12 MARCH 1910, Page 13

LORDS V. COMMONS.

[To THE EDITOR OF THE " SPECTATOR:1

Sra,—The Chantecler ' of the Exchequer, especially when crowing in his own Welsh farmyard, has assailed the House of Lords with every form of scurrility. But Mr. Lloyd George is not the first man who has seen clearly the mote in his neighbour's eye while blind to the beam in his own. It is a pity that some one with his Celtic gift of vituperation has not taken the case of the House of Commons in hand.

The defence of the House of Lords, as it at present exists, may be put in a nutshell. On one question out of a hundred it may act as an assembly of landlords or property-holders, but on ninety-nine questions out of a hundred it fully and fairly represents the opinions of that still considerable section of the community,—namely, the people who do wash and who do not steal. The strongest, if not the only, reason for the reform of the House of Lords is the decadence of the House of Commons.

Paley's description of the House of Commons in the eighteenth century is well known, and it held good for a hundred years after be wrote it. He refers to the House as a microcosm of the active life of the nation :—

"We have," he says, "a House of Commons in which are found the most considerable landholders and merchants of the kingdom; the heads of the army, the navy, and the law, together with many private individuals eminent by their knowledge eloquence, and activity. If the country be not safe in such hands, in whom may it confide its interests P ' —" Moral Philosophy," pp. 221-22.

Now let us compare the ancient House with the House elected by a demented democracy in 1906. No account need be taken of the Unionist Opposition. They were outvoted in divisions by more than three to one, and anything like free debate was stifled by the Closure. The unwieldy composite majority of nearly five hundred alone deserves analysis. As regards the Army, it did not contain a single General or any officer who had commanded even a brigade in the field. The Navy was represented by a Lieutenant, whose few years of practical knowledge brought him into hopeless conflict with his party. England is the great financial centre of Europe, and the blue ribbon of finance is a directorship of the Bank of England. Not a single director of that Bank sat on the Government benches. All the great names in banking and commerce were conspicuous by their absence. England is still in the van of scientific progress, but the Government ranks did not contain a single member of the Royal Society. Art one would not expect to find represented in a democratic majority, and the "considerable landholders " would naturally not be found in a party whose aim is to destroy landed property. English medicine and surgery will hold their own anywhere, but no member of the General Medical Council, and no name known to medical science, was to be found among the Government supporters. The active life of the nation was represented only by a successful soap-boiler and some pushing retail tradesmen.

Passing from the negative to the positive qualities of the great democratic majority, it must be admitted that the members of Mr. Asquith's Cabinet were all able debaters, and that three of them (Sir Edward Grey, Mr. Haldane, and Mr. Samuel) did not fail in statesmanship. But as a Radical Party is always wagged by its tail and not guided by its head, the composition of the Ministry is not very material. The " heads of the law" are in the House of Lords, but the Radical majority contained three or four really able lawyers, who, having taken their brief, honestly did their best for a dis- reputable client. The great bulk of the party consisted of more or less mischievous nonentities, who in any ordinary affair of life no one would trust to swing a cat.

Some little time ago I was travelling in a suburban train. The subject of discussion was the House of Commons. A fat, pursy citizen summed up the controversy by saying : "There are two views of the House of Commons; there is the view of the people inside, who think it the perfection of human wisdom, and there is the view of the people outside, who think it a damned monkey-house." If any candid person will fairly consider the recent antics of the Radical Party in matters of finance, it will be easy to determine whether the esoteric or the exoteric view is the correct one.—I am, Sir, 8:e.,

UNIONIST FREE-TRADER.