But that is not the point--nobody expects gentlemanly feeling or speech from Mr.Chamberlain.The point is that the observation could have been applied with much more truth to the speech of Mr.Chamberlain than to that of Labby; for Mr.Chamberlain's speech consisted, for the most part, of nothing better than the merest party hits--the kind of thing that almost anybody could say--that hundreds of journalists nightly write in their party effusions, and for very modest salaries.

But the heart and soul of the question of Uganda were not even touched by Mr.Chamberlain.Labby may have been right or wrong; but Labby's was a serious speech with a serious purpose.

Mr.
Chamberlain's speech was just a smart bit of party debating.

The buffoonery--in the sense of shallowness and emptiness--was really in the speech that everybody took to be grave.

The seriousness was in the speech which, amid the delighted applause of the Tories, Mr.Chamberlain denounced as buffoonery.
[Sidenote: The grip of Labby.] In some respects Mr.Labouchere reminds me of the late Mr.Biggar.
Underneath all his exterior of carelessness, callousness, and flippancy, there lies a very strong, a very tenacious, and a very clear-sighted man.