The Daily News. SATURDAY, JULY 22, 1922. THE HOUSE OF LORDS.

Taranaki Daily News, 22 July 1922, Page 4

The Daily News. SATURDAY, JULY 22, 1922. THE HOUSE OF LORDS.

The recent discussion at Home of the vexed question relating to the granting of honors, coupled with the Government’s proposals for the reform of the House of Lords, has brought the peerage into the glare of the limelight. With reference to the conferring of honors, there can be no doubt that so long as the present system, which practically gives the Prime Ministers of Britain and the Dominions the right to select not only those on whom the King’s favor is to be bestowed, but also the particular nature of the honor in each ease, so long will there be cases which arouse a feeling that the privilege is open to abuse. That honors can be virtually purchased has long been a blot on British political methods, The sordid system has been attacked on many occasions without success, it being contended that large contributions to party funds is a sufficiently worthy national service to be recognised as deserving reciprocation in the shape of a knighthood, baronetcy, peerage, or some other honor to which the recipient aspires. In theory the King is the fountain from which these honors flow, but in practice, except in the case of outstanding public services. the majority of those appearing in the honors list are the nominees of the Prime Minister of Britain. assisted by the Prime Ministers of. the Dominions where citizens of the latter are concerned. For instance, the Lord Chancellor, on being appointed, is usually created a peer, though by virtue of his office he becomes Speaker of the House Of Lords even if he remains a Commoner. Judges, on their appointment, are created knights, and so are the Solicitor-General and the At-torney-General. It is quite customary for the Sheriffs of London to be knighted and for the Lord Mayor, at the conclusion of his term of office, to be raised to the baronetcy. There is nothing, however, which justifies the creation of peers by way of political rewards. If the House of Lords is

o be recruited from prosperous and ambitious party-mongers, the honor of a peerage is distinctly lowered and brought into disrepute. The infusion of new blood into the House of Lords can only be justified if it is the result of exceptional merit, which' is scarcely likely to eventuate by the choice of men whose only asset —a formidable one—is money. It is many years since the demand for the reform of the House of Lords took shape. Threatened men. it is said, live long. Whether the present proposals will materialise is matter for conjecture. That reform is needed was strikingly illustrated by the speech of Lord Willoughby de Broke, when discussing the Government’s proposa's. He expressed the belief that the hereditary principle was the only sane principle upon which to found any sane institution—whether a monarchy, a Hopse of 1 ,ords, or a nack of hounds.” Apparently this enlightened peer omitted to consider the logical application of his argument, inasmuch as it implied careful selection, for although the Royal succession is by inheritance, the selection of the bride of the reigning or future sovereign, is a matter of the utmost concern. His Lordship places the House of Lords and a. pack of hounds on the same plane, although he would have more, fittingly substitued a dairy herd for a pack of hounds. Tn both cases, the more thorough the selection, the better will be the results expected. Hence the need for a sys-tem-of selection that will, as near as is humanly possible, make the House of Lords, a model as an Upper Chamber. New Zealand is faced with the same problem, and the only rational course to take is to confine the selection to those who have demonstrated beyond all question their exceptional fitness for such a responsible position, entirely irrespective of their political leanings, and aiminor only at .constituting tbe House sq

that it shall fulfil its proper mission as a steadying and revising power, and become a, tower of legislative strength. The ideal is generally recognised and applauded, but vested interests bar the way to accomplishment.