THE VETO BILL.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1103, 17 April 1911, Page 6

THE VETO BILL.

THE SECOND READING DEBATE TUMULTUOUS SCENE. SPEECHES BY MTi. BALFOUK AND MK. ASQUITH. London, March 3. The last day of the great second reading debate on the Veto Bill opened in His House of Commons on March 2 with a pungent speech by Mr. Balfonr, a scene at its close stirred by his charge of iraucl against the Government, and Mr. Asrjiiith's indignant reply, Then nt eleven o'clock came the div Won in which the Unionist amendment (tantamount to rejection of the Hill while welcoming, reform of the House of Lords) was deleaved by 121 votes. . , , ~ t . i Just before four o clock the Speaker called on Mr. Balfour. With a single sheet of notepaper in his hand, he rose amid the cheers of the Unionist members. He be"an by examining the universal tendency in favour of the hereditary principle. "The whole of history shows that it seems a reasonable thing to the ordinary man." Lucidly, persuasively, he went on to show the part Hereditary had in our national preferences. Admitting that the democratic form of Government was the only form of Government for a community like ours, he declared that it was folly to appeal against the House, of Lords on the ground that the Chamber was based on heredity. But he cried, "Let it (the heredity principle) be our pcrvant; let it be no longer our master. The Liberals cheered loudly. Lords Not Strong Enough. Quickly Mr. Balfour pointed out that it was the 'Liberal party who claimed to be the great innovators in legislation. Surely it was for great innovations that checks were required. (Liberals laughed.) "Well," said Mr. Balfour, "If you think, violent measures are likely to issue from the quiet benches behind, we find a system ffi checks to apply to both sides. But let it be a real check; don't let it be a sham. "Why do we want a change of the Constitution? I want it because I think the House of Lords a» at present constituted ii not strong enough to carry out its functions at the present time." (Opposition cheers.) "If the House of Lords is to bo classed with the beautiful arm >nr in the Tow-er— (laughter)—as something ancient and valuable, but wholly useless-(Ministerial cheers)—for our modern purposes, then I say I cava as little for that House of Lords as lion, gentlemen opposite. I want a Second Chamber, and the Government also want a Second Chamber—l suppose they mean one which will carry out the functions of a Second Chamber. Sse to it that you have a Second Chamber that is strong enough." (Cheers.)

Break of the Storm. Nationalists nnd Radicals became restive as Mr. Balfour dealt with tho interval between ths passing of the Parliament Bill and tin revision of the Lords, tho interval during which it was proposed to pass Home Rule. There were ono or two shouts as ho said: "The, results will probably be disastrous to the country, ar.'i certainly will be discreditable to yourselves." Mr. Balfour had come to the point when he- meant to deliver his message. ' The whiteness of his face told of tho intensity of his feelings. He stood back from the' table and raised a finger in the direction of Mr. Asquith and his colleagues, and speaking with a strength and a. spirit which gave his words almost a hissing effect, he said: "You are doing what you have no right to do. You aro using tho power given by the transfer of a relatively few votes from ono side to the other at an election to make fundamental changes in tho Constitution of which yon are . tho guardians, and you openly say you are going to force them through one part of the Legislature by coercion as you have imposed them on tho country by fraud." The storm broke then. From tho Nationalists, the Liberals, the Labour members there came infuriated cries, and they grew in volume each second. A hundred things were called out, "Withdraw, withdraw," "Shame, shame," "Tory fraud," among them. The . Unionists cheered jubilantly, exultantly. One Nationalist roso and shook his fist at Mr. Balfour. The latter stood at the table, erect and collected, surveying the tumultuous scene with a reflective air. Presently ho tried to make his voice, heard, but not a word penetrated through the uproar to the Press Gallery directly overheard. . All the Coalition had now joined in the common shout, "Withdraw, withdraw." For a full minute they spent their lung's on it. Then, when Mr. Baifour tried to get in a word, they began again. "I am not quite done," he said blandly. Sir Henry Dalziel jumped up from ono of the Liberal back benches: "Is it your ruling, Mr. Speaker, that the word 'fraud' applied to individuals and political parties is in order?" "Applied to individuals," replied the Speaker, "it would bo out of order, but applied to parties I see no objection." Mr. Asquith Indignant. When Mr. Asquith got up there was much Liberal cheering, for the Ministerialists felt they had a worthy gladiator in the field. Quickly the Prime Minister dashed into the fray. He has a deep, rich voice, which ho can. control perfectly, and this evening he modulated it to the extremest indignation. "We know tho right lion, gentleman's policy now," ho cried; "it is to make the Upper Chamber stronger." As be denied the charge of "fraud" made by Mr. Balfour ho hit the dispatch-box heavy, loud blows to show his resentment. Tho Coalition cheered every manifestation loudly. His plan, he said, followed tho C'ampbellBannerman proposals of 1907. "To pretend that we have adopted our present course in bringing forward this Bill not because of our conscientious convictions, but as an afterthought and for party interest, is to make a charge which is less supported by reason and evidence than any charge I have ever heard made in this House." (Loud Ministerial cheers.) An excited Liberal called out, "Now let him withdraw." "No, no," cried tho Prime Minister with, a great display of scorn. "Let it go forth for the judgment of the country." Mr. Balfour hnrt said: "Take the hereditary principle. What can we get out of it?"' "Yes," retorted Mr. Asquith, "they have made a great deal out of it. (Loud Ministerial . cheers and laughter.) I am not surprised, then, that the. right hon. gentleman thinks the hereditary principle is -i practical thing and a working instrument. It is a working instrument to secure the absolute supremacy of this House wh«n there is a Tory majority in it, and an equally working instrument to frustrate and nullify the working of this House when it contains a. Liberal majority. (Ministerial cheers.) '"Let it iml ho onr master?. . So pay we! (Loud Ministerial chrers.) Becauso it has born our masters, and is our masters at Hip present time, because it enslaves and fetters the freo action of this House, we have put forward these proposals, and we mean lo carry them into law." (Loud and prolonged Ministerial cheers.) Finally Mr. Asquith laid down his conditions of reform: 1. The House of Commons must be predominant in legislation. 2. The only 'functions of the Second Chamber aro consultation, revision, and, subject to proper safeguards, delay. 3. It must be a small body, not resting on an hereditary basis, and not governed by partisanship tempered by panic. It was a good fighting speech. The Liberals received it with acclamation. The House then divided on Mr. Austen Chamberlain's amendment: "This nouse would welcome the introduction of a Bill to reform the composition of the House of Lords whilst maintaining its inde-ix-ndcnce as a Second Chamber, but declines to proceed with a measure which places all effective legislative authority in the hands of a single Chamber and ofrers no safeguard against the passage into law of grave changes without the consent and contrary to the will of tho people." Auainet the amendment 3M For the amendment 244 Majority 121 The House then divided on the second reading of the Bill: For second reading fIGS Asaiiiit 213 Majority 125