THE HOUSE OF LORDS.

Greymouth Evening Star, 19 March 1910, Page 4

THE HOUSE OF LORDS.

THE REFORM PROPOSALS. ’HEREDITARY PRINCIPLE MUST GO. [PER PRESS ASSOCIATION—OOPrRIGHI.] Received this day at 9.46 a.m. LONDON, March 18. Tiie Standard, in summarising l 'Lord Lausdown’s second chamber policy,, considers that the, powers of the veto could not be weakened. The number of [icers would be reduced but the whole peerage would sleet representatives of their own body. Otlirs would sit without election by virtue of their public, services. The Government of the day would also select a number ol Peers with tenure of office long enough not to bo influenced by general elections. Hie principle of life Peerages would bo extended to cover representation of all schools of political thought and great interests of the country. REFORM FROM WITHIN. In the House of Lords, Lord Courtney discussed Lord Rosebery’s resolution from the standpoint of the divergency between the two Houses Ho incidentiy criticised the Commons as not being true to the Council of the Nation as owing to the absence of representations some great elements were absent therein just as great elements were absent from the Lords. He concluded by detailing a scheme of representation of Capital, Labour, and fb Nationalists. Lord Lailsdowne emphasised that no body objected to going into commit too, •01 the subject of the reform of the House of Lords, inasmuch as such an aitifndo was equivalent, ‘o declaring lie House to be perfect. Hi l dv.elt on the seriousness of (he proposal to ask a larg number of Peers to surrender (heir duties and privileges. He hoped 1 "id Rosebvy would submit, his ultimate scheme of continuity by keeping he right side of the line between reform ami revolution. The House was a min.g concern with a considerable g'dmvill. which ought not. to be saert- ' ced. If new blood were introduced

'he old tradition should be ret,'lined. He would greatly regret, any alteration in the name of the House, a name whereof they had no reason to be ashamed. He trusted Hie reform would be on an imputable and reaso”able basis, not exeluding the hereditary principle. Hlii PEOPLES MANDATE. Ihe Unionist. Leader contends that lie* country's recent verdict was no wholesale condentna! ion of tlie House of Lords. The principle of reform should be simple. He remarked that one * r (In* picturesque, attractive and impractical suggestions favored was ineluding representatives from the oversea dominions. Sluvly the Imperial Parliament was .me thing and the Second Chamber another. He would ask tlmse familiar with the ..pinion of the great colonies whether (lie latter greatly desired (die associated with the Motherland in the everyday work of legislation. He did not think (he Dominions would part with their best men for the purpose ..f attending, nor lie grateful fur tin- amount. »f represent'd ion granted which would necessarily he small. ll.* concluded by reviewing (he various practical methods ~f reform.

Lord Crew.* said !c was not opposed to the resolutions but (lie primary, urgent question concerned in the relations of the two 11 1 uses. What was unpopular, he said was not the hereditary principle but the uncontrolled exercise of hereditary power. He added *ba( tin Commons must have a proportionate right regarding anv mform of Mm Lords;

I ii>- resolution was (lion amved to, ami Hi.* Hons,* wen*. into i*<iTDinit .'mil adjourned. 1 Ik* I mil's says the ( b.v.'rnmenCs present, plan for « K r-r inyr a second Chamber is to subdivide Britain an<! lie] ;i tirl into si -v* ■) 1 1 y-fi\• ■ enormous constituencies <*acJi returning two i members—a senior for eight years, and a junior for four years' Tin*: NATIONALIST ATTITUDE. Mr John Redmond, speaking at an Irish banquet in London, said the Nationalists were anxious to prevent a failure of the veto campaign but they did not intend pm tiepating in a sham tie. He demanded, he said, a straight tight and not a Fabian policy. Fonie weal or woe they would stand hy their pledge. He .lid not know whether (hey would succeed or whether the Irish cause would have unco more to wait. Mr O'Connor, in a speech at Liverpool, said in (he tight with the Lords .hey had the Budget Weapon which ought to bo fearlessly used fff'fflCfpP* must or,.