We venture to say that any one who has studied
the situa tion from the point of vie* of Ministers, and who recognises that they are not merely the instruments of party but trustees for the safe and good government of the country, must admit that this is the only course possible. It appears, however, that the Nationalists and Labour Members and a considerable section of the Liberal extremists refuse, as we have said above, to face the facts, and demand that the question of veto shall be taken first, and that the exigencies of the financial and administrative situation, if recognised at all, shall only be recognised as a useful engine for intimidating the Opposition and the House of Lords. Only on one condition will they consent to modify their demand for the veto first, and that is that the Government should place themselves iu a position to be able to declare publicly that they have received assurances from the King that if the House of Lords refuse to pass a Bill for abolishing the veto, the terms of which are as yet undisclosed, his Majesty will consent to the creation of any number of Peers required for the contemplated coup d'etat.
