LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.
THE SECOND CHAMBER.
[To 'ins EDITOR OP THE " SP ICOTATOIt."1 Sin,—The question now before the British people, and all who look up to the British people for example and guidance, is that of the House of Lords,—in other words, of a Second • An old musician once said to me "Joachim is the only violinist who brings 'lames .ut uj ti, The scale-passage in the Chaccnno Mill recall t...e truth of nue picturesque remark. Chamber. It is absolutely vital, and swallows up all other issues, such as those of the tariff or old-age pensions, for the time. A wrong decision would be irreversible and fatal. The other day the United Kingdom was saved by the Second Chamber from the disruption with which it was threatened by the leader of a party in the Commons so far blinded by demagogic passion as to believe that the abolition of the Ascendency Parliament in Ireland, closed as it was against four-fifths of the Irish people, sunk as it was in jobbery and corruption, was a crime as great as the massacre of St. Bar- tholomew. The Parliamentary vacation is coming. It brings a truce to wrangling. Let it be given to patriotic thought. There is no sense in railing at the Lords, who did not put themselves where they are, and being where they are, could not fail to do as they have done. Birth as a qualification for legislative powers has had its day, if it ever really had one ; for perhaps even a Venetian Senator thought not so much of the "Libro d'Oro" as of a barrier against the turbulence of Florence or the tyranny of Milan. As I have said before, half the House of Lords in the Middle Ages was practically not patrician, but ecclesiastic. The Monarchy stands on a different ground. It embodies the unity of the nation.
There are three courses :—(1) Simple abolition, leaving the country, and not only the country but the whole Empire, to the legislative control of a democratic Assembly, elected under the impulse of the hour, without any power of revision. (2) The policy of Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman, who would let the House remain hereditary, but confine its power to a suspensive veto, at the same time making the Lower House more democratic by shortening its term from seven years to five and introducing female suffrage. Such a House of Lords would probably be nothing more than an irritant and a target for popular attack without real power of revision or control. Probably if it attempted revision it would fall. (3) To give up the hereditary qualification as obsolete and institute an effective organ of national second thought. If this course is adopted, the formation of a new Upper House will be the work of statesmen who will address themselves, if party has not extinguished patriotism in their breasts, impartially and calmly to the task. In mentioning the Instrument of Government, I did not so much presume to point to a model as to recommend the spirit of men who could frame a. Con- stitution so moderate and wise for its time when they bad just emerged from a violent revolution. There would, of course, be no occasion to touch the titles, which are merely a social
Toronto.
Previous page
