NEWS OF THE WEEK.

ON Monday Sir Michael Hicks-Beach moved as an amendment to Mr. Childers's Budget the following resolution :—" That this House regards the increase proposed by this Bill in the duties levied on beer and spirits as inequitable in the absence of a corresponding addition to the duties on wine, and declines to impose fresh taxation on real property until effect has been given to its resolution of April 17th, 1883, and of March 28th, 1884, by which it has acknowledged further measures of relief to be due to ratepayers in counties and boroughs in respect of local charges imposed on them for national services." He supported this resolution by arguing that the increased beer-duty would injure the growers of barley, and cause the brewers to water their beer ; that the increased spirit-duties would lead the spirit-manufacturers to sell raw whisky not properly mellowed by being kept in bond ; that it was unfair to increase these duties without increasing the wine-duties ; and that instead of these duties, it would be fairer to propose an increased tea-duty, which would fall on the whole community, and not merely on the consumers of alcohol. He sneered at the Radical preference for teetotallers, and argued that an additional 3d. a pound on tea would make little difference to the consumers of the dearer teas. On the subject of the succession-duties, Sir Michael Beach was still more eloquent, and was extremely indignant that a new tax on real property should be imposed before the promise to throw the rates more equally on all property, whether real or personal, had been redeemed.

Sir Charles Dilke replied to Sir Michael Hicks-Beach that for his part he was not ashamed to prefer the Radical teetotallers to the pothouse politicians for whom Sir Michael felt so much tenderness ; and he pointed out that, since it is the consumers of wine who really pay the increased Income-tax, it is pure claptrap to clamour for an increased wine-duty, which would greatly discourage the trade and hardly bring so much as a few thousand pounds into the Exchequer. As for tea, the great consumption is that of the cheaper teas, which are already taxed nearly fifty per cent., while a tax of threepence a pound on the dearer teas alone would produce nothing of the smallest value. Sir Charles Dilke then insisted that as an increase of taxation is wanted, it is only fair to make some readjustment of the death-duties, which at present unduly favour real property. Even the successor to a freehold only pays on the life-interest he is supposed to gain, while the successor to a personal estate pays on the whole. Mr. Childers's readjustment was a very moderate one, and well justified at the present moment. At all events, Sir Michael Hicks-Beach could not defeat the Budget without accepting the responsibility of proposing his own finance and his heavy increase of the tea-duty. The Government must stand or fall by its Budget proposals.

Mr. O'Sullivan especially entering on a vehement attack on the proposal to increase the Irish whisky-duties, and so to cripple one of Ireland's three great trades,—beer, whisky, and pork. Mr. Childers pointed out that if real property had been relieved of its extra burden of rates, the change he had proposed in relation to the succession-duties would not be half stringent enough, and that it was so moderate precisely because he was aware that real property is, in some respects, heavily weighted. Sir Stafford Northcote became very virtuous on the unsound and fidgetty finance of the present Government, which he regarded as based on no sort of principle. And to him the Prime Minister replied in a very effective speech, commenting sarcastically on Sir Stafford Northcote's comparative notions of sound and unsound finance,—his conception of sound finance being illustrated by the fact that in four out of Sir Stafford's six Budgets he left a deficiency; though he had succeeded to a surplus of £6,000,000, with which iu his first Budget he had to deal ; while the present Government had shown a surplus in every Budget up to that of the present year. Mr. Gladstone insisted that the real ground of attack was the change in the succession-duties, the perfect fairness of which he strongly defended. As to the wine-duties, it would have been perfectly absurd to have interfered with them for so small a matter. Nor did he admit that the consequence of doing so would have been half as mischievous to the foreigner as it would be to ourselves, for the importation of foreign wines is the source of a great deal of the British export trade, which has increased pan imam with the importation of these wines. And Mr. Gladstone repeated emphatically Sir Charles Dilke's declaration that the Government must stand or fall by its Budget.

The division showed a majority of 12 against the Government, 264 against 252, the Parnellites voting in a body, 38 strong, for the Opposition. Only four nominal Liberals voted against the Government. The defeat was due to the much larger number of absences on the Liberal side, as compared with the number of the Conservative absentees. The Liberal Whip had not been the most urgent; and there were, it is said, several direct permissions given to absent themselves under the notion that the division would not be a critical one, and that the Conservatives hardly cared to win. The day, too,—the first Monday after a recess,—was an unfortunate day for a critical division, as so many Members prefer to overstay the recess. But no doubt the truth is that indisposition and absence would not have been so common in the Liberal ranks, had not a good many nominal Liberals felt disposed to defeat the succession-duties, and a certain number of Radicals felt disposed to prevent the renewal of the Irish Crimes Act.

There could be but one result to a vote of this kind, which, as we have endeavoured-to show elsewhere, was as direct a vote of want of confidence as has been passed in our time. The Cabinet met on Tuesday at noon, and at half-past four Mr. Gladstone announced to an excited House that the Cabinet had made "a dutiful communication to her Majesty,"—or, in other words, had tendered their resignations. The necessary communications were sent down to Balmoral by messenger, Mr. Gladstone being unable to risk the fatigue and exposure of so long a journey, and since then everything has awaited the pleasure of the Queen. It is stated, with some confidence, that her Majesty demanded "personal explanations," and that Lord Hartingfen agreed to go ; but this arrangement has since been countermanded. Lord Salisbury has been summoned to Balmoral, and has obeyed the summons; but though the summons is most significant, it is inot probable that negotiations will be completed until her Majesty's return on Monday. It is impossible to conduct business at such a•distance from the centre, and the Queen has been wisely advised to interrupt her holiday. Much consideration is felt for her Majesty by all classes,

but the practice of dragging the statesmen of the Empire six hundred miles into the wilderness merely because the Sovereign prefers coolness to heat, could not continue without exciting deep popular displeasure.

The rumours are, of course, endless; but the balance of probability is that Mr. Gladstone will adhere firmly to his resignation, which has been accepted by the Queen, and that Lord Salisbury, who has been sent for to Balmoral, will have the option of being Premier, though he may recommend Sir Stafford Northcote. In any case, it is understood that the Tories will accept office, Lord Salisbury being Foreign Secretary, and that he will be obliged to introduce new men into the Cabinet, the principal being Lord Randolph Churchill, who will, it is said, be Secretary for India. As Lord Randolph has never displayed the smallest skill in administration, though he has some in the management of men, and as he will be in possession of that tremendous political weapon—the Indian Secret Department—the country and Lord Dnfferin will view that appointment with an interest not easily distinguishable from dismay. Sir S. Northcote, if he leads the Commons, will, of course, be Chancellor of the Exchequer, and is always safe there ; and Sir M. Hicks-Beach will probably be Home Secretary. All other appointments are very much in the air ; and it must not be forgotten that it is part of the Tory policy—and not its most unwise part—to limit closely the size of Cabinets. The older Ministers, who may be excluded, will doubtless receive coronets in compensation. As the House of Lords is—and will remain while it exists—an instrument of the Tory Party, such promotions are of no moment.

The reception of the news in the country has been singular. No Liberal journal is genuinely grieved by the resignation, which is everywhere admitted by Liberals to have been inevitable ; and amongst Radicals there is a distinct trace of exultation. The feeling is abroad that the leaders, released from office, will be able to "fire the prairie," and sweep the constituencies with overwhelming force. On the other hand, while Conservative journals in London agree that the party must accept office—the Standard in particular turning its back

• upon itself in order to say so, with a coolness which recalls the palmy days of the Times—the country Conservatives evidently do not like the notion at all. They wanted their leaders to be free at the election both to criticise and to promise everything; and to find them sobered by office, and unable to hint at Protective duties, is a disheartening prospect. The body of the people are not much moved, and the absence of excitement in the City is noteworthy. Clearly financiers do not believe that the new Government will go to war, or invent new taxes, or do anything either very showy or very expensive. Consols and Russians hays "drooped," but there has been no panic.

It is asserted in all directions that nothing short of imperative duty will induce Mr. Gladstone to resume power, and that he contemplates an immediate and final retirement from public life. The first statement we believe fully, the resolution to resign having been taken after full consideration, and ;n view of difficulties as great as the rejection of the Budget. If he returned, Mr. Gladstone would, it is believed, drop the Crimes Act, and in some respects reconstruct his Ministry,—a policy not agreeable to his Whig followers. The Budget also must, of course, be accepted as it stands. The second rumour is just as true and as false as it has always been. Mr. Gladstone has earned retirement, and may resolve to retire ; but his whole party are urgent that he should stay ; his interest in public affairs is as keen as ever, and his strength needs only the rest which a few months out of office will enable him to command. It will be well, if the Tories are to wind up business, that he should not reappear in the House during the remainder of the Session, as he is certain to be provoked into rising, and then they will be crushed. That, however, is not retirement ; and unless we greatly mistake both his character and his position, Mr. Gladstone, just before the elections, will be found delivering speeches which will materially affect their result. It is not in him to sit quiet and see the people go wrong, and if be moves, he cannot help putting forth his full strength.

Sir Charles Dilke, who spoke at the City Liberal Club on Tuesday, did not pretend to conceal his exhilaration at the defeat of the Government. This was due, we imagine, to the difficulty uoacerning the: renewal of the Irish Crimes Act, ythich the resignation of the Government will remove. He passed a most enthusiastic and eloquent panegyric on Mr. Gladstone, whom he declared to be still the leader of the advanced party, even in his old age, and described with exultation the great reception which the Liberals gave Mr. Gladstone when he announced on Tuesday afternoon that the Cabinet had through him made a " dutiful communication " to her Majesty, the nature of which it would not be proper further to specify. Sir Charles Dal} congratulated himself on the prospect of a Conservative Budget, and did not think that even a Tory Government could now plunge us into war with Russia,—so nearly had we reached theterms of a satisfactory settlement. Sir Charles hoped that Mr. Gladstone would continue to lead the Liberal party to its great, triumph at the General Election, and thought that the interval of rest now probably secured to him would be adequate to restore to him all his old elasticity. The Liberals alone could so deal with the question of Local Government as to make the whole kingdom a real United Kingdom ; and this the General Elections would, in his opinion, enable the Liberals to do. Sir Charles Mike's speech was one long sigh of relief.

Lord Aberdeen and Mr. George Russell addressed a meeting of the Liberal supporters of Sir Henry Le Marchant for the Chertsey Division of West Surrey last Tuesday, and both, of course, referred to the event of the day, and both in the same tone of profound and almost passionate reverence for Mr. Gladstone which Sir Charles Dilke had assumed. Yet the speakers were by no means in complete harmony with each other, Lord Aberdeen evidently adhering to Lord Rosebery's belief that the House of Lords may be effectually " mended " ; while Mr. George Russell held that nothing effectual can be done with the House of Lords except to "end " it. Mr. Russell's speech was of interest not only for this avowal,—which, as coming from one of the most promising of the younger members of the Government, is very significant,—but because be gave so prominent and eloquent an expression to his own view of the future of Democratic politics. He held that social questions would become more and more prominent, that "the condition-of-England question" was coming more and more to the front, and that even the comparatively subordinate issues on which the defeat of the Government had turned, the campaign of the Tories against temperance, and their hostility to the fair taxation of landed property, would prove to be of far greater moment than they are commonly conceived to be, because they are issues affecting the physical and moral elevation of the masses. He held that Lord Salisbury was precluded by his principles from forming any Government which would not imperil the elevation of the people, even more than it would imperil the blessings of peace.

Mr. James Lowther does not like the situation, and says so plainly. On Thursday, while addressing the electors of the South division of Lincolnshire, he declared that the crisis had been "wantonly precipitated" by her Majesty's Government. They could have adjourned the debate, and had wilfully courted defeat. The Conservative Party were, therefore, not bound to accept office, for they were not a majority, and they could not dissolve ; and for his part, " he thought they would make a very great mistake if they accepted the shadow of office without the reality of power." He sincerely trusted that the Conservative leaders would not walk into the trap so deliberately laid for them, and would remain where they were until the constituencies could return a House prepared to support Constitutional government. Perhaps the Tory leaders are not quite so sure of the verdict of the constituencies as Mr. Lowther is ; but his speech is significant of the opinion entertained by the stronger Conservatives. They consider the Gladstone Government the worst in the world, but had rather it should continue than that they themselves should be called upon to act,—that is, to prove that most of their criticisms were unfounded. Mr, Lowther, who, violent as he is, is shrewd and direct, sees quite clearly that the Conservatives will be able to do nothing the electors care about, and that they will lose all the benefit of the hopes which gradually accrete to the unknown. They will cease to be dark horses without becoming favourites.

A despatch from Lord Wolseley to Lord Hartington has been published, condemning the retreat from the Soudan. It is dated April 16th, less than two months ago, yet it already reads like ancient history. Lord Wolseley maintains that the Mandi will occupy Dongola, and that after some years he will attack Egypt, which we shall intermediately be compelled to defend by frontier cantonments. Daring this period Mandism will so increase in ascendancy that even the death of the Mandi will make no difference, and his successor will be as powerful as himself. Lord Wolseley would, therefore, attack and defeat him at Khartoum, maintaining that this operation will be oven less expensive than waiting on, as well as much more glorious. Lord Wolseley does not deny that it is possible to defend Egypt from Wady Haifa, but maintains that the policy of advance would be more worthy of the English nation. The immediate answer to his counsel is that the Mandi is already hampered by internal dissensions, and has lost El Obeid; and the ultimate answer is that if, as he says, we have years of time before us, we must settle first to whom Egypt is to belong. If it is to be ours, his advice can be again considered, and, if sound, carried out within six months. The Soudanese will be no braver in 1890 than to-day.

A few more provinces. Lord Granville has this week issued a proclamation notifying that the British Government assumes the protectorate of the States upon the lower waters of the Niger ; and the Tinos publishes three columns of description of the vast territory called Bechuanaland, just annexed by Sir Charles Warren. This last is quite a nice little estate, being a plateau about 4,000 feet high, in temperate Africa, and not much bigger than Spain. It is healthy for Europeans, is well provided with wood, is, accordiug to the Boers, " the best pastureland in South Africa," and will grow anything. from wheat to oranges and fine grapes. Surface water is scarce, but it rises in the wells everywhere, and everywhere there is " good grass feed." The natives need and occupy only a part of the soil, and the remainder will furnish " many thousands of farms," all to be sold to settlers. These things being so, can anything be equal to the graspingness of Germany in wanting the territory of Vita, or to that of France in extending her claims upon the Congo ? They do not take, with all their fuss, onetenth of what we take silently ; but then to be sere, in English judgment, Englishmen have a right to take. Anyhow, the Empire grows like the prophet's gourd.

The final Treaty between France and China was signed at Tientsin on the 9th inst. It is the Foamier Treaty expanded, and its main provisions cede Tonquin to France, and recognise that France possesses a Protectorate in Anam. The exact character of the Protectorate is not defined ; but a provision exists that it shall not take a form dishonouring to China, that, in fact, the nominal suzerainty shall continue. This will not interfere with direct French government through a Resident such as now exists in Tunis; and for practical purposes France is now sovereign from the Gulf of Siam to Western China. She will not be a pleasant neighbour either for Siam or Burmah, the former of which in particular is assailed on two sides, and has an indeterminate frontier. We wonder if Europe will ever know accurately the causes which induced the Chinese Court to recede at the very moment of victory. There must have been some danger to the dynasty arising from the war which alarmed the statesmen of Pekin, who, to all appearance, had only to hold on obstinately to save both Tonquin and Anam, and who must now keep a watchful army in Yunnan.

A Russian journal, the Novosti, published on Friday week a statement that the Ameer of Afghanistan, on his return to Cabal, had been assassinated by his suite, and the Russian papers have been discussing it ever since. The information was said to have come from Tiflis, and also from the Afghan frontier ; but there has been no confirmation of the news, which would have reached Lord Dufferin in four days. It is probably a rumour based upon some discovered treachery in the Afghan capital, where society is honeycombed with murderous intrigue; but the Russians are clever in hitting the English weak points. The death of Abdurrahman would be a calamity for England, for there is no recognised heir to the throne, and the most popular candidate, Ayoub Khan, is distrusted at Simla, and would have all Abdurrahman's work to do over again. During the consequent anarchy, the temptation to a Tory Ministry to seize Candahar would be very great, and Russia might make a spring both at Herat and Balkh. The situation is not rendered better by the nearly insuperable reluctance of an Afghan Ameer to name his heir. That would make every pretender furious, and.in the Ameer's judgment provide a nucleus for all floating disaffection.

Lord Randolph Churchill made a speech at Cambridge last Saturday, which will certainly win for him the doubtful repu

tation of being guided by a familiar spirit. The Government, he said, were in such a wretched position, that they had " altogether passed beyond the scope of blame. My own feelings with regard to them are precisely similar to my feelings when I read in the paper of some criminal condemned to death. I imagine one would more appropriately address them as the Judge is generally supposed to address the convict who has been condemned to death,—• Unfortunate man. I do not wish by any words of mine to add to the agony of your last moments.' " Perhaps, however, Lord Raudolph's speech, though it did not certainly add to the agony of the Government's last moments, may have added to the exultation of their first moments of freedom,—for he painted very truly the demands of the day on the energies of public men, pointing out how necessary it is for men who desire to succeed in public life to go about attacking the Government and ornamenting their discourse " by every variety of vituperation," and how inconsistent the duty of doing this, and of replying to it, is with anything like statesmanship. Probably the man who takes that view of public life will not escape the riddling with which he has tried to riddle others. Lord Randolph's general advice to the Cambridge youth was to do their thinking while they were young, since when they had reached his own age it would be too late to think at all,—a charming apercu into his recent statesmanship.

Mr. Boehm's statue of Charles Darwin was unveiled by Professor Huxley in the British Museum on Tuesday, and accepted by the Prince of Wales on behalf of the British Museum, the Archbishop of Canterbury, who is one of the trustees of the Museum, being present. Professor Huxley's words on the occasion were few and weighty, and served only to mark the new and great impulse which Darwin gave to the investigation of the laws of natural phenomena; and the presence of the Archbishop showed that there is now no jealousy felt by the Church of the recognition of Darwin's greatness. Professor Huxley, however, dropped a phrase which we do not quite understand. He said the admirers of Darwin did not ask the authorities of the Museum to give any official sanction to Darwin's views, for science "does not recognise such sanctions, and commits suicide when it adopts a creed." Does it ? Could science exist at all if it did not assume as its very postulate the creed that the methods of Nature's operations are and will remain in some sense uniform We observe that at a meeting of the English Church Union on Wednesday, it was proposed to create a House of Laymen, but that, according to Lord Nelson, this House of Laymen would be merely consultative, and would not " interfere with the rights of the Synod of the Church." We think we may say with some confidence that no House of Laymen worth consulting at all, will be got, so long as it is known that the ultimate intention is to give it no real voice in the Synod of the Church. If there ought to be a House of Laymeu at all, it is as a constituent part of the Synod of the Church that it ought to exist, and not as a mere external body hanging on, as President Andrew Johnson used to say, "on the skirts of the Constitution." Are the laymen an essential part of the Church or not P If they are, why speak of them as outside any true Synod ? If they are not, why consult them at all ?

A fear appears to be entertained that the death of Mrs. Ewing may bring the children's magazine, Aunt Judy, to which she contributed so many admirable tales, to a close with the current volume. We hope it may not be so, for though Mrs. Ewing's genius was unique, there must be in existence women —like the editor, Miss Gatty—with gifts of a somewhat similar kind, who could do some part at least of her work with great benefit to the public, though not with her peculiar powers. But Mrs. Ewing's personal friends are afraid that if the magazine should be discontinued the child's cot at Cromwell House, Highgate,—which is the convalescent home of the Children's Hospital in Great Ormond Street,—for which Aunt Judy was gradually raising a permanent endowment, as it had already raised an endowment for two cots in the Children's Hospital itself, may never be permanently established. It was to have been dedicated to the memory of Mrs. Alfred Gutty, Mrs. Ewing's mother, and £1,000 are necessary for its permanent endowment, of which only £400 had been raised. Could not the admirer& of Mrs. Ewing easily raise the remainder of the sum which Mrs. Ewing's labours, had they lasted, would certainly have provided?