« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »
Sovereign without a very minute investigation of the purposes to which they were to be applied. Many
public charges were up to that time included in the • Civil List, but, after deducting these charges, a much • larger sum remained available for the Sovereign than . was granted on the accession of William IV., and a * very much larger sum than was granted to her present Majesty when she ascended the throne. I must also point out that, during the time when these larger sums were granted, applications which greatly offended and • scandalised the country, and weakened the foundations
of Royalty itself, were from time to time made to • Parliament for grants of money to discharge debts which had accumulated upon the Civil List and which the Sovereign was not in a position to discharge. The great object of the new arrangement was to get rid of • all applications of the same kind in future. It was • not a matter of very great consequence to the people • or the Parliament to know whether 20,0001. or 30,0001. • a year more or less were expended in maintaining the dignity of the Monarchy; what was important was that they should know what they had to pay, and that • the Sovereign should not be put in the unworthy and • humiliating position of accumulating pecuniary ob·ligations he could not discharge, and then baving to • come in formâ pauperis,-as a mendicant, in fact,• to the door of the House of Commons to ask for the • discharge of his debts. That great object has been
completely gained, and gained by Parliament acting • on the principle of ministering to the wants of the • Sovereign upon a fair and liberal scale, adequate to • the grandeur of the monarchy; but, at the same time, • with strict reference to the purposes in view and to the
Provision for Royal Marriages.
actual circumstances of the Royal Family from time 'to time. The question arose as to the sources from • which the wants of the younger members of the Royal • Family should be supplied. They were not in a con*dition of life, however assiduously they might apply • themselves to public duties, to earn a living for them
selves. Neither their position, nor their traditions, “nor the opinion of the people would allow the Royal • Family to become what are called self-supporting 'members of the community. The allowances granted 6 to Her Majesty have not been made on such a scale as sto permit ber either with facility or propriety so to
reduce her own expenditure as to make becoming provision for the wants of the younger branches of the • Royal Family. Whence, then, is that provision to • come? I think the common sense of the case will
show that the intention of Parliament was and is to minister to the requirements, even of the Sovereign, only in such a way as to meet the circumstances of the day, and to keep in its own hands the means of judging of future exigencies as they arise. This is shown by the fact that the Civil List of William IV. was fixed at 435,0001. a year, and that of Queen • Victoria on her accession at 385,0001.--and I may add that in the present reign Her Majesty pays income-tax on the amount which is granted to her. The reason for this difference of 50,000l. a year is that at the accession of William IV. there was a fully de'veloped expenditure, because there was a Monarch and a Queen Consort; when Queen Victoria acceded there was no Prince Consort. As soon as Her Majesty happily married, an application was of course made to * Parliament for an increased grant. This, I think, clearly proves the main proposition that Parliament • keeps in its own hands the power of judging according • to varying circumstances and deciding accordingly. • The only question that remains, then, is as to whether
the arrangements which have been made are fair and reasonable. I do not think my hon. friend will stand out upon so sinall a point in an affair of the kind as "to persist in his demand for information, which, how
ever reasonable in principle, is a very separate affair with regard to the subject of which we have now to • judge. There can be no doubt that from no source • other than the votes of Parliament can the money ' necessary for the purposes I have mentioned be ob• tained. The practice bas had the approval of a number of successive Governments and Parliaments. The first was during the first Ministry of Lord Palmerston, on the occasion of the marriage of the Crown Princess. • From that time forward it was necessary to make ap*plication for one and another member of the Royal • Family, and on every occasion when the application
was made it has been answered in the most loyal and • becoming manner. I hold that the basis of the present
system is essentially a popular one, because it pre• serves to Parliament the power of judging in each
case as it arises; it strengthens the control of Her • Majesty over the members of the Royal Family, and • leaves to Parliament a full consideration of all the 6 circumstances of every case. The complaint of my "hon. friend is, not that a provision is made, but that 6 an additional provision is made for marriage. Now,
that is the very thing I am anxious to preserve, as an original adviser of the arrangement made in 1862, • of which it was an essential part. It is infinitely
The Royal Household.
better on every ground that a provision should be made attaching to the condition of a young Prince or · Princess in single life, and that a new provision should • be made for married life. Therefore, I give my full 6 and entire adhesion to the proposal of Her Majesty's . Government.'
The following is the form of the resolutions adopted by the House :
* That the annual sum of 10,0001. be granted to - Her Majesty, out of the Consolidated Fund of Great • Britain and Ireland, towards providing for the establishment of His Royal Highness the Duke of Con
naught and of Strathearn and Her Royal Highness • Princess Louise Margaret Alexandra Victoria Agnes
of Prussia, the said annuity to be settled on His Royal * Highness for his life, in such manner as Her Majesty • shall think proper, and to commence from the day of
the marriage of their Royal Highnesses, such annuity • to be in addition to the annuity now enjoyed by His * Royal Highness under the Act of the 35th year of Her present Majesty.
“That Her Majesty be enabled to secure to Her • Royal Highness Princess Louise Margaret Alexandra
Victoria Agnes, in case she shall survive his Royal • Highness the Duke of Connaught and Strathearn, an
annual sum not exceeding 6,0001. during her life, to ' support her Royal dignity.''
4. It is so long since the organisation of the Royal Household has presented any political or constitutional problem that the modern reader may well experience a difficulty in understanding how, in 1839, the leader of a great political party, Sir Robert Peel, could have
* The Times, Friday, July 26, 1878.
declined to take office, and prolonged for two years the régime of bis opponents, solely because the Queen refused to remove certain ladies of her bedchamber who had been appointed by the Government he was called upon to supersede. The whole affair has been dwelt upon from so many points of view (including that presented by Mr. Disraeli in his novel of “ Coningsby'), that there is little now to be said about it, except to notice the necessity and the difficulty which the Constitution experiences in providing for the Sovereign a sanctum of personal liberty, while guarding against the introduction at Court of influences which, however feeble in the case of a mature and experienced Sovereign, might be omnipotent in the case of one just called to the throne; and which might afford, as some of the worst periods of English bistory abundantly demonstrate, a dangerous and chronic counterpoise to the counsels of the constitutional advisers of the Crown. The whole transaction can be best understood in the light of the circumstances in which the Royal Household was originally constituted at the time of the Queen's accession ; and it would appear that the arrangements were carefully made by concert between Lord Melbourne, the Prime Minister, and Lord Lansdowne, the President of the Council. Mr. Torrens quotes the following interesting letter, addressed by Lord Melbourne to Lord Lansdowne on the 22nd of June, 1837: It is very necessary that
some of the situations in the Queen's household, such • as some of her ladies, and the Privy Purse, should • be settled without further delay. It appears by • Chamberlayne's “ Present State of England,” which is "the only authority we can as yet find upon the subject,
that Queen Anne had a Privy Purse, a Groom of the