New-York tribune., 1909-12-01
THE PEERS DEFY
THE COMMONS
BUDGET SUSPENDED
-VOTE $50 TO 7j.
British Constitutional Issue
No1c Fairly Joined-Proro-
CATION assured.
IBy cable 20 The Tribune. I

BY Gable % The Tribune
London. Nov. 30-The debate in the
House of Lords. which resulted in the
adoption OF Lord LansdOwne's motion
suspending the budget by a vote of 35o
to i5. was elosed as decOrously and SOL
EMMY as II was opened. There were no
outbreaks of patrician scorn and intoI-
erance, as there were when the reform
bin of 1882 was rejected thrice: there
was no mob of unknown peers. wild
eyed and rough hammered. as there was
when GladstOne's Home Rule bill was
thrown out: there was no caucus of a
drilled battalion of the peers reporting
ceived from Lord LansdOwne in the
House. as there was when the licensing
bill was destroyed The funeral of the
budget was a more impressive function
than any of these earlier exhibitions OF
partisan spirit in the privileged house.
Everything was done with stately pre-
cision. decently and i'm order.
The majority was 30 i'm a total vote
of 42J. "A small group OF neutraIs fol-
-
Cromer. Balfour of BurIeigh and Lytton
and abstained from division. and the
majority OF bishops took their cue from
the Archbishop of Canterbury and kept
out Of politics. The Archbishop of York.
the Bishop of Hereford. the Bishop Of
Birmingham, Lord James of Hereford.
Lord Courtney and few other broad
minded men voted against Lord Lans-
downes motion
The Unionist peers generally were con-
tent TO face the consequences of their
unprecedented action and followed Lord
LansdOwne into the division lobby. roll
ing up majority even greater than that
which the budget had received i'm the
Commons IL was a majority too large To
be overcome by the creation of peerages.
a menace which operated To- carry tho
reform bill of 1S32 as a final resort.
The total vote on the Home Rule di-
vision was 100. and the aggregate when
the licensing bill was thrown out was
3t;S. Almost as large a proportion of
the peers accepted the responsibility of
voting for the suspension of the budget
as for the defeat of Home Rule. and
the majority sufficed 20 offset the ef
feet of generations of continuous usage,
unbroken practice and passive aequi-
escence.
AwED BY REsPoNsIR4ldIY,
The. Lords. when the crush Of the vOt-
ing divisions was over went out silent
Iy. with the sense of an unique expert
ence. They had killed the first budget
ever dispatched by the sportsmen OF the
privileged class and possibly many were
haunted with the superstition that il
might prove an albatrOss and bring dis
aster on their ancient order
There was an orderly, good natured
assemblage of several thousand men and
boys outside the houses of Parliament.
and Radical red rockets were in the air
as signals that the Lords revolution had
opened.
The House was not crowded until after
the dinner hour, the Lords having heard
quite enough ON the constitutional issue
from Lord Morley and Lord James Of
Hereford. and being persuaded that Lord
Courtney might emphasize the earlier
warnings and tell them plainly that their
own procedure was more revolutionary
than the vagaries of socialism in or out
side of the budget.
The Archbishop of York astOnished the
House at the outset BY delivering "A
strong fighting speech against Lord
Lansdowne's motion. cOnfessins that his
opinion had been changed by the con-
stitutiOnal arguments which he had
heard during the week. He discussed
the social questions involved In the bud
get with candor. and instead of re-
manning neutral. like the Archbishop OF
Canterbury and the majority OF the
bishops. announced his intention of vOt-
ing with Lord James of Hereford for
constitutional law.
A half dozen speeches of minor inn
portanee followed this onslaught on the
policy of the majority.
LORD CAwDOR OPPOSES BILL
Ii was not until o o'clock that there
was a revival of interest In the discus
sion. when the closing speeches were
made by Lord Cawdor and the Earl
of Crewe. Neither is an orator. but
each had the responsible duty OF sum
ming up the case for his side. Lord
Cawdor spoke like business man. with
incisive energy and downright sincerity.
in condemnation of the finance bill.
which he considered ruinOus 10 the wei
fare of the country and which required
"a mandate from the general electorate.
He belonged 20 the same advanced
school OF tariff reform as Lord M.
and seemed equally Indifferent 10 the
consequences of violating the traditions
of generations respecting the money
b:lls.
Lord Crewe. who had spent six nights
n. yawning behind mis- hand With his
hat tilted at sharp angle over IS
face. spoke with his usual affectation.
weariness and rstlessness. but laid
stress ON the unanswerable arguments
offered by Lords Loreburn. Morley aad
James of Hereford against the con-
stItutioaaIity OF the procedure proposed
bv Lon Lansdowne. AS the cOnfiden-
tIal adviser OF the Prime Minister he
might have been expected 10 forecast
the remOnstraucc which would be voted
by the Commons and the subsequen.
battle IN January. but he cOntented