HE TA

A Weekly Newspaper and Review.

DÜM VOBIS GRATULAM UR , ANIMOS ETIAM ADDIMUS U T IN INCŒ PTIS VESTRIS CONSTANTER M ANEATIS.

From the B r ie f o f H is Holiness P iu s IX . to T h e T a b l e t , June j , 1870.

V ol. 81. N o . 2769. L o n d o n , J u n e 3 » ^ -^ 9 3 *

pr ic e sd., by post s^ d .

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

C h ronicle of t h e W e e k :

Page

Imperial Parliament: The Reassembling— Important Divisions —Wednesday’s Sitting— The Antarctic Expedition— Mode of Capture— A Purge for the French '•Chamber—Women as Geographers — Decoration o f La Fayette’s Tomb — Lord Roberts on Indian Forces — Revolting Bull Fight in Spain.. 837 L eaders

The Dedication o f England . . 841 'T he Ministerial Crisis in Italy . . 842 The Old Syriac Version of the Gos­

pels ...................................................843 The EucharisticCongress .. ..844 British Catholics and Home Rule.. 845 'N o t e s ........................................................ 846

C O N T

ENTS.

R ev iew s :

Page

Life of St. Edmund of Canterbury

. . 848

Thirteen Satires o f Juvenal . . 849 General Jarras “ The Dublin Review ” .. . . 849 St. Paul’s Cathedral in the Time of Edward V I .................. Introduction to Shakspere . . 850 The Age of the Human Race •• 850 Sir James Dormer C orrespondence :

Rome:—{From Our Own Corre­

spondent) . . . . . . . . 853 Dublin (From Our Own Corre­

spondent) ......................... . . 854 An Interesting Ceremony in Edin- .

burgh Castle .. . . . . 855

L e t t e r s to t h e E d it or :

Page

The Primrose League . . . . 856 Lork Plunket’s Castle in Spain . . 856 Religious Instruction . . .. 856 Free Catholic Thought . . . . 857 “ The Cross of Christ ” . . 857 Beaumont Union Dinner . . . . 857 Answer to “ Inquiry” . . . . 857 Our Factory Girls— Shall They

Perish ? .................................... 858 Rosmini and the Church . . .. 858 Mr. Davitt and the Temporal

Power . . . . . . . . 858 The Site of St. Peter’s Martyrdom 858 St. Peter’s Statue . . .. .. 859 The English Hierarchy and the Con­

version o f England .. .. 859 From St. Bernard to the Peace

River . . . . . . . . . . 863 An Old Church and Manor .. .. 863 So c ia l a n d P o l it ic a l . . . . 865 M a r r ia g e . . . . . . . 865 A p pe a l to t h e C h a r it a b l e . . 865

SU PPLEM EN T . N ews from t h e S chools :

Page

The So-Called Catholic Concordat 869 Wanted “ A Policy for Voluntary

Schools ” . . . . . . . . 870 Religious Instruction of Pupil

Teachers . . . . .. . . 870 About Education .. . . . . 871 N ews from t h e D io c e s e s : Westminster . . . . . . 871

Southwark . . . . . . . . 871 Birmingham . . . . . 872 Clifton . . . . . . . . 872 Newport and Menevia . . . . 872 Nottingham .. . . . . . . 872 Shrewsbury . . . . . . . . 872 St. Andrews and Edinburgh . . 872 Glasgow .................................... 872 St. Anselm’s Society Conference . . 873 Sir Charles Russell and the Behring

Sea Arbitration . . . . .. 874

* f RejectedMS. cannot be returned unless accompanied with address andpostage.

CHRONICLE OF THE WEEK.

------------ ♦-----------

ON Monday the questions were few, and presented no features of interest, and the House went into Committee of

Supply at the unusually early hour of a quarter to four. On the Vote on Account of ¿£4,810,250, desultory discussions arose on a great variety of subjects. The first topic touched •upon wasthecompletion and revision of the Ordnance Survey. Sir J. Hibbert was pressed by Mr. Chaplin to say what provision had been made for carrying out the main recommendations of the Departmental Committee, as a single year’s delay would entail a considerable addition to the -expense. Before Mr. Chaplin could receive any answer, Mr. Courtney diverted the discussion into a channel relating >to the question whether the Vote should be for one month •or two. He held that when the late Government were in -office an arrangement was come to that no second Vote on Account should be for more than one month, and he urged -the Government to adhere to the custom. It appeared, however, from a statement by Mr. Jackson in i89r, •quoted by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that it had been usual for the preceding fifteen years to take the second Vote on Account for two months, and this point ended with Mr. Courtney acknowledging that his memory had not served him rightly. Mr. Chaplin then repeated his question about the revision of the Ordnance Survey maps, ■ remarking that an additional sum of £ 1 6,000 was wanted to start the work of providing for the revision of the maps on the larger scale. If the work were begun this ye&r it ■ could be completed in the course of ten years for .£630,000, whereas if it were postponed for a single year the cost would be very materially increased. To this the Chancellor of the Exchequer replied that the Exchequer could not at present afford £16,000, and he would resist any demand for the amount, from whatever side of the House it might come. Mr. Chamberlain then moved the reduction of the Vote by £100 on account of the surveys o f the United Kingdom, and the Motion was immediately put and rejected by a majority of 89. Mr. Bowles next complained of the irregularity and inadequacy of the lights in several of the twelve lighthouses under the control of the Board of Trade. Mr. Mundella replied that they were

N ew Series, V ol. X L IX . , No. 2,078.

really under charge of the Admiralty, but no complaint had ever been made about the lights. Mr. Bowles rejoined that it was evident Mr. Mundella knew nothing about the matter, and he moved the reduction of his salary by £500. This Motion was also put immediately, and rejected by a majority of 96. On the item of the Vote relating to the salaries of the officials of the House of Lords, Mr. Morton moved the reduction of the Vote by £1,000 as a protest against the extravagant salaries paid to them in comparison with the salaries of the officials of the House of Commons. Sir J. Hibbert replied that the House of Commons could not control the expenditure of the House of Lords, as it was under the management of a Committee of that House, and that the Committee was desirous of reducing many of the salaries, especially that of Black Rod, when a vacancy occurred. Lie believed that many of the salaries paid by the House of Lords were extravagant, but he did not see that any action could be taken at present. Dr. Clark supported the reduction with great energy, and contrasted the scales of salaries paid by the two Houses, and the amount of work done by the two classes of officials. He repudiated Sir J. Hibbert’s statement that the House of Commons could not control the expenditure of the Lords. It was for the Commons to vote the money, and if the Lords chose to pay more than the Commons voted, they would have to pay it out of their own pocket. Mr. Hanbury supported the reduction, and Commander Bethell and Mr. Bartley expressed some sympathy with it, but recommended that a joint Committee of the two Houses should be appointed to arrange a scale of salaries. Sir J. Hibbert said it would be very desirable to appoint such a Committee, but he himself could not promise one. The Committee then divided, and the reduction was rejected by 139 to 66. Sir E. AshmeadBartlett next alluded to the riotous proceedings at a Unionist meeting at Bermondsey Town Hall, at which the Rev. Mr. Walsh was severely injured by supporters of the Government. Mr. Barrow, the member for Bermondsey, said that the speech of the hon. member himself was enough to provoke disorder. Sir E. Ashmead-Bartlett denied the accusation. The Home Secretary read a statement by Mr. Walsh himself to show that Sir E. Ashmead-Bartlett’s account was greatly exaggerated. Mr. J. Lowther rose to support Sir E. Ashmead-Bartlett, and Dr. Tanner (according to The Standard) caused great laughter by shouting, “ Fetch him a glass of water,” and then hurrying out of the House as if he was going for it. He, however, did not return, and the discussion proceeded with reference to various other points. In reference to the use of revolvers in the streets,