The San Francisco call., 1910-03-27

bill be submitted to the unfettered
discretion of the house of lords.
To argue that the budget of this year
is certain to be accepted by the house
of lords, as many liberals do, is irrele-
want and begs the whole question.
First, 1t is impossible to know. 1t is
difficult for anybody nowadays to an
swer for the majority of the house of
lords; even Lord Lansdowne can not
command the backwoodsmen. But
even If he could, the fact that the lords
are ready to accept the budget does not
rob them of the right to reject it, or. if
not to reject this budget, their power
to reject the budget of the future re-
mains not only uncontrolled but also
strengthened and even accelerated by
the liberals.
If, on the other hand, the budget is
held over until the lords have rejected
the veto proposals of the ministry, then
the right to accept or reject it by the
lords is not admitted; it is, on the con-
trary, denied in the most emphatic man
ner. And Balfour, if he should come
into Office, must come prepared to face
the gigantic deficit which is created by
the hanging up of the budget
SOCIAL EMANCIPATION
The liberal, or at least the minis
terial, position is complicated by the
many things that have come to be
bound up with the Lloyd d-George budget.
The budget, especially the land clauses,
is regarded by the British masses as a
great act of social emancipation. The
land taxes alone If they had been in
existence for the last SO years might
have enabled the city governments of
Great Britain to have made such war
on the siums that slums need not exist
in any great city. And it was these
golden hopes raised by the budget that
largely helped the liberal party win the
election.
The labor party takes up this position
even more strongly. The land tax to
its members is the very first measure
which opens up the campaign against
land monopoly These two sections,
then, put 1t truly that they can not face
the electorate again unless they have
the budget. and for that reason taey
press forward that the budget be
passed at all costs.
Against all this reasoning stands a
stone wall and that stone wall is the
determination of Redmond to stand by
the battle cry of mo veto no budget"
If an attempt be made to pass the
budget through all it's stages and if the
attempt is made to do SO before the
lords have pronounced on the veto or
after they have pronounced against the
veto. then the Irish party will vote
against the veto and destroy it. Red
mond does not take up this policy
without due consideration of the i'm
mense mischief of breach between the
Irish and British progressive forces.
But his policy is the right policy, and,
above all, is the only policy he could
carry through in Ireland. For Ireland
has risen to it's feet behind Redmond in
this policy. There is something that
has all the splendor and hopefulness of
a great renaissance in Ireland since
Redmond announced his policy of mo
veto no budget" and the enthusiasm is
marking itself by the practical testi-
mony of bigger, more widespread SUBJ
scriptions than at any moment since
the great days of Parnell. And, as I
have already said, radical opinion in
England justifies Redmond's as the true
policy.
These are the conditions which have