THE TABLET

A W e ek ly N ew sp a p er a n d R ev iew .

DU.M VOBIS GRATULAMUR, ANIMOS ET IAM ADDIMUS U T IN INCCEPTIS V E STR IS CONSTANTER MANEATIS.

From the Brief of His Holiness Pius IX. to T h e T a b l e t June 4, 1870.

V ol. 60. No. 2220. L ondon, October 28, 1882. P r ice sd., b y P o st , sKd.

[R eg ister ed a t t h e G en er a l P o st O f f ic e a s a N ew spaper.]

C hronicle of t h e _ W e e k :—

Reassembling of Parliament— Mr. • Gray’s Imprisonment— The Go­

Page vernment and _the Procedure Rules—The “ Principle” of the Closure—The Egyptian Policy of the Government— Arabi’s Trial— His Guilt or Innocence— Arabi and the Sultan—Discovery of Documents — Reappearance o f the

Prophet ”— Return o f the Troops — The “ Cologne Gazette” and our Soldiers in Egypt—The Army Hospitals in Egypt—The Missing Expedition— The French Protectorate in Tunis— Mr. Trevelyan on the Pacification o f Ireland— King Alfonso in Aragon— Cyclone at Manila— Attempt to Murder the King of Servia— The Danish and Dutch Arctic Expedition

677

P e t er P e n c e .

681

CONTENTS.

Page

L eaders :

The Pontifical “ Motu Proprio ” . . 681 The Coming School Board Elec­

tion.. .................................... 681 Difficulties under the Irish Land

Act .. ^ . .... . . 683 The Catholic University of Ire­

land.. ^ . . . . . . . . 684 The Socialist Agitation in France 684 The Viceroy of India . . . . 685 N o tes 686 R eview s :

A History of the Papacy during the Period of the Reformation 688 The “ Dublin Review” . . .. 689 S hort N otices :

Readiana . . . . .. . . 690 The “ Nineteenth Century ” . . 690 The “ Contemporary Review” . . 690 Killed at Sedan . . . . . . 690

Short N otices (Continued):—

Page

Treatise on the Way of Sorrows.. 690 Boys’ Books . . . . . . .. 690 C orrespondence :— Rome : — (From Our Own Corre­

spondent) . . . . . . . . 693 Paris :— (From Our Own Corre­

spondent) . . . . . . . . 695 Madrid :—(From Our Own Corre­

spondent) . . .. . . . . 697 Ireland.. . . . . .. .. 697 United States (From our American

Correspondent) . . . . .. 698 L e t t e r s to t h e E d it or :—

The Proposed Catholic Congress 699 All Souls’ Church, Peterborough.. 700 A Catholic Liberal Association .. 700 Conservatism and Orangeism .. 700 The “ Hail M ary” o f our Fore­

fathers .. . . . . .. 701 M oney an d T r a d e . . 701

SU PPLEM ENT.

Page

Decisions of Roman Congregations 709 N ews from t h e Schools.. . . 709 E ngland :—

Westminster . . . . 7 ir Southwark . . . . . . . . 711 Birmingham.. .. . . . . 712 Clifton . . . . . . . . 7 1 2 Hexham and Newcastle .« . . 7 1 2 . Leeds ....................................... 714 Liverpool .. . . . . . . 714 Newport and Menevia . . . . 714 Salford .......................................714 New South Wales . . . . . . 714 The Borneo Mission . . . . . . 714

CHRONICLE OF THE WEEK.

REASSEMBLING

OF PARLIAMENT.

A R L I A M E N T reassembled on Tues­

day, and in the House o f Lords all that Lord Granville had to announce was that a V o te o f Thanks to the army in

E gypt would be proposed on Thursday, that the Government had no business to lay before the House, and that after the vote o f thanks their lordships would be asked to adjourn until the io th o f November. In the Commons Lord Randolph Churchill opened the proceedings by protesting against the resumption o f the Session after the Appropriation B ill had been passed, a course which he considered a dangerous precedent, as it would enable a Government to keep one Session open for the whole duration o f a Parliament. A nd he threw his protest into the form o f a motion for adjournment. Mr. G ladstone replied that the proper motion would have been one for an Address asking for prorogation— which L o rd Randolph, by the by, said he was very willing to make— and he quoted the precedent o f 1820, when the H ouse was adjourned three several times after the passage o f the Appropriation A c t and transacted business connected with the trial o f Queen Caroline. That was a grave emergency, and so, the Prime M inister contended, was this. And the precedent here adduced completely “ smashed, destroyed, and pulverised ” Lord Randolph’s statement that the course now adopted was an unconstitutional innovation. Sir Stafford Northcote’s contribution to the discussion was the expression o f his opinion that it would have been better to reserve the Appropriation B ill till the end o f the whole Session, as the Government might want more money, and it would be undesirable to create a precedent for two Appropriation A c ts in one year. H e thought, therefore, that Lord R . Churchill was perfectly justified in raising the point, and was o f opinion that the precedent o f 1820 had no bearing on this case, as on that occasion the Government brought forward no new business o f their own, but merely kept the H ouse sitting for the purposes o f the Queen’s trial. But, as S ir William Harcourt pointed out, the H ouse did do business, receiving the B ill o f Pains and Penalties sent down from the Lords— exceptional business, it is true, but so was this exceptional business. On a division Lord R . Churchill’s motion was negatived by 209 to 142, several Irish members and six Conservatives voting with the Government, and Mr. J. Cowen, Sir John Ennis, and fifteen Parnellites in the minority.

New SERirs. Vol. XXVIII. No. 727.

MR. g r a y ’s IMPRISONMENT.

T h e next subject which came up was the case o f Mr. Gray. Mr. G ladstone moved for a Select Committee to report upon Mr. Justice Lawson’s notice o f Mr. Gray’s com ­

mittal for contempt, and intimated that next year Government would in troduce a measure altering the law on the subject. This Mr. Parnell heard with satisfaction, and suggested that the instructions to the Committee should be enlarged, so as to enable them to report upon the state o f the law. T h e Attorney-General, however, maintained that to enter on the general question now would be out o f order, in asmuch as it was only the question of privilege raised by Mr. G ray’s incarceration which was to take precedence o f the Rules o f Procedure. T h e appointment o f a Committee— to be named hereafter— was agreed to.

Mr. G ladstone then opened the ques-

™ E “ r NT t ‘on t'ie P rocedure Rules by moving p r o c e d u r e r u l e s , precedence for them whenever they were set down, and explained the line which the Government meant to adopt. T h e y would adhere to “ the main propositions ” o f their first Rule, for they “ d id not see how it could be im proved,” but there were “ some points o f it on which they might reserve their liberty,” and they would adopt the substance o f Mr. Gourlay’s amendment, and require that before a motion for “ closure ” a subject shall have been “ adequately discussed.” In fact Mr. G ladstone le ft on the House an impression that the door was not absolutely closed against some k ind o f com promise i f the general sense o f the House was in favour o f it. On the Second Resolution concerning motion for adjournment he proposes that they shall not be made during question tim e unless forty members rise in their places to support them, or until the questions on the notice paper have been disposed of. First Readings and B ills which have passed through committee are to be exempted from the operation o f the 12.30 R u l e ; the M onday R u le is to be extended to other Government days, except Friday, and there are to be morning sittings, i f necessary, on Tuesdays for Supply. F inally the motion for precedence was carried by 98 to 47, one Conservative, Sir John Mowbray, voting with the Government, and Mr. J. Cowen and seventeen followers o f Mr. Parnell in the minority.

THE “ p r in c i p l e THE CLOSURE.

I f the report o f Mr. Herbert G ladstone’s

0F remarks at Leeds on the proposed Rules o f

Procedure is correct, we cannot quote w ith any approval his utterances on this