New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-08-04

80, Of the waters. not till the floods
INC -, moi till Mr. Gladstone began his long
g attacks on the existing institutions OF
o,,trv. did the House OF Lords take up
t''' on.,,Iv defensive and Conservative position
renarkable that within the same period
tho now accepted Limitation upon the
1.-two authority Of this Chamber. by which
Ies' permanent negative upon bills OF the
W. House was modified into a transitory
o'.,,e or as the phase Is. suspensory veto.
,.or1 veto as applied TO the act Of rejection
-" no coordinate branch OF the Legislature OF
w, oossei by the other, is extremely unsclen-
~ T, e no more accurately applicable 10 the
IL ,..,,on Of Commons bill by the Lords than
!" .a rejection of Lords bill by the Com
But Il has passed into common use ana
'.,,e a political colloquiaIism. II IS. at any
convenient for our purposes because 1t con-
is as into a phrase a political change Of very
". CONFERENCE.-The which removes. II broadly
Tod al. the last argument for the total abol-
49,, If the Second Chamber. The argument Is
~, the Second Chamber ressts the will OF the
me MI as EXPRESSED by the House OF Commons.
rAa answer IS that the Lords do not resist the
-su n the people but Only the Will OF the
,,ouse II Commons when they think the House
commons does not truly express the will Of the
The I<OINS ltJSCt d blH W. N'Nci " 'N'S' -
- .,e neople II 1t be really great question.
:. 4. NIT before the constituencies at the next
,.o,,on 1t becomes an issue on which that cleo
A., turns g majority in favor OF 1t Is re-
.n,,ed 70 the House OF Commons. and the bill
:. ora,n passed the Lords also pass 1t. and II
ZONES law. The people have their way What
.ho lords do is to make sure that the people do
y ruth desire the measure 10 become law. Is
." involves NplaV.
s.,,h,. perhaps one-tenth of the delay which
,,ar measure would meet under the existing,
borengel and Invaluable restrictions and
so,as,,ar5s imposed by the Constitution Of the
,-,.sd States But the constitutional methods
:, tho United States are l admit. odious 10 the
English Radical.
Tho House Of Lords is in truth, the one single
,,oos If noltical machinery In England which
s,onds I'm the place of the whole system OF
,bscks and wise precautions and contrivances
.or de,iberative delay which exist In the United
Gates Abolish II, and there remains absolutely
,o,hnq between the Constitution, the whole
,,,-,c If government in the country and the
,rnovating impulse OF the majority or the
r,op,en, in the House Of Commons. What the
American student Of English politics has there
fore 10 consider Is this question: Which OF the
two evils is greater practically: a Hereditary
chamber which ensures the reference Of great
constitutional question 10 the people; or an all
nowerful Single Chamber without one single Cd
s,ace 10 the most revolutionary legislatoh even
when that legislation is known 10 be ha'e1ui 10
the majority Of the people
Such is the dilemma. But do not think 1t
rood he a dilemma forever. There can De no
douht that the House Of Lords ought 20 De re-
formed: that the hereditary principle ought 10
ha either abolished or 50 far mtigated as TO give
elected representatives controlling voice in the
Chamber. The reform undoubtedly needs 10 De
large If not radical. The House ought 10 De
brought into harmony with the political prlnol-
rles Of the period At present it Is in harmony
with the political principles Of six hunoreu years
ago. Reform IT. therefore. but not altogether
altogether means abolition. Il cannot continue
in its present form. II ought not 70 continue.
Pm, 7 for one. were an Englishman and an
English Liberal should far rather see 1t continue
IN its present form. Il that were possible than
see pale copy of the French Convention at
Westminster. w. w. D.