ENGLAND TO-DAY

Greymouth Evening Star, 16 November 1931, Page 7

ENGLAND TO-DAY

LADY ASQUITH’S VIEWS. “I never remember a time when the Past was not extolled at the expense of the Present. Young men and women had better manners, country life was less hectic, cocktails unknown, night clubs only visited by the degenerate, the City more scrupulous, society more discreet, game-playing more successful, and newspapers more moral, cheats dishonoured, religion observed, and Parliament more powerful; in fact, England is—as it always was—going to the devil.” writes the Countess of Oxford and Asquith in the “Daily Telegraph.” Let us examine a few of these contentions.

I think the young women of to-day are more masculine and muscular but less original than those thaZ I knew in my youth. They swim the Channel, aeroplane over Siberia, shoot at Bisley, sit upon juries, and are returned by constituencies to the House of Commons. But although not a single female M.P. has made a speech of any significance, I think they have probably had a great deal of influence over organising children's welfare, the diminution of drunkenness, and hearth and home. The young men of to-day have good manners and, thanks to the war and taxation, have ail kinds of professions and are hard-working-London society has always been the same, but I think the unwritten laws that regulate it are more lax- The City has always had its Hatrys; we were the leaders of the game-playing, but in our anxiety to teach our rivals the honourable way in which to lose games we have been only too successful. The Press has less power to-day than it had in my youth because it has no ethical basis and prefers playing down rather than up to popular - opinion. People do not go to church, not because they have less religion, but because the services are long and dull, and overworked men need the rest and sunshine of their rare week-ends. Parliament, and the House of Commons have not ceased to command the respect of the civilised world. That there are few great speakers and a deplorable lack of political courage—in all parties—at the present time is obvious; but there was more vivacity, rudeness, and obstruction in the House of Commons in my youth than there is to-day, and the lack of courtesy was far more deliberate, witty, and effective. I have never known a two-party House of Commons; for though Labour—quite wrongly—was not represented, we had Liberals, Tories, and Irish, and the latter were so convinced and powerful that each party in turn courted their support. The Liberals—under the leadership of Mr Gladstone —were kept out of power, with the exception of a short term of office, for nearly thirty years. No one looking at the House of Commons as it is can imagine the scenes, strife, and struggles which members had to face in those days. The Irish were reliable and dramatic offenders', and though their leader, Mr Parnell, was not witty or rough-tongued, he was a past master - in the art of obstruction, and a personality of such formidable distinction that the floor of the House was crowded, whenever, it was known that he was going to speak. TRIED NERVES. ' The spontaneous interruptions of Healy and Devlin were light relief from the heavier oratory of O’Brien, Dillon, Redmond, and Sexton; and what with all-night sittings and autumn sessions, nerves were racked and tempers ruffled to a degree quite unknown to-day.

Fashionable as well as intellectual women would sit lor hours in the galleries listening to Mr Gladstone and Mr Balfour, Lord Randolph Churchill, Mr Joseph Chamberlain, Sir Michael Hicks-Beach, and Sir William Hardaurt —not to mjention minor notabilities —in debates upon Home Rule, votes for women, and caber subjects of such passionate personal and political controversy that they divided half of the London society. I was lunching with Lord Rosebery the morning that the newspapers announced that the Labour member, Keir Hardie, had marched down to the House of Commons, accompanied by a brass band, to take his seat, and the late Archbishop of CanterburyRandall Davidson —said: “This looks like Labour governing us in the future.”

People will tell you (hat there are no great speakers to-day, but though there are fewer I do not think there was any man who spoke better than Lord; Hugh Cecil. His speeches will rank' with the finest that I ever heard, and if he spoke oftener I think ho would have more political influence in the country. Mr Lloyd George and Mr Winston Churchill are remarkable speakers, both on public platforms and in the House of Commons, but their trackless convictions rob them of power, and though they can fill any hall, I doubt if they turn any votes. In the House of Lords we have Lord Buckmaster and Lord Grey, but beyond these I know of no one that I particularly want to hear, and 1 with the death of the late Lord Balfour the House of Commons lost its greatest debater. Daniel O’Connell and Disraeli were before my day, but the debating duels between these two antagonists must have been of the highest order. Describing fjir Robert Peel, Daniel O’Connell said his “smile was like the silver plate upon a coffin” and the briU'ance of Disraeli’s and Lord Randolph Churchill’s attacks are too well known to too many people for me to quote.