We have shown elsewhere that Mr. Asquith's motion would have
wrought an absolute revolution. Single- Chamber Government is bad enough, but we should have reached an infinitely worse stage. We should have had a Single Chamber practically unchecked by any in- tern:a Constitution. The bare majority of the moment would have been supreme in its unchartered freedom. Ministers need not have troubled themselves about the antics played in the Commons' debates. Anything done there could have been ignored, because it could be "put right" at the end of the week by a Minister ringing up a mechanical majority, and telling them to rescind this or that decision of the House in accordance with the will of the Administration. Thursday after ten might have been allotted for this operation. As it is, the forms of the House do in a great measure preserve its independence and dignity. If Mr. Asquith had had his way, those forms might have remained in name, but in fact they would have been extinct. They would have been side-tracked by the new patent " rescinding-on-a-simple-motion " device. Or, again, they would have been like some ancient inn on a by- road. All the traffic would go by the scientific short out of the new Road Board. Rescinding once made easy, it would }lave been adopted as the constant resource of Ministers!
Previous page
