Of course everyone naturally draws a comparison between this Queen's Hall meet~ ing and the great meeting of Liberal Univnists who had just s-ceded from Mr. Gladstone, which was held in Her Majesty's Theatre seventeen yea's ago. The strength the pre-ent secession—at least as regards the statesmen of Cabinet and Ministerial rank—is certainly not less than that of 1886, for there were no fewer than seven members of Lord Salisbury's last Cabinet on the platform at the Queen's Hall meeting; and' they were certainly noc the least fable and experienced members of that Cabinet. In addition to the Duke of Devonshire there were three ex-Chancellors of the Exchequer—Viscount Goschen, Sir Michael Hicks-Beach, and Mr. Ritehie—and there were Lord George Hamilton, Lo: d Balfour of Burleigh and Lord Tames of Hereford.
Technically of course it is not quite, accurate to speak of them as seceders, for wh they declare determined be put upon hes somewhat nouncement of the Govermnent But ay Mr, Chamberlain's pulley is the only Fiseat Reform policy heiore the country, the only policy which anyone dreams of discussing, and as Mr. Cham: berlain has been allowed to nominate his own son, who is in absolute accord with his fiscal view, forthe Chancellor-hip of the Exchequer, an opponent of Mr. Ghamber-Jain may be regarded as an opponent of the Government. Ministers may make subtle distinctions between the two; but the general public makes none.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.