NEWS OF THE WEEK.
IVTR. DISRAELI on Thursday applied for leave to bring in a Bill AIR. her Majesty to add to her titles, the addition to be made being one to express sovereigntyoverIndia. He did not, how- ever, explain what title he should advise Her Majesty to take, and his refusal to "impede the prerogative" deprived the debate of much of its interest. Mr. Lowe made an amusing speech, de- precating the assumption of an Imperial title, and advocating the claim of the Colonies to be equally honoured, but lost ground by suggesting that it would be disagreeable to remote the title when we had lost India. We may lose India some day, as we may lose Ireland, but statesmen cannot guide their .action on prophetic polities of that kind. Mr. Forster also pleaded the cause of the colonies, and suggested that the title used in the Proclamation of 1868 announcing that the Queen took over the Government of India, should, with an addition for India, be the legal style. In this title the Colonies in all parts of the globe are included. He preferred " Queen " to "Empress," because Empress implied a personal rule, and the Queen would yule India under the advice of Parliament. Mr. Disraeli replied to the colonial argument by saying that the colonists are British— which, as the Queen is Queen of Britain, and not of the British, is not 'apropos—and affirmed that the natives of India had signified in many ways their desire for the change. As far as journals represent opinion, we should say the majority are for letting the matter alone, or for employing the title "Queen of India." The dislike to the Imperial title will probably be displayed more strongly in the debate on the second reading.
