The Farmington times. (Farmington, St. Francois County, Mo.) 1905-1926, 1922-11-10
TORIES WOULD "REFORM"
LORDS TO CURB LABOR

people In England think the same. Bu
1T is not and it is to enter once more
upon the public stage. Lord Curzon
the British foreign minister, is tC
propose in the Lords certain ''resolu.
tions" announcing the Forthcoming
reform" and reconstruction of the
House into a second chamber more in
keeping with the times and more like
those enjoyed by other democratic
countries such as the United States
or France or Norway.
The proposal is to come up first in
the Lords because theirs is the house
that is to be reformed" and it is be-
ing brought up by Lord Curzbn not
only because he is Leader of the
House" but because he is known to
have given great thought and study to
the question of second chambers. But
it is curious choice, all the same,
because few years ago Lord Curzon
was the strongest champion in the
country of the hereditary principle.
he used to explain how he had been
Viceroy of India and had seeen a par
ticular trade or occupation handed
down from generation to generation
and the system, he thought, worked
pretty well--why should it not be
good also for the British people to be
ruled by peers simply because they
were their fathers sons?
Reform" Not by Reformers
Lord Curzon must have modified
his views since then or else he will
presumably conceal them, for their
day is past. But his part in this re-
vival Of old controversy makes the
honest democrat suspicious. What do
Lord CurzOn and his fellows mean by
reform" of the House of Lords?
What are they after? Do they want
10 undo the Parliamentary Act of
1911 which put a bit in the mouth
of the hereditary peers and made the
Commons ultimately supreme? Do
they want a grip over the Commons
before the advent of the labor min
istry which they anticipate and fear?
Is that why 50 many of the Unionist
leaders insist, in season and out of
season, that the next general election
in England the House of Lords must
at all costs be reformed?
When at the beginning of this year
Mr.. Lloyd George had, as there is
reason to believe, decided to hold
general election, Sir Geo. Younger,
the chief Tory organizer, interposed
with plain veto; no general election
he said, until the House of Lords had
been reconstructed For it is now or
never with the Tories. They have
majority in both Houses OF Parlia-
nent and regard themselves, there
fore, as having the actual physical
power to remake the constitution as
they choose. And they foresee the
likelihood of Labor ministry which,
under the protection of the Parlia-
ment Act. will put into force all
kinds Of socialistic schemes, includ-
ing the naturalization of mines, the
railways and no man knows what else.
The Parliament Act, therefore. is
their enemy and their plan is to get
around it. s.. rs
Under the Parliament Act, if the
House Of Lords three times in success
Sive sessions rejects or modifes, in
way which the House. of Commons
will not accept, bill passed and sent
up to the Commons, the bill automat-
Ically becomes law. The government
having a majority in, the Commons
has only to sit tight and refuse to ac-
cept any changes in its bill and at the
third time of asking the opposition
of the Lords is simply overruled and
set aside. Suppose that in 1923 La
Dor government were, in office, and
that it passed through the lower house
measure nationalizing the railways
and the mines. Later in the same
year the Lords would certainly reject
1t. In 1924 the Commons would send
it up again and the Lords would once
more throw it out. In 1925 the Com
mons would return it, the Lords, would
reject it for the third time and the
King would at once under the Parlia-
ment Act give his formal assent to
the bill and it would become statute
law. ,.. q.
Labor Government Bogy
Of course, the delay interposed by
the Lords gives opportunity for de
bate and criticism in the country, with
the possible result that a government
which had no strong majority might
be seriously weakened and even COM
PEELED to withdraw the measures al
together. Also government which
was losing popular favor might be
disposed on substantial details to
COME to a compromise with the Lords.
But on vital principals, no. A Labor
government, as long as it retained it's
majority in the Commons, would never
yield to a principle like nationaliza-
ton. 1t would put the measure
through. That is why the Tories are
never tired OF declaring that under
the Parliament Act the English are
really subject to single-chamber gov
eminent like the Greeks). There
are really two questions to be set
:le4:
Is it or is il not intended that where
the country at general election de-
liberately puts certain party in pow
e.. knowing well its ponc, AMI pro-
gram, that party should be free 70
carry out the essentials of that pro-
gram? tt4 atbti&i AZ"
What the Tories who would abolish
the Parliament Act and setl up
strong second chamber really mean
to do iseto prevent any party whose
program is Objectionable to'tiiem per-
sonally from carrying it into execu-
ton, even when the country has re-
turned it to office and the House Of
- III "a