Evening Post. SATURDAY, JANUARY 28, 1911. THE MOMENTOUS CLASH.

Evening Post, Volume LXXXI, Issue 23, 28 January 1911, Page 6

Evening Post. SATURDAY, JANUARY 28, 1911. THE MOMENTOUS CLASH.

The session which opens on Tuesday next promises to be one of the most mom««itouß ever held by a British Parliament. The great constitutional struggle which was precipitated by the House of Lords when it rejected the Budget of 1909 has now resulted in two general elections within the space of tw-elve months, and the attempt to settlethe conflict will, of course, be the principal task of the Parliament which was. constituted last month at the second of these elections. In January last there were two principal issues — the Budget and the Lords. As the ground taken by Lord Lanadowne and his majority for refusing to pass the Budget was not that they had a right to reject it, but thaffc the people had a right to be consulted about it, the verdict of the elections, was accepted as final so far as the. Budget was concerned, although they had reduced the Government's' majority from 355 to 124. The chief danger to the Budget in the last Parliament lay in the idea which found favour -with many of the Radicals that tihequestion of limiting the power of the Lor.de should be taken first. A deadlock could certainly have been created that way, but we could never .see what the party in power had to gain by the obstructive tactics which are the natural resort of an Opposition. The effect of putting the Budget first was that it w«nt through both Houses unopposed, and gave the Liberals 1 the solid fruits Kit a victory which would otherwise have been baa'ran. The other issue proved, as was expected, incapable of settlement. If the struggle had taken its normal course, the Government would have been faced with the alternatives of resignation or dissolution before the middle of last year. But the death of King Edward at a critical point in the struggle changed tho aspect of affairs. The combatants decided that a fitting memorial to Edward the Peacemaker would be a peaceful settlement of the constitutional struggle with which they had embarrassed th&Jast six months of his reign. Tho negotiations postponed tihe crisis till the end of the year, but o,n fthe :eve of 'tihe opening of the autumn session Mr. Asquith reported that the negotiations had failed, and tn© chief work of Parliament when it met was to receive the announcement of an immediate dissolution and to make preparation accordingly. The result of the appeal to the country was that, on a considerably diminished poll, tihe Liberals slightly improved their previous majority. For all practical purposes a majority of 126 is the same as one of 124, and the question which the newspapers and the politicians have bean busily discussing during the last six weeks is as to the meaning, after so acute and far-reaching a struggle, of tihe popular verdict of "As you were." We were at first die- • posed to take the view that, as Mr. Asquith had asked for an increased majority on the ground that his majority in the last Parliament was insufficient for the carrying of the great constitutional measure which he has in hand, and had failed to get it, the verdict must be accepted as unfavourable to his request for effective power. It is, however, interesting to see that an authority which nobody would accuse of bias in favour of the claims of the Government has proclaimed the oppo site view with great emphasis. "Remember," said the Spectator just before the elections, "that it will not be necessary for the Government to secure as large a majority as they have at present. They may lose a very considerable number of seate, and yet have quite enough Parliamentary support to place the constitution at their disposal, for we may dismiss as idle the notion that the King could resist, even if he fib desired — which ifi an assumption we have no sort of right to make — the pressure which will necessarily be put upon him should the Ministry be given a new lease of life." Such an argument from such a quarter is undoubtedly entitled to great weight, and the analogy of the Budget issue strengthens it considerably. The Government appealed to the country on the Budget in January last, and, though the result was the reduction of their majority by more than 50 per cent, the Lords nevertheless accepted their decision as conclusive, because the majority was still substantial. The result of the general election last month was not to diminish the Government's majority, but to increase it very slightly, and the dominant issue was even more clearly the fate of the Lordß than the fate of the Budget had been the dominant issue at the general election in January last. Another point which we have regarded from the first as a weighty one is that the House of Lords had itself, on the eve- of the last election, declared for a radical reform of its constitution. The fact that even after this remarkable concession the hostile majority was repeated, is decidedly significant. Every vote cast last month was indeed a vote for reforming tha House oi Lords in some way or other, but the party that scored the most votes was the party that wanted to make the deepest cut with the knife of xe4sm> It-mujt : ftlßu-^e>pmß in. aim.4

that, though Ihis curtailment of the power of the Lords figured prominently at the general election in January last, the intentions of the Government had not then got beyond the resolution stage. Last session, however, they blossomed into a Bill which was submitted to both Houses, and it was on this Bill that the dissolution was taken. If the Lords nevertheless follow Mr. Chamberlain's advice and reject the Bill, can the King refuse to take the course which his Advisers may recommend for abating their pretension ? The Spectator at any rate does not think so. "The King," it says in the article already cited," "will be bound by the decision of the people, whatever it may be," What is still more to the point, the King himself is said, on what we regard as excellent authority, to take the same view. In the letter te the Sydney Morning Herald, which we quoted at length yesterday, Sir Henry Lucy refers to Mr. Asquith's reticence since his last interview with the King on the question of guarantees that the will of the people when expressed at the polls should be carried into effect. "In private conversation," writes Sir Henry Lucy, "Ministers are less reticent, and it is known, beyond doubt, that, as might be expected from a Sovereign loyal to constitutional principles, such assurance has been given, and, if necessary, will be made available to the fullest limit." It is singular that this remarkable secret should have been kept so well. Ministers have plainly a lever now by which they can at least enforce a far more favourable compromise than was possible last year.