British possessions in Africa and the Pacific the head of the government is styled high commissioner. In India a commissioner is the chief administrative official of a division which includes several districts. The office does not exist in Madras, where the same duties are discharged by a board of revenue, but is found in most of the other provinces. The commissioner comes midway between the local government and the district officer. In the regulation provinces the district officer is called a collector (q.v.), and in the non-regulation provinces a deputy-commissioner. In the former he must always be a member of the covenanted civil service, but in the latter he may be a military officer.

A chief commissioner is a high Indian official, governing a province inferior in status to a lieutenant-governorship, but in direct subordination to the governor-general in council. The provinces which have chief commissioners are the Central Provinces and Berar, the North-West Frontier Province and Coorg. The agent to the governor-general of Baluchistan is also chief commissioner of British Baluchistan, the agent to the governor-general of Rajputana is also chief commissioner of the British district of Ajmere-Merwara, and there is a chief commissioner of the Andaman and Nicobar islands. Several provinces, such as the Punjab, Oudh, Burma and Assam, were administered by chief commissioners before they were raised to the status of lieutenant-governorships (seeLieutenant).

A commissioner for oaths in England is a solicitor appointed by the lord chancellor to administer oaths to persons making affidavits for the purpose of any cause or matter. The Commissioner for Oaths Act 1889 (with an amending act 1891), amending and consolidating various other acts, regulates the appointment and powers of such commissioners. In most large towns the minimum qualification for appointment is six years’ continuous practice, and the application must be supported by two barristers, two solicitors and at least six neighbours of the applicant. The charge made by commissioners for every oath, declaration, affirmation or attestation upon honour is one shilling and sixpence; for marking each exhibit (a document or other thing sworn to in an affidavit and shown to a deponent when being sworn), one shilling.

COMMITMENT,in English law, a precept or warrantin writing, made and issued by a court or judicial officer (including, in cases of treason, the privy council or a secretary of state), directing the conveyance of a person named or sufficiently described therein to a prison or other legal place of custody, and his detention therein for a time specified, or until the person to be detained has done a certain act specified in the warrant,e.g.paid a fine imposed upon him on conviction. Its character will be more easily grasped by reference to a form now in use under statutory authority:—

Back to Index Next