A W e e k ly N ew sp a p e r a n d R e v ie w ,

DUM VOBIS GKATULAMUR, ANIMOS ETIAM ADDIMUS DT IN INCCEPTIS VESTRIS CONSTANTER MANEAT1S.

fr om the B r i e f o f H is Holiness P iu s IX . to T h e TABLET, June 4, 1S70.

V o l . 87. No. 2929.

L o n d o n , J u n e 27, 1896.

P r ic e s d . b y P o s t s ^ d

[R e g i s t e r e d a t t h e G e n e r a l P o s t O f f i c e a s a N ew s p a p e r

-Ch ro n ic le o f t h e W e e k !

Page

Imperial Parliam ent: The D eceased W ife’s Sister Redivivus— An Analysis o f the Division List— 'T h e Government and the Education Bill — Programme of the ’’Government — The Agricultural •Rating Bill— Amendments to the Rating Bill The Papal Allocution— Grave Situation in Rhodesia l — Prorogation of the Belgian Par­

liament — The Wreck of the “ Drummond Castle ” — French Sympathy — The Situation in C r e t e— Madagascar a French Colony— Fate of a French Expedition in the Sahara— Strikes in St. Petersburg— A Peaceful Invasion — Human Sacrifices in Russia— Bad News from Canada— A. French Premier for the Dominion— Lord Salisbury on Arbitration— Ireland as a Land for Tourists . . . . 997

L e a d e r s :

C O N T

Page

The Abandoned Bill . . ..1001 The New Grand Orient of Ita ly 1001 Bishop Barlow Again . . ..1002 The Eastern Churches in Union with the Holy See .. ..1004 The Optimism of Lord Halifax .. 1006 Corpus Christi in a Brazilian C ity 1006 N o t e s . . . . ........................... 1007

R e v ie w s :

The Courtships of Queen Elizabethiooo St. Catherine’s Dialogue . . . . 1010 The Social Question for the Clergyioio Thomas Ken . . ..10 11

C o r r e s p o n d e n c e :

Rome :— (From Our Own Corre­

spondent) . .

.. - 10 13

The English Catholic Sailors at the Pope’s Mass . . ..10 15

E N T S .

A Rose M a s s .................................... 1015 L e t t e r s t o t h e E d it o r :

“ Sancta Sanctis” . . . . ..1016 Dean Fremantle and Christianity 1016 “ Animals on T r i a l” . . ..1016 Edwardine Ordinations . . ..1016 The Education Question . . ..10 17 St. M ary’s, Moorfields . . ..10 17 Catholic Alms for Protestant

O b j e c t s ......................... . . 1017 The Canadian Bishops and the Elec­

tions . . . . ......................... 1017 The Maynooth Union . . ..1019 Our Blessed Lady Queen o f Pro­

phets and the Return of England to the Unity of the Church . . 1020 Proposed Purchase o f Trafford

Park . . .................................... 1021 Catholic Union of Great Britain . .1022 The Custody of Infants . . . . 1023 Meeting of the Newman Society,

Oxford....................... . . ..1023

Page

Father Watson's Farewell . . ..1024 O b i t u a r y ........................... ... 1024 SOCIAL AND POLITICAL . . ..10 26

SU P P L EM E N T . N ew s from ^ h e S c h o o l s :

Catholic Education Leaflets ..1029 The Future of the Bill . . ..1029 The Abandonment of the Educa­

tion Bill . . . . . . ..1030 Downside Annual D inner.. -.1031 D a y School C o d e .......................... 1031. London University . . -.1031 N ew s from t h e D io c e se s : Westminster . . . . ..1031

Southwark . . . . . . ..1032 Clifton . . . . . . . . 1032 St. Andrews and Edinburgh ..1032 Catholic Conference..........................1034

% * Rejected MS. cannot be returned unless accompanied with address |

•

and postage.

CHRONICLE OF THE WEEK.

■----------- ♦ -----------

TH E Bill legalizing marriage with a deceased wife’s s ister r e d iv iv u s . . . sister wa, read a second time in the House of Lords on

Monday, and carried by a majority of 29— 142 votes to 113. Lord Dunraven, in moving it, described the first Clause as retrospective as regarded the legitimacy of the offspring, but not as regarded the devolution of property. The second Clause, prohibiting the clergy from solemnizing these marriages, was intended to prevent them from being placed in an invidious position ; and he appealed to the Bishops not to use their Parliamentary power to prevent the legislation of civil marriages which were consonant to the feelings and consciences of the majority of the people. After Lord Percy and Lord Nelson had spoken against, and Lord Herschell in favour of the Bill, the Archbishop o f Canterbury entered a strong protest against it, as making a breach in the principle of the Marriage Law, and setting the code of the Church at variance with that of the State.

The figures of the division list at once

— a n an a l y s is suggest that the voting was not on party lines. Even the votes of the members of the Government were divided. Lord Salis­

bury went into the lobby against the Bill, and had with him such members of the Ministry as the Lord Chancellor, Lord Cmss, the Duke of Norfolk, the Earl of Limerick, the Earl of Dudley, and the Earl of Selborne. On the other side the majority in favour of the Bill included the Duke of Devonshire, Lord James of Hereford, the Duke of Portland, the Earl of Onslow, the Earl of Ranfurly, the Earl of Kintore, Lord Belper, and Lord Lawrence, all members of the Government. The Prince of Wales and the Duke of York voted for the Bill, while the two Archbishops and seventeen Bishops voted against it. Most of the Liberal peers voted for the Bill, including the Earl of Rosebery, the Earl of Kimberley, Earl Spencer, the Marquis of Ripon, Lord Herschell, Earl Carrington, the Earl of Cork, Viscount Oxenbridge, Lord Battersea, Lord Burghclere, Lord Coleridge, Lord Kensington, Lord Lingen, Lord Monkswell, Lord Playfair, and Lc\d Tweedmouth. Taking the whole list the House was divided as under:

Peers of the Royal Blood ............. Archbishops ................................. Dukes ............................................ Marquises .................................... Earls ............................................ Viscounts........................................

For.

Against.

................. 9 ................. 8 .. ................. 50 ..

2 9 5 32

Bishops ........................................

Barons............................................ ................ 66 .. 39

U

142 113

This is the second time that the Second Reading of the Bill has been carried in the House of Lords. On the former occasion (1883) the majority was seven— 165 to 158, but on the Third Reading the Bill was thrown out by 145 votes to 140. On thirteen other occasions the Bill was rejected on the Second Reading.

Mr. Balfour, at the lapse of a week,

—t 11^governmbnt ma(j e on Monday night a fresh state

ED u cA T iO N r i l l * ruent in the House of Commons,

announcing the abandonment of the

Education Bill for this session, with the undertaking to fulfil the promises made to the Voluntary schools by its réintroduction in a fresh session next January. The inordinate length of the discussions was assigned as the reason for this change of front, rendering it hopeless to deal with the 1,238 amendments placed on the paper within the limit of 53 days, which it was calculated would have been secured for its discussion under his previous arrangement. Not only had five nights been spent in passing two lines of the first Clause, but for every amendment disposed of, two fresh ones appeared on the paper next day. As regarded the position of the Voluntary schools, he expressed the opinion that they would not materially suffer by the delay, as the Government were still pledged to bring in next January a measure for their relief. The loss of the eleven days devoted to the Bill was matter for regret, but the evidence of Parliamentary decay afforded by the events of the session was still more deeply to be deplored. Sir William Harcourt in reply, exulted in having obtained adequate consideration for the Bill, and in having made its true character known to the House and to the country. Amid the loud cheers of his own party he declared that it had perished by reason of its own inherent imperfections, and because it had not the united support either of the Unionist party or even of the Cabinet. Mr. Dillon urged the Government when they dealt with the question again, to bring in a short measure for giving financial aid to the Voluntary schools, unencumbered by the devolution scheme, the opposition to which had wrecked the present Bill. The later part of the sitting

N ew S eries, V ol. L V . , No. 2,238.