M. Fazy, although ultra in politics, had no religious prejudices, and, neither Catholic nor Protestant, all he cared for was to bring about the ruin of the Calvinist aristocracy. In so much (as the Bishop of Lausanne observed in 1849), he was acting to the advantage of Catholics. After the radicals had destroyed the ramparts of the old town, Geneva began rapidly to change appearance: entirely new quarters were soon laid out, strangers came in large numbers, and the Catholic population visibly increased with the immigration. In 1850, the canton counted 34,212 Protestants and 29,764 Catholics; ten years later, the figures stood 42,099 of the latter to 40,069 of the former.
The radicals had the good sense also to respect the liberty of Catholics; they gave them ground to build another church on, and in the central part of the new districts, hard by the railway-station, a Gothic edifice, which people used to call the cathedral-citadel—the temple of liberty—was erected. Thus little by little the two classes were drawn together, despite so many profound differences. The conservatives themselves contributed to this, for the concessions to Catholics were their chief point of opposition; and in the next electoral campaign they took for rallying-cry, "Fazy sold to the papists." Thereupon it became a necessity, if Catholics would keep their rights, to vote with the radicals; they did so in 1855, and the conservatives were utterly defeated. Things remained in this state until 1860, the government continuing to respect Catholic liberty; the bishop also was allowed to return to Geneva, and Fazy ably defended him against the narrow prejudices of a few friends. When the church of Our Lady was finished, the consecration sermon was preached by the eloquent mouth of the man who to-day exercises over the faithful of Geneva, although with different qualities, the influence that M. Vuarin once had. This was the Abbé Mermillod. Untrammelled by attachments either to person or party, clever, firm, yet pacific, uniting to the authority of virtue all the charms of talent and character, his liberal ideas no one could gainsay, and his devotion to the church the Holy Father has on more than one occasion publicly recognized. Nevertheless, if the rule of the radicals was in some respects profitable to Catholics, it was baneful to them on more than one account. The sources of moral and intellectual corruption were multiplied in the canton; freemasonry received the same concessions as religion; the professorships in the academy were bestowed upon the enemies of every form of Christianity; and all the while an active proselytism was spreading immoral sentiments and infidelity among the people. In this state of affairs, the opposition daily waxed stronger, and after fifteen years of administration, the radicals were defeated (1861) by the conservatives, rejuvenated and transformed into an independent party.
II.
The party that now came in was no longer the same old purely aristocratic one of former times; it had allies among the democrats. A popular society, known as The String, established in the very centre of the working Quartier de Saint Gervais, furnished it with brawny arms and clubs to repel at the polls the violence which the radicals had initiated. From 1861 to 1864, the independents gained ground rapidly, and the bloody riots that disturbed Geneva in the last-named year only served to assure their success. It may be asked, What did the Catholics do during this political change? They could not aspire to rule: they were forced to choose between the Protestant haters of their faith and the radical indifferentists who treated all religions alike—one might say with equal contempt—but which had at least the merit of respecting liberty of conscience. A handful of Catholics, disgusted with the subversive doctrines of the radicals, sought alliance with the independents; but the mass remained liege to their first protectors. Some of the leaders, too, of that party belonged to Catholic families, and were, nominally, Catholics themselves; whereas all the chief men of the independents were Protestants.
At this period, a great event in the Catholic life of Geneva took place. Pius IX. in 1864 raised the Abbé Mermillod to the episcopal dignity; only by a prudent reserve he did not immediately confer upon him the title of bishop of that city, but of Hebron in partibus infidelium. In order not to encounter too many obstacles at the outset, the authorities of the canton were not officially notified of the fact, which was brought to their knowledge indirectly. The independents affected to ignore the new arrangement, and consider Mgr. Mermillod as only the vicar-general of Bishop Marilley. Whenever he spoke as a prelate, they showed themselves surprised and angry. The radicals, on their part, saw the establishment of an episcopal see with the same unconcern as they had witnessed the erection of the cathedral. And yet a few were provoked; they were principally leaders from the Catholic ranks, who foresaw the blow their influence would receive from such a quarter. On the other hand, Mgr. Mermillod's European reputation flattered the self-love of the Genevans, thus lessening political and religious repugnances; while his amenity, conciliatory spirit, the irresistible seduction of his ways, his political prudence, which caused him to avoid the entanglements of party strife, helped to surmount many obstacles.
A question of great importance to Catholics soon came up. In 1815, when parts of Savoy and the Pays-de-Gex were annexed, although the religious liberty of the new-comers had been diplomatically secured, Geneva reserved to her own sons, under the modest designation "rights of property, burghership, and district residence," the enjoyment of considerable wealth coming from old foundations, and destined particularly for hospitals and other charitable institutions. The new-comers had no share in the distribution of these funds: hence arose the distinction in the community of elder and younger brothers. About the year 1866, a motion was put forward to abolish this privilege of the ancient citizens, and to induce the new ones to renounce the treaty stipulations in their favor and come under the common law. The project fell through at the time, but was finally adopted in 1868. The Catholics took a liberal and generous stand. They might regret the international engagements to respect their religious liberty; they could loudly complain that by a provision of the bill the independents endowed the Protestant Church with a part of this appropriation, consequently securing it against loss in the event of a separation between church and state, whereas nothing was set apart to defray the expenses of Catholic worship; nevertheless, the great majority voted to let it pass. God grant that they may not have been deceived! If they had been organized into a political party, they could and they should have had inserted some similar allowance in their favor. For all this, the Catholics, while they continued to make rapid progress, assumed an attitude of moderation and straightforward liberality. Mgr. Mermillod openly declared, "The Catholics have not the preponderance, or the means of obtaining it; they do not think of it, they cannot have it, they do not desire it. They have no privileges to petition for, but all more than ever must love our native Switzerland, which turns now her eyes upon us, and must cling to our institutions and to that liberty which they secure us." The bishop's adversaries could not find fault with him, and the Revue des Deux Mondes was obliged, however unwillingly and tardily, to acknowledge his liberal tone. And yet this attitude of Catholics and their progress only excited greater distrust and hatred. The society of The String raised in its manifestoes the phantom of ultramontanism, the press insulted them, and they were threatened in their rights of association, of burial, of instruction, and of preaching. It is principally at Carouge that they have had to suffer. This place is under the influence of certain so-called Catholic radicals, who in truth are more anti-Catholic than the Protestants themselves. When these people attack the church, the independents support them; sometimes, however, the latter have known how to maintain an at least apparent neutrality.
It is chiefly in view of the eventual re-establishment of the bishopric of Geneva that anti-Catholic prejudices are manifested. The Protestants understand that Hebron is only a first step, and they recoil at the idea of having at Geneva itself a Bishop of Geneva. Several times already the question has been discussed in the council of state, and the opponents of the church seek in Gallican and Josephine traditions, in the text of treaties, everywhere, for reasons to deny to Catholics the right of having a bishop. Common sense, equity, treaties, all is against them, but prejudice prevails. The Catholics on their side are determined that they shall have their own bishop, and this to-day is the great dispute between them and the Protestants. Mgr. Mermillod acts in all these troubles more like an apostle than a politician. He is right. He believes in his mission; and, without being able exactly to point out the course which Providence will keep, he is convinced that the church will prosper in Geneva. May his hope be realized! At any rate, the Genevan Catholics are fortunate to have such a bishop. To conclude, their present situation is a critical one. It is fraught with dangers and yet full of hope.