The Irish standard., 1894-06-23

REFORM THE PEERS.
It is evident to the most superficial OBJ
server of events transpiring in England
that the democracy of Great Britain and
Ireland sswill not succeed in obtaining
their rights until the House of Lords is
either reformed or abolished. The cry
of ''mending or ending the Lords has
been frequently heard of late at Liberal
meetings, but those in favor OF ending
the hereditary house of peers seem to be
in an overwhelming minority. The Brit
ish and Irish people have deep-seated
veneration for the aristocracy, and the
last thing they would do is to abolish
the upper chamber. The peers are cog
infant OF the fact, and Salisbury and his
party are not mucb distressed over the
cry Of the Radicals for lending" it by
Liberal legislation. The Liberal prime
minister is Lord himself, and though
apparently democratic in principle it is
too much to expect from him that he
would consent to it's adjustment. The
Lords know that it is practically impos-
sible to abolish their chamber at present
without resorting to revolution, and the
British people have no intention of tex
ing such drastic steps. The House of
Lords cannot be abolished by vote of
the House of Commons no more than
the United Estates Senate can be abol-
ishel by the House of Representatives.
But the House Of Commons can check
mate the House of Lords by passing a
measure for the abolition of the Lords
veto by providing that when bill, like
the HomeE Rule bill, for instance, is re-
jected or rendered worthless by amend
ments in the iHouse of Lords, the same
bill may DO passed again and sent to the
Queen for her royal assent, and there
upon become law. That was the sub
stance Of a resolution passed at Leeds
the other daykby 1900 delegates who at
tended conference under the auspices
of the National Liberal Association for
the purpose of fol- nulating some plan to
reform the House OF Lords. Such reso.
luton did not satisfy Mr.. Labouchre
who proposed substitute declaring the
House of Lords as useless and danger
Gus. He said it ought to be abolished,
and called upon the Liberal government
to Introduce measure for it's immediate
abolition. Sir Wilfred Lawson seconded
Labouchere's amendment and said that
the members CT the House Of Lords were
descended from the greatest set of ras-
Gals and reprcbates on the face of the
earth. "But,' Sir Wilfrid continued,
s'their teeth will be drawn and they will
be forever left sitting as representatives
OF medieval monstrosities. They are
hereditary miscrean is and ought to be
swept away Though Labouchere and
Lawson were vociterously applauded by
the large gathering, the amendment was
lost by great majority, and the original
resolution was carried with enthusiasm,
thus showing that the English democ-
racy still favors the retention of the here
ditary chamber. They are willing to
ssmend'' the Lords and are not yet ready
to lend" them.
The question argaln arises, Would the
Queen sign bill sent to her after it's re-
lection or mutilation by the Lords, and
would it really become law by her more
signature without the consent of the
Lords, while their chamber is composed
as it is at present? The Lords, Of course
would not consent to become men Of
straw and that they would really be il
lie Queen and Commons could pass bills
over their veto. But what could they do
II III ,ss such case? The people would not
natiently endure their action il obstruct-
IL III the popular will and il the Lords be-
actious they would eventually
| aliysS q sople into! z revolution That
snlilt y sniicidal and they would prefer
M pos Y y tai Il rather 'sE'