We cannot find space to analyse Thursday's debate in the
Lords, nor do we think it would serve any useful purpose to do so, for the debate was in truth but a sham fight. The real fight, if there is to be one, will come next week. We may note, however, Lord Ilalsburfs speech, which, though we must utterly condemn its statesmanship, certainly bad the good qn al i ti es of plainness and atm igh tforwardness. Unless, said Lord Halsbury, the amendments were accepted in substance, in meaning, and in operation, he should himself never con- sent without a division to the passing of the Bill. Though we recognize Lord Mdsletny's doggedness and pluck we cannot profess to feel greatly alarmed. We cannot resist the feeling that at the back of his mind Lord Halsbury knows that if at the last moment, and contrary to Lord Lansdowne's wishes, he does attempt to reject the BM, he will only be indulging in what we may call a persona/ luxury. He will not be able to force the creation of peers, but at the same time be will be able to stand forth as "the noblest Roman of them all?' To parody Mr. Jorrocks on hunting, he will have all the glory of a fight to a finish without even one per cent. of its risks and inconveniences.
Previous page
