THE TABLET

A Weekly Newspaper and Review.

WITH SUPPLEMENT.

D u m VOBIS GRATULAMUR, ANIMOS ETIAM ADDIMUS UT IN INCCEPTIS VESTRIS CONSTANTER MANEATIS.

From the Brief oj H is Holiness to T h e T a b l e t , June 4, 1870.

V o l . 4 1 . N o . 1 7 1 7 .

L o n d o n , M a r c h 8 , 1 8 7 3 .

P r ic e sd. By P ost 5%

[R e g is tered a t th e G en e r a l P o st O f f ic e a s a N ew s pa p e r .

Page

•Ch r o n ic l e of t h e W e e k : The

Irish University Bill. Mr. Gladstone’s Alterations.— LordHartington’s Defence o f it.— Mr. Fawcett’s Speech.-‘-Mr. Gladstone at Croydon.— The Debate on the French Constitution.— Speech o f M. Gambetta— and of M. Dufaure— Subsequent Debate.— Attitude of M. Thiers.— The President’s Speech and the Division.—The Debate on .the Clauses.— The Civil War in Spain. —Persecution in the Diocese o f Bale.— Mgr. Mermillod on the Persecution.— The Manufacture of a Schism.—Admissions of the German Liberal Press.— Mgr. Strossmayer.— The Oriental Schisms . 289

L e a d e r s :

CONTENTS.

Page

[ N ew M usic :

Page

The Irish University Bill . . 293 Spoliation in Rome.— Pledges of

Hymn to S. Patrick . . . 302 C orrespondence :

the Italian Government . . 294 | Parties at Versailles. . . . 295 Concordats ..... 296 O ur P r o t e s t a n t C on tem po rar ie s :

Theology of S. Francis Xavier . 302 The Swiss Clergy .... 302 Catholic Pauper Children . . 302 Impending Shipwreck of theChurch

Secular Education. —False Colours. — Irish Education. — Quirinus Minor.— German Justice . . 298 R e v ie w s :

The Galiican Church . . . 299 Hymns and Poems . . . 301 Sermons for all Sundays and Fes­

tivals of the Year . . . 301 S h ort N o t i c e s : Rosalie. — The

Order for the Burial of the Dead. — Physical Geography.-Lady Lucy Herbert of Powis , . . 302

in Wales —Another Appeal to the Ladies , 303 The Distress in South Wales . 303 P a r l ia m en t a r y S ummary . . 303 R ome :

Letter from our own Correspondent 305 R ecord of G erm an P er secution ,

&c. . ..... 307 D io ce san N ew s : W estm in ster....................................308

S o u t h w a r k ................................... 308

D io cesan N ews continued) :

Page

Beverley ..... 308 Northampton .... 309 P l y m o u t h ...................................... 309 I r e lan d :

Letter from our Dublin Corre­

spondent ..... 309 Declaration of the Bishops on .the

Irish University Bill . . . 309 F oreign N ews :

Sw i tz e r la n d ...................................... 309 M em o randa :

Religious . . .. . .310 Catholic Union— Suppression of

Religious Houses in Rome, &c. . 310 E d u c a t io n a l ...................................... 312 L i t e r a r y ...................................... 312 Legal . . .... 312 Gen e r a l N ew s . . . . 313

C H R O N I C L E O F T H E W E E K .

TH E opening o f the debate on Monday must have undeceived anybody who ima­

gined that Government meant to intro-

g l a d s t o n e ’s duce any material alterations into the Bill. In a l t e r a t io n s , moving the second reading, Mr. Gladstone passed over sub silentio the objections o f the

Irish Hierarchy, and indeed all objections to the general features of the measure, and confined himself to explaining certain modifications which he meant to adopt. The first concerns the future affiliation of colleges, the claims of which are to be examined into and reported on by the Council of the University, but they are to be admitted into the university by the Crown itself. Another guards against the affliliation o f mere boys, who are to be not less than seventeen years of age, are not to belong to more than one college, are to pass all the required examinations, and are to be certified as attending lectures. A third alteration leaves to the Council the subdivision of the faculty of arts for the purpose o f degree examinations, and a fourth, while it leaves examination in modern history and mental and moral philosophy voluntary, makes one in ancient languages and literature obligatory. Beyond these points Mr. Gladstone dealt with nothing but Mr. Bourke’s motion for the production o f the names of the Council. He certainly succeeded, to our mind, in establishing his position that what the resolution asked for was an impossibility. There is not, he said, even a “ satellite ■“ of the Government ” who would not answer, if now asked to give his name, “ I decline to serve under your Bill till I “ know what your Bill is to be.” And though members of the Opposition might be very properly asked to sit on the •Council after the Bill was passed, he could not quarrel with them if they answered now, “ We will have nothing to say to you or to your B i l l ; ” and he could not but think that to propose a vote o f censure for the non-performance of an impossibility, was “ one of the extremest measures ever “ adopted in Parliament.”

A l l this, however, is to Catholics now of L0RD , comparatively little moment. The Irish defence of i r. Episcopate has pronounced against the Bill,

unless it is altered in a direction in which we

•fear there is little chance o f its being altered by the present Parliament. That condemnation has been echoed with singular unanimity by the Irish Catholic Press, and on different grounds even by the Irish Protestants. Representatives of Protestant opinion, such as Mr. Pim— a Liberal and a Quaker— Dr. Haughton, o f Trinity College, and even Dr. Ball, member for the University o f Dublin, all testify that denominational education is a necessity for Ireland, and that the Catholics have a right to separate endowments. It was not a little cool in

N ew S e r ie s . Yol, IX. No. 226.

Lord Hartington to maintain that the Irish people had not spoken because neither the Senate o f Trinity College, nor the students of the Catholic University, nor the Catholic prelates could be said to represent it, and to declare that he “ would not accept any condemnation of the Bill “ which does not emanate” from it. How does he expect the people o f Ireland to speak ? Mass-meetings are not got up in a moment; and if such meetings were to express their opinions, we should be told that they were composed o f slaves to ecclesiastical dictation, just as, when it is the Bi^jops who speak, we are told they are only speaking for tfl^&elves. And Lord Hartington’s argument, based on the acjKffance o f the measure by two other religious bodies, was sinjPfearly fallacious. “ If,” he said, “ any given mea“ sure were acceptable to two o f the three great denomi“ nations in Ireland, the third should not be supported in “ declaiming against i t : and it was too much to expect that “ in a measure dealing with notoriously conflicting interests “ all the proposals contained in that measure would meet “ with the unqualified approval o f all the interests con“ cerned.” This would be all very well if the Catholics o f Ireland were only one o f three bodies o f equal importance into which the nation was divided— and even then they would have a right to be treated in the same manner as the other two— but, as it happens, Catholics are 77 per cent., and the other two bodies together only 23 per cent, o f the population o f the country. Another piece o f special pleading was contained in the speech o f Mr. OsborneMorgan, who in defending the Bill told the House that “ what the Catholics wanted was not justice and equality, “ but ascendency.” H e contrived however to confute himself a little later, for he offered to Trinity College the consolation that, “ if the worst should happen,” and other colleges succeed in university competition, it would still get “ something like a monopoly amounting to ^50,000 a ‘ •year.” This is “ justice and equality,” but if the Catholics ask for a single penny, it is a demand for “ ascendency.” Lord Robert Montagu stated the case very well when he said that it came to this, that “ the kind of college educa“ tion which the majority in Ireland never did make use of “ was supported by the State, and those colleges which the “ Irish had established for themselves were denied every “ kind o f support.’” It is the old story, the Protestants of Great Britain do not like the education which the mass of the Irish nation prefers, and the Irish are therefore told, first, that they do not know what is good for them, and secondly, that they do not even know what they would like to have.

Mr. Fawcett’s speech deserves a few words

FAWCETT’S of seParate notice. It was so generally be-

speech . beved when the effect o f Mr. Gladstone’s brilliant introductory speech was fresh, that