AT WESTMINSTER
HE House of Lords still keeps some of its fallen day about it. There are occasions—the debate on Seretse Khama was one—that fill the peeresses' gallery, with women of a grace, elegance and schooled manners that you would find in no other deliberative assembly. The laws of heredity are seeing to it that the aristocracy shall survive in its physical and moral attributes long after its political and economic death. These women provide the one additional piece of decor the gilded chamber needs. They triumph even against the opulent setting. Some may think this the wrong end from which to approach the debate on Seretse Khama's exclusion from the chieftainship, but why not, once in a while, in a world submerged in politics, take some account of more engaging phenomena ? There shall be no apologies for it here.
The House of Lords does not sit on Mondays and Fridays. In theory, though many of them now come from Hampstead, Wimbledon or 'Brixton, their Lordships have great estates and parklands to look after as well as an Empire. It was fitting of Lord Salisbury to bring them together on Monday so that he could present a full exposition and defence of the Govern- ment's decision. That had not been done in the Commons. It emerged from Lord IsmaY's speech that it was he who had advised the Cabinet to exclude Seretse from the chieftainship before Lord Salisbury took over the Commonwealth Relations Office from him, but, in the terminology of a far older contro- versy, Lord Salisbury proved to be as much of an exclusionist. if not more, as Lord Ismay. Here was a Cecil with his mind made up, literally flushed with the ardour of conviction. These are the terms on which good speeches are made and this was one of Lord Salisbury's best. It also turned out that it was Lord Ismay who made the mistake of refusing to see the Bechuanaland deputation. There was a relief -when Lord Salisbury repaired the mistake to the extent of agreeing to meet the deputation as a matter of courtesy.
Lord Jowitt did his Best for the Opposition with a case weakened by Labour's 1950 White Paper and its banishment of Seretse. He promises to be as strong an adversary of the Conservatives, though in a more supple way, as Lord Addison. He brings dignity and a handsome person to the despatch box. Sartorially, he might have stepped right out of the drawing- room of an Edwardian political hostess. The Tailor 'and Cutter should have a look at him now he is divested of his Lord Chancellor's robes.
What a' transformation when the Lords debated the Budget. No peeresses now to rain a bright influence over the scene. Much worse, for a time you might have thought you had mis- taken your way and wandered into the Commas during one of its more inglorious shindies. Lord Swinton has a volcanic temper and much ability. Lord Pakenham has ability and a provokingly bland complacency. Add to this a mutual anti- pathy between the two men and you had most of the ingredients necessary to Tuesday's explosion. Friction was at work between them from the start and Lord Swinton's blood-pressure could be seen visibly rising some time before, as they say in less exalted circles than the House of Lords, he " flew off the handle," blazed at Lord Pakenham, addressed remarks to him that showed how little his temper was under control, and trounced the late Government for having grossly misled the country about the economic situation. These were, indeed, fine goings on for the upper House. * * As for the Commohs, the increase in steel prices which, of course, the Tory Machiavels intend shall put profits into the pockets of the steel firms and so help denationalisation, kept the House up until after midnight on Monday and the Army and Air Force Bill kept it up until 3 a.m. on Wednesday. The newspaper formula, The House was still sitting when we went to Press," is now in standing type. H. B.
Previous page
