MR. BALFOUR SPEAKS.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1126, 13 May 1911, Page 5

MR. BALFOUR SPEAKS.

LIBERAL INCONSISTENCY. PASSAGE OF HOME RULIi BY SINGLE CHAMBER. THE ONLY TRUE DEMOCRATS. By Tetecranh—Press Asjociation-CoDytisUt (Roc. May 12, 10.30 p.m.) tendon, May 12. Sir. Balfour, Leader of the Opposition, delivered an important speech on the House of Lords question at a Primrose League meeting at the Albert Hall to-day. In opening, Mr. Balfour said he heartily supported Lord Lansdowne's House of Lords reform proposals, which, went as far as it was right or possible to go in the direction of a change in tho House of Lords' constitution. He warned the public of the folly of so changing the House of Lords that it would overshadow the House of Commons. Effective Chamber Needed. They must, however, have a strong and effective .Second Chamber, able to carry out the great duties falling upon it; not one with tho pitiful, beggarly, modicum of responsibility given, by the .Parliament Bill. The Government proposed indefinitely to postpone an admittedly necessary reform of the House of Lords, and insisted that they should meanwhile be governed by one Chamber alone. He called that a gross, palpable, and almost criminal inconsistency. The Labour party were consistent: they constantly declared that they could see no object in having a Second Chamber, and they can vote for this Bill with a clear conscience. "Humiliating Strait 3." "This Bill," continued Mr. Balfour, "gives them a Single Chamber Government, and their position is unassailable, but I cannot imagines any inconsistency greater than that of tho Government in saying that the future Constitution must bo bi-cameral while the Parliament framing it may be under a Single Chamber Constitution. The only explanation of such humiliating straits is that ablo men have been driven tj them by tho necessity of keeping a majority together in tho House of Commons." Mr. Asquiih. at Manchester, had j claimed that if Home llulo were relinquished tho Government would have no difficulty in securing assent to the Parliament Bill. This was an inversion of the real facts. There would have been no Parliament'Bill but for Homo Kule. There might havo,been reforms of the Second Chamber and a change in tho relations of the two Houses, but never tho absurdity of suggesting tho transfer to a Single Chamber, elected on- a different issue, of all tho most fundamental, important, and invaluable elements of iho Constitution. Solution of tho Question. Whether what tho Government proposes is Homo Rule on Gladstonian or some other unknown model it ought never to bo passed by a Single Chamber alone, but either to bo subjected to revision by two independent legally co-equal Chambers or referred to the pcoplo as a whole. (Cheers.) ■'•The true solution of.-the Constitutional question, continued tho speaker, was: Firstly a change in tho constitution of tho Second Chamber, not an alteration of its powers, and at all events not the fundamental. alteration of its powers proposed by tho Parliament Bill. Secondly, that deadlocks should bo met by conferences for conciliation and joint sittings. Thirdly, that matters of grave importance and special instances should bo dealt with bv a referendum. (Cheers.) Nothing could bo moro entertaining and pathetic than to see their opponents, who had been talking about Democracy Throughout their lives, struggling to show that an appeal of tho people on a specific issue was tho worst service that could bo rendered to Democracy. Mr. Balfour concluded by claiming that the Unionists wero only the true I Democratic party in tho State.