New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-08-15
REJECTED BY THE PEERS.
THE EvICTED TENANTS BILL THROWN
OUT.
DEFEATED on SECOND READING BY VOTE OF
2i9 TO 3o-LORD SALISBURY DENOINCES
AND LORD ROsEBERY ADVOCATES THE
MEASU RE-MINERS EIGHT-UOvR
BILL WITHDRAWN IN
TIE COMMONS.

TIE COMMONS.
London Aug 14-Thc House of Lords tonight
after debate in which the Duke of Devonshire
Lord Salisbury and Lord Rosebery took part
rejected the motion for second reading OF the
Ev!cted Tenants bill by IA vote Of 249 TO 30.
The Duke Of Devonshire spoke at length
against the bill. basing his opposition on the
ground that the Government was not Justified In
making the reinstatement OF tenants compu-
sorry. The Duke said that the Unionists would
have met the Government halfway II they had
any basis for real compromise; but. be-
lieving that the present bill would further dis
,urb Ireland, they could not assent to 1t.
Lord Salisbury complained Of the oppressive
power conferred upon the arbtrators. which. he
said. amounted TO despotism. Moreover. he con-
tinued. Messrs. Fot'rell and Greer were forced
upon the landlords. Though able they could not
possibly be impartial. as their acts and speeches
had shown. lie ridiculed the prophecies that the
Lords would seal their own doom BY rejecting this
bill Nobody paid any attention to such buster
and mcnaccs. he said. as they were known TO be
hollow. He admitted that second chambers. like
the House OF Lords were not immortal SIX OF
seven such institutions had vanished in this cen
tury he said. and In each case the popular cham-
Der had vanished az the same time. II he were
decease he would say "a few months before the
Commons" Uaughter) 1t made no difference
IN the,r duty whether they were likely 10
lenpthen or abbrevia:c their existence. (CheersJ
There could be no contingency calling more
loudly for the exercise of the ancient powers oi
the Peers than an occasion when the Commons
Welding To party exgency to retain N",es' pa,
a lin which dug at the root Of all society. made
contracts hopeless and rendered prosperity I'm
possible ,,. ,,oro,
the leylty with which the noble Lord VINO hau
,us, snoten had treated "A grave question. No;
only had ne not suggested compromise. Dut ne
seemed to doubt whether anything eNlsted III
regard to which a compromise was drsiraoie'
pafn,rine 10 the Duke ~ ArgylTs remarks
against the bill. the Prime Minister said tha'
this measure came 10 them WIN the au'iotlts
Of Justic. Mathew. 0.aughtert lie regretted t'Ia'
,ba,r I,rdships laughed at the learned Judge
They might laugh. but they could not iRnorc
the authority of the tribunal W heh a pl'' "
This kind arising from such advice. was reJ'c' ~
without the slightest alternative: ne was 'eH,p'eu
| TO consider what was the position of me houSc
Of Lords He would not for Il moment say '"a'
js existence was at stake more ihhn II han p'r'
last year or would Toe next year. but every nho ,
could see that there much In the air wh' n
ought To make the House walk wariIF. IL c"ui'
NOT be denied that the Lords had been uiapi'
since the Franchise act of 1874 10 claim co-ofui.
| nate authority with the Commons inc prcseh'
bill had come to them approved by IN" ,on,-
mons and supported by four-nI'h oi '"' ~. ,.u
| members Their Lordships were PLAYING win
edged tools. They were playing with hre al the
| door OF a magazine. tCheers) SO,
The motion for the second reading OF the p'''
mas then rejected by the vote given above. .
Vhen III. Hous" OF Commons took up va, q
,,,nar.. r-,vht "a o,,r rfsr fnir afternoon bnvih
| A Thomas q. .lberaD. Member Cor Merthyr IydVl''
| moved an amendment making the bili operauNe
only in districts where majority OF the electors
fnsenh Chamberlain G.iberal-Unoniso sup
| nor,ed The amendment. and Sir Charles DIXIE
| 'RadicaD opposed IT. when the division was
,aLen Tho amendment carried by vnt" ~
| II2 10 107 Immediately after the announcement
! ~ the vote the bill was Withdrawn by l's pro-
| mOters.