THK TABLET

A IVeekly Newspaper and Review.

D um vobis gratulamur, animos etiam addimus ut in incceptis vestris constanter maneatis.

F ro m th e B r i e f o f H is H o lin e s s to T h e T a b l e t , J u n e 4, 1870,

Vol. 4 3 . No. 1777.

L o n d o n , M a y 2 , 1874.

P r ic e 5& By Post 5%d.

[ R e g i s t e r e d a t t h e G e n e r a l P o st O f f i c e a s a N ew s pa p e r

C h r o n ic l e of the W e e k : —

Page

Revision of the Swiss Constitution. —Count Arnim and the German Government.—His Letter to Dr. von Dollinger.—The Supplementary Falck Law.—The German Press Law.—The Bishop of Nancy.—The Austrian Convents Bill.—The Late Dissolution.—The Public Worship Regulation Bill.— Mr. Cross’s Licensing Bill.—The Temperance Associations on the Bill.—The ‘ ‘ Whiskey War” in Manchester.—The Elections.— 'The Ashantee Rewards.—General Grant and the Currency Bill.— The War in Spain. —Movements of the Comte de Chambord — The Suez Canal, &c., &c... .. 545

CONTENTS.

L e a d e r s :

An Englishman’s Judgment onMr.

Page

Newdegate's Convent Bill .. 549 Mr. Ne vdegate Judged by the

P ast.. .. .. .. .. 550 The Irish Railways Debate .. 551 Irish University Reform .. .. 551 Liberal Grievances in Rome .. 553 Our P r o t e s t a n t C o n t e m p o r a r ie s :

“ Standard ” Christianity .. . . 554 R e v ie w s : Who is Jesus Christ ? .. .. 555

Literary, Artistic, and Scientific

Page

Gossip ...... 558 C o r r e s p o n d e n c e :

The Church at Mill wall .. .. 559 The Mission and School at Barnet 559 P a r l ia m e n t a r y I n t e l l ig e n c e .. 559 R o m e :

Letter from our own Correspondent 561 The Girls’ Presentation to the

The Life of St. Gaétan .. . . 556 The Month .. .. .. .. 556 S hort N o t ic e s :

Mois de Marie d’apres le Saint

Evangile .. .. .. .. 557 A Few Words from Lady Mil-

drid’s Housekeeper, &c... .. 557

Pope .. . . . . .. 562 Peter’s Pence .. . . . . 563 R ecord of G e rm a n P e r s e c u t io n :

Petition to the Empress .. .. 563 Imprisoned Bishops and Priests .. 563 Church Laws .. .. .. 563

Page

D io c e s a n N ew s : Westminster.. . . .. . . 563

Beverley .. .. . . .. 564 Clifton.. .. .. .. .. 564 Salford .. .. .. . . 565 Shrewsbury .. .. .. .. 565 I r e l a n d :

Letter from our Dublin Corre­

spondent h ........................565 F o reign N ew s :—

Germany .. . . .. .. 566 M em o randa :—

Religious .. .. .. .. 5^6 G e n e r a l N ew s ............................ 567

C H R O N I C L E O F T H E W E E K .

REVISION OF THE SWISS CONSTITUTION. W

E were misled last week by the tele­

graphic agencies as to the relative number of the Cantons which voted for or against thealterations in the Federal Con­

stitution of Switzerland. The Canton Ticino did not vote for, butagainst i t ; so that there were thus eight and a-half Cantons, instead of seven and a-half, in the minority, and thirteen and a-half, instead of fourteen and a-half, in the majority. It is consequently incorrect to speak of the Cantons which resisted the change as identical with those which formed the Sonderbund, as to that league the Canton Ticino did not belong. The numbers of the popular vote were correctly given; 335,000 for and 200,000 against; and these figures represent pretty accurately the strength of the Protestants and the Catholics within the Swiss territory, for although among the majority of 335,000 there were about 20,000 Catholics, these were counterbalanced by the same number of Protestants who voted in the minority. All the Cantons in which the Catholics form the majority of the population voted against the measure, with the exception o f Soleure and St. Gall, which are the head-quarters of the indifferent orrebellious Catholics; and in the other mixed Cantons the proportions in the voting corresponded pretty accurately to the proportions of the two religious bodies ; except in Geneva, where fear of the usual mob violence induced a great number of Catholics to abstain from voting. count arnim The extent to which the German Government and th e is going in carrying on its war to the knife against german the Church is beginning to create dissatisfaction government. even among the more moderate anti-Catholics. Count von Arnim himself is one of these. The letters written by him from Rome at the time of the Council, which have recently excited so much attention, suffice to prove that he is no partisan of Rome, of the Vatican Council, or of the Catholic Church. But nobody who ever knew him would think him a likely man to sympathize with downright persecution. And the proceedings of his Government have become so strongly marked with that character that he has been moved to express his disapprobation. Such, at least, is the only interpretation which we can put upon the telegrams which record the anger of the Berlin official or semi-official press at a letter written last week by Count von Arnim to Dr. Dollinger. The criticisms which that letter contains on the course pursued by the German Government in ecclesiastical matters are such— says the North German Gazette—as it is “ difficult to reconcile with the traditions of the Prussian “ diplomatic service;” and the National-Zeiiung can only understand the publication of them on the supposition that

N ew4Series V ol. X I . No. 286.]

Count von Arnim “ declines any longer to represent the “ policy of the Emperor and Prince Bismarck.” It is hinted that Count von Arnim will not be able to retain his appointment to Constantinople, or, indeed, to remain at all in the diplomatic service; in reply to which his friends are said to threaten that, if he is ill-treated, he will be obliged to publish in self-defence documents which “ will cover Prince Bismarck “ with confusion.” I f he does, he will probably prove a far more embarrassing antagonist than even General La Marmora.

It must not be supposed that Count von Arnim at all takes the part of the persecuted dollinger. Catholics. But that he is disgusted at the present state of hostilities between State and Church is apparent from the terms which he employs in his letter to describe it. I f the Government, he says, had adopted the course which he should have preferred, and which Prince von Hohenlohe advised at the time of the Council, “ we “ should not at this moment be involved in an incompre“ hensible muddle, which calls into question that which long “ since had appeared to have become the common property “ of Christians.” The phrase cannot be interpreted otherwise than as meaning that freedom in matters of religion and conscience, which he holds to be “ the common property of “ all Christians,” is now violated in the case of Catholics. As to the expedient for preventing the conflict to which Count von Arnim would have resorted, it is in the eyes of Catholics most absurd. He would have entered into “ more “ serious negotiations ”—whether between the Powers themselves or between them and the Holy See, is not quite clear —with a view of “ nipping in the bud the rank growth (tes “ plantes pullulantes) cultivated by the Council.” Nothing has been more conspicuous in all Count Arnim’s letters than his inability to recognize, not only any divine element, but even any conscientious motives in the action of the Council. He seems to believe that “ serious negotiations ” would have stopped a definition of doctrine, and the “ explanation " which he says that he received “ respecting the consequences “ of the dogma” from some German Bishops, evidently was either misunderstood by him, or was not applicable to the definition which was actually decreed, as, in the judgment of the German Bishops themselves, that was utterly incapable of affecting the existing relations between the Powers and the Holy See. We publish the letter elsewhere as a curiosity.

THE SUPPLEMENTARY FALCK

LAW.

On Thursday week, after a debate of six hours, the first clause of the supplementary Church Bill passed its second reading in the German Reichstag, the only amendment carried being one permitting an appeal to a legal tribunal to be brought within eight days against decrees “ interning” or banishing ecclesiastics, the sole effect of