THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. MONDAY, MAY 2, 1910. LORDS AND COMMONS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLVII, Issue 14359, 2 May 1910, Page 4

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. MONDAY, MAY 2, 1910. LORDS AND COMMONS.

.-' .— . "r r> ~— ; With the passing by the House of Lords of the much-debated Budget and the subsequent adjournment of both Houses until May 26, a short truce has v been; tacitly. arra.r.ggjj' between Lords a|4-CTornraons \ in the Imperial. parliament. ' That this is merely a temporary cessation of hostilities is indicated by the character of the " Parliament Bill" issued by the Government, which foreshadows an ultimate Second Chamber "on a popular basis" and embodies in legislative form the " veto resolutions" already carried by the House of Commons. As for the acceptance of the Budget by the House of Lords, this was definitely promised ; last year, its treatment being specifically stated to be dependent upon the verdict of the electors. The short debate which preceded the acceptance of the Budget without a division was in no way remarkable, being confined on one side to an exposition by Lord Lansdowne of the attitude of the previously dissenting peers, coupled with a denunciation of the tactics 'by which the Nationalist, support had been • secured by the - Government, and on the other side to '.- the allegation by Lord Loreburn, speaking for the ; Government, that the predominant motive of the Unionist Opposition had been - to secure the triumph of "the pernicious doctrine of Tariff Reform." The most noteworthy feature of this mutual recrimination is the evident consciousness on the part; of .' the Unionists that the majority by which the Asquith Administration is dominating Parliament is not a national but a Nationalist majority, v and the , equally evident determination on the part of Government supporters that Tariff Reform shall not be eliminated from the -issues. It isr interesting to note, in connection f with these phases of the political battle,; that such an \ old political tactician as Lord Rosebery believes that its advocacy of Tariff Reform alone prevents the Unionist Party from obtaining the Parliamentary * confidence of the electors. The contrary opinion, however, is held by : the. Tariff Reform leaders, who are making no concession to the Free TradeUnionists, other than that involved in abandoning the proposal to place a small preferential ; duty upon foreign , as against colonial breadstuffs. From the discussions of the past few weeks, there is no reason to anticipate that Tariff Reform will cease to be the chief line of demarcation between rival British parties; and it plainly possesses this great advantage that it offers a living issue to the public which is unaffected by any changes in the constitutional relations of Lords and Commons or by any reform v in the composition of either House. Whether it weakens or strengthens the Unionist Party in opposing the attempt of a small majority, secured by very doubtful tactics,. to radically alter the; most venerable of free Constitutions, Tariff Reform will certainly be 'to the forefront in ; any approaching British General Election. But though the " Parliament Bill" will not be allowed to monopolise public attention should ■ it ; lead to another appeal to the electorates of the United Kingdom it is none the less a grave and far-reaching measure. The political tension has to a certain extent, been relaxed by the presentation of the Budget to the House ; of Lords and' its > final passage, -j It was anticipated at ; one time L that the ; Government would absolutely refuse to make the necessary financial provision, long overdue, until the question of constitutional reform had been settled to their ; liking. ■ This unprecedented course was openly advocated by the extremists and by Nationalists, but the ourable traditions of British Parliamentary procedure have prevented such an unjustifiable attempt: to; misuse a casual majority in the Commons and the Budget has

been finally passed without demanding impossible conditions from the House of Lords or humiliating connivance from the King. It may, be presumed that the dangerous and. imminent crisis which lately threatened, and was emphasised by' the tardiness of the Government in again presenting the ? Finance Bill to i the Commons, has '% not )been avoided without the exercise.of that moderating influence which rightly attaches to the monarchical institution. -■. But though that particular crisis has been avoided, the financial weapon still remains in the hands of ; Mr. [ Asquith. Financial provision ; has | only been made for the year) which 'j ended on March 31 last; and another J Budget is now necessary. Under the Parliamentary methods ; which have been evolved by modern democracy, any majority in the House of Commons can bring the guillotine" into 'operation and -effectively: prevent discussion ! upon and amendment : of, , any measure, however important ) and complicated. ) The " Parliament Bill" \is thus reasonably assured of a quick journey through its various stages in the. Commons; but it is hardly conceivable that the Lords will do^ T any-' thing but reject it. As a matter of fact, ; they have no moral right *to pass such a measure, unless they are satisfied that it expresses the deliberate and convinced opinion, of a decisive majority of the electors of the United Kingdom. No support of this ■/■ character can be impartially claimed for Mr. Asquith's Bill, which is wholly a party measure— and that party;of (exceedingly dubious strength. The rejection of the Bill by the House of Lords will lead •to the refusal of Mr. Asquith to continue in office. He has made repeated public ! -statements to this effect. Mr. Balfour cannot, refuse ... - .-- -*•'**'. - - 5 *- ■■>'...■•••■•-. - to accept the responsibility will thus be.thrown upon him, particularly as : the passage of the Budget of ; 1909 allows.Mr. Asquith to claim that ;he has discharged ' his duty to the country. As Mr. Balfour cannot carry on the public; business against a hostile House of Commons, he must, in accepting office, rely upon a new House) of Commons to give him a working majority not only against ■ the orthodox Liberals, but against Liberals, Labour members, arid Nationalists combined.,