the Monastic Orders, and prohibiting all teaching by monks and nuns except in private, has naturally aroused a considerable excitement in the Chamber, all the more as it involves a cost to the State, which is by no means "flush" just now, of some £2,400,000 in capital, besides annual grants of £320,000 for additional teachers. The first and most sweeping clause, which "forbids all religious congregations to practise teaching of any kind or nature in France," was passed by the full Ministerial majority, but a subsequent amendment to extend the period of grace from five to ten years was carried in spite of the Government. Nevertheless M. Combes is still able to summon his legions to his aid whenever he raises the direct issue of No Confidence. We are so fortunate this month as to be able to present our readers with the Catholic view of the Religious Crisis through which France is passing, thanks to the courteous assistance of Comte Albert de Mun, the cultivated and eloquent Leader of the Catholic party in the Chamber of Deputies. We believe his paper will be read with immense interest in this country, as being the first authoritative exposition from the Catholic standpoint. We do not think it necessary to make any apology for its unusual length, as, apart from its deep interest we were particularly anxious that an organ so essentially Protestant as the National Review should accord the fullest hearing possible to so eminent a spokesman of Catholicism. M. Combes is not the only foreign Premier in difficulties, as Count Bülow is involved in a serious struggle with the intellectual and Protestant forces of Germany, as well as the Socialists, owing to the blackmail he continues paying to the Centre as the price of their support of German Weltpolitik, of which the latest instance, as we have seen, is the partial repeal of the law excluding the Jesuits. Happily for Count Bülow the German Constitution is only Parliamentary in name. No vote of the Reichstag can turn him out of office so long as he enjoys the favour of his Sovereign. Another Continental Premier, viz., Count Tisza, the new Premier of Hungary, has greatly distinguished himself by the masterly manner in which he has solved the crisis caused by the Army Bills, which had distracted the country for nearly two years, and which threatened at one time to disrupt the Dual Monarchy. The Premier had prepared a drastic code, including "the guillotine," which proved too much for the nerves of the Opposition, and at the very eleventh hour, when the prospects of compromise seemed most hopeless, their leader rose and announced that they intended to yield and accept and vote for the Army Bills, rather than sacrifice their Parliamentary liberties. This development caused great rejoicing both in Budapest and Vienna, though in the latter capital it is tempered by the melancholy contrast afforded by the chaotic condition of the Austrian Parliament. The Attempted Suicide. In spite of the frantic onslaughts of the Radical Opposition, reinforced by the Irish Nationalists and the Megalomaniacs of the Free Food League, the Balfour Government, which we were told could not possibly survive the opening of Parliament, still pursues the even tenor of its way; and if it acts with common prudence and enjoys reasonable luck, it should be able to survive the Session, which means that the country will be spared the turmoil of a General Election this year. But while fully able to cope with its enemies, at one moment during the past month the Ministry came perilously near to committing suicide. The episode is one of the most curious in recent Parliamentary annals, and cannot be too vigilantly scrutinised by the Unionist Party. The facts seem to be substantially as follows: A Radical member, Mr. Pirie, had placed a Motion on the Paper for Wednesday, March 9, calling attention "to the public utterances of Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer and other members of the Government on the Fiscal Question," and moving "That this House, noting the continued agitation in favour of Preferential and Protective Tariffs, which is encouraged by the language used by certain of his Majesty's Ministers, deems it necessary to express its condemnation of any such policy." This was an unobjectionable Motion as coming from the Opposition, as it raised the whole fiscal question in a plain and direct manner, and offered Mr. Balfour, who had been absent from the deplorable debate on the Address in which several of his colleagues cut such a pitiful figure, an opportunity of declaring the policy of the Government. Considerable astonishment was, however, caused among Tariff Reformers, who constitute the great majority of the Unionist Party in the House of Commons and ninety-nine hundredths of the Party outside the House, by the announcement that Mr. Wharton, a respectable Ministerialist member of unsettled convictions, had put down the following Amendment to the Pirie Motion: "That this House approves the explicit declaration of his Majesty's Ministers that their policy of Fiscal Reform does not include either a general system of Protection or Preference based on the taxation of food." This was a direct attack on Mr. Chamberlain and the numerous members of the Cabinet who share his opinions, and the mystery was enhanced by the rumour that Mr. Wharton, who is not an organiser of private political tiger hunts, had been "put up" by some person or persons in authority. Though we are inclined to disbelieve the gossip which attributes this Free Food manœuvre to a Cabinet Minister, there is, we fear, only too much reason to believe that it emanated from Sir Alexander Acland Hood, The Vanishing Amendment. who, unfortunately for the Unionist Party, temporarily occupies the important and responsible position of principal Whip, and who has been reduced to a "jumpy" condition by the fact that he happens to hold a seat in Somersetshire, which might conceivably be imperilled by the food bogey. Sir William Harcourt, in a subsequent letter to the Times, reviewing the incident, declared, "It is not denied that its terms (i.e., of the Wharton Amendment) were settled on the part of his Majesty's Government, and that it was with their authoritative sanction and at their instance that it was put forward. Its terms therefore are of the first political importance. . ., It is a plain downright denunciation and repudiation of what is known as the Birmingham Fiscal Reform put forward by Mr. Chamberlain." For once we are so happy as to find ourselves in agreement with Sir William Harcourt on a political question. The Amendment was undoubtedly an attempt to stab Mr. Chamberlain in the back, and if inspired by "his Majesty's Government," it would have been of "the first political importance." We also agree with Sir William Harcourt that "the sequel is of the highest moment, as it affects the position of the Government." Directly this Amendment became public, a meeting of Members of Parliament, numbering over a hundred, was hastily summoned under the Chairmanship of Mr. Chaplin, who without any needless circumlocution, informed the Whips that unless the Wharton Amendment was withdrawn, they should vote against the Government, which would have caused its defeat and resignation. This prompt and resolute action had the desired effect, and to the intense annoyance of the Free Fooders and their Opposition allies, the Wharton Amendment disappeared from the Paper as suddenly as it had appeared, and the House of Commons was left to discuss the undiluted Pirie proposition. In his speech during the debate the Prime Minister declared that the policy of the Government "was one which would enable them to deal, so far as retaliation can deal, with hostile tariffs, and to deal, so far as fiscal arrangements can deal, with dumping;" and he appealed to "the great body of gentlemen on his side of the House frankly to accept what has been called the Sheffield Programme. That is the programme which, if he had to write an Election Address tomorrow, he should lay before the country." According to Sir William Harcourt the whole aim and object of the Wharton Amendment, sanctioned and promoted by the Government, had been to limit the policy of the Government to the Sheffield Programme, and to bind the Unionist party to that policy, so limited, at the Election; and he gleefully uses its withdrawal to prove that the Ministerial policy has now become unlimited, and as evidence cites the striking words with which Mr. Chaplin closed the debate: "He (Mr. Chaplin) declared that if he had to make an Election Address, he would go a great deal further than the Prime Minister went in his Sheffield address, and he had reason to know that he would be expressing the views of a very large number of members of the party." A Hint to the Government. As we have said above, we demur to Sir William Harcourt's suggestion that Mr. Balfour was the author of the Wharton Amendment, which he had never heard of until it appeared in print, though, as we have admitted, there is reason to believe that it enjoyed minor official inspiration. It should also be noted that directly Mr. Balfour became aware of its existence, the objectionable Motion was withdrawn. The incident ought to be a lesson to Members of Parliament who wish to stand well with the Whips to be quite sure of their ground before they treat the inspirations of Sir Alexander Acland Hood as the inspirations of the Cabinet. It should also encourage any public-spirited persons who may chance to reside in Somersetshire to ascertain why their Member systematically plays the game of the Free Food League while remaining in the service of the Government. We cannot resist the hope that the affaire Wharton may serve to impress upon the Unionist leaders the impracticability of endeavouring to confine the Party Programme to "Retaliation" and Dumping, for the reasons contained in the article we publish this month from the powerful pen of "Preference." We believe that "Preference" expresses the opinions of the immense majority of our readers, and of ninety-nine Unionists out of a hundred. As it stands at present, the official policy deliberately ignores the existence of the Empire. This makes it objectionable for political reasons, and impossible on tactical grounds. The great asset in the propaganda of Tariff Reform is not what is commonly called Protection, though the construction of a national tariff is an urgent national necessity, but the strong desire prevailing throughout all classes of the community to place the British Empire on a business footing and to favour Imperial trade over foreign trade. This can only be done through Preference, and we cannot help feeling that our leaders would be better employed in educating the country up to the policy of Preference than in eternally insisting on the supposed prejudice against food taxation. The Chinese It was announced on March 12 that the Secretary of State for the Colonies had informed Lord Milner that "It is his Majesty's pleasure not to disallow the Labour Importation Ordinance, which cannot, however, be brought into operation for the present," the further delay being due to certain arrangements to be made with the Chinese Government. Simultaneously there was published the following telegram from the Acting Governor of Natal to Mr. Lyttelton (the Colonial Secretary): "I am asked at the request of Ministers to send you the following message. (Begins). It is the opinion of Ministers that, unless tension occasioned by the short labour supply in the Transvaal is afforded immediate relief, such as the proposed introduction of Chinese under indenture offers, there is grave cause to apprehend that the financial position throughout South Africa will be seriously affected." There was likewise an urgent telegram from Lord Milner stating that on that day he had received a large deputation, consisting of several hundred men, half being delegates from the mines, and the rest leading professional and commercial men, representing altogether some thirty public bodies, including Town Councils of Johannesburg, Boksburg, and Germiston, Chambers of Trade and Commerce, &c., and about forty mines in the Witwatersrand district, who had asked him to telegraph the following resolution: We desire most earnestly to impress on his Majesty's Government: (a) That it is the interests of the whole white community of this colony that are at stake, and more especially of the British population engaged in commerce and industry, which are dependent on an adequate supply of coloured labour. (b) That so far from the importation of unskilled labour diminishing the employment of whites it must necessarily augment it. (c) That failing the immediate giving effect to Ordinance an increasing number of white workers will find themselves without the means of livelihood and the present acute financial and industrial depression will be intensely aggravated. Lord Milner added that his own feeling was entirely in accord with the terms of the Resolution. One might have hoped that this would be the end of the nauseous controversy with regard to the proposed experiment in Asiatic labour. Unfortunately the Radicals, who are positively famishing, believe that they are more likely to be carried into office on the back of the China13 VOL. XLIII |