genially that before he sat down I
am sure that a good half of his hearers began to think that, after all,
there was "something in it." Visions of a carboniferous millennium, when
there would be no more strikes and hardly any accidents, and altruistic
colliers would hew their hardest to get cheap and abundant coal for the
community, floated before the mind's eye as Mr. BRACE purred persuasively
along.

[Illustration: THE PIED PIPER OF ABERTILLERY

(MR. W. BRACE).

"FOR HE LED US, HE SAID, TO A JOYOUS LAND

WHERE WATERS GUSHED AND FRUIT-TREES GREW,

AND FLOWERS PUT FORTH A FAIRER HUE,

AND EVERYTHING WAS STRANGE AND NEW."]

Unfortunately for the Nationalisers Mr. LUNN thought it necessary later to
make a blood-and-thunder oration, threatening all sorts of dreadful things
(including a boycott of the newspapers) if the Miners' demands were
refused. Moreover, he made it clear that coal was only a beginning and that
the Labour Party's ultimate objective was nationalisation all round, and
wound up by reminding the House that "we are many and ye are few."

The PRIME MINISTER is not the man either to miss a chance or refuse a
challenge. The tone of his reply was set by Mr. LUNN, not by Mr. BRACE; and
though he had plenty of solid arguments to advance against the motion the
most telling passage in his speech was a quotation from "Comrade TROTSKY,"
showing what Nationalisation had spelt in Soviet Russia--labour
conscription in its most drastic shape. The nation, he declared, that had
fought for liberty throughout the world would stand to the death against
this new bondage.

Result: Amendment defeated by 329 to 64.

_Thursday, February 12th._--This was the first Question-day of the new
Session, and the House was flattered to see Mr. LLOYD GEORGE in his place,
despite the counter-claims of the Peace Conference at St. James's Palace.
Evidently he means this year to "stick to the shop" more closely, in view,
perhaps, of the possible return from Paisley of the old proprietor.

To a Labour Member's complaint that several ex-Generals had been appointed
as divisional Food officers, Mr. MCCURDY replied that no preference was
given to military candidates. But why not? Where will you find more
competent judges of alimentary questions than in the higher ranks of His
Majesty's Forces?

In attacking the provisions of the Peace Treaty with Germany as
"impracticable," Sir DONALD MACLEAN revealed himself as a diligent student
of a