On the following night Mr. Asquith, on Talleyrand's principle--that speech is given us to hide our thoughts--dilated interestingly on the position, his sympathies oscillating between the Opposition, the Government, and Mr. Kruger. Sir Henry Campbell Bannerman declared it to be the duty of the Opposition to press Lord Edmond Fitzmaurice's amendment to a division. He inferred that the conspiracy of the Cape Dutch was a chimera, and went so far as to suggest that when our military supremacy was asserted in South Africa the question of settlement might be left to decide itself _sine die_! Said he: "Provided that our territories are free and our military supremacy asserted, what matters it at what time or what place a settlement is arrived at?" In his reply Mr. Balfour distinguished himself. He said that it was discovered that the War Office has more than fulfilled its promises, and appealed to the members of the Opposition who sympathised with the justice of the war to reflect before voting for the amendment. It was necessary to help the soldiers at the front by proving to them that they were supported by a united country, and that every hostile vote might induce or encourage our opponents to prolong the contest. He concluded by saying:-- "Can they contemplate with equanimity that their first action in a session of Parliament meeting under such circumstances should be a weakening of the Government, whose hands they profess to desire to strengthen--whose hands I believe they genuinely desire to strengthen--in every succeeding operation connected with this war? Can they contemplate with equanimity the reflection that possibly their votes may lengthen the war, and, by lengthening it, may increase that tragic list of losses with which we are already too familiar? If in giving their vote they add one fraction to the chances of a European complication, one fraction of a chance that an unnecessary life may be lost or a family thrown into mourning, can they easily reconcile that with their duty towards their own principles and to that country of which they are, I believe, as devoted servants as we on this side of the House? I think it is a violation of every Parliamentary tradition that men who desire to keep in office a Government should vote for an amendment which, if carried, will turn out that Government, and that it is contrary to every patriotic instinct to vote in a minority against the Government. The size of that minority will affect the whole course of European policy, the whole course of the war. I have stated the problem as it presents itself to my mind. I know that you are men of conscience and honour, and I must leave it to you to decide the problem, each man in his own case as his conscience and honour dictate. To the House at large I can only make one appeal. It is that we, who are the