labour for a better understanding between the two nations. Long may it flourish, and may it bring forth a plentiful progeny of similar clubs both in Germany and in Britain !

The Friendship with Russia.

Sir

One of the most satisfactory incidents last month was the visit paid by a deputation of some thirty notable and representative Englishmen, both lay and clerical, parliamentary and otherwise, to Russia. It is the return visit, on an enlarged scale, to that which was paid by the members of the Russian Duma to London last year. The visitors were to be headed by the Speaker of the House of Commons, but before the deputation had reached Berlin Mr. Lowther was unfortunately summoned back by the news of the death of his father. Lord Hugh Cecil and Lord Charles Beresford are the most notable Parliamentarians who took part in this excursion; but both Ministerialists and Unionists were well represented, as also were the Church, the Army and Journalism. There was a little unfortunate misunderstanding as to the issue of the invitations, which appear to have been arranged by Mr. B. Pares in this country, and M. Zvegintseff in Russia. Mackenzie Wallace, Lord Weardale and Lord Sanderson signed the invitations, which were sent out by the Speaker. It was understood that the Russians were very anxious that the Deputation should be thoroughly representative and should not be in any way political. Everything has been done in Russia to give a warm and hearty welcome to the representatives of Great Britain. Their stay at Moscow and St. Petersburg was crowded with receptions, banquets and excursions. The Bishops of the Greek Orthodox Church were delighted to welcome their Anglican brethren, and the presence of Mr. Birkbeck lent some colour to the suggestion that they might witness the revival of the movement for the re- union of the Greek Orthodox and Anglican Churches; which is a fine dream, but one of those dreams which do no harm to the dreamers. The Labour Party and the Poles refused to take part in the welcome extended to the British visitors, but there are some people who delight to play the part of the mummy at every Egyptian feast.

A

Ridiculous Radical

Rump.

The attitude of some English Radicals with regard to this visit seems to be the very acme of absurdity. As long as Russia was a despotism without even a semblance of Constitution, with no representative Assembly of any kind, the Daily News, following the lead of Mr. Gladstone, Mr. Bright, and all the great Liberal leaders of the past generation, worked in season and out of season for a rapprochement with Russia. Anglo-Russian friendship was one of the watchwords of the Liberal Party. Now that Russia has modified her despotism, established her Duma, and entered into the Anglo-Russian Agreement, these inconsequent politicians do everything they possibly can to inflame the relations

between the two countries. They are not pleased with the Anglo-Russian policy in Persia, therefore they are doing their level best (or worst) to set up a row between England and Russia, entirely regardless of the fact that upon good relations between these two Empires the peace of Asia depends. These gentry seem to forget that there are many things in our policy which are just as much disliked by Russians as we dislike things in Russia's policy. When we enter into a working agreement with a nation we do not give them a certificate for the possession of all the virtues; we only recognise that with all their shortcomings it is better to be friends than to be enemies, especially as by being enemies we would accentuate every fault that we most dislike. The Daily News and its friends are all at present in favour

of an Anglo-German entente, and as it seems as if they must hate someone, they are therefore reviving Russophobia, apparently in the hope that by so doing they may divert national prejudice from Germany to Russia. It is a dangerous game, and one entirely unworthy of the best traditions of the Daily News.

Mr. Shuster and Persia.

Mr. Shuster arrived in London at the end of the month on his way home to America. He was entertained at a banquet at the Savoy Hotel by his friends and admirers. Mr. Shuster appears to be a very capable young man, and if he had had a little more tact might have done great things for Persia. Unfortunately he seems from the first to have set himself to jeopardise the agreement between Russia and England and to encourage the Persians in a provocative line, which, things being as as they are, everyone with half an eye must have seen would play directly into the hands of those Russians who from the first have regarded with little sympathy the agreement between the two Governments, the object of which was to maintain the independence and integrity of Persia. The one hope for Persia is that England and Russia will be on good terms with each other, and that each will act as a mutual check upon the other should they be tempted to interfere in the internal affairs of Persia. Eloquent and ambitious speeches were delivered in Mr. Hammerstein's Opera House and at the Savoy

banquet by men who do not seem to have realised the inevitable result of their impassioned rhetoric. Supposing Mr. Ramsay Macdonald, Sir Thomas Barclay, or Mr. Lynch were made Foreign Secretary, what would he do? He would either have to carry on with Russia as best he could, endeavouring to obtain the maximum security for Persian independence or integrity under very difficult circumstances. If he did this he would be doing exactly what Sir Edward Grey is doing. Or he might take umbrage at something Russia has done and protest against it, which apparently is the only idea these Opera House politicians have in their heads. But after you have protested, what then?

Fight or Sulk ?

Supposing that Russia ignores your protest, are you going to quarrel with Russia, which means war, the first results of which would be

to place the whole of Northern Persia in the hands of Russia, without any possibility of being able to dislodge her by an attack from the Persian Gulf? Our Persiamaniacs protest that they do not wish to go to war, and as they are most of them pacifists by profession we may accept their assurances. What, then, is the other alternative? Simply to protest and sulk; to break up the harmonious relations between England and Russia, and to set up along the whole of the Asiatic frontier, from the Red to the Yellow Sea, the old policy of antagonism, intrigue and

preparation for future war which has been the bane of Asia ever since the Crimean War. After nearly forty years of active participation in international politics, I can hardly remember any case of such fatuous folly as that in which a certain section of the Radicals are indulging at present. It is an apostasy, to begin with, a repudiation of the best traditions of the Radical Party, and it is of all others the cause most calculated to defeat the end which they desire to attain.

The Crisis in China.

Mr.

All last month China was in a state of unrest. Negotiations have been going on between Yuan Shih Kai, as representing the Manchus in the north, and Wu Ting Fang, as representing the Republican revolutionary movement, which is in the south. At one time there seemed to be a fair prospect that the Manchu Princes would abdicate and that the State of China would come into being under the Presidency of Sun Yat Sen. Difficulties, however, arose, and misunderstandings cropped up. The Manchus reconsidered their position as to abdication, and in the last week in January China seemed to be heading straight for civil war. Sidney Webb, who passed through China on his way home, reports that the revolutionary Republican forces have been recruited by the simple process of emptying all the gaols of their adult males. These criminals were at once furnished with arms and enrolled in the revolutionary ranks. There will be some wild work when the ex-gaol birds are let loose on the peaceful population of the North. Both sides seem to be feeling the pinch of money, for without money armies cannot fight, even in China, and even the greatest optimist contemplates the immediate future with dismay. As the result of the war the vast outlying provinces of China are breaking loose. Thibet and the great Mongolian desert have already declared their determination to be independent of the rule of Pekin. Unless the Republicans and the Manchus can arrange their differences rapidly the integrity of China will be gone. And it should be noted, by the way, that the Japanese Government have issued a significant declaration to the effect that they do not think Republican institutions are suited to China. This may be a declaration of pious opinion, but on the other hand it may be the precursor of active intervention against the Republican forces. Japan holds that the AngloJapanese Alliance commits both Japan and England to the maintenance of the integrity of the Chinese Empire. It will be a pleasant prospect if, in addition to quarrelling with Russia about Persia, the

Mr.

SIR EDWARD CARSON: "Ulster will fight!" MR. PUNCH: "What! Against free speech? Then Ulster will be wrong!"

Orangemen would occasion. Lord Londonderry and the other members of the Ulster Unionist Council no sooner heard of the intended visit than with incredible insolence they publicly declared they would not allow the meeting to take place. The proper course for the Government to have taken would have been to at once summon Lord Londonderry and his fellow councillors to show cause why they should not be at once bound over to keep the peace. Many better men than Lord London

derry have been imprisoned in Ireland for declarations not one whit more illegal than the ukase abolishing the right of free speech in Belfast. Unfortunately when faced with a similar conspiracy to silence unpopular speakers in London the Government had taken the course of binding over the threatened speaker to hold his tongue or go to gaol for three months. If Mr. Birrell had acted on Mr. McKenna's principle, Mr. Churchill would have been bound over to stay away from Belfast, or sit in gaol for six months if he declined to give sureties for his silence. Mr. Asquith, however, is enjoying a holiday in Sicily, and, no one apparently being in command, Mr. Churchill offered to temporise. He would not go to

Westminster Gazette.]

Fits from Dickens.

Sir E. Carson and Mr. F. E. Smith as Lord George Gordon and Mr. Gashford.

Lodges, and they could not resist the temptation to strike a blow at the apostate son of the patriot statesman who a quarter of a century ago had declared that" Ulster would fight, and Ulster would be right." Mr. Churchill's visit seemed to afford them an opportunity of showing that they meant business, and were in for war and not for politics. The First Lord's proposed excursion to Belfast served the purpose of a reconnaisance which unintentionally unmasked the enemy's position. The spirit of dark rebellion, squat like the Satanic toad at the ear of Eve, had for weeks past been filling the Orange mind with

Distempered, discontented thoughts,
Vain hopes, vain aims, inordinate desires,
Blown up with high conceits engendering pride.

of a riot. He would content himself with some other place of meeting. To this Lord Londonderry assented, but Lord Londonderry's followers, by engaging all the other halls for the night in question, rendered it impossible to hold the meeting, except in a huge tent erected for the purpose.

Ithuriel in Milton's epic :

Him thus intent Ithuriel with his spear
Touch'd lightly; for no falsehood can endure
Touch of celestial temper, but returns
Of force to its own likeness; up he starts
Discover'd and surprised. As when a spark
Lights on a heap of nitrous powder, laid
Fit for the tun, some magazine to store
Against a rumour'd war, the smutty grain
With sudden blaze diffused inflames the air:
So started up in his own shape the fiend.

It was well to know what these gentry were plotting, It would have been madness to play into their hands by trying to hold the meeting as if it was only on political matters. It is not politics but war in Belfast

now, and you cannot conduct a campaign on the assumption that this is a mere political march past. It is worth while abandoning the meeting after the proposal to hold it had unmasked the rebel plot.

The Prospects of Home Rule.

The prospects of Home Rule are not too bright at the present moment, even apart from this Ulster row. Although the Home Rule Bill has been drafted, Ministers have not yet produced it, and when it is produced they are by no means certain that it will meet with the acceptance of the Irish Nationalists. Ministers have an ugly memory of what happened with the Irish Councils Bill, That Bill was framed in concert with the representatives of Ireland in Parliament. It was produced in the firm conviction that it would be enthusiastically accepted in Ireland. No sooner, however, were its contents published than the Bill was repudiated, hardly anyone having a word to say on its behalf. What happened about the Irish Councils Bill may happen about the Home Rule Bill. There are many awkward questions, especially those relating to customs, finance, and excise, which may easily be taken advantage of by the irreconcilables in order to make an outcry against the Bill. Unfortunately the Nationalist leaders are morbidly afraid of appearing to seem less patriotic than their followers. The best course, as I have maintained from the first, was for the Government to refuse to bring in any Home Rule Bill, and to summon an Irish National Convention to frame a Bill which could be submitted as an expression of the wishes of the Irish people; then they would know where they stood. As it is, Ministers may be running full steam on to a snag which may wreck the Home Rule ship just as it seemed to be nearing harbour.

Does Rome
Want

Home Rule ?

There is a good deal of confusion

in popular talk as to the attitude of the Church of Rome in relation to Home Rule. It appears to be firmly believed by many good Protestants that the Pope and his agents regard the concession of Home Rule with profound alarm, and it is quite openly said that the publication of the recent Papal Decree against prosecuting clericals before lay courts was launched just at this moment in order to prejudice the success of the Home Rule Bill. A good deal of nonsense has been talked about the Decree, but it is difficult to conceive worse nonsense than that which implies that the action of the good old Pope and the Vatican in asserting once more the ancient policy of Rome as to the immunity of clerical persons from lay courts was prompted by any consideration as to the effect

ments to consider whether it conduces much to the force of his argument to call Ministers of the Crown, even if they do happen to be his political opponents, gamblers, dangerous lunatics, rogues, and humbugs. Apart from this indulgence in the lingo of the bargee, Mr. Bonar Law failed to give any certain sound as to his attitude towards the attack on free speech in Ulster. But the most famous and fatuous part of his speech was that in which he referred to Tariff Reform. He believes in Tariff Reform because he believes that it is the only way to raise wages. That Tariff Reform will directly and obviously diminish the purchasing value of wages is admitted; but that it will tend to a corresponding, to say nothing of a greater, rise in wages is a very different proposition. Mr. Bonar Law almost plaintively admitted that on this question he is on the horns of a dilemma. He is not blind. He sees that Tariff Reform alienates many Unionists whose support would carry him to