A PVeekly Newspaper and Review

WITH SUPPLEMENT.

D u m VOBIS GRATULAMUR, ANIMOS ETI AM ADDIMUS UT IN INCCEPTIS VESTRIS CONSTANTER MANEATIS.

From the Brie/ of His Holiness to T h e T a b l e t , June 4, 1870,

Voi. 43. No. 1782.

London, June 6, 1874.

byposts^

[R egistered a t the General Post O ffice a s a N ewspaper.

C hronicle of th e W e e k : —

Page

The Catholic University College. —The Poole Election.— The Galway Judgment.—The Mayo Elec-tion.— Other Election Decisions.~ The Derby Day.— Mr. O’Keeffe's Case.— Mr. Newdegate’s Bill.— French “ Parliamentary” Incidents.— Probability of a Dissolution.—The Spanish War.—The German Candidature.—Treatment of Suspected Carlists.—The Austrian Church Laws.—The Conflict in Prussia.— Russia and the Holy "See.—The Pfuthenian Liturgy.— The International Law Congress. — Revolution in Corea.-Cardinal. Falcinelli .. .. .. .. 705

CONTENTS.

L e a d e r s :

The Evidence in the Galway Pe­

Page tition. —The O’Donnell Defence Fund .. .. .. .. 709 The Catholic University of

Ireland .. .. .. .. 709 Constitutional Government in

Italy .. .. .. .. 710 O ur P rotestant Contemporaries:

The Scottish Episcopal Church.—

Sham Romanism. — German Persecution.— A New Rite .. 7xr R eview s :

The Letter-Books of Sir Amias

Poulet .. .. .. .. 713 What am I ? .. .. . .7 1 5 Short N otice :

National Portrait Gallery.. .. 7x6 Literary, Artistic, & Scientific Gossip 716

C orrespondence:

Page

The National Pilgrimage .. .. 716 The Liberal Government of Spain 717 The Lock-out in the Eastern

Counties .. .. .. .. 717 The late Herr von Mallinckrodt 7x8 Aberystwith. S. Wales .. .. 718 Parliamentary I ntelligence .. 718 R ome :

Letter from our own Correspondent 721 R ecord of G erman P ersecution :

Address to the Bishop of Minister 723 The Bishop of Paderborn .. .. 723 The Threatened Imprisonment of the Bishop.. .. .. .. 723 Imprisonment of Father Wehn .. 724 Protestant Feeling in Germany .. 724 Old-Catholic Synod .. .. 724

D io cesan N ews :—

Page

Westminster....................................724 Hexham and Newcastle .. .. 724 Northampton .. .. •• 724 Salford .. .. •• •* 725 Scotland—Northern District .. 725 I reland :

Letter from our Dublin Corre­

spondent .......................................725 F oreign N ews :—

Germany .. .. .. .. 725 Austria .. .. . ■ 72d Monsignor Mermillod at the Uni­

versity of Louvain .. .. 726 M emoranda :

Educational .. .. .. .. 727 L e g a l .................................................. 727 General N ews .............................. 728

CHRONICLE OF THE WEEK.

COLLEGE. W

THE CATHOLIC ■ UNIVERSITY

E are requested to state that as the

Catholic University College for H igher Studies w ill be able to commence its work the next M ichaelm as Term , students seeking admission may make application at once to the R ector, the R ig h t R ev. Monsignor C apel, Cedar V illa , Kensington.

T h e second and last Poole e lection has given the poole rjse (-0 a rather sharp correspondence between the unsuccessful candidate, Sir Ivor Guest, and his brother, Mr. Arthur Guest, on the one part, and their victorious opponent, Mr. Evelyn Ashley, on the other. Speaking from his w indow after the announcement o f the result o f the contest, Mr. A sh le y was understood to say that S ir Ivor Guest and his brother had been canvassing after m idnight with a corrupt intention. These two gentlem en accordingly wrote, d istinctly denying the charge, and calling upon Mr. A sh ley for a withdrawal o f it, and sent their letters to the lim es. Mr. A sh ley replied that he “ hardly knew what “ he did exactly say in the great heat and excitem ent o f the “ simultaneous announcement o f the result o f the contest, “ and the appearance o f a large crowd at his window calling “ for a speech ; but that all he in tended to say, and no “ more was, that Mr. Copeman,” Sir Ivor Guest’s agent, “ enjoyed a very singular notoriety in election m atters” ; and that Sir Ivor had follow ed what he (Mr. Ashley) considered “ the novel and evil plan o f carrying on his canvass after “ dark.” A n d writing sim ultaneously to Mr. Arthur Guest, M r. A sh le y repeated this statem ent, and said in addition that his words ought not to receive the interpretation put upon them. H e had “ certainly meant to say that Mr. Guest “ had been out canvassing to a very late hour on the morn“ ing o f the 25th, because he had been told on good au<,! thority that he had been so out, but he did not in tend to “ charge him with being out for corrupt purposes.” That, he added, was “ much too serious a charge for any man to “ make except after grave deliberation.” T h is reply Mr. Arthur Guest regards as “ far from satisfactory,” and leaves it to the public to decide whether it is possible for Mr. A sh le y ’s words to receive any other interpretation than that which he had put on them ; namely, that he had been out canvassing after dark “ for corrupt purposes.” H e feels bound to accept Mr. A sh le y ’s statem ent that he did not mean to make this charge ; but expresses his “ surprise that “ no single word o f regret accompanies the withdrawal o f “ it.’’ T h e facts he states to be these : H e was in bed before m idnight on the night in question, when at half-past one in the morning he was summoned to go to the police-station to assist Mr. Copeman, the agent, who had been “ seized and grossly abused ” by Mr. A sh le y ’s

N ew Series V o l . X L N o . 291.]

partisans. H a v in g induced the superintendent o f police to summon an extra force for his protection, Mr. Guest proceeded on foot to the M ayor’s house, a mile and-a-half from the town, to urge the necessity o f calling in an additional force o f the Dorset County Constabulary. “ A t no time during the election did he canvass after dark.” Mr. Evelyn A sh le y ’s rejoinder is sim ply the publication o f a very friendly letter from Sir Ivo r Guest, accepting his “ ample explanation “ and apology,” and wondering at the objection to canvassing after dark com ing from him, as he had had much less tim e for a personal canvass o f the borough, and must have known that many electors could not be found except at breakfast-time, dinner-time, or after dark. On the whole it appears to us that Sir Ivor comes best out o f the correspondence ; his brother is too angry. I t would be absurd to be too severe on Mr. A sh le y for making the original charge in a moment o f great excitem ent, when he hardly knew exactly what he did say, and when what he did say he had been to ld on authority to which he trusted. But when he was assured by Mr. Guest that the facts were otherwise, it would have been better frankly to accept the denial on the word o f a gentlem an, and to express his regret that he and his informants had been misled.

the GALWAY JUDGMENT.

On Monday Mr. O ’D onnell appeared a t the bar o f the House o f Commons and requested to be inform ed by the Speaker whether it was com petent for him to raise a question o f privi­

lege before the report o f the ju d ge on the late election for Galway was read. W e suppose that the point to which Mr. O ’D onnell proposed to call the attention o f the H ouse was the enormous power over any o f its members which the law, as it now stands, g ives to an individual judge, who, if ever he should be a strong political partizan, may o f course conceivably a llow his mind to be in flu enced rather by the preconception o f the case to which his prejudices cause him to incline, than by the actual evidence before him. T h e Speaker, however, replied that he felt bound to inform the late hon. member for G a lw ay, that he had received a report from the ju d ge appointed to try the petition, and that report was to the effect that the late election was void, and that he was consequently disqualified from sitting or addressing the House. Mr. O ’D onnell answered that he bowed to the Speaker’s authority, and re t ir ed ; but the matter does not quite end here. Mr. O ’D onnell’s view , as expressed in a letter from him to the Freeman's Journal, is that, although there is no appeal against the ju d g e ’s decision as regards the validity o f the election, the H ouse has yet a right to examine, before it applies the personal disqualification entailed by it, whether the report is in that respect consistent w ith the evidence adduced. I t is extrem ely im probable that the H ouse w ill consent to open this question, but a petition from Mr. O ’D onnell, based upon legal opinions, was to be