THE LEAGUE AND THE ORIGINS OF THE ENGLISH PARLIAMENT.
[To THE EDITOR OF TEE "SPECTATOR.")
Sist,—On reading the critique on Venice Preserv'd one felt that there was indeed an uncanny appositeness in this work being brought before the public in these days when the dis- closing of plots is in the air. One could not help being struck with another case of the apposite. In your review of The Evolution of Parliament we read that "Parliament began as a law-court; not as a taxing assembly, still less as a chamber of debate." And in the article on America we read that the Republicans are intent upon founding an Interna- tional High Court of Justice. In these days, when many are apt to think somewhat bitterly of the position of America, one would like to think that American politicians may after all be going the right way about and following the best traditions of English history. In the Parliament of old "most of the petitions were referred to the courts for prompt discussion; others were considered by the Council; others again by the
Council in Parliament." In Dr. Butler's scheme as suggested by you "all justiciable differences would be settled by an impartial tribunal. Non-justiciable differences would be settled by conciliation or by arbitral councils." Does not this scheme as outlined by you for an ideal League of Nations seem, after all, but the modern method of putting into force on a n-orld-wide scale the old principle of the English Parliament?
Previous page
