We should like to quote another comment upon the debate
by the Parliamentary correspondent of the Dairy keno% 'who remarks that what chiefly interested him in Mr. Runci- man's speech was "the contrast between his strong declarations in favour of a Second Chamber, and the curiously vague
explanation of what should be the purpose of the institution."
He proceeds :— " One can easily understand Mr. Clyde, the Scottish lawyer on the Front Opposition Bench, waxing earnest and vigorous in his defence of the Second Chamber, for he honestly wishes to set up a substantial obstacle against progressive legislation. But on the aide of the Coalition I am stating the bare truth when I say that the whole case for a Second Chamber is crumbling."
This is a perfectly fair account of the ease. Unionists are in
favour of a Second Chamber, as being "a substantial obstacle" against certain forms of legislation. Radicals like the Daily News correspondent are against it for the same reason. The Government, however, take neither of these views, but regard a Second Chamber merely 218 a highly decorative form of larder in which laws may be hung up for two years before being served
for the nation's consumption.
Previous page
