would be the outbreak of anarchy in Egypt; and we look to the Khedive, to Cherif Pacha, and the good sense of the Egyptian nation, to prevent such a catastrophe. They may be perfectly assured that so long as Egypt continues in the path of tranquil and legitimate progress it will be the earnest desire of Her Majesty's Government to contribute towards so satisfactory a result. We have every reason to believe that France will continue to be animated by similar views. It has been easy for the two countries acting in concert, and with no selfish object, to assist in the improvement of the political and financial condition of Egypt. Any designs of aggrandisement on the part of either Government must of their very nature destroy this very useful co-operation. The Khedive and his Ministers may therefore feel secure that the British Government has no intention of deviating from the paths traced by themselves."

Cherif Pacha, who had succeeded to the post of Prime Minister, expressed his satisfaction with this declaration; and the attraction of France being called away by domestic difficulties, the year closed in complete-though delusive-tranquillity.

An unlooked-for cloud threatened for a moment to fleck the western sky. Mr. Blaine, who held the post of Secretary of State during the short administration of President Garfield, found occasion to address to this country a curious despatch on the rights of the United States over the Panama Canal. Although the final despatch was dated (November 19) subsequent to President Arthur's accession to office, the correspondence had commenced as far back as the month of June. It was generally understood to represent the views of that party in the Cabinet to which the incoming President did not adhere. Mr. Blaine's withdrawal from office, therefore, though following at a short distance, was regarded rather as a general indication of policy than any special censure upon the writer of the despatch. In this document the Government of the United States notified to that of Great Britain that it would be no longer bound by the provisions of the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty. By this document, drawn up when the piercing of the Isthmus of Darien was first under discussion, it was stipulated that neither country should erect or maintain fortifications commanding the canal. The treaty bound "the United States not to use its military force in any precautionary measure, whilst it left the naval power of Great Britain perfectly free and unrestrained, and ready if need were to seize both ends of the canal." In this respect the one-sidedness of the treaty could not be denied, and Mr. Blaine, arguing from the analogous condition of the Suez Canal, came to the conclusion that Great Britain would seek to turn to its own advantage the treaty rights she had secured, and to establish a control over the Panama route, as she had over the Suez route. A paper agreement of neutrality in time of war would in such case be probably blown away by the first cannon shot, and therefore Mr. Blaine claimed the

CHAPTER VI.

THE RECESS.

The Fair Trade Agitation-The Bye-Elections The Northern Campaign-The Policy of the Government in Ireland-Arrest of Mr. Parnell-Agricultural Discontent-The Farmers' Alliance-The Foreshadowing of the Clôture-The Guildhall Banquet-The Mansion House Committees.

THE Fair Trade' movement, although brought to the front by Mr. Ritchie's motion (Aug. 12) on the subject of retaliatory duties to be imposed on French goods, can scarcely be said to have attracted much prominence during the session. The election at Preston, it is true, was believed to turn upon the secret sympathies of workmen for protected industries; and in the debate on Mr. Ritchie's motion, Mr. Ecroyd, the successful candidate at Preston, defended his theories in an effective speech. The obstacles thrown in the way of the English Government in their endeavours to renew the French Commercial Treaty in a not less liberal spirit than that which characterised the Cobden Treaty, gave force and colour to the arguments of the Fair Trade League. Roughly speaking, the object of the League was to make of Great Britain and her dependencies a vast Zollverein, within which the principles of Free Trade should be unhesitatingly recognised; whilst to the produce of foreign states, except the raw materials used in home manufactures, a graduated scale of duties should be applied. In the North Lincolnshire election, which took place in the earliest days of the recess, Mr. Lowther boldly advocated a return to Protection, and avowed his willingness to support a proposal to place upon foreign corn an import duty of five shillings per quarter. Whether the tenant-farmers as a body supported the Conservative candidate in spite of or because of his views on Protection cannot be predicated, but the result (Sept. 1) gave to Mr. Lowther 4,200 votes against 3,729 polled by Colonel Tomline, the Liberal candidate, thus reversing by the transfer of upwards of 600 votes the political opinions expressed at the general election. Two days later (September 3) the Liberals sustained another serious defeat in North Durham, where Sir George Elliot, a former member who lost his seat at the general election, recovered it for his party by a majority of 632 over his opponent, Mr. Laing. The loss of this important seat was variously explained; the Liberal organs attributed to Sir George Elliot's bid for the Irish vote, in denouncing the Coercion Acts calling for the release of the suspects; whilst the Conservatives, with apparently

speaking at Winchcomb (September 21), carefully discussed the condition of agriculture, which deserved and demanded parliamentary relief. Protection he looked upon as dead and buried, and hoped more from a readjustment of taxation, by which the burdens now thrown upon the land would be removed or at least lightened. In opposition to the parties of Protection or readjusted taxation, the Farmers' Alliance put itself prominently forward as the champion of the new-born party of tenant-right, which claimed the application in a milder form to England and Scotland of the principles embodied in the Irish Land Act. Throughout the country meetings were held at which tenant-farmers gave in their adhesion with more or less reservation to the programme of the Farmers' Alliance, and that body eventually drew up the draft of a bill which was distributed far and wide through its branches, and played an important part in the subsequent speeches and elections of the year. Earl Spencer was almost the first (September 27) to deal with the question from a landlord's point of view. He dismissed the idea of a return to Protection as an impossibility, as was also the prohibition of the importation of live cattle. The true relief for which farmers should look was from the landlords; and he held that Parliament should recognise more distinctly than it yet did the right of tenants in all improvements made by the latter.

All these speeches, however, were but as slight skirmishes in advance of the great campaign which was to follow in the North of England. The engagement was on this occasion also to be opened by Sir Stafford Northcote, who at Hull (October 3) solemnly impeached the Ministry for its want of vigour in dealing with Irish disaffection, and allowing the Land League to become a power equal to, or even greater than, the lawful Government of the country. In like manner the Ministry had shown itself wanting in backbone when dealing with France in the matter of commercial treaties, with the Boers in not obtaining a ratification of the Convention, and with its own followers, whom it was often forced to follow against its better judgment. On the subject of the rival claims of Free Trade and Fair Trade the leader of the Opposition was less explicit. He admitted that the results of the Cobden Treaty with France had been advantageous in some ways, but he was not sure that it had not been detrimental in others; because treaties always imply bargains and equivalents, or lead to obligations. He wished to see both our home and foreign markets developed; but as all the data with regard to the latter were not always obtainable, he would like to see more attention paid to the former. With this object legislation should have in view to advance the prosperity or remove the difficulties of the home market. This, he thought, could best be effected by doing nothing which could shake confidence in the credit or capital enjoyed by English commerce; and by relieving home interests of any heavy burdens under which they might be labouring. On the following night, at Beverley (October 4), Sir Stafford Northcote reverted to the question, denying that the re