IMPERIAL POLITICS.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVIII, Issue 2753, 7 March 1910, Page 5

IMPERIAL POLITICS.

THE DELAY OF THE BUDGET

United 1 ress Association—Copyright LONDON, March 4.

Hr. H. E. Mallet, member of the House of Commons, has been appointed Financial Secretary to the War Office. In the House of Commons, Mr. Evelyn Cecil drew attention! to the authorities refusing him an income tax cheque. Ho accused the Government of adopting a factious policy, in order to spite the Lords. Mr. Asquith, replying, stated the Lords were entirely responsible for the confusion. He. refused to depart from the principle of forty years and divide the Budget into parts, for the purpose of mitigating the damaging results of the Lords’ action.

Mr. Lloyd. George said the demand for a separate Income Tax Bill was a piece of hypocrisy. Lord Lansdowne lias given notice of motion to inquire regarding the Government’s delay in the production of the Budget.

THE PARLIAMENTARY SITUATION.

(Received March 5, 5 p.m.) LONDON, March 4

Government introduced a temporary borrowing Bill. During the debate, Lord Cecil, answering Mr. Asquith’s remark that the great majority of the people regarded as incredible the Lords’ rejection of the Budget, recalled Mr. Llovd-Georgo’s remark, “rat trap,” when Air. Stanley Wilson reminded the House of Commons that Lord Ribbles_ dale, a Government supporter, had described Air. Llovd-George as half pantaloon and half highwayman. The Speaker objected to such ofFensivoness, but was unable to compel withdrawal, because quotations from the other House were frequently used during the election.

Air. Wilson explained that he mentioned it because Air. Llovd-George’s methods in the House and country had produced the present situation. Mr. Llovd-George declared that the Government would not accept the responsibility of using demand notes on an income tax, which they were not prepared to enforce. They were prepared to receive any income tax voluntarily. If the Government- sent the Lords a Bill for a single tax the Government would surrender the right gained, when Air. Gladstone, in 1861 circumvented the Lords by putting taxes on a Bill which the Lords most accept or reject as a whole. Lord Cortney, speaking at the New Reform Club, said that though a majority had been returned with a mandate to curb, restrain, or limit the Lords, the mandate carried no absolute direction to carry through any Bill embodied in the late Sir Henry CampbellBannerm an’s resolution.

TO PAY FOR HOAIE RULE. Air. Redmond, addressing London Irishmen, said that the last election had been paid for by the American Irish. The coining election must be paid for by the Irish at Home and Great Britain.

IMPORTANT SPEECH. 35V ME. BALFOUR. (Received March G, -3 p.m.) LONGu.i, 31 arch u. Banquotting with Sir-Frederick Ban. bury, M.P. for the City of London, Mr. Balfour remarked that the Parliamentary .fortnight had demolished the glowing picture painted by the enthusiastic brush of Radical journalists. The Government’s own followers charged Ministers with every sort of tergiversation and with >a breach of the clearest pledges. They had seen weekly changes and plans of surrender. The original pledge insisting at the very beginning of the session upon the Sovereign giving constitutional guarantees was r,o scandalous that any device might be justified to enable them to get out of it. The constituencies had justified the Lords’ action, for Ministers were unable to. pass the Budget, He wanted not a better, but a stronger second Chamber, not another House of Commons or a House too sfciong which might arrogate to itself as some second Chambers did, of immediately representing the people, but should be powerful enough to resist temporary, gusts of opinion, and representing,' perhaps more accurately than the Commons, the permanent wishes of the nation. !e Radicals desired no social reform, but revolution. Social reforms were complicated, and were necessarily gradual. The Government’s policy would involve a revolutionary or anti-revohitionary struggle. Would the country sit down under a single Chamber system? | K - Socialists, Radicals, and Nationalists were not going to be in powei iOi ever. One revolution would breed another. “The abolition of the veto, said Mr. Redmond, “would mean Home Rule,” and Home Rule meant Irish import duties and Customs’ barriers. Mr. Balfour proceeded to say that our delay with ficsal reform was forcing Canada to make commercial treaties with foreign countries. In solf-deftnce this country would adopt a pro trcncc system, which was possible between Canada and ourselves. He "won < 1 to see tariff reform, but whether r.uch reform be tlic future- pohc;> 01 ° 10 j wise, the old system was gone never to return, largely owing to the P re^ e *V Government pressure- on the °--P • 1 turn.