New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1881-08-02

sion, anu inc IAlDeral HecrS JuStllleu themselves
in uniting with the Conservatives in opposition
to the bill on the ground that in tho Lower
House there had been so many assertions from
the Government ranks No special ploa Of this
sort can be entered now. The Land bill has
gone to the Lords with nm unprecedented ma
Jorlty. The initial majority of 100 Mt the gem
eral elections has run up to ITO on tho second
and to PIG on tho third reading. On the
maj division only Ii votes were recorded
against it, the great body of tho Conservatives
making no sign. The collapse of the Opposition
could not have been more complete. If the
Lords decide 10 throw out this complex meas
ure OF land reform upon which the ener-
gies OF an entire session have been expended, it
must bo entirely upon their own responsibility.
III VIII he wnnton attempt to set at defiance
an overwhelming majority of q representative
assembly that has received the most signal
proofs of the confidence of the constituencies.
Tho Lords have done much that was ill-ad-
vised during the last fifty years. Beginning in
1880 with obstructing the first of the Waste
LAM acts, they persisted in opposing every
measure of Irish land reform, either hanging up
in committee or openly rejecting every act
based on the report of the Devon Commission,
cOndemning the Tenants Compensation bill in
the Land acts of 1860 and 1870, and thrusting
aside with ill-concealed scorn the Compensation
act of 1880. They have been true to their in
stincts as the landed arstOcracy of the realm
and have been Indifferent in tho main to the
interests of any class save their own. It is not
generally known that full House of Peers
comprises to-day the actual owners of one-t third
of the land of The United Kingdom Primo
genture, entail and the traditional system of
settlements have prevented the subdivision of
estates and have created territorial chamber
whose sympathes are invariably enlisted on the
side of the land owners. Yet while the Lords
as a class and as q coordinate branch of the
National Legislature take counsel of their pref
udices and never hesitate to offer resistance to
popular measures, they are not devoid Of prac-
teal sagacity. They know how far it is safe to
go in obstructng the will of tho Commons
when that will is wholly in accord with and
powerfully supported by the mass of public
sentiment They discern before it is too late
when they must yield their ground. In every
great crisis of Parliamentary history they have
eventually Nindicatcd their reputation as a far
sighted and practical body of landed aristocracy.
TO throw ont the present Land bill as they
did the Compensation act would be positively
f0olhardy. To repeat their tactics of n wear
ago would be TO convert all the Liberals and
not few Wings into downright Radicals, and
to hazard the influence possibly the very exist
encc of the Upper Chamber The Lords are
not in hot haste to make Land Reform an ire
pressible conflict in England, nor will they be
guilty of the insane folly of dragging Ireland
to the verge of anarchy and revolution. Preiu-
dice may not have run its course Lord Sails
bury has his reputation as a political leader to
make, and he is not likely to let the bill slip
through the Lords without amendments. Tho
narrow majorities on two motions received in
committee of the Commons will give him ten
able grounds of criticism, if he does not find
new lines of attack. The bill may be sent back
to the Commons with one or more clauses rem
dered imperative, the case in 1870,
when Mr.. Gladstone was reluctantly compelled
to abandon the very principle which was en-
bodied in last years act. This great measure
of equity and mercy may be marred in this way,
but it cannot fail.