Chapter 9

See Hemsley’sHandbook of Hardy Trees, &c.

LAURENS, HENRY(1724-1792), American statesman, was born in Charleston, South Carolina, on the 24th of February 1724, of Huguenot ancestry. When sixteen he became a clerk in a counting-house in London, and later engaged in commercial pursuits with great success at Charleston until 1771, when he retired from active business. He spent the next three years travelling in Europe and superintending the education of his sons in England. In spite of his strong attachment to England, and although he had defended the Stamp Act, in 1774, in the hope of averting war, he united with thirty-seven other Americans in a petition to parliament against the passing of the Boston Port Bill. Becoming convinced that a peaceful settlement was impracticable, he returned to Charleston at the close of 1774, and there allied himself with the conservative element of the Whig party. He was soon made president of the South Carolina council of safety, and in 1776 vice-president of the state; in the same year he was sent as a delegate from South Carolina to the general continental congress at Philadelphia, of which body he was president from November 1777 until December 1778. In August 1780 he started on a mission to negotiate on behalf of congress a loan of ten million dollars in Holland; but he was captured on the 3rd of September off the Banks of Newfoundland by the British frigate “Vestal,” taken to London and closely imprisoned in the Tower. His papers were found to contain a sketch of a treaty between the United States and Holland projected by William Lee, in the service of Congress, and Jan de Neufville, acting on behalf of Mynheer Van Berckel, pensionary of Amsterdam, and this discovery eventually led to war between Great Britain and the United Provinces. During his imprisonment his health became greatly impaired. On the 31st of December 1781 he was released on parole, and he was finally exchanged for Cornwallis. In June 1782 he was appointed one of the American commissioners for negotiating peace with Great Britain, but he did not reach Paris until the 28th of November 1782, only two days before the preliminaries of peace were signed by himself, John Adams, Franklin and Jay. On the day of signing, however, he procured the insertion of a clause prohibiting the British from “carrying away any negroes or other property of American inhabitants”; and this subsequently led to considerable friction between the British and American governments. On account of failing health he did not remain for the signing of the definitive treaty, but returned to Charleston, where he died on the 8th of December 1792.

His son,John Laurens(1754-1782), American revolutionary officer, was born at Charleston, South Carolina, on the 28th of October 1754. He was educated in England, and on his return to America in 1777, in the height of the revolutionary struggle, he joined Washington’s staff. He soon gained his commander’s confidence, which he reciprocated with the most devoted attachment, and was entrusted with the delicate duties of a confidential secretary, which he performed with much tact and skill. He was present in all Washington’s battles, from Brandywine to Yorktown, and his gallantry on every occasion has gained him the title of “the Bayard of the Revolution.” Laurens displayed bravery even to rashness in the storming of the Chew mansion at Germantown; at Monmouth, where he saved Washington’s life, and was himself severely wounded; and at Coosahatchie, where, with a handful of men, he defended a pass against a large English force under General Augustine Prevost, and was again wounded. He fought a duel against General Charles Lee, and wounded him, on account of that officer’s disrespectful conduct towards Washington. Laurens distinguished himself further at Savannah, and at the siege of Charleston in 1780. After the capture of Charleston by the English, he rejoined Washington, and was selected by him as a special envoy to appeal to the king of France for supplies for the relief of the American armies, which had been brought by prolonged service and scanty pay to the verge of dissolution. The more active co-operation of the French fleets with the land forces in Virginia, which was one result of his mission, brought about the disaster of Cornwallis at Yorktown. Laurens lost no time in rejoining the army, and at Yorktown was at the head of an American storming party which captured an advanced redoubt. Laurens was designated with the vicomte de Noailles to arrange the terms of the surrender, which virtually ended the war, although desultory skirmishing, especially in the South, attended the months of delay before peace was formally concluded. In one of these trifling affairs on the 27th of August 1782, on the Combahee river, Laurens exposed himself needlessly and was killed. Washington lamented deeply the death of Laurens, saying of him, “He had not a fault that I could discover, unless it were intrepidity bordering upon rashness.”

The most valuable of Henry Laurens’s papers and pamphlets including the important “Narrative of the Capture of Henry Laurens, of his Confinement in the Tower of London, &c., 1780, 1781, 1782,” in vol. i. (Charleston, 1857) of the Society’sCollections, have been published by the South Carolina Historical Society. John Laurens’s military correspondence, with a brief memoir by W. G. Simms, was privately printed by the Bradford Club, New York, in 1867.

LAURENT, FRANÇOIS(1810-1887), Belgian historian and jurisconsult, was born at Luxemburg on the 8th of July 1810. He held a high appointment in the ministry of justice for some time before he became professor of civil law in the university of Ghent in 1836. His advocacy of liberal and anti-clerical principles both from his chair and in the press made him bitter enemies, but he retained his position until his death on the 11th of February 1887. He treated the relations of church and state inL’Église et l’état(Brussels, 3 vols., 1858-1862; new and revised edition, 1865), and the same subject occupied a large proportion of the eighteen volumes of his chief historical work,Études sur l’histoire de l’humanité(Ghent and Brussels, 1855-1870), which aroused considerable interest beyond the boundaries of Belgium. His fame as a lawyer rests on his authoritative exposition of the Code Napoléon in hisPrincipes de droit civil(Brussels, 33 vols., 1869-1878), and hisDroit civil international(Brussels, 8 vols., 1880-1881). He was charged in 1879 by the minister of justice with the preparation of a report on the proposed revision of the civil code. Besides his anti-clerical pamphlets his minor writings include much discussion of social questions, of the organization of savings banks, asylums, &c., and he founded theSociété Callierfor the encouragement of thrift among the working classes. With Gustave Callier, whose funeral in 1863 was made the occasion of a display of clerical intolerance, Laurent had much in common, and the efforts of the society were directed to the continuation of Callier’s philanthropic schemes.

For a complete list of his works, see G. Koninck,Bibliographie nationale(Brussels, vol. ii., 1892).

LAURENTINA, VIA,an ancient road of Italy, leading southwards from Rome. The question of the nomenclature of the group of roads between the Via Ardeatina and the Via Ostiensis is somewhat difficult, and much depends on the view taken as to the site of Laurentum. It seems probable, however, that the Via Laurentina proper is that which led out of the Porta Ardeatina of the Aurelian wall and went direct to Tor Paterno, while the road branching from the Via Ostiensis at the third mile, and leading past Decimo to Lavinium (Pratica), which crosses the other road at right angles not far from its destination (the Laurentina there running S.W. and that to Lavinium S.E.) may for convenience be called Lavinatis, though this name does not occur in ancient times. On this latter road, beyond Decimo, two milestones, one of Tiberius, the other of Maxentius, each bearing the number 11, have been found; and farther on, at Capocotta, traces of ancient buildings, and an important sepulchral inscription of a Jewish ruler of a synagogue have come to light. That the Via Laurentina was near the Via Ardeatina is clear from the fact that the same contractor was responsible for both roads. Laurentum was also accessible by a branch from the Via Ostiensis at the eighth mile (at Malafede) leading past Castel Porziano, the royal hunting-lodge, which is identical with the ancient Ager Solonius (in which, Festus tells us, was situated the Pomonal or sacred grove of Pomona) and which later belonged to Marius.

See R. Lanciani in articles quoted underLavinium.

(T. As.)

LAURENTIUS, PAUL(1554-1624), Lutheran divine, was born on the 30th of March 1554 at Ober Wierau, where his father, of the same names, was pastor. From a school at Zwickau he entered (1573) the university of Leipzig, graduating in 1577. In 1578 he became rector of the Martin school at Halberstadt; in 1583 he was appointed town’s preacher at Plauen-im-Vogtland, and in 1586 superintendent at Oelnitz. On the 20th of October 1595 he took his doctorate in theology at Jena, his thesis on theSymbolum Athanasii(1597), gaining him similar honours at Wittenberg and Leipzig. He was promoted (1605) to be pastor and superintendent at Dresden, and transferred (1616) to the superintendence at Meissen, where he died on the 24th of February 1624. His works consist chiefly of commentaries and expository discourses on prophetic books of the Old Testament, parts of the Psalter, the Lord’s Prayer and the history of the Passion. In two orations he compared Luther to Elijah. Besides theological works he was the author of aSpicilegium Gnomonologicum(1612).

The main authority is C. Schlegel, the historian of the Dresden superintendents (1698), summarized by H. W. Rotermund, in the additions (1810) to Jöcher,Gelehrten-Lexicon(1750).

(A. Go.*)

LAURIA(LuriaorLoria)ROGER DE(d. 1305), admiral of Aragon and Sicily, was the most prominent figure in the naval war which arose directly from the Sicilian Vespers. Nothing is really known of his life before he was named admiral in 1283. His father was a supporter of the Hohenstaufen, and his mother came to Spain with Costanza, the daughter of Manfred of Beneventum, when she married Peter, the eldest son and heir of James the Conqueror of Aragon. According to one account Bella of Lauria, the admiral’s mother, had been the foster mother of Costanza. Roger, who accompanied his mother, was bred at the court of Aragon and endowed with lands in the newly conquered kingdom of Valencia. When the misrule of Charles of Anjou’s French followers had produced the famous revolt known as the Sicilian Vespers in 1282, Roger de Lauria accompanied King Peter III. of Aragon on the expedition which under the cover of an attack on the Moorish kingdom of Tunis was designed to be an attempt to obtain possession of all or at least part of the Hohenstaufen dominions in Naples and Sicily which the king claimed by right of his wife as the heiress of Manfred. In 1283, when the island had put itself under the protection of Peter III. and had crowned him king, he gave the command of his fleet to Roger de Lauria. The commission speaks of him in the most laudatory terms, but makes no reference to previous military services.

From this time forward till the peace of Calatabellota in 1303, Roger de Lauria was the ever victorious leader of fleets in the service of Aragon, both in the waters of southern Italy and on the coast of Catalonia. In the year of his appointment he defeated a French naval force in the service of Charles of Anjou, off Malta. The main object before him was to repel the efforts of the Angevine party to reconquer Sicily and then to carry the war into their dominions in Naples. Although Roger de Lauria did incidental fighting on shore, he was as much a naval officer as any modern admiral, and his victories were won by good manœuvring and by discipline. The Catalan squadron, on which the Sicilian was moulded, was in a state of high and intelligent efficiency. Its chiefs relied not on merely boarding, and the use of the sword, as the French forces of Charles of Anjou did, but on the use of the ram, and of the powerful cross-bows used by the Catalans either by hand or, in case of the larger ones, mounted on the bulwarks, with great skill. The conflict was in fact the equivalent on the water of the battles between the English bowmen and the disorderly chivalry of France in the Hundred Years’ War. In 1284 Roger defeated the Angevine fleet in the Bay of Naples, taking prisoner the heir to the kingdom, Charles of Salerno, who remained a prisoner in the hands of the Aragonese in Sicily, and later in Spain, for years. In 1285 he fought on the coast of Catalonia one of the most brilliant campaigns in all naval history. The French king Philippe le Hardi had invaded Catalonia with a large army to which the pope gave the character of crusaders, in order to support his cousin of Anjou in his conflict with the Aragonese. The king, Peter III., had offended his nobles by his vigorous exercise of the royal authority, and received little support from them, but the outrages perpetrated by the French invaders raised the towns and country against them. The invaders advanced slowly, taking the obstinately defended towns one by one, and relying on the co-operation of a large number of allies, who were stationed in squadrons along the coast, and who brought stores and provisions from Narbonne and Aigues Mortes. They relied in fact wholly on their fleet for their existence. A successful blow struck at that would force them to retreat. King Peter was compelled to risk Sicily for a time, and he recalled Roger de Lauria from Palermo to the coast of Catalonia. The admiral reached Barcelona on the 24th of August, and was informed of the disposition of the French. He saw that if he could break the centre of their line of squadrons, stretched as it was so far that its general superiority of numbers was lost in the attempt to occupy the whole of the coast, he could then dispose of the extremities in detail. On the night of the 9th of September he fell on the central squadron of the French fleet near the Hormigas. The Catalan and Sicilian squadrons doubled on the end of the enemies’ line, and by a vigorous employment of the ram, as well as by the destructive shower of bolts from the cross-bows, which cleared the decks of the French, gained a complete victory. The defeat of the enemy was followed, as usually in medieval naval wars, by a wholesale massacre. Roger then made for Rosas, and tempted out the French squadron stationed there by approaching under French colours. In the open it was beaten in its turn. The result was the capture of the town, and of the stores collected there by King Philippe for the support of his army. Within a short time he was forced to retreat amid sufferings from hunger, and the incessant attacks of the Catalan mountaineers, by which his army was nearly annihilated. This campaign, which was followed up by destructive attacks on the French coast, saved Catalonia from the invaders, and completely ruined the French naval power for the time being. No medieval admiral of any nation displayed an equal combination of intellect and energy, and none of modern times has surpassed it. The work had been so effectually done on the coast of Catalonia that Roger de Lauria was able to return to Sicily, and resume his command in the struggle of Aragonese and Angevine to gain, or to hold, the possession of Naples.

He maintained his reputation and was uniformly successful in his battles at sea, but they were not always fought for the defence of Sicily. The death of Peter III. in 1286 and of hiseldest son Alphonso in the following year caused a division among the members of the house of Aragon. The new king, James, would have given up Sicily to the Angevine line with which he made peace and alliance, but his younger brother Fadrique accepted the crown offered him by the Sicilians, and fought for his own hand against both the Angevines and his senior. King James tried to force him to submission without success. Roger de Lauria adhered for a time to Fadrique, but his arrogant temper made him an intolerable supporter, and he appears, moreover, to have thought that he was bound to obey the king of Aragon. His large estates in Valencia gave him a strong reason for not offending that sovereign. He therefore left Fadrique, who confiscated his estates in Sicily and put one of his nephews to death as a traitor. For this Roger de Lauria took a ferocious revenge in two successive victories at sea over the Sicilians. When the war, which had become a ravening of wild beasts, was at last ended by the peace of Calatabellota, Roger de Lauria retired to Valencia, where he died on the 2nd of January 1305, and was buried, by his express orders, in the church of Santas Creus, a now deserted monastery of the Cistercians, at the feet of his old master Peter III. In his ferocity, and his combination of loyalty to his feudal lord with utter want of scruple to all other men, Roger belonged to his age. As a captain he was far above his contemporaries and his successors for many generations.

Signor Amari’sGuerra del Vespro Sicilianogives a general picture of these wars, but the portrait of Roger de Lauria must be sought in theChronicleof the Catalan Ramon de Muntaner who knew him and was formed in his school. There is a very fair and well “documented” account of the masterly campaign of 1285 in Charles de la Roncière’sHistoire de la marine française, i. 189-217.

(D. H.)

LAURIA,orLoria, a city of Basilicata, Italy, in the province of Potenza, situated near the borders of Calabria, 7½ m. by road S. of Lagonegro. Pop. (1901) 10,470. It is a walled town on the steep side of a hill with another portion in the plain below, 1821 ft. above sea-level. The castle was the birthplace of Ruggiero di Loria, the great Italian admiral of the 13th century. It was destroyed by the French under Masséna in 1806.

LAURIER, SIR WILFRID(1841- ), Canadian statesman, was born on the 20th of November 1841, at St Lin in the province of Quebec. The child of French Roman Catholic parents, he attended the elementary school of his native parish and for eight or nine months was a pupil of the Protestant elementary school at New Glasgow in order to learn English; his association with the Presbyterian family with whom he lived during this period had a permanent influence on his mind. At twelve years of age he entered L’Assomption college, and was there for seven years. The college, like all the secondary schools in Quebec then available for Roman Catholics, was under direct ecclesiastical control. On leaving it he entered a law office at Montreal and took the law course at McGill University. At graduation he delivered the valedictory address for his class. This, like so many of his later utterances, closed with an appeal for sympathy and union between the French and English races as the secret of the future of Canada. He began to practise law in Montreal, but owing to ill-health soon removed to Athabaska, where he opened a law office and undertook also to editLe Défricheur, a newspaper then on the eve of collapse. At Athabaska, the seat of one of the superior courts of Quebec, the population of the district was fairly divided between French- and English-speaking people, and Laurier’s career was undoubtedly influenced by his constant association with English-speaking people and his intimate acquaintance with their views and aspirations.

While at Montreal he had joined the Institut Canadien, a literary and scientific society which, owing to its liberal discussions and the fact that certain books upon its shelves were on theIndex expurgatorius, was finally condemned by the Roman Catholic authorities.Le Défricheurwas an organ of extreme French sentiment, opposed to confederation, and also under ecclesiastical censure. One of its few surviving copies contains an article by Laurier opposing confederation as a scheme designed in the interest of the English colonies in North America, and certain to prove the tomb of the French race and the ruin of Lower Canada. The Liberals of Quebec under the leadership of Sir Antoine Dorion were hostile to confederation, or at least to the terms of union agreed upon at the Quebec conference, and Laurier in editorials and speeches maintained the position of Dorion and his allies. He was elected to the Quebec legislature in 1871, and his first speech in the provincial assembly excited great interest, on account of its literary qualities and the attractive manner and logical method of the speaker. He was not less successful in the Dominion House of Commons, to which he was elected in 1874. During his first two years in the federal parliament his chief speeches were made in defence of Riel and the French halfbreeds who were concerned in the Red River rebellion, and on fiscal questions. Sir John Macdonald, then in opposition, had committed his party to a protectionist policy, and Laurier, notwithstanding that the Liberal party stood for a low tariff, avowed himself to be “a moderate protectionist.” He declared that if he were in Great Britain he would be a free trader, but that free trade or protection must be applied according to the necessities of a country, and that which protection necessarily involved taxation it was the price a young and vigorous nation must pay for its development. But the Liberal government, to which Laurier was admitted as minister of inland revenue in 1877, made only a slight increase in duties, raising the general tariff from 15% to 17½%; and against the political judgment of Alexander Mackenzie, Sir Richard Cartwright, George Brown, Laurier and other of the more influential leaders of the party, it adhered to a low tariff platform. In the bye-election which followed Laurier’s admission to the cabinet he was defeated—the only personal defeat he ever sustained; but a few weeks later he was returned for Quebec East, a constituency which he held thenceforth by enormous majorities. In 1878 his party went out of office and Sir John Macdonald entered upon a long term of power, with protection as the chief feature of his policy, to which was afterwards added the construction of the Canadian Pacific railway.

After the defeat of the Mackenzie government, Laurier sat in Parliament as the leader of the Quebec Liberals and first lieutenant to the Hon. Edward Blake, who succeeded Mackenzie in the leadership of the party. He was associated with Blake in his sustained opposition to high tariff, and to the Conservative plan for the construction of the Canadian Pacific railway, and was a conspicuous figure in the long struggle between Sir John Macdonald and the leaders of the Liberal party to settle the territorial limits of the province of Ontario and the legislative rights of the provinces under the constitution. He was forced also to maintain a long conflict with the ultramontane element of the Roman Catholic church in Quebec, which for many years had a close working alliance with the Conservative politicians of the province and even employed spiritual coercion in order to detach votes from the Liberal party. Notwithstanding that Quebec was almost solidly Roman Catholic the Rouges sternly resisted clerical pressure; they appealed to the courts and had certain elections voided on the ground of undue clerical influence, and at length persuaded the pope to send out a delegate to Canada, through whose inquiry into the circumstances the abuses were checked and the zeal of the ultramontanes restrained.

In 1887, upon the resignation of Blake on the ground of ill-health, Laurier became leader of the Liberal party, although he and many of the more influential men in the party doubted the wisdom of the proceeding. He was the first French Canadian to lead a federal party in Canada since confederation. Apart from the natural fear that he would arouse prejudice in the English-speaking provinces, the second Riel rebellion was then still fresh in the public mind, and the fierce nationalist agitation which Riel’s execution had excited in Quebec had hardly subsided. Laurier could hardly have come to the leadership at a more inopportune moment, and probably he would not have accepted the office at all if he had not believed that Blake could be persuaded to resume the leadership when his health was restored. But from the first he won great popularity even in the English-speaking provinces, and showed unusual capacity for leadership. His party was beaten in the first general electionheld after he became leader (1891), but even with its policy of unrestricted reciprocity with the United States, and with Sir John Macdonald still at the head of the Conservative party, it was beaten by only a small majority. Five years later, with unrestricted reciprocity relegated to the background, and with a platform which demanded tariff revision so adjusted as not to endanger established interests, and which opposed the federal measure designed to restore in Manitoba the separate or Roman Catholic schools which the provincial government had abolished, Laurier carried the country, and in July 1896 he was called by Lord Aberdeen, then governor-general, to form a government.

He was the first French-Canadian to occupy the office of premier; and his personal supremacy was shown by his long continuance in power. During the years from 1896 to 1910, he came to hold a position within the British Empire which was in its way unique, and in this period he had seen Canadian prosperity advance progressively by leaps and bounds. The chief features of his administration were the fiscal preference of 331⁄3% in favour of goods imported into Canada from Great Britain, the despatch of Canadian contingents to South Africa during the Boer war, the contract with the Grand Trunk railway for the construction of a second transcontinental road from ocean to ocean, the assumption by Canada of the imperial fortresses at Halifax and Esquimault, the appointment of a federal railway commission with power to regulate freight charges, express rates and telephone rates, and the relations between competing companies, the reduction of the postal rate to Great Britain from 5 cents to 2 cents and of the domestic rate from 3 cents to 2 cents, a substantial contribution to the Pacific cable, a practical and courageous policy of settlement and development in the Western territories, the division of the North-West territories into the provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan and the enactment of the legislation necessary to give them provincial status, and finally (1910), a tariff arrangement with the United States, which, if not all that Canada might claim in the way of reciprocity, showed how entirely the course of events had changed the balance of commercial interests in North America.

Laurier made his first visit to Great Britain on the occasion of Queen Victoria’s diamond jubilee (1897), when he received the grand cross of the Bath; he then secured the denunciation of the Belgian and German treaties and thus obtained for the colonies the right to make preferential trade arrangements with the mother country. His personality made a powerful impression in Great Britain and also in France, which he visited before his return to Canada. His strong facial resemblance both to Lord Beaconsfield and to Sir John Macdonald marked him out in the public eye, and he captured attention by his charm of manner, fine command of scholarly English and genuine eloquence. Some of his speeches in Great Britain, coming as they did from a French-Canadian, and revealing delicate appreciation of British sentiment and thorough comprehension of the genius of British institutions, excited great interest and enthusiasm, while one or two impassioned speeches in the Canadian parliament during the Boer war profoundly influenced opinion in Canada and had a pronounced effect throughout the empire.

A skilful party-leader, Laurier kept from the first not only the affection of his political friends but the respect of his opponents; while enforcing the orderly conduct of public business, he was careful as first minister to maintain the dignity of parliament. In office he proved more of an opportunist than his career in opposition would have indicated, but his political courage and personal integrity remained beyond suspicion. His jealousy for the political autonomy of Canada was noticeable in his attitude at the Colonial conference held at the time of King Edward’s coronation, and marked all his diplomatic dealings with the mother country. But he strove for sympathetic relations between Canadian and imperial authorities, and favoured general legislative and fiscal co-operation between the two countries. He strove also for good relations between the two races in Canada, and between Canada and the United States. Although he was classed in Canada as a Liberal, his tendencies would in England have been considered strongly conservative; an individualist rather than a collectivist, he opposed the intrusion of the state into the sphere of private enterprise, and showed no sympathy with the movement for state operation of railways, telegraphs and telephones, or with any kindred proposal looking to the extension of the obligations of the central government.

Bibliography.—J. S. Willison,Sir Wilfrid Laurier and the Liberal Party; a Political History(Toronto, 1903); L. O. David,Laurier et son temps(Montreal, 1905); see also Henri Moreau,Sir Wilfrid Laurier, Premier Ministre du Canada(Paris, 1902); and the collection of Laurier’s speeches from 1871 to 1890, compiled by Ulric Barthe (Quebec, 1890).

(J. S. W.)

LAURISTON, JACQUES ALEXANDRE BERNARD LAW,Marquis de(1768-1828), French soldier and diplomatist, was the son of Jacques François Law de Lauriston (1724-1785), a general officer in the French army, and was born at Pondicherry on the 1st of February 1768. He obtained his first commission about 1786, served with the artillery and on the staff in the earlier Revolutionary campaigns, and became brigadier of artillery in 1795. Resigning in 1796, he was brought back into the service in 1800 as aide-de-camp to Napoleon, with whom as a cadet Lauriston had been on friendly terms. In the years immediately preceding the first empire Lauriston was successively director of the Le Fère artillery school and special envoy to Denmark, and he was selected to convey to England the ratification of the peace of Amiens (1802). In 1805, having risen to the rank of general of division, he took part in the war against Austria. He occupied Venice and Ragusa in 1806, was made governor-general of Venice in 1807, took part in the Erfurt negotiations of 1808, was made a count, served with the emperor in Spain in 1808-1809 and held commands under the viceroy Eugène Beauharnais in the Italian campaign and the advance to Vienna in the same year. At the battle of Wagram he commanded the guard artillery in the famous “artillery preparation” which decided the battle. In 1811 he was made ambassador to Russia; in 1812 he held a command in theGrande Arméeand won distinction by his firmness in covering the retreat from Moscow. He commanded the V. army corps at Lützen and Bautzen and the V. and XI. in the autumn campaign, falling into the hands of the enemy in the disastrous retreat from Leipzig. He was held a prisoner of war until the fall of the empire, and then joined Louis XVIII., to whom he remained faithful in the Hundred Days. His reward was a seat in the house of peers and a command in the royal guard. In 1817 he was created marquis and in 1823 marshal of France. During the Spanish War he commanded the corps which besieged and took Pamplona. He died at Paris on the 12th of June 1828.

LAURIUM(Λαύριον, mod.Ergastiri), a mining town in Attica, Greece, famous for the silver mines which were one of the chief sources of revenue of the Athenian state, and were employed for coinage. After the battle of Marathon, Themistocles persuaded the Athenians to devote the revenue derived from the mines to shipbuilding, and thus laid the foundation of the Athenian naval power, and made possible the victory of Salamis. The mines, which were the property of the state, were usually farmed out for a certain fixed sum and a percentage on the working; slave labour was exclusively employed. Towards the end of the 5th century the output was diminished, partly owing to the Spartan occupation of Decelea. But the mines continued to be worked, though Strabo records that in his time the tailings were being worked over, and Pausanias speaks of the mines as a thing of the past. The ancient workings, consisting of shafts and galleries for excavating the ore, and pans and other arrangements for extracting the metal, may still be seen. The mines are still worked at the present day by French and Greek companies, but mainly for lead, manganese and cadmium. The population of the modern town was 10,007 in 1907.

See E. Ardaillon, “Les Mines du Laurion dans l’antiquité,” No. lxxvii. of theBibliothèque des écoles françaises d’Athènes et de Rome.

LAURIUM,a village of Houghton county, Michigan, U.S.A., near the centre of Keweenaw peninsula, the northern extremity of the state. Pop. (1890) 1159; (1900) 5643, of whom 2286 were foreign-born; (1904) 7653; (1910) 8537. It is served bythe Mineral Range and the Mohawk and Copper Range railways. It is in one of the most productive copper districts in the United States, and copper mining is its chief industry. Immediately W. of Laurium is the famous Calumet and Hecla mine. The village was formerly named Calumet, and was incorporated under that name in 1889, but in 1895 its name was changed by the legislature to Laurium, in allusion to the mineral wealth of Laurium in Greece. The name Calumet is now applied to the post office in the village of Red Jacket (incorporated 1875; pop. 1900, 4668; 1904, 3784; 1910, 4211), W. of the Calumet and Hecla mine; and Laurium, the mining property and Red Jacket are all in the township of Calumet (pop. 1904, state census, 28,587).

LAURUSTINUS,in botany, the popular name of a common hardy evergreen garden shrub known botanically asViburnum Tinus, with rather dark-green ovate leaves in pairs and flat-topped clusters (or corymbs) of white flowers, which are rose-coloured before expansion, and appear very early in the year. It is a native of the Mediterranean region, and was in cultivation in Britain at the end of the 16th century.Viburnumbelongs to the natural order Caprifoliaceae and includes the common wayfaring tree (V. Lantana) and the guelder rose (V. Opulus).

LAURVIK,LarvikorLaurvig, a seaport of Norway, in Jarlsberg and Laurvikamt(county), at the head of a short fjord near the mouth of the Laagen river, 98 m. S.S.W. of Christiania by the Skien railway. Pop. (1900) 10,664. It has various industries, including saw and planing mills, shipbuilding, glassworks and factories for wood-pulp, barrels and potato flour; and an active trade in exporting timber, ice, wood-pulp and granite, chiefly to Great Britain, and in importing from the same country coal and salt. The port has a depth of 18 to 24 ft. beside the quays. Four miles south is Fredriksvaern, formerly a station of the Norwegian fleet and the seat of a naval academy. Laurviks Bad is a favourite spa, with mineral and sulphur springs and mud-baths.

LAUSANNE,the capital of the Swiss canton of Vaud. It is the junction of the railway lines from Geneva, from Brieg and the Simplon, from Fribourg and Bern, and from Vallorbe (for Paris). A funicular railway connects the upper town with the central railway station and with Ouchy, the port of Lausanne on the lake of Geneva. Lausanne takes its name from the Flon stream flowing through it, which was formerly called Laus (water). The older or upper portion of the town is built on the crest and slopes of five hillocks and in the hollows between them, all forming part of the Jorat range. It has a picturesque appearance from the surface of the lake, above which the cathedral rises some 500 ft., while from the town there is a fine view across the lake towards the mountains of Savoy and of the Valais. The quaint characteristics of the hilly site of the old town have largely been destroyed by modern improvements, which began in 1836 and were not quite completed in 1910. The Grand Pont, designed by the cantonal engineer, Adrien Pichard (1790-1841), was built 1839-1844, while the Barre tunnel was pierced 1851-1855 and the bridge of Chauderon was built in 1905. The valleys and lower portions of the town were gradually filled up so as to form a series of squares, of which those of Riponne and of St François are the finest, the latter now being the real centre of the town. The railways were built between 1856 and 1862, while the opening of the Simplon tunnel (1906) greatly increased the commercial importance of Lausanne, which is now on the great international highway from Paris to Milan. From 1896 onwards a well-planned set of tramways within the town was constructed. The town is still rapidly extending, especially towards the south and west. Since the days of Gibbon (resident here for three periods, 1753-1758, 1763-1764 and 1783-1793), whose praises of the town have been often repeated, Lausanne has become a favourite place of residence for foreigners (including many English), who are especially attracted by the excellent establishments for secondary and higher education. Hence in 1900 there were 9501 foreign residents (of whom 628 were British subjects) out of a total population of 46,732 inhabitants; in 1905 it was reckoned that these numbers had risen respectively to 10,625, 818 and 53,577. In 1709 it is said that the inhabitants numbered but 7432 and 9965 in 1803, while the numbers were 20,515 in 1860 and 33,340 in 1888. Of the population in 1900 the great majority was French-speaking (only 6627 German-speaking and 3146 Italian-speaking) and Protestant (9364 Romanists and 473 Jews).

The principal building is the cathedral church (now Protestant) of Notre Dame, which with the castle occupies the highest position. It is the finest medieval ecclesiastical building in Switzerland. Earlier buildings were more or less completely destroyed by fire, but the present edifice was consecrated in 1275 by Pope Gregory X. in the presence of the emperor Rudolf of Habsburg. It was sacked after the Bernese conquest (1536) and the introduction of Protestantism, but many ancient tapestries and other precious objects are still preserved in the Historical Museum at Bern. The church was well restored at great cost from 1873 onwards, as it is the great pride of the citizens. Close by is the castle, built in the early 15th century by the bishops, later the residence of the Bernese bailiffs and now the seat of the various branches of the administration of the canton of Vaud. Near both is the splendid Palais de Rumine (on the Place de la Riponne), opened in 1906 and now housing the university as well as the cantonal library, the cantonal picture gallery (or Musée Arlaud, founded 1841) and the cantonal collections of archaeology, natural history, &c. The university was raised to that rank in 1890, but, as an academy, dates from 1537. Among its former teachers may be mentioned Theodore Beza, Conrad Gesner, J. P. de Crousaz, Charles Monnard, Alexandre Vinet, Eugène Rambert, Juste Olivier and several members of the Secretan family. On the Montbenon heights to the south-west of the cathedral group is the federal palace of justice, the seat (since 1886) of the federal court of justice, which, erected by the federal constitution of 29th May 1874, was fixed at Lausanne by a federal resolution of 26th June 1874. The house, La Grotte, which Gibbon inhabited 1783-1793, and on the terrace of which he completed (1787) his famous history, was demolished in 1896 to make room for the new post office that stands on the Place St François. The asylum for the blind was mainly founded (1845) by the generosity of W. Haldimand, an Englishman of Swiss descent. The first book printed in Lausanne was the missal of the cathedral church (1493), while theGazette de Lausanne(founded 1798) took that name in 1804. Lausanne has been the birthplace of many distinguished men, such as Benjamin Constant, the Secretans, Vinet and Rambert. It is the seat of many benevolent, scientific and literary societies and establishments.

The original town (mentioned in the Antonine Itinerary) was on the shore of the lake, near Vidy, south-west of the present city. It was burnt in the 4th century by the Alamanni. Some of the inhabitants took refuge in the hills above and there founded a new town, which acquired more importance when Bishop Marius about 590 chose it as his see city (perhaps transferring it from Avenches). Here rose the cathedral church, the bishop’s palace, &c. Across the Flon was a Burgundian settlement, later known as the Bourg, while to the west was a third colony around the church of St Laurent. These three elements joined together to form the present city. The bishops obtained little by little great temporal powers (the diocese extended to the left bank of the Aar) and riches, becoming in 1125 princes of the empire, while their chapter was recruited only from the noblest families. But in 1368 the bishop was forced to recognize various liberties and customs that had been gradually won by the citizens, thePlaid Généralof that year showing that there was already some kind of municipal government, save for thecité, which was not united with theville inférieureor the other fourquartiers(Bourg, St Laurent, La Palud and Le Pont) in 1481. In 1525 the city made an alliance with Bern and Fribourg. But in 1536 the territory of the bishop (as well as the Savoyard barony of Vaud) was forcibly conquered by the Bernese, who at once introduced Protestantism. The Bernese occupation lasted till 1798, though in 1723 an attempt was made to put an end to it by Major Davel, who lost his life in consequence. In 1798 Lausanne became a simple prefecture of the canton Lémanof the Helvetic republic. But in 1803, on the creation of the canton of Vaud by the Act of Mediation, it became its capital. The bishop of Lausanne resided after 1663 at Fribourg, while from 1821 onwards he added “and of Geneva” to his title.

Besides the general works dealing with the canton of Vaud (q.v.), the following books refer specially to Lausanne: A. Bernus,L’Imprimerie à Lausanne et à Morges jusqu’à la fin du 16ièmesiècle(Lausanne, 1904); M. Besson,Récherches sur les origines des évêchés de Genève, Lausanne, Sion(Fribourg, 1906); A. Bonnard, “Lausanne au 18ièmesiècle,” in the work entitledChez nos aïeux(Lausanne, 1902); E. Dupraz,La Cathédrale de Lausanne ... étude historique(Lausanne, 1906); E. Gibbon,Autobiography and Letters(3 vols., 1896); F. Gingins and F. Forel,Documents concernant l’ancien évêché de Lausanne, 2 parts (Lausanne, 1846-1847); J. H. Lewis and F. Gribble,Lausanne(1909); E. van Muyden and others,Lausanne à travers les âges(Lausanne, 1906); Meredith Read,Historic Studies in Vaud, Berne and Savoy(2 vols., 1897); M. Schmitt,Mémoires hist. sur le diocèse de Lausanne(2 vols., Fribourg, 1859); J. Stammler (afterwards bishop of Lausanne),Le Trésor de la cathédrale de Lausanne(Lausanne, 1902; trans. of a German book of 1894).

(W. A. B. C.)

LAUTREC, ODET DE FOIX,Vicomte de(1488-1528), French soldier. The branch of the viscounts of Lautrec originated with Pierre, the grandson of Archambaud de Grailly, captal de Buch, who came into possession of the county of Foix in 1401. Odet de Foix and his two brothers, the seigneur de Lescun and the seigneur de l’Esparre or Asparros, served Francis I. as captains; and the influence of their sister, Françoise de Châteaubriant, who became the king’ mistress, gained them high offices. In 1515 Lautrec took part in the campaign of Marignano. In 1516 he received the government of the Milanese, and by his severity made the French domination insupportable. In 1521 he succeeded in defending the duchy against the Spanish army, but in 1522 he was completely defeated at the battle of the Bicocca, and was forced to evacuate the Milanese. The mutiny of his Swiss troops had compelled him, against his wish, to engage in the battle. Created marshal of France, he received again, in 1527, the command of the army of Italy, occupied the Milanese, and was then sent to undertake the conquest of the kingdom of Naples. The defection of Andrea Doria and the plague which broke out in the French camp brought on a fresh disaster. Lautrec himself caught the infection, and died on the 15th of August 1528. He had the reputation of a gallant and able soldier, but this reputation scarcely seems to be justified by the facts; though he was always badly used by fortune.

Back to Index Next