COMMITTED BY THE LORDS.

Northern Advocate, 23 February 1911, Page 5

COMMITTED BY THE LORDS.

.aN UNSUBSTANTIAL NIGHTMARE

VETO BILL INTRODUCED

(Received February 23, 5.42 a.m.) LONDON, Feb. 22. Mr Asquith received a warm ovation m rising to introduce the Lords' Veto Bill (Parliament Bill.) He said it was admitted that the Lords must yield to the will of the electorates. The rejection of the Budget in 1909 was the most stupendous blunder ever perpetrated. The Lords had committed political suicide. The assertion that Government wished tc rule by a despotic Single Chamber was an unsubstantial nightmare. There were conceivable conditions in which the Referendum would be a possible expedient in dealing with exceptional cases, but if it were regarded as a rejMlar part of the Constitution it would reduce elections to a shameful parade and would degrade the Commons to the level of a talking club. The Referendum was more revolutionary than the Veto Bill.

Mr Balfour declared that the general election was not a decision upon one issue, whereas the Referendum was. Government last week claimed the election as a decision against preference and tariff reform. By what miracle could the same Veto decide the details concerning the House of Lords? He hoped that the controversy would proceed without controversial \iolence. He would not assent to an agreement imposing a constitutional change which the people did not desire. They desired a change, but did i.ot desire a revolutionary change at the bidding of an Irish minority. There v, ere some issues so great that a compromise was impossible. A purely elective Second Chamber was inconsistent with the predominance of the Commons.

Unless Government wished to destroy that predominance, it would be folly to throw wholly aside the hereditarr principle. Mr Ramsay Mac Donald recognised with regret that the majority of the people insisted on a Second Chamber composed of Irishmen, able to spend money to contest enormous constituencies. That was going from frying pan into the fire. He would object less to the present system, which had soma aesthetic and picturesque value. ' The Labor party objected to the preamble of the Bill, but would rather accept it than forego reform. Mr Cory intimated that, though he sympathised with the Bill, he would '.ote against it unless it were made clear that it would not be used to carry Home Rule.