The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1893-08-29

the case with the bill permitting marriage
with a deceased wife's sister. which was
passed by the Commons but rejected
by the upper House. The fact. also,
is worth consideration that, as the
record Of past divisions on the sub
ject shows. a bill giving the parliament
tary franchise to women might a. some
juncture pass the Commons by small ma
jority: then IL would be obvious that the
delay aud mature dellberation secured by
the interposition OF the Lords might be
matter Of vital moment to the State.
No Intelligent Tories deny that the House
OF Lords ought to be purged OF its obnoI-
ious and Incapable members, and many OF
them think that 1t should he made truly
representative OF other national inter-
csts than the landowning interest. Some
even admit that the hereditary principle
should be abolished. But they all contend
that In the absence OF written organic
law vigorously defining the regulations
for It's own amendment. an upper House OF
some kind Is as Indispensable to the safe
working OF tho British Constitution as
brakes are to q railway train. Our own
Federal Constitution takes the most elabo-
rate precautions to assure not only n pro-
longed discussion OF proposed constitu-
tional changes. but great preponder-
ance OF public opinion in their favor.
There Is absolutely nothing correspond
ing to these safeguards in the unwritten
British n-absolutely nothing to
preveht the most sweeping OF organic
changes. although these may have received
only majority OF one in the House Of Com
H., 80 kNri,,
tive vested In the House OF Lords. Wesay
that there is no other safeguard. because
the veto once possessed by the Crown is
generally held to have been lost by nom
user. not having been exercised since the
reign OF ANNE.
Unquestionably. q body OF hereditary
legislators is in the eyes OF all thoughtful
Englishmen ridiculous anomaly and
grotesque anachronsm. Yet the fact re-
mains that, pending thorough revision OF
the British Constitution and an embodi-
ment OF 1t In q document, the House OF
Lords is the only instrument for securing
an appeal to the sober second thought
OF the electors. In tho case. for in
stance. OF the Home Rule bill. which
contemplates so trenchant constitutional
change as the legislative separation OF
ireland. the Unionists contend that but for
the delay and second general election COM
PEELED by the temporary veto OF the House
OF Lords. there would be no means OF ascer-
tanning whether the measure in its final and
greatly altered form Is acceptable to major
ity OF the voters OF the United Kingdom. Tho
existence OF any doubt upon this subject Is
something which Gladstonians and Nation
alists as well as Unionists must desire to
avert. Such doubt would be fatal to the
permanence and efficiency OF home rule
system. II. on the other hand, the
particular form OF Irish seli-government
approved OF by the House OF Commons
Is distinctly sanctioned by O majority
Of the voters OF the United Kingdom
at general election turning mainly on
that Issue. the Tories will no more venture
to NEEDLE with it than they have ventured
since PEEhs day to meddle with free trade.
Absurd survival OF the middle ages as the
House Of Lords now seems to US. 1t will yet
bring about. and is the only power that can
bring about. such deliberate sanction OF
the Home Rule bill by the electors as
Is essential to the indestructlble establish
ment OF the system. For our own part we
have no misgivings regarding the result OF
an appeal to the constituencies and no one
apprehends that the final verdict OF the
people will be dlsregarded by the Lords.