The Wanganui Chronicle. "Nulla Dies Sine Linea." MONDAY, JUNE 17, 1907. BANNIRMAN'S GAUNTLET.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume L, Issue 12109, 17 June 1907, Page 4

The Wanganui Chronicle. "Nulla Dies Sine Linea." MONDAY, JUNE 17, 1907. BANNIRMAN'S GAUNTLET.

!» Sip. Henry Campbell-Bmmerman has now definitely thrown down the gauntlet, and the motion of which he has j;rven notice—as reported in our telegraphic columns this morning—may bo regarded as the first shot in what must inevitably prove a great campaign. The motion, which in. accordance with the notice given by the British Premier, is to be formally submitted to the House' of Commons is radical in the extreme, and its literal acceptance would virtually mean tho abolition of the House of Lords-,-- In a sense,-of course, |Sir/He;nry f Campbell-BaVir^eriti^ regarded as. the formal . oft tllo Government's policy-; hut, "we doubt' very 'much whether at -is seriQVis'ly 'i*l-! tended to go" as far as1 the motion incUcates. If it were, and if the Commons were- to > give authoritative iexpression to it in legislative form, the, noWe: Lords would <hayo only ■themselves ■ tpj blame, for they have been [foolishly and persistently/headstrong in, their oppo^ sition to every popular refor.m which1' has emanated from the direct..representatives of the people. For upwards of half a'century the House of Lords has remained wilfully blind'to the signs, pjt' tho times, and, as the guardian, of: aristocratic privileges and vested interests," it has stood obstinately -between the/ people and the attainment of their legitimate- desires. The Lords have Jbefen blind to the wisdom of, reasonable sacri-; fi.ee, < and ■ they cannot well complain if■■ at last they are called upon, to pay the price of their selfishiiess.j' Certainly Sir Henry Campbell-Banuej-iiian'scDisraeli-like motion will give .their. Loisships| :V----shock: The motion; as .it stands!,! would, if .it were reduced jo .a legisuitiv.e .fact, : effectually.. rob . the, House of 'Lords «f tho constitutional functions it1 has so long abused. In other words it would end, rather than mend, the ■ British " Upper " House, and that is precisely what Disraeli would have done before ho himself became a member of that august Chamber. Disraeli at that time regarded the House of Lords" as the "weaker vessel" —whatever he may have thought of it afterwards. He declared'that the House of Commons wasby far the most aristocratic body of thetwo, and emphasised his declaration by tho assertion that a great peer would be a greater man in the House of Commons than in the House of Lords. Disraeli evidently looked upon the Lords in 1844 much as many New Zealanders have -of lato years been accustomed to look upon the Legislative Council —as a refuge for political derelicts and antiquated "party" hacks. "It is," he wrote, " a valuable institution for any member of it who has no distinction, neither character, talents, nor estate. But a peer who possesses all or any of these great qualifications would find himself an immeasurably more important personage in what, by way of jest, they, call the* Lower House." And, with this idea in his mind, he asserted that " nobody wants a second chamber except a few disreputable individuals." Obviously there -would be no need for a second Chamber if that Chamber were deprived of tho right of veto, which would be the logical effect of Sir Henry Canipbell-Bannerman's motion. As wo have said, however, we doubt if it i<3 intended to go quite so far as that, a'though we quite expect that the Government will go a good deal further than will be pleasant for their lordships. In whatever form the policy foreshadowed by the Premier's motion may mature, it is to be hoped that it •will result in leaving the ."House of Lords an effective,, -but no longer an arbitrary, revisory Chamber.