A Weekly Newspaper a n d R .eviezu.
DUM VOBIS GRATULAMUR, ANIMOS ETIAM ADDIMUS UT IN INCCEPTIS VESTRIS CONSTANTER MANEATIS.
F ro n t the B r i e f o f H is H o lin e ss P iu s I X . to T he T ablet Ju n e 4, 18 70 .
V o l . 77. No. 2648. L ondon, F e b r u a r y 7, 1891.
p r,ce Sd„ by post 5kj.
[ 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 O f f i c e a s a N ew s p a p e r .
'C h ro n ic le of t h e W e e k :
Page ,
Imperial Parliament : The Plan of Campaign — Monday Night — 'Tuesday : The New Rifle—R emoval of Disabilities —_Signor ■ Crispi’s Fall — The Behring Sea Difficulty—Retirement of Count Waldersee—The Banquet to Lord Hartington—Revolution in Oporto —Mr. Parnell at Ennis — The Spanish Chamber and the Church —Funeral of Mr. Brad laugh— Meissonier—End of the Scottish Strike—Execution of Eyraud— Double Murder in Ireland—Fatal Outrage in a T rain . . . . . . 197 ^Le a d e r s :
The Government and its Penal
L aw . . .. .. . . . . 201 Crispi’s Mutinous Majority . . 202 Church Money and Schools in
Prussia . . . . . . . . 203 The Late Cardinal Simor . . . . 204
L e a d e r s (Continued) :
CONTENTS .
Page
L e t t e r s to t h e E d ito r (Cor
Page
Let Us See for Ourselves.. . . 205 N o t e s . . . . . . . . . . 207 R e v iew s :
From Cmsar to Guelph . . . . 209 The Guild Merchant • . . . . 210 The Life of Ferdinand Magellan 210 Some Central Points in Our Lord’s
Ministry . . . . . . . . 2 1 0 An Audience at the Vatican . . 2 1 1
tinued) : Are There any Disabilities? . . 216 The Irish in Chili . . . . . . 216 Needless Horrors . . . . . . 216 St. Patrick’s, Wapping . . . . 216 The Children’s Album . . . . 216 A Disclaimer . . . . . . 2 17 Religious Disabilities’ Removal . . 217 Catholics Abroad . . . . . . 221 Ob it u a r y ......................................... 221 S o c ia l and P o l it ic a l . . . . 222
C o rrespo n d en c e :
Rome :—(From Our Own Corre
spondent) . . . . . . . . 213 Dublin :—(From Our Own Corre
spondent) . . . . . . . . 214 Sor Patrocinio . . . . . . 215 L e t t e r s to t h e E d ito r :
A Class of Catholic Philosophy . . 216
S U P P L EM E N T . D ec is io n s o f R oman Co n g r eg a
t io n s . . . . . . . . . . 229 N ew s from t h e S c h o o l s :
At Stonyhurst . . . . . . 229 Birmingham Diocesan Schools . . 229 St. George’s Schools, Walthamstow 230 Tudhoe School Board Election . . 230 About E d u c a t io n ............................ 230
Page
N ew s from t h e D io c e s e s : Westminster.. . . . . . . 231
Clifton . . . . . . . . 231 Newport and Menevia . . . . 231 Salford . . . . . . . . 232 St. Andrews and Edinburgh . . 233 Aspects of Anglicanism . . . . 232 The Colour Question In America . . 234 Madras and the Padroado . . . . 235 Taxation, Papal and R e g a l .. . . 235 Are There any Disabilities ? . . . . 236 Relics in Court . . . . . . 236 The Case of Violet Nev.in . . . . 236 Jew ish Persecution Old and New . . 238
Rejected MS. cannot be returned unless accompanied with address and postage.
CHRONICLE OF THE WEEK.
CAMPAIGN. A ' 1
IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.— THE PLAN OF
T the end o f last week, after the questions o f a more or less uninteresting kind had been disposed of, Mr. Shaw-Lefevre rose to call attention ; to the remaining disputes between large bodies of tenants in Ireland and their landlords, which .arose in the years 1885 to 1887, and to move : “ That, in the opinion of this House, it is the duty o f her Majesty’s Government to use its influence for the settlement by arbitration o f the remaining disputes between large bodies o f tenants in Ireland and their landlords, which arose in the years 1885-7, and, i f necessary, to propose legislation to Parliament for effecting this purpose.” H e explained that his justification for bringing the subject before the House was that he had seen more than any Englishman of those ■ estates on which the disputes were taking place. H e gave the facts o f his case— the number o f estates where these disputes were now in force, and the condition o f the tenants who lived under them. Where a reasonable abatement of rent was refused, the tenants took to combination and refused to pay anything till their abatement was granted. H e then went into an elaborate argument justifying that combination, and declaring that the sole object o f the Crimes’ Act had been to support landlords in evictions and in their collection o f admittedly unjust rents. Therefore he proposed that the Government should step in with arbitration, after the fashion of a fairy godmother, and do something noble to strengthen the back of the Plan of Campaign. The debate that followed was of very great length, and we vTould do best to sum up the answer o f the Government side in a brief account of Mr. Balfour’s speech. It was in that powerful speaker’s best manner, and, indeed, the reading of it almost leads one to suspect that Mr. Balfour gives some time to the special study of literary oratory. H e opened by questioning the usefulness— from an expedient point o f view— o f the motion. Which of the numerous sections on the Opposition side o f the House did M r. Shaw-Lefevre expect to please ? Was it to please members below the gangway, who initiated the Plan of Campaign by informing their dupes that it was a certain and expeditious method o f bringing the landlords to their knees, ■ that he brought forward a resolution which, i f it meant anything, means that the landlords had not been brought to their knees, and that legislation was required to do it? Was it to please members above the gangway, by bringing forward a motion which, if it proved anything conclusively, proved this, that there never was a feebler attempt at the settlementof any great question than the attempt made by Mr. Gladstone in 18 8 1 . H e w'as aware that Mr. Shaw-Lefevre held it to be his prescriptive right to deal with the subjo t. “ He has trotted about Ireland, and has from time to time written letters to the papers explaining his view's.” For his part Mr. Balfour recommended him to leave those questions to the Irish members. “ Depend upon it,” he said, “ these amateurs at agitation, these dabblers in disorder, do not know really how to play the game.” Let him leave it alone ; let him not come down to the House again with that curious hesitation o f manner which w'as wont to overcome him w’hen he tried to explain to the House “ how very near he went to breaking the law and how terribly afraid the Government v'ere to prosecute him.” Leaving his unmerciful handling o f Mr. Shaw-Lefevre, Mr. Balfour then went into the serious issues o f the case. H e discussed at length the origin o f the Plan, denying to it the attribute of a spontaneous movement, denying the possibility o f working it without bribery and intimidation. Then to allay the discord produced by agitators on his own side, Mr. Shaw-Lefevre recommended an arbitration with a rider to the arbitrators that they should inform the landlords v'ho failed to make peace with their tenants that they would have no justice in court and no protection outside. And to ask the Government to appoint compulsory arbitration in such cases, to ask it, in other words, to bolster up the tottering Plan, was surely, in the highest degree, absurd, “ and I am certain,” he concluded, “ that, i f we v'ere insane enough to propose such a course, the House of Commons would not be insane enough to adopt it.” A speech w’hich had for result that the motion was lost by a majority o f 6 1.
In the House o f Lords on Monday, Lord
— Mo n d a y Salisbury, replying to Lord Delaw’arr, gave no n i g h t . hope o f a concession to Arabi Pacha’s petition for return to his country from his exile in
Ceylon. The Custody of Children B ill was, on the motion \ o f the Lord Chancellor, read a second time, and the House adjourned. In the Commons, the Chancellor o f the I Exchequer referred Mr. Ja coby to the Home Secretary on \ the burning question of the possibility of requiring itinerant musicians to take out licences. Mr. Matthews refused to ' be drawn by Mr. Cobb on the subject o f the Duke o f
Bedford’s inquest, and he also declined to authorise further
N e w S e r i e s , V o i . X L Y . , N c . 1,157.
