The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1902-11-03
The Proposed Revival of the Veto
Power In England.

NIX tHdt, III Tue measure DE passed, they
will defy the authority of Parliament by
refusing To pay rates for the support of
UNCONVENTIONAL schools. That is not the
only revolutionary position which finds
advocates among them. The other day
Dr. CLIFFORD, a conspicuous Radical
politician, and the recognized leader of
the Nonconformist antagonists of the
BILL declared upon public platform that,
If the measure should be carried through
both houses of Parliament, King ED-
WARD VII should be pctitioned by the
whole body of his Nonconformist sub
Jects to veto the bill
Let us consider for a moment what
this proposal means. The power origi-
nally possessed, and up to the eighteenth
century repeatedly exercised, by English
sovereigns to nullify the will of the ma
tional legislature by vetoing a bill. has
never been explicitly surrendered by
the Crown; neither has il been expressly
extingushed by an act of Parliament.
II is true that the veto power has not
been technically exercised since the reign
OF ANNE, and most commentators on
the English Constitution describe il as
having been lost through dcsuetudc. A.
matter of fact, however, the veto power
was practically used by GEORGE III
soon after the beginning of the nine
| tcenth century, when he warned WILL
LIAM PITT that, if the latter should at
tempt to carry out the promise by which
/ inc Act OF Union between Great Britain
and ireland was secured. tho promise.
/ namely to pass "A Catholic Emancipa-
| ton bill. the measure would be vetoed
/ by the Sovereign. II is certain that. if
! PITT had not believed that the threat
would be fulfilled, he would not have
deemed i, incumbent upon him. a. "A
man of his word To resign the place of
, First Minister. There is no doubt. either.
that WILLIAM ". had he received any
encouragement from the Duke of VEL
LlNGToN, would have vetoed the Reform
bill, which, much against his wishes
became operative in 1892
1t is open, therefore. 10 argument
whether the Crowns veto power is so
utterly defunct as many interpreters of
the unwritten British Constitution assume.
Neither is it impossible to conceive of
cases wherein the reassertiOn of the
veto power, if il may be regarded. not
as extinct, but merely latent. might
prove Of the utmost value TO the British
nation. To avert a civil war. for in
stance, threatened by legislation odious
to large fraction Of the people. would
be one OF the motives that might justify
the Soverclgn's interposition. especially
II 1t were accompanied with a declara-
ton that the veto would have only n
suspensory effect. and was intended
solely for the purpose of enabling the
cons,it'iencics Ia he heard at a new gen
eral election Under such circumstances.
the Crown would merely be doing what
the House Of Lords did after Mr.. GLAD
STONE carried his second Home Rule
bill through the House of Commons; il
would act as shield against the enact
ment of laws as to which the popular APP
proval was doubtful, and would compel
a specific appeal upon the question in
dispute To the sober second thought of
the voters. So far as English Radicals
are concerned, there is reason to believe
that they view the Crown with less dis
like and distrust than they do the House
of Lords, and that they would quite as
willingly see the veto power EMPLOYED
by the former as by the latter source of
authority That seems to be at all events
the conviction of DR.. CLIFFORD, who is
one of their chief spokesmen.
1t If evident, on the other hand. that a
revival of the Crowns veto power would
involve fundamental reconstruction
of the current conception of the British
Constitution. 1t could no longer be
said with truth that the King reirns but
does not govern, No longer could First
Minister be held responsible for the
SovereiGn's acts, because. in the case
supposed, those acts would have been
performed in notorious opposition TO the
Minister'S advice 1t il true that respon-
sibility might be Ostcnsiblv cvadcd by
the Sovereign if he dismissed the Minister
accountable for carrying an obnoxious
measure through Parliament, and then
appointed a Minister I'D interim, who
would accept responsibility for the veto.
The drastic eff eCt of reasscrting the veto
power could not be hidden BY a resort 10
that expedient. From the moment that
members of the House of Commons or
Of the House of Lords became aware
that they had TO reckon, not only with
the First Minister, but also, and indie
pcndently, with the Sovereign, there
would arise in both houses party Of
the Kings Friends" like that which
GEORGE III. did his best To create, and
which rendered government so difficult
between 1850 and December, 1888 when
the younger PITT was invited to form a
Cabinet, In "A word the whole theory
to which men became accustomed in
the Victorian age, the theory of the
executive omnipotencc Of the First Min
ister, would be demolished by a revival
OF the Crowns veto power,
To which. no doubt. English Radicals
might answer We will assume that
what you say is true, and that Il revival
of the veto power would tend to assmi-
late an English King 10 Prcsidcn, of
NI... |..tN al