Weekly hawk-eye and telegraph. [volume] (Burlington, Iowa) 1855-1857, 1856-05-28
From the Cincinnati Gazette
Expenses Of q Queen.

= - 81 +.
Queen Victoria is repaied to be very esti
mable lady; possessing the leading commenda-
bIe features OF woman's character, and by the
course ol conduct pursued towards her subjects
since she asceaded the throne, she has secured
for herseif popular position at home, and is re-
garded abroad as a yery good sort OF woman,
and for the occupant of throne, and the wear
er of the Crown OF England, comparatively
harmless person. In her own country she is
treated with the greatest consideration, and she
goes about more after the manner OF private
individual, than that Of MISUNDERSTANDING no
ear, apparently, of being assassinated. Unlis e
the subjects OF Louis Napoleon, the subjects of
Ter Majesty. manifest no desire to terminate Ler
lie.
But, while Victoria appears to give satisfaction
as a Queen, the fact cannot be concealed that
her government is Immensely expensive, and it
must puzzle plain Republicans to understand
how one little woman and her household can
manage TO spend fifty million dollars per annum;
aud it also requires little twisting and stretch
ing Of the imagination and a good deal OF chart
ty discover any benevolent feartures in the char
acter of a lady, who can even hint at economy,
or set herself or household up as an example for
the nation, while spending fifty millions dollars
annually the collection of which presses almost
to the dust her tax.ridden and poverty-stricken
subjects.
The facts, to which reference has been made,
regarding the expenses OF the Roy household,
have been brought to light by the Financial
Association" organized in Liverpool by a body
OF merchants, for the avowed purpose of expo
sing all cases of wilful extravags nee or waste
in the disburs ements of the public revenue
This association has recently issued the four
teenth number of their tracts, entitled, s'Ihe
Royal Household, Model to Parliament and the
Nation" From this it appears that soon after
Victoria succeeded to the throne, on the death
Of her uncle William w., Parliament settled the
question of the Civil List. e., voted the amount
OF the annual allowance to be paid to 'Her Most
Gracious Majesty" This action of Parliament
fixed the amount Of :e3S5, 900 year Tor nearly
$4,000, OOo) on her Majesty for life. This allow
anee was 10000 a year more than had been
paid to her uncles, and was considered as AIDE
quate provision for the support and dignity OF
the Crown. At the same time the allowance TO
the Queens mother was increased from t22,ooo
to 100000 per annum.
The statute by which the above named annual
allowance was voted to the Queen with 100000
additional for ''home secret service, provided
for the application OF the money as follow:
Priv purse G5o,000
Salaries of household, 3l,26o
Expenses of household, $4,000
Royal bounty, 1920
Pensions, l,2OO
Unnpprorriated, S,o4o
When this civil list was settled, there was a
q sort of an understanding that the Queen would
surrender for her lifetime the hereditary reven-
ues which her immediate predecessors had been
possessed of, or in other words that three hum
dred and eighty-fve thousand pounds year
should be her entire income. This understand
ing, however, has not been complied with, and
Queen Victoria's annual income is in fact SIX hum
dred and sixty-eight thousand pounds, or nearly
double what even George ". luxuriated upon.
In addition to the income of the Queen, Prince
Albert gets large slice of the revenue. He has
u yearly life allowance of thirty thousand pounds
in addition to which Her Majesty has heaped lu-
crative appointments upon him, whichm more than
double his income The Queen has also the life
use of variety Of palaces, the minutest cost OF
repairing and keeping up which is paid out OF
the public purse.
aNhen the income tax was imposed it was an
nounced that the Queen had determined to sub
nit her own income to this impost, but it does
not appear that this tax has ever been collected
Of Her Majesty, or her husband, and inquiries
made by the Committee at the Treasury Depart
ment with reference to this point, received an
answer that, rs regards point and politcness, is
cquivalen, to it is none of your business" No
member o! Parliament has had courage enough
to ask the question in that body.
We have included, as Il great pecuniary adyan-
tage to Queen Victoria, her being lodged rent
fee in the Royal Palaces, without being called
upon as tenants usually are, to incur the cost OF
repairs and alterations. This may appear to be
not very considerable, but really is enormous
The sum voted in the estimates for royal palaces,
buildings, parks, and gardens, were e22l $50 in
1854; increased to e224, 496in 1855; and further
extended to f249, 693 in the present year. Add
10 this the sum of six hundred and sixty-eight
thousand pounds, which is the Queens actual in
come, and sixty thousand pounds to Prince Al
bert from oil sources (without including the an
nuities to the Duchess of Kent, Duchess OF Glou-
cester, Duchess OF Cambridge, Duke of Cam
bridge, Princess Augusta, of Cambridge, Prin-
cess Mary, of Cambridge, and King Leopold, OF
Belgium, making one hundred and ten thousand
pounds) and the Queen Of England and her hus-
band will be found 10 receive 991I 1893 year,
and all this for wholly personal and domestic ex-
pendi,ure-and savings.
Our readers havesthus obtained an idea of the
expense of supporting "the honor and dignity OF
the Crown;" and an opportunity is afforded OF
ascertaining the cost of maintaining Kingdom
as compared with that of a Republic.
In the light of fifty million year, the twenty
five thousand dollars paid annually to the Presi-
dent Of the United States looks insignificant, and
the most STAT Offices connected with our govern
,nent look lean and uninviting, when compared
with the lucrative offices occupied by English
Royalty.