BRITISH POLITICAL CRISIS

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LII, Issue 250, 27 November 1909, Page 2

BRITISH POLITICAL CRISIS

THE LORDS AND THE BUiXiET. WM HAHD HITTING. By Uable,—Press Association,—Copyrl^U London, Noremoer &>- During thu Budget debate, Lord St. David admitted that many business met were afraid of tlie Budget, Gould it be wondered at when responsible men jetted about bunds being shipped as ballast The remedy wus to let the Budget paw. When people found nothing had flappened, bond* would be shipped back. Lord llilnor declared that nil expertence as chairman of the Board of Inland Itevenue showed Hie utter impossibility of securing an enactment of all the complicated taxes included in tie present Budget in a tingle year. He went on to say tihat the proportion of public investments in Britain) to thu total was forty per vent, in 1004, aid thirty-one per cent in 11)05. Since the (iovernment came into power, the proportion each year hud been thirty, twenty-five and twenty-six per cent. ..- spectively, and this Budget year I'll per cent. He severely condemned tftc death duties, and concluded that it «u» impossible to raise the whole amount required by imjjort duties without lajury to business and employment. .■■- deed, with benefit to both, the Lord! were not justified in passing the Budget without the consent of the people. Lord Carrington declared that. t'w valuo of land had advanced from twent) • five to forty per cent, siuce the Liberal* cume into office. This, iie said, was a testimony of the public confidence in the Government's land legislation. Opposition interjectors suggested that , the improvement was' due to the rise in prices. Lord Carrington admitted this, but - added that indulgent land legislation had r its share. The Cabinet, be believed,waa i wrong in taxing land which produced the people's food. 'Lord Onslow opposed, and Lord Weardale and Lord Olastawe supported tin Budget. Lord Curzou moved the adjournment of the debate.

"THE THROW OF A GAMBLEK". A STUMBLING BLOCK TO LIBERALISM. SIR EDWARD GREY ON THE LOROS. London, November 25. Sir Edward Grey, Secretary ol State for Foreign Affairs, speaking at Trowbridge, said the action ol the Lord* wai not statesmanship, but " the throw of » gambler who was playing for a stake." ,; He favored a second chamber, which, j however, would be something whicn would reflect the opinion of the country. ' The Lords, he said, only did thin by accident. When the Conservatives were in power the House of Lords fit a Bleeping partner, but when the Überais were in power it was not a second chtmber, but an opposition, If good Liberal work was to be done it was essential that some fair and reasonable mean* should be accepted by the Lords, whereby in the case of a deadlock the opinion ' of the House of Commons should prevail.

NEWSPAPER CRITICISM. London. November £9. The Opposition newspapers pay high tributes to Lord Rosehery's eloquence, but regret that he shrinks trom action 0 which alone could give effect to his pro-r tests. The Telegraph says': "The enjoyment of a superb oratorical triumph mi marred by the chilling thought of :U supreme practical futility." 11? THE LORDS DO NOT ASSENT. London, November 85. It is expected that Parliament will be prorogued until the end of next week. The elections will be held early in January if the Lords do not assent to the Budget. The Times soys the Government » averse to any proposals concerning the collection of taxes to tide over the interregnum lest its action should be interpreted as accepting an alternative to the Budget. The deficit resulting from the rejection will continue until the new Parliament assembles.

STRENGTHENING THE GO\ERNMENT S HANDS. London, November 25. Mr. Asquith, Premier, in reply to a petition signed by 2000 City electors in favor of the Budget, welcomed the weighty memorial as strengthening the Government's hands in maintaining the full force of the supremacy of the Commons in the matter of finance.

AN 'UNJUST AND UNFAIR" BILL,.

RHETORICAL ROTTEN Eurf. VIEWS OF LORD BALFOUR OF I BURLEIGH. f LORD LANSDOVTOE'S AMENDMENT ! A TRAP. I * _^_ Received 20, 10 p.m. London, November 28. In the absence of Lord Curron, the debate, opened tamely. Some of the benches wore half meant. There were fewer spectators. King Manuel of Portugal was present. Lord Ashbourne said that for Uiefint time in history the Budget went tar beyond the provisions of the year's revenue. The Lords had a right to be sure the people knew ike character of the Bill. Lord Balfour of Burleigh, in a remarkable speech, characterised by manly «ineerily and frequent Liberal applause, objected to the Bill because the various taxes were unneeesary for the Service of the year, It was, lie aaid, no answer to say the State would be in possession of funds for future, expense*. That aggravated the change, because it tended to make the Executive more independent of Parliament. In many respect* the Budget was unjust and unfair ai between inon. For the first time finance was founded on class hatred and jealousy. If he objected to the content* ! of the Budget he objected still more 1 strongly to the tone of some of toe speeches by which it had been recommended. There had been an increase in the output of rhetorical rotten eggs. Party organisation bad been raised to Kuch perfection that it was crushing oat the independence of the Commoners. There never was a time in the history of ttie country when the second chamber

whs so strong or so trusted, and in the an turn of things it «u somewhat conservative. This was more necessary. He questioned whether the Lords were wise in making a new claim at this juncture Long usage had made the House of Commons supreme with the Government of the day hi control of finance matters. " That the two things go together and are in essence the truth is admitted hy every constitutional lawyer," the speaker eontinm-<l. "If a system is established whereby the Lords have the right to force n referendum, you destroy tho control of the Commons over the Government and make a momentous change in the Constitution, if the Lords win «ie : victor}', it on ii In- at the most temporary. l*e passn.v.. of Lord Lnnsdowae'e reJ solution will only lead to .a tfenewnl of a conflict hy which the House of Commons attained its present position. I If defeated, the result will he the prejudice of the power, prestige, and usefulness of tho House of Lords. 1 object to the tactics which combine the defence of tho second chamber with taxation ot the people's food. Ido not believe that tariff reform will provide the needed revenue. Those who vote with Lord Lans-(low-nc will lie walking into a trap. They will offend the deepest conservative instincts of the country. That feeling mny 'lie reflected at the polta.'" Lord Lucas said-the Lords killed eighteen hills during the four last Liberal Parliaments, and not one Conservative measure was rejected. The Lords now stepped into the political arena, and were competing with the Commons on party lines.

liord Ridley ridiculed the contents of this " poor man's Budget," since it taxed his great necessity, namely, employment. The Bishop of Hereford supported the Hill, because of the social welfare 0 f the Budget, aud because it was bated on sound finance. It was impossible to expect an educated democracy to remain content with the survivals 'which rcpr«sent the present constitution of society. Ho ■protested against tie bloated estimates of military armaments all over Europe. The country was waiting thtime when arbitration would supersede competitive armamcnU.

Lord I*mington did not share Lord Balfouv of Burleigh's alarm, if stone with all his prestige and authority failed in his attack, it was unlikely the present Government would bring* the walls of the House about their ears. Dealing with socialist!*! remedies tnd rural depopulation, lie said the settle|inents «et up by Hie Australian Governi ments m country dtetricti had been „«. [successful, though the «MdlU«it%M^