THE TABLET A IVeekly Newspaper and Review.
DUSI V O B I S G R A T U L A M U R , A N IM O S E T I A M A D D IM U 3 U T IN IN C C E P T I S V E S T R I S C O N S T A N T E R M A N E A T I S
From the B r ie f of His Holiness Pius IX . to The Tablet tune 4, 1870.
Vol. 75. No, 2599, London, March i , 1890.
P r ic e s d ., byP o st , 5%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 st Of f i c e a s a N ew s p a p e r .
CONTENTS.
C h ro n ic l e o f t h e W e e k :
Page
Imperial Parliament : The Eight Hoars’ Question — Sir J . Fergusson and Lord Randolph Churchill — Other Discussions— The French Amnesty Proposal— The German Elections — The Labour Conferences—The American World’s Fair—Socialism in England—Steam Navigation and the Strikes— North West London Polytechnic— Lord WMseley and the Volunteers—The Blackwall Tunnel Scheme—Western Australia— Inquest on the Llanerch Explosion—The Allsopp Meeting —Death of Lord Auckland and Lord Dacre—The Trial of the Bishop of L in coln .......................... 3 T7 L e a d e r s :
Mr. Morley and the Schools . . 321 Foreign Freemasonry and State
Education.. . . . . . 322
L e a d e r s (continued) :
Page
Anomalies of Royal University.. 323 “ Celestial Evolution ” . . . . 324
N o t e s ..................................................... 325
R e v iew s :
L ife of Don Bosco, Founder of the Salesian Society
A Commentary
. . 327
. . 323
London Church Antiquities . . 328 Fifty Years Since .. . . 329 Ballads of the Brave . . 329 Free Education a . 329
I
Consecration of the Bishop-Coadjutor of Leeds
• • 331
C o rr e s po n d en c e :
Rom e :—(From Our Own Correspondent) ..
C o r r e s po n d en c e (continued):
Page
Paris:—(From Our Own Corre
spondent) . . . . . . . . 334 Dublin:—(From Our Own Corre
spondent)
. . . . . . 335
L e t t e r s to t h e E d ito r :
Father Lescher, O .P ., and the
“ Irish Ecclesiastical Record ” 336 Stephen Langton and the Chap
ters of the B ib le .. . . 336 The Beatification of the Venerable
Curé D ’Ars . . . . . . 337 “ Priests in Politics ” . . .. 337 A Pilgrim's Handbook to Jeru
salem . . .. . . . . 337 Papal Dominion in Ita ly . . . . 338 Christchurch Guardians and Ca
tholic Children . . . . . . 338 St. Peter’s, Gorleston-on-Sea,
Suffolk . . . . . . . . 358 The Pope to Cardinal Gibbons . . 339
Page
F rom E v e r y w h e r e . . . . . . 339 S o c ia l a n d P o l it ic a l . . . . 340
S U P P L E M E N T . N ew s from t h e S chools :
Hammersmith Training College.. 349 Liverpool Training College . . 349 Mr. Morley's “ Compact ” . . 349 Shrovetide Plays at Beaumont
College . .......................... 350 Cottam Country School . . . 350 About E d u c a t io n ..........................350 N ew s from t h e D io c e s e s :
Westminster . . . . . 351 Southwark . . . . . . . . 351 Clifton ......................................3 5 1 Salford . . . . . . . . 351 St. Andrews and Edinburgh . . 351 Lenten Pastorals .......................... 331
% * Rejected M S . cannot be retu rned unless accompanied w ith address and postage.
CHRONICLE OF TH E WEEK.
h o u r s ' q u e s t i o n .
TH E debate on the Address is over at last, and was brought a close by a discussion on an Amendment, which should never have been brought forward in connection with the Address, on the Eight Hours’ Question. Mr. C. Graham moved the Amendment in these words : “ That the increasing desire of the working classes in Europe for legislative restriction of the hours of labour renders it desirable that this subject should be discussed by the representatives of this country who are to be appointed to attend the International Conference on Labour Legislation at Berne or Berlin.” He began his speech by urging that this question was not to be considered by any means as a party question. He went on to say that it was an incontrovertible fact that there was some demand for legislative interference with adult labour in this country and the colonies, as well as in the various countries of Europe and in America. Upon this ground he briefly based his views of the necessity for discussion on the subject by those who are to attend the International Conference. Mr. Bradlaugh opposed the Amendment, and, after a preliminary skirmish with Lord Randolph Churchill and Mr. Graham, assured the House that he had the interests of the working class as much at heart as the latter gentleman. But though in favour o f shortening the labour hours of the working classes, he was not in favour of ruining their industries. Unless a Government wilfully meant to fetter the nation in its industrial enterprise, it would never be so mad as to empower representatives of any kind to discuss the restriction of that wonderful output which had placed this country in the forefront of all nations. It was not a friendliness to the working man to make such a proposal. This was not an International question, he contended, for the standard of comfort and the purchasing power of money differed in every country. Parliament could not make backbones for men who did not possess backbones, and if they were to give to the weakest the protection of a Statute Law, they would discourage the strongest from continuance in the efforts they had hiiherto made. He reduced the true principle of the matter to a single sentence : if the workmen were in favour of shorter hours, the workmen would get them ; and if the workmen were hostile to shorter hours, such hours should [
not be imposed upon them. Such imposition would destroy the chance of winning sufficient wealth for the increasing millions of the country.
The Under-Secretary of State for
_iIEAinFTnpnSS0N Foreign Affairs also speaking against Ra n d o l p h c h u r c h i l l . Amendment regarded it as unfor-
tunate that he should be compelled to be restrictive in his reply, for the replies to the invitations from the German and Swiss Governments to consider the laws affecting labour could not be communicated to Parliament. This course was followed in no narrow spirit, for such communication might not only hamper the action of the Government but also prejudice the interests at stake. He need offer no further apology, but would be glad to answer the question put down on the paper on the following day. Lord Randolph Churchill, who spoke immediately after Sir John Fergusson, found no mercy for his announcements. He (the speaker) said that it always seemed to him that the Under-Secretaries for Foreign Affairs were unnecessarily pompous. But he thought that this occasion had won the pr'za for pomposity. Sir J . Fergusson had intimated that one word that night as to the tenour of the Government’s reply to the German Government might involve grave interests, but that he would be happy to give all such information the following day. As to the Amendment itself, he could not vote for it, as it was an Amendment to the Address, but he regretted the practice of bringing forward Amendments to the Address which had no legitimate connection with it. As to the subject of the Amendment, he put in a plea for discussion of the matter. I f the eight hours’ movement was an unsound one, then he thought nothing could prove its unsoundness better than Parliamentary discussion. He thought Mr. Bradlaugh’s speech a compound of banter, rhetoric, and’groundless assertion, and no proposition seemed to him more untenable than that the Government had no right to take part in any foreign conference on social questions unless they were prepared to legislate on those questions; the burden of proof lay with the assertors, and no possible proof could be forthcoming. A great deal had been said about the “ narrowmargin of profit,” of which for his part he had never been able 10 detect the existence. He concluded by begging his opponents to deal with enlightened argument rather, than with dogmatic assertion. Mr. W. H. Smith reminded the House that ample opportunity would be given later for the renewal of the subject on a wider scale. The Amendment was accordingly lost by m votes, and the Address was then agreed to with much cheering, and probably more relief.
N e w S e r i e s , V ol K L I I I . , No. i . ioS
