The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1880-09-11 00:00:00

THE HOUSE OF LORDS.

The Times of Wednesday published the following letter :

Sir,—Mr. Forster, the Chief Secretary for Ireland,
in a speech delivered on Friday last, complained of
the rejection by the Lords of the Irish Registration
Bill, a Bill which, though not of Imperial value,
was short and simple, and much desired by the Irish
people.
I was no party to the rejection ; on the contrary, I
did all that lay in nly power to prevent such an un-
happy issue. But Mr. Forster, as stated in your
Parliamentary report of Saturday morning, made a
reference to the rejection of the Ballot Bill as a simi-
lar affront to the dignity of the House of Commons.
The person who presumed on that occasion to move
that the Bill should not be accepted was myself; and
as I cannot offer an explanation in person, you will,
perhaps, be good enough to allow me to do so by
letter.
The Ballot Bill was sent up to the House of Lords
at the close of the Session of 1871. I moved the House
to refuse it a second readily-, ; and the Bill was thrown
sut by a majority of OIL I urged that a measure of
such vital importance in many respects ought to
receive the calm and deliberate judgment of the
country; that it was the right and the duty of the
House of Lords to give time for such calm and
deliberate judgment, which if expressed after reflection
by the country would influence most seriously our
decision on the matter.

The Bill was again sent up by the Commons to the
Lords early in the Session of 1872. I then stated that
the case was entirely altered ; that, however great
my repugnance to the Bill—a repugnance entirely
justified by the subsequent experience of its pernicious
operation—l should not oppose the repeated and con-
firmed will of the representatives of the people.
The House of Lords were of the same opinion, and
the Bill was passed.
I dare not presume to state the sentiments of my
brother Peers; but I venture to believe that such a
spirit of concession and such a recognition of the
p.opular power will ever guide them on all similar occa-
sions. But Mr. Forster, in his speech, combined the
past with, the present action of the Lords, and re-
garded each instance as "a contemptuous refusal" on
their part to consider the questions sent up to them
by the House of Commons. Here I may boldly and
safely contradict his words, and assure him that our
House, collectively and individually, has no sentiment
but that of deep, fixed, constitutional respect for the
representatives of the people.
As one of that august Assembly, he appeals to the
people, and in his position as a INfinister of the Crown,
seems to threaten us with extinction, or, at least,
degradation. I, too, as one of the body so menaced,
will dare, on behalf of my colleagues, to appeal to the
same tribunal. The history and services of the House
of Lords will not be outweighed by a single misjudg-
ment. If the public will try the question we shall
have, I doubt not, a verdict of acquittal, and so be
relieved from the fear of an aggressive action—an
action suggested far less by mature judgment than by
a hasty spirit of temper and declamaticn.—l am, Sir,
your obedient servant, SHAFTESBURY.
Castle Wemyss, Wemyss Bay, N. 8., Sept. 6.