if the scheme might be regarded as quite dead, Sir ALFRED MOND
replied that he certainly thought so. In fact, to judge by his previous
answer, it was never really alive.

There is still anxious curiosity regarding the increase of railway fares,
but when invited to "name the day" Mr. BONAR LAW remained coy. Suggestions
for postponements in the interests of this or that class of holiday-maker
finally goaded him into asking sarcastically, "Why not until after
Christmas?" Whereupon the House loudly cheered.

_Wednesday, July 21st._--Tactful man, Lord DESBOROUGH. In urging the
Government to call a Conference to consider the establishment of a fixed
date for Easter he supported his case with a wealth of curious information,
some of it acquired from the Prayer-book tables, as he said, "during the
less interesting sermons to which I have listened." You or I would have
said "dull" _tout court_, and in that case we should not have deserved to
receive, as Lord DESBOROUGH did, the almost enthusiastic support of the
Archbishop of CANTERBURY.

In spite of this Lord ONSLOW, for the Government, was far from encouraging.
He quite recognised the drawbacks of the movable Easter, and agreed that it
was primarily a matter for the Churches. But he feared the Nonconformists
might dissent, and displayed a hitherto unsuspected reverence for the
opinion of the Armenians. Besides, what about the Dominions and Labour? And
with Europe in such a state of unrest ought we to throw in a new apple of
discord? With much regret the Government could not see their way, etc.
Whereupon Lord DESBOROUGH, who seems to be easily satisfied, expressed his
gratitude and withdrew his motion.

In an expansive moment Mr. MONTAGU once referred to Mr. GANDHI as his
"friend." He did so, it appears, in the hope that the eminent agitator
would abandon his disloyal vapourings. But the friendship is now finally
sundered. Mr. GANDHI has been endeavouring to organise a boycott of the
PRINCE OF WALES' visit to India, and, as Mr. MONTAGU observed more in
sorrow than in anger, "Nobody who suggests disloyalty or discourtesy to the
Crown can be a friend of any Member of this House, let alone a Minister."

If anyone were to take exception to the accuracy of some of the PRIME
MINISTER'S historical allusions in his post-Spa oration he would doubtless
reply, "I don't read history; I make it." He was tart with the Turks,
gratulatory to the Greeks, peevish with the Poles and gentle to