THE NEXT STEP.
ANEW and critical era opens before us. Such has been the public apathy within the last few months, however, that we doubt whether Englishmen recognize the vastness of the difference between the conditions before the passing of the Parliament Bill and those which exist now. It would be an interesting study in itself to investi- gate the reason why a unique constitutional revolution has produced less excitement among the electorate than many of us can remember to have seen caused by such relatively unimportant political questions as Local Option. It may be that the electorate with its daily, and almost hourly, supply of sensations suffers from the numbed faculties of a dram-drinker, and that a constitutional question cannot be presented with the requisite vividness and directness to intellects incapable of pursuing a theory or of arguing by the simplest processes from cause to effect. However that may be, it is very necessary for Constitutionalists to awaken the country to a clear perception of what has hap- pened and to the dangers to which we are all exposed, and to make the electors familiar with the remedy. The crisis which has just passed was indeed only the first of a long series of struggles which are bound to take place before the old balance of power between the King, Lords, and Commons can be restored, or, rather, we should say till the equivalent of that balance has been found, for when once a political institution has been destroyed it is never reconstructed in the same form.
For serious purposes we azenow withouta Second Chamber —the only great nation in the world which is in such a posi- tion. We emulate the impressive examples of Greece and Honduras. The majority in the Commons will be able to pass any Bill they please over the heads of the Lords by the simple expedient of sending it to them three times in separate Sessions within the same Parliament. " What I tell you three times is true " is to be the animating prin- ciple of British politics as well as of the " Hunting of the Snark." We need hardly say that what the Commons say three times is no more likely to be true than what they say twice or once, or even than what they never thought of saying at all. Look at the multitude of ill-considered and unjust provisions in the Insurance Bill. In such a case as that the country is to be deprived of all the • effective value of the criticisms of the House of Lords, which contains employers, great lawyers and administrators who can carry on a debate (as every candid person must admit who troubles to read his newspaper carefully) at a level not to be matched in the world. On great occasions when the same subject is debated by the full powers of the Lords and the Commons the debate in the Lords is frequently better than that in the Commons ; and that is to give it very high praise indeed, for we are not among those who find any decline of debating ability in the Commons. We know that there will be small mitigations of the absolute subjection of the Lords to the Commons. Towards the end of a Parliament it will be impossible to return a Bill the necessary number of times to the Lords. Again, rather than run the risk of committing a pet Bill to any of the conceivable hazards which are held by the future, however explicitly the course of the future may seem to be mapped out, the Government of the day may prefer to accept-just sufficient amendments to pass a Bill quickly. They may be conscious of rapidly waning popularity and be anxious to get a Bill approximately near their ideal accepted rather than hold out for the whole ideal. But when all these allowances have been made the ugly fact remains that a majority in the Commons, determined on having its way, can do so in the case of any Bill introduced in the first two or three years of a Parliament of normal duration, exactly as though a Second Chamber did not exist. Now what is the authority and what are the credentials of a majority in the House of Commons for enforcing its will by a system of Single-Chamber government? The will of the majority in the Commons nowadays is simply the will of the Cabinet—that and nothing else. No sooner has the Cabinet drafted a Bill than it is accepted by the party behind the Cabinet as a Heaven-sent measure of almost plenary verbal inspiration, rather in the spirit of the old woman who thought that her copy of the Authorized Version had come down from heaven, gilt clasps and all. Thus we see that the supreme power of this country is now placed in the hands of an oligarchy who have absolute power to enforce their will. We are not now referring only to the present Government, though we thick that of all possible oligarchies it is one of the worst. The principle will remain equally true and equally vicious whatever party may be in power. We are optimistic enough to believe that this extraordinarily unhappy phase in the evolution of democracy is nothing more than an incident, just as the rise of tyrants was a reactionary incident in the progressive move- ment of Greek democracy. One might almost compare a British Cabinet under the new conditions with the Turkish Committee of Union and Progress. Both are secret and oligarchical authorities within the body of a professedly democratic constitution. Both declare that they are doing their best kir democracy, but both are afraid of the people and will not trust them.
Let us now measure the dangers ahead of us by looking at the legislation which the present Government can carry out if they wish without let or hindrance. They are only at the beginning of a career which, we may suppose, will be of normal Parliamentary duration. The most momentous Bill we are promised is, of course, Home Rule. There has never been a majority for Home Rule in England. The ancient bi-cameral system of our Constitution has been broken down by the Government chiefly in order to pay the price of support from the Irish Nationalists. The decision as to Home Rule is taken violently out of the hands of the predominant partner, who, in spite of his objections to Home Rule, will have to pay the cost of it. Englishmen are to foot Irish bills without any say as to how the money is to be spent and very little say, indeed, as to how much is to be spent. If that is not enough to awaken Englishmen from apathy we cannot imagine any- thing that will be. Other measures of prime importance which the Government hope to press through without let or hindrance are the Insurance Bill—unless the present opposition of the Labour Party becomes so acute that the Government are forced to drop it through fear of losing the Labour vote—and Welsh Disestablishment. There are, of course, many others of scarcely smaller significance. Every group which knows that the Government cannot afford to do without its votes will open its mouth as wide as possible like shrieking starlings in a, nest. The Government will not be able to satisfy all their supporters, but the condition of their remaining in office is that they shall satisfy as many as they can in the fruitful period during which the resistance of the Lords is perfectly innocuous. The country can no lonaer look to the Lori to save it. That means of salvation is a thing of the past. So long as a Government retain their power to purchase support by doles and the creation of functionaries who will before long rival in number the Jacks-in-office who make life in France complicated and harassing, they will be able to remain in power. This may be called freedom, but it is really the very negation of freedom. Even if archangels worked the system for a time the day would come when it would fall into the hands of cynics and tyrants, and the people would find that their Constitution no longer provided them with any means of protection.
What is the remedy which Unionists and all Constitu- tionalists should set before themselves and urge on the country with all the energy at their command.? The House of Lords ought, of course, to be reformed, and Liberals should. be carefully held to their promise in that respect. But now that the Parliament Bill has been passed the reform of a Chamber which in any case has only very slight powers of delay is not the first necessity. The first necessity is to give the people themselves the power of absolutely declining to have legislation thrust on them which they do not like. This can be done very sinjply and very effectively by the adoption of the Poll of the People, or Referendum. The Poll of the People has already been accepted by the Unionist Party, and even Liberals should be open to con- viction before long, for some of the ablest thinkers in the Liberal Party are in favour of it. Mr. J. A. Hobson and Professor Hobhouse—both prophets in their own country —have argued in its favour, and it was for years advocated by that authoritative Liberal paper the Manchester Guardian. Only expediency, which we think has been =Tied much too far, can have induced such Liberals to pocket their opinions on this subject for the time being. We need not explain again now the working of the Poll of the People. There is not a single objection to it which has not been conclusively answered. It will of itself end all the practical dangers of the new system of Single-Chamber government. The veto of the Crown is now directed by a caucus. It is not possible to restore the Veto to the Crown, and therefore it must be vested in the people. That is what the Referendum would do. The second remedy is the reform of the present inequalities of representation in the House of Commons. Redistribution is urgently necessary, but not redistribution which does not touch Ireland, where by far the grossest instances of over-representation exist. The Government with unexampled cynicism propose this lopsided kind of redistribution because they dare not offend their Irish supporters. Under the head of the reform of the House of Commons comes also proportional representation, which would abate the unnecessary rigours of party government by securing the representation of minorities. A complete system of proportional representation, though very desirable, might not be achieved at once. It is capable, however, of gradual introduction, when once the principle has been accepted, by pooling the representation of some of the larger cities. In a few cities very considerable minorities are absolutely unrepresented in Parliament. These remedies, which are recommended. by the British Constitu- tion Association, whose letter we print elsewhere, have our most earnest support. They are surely comprehensive enough and clear enough to unite all moderate people— without whose help the Unionist Party cannot afford to wage war—in a determined attempt to gain for the people the right to have the last word in the management of their own affairs. Here is a short and simple programme for the reconstruction of a true democracy in place of the present false democracy.
But though we hold that the remedies we have de- scribed. are vitally necessary to redeem the Constitu- tion, we do not forget for a moment that perilous struggles will be forced upon us meanwhile on ground which is not of our own choosing. Simultaneously with the work of educating the country there will be the need to defend the Union. How far the remedies we have mentioned. and the resistance to Home Rule may react upon each other we cannot foretell. The one certain fact is that the Government play with loaded dice. Yet we believe that the Union may be saved if the Unionist Party will rally to itself every person without exception who is opposed to Home Rule. The prepossessions of Unionists in all other matters should be absolutely ignored for the time being. There should be no test for serving in the Unionist army except the single test of opposition to the disastrous scheme for breaking up the unity of the United Kingdom.
Previous page
