Our English climate has not been very kind to Sovereign visitors Lately, King Carlos of Portugal came in for a success sion of fogs during his winter visit, and now King Alfonso of Spain has had barely one fine day since he arrived on Monday, During the five days of his stay we have had considerably more than the average rainfall for the-whol of June; indeed for the first forty hours it rained without ceasing. However, the people have done- their best to console his Majesty by the warmth of their wol-come. King Alfonso isseomingly a must indefatigable sight-seer and in the brief intervals betwoon the banquets and State ceremonies arranged in his honour he has managed to see most of. the lions of London, Qn Wednesday he was sented with an address from the Cit; of London at the Guildhall; and it was perhaps with some surprise that those present heard from the Lord Major that this was the first occasion on which this honour had ever been paid to a Spanish Sovereign. Of course all sorts of complimentary things were said about the past relations between the two countries, and all reference to the long period of our history when a Spaniard was regarded by Englishman as rather worse than a devil was avoided. Old alliances between the Royal Houses of England and Spain were recalled; and apparently there still some who imagine that the difficulties of the Act of Settlement may be overcome, and that the young king may havea British princess for his bride, The Colonial Conference.
There have been some marked developments in the fiscal question this week, though the censure debate, which had to be postponed on account of Mr. Balfour's illness, has been put off till after the Whitsuntide recess. On Friday Mr, Balfour delivered his great speech at the Albert Hall, and on Saturday Mr. Chamberlain carried on his fiscal ca paign at St. Helen's. On Monday the Dul of Devonshire made these two s and the Prime Ministers's alleged violation of a pledge in regard to the Colonial Conference the subject of a really enlightening debate in the House of Lords; and on the following day the motion for adjournment over the Whitsuntide recess gave an' opportunity for'a similar debate in the Commons. The upshot of it all is that there is to be no Uolonial Conference next year, and \consequently no discussion of the fiscal question by such 8 Conference before the General Election. What has given rise to this sudden change of plan on the part of the Government can only be conjectured. Mr, Brodrick was the first Minister to announce that the next Colonial Conference, which under a resolution passed by the last one, ought if possible to meet next year, would not only meet but discuss the fiscal question and Me. Balfour would surely not have all himself open to the charge of broaking a pledge by endorsing Mr. Brodrick' statement in the House of Commons, if the Government had not practically made up rheic minds to summon the Conference and to leave it free to discuss the fiscal matter. Now, however, it has been stated by Lord Lansdowne in the Lords, and by Mr. Lyttleton in the Commons, that it would be inconvenient to hold a conference just before a General Election, and Lord Lansdowne has farther declared that, even if the Conference were held next year it would be "im. perfect" in respect of the fiscal question as it would not contain representatives of India and the Crown Colonies, and another Conference would have to be held after the election to rediscuss the quostion. So the memorable. storm.in the House of Commons took. place over a Conference which there is no intention of summoning.
Balfourism and Chamberlainism.
This, however, is not the only point which the debates have clodred up. They have afforded conclusive evidence of the fatare of the Balfour-Chamberlain conferences to unite the Unionist party. Mr. Balfour, at the Albert Hall, uttered an eloquent appeal for unity. Ho declared in effect that his fiscal policy was Ro-taliation and free and open discussion of preferences by a Colonial Conference and he urged that this was a programma upon which all Unionists might mite, Mr, Chamberlain on the following day declared once more that he was fect ogreement with Mr. Balfour, but er
generalist and_his! interpretations then he began to interpret Mr. Balfour's
have incensed the Unionist Frotraders more bitterly than ever. He declared that Mr. Balfour had placed preference—which, a8 Mr. Chamberlain has con toutly admitted, involves food-taxes—in the forefront of the Unionist programme, {n the House of Commons debate Mr. tion, while Lord Hugh Cecil and other Unionist Freotraders _vehomently denied that. Mr. Balfour's words bore any such meaning, and all the while Mr. Balfour sat mute. He had, it is true, spoken earlier in the debate, but he had carefully' avoided to these points, The Freotraders have been further embittered by a sentence' in Mr. Chamberlain's speech in which he expressed the opinion that it would be better for the "bigoted" Cobdenites" to withdraw for a time from the Unionist Party than to remain drag upon the wheel.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.