Omaha daily bee., 1889-07-07
ROYALTY'S REQUESTS
The View English People Take of
the Last Application.
DlSCONTENT ON THE SURFACE.
Radical Constituencies Vehement in
Their Denunoiations.
VOTED AS A MATTER OF COURSE
Unpopular With Many Afraid to
Vote Against Them.
DiSRAELpS ODloUS COMPARISON.
A Speech of the British Premier
Recalled as to the Cost OK
a Monarchy and a
Republic.
Radical Constituencies Vehement in
Their Denunoiations.
VOTED AS A MATTER OF coURS
Unpopular With Many Afraid tt
Vote Against Them.
DIsRAELrs oDlous COMPARISON
English AunuitieS,

tCopni0ht 1889 on James Gordon Bennet.1
LONDON, July 6.-TNew York Herald
Cable-Special to THE BEE. There can be
no doubt, and it is no use Disgusting the
fact, that the application for two additional
grants of money to members of the royal
family is exciting good deal of discomfort
on the surface. How deep down 1t goes it
would be very difficult as yet to judge. The
classes are not opposed to the annuities now
asked for, or, If they are say nothing about
it. The masses look upon the matter with q
good deal of disapprobation In radical con.
stituencies the application is vehemently
condemned 81 could not hope to retain my
seat" more than one friend has assured me,
'if 1 voted for these grants" Conservative
working men have not been heard from on
the subject, but there are not many persons
who would be disposed to assert that the
grants are really popular among them. They
will be voted by the house of commons as a
matter of course, but that certainly does not
prove that they are popular out doors. l
have spoken to some very intelligent work
ing men on the question and what they say
comes very much thus:
1--WE are paying too mnch now for the
royal family. They ought to support each
other out of the money they draw from the
nation. The queen Is rich and why should
she not give something to the Prince of
Wales Children
How do you know she has not already
done sos'' asked an acquaintance. He did
not know. Probably the truth lies quite in
the opposite direction from that which he
supposed AS for the money paid now to the
royal family, it amounts to e543, 600 year,
as the last official finance accounts show.
Out Of this e3S5, 900 is paid the queen for ex.
penses and salaries of the household, allow
ances for special services, etc. For her
majesty's private purse 500, 900 is allotted. In
addition to this she receives from the duchy
of Lancaster about g45, 900 a year. sOut of
these revenues it is alleged, and alleged as
a grievance, that her majesty has made large
savings and that she is immensely rich. 1t
is very doubtful, but supposing 1t to be true,
is there any shame in the sovereign living
within the means provided by parliament?
1t is at least phenomenon
In forty regns pariaments have frequently
been called upon to pay the debts of
monarch or heir presumptive. No such
claims have been made during the present
reign. The arrangement with the queen
made by parliament in June, 1887, has never
been departed from. 1t would certainly be
a very strange proceeding for parliament to
step in now, after a lapse of ffty-two years,
and say to the queen:
'You have honorably fulfilled your part of
the contract, but we must require you to tell
how much meney granted to you has been
saved, how much expended, and what your
investment has brought in"
doubt whether any house of commons
will ever treat sovereign so shabbily as
that and no one will pretend that the queen
hoc6 npy VT tn m arit oh
remember a speech of Mr.. Disraeli, in
which he saught to show that republic costs
much more than monarchy, and he pitched
upon the republic of the United States as an
example. How did he work out his figures9
BY taking all the members of congress and
adding the amount, with mileage, to the
presidents salary and then adding the sala-
ries of members of the state legislatures
until he got a total of about e5Oo0OO a year
to set off against the queens e3S5,0OO This
struck M |at the time-I believe the spec ca
was made in 1S72-as being very inge nious,
but not stately relevant to the real issue. Is
it quite fair to put the salaries of members of
congress into immediate comparison with the
direct cost of the crown. We, in this coun-
try, paid members of parliament in former
| times, and may do so again, but the civil list
remains the same. IT would not be dimn-
| ished if members of parliament once more
received salaries, and the fallacy of Lord
Beaconsield's comparison would then
at once become visible. Whether
right or wrong, the people of this
| country have decided ON a monarchial
form of government. Well, then, they ought
| TO MAINTAIN it with becoming dignity, and
the children of the Prince of Wales are in
the direct line Of succession. Prince Albert
| Victor will one day in turn be Prince of
| Wales and Princess Louise will be the Prn-
| cess royal of England Are tLey to be left
pennilessl They cannot go out into the
world to earn living or TO starve. If they
| were found IN that plight feel pretty sure
| that subscription would be promptly
| started IN the United States for their ben
| eft. What are they to dol
The Prince of Wales is allowed 100000
| year by the nation, and he gets perhaps
| 100000 year-the exact amount is not
| known-from the revenues of the duchy Of
| Cornwall He mas TO subscribe largely TO
numerous charities, to keep up costly es-
| tablishment, to entertain on great scale, to
| leave the present behind wherever he
| goes and he has had to educate a
| large family. Can it reasonably be
| expected that he should now settle el0,000 or
| so on his eldest son. 1t must also be taken
into account, in endeavoring 10 get at all
sides of the subject, that the grants now
made to the royal family are on a much lower
scale than they used to be. George the
Thirds eldest son, when Prince Of Wales,
had an annuity of 100000 year, and in his
accounts will be found such entries In the
| supply grant; To discharge the Prince of
| Wales debts, e161, 900; ditto for works at
Carlton House, a55, 200; incidental expense,
al00,0 900, and so on. The Princess of Wales
at that time had 935.0OO year. The present
Princess of Wales gets only 100000. Prin-
cess Charlotte, on her marriage with Prince
Leopold, when she was the eldest daughter
Of the Prince of Wales, in the same position