The Leaders of the House did not rise to the
occasion. Lord Granville declined to acknowledge the inefficiency of the House, though he acknowledged that the rushes of Peers, who took no part in the business, to vote on party divi- sions, amounted to a scandal; and he tried to narrow the inquiry into one as to the value of life-peerages, a compro- mise which Lord Rosebery definitely refused. Lord Salisbury also refused it, and maintained that the House was as good as it could be made until some great surge of opinion caused a reform which "would not be submitted to any Committee." At last Lord Granville moved an amendment virtually restricting the -enquiry to life-peerages, and was defeated by 85 to 45, and the original motion was defeated by 77 to 38. It is to be observed -that while the House objected openly both to inquiry and re- form, the debate showed that the younger men wish for change, - and that there is a general uneasiness in the House, a sense of -declining power. • This impression is clearly well-founded, nothing being more marked than the increasing inattention of the country to anything that passes in the House of Lords. Except when they use their reserved power to spoil the states- men's labour, the Peers are hardly more noticed than the Mem- bers of Convocation. _
Previous page
