INDUCTION IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS.

Dunstan Times, Issue 3133, 4 September 1922, Page 8

INDUCTION IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS.

(By Thomae I?,. Marshall, former VicePresident of the United States.) Witnessing the introduction of a newly created 1 peer into the House of Lords, 1 had opportunity t6 contrast the ceremony with the simple induction of a United States senator into office. The American Senate has often been referred to, every one knows, as the counterpart of the British House of l/ord« with the outstanding difference that membership in the one is restricted by terms while in the other Hie tenure prevarils. The induction of a new senator m entirely devoid of formality. His credentials signed by the Governor of his State, are read by a clerk. He is escorted by his colleague to the left of the presiding officer, who administers the oath, whereupon lie takes his scat ais a full-fledged member. He does not even kiss the sacred volume wbidh contains the only guaranty of the sincerity of hie oath. Far different is the ceremony by which a newly created peer is received into the House of Lord®. But first a word about the setting. The chamber itself reflects an atmosphere of venerable tradition. The Lord Chancellor of Great Britain presides. At one end of the chamber is the historic woolsack, or seat of equity, which is occupied by the Lord Chancellor in the trial of causes,, but which he leaves when he speaks upon a legislative question in order to maintain the distinction between legislative and judicial authority. Theoretically, the woolsack or seat of justice, is not in the legislative chamber.

'The Lord Chancellor was seated upon the woolsack when I made my visit. Tn an adjacent room were assembled the earl marshal, the lord great chamberlain, who was attended by the garter king of arms; the newly created peer and two peers of his own degree. Soon they entered the chamber in dignified processions, headed' by the usher of the Black Bod and the ear! marshal with his baton. The garter king of arms carried the newly created peer's patent. The peer, himself, bore his writ of summons.

I may pause to explains that a newly created peer receives from the King not only a patent to his peerage, or a commission, but also a writ of summons to appear in the House of Lord's and discharge his duties. It was hecause Lady Rhondda had no writ of summons that she was denied admission to the House of Lords when she appeared with her patent to nobility. The procession, each member bowing at the entrance to the chamber, advanced down one side, where the Lords temporal were seated. Midway a second bow was made, and then a third at the woolsack, where the garter king of arms delivered to the new peer his patent. The peer, kneeling, presented it ,«nd his writ of summons to the lord high chancellor. Rising, he retired to the temporal side of the House with his two supporters while his patetit and writ were being read. The oath was administered. The newly created peer was seated. Thrice he arose with his supporters and bowed to the Lord Chancellor, who 'returned the salutation without rising. Then he was escorted to the woolsack, where the Lord Chancellor shook hands with him. Thus he became for the rest of his life a member of the House of Lords. I was curious to know who this new peer was and what particular service he had rendered to the British Empire that led to his preferment, f was told he was the manufacturer of a popular brand of whisky. Whatever his business, he nianfestly had been successful in it and had fought his way to a commanding position in the business world. To me, he well illustrated; the difference between American and British] thought, touching successful business careers. Great Britain knights a successful business man, America indicts him. In Great Britain he is incarcerated for life in the House'of Lords. In America he is compelled to fight incarceration in the penitentiary. T am not philosopher enough to determine which punishment the better fits the crime. I can only say that justice is sure in Great Britain.