For as long as I can remember the French have been _partant pour la Syrie_.
Now they have got there, with a mandate from the Supreme Council, and have
come into collision with the Arabs. As we are the friends of both parties
the situation is a little awkward. Mr. ORMSBY-GORE hoped we were not going
to fight our Arab allies, and was supported by Lord WINTERTON, who saw
service with them during the War. A diplomatic speech by Mr. BONAR LAW, who
pointed out that the French were in Syria on just the same conditions as we
were in Mesopotamia, helped to keep the debate within safe limits.

_Tuesday, July 20th._--The Lords continued the DYER debate. Lord MILNER
confessed that he had approached the subject "with a bias in favour of the
soldier," and showed how completely he had overcome it by finally talking
about "Prussian methods"--a phrase that Lord SUMNER characterised as
"facile but not convincing." Lord CURZON hoped that the Peers would not
endorse such methods, but would be guided by the example of "Clemency"
CANNING. The Lords however, by 129 to 86, passed Lord FINLAY'S motion, to
the effect that General DYER had been unjustly treated and that a dangerous
precedent had been established.

The FIRST COMMISSIONER OF WORKS was inundated with questions about the
pylon and explained that it had been designed by Sir FRANK BAINES entirely
on his own initiative. Its submission to the Cabinet had never been
contemplated, and its exhibition in the Tea Room was due to an hon. Member,
who said that a number of people would be interested. Apparently they were.

Asked 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,