Daily Los Angeles herald., 1879-05-30

statement Is a very impudent ex-
preston of the latest development
Of the ridiculous imperialism of
the present day; and in the official
attempt to gag members of Parlia-
ment In the free debate of ques.
tions of public interest in the
House Of Commons, by the publish
ed menace of the royal displeasure,
there Is a clear breach of privilege, {,
recalling the most stupid exhibi.
tions Of royal misconduct. Royal
displeasure! Imperial censure!
And because q member of the
House of Commons dares to ex-
press his opinion in his place in
Parliament, and to quote Thack-
cray and history in support of that
opinion! After all, 1t Is notorious
that two members of the royal
family INDUCED inIsimilar threats,
and a great deal worse, am sorry
to say, as regards Mr.. Gladstone;
while the language of the Com.
mannder- in-Chief with respect to
the late Government Is too well
known to need further comment at
this present moment. You appear
to be instructed to make
me u challenge, which,
Notwithstanding the channel
through which it comes, 1 accept
with great pleasure, and as you in
vite me to a game which two can
play at, one of the parties in the
contest may prove pungent critic
of the coming k and Co.; and,
by the way, would advise you
strongly, as you profess to be the
depositary of the imperial conf
dence, to be little more discreet
In the circulation of your authoriz-
ed versions Of royal messages, or
they may get you into trouble.
Like many others, 1 have put up
with a good deal of your insolence
from time to time, and as your per-
sonalitles have nothing in common
with the honorable and legitimate
duties of journalism, you will find
me now quite equal to the occasion.
But as In the present instance you
act as the plenipotentiary of royal
ty, 60 and tell your master that
am not the sorC of man to be
smothered by imperial menaces;
and unless / receive the most am
pie satisfaction from the royal
sources which have made you their
most impudent mouth-piece, L
shall send copy of your state
ment, together with a copy OF my
reply, to the Prince of Wales and
to the Duke of Cambridge. And as
you have published and circulated
such declaration of the intentions
of the royal family with respect to
my remarks in the House of Com
mons, I shall also avail myself of a
fitting opportunity to publish and
to placard in London and the
provinces, under the heading of
sSir Robert Peel and the Rest of
the Royal Family both your off,
cial notification of the royal mes
sage and my contemptuous ac-
acknowledgement. I am, sir, your
obedient servant"
The petrlfied Mr.. Bowles instead
of publishing this epistle wrote to
Sir Robert asking him to withdraw
it, and through one of the Prince
of Wales suite laid it before H. r.
H., who instantly, with natural
tact, caused Sir Robert to be in
formed that he had never author
ized Mr.. Bowles's statement. Sir
Robert at once sent the Princes
message to the Times, whereupon
the exasperated Mr.. Bowles retail
lated by publishing Sir Roberts
letter. OF course the breeze thus
raised will die away, but it has
none the less set people to thinking
whether Lord Beaconsfield's policy
of putting forward the sovereign
and the Court as active factors In
British politics may not have pre-
pared disagreeable quarter of an
hour for royalty in England at a
future daY.