IMPERIAL POLITICS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 15383, 21 February 1912, Page 5

IMPERIAL POLITICS

.J ADDRESS-IXREPLY DEBATE, d ANOTHER" AMENDMENT. ' r Prosj Association—By Tclojraph-Copyrijnt, \ LONDON, February 19. o In tlie House of Commons Mr F. K. Smith moved an amendment to the Ad-diess-in-lteply, The country, he said, liad been persuaded to agree to the Parliament Act because a reformed J louse of 1/irdti was promised. The whole of the electioneering against the hereditary principle was dishonest unless those promised reforms followed. u MINISTERIAL CHANGES. LONDON, February 19. Mr Ellis Griffith succeeds Mr Masterman as Undcr-sccrcUrv for tho Homo Oilicc. if . ALLEGED BREACH OF FAITH. '' ATTACK OS THE GOVERNMENT. 1, LONDON, February 20. (Received Feb. 20. at 10.10 p.m.) . In the House of Commons Mr F. E. Smith quoted the Prime Minister's declaration made in 1910 that the reform of the House of J/irds would be dealt with at the earliest possible date. They had understood this to mean during the present session. Ministers had jic.vcr warned tho country that the reform would be postponed until the Home. Rulo Rill was passed. He did not believe that more than a fragment of the Government supporters would follow the Prime MinisL ler in reconstructing the House of Lords. One measure whereon (he suspension of the constitutional power of the House of Lords should not be used was Home c Rule, but the. whole conspiracy was made e for that purpose. '" Sir J. A. Simon said Mr Smith had r not proved that the Government, in giving Home Rule priority over the recotistitutioit of the House of Lords, was ~ breaking its pledges or perpetrating an 0 injustice. He had also assumed that the ip Government would have greater difficulty •>■ in carrying Homo Ride in the House of e Lords reformed on Liberal lines. What;v over the future coni|K>sition of the House , r of Lords was it would never regain the >h unlimited veto, nor would its constitution n make it more bitterly opposed to Home 'j Rule than it was at present. Jl Mr A. Ronar 1,-iw asked if there would v be no method under,reform to enable an : : appeal to be made to the people. '} Sir J. A. Simon asked Mr Law ': whether if the Unionists were returned to n power they would repeal the Parliament Act. Mr Law replied that there would he no repeal without a simultaneous reform of the House of Lords. Sir J. A. Simon declared that throughout Iho last election the members of the Opposition had prophesied that if the , Parliament Rill was once passed tlie Radical Government, if faithful to its pledges, would carry Home Rule. After prophesying a thing which had been 1 realised, the Opposition now pretended • that a monstrous fraud had been perpe- >' trated. Tlie Opposition further cmplia--1 sised this knowledge in seeking to graft • an amendment on to |.ho bill excluding Home Rule from its scope for a quarter of a century. The Liberal party had been a Homo Rule party for a quarter of a century. The Opposition claimed the name of Unionists, and denounced the Liberals as. Separatists. The debate was adjourned.