, 1879-05-20

themselves; III tllis, tl,oy are already freed.
---.-'.:.-..z..--"
THE COURT PARTY IN ENGLAND.
Queen TIcroR1A'a Royal dignity md t},at
OF tho coming King hayo received shock
il, Sir nonsnT PEE1ta letter from which they
n,Ry not Roon recover. Tho bad taste and
unnecessary violence Of the letter In qncs-
tion wcro ntarat tho only qualities Of It which
attracted ,nnc1 public attention. 1]ut aftor
tho first storm OF indignation against tho
author liad passcd away, peoplo began to
think thai below oil the coarsoness antl
ridiculous oxnggerntjon Of tho nttack thoro
might DO eono real proyooation for It. Tho
lloynl Influence md tho Royal prerogativo
have bcon constantly growing under tho
fostering care OF Earl DEAcossF1Ehp. It hns
been part Of hia policy to aggrandizo both,
mud to reinforce his own Government
through them. 11o made tho Queen On EN-
press; ha prepared for war, aud concluded
poaoe In her 1lamo. IIe hns claimed for the
Royal pregrogativo MI exercise Of power
which has not been enjoyed by 1t since the
time Of GEORGE III. Tho Objects Of this
cunning policy havo been to secure fur him
larger ehnre of tho Royal favor than
l,as been enjoyed by anY other Premier
for fifty years, md to give tue
Queen aud her immediate family M ex-
nggorated senao Of their own Importance
to the British nation. Il is not surprising
Tint tho lattor result should liavo followed
upon the obsequious ilattery Of tho Queen by
tho Earl Of DEAcoHBr1E1p. No other Premier
in modern tines has been equally minltnl
Of tho dignitios and omo1umonts Of tho
Court. md no other Government llas beon 20
absolutely dependent upon Royal favor for
| it's prosperous existence. Tho sturdy intle-
rontlcnco Of truo Englishn,en Inns mat1o
| other Prsmiess indifferent to Royal smiles
| or frowns. Tho lmmedinto predecessor of
| BEAcoSsF1ELp was jealous Of tho Royal pro-
rogAtiya rather than sollcitous on its bohalf,
mud patronizcd Royalty, SO far as lie funo-
tions Of Government wuro concerned, with
lofty superiority and CALLING good 'hnmor.
The contrast between Mx. GtAnsgosH'a idea
of the uRo Of the sovereign power fu tho
l}ritiah Constitution, as exhibited in his late
article in tho North american Reuie,o, and
tllat Of Earl DEAooAsr1ELp, rs eyiIoneed In
lis public acts, is most instructive CON-
,nentary on the drift Of political aIfairs in
| England.
Sir RODENT PEEL'a letter, unwiso aud un-
founded as part Of it waa, seoms to havo sot
tho people thinking with rcferonce to tho
nbuse Ut tho RoyM power, which In now
constantly Threatened. Sir ROBERT may
havo boen wrong in, snpposing. TINT tho
Prince Of Wales WIS one Of those mo1nbors
Of the Royal family who hnd !" deolarotl
their intention nevor to tako my notice of
him in f,lturo," on nocount Of words spoken
in Parliament, But 1t is not so cortaiu that
some members Of tho Roynl family Aad not
made declaration to that elIaot. Tho stato-
1nent was first published In PANTY Fair,
tho editor Of which, AIr. Dow1Es, is known
to bo ono Of tho Prince OF Walcs' friends,
And, asilo from the truth or fnlHity OF this
particular charge. tho fact TINT it ahould b
published In reputable journal, widely cir.
culated mud widely believed, was startling
evidence of the hight Of assumption to whicl,
THO Court party haa lately rison. Sir ROBERT
wns q,tito right in saying that SIN the
official atsampt to gag members Of Par-
lnncns In tho FREQ debate of question:
OF public interest III tho uonse Of Commons
by tho published menace Of the Royal dis.
pleasure, thero IL clear breach of privilege,
reco1ling tho most stupid exhibitions ol
Royal misconduct" Tho official atton,pt WIS
not mado perhaps In tho case Of Sit RonEn1
PEEL, but 1t was made, wo know, In the
caso Of Alr. GLADSTONE and tho Royal mar
riago, md 1t may hRvo beon matlo In tho case