T TABLET.

A Weekly Newspaper and Review.

D 0 M VCBIS GRATULAMUR, ANIMOS ETIAM ADDIMUS UT IN INCCEPTIS VESTRIS CONSTANTER MANEAT1S

From ihe B r ie i oj H is Holiness P iu s IX . to The Tablet, June 4, 1870.

V o l . 83. No. 2821.

L o n d o n , June 2, 1894.

Price sd. by Post s % d.

'¿Chronicle of the Week :

Page

Imperial Parliament : The Budget Bill Debate — Prevention of Cruelty to Children— The New French Cabinet—The Cab Strike — The Future of Matabeleland— H e r r D o w e ’ s C u i r a s s — The (Finances of the Congo State— Corpus Christi Procession in Vienna — The Riots in Sicily— The Tsar and his Civil Service— The Arch"b ish op o f Canterbury on the W e l s h Disestablishment Bill— The Bulgarian Crisis : Rioting in S o p h ia — A Terrible Engine o f

War—The Money Market . . 837 ‘Leaders :

The Threatened House . . . . 841 England and Belgium in Central

Africa . . . . .. . . 842 The Papal Registers .. . . 843 'The Discipline of Society . . 843 JMo t e s ....................................... 845

C O N T

F u n e r a l o f Lord Russell’s Half-

Page

Sister . . . . . . . . 847 Reviews :

The Papacy During the Reforma­

tion .. .. . . . . . . 847 Health at School .. .. . . 848 The Prodigal’s and their Inherit­

ance . . . . . . . 849 A History of Crustacea . . . . 849 No Hero, but a Man . . 850 Books of the Week . . ..8 5 0 The Corpus Christi Festival at Car­

diff . .

. . .. .. 851

Catholic Commercial Employment

Association . . .. . .8 5 1 Correspondence :

Rome :— (From Our Own Corre­

spondent) . . . . . . . . 853 News from Ireland........................ 855

[Registered at the General Post Office as a Newspaper

ENTS.

Letters to the Editor :

Page r

Secondary Education for Women 856 “ Aspects of Anglicanism ” .. 856 Fdnelon’s “ Spiritual Letters ” .. 857 1 The Words “ In S e ” . . .. 838 The McGlynn Case . . .. 859 General Assembly o f Catholics of Germany . . . . . . 859 Joan o f Arc .. . . . . .. 859 Lending Reference Library .. 860 Mis-statementofCatholicDoctrine 860 Indulgences.. .. . . . . 860 An Appeal for a New Church .. 860 Sacred Congregation o f Indul­

gences . . . . . . . . 85o The Catholic Social Union . . . . 85o Public Retractation of Error . . 85o Southwark Diocesan Workhouse

Association .. . . . . . . 85i Our Sailors . . .. . . . . 862 From Everywhere . . . . 864 Social and Fcl tical . . . . 864

SU PPLEM EN T . News from th e Schools :

Progress of the Buckfast School

Page

Contest . . . . . . . . 869 Mr. Acland’s Last Straw .. .. 869 Defective Eyesight o f S c h o o l

Board Children . . . . . . 870 C a t h o l i c Sum m e r School o f

America . . .. .. 870 HEWS FROM THE DlOCESES l

Westminster . . . . . . 870 Southwark . . . . . . . . 8 7 1 Clifton . . .. . . . . 871 Hexham and Newcastle . . . . 871 Newport and Menevia . . . . 872 Nottingham . . . . . . . . 872 Portsmouth . . . . . . . . 872 Salford . . . . . . . . 872 Shrewsbury .. . . . . . . 873 St. Andrews and Edinburgh . . 873 Aberdeen . . ......................... 873 Galloway . . . . . . . . 874

*** Rejected MS. cannot be returned unless accompanied with address and postage.

CHRONICLE OF THE WEEK.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.— THE BUDGET BILL

DEBATE.

N Mr. Balfour moving on Thurs­

O-------------- 4.-------------

day night to report progress, until the Government had submitted the Resolution in reference to the Fifteenth Clause dealing with suc­

cession, a very animated and protracted discussion ensued in which Sir W. Harcourt, in reply to Mr. Balfour, manifested great heat, and indulged in somewhat vehement language. His speech drew from Mr. Balfour the rebuke that if he meant to lead the House in that temper and spirit, he would not succeed in passing his Bill. Sir W. Harcourt afterwards apologized for his loss of temper. Mr. Balfour added that the Chairman’s ruling made it impossible for the Opposition to move any amendments relating to the principle of the Estate Duty. The closure was (finally moved and carried by a majority of 45, and the ^motion for reporting progress was rejected by a majority of .44. The Chairman then put Clause One, which granted the Estate Duty, whereupon Mr. Hanbury moved its postponement until the production of the Government Resolution. After a sharp discussion his motion was negatived by ■ a majority of 36. Mr. Bowles moved an amendment to the 'first line of the Clause, with the object of giving the correct ■ name to the duty, which was not an Estate Duty, but a Succession Duty; but Sir W. Harcourt said it raised the whole ■ principle of the clause. After considerable discussion, Mr. Bartley moved that progress be reported, which was rejected by a majority of 31 ; and a Division being taken on Mr. Bowles’s amendment, it also was negatived by a majority of ,31. Progress was then reported at a quarter to one o’clock. The Committee stage of the Budget Bill was resumed on Monday night, when Mr. Hanbury moved an Amendment to the First Clause, limiting the new Estate Duty to the •case of persons domiciled in the United Kingdom. His ■ object was to exempt the personality of foreigners carrying •on business in the country, but domiciled abroad. The Clause as it stood would, he said, drive foreign capital out •of the kingdom. The Chancellor of the Exchequer replied that there was no rule of exemption. What would the Manchester mill-owners say if a foreigner planted a mil! among them and competed with them and was completely exempted from taxation ? The Amendment, he said, was absurd. M#t Graham Murray and Mr. Goschen supported the Amendment, which was negatived without a division. The Clause imposed the new estate duty upon the principal value of all property. Mr. Heneage moved the omission of these words, thereby raising the whole principle of the Clause, whether or not the duty was to be levied on the capital value, but leaving it open to be settled by future Amendments whether the tax was to be levied on the annual value, on the net annual value, or on the reversionary interest; or whether different principles of valuation and taxation were to be applied to personalty and realty. The discussion was accordingly very desultory and indefinite, the indefiniteness being increased by the Chairman putting the question that the word “ the ” stand part of the Bill. The reason of the question being put in this form was to prevent the other possible Amendments being cut out. Mr. Courtney ridiculed the idea of dividing on such a colourless Amendment, and Mr. Balfour suggested that they should divide on the words “ the principal.” Sir W. Harcourt agreed with this suggestion, but after some discussion Mr. Heneage, on Mr. Balfour’s suggestion* withdrew his Amendment, and Mr. Balfour himself moved the omission of the word “ principal.” This Amendment would have imposed the duty simply on “ the value ” of all property, and the ascertainment of that value would have been settled by subsequent Amendments. The Commitee divided on Mr. Balfour’s Amendment, and it was rejected by 216 to 189. On the motion of Mr. Balfour, progress was then reported, and the House adjourned.

In the House of Commons, on Wednes-

o7 crEu e l t y °t o day afternoon>Sir Richard Webster’s excel-

c u i l d r e n . lent and much-wanted Bill came up for discussion. But the Irish members wanted the time for the consideration of the Bill for repealing the Crimes Act. But a glance at a few of the questions raised in the debate is sufficient to see the impossibility of disposing of them in time for the Crimes Act Bill to come on. Such questions as the right of parents who have been convicted a second time, and whose children have been sent to the workhouse, to have them back again. Again may a person found guilty of cruelty, who is at the same time an habitual drunkard, be sent to a retreat without his own consent ? These are only two out of several points raised affecting both the rights of parents and the liberty of the subject, fully justifying the amount of time expended on them. But the Irish members, failing in their attempt to

New Series, Vol. LI,, No. 2,130.