The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1860-07-21

Justineo py the experience OF the present season,
and we expect that we shall hear no more
about the sale Of the Erie canal.
The Commons OF ENGLAND SNuBBED BY THE
LoRDs.-As sop to the popular Cerberus, the
House OF Commons passed u bill abolishing the
duty on paper, amounting to Ell. 400. 900 (seven
millions OF dollars) By our last mails from
England we learn that the House of Lords re-
jected the BILL and that Palmerston has pock-
eted another insult to his ministry and another
aggression upon the representatives of the peo-
Pile. The London Times, for some secret purpose
of its own, probably because 1t feared the RI
vaEy of cheap papers. opposed The removal of
this odous tax which Ia worse than the stamp
act for which our Revolutionary fathers in the
colonies drew the sword. The Times, however,
put It on the ground that In view of the war
with China, and the unsettled condition of the
continent of Europe the government could not
afford to give up the tax. The House of Lords,
the grand obstacle which has always stood In
the way Of popular reform in England agrees
with the Times, and thus practically annuls the
maxim that the people can be- taxed only by
themselves, or by their representatives freely
chosen. They do not choose the House of
Lords directly or indirectly. and yet that
House saddles them with tax of seven
millions Of dollars, after their repre-
sentativee In the House of Commons had
removed 1t. Is this constitutional? If 1t be.
then the constitution is what Lord Chief Justice
Denison in the House of Lords once pronounced,
in a solemn Judgment trial by jury on ireland,
to be "a m0ckery, delusion and snare"
Let us hear no longer of the glorious British
constitution after this. We bad always sus-
picion that 1t was myth nowhere to be found,
nowhere that you could lay your band upon it.
Late proceedings in the British Parliament more
than confirm that suspicion.
In the late contest with the House of Lords
upon the constitutional question of interfering
with money bills, the House of Commons aud
Palmerston, after great deal of biuster, caved
in, milk and water protest being put on the
record that the Commons are supreme, ever
have been supreme, and always ought to be
supreme, in all matters relating to money, taxa
ton and expenditure. Yet. in the face of this.
the supremacy Of the Commons into atoms,
by their reimposing the tax on paper which
the Commons had taken of. In not the unwrit
ten thing called British constitution chang
ing chameleon? If the Commons are supreme
in matters Of taxation. then why are bills Of
that description sent to the Lords. who ought
not to be permitted to have anything to do
with them? Az long as the bills are sent to
them, Of course they conclude naturally that
they have discretionary power to act upon
them.
But the sympathy Of Palmerston is more
with his own order than with the people or
their representatives. The only members Of
biz government who had the pluck to assert
that the Commons show of independence was
sham were Lord John Russell. Mr.. Gladstone
and Mr.. Miner Gibson. And Lord John Rus
sell IL brother to a duke and heir to q duke
dom. The age of chivalry is gone. All the
talk about British love Of freedom Is humbug.
A hereditary house Of old fogies domineers over
the nation, paper owned by the Rothschilds
in,uln and dictates to them. and few are found
with sufficient courage to assert their boosted
birthright Mr.. Diraeli and all the tories are
content, a. well as the easygoing wings in Of
fee.
If the House Of Lords be such nuisance.
why not get lid Of 1t? Unfortunately, In Eng
land there IL no Supreme Court Of ultimate re-
sort to expouDd the law and the constitution.
The House Of Lords are themselves the highest
legal court In the land. and their decision Is
anal. There is only one way Of upssttlng
them, and that is by revolution. The Norman
blood still rules the Saxons in England, just as
much a. when the Conqueror from Normandy
reduced them to subsection eight hundred years
ago.