The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1886-03-13 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

In the HOUSE OF LORDS, March 5, the Boys
Assent was given by Commission to the Land Registry
Bill. The Drill Grounds Bill was read a second time,
and the Marriages Validity Bill was read a third time
and passed.
In the HOUSM OF COMMONS, Mr. Campbell-Bannerman
informed Sir g. Tyler in reference to the order for the
discharge of workmen from the Enfield Small Arms
Factory that the final arrangements of the ar Office
would be such that he hoped any permanent reduction
on a large scale would be avoided.

HEREDITARY LEGISLATION.

On the order for Supply Mr. Labonchore moved an
amendment declaring it to be inconsistent with the
principles of Representative Goveenment that any
member of either House of Legislature should
derive his title to legislate by virtue of
hereditary descent. This country, he contended,
had now become a democracy, and hereditary
legislation in a democracy was an anachronism.
Moreover, the House of Lords was a thoroughly partisan
assembly, representing only one class of the community;
its efforts were constantly directed to mutilating
Liberal legislation, and its action had been a persistezt
warfare against all reforms, against all sound doctrines
of political economy and commerce and against all
measures of religious and poll:kit equality.—Mr.
Brodrick thought that it was on account of politics
rather than of the composition of the House of Lords
that the hon. member asked the House of Commons to
deal with the question. There were, however, in that
House some 200 members who were experienced in the
work of legislation, having previously been members of
the Lower House, and in addition there was a con-
siderable number who has held high office in the
State. He admitted that a certain section of the
peers did not adequately discharge their legislative
duties, and he should like to see them deprived
of their privileges, but on the whole, he thought
there was little reason to complain of the House of
Lords.—After some remarks by Baron F. de Rothschild
and Mr. C. W. It. Cooke, Mr. Gladstone declined to vote
tor the amendment, though he considered that the
Liberal party and the country had much to complain of
with regard to the legislative action of the House of
Lords. He opposed the amendment because its adop-
tion by the Government would be a virtual promise to
give it effect, and he had never voted for a declaration
of abstract opinion in regard to a matter involving i.n.
portant public interests unless ho is able to follow it
up by action. It was universally admitted that there
ought to be reforms in the House of Lords, and as
regarded its legislative action there was a case for a
large and important change; but the great strength of
the House of Lords lay not in its legislative but in its
local action through its individual members. The House
would 'do well to reserve this great subject for a time
When its whole powers could be concentrated upon it,
and not hand down in advance a principle the adop-
tion of which would hinder its future freedom at action.
On a divicion, the amendment was negatived by 202 to
160.
THE FISHING INDUSTRIES.

Sir E. Birkbeck called attention to the great want of
a central department for all matters connected with
the fishing industries, and advocated the establishment
of a Fishery Board for England with power to deal
with all questions relating to sea and inland fisheries.—
Mr. Mundella intimated that it was intended to con-
stitute a new board, to which would be transferred the
•duties in regard to fisheries now performed by the
Home Office and the Admiralty, and that the new
department v.ould be responsible for all matters con-
nected with fisheries.—The subject then dropped.