REFORM OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS.
[To THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR."] Sin,—I thank you for your kindness in publishing my former letter in the Spectator of May 12th. Having read the recent discussion upon this subject in the House of Lords, I venture to trouble you with a few more remarks.
A leading article in the Times has contained in a few words a description of the House of Lords as proposed to be hereafter. "A House of Lords, from which not only the black sheep but also the incompetent one to be weeded out by an elective pro- .cess ; supplemented by a limited creation of Life-Peers." But if there is no elective process, upon whom is the task of "weeding out" to fall ? It is suggested by some public body. Still, it must be commenced by some individual; probably by the Peer who is for the time being Leader of the House of Lords. Such a task would be invidious in a most painful degree. It would be calculated to give rise to a most painful discussion.
On the other hand, if there were to be an election of those Peers who are to constitute the legislative body, with the entire peerage as electors, then the act of " weeding out" would be performed by the Peers themselves, and the process
would be not the condemnation of the individuals whom it is intended to exclude, but merely the omission to vote for them. Thus there would be a complete representation of Peers, minority as well as majority, and the House of Lords so com- posed would in character and talent be by no means inferior to the House of Commons. To such a body Life-Peers might be added, chosen upon such principles as Parliament might have sanctioned.—I am, Sir, &c., FREDERICK CALVERT.
38 Upper Grosvenor Street, Tune 27th.
Previous page
