New-York tribune., 1901-07-21
THE TRIAL OF THE PEERS.

The trial of Lord Russell was also trial or
the House of Lords, and in the latter capacity
was far more significant and important than IN
the former. Before it occurred two forecasts were
heard on every hand. One was that the anti
quated mummery of the procedure would De
ridiculous converting the trial into an act OF
opera bouffe. That forecast has been signally
disappointed. Our London correspondent, as
all Tribune readers have long known, is too
true a republican to have any prediction for
the fuss and feathers of monarchical instltu-
tions Yet he. who had expected to be amused
by the grotesque scene, was impressed with lts
dignity and stateliness In that particular, then,
the House of Lords. acting a court of justice
acquitted itself in creditable fashion.
In another and more important particular,
likewise il has done well. The second predlc-
ton. which was SC freely made, was that Lord
Russell would be acquitted. The peers VIII
stand by fellow peer, men said, especially one
bearing so distinguished name as that or Rus
sell. But such was not the case. What they
would have done had Lord Russell not pleaded
guilty but fought the matter out we do not
know. But. judging from all indications at the
trial. they would probably have convicted and
condemned him. As it was he pleaded guilty
and threw himself upon the mercy of the court
10 him a degree of justice which sends the
"belted earl TO Jail and expels him forever
from the House of Lords. The only comment
made upon this Judgment is that of its extreme
severity, some declaring that he would have
Jared far more lightly had he been tried as
common malefactor at the bar Of the Old
Bailey. In that particular then, the peers have
also acquitted themselves with credit
Nor is il at all difficult TO divine the reasons
for such action by the peers. Even those OF
them who because of birth habits of life
might have been inclined to condone Lord Rus
sells offence and to give whitewashing YER
dict doubtless realized that the House of Lords
was itself on trial, and that as coordinate
branch Of the government it is existing on Its
good behavior. They felt that they could not
afford TO act otherwise than with an impartial
justice which would command the approval OF
the nation, or which, at any rate, would acqult
them of all suspicion of favoring their own
caste But beyond that 1t must be remem-
bered that the House Of Lords is to-day com
posed largely of men of Eight and leading" in
Guiding a large share Of that which is best In
intellect and morals. There are some hereditary
nobodies, or worse than nobodies. But the men
who lead the House of Lords and direct its con-
duct are of different type. They are men who,
by their virtues and achievements, confer dis
tinction upon the peerage, instead Of merely be-
ing themselves decorated with its stars and
garters To imagine, for example, man like
Lord Roberts, of austere virtues, condoning a
felony simply because it was committed by an
earl is simply impossible. In disposing OF Lord
Russells case as it did the House Of Lords per
formed a painful duty, but performed 1t well
1t was itself on trial. and the result of that trial
was a vindication Of its honor.