Marie Popelin: the Belgian woman barred from the bar

The Popelin affair was the 1888–1889 legal case in which the Brussels Court of Appeal, and then Belgium's Court of Cassation, refused to let Marie Popelin take the lawyer's oath. Popelin was the first woman in Belgium to earn a doctorate in law, and no Belgian law excluded women from the bar. The judges refused anyway, citing tradition and the "nature" of women.

Brussels, 3 December 1888. The courtroom of the Court of Appeal is crowded. For weeks, newspapers and their readers have argued over one question: can a woman be a lawyer? At the front stands Jules Guillery, former Speaker of the Chamber of Representatives and former head of the Brussels bar. He does what a senior lawyer does for a new colleague: he presents her to the court. Beside him stands Louis Frank, just 24, who will argue her case. And then there is her: Marie Popelin, almost 42, a former school headmistress holding a brand-new doctorate in law.

She asks for one thing only: to take the oath. For men with the same degree, it is a formality. But the Prosecutor General, Van Schoor, rises and firmly objects. The sources do not tell us what Popelin felt in that moment. They do tell us what she knew: no Belgian law forbade what she was asking. Nine days later, she would learn how little that meant.

Marie Popelin: from schoolteacher to Belgium's first doctor of law

Marie Popelin (Schaerbeek, 1846 – 1913) was a teacher and headmistress before she began studying law at the age of 37 at the Free University of Brussels (Université libre de Bruxelles, ULB). In 1888 she graduated there with distinction as a doctor of law, the first woman in Belgium to do so. Popelin started her career at the school of Isabelle Gatti de Gamond, the Brussels pioneer of serious education for girls. In 1875 she moved with her sister Louise to Mons to run a new girls' school, founded with Liberal support. In 1881, she became a headmistress in Laeken, but administrative issues led to the early termination of that position. In 1883 she enrolled at the ULB.

That she could study at all was a legal accident. The Belgian law of 20 May 1876 on academic degrees did not ban women, simply because no one had thought of women. What is not forbidden is allowed. That is how Emma Leclercq became one of the first women admitted to the ULB in 1880. This is where Marie Popelin's contradiction lies. She was no woman of the barricades. She chose the most proper, formal route there was: study, pass, and apply by the rules. Her whole strategy rested on one act of trust: that the law, read honestly, would prove her right.

The ruling of 12 December 1888: a woman's 'nature' on trial

On 12 December 1888, the Brussels Court of Appeal refused to let Marie Popelin take the lawyer's oath. The court admitted that no law explicitly excluded women. It refused her anyway. The ruling largely followed the reasoning of Prosecutor General Van Schoor. The law, the court said, reflected 'our customs' and the traditions of the past. Had lawmakers wanted women at the bar, they would have said so. Then came the passage that stuck: 'The particular nature of woman, the relative weakness of her constitution', made her unfit for the battles and fatigues of the bar.

Motherhood, child-rearing and housekeeping completed the list. Notice the irony. In 1876, the lack of legal restrictions allowed women to attend the university. In 1888, the same silence was employed to close the courtroom. It is tempting to turn Van Schoor and the judges into caricatures. That would be too easy. They sincerely believed they were protecting the social order and women themselves; the ruling speaks of "the protection she needs." That is precisely the problem, because protection nobody asked for quickly becomes a cage. The press had a field day. La Meuse joked that Brussels should open a university of cooking instead, and the satirical paper Le Rasoir drew Popelin being sent back to the stove.

Yet one female reader of Gil Blas summed it up dryly. Knowledge of the Code? She has it. The robe? That too. 'Eh bien! Alors?' (So what's the problem?)

The Court of Cassation, 11 November 1889: 'a matter for the legislature'

On 11 November 1889, Belgium's Court of Cassation rejected Marie Popelin's appeal. The highest court ruled that the masculine wording in the laws on the legal profession did not include women here. It refused to rule on the "nature" of women. The solution, it said, lay with the legislature.

From courtroom to movement: the Belgian League for Women's Rights (1892)

Marie Popelin lost her case, but she built a movement. In April 1892 she and Louis Frank founded the Belgian League for Women's Rights (Ligue belge du droit des femmes), the country's first organised feminist association. First, she did something striking. She completed a traineeship with a Brussels lawyer anyway, knowing she would never be allowed to practise. Frank, meanwhile, kept writing. In September 1888 he had already published the pamphlet La femme-avocat, and in 1892 came a 600-page study of women's political position.

The League won support from Isala Van Diest, Belgium's first female doctor, from Léonie La Fontaine, and from progressive figures such as Henri La Fontaine, Emile Vandervelde and ULB professor Hector Denis. Popelin summed up its purpose herself: a woman is something other than a wife and mother. She may have talents of her own, and she must have the right to use them. The League fought with draft laws, not paving stones. It worked. From 1900, a married woman could control her wages and savings; from 1908, women could act as witnesses to civil registry records. In 1905 Popelin brought women's organisations together in the National Council of Belgian Women (Conseil national des femmes belges). Marie Popelin died on 5 June 1913. Only the law of 7 April 1922 opened the bar to women, and on 8 May 1922, Paule Lamy became the first woman to take the oath. A married woman, however, still needed her husband's consent.

Why the Popelin affair is about free inquiry

The Popelin affair shows what happens when authority takes the place of inquiry. What follows is an interpretation grounded in the secular humanist principle of free inquiry: do not believe in authority; examine for yourself. The judges never examined whether Marie Popelin could be a good lawyer. The evidence was right in front of them: a doctorate with distinction, earned at a university founded on the very principle of free inquiry. Yet 'customs', tradition and a supposed 'nature' won out. These are not valid arguments; they are merely habits disguised as principles.

A second value was at stake too: self-determination. Popelin did not ask for a favour, but for the right to choose her own profession. The court decided on her behalf what was good for her. Honesty also demands an uncomfortable observation. The liberal Belgium of the 1831 Constitution promised broad freedoms but in practice designed them for men. The 1890 law on academic degrees opened the medical profession to women, yet the Catholic majority kept the bar closed. Even in progressive circles, women's rights long remained a second priority, which is why Popelin's fight was also a test of the liberal ideal itself.

Marie Popelin today: equality on paper and in practice

Marie Popelin's lesson for today is that equality on paper is not enough. Those who apply the rules must also be willing to read them for everyone. This is a parallel, not an equation: no one today would refuse a woman's entry to the bar. Even after 1922, progress was slow. Until 1958, a married woman lawyer needed her husband's consent. Only after a law of 1948 could Geneviève Pevtschin become Belgium's first female judge. So Popelin's question still stands. What should you do when the law supports you, but those who enforce it do not? Her answer was not bitterness, but organisation. She lost her case and won it for the generations after her.

For us, the question is both simpler and harder. Which "natural" arguments do we still use today without ever truly examining them?

Frequently asked questions

Why was Marie Popelin not allowed to become a lawyer?

Marie Popelin was refused admission to the bar in 1888 because she was a woman. The Brussels Court of Appeal admitted that the law included women, but denied her the oath on the grounds of tradition and women's 'nature'. Belgium's Court of Cassation upheld that refusal on 11 November 1889.

Who was Marie Popelin?

Marie Popelin (1846–1913) was a Belgian teacher, jurist and feminist. In 1888, at the Free University of Brussels, she became the first woman in Belgium to earn a doctorate in law. After the bar refused her entry, she co-founded the organised Belgian women's movement.

What was the Popelin affair in Belgium?

The Popelin affair was the 1888–1889 legal battle over Marie Popelin's right to take the lawyer's oath. On 12 December 1888 the Brussels Court of Appeal refused, arguing that tradition, motherhood and women's 'nature' made them unfit for the bar.

What was the Belgian League for Women's Rights?

The Belgian League for Women's Rights (Ligue belge du droit des femmes) was the first organised feminist association in Belgium. Marie Popelin and Louis Frank founded it in April 1892. The League campaigned through draft legislation for women's legal and economic equality.

What does the Popelin affair have to do with free inquiry?

From a secular humanist perspective, the Popelin affair is a textbook case of authority replacing inquiry. The judges gave more weight to tradition and a supposed female "nature" than to the evidence of her degree. This verdict is an interpretation from that value framework, not a legal finding.

When could women become lawyers in Belgium?

Women in Belgium could become lawyers under the law of 7 April 1922. Paule Lamy was the first woman to take the oath, on 8 May 1922. Until 1958, however, a married woman lawyer needed her husband's consent.