Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1889-07-30
THE ROYAL GRANTS BILL.
Mr.. John Morley's Amendment-His
Reasons for Opposing the Measure.

The English house of commons, sitting in
committee Of the whole, resumed the debate on
the royal grants bill yesterday. Mr.. John Nor
ley moved an amendment declaring that 'the
house is unwilling to increase the burdens Of
the people without assurance that no further
claims will be made for younger members of
the royal family" He denied that he opposed
the grants because he dare not openly attack
the crown. He opposed them, he said, because
parliament had in no degree failed to comply
with any provisions Of the act Of 1887. The
government had not made out their case either
in the select committee or in the house. Par
lament had already literally provided for all
the children of the queen. 1t had not been
shown that retrenchments might not be made
in expenditures upon royalty without causing
the queen any anxiety. He especially objected
to the assertion of the claim to grants of the
grandchildren Of the queen. Lord Harting-
tons speech on Friday clearly Indicated an in
tention to preserve that right for future use.
II was proposed not to restrict these claims to
the children of the heir apparent, but to open
them to grandchildren Of the sovereign gen.
orally. He moved the amendment in order to
prevent reassertion and reafirmation of a
claim the justice of which he denied.
THE NIHTLIsTs OF ENGLISH POLITICS.
Mr. Chamberlain said that Mr.. Morley OBJ
jected to the grants because. no finali.y was
promised, but, as regarded the present reign,
the proposed grants were absolutely final He
did not think that after the queens promise
any minister would advise any sovereign to ask
further grants for other grandchildren of her
majesty. 1t was argued that there was no Sc
curity against such grants in the event of a new
reign, but q general declaration against them
would be worthless. as the whole question must
be decided when the civil list was discussed.
Mr.. Chamberlain denied that Mr.. Labouchere
and his colleagues represented the people.
They only represented a small minority. They
did their utmost to stimulate the popular
prejudices to which they truckled 1t was
shameful to fawn upon a monarch, but it was
still more shameful to truckle to the multitude.
The members who were doing 80 were nothing
less than the nihilists of English politics. Loud
conservative cheers and radical groans.]
Mr.. Lsbouchere said he hailed Mr.. Morley's
amendtl.snt as q practical refusal of further
grants during the present reign. With future
reigns he would not trouble himself. Suff-
Gent for this reign were the grandchildren
thereof. Public opinion was making strides
toward a universal acceptance of the princi-
pie that the sovereign, like any other head of a
family, ought to provide for her children. The
conservatives. who, in and out of season, had
villifed Mr.. Gladstone, were now ready to fall
down and worship him because on the ques-
ton Of the grants he had turned their way.
They would worship the devil himself under
similar circumstances. [Cries Of "Orderl''l
In conclusion he said that he and his col
leagues would be beaten on the division, but
he intended to oppose the grants at every
stage as d moral protest against the crowns
claim.
Mr. MoRLET's AMENDMENT WAS DEFEATED
by vote of 355 to 1874. Mr.. Gladstone, the
Parnellites and the bulk of the dissidents again
voted with the government. The minority in
cluded Sir VIM. Yernon-Harcou.t, S;r George
y. Trevelyan, Right Hon. Hus Childers, Right
Hon. Geo. Shaw-Lefevre and Right Hon. A. ].
Mundella. Sir VIM. Vernon Harcourt said he
would vote against the grants because the ac-
together unsound. The queen, according to
the governments declarations, waived further
claims for her grandchildren, yet the govern
ment persisted in keeping alive those claims
and tried to perpetuate them.