A W eek ly N ew p a p er a n d R ev iew .
DUM VOBIS GRATULAMUR, ANIM OS ETIAM ADDIM U S 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 fune 4, 1870
V ol. 61. No. 2247.
L ondon, May 12, 1883.
P r ice sd;, b y P o st , s ^ d .
[ R eg ister ed a t t h e G en er a l P ost O f f i c e a s a N ew spaper.
C h r o n i c l e o f t h e W e e k :—
Page
The Second Government Defeat — The Persecution in France— Our Ironclad Fleet— The Colonial Policy of France— Third Trial of Timothy Kelly— Another “ Secret” Society— A Fenian Scare—The Irish NationalistsEmigration to the United States — Mr. Bradlaugh Again—Sunday Opening of Museums— State Regulation of Theatres— Indian Expenditure— The Grievance of Southport—The Royal Academy Dinner — Musical Honours — Prince Bismarck and the Budget — The New Governor of the Lebanon—The Fighting in Zululand—The Conservative Leaders and the Beaconsfield Club . . 717 P e t e r P e n c e . . . . . . . . 7 2 1 I r ish D is tress F und . . . . 7 2 1
C O N T E N T S .
L eaders :
Page
After the Battle . . . . . . 721 Is Atheism Culpable ? . . . . 721 Catholic Chaplains and the Work-
houses ,. . . . . . . 722 A Curious Survival . . . . 723 The Royal Red Cross . . . . 724 N o t e s .....................................................726 R eview s :
The Life of St. John Baptist de
Rossi . . '■ . . . . 728 The Golden Chersonese . . .. 729 Select Specimens o f the English
Poets . . . . .. .. 730 The Nineteenth Century . . . . 730 The Contemporary Review . . 730 The Fortnightly Review . . . . 731 S hort N o t ic e s :
Genesis .. . . . . . . 731
Short N otices (Continued):—
Page
Nature near London . . . . 731 Programmes of Sermons and In
structions ..
731
C orrespondence :— Rome : — (From Our Own Corre
spondent) ...................................... 733 Paris :— (From Our Own Corre
spondent) .. . . . . .. 736 Dublin (From Our Own Corres
pondent) . . . . . . . . 736 L e t t e r s to th e E d itor :—
Theories of the Creation .. .. 738 Was Moses an Inspired Geologist? 739 “ Low Sunday ” . . . . . . 739 An Appeal from Norway . . . . 739 The Housing of Our Poor.. . . 739 Mgr. Smith’s Work on the Penta
teuch .. . . . . . . 740 Society for the Relief o f Dis
charged Catholic Prisoners . . 740
L e t t e r s to th e E d itor (Con
Page tinued): Our Aged and Infirm Priests . . 740 Irish Distress .. . . . . 740 M oney a n d T r a d e ........................... 741 O b it u a r y ........................................ 742 Social a n d P o l it ic a l . . . . 742
SU PPLEM ENT. Decisions of Roman Congregations 749 N ews from th e Schools.. . . 749 E ngland :—
Westminster . . . . 75r S o u th w a rk ......................... . . 75r Clifton .. . . . . . . 751 Middlesbrough . . . . . . 751 Ireland.. . . . . . . .. 752
C H R O N I C L E O F T H E W E E K .
THE SECOND GOVERNMENT
DEFEAT.
F ' ‘‘ OLLOWING hard upon of Thursday came needless Government Friday. At the opening of the defeat the quite disaster of the day’s proceedings the Speaker said he had received a letter from Mr. Bradlaugh, which he then read to the House. Mr. Bradlaugh asked the Speaker to call him to the table of the House for the purpose of taking the oath in the usual way, but added “ should you feel any difficulty in this course, I respectfully ask to be heard at the bar of the House in support of my claim.” Upon this, Sir Stafford Northcote rose and moved the Resolution already carried on four previous occasions, forbidding the public profanation of the oath, and added that he did not care whether Mr. Bradlaugh spoke at the bar or not. After a few words from the Prime Minister, who was understood to wash his hands of the whole matter, Mr. Bradlaugh came forward, and, in a speech of which the moderation was in pleasing contrast with some of his outside utterances, urged his claim. He reminded the House that, though elected on the 4th of March last year, he had made no effort to take his seat, but had been content to abide the issue of the promised Relief Bill, that all during the debates he had sat there listening to the charges brought against him, but speechless, not able to speak a word in his own defence. Altogether Mr. Bradlaugh was very successful in posing as the injured innocent, but when he came to argument he was weak. His main contention that, being duly elected, he could call upon the House either to admit him or else to pass a law expressly depriving him of his civil rights and declaring him incapable of sitting for any constituency's not tenable. I f Northampton, with lull forethought and knowledge of the consequences, wilfully chooses to elect a member who they know cannot take his seat, that is a matter which chiefly concerns Northampton, and may be taken as the idiosyncracy of the borough. Mr. Bradlaugh’s facts, too, are a little difficult to grasp. Thus he disdained all aid from the Liberal party, and declared that in his elections he owed nothing to them— indeed, he had “ always regarded the Liberal party as rather standing in the way of his election than helping his return.” This is sufficiently remarkable, and sets us wondering whence his support came, or is there some fifth party to help infidels ? For ourselves, we quite fail to see what good end was gained by allowing
N e w S e r i e s . V o l . XXIX. No. 755.
Mr. Bradlaugh to strike attitudes at the bar of the House when the issue had been prejudged— when the House had no choice between stultifying itself and passing the excluding Resolution. The question, however, was not to be settled without a division. Mr. Labouchere moved the previous question, a Resolution which, if carried, would have undone the work of the Christian Opposition, and by defeating Sir Stafford Northcote’s Resolution have allowed Mr. Bradlaugh, as far as lips can swear, to take the oath. The Prime Minister was consistent, and announced that he would vote for the previous question, and it then dawned upon the House that the division was critical and crucial, and Mr. O’Donnell, who throughout the whole of this struggle has played his part manfully, in trenchant words accused the Ministry of being guilty of a most discreditable trick, in trying, by a snatch vote, to override the solemn decision of the House. However, the spirit of the House was up, and upon a division, promptly put the Government into a minority of 106— there being 165 for the previous question, and 271 against it. AVe trust the Bradlaugh controversy may for the present be ended.
The French Senate was on Saturday the
ERSEcu”iioN scene an interpellation relative to the pendin France. ino action against the Bishops. M. Batbie, who raised the question, spoke strongly against the impolicy and the iniquity of the recent decision by which the Council of State affirmed its own power to deprive both Bishops and priests of the narrow stipends allowed them by the State. For the Ministry M. Martin-Feuillée, representing the Department of Justice and AArorship, made answer by quoting plentiful precedents for the policy of persecution— a facile task which he performed exhaustively and as though his heart were in it. Napoleon I., he assured the House, stood out alone from the line of the Kingly and Imperial masters of France in refusing to fine the clergy, and that was only because he found it more effective to imprison them. The Minister then sketched out the coming policy, which will consist in firmly enforcing not only respect but submission to the Republic, This happily comprehensive phrase is seen from the context to mean approval of, or at least acquiescence in, the godless schools and in the use in them of books from which the name of the Almighty has been erased, and where, as in M. Paul Bert’s child’s guide to the duties of a citizen a pitfful travesty of the past is taught under the name of history. M. Martin-Feuillée’s further assurance that it was ng part of the Government plan to try
