HOUSE OF LORDS.

Ohinemuri Gazette, Volume XXI, Issue 2723, 25 November 1910, Page 3

HOUSE OF LORDS.

OBSTRUCTIVE TACTICS CON-

DEMNED

In the course of political discussions in Great Britain reference is very often made to the second chambers of the colonial Legislatures, as an argument for the retention of the House of Lords. A few weeks ago the Hon. W. P. Reeves, late High Commissioner forj New Zealand, made reference to the subject in the course of a lecture before the London School of Economics, of which he is now the principal. His remarks have caused something of a stir in Conservative circles. Mr Reeves expressed the opinion that to a large extent the Upper Houses of the oversea dominions were obstructions in the way ot progressive legislation. They had rejected, maimed and mutilated large numbers of progressive and democratic measures, and had kept a fairly steady eye on the protection of private inter-

ests and of property, especially when it took the form of land. It was commonly supposed, said Mr Reeves, that the British House of Lords was the most conservative, aristocratic and highhanded of the second chambers of the British Empire. Nothing of the kind was the case. Some Upper Houses in the colonies, had been more high-handed in many of their acts than the British House of Lords, as would speedily be gathered by a study of the measures rejected in Victoria since iB6O. The New Zealandcr added that the constitution ot the Legislative Council in the new Union of South Africa seemed likely to give better results that? Had been attained from the " lords" in any other country. The chamber had one feature that was absolutely good, and that was its election on a system of proportional representation, so that minorities would secure representation.