THE TABLET
A W eekly Newspaper and Review
D um VOBIS GRATULAMUR, ANIMOS ETIAM ADDIMÜS UT IN INCCEPTIS VESTRIS CONSTANTER MANEATIS.
From the Brief of H is Holiness to T he T ablet, June 4, 1870.
Voi. 48. No. 1905. L o n d o n , O c t o b e r 14, 1876.
P r ice sd. B y P ost
[R eg iste r ed a t th e G en er a l P o st O f f ic e a s a N ew spaper
-Ch ro n ic le o f t h e W e e k :—
Page
The Porte and the Armistice.— A Conference — Attitude of the Powers.— Public Opinion on the Eastern Question.— Lord Derby’s Despatch.— Sir H. Elliot and the Sultan — The Armistice. — The Russian Army in Servia.— Mr. Forster and the “ Times.”— Mr. Forster on our Policy in the East.— Servia and the Bulgarian Insurrection— The Sultan.— Mr. Gladstone Again.— Impalement. — Mr. P. J. Smyth and his Constituents. — The Last Trial of Count Arnim. — The Anglican Church Congress.— Spiritualism in Court.— Tho “ Univers” and the Bishop of Gap .........................481
CONTENTS.
Page
L e a d e r s :
Patriotism in the Present Crisis.. 485 Mr. Theodore Martins' Last
Volume . . •• •• •• 485 Austrian Opinion on the Turkish
Question . . . . .. .. 486 Russia and Turkey.— I. . . .. 487 The Book of the Imitation of
Christ and its Author, John Gersen, Abbot of St Stephen’s, at Vercelli.— V. .. .. . . 488 P ic tu r e s :
The Royal Garden Party at
Chiswick . . . . . . .. 489 R e v iew s :
Firdusi and the Shah-Nameh . . 490
R eview s (continued);
Page
De Intellectualismo . . .. 491 The Catholic Church Under
Russia . . .. . . . . 492 Short N otices :
Picturesque Europe . . . . 493 Bible Atlas .. .. . . . . 493 Catholic Church Guide . . . . 493 A t Dusk .. . . . . . . 493 Literary, Artistic, & Scientific Gossip 493 C o r r e s p o n d e n c e :
The Irish Land Question .. . . 494 Mr. Gladstone and Catholics . . 494 Schools at Ince, Wigan . . , . 494 The Authorship o f “ The Imita
tion” . .
. . ..493
Page
A Poor Mission . . . . . . 495 Sham Hermits .. . . .. 495 Club for Working Lads . . . . 495 R ome :— Letter from our own Cor
respondent ........................... 497 D io cesan N ews Westminster .. . . . . . . 499
S o u th w a r k ....................................... 499 Clifton .......................................499 Hexham and Newcastle .. . . 499 Salford . . .........................500 Shrewsbury . . . . . .. . . 50x Scotland—Western District .. 501 M em oranda :—
Religious . . . . '
. . 502
Educational . . . . . . . . 502 Gen er a l N ew s . . . . 503
CHRONICLE OF THE WEEK.
THE PORTE AND THE ARMISTICE. T
'H E R E is a great rise in the political barometer this week. We cannot yet say that it stands at “ set fair,” but the prospects of peace are far more nearly assured than they have been yet. This change is due in the first place, probably, to the energetic ultimatum administered by Sir Henry Elliot, and, secondly, to the consequent acceptance of the armistice by the Porte. And if the Turkish Government committed, as we said last week, a great blunder in giving an evasive answer to Lord Derby’s proposals, it has done a clever stroke of business in its reply to the demand for an armistice. The Powers asked for a month, and it has granted five or six months, for the accounts vary. By so doing it has checkmated the Servian war party and the Panslavists, whose object was to obtain time for an extensive reinforcementof the Russo-Servian army, but by no means to procure so lengthy a cessation of hostilities as to allow the war to die out. On the other hand, the Powers, whose professed aim in demanding the armistice was to secure time for the settlement of the final conditions of peace and the necessary reforms, can of course have nothing to say against six months’ armistice instead of one. But as to the intentions of Servia and of Russia there are contradictory reports. Vienna telegrams inform us that although the Servian Government had decided to accept an armistice of short duration, it is positively stated that it will reject the armistice for six months, and further that this counter offer of the Porte will be considered by Russia as equivalent to a rejection of the proposals of the Great Powers. Another despatch, however, of the same date (Wednesday) from Belgrade, asserts that at a Council of Ministers held on that day it was decided to accept a regular armistice as soon as it should be proposed to Servia by the Consuls of the Great Powers, and intelligence has been received at Vienna to the effect that M. Ristics is resolved to accept the armistice, even against the will of General Tchernaieff and the war party.
The English proposal of an armistice is be-
a conference ¡¡eved (q be macie with a view to a Conference of the of tlie Powers, and up to this point the project powers. seems to be supported by all the Governments.
But difficulties loom in the future, for Russia is supposed to object to the presence of Turkey at “ the “ European Council-table,” while Turkey, as one of the parties to the Treaty of Paris, will insist on her right to have a voice in any modification of it, especially when it so nearly concerns her. Austria, however, will press for the admission of Turkey, and Russia is scarcely likely to maintain any objection which would be fatal to the meeting of a
New Series, V ol. X V I . No. 414.
Conference. For it is to this that she must now look for obtaining such satisfaction as she can get, as the project of an occupation of Bulgaria has had to be renounced in consequence of the attitude of Austria. That Government has met the proposal of a joint military occupation by a reference to the other Powers, and is now known to be so opposed to the idea of Russia’s crossing the Danube that she has given it to be understood that in that case she would herself occupy, not only Bosnia and Herzegovina, but Servia also. Germany looks on, and does not occupy herself very much about the matter, but would probably give her support in a Conference to any arrangement upon which England, Austria, and Russia could be brought to agree. So too with Italy. As to France, it is believed to be the ambition of the Due Decazes to recoup her losses by means of a close alliance with Russia. It is not easy, however, to see how this could be effected, unless it were by a European war in which Russia was on one side and Germany actively engaged on the other— not a very probable contingency at present.
A striking change has come over popular public opinion during the past week. Exceptions the eastern there are ; painful and discreditable exceptions,
question, but the soberer fraction of the Liberal party have had their eyes opened to the dangers of impulsive diplomacy, and an emotional interference with complicated negotiations. Of the organs of the party the Daily Telegraph, to its very great credit, has been steadily patriotic throughout, but the conversion of the lim es, as we shall see presently, is something wonderful.
The disillusionising process began when lord derby’s R ussia showed her hand by the proposal to despatch. 0CCupy Bulgaria, and was not a little advanced by the publication of Lord Derby’s despatch concerning the Turkish atrocities, which was quite as stern and resolute as the most indignant philanthropist could wish it to be. This most important diplomatic paper, which is dated the 21st of September, begins by declaring that the apprehensions excited by Mr. Baring’s preliminary Reports have been confirmed to the fullest extent by the complete Report itself, and that the crimes perpetrated by the Bashi Bazouks and Circassians have been of the gravest character. The conduct of the Vali of Adrianople, in ordering the general arming of the Musultnans, is condemned as the immediate cause of these crimes, “ which Mr. Baling justly describes “ as the most heinous that have stained the history of the “ present century.” And while the provincial authorities have shown “ the most culpable apathy” “ in allowing or “ conniving at such excesses,” “ little or nothing effectual “ has been done in the way of reparation,” for “ while 1,956 “ Bulgarians were arrested foi* complicity in an insurrec-