MR ASQUITH IN REPLY.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10309, 9 August 1911, Page 5

MR ASQUITH IN REPLY.

(Received Last Night, 9.55 o'clock.)

LONDON, August 8: The Right Hon. H. H. Asquith 'said:—"As it is desirable that there 1 should be no mystery or misunderstanding over a perfectly simple and correct transaction, at the King's strong desire I am able to disclose communications which hitherto have been confidential. The matter became urgent on the 9th of April, 1910, when, the Veto resolutions were, approved and a Bill introduced. King Edward was then on the Throne. A majority inside and outside the House of Commons was beginning to ask, not unnaturally. -•Aether the election had been reduced to a nullification, and matters were again to result in a futile deadlock. Accordingly, on 14th April, after a careful consideration with my colleagues, and in language approved by. them, I communicated I with the King, who was abroad. ■', I [used these words: (Here Mr Asquith quoted the verbatim declaration cabled on April loth). I emphaßizetl the phrase that in no case would I recommend a dissolution;.-except, bn.cbnr i ditions'sj&curing: that the judgment of I people cam j That very plain language, which re- ' presented the deliberate policy of the I Government, was so understood and accepted by my friends and antagonists. That policy was announced while ( I was still King Edward's Minister." Continuing, Mr Asquith said: "The only observation I desire to, make in reply to Mr Balfour's very unhappy, reference anent the new King is that within a month, of King Edward's reign, which was prematurely and most unexpectedly ended, a political truce followed for the best part of six months. Honest, continuous, and well-inspired endeavours were mado by the leading representatives of both parties to arrive at a settlement. When the experiment broke down, we reverted to the policy of April. After the fullest consideration we thought, it" right to advise a dissolution; but we clearly opined that it would neither' be honourable nor justifiable to go into •an election blind-folded. Many hard [words had been tised about me, but i we would have been rightly accused of i ; treachery and trickery if we had gone | into a dissolution without any understanding. When we came to the conclusion that it was our duty to. advise the King to dissolve, we accomI panied our advice on the 15th with this statement:— " 'Your Ministers cannot take the responsibility of advising a dissolu- < tion unless they may understand that in the event of the policy of, the Government Ixiing approved by an adequate majority in the new House, your Majesty will be ready to exercise the Constitutional powers which may involve your prerogative in creating Peers, if needed, to secure that effect shall be given to the decision of the country. Ministers are fully alive to the importance of keeping the name of the King out of the sphere of the electoral controversy, and they take upon themselves the entire and exclusive responsibility for the policy which they will place before the electors. Your Majesty will doubtless agree that the intention of the Crown should not be made public' ''His Majesty, after discussing the matter in 'all its bearings with myself and Earl Crewe, felt that there was ' no alternative but to assent. Accordingly, on November 18th. a dissolution was announced. ' T challenge the Op-

CABLE NEWS

United Press Association— -By Electric Telegraph — Copyright.

position to say what is a Constitutional outlet. Now the Lords insist on adding the Referendum to the Parliament Bill, which the country had deliberately repudiated. The country was fully warned of the dangers of Home Rule. You may think the nation misled, befooled, and defrauded, but at the present moment there is no alternative for the Government possible. No responsible Minister would counsel a third dissolution. There is no good in blinking the facts. The country had to face the precise situation, which justifies wholly the exceptional use of the Prerogative." Mr Asquith then quoted the answer given Mr Wedgwood in the House of Commons. He continued: "If I had resigned, tho King would have sent for the Leader of tho Opposition, who would have been compelled to dissolve. It would then have been almost impossible to keep the name and authority of the King out of the arena of the electoral conflict. The King doubtless thought this was a matter which was particularly incumbent upon him to safeguard. I never used either publicly or privately the words 'guarantee' or. 'pledge' in regard to this matter. There never was any question of obtaining the. Royal assent in advance to a cast-iron legislative rcheme which would be rammed through Parliament. It was perfectly certain that the King's consent would never have been granted to such a proposal. The Bill throughout has been treated, and is treated now. as we shall see to-morrow, as a Bill approved in principle by the electorates, and therefore will be carried into law; but it is susceptible to any reasonable amendment which will not be fatal to its principles. It was my strong hope and belief that tho Lords would be prepared, without pressure, to give substantial effect to the decisive wishes of the electors. Only when that hope was frustrated, the King was asked, and consented, to exercise the Prerogative. The 1 circumstances were far stronger than in 1832." • Mr Asquith concluded: "Lord Grey, in 1832, was accused of a breach of the Constitution and treachery to the Crown, but I am not the least sensitive to this, cheap, ill-informed, vituperation. I have served under three Sovereigns and have constantly striven to uphold the dignity and just privileges of the Crown, hut hold office not only by the favour of the Crown, but in the confidence of the people. I should be guilty of treason indeed if, in the supreme moment of a great struggle I were to betrav their trust;" -.■-■■•'. "\ _ There was vociferous cheering when Mr Asquith concluded his speech, many Liberals waving their hats and paper* THE DIVISION. After debate, the motion was last on division, the voting being a3 follows : For the motion 246 Against the motion 365 Majority against 119