TABLE T News-paper and Review .
DUM VOBIS G R A TU LAM U R , AN IM O S ET IA M ADD IM U S U T IN INCOEPTIS V E S TR IS CONSTAN TER M ANEATIS
From the Brief of His Holiness Pius IX . to T h e T a b l e t fune 4, r S jo .
V o l . 75. No, 2607, L o n d o n , A p r i l 26, 1890.
P r ic e sd ., by P o s t ,
[R e g is t e r ed a t t h e G e n e r a l P ost O f f ic e a s a N ew spaper.
C O N T E N T S
C hronicle o f t h e W e e k :
Page r
Imperial Parliament: Irish Land Purchase — Other Speeches— Budget Resolutions— Supply and I Other Matters—Drink Traffic in Ireland — The London County Council — Signor Magliani and the Finances of Italy— The Return of Major Serpa Pinto—Mr. Stanley in Brussels—Prince Bismarck and the Emperor—The Irish National League — The Measurement o f Criminals — A Drunken Crew— London Revising Barristers— The Labour Question in Vienna—Sudden Death of Mr. Cossham, M.P. . . . . . . 637
L e a d e r s :
Father Schynse on Stanley and
Emin Pasha . . . . . .6 4 1 An Irish Protestant Synod . . 642
L eaders (continued):
The Catholic Uniates in Russia
Page in the 19th Century— I. . . 643 N o t e s ................................................... 645 Bishop Wordsworth and the Lincoln
Case
647
R e v iew s :
Fabian Essays on Socialism . . 647 Conflicts of Jesuits and Seculars in the Reign of Elizabeth . . 648 A Century of Revolution.. . . 649 The Catholic Democracy of Ame
rica . . . . . . . . . . 649 An Interview with Mr. George
Lane-Fox .. . . . . . . 651 C orrespondence :
Rome :— (From Our Own Corre
spondent) . . . . . . . . 653
Correspondence (continued) :
Paris :—(From Our Own Corre
Pag«
spondent) ....................................... 653 Dublin:— (From Our Own Corre
spondent) ......................... 656 L e t t e r s to t h e E d itor :
Cardinal Wiseman and Cardinal
Newman . . . . . . .. 657 Intention in A r t ........................... 657 About a Book .. .. . . 658 Cardinal Newman and Dr.
Dôllinger . . . . . . .. 658 “ Priests in Politics ” . . . 658 An Unknown Sodality . . .. 659 A Chapel at Henley . . .. 659 Catholics and the Law . . . . 659 Archbishop Walsh on Religious
Orders .. . . . . .. 660 A ppeals to t h e C h a r it a e l e . . 661 O b it u a r y ...........................................661
F rom E v er yw h er e . . Social a n d P o l it ic a l
Page . 661
SU PPLEM ENT. D ecision s of R oman C ongrega
669
N ews from th e S chools :
Parisian Elementary Education.. 669 About Education .'....................... 670 N ew s from t h e D ioceses :
Southwark . . . . , , , , (,71 Hexham and Newcastle . . . . 671 Liverpool . . . . . . (j7I P l y m o u t h .................................... 671 Salford , . . . . . . . 672 Glasgow ......................... !! 672 Society of St. Vincent de Paul . . 672 The Suppression of the Slave Trade 673
Rejected MS. cannot be returned unless accompanied with address and postage.
C H R O N I C L E O F T H E W E E K .
IM PERIAL PARLIAM ENT
— IRISH LAND PURCHASE.
HE Debate on the Second
Reading of the Irish Land Purchase Bill began on Monday night. Before the discussion Mr.
Lea asked if the Government intended to introduce a Local Government Bill for Ireland this session, and if so, whether it will contain provision to empower local authorities to control the hours during which liquors subject to excise are sold in Ireland. Mr. Balfour replied that it was impossible to introduce the Bill before progress had been made with other Government measures standing before it. The Bill, nevertheless, would be introduced, and in its licensing provisions it would not differ from the English and Scottish Acts. The second reading of the Bill before the House was then moved without any speech, and Mr. Parnell at once rose to move that it be read that day six months. He began by summarising his objections to the Government measure under different heads. First he objected to it because it did not nearly approach a complete solution of the Land Question. Out of every four tenants, he maintained, three would be left paying unreduced rents, and for their “ example and edification” a neighbour would be set up, paying a rent reduced by 20 per cent. It would be extremely difficult, he contended, for the Government to deal with the inevitable agitation that would necessarily follow on the part of three-fourths of the Irish tenantry. Again, the sum proposed, which he rated in round numbers as ^40,000,000, was ridiculously inadequate. The Government had been acting on the principle that the landlord must sell the whole of his estate, if he sell any. Fourteen million statute acres would therefore have to be purchased. The Poor Law tenement valuation is ,£9,000,000, and, according to the returns, an average of eighteen and a half years’ purchase on that valuation has been given in the sales already effected. Thus you have a sum of £166,500,000 as the amount necessary to provide for the solution of the
Irish land question on the lines proposed by the Chief Secretary. After some denunciations against the sales already effected, he went on further to object that the Bill could not work in a country where “ coercion existed,” and the “ legitimate combination ” of Irish tenants was prevented, for the tenant did not stand on an equal footing in making
N ew S e r i e s , 1 V o l . X L I I I . , No. 1 , 1 1 6
his bargain with the landlords. His final objection was raised on behalf of the Imperial taxpayer the guarantees provided for the safeguarding of his credit being unreal and unavailable. Mr. Parnell then proceeded to set out his own ideas on a constructive scheme. He proposed to limit the application of State assistance to tenancies whose rental did not exceed £50, and this would at once reduce the area to be dealt with by 55 per cent. There were two ways of dealing with this development of the question if the idea of purchase were definitely abandoned. The first, the reduction of rents by the Land Act of 1881 and the Acts amending i t ; the second, to fine down the rents of those tenants whom the necessity of the question compels the Government to deal with, and with them alone. Mr. Parnell would give the landlord so many years’ purchase to reduce the rents to a satisfactory basis, the landlord using the money thus obtained to pay off the most burdensome of the encumbrances. In favour of this he urged that only one-sixth of the credit asked for would be required. Therefore, he concluded, “ I beg to move that this Bill be read a second time,” an announcement received with much merriment, which having subsided, he moved that “ this Bill be read a second time this day six months.”
The Attorney-General for Ireland
— o t h e r s p e e c h e s , followed Mr. Parnell, and claimed that he was entitled to regard his speech as one for the second reading of the Bill, and that it was not ; a slip but a natural consequence of ideas which had induced 1him to move the second reading. For, the speaker coni tended, the cardinal principle of the Bill was State-assisted land purchase on the principle of hypothecating the Imperial contributions to local purposes. This was also the principle of Mr. Parnell’s speech, whose only complaint was that the Government did not carry it out in the most economic manner. But the question of economising purchase was a matter for the further consideration of the House, and could not justify any member in voting against the Bill. He had I been looking forward with interest to hear Mr. Parnell’s attitude in reference to the congested districts. Here Mr. | Parnell explained that this was an omission of forgetfulness on his part. The Attorney-General went on to emphasise so remarkable a piece of forgetfulness, and concluded with l applauding the methods of the Bill as extremely simple. ISir George Trevelyan followed in a lively speech, and dwelt particularly on the means to be used against localities, in case of repudiation of payment by tenants. This had, 1however, been more or less threshed out before the debate