Favoritism of Catholics in the colonial adminstration

Dear friends,

I'm trying to find some sources to help gauge the oft-cited claim that

the French favored Catholics over other Vietnamese for positions in the

colonial administration. I'm particularly interested in the interwar

period, when there actually was a French administration to speak of. My

research on Catholicism in this period so far hasn't at all confirmed

this point, and just the fact that the administration was biggest in the

region with the fewest Catholics (Cochinchine) suggests that Catholic

influence within the administration might not have been as significant

as people often assume. Any thoughts appreciated.

Best,

Charles Keith

Yale University

Dear Charles and list:

One place in which Catholics did wield a measure of administrative power

during the interwar period was at the imperial court in Hue. They also were

well-represented in the provincial administrations of Annam. However, as

Bruce Lockhart explains in THE END OF THE VIETNAMESE MONARCHY, this Catholic

influence in the region was not purely and simply the result of any French

favoritism for Catholics. The main Vietnamese powerbroker at the court

during the 1920s and early 1930s was the Catholic minister Nguyen Huu Bai.

Other Catholics in Bai's faction included Ngo Dinh Diem and his older

brother Ngo Dinh Khoi, both of whom served as province chiefs in Annam

during the interwar period. Diem was briefly elevated to the post of

Interior Minister in 1933, but resigned soon after to protest the French

refusal to permit the court a greater degree of administrative autonomy--a

move which Bai counselled him to make. This last point is significant,

because it shows how the relations between French officials and Vietnamese

Catholic administrators was much more complicated that the conventional

wisdom would have it. French officials considered Bai and his cronies to be

an annoyance, and the appointments that the latter received were given

mainly in the hope of mollifying the old mandarin, rather than because of

any French preference for Catholics. See especially chapters 4 and 5 of

Lockhart's book for more info.

Cheers,

Ed Miller

Department of History, Dartmouth College

Charles,

I agree entirely with Ed's comments about the intricacies of the

relationship between Church and colonial state. Although it largely

deals with an earlier period than the pre WWI, it might nevertheless be

helpful to have a look at some of the correspondence in Patrick Tuck's

book, which gives a lot of the flavour of the relationship (Masonic

Adulterers vs. Meddling Religious Fanatics).

Peter Hansen

My understanding of the relationship between French administration and

Catholicism was always that in terms of the laicité French civil servants

had a strong inclination for freemasonry. There have been "loges" in

Indochina. Paul Beau was a Freemason and even a number of Vietnamese became

member. A description can be found in Jacques Dalloz, FRANCS-MACONS

D'INDOCHINE 1868-1975. Edimaf, 2002 and his article in the Revue française

d'histoire d'Outre-Mer Vol. 85, No. 320 (1998), p. 103-118. I wonder how

strong freemasonry in reality was and, even more, important how these

"loges" internationally have been cooperated e.g. in India and in the

Netherlands-Indies. I haven't seen any Ph.D project about this.

Best,

John Kleinen

Dear Charles and List,

I would like to follow up on the previous emails and suggest a few more

titles (from memory):

1) Patrice Morlat seems to be the other main scholar on freemasonry in

French Indochina. He has published an article in his co-edited book (La

religion dans l'empire, or something similar, Les Indes savantes, Paris,

roughly 2002). In Morlat's other books on the top-level French

administrators in Indochina, it is likely that he refers to their political

or religious affiliations as well. If I recollect, GGs Pasquier or Robin

were freemasons, and so was Louis Marty (and, as a result, apparently Pham

Quynh as well). There were Vietnamese members too, which is discussed in the

Dalloz book.

2) Henri Eckert's article on the creation of the French colonial army in

French Indochina (South-East Asia Research, Nov. 2002) refers to the many

political streams within the army (generally more republican and

anti-Church) and the navy (generally more royalist and Catholic), but then

dissects these positions further, so that we do not have only the Catholic -

Masonic divide, but a far more complex mosaic of royalists, Gambettists,

republicans, naturalists, etc.

3) David Gilbert (or Gilbert David?) has published two books with

L'Harmattan, Paris, narrating the story of a freemason network from about

1930 to 1945, with an emphasis on the WWII years. He is not a professional

historian, but he does draw on masonic sources, though many of his claims

are not footnoted. The book also provides some information on the

co-operation across colonial boundaries, as the author argues that some

Force 136 (or was it the OSS) members were freemasons.

4) Point 3 makes me wonder whether Eric Jenning's recent book, Vichy in the

Tropics (title?), refers to the freemasons as well, as many of them would

not have been happy with the Vichyist project.

Finally, Dalloz mentions the competition between different lodges, as well

as different political positions represented in them or in individual

chapters, for instance with regard to the membership (or not) for

Vietnamese.

Best wishes,

Tobias