The Farmington times. (Farmington, St. Francois County, Mo.) 1905-1926, 1922-11-10

cut lWpOSSlDle mouse Oh LOTUS WHICH
will nevertheless not be so powerful
as to diminish the authority of the
House of Commons? 1t should on the
one hand act as true ''revising'
chamber in the interests of sober, bal
anced national development and on the
other it should possess no power to
stand out permanently against the
will Of the Commons as expressed ev-
en- by small but steady majoriay Of
the House.
The present arrangement, is, of
course, illogical and undemocratic
The hereditary principle, in which no
intelligent person now believes, is alb
solutely maintained. Whatever the
powers left to the House of Lords by
the Parliament Act may be, they are
welded by body of men who for the
most part are where they are and pos
sess the authority they do because
they are the sons of their fathers, and
| for no better reason. 1t makes no
substantial difference that few of
the peers are Law Lords, who hold
office for life and do not pass on their
seats in the house to their sons; or
that the same is true of the bishops;
or that good many of the peers are
the first holders of their titles; or
that the actual work is mostly done
by a small nucleus of peers who in
experience and judgment far surpass
the average member of the House of
Commons. These mems services could
and Of course should be made avail
able under different system of cleo
ton, but well on into the twentieth
century we are still maintaining a
second chamber based on an indefens-
IDLE principle. The House of Lords
is like the human appendix: it is an
organ which has lost its usefulness in
political society.
The Parliament Act was not intend
ed to be final settlement. The "pre-
amble" to it itself indicates that it is
to be followed by reform" of the
Lords, and Mr.. Asquith, who was then
Prime Minister, spoke of reform as
"debt or honor" that must be paid.
So the Lords must some day be re-
constructed. But how? That is the
rub. So many men, SO many views.
There is no arrangement about the
method, though there is a general
agreement about the result. Liberals
would like second chamber that
would reflect their views rather less
than a Liberal House of Commons.
but would be nicely Tory in sentiment.
Many Shcemes Postponed
There are all manner of schemes
for choosing a new house. Some of
them retain the hereditary element
IN an indirect form. That is, they
would allow the present peers to
choose a small portion of their num-
Der Ia hundred, fifty or thirty) to sit
In the new body. arguing that in this
way We should maintain continuity
with the historic past-the House of
Lords is more ancient body than the
Commons-and also obtain the best
OF the brains which the House of
Lords contains. But this latter we
could obtain just as easily in many
other ways and the objection still re-
mains that we should be allowed he
reditary peers, simply because they
are hereditary, to exercise an impor-
tant share in government.
Others would have the new cham
Der chosen directly by the same cleo
torate which chooses the Commons.
only at different times and with much
larger constituencies. An important
presided over a year or two
ago by Lord Bryce proposed that the
members of the Commons should be
into geographical areas
(such as London, Yorkshire, Lanca-
shire. and should then elect their quo
tas of members to the upper house.
others, again, suggest that the Com
mons should elect by proportional
representation or that the selecting
bodies should be the organs of local
government-the county and borough
councils. Some of the schemes pro-
vide for the selection of representa-
tives of clergy and distinguished rep
resentative men of various kinds. All
propose that members of the upper
house should sit for period of years,
so that only part Of the house would
De elected at any one time and its
constitution would tend, therefore, to
be somewhat different from that of a
newly elected Commons. 1t would
therefore be detached and impartial
IN its function as "reviser" of Com
mons legislation, which is, in theory,
what second chamber would be. But
what is to happen when it comes in
to conflict with the Commons
Looking Far Ahead
That is wholly unsolved difficulty.
The desire Of English Tories is that
when such a conflict took place the
government Liberal or Labor on this
hypothesis should be forced to "go
to the countrywide general cleo
ton" That is a settlement which
Liberals and Labr men will not toll
crate, for it means simply the de-
struction of the Parliament Act and
the restoration of the unlimited veto
Of the upper house.
The best solution would seem to be
that the second chamber should be
kept small in numbers, that it should
be chosen in sections at intervals OF
four or five years, and that if Sc
rious deadlock with the Commons
arose, the two houses should meet in
joint session. The House of Commons
has about 700 members. If an upper
house of about 100 members were es-
tablished and if it were chosen as sug-
gested, it is very unlikely that there
would be party majority in it at
any time Of much more than a score