THE TABLET.

A Weekly Newspaper and Review.

DUM VOBIS GRATULAMUR, ANIMOS ETIAM ADDIMUS UT IN INCCEPTIS VESTRIS CONSTANTER MANEATIS.

F rom the B r i e f o j H i s Holiness P iu s IX . to The Tablet, June 4, id/O.

V ol. 91. No. 3026.

L ondon, May 7, 1898.

P r ic e sd ., byP o s t $ % 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 .

C h r o n ic l e o f t h e W e e k

Imperial Parliam ent: Sir William Harcourt and the Government— Mr. Balfour’s Reply — Tonnage Dues and Local Government :

Page uiet Sittings— Mr. Gladstone’s ealth— Bread Riots in Italy— Measures in France — Golden Klondike — The Academy Banquet— Attorney-General v. Beech — Newfoundland’s Experiment— Recent Negotiations : Lord Salisbury’s View — Destruction of Spanish Fleet in the Pacific—The Effect of the Blow on Spain— A Republican Manifesto—England’s r?--- - --Work in Egypt .........................713 L e a d e r s :

Catholics and the London Hos­

pital .................................... 717 The Future of the Philippines . . 717 The Royal Academy . . . . 719 Fra Girolamo Savonarola.. . . 720 N o t e s ... ... — — . . 722

CONTENTS.

R e v ie w s :

Hindu Manners, Customs, and

Ceremonies . .

Page

. . 724

Studies in Brown Humanity . . 725 A Travers l’Europe, Enquetes . .

et Notes de Voyage . . . . 726 Torn S a i l s ....................................... 727 New May B o o k s ........................... 727 Pro P a t r i a ....................................... 727 C orrespon d e n c e :

R om e :— (From Our Own Corre­

spondent) . . — — — 729 News from Ireland — — 731 News from F ra n c e ........................... 731 News from America . . . . 733 L e t t e r s t o t h e E d it o r :

Why Secular Priests are Not

B e a t i f i e d ........................._ . . 733 Certified for Workhouse Children 733 Maying . . . . . . .*734 The Future of Christian Art . . 734 A Query ....................................... 734 Indian Catholics and Support of the

Church .......................................734

Page

St. Edmund’s House.. . . . . 734 The Church A s s o c i a t i o n and

Ritualism . . . . . . . . 735 The Catholic Relief Bill . . . . 737 The Conversion of England.. . . 737 Catholic Bluejackets . . . . . . 738 Historical Research Society . . 738 The Council of Cloveshoand Appeals to Rome . . . . . . . . 739 Liberal Catholicism . . . . . . 739 “ The Standard ” and Reunion . . 739 The Nazareth House Sisters . . 740 The Dean of York and Anri-Catholic

Lectures . . _ . . . . . . 740 First Communion in Brittany . . 740 The Liberation Society and the

Irish U n i v e r s i t y ......................... 740 Books of the Week . . . . . . 741 F rom E v e r yw h e r e . . . . 7 4 1 S o c ia l and Po l i t i c a l ... . . 742

SU P P L EM EN T . N ews from t h e S c h o o l s :

Intermediate Education in Ireland 745 Non Multa sed Multum . . . . 745

N ew s fro m t h e Schools (Con­

tinued): Religious Liberty in the House of

Pag

Commons . . . . . . . . 745 Conference at Antwerp on Com­

mercial Education . . . . 746 How to Get a Scholarship at

Oxford . . . . . . . . 746 When Scholars Work Best . . 747 The Teaching of Patriotism . . 747 Reports of Glasgow Schools . . 747 The Convent, Layton Hill, Black­

pool.................................................. 747 N ew s from t h e D io c e se s :

Westminster ........................... 747 S o u th w a r k ....................... . . . 748 Birmingham....................................... 749 Salford . . . . ... . . 749 Newport . . . . . . . . 749 St. Andrews and Edinburgh . . 750 Glasgow . . . . ... . . 750 The Irish Distress . . . . . . 750 Early History o f Catholicism in

New Y o r k .......................................751

Rejected MS. cannot be returned unless accofnpanied with address and postage.

CHRONICLE OF THE WEEK.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT : SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT AND THE GOVERNMENT. T

H E great debate on the policy pursued by the Government in the Far East came off on Friday in last week, but without effecting any breach in the Ministerial position. Taking advantage of the opportunity afforded him in Committee of Supply by the Foreign Office Vote, Sir William Harcourt rose in a crowded House and delivered a long criticism of the Government policy in regard to recent events in China. The principles upon which Ministers had professed to go were in opposition to any territorial occupation that would lead to the dismemberment of China, the maintenance of open ports for commerce secured by the Treaty o f Tientsin, and a refusal to recognize special spheres of influence for particular States. Judged in the light of these principles he declared that, according to the evidence of the Blue Book, the policy of the Government had met with failure all round. Germany had secured a sphere of influence in Shan-tung and a port at Kiao-chau, without giving any binding agreement as its being made an open port. He next entered into details connected with the course of the Chinese Loan negotiations. We had withdrawn our demand for Ta-lien-wan under menace from Russia, and had abandoned the Loan for a similar reason. Our measures had been maladroit and our retreat undignified. Furthermore, we had withdrawn our ships from Port Arthur at the instance of Russia, when their presence there was covered by the Treaty of Tientsin. Russia had gained Port Arthur and Ta-lien-wan, and then we, alarmed at the possible pressure that might be put upon the Court of Pekin, had taken a lease of Wei-hai-wei, giving unasked for assurances to Germany that we should not use it for commercial purposes. True, a claim had been set up for a sphere of influence in the Yangtse Valley, but the Government had taken no means to secure that sphere of influence.

Sir William Harcourt, it will be seen, in

— m r . b a l f o u r ’ s spite o f his long criticism o f the action r e p l y .

taken by the Government, had no alternative policy to offer, no vote o f censure to propose. Probably he was unwilling to give any encourage-

N e w S e r i e s V o l . LIX., No. 2,335.

ment to the wilder spirits on either side of the House in a situation of such delicacy. Consequently his attack was not marked with the spirit which he can at times so effectively display. Mr. Balfour’s reply was, on the other hand, full of vivacity and animation and is doubtless to be credited with the break-down of the debate. The Government, he declared, had made no admission to Germany recognizing Shan-tung as her sphere o f influence or abrogating the Treaty of Tientsin. He pointed out the distinction, a fine one may be, but still important, between spheres of influence and spheres of interest. The former the Government had never admitted, the latter they had never denied and could not do so as long as this country possessed them in China. The Treaty of Tientsin had not been abrogated either by Germany in Shantung or by Russia in Manchuria. In regard to the Loan it was quite true that China had, in obedience to Russia, yielded so far as to break off the negotiations she had entered into with us, but that could not by any feat of political legerdemain be twisted into a concession by her Majesty’s Government to pressure by Russia, or an argument that the threats of Russia have influenced her Majesty’s Government. For the benefit of certain critics Mr. Balfour then explained that the sending ships to Port Arthur had never been any part of the Government’s plan of operation, and consequently their leaving it could not be construed as a submission to Russian menaces. The Government had never imagined that so damaging a misconstruction could be placed upon their action. He reminded members o f the special difficulties under which our diplomacy had to be carried on, difficulties which were absolutely unknown in any other country of the world. I f bargaining between States could not be carried on without giving up something that had been put forward, such, bargaining was impossible. It was absurd to suppose that both parties were to start with an irreducible minimum. Some had said that we ought to have occupied Port Arthur and so prevented Russia going there. The consequences of such action could not have been foreseen; it might have involved England and Russia and perhaps the rest of the world in war, and he for one refused to take any part in a game of bluff unless he was prepared to face the consequences. Wei-hai-wei was a good naval station, and its occupation was a reply, politically and strategically, to the Russian advance. Recent events had not been a long series of triumphs for Russia. Her position in the Far East was distinctly less favourable than it was seven or eight months ago. Germany had occupied Kiao-chau; we had gone to Wei-hai-wei; a feeliDg against Russia had been