THE TABLET

A Weekly Newspaper and Review.

W I T H SUPPLEMENT.

Dum v o b i s g r a t u l a m u r , a n i m o s e t i a m a d d i m u s u t i n i n c o 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 Briel 0/ H is Holiness to T h e T a b l e t , June 4, 1870,

Voi. 44. No. 1789.

L o n d o n , J u l y 2 5 , 1 8 7 4 .

Price 5d. By Posts^cI

[R e g is tered a t th e G en e r a l P ost O f f i c e a s a N ew spaper.

C h r o n ic l e o f t h e W e e k : —

Page

St. Edmund's, Pontigny.— The Public Worship Bill.— The Endowed Schools Bill,— Mr. Disraeli at the Mansion House.— Carlist Successes.— The Duke of Aosta on the present Government. — The “ Atrocities ” and the Reprisals.— The Latest Accounts.— Manifesto of Don Carlos.—The Attempt on Prince Bismarck.— Kullman’s Antecedents.— An Elec­

tion under the Falck Laws.—The •Crisis in France.—The CasimirPerier Bill.— The Brussels Conference.— The Russian Embassy,. 97

CONTENTS

L e a d e r s :

Page

The Endowed Schools Debate . . 101 Crime in Ireland .. . . . . 101 The Reform of Church Music in

Germany.— I . . . . .. 193 O ur P r o t e s t a n t C on tem po raries :

The Public Worship Bill, and what it Proves .. .. .. .. 104 R e v ie w s :

Lectures on the Doctrine of Justi­

fication .. .. .. .. 105 Eastern Africa as a Field for Mis­

sionary Labour . . . . .. 106 The Spiritual Conflict & Conquest 107 Literary, Artistic, & Scientific Gossip 107 C o r r e spondence :

The Missions in New Caledonia and the “ Times ” . . .. 109 Church Music .. .. .. 109

Page i The Liberal Government in Spain 109 ! The Pilgrimage to Pontigny . . 109 I Our Lady and St. Catharine, Bow 109 ! Lincoln’s-Inn-Field’s Schools Ex­

cursion Harmonium Wanted 1 P ar l ia m en t a r y I n tellig en ce .,

R ome : 1 Letter from our Correspondent .. j Peter's Pence

R ecord of G erman P ersecution

Petition of the Bishop o f Pader­

born .. ; The Election of Priests by their

114

Congregations . . .. .. 114 The Bishop of Ermland and <Bishop Reinkens at Königsberg 114 The Attempt on the Life o f BisI marck .. . . .. .. 114

Archbishop Ledochowski Visited

Page in his Prison . . . . . . 114. D io ce san N ew s :—

Westminster.. . . .. . . 115 Beverley . . .. . . . . 115 Birmingham .. .. .. . . 116 Newport and Menevia . . .. 116 Plymouth . . .. . . .. 116 Salford . . . . . . .. 116 Scotland—Western District . . 117 I r eland . . . . .. .. 117 F oreign N ews :— France . . .. 117

Germany . . .. . . .. 118 Austria.— Bavaria . . . . . . 119 M em oranda :—

Religious . . . . . . . . 119 Educational . . .. . . 120 G en er a l N ews . . . . . . 121

CHRONICLE OF THE W EEK .

■ST. EDMUND

PONTIGNY, in d ’ s , l \ «Y- A

BRITISH contingent to the great movement of pilgrimages that goes on with unflagging energy on the Continent this summer, will proceed to the tomb of a great English Saint in France on the ist of September next. In place of all recommendations of our own, for this week at least, we request the attention of our readers to the letter which we print to-day from the Right Rev. President of St. ;Edmund’s College. It will be observed that the journey to Pontigny is by no means so long or inconvenient as that to Paray-leraonial, and also that the service of steamers between Newliaven and Dieppe is much improved, and the general arrangements such as will “ secure all against the hardships “ which many had to suffer last year.” Mgr. Patterson adds, that “ the importance of pilgrimsjsending in their ap“ plications for tickets at once cannot be overstated.”

THE PUBLIC WORSHIP

BILL.

The triumphant passage of Mr. Gurney’s Bill through its second reading without a division, and perhaps Mr. Disraeli’s evident eagerness to seize the opportunity for inflicting a personal defeat on his great adversary, convinced Mr. Gladstone, who has never been accused of a want of wise pliability, that his Resolutions had better be withdrawn. In the face of the evident determination of the House to make an •end of the extreme Ritualists, it was clear that to move them would only have been to court a crushing rejection, and at the same time, as Mr. Gladstone said, “ to prejudice ■“ by a preliminary controversy the consideration of several “ valuable amendments.” The Bill accordingly went into Committee on the Friday, after a debate, which resulted in two important concessions. Mr. Lowe moved an instruction to the Committee to extend the operation of the Bill to all ecclesiastical offences in doctrine and morals, and was seconded by Mr. J. G. Talbot, and Mr. Russell-Gurney objecting that it was July and not February, and that he could not therefore consent to the enlargement of the measure, as he otherwise would, Mr. Hardy asked whether he would undertake, if the Bill passed now, to bring in a supplementary one early in the next session to effect the purpose desired. This Mr. Russell-Gurney promised to do, and as, by the other concession referred to, the operation of the Bill has been postponed from January to July, the new system of procedure, as soon as it comes into force, will be applicable to all kinds of ecclesiastical offences. There is certainly something in the argument that after a certain number o f convictions, and after a certain time — say a few years— the ritual law and usage of the Establishment will be more settled, and a judge who had nothing to do but deal with Ritualists might find his occupation gone, and the House probably feels more easy at

New S e r ie s V ol. X I I . No. 298.

being assured that an official who is to receive ,¿3,000 ; a year is to be provided with permanent work. Moreover, as the procedure under the Church Discipline Act, j to which all offences but those against Ritual are left, was *justly described by Mr. Lowe as the worst possible— the j Bishops being grand jury, a party to the case, and as he 1appointed the tribunal, the sheriff, and also the executioner — there is obviously no reason why “ the new and good pro-

“ cedure should be employed only in connection with “ matters of form, while the old and bad procedure was still | “ kept up in regard to matters of substance.” But this ex­

tension of facilities to prosecute to questions of doctrine will probably be fruitful of graver consequence than the promoters of that extension quite foresee. Decisions limiting, j and decisions widening the doctrinal area of the Establish|ment— for there are sure to be both— will be equally offen­

sive to all parties, for nobody can tell in which direction the limiting or widening will take effect. All that we can be sure of is, that no doctrinal decision can possibly be given without alienating some of the parties in the Establishment. To what extent they will be alienated is another question. Probably not to the extent of secession. Several amendments were victoriously disposed of, such as Mr. Dillwyn’s for abolishing the provision that the judge must be a member of the Established Church— an attempt, unreasonable if it could be effectual, and meaningless as it is, as the judge is to be appointed by the Archbishops and to be also judge in their Courts. This in fact is part of the plan by which Mr. Gladstone’s objection to taking his salary out of the fund for augmenting small livings is to be met. He is to absorb in himself the duties and salaries of all, or nearly all, the officials of the existing Ecclesiastical Courts.

The Bill was to have been pushed on THE through Committee on Tuesday and Wednesschools b ill day, but the Endowed Schools Bill has stopped the way. It is a Government measure, and thus entitled to take precedence of the other, and is creating a great deal more fuss and taking up considerably more time than Mr. Disraeli probably expected. The House has been occupied with it from Monday to Thursday. On the Motion for going into Committee, Mr. Fawcett moved a resolution that it was inexpedient to sanction a measure which would allow one religious body to control schools which were thrown open to the whole nation by the policy of the late Parliament. Lord George Cavendish, a typical independent Whig, seconded the amendment, supporting it on the same ground, that the Bill was reactionary. Mr. Dixon and several other Liberals followed on the same tack, while Mr. Forster and Mr. Lowe, looking on the Bill from an ex-official point of view, were particularly