EXTREMISTS ATTACK KIM'S CIVIL LIST.

Auckland Star, Volume LXVII, Issue 106, 6 May 1936, Page 7

EXTREMISTS ATTACK KIM'S CIVIL LIST.

COMMONS DEBATE

Labour Recognition of the Monarchy's Power.

SYSTEM CRITICISED. United Tress Association. —Copyright. (Received 12 noon.) LONDON, May 5. Several members of the Left in the House of Commons did not hesitate to attack the mouarchial system when Mr. Neville Chamberlain, Chancellor of the Exchequer, brought tip the report on the King's Civil List.

The official spokesman of the Labour party, Mr. Pethiek Lawrence, however, said the party recognised that the Crown was the bulwark of democratic government. Labour did not favour extravagant ceremony but believed that the waste attending past Courts had been almost eliminated.

The present King , had a more direct and more intimate association and friendship with the common people than perhaps any monarch since Charles 11.

Sir Archibald Sinclair (Liberal) said the House should not approach the question in a niggardly spirit because there had been nothing niggardly in the spirit in which the Royal Family had performed its duties.

Mr. J. McGovern (Ind. Lab.) said that if ho were a Conservative, he would be entirely satisfied with the present Royal Family, but he believed the system of a "parasitical monarchy" was an outrage in the present age. Unbridled Criticism in House. Mr. McGovern said the proposal to provide the King with £110,000 for his personal purse was outrageous if contrasted with the 17/ a week given an unemployed man. Mr. A. MacLaren (Labour): The House is not giving the King anything. Mr. McGovern proceeded to refer to the Monarchy as "a purely decorative job, the symbol of exploitation and robbery," and described the monarchical institution as a useless thing in a modern State. Mr. G. D. Hardie (Labour) contrasted the £10,000 provision for a possible wife of the King with the condition of children being born in the East End of Glasgow that night. He protested against the provision for relatives of the King, whereas other people had to keep their own relatives, and also criticised the £70,000 for Queen Mary while widows received 7/6 or 2/6. He did not believe the King would approve of it if he were a free agent. Sir Stafford Cripps (Labour) said he believed these large sums were necessary in the present circumstances, which arose from the traditional demands of the aristocracy. Many Amendments. Mr. W. Gallachcr (Communist) thought the Government ought to have a sense of shame for bringing the proposals before the House. Many members explained and defended the vote.

Mr. Pethick Lawrence's amendment to reduce the amount by £1000 as a protest was defeated by 238 votes to 102. Tho Rev. C. Stephen (Ind. Lab.), moved an amendment to omit the additional provision for the Duke and Duchess of York and their children, but this was defeated by 201 votes to 22. An amendment to delete the provision for a prospective Queen and children of such a marriage was defeated*by 278 votes to 17. Two Government resolutions were carried by 284 votes to 17 and by 291 to 3, a third being passed without a division.