THE TABLET
A W eekly Newspaper and Review\
D u m VOBIS GRATULAM U R , AN IM O S ETIAM ADDIMUS U T IN INCCEPTIS V E STR IS CONSTANTER M ANEATIS.
From the B r ie f o j H is Holiness to T h e T a b l e t , Ju n e 4, 1870.’
Vol. 39. No. 1677. L o n d o n , J u n e i , 1872.
P r ic e 5<1. B y P o st 5%d.
[R eg iste r ed a t th 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 : The
Page.
Supplemental Article.— Sir Stafford Northcote’s Explanation. — Mr. Gladstone’s Statement. - Rumoured Reply from America. —The Galway Election.— Change of Ministry in 'Spain.— The Ministerial Revelations.— The Carlists. — The Amnesty.— Don Carlos.— The Reichstag and the Jesuits.— The Coming Persecution in Prussia.— The Case of Mgr. Namzanowski. — M. de Belcastel’s Speech. — The Emperor’s Letter and Sedan.— Reorganization o f the French Army.— Mgr. Dupanloup on Religion in the Army.—The Educational Crisis in Italy.— The Greeks and Bulgarians .............................................669
L eaders :
C 0 N T
Page.
The Galway Election Petition . 673 The Armenian Patriarchate . . 673 Irish University Reform . .674 Catholic Students in Queen’s Col
leges ............................................... 675 Protestant Ritualists . . . 677 R e v iew s :
Nazareth: Its Life and Lessons . 678 Gerald’s Ordeal .... 680 The S a c r i s t y ...................................... 681 S hort N o t ic e s : The Mistress of
Langdale H a l l; a Romance of the West Riding.— Little Pierre, the Pedlar of Alsace ; or, the Reward of Filial Piety . . . .6 8 1 C orrespondence :
The “ Dublin Review” on Pri
mary Education .... 681
E N T S .
C orrespondence (continued):
Page.
The Earthquake at Antioch . . 682 Antichrist and the Church . . 682 An Appeal to the Tertiaries of the
Third Order o f S. Francis . . 682 The Late Mr. Trevor White . . 682 P a r l ia m en t a r y S ummary . . .682 R ome :
Letter from Rome .... 685 Address of His Holinees to Roman
Ladies . . . . . 685 Allocution to Catholic Artists . 686 The English Chapel at Rome . 686 Pope Pius IX . .... 686 Peter’s Pence....................................685 D io cesan N ews :
Report of the Society of S. Vin
cent de Paul in England . . 686
D io cesan N ews (continued):
Page
Westminster . . . . .6 8 7 S o u t h w a r k ...................................... 08S Beverley............................................... 688 B irm ingham ...................................... 688 I r elan d :
Letter from our Dublin Corre
spondent ..... 688 Galway Election Petition.— Judg
ment ...... 6S8 F oreign N ews : Rome and Ger
many.— Spain.— France.—Japan . 689 M em oranda :
Religious.— Literary— Scientific.—
Legal.— Fine Arts and Music.— Cricket.— Statistics . . . 690 G en e r a l N ew s . . . . 691
C H R O N I C L E O F T H E W E E K .
THE SUPPLEMENTAL
ARTICLE. O N Saturday night the news arrived that the Senate had approved of the draft supplemental article by a large majority. It turned out, however, that the vote was carried by 42 against 8 ; 21 Senators, .some of whom were present, declining to vote. It is .said that when it comes to be a question of ratification, this kind of majority will not suffice, two-thirds “ of the “ Senators present ” being required. We have, however, by no means as yet arrived at the point at which we can begin to talk of ratification. In the first place there are the amendments, said to be verbal ones, introduced by the Senate, and stated by the Times to consist in a more accurate definition of the term, “ Indirect “ Claims.” These were referred by Government to .the law officers and Sir Roundell Palmer to repo~t on their precise effect, after which the negotiations were -to go on by telegraph, until the supplementary treaty was .concluded. Then, as Mr. Gladstone has promised, it would be laid before Parliament, as the original treaty was, before ratification ; and as a treaty cannot be ratified by telegraph, as Mr. Gladstone explained, but must be sent by post across .the ocean, it is quite impossible that the ratification can be completed before the 15th June. If the negotiations were completed and the debate in Parliament over this week, there would then be only 15 days for appending the English ratification, sending the treaty to Washington, passing it through the Senate, and communicating it to the Court of Arbitrators. There would not be a day to spare, and it would be hard to lay one’s hand on a transaction of the kind in which not one day has been lost anywhere. Moreover, there seems to be abundant reason for avoiding haste; the article itself, as we said last week, is anything but precise, and may be interpreted as of merely prospective force. This interpretation would throw us back on inferences and understandings as to the action to which it may be taken to bind the American Government. It might possibly be urged that all which that Government now undertakes to do is to be silent about indirect claims in its future arguments, and the distinction between this and withdrawing the claims may be the very ground on which the Senate has been persuaded to adopt the article. I f so, we shall be just where we were before as regards the principal difficulty, with a fresh verbal controversy on our hands. This is a point which is certain to be raised in Parliament, and one which, if a thoroughly satisfactory answer is not forthcoming, must materially endanger the ratification. Nor, if the arrangement proves to be thoroughly satisfactory here, can we calculate upon its passing without further opposition through the Senate. On any supposition,
N e w S e r i e s . V o l . V I I . N o . 186.
therefore, some expedient must be adopted for lengthening the term fixed for the final reference.
When the House of Commons re-assembled northcote\D on Monday> Mr- Bouverie asked Sir Stafford explanation. Nortbcote whether his speech at Exeter had been correctly reported, and, if so, under what circumstances and with whom the understanding of which he spoke had been arrived at. To the first question Sir Stafford replied in the affirmative, adding that he made the statement he did because it would be inferred from Mr. Fish’s despatch of the 16th April, that the claims for consequential damages had been formally laid before the Commissioners at Washington, who had offered no objections to them. He spoke, therefore, without consultation with his brother Commissioners, thinking it right instantly to prevent such a false impression from getting abroad. The second question he did not feel justified in answering without previous communication with the Government and the other Commissioners, especially Lord Ripon, absent in Scotland, “ with whom,” added Sir Stafford, “ I have always acted most confidentially, “ and between whom and myself there has not been a “ shadow of disagreement throughout the whole of the trans“ action.”
It took two days to obtain a complete expla-
- - r nadon ° f the intentions of Government, as Mr. s t a t e m e n t . Gladstone very justifiably declined to answer
Mr. Disraeli and Mr. Horsman’s question without regular notice. He stated, however, on Monday, that he was not surprised at Mr. Disraeli’s feeling mortified at the publication of the draft article in America, after it had been withheld from Parliament here out of consideration for American susceptibilities. For this, however, Government was not responsible. The modifications introduced could not be published, because they had not been yet disposed of, and notice must be given of the question whether the treaty would be communicated to Parliament before ratification. On Tuesday Mr. Disraeli excused himself for pressing this question, apparently in derogation of “ an ancient and a “ salutary prerogative of the Crown,” on the ground of its being an exceptional case, and of the system which had sprung up of “ understandings” in lieu of precise diplomatic documents. Mr. Gladstone, however, while he replied that no apology for the question was necessary, denied that the Government had ever based its arguments on an understanding, and when Mr. Bouverie wanted to know whether the understanding between the Commissioners had been communicated to Government, repeated that the Government did not rest their case on an understanding, which, as Mr. Bouverie observed, was no answer to his question, but it was all the answer he got. Mr. Gladstone, however, gave the assurance, which was the principal thing wanted, that the Supplementary Treaty would be laid before Parliament as