We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 May 2015
This article deals with Marseille's social and political history between the 1850s and 1910s. During this period of extensive economic and demographic growth, the municipal government and police never seemed able to handle the consequences of these rapid changes. The case of Marseille thus allows us to test the connection between a growth situation interpreted as a ‘permanent crisis’ and police reform. The persistence of the crisis discourse invites us to examine the connection between the alarmist rhetoric and reforms in law enforcement. Is the first the cause of the second and, if not, how do we interpret the continuing complaints of a crisis for more than half a century, when they must have lost their effectiveness? This article examines the weakness and discontinuity of the relationship between claims of a crisis and police reforms and situates these reforms within the political context of tensions between the national and local levels.
1 For urban history during the nineteenth century, see Pinol, J.-L., Le monde des villes au XIXe siècle (Paris, 1992)Google Scholar; for French urban history, see Duby, G. (ed.), Histoire de la France urbaine, vol. IV: M. Agulhon (ed.), La ville de l’âge industriel. Le cycle haussmannien (Paris, 1998; original edn, 1983)Google Scholar; for general aspects of the history of nineteenth-century Marseille, see Marseille au XIXe siècle, rêves et triomphes (Marseille, 1991).
2 The first census measuring the growth rate of urban populations in France was taken in 1851. For these statistical aspects, see Agulhon (ed.), La ville de l’âge industriel, 27.
3 For a detailed table of this growth, see Regnard, C., Marseille la violente. Criminalité, industrialisation et société (1851–1914) (Rennes, 2009)Google Scholar, introduction, 16 et seq.
4 Daumalin, X., Girard, N. and Raveux, O. (eds.), Du savon à la puce. L’industrie marseillaise du XVIIe siècle à nos jours (Marseille, 2003)Google Scholar.
5 Echinard, P. and Temime, É. (eds.), Migrance. Histoire des migrations à Marseille, vol. II: R. Lopez and É. Temime (eds.), L’expansion marseillaise et ‘l’invasion italienne’ (1830–1918) (Aix-en-Provence, 1990)Google Scholar; Mourlane, S. and Regnard, C., Empreintes italiennes. Marseille et sa région (Lyon, 2013)Google Scholar.
6 Roncayolo, M., Les grammaires d’une ville, essai sur la genèse des structures urbaines à Marseille (Paris, 1996)Google Scholar.
7 On the popular ‘imaginary’ of Marseille, see L. Montel, ‘Marseille capitale du crime. Histoire croisée de l’imaginaire de Marseille et de la criminalité organisée (1820–1940)’, University of Paris X-Nanterre doctoral thesis, 2008.
8 These documents form the basis of this study. They are collected together in the 4 M series of the departmental archives of Bouches-du-Rhône (AD BDR).
9 This paradoxical expression is used to formulate the central question of this article, which, indeed, is to establish whether this permanent crisis is really a ‘crisis’ or rather a discursive phenomenon.
10 AD BDR 4 M 4, services manager of Messageries Maritimes to the prefect, Sep. 1855.
11 Ibid.
12 AD BDR 4 M 4, letter from Senator Maupas to the minister of the interior, 3 Dec. 1861.
13 AD BDR 4 M 8, letter from the commissaire central to the mayor, 1 Dec. 1883.
14 Dornel, L., La France hostile. Socio-histoire de la xénophobie 1870–1914 (Paris, 2004)Google Scholar; Lucassen, L., The Immigrant Threat: The Integration of Old and New Migrants in Western Europe since 1850 (Urbana, 2005)Google Scholar, in particular: ‘A threat to the native workers: Italians in France (1870–1940)’, 74–99; Noiriel, G., Immigration, antisémitisme et racisme en France XIXe–XXe siècle. Discours publics, humiliations privées (Paris, 2007)Google Scholar; Regnard, Marseille la violente, 177 onwards.
15 AD BDR 4 M 4, note from the commissaire central to the senator, 4 Nov. 1860.
16 AD BDR 4 M 4, senator to the minister of the interior, 3 Dec. 1861.
17 AD BDR 4 M 4, correspondence between the prefect and the minister of the interior, 1860–65.
18 In 1881, France conquered Tunisia, leading to the deterioration of diplomatic relations with Italy, which had imperialist aspirations in relation to this territory. There were many Italians in Marseille at the time (approximately 60,000 in a population of 360,000). On 17 Jun. 1881, the victorious French troops landed in Marseille and the city was in a state of jubilation: a large crowd gathered to admire the parade and façades were decorated with flags. As the troops approached the Vieux-Port, at the beginning of the Rue de la République, whistles were heard that were attributed to the Italian Club. This incident, considered as a national insult, led to violence between members of the French and Italian communities on 19 and 20 Jun. The results of this violence, spread out over a few days, were serious, but limited: 3 dead, 2 of whom were French, and 21 wounded, 15 of whom were Italian. Nevertheless, the event aroused great emotion. It was called the ‘Marseille Vespers’ in reference to the massacre of French residents in Sicily in 1282, referred to as the ‘Sicilian Vespers’. Cf. Liens, G., ‘Les “vêpres marseillaises” (juin 1881) ou la crise franco-italienne au lendemain du traité du Bardo’, Revue d’histoire moderne et contemporaine, 14 (1967), 1–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mourlane and Regnard, Empreintes italiennes, 92–3, and Lucassen, The Immigrant Threat, 81.
19 AD BDR 4 M 8, commissaire central to the mayor of Marseille, 1 Dec. 1883.
20 AD BDR 4 M 4, note from the commissaire central to the senator, 4 Nov. 1860.
21 AD BDR 4 M 4, senator to the minister of the interior, 3 Dec. 1861.
22 AD BDR 4 M 7, commissaire central to the mayor, 20 Feb. 1875.
23 AD BDR 4 M 8, note on the Marseille police, commissaire central, 7 Jun. 1882.
24 Montel, ‘Marseille capitale du crime’, and Montel, L., ‘Espace urbain et criminalité organisée: le cas marseillais dans le premier XXe siècle’, in Marec, Y. (ed.), Villes en crise? Les politiques municipales face aux pathologies urbaines (fin XVIIIe–fin XXe siècle) (Grâne, 2005), 65–74Google Scholar.
25 Regnard, Marseille la violente.
26 V. Milliot, ‘Une ville malade de son espace? Paris et le lieutenant général de police Lenoir (1775–1785)’, in Marec (ed.), Villes en crise?, 32–40.
27 D. Voldman, ‘Sur les “crises” urbaines’, Vingtième siècle, 64 (1999), special issue on ‘Villes en crise?’, 5–10.
28 J.-C. Farcy, ‘La ville contemporaine (XIXe–XXe siècles) est-elle criminogène?’, in Marec (ed.), Villes en crise?, 20–31; F. Bourillon, ‘Changer la ville. La question urbaine au milieu du XIXe siècle’, Vingtième siècle, 64 (1999), special issue on ‘Villes en crise?’, 11–23.
29 The Law of 5 May 1855 strengthened the police powers of the prefects and Article 50 gave departmental centres with more than 40,000 inhabitants (17 departments) the state policing measures instituted in Lyon by the Law of 19 Jun. 1851, themselves modelled on the powers of Paris’ Prefecture of Police in the department of Seine. For a recent overview, see Berlière, J.-M. and Lévy, R., Histoire des polices en France de l’ancien régime à nos jours (Paris, 2011)Google Scholar.
30 ADB DR 4 M 2146, Ministry of the Interior to the prefect of Bouches-du-Rhône, 26 Jun. 1855.
31 ADB DR 4 M 2146, Ministry of the Interior to the prefect, 27 Apr. 1857. A few months later, however, in Nov., four special police bases were created, one of which was dedicated to policing ports and railways. In 1868, the Marseille commission for emigration, attached to the special commission for ports and railways, was established.
32 AD BDR 4 M 4, security department of the Ministry of the Interior to the senator of Bouches-du-Rhône, 31 Dec. 1861.
33 AD BDR 4 M 4, senator to the minister of the interior, 14 Jul. 1862.
34 Montel, ‘Marseille capitale du crime’, and Regnard, C., ‘Violences de Marseille, violences à Marseille’, in Jeanneney, J.-N. (ed.), L’actualité au regard de l’histoire. De l’affaire Merah à l’élection du pape François (Paris, 2013), 135–54Google Scholar.
35 The Law of 24 Jul. 1867 abrogates Article 50 of the Law of 1855 and returned policing and recruiting powers to the municipal government, with the exception of the recruitment of police superintendents. The central administration reserved the right to decide, on the recommendation of the municipal council, the organization of the services, the managers of police personnel and the approval of staff.
36 AD BDR 4 M 4, senator to the minister of the interior, 31 Dec. 1861.
37 Ibid.
38 AD BDR 4 M 7, Prefecture to the mayor, 4 Apr. 1876.
39 AD BDR 4 M 8, letter from the commissaire central to the mayor, 14 Feb. 1856.
40 AD BDR 4 M 8, letter from the commissaire central to the prefect, 23 Jan. 1873.
41 AD BDR 4 M 8, report on the police of Marseille, from the commissaire central, 1877.
42 AD BDR 4 M 8, report from the commissaire central, 7 Jun. 1882.
43 AD BDR 4 M 8, letter from the commissaire central to the mayor, 20 Feb. 1875.
44 AD BDR 4 M 8, report from the commissaire central, 7 Jun. 1882.
45 For further details, see Berlière and Lévy, Histoire des polices, 73.
46 ‘Midi rouge et Midi blanc’, Provence historique, 36, fascicule 148 (Apr. 1987); Les fédéralismes, réalités et représentations 1789–1874 (Aix-en-Provence, 1995).
47 Temime, É., Histoire de Marseille de la Révolution à nos jours (Paris, 1999)Google Scholar.
48 AD BDR 4 M 4, letter from the senator to the minister, 16 Dec. 1865.
49 Emmanuelli, F.-X. (ed.), La Provence contemporaine de 1800 à nos jours (Rennes, 1994), 123–7Google Scholar.
50 AD BDR 4 M 7, letter from the mayor of Marseille to the prefect, 22 Jun. 1872.
51 AD BDR 4 M 8, report on the project to reorganize the police service presented by Mr Barbaroux, deputy, 1891.
52 Milliot ‘Une ville malade de son espace?’, and A. Nugues-Bourchat, ‘Les ajustements du quadrillage policier à Lyon (1800–1852)’, in Marec (ed.), Villes en crise?, 54–63.
53 AD BDR 4 M 2147, letter from the Ministry of the Interior to the prefect, 6 Jul. 1874.
54 Temime, É., ‘Immigration et police portuaire à la fin du XIXe siècle. Le cas de Marseille’, in Blanc-Chaléard, M.-C., Douki, C., Dyonet, N. and Milliot, V. (eds.), Police et migrants. France 1667–1939 (Rennes, 2001), 251–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
55 AD BDR 4 M 8, cited report.
56 Ibid.
57 AD BDR 4 M 9.
58 Regnard, C., ‘Terreurs de quartiers. Jeunesse et violences à Marseille (1850–1914)’, in De Weirt, X. and Rousseaux, X. (eds.), Violences juvéniles urbaines en Europe (Louvain, 2011), 143–60Google Scholar.
59 D. Kalifa, Crime et culture au XIXe siècle (Paris, 2005).
60 Lewis, M.D., Les frontières de la république. Immigration et limites de l’universalisme en France (1918–1940) (Marseille, 2010), 49CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and ‘The strangeness of foreigners: policing migration and nation in interwar Marseille’, in H. Chapman and L. Frader (eds.), Race in France: Interdisciplinary Perspective on the Politics of Difference (New York, 2004), 75–107.
61 AD BDR 4 M 7, letter from the commissaire central to the mayor, 2 Feb. 1875.
62 AD 13, 4 M 11, report from Émile Lévy to the Marseille Chamber of Commerce on policing the ports, adopted by the Compagnie in its meeting dated 28 Oct. 1919. The prefectoral project for reorganizing the policing of ports, 17 Oct. 1931, p. 1, and AD BDR 4 M 11, letter from the Ministry of the Interior to the prefect of Bouches-du-Rhône, 26 Jan. 1920.
63 Chambre de Commerce et d’Industrie de Marseille, reference no. MR 56 11 21 21, Ministerial Order dated 11 Dec. 1899, cited by Montel, L., ‘Grappillages et surveillance dans le port moderne de Marseille dans l’entre-deux-guerres’, in Figeac-Monthus, M. and Lastécouères, C. (eds.), Territoires de l’illicite: ports et îles. De la fraude au contrôle (XVIe–XXe s.) (Paris, 2012), 345–58Google Scholar.
