[Page 73 note 1] Thus questions were the only opportunity Mr Wedgwood and others had of exposing the farce of the “Conference” of last summer. They were not ineffective.
[Page 85 note 1] When one of the joint authors of this book brought in his motion for the auditing of the secret Party Funds, the Front Benches put up an amendment which turned the debate into a discussion upon the abstract economic merits of Free Trade, and to this day no one knows the opinion of any member of the House of Commons, as expressed by vote, upon this most corrupt feature of all the corrupt features of Parliamentary life.
[Page 87 note 1] This is notably the case with Foreign Office questions, as has been conspicuously apparent in the last two Parliaments, where the Foreign Minister had no personal knowledge of foreign affairs, nor of the languages, places, peoples, etc., involved in them.
[Page 88 note 1] Thus the Ayrshire foundry scandal, in which Campbell-Bannerman was mixed up, was exposed by means of questions.
[Page 91 note 1] The very first words of every Bill are a standing formula, “Be it enacted by the King’s Most Excellent Majesty, etc., etc.”
[Page 91 note 2] Hansard’s Reports—now succeeded by the Official Reports —are (or were) the fullest available reports of speeches. Those of all save men of Cabinet rank are somewhat condensed, but they are sufficiently accurate to afford the most practical standard of measurement, both of time and of number, of words occupied in a debate. The pages are close printed and in double column.
[Page 98 note 1] It has often been suggested by those unacquainted with Westminster that the breakdown of the Labour Party and its absorption and digestion by the professional politicians was due to this influence of “the Tone of the House.” The suggestion is plausible, but inaccurate. “The Tone of the House” certainly made the good speakers in the party much worse speakers than they might have become—for “the Tone of the House” is death to rhetoric; but the definite capitulation of the Labour men to the two Front Benches and the disappearance of the Labour Party as an active force was due to something far less subtle than any “Tone.” It was due to a definite compact with the Executive by which places, advantage in moving motions, etc.—ultimately, perhaps, Cabinet rank—should be the price of compromise: the bargain was accepted.
[Page 122 note 1] Occasionally a rich but stupid man is duped, an apparently “safe” seat being offered him as against a really large sum of money, when the salaried officials of the two machines have already winked at a third independent candidature.
[Page 135 note 1] It is indeed a question concerning which the two authors of this book decidedly disagree.
[Page 157 note 1] Is it not the Master of the Horse?
[Page 173 note 1] Members particularly picked out as the “Official Economists of the team” were most ardent in this contention! It is as though a proposition in chemistry or mathematics were to be left to advocates with an axe to grind.
[Page 178 note 1] Every reader can suggest an addition of his own to such a list—the bullying of the publican, for instance, and the wretched nagging of the primary education system, etc.
[Page 186 note 1] Thus the land clauses in the Budget are known to be the suggestion of Sir Edward Grey, and the ill-thought-out, crude, and most unjust licensing clauses are ascribed to the Chancellor himself.
[Page 191 note 1] This little pamphlet, of no more than thirty pages, should be in the hands of everyone who is interested in the present decay of Parliament, and concerned to find a remedy. The futility of the Commons procedure, the effect produced by the House of Commons on a member submitted to that procedure, has never been more lucidly or accurately put. The examples chosen are peculiarly striking and typical. The remedy Mr Jowett proposes is not only worthy of debate, but will provoke it, and there will be conflict of opinion upon it: there can be no conflict on the value, sincerity, and effect of the exposure upon which the tract is based. It is the second of the Pass On pamphlets, published by the Clarion Press, of 44 Worship St., E.C., and may be purchased for a penny, or by post 1½d.
[Page 215 note 1] Thus in the form of an extension of the suffrage to the well-to-do, the two Front Benches are on the whole, or at least by a majority, agreed, and the adherence of the Labour Party to this scheme is particularly significant, for their attitude is always an index of the official view held on either side of the Speaker’s chair. The alternative proposal to extend the suffrage to all women is, on the contrary, discountenanced by the two Front Benches. Time would be required to make such a scheme fit in with the machines that feed and support them.
[Page 219 note 1] Just now it has no fixed name. Shall we call it (in January 1911) “Conservative”?
[Page 226 note 1] It has ceased, that is, to affect opinion where “Party” is concerned: largely because very little true opinion in the matter of party now exists. It has not, of course, ceased to affect opinion in another sense; it can affect the public very deeply indeed by its choice of information upon foreign affairs. The attempt, however, to influence the party game through the purchase of newspapers has latterly proved financially so disastrous that we shall probably not see it repeated.