[Illustration: _Duke of Venice (the Lord Chancellor), to Portia_. "YOU
ARE WELCOME: TAKE YOUR PLACE."--_Merchant of Venice, Act IV. Sc. 1. _]
* * * * *
_Monday, March 10th_.--Sir JAMES AGG-GARDNER asked two questions
dealing with the distribution of poisons. By a singular
coincidence--or was it design?--the hon. baronet was himself, as
Chairman of the Kitchen Committee, accused by Mr. BOTTOMLEY of having
purveyed poison in the shape of stale fish to sundry Members of the
House, thereby causing them serious internal disturbance. Happily he
was able to show that the charge was entirely baseless.
Scots legal terminology always puzzles me. The "peremptory diets"
which Mr. MACQUISTEN urged upon the attention of the SECRETARY OF THE
TREASURY as a remedy for the grievances of Glasgow's financiers are
not, as you might suppose, a synonym for forcible feeding; nor have
they anything to do with the substitutes for "parritch" to which, as
I gathered from Mr. STURROCK, the people of Scotland are being obliged
to resort owing to the high price of oatmeal.
Members rubbed their eyes a little when they heard Colonel AMERY
declare that the general policy of the Government regarding Imperial
Preference had been "clearly defined" and in the ensuing debate Sir
DONALD MACLEAN declared that, on the contrary, their whole fiscal
policy was "wrop in mystery."
The veil was lifted to some extent by Sir AUCKLAND GEDDES, the
Ministerial "handy man," who, in the absence through illness of Sir
ALBERT STANLEY, explained how the Government proposed to regulate
imports and exports during the transitional period. Up to September
1st our manufacturers are to enjoy a sort of close-time, free from
foreign competition, but after that they must, like the partridges,
take their chance.
Later in the evening the House welcomed a new orator in Dr. MURRAY,
who sits for the Western Isles. He made a rousing appeal on behalf of
the men--practically the whole able-bodied population--who had gone
from them to fight the Empire's battles. In his view the SECRETARY FOR
SCOTLAND was too mild in his methods, and should be "bristling with
thistles and flourishing the claymore" when he tackled the reform of
the Land Laws. Mr. MUNRO was evidently flattered by this tribute to
the martial potentialities underlying his eminently pacific exterior.
_Tuesday, March 11th_.--In moving the Second Reading of his Bill to
enable women to become barristers and solicitors, Lord BUCKMASTER
thought it necessary to assure the House that there was no danger of
its flooding the Inns with prospective Bar-maids. He might have spared
his apologetics, for there was no opposition. The LORD CHANCELLOR
welcomed the Bill on behalf of the Government, and expressed the
conviction that the Benchers, though not "avid of this change," would
nevertheless loyally co-operate if Parliament saw fit to adopt it.
Having caught the infection from the Commons the Peers then proceeded
to discuss their own procedure. From Lord CURZON we learned, somewhat
to our surprise, that the House possesses certain Standing Orders.
At present it honours them chiefly in the breach, and in its Leader's
view it would do well to imitate the more orderly procedure of
another place, even to the adoption of "starred questions" and the
abandonment of the practice by which any noble Lord, by the simple
process of addressing an inquiry to a Minister, can initiate a
full-dress debate. Lord CREWE'S pious hope that these suggestions
would enable more noble Lords to take part in the debates was welcomed
by Lord AMPTHILL, who remarked that, after nearly thirty years in
that House, he had never before been made aware of this desire for
backbench orations.
As originally introduced the Rent Restriction Bill was strictly
limited in its operation. But landlord-baiting is a sport to which the
House of Commons is much addicted, and by the time the measure emerges
from Committee its own draughtsman will hardly recognise it.
The best of the many Amendments complacently accepted, after a show
of reluctance, by the Government spokesmen, was one providing that
no increase of rent shall be chargeable except in the case of a
house "reasonably fit for habitation." That should make some of our
slum-owners sit up and take notice.
_Wednesday, March 12th_.--An apparently innocent request from Lord
SUDELEY for the reinstatement of the system of guide-lecturers in
the Museums led to quite a lively debate. Other noble lords used the
motion as a peg for a fierce indictment of the Government's treatment
of these institutions during the War. Lord CRAWFORD, who has probably
forgotten more about Art than some of his critics ever knew,
concealed his real sympathy for the motion under a mask of official
obstructiveness, but was compelled eventually to give it a strictly
provisional acceptance.
In the old days when the possession of a seat was secured by the
deposit of a hat it was no uncommon thing, on the morning of a big
debate, to see a Member staggering in under a load of toppers, with
which he proceeded to secure seats for his friends. To put an end to
this nefarious practice the card-system was introduced; but that, it
is said, has now been similarly abused. One man one card, however,
is in future to be the rule. Colonel WILL THORNE feared that it might
still be circumvented by the "stage army" trick; but the SPEAKER
thought the attendants might be trusted to recognise and defeat any
Member who essayed it.
Rear-Admiral Sir REGINALD HALL, having added to his laurels by
defeating a NELSON at Liverpool, took his seat this afternoon, and was
loudly cheered for the manner in which he came into action. He and
his supporters maintained their "line abreast" and discharged their
salvoes of salutes to the Chair with faultless precision.
Later on the gallant Admiral earned further cheers for a capital
maiden speech on the Naval Estimates. These were introduced by Mr.
LONG, who told the story of the Navy's triumph with all a landsman's
enthusiasm. Its future size may to a certain extent depend upon the
Judgment of Paris, but he was certain that, come what may, the Nation
would always insist on having a Fleet sufficient for our needs--a
sentiment which received the welcome endorsement of Mr. BRACE for the
Labour Party.
According to Commander NORMAN CRAIG it was anything but sufficient for
our needs when war broke out. It lacked docks, destroyers, submarines,
air-ships--everything, in fact, save Dreadnoughts, which, in the
absence of these accessories, had to belie their name and rush
from one unprotected anchorage to another in fear of the German
mosquito-craft. Only the courage of the officers and men saved us, and
up to the present--that was the tenor of many of the speeches--they
have reaped but a scanty reward.
[Illustration: GENERAL SEELY'S NON-STOP FLIGHT.]
_Thursday, March 13th_.--Ministers left at home to "mind the shop"
would rather like, I fancy, to put up a notice over the Palace of
Westminster, "Closed till after the Peace Conference." Nearly every
problem presented to them depends for its ultimate solution upon the
decisions arrived at in Paris. Lord STUART OF WORTLEY, for example,
put a series of most pressing questions regarding the present
condition and future prospects of Poland; but Lord CURZON in reply
could only shrug his shoulders (at considerable length) and refer him
to the Conference.
The LEADER of the House of Commons labours under similar disabilities,
which are beginning to try even his amiable temper. Until Paris has
spoken he cannot give definite information about the Government's
fiscal policy, the amount of the German indemnity and other pressing
topics, and, as he told some of his persistent questioners this
afternoon, it is no good putting the same question to him every week
and expecting a different answer.
The best news of the day is that there will be an ample supply
of currants for Whitsuntide school-treats, and _Smith minor's_
translation of "_Non cuivis homini contingit adire Corinthum_" as "Not
everyone is lucky enough to find a currant in his war-bun" will no
longer be applicable.
Five years ago General SEELY, then Secretary of State for War, asked
timidly for a single million for aircraft. To-day, as Under-Secretary
for Air, he boldly demanded sixty-six millions, and explained that but
for the Armistice the amount would have been two hundred millions.
And the House, after hearing his glowing account of the wonderful
achievements of our airmen, readily voted the money. A good deal of it
is to go, quite rightly, to relieving the hardships of demobilisation,
which fall with peculiar severity on men whose special training is
not much use to them in civil life. The least we can do when they are
forced to descend from their chosen element is to insure them against
a bad landing.
* * * * *