y. This series of proposals failed utterly to meet the Liberal
demand and no action was taken upon it. But it is to be noted that the
Lords' Reconstruction Bill of 1911, to be described presently, was
based in no small measure upon information and recommendations
forthcoming from the Rosebery committee.[151]
[Footnote 151: May and Holland, Constitutional
History of England, III., 343-349. For references
on the general subject of the reform of the Lords
see pp. 115-116.]
III. THE QUESTION OF THE LORDS, 1909-1911
*111. The Lords and Money Bills.*--In November, 1909, the issue was
reopened in an unexpected manner by the Lords' rejection of the
Government's Finance Bill, in which were included far-reaching
proposals of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Lloyd-George,
respecting the readjustment of national taxation. This act of the
upper chamber, while not contrary to positive law, contravened in so
serious a manner long established custom that it was declared by those
who opposed it to be in effect revolutionary. Certainly the result was
to precipitate an alteration of first-rate importance in the
constitution of the kingdom. The priority of the Commons within the
domain of finance was established at an early period of parliamentary
history; and priority, in time, was converted into thoroughgoing
dominance. As early as 1407 Henry IV. recognized the principle that
money grants should be initiated in the Commons, assented to by the
Lords, and subsequently reported to the crown. This procedure was not
always observed, but after the resumption by the two houses of their
normal functions following the Restoration in 1660 the right of the
commoners to take precedence in fiscal business was forcefully and
continuously asserted. In 1671 the Commons resolved "that in all aids
given to the king by the Commons, the rate or tax ought not to be
altered by the Lords," and a resolution of 1678 reaffirmed that all
bills granting supplies "ought to begin with the Commons." At no time
did the Lords admit formally the validity of these principles; but, by
refusing to consider fiscal measures originated in the upper chamber
and to accept financial amendments there proposed, the Commons
successfully enforced observance of them.
The rules in this connection upon which the Commons insisted have been
summarized as follows: (1) The Lords ought not to initiate a
|