Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

REFORM OF THE LORDS

FURTHER DEBATE EARL ROSEBERY’S PICTURESQUE QUESTIONS. By Telegraph—Press Association—Copyright (Received May 18, 11.35 p.m.) LONDON, May 18. The Marquis of Lansdowne’s Bill-for reform of the House of Lords was further discussed yesterday by the Lords. Lord Curzon complained that the Government’s uncompromising attitude did not reflect public opinion. He attributed the refusal of Ministers to reveal their policy to their fear of certain sections of their followers. Lord Lansdowne’s Bill was fairness and simplicity itself. Though Lord Morley estimated the Unionist majority in the House of Lords at forty, the Radicals would bo in a majority of eighty in joint sessions. Lord Courtney hoped the Government would encourage tho proposed reforms, which involved a great step forward. Lord Rosebery criticised the bad policy of introducing tho Bill. He said it would have been wiser to rely on his resolutions, as adopted last year. Only a responsible Government should introduce Constitutional reforms; for, since it was impossible to frame a scheme to please everybody, it required all a Government’s influences and blandishments to secure the acceptation of any solution. He ridiculed the idea of election by his colleagues; election by borough or county councils would be preferable. Lord Rosebery declared that ho also objected to the Lords’ choice being limited to peers with special qualifications, and .asked: “ AVhat will he the position when the Parliament Bill becomes law ? AVho will be acolytes and sycophants? Who will accept the degrading position and fill the denuded benches if the Veto Bill becomes law?” Lord Lansdowno’s Bill, Lord Rosebery concluded, mattered little. He held no brief for Lords or Commons; but he wished to preserve the bicameral system, which the Government desired to overthrow. The debate was adjourned till Monday. Lo.d Eosobeiy’s resolutions were as follows: (1) That in future the House of Lords shall consist of Lords of Parliament (a) chosen by the whole body of hereditary peers from among themselves and by nomination by the Crown ; (b) Bitting bv virtue of offices and of qualifications hold by them; (c) chosen from outside. (2) That the term of tenure, of all Lords of Parliament shall he the same, except in the case of those who sit ex oflioio, who would sit so lon v as they hold the office for which they sit.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZTIM19110519.2.60

Bibliographic details

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 7444, 19 May 1911, Page 5

Word Count
384

REFORM OF THE LORDS New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 7444, 19 May 1911, Page 5

REFORM OF THE LORDS New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 7444, 19 May 1911, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert