the land taxes may be confounded. There may be curious interludes in the House of Commons before this remarkable association of opposites and contraries comes to an end. Mr. Hayes Fisher goes to the Under-Secretaryship of the Local Government Board as an expert, with an unsurpassed knowledge and experience of the practical work of local government, and all matters relating to local taxation. A most capable speaker, clever at handling details which most men find tedious and dry, and a shrewd and adroit debater, if Mr. Hayes Fisher had been appointed President rather than Under-Secretary of his Department the post would have been better fitted to his attainments. But Mr. Walter Long is leader of what remains of the old country party in the House of Commons, and he goes back to the office which he held with credit for some years in the last Unionist Administration. Popularity, courtesy, good temper, and a palpably honest patriotism carry some men far in politics, and prove more valuable even than the possession of greater talents. That is the chief reason why the National Government contains "the pleasing presence of Mr. Long."

Mr. Birrell remains Chief Secretary for Ireland at the express desire so it is said of the Nationalist Party, whose full confidence he possesses, and the Board of Education-hapless Board, which scarcely ever falls to a Minister of real educational attainment and insight!-has been allotted to Mr. Arthur Henderson. The Chairman of the Labour Party belongs to the Trade Union section of his Party, and a few years ago would have been thoroughly well content to call himself a Liberal. He is a very capable organiser, a hard worker, and a fairly effective speaker of a somewhat commonplace type. Mr. Henderson does not pose as an "intellectual," like Mr. Ramsay Macdonald, who now sits silent, distrait, and alone among the colleagues who once admired the talents while they never wholly trusted the man. Mr. Henderson, unlike his predecessor, is not ashamed to avow himself a good Englishman and a loyal patriot, and he is heart and soul for a vigorous prosecution of the war. So, too, Mr. Brace, the nominee of his Party for the Under-Secretaryship placed at their disposal by the Government. He is an admirable leader of the patriotic South Wales miners, and his presence at the Home Office should prove a real accession of strength to the Government. It has happened before, when Labour leaders have been promoted to office, that they have soon lost the confidence of the Labour world. That was the case with the late Mr. Broadhurst; it has been even more the case with Mr. John Burns, who now seems to have dropped absolutely out of sight and out of mind. We trust it may not be true of Mr. Brace and Mr.

Henderson.

The innocent victims in high places of the political upheaval have not lacked public sympathy in their hour of misfortune. Some, however, are certain to be restored to status again in the next Liberal Administration. Neither Mr. Herbert Samuel nor Mr. Montagu-who only recently received promotion-is likely to remain permanently in the shade. There are one or two others whose only obvious claim to Cabinet rank was that they were Peers and Liberals, while both Mr. Hobhouse and Mr. Pease belong to the class of Liberal politicians whose active careers are wont, as Fox once said, to "terminate foolishly in a peerage. It is hard on them to have to go before their time --and without peerages and hardest of all, perhaps, to reflect that the Secretary for Scotland still remains in the charmed circle. That only shows the extraordinary part which sheer luck sometimes plays in the world's affairs. The Scottish Liberal members, however, developed for Mr. McKinnon Wood an affection of which they had previously given no sign in a spasm of apprehension lest Scotland should have no direct representative in the Cabinet, or lest the post should be given to a Unionist. Such was the lucky safety-belt which kept Mr. McKinnon Wood afloat, while stronger swimmers than he went down all around him.

It remains to be seen how the victims will bear their disappointment. Mr. Pease could not-though he manfully did his very best-conceal his deep chagrin in his speech of personal explanation. Mr. Hobhouse took an early opportunity during the debate on the Ministry of Munitions of hinting to the Home Secretary that he still carried arms. Mr. George Lambert pointedly blamed the Ordnance Department of the War Office for the shortage in the supply of Munitions. Mr. Robertson, the ablest of them all, has kept discreet silence. They all sit, sad and sombre, among the Privy Councillors, who now cluster thickly on what in normal times is the Front Opposition Bench-a cluster of brilliants, a little off colour. But there is no Opposition, and will be none, if the new Ministry of Munitions proves the success which every loyal Briton hopes it may. Moreover, the Government have pledged themselves not to introduce Compulsion by any side issue; if they are driven to such a policy, they will come to Parliament and ask its sanction. That means that until that day there will be no real Opposition in the House of Commonsonly the occasional carping of a little knot of Socialists and Radicals, angry at the ruin of their theories, disappointed at the non-fulfilment of their ambitions, or fussy from vanity and a constitutional incapacity to keep still.

AUDITOR TANTUM.

WHAT WILL BE AUSTRIA'S FUTURE?

GERMANY occupies at the moment so large a position on the political stage that people have almost forgotten that AustriaHungary is, after all, a very important political and military factor in Europe. The importance of Austria-Hungary is strangely underrated, and it is no exaggeration to say that the Dual Monarchy may exercise a decisive influence upon the issue of the war and upon the future of Europe. It seems, therefore, worth while to cast a glance into the future of that country. It is true that at first sight it would seem that Austria-Hungary is doomed; that the war will end in its downfall and its disintegration. However, if we look a little more closely into Austria's position, it seems possible that the war will result in an Austrian revival; that it will make the house of Hapsburg far more powerful and influential than it has ever been in the past.

The war may end in an Austro-German victory, or in an Austro-German defeat, or it may prove indecisive. It is improbable that the war will lead to an Austro-German victory, or that it will come to an end by the exhaustion of all the combatants. However, if we consider all three possibilities, it would appear to the casual observer that Austria's power and independence will in any case be lost. Austria-Hungary has been severely defeated not only by the Russians, but even by the Serbians. But for Germany's assistance the country would have been lost. Germans command and control the Austrian armies and fortresses, and direct and administer the country. Large numbers of German troops defend the Austrian soil. Austria has become a German dependence, almost a German vassal. At the beginning of the war Germany allowed Austria to be defeated, and only after many months of failure she came to her help. But then she acted with the greatest energy, and took both the military and the civil administration of Austria into her own hands. The fact that Germany left Austria-Hungary at first in the lurch, that she came to her aid only when matters had become desperate, and that she is treating the Dual Monarchy now like a State subordinate to the German Empire is highly significant, and gives matter for thought. It seems possible that Germany agreed to help her unfortunate ally only when Austria, driven to despair, would agree that she would abandon her independence and become a German subject State, another Bavaria. Whether an undertaking of some kind, making the Dual Monarchy a

German subject State, has been signed or not, or whether certain verbal promises have been made, is perhaps immaterial. Drowning men clutch at straws, and agreements made under compulsion are void. The future of Austria-Hungary will not be decided by verbal or written agreements made in the stress of war, but by the logic of events.

If we consider merely the logic of events, Austria's position towards Germany is apparently a hopeless one. The Dual Monarchy is divided against itself, while Germany is firmly united. Germany has acquired an enormous prestige by her victories, and the German people have been taught to look down upon the Austrians with contempt. Germany has undoubtedly saved Austria-Hungary from annihilation. A victorious and greatly-enlarged Germany, flanked by a much-weakened France in the west and an enfeebled Russia in the east would absolutely dominate Austria-Hungary. The Dual Monarchy would, by the logic of facts, become a German dependency; and if it should endeavour to recover its independence, Germany could quickly render it submissive either by the threat of war or by increasing the differences among the nationalities. In the past, Germany has encouraged the national aspirations of the Magyars and of the Czechs in order to weaken Austria. An Austrian Government resisting Germany might quickly be brought to heel by a threat to transfer the supreme Power in the Dual Monarchy to Germany's clients at Buda Pesth.

In the case of a drawn war, Germany's superiority over Austria-Hungary would obviously be still greater. An undecided war would lead to a renewal of the contest earlier or later. The Dual Monarchy, being far weaker and far poorer than Germany, would be much more enfeebled by the war than its powerful and wealthy ally. As Austria would stand much in need of Germany's financial and military help, she would be compelled to accept virtually all the conditions which Germany might choose to impose in return for her assistance. It appears that AustriaHungary is bound to become another Bavaria if the war should have the most happy ending which Austrians can hope for. If, on the other hand, the war should, as is likely, end in an AustroGerman defeat, the Dual Monarchy may be partitioned. In that event the Roumanians, the Italians, the Serbs, the Poles, and the other Slavs of Austria-Hungary would probably receive their independence, and the Magyars would cut themselves adrift. Austria might be reduced to a chiefly German State of 10,000,000 or 12,000,000 inhabitants. The position of the Dual Monarchy seems hopeless, however the war will end, unless it should decide to abandon its German partner, make a separate peace, and

endeavour to obtain territorial compensation from Germany. Such a step may be unexpected by many, but it can be justified both on historical and on political grounds. After all, the first duty of every nation, as of every individual, is the duty of selfpreservation.

The history of Austria during the last two centuries is the history of her struggle with Prussia for the supremacy in Germany, during the whole of which Prussia has been the aggressor. All who are thoroughly acquainted with Prusso-German and with Austrian history are aware that Austria's most dangerous and most determined enemy, her hereditary enemy, has not been France or Russia or Turkey, but Prussia. Let us cast a glance into the past before considering Austria's future.

During more than two centuries Prussia has treated Austria with scarcely disguised hostility, and has endeavoured by the most reprehensible means to bring about her downfall. On March 22nd, 1686, a secret treaty was concluded between Brandenburg and Austria. By that treaty the Great Elector, who at the time ruled Brandenburg, promised to support Austria against her enemies, and he was to receive liberal subsidies in return for his assistance. The Great Elector had previously claimed from the Emperor the principalities of Liegnitz, Brieg, Wohlau, and Jägerndorf in Silesia, to which Brandenburg had advanced the most shadowy and the most insufficient claims. The Emperor induced the Great Elector to abandon his pretensions to the four Silesian duchies, but declared that he was ready to cede to him the circle of Schwiebus. As he did not care to cede that circle to Brandenburg, he turned to the heir of the Great Elector, who as Frederick the First became King of Prussia. Frederick wanted money, and he was ready to sell to the Emperor the reversion to Schwiebus. He concluded with him an agreement by which he promised to return that territory to Austria on his advent to the throne against the payment of 100,000 thalers. Frederick was at the time not a foolish boy who sold rashly his inheritance. He was twenty-nine years old, and knew what he was doing. Two years after this transaction, in 1688, the Great Elector died. His son ascended the throne, and had the effrontery to repudiate the bargain to which he had agreed after mature consideration. However, as the Emperor would not release him, he agreed after years of negotiations to fulfil his promise.

King Frederick the First was succeeded by Frederick William the First. He, like his father, endeavoured to obtain territory from Austria by trickery, by negotiation, and by threats, and he created an extremely powerful army intended to be used against