The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1909-11-23
DEBATE ON BUDGET
BILL IS EXCITING
Sensational Utterances in Eng
liSh House of Lords Arouse
the Galleries.
REJECTION OF BUDGET
F0REG0NE CONCLUSION
Constitutional Revolution Pre-
dicted Through Attempt of
Lords to Interfere.

LONDON, Nov. 22.-"It is my opn-
ion that it is impossible that any lib
cral government can ever again bear
the heavy burden of office. unless il
is secured against a repetition of treat
ment such as other measures had TO
undergo for the last four years. -
This sensational declarat tion by Lord
boreburn. lord high chancellor, in the
debate on the budget in the house of
lords today, had an electrical effect
upon liberal members Of the house of
commons who crowded the galleries.
Quitting the gallery they surgcd into
the lobbies under the conviction that
word before the general election; that
Premier Asquith will make u similar
declaration in the house of commons
next week. and, that the long DELAYED
campaign against the lords has now be
gun In earnest.
Strong Interpretation.
IL was held that Lord Lorebur S
statement could only mean that no lib
eral leader henceforth will accept office,
unless he receives Il pledge from the
crown that enough peers Will he APP
pointed on the premier nomination
TO secure the house of commons against
interference from the house Of lords III
financial matters.
After the Earl Of Crcwc, lord of the
privy seal. had formally moved the see
ond reading of the budget bill, without
comment. Lord Lansdownc, leader Of
| the opposition, Immediately moved lis
rejection. He quoted precedents to show
that, although the house Of lords could
not amend a finance bill, it had full
right TO discuss it and to throw 1T out
| il ii so wllcd Besides. thc present
bill, he argued, had tackled to 1T lcgis
lation such as land taxation and in
creased license duties which the lords
already had rejected, and which had
been placed in the bill TO oust the
lords from their legitimate opportunity
of dealing with the measures.
Abuses Alleged.
What, he asked, was 10 prevent home
rule from being introduced IN the
| finance bill. There was no limit to
such abuses. The UnioDis,s opposed
license duties because they were crush.
| ing in their severity; the same applied
TO the land taxes.
! The people, he said. no, having been
consulted, the peers had clear duty not
to decree the final extinction ef tho
bill but to insist that, before it be
comes law. the country should be al
| lDWFu an tNIItSSlpD VI bplnl'n' ! HN
| lords had carefully considered cousc'
qucnces of the rejection of the bill and
were ready 10 face them.
Lord Loreburn replied, conteudjug
that there was nothing i'll the bill
foreign TO finance with which the house
of commons had the exclusive right to
deal.
The attempt of the lords to inter,
ferc, he declared. was the beginning Of
system that would lead 10 consti
tutional revolution, What was embod
led in the bill was not new, either IN
the United States or Germany, and had
been approved, not only by the pres.
enf. but by the late house of commons
After the lord high chancellor. many
peers addressed the public, but interest
! waned. The Duke of Norfolk, who sup.
portcd Lord Lansdownc s resolution
confcsscd> that the lords had n serious
problem TO face, but that 1t should not
dauut them in performing their duty