Trevelyan would go with Mr. G.... I shall want to know what you think of it all, and whether you have any alterations to propose in the reply." 'I noted: "I, of course, make common cause. The Whigs want to force him into a row with Mr. G., who, they think, will break him in place of his breaking Hartington after Mr. G. is gone." I admitted to Chamberlain when we met on February 3rd that there was, as he said, a dead set at him, and that the _Pall Mall_ for a wonder was backing it up. On his first point I was sure that Mr. Gladstone did not wish for his resignation, and knew that I should go too. On the second, I doubted any member being ready to bell the cat; and on the third point I was sure that Mr. Gladstone's defence of Chamberlain would not be such as to entail his resignation.' Sir Charles thought, and told Chamberlain, that the object of the Whigs was to force them 'to war with Mr. G. who is strong, and not with Hartington,' against whom the Radicals would hold winning cards. 'We therefore play into their hands by going NOW.' Meanwhile, he took up a fighting attitude towards the rest of the world. 'I had written to Mr. Gladstone very strongly backing up Chamberlain's right to express his individual opinion upon the questions of the future, and pointing out his patience in not repudiating some of Hartington's remarks, and saying that I could not let him go out alone.' 'On February 4th I heard from Chamberlain ... thanking me for getting Carrington, who represented my Department in the Lords, to make a pro-Chamberlain speech.' This was the more valuable because the whole Press was against the "unauthorized programme." At the same time, Sir Charles did not fail to point out that their position was an unsound one, writing first: 'Our words as to the future are too wide. They would cover my preaching a Republic for two years hence, or your preaching the nationalization of land without compensation for the next Parliament.' He urged also that the precedent which Mr. Chamberlain sought to establish was two-edged.