New-York tribune., 1909-11-23
CONSERT1TIJE TIEU.
Sir 1rthW Pearson CphOIds
Course of Lords.
By >ir Arthur Pearson. principal proprietor
Of THE standard and The Express"

of The standard and The Express"
tCopyright uv The Chicago Tribune" 1eIeJ
by cable to The chicago Tribune
London. Nov. 22.-Briefiy. the case for
tho House OF Lords is thai the sO-called
privilege Of the House os Commons in
r gard 10 money bills has always been
strictly limited to questions involving
the imposition. remission or alterations
of taxes.
a bill is not FOR this purpose regarded
as money bill merely because IL in
creases or diminishes taxation. Scores
os bills imposing public charges have,
within recent years. been rejected by
the Lords. and their righ, 10 take this
course has never before been called into
question.
II is disputed whether the Lords are
entitled to amend finance bill; there
fore they do not propose 70 amend IL; but
il is universally agreed that they have
the right 10 reject it altogether This
was laid down by Liberal statesmen.
such "a Russell Palmerstor and Glad
stone. as well as by the late Lord Sal.s
bury nor has il seriously been denied
even in the present controversy. although
tire policy of such action has been con-
denned in advance by radical agitators.
Well. the Lords do not propose under
Lord Lansdowne's motion 10 reject the
budget All they say is that before an
unprecedented and. as they think. an un-
fair and "a mischievous budget shall be-
come Law the people must be- consulted
and let the government show either by
a general election 0r by resort 10 a spe-
cial referendum that the budget is ap-
proved 10y the country In that case the
Lords will pass it. but not otherwise.
The legal and constitutional position
taken up by the LoTds is unassaiIable.
but is 1t also prudent and statesmanlike?
Yes say the CONSERVATIVES throughout
the United Kingdom. who represent GER
tainIy One-half and probably a large
plurality of the people.
There is here no case Of the people
against the Lords or tho Lords against
the people. ON tue government side
there are arraigncd a majority of the
Commons. with not more than half
probably less than half tho qualified
electors
With the opposition are a ma ioritv %
the Lords and NJ hast half the cleo
or-. There IS. therefore no question 81
an aristocracy seeking 70 impose its viii
or Tho demo"ra07- Rather Is ~ A case
of divided natiogal opinion. With most
OF the present Commons on one side and
most of the Lords on ths other
obviouslv, ~ question is one that
should be settled not bv urangting be
tween tho two houses but by direct
appeal 70 the sovereign p~ople That
test is welcomed 10y the whole ConsArva
tive ana Unionlst party n IS refused
or will he unwillinElv accepted bv the
Radicals In the~e circumstances the
Lords claim and believe that they have
the great body of the nation with them.
and are prepared 70 abide bv the con
sequences Of their action
The government leaders. on the other
hand, are shuffIing and making excuses.
so % avoid q direct issue
The Lords are challenging nov the
Commons, still less the people but an in
tolerant and usurpins executive which
has outlved It's mandate and lost its
popularity. but cliu;s 10 office in defiance
# the national Will