The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1892-08-24
lean Democrat, North. South. East, West,
and In New Jersey. Is united. No Force bill
No Negro Dominationi
The Case OF MIR. Laboucheec.

we are informed, that she would never con-
sent to the bestowal OF an Office under tho
Crown upon o man who had perslstcntly
opposed the grants Of public money for the
| support OF her children and grandchildren.
II the facts are correctly stated by Mr.. LA
%BouCHERE. they raise agrave constitutional
question which they who have ut heart the
interests Of the sovereign would have done
we'll not to revive in view OF the great and
growing strength Of the Radical party in
Great Britain.
II it be true that tho Queens personal
dislike can shut out a representative OF tho
people from executive Office. tho theory
that in England the sovereign reigns but
loes not govern Is based upon q tendency
rather than n completely accomplished
fact. The fundamental principle laid down
by oil the writer's on the constitutional his
tory OF Great Britain in this centuryis that
the Queen must accept for her First Minis
ter the man who commands the confidence
OF the House Of Commons: and, inasmuch
rs no becomes responsible for the Govern
ment. she must also accept for his colleagues
those whom he secs fit to designate. This
principle must be abandoned and super
seeded by an acknowledgment that the right
of personal government still fingers in the
United Kingdom, II from the list OF col
leagues submitted by the First Minister.
the Queen retains the right 10 strike out
the name OF q given individual against
whom she bears a private grudge.
At the time OF tho accession of Queen VIc-
ToRIA the question OF personal government
was supposed to be definitely settled. The
attempt Of GEORGE III. to organize in the
House OF Commons a party of tho Kings
friends. and to appoint or select Ministers
according to their personal acceptability to
him. had ended in the discontinue and hui
initiation Of tho sovereign. The plausible
notion that a monarch's advisers ought to
be persona gratr was relinquished in view
Of the discovery that the executors Of the
will of the national legislature. although
nominally and additionally advisers, were
really the masters aud dictators of the
State. Bowling to the iron law of necessity.
GEORGE III. eventually forced himself to
receive as Ministers men Of whom in private
he did not scruple to nvow his destestation.
His sons and successors, GEORGE ". and
WILLIAM ~. made no effort to continue
the struggle for sclf-assertion. which they
recognized as hopeless. Each of them had
to submit to government by Ministers
whom they had good reason to hate tho
sight OF.
Curiously enough. it was reserved for n
female sovereign to twice shake n constitu-
tional principle which ut the time Of her &C
cession was deemed ~impregnably estab-
lishcd. Thnt Queen VICTORIA was able to
shake it temporarily was unquestionably
due to her being n woman. whose weakness
allayed misgiving. and. indeed. was calcu-
lated to assure sympathy and long suffer-
ing. Her first revolt against u doctrine
which apparently she failed to understand.
occurred in connection with the once fn-
nous bedchamber question. When. not long
after her assumption of the crown. Lord
MELBOURNE was beaten and Sir ROBERT
PEEL was called upon to form n Govern
mcnt. the latter. in accordance with prece-
dent. submitted to her Majesty n list
Of Tory ladies to be substituted for
Wing ladies in certain Offices of her
household and of attendance upon her per-
son. With the pettish ~obstinGcy of n will
full girl. the Queen refused TO change her
ladies. and a political crisis cnsucd. which
might have had awkward consequences.
had not trouble been avertcd by the Tory
leader silently acquicscing in Lord MEL
BoURSE's return to power. On the next
defeat Of the Wing Ministry. however, the
Queen. who had learned wisdom, made no
resistance to the bedchamber appointments
made by the new Premier. Sir RoBEHTPEIL.
Tho Queens second attempt to assert
personal influence upon tho Govern
ment. took place soon after tho French
coup ditat of Dec. .. 1851. and was no.
toriously dictated by her c~onsort. Prince
ALBERT. The Queen complained that Lord
PALMENsToS. then Minister of Foreign
Affairs. had not submitted for her approval
the despatch directing the English Am
bnssador at Paris to virtually sanction the
coup fiafby callingon the Prince-HIcsident.
Louis NAPOLEON. Revolving at what she
said was only the last dropin u cup ofindig-
nifty which the Foreign Secretary had forced
her to drink. she practically compelled the
Primo Minister. Lord JOIN RUSSELL. to
dismiss Lord PALMEEsTON summarily from
Office. In good time the latter had his re-
venSe: he helped to upset Lord JoHN's
and after u f~rllitlcsS attempt
OF the Tories to maintain themselves
IN power. the Queen had to swallow her re-
sentiment and accept Lord P~ALMEHSToN for
her Prime Minister. although lie never con-
descended to make any promises about de-
ferring to her Majesty in the future. That
WAS a lesson which. 1t was supposed. had
completed the Queens education in the
principles OF constitutional government.
From that day to this, however distasteiul
may have been some Of the persons sug-
gCsted for Ministerial posts. she has ne
ceptcd them with becoming indifference or
meckncss. She did not even protest
against the appointment of Sir CHARLES
DILKE to n seat in II former Cabinet, whom |
Mr.. GLADSTONE proposed him. although
Sir CHARLES first made his mark In tie
House of Commons by n stroke identical
with hat which she deems objectionable
on the part Of Mr.. L~ABoUcHERE. namely, Il
scatllnS criticism Of the civil list and a vc-
hcmcn dcnunciation of royal grants.
One can scarcely doubt that had Mr..
GLADSTONE. who by virtue of his appoint
ment as First Minister had become tho