THE HOUSE OF LORDS.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XXI, Issue 36, 5 January 1894, Page 29

THE HOUSE OF LORDS.

The following is a paper on " The attitude assumed by the House of Lords in rejecting the H.me Rule Bill," read by Mr John Callnan at a meeting of the Auckland branch of the Irish National Federation on December H :—: — Aa was fully anticipated, the House of Lirds rejected tbe Home Rulo Bill introduced by Mr Gladstone. These fossilised Conservatives \me actuated by two powerful motives— the first, that by assenting to it their own selfish interests would be affected, by losing tbe influence and patronage which they have wielded for such a lengthened period in Ireland ; and the second was almost equally as great with them, because it gave them an opportunity of throwing out a measure which they knew Mr Gladstone was very anxious should become law. It is not the first time that Mr Gladstone has had to submit in a temporary way to humiliations of this kind from the Lords, but in the end he has eventually compelled them to submit to the voice of the nation ; and in this instanse it is only a matter of time, no doubt, when they will have to accept this amendment of the coustitution formulated by him. If they could only view the aspect of the question dispassionately they would at once feel convinced there was no going back with reference to the decided action taken by the House of Commons on an issue of this nature. It was not as if the subject was hastily introduced and adopted by tbe Commons without full and mature consideration, for then there wou'd, perhaps, be some show of reason for the action ; but the very reverse is the case. For years it has been a burning question in English politic, and is certain to continue an element of the moat importance m tbe future until the concession is granted. The majority of ths House of Lords, in their wisdom, may be under the impression that by putting it off for a time the death of Mr Gladstone will solve the problem in a way most agr. cable to their wishes. But in this supposition— if they really indulge in it— they will find themselves eggregiously mistaken, because if Mr Gladstone was to disippear out of the political arena to-morrow there are statesmen in England who would be sure to take it up until it was finally carried into law. The democratic instincts of people are becoming too strong in England as elsewhere, so that the question is certain to be looked on aB of preeminent importance, no matter what party may be in power for the time. In fact, it is just possible that the Conservatives may be tbe very party to finally submit even a more acceptable scheme and carry the measure into law. It is not the first time such a ihing has occurred in English politics, as a party at one period strongly denouncing certain principles in a bill and almost immediately after getting into office and carrying the very law themselves. Of course, to Ireland it will be equally acceptable from the Conservatives as from the Liberals, provided it is of such a naure as to give satisfaction to tbe Iruh nation. At the same time the genuine gratitude of the people of Ireland ought to be always manifested towards Mr Gladstone as being the first prominent English statesman who, setting aeide old traditions, fearlessly propounded the scheme which was to regenerate the Irish race by giving them self-government. The House of Lords may yet find that the rejection of the Home Bule Bill was the nemesis of their own destruction. There is growing up in England, slowly it may be but surely, the settled conviction that the House of Lords is the Cerberus at tba gate, obstructing every important reform whereby the people generally are to ba lifted or elevated out of tbe degraded state in which they have been living for centuries. The lordly palace, in the possession of every luxury, existing side by side with the hovels of the poor and wretched, where nothing but misery is experienced, ought not to be. That the people are likely to tolerate a continuance of this state of things with the schoolmaster abroad is scarcely conceivable. Now, to show in a very forcible manner wbat the working classes in England have to put up with from these magnates of the land, it ia only necessary to allude to the coal strikes there at the present time. The wide tracts of bituminous country in which the poor miners have to work for a miserable pittance, were original.y Crown lands, but given to the ancestors of these drones in society for political or other services of one kind or another, some of them of a very questionable nature, without in some instances costing them a shilling. Now it would scarcely be believed, but it is tiue nevertheless, that in some cases the profit which they receive off each man equals, if it does not exceed, what he gets in wiges. And further, strikes have come about in a great measure because they wanted to have more profit out of the unfortunate miners, by attempting to reduce their wages from ten fo twenty per cent of what they have been receiving recently. Just imagine what avaricious vu.tures these landed aristocrats arc when they unfeelingly try to cut down the wages of men who daily run tbe r.hk of losing their lives in following this dangerous avocation. The miners are looked upon as an ignorant and degraded class, but what else can be expected from men who have no hope of bettering their condition, it might be truly said, from the cradle to the grave. Thus wbat ought to be the patrimony and heritage of the people is owned by the few, to the positive injury of the great masses of the people. And there is the peculiar ftn^aaJy about it, that they not only possess moßt of the valuable

lands in England, Ireland, and Scotland, but they scarcely pay any taxation upon it whatever. The whole of the land taxation paid by the proprietors in the United Kiogdom does not excetd a million of money, while a small colony like this contributes something over three hundred and fifty thousand a year to the State. They certainly want the New Zaaland graduated land tax system there, but they are too powerful at present, politically, to allow a measure of this kind to get on the statute book in England. To show how the legislation of the House of Commons ia received by the Lords, it is only necessary to point out that the average attendance of the Houße of Lords ia twelve and that three members form a quorum, no matter what important business is on hand. The land owned by these Lords amount to 13,000,000 seres, valued at £16,000,000. The foregoing is what Reynolds' Newspaper states, and it may be depended upon as true, because it is a journal that pays particular attention (o the doings and history of the aristocrat! of England, especially that section of them which sit in the House of Lords and have the absolute destiny of the people in their bandi. The real position which the House of Lords holds over the action of the House of Commons is this : that no matter how important the elements of a Bill may be -no matter how much time, energy and wisdom may have been devoted to its constructive details, and after full consideration and the moßt incisive criticism, besides, being carried by a very large majority, it can be disposed of in a few miautes by just three members of the former. These three men have not only this dangerous power as individuals, and tbe lives and fortunes of pretty near forty millions of people in England, Ireland and Scotland, but they hold the proxies of hundreds of other Lords in their hands, to be exercised just as they please. Buoh a pernicious system of utilising proxies is one which onght to be done away with on the first opportunity, because it is impossible that just legislation can take place, while such a thing is tolerated. Hers is a set of men, who have powar to veto and reject measures that emanate from another body, who do to a certain extent represent the people and are anxions perhaps to improve their moral, physical and material interests, but are prevented from doing so by those Lords without leaving their firesides or stately balls. Few attend either the House of Lords or Commons to listen to what can be Baid on one side or the other of a question. It is quit* sufficient for them to be informed that it is an innovation, and likely to act as a beneficial reform, by elevating the status of the people, when they resolutely set their fices against it, and forthwith exercise their proxies with that object in view. At no distant date, if Mr Gladstone and the present Ministry remain in power, they are certain to submit an Act with the object of establishing tbe principle of one-man-one-vote. This will inevitably meet with the same fierce hostility as Home Rule, and the same action is sure to be taken to prevent its being brought into practical operation. The rejection of a measure of this kind can be made a great deal of by arousing publio feeling in a way that could never be expected from the manner in which they treated the Home Bule Bill. The working classes from one end of tbe United Kingdom to the other would be prompted to take an interest in the acquisition of such a concession, because once it was accomplished it would give them power and influence, which they could never hope to possess without it. I therefore think that Mr Gladstone's Government ought to take advantage of the first stages of the present session to introduce tbe principle for the consideration of the House of Commons. It ii the only effectual means of giving power of such a nature as to compel the House of Lords to hesitate before they throw out measures calculated to promote the well-being and improvement of tbe masses, both materially and socially. Now this colony might be taken as an illustration in favour of the contention that great advantages are likely to arise from the universnl application of the one-man-one-vote. Since the principle was adopted and became the law in this colony, it might be truly said that the people themselves are the arbiters of their own destiny politically. It has placed the machinery whereby the State is governed, completely in the hands of «he working class, and if they do not send men to Parliament to purely represent their views and administer the affairs of the country on lines of juot economy and true patriotic principles, they have only themselves to blame for it. For many years in this Colony the position was similar to that in operation in England at the present juncture, that is, the whole power and inflaenoe of the country was exercised, in fact strictly confined to a few governing families. Luckily this Colony has got rid of the incubus which existed like a pall over it for a very lengthened period, and^under their regime its experience has been Buch that it ie to be hoped that they never will be allowed to usurp the functions of government again. It is understood that colonial politics are to be eschewed in the discussions which take place here, aod very properly so, I think, but in the present instance I have done so incidentally by way of comparison to bdow what practical benefits have been conferred on this country by the one-man-one-voie. In England it will require a great upheaval in public opinion to bring this about, but at the same tima there are indications which are becoming more pronounced every daj in their assertiveness, that lead one to indulge in the anticipation that

this desire may be accomplished at no distant period. The House of Lords, to be really useful, must he made to be of a representative character, and not allowed to remain the nominees of a class which they are now. Wealth in ito elf should not be a talisman to place Individuals in possession of it in positions where they can at one* promote their own aggrandi sement at the expense of their fellowmeu,

(Concluded in our newt.)