THE PLURAL VOTING BILL.
[TO THE EDITOR or TUE "SPECITATOIL"] SIR,—Kindly permit me to reply to Mr. John Humphreys, who, taking as his text the debate on the Plural Voting Bill, again puts forward certain figures as regards the Government majority which he states might have resulted had the system of equal areas been in operation at the last General Election. As I have previously said, it matters very little now what the figures might or would have been under different electoral conditions at the last General Election at the time when the Veto Bill was submitted to the judgment of the country. What is far more to the point is what may be expected to happen at the nest General Election, which will probably be fought on the question of Home Rule and Welsh Disestablishment, neither of which policies was really before the electors at the last General Election, but which it is nevertheless intended by the Coalition to place on the Shtute Book while the Con- stitution is in suspense. My point is that England, which may rightfully claim to be vitally interested in both these measures, is under-represented by nearly forty seats, and that before they are submitted to the next Great Assize this unfair handicap should be rectified, Mr. Humphreys would have your readers assume that this addition would not be to the advantage of the Tory Party, and I recognize an old friend in what I will call the "Solid North" bogey. It is this impression that the Conservative Party must inevitably lose any extra seats that may be allotted to the "Solid North" that I am endeavouring in humble way to combat. On the very day that Mr. Humphreys issues his letter to you comes the result of the election in South Manchester, reputed one of the most solid" seats in the "Solid North." Evidence of this sort, no less than equally clear indications given recently in Ayr- shire and the St. Rollox Divisions, simply goes to show that the more seats given to England (as justice and fair play demand) the more chances there are for the Tory Party. Incidentally, any of these seats that were won would count two on a division.
My amendment to the Plural Voting Bill urged the necessity of giving to each portion of the United Kingdom its proper quota of members, according to population; and though this appears to be common sense no less than a bare act of justice to the predominant partner, and therefore a question that should stand on its merits, one is nevertheless bound to be prepared for the party view as expressed in the query, "Where do we come in F" I decline to believe that the Conservative Party have anything to fear from an honest and fair readjustment, and I think I may claim South Man- chester in support of this opinion.—I am, Sir, &c., 88 St. James's Street, S. W.
OLIVE MORRISON HELL.
[We are, of course, whole-heartedly with Major Morrison Bell in his plucky and persistent protest against the iniquity of an electoral system under which England has some forty members less than she ought to have and Ireland some forty more. The advocates of proportional representation are not in the least concerned to support this gross injustice.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
