Boat People, Then and Now

Making the Calais Crossing

By Renaud Morieux/September 7, 2015/Foreign Affairs

On August 1, 1686, at eight in the morning, a small ship dropped anchor

off the Dover shore. Among those who hobbled onto the beach was a 26year-old Calvinist Frenchman from Calais, Isaac Minet. Minet had finally
succeeded in leaving his native country alongside his 65-year-old mother,
Susanne, his younger sister Elizabeth, and 15 other men, women, and
children. In the Calais region, the accession of Louis XIV, that most
Catholic of monarchs, to the French throne heralded an increase in state
persecution of the Protestant minority.
In 1685, Louis XIV officially outlawed Protestantism. And so, to avoid
being condemned to the galleys, French Protestants had no choice but to
abjure or run away. In Calais, religious persecution was particularly
fierce. Between October and December 1685, the Minets were put under
house arrest and then imprisoned in a dungeon. They eventually yielded
to their captors and converted to Catholicism, but their troubles were not
yet over. Flight seemed a rational choice, as did the decision to head for
Dover. French Huguenots, as Protestants in France were called at the
time, generally opted for the closest Protestant country that would have
them: between 40,000 and 50,000 Frenchmen migrated to England after
1685.
Minets escape was well prepared. To begin with, he knew Dover very well
and spoke English; as a teenager, he had spent two years with the family
of a merchant in Dover, as was customary in Europe for sons of affluent
traders. Further, this was what sociologists call a chain migration,
dependent on a sending network in France and a receiving network in
England. Other members of the family had preceded Minet on the same
journey. In fact, six of his brothers and sisters were already living in
Dover or its vicinity when he made his great escape.
Best-laid plans aside, as in all such stories, chance also played its part.
Surveillance was tight, but Isaac and his fellow passengers slipped past
the detachment of soldiers patrolling the French coast. A cruiser from
Dunkirk that was detailed to board and inspect vessels carrying
runaways also failed to catch sight of the Minets. Bribes to mounted
customs officers also helped their cause. And so, at one in the morning

Minet finally left Calais behind, never to return until his death in 1745.
He did not go very far, relocating a mere 21 miles from his birthplace.

Migrants sit by a roadside as darkness falls, near to the Eurotunnel site

in Calais, France, August 4, 2015.
In many ways, the Minets exile is not original: thousands of French
Protestants devised similar strategies to find a better fate abroad. The
success story that followed, however, is far less common. While 90
percent of their coreligionists only passed through Dover, the Minets
stayed there. Their prosperity was built on their ability to retain and
develop their connections in France while firmly anchoring themselves in
England. Isaac Minets grandson Hughes became mayor of Dover in
1765. At the same time, the Minet firm became a leading international
trading company for over a century. Cross-channel packet boats were the
heart of their business. Neither storms nor wars put an end to their
activities. In both directions, their ships transported letters, corn,
brandy, horses, Huguenots on the run, prisoners of war, British tourists,
and Italian peddlers. The Minets reaped the benefits of their situation,
one foot on each side of the Strait of Dover (or the Pas de Calais,
depending on your viewpoint).
As the Minet saga shows, it is impossible to understand Calaiss role in
international migrations without looking to its symbiotic relationship
with Dover. Events on one side of the English Channel always create a
ripple on the other. Still, if Calais and Dover enjoyed a privileged
partnership, their similarities should not be pushed too far.
At least one thing that Calais had was a flourishing hotel industry,
catering to every budget. Dover reigned supreme on the southeast corner
of England. It was the main port of entry into the British Isles from the
continent, and its proximity to London was a major asset: already in the
thirteenth century, a Benedictine monk, Matthew Paris, called it the key
to England. By comparison, from a Parisian perspective, Calais was
peripheral, suffering from competition with two powerful regional rivals,
Dunkirk and Boulogne. In fact, before the nineteenth century, Calais was
merely a stopover town on a migrants journey, a place of transit between
England and the continent. The contrast between its modest size and its

role in international relations is striking. Calais, including its suburbs,

totaled 5,000 inhabitants in the eighteenth century and around 7,000 at
the turn of the nineteenth. It was described in an 1814 travel guide (The
Entertaining Magazine; or, Repository of General Knowledge for the Year
1814) as a well-fortified town that does not abound with many lively
looking or showy shops and has rather a monotonous and spiritless
appearance .
At least one thing that Calais had was a flourishing hotel industry,
catering to every budget. In 1807, there were 78 inns and hotels in the
town. Their names say something about their target clientele and their
owners: the Kingston Hotel, the Golden Inn, the Htel dAngleterre, and
so on. Advertisements for the most luxurious ones were published in the
British press as well as in local English-language papers, such as the
Pas-de-Calais, or the British Continental Mercury. This daily traffic
encouraged some acculturation to English tastes and ways of life. In
1772, a Dr. Daignan, who worked at the Calais military hospital,
disapprovingly singled out the excessive use of hot drinks, such as tea
and hot water mixed with milk: this excessive consumption is general . . .
and is able to cause the degeneration of the human species.
As the eighteenth century wore on, European states became increasingly
suspicious of international migrations, and they devised different means
to monitor the movements of people across their borders. By the
beginning of the nineteenth century, the requirement to carry
identification and the development of state bureaucracies specializing in
migration issues certainly made traveling more burdensome but also
gave future historians a treasure trove of details about the identities and
whereabouts of migrants.
Thus, even throughout the wars, useful and respectable migrants,
such as sailors, qualified workers, merchants, or soldiers, were to be
attracted or retained. By contrast, idle or dangerous individuals, such
as vagrants, servants traveling without their masters, single women, or
peddlers, were to be kept at bay and, if possible, expelled. For a brief
period between the French Revolutionary Wars and the Napoleonic Wars,
in 180203, France and Great Britain were at peace for the first time in a
decade. Although illicit migrations had never stopped during the war,
thousands of migrants now legally flocked between Calais and Dover.
Their names, gender, occupation, and national origins were patiently

recorded in passport registers. Many were smugglers laden with French

silks, watches, jasmine oil, or British-manufactured goods and
machinery who were stopped at the British or French customs. Others
were British celebrities eager to (re)discover France after a decade of war.
Among them were the Francophile and opposition politician Charles
James Fox, the economist Jeremy Bentham, and the painter J. M. W.
Turner. But the vast majority of these travelers were unknowns: Italian
servants, Swiss merchants, American gentlemen with their spouses,
Danish lawyers, and German clergymen.
In Calais as in other ports, the maritime world was cosmopolitan. As
early as the start of the eighteenth century, a third of the seafarers living
in the town were born outside France, and most, including subjects of
the British crown, served on the privateers that preyed on British or
Dutch merchant ships. Calais is half as far from London as from Paris,
and the London labor market acted as a magnet to people from all over
the region and beyond. North Sea ports such as Ostend in todays
Belgium or Flushing in the Netherlands were also within striking
distance. Depending on the changing economic legislations of these
countries, Calais, Boulogne, or Dunkirk merchants, fishermen, and
workers would move their activities along the maritime edges to more
lucrative ports.
Thus, even throughout the wars, useful and respectable migrants,
such as sailors, qualified workers, merchants, or soldiers, were to be
attracted or retained. By contrast, idle or dangerous individuals, such
as vagrants, servants traveling without their masters, single women, or
peddlers, were to be kept at bay and, if possible, expelled. In 1765, for
instance, the French monarchy adopted an ordinance that prohibited
national artificers and workers from leaving the country, subject to
imprisonment. Conversely, Italian or British artisans and manufacturers
were encouraged to immigrate to France thanks to government bounties.
These distinctions still held in the nineteenth century: despite official
restrictions on the emigration of skilled workers that were in place in
Britain until 1824, thousands immigrated to Calais with their families,
attracted by higher salaries in the tulle and lace industries.
National migration policies became reality in border towns, and Calais
customs and police officers were given a central role in monitoring the
flows of migrants. But corruption was rampant, and low-grade officials

were torn by contradictory imperatives: distinguished travelers were not

to be harassed; the dangerous ones had to be stopped at all costs.
Ultimately, the categorization and labeling of migrants, far from being a
straightforward and objective bureaucratic procedure, remained a matter
of local and personal discretion. Besides, local communities often helped
migrants pass through the net of state surveillance. During the French
Revolution, many British subjects trapped in Calais prisons escaped
thanks to local help. On the migrants side, one could always employ a
fake passport or bypass the Channel altogether and cross the land
border to Ostend if Calais was unsafe.
It is remarkable that, more than two centuries later, migrants are using
the same itineraries and strategies that carried Minet to a not-so-distant
shore. As the history of Calais demonstrates, the fears and hopes of
immigrants have also endured.

The Migrant Problem

September 10, 2015 9:04 pm
Ma. Isabel Ongpin/Manila Times

THE Migrant Issue in Europe has been in the news for years. Many
countries of Western Europe feel they are under siege from the relentless
pressure of migrants fleeing war, persecution, famine and political
repression trying to come into their countries. Italy has been under
particular pressure since the Arab Spring erupted and sadly did not
bring better times to the countries involved but instead civil war affecting
everyone. Before that Spain was the country under most pressure with
immigrants from the Sahel (Africa) taking rubber dinghies from Morocco
to southern Spain. Despite pleas from these two countries and others the
European Union gave only what is now seen as inadequate support.
There is a Dublin Accord but it is more like a bureaucratic approach that
seems to be more concerned with formalities like documents that are

difficult for migrants on the run to produce or refugees to acquire. This

latter is what caused the unconscionable delay in getting the Syrian
family that lost its mother, and two toddlers in a sea journey an
immigrant visa. If their papers had been processed quickly enough they
would have been able to arrive in Canada in the proper immigrant entry
way as they had family there that guaranteed taking care of them
including a bank account deposit. But for lack of one document
supposedly from the Turkish government where they were given refuge,
they were turned down. A document which apparently does not exist or
is not issued by the Turkish government anyway. Here is where
bureaucratic delay caused the tragedy that the world has shuddered to
see in the photograph of the drowned Syrian 3-year-old boy.
When the Jews had to leave Germany and other countries of Europe
during their time of persecution, there were a few consuls and others
(like Schindler) who knew enough facts about what was going on as well
as had enough courage and compassion to dispense with bureaucratic
procedures and red tape delays to help people needing to escape their
persecutors.
What is historical fact is that from time immemorial there have been
migrants. In Asia from the main continent to the outlying islands and
from there to other places. Europe has for centuries had migrant
populations fleeing war, religious persecution, unbearable living
conditions and other natural or historical pressures that cause a people
to move away.
In prehistoric times waves of migrants (invaders?) went from North to
South and settled along the way. Didnt the native Indians cross the
Bering Sea and settle in America?
Think of countries like the United States, Canada, Australia which in
recent times (relatively speaking just the last few centuries ago) migrants
joined their native populations in such numbers that they took over.
What were the Puritans on the Mayflower if not migrants? And before
that they were refugees fleeing England and staying in Holland. In those
days they were not treated like criminals as some governments of Europe
are wont to do to todays migrants.

And let us not be holier-than-thou, right here in this country we have

evacuees, refugees, migrants, mostly coming to Luzon (Mindanao
displaced people, economic migrants) just as in an earlier time Luzon
and Visayas settlers went to Mindanao. I hear there are 6,000 Badjaos
living in the Malate area with just a few social workers from NGOs toiling
away to help them. Most are homeless, penniless, jobless.
There must be government attention and concern to address this
problem and others like those of ethnic minorities leaving their homes to
come to the city thinking of bettering their economic conditions. We have
our own migrant problem to address.
Yes, times have changed and there is need for control, management and
formalities in the case of migration. There is also a need to reflect on why
they have become so huge in numbers through the reasons why they
have felt the need to move. Is it not that their countries have become
unlivable through surrogate wars, some of which can be traced to the
First World that from far away tries to perpetrate its interests, ideologies
and pursue the power rivalry with other competitors in small or helpless
countries usually of the Third World? Isnt it for the use of violence to
settle issues as in Mindanao?
The migrant problem is now seemingly unmanageable in the countries
where it is now exists along with climate change, modern social problems
like unequal societies, economic depression, human rights violations,
religious persecution, slavery and trafficking, famines and epidemics.
The additional question that has to be answered by the world not
excluding us with our own migrant problem, is can we react in a just and
compassionate way to handle them? In particular, can developed
countries that had so much to do with why migrants have to flee in the
first place review their actions in those countries where they come from
and those countries they want to enter? Looking the other way, neglect,
rationalization, finger-pointing, bureaucratic solutions have not worked
and are obviously not the answer.
This is a human problem like all the others. It must be solved in a
humanitarian way, by a caring, concerned, unselfish sharing of what can
be set aside from the resources of those who have them.