A Weekly Newspaper and Review.
D u m VOBIS GRATULAMUR, ANIMOS ETIAM ADDIMUS UT IN INCCEPTIS VESTRIS CONSTANTER MANEATIS.
From the Brief oj His Holiness to The Tablet, June 4, 1870
Vol. 44. No. 1810. L ondon, D ecember 19, 1874.
P rice 5d. By P ost s^d.
[R egistered a t the G eneral P ost O ffice as a N ewspaper
C hronicle of th e W e e k :—
Lord Acton and St. Pius V.— Count Arnim.—A Scathing Speech.— Political Elections in Italy.—The Advisers of Den Carlos.— Spanish Trade.— Russia and Turkey.—Anglican Church Courts .. .. .. .. .. 769 L e a d e r s :
The “ Times ” on Prince Bis
marck’s Veracity .. .. .. 773 Proselytising in West Connaught
1851— 1871 .. .. .. .. 773 O ur P rotestant C ontemporaries :
Intercommunion .. .. .. 775
C O N T
R eview s :
A Lost Chapter in the History of
Mary Queen of Scots Recovered 776 The Contemporary Review .. 777 The Month .. .. .. .. 778 The Abomination of Desolation .. 779 Mr. Tomlinson on the Sonnet .. 779 Short N otices :
Lives of the Saints .. .. .. 780 Wonder-World .. .. .. 780 Church Decoration .. .. .. 780 Intermediate Geography .. .. 780 A Tale of Two Cities .. .. 780 The Children’s Bible History .. 780 C orrespondence :
Lord Acton’s Letters .. .. 780 The Vatican Decrees .. .. 781
E N T S .
Correspondence (continued) :
Pope Gelasius on the Spiritual and
Secular Powers .. .. .. 782 The Deposing Power .. .. 782 The “ Times” and the Pope .. 782 Lord Emly’s Address to the Sta
tistical Society .. .. .. 783 Lord Camoys and the Divorce
Bill .. .. .........................783 The Registration of Conditional
Baptisms .. .. .. .. 783 Catholics in Great Britain.. .. 783 R ome :—Letter from our own Cor
respondent .. .. .. 785 R ecord of German P ersecution :
Prince Bismarck’s Speech in the
Reichstag .. . . .. .. 786
German Persecution (continued):
A Fortnight in a Free Country .. 787 Deputation of English and Irish
Catholic Ladies to Munster, with the Address of Sympathy.. 787 Reply to the Address .. .. 788 D iocesan N ews :—
Westminster.. .. .. .. 788 Birmingham .. .........................789 Liverpool .. .. . . .. 790 Northampton.. .. .. .. 790 Nottingham.— Pastoral Letter for
Advent .. .. .. .. 790 Salford.—The Bishop of Salford on Liberty of Conscience and of Worship .. .........................791 S upplement.
CHRONICLE OF THE WEEK.
WE return to the subject o f Lord
A c ton ’s charge against St. Pius V .,
not because vve consider that in the main it any longer requires an answer, but in order to clear up a few points connected with it, and lest it should be said that we have left any portion o f his evidence unnoticed. I t will be conceded, we believe, b y all who have follow ed our argument so far, that one thing at least is certain, and that is, that the “ so-called “ conspiracy o f “ R id o lfi,” instead o f being, as Lord A c ton has told the world, “ little more than a plot for murdering E lizabeth,” was in reality an extensive design, o f which her death form ed no necessary part. I t is also certain that this •design was laid before St. Pius V . , as com ing from the first nobleman o f England, “ in the name,” as he was made to say, “ o f the major part o f the Peers o f the “ k ingdom ,” and it provided for every object which the Pontiff could desire. E lizabeth was to be dethroned, Mary crowned in her stead, and the Catholic religion re-established in England. T h e forces promised and stipulated for seemed quite adequate for the purpose ; and all the Pope had to do, besides the grant o f a subsidy, was to urge the K in g o f Spain to carry out his part, a part which, though very important, was not very difficult for so powerful a monarch as Philip II. to accomplish. A n d these things were, we contend, all that St. Pius did. W e maintain, therefore, that the project which the Pope recommended to Philip I I . was the D uke o f Norfolk’s, and no other ; and that the words nonnulla . . ad honorem ejusdem omnipotentis D e i , reique publicce Christiance non parum pertinetitia utilitatem refer to that plan, and no other. Our readers have seen the D uke’s proposal with regard to Elizabeth, but we will remind them that not on ly did he afterwards protest that he had never thought of harm ing that queen, but he was not even accused o f such a design, except in the technical legal sertse o f in tending to le vy war upon the sovereign. It is, moreover, certain that R id o lfi delivered at Madrid the “ Instructions ” o f the Queen o f Scots and o f the Duke o f Norfolk. These letters exist, and they are the counterparts o f those laid before the Pope. B o th urgently begged the aid o f Philip for the Catholic cause in E n g la n d ; Mary, besides, on her own account, imp loring him to save her from assassination. “ Y o u are to “ declare,” the instruction to R id o lfi ran, “ the State in “ which I am ; the ill-treatm ent I receive ; . . . and the “ danger I run o f being poisoned or otherwise murdered.” (Memoirs, vii., 463.) In her eagerness she offered to give up Edinburgh or Dumbarton Castle to the Spanish troops, should they land in Scotland. T h e D uke, on his part, asked for 6,000 arquebusiers, 4,000 arquebuses, 2,000
New Series. Vol. X II. No. 319.
corslets, 23 pieces o f field artillery, with the necessary ammunition, and some money. “ W ith this “ succour,” says the Spanish precis, “ he offers to jo in “ 20,000 infantry and 3,000 horse, and to possess him self “ (apoderarse) o f the person o f the Queen of England, as “ well as her councillors; and to liberate at the same “ tim e the Queen o f Scotland, putting her in possession “ o f the kingdom .” These documents alone prove how greatly Lord A c ton is in error when he says that R id o lfi’s commission “ resolved itse lf into little more than a p lo t “ for murdering E lizabeth.” W e do not for a moment deny that R idolfi d id also assure the Spanish Council o f State that “ the Catholics o f England ” were resolved to k ill the Queen. H is object before all things, as A lv a p la in ly saw, was to lure Philip in to an armed in tervention in E n g la n d ; and, by way o f making the enterprise appear easy, he brought forward and exaggerated every vague and w ild project that he had anywhere heard mentioned among the English Catholics, not only against the Queen, but against C e c il and Leicester, and others o f her Council. A l l this, however, was mere unauthenicated talk, with which he d id not venture to connect a single name directly, though he had the audacity to assert that the conspirators counted for certain not only on the D uke o f Norfolk, but on two such ultra-loyal men as the V iscount Montague and the Earl o f Worcester, both personally favoured by Elizabeth, and both employed by her after this time. H ere we have another specim en o f R id o lfi’s want o f truth, after which, it is not surprising i f he also brought the Pope’s name into connexion with this underplot. I t is, however, by no means certain that he did so, the only apparent evidence for it depending upon Philip ’s accuracy o f literary construction, which was, in fact, o f the smallest. But before com ing to this, we must, in the first place, affirm that notwithstanding R id o lfi’s talk at Madrid it may well be doubted that there ever existed any tangible fixed design for killing Elizabeth at this juncture. I t is manifest that neither Philip I I . nor the D uke o f A lv a had much faith in it. A month had not passed after R id o lfi’s arrival at Madrid, when the K in g wrote, on August 4, to A lv a in these te rm s :— “ D e lay is dangerous, and may lead to discovery, or to “ alteration o f m ind.” (Gachard, Corresp. de Philippe I I . , ii. 191.) This at least shows that Philip had no confidence in what R id o lfi had called the “ resolve” o f the English Catholics to k ill the Queen. Nor had A lv a any more confidence in it. Three things are clearly apparent from his letters : i , that whatever plot existed against either the liberty or life o f E lizabeth was British, and not Roman ; 2, that nothing was decided ; and 3, that he had no faith in the earnestness o f any one in the matter. T o understand aright