Litchfield enquirer., 1876-03-16

One of the most instructive lectures we have ever read on the British con. stitution is that of Mir. Moncure D. Conway reported in full in Saturday s Tribune. 1t thoroughly explodes the false notion which Blackstone's Commen. taries give of the present governing power in Great Britain. Under .he Tudors, ln- deed, the English King was real mon- arch. The great civil war gave parlia- ment the predominance, even under the restored Stuarts, and the Revolution of 1888 placed the king in permanent subor. dination to the legislature. King William, retained, however. much real executive power, commanding armies in person, exercising undisputed control of foreign affairs and vetoing bills which had passed the Lords and Commons. g..
 William III was the last real King of Great Britain. Under the Hanover line Ministries took the entire executive power to themselves George III, indeed, rebel led against the parliamentary form of gov erlment early In his reign. and his disas, trous defeat is most graphically described by Macaulay in his second essay on Lord Chatham. This king, however, certainly had great and a very evil influence over Ministries, as was especially shown in their course regarding American affairs before and during our Revolution. As the executive power of the monarch went into disuse during the past century, the ob. structive power of the House of Lords is showing rapid decay in this. It still ex- erc.ses the veto power abandoned by the Sovereign in matters of minor importance, but with the understanding that when the Commons are really in earnest it must yield.
 Mir. Conway believes that the English church will not only be disestablished but disendowed; that the state will eventually take possession of the land; and that Lib. eral leaders more like Mill than Gladstone wlll yet rule Great Britain.
 It IS with some interest that we notice the partisan phase of the recent vote in the Massachusetts Senate on the bill con. ! ceding to women the right of voting at town and other municipal elections The Republican Senators were equally divid- ed; Il for, and II, against the bill. Eight Democrats voted solidly against it. We were somewhat surprised at first at theil unanimity, for here in Connecticut wo. man suffrage has many strong friends in the DemocEatic party. A moments con, sideration, however, shows the partisan reasons for such vote. The strength oi the New England Democracy lies in the large naturalized vote cast almost solid or their side. The admission of women to the suffrage would at first turn the scale heavily against them. for this reason:
 Very few foreign born females have eve, been naturalized. Consequently they could not have voted even if the proposed act had passed, until they could have procured na turalization papers, which could not be had under about two years if we are not mis. taken. 1t was in view of this fact that 6 writer in the Woman's Journal suggested that, by passing resolution allowing wo. men to vote for presidential electors, the present New York legislaturec ensure the victory of the Republican party in that state. The U. 5. constitution gives control oi this matter 70 the respective state legisla. t,tres SO that Gov. Tilden would have nu chance of killing the measure by veto. We should be sorry, however, to see such