THE TABLET A Weekly Newspaper a n d Review .

DUM VOBIS G R A T U LA M U R , ANIMOS EX IA M ADD IM U S U T IN IN CCEPTIS V E S T R IS CONSTAN 1 E R M AN EA T IS .

From the B r i e f o f H is Holiness P iu s I X . to T he T a b let , Ju n e 4, 18 7 0

Vol. 63. No. 2305. L o n d o n , J u n e 28, 1884.

P rice sd., by Post, 5%d.

[R egistered a t the General Post Office as a N ewspaper.

CONTENTS.

C hronicle of the Week :—

Page

Reform of the House of Lords— The Merits of Lord Rosebery’s Suggestions—Life Peerages—Reception and Fate of the Proposal —The Conference and the Financial Proposals—The Anglo-French Agreement—Attitude of the Opposition—M, Ferry’s Statement— An Awkward Point—Turkey and the Conference—The Franchise B ill—Death of the Prince of Orange—Prince Bismarck’s Colonial Policy—Cholera in France— The English Augustinian Convent in Paris—Divorce in France—The Conscription Bill—Protest of the French Cardinals — Egyptian News—Enlargement of the Suez Canal—The City Companies . . 1001 L eaders :—

The Pound of Flesh . . . . 1005

L eaders (continued) :

Page

The Problem of the D ay . . 1006 Catholic Progress and Catholic

Wants . . . . . . . . 1006 The Dutch Succession . . . . 1008 A Foolish Inference . . . . 1008 Money and T rade . . . . 1008 Martyrdoms in Tonkin . . . . 1009 A Tory Herald ! .......................... 1010 N o t e s ....................... . . ion

R eviews :—

Fenelon . . . . . . . . 10 13 Jungmann’s Church History . . 1014 The Life of Christ . . . • 1014 Farmer Bull’s Bailiff . . . . 1014 The Centenary of Our Lady’s

Nativity . . .......................... 1015

Correspondence :—

Rome : —(From Our Own Corre­

Page spondent) . . . . . . 1017 Paris :—(From OurJOwn Corre­

spondent) .......................... 1019 Dublin . . .......................... 1020 United States : — (From Our

American Correspondent) . . 1021 The New Belgian Government . . 1024 L etters to the E ditor :

Scarce Ascetical Books ., A Few Questions .. Public Education . . Girvan Bazaar . . ., An Insidious Abuse St. Anselm’s Society

. . T024 . . 1025 . . 1025 . . 1025 . . 1025 . . 1037

Cricket

L iterary Gossip .. Social and Political

1025 • 1026

SU P P L EM E N T . Page

Decisions of Roman Congregations 1033 N ews from the Schools :—

The “ School Guardian” and

Cardinal Manning . . . . 1033 The Douai Society Meeting . . 1034, Catholic Success and Catholic

Failure . . . . . . . . 1034 The Royal Commission on Tech­

nical Education—II. . E ngland :—

•• 10 35

Westminster Birmingham Clifton ........................ Hexham and Newcastle. Newport and Menevia . Northampton Salford . . Scotland :—

- 1036 . . 1036 . . 1036 . . 1037 . . 10 37 . . 10 37 • • 10 37

Glasgow . . ..

1037

The Editor cannot tindertake to return Manuscript, in any case.

CHRONfCLE OF TH E WEEK.

REFORM OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS. L

A ST week’s Parliament closed with a re­

markable debate in the House of Lords. Lord Rosebery, in a speech o f great brilliancy and some humour, moved fora Select Committee to consider the best means o f improving the efficiency o f that House. H e began by reviewing the changes the House had already undergone in the course o f its history .—the loss o f the abbots and the conversion of the temporal lords from a minority into a large majority, the suspension o f the House under the Protectorate, the admission of representative peers from Ireland and Scotland, the enormous creation o f peers — 388-—by George I I I , the loss o f the Irish Bishops in 1869, the suspension o f bankrupt peers in 18 7 1 , and the admission o f the Lords of Appeal with life peerages in 18 76 . Contemporaneously with these modifications, momentous changes had taken place in the country generally, in the enormous increase of the power o f the House o f Commons, and in the number o f the voters and o f the population generally, and lastly, in the coming into an existence of a newspaper press and a Colonial Empire. H e thought then that so ancient an institution as the House o f Lords might require some re-adjustment, and that “ his modest proposal was only a request for a coat o f new paint.” H e believed that that House was neither so popular as its friends maintained, nor so unpopular as it was represented to be by those who ■ wished for its destruction. What, then, were the defects which contributed to its unpopularity, and which might properly form the subjects o f inquiry ? First, there was the quorum, which in the Lords is only three, while in the Commons it is forty. In connection with this he told two funny stories. The late Lord Leitrim, who afterwards came to so tragical an end, once spoke for four hours to the Lord Chancellor and one other peer, who was to answer him. Here Lord Ellenborough thought it worth while to interrupt, and to say that for a part o f the time he too was present. “ Very well,” said Lord Rosebery, “ then I will take it that three and a half peers were present.” The other was a story, perhaps a legend, about Lord Lyndhurst, who was talked to death by the only peer present when he wanted to go to dinner. Driven at last to desperation, the Chancellor exclaimed : “ This is too bad ;

New Series, Voi., XXXI, No. 813.

can’t you stop ? B y Jove, i f you don’t stop I will count you out.” The desirability o f Jo in t Committees o f the two Houses -was then touched upon, and the next point was the large number o f habitual absentees who now and then swamped the regular attendants by a sudden influx. Then there was the representation o f classes, the Dissenters being hardly at all represented, medicine not at all, in spite o f Lord Beaconsfield’s san ita s san ita tum , om n ia san i/a s ; nor art, though the question about the Duke o f Wellington’s statue had aroused such a bitter controversy; and science, literature, and commerce were but inadequately represented. Then there were the colonies, which might well supply peers to the Upper House, and lastly the labouring classes, which were not represented there at all. And as the number o f Bishops increased, those who succeeded to seats by rotation would soon come in at so advanced an age that some system o f delegation would be necessary. A ll these points would be proper matters for the consideration o f a Committee which he looked upon as a “ hatching machine,” for no peer on either side would have any chance of carrying a substantial proposal. Lord Rosebery then invoked the authority o f a speech of Lord Salisbury in 1869 in favour of life peerages, and wound up with an eloquent defence of the merits of the House as a Second Chamber, and of his proposal as a piece of true Conservatism, inasmuch as by examining the foundations and testing the structure o f the institution, they could best guard, in the words o f Burke, “ their own honour, the honour o f their ancestors, and o f their posterity.”

That no institution is perfect, and that

MERITS OF LORD roserery’s SUGGESTIONS.

th e merits every institution has from time to time to undergo modification, is a mere truism ; the real question is what modification o f an institution is compatible with the mainte­

nance of its essential qualities, and it therefore must always be a question o f details. We confess that on some points we think Lord Rosebery made out a very good case for reference, and, in the interest o f the Lords, it would obviously be better that such points should be considered by a Committee o f their own than be forced into notice from without. Undoubtedly the quorum might advantageously be raised, and Joint Committees would probably facilitate more rapid legislation. As to habitual absentees, it would be difficult to frame a limit o f time which should be a disqualification, and at the same time provide a locus poenitentiae for those who wished to mend their ways. We doubt, however, whether any practical good would be effected by representation o f medicine