Los Angeles herald., 1910-01-27
The English Elections
VI-The House of Lords
Bv Erederic ] Haskin

| Liberal legislation proposed since the
reform bill of 1882.
Only three peers may constitute a
quorum of the house of lords, and less
than twenty have more than once neg
atlVed the work of the commons with
out consideration or argument. In
one instance the representatives of
| both parties from Scotland were sup
porting a bill which applied only to
Scotland 1t passed the house of COM
mons unanimously and was unani-
mously rejected by the house of lords,
seventeen peers being present, be-
cause as one of the leaders said, 1--WE
would rather have the word of one
Scotch peer than of all the people in
| Scotland"
In 1911 in the reign of Charles II
and Immediately after the house of
lords and the king had been restored
the commons passed a resolution
claiming absolute control over the
finances of the nation. This exclusive
right was never afterward seriously
disputed until the rejection of the
Lloyd-George budget. But until 1892,
under the corrupt elections and rotten
borough system, the peers actually
controlled Thea house of commons. Since
the enactment of the reform bill, which
was passed against the terrific oppose
| ton of the lords, the TWO houses have
been growing further and further
apart. But always until now the lords
have admitted that the commons had
the exclusive control over the finances
the sole power of the purse strings.
The crown has admitted this, the
speech from the throne always ad-
dressing the commons separately when
discussing revenue and disbursements
of funds.
That the sudden use of this mort
tour, ;rs
proved by the fact that it was gem
orally considered an impossibility. Less
than eighteen months ago, in the com
mons, Mr.. Balfour, who led the cam
paign for the lords, said: 1--WE all
know that the power of the house of
| lords is limited by the fact that it can
not touch these money bills, which, if
it could deal with, no doubt it could
| bring the whole executive machinery
of the country to a standstill." The
late Lord Salisbury, a pre-eminent
| Conservative leader said in 1894: THE
house of lords takes no share what
ever in that which is the most impor-
tant part of the annual, constant bus
mess of every legislative Jody, viz, the
provision of funds by which the pub
lie service is to be carried on, and the
determination of the manner in which
these services are to be carried on"
William Pitt, in 1866, in speaking
| against the American colonies stamp
act, said 1.-THE taxes are a voluntary
gift of the commons alone. In legisla-
| ton the three states of the realm are
alike concerned, but the concurrence
of the peers and the crown to a tax is
only necessary to clothe it with the
form of law. The gift and grant is
of the commons alone" In fact, this
! principle of the constitution never had
been questioned from the time of oliver
Cromwell until it was found necessary
to do something to prevent the prin-
ciple of taxation of land values f, ON
becoming part of the British system
of taxation.
In 1898, under the leadership of Mr..
Gladstone, the commons passed a home
rule bill for ireland. The lords sent
out wild alarm and many peers who
never before had seen the inside of
the chamber attended to vote against
the bill, which was rejected ny vote
of 419 to Al. Since that time the lords
have rejected and amended many bills
sent up from Liberal Commons, never
those from Conservative houses.
Then came this much discussed
Lloyd George budget. Another alarm
was sounded and the wild peers as
they are called, trooped in. Many of
the right to vote in a legislative as
sembly by virtue of birth, had never
before taken their seats and dozens of
them did not know how the division or
process of voting was conducted. The
budget was rejected by vote of 800 to
75 Even then there were 1877 lords not
present or not voting.
While the Conservative party at
tempted to place. the emphasis upon
other questions, it did not shrink from
its task of defending the lords, despite
the old speeches of Mr.. Balfour, Mr..
Chamberlain and other leaders which
were so widely quoted by the Liberals.
One of the leaflets circulated by the
National Union of Conservative assoel-
ations said: why not abolish the house
of commons because it often Vetoes the
LEGISLATION of the house of cords? Inc
house of lords has the older standing,
the greater intellect and, above all,
the freedom to consider questions on
their merits alone, which the house OF
commons, subject as it is to electoral
carrice. can never have" That nun
dreds of thousands of copies OF TINS
leaflet were distributed broadcast
throughout the kingdom is proof sum
Gent that the Englishman still dearly
loves a lord Nevertheless, great
MANY Englishmen are thoroughly III
earnest when they cry Down With
the lords!''
TOmorrow-The English Elections;
VII-The House of Commons.