THE HOUSE OF LORDS.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 770, 19 March 1910, Page 10

THE HOUSE OF LORDS.

VARIOUS REFORM SCHEMES. FOKTY TEAES OP FUTILE EFFORT. It is perhaps not.. generally known by those who. aro following with interest the progress of the war between tho British Government and/the House of Lords that many, attempts to reform, the House have been made by. the Conservatives in the past. ' •■■.' -■■■■' • ' ■'' ■■'_ - "■ ;■ ■■'• . ■.■

For. nearly "a';.:generaiion. the; cry of "End or, mend the House of Lords!", .has been a shibboleth of. the .Radical' party;; yet most of the proposals for'reform , have originated from the Unionist side of the House. Despite the preparation of practical and detailed schemes of reorganisation, no plan has ever been taken up officially by tho Government, and the recommendations of the powerful committee which in 1908 spent the greater part of the year in debating a plan for reform have.remained a dead letter. "

With the exception of the passing of an Act in 1871 disqualifying bankrupts from sitting and voting in the.House of Lords, and the Appellate Jurisdiction Acts of 1876 and 1887, limiting the qualifications to sit arid vote of Lords of Appeal in Ordinary, no. changes in the constitution of the Upper Chamber have been made in modern times. But there have been many attempts at reform,. beginning with Earl Russell's Bill, of 1869. and ..ending with Lord Newton's Bill of 1907 and the deliberations of the Sekct Committee of 1908, already mentioned.. These attempts may be briefly recapitulated in the following manner:— ' '

1869.—Introduction of Earl Russell's Life Peerages Bill, to empower the Crown to create 28 lifo peers', not more than four in any one year. Bill read a second time; greatly amended in committee,' and ultimately rejected by 106 to 76. Earl. Grey introduced a Bill to amend the laws relating to the election of representative Irish and Scottish peers. On the motion for the second readings the Duke of Buccleuch • nioved for the appointment of a Select Committee. -This wa-S agreed to. The committee wa appointed, heard evidence, but made no report. .'._;,. the Committee of; 1874.; .; 1874.—A Select Committee , appointed- to inquire into the niethod of sentative Irish' and Scottish -.peers,'"and repwt ''as to' , desirable changes. Lord Kosebery jrn's, c'hairmiraj; , . tho recommendations ■"■ were:—(l).;. Th.atr it was undesirable to maintam.'aiclkss' of peerages ~tb' Mvhich no "■ legislative functions wereWattaehed; (2) that;, the Scottish representative peers should be increased to 21;..(3); that Scottish peers who were not representative ouehti.not to be debarred from sitting in the House of Commons; (4) that everj addition; to-the Irish peerage only increased the anomalous'condition of that body. „■''..' 18Bi.—Lord. Eosebery advocated that, in order to increase the efficiency of the House' of. Lords,, the quorum should be enlarged; that a system of joint committees of the two Houses should be instituted for the consideration of Bills, both publio and private; that the Churches, the. professional, ; commercial, and labouring classes,- science, art, and literature in the colonies should be represented., in the, House of- Lords; and that thbre-shquld.be. an extension of the system .of. lifo peerages. After .a debate Lord: RoseberyV motion was 1 rejected by 77 votes'to 38... . ' : '.'■'. ..•■'. . .

1888.—Lord Bosebery again moved for the appointment of a Select but'.tne motion-was-rejected. On this occasiqn"Lord-.,liqsebery -made more definitt>.,suggestjons. -. r He .proposed-that- the whole, 6 bqdy of 'peers should = delegate-'.a certain ; numlser..-of peers : to , T sit .Hot.,.', a limited :pori6d as representative-.-peers; that a reconstructed House ■ of Lords should contain a large number of elected peers, elected by .county boards, municipalities, or oven by ' the House of Commons; that -.there should i .be ■ life and official.. ■■pcjragesY .and that , the ielfgoverhing' cblqnios' i should " v send .their or' other"' , , representatives to sit in 'the House of Lords., Hβ also suggested that, in .the,. event of disputes .between the two Houses, they .should both meet .together, and, by certain ' . fixed ])iajonties,' carry' or "reject-any" '■' measure in dispute; ■ ■■"- •■•<■■■' '■' ■;•' '• Lord Dunraven's Scheme. • Four days later Lord Dunraven introduced a Eeform Bill, .of which the principal; points were ..the following:— ■ (1) That the temporal, peers should by some system.. of, proportional election 180 from. ambng their., number to form ■ a representative, section. of the of : elimination; ■ through" death!: retirement,: bring .atohf''the:ijessatioii. of' hereditary 'right ■ 'fer . Sit' as. 'legislators! .'in the House of Lords. . : ',.'..'''. '-:

(2) That no peer elected "to sit in the representative eqctiori should be less than 30 yeara of age. , : i , .-. . •_(3] That ■: aiy hereditary, peer, created after the-passing of the Act should only be entitled to sit and vote. 6h being elected to tho representative section. , (i) That the' Crown should have the power to create life -peers to sit in the House, but that not more than five of theso peors shonld be summoned during' the life of any one P&rliament. (5) That the Crown should appoint 18 lords of Parliament for life to represent the colonies, Roinail Catholics, Protestant Dissenters, and science, letters, and "sound learning," .- ■ ■ (G) That each county council should recommend one person for appointment as a lord of Parliament. (7) That one-third of the lords of Parliarnent should retire every three yoars. . (8) That certain great officers of State, boiug members, of the Privy .C6undl, i should have the rignt to spoak. in 'the House of Lords. ''■""".'■.■..

Lord Salisbury's- Plan... This Bill was withdrawn after debate, and in session the Marquess of Salisbury introduced two Reform Bills, both of whioh.were debated and ■ withdrawn. Lord Salisbury's Bills- suggested :—• . (1) The appointment of life, peers (not exceeding 50 at any one time) from the ranks of judges, admirals, generals, Ambassadors and Ministers, Privy Councillors or Governors-General. (2) The appointment in .the same way '.of any person chosen by tho Crown for special cfAilifications other than those specified in the Act. Tho dignity and privilege were not in these cases to descend to heirs. ' ; ■ (u) That under certain conditions writs of.summons , to peers might be cancelled.1889.—Lord Carnarvon introduced a Bill very similar to that of Lord Salisbury for the discontinuance of writs, but an amendment was .moved:-on the second reading, "That it. ,is inexpedient to procoed with any Bill affecting the privileges of members of this House which d6es not. deal with: the .question, of the amendment -of its 'i constitution." . .The amendment was withdrawn, but the second reading of the Bill wos : not carried; ; No further attempt in any way to chafige the constitution of the House of Lords was made In tho Upper House until Lord Newton introduced his Reform Bill ill 1907. Lord Newton's Bill. Lord Newton's Bill proposed: (1) That ,peorage by descent should not carry the fright to a.scat in the House of Lords 'unless the peer had occupied,somo high State office or had been elected not less than twice to the House of Commons before succeeding to the peerage. (2) That the unqualified peers should elect a quartor of. their nuihbtr to represent them , during each Parliament, tho Scottish and Irish peers to do the same, and the' Bishops similarly--to elect spiritual-'repre'sontative peers." : ■ ' (3) That' the-Crdwii shduld '-crdato 100' life peers, not more : than "ton in one yoar. i On May 6, 1007, Lord Newton moved tho second reading of this Dill, but the motion was , withdrawn by. leave of, the Houso, and Lord Cawdor moved for tho appointment .of a.'Select Committee to consider all the various proposals of which the-foregoing is a summary. This was agreed to .by 198 votes to.dG. The committee sat from February 4 to November 23, and. recommended: (1) Reduction in the number 6f legislative peers. .— ' . . . . ; (2) Acceptance of tho principlo, of electiou. (3) Acceptance of the principle of qualification. - - . - (i) Heredity itself no longer to be a tltlo to legislative ptfWor. beyond the se&& (Loud applausaj

(5) Inquiry from oversea States as to desirability of including their representatives iu the Chamber.

This is the scheme which has been several times summarised in our columns. Tho House would consist under the plan of three Peers of the Blood Royal, 200 olected by hereditary peers, five Lords of Appeal, 10 spiritual lords, 130 qualified hereditary peers, nnd a possible annual increment (up to a total of dfl) of four life peers. ...••■..

The Liberals havo never assisted in , any of these schemes of reform.- ■'