ANTHONY   EDEN
merits of the Treaty but of the procedure of ratification by
Act of Parliament. He * took advantage of the occasion in
order to make a brief statement as to the intentions of the
Government with regard to the important question of the
submission of Treaties to Parliament *. There was no con-
stitutional obligation for governments to submit treaties un-
less, as in this case, the treaties contained financial clauses
over which Parliament had supreme control. ^£ I think,
therefore, that we shall carry the general approval of the
House with us if we endeavour so to adjust the practice
with regard to the submission of treaties as to give Parlia-
ment, not arbitrarily in this or that case, but completely in
all cases an opportunity for the examination, consideration,
and if need be the discussion of all treaties before they reach
the final stage of ratification.' Mr. Ponsonby warmed to
his dieme, great constitutional changes were envisaged.
Secret treaties and secret clauses were henceforth ' to be
rendered impossible *.
The Treaty and its origin were all concealed amid a
welter of Socialist happy thoughts. He concluded by say-
ing: 'I have explained the provisions of the Treaty of
Lausanne which is now before the House.* At which point
Mr. Ormsby-Gore interrupted with: * You have not said a
word about it.' * I mean the Bill arising out of the Treaty,'
Was Mr. Ponsonby's lame reply. ' After all, it is a small
technical matter, and I will conclude by urging members in
all quarters to help us in passing this Bill through its various
stages in order that ratification may take place at the earliest
possible date, and our normal relations with Turkey be
speedily renewed.*
This was ingenious, but not powerful enough to divert
the debate from the purpose of the motion. Sir Samuel
Hoare gave a masterly analysis of the matter in hand, and
with a minimum of partisanship extracted the maximum of
credit for his side. The Liberals attacked it. Mr. Herbert
Fisher described Labour's apology as a dirge and Sir