THE UNIONISTS AND HOUSE OF LORDS REFORM.
[TO TER Forum OF THE "SPECTATOR."] SIR,—I have been a constant reader of the Spectator for five- and-thirty years. During the greater part of that time your paper was a weekly delight, though in recent years it has been, I confess, more of a weekly discipline. I have continued to read it, however, and have found pleasure in your zeal and sincerity, even when I have most strongly dissented from your judgment. The notes appended to letters from your corre- spondents have usually a special interest for me, and I generally turn to them early. May I call attention briefly to two notes in your last issue ? Mr. W. Stanley Anderton in his letter expresses a doubt whether the Unionists, if they were returned to power, would really reform the House of Lords. You say they are pledged up to the hilt to do so. That is not quite convincing. When Lord Lansdowne wanted the Licensing Bill killed, he had only to beckon to the " wild" Peers and they filed forth in multitudes into their unaccus- tomed places to perform his behest. But when he summons them to perform "the happy despatch" upon themselves, will they obey ? It is quite conceivable, and even probable, that with the Unionists back in power they would obstinately refuse to be extinguished. Who could coerce them ? Not Mr. Balfour or Lord Lansdowne. These might threaten or cajole; but if the unconsidered Peers, encouraged, if not led, by Lord Halsbury, refased to vote away their hereditary right to legis- late, what would happen F The Unionist leaders would be powerless, unless, perchance, they appealed to the Throne for help to carry their reform.
Then your note on "Nonconformist's" letter was distinctly unsatisfactory. You will not question that the Liberals in 1906 did their utmost to remedy the injustice of Mr. Balfour's Act. They were fresh from an appeal to the country. They had a clear mandate from the people, and they were backed by an enormous majority. It was not their fault that a solution of the education problem which would have satisfied Nonconformists did not pass into law. You say that Non- conformists will not get an Education Bill from the Liberal Party, " controlled as it is now." It seems absolutely certain that they will get nothing from the Unionist Party in any circumstances. It only remains for them, therefore, to work on until the Liberals have secured such relationship with the House of Lords that the attempt to secure a reasonable
solution of the education problem shall never again be frustrated by Lords who have no sympathy with the Non- conformist position and little understanding of it. —I am,
Previous page
