New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1871-05-16
ENC 1fON4PEHY.

M +. a
his constituents at Nottingham, that when they
were once rid of that good but oppressive
incubus, the Queen, they should treat them
selves to a ruler of their own choosing, has
acted Ike the touch of a witch-hazcl in bring
ing the hidden revolutionary feeling to the
surface. The English press have made haste
to embrace the pretext to disclose their opinions
on the question of Monarchy versus Republic.
The most noticeable point in their comments
is that, by even the most loyal journals, Roy
atty is defended and Landed in half-elegiac
strain on the too-evdent principle "Of the
dead, of the dying, nothing but good"
The most ludcrous defense of monarchy,
however, is entered by The Saturday RepieW,
which numbers on the field as the organ OF the
present system, perplexed as usual between Its
anxiety to be both oracular and cynical. After
Datronizng pat on the back for Mr.. Herbert
and his liberal compeers as "mcn of culture
land courage who have not much good sense"
il recommends them to turn to philosophy,
to study the strata of society, experience the
&" discipline of life" before they venture an
opinion on this profound subject, and then
proceeds to pronounce its own dictum, which
is to settle the matter finally. There undoubt-
eddy, it acknowledges, is an antagonism among
the starving masses to the costly, useless
burden of Royalty, and this antagOnism should
be set at rest by arguments as it is probably,
painful to the royal family. The starving
masses are then assured that Royalty is best for
England, because a Republic would place
it under the tyranny Of mediocrity. Mediocre
men always rule in republics-with a signii-
cant nod to the United States-but out of
ROYAL and aristocratic families there is always
chance of something good coming to the
top. Lest the ignorant masses should insist
upon Immediately weighing the brains and
morals of their hereditary rulers, taking the
Prince of Wales and his noble cronies away
from their favorite dance-houses and pigeon
matches, The Rerew hurries on to assure them
that monarchy is best for England, because
/" it gives an immense amount of innocent hap
piness to the thousands who talk of the
Royal Family as belonging to themselves"
Then remembering that on another page it
had quoted these very thousands as habitually
calling the Queen the great robber," and
brutally rejoicing in the death of the infant
prince as lone less on the long roll of State
"beggars,r it adds its browning and decisive
argument in bewidered, unintelligible con-
fusion. The existence Of Royal Family "adds
romance to government, and brings in the
"play of imagination in defense of law"
1.-THE idea of any glamour OF romance
"about the House of Guelph will, no doubt,
"amaze and confound nobody more than the
Ignorant poor" for whom The Rerie,c has
deigned to summon this array of argument.
Ignorant poor, nowadays, are terribly shrewd
and matter-of-fact. We doubt if the royal
Stuart herself with all her misfortunes and
magnetism, came among them, whether she
would excite any other curiosity than How
"much will she cost :" But from the
days of the padded bombast, George w.,
to his niece the present family have been es-
sentially vulgar, sensual, and commonplace,
and thoroughly recognized as such by their
subjects. Victoria would, no doubt, have been
in her place as portly, comfortable housewife
in any station, fond of her husband, her chill
dren, and her well-cOoked meals; but she has
barely been able to make royalty respecta-
BILE in the eyes of the people. Instead OF the
divinity that doth hedge king, the Prince
of Wales has managed to surround 1t with
ballet-girls, jockeys, and dog-trainers The
only member Of the Royal Family who has
touched the enthusiasm of the people Is his
wife, and that solely because they believe her
ill-treatcd by him. The Reuew must look out
for another argument in behalf of the family
who hold the right divine. To credit English