Evening Post. SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1911. POSITION OF THE LORDS.

Evening Post, Volume LXXXI, Issue 47, 25 February 1911, Page 4

Evening Post. SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1911. POSITION OF THE LORDS.

It is not often that the first reading of a Bill is debated at all, and- that it should be debated with, the spirit and excitement- which distinguished the first., -stage of the Parliament Bill t is almost' without preced-ent. Another still more remarkable feature is the size of the majority. It is a very rare thing for 'a Government to- poll anything like the* full strength of its nominal majority in the House 'of • Commons. The Chamber is not large -enough to accommodate aIL its members, and a considerable proportion^qf them takeoio part in the- debates and raa-ely attend a division. Intense as was 'the interest aroused by the .oon— stitutional isaac which, after precipitating and dominating two general elections wifchiiu a year, is now reaching its crisis, there were nearly ,a hundred members of the House of Commons .-missing from the division on the first reading, of the Bill. In these* circam•stances one' would expect something like a proportional reduction of the Go-v- : eminent? s majority, find that Ut only falls short of its maximum strength by two. On a total vote of' 578 the- Government has a majority of 424, althoug-b if 4ne whole 670- members had been, ia their places the majority icould only hwra- been 126. Whatever 'may- be the ftituro fate of the hetero*'geneous 'coalitions-at which..the-Unionists-have .directed so' many jibes, it is clear *that on <th©- question < of the 3ior-ds' .Veto the coalition is solid -and -.veiy much in -.earnest. The enthusiasm which signal•ised both the opening and the conclusion of the debate tells tho same Ejtory as 'the- figures. Mr. Asquith is • reported ' to have received an "ovation" as he u-ose to introduce the Bill, and when, after the 'division he carried it from the Bar -of 'the House to the table,, the jubilation of his suppoutexs found expression in. a demonstration which lasted several minutes. The excitement recalls-thß-'wil'd scenes of enthusiasm, which attended tho introduction of Gladstone's \.Home, Rule Bills, but in the present 'case, if our cabled reports can -be relied on, the counter- demonstrations do not to have been so vigorous. Tlie^e was one remark inJtfr. Asquith'sopening speech from which, it is probable that but very few of his opponents* really dissent in their hearts. Itn is surely indisputable that " thto- rejection!. ,of the BudgeWf 1809 was the most -stupendous, blunder -ever perpetrated by, .the House -of 'Lords." The- House- was, warned by men- of suoh high authority*and so staunchly opposed -to 'the Budget as Lord Rosebery, Lord Balfour of Burleign, ajad Lord, James of Hereford, thafr to reject the Budget -would play into the hands of' the enemy and imperil the authority and even the very existence of the hereditary Chamber. Nevertheless, by the immense^majority of 350 votes to 75 the fatal amendment wsls carried. The Budget was not killed, but merely postponed. The effect of the general e'ection which follow«d was 'to place it on the- starcute--book, hand' the ,guns of the democracy aro now trained on to those who tried to kill it. The Lords, says Mr. Asquith, have committed political suicide. So far as 'the immediate issue raised by the rejection of the Budget is concerned, the remark is beyond challenge. By the- passing of Lord La-ns-downe's resolutions on thjs very eve of the last dissolution the Lords declared themselves "prepared to forego their constitutional right to reject or amend" Money Bills which are purely financial in character." If they had taken the same position .a year before, as Lord ißosebery and -others advised them to do, ;they would hawi-sa-v-ed the country two elections, and themselves a bitter humiliation. But after the matter has proceeded so far, e>v«n the complete surrender of the right to touch a Money Bill and the qualifications of its hereditary character will not suffice the enemies of the House of Lords. The "knife must cut deeper than that. The first cut will be administered by the passing of the Parliament Bill. As to that, Mr. Winston ChurchDl stated during the debate that "if the Government accepted ths invitation ior another conference they would not have fifty, supporters." We trust, however, that the application of this remark was strictly limited to the scope of the- present Bill. A measure establishing "a fair, wellconstituted Second Chamber" will, said Mr. Churchill, b© introduced at some later date which he declined to attempt to fix. There is surely no prospect of bringing this constructive work to a. successful issue in the approved hammer-and-tongs style of party politics, and we hope that nothing will be said during the heat of the debates on the Parliament Bill to prevent the holding of a conference on ths lines of that of last jKOttJfj when the Bill ia out of the \ya>\