Mr. Bryce made a speech at Ipswich yesterday week on
the House of Lords question, from which it would appear that he is not at all desirous of any Second Chamber which should have authority to throw out legislation ; indeed, he declares expressly against any such Second Chamber, whether elective or not. That being so, we cannot understand why he does not propose the simple abolition of the House of Lords, unless it be that he would rather avoid the plain confession that he is as profoundly indifferent to the passing of rash and ill-considered legislation as he would appear to be if his speech expresses his whole mind. "What we want," he says, "is to make the will of the people prevail." Yes; but of how bare a majority of the people ? And does he wish it in relation to all kinds of legislation, whether alterations of the Constitution of the first importance, or merely temporary measures of a trivial kind ? What he says, as we understand him, is that a majority of 5 per cent., or even a good deal less than 5 per cent., should have the power to subvert the Constitution without any check at all upon its arbitrary or even capricious will. Does a great constitutional lawyer like Mr. Bryce seriously think that in a proposal to revolu- tionise the relations of the • three Kingdoms to the United Kingdom, a temporary and fractional majority should meet with no check upon its will ?