FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89  
90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   >>   >|  
hrown. FOOTNOTES: [4] Mr Lyttelton. [5] Prime Minister of the Australian Commonwealth. THE HOUSE OF LORDS HOUSE OF COMMONS, _June 29, 1907_ On June 24, Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman had moved: "That, in order to give effect to the will of the people as expressed by their elected representatives, it is necessary that the power of the other House to alter or reject Bills passed by this House should be so restricted by law as to secure that within the limits of a single Parliament the final decision of the Commons shall prevail." This was carried after three days' debate by 315 to 100. I will not venture at any length into an abstract constitutional discussion upon this Motion, because, after all, we have an extremely practical issue before us. It seems to me that this great question must be looked at from three points of view. There is the issue between the two Houses; there is the issue between the two political Parties; and then there is the national issue. The quarrel which is now open between the House of Lords and the House of Commons arises from two events--the general election of 1906, and the rejection of the measures of the new Liberal Government, culminating in the destruction of the Education Bill by the House of Lords at the end of that year. Either of these events is memorable in itself, but placed in juxtaposition and considered together they have a multiplied significance. The general election of 1906 was the most vehement expression of public opinion which this generation has known; and that expression of public will was countered in the December of the same year by the most arbitrary and uncompromising assertion of aristocratic privilege upon record. Let the House think of it. The process of the election of Members of Parliament is extremely elaborate. The candidates go about the country for two or three weeks saying all they have to say for themselves in the different constituencies which they are contesting; at the end of that exhaustive discussion there is an elaborate process of voting; the returns are counted with the most scrupulous care; and as the result 670 Members, representing 6,000,000 of voters and many more who take a deep interest in public affairs but have no votes, are returned to the House of Commons in the name of the people of Great Britain and Ireland. The new Parliament assembles. Scarcely any question
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89  
90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Commons

 

public

 

election

 
Parliament
 

extremely

 

expression

 

elaborate

 
Members
 

process

 

discussion


general

 

events

 
question
 

people

 

measures

 
Government
 

Liberal

 

rejection

 

generation

 

considered


opinion
 

vehement

 
memorable
 

significance

 

Either

 

multiplied

 

juxtaposition

 

culminating

 
destruction
 

Education


voters
 

representing

 

scrupulous

 

result

 
Britain
 

Ireland

 

assembles

 

Scarcely

 
returned
 

interest


affairs

 

counted

 

returns

 

privilege

 
aristocratic
 

record

 

candidates

 

assertion

 
uncompromising
 

countered