Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1889-07-15
GRANTS TO ROYALTY.
The Glasses Willing. but the Demand
Sets the Masses a-Thinking.
Republic and Monarchy Disrseli,s Manipula-
ton of Figures Against the Former-Unele
Sam Might Find a Little Pocket
Money for Destitute Royalties
New York Herald European Edition.

LONDON, July 6, 1SS9.-There can be
no doabt, and it is no use Disgusting the
fact, that the application for two addi-
ysional grants of money to members of
Fthe royal family is exciting good deal
of discomfort on the surface. How deep
down it goes it would be very difficult
as yet to judge.
The "olasses' are not opposed TO the
annuities now asked, for if they are they
say nothing about it. The ''masses ,
look upon the mattel with good deal
of disapprobation In radical constitu-
encies the application is vehemently con-
demned. I could not hope to retain my
seat, more than one friend has assured
me, if l voted for these grants.
The conservative wOrkingmen haye not
been heard from on the subject, but
there are not many persons who woulE
be disposed to assert that the grants are
really popular among them. They will
be voted by the house of commons as &.
matter of course, but that certainly does
not prove that they are popular out of
doors.
THE WORKINGMEN IS VIEW.
1 have spoken to some very intelligent
workingmen on the question, and what
they say comes pretty much to this: I'VE
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. Why
should she not give something to the
prince of Wales children?'
GLOW do you know she has nosB2s
ready done so?'' asked my acq8aint-s
uo n ~ hob ~ 80,
truth lies quite in the opposite directIbn
from that which he supposed.
THE QUEENS INCOME. $50
AS for the money paid now to We royal
family, it amounts to G543 900 year, as
the last official finance accounts show.
Out of this 1856 200 Is paid the queen
for the expenses and salaries of her
household, retired allowances, bounties,
aims. special services, etc. For her
majesty s prlvy purse EGO, 1000 is allotted.
In addition to this she receives from the
duchy of Lancaster about forty five
thousand pounds year.
Out of these revenues it is alleged and
alleged as grievance, that her majesty
has made large savings, and that she
is immensely rich. This is very
doubtful, but supposing it to be
true, is there any shame in the sovereign
living within the means provided by
parliament? 1t is at least totally new
phenomenon. In former reigns parlia-
ments have frequently been called upon
to pay the debts of the monarch or of his
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.
AN IMPOSSIBLE PROCEEDING.
1t would certainly be very strange
proceeding for parliament to step in now,
after a lapse of f1fty-two years, and say
to the queen: f'You have honorably
fulfilled your part of the contract, but
we must require you to tell how much of
the money granted to you has been
saved, how much expended, and what
your investments have brought in. -
[ doubt whether any house of commons
will ever treat the sovereign so shabbily
as that, and no one will pretend that the
queen has done anything to merit such
treatment.
The real question is: "Will you have
monarchy or not?'' That, of course, is
a question open to much argument, and
there is a good deal to be said on both
sides.
HOW DIsRAELI 'fFIGURED. -
1 remember a speech of Mr.. Disraell's
in which he sought to show that repub-
lie costs much more than q monarchy,
and he pitched upon the republic of the
United States as an example. How did
he work out his figures? By taking all
the salaries of the members of congress
and adding the amount, with mileage, to
the presidents salary, and then adding
the salaries of the members of the state
legislatures, until he got total of about
eight hundred thousand pounds year to
set off against the queen IS of G3S5, 900.
This struck me at the tIme--I believe the
speech was made in 1872-as being very
ingenious, but not strictly relevant to the
real issue. Is it quite fair to put the
salaries of members of congress into i'm
mediate comparison with the direct cost
of the crown? We in this country paid
members of parliament in former times
and may do SO again, but the civil list
remains always the same. It would not
be diminished If members of parliament
once more received salaries. and the fall
lacy of Mr.. Disraeli's comparison would
then at once become visible.
NECESSARY CONCLUSION.
Whether right or wrong, the people of
this country have decided on mon
archical 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 in turn be the prince of Wales,
Princess Louise will be the princess royal
of Great Britain and Ireland. Are they
to be left penniless? They cannot go out
into the world to earn a living or starve.
If they were found In that plight l feel
pretty sure that subscription would be
promptly started in the United States for
their benefit. What are they to do2
POOR, ALL THINGS CONSIDERED.
The prince of Wales is allowed $40, 900
q year by the nation, and he gets
perhaps &20 900 a year-the exact
amount is not known-from the
revenues of the duchy of Cornwall. He
has to subscribe largely to numbers of |
charities, to keep up costly establish
ment, to entertain on a grand scale, to
leave presents behind him wherever he |
goes, and he has had to educate a large |
family. Can it reasonably be expected |
that he should now settle f10 900 a year |
or so on his eldest son
1t must also be taken into account, in |
TO get at all the sides of the |
snhieaf that the grants now mazda IN the |