Vaticanist-Jesuitical, superiors-which is endowed with the same rights and privileges, and enjoys the same protection of law as the Romish Church and the other acknowledged religious communities. Old Catholics will now, under the protection of the law and after the pattern of the Old Catholic constitution, elect their parish clergy, hear divine service in the mother tongue, regulate the business of their Church congregations by a freely elected Church council, take counsel in concert with other congregations respecting common business, and reforms in periodical assemblies and synods, &c. "Now that the Old Catholic Church is acknowledged throughout Austria, every man who desires to maintain his Christianity without the lies of Rome added to it may join any one of the existing congregations. He has simply to make a declaration of accession to it: and then before long, as we hope, many more congregations will arise, for the elements of such have long been prepared. So the Old Catholic Church will prove a city of refuge for the conscience, a shelter for those Catholics who are faithful adherents to their faith, and who are sick of the miserable religioncontemning intrigues of the Jesuits. In a political point of view, too, the Old Catholics of Austria have accomplished an act of deliverance. They have protested against the Vatican decrees not only as Christians, but also as Austrian citizens. As such, they refuse obedience to Rome, because, through the Syllabus and these Vatican decrees she mixes in every business of the State, and would draw within the range of her power every civil and human relationship. The thought is theirs, that he who will break Rome's power must give her a bill of divorce.' It is not enough to protest, to grumble and deride, and then at last allow ourselves to be numbered among her faithful sheep." As regards the financial position of Hungary, a statement of the Finance Minister showed that in the year 1877 there was an increase in the revenue of 860,000l. over that of 1876; about onethird of this increase being from excise and other indirect taxes. As the expenditure was estimated at 23,300,000l., and the revenue at 21,750,000l., there remained an uncovered deficit of about 1,600,000l. This the Minister thought a serious matter, but to judge fairly of the financial position of Hungary it was necessary, he said, to contrast these estimates with those of former years. In 1873 the deficit was 6,000,700l. In 1875 it had fallen to 4,000,000l.; in 1876 to 3,100,000. The Finance Minister believed, therefore, it was only necessary to persevere in the efforts that had been made to grapple with the difficulty, to re-establish the economical equilibrium. Further explanations of the policy pursued by Austria on the Eastern Question were given by Count Andrassy to the Hungarian Delegation on December 10, when, said the Pester Correspondent, "Count Andrassy expressed his concurrence in the opinion that another factor in Europe besides the treaties must be taken into account, namely, force; and that the validity of treaties could only be assured in so far as it could be energetically maintained. Referring to the alliance of the three Emperors, Count Andrassy declared that the Monarchy was the free arbiter of its own destiny, and that no State in Europe could more securely count upon its just and reasonable interests obtaining proper satisfaction. Discussing the position of the small frontier States, Count Andrassy declared himself strongly opposed to the Christian populations of the East being any longer abandoned to the injurious effects of prejudice, as if Austro-Hungary had no heart for their welfare, and as though it were her interest to maintain unchanged the state of things that existed in Turkey previous to the present movement. The Count said courage failed him to defend a status quo in Turkey in such sense, and to employ the power of the Monarchy for an object which no statesman in Europe, nor even in Turkey, believed to be either just or possible of attainment. Count Andrassy, in conclusion, refuted the erroneous belief that Austro-Hungary was acting under pressure from another Power, and declared that there was no Power in Europe which could undertake the settlement of the Eastern Question without the AustroHungarian Monarchy." On December 12 an important debate on foreign affairs took place in the Austrian Delegation, and in reply to the remarks that were made Count Andrassy said that certain statements had been put forth that ought to be refuted at once. First about his vacillating policy, and that the Government had only a policy of opportunity. A policy of opportunity was only true as opposed to a binding policy-a policy of engagement. There was no cause for depression. Contrasting the fears of former times with the feeling of the present he saw a sign of patriotic zeal in the reproach that the policy of the Government had not been decided enough. Hitherto the prevalent feeling had been peace at any price, and the fear of mobilisation, which absorbed millions without securing the interests of the Monarchy; yet now that there had been no mobilisation and no millions spent, and that the interests of the Monarchy had, nevertheless, been preserved, there were some who judged the policy of the Government as if the reverse of all this had occurred. He would ask those gentlemen to define those interests of Austria which had been damnified. What ought the Government to have done or not to have done? In what way could it have prevented the war? By going to war? If they thought so let them speak out; the question was an open one. War could be waged now every bit as well as before, perhaps under more favourable conditions; but the Minister himself would decline the responsibility of such a step. His aim was to secure the interests of the Monarchy and yet preserve friendly relations with all the Powers. This policy, moreover, had never wavered, and had remained consistent at the time when the Russians crossed the Balkans with such ease no less than when they suffered reverses s; and it was the same to-day when the Muscovite arms were again victorious. This policy had been announced both in the Austrian Reichsrath and in the Hungarian Diet in May last in reply to questions about the policy of the Government. It was conscious of its responsibility, but looked with confidence into the future. Its trust arose from the decidedly friendly relations with all the Powers, from the frankness with which it had explained its policy in every direction, and from the conviction that, when Austrian interests were at stake, his Majesty could fully rely on the devotion of his people and the patriotism of their representatives. What the Government said then it clung to now. Again (December 20), to the Committee of the Austrian Delegation, Count Andrassy said he thought that neutrality with regard to the events of the war, with full reservation as to exercising the influence of the Monarchy at the final settlement, was the best course, and he meant to keep it. The principle laid down was this Austria would protect European interests in concert with Europe; but as for her own immediate welfare she would take care of herself. CHAPTER VII. ITALY AND SPAIN. Italy: Roman Catholicism and the Eastern Question-The Health of the Pope- Ir the Pope had been King of Italy in 1877 and all Italians of the same mind as the Pope, Italy would not have been one of the neutral Powers. It has been observed that extremes meet, and it is probable that an Ultramontane would sooner fight with and for a Mohammedan than for a Christian who did not believe in the Pope's supremacy and infallibility. Accordingly we find that the Roman Catholic Church has no sympathy for Eastern Christians or Catholics, and Russia comes in for her especial malediction, and Russia's Eastern policy is reprobated simply because of her sins against the supremacy of the Holy Father. So an article that appeared in the Civilta Catholica in January 1877 declared that, though in the event of war between Russia and Turkey, Turkey, however enthusiastic and courageous, must in the end succumb to the superior numbers and resources of Russia, "Turkey in falling would deal a blow to Muscovite despotism, which had become hateful to God by its unutterable enormities against Catholicism. The health of the Pope from the very beginning of the year was liable to those strange fluctuations that were beyond calculation, and made it no easy matter for the boldest prophet to predict whether on the morrow he would be at death's door or rising betimes and evincing the utmost energy and activity. During the first few days of the new year, we were told, the Pope suffered from a severe cold, which prevented him from replying to the address of the heads of the religious houses on the 4th inst.; but on the 6th he was able to receive the deputation of Italian pilgrims, and to pronounce a long discourse on the condition of Italy. Again it was reported, under the date of January 26, that "the Pope's health was the subject of the most anxious solicitude in the peninsula, and every day the papers had something to say about it." At one time he was said to be "seriously indisposed," but in a day or two he was "able to give audiences and resume his usual course of life;" then, again, he suffered from an attack of gout, and was all but confined to his bed. The "revolutionary" Government, as he called the Government of King Victor Emmanuel, the Pope would not in any way recognise, nor would he have anything to do with the elections; but he scrutinised closely the laws that resulted from the national legislation. Bills concerning the Church were discussed by the Congregation of the Inquisition, which reported upon them to the Pope. The bill for preventing abuse of the ministerial office passed in the Chamber of Deputies by 150 votes against 100. This bill enacted that any minister of religion who misuses his office "to disturb the public conscience or the peace of families," or who by sermon, lecture, or writing shall offend against the laws, or who shall resist the officers of public security, or who contravenes the decrees of Government, by publishing documents affecting religion, shall be punished with imprisonment of from three months to two years, and by fine up to 2,000f. The third paragraph ordains that "Any minister of religion who shall perform external acts of religious observance in opposition to the orders of the Government shall be punished with imprisonment up to three months and with fine up to 2,000f." And the article imposes the same penalties on all "who publish or distribute the above-mentioned documents, from whatever ecclesiastical authority and whatever place they may emanate," which clause is evidently directed against the publication of Papal briefs, allocutions, and other circular notes emanating from the Vatican. The fourth article prescribes six months' imprisonment or a fine of 500 lire for priests who contravene the rules requiring Government consent for the "publication or distribution of provisions relative to worship." The fifth article directs that "clerics who commit any other crime in the exercise of their ministry, even by means of the press, are to be punished by the ordinary penalties, aug mented by one degree." The sixth and last article provides that "the Courts of Assize shall take cognisance of offences included under the first and second articles." Such were some of the stringent penal enactments that would have become law by the passing of the bill, and that the Pope was greatly incensed was only natural. In his opinion it was bad enough that a "revolutionary" Government should be legislating in his own Imperial Rome, but that its legislation should be directed against his own authority, added insult to injury, and was the very climax of wickedness. The case warranted, he thought, strong, not to say violent language. Accordingly, to the Archbishop and pilgrims of Besançon he spoke of the "horrible blasphemies" of the usurping legislature; but "Do not imagine," he said, "that this Parliament represents the nation: no, for Italy is Catholic, profoundly Catholic. They who sit in this assembly form only a small minority, which has imposed on the majority by artifice, violence, and audacity, which is, indeed, the representation of Satan on the earth! This country of Italy is reduced to the most frightful misery, but it will always continue Catholic. France imitates her in this constancy; she is always the eldest daughter of the Church." A bill passed at this time by 142 out of 203 votes abolished imprisonment for debt throughout the kingdom, and all debtors were at once set free. In an Allocution published on March 12, the Pope protested "in the face of the world" against the action of the Italian Government and the way in which it sought to restrain the liberty of his word and his apostolate. In answer to this Signor Mancini, Minister for Public Worship, addressed a circular to the Procureurs-Généraux of the Kingdom of Italy, who desired instructions with reference to papers, that, contrary to recent enactments, had published the Allocution. The Minister remarked that patriots had read "with bitterness of spirit the language of this Allocution, more excessive and more violent than ordinary, against the laws and institutions of Italy, and the august Sovereign who governs by the will of the nation." . . . "It is certain," he continued, "that no constituted government in Europe or in the world could tolerate so grave an offence, and so open a provocation to the people to break their fidelity and respect for existing political institutions and the laws of the land, combined with the danger of exciting in their midst civil agitation and discord." Italy, however, strong in the patriotism of her people, could afford to be tolerant to one whose personal inviolability had been guaranteed, even when he "does not use the gentle language of a religion of charity and peace." So no prosecutions were threatened, and as for the Allocution, " let it freely circulate," said the Minister, "under the eyes of the Italian people, and leave the appreciation of it to their good sense." Finally, the Minister concluded with these two remarks, addressed to Europe, that not only was the Pope |