The Washington herald., 1911-02-22
LORDS VETO BILL
AGAIN PRESENTED
Asquith Seeks to Curtail
Powers of Upper Body.
NOT FOR A SINGLE CHAMBER
Premier Denounccs Action of Lords
in Rejecting the 1909 Budget-BaI-
plying to Asquith, Denies Public
Approval of the Measure.

London, Feb. 21.-The final stage in
the conflict between the House of Com
mons and the House of Lords began this
afternoon with Premier Asquith's re-
introduction of the Parliament or Lords
veto bill. The House was full in all parts.
The peers gallery was crowded with
members of the House of Lords when
the Prime Miaster rose and delivered
his Introductory speech. in which he was
compelled to cover much ground which
had already been covered in previous
speeches, the bill being identical with
the one which was read the first time in
the House of Commons in 1910. In gen.
eral it abolishes the veto power of the
House of Lords in regard to money bills,
restricts the powers of the second cham
Der regarding other measures. and cur
tails the duration Of any one Parliament
to five years, instead of seven, as here
tofore.
The provision Of the bill restricting the
veto powers of the House of LnIds on
general legislation is:
IF any bill other than a money bill is
passed by the House of Commons in
three successive sessions whether of the
same Parliament or nOt), and, having
been sent up to the House of Lords at
least one month before the end of the
session, is rejected by the House of
Lords in each of those sessions, that
bill shall. on its rejection for the third
time blythe House of Lords unless the
House of Commons direct to the con-
trary, be presented to his majesty and
become an act of Parliament on the
royal assent being signified thereto, not
withstanding that the House of Lords
has not consented to the bill; provided
that this provision shall net take effect
unless two years have elapsed between
the date of the first introduction Of the
bill in the House OF Commons and the
date on which it passes the House Of
Commons for the third time.
Public Favors Measure.
Mr.. Asquith. among other things. de-
clared that the situation was in some re-
spects almost unprecedented in British
annals. The bill had been
submitted definitely and specifically to
the electorate, with a result that they
returned majority in its favor of some
thing like 120.
Hereditary in origin. irresponsible in
the exercise of its powers and over-I
partisan in its actual COM
iOSi1AOIi' Sdlb litt pIciIleT-lUdI was the
body to which the law intrusted the
right to delay and check the considered
decisions of the elected representatives
Of the people. 1t was not a very rash
he thought, to say that the
Judgment of history would condemn the |
lords rejection of the budget of 1903 as 1
he most stupendoUs act of political |
blindness ever perpetrated in this coun- |
ry. On that day the House of Lords |
committed political suicide.
Nobody, said the prime minister pro-
posed TO dispense with the second cham
Der. They had seenFand suffered enough
rom the evils of a single chamber. The
government bill proposed to give -statu-
ory definition and protection to he con-
'tituGonal doctrine that the House Of
commons was supreme in matters Of
nance, at the same time cutting down
he Lords absolute veto to a suspeusory
'eto. Its provisions prevented the arbi-
rary smuggling into law of measures
condemned by popular opinion.
The premier concluded by saving that
he government presented the bill as the
lrst and most urgent step they could
axe toward the attainment of perfec-
ion.
Mr.. Balfour. leader OF the opposition,
eplying to Mr.. Asquith said the govern
nent claimed to have public approval for
he bill. 1t had also claimed that the
lections proved that the country did not
want colonial preference, The general
lection Mr.. Balfour declared, was not a
ecision by the people upon any particu-
ar measure. Home rule was an issue
Or the Irish, but not for the English or
cotCh electors.
Heredity Is Essential.
It would be folly, declared Mr.. Balfour.
D throw wholly aside the principle Of
eredity. He was convinced that some
,aven of it was necessary in a second !
hamber. How was it, he asked, il there
as so much agreement between all sec
ons of the House that they all looked ,
'rward with so much misgiving to the ,
purse of the controversy. He desired
peaceful arrangement by agreement
e would do much for peace, and espe-
ally in this particular year, but there {
ere some issues so great no compromise
as possible. {