THE TABLET

A Weekly Newspaper and Review.

D um VOBIS GRATULAMUR, ANIMOS ETI AM ADDIMUS UT IN INCCEPTIS VESTRIS CONST ANTER MANEATIS.

From the Brief of His Holiness to T h e T a b l e t , June 4, 1870,

Vol. 43. No. 1775. L o n d o n , A p r i l 18, 1874.

P rice 5d. B y P ost s^ d .

,

[R egistered a t th e General P ost O f f ice as a N ewspaper

C hronicle of t h e W e e k : —

Page

The Meeting of Parliament.— Ancient Monuments.—Mr. Newdegate and his Bill.— Imprisonment for Debt.—The Bengal Famine.— Intimidation under the Ballot.—The Ashantee Treaty.— Civil Marriage.—The German Army Bill.— Success of the Compromise.— The “ Trial” of Archbishop Ledochowski.— The Austrian Ecclesiastical Bills.— The •Carlist War and the Government. —The French Government and the Septennate.—The Press and the Government.—Arrest of an Ex-Minister.— The Armenians at Constantinople .. .. .. 481

CONTENTS.

L e a d e r s :

The Debate in the Austrian House

Page of Lords .. .. .. .. 485 Reform of Trinity College, Dublin 485 “ Affairs of Honour ” in Italy .. 486 O ur P rotestant C ontemporaries:

Persecution and its Fruits.. .. 487 P ictures :

The French Gallery .. . . 488 R eview s :

The Life of Charles Dickens .. 489 The Contemporary Review .. 491 Short N otices :

Old Court .. .. .. .. 491 Debrett’s Peerage .. .. .. 492 Literary, Artistic, and Scientific

Gossip . . . . . . 492

C orrespondence :

Page

Developments of Ritualism .. 492 The War in Spain .. .. .. 493 Civil Marriages .. .. .. 493 The Tower Hill Mission .. .. 493 The Case of Typhoid Fever .. 493 Declaration of the Archbishops and

Bishops of Austria relative to the Projects of Law upon Church Affairs now Presented to the Reichsrath .. .. .. .. 493 P arliam entary I ntelligence .. 494 R ome :

Letter from our own Correspondent 497 R ecord of G erman Persecution :

The Government and the Catholic

Demonstrations .. .. .. 499 Calumnies against the Archbishop of Cologne .. .. .. .. 499

Attempted Justification of His

Page

Imprisonment .. .. .. 499 The Bishops of Paderborn and

Ermland . . . .. .. .. S°° Prince Bismarck and Count Arnim 500 The Archbishop of Cologne and the Police Sergeant .. . . 500 D io cesan N ews :

Westminster .. .. .. .. S°° Southwark .. .. .. .. 501 Beverley .. .. .. .. 501 Clifton— Salford .. .. .. S°2 I reland :

Letter from our Dublin Corre­

spondent .. .. . . .. 5°2 F oreign N ews :— Russia .. .. 503 M emoranda:—Religious .. .. 503

Catholic Union .. .. .. S°4 General N ews .. .. .. 504

CHRONICLE OF THE WEEK.

OF PARLIAMENT. T

THE MEETING

HE House of Commons met on Monday for the first time after the recess. Mr. Hardy had replied to Mr. Lewis that the Catholic inmates of Kilmainham were not obliged to go half-a-mile to attend Divine Service, whereas the Protestants had their chapel within the building, because the Catholics need not go to their church unless they were inclined, which may be thought by some a scarcely satisfactory justification of the inequality. In answer to questions put by Mr. O’Clery— whether information received respecting the increasing magnitude of the Carlist War would not warrant a recognition of the Carlists as belligerents, and what correspondence on the subject had been exchanged with other Powers, Mr. Bourke was able to state that nothing had occurred to raise the question of belligerent rights, and that there had been no correspondence on the subject with foreign Governments. Sir C. Adderley was also unyielding in his reply to a question about unseaworthy ships. The Government had no intention of bringing in a Bill, and they would never in any measure specify what is meant by seaworthiness, or lay down any particular model. The Board of Trade would exercise a discretion in prosecuting on any information received, and would be cautious in acting on information from those who had formerly failed in making out their case— the erroneous information given by Mr. Plimsoll in the case of the Parga having cost the country over ,£1,200. The principle adopted would be “ to prosecute only the worst cases as “ examples, and interfere as little as possible with the legiti“ mate course of trade.” The rest of the evening was occupied by the Army Estimates, which were got through, after Major Beaumont had raised an ineffectual debate on a proposition to pass the reserves through the regular army.

ANCIENT MONUMENTS.

Sir John Lubbock’s well-meant attempt to preserve objects of antiquarian interest from destruction has been wrecked against the jealousy excited in the new House of Commons by anything which looks or can be made to look like an interference with the absolute rights of property. Mr. Bentinck thought that the Bill would have had more chance of passing in the late House, as it was a “ measure of spoliation,” and took Mr. Beresford-Hope roundly to task for letting his name appear on the back of so revolutionary a proposal. It was “ legalizing burglary by daylight,” and “ made it penal for a “ man to protect his own property.” Sir G. Jenkinson was more reasonable, arguing that it was a subject which should be dealt with by a Government Bill, as rates would have to be imposed ; Mr. Walter objected to the arbitrary selection of monuments specified in the schedule ; Mr. Lowther con

New Series Vol, XI. No. 2S4.]

demned a measure dealing with private rights without notice to the possessors of those rights ; Mr. Davenport Bromley said that the Bill would leave no rest to the living or the dead, and that the Commissioners might come and dig up honourable members’ grandfathers; Sir E. Antrobus told how a relative of his had been applied to by Sir J. Lubbock to permit excavations at Stonehenge, adding, that if consent had been granted, the stones would all have come down in consequence of the looseness of the chalky soil. Mr. Henley objected that the compensation offered was insufficient, as it was founded on the clauses of the Defence Act instead of on the Lands Clauses A c t ; and the Chancellor of the Exchequer brought the opposition of the Government to bear, stating as the ground of it that a Bill contemplating the application of public money must be a Government Bill, and that this measure could not be passed on the vague understanding that the Commission was to be supplied with funds in some other way. A second objection to it was based on the power granted to the Commissioners to transfer monuments to local authorities, which would be very offensive to the original proprietors ; and another was to be found in the enormous extent of the responsibilities which might be thrown on the Government. At all events the only possible way in which the Bill could be rendered acceptable was by adopting the principle of a liberal subsidy from the Treasury, and for this a Government Bill would be necessary. Sir J. Lubbock and Mr. BeresfordHope in vain urged in reply that there would be no invasion of a man’s house or property, as the Commissioners would have no right of access to a monument till they had bought and paid for i t ; that nobody lived in British, Celtic or Roman remains, and that monuments in gardens, pleasure-grounds or parks were excepted; that ratepayers would not be burdened, because a charge on the Treasury was contemplated, and that if Government would not consent to that, the promoters would be glad to take the Bill without i t ; that some monuments, such as Silchester, were not included in the Bill, because they were in the best possible hands— the Duke of Wellington owns Silchester, and is excavating there— and others— thelDorsetshire monuments are probably meant, though the Tim es' report says Gloucestershire— because they were already destroyed. That the ecclesiastical remains in Ireland— mentioned by Mr. Mitchell-Henry— were provided for by the Irish Church; that there had never been any intention to do more at Stonehenge than to scratch the soil superficially for a particular purpose; and that the Defence Act instead of the Land Clauses Act was chosen as the model for the compensation clauses, because the former contemplated partial, and the latter entire acquisition. All was useless, and the Bill was thrown out by a majority of 53— 147 to 94 votes.