At first it was announced that the Honours List was to be postponed, but by the King's wish this postponement. was revoked and the li-t was duly published. Tt interesting list but it falsifies many of the forecasts. The confident pre-dicta-n that the Marquess of Salisbury would get dukedom has not been realised, nor has the prophecy that peerages would he conferred on Sir Edward Lawson, Sir Blundell Maple, and Sir Thomas Lipton, though Lipton gets a baronetcy. The expectation that Sir William Harcourt would raised to the peerage was better found ed, though it has not come off. He was offered a Viscounty but declined it. The best feature about the list is its nonpolitical character. Those politicians who do receive honours are drawn almost as numerously from the Opposition as from the supporters of the Government. It is understand that this is in a much more real sense a Royal bestowal of honours than any we have had for many years—that is to say a large proportion of them fare given on the King's personal initiative, though of course his constitutional advisers were duly consulted. Apart from_ the statesmen, diplomatists, naval and military otlicers and civil servants, who of course receive the bulk of the honours, a goodly Kling of baronetcies and knighthoods are conferred upon lawyers, surgeons, physicians, artists and men of letters, including baronetcies for Sir Frederic Treves and Sir Francis Lvking, two of the medical men uow attending the King, Sir George Lewis, Sir Herbert Parry and Sir Edvard Paynter, and Knighthoods for Mr. Conan Doyle, Mr. F. ©. Burnand, Mr. Gilbert Parker, Mr.' Laird Clowes (the navy expert) and Mr. Eraest Waterlow, A.R.A.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.