WOMEN’S FRANCHISE.

Wairarapa Daily Times, 23 May 1928, Page 5

WOMEN’S FRANCHISE.

DEBATE IN LORDS.

OPINIONS DIFFER. Press Association-Electric Telegraph-Copyright LONDON, Wednesday. In tho House of Lords the Lord Chancellor, moving the second reading of the Votes for Women Bill, said he looked forward to men and women equally sharing the burden of Empire. Tlioy had slowly built up a democracy to which they were now setting a coping stone. Lord Haldane believed that the decisive majority in the House of Commons was endorsed by the great mass of public opinion. Lord Banbury, in moving the rejection of tho/Bill, claimed that there was no mandate at the last election for such a Bill. Previous extensions of tho franchise did not result in increased interest in politics.

Lord Beauchamp pointed out that all* opponents of the Bill were Conservatives. Absentees from tho House of Commons division on the measure included three members of Cabinet and twelve junior Ministers. Lord Beauchamp objected to an increase in plural voting, a fact which made it more expensive to enter Parliament.

The Duke of Northumberland said the Bill represented a breach of the pledge to call a party conference on the subject, when it would have been accompanied by a redistribution of seats. The Reform of the House of Lords Act, 191 S, had x lowered tho standard of political morality and led to the creation by tho Government of the day of enormous funds for propaganda in the electorates by-, means of the sale of honours.

Lords Newton, Sumner, Joiccy and and Ampthill spoke against the Bill and the debate was adjourned—(Australian Press Association. —United Service). SECOND READING CARRIED. (Received Wednesday, 12.43 p.m.) LONDON, Tuesday. The second reading of the Bill was adopted by the House of Lords by 114 votes*to 35. —Australian and N.Z. Press Assn.