what the same effect on the Unionist ranks

as that produced on the Scotch army when the English champion fell cleft through the skull by the battle-axe of the Bruce at Bannockburn. Nothing that subsequently took place broke the force of that great blow. Sir William Harcourt's subsequent election for West Monmouth, a constituency which curiously enough figures in the Home Office statistics as one of the worst in the United Kingdom for criminality, enabled the doughty leader to creep back into Parliament; but it was not in the power of West Monmouth to restore the prestige lost at Derby. Very different feelings were excited by the rejection of Mr. Morley, who, after representing Newcastle for twelve years, was sacrificed to the vengeance of the Independent Labour Party. Mr. Morley remains the most conspicuous and most regretted victim of this disastrous election. Mr. Asquith in East Fife achieved the one solitary personal success scored by a Liberal leader.

What will Leaving these questions of the past, the Lord Salis- question naturally arises as to what Lord

bury do? Salisbury will do with the majority which

now awaits his orders. Will he rest and be thank

ful, and let John Bull take his snooze, or will he attempt to carry out any extensive programme of social and political reform? Mr. Chamberlain's programme is unquestionably not one of the armchair. Several Unionist candidates have made profession of a desire to legislate in many directions, as may be seen, for instance, from the programme which was printed on one of the cards of Mr. Whitelaw, Unionist candidate for North-East Lanark, who adopted as his motto, "Union, not Separation":

From the New Budget.]

[July 18, 1895.

"I shall persevere as long as I am able in the Liberal cause and the maintenance of the prin

ciples to which I am attached.-Sir William Harcourt's Telegram, Tuesday, July 16.

POLICY.

1. STRONG AND RESOLUTE FOREIGN POLICY-Without which there can be for Employer, No Trade; for Workman, No Wage. 2. NAVAL SUPREMACY-To protect our Commerce in transit to and from the market.

3. SOCIAL LEGISLATION-(a.) Provision for Old Age-no injury to Friendly Societies. (b.) Improve Workmen's Dwellings. (c.) Compensation for all Accidents. (d.) Conciliation in Trade Disputes. (e.) Increased Vigilance over and Inspection of Dangerous Trades. (f.) Fatal Accidents Inquiry. (g.) Restrict Alien Pauper Immigration.

4. REFORM OF LICENSING SYSTEM.

5. REGISTRATION REFORM.

6. REFUSE TO DISESTABLISH THE CHURCH.

7. REFUSE TO INCREASE TAXATION TO PAY MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT.

It is probable that in relation to several of these items Lord Salisbury will meet proposals to legislate by Lord Melbourne's old question, "Why cannot you let it alone?"

The Compulsion of

In politics, as in everything else, man proposes but God disposes, and Ministers Circumstance. will have to do not as they would, but as they must. The instinct of Lord Salisbury will unquestionably be to do as little as he possibly can, and therein he will undoubtedly be in accord with the majority of his supporters. But however reluctant he may be, he will find himself compelled to deal first with the Irish land; secondly, with the reform of procedure in Parliament; thirdly, with the question of Employers' Liability. These are questions which any Government would have to deal

over for the present all matters upon which there existed a serious difference of opinion, he would secure the maximum of support and the minimum of opposition. The question of the reform of the House of Lords, the redistribution of the seats in the House of

Commons, and the reform of the licensing system will be left alone for the present, and possibly altogether. One Vote One Value was a useful cry against One Man One Vote, but Ministers will probably find that it is best to let sleeping dogs lie. Registration reform is

the sooner something is done the better; nor is there any need for complicating the elec toral law by controversial matters such as One Man One Vote, or One Vote One Value. Irish Local Government is another matter upon which there is a general agreement that something must be done, nor is there any reason why it should be of a contentious nature. They cannot go so far as Liberals would wish, but if Ministers would act in this, as in other matters, on the principle of carrying out what is agreed upon, and leaving over that which is disputed, they might secure the support of the whole House a measure of long delayed and much needed reform.

by Committees and Commissions, and which command the general support of all parties. Lord Salis. bury could take a very strong line in this matter, if he chose, by adopting, in fact, the principle which is the basis of the National Social Union. If he would say frankly and strongly that in all social legislation he intended to carry out only those measures upon which all were agreed, and to leave

on

The

Horror.

It is possible, perhaps even probable, Armenian that all these questions may be cast into the shade by the sudden outbreak of war or the changes which would inevitably follow the accession of a new sovereign. The horoscope of Europe points to war. Inter arma silent leges,—the thunder of the cannon silences Parliamentary debates on social reform. The situation in Macedonia is menacing; that in Armenia is horrible. Out of these difficulties it is possible for a bold Minister, free from prejudice, to pluck the flower of safety; but it would be too much to hope that Lord Salisbury will dare to affront the senseless prejudices of his party by meeting the Armenian difficulty in the only way in which good can be done. If he were to take the initiative in proposing that Russia should have a European mandate for the occupation and the administration of the Armenian provinces, he would at one stroke deliver Armenia, conciliate Russia, and ward off the danger which threatens British interests in Egypt. Russia is now reconciled with Bulgaria, and it only needs a good Anglo-Russian agreement to settle the Armenian question. In those distant parts, where the Pasha and the Kurd are waging a war of torture and of extermination against the unfortunate Armenians, no milk-andwater proposals are of the slightest use. Let Lord Salisbury grasp the situation, invoke the intervention of Russia by a European mandate, and everything may be done, otherwise nothing will be done, and the massacres and atrocities will go on unchecked until there is an explosion which may bring about a general war.

With the exception of the Eastern Question, upon which Lord Salisbury has a bad

Probable Foreign Policy. record, there is a very general feeling of satisfaction, even among Liberals, that the foreign policy of this country is in the hands of a Minister who has at his back a strong and united majority. The situation in the far East is serious, not to say menacing. The evacuation of the Chinese mainland by the Japanese forces lingers. The Russians have succeeded at the eleventh hour in overcoming the reluctance of the Chinese to accept their guaranteed loan, and it is more than ever obvious that Japanese projects of conquest can only be carried out after a war with Russia. Lord Salisbury is almost certain to base his foreign policy upon a good understanding with Germany, and as such understanding can usually be only obtained by quid pro quo, every one is wondering what quid the Germans will demand. Dɔ ut des, Bismarck's maxim, continues to be acted upon

by his successors.

In politics the Germans resemble the Dutch, who were said, at the beginning of this century, in commerce to give too little and to take too much; and the Germans, finding Lord Salisbury in a mood to bargain, will squeeze him as to terms. This disposition to bargain with Berlin will not facilitate an arrangement with St. Petersburg, where indications are not lacking of suspicion. France, it is said, will raise the Egyptian question in October, and will be supported by Russia. Should that come to pass, Lord Salisbury will almost inevitably be compelled to make terms with the Triple Alliance, and those terms are not likely to increase a feeling of tranquillity in Europe. The outlook is stormy. At any moment news may come of French action in the Upper Nile Valley that would bring us face to face with the imminent possibility of war. With courage, however, and prudence, Lord Salisbury may be able to use our independent position to avert so terrible a catastrophe.

Mr. Chamberlain and the Colonies.

The question of questions is what Mr. Chamberlain will do. He is not a man to be interned in any one department, even although at the Colonial Office he will have free range round the world. There are, however, two or three things he could do with great advantage. By far the most serious problem that confronts us in the near future with regard to the Colonies is their financial indebtedness. We have quite recently had painful experience of the consequences of bankruptcy in the oldest of our Colonies, Newfoundland. In the opinion of some alarmists, Newfoundland is by no means the only Colony whose finances give occasional cause for great anxiety. The smash up in Newfoundland produced no appreciable effect here. It would be very different if any of the Australian Colonies were to be unable to pay their way. The policy of the Argentine brought about a fall of the Barings and precipitated a financial catastrophe from which we were extricated by the skin of our teeth by the action of the Bank of England. But the collapse in the Argentine would be as nothing compared to any serious financial difficulty affecting Australian credit. Why should Mr. Chamberlain not take steps at once to inform himself of the actual facts by sending a special commissioner, such a man for instance as Sir Alfred Milner, who might have been created for such a post, on a confidential mission to all the great colonies? His report would be invaluable, and what we want to see is the actual facts of the financial condition of Greater Britain in a clear white

The Hunt

Markets.

light that will not be too cold, and that is exactly the kind of light that Sir Alfred Milner turns upon all questions connected with the Empire. Another task which Mr. Chamberlain is for New probably engaged in is the drawing up of a comprehensive report based upon the material, which has been accumulating of late years, concerning all the proposed railways, undeveloped trade routes, and possible markets within and without Greater Britain. Such a blue book, with maps, would afford a foundation for the British Market policy, which he maintains, not without cause, is the best remedy for trade depression. At the same time, it is possible he might look out of the corner of his eye at the question of developing the home market. It would be a pity if he were to afford a new illustration of the old proverb "that a fool's eyes are at the end of the earth." He might also, with advantage, create an influential consultative Commission, representing the Chambers of Commerce and other commercial bodies, with which he could discuss, as in a kind of Trade Parliament, what can be done, and how to do it. The Vene- Another question which Mr. Chamberlain will have to deal with, and which it will be well for him to draw his attention to at once, is the irritating little dispute which exists between British Guiana and the Republic of Venezuela. There is reason to believe that the Colonial Office has hitherto been but imperfectly informed as to the irritation which the dilatory policy of the past has occasioned in the United States. Both Houses of Congress six months since called upon Great Britain to consent to arbitration at once on the Venezuelan frontier question, but the impression seems to have prevailed in Downing Street that the resolution did not amount to much. Now, however, that France has consented to refer to arbitration the question between French Guiana and Brazil, American sentiment is more pronounced than ever as to the necessity for settling the Venezuelan frontier by the same means. On the last Fourth of July, ex-Governor Campbell, of Ohio, delivered a very fierce attack upon England at Tammany Hall. Dr. Shaw, commenting upon Mr. Campbell's speech, says:

zuelan Frontier.

It was in defence of the Monroe Doctrine, and its particular burden was the dispute between Great Britain and Venezuela touching the boundaries of British Guiana. This is no new topic to the readers of the REVIEW OF REVIEWS, for this periodical, as it happens, has been foremost in urging the plain duty of the United States with reference to England's continued refusal to arbitrate. Mr. Campbell presented the facts regarding British encroachments, and their bearing upon the

position and policy of the United States, with unusual clearness and force. In doing this Mr. Campbell was not performing a pioneer duty. The Republican leaders are quite as strongly aroused upon this question as any of their opponents. For example, Senator Cushman K. Davis, who is a highly international authority, had recently taken the same grounds in an address delivered delivered to some of his constituents in Minnesota; while Senator Henry Cabot Lodge, of Massachusetts, has not only made eloquent speeches but has published a somewhat impassioned article in the North American Review invoking the Monroe Doctrine as against British aggressions. Furthermore, Governor Campbell, Senator Davis, Senator Lodge, and all the hundreds of other orators of both parties who are taking up Venezuela and the Monroe Doctrine, are merely following out the tone and spirit of the resolution passed by both Houses of Congress before the adjournment of the session four months ago.

The Venezuelan question, in the partition of ministerial duties, belongs to the Secretary of State for the Colonies rather than to the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs; and now that the Marquis of Ripon has been superseded by Mr. Joseph Chamberlain it is possible that such questions may be handled at least with keenness and decisiveness. Meanwhile M. Hanotaux and Mr. Eustis have scored a point, and France will have gained many friends in North and South America. The French claims in Guiana are far more plausible and respectable than the British; and in consenting to arbitration the French Government is making a real concession that deserves praise.

Arbitration.

Dr. Shaw, undoubtedly, expresses the A Case for American view of the question. The English view, about which the Americans appear to be as much in the dark as we have been about the strength of American sentiment on this matter, is that so far from there being any English aggressions on Venezuelan territory, the whole difficulty relates to territory ceded to us by the Dutch many years before the Monroe doctrine was ever heard of. We have from time to time proposed to give up to Venezuela territory which the Dutch claimed as their own, and which we have always regarded as our own by virtue of the treaty ceding to us the Dutch possessious in this region. But putting on one side all the misleading references to the Monroe doctrine which, as formulated by its author, only protested against the extension of influence or territorial possession by European Powers beyond the frontiers which they claimed when the doctrine was formulated, Mr. Chamberlain will do well to We have never get this question settled off-hand. objected to arbitration about territory which can legitimately be regarded the subject of dispute; we only object to refer to arbitration questions as to the ownership of territory which we consider to be as indisputably our own as Florida is the possession of the United States. But that is a question of detail, which a business man like Mr. Chamberlain ought to be able to settle without much difficulty. It is perfectly ridiculous to allow a trumpery question such as this of the Venezuelan frontier to act like a