RESOLUTION. (Hansard, 31 August 1880)

§ MR. T. P. O'CONNOR
begged to move the following Resolution, which stood in his name on the Paper:— That it is no longer just or expedient that all measures for the improvement of the condition of the people of England, Ireland, and Scotland should he at the mercy of a body of Legislators hereditary and irresponsible.

§ MR. WARTON
rose to Order. He objected to that Motion as being unconstitutional. It was unconstitutional for either House of Parliament to bring forward Motions reflecting upon the other.

§ MR. T. P. O'CONNOR
said, he only asked for a few minutes in order to explain his Motion. He should not make a long speech. In reply to the observation of the hon. and learned Member for Bridport (Mr. Warton), he would say that it must be remembered that the measures introduced into that House were often ma- 946 terially modified by the other. That House was of a representative character, and its composition could be altered comparatively easily whereas the other House was only to be altered by a strong exertion on the part of the national will. When he first proposed his Motion, it was just double its present length. Mr. Speaker, in the exercise of his discretion, which he always used wisely, had compelled him to cut it in two, whereby he (Mr. T. P. O'Connor) thought it lost much of its grace and force.: The Motion had concluded with the words— At the mercy of a body of Legislators, hereditary and irresponsible, selected for their eminence as lawyers, for party convenience, or from administrative failures. It appeared to him that those words most aptly described the men by whom that House was recruited. It was sometimes said that it contained the cream and wisdom of the nation. He should like to point out that if they examined the eases of the most recent additions to that Assembly, it would be scarcely found that principle and practice hung together. He hoped that none would misunderstand him. He had no wish to say anything unpleasant. A certain right hon. Gentleman failed as Home Secretary; he was at once elevated, and became a Member of the more sagacious Assembly. Another was a failure as Postmaster General; he also became a Member of the more sagacious Assembly. A short time ago, a Gentleman who supposed that he was a fit candidate for the highest Office in the Realm, but was not supposed to be so by his Colleagues, also became a Member of that House. Another most respected Member of the House of Commons, who, somehow or other, was always quarrelling with his best friends, was put into the other House. He saw an article in a newspaper of that day in praise of the noble Lord the Leader of that House, in which it said—"That the unfortunate thing was that the time must come when he would have to sit in the House of Lords." Under those circumstances the noble Lord would be a loss to the country, because he could not exercise anything like the same amount of influence upon the rank and file of Liberalism. Another Member of that House, who he earnestly hoped would not be called to "another place," was the noble Lord the Mem- 947 her for Woodstock (Lord Randolph Churchill). He was sure it would he a misfortune to that House if his activity should he lost to them. He did not know anybody more to be pitied than an hon. Member of that House who, in the course of nature, was doomed to sit in the other House. He did not know which was the mere cruel, that, or compelling a widow, as they did in some Eastern countries, to go to the tomb of her husband and he buried alive. One could not describe that transference to the other House in better terms than by saying that it was being buried alive, so far as politics were concerned. With regard to the arguments which had been used in favour of the maintenance of that Assembly, one was that a Democratic Assembly, such as the House of Commons was inclined to go too fast. He wished to point out that in the opinion of a great many that House did not go half fast enough. That night they had tried to remedy a grievance to which a large body of the people had been subject for generations, and notwithstanding that there was a strong Liberal Party in Office that measure had been condemned as not dealing with the question effectually. It was said that that other Chamber was necessary for the protection of property. He was taught, when reading books on law, that there was more than one kind of property in the world. There was personal as well as real property; and if it were necessary to maintain an Assembly for the protection of real, why not necessary for the protection of personal property? Both kinds of property had been affected by the Bills just brought before that House. Did not the Employers' Liability Bill expose personal, as well as real, property to great risks and serious damage? No one said that there should be a Chamber representing the manufactures of the country selected with hereditary rank. He had spoken of the Upper Chamber as being irresponsible. Of course, to some extent, that was not correct. They were supposed to be responsible to public opinion, but there was a great influence exercised by them which never came before public opinion. It was not the direct influence that injured the legislation of the country, but the indirect, such as that of mutilating a Bill which had just passed the third reading in the House of Commons. He was sorry that the Under 948 Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Sir Charles W. Dilke) was not in his place, because he might quote some passages from him in his days of wildness. There could be no doubt that several important measures brought in by the Liberals had been seriously modified by the Upper House. He would quote, what he believed to be in support of his proposition, some words used, he would not say where, or when, with regard to that proposition. It was—"If the House adopts that Motion, it will render itself liable to much misrepresentation and misapprehension." He would say, as regarded that, that for his part, he had no wish to disturb Ministries or reform them; but his desire was to remedy a defect in the Constitution of his country. Of that Constitution that House was one of the guardians; and he felt sure that he and his supporters, if they exercised clue discretion, would receive the support of the bulk of the people of this country. Finally, he would say that if the House would adopt his Resolution they would, he believed, obtain the lasting confidence both of their constituents and the country at large. He begged to move the Resolution which stood in his name.

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON
said, if he failed to understand the exact object of the Motion of the hon. Member for Gralway Borough (Mr. T. F. O'Connor), he gratefully acknowledged the brevity of the very amusing speech which had preceded it. The hon. Member would, no doubt, agree that the short space of time within which he had confined his observations scarcely allowed him to do justice to the importance of his subject. It was hardly convenient that questions of that kind, involving great Constitutional improvements, should be submitted to the House at half-past 3 o'clock in the morning, and the House would admit that very few Assemblies had ever been induced to make such great Constitutional changes in the manner now proposed. He considered the time improper for the discussion of 949 the question, and hoped that the Motion would be disposed of with as little delay as possible, so that the House might proceed, if necessary, to the consideration of more serious Business.

§ MR. BRIGGS
said, he agreed that the hour was unfavourable for the discussion of the question raised by the Motion of the hon. Member for Galway, and suggested that the debate should be adjourned.