St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1889-07-26
Liberal Leaders at Logger
heads Means More Money
for English Royalty.
Salisbury and His Tory Fol-
lowing Secure the Aid Of
Gladstone.
The Gram Old Man as Usual
Cuts a Path Of His
Own.
He Will Stand by the Throne
Whether School Keeps
or Not.

LONDON, July 25.-The report of the
parliamentary committee OH royal grants
was called up in the house of commons
this afternoon. Hon. W. II. Smith, the
government leader, was questioned as to
the amount of the queens savings. He
declined to answer the question and
moved that the report of the committee
be adopted. He contended that the
principles on which the government was
acting had been determined by the COM
pact between the crown and the people.
1t was not the duty of the sovereign to
provide for the members of the royal
family. No minister of the crown dur
ing the queens reign bad ever ventured
such suggestion. When the settle
ment was made upon the Prince of
Wales, it was never contemplated that
the prince would be called upon to pro-
vide for his family out of his income. The
government could not believe that any
important section of the people grudged
to pay the moderate provision necessary
to maintain its dignity. If they ex-
amined the systems of other civilized
countries, they would find that the
English system was the most economi-
cal giving invaluable stability. while
speaking people. Mr.. LabOuchere
moved the adoption of his substitute
for the committees report, declaring
that the sums given the royal family
are
ALREADY AMPLY SUFFICIENT,
and that if further supplies are needed
they ought to be provided through re-
trenchment on the expenses of the royal
household and not by fresh demands
upon the taxpayers. He ridiculed Mr..
Smiths assertion Of economy in the
English system, calling attention to the
fact that while the president of the
United States receives only $4,000 an
nually, the queen and her family re-
ceive $3,500,000. He said the time had
come to deal finally With grants to roy
atty. The supporters Of the amend
ment were determined to oppose
royal family. He denied that the
queen had any sort of title to the crown
lands. If there was talk about bar
gain, his advice to the crown would be:
Take the GuchieS of Lancaster and
Cornwall altogether and maintain your
family and households.
Lord Randolph ChurehiIl-We should
make the worst of the bargain.
Mr.. Labouchere-No; the bargain would
be good one.
Continuing. Mr.. Labouchere said that
the government admitted the large saw
ings of the queen from the civil list.
Doubtless the savings were well in
vested. Even if the queen had given
various sums to her children, enough
was left to provide for the others. The
extreme limit of the nations grants
ought to be the children of the SOW
ereign. 1t was impossible for the coun-
try to submit to the burden of an in
definite number of grandchildren. He
did not complain of Mr.. Gladstone's sup
porting the grants. The Liberals un-
derstoOd MIR. Glandstone'S peculiar and
exceptional position, and were not sur
prised at his action. Mr.. Labouchere
proceeded to explain how reduction
OF the queens household would produce
the sum necessary to
PROVIDE FOR JUNIOR ROYALTIES.
If the useless Office of lord chamber
lain, lord steward, master of the horse,
master of the buckhounds, eight lords
in waiting, eight grooms in waiting,
four equeries and number of others
were abolished, an ample sum would be
left for the purpose mentioned. There
were gentlemen who would be glad to
do what work these offices en-
tailed for nothing-Mr. Cham
berlain. for instance. Laughter
He trusted that the house, having re-
gard for the growing sense of the peo-
pie that these grants ought not to be
tolerated. would support the amend
ment. Samuel Storey, member for Sum
derland, and a Radical, seconded the
amendment. Mr.. Gladstone briefly said
he was averse to all measures of econo-
my that impaired the dignity and
splendor of the crown. Therefore, he
supported the government. He re-
ioiced that an occasion was given BIN
to testify in his old age that he did not
forget the services he had borne for
many years in connection with his office
as representative of the crown.
John Morley attributed the fever that
had been excited by the question of the
royal grants to the governments want
of frankness. Their original
PROPOSALS WERE SUPPLYING,
and they had Withdrawn from an i'm
possible and impracticable position in
agreeing to a grant of e36, 200 in order
to prevent a mischievouS friction be-
tween parliament and the crown. He
feared that he strained the pledge given
by him to his electors, but he did so on
Tic liO OpChIuS
would be left for future claims. More
ever, he was anxious to avoid parting
company with leader to whom he was
bound by ties of gratitude and esteem.
The eXtravagant grants of former
reigns furnished no excuse for repeti-
ton of them now. He could not sup
port Mr.. Laboucbere, because that gen.
tleman implied that the message from
the queen ought never to have been
presented. and he, (MOrley) desired to
uphold the good forms and tradition of
parliament, but on Monday he would
move an amendment raising the whole
question in the broadcast possible form.
Sir John Gorst, defending the govern
ment, contended that there was no
actual difference between the original
and the present proposals. He COM
planned of the waste of time involved
in Mr.. Morley's mode of procedure.
Mr.. Bradlaugh adjourned the debate.
Mr.. Lincoln, the American minister.
and Mr.. Chauncey M. Depew were
present in the house of commons to-
night during the debate on the royal
grants.