BRITISH POLITICS.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXIX, Issue 131, 26 July 1911, Page 5

BRITISH POLITICS.

SCENES IN THE COMMONS. S 1: LAKEB 1 NTFUVENES. ]3 V Electric 'Jolograph. —-Copyright. United I’rcss Association. London, July 25. When the House of Commons assembled it was evident that the atmosphere was electric. There was a general hubbub while questions were being asked. The galleries were crowded. Many peers, diplomatists and Commoners wore unable to and scats, which were filled to the gangways. Many stood at the bar. Mr Redmond was greeted with ironical Unionist cheering. A few minutes later Mr Asquith entered. The Liberals, Radicals, Rcdmondites and Labourites instantly rose and waved their order papei s and cheered. The Opposition countei cheered, and there were cries of “Traitor!”■ This demonstration had been carefully prepared, being generady paragraphed in the newspapers. It was evident that the later disturbances were due to a number of Tpnes determining upon a counter demonstration. When Mr Asquith rose to make a statement lie was greeted bv cues of “Patrick Ford!” causing fierce Liberal protests and cries of “Order. The Speaker called upon members to exercise their self-control and observe the ordinary courtesies of debate. Lord Hugh Cecil, sitting on the corner of the front bench belcw the gangway, shouted: “This is rot an ordinary occasion!” Mr Asquith again rose. A grouo of Tories, favouring the lighting policy, headed by Lord Cecil and others, cried “Traitor! traitor!” Mr Asquith faced the House and tried to speak. Every time he op;lied his lips he was greeted with the word “Traitor!” and cries of “Patrick Ford!” “We will hear Redmond first!”

Tin Liberals counter cheered. Other Unionists pointed to Mr Redmond and called upon Inin to address the J 1 nme. When tiie rowdyism was it its height Mr Crooks shouted derisively from tiis Labour benches: “The British aristocracy—Patrick O’Brien. Bine blood will tell for twenty minutes!’’ Mr Asquith continually advanced to his table, but resumed his seat. ( The Speaker again and again sought to restore* order. Mr E. Smith passionately dr da: ml that the Prime Minister had degraded ibo political life of the country. Lord Hugh Cecil shouted: ' Asquith, you are totally unworthy of your position!'’ The Speaker pointed out that the Opposition was in a minority, and therefore should lie more concerned about maintaining the freedom of discussion. He appealed to the House to be worthy of its high traditions.

Mr Asquith’s rising resulted in pandemonium unequalled sides 'the Parnell episode. The House was at such a pitch of excitement that an exchange of blows seemed imminent, Mr Chavchill continually throwing excited <jaculations towards the Unionists from his Bench.

Mr Asquith seemed desirous of klinquishing the attempt to be heard, but his colleagues persuaded him to continue.

Finally Mr Asquith was able to make some progress. He recited the history of the Bill, and recalled the resolutions of February, 1910, bid bis statement that, hut tor the death of King Edward the Bill would have been passed in 1910 ,aroused mi instant storm of angry cries of “Leave the King out of it!” “Who kuh.d the King : j ” Henceforth the speech was punctuated with derisive and angry cries, until Mr Asquith folded his notes and cried, “I am not going to degrade myself by attempting to address members who will obviously not listen to me. I merely declare that if the Lords will not accept the Bill uith, ithey like, reasonable amendments, the Government will be compelled to invoke the Royal prerogative.” The Prime Minister resumed his seat, and the .Liberals cheered enthusiastically, waving papers and batter several minutes. Mr Balfour, who was heard in comparative silence, frankly vgu-ttco that Mr Asquith had not been listened to, but the subject could not fail to excite passion. There were loud Unionist cheer, when Mr Balfour recalled the I act that Mr Churchill was the unglcaucr or the disturbances in 1905 whereby Mi Lyttelton was kept standing :u the time an hour unable to speaiv. Mr Balfour quoted the .Radical newspapers showing that Mr Asquith secured pledges from the King before the general elections. He s-ud d this was so Mr Asquith incurred coneuro by forging a bank cheque from the Sovereign and bad arrogated powers that no republican dictator would

possess. A Liberal member interjected: “Then you’ve been had!” Mr Balfour replied; “'1 rue, if the member means that it rover entered my head that a Minister or the Cr nvn could giro such advices Tim Premier had asked them to discuss the Bill, knowing, all the time they were not free agents. But he had advised the Sovereign to make him “absolute dictator. Mr Asquith responded; “I was g - iug to give reasoned argument- tm the grounds of my advice, hut am mu allowed.” Mr Balfour admitted this, awl ho lioved that Mr Asquith’s action due to the consciousness that it hat boon a cruel trial to the Sovereign, end had introduced discord to lb; Coronation ceremonies. He conclude., that the real heroes of the campaig: wore the Irishmen. Their decree: had been obsequiously obeyed. “ir E. drey protested at th ' p

position’s refusal to hear Mr Asquith, and moved the adjournment. TO-DAY’S MESSAGES. (Received 2(1, 8.5 a.m.) London, July 25. Lord Lansdowne has circularised Opposition poors, asking whether they v.ili be prepared to support his policy. It is estimated that 130 peers are opposed to Lord Lansdowne. Fifty Commoners attended the banquet to Lord Halsbury. The Marquis of Londonderry supra ,s Lord Lansdowne. A comparatively small body was responsible for the disorders in the Commons. The majority were in the lobby, and strongly deprecated and condemned the personal discourtesy to Mr Asquith. Notes of Mr Asquith’s speech were a ftor ward s circula t ed. The Prime Minister declared that the Government had not been indisposed to accept safeguarding amendments, hut the Lords’ amendments substituted a measure already rejected by the electorates. He derided Lord Lansdowne’s amendment, clause two (giving the committee power to exclude Hills) raising issues of great gravity. Such an amendment amounted to rejection. He’concluded by detailing the precedent of 1832, and argued that the advice given to the Crown, which the Crown accepted, was warranted by constitutional principles. There was nothing derogatory or humiliating in a great party admitting defeat. They would, said / Mr Asquith, have only to convince their fellow-countrymen that they were right and wo wrong.