In Tuesday's Times appeared a most interesting and sugges- tive
letter from Lord Onslow analysing the views held by tl.e members of the Committee which was appointed by the House of Lords to consider the question of reform, and on which he himself served. Lord Onslow shows first that " the principle of heredity and primogeniture (or, as Mr. Lloyd George would put it, `the first of the litter ') found no support in the Committee," which, it must be remembered, included only two Liberal Peers. There was also general agreement that it was desirable to let into the House a "current of fresh air," and the only differences of opinion were as to means. The proposal of Lord Rosebery and Lord St. Aldwyn for th3 representation of large urban communities was only defeated by a majority of one. And in fact nearly all the reforms sug- gested to-day " were considered by the Committee and received some measure of support." Lord Onslow says in conclusion that be has shown "that an influential body of Peers are prepared to go as far as any suggestion I have yet seen made in the direction of reforming the House of Lords." That the Lords will not object to any scheme of reform, no matter how drastic and democratic, provided it is just and impartial, is also our firm belief. What it is essential for them to resist is a scheme for so greatly restricting the functions of the Second House that we shall in fact, if not in name, be confronted with single-Chamber government. Reform or even complete reconstruction will be welcomed. Emasculation must be resisted at all costs.
Previous page
