MORLEY'S DEFENCE.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 678, 1 December 1909, Page 7

MORLEY'S DEFENCE.

; THE BUDGET. : — A CRISIS FORCED BY A FINANCIAL DEADLOCK. , NO EIGHT TO COMPEL A MANDATE. (By Telegraph.—Press Association —Copyright.) .' (Rec. November 30, 10.5 p.m.) London, November 30. . Continuing the debate in the House of Lords on the Government's Financo Bill, and the Unionist amendment declining the House of 'Lords' consent till the Bill has been submitted to the judgment of ;tho people, Lord Morley, Secretary for India, reviewed the legal and constitutional position. The House was crowded, as also wero the galleries. Five Breaches of Constitutional Usage. Lord Morley declared that-.; the' Unionist amendment, involved five points, each further from constitutional usage and practical convenience than the other. If the amendment were carried the House of Lords would ' (1) Arrogating-to itself the control of the taxing power. (2) Assuming the power to force a penal dissolution of Parliament by refusing to grant supplies,(3) Making it compulsory that there , should be anew Parliament when : , i : ever the House of Commons had . '„'"' ;' the misfortune to incur the dis- >■:.-. . pleasure of their Lordships. (4) Transforming representative supremacy into supremacy of an 'oil-.- : garchy. ;.'!. •;' (5) Throwing out of gear tho whole of the ■■'. financial machinery. Proceeding, Lord . Morley said it. was on th«:authority of.the House.of Commons that taxes were : collected, but if the Commons were told that : their' decisions were to bo subject. to a plebiscite, -their collecting responsibility would be weakened. ■Least Likely Subject for Plebiscite. '.-■ "The Budget (he continued) is the'one: thing which usually cannot wisely be, subjected to a plebiscite. There can be no plain,Tes' or- ' No' thereto."'; - ... ... .' The Unionist amendment disregarded the Septennial Act (passed in 1716, and prolonging the term;• of Parliament from three to seven years), and the.prerogative of the Crown, in that it- would stop the supplies, granted to the Crown by ' the House." of ; Com.nions. Nobody denied the bare.legal right ol the House of. Lords, ,but ithe assertion of thia bare right'- by foisting a constitutional crisis pu top of a financial deadlock was' ', nowise, provident, sensible, or likely .to • serve one, single useful end. -'.■ ■. ■; Lord,Mprley ; quoted authorities toj show that: the House of Commons \ had: sole ' control of taxing..,, Beplring- to the argument that the Government had. no mandate, he contended that the whole idea of an deotion ad hoo, and of-a ; referendum and mandate was.a.complete departure' from the wholesome usages of the country.:' When the' elector -goes... to the. poll he is voting for a House to make' laws and watch their administration, and to'support a' party for, a certain;number of. years in Parliament... •' .;...■ :-,-.•'■■'.'■ ;-:.'.'..,'-...'■';:. : r'.-";-,;. ■ What, the Elector Himself Cannot; Do. ...'.,'■ -The Minister •proceeded to show .that, such .a Parliament cannot.be fettered in any. matters with 'which it thinks fit to deal. The. electors can-demand a:, financial policy;'ttie'y can .demand, for example,,'some day,, tariff reform; and they can' punish a.'Ministry when"■■:tho time comes' for dismissing it. What they. Can-' noti'do.is, by,- means : of, a plebiscite, to break into'tho middle-of- a fully-planned Executive scheme for; supplying the needs', of tho '-year; three-quarters., of which year'had, by the way, now expired. Tho electors must; trust"; those whom thoy'had' elected,'and'must acquiesce in the action of their' Representatives,.: who— h_aving the wh'olo case ; before'; them,' all, the facts and possibilities—fixed \ the est juiatos 1 , and who," decided the ways and means of satisfying them.;.;.' v..,.-V ; :.".. ■;>. ■{■ -I.■'.■':} -. '-'~ ■ ■:-. -'.'-.•' ':;■_"■ .No Dangerous ;,Tide of Socialism. ; "The amendment jmove'pV by.,. Lord.. Lans-; downe," Lord' Morley; declared, ."is'no;,rampart against Socialism., ; :.;'.:-, ■■ % ';•>': '"■/:'-.": "The artisans of Britain aro : not : '; .'Reds.? If a;dangerous tide of So-; ; , : cialism is'running—which I deny;- ,-.!.' is;it wise and sagacious to risk thV ; '-'...•■ charge, unfounded, .that;: : : . ard straining the Constitution T' , of tlje rich against :. [.t i ,,i ; the poor 7 That is ■ what it will :; I:.;come to in plain electioneering Ian?: '. :--guage.";;, ; ,:.,-,: '. \-;;j'.; : y -''-'' . It .was' admitted - that the only: thing which could' justify the.amendment was the wildest proposals by a- demented .House'of: Commons. Such- a ; :ca6e ,had-not yet risen. There : was something; worse than, a dummy ..House . of Lords—namely, a dummy Hopse of- Commons. .; He. warned •'■ the'. Opposition .that*'the■ more. triumphant the majority in the Lords, as; compared with the ! major|ty. in' the Commons, the more Mazing in: the public eye would.be the constitutional; outrage. :.'.'. .. : -,;•': \.■'■'.'-'. !'_ ; NOT A ONE-PARTY CHAMBER/ r -'':'. WHAT THE' HOUSE OP iOEDsV SHOULD ,- ; -';/ : v.''-■:■■:/:■ ':';--S^.'" : ; ; /'.',^.; ; -;. v .,.-:';. :;.-;■ -./...- .: London, .November 29. In its. plea for the reform of the House of Lords, by. placing it on a:more,representative •basis—a: tack, .which it advises' the Unionists to take Times".'also urges that :'■ the House of Lords; ought not to, be dpmfnated by any-party;:' ; '~;■.;.,..-,;-'; •■■'.,.; .-:-.■"..! WHAT TrJEPOW'ER OF THE: PURSE ';: ; : '-'.■]'■ MEANS. , : /;v ' •■'.:;;•: v-^^^^vsV'^^-'-'^;--;;:''^-';;; ;;; A BEAItE ON■ GOVERNMENT. DISSOLUTION MAY BE FOECED BY THB : '■■■■'<:-C;:. \'.';',:,-.''. ■'LOEDS:;. '.■■ ,;:;- .!-.;.- ,'• London, November-29,: ', Mr.; Herbert' Samuel,. Chancellor '.of . "the Duchy ■ of; Lancaster, speaking; at Paddington, the difference between ...rejection; of the Finance' Hill and other Bills. :They inight, .ho . said, regret tho rejection of the Licensing.Bill or a One-man-one-vote Bill, but government; could'at'least, in such an event, continue. :On the other hand, a Finance Bill of some' kind must be' passed every .year, of; tho whole process of administration stop. ■ \ Therefore, continued Mr. . Samuel,' if •. the Lords .could establish a cjoim to refuse the passage of the Finance Bill, it meaot that they could make and unmake Parliaments and Governments -whenever thoy wished it. -It meant usurpation, of - the prerogative ;the Sovereign,. whose right it was,' on, the advice ■ of his Ministers, to determine the hour of dissolution; The Minister'-'added :"Tho Government will accept'no compromise or bargain from.the Lords in connection with the Budget,"