On Monday the circumstances in which the Free-traders left the
Cabinet were discussed in the House of Commona on a Motion for the adjournment of the House. We have told the story of these transactions at length elsewhere, and will only note here that Lord George Hamilton quoted his original statement that Mr. Balfour placed before the Cabinet at the end of the Session two documents, one his published pamphlet, and the other a document "containing proposals the Prime Minister wished officially put forward in the name of the Government. Preferential tariffs and taxation of food were included in that programme." Lord George Hamilton went on to say that he had re-read the document in question "during the past few hours," and that he adhered to every syllable of his statement. It is difficult to understand why Mr. Balfour is so annoyed at the references made to this document, but apparently he wants to insist that the unpublished document was not contradictory of the published. Clearly it was not that, but rather, as we have said elsewhere, complementary. An important proof that Mr. Balfour's present policy, which is that of the published pamphlet, is only Chamberlainism under an alias is to be found in his assertion that the second and unpublished document (which we know from Lord George Hamilton is the Chamberlain policy) is not contradictory of the first. Of course it is not, because the Balfour policy is not in any way contradictory of the Chamberlain policy. When the House divided the adjournment was negatived by a majority of 65 (237 to 172).