User accounts and text correction are temporarily unavailable due to site maintenance.
×
Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

PEERS HOLD OUT.

NO GUARANTEE,

UNIONISTS TO ABSTAIN FROM VOTING. A NEW DILEMMA. . . (Rec. August 1, 9.50 p.m.) Bj Tclecrajih—Press Association— Copyricht London, August 2. Lord Lansdowne, leader of the Oppo-' sition in the House of Lords, in writing to Lord Caiuperdown—who had announced that lie was prepared to vote for the Government if such action would prevent the creation of new Peers—stated that he had recommended his supporters to abstain from voting, and that personally ho would not vote with tho Government when the Parliament Bill. was returned from the House of Commons. (Eec. August 1. 9.50 p.m.) London, August 1. It is unlikely that tho House of Commons will deal with tho Lords' amendments to tho Parliament Bill before next week. "Tho Times" states that the Government is in a dilemma, as, owing to tho situation in the House of Lords, they must either send tho Bill back to tho Upper House without any warranty that it will pass, or else forthwith create new Peers to assure its passage. THE SHOUTING DOWN OF MR. ASQUITH. ATTACK ON THE SPEAKER. , London, July 31. Mr. J. Pointer, Labour member for Attercliffo, writing to a Labour newspaper, accused the Speaker of tho House of Commons (Mr. J. W. Lowther)' of miserable, pitiable faililre in dealing with the shouting down.of Mr. Asquith in the House on Monday, July 21. Colonel Lockwood, Conservative member for Epping, drew attention to the matter in the Coni.nons. Air. Pointer apologised and withdrew the accusation. If Lord Lansdowne and his following abstain from voting on the Veto Bill, it will leave Lord Halsbury and the "No surrender" party pitted against tho Liberal Peers in the Upper House. The supporters of Lord Halsbury's fighting policy were stated on Saturday to have dwindled down to between sixty or seventy, and in yesterday'b messages it was announced that 305 Peers were supporting Lord Lansdowne. The state of parties in the House of Lords on December 1 last was as under t—. Conservatives and Unionists... 471 Liberals 105 • Nationalists 1 Politics not stated 40 Minors 13 630 There were on the date mentioned two vacancies among the Scottish representative Peers. If the Bill is once rejected, it cannot, of course, be resubmitted during the same session. of Parliament. It was recently stated that one week was to be given to enable the Unionist Peers to guarantee that the Bill will pass as transmitted from; tho House of Commons. In default of such a guarantee, the Government would- create a sufficient, number of new Peers to ensuro the passage of the measure.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19110802.2.45

Bibliographic details

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1195, 2 August 1911, Page 5

Word Count
430

PEERS HOLD OUT. Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1195, 2 August 1911, Page 5

PEERS HOLD OUT. Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1195, 2 August 1911, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert