The Birmingham age-herald., 1903-10-07
LETTERS TO EDITOR.
ealfour Versus Chamberlain.


 To the Editor of the Age-Herald: A battle royal has commenced in England. Giants are the combatants; the prize su- premacy Three gaudy standards flouc the pale blue sky'-retaliatory tariff, borne by Balfour; preferential tariff, borne by Chamberlain; no tariff, borne by Ritchie, each having its advocates and supporters.
 It affords a grand field for speculation and one well worthy the computation of chances and probabilities. Knowledge of the men and their antecedents is essen- tial to venture a forecast, and while not at present attempting to predict which will win there are many good and valid reasons for saying who will lose.
 Joseph Chamberlain's race Is well nigh run. Daring made his rise as 1t will make his fall. He never had, nor has he now, any spurs to prick the sides of his intent but only vaultng ambition which o'er- leaps itself and falls on the other side. This has been the rock upon which Cham- berlain split when he deserted the liberal party and in selling his master, Glad stone, earned for himself the soubriquet. Judas Chamberlain.
 Twenty years ago Chamberlain was a radical; he had a strong tinge of republi- canism; his doctrine bordered on social- ism he advocated the abolition of the house of lords; three acres and COW was the brthright of every Briton; he was the doyen of the masses; hs speeches were eheered to the echo; he stood next to Gladstone and was his legitimate success or and heir-apparent to the premiership of the liberal party; one step higher would have set him highest, but like Prince Henry, he clutched at the crown before the king was dead. 70, foolish youth! thou seel1st the greatness that will over whelm thee"
 Forestalled in his attempted theft of Gladstones scepter, MT. Chamberlain sought to justify his action by opposing Gladstones home rule bill on the ground that 1t meant the beginning of the dis memberment of the empire, and in pur- suit of his revenge for his disappointed ambition formed the unionist party ana joined the tories. He expected and re- ceived from his new associates the re- ward of his perfidy. He served with all the false and fatal zeal the convert of revenge can feer' the cause of his hered- itary enemies. The man who quite previ- ously had damned dukes now dined with them; he recanted all his former profess sions; he infused his aggressive spirit into the tory ranks; he led the assault upon the demoralized liberals and smashed them; before him Rosebery and Banner man went down like nine-pins; he won victory for the tories and claimed his re- ward.
 But there was one obstacle in Chamber lain's path, he represented trade; he was Brummagem both by birth and business; he stood among the tory aristocrats but not of them; the We're de Veres gladly &C., cepted his services, they would not accept his mastery; he was a Napoleon and parvenue; he was like Alp in the Moslem army; he was in short, renegade.
 Chamberlains' hope was to succeed Sal isbury as premier of the tory party and most likely he would have done so had not the aristocratic Balfour stepped into his uncle's shoes, leaving Chamberlain again one step short of his ambition. In- tolerable that family ties should strangle merit, he appeals to Caesar, the masses. whose voice he closed his ears against long since.
 Is this man sincere? The question raises an unfavorable presumption His treach- cry to Gladstone sprung from disappoint- ed ambition. His jealousy of Balfour is the result of disappointed ambition; his inevitable defeat will be due to his ambi- ton, doomed to disappointment. Hum fuit F. I. MONKS.
 Birmingham, October, 1903.