The Irish standard., 1911-07-22
LANsDoWN.E AND THE VETO BILL

only interesting but instructive.
LANSDoWNE AND THE VETO BILL
1t is strange how completely men
can become engrossed in their own in
terests to the exclusion of all consid-
GRAFTON of the rights of others. Lord
Lansdowne who is opposing the pas
sage of the Veto Bill is good ex-
ample of the man who cannot see why
others should have the rights which he
at the same time is positive he him
self should have. Witness his COM
ment on the purpose of the Veto Bill:
Il am quite unable to understand
that anyone should have the courage
to say no measure whatever, no mat
ter what it's Importance, is to be
treated otherwise than in the ruthless
manner provided for by the Second
Clause of the Bill. Under that clause
the majority of the House of Com
upon any measure for that measure to
become law, not only over the heads
of your Lordships' House, but over
the heads of the country. 1t is neces-
sary to bear in mind that the major
ity bringing this about may be
wholly insignificant one in point of
numbers. 1t may be majority hav-
ing no relation whatever to the num-
Der of votes by which it Is supported
in the country. +. A majority so
composed may be secured by those
methods of curtailing discussion in the
House Of Commons with which we be-
come more and more familiar; from
such majority under this Bill, liter
ally, nothing whatever is safe. 1t may
insist upon the passage of measures
intlicting irreparable injury upon our
institutions. The Grown is not safe,
the Church is not safe, our political
liberties are not safe"
Notice Lord Lansdowne lays great
stress on the fact that small ma
jority in the House Of Commons could
under the Veto Bill pass legislation
over your Lordships' House." Now,
arguing on the same basis, is it not
quite as deplorable that a small ma
jority in their Lordships' House, the
members of which are not elected by
the people, should be able to reject
bill which was passed by majority
Of the members Of the House of Com.
mons who are chosen by tho people on
the merits of their political policies?
Lord Lansdowne tacitly assumes tina,
the House of Lords should be con-
suited, that when they reject a bill 1t
is always the wise thing, and, as
corollary, that when the House of
Commons has the right to pass bill,
even after two years delay, without
the consent of the upper house the
crown, the church and the political
liberties of the country are no longer
safe.
Lord Lansdowne Is clearly assum.
AA6 eAAS poAAC dl lSouC DIS proved. ne
takes it as granted that the House of
Lords should have the right to reject
all measures of vital Importance. his
reason being that the upper house
will not harm the country by reject
ing bills while the lower house is go
ing to bring ruin on the country by
passing bills over the veto of the up
per chamber. The Commons, on the
other hand, are citing history to show
that the House of Lords has been a
dead weight to the progress of the
country by refsuing to pass bills
which would have been for the public
welfare
Taking a Democratic view of the
matter it does seem that the country
will risk less danger under the Veto
Bill than it has rsked under the old
system Of the absolute multiplying
power of the Peers. The Commons
are elected by the people and natur.
ally the temper of the people will az
feet the legislation passed The Lords
being independent of the people give
little consideration to popular de-
mands as is witnessed in the present