The Daily News. TUESDAY, AUGUST 15, 1911. SURRENDER OF THE PEERS.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 45, 15 August 1911, Page 4

The Daily News. TUESDAY, AUGUST 15, 1911. SURRENDER OF THE PEERS.

The surrender of the House of Lords and the passage of the Parliament Bill, which robs the undemocratic chamber of its •right to kill democratic measures, is perhaps the finest feat in "aggressive I statesmanship ever successfully attempted by a British Government. The remarkable feature about the exceedingly able tactics of the Prime Minister and his followers is the complete disposition that was made to ' surround" the peers and to leave no possible outlet by which they could ignore the wishes of the people as represented bv the people's elected advisers. The (Jovernment considered that no constitutional means, however heroic, were too rigorous to attain an end which was wholly good and plainly democratic. The jwsition was that the House of Lords held their places by accident of birth and not by democratic right.' They were able to resist the will of the people because they were the greatest political power in Britain. One may believe that a very large number of the peers could win a place in Parliament by appeal to the people in the usual way, for we all know that many of the members of the House of Lords are among the most distinguished and useful British men of their time. In the hands of the notable peers who represent something more than a mere vote, the business of the people would be quite safe. It may be presumed that the sense of honor in the House of Lords is extremely high, but the general body of peers as a voting machine will not conceive that the people have sovereign rights, although they have now been made to know that the people have a very absolute power. The alternative given to the peers by the Government, in case they refused to sanction the Parliament Bill, was to have the historic chamber flooded with mushroom voting machines, a method grotesque in its comicality and one which, as has been seen, the peers themselves regarded with distress. After a great deal of fighting, during which the r greatest peers showed the irritation and inconsequence that the commonest clay (and all men from scavengers to marquises) shows under such circumstances, they have obeyed the people for the first time in British history. They have saved the important institution (still dear to the yellowest of British democrats) from an infusion that would have made it a gallanty show for the amusement of the world. Lord Lansdowne's scheme of reform, which he promised to carry into effect while the threat of. the extinction of the peers' greaf power was held over their heads, was an acknowledgment by that eminent statesman that the second chainber was badly in need of reform. Although the power of veto has apparently disappeared for ever, there is yet the reforming to be done. As a corollary to the Veto Bill, there is Home Rule for Ireland, and it may be conceived, now that the hereditary landlords have no longer the power to throw it out, it will, with accompanying disturbances and great bitterness, join the Veto Bill on the Statute Book. In fact, there is food for much political fight in the near future, and' Scotland and AValcs will probably be heard from in emphatic tones. The outstanding feature of the victory of Mr. Asquith is that an intolerable situation is at last relieved by successful if drastic means, that the Lords can no longer flout the wishes of the multitude, and that their already numerous ranks are not to be swelled by the grotesque method of creating a few hundred wealthy voting machines, whose coronets would have been purchased for agreeing to punish their fellow peers.

borough of New Plymouth is an event of considerable importance, for on the result depends the fate of the Greater New Plymouth scheme and the tramways scheme. If the Fitzroy people are so blind to their interests as to declare against the proposal, or to accord it only lukc-warm support (which for the purposes of the object would be regarded by the Minister for Internal Affairs as an undecisive vote) it will be a case of saying good-bye to the tramways project for many years to come, for it is unreasonable to expect the ratepayers of the town to shoulder the whole responsibility and take the risk involved when the chief benefit arising from the introduction of a tram service will be gained by suburban residents. The Suggestion put forward by those opposed to amalgamation with the borough, namely, that a tramways district covering the borough, Fitzroy town district, St. Aubyn town district and the Taranaki county, be created, may be ruled out straight awiay. The ratepayers of the town will have none of it. They feel, and rightly so, in our view, that we are hampered already by too many public bodies without creating another and laying up for ourselves trouble and expense in the future. It does seem ridiculous that in so short a stretch as that between the Waiwakaiho and ' Moturoa there should be four controlling authorities, all with their separate staffs, separate by-laws, separate rates, separate organisations, and separate ideas as to management. The area in question forms 1 the town proper, and it should be so constituted. The saving in cost of administration alone would justify amalgamation. Then there are the other advantages accruing to the suburban residents. They may be epitomised as follows:—Those requiring water will be connected with the mains free cf coat; the cost of the water itself is likely to be less to them than at present; any house can be connected with the lighting system; the profits of the latter (and they are a real and growing quantity) will be participated in; the engineering and legal advice of the bor-

ough will be available at 110 additional cost; and the endowments of the borough, which are likely to yield a substantial revenue in the near future, will be shared in. On top of all these material advantages, is the tramways scheme, which must make the suburbs, just as the suburbs of Auckland, Wellington and Wanganui have been made as a consequence of the installation of tramways in those places. And what does New Plymouth stand to gain? Practically only one thing; its status will immediately be raised from a borough of comparatively small population to a town of fairly considerable proportions, and to gain this end the sacrifice entailed is not too great. If Fitzroy is emphatic enough in favor of merging, it is pretty certain that the other suburbs will soon follow suit, and the way cleared for proceeding with the tramways. Everyone knows how enthusiastic the late Mayor was on the formation of a Greater New Plymouth, and, as pointed out by a correspondent elsewhere, no better compliment to his memory could be accorded than by giving effect to the scheme he so ably initiated and strove for. To-morrow's poll is the first practical step in that direction, and we hope that no stone will be left unturned in securing a strong vote in favor of merging with the borough.