The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1905-02-05

] W ftuItl AhtUl0ttNtS a ll'ih iNkt7N''''s
chamber. whose main function should be
to lndorse and accept the edict promul-
/ gated in "another place" The veto power
OF the Lords was not. indeed, denied; no.
body disputed that il might he used II oc-
casion called for it. but It was generally
/ felt that the occasion would arise less and
| less often. until. In fine, the veto OF the
/ Lords. like the veto of the Crown would have
become almost atrophied from disuse
/ That the powers OF the Upper House
were not destined TO be quickly atrophied
was demonstrated impressively during Mr.
/ Gladstone's last administration. when the
| Lords not only vetoed the second Home
Rule bill. but compelled the abandonment
! Of the Employers Liability bill, and forced
! a compromise on the Parish Councils bill.
| The duty OF the House Of Lords. as now
defined, Is TO provide that time be given
for mature reflection on matters OF i'm
portance. 1t cannot permanently upset
/ the verdict OF the national jury; but 10
may take care that the issue Ia placed
properly before the courts. 1t can ask
for suspense OF judgment till the national
tribunal has weighed and examined the
arguments II may say TO the executive
committee which speaks for the Commons:
You tell us you have received your man
date, or. as the vulgar might put 1t. got
your orders 70 do such and such things.
We'll, we ars not quite sure. We think
you were chosen on other grounds We
did not notice any special reference to
this subject in your election addresses.
So we shall throw out your bill. and you
can go to the people and place the ques-
Al
fashion. II you come back with a great
majority we must no doubt admit that
you are right in your construction OF the
popular will. and we shall have to allow
you TO do what you want A House OF
Commons led by strong Cabinet. with a
majority OF the electorate behind It. could
not be bitted and brided by the peers.
What Wellington and Lyndhurst shrank
from seventy years ago-at the time Of
the passage of the first Reform act-would
not be attempted again by any champion
OF the forces Of conservatism. The Lords
cannot prevent reform or even revolution
il the electorate Is in earnest, and has
a Ministry to its mind In such case
tho Upper House IL not the check upon
popular violence Of Ministerial haste which
il has been supposed TO be. There is
another set OF circumstances in which 1t
practically ceases 70 operate IA a check.
When the Conservatives are In power
the peers are slow to interfere with any
great political measure for fear of giving
an advantage to the party which the ma
jority of their number dislike and distrust
At such times they have been denounced
as a mere Committee OF the Carlton Club.
l., a l.
their constitutional functions largely In
allegiance until the advent Of a Liberal
Ministry recalls them to activity, as it did
in 1893. The standing Conservative ma
jority in the House OF Lords then becomes
of some effect. whether for good or evil
II Is on such occasions that wide reaching
resentment is aroused 10y the spectacle
of privileged caste able 70 oppose the
popular will and then an agitation for the
reform or reconstruction Of the House
Of Lords IS very likely to be ret on foot
Even Conservatives admit the necessity
Of reforming the House Of Lords; it
needs new blood. and leeds 10 be
purged OF bad blood very extensive
creation OF representative life peers was
proposed in 1883 by Lord Dunraven an
independent Conservative In the same
session Lord Salisbury introduced az a
Government measure his House Of Lords
life PEERS bill The Crown was to have
the right Of nominating five life peers in
any one year the total number to DE added
not exceeding tifty Three Of the five
life peers were 10 be appointed from among
those who were OF had been, Ambassadors.
colonial Judges. Governors. Judges or Adj
mirals rhe bill however met with little
favor. and was dropped Lord RoseUerys
resolution which had been rejected earlier
in the same session went further. and would
have permitted the Crown 20 constitute
an upper chamber made up partly Of
selected members of the existing peerage,
and partly OF life peers the latter to be per
sons who had gained distinction in somo
branch of the public service
70 make room Tor lie peers 1t would be /
necessary to withdraw from many of the
present hereditary Legislators the right 10 !
attend the sittings of the House A. "A
matter Of fact very few of them do attend /
except when very important division is {
expected our author thinks II would be |
well TO confiue the right OF attendance 10 I
those peers who are Interested in legislative I
work. aud capable Of doing It, Thus the 1
loungers the incompetent and the dis !
reputable would he kept out This could 4
easily h- accomplished by allowing the
existing peerage TO elect representatives
for England a- is done in Scotland and Ire
land under the Acts OF Mon II the Peers
were allowed to elect cay two hundred Of
their own body TO he Lords OF Parliament
all the State men. the party leaders and the
e1 perienced politicians in the peerage
could Ind places in the l PIPER House. Bust
ness would not be interfered with by the
capricous presence 81 ignorant amateurs,
and public sentiment would be spared the
shock &, occasionally feels when il observes
that. however dissoutn or disgracefu
peer may be, nothing short Of bankruptcy
or a conviction for felony can exclude him
from the ranks Of the hereditary Legislators
Mr.. Low recalls that Lord Salisbury's bill
~ 1883 above mentioned contemplated
relieving the Upper House Of it, more un-
worthy members by providing that where
any peer had been guilty Of disgraceful
conduct the House might present an ad-
dress 10 the Sovereign who might then di-
rect that the writ ~ summon. should be
and the peer disentitled 70 sit
during the existing Parliament