that it can be understood perfectly, even by hon. Gentlemen below the Gangway opposite. In these circumstances I appeal to them to support the Amendment. The President of the Board of Education made a most extraordinary statement. It was that the Government rejected this Amendment on 1794 the ground that they did not wish to pledge themselves as to the future constitution of the Second Chamber. But they have pledged themselves up to the hilt in the Preamble of the Parliament Act . It says that they contemplate putting the Second Chamber upon an elective basis. [HON. MEMBERS: "Democratic."] The word "democratic" means "elective." [HON. MEMBERS: "It is 'popular.'"] I will take the word "popular." I take it as popular. Does not popular mean elective? Of course it does. What 'we are urging is to make it perfectly clear that this Bill is only to apply to this House. If that is the intention of the Government, why reject the Amendment? It will do them no harm. If the Government mean that the Bill is only to apply to the House of Commons, why not put in the words "House of Commons," and make it perfectly clear? That is the sole object of the Amendment, and I am really astonished that the Government do not see that it is right to make it perfectly clear. I think for once perhaps the Government might consent to call a spade a spade. Do they mean the House of Commons or Parliament, or