The Washington times., 1914-06-05
THE PALACES INVASION.

THE PALACES INVASION.
Americans, particularly Ameri-
cans who are familiar with the sim
pie ceremonials and business forms
of our White House, will find it diff
fcult to understand just why such a
tremendous significance should be
attached in England to the fact that
a suffragette actually got to the roy
al presence and started to plead with
the King in behalf of her cause.
From the American viewpoint, it
seems rather more remarkable that
any especial significance should at
tach to the incident than that the
incident should have taken place.
For months past the suffragettes
have been trying to get chance
to speak to the King; just to ap-
proach within hearing distance Of
the royal ear and mention that they
would be glad to deserve his royal
favor, certainly not to bear his dis
pleasure. They have threatened"
persistently that they were going, to
do this. Why threats should have
been necessary, in a country that
prides itself on the freedom of the
right of petition, is not apparent;
but threats" they have been.
Meanwhile, a big delegation Of
suffragists in this city organized
themselves, marched to the White
House, were received by the Presi-
dent, and told him all about what
they wanted and for what they
hoped. 1t was not an extraordinary
circumstance at that. Organizations
of labor representatives, of business
men, of professional and civic bod
les, are constantly admitted to the
presence of the President. state their
cases in a frank, man-to-man fash
ion, and go away. There is about
as much ceremony about the thing as
there is about going TO see the pres
ident of a corporation on business.
Getting to the "royal presence" is,
moreover, rather a spectacle than a
method of effective appeal. The roy
al authority in England couldn't do
anything worth while for the suf-
fragists. The King doesn't take a
big stick and club legislation into the
books, as Presidents are accused Of
doing. Quite to the contrary, King
in Britain who would attempt to
use the vigorous methods that some
recent Presidents have employed,
wouldn't have a joo at the king
business longer than it would require
the commons to say JACK Robinson
in parliamentary language. The
King has so little influence over
Legislative processes that the very
suspicion that he is using it is more
than likely to detroy it all and throw
the scale in the very opposite direc-
tion.
Therefore, when the suffragettes
set about, months ago, to get TO the
King in person with petition, they
were merely putting on a press
agency performance that was certain
of headlines everywhere. Their sue
cess has been notable, in that regard.
They knew that every overt effort
at reaching the royal presence would
get endless publicity. They knew
il would do them no possible good
in any other way. They knew that
the present King and the present
Queen are both hopelessly hostile TO
their cause, and that making a spec
tacle of them would only increase
their unfriendliness. No difference,
The suffragists regarded the royal
opinion as of such small import
ance that to offend it was not a seri-
Gus affair. They wanted to use the
kingly Office and the sentiment and
reverence surrounding it, as settings
for a performance that would COM
msnd attention; and they have sue
ceeded.
Almost any sovereign, or any re-
publican ruler. in the world, could dc
more for such a cause than could
the British King, if he so willed
When a Roosevelt or a Wilson is
President in this country, the execu.
tive purpose has very great deal