The morning star and Catholic messenger. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1868-1881, 1876-07-09
aaornIng Star and Catholic Messenger.
NEW ORLEANS. SUNDAY. JULY 1870.
FRANCE.
Icorresponpent London Tablet
THE NEW UNIVERSITY BILL.

the Cham her entered upon Ine oiScuse'op
of che Bill brought in by M. Waddipgtop,
the object of which is, as you are aware,
90 withdraw from the Catholics the rignt
of comforting degrees, and to vest it soieiy
IN the State. No decision is come to as yet ;
Il sfiie Chamber have voted the concinsion OF
The debate on the general scope of the Bill,
and proceedt d TO the discussion OF It's de
\ tails and the amendments proposed. This
affair has caused much excitement IN
France. It is one of the many phases OF
chat war now waged every where against
q catholicism by all the hostile sects. We
nave bad o whole series Of conflicts on this
~aueetion of education. There was one Id
4 iS44, and another in 1855, on secondary
-xsiucation. Last year the fight began
4 about superior education, and it was the
-of things. Now that success ia sought TO
aoe wrested from US, against all Poii.ica,
y suood faith, by the Republican and Radical
r<zIasj ority in the Chamber.
THE DEBATE.
The Catholic deputies have energeticai'y
seconded the wishes of the Bishops, and
g have delivered number of able speeches
+ Ia defence of the Act of last year. On the
IftFirst day of the debate NJ. Paul de Cassag-
i .uac and the Marquis de Castellane showed
Tho gross unfairness of the Bill towards
i Catholics. The former of these speakers
did himself credit by his profession of
Catholic principles, and it would be well II
sSsame ground, which is at once Copserva-
Give and honestly Liberal; although his de-
! rlaration that he spoke not as an lmpe-
I etialist, OF as a party man, but as q
sC&tholic, goes to deprive his action of
sauy .poiitical value. He pointed out that
Vls debate was remarkable one inasmuch
I as the uphoIders of authority had the task
s-uf defending liberty against the Liberals.
EVEN IN these two opening speeches the
I. riRhteousness of the Catholic claims was
sgSuade so clear that it must have carried the
X day had not the Republican majority been
ssblindly resolved to oppose it, as M. Gam
sSetta, in his Lille address, asserted would
DO the case. On the second day the conflict
y became warmer, and M. Keller, who since
sshe exclusion of n. Cheanelong from the
Chanber has been tho spokesman Of the
Catholic party, explained the true charac-
ter of the Bill, and told the Honse that it
WAS simply concession to the Left by
young Ministry in quest of q majority, and
the present measure Ia but the first OF ser
z les of c0ncessiops each of which will be
ssthan it's predecessor. The complete secu-
2arization of education was, he said, one of
4 the principle articles of the programme of
that Ultra. Radical which counts numerous
ssadherants in the Chamber. One of the
ieading supporters Of the measures, M.
Spuller finding arguments fail him, had re.
zOourse to abuse, and spoke OF" mistakes of
TACT and errors of opinion committed By the
st0pponents of the Bill; and falsely asserted
chat the law of the 18th July does not re-
quire any professors of free Universities
salthough the act sage expressly the contrary,
Senad provides that there shall be professors
.Ssf free education as we'll as of the State
university. Nor was this the only instance
'4of glaring and apparently deliberate mis-
statement on the part OF the opponents OF
Catholic rights. Prince Hohenlohe, the
y Ambassador from Prince Bismarck was
: NEnunsat the audience at the debate, aud
slent ali the couutenance his presence could
sxakEord' to the opponents of Catholic rights.
Ca Saturday the Minister of Public In
sstxuction spoke, but did not do much to
,SHards refuting the reasoning Of the oppo-
nents Of his measure. Then ID, DC Mum 1.
su1Ounted the tribune to reply. This die
tinguished Catholic deputy is likely to lose
Sl,ss seat through the finding of the election
2 committee, 30 that 1t may perhaps have
been the laat occasion on which his voice
will be heard in the Chamber, to which
oEnament. He protested energetically
agAinstthe injustice of the Bill. He char
= ActAxiGed it as q measure OF persecution
against the Church, whose duty and whose
4 sEiahe IL is to console and instruct mankind.
nc is not yet twelvenonth ago slnce q law
was enacted confirming the Church's right
Sof instruction. What, he asked, are We to
think of Government that adopts the dan.
@aEous principle of instability In the law
GIfindeed it could be said that the Act had
been tried, and had been found 10 Wo!
! BADLY; if abuses had been committed II
.outtip0 it into execution, there then woulC
Be- some plausible ground for the sudde1
.change. But the Government refnses al
delay, it insists on the immediate abolition
of the mixed jury because 1t will be easie
ito carry the abolition now than later; tha
Sia. when the new machinery for granting
degrees shall have come into operation
The argument is perhaps conclusive, bu
its Injustice is very manifest. The fact !
that In this matter might prevails over right
fore, our free Universities are to be con
Gemued without trial, although their or
ponents were unable to allege eingl
grievance in respect TO them. This act OF II
Justice will cause surprise and deep indignt
zion to the great Catholic body of Franc
who are still the majority of the natio'
but their feelings on the subject give lit
concern to NJ. Waddington and his sui
Sporters, and the Bill will be carried by