THE HOUSE OF LORDS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLVI, Issue 14145, 21 August 1909, Page 1 (Supplement)

THE HOUSE OF LORDS.

EARL BEAUCHAMP AND REFORM.

BY FRANK FOX.

The tariff reform issues now obscure every other in British politics. Even home rule for Ireland is little talked of, less written of, outside of Ireland itself. For a few weeks lately defence overshadowed tariff reform, but even defence, which is a matter of grave and increasing anxiety, soon had to give pride of place to the "fiscal issue," with or without direct reference to the Budget. (It is curiously like old Australian days to hear " the fiscal issue" talked of as the one thing in politics.) To speak just now in London of the constitutional position of the House of Lords, to recall the old phrases about "mending or ending" the chamber of men who are " born into constituencies" is to invite inattention, or a sneer in which Rip Van Winkle is mentioned illustratively. The House of Lords is now an issue. Its mending or ending, for the time being, is as unimportant as the naval policy of Switzerland. But it will not always be so. These are times of ripening democracy. With Russia gradually shaping a system of Parliamentary government, with constitutional assemblies meeting at Teheran. and Constantinople, it is evident that the spirit of popular government is abroad; and that spirit must, when it has time to consider the subject, see a foolish and possibly dangerous anachronism in the position of the, House of Lords in Great Britain, the members of which are responsible to no consti-

tuents, but have yet theoretically almost

exactly the same powers and responsibilities as the elected representatives of the people. The King once claimed a right to a share in the government of the country. But that claim has long since fallen into disuse, and it could not be revived now. The King never amends a Bill, never vetoes a Bill, never, except at the behest of his Ministers, initiates a Bill. The Lords, who have just as much, and no more, representative right as the King, constantly do all three, especially when a Liberal Government is in power. Like the King, the majority of them owe their positions purely to birth. Like the King, they have no certain way of consulting the people's wishes, for they do not stand for election. That this anomalous feature in the British Constitution of the House of Lords having theoretically an almost complete equality with the House of Commons in legislative power should have survived so long in the British governing system, is due to the fact that the House of Lords has, on the whole, done very good work. It has never resisted stubbornly the cer-tainly-ascertained will of the people. It has often been of great use in its work of revision. When the storms of party strife have in the other Chamber—so large in numbers as to be unmanageable on any basis of full freedom of discussionraged so furiously as to drive Governments into hasty and ill-considered actions, the House of Lords has interposed a period of calm deliberation, and has often prevented serious mistakes being made. The British mind is intensely practical. It is apt to look at results rather than logical arguments when an , institution comes to judgment. The fact that the powers of the House of Lords were inconsistent with democratic ideals has never yet been sufficient to induce the British voter to make a radical change. He wanted to see definite instances of mischief done before taking any action. But that attitude cannot last over a period of "slack" politics when it will be the business of politicians to look out for new party cries and shibboleths. Once tariff reform is out of the way— it seems likely that it will be temporarily put out of the way after the next general elections by a Unionist Government making a first

timid move towards protectionthere will be a looking round the ship to see there is room for improvements; and the House of Lords, the gilded, picturesque, but out of date, figurehead at the prow, will at once challenge attention. It will be argued that it does not accelerate the pace, that it is not a good collision bulkhead, that in these utilitarian days a House of Lords cannot be maintained merely because of its aesthetic value. When that time comes, the House of Lords must expect to be very much mended or very sharply ended if it is found in its present form.

Many of the Lords recognise this fact, and, believing that the House of Lords has done good work, can still do good work, and that some sort of a Second Chamber is, in fact, essential to the good government of Great Britain, devote their minds to considering a method of reform of their House which will leave it as a useful Chamber of revision, and yet so modify its constitution as to remove the chief democratic objections to its continued existence. There is a. Bill embodying some reform ideas now on the table of the Lords ; but it has never yet been discussed, and does not seem to be seriously intended. Chatting the other day with Earl Beauchamp in the House of Lords, however, he casually outlined a scheme of reform of the Lords quite startling in its simple directness.

It was a drowsy day in May, when London weather occasionally breaks into a warm brilliance, which makes the stranger suspect that summer is coming, but summer never does come. In the Chamber of the Lords a few members talked monotonously on subjects in which they clearly did not take an atom of interest. In one cosy corner of the House a member slept unashamedly, and a little, just a little, noisily through the afternoon hours.

"It is not always like this," remarked Lord Beauchamp, somewhat apologetically. "In the House of Lords you do-get debating sometimes of a higher standard even than in the Commons. Since public business began to demand so much the use of the closure in the Commons, sometimes the only really thorough debate of a measure is in this House."

There was a suggestion that, after all; the historic function of a Parliament was to debate, " to talk;" and that the debates of a Parliament were sometimes quit© as useful in awakening public opinion as the Acts of a Parliament were in enforcing the verdicts of public opinion.

" Yes," continued Lord Beauchamp, " I do really think that the House of Lords has its uses. I do not think that Great Britain will ever consent to it« abolition. But I favour some great modifications in its constitution. \ " The Japanese system of life peerages have always seemed to me admirable. In Japan, the man who has done great work for the nation is honoured with a peerage; and, rightly, that gives him a voice in the councils of the people. His children, who have not done anything for the nation, do not inherit the peerage, nor the legislative power. As a first step in Great Britain I would stop the creation of any new' hereditary peerages. All future peers should be for life, and for life only."

At the great human hair fair at Limoges, France, held annually in the first week of July, the amount offered for sale this year was less than ever before, owing to the growing reluctance of young women to sell their hair, even at high prices. Ordinary brown and dark hair fetched from £1 16s to £2 2s a pound. Five years ago the price was £1 a pound. Blonde hair realised more, but the highest price was for a small consignment of very fine silver hair, for which £6 a pound was paid.