BRITISH POLITICS.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 979, 24 February 1910, Page 5

BRITISH POLITICS.

A NATIONALIST APPEAL.

Unite dPres3 Association 'y Electric Telegrap Copyright.

Received February 23, 9 a.m. LONDON, February 22,

The Nationalists have issued a strong appeal for funds in view of the possibility of a dissolution before Easter.

In the House of Commons Mr H. Belluc (Liberal) gave notice ot an amendment regretting that the King's Speech did not contain any reference to a guarantee that the Veto Bill would become law if it passed the Hojs? of Commons,

OPPOSITION ' Recfih'ed February' 23, 9 a.m. LONDON.- February 22. Mr Au-iten CKdmberfain. who was Chancellor of the fixfchequer in the Balfour Administration, has given i/otiee of an official Opposition amendment to the Addrass-in-Reply. It will be identical with that moved by him in February, 1901.

LORD ROSEBERY'S VIEWS,

Received February 23. 8.45 a.m LONDON, February 22.

Lord Rosebery, speaking on the Addreas-in-Keply, in the House of Lords, deprecated any delay. Throughout the election the Unionist candidates had broken their shins against the Peers' hereditary c laracter. The Government's Valo Bill would reach the House of Lords some time before mid winter. Without waiting for this leisurelv progress, the ' Lords should place their own scheme of reform before the country. The real lisue was not the veto, but the constitution of the Second Chamber.

RESOLUTIONS CRITICISED. Received February 23, 8 25 a.m. * LONDON, February 22. "The Times" says:—"Tf e Government resolutions will be sheer waste of time, and bind no one. Presumably, they are intense j a3 a sop to keep impatient people quiet."

MR REDMOND CANNOT BE BLAMED.

The "Daily News" (Liberal) declares that Mr Redmond cannot be blamed for believing that the guarantees mentioned* meant guarantees from the Crown. In that belief he was in company with every journalist and politician, and every ordinary citizen. It was unfortunate that Mr Asquith did not take an earlier opportunity ot correcting a general mis apprehension. Mr Redmond's sjpport was indispensable to the Government; bis advice was intrinsically sound.

MEETING OF REDMONDITES, " WHAT THE LABOUR PARTY WANTS. Received February 23, 10 a.m LONDON, February 22.

A meeting of Redmondites decided, considering the supreme Importance of the veto question, tn refrain f-'-m complicating of the issues by moving an amendment to the Address or from balloting for private bills.

Mr Barnes -tates that the Labour Party desired to see the Budget passed, and had suggested that toe Government should produce the Veto Bill before Easter instead of a resolution. and pressed for an assurance that supply or the second Budget would follow the Veto Bili.

OFFERS TO RESIGN. Received February 23, 10.10 a.m. LONDON, February 22. Sir VV. H. Holland and Sir Walter Foster, members respectively for the West Riding (Rotherham division) oi Yorkshire, and Ilkestone Division of Derbyshire, have offered to resign their seats in favour of Mr J. A. Pease and Colonel Seely, who were defeated at the general ejection.

THE ALBERT HALL SPEECH

LIBERAL MEMBERS AND THE GOVERNMENT'S POLICY.

Received February 24, 1.25 a.rn, LONDON, February 23. In the Commons debate, Mr J. j O'Brien (Nationalist) declared that he at firs'- had hoped that Mr Redmond had crossed the rubicon, and intended to save Ireland from the Budget, but before he had finished he had scrambled back to the safe Ministerial ground, and Irejand only got a shadowy postobit for Home Rule on the death of tbe Lords. The Budget, said Mr O'Brien, was a more serious obstacle to Home Rule than the Lords' veto. Hon. Winston Churchill, speaking after the prolonged Cabinet meeting, deprecated the rising of the Budget as a financial lever to force the constitutional change. The loss of the Budget would be a terrible vindica tion of the Lords' action. The Minist?rs had discussed the policy, refusing to meet Parliament, and had concluded that this would be neither wise nur courageous. The House must wait patiently for the Government's proposals. When introduced the Gov.rnment will stake the whole of its existence upon carrying them into law. Mr H. J. P. Belloc (Liberal) declared that the omission tojguarantee the King's Speech made the whole thing a piece of party sham. Mr Keir Hardie (Labour) asked for an explanation of the proposed increase in the naval expenditure, adding that the Government evidently yielded to the clamour of the "yellow The refusal to vote Supply would be drastic and revolutionary, but the Lords created the revolution. Mr E. G. Hemmerde declared that if Mr Asquith's Albert Hall pledge was not the Ministers' policy they will have to get their support from others. ! air J. H. Dalziel, Messrs J. C. | Wedgwood, D. C. Firie, E. H. j Pickerseill, and Joseph Martin echoed Mr Redmond's complaints, and alleged that their constituents were deceived. Sir Albert Spicer said the action of the Lords had spread the idea among the people of the Dominions Overseas, that Britain was decadent, and that they could do better in many cases by dealing with foreign countries. He fought the elections 'upon the Albert Hall speech, and could not honestly face his constituents if Mr Winston Churchill's policy was adopted.