THE CIVIL LIST

Evening Post, Volume CXXII, Issue 155, 29 December 1936, Page 3

THE CIVIL LIST

ORIGIN AND GROWTH

PROVISION FOR ROYALTY

THE KING'S REVENUES

Up to the- time of George 111 the King and his family depended upon hereditary revenues, which frequently were very large, but also were uncertain, says a writer in the Melbourne "Age.". During that Monarch's : reign the position both of the Koyal Family and Parliament was regulated by an , arrangement under wuic'h most 01 hereditary revenues were surrendered in return for a fixed civil list of £800,000 a year. The list has since been periodically revised, and that recently sanctioned for the current year contains some new features. An interesting review of the history of the civil list is given by Professor A. Berriedale' Keith in a new volume intended primarily as a close legal exposition of the constitutional powers and duties of the Monarch —the King and the Imperial Crown. When George 111 agreed to accept £800,000 a year, leaving revenues to the disposal of Parliament, the King continued to be responsible for certain substantial expenses beyond his household. From that amount there were paid the salaries of the Civil Service, of Judges, Ambassadors, and certain pensions. The King, however, retained the hereditary revenues of Ireland and Scotland, which were surrendered in stages until in the early part of Queen Victoria's reign the last charges for public expenditure were removed from the Royal budget. Nominally the "surrender" is still made by each Sovereign and holds good only for the period of his reign and six months thereafter. But the procedure is now so customary that, as the author shows, it would be very difficult for the Crown to claim freedom from the obligation of accepting it, although the lands which brought in £89,000 when George 111 surrendered them E.-.-2 now worth £1,350,000 a year. Legally the King could decline to renew the bargain, but the only question thus raised would be the terms of a fresh settlement. Upon his accession, the present King made the formal surrender forthwith. ALLOWANCE TO QUEEN. In the case of Queen Victoria the total sum allowed was £335,000 a year. At various periods the Queen came into conflict with Ministers and Parliament regarding the allowances, not for herself, but for '^members of her family. The rule is that provision shall be made from '• public funds for the husband or wife and children of the Sovereign, but there have been occasions upon which doubtfully justified extensions were made. Queen Victoria was incensed when under the Ministry of Lord Melbourne a proposed allowance of £50,000 a year for the Prince Consort was cut down, through a combination of .Conservatives and Radicals, to £30,000. AH her children were later voted grants. The House of Commons disliked, though it sanctioned, the dowry of Princess Louise on her marriage to the Marquis of Lome, which established the principle that marriage with Royalty was not essential. In the case of Prince Arthur an attempt was made to reduce his annuity from £15,000 to £10,000. but the Commons declined to oppose the wishes .of the Queen by positive refusal until she claimed the right of.the Crown to secure grants for grandchildren. Mr. Gladstone' refused, and in 1889 the principle was laid down that special grants should be limited to the children of the Prince of Wales. JOINT PROVISION. During a King's life the Civil List makes provision, for King and Queen together. On the death of the King the Queen receives an allowance for herself. In Queen Mary's case the.payment from public revenue is fixed at £70,000 a year.' Although there have been complaints against what some have regarded as excessive Civil Lists, Parliament has never countenanced outright opposition. In 1871 Queen Victoria was criticised on the ground that her allowances were excessive, and that her seclusion had eriahjed her to save as much as £2,500,000, in addition to the Prince Consort's bequest of £1,000,000, and one from Mr. Nield variously stated at between £500,000 and £1,500,000. But when Sir C. Dilke brought the question up in Parliament his motion for an inquiry was defeated by 276 votes to 2. For this Sir C. Dilke was never forgiven. A few years later the Queen had her revenge, when her critic, instead of securing an important Cabinet office, was admitted only to the lowly rank of Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs. When, in 1882, Sir C Diike refused to vote for an annuity to Prince Leopold, the Queen declared that he was debarred from ever being a Cabinet Minister. Although later^he became a member of a Ministry, the post awarded him was at the Local Government Board, where he was not likely to be in contact with the Queen. TREATED GENEROUSLY. Despite a few instances of resistance to her proposals, Queen Victoria was treated generously by Parliament.ln addition to her own allowance, £40,000 a year was voted to the Prince of Wales on his marriage, apart from the revenues of the Duchy of Cornwall, which rose by the end of the reign to £60,000 a year. In 1889; Parliament granted £36,000 a year- to the children of the Prince of Wales, and also passed annuities to Prince Arthur, Prince Alfred, Prince Leopold, and their sisters. THE VOTE INCREASED. On the advent to office of Edward VII the Civil List was increased to £470,000, with the privilege of franking letters and sending telegrams on public ( business free of charge. Queen Alexandra was given on widowhood an annuity of £60,000 a year, the Duke of York £40,000 with the Duchy and £10,000 a year to the Duchess, while £6000 a year each was provided for the King's daughters, the Princess Louise, Princess Victoria, and Princess Maud of Denmark. ' The only minor clash recorded between the Royal household and the Treasury during Edward Vll's reign occurred after the Civil List had been ! revised and increased. A Parliamentary committee struck out the official salary of the Master of the Buckhounds, there being a good deal of i feeling against the Royal hunt, and fixed the joint purse of the King and Queen at £110,000 the Queen's share being £33,000. With additional pensions and annuities the total came to £543,000. The Treasury then suggested that the King should bear the cost of 'official visits 'from. Royalties, but the proposal was indignantly refused. An attempt by the Treasury to make it a condition that the Foreign Secretary should have a voice in deciding what visits the State should pay for was tartly rejected by'the King, and there the matter was left. ADDITIONAL SUMS. The same total was paid to King George and Queen Mary when they ascended the Throne. To this was added £10,000 a year for each son except the heir apparent, who had the

Duchy, and an additional £15,000 on their marriage, with £6000 a year for the Princess.

The author explains that in the case of King Edward VIII the position differed in important points from that under his father. The King held not only the Duchy of Lancaster, which George V had, as its revenues are hereditary to the Crown, but the Principality of Scotland and the Duchy of Cornwall as well. These sources of revenue go to the King unless he has a son who is heir apparent, to whom they would fall. The King holds them because they have never been included in any of the surrenders made, although Lord Brougham argued in 1837 that they were really the property of the people. The fact that the King was unmarried also was important, ahd accounts for the fact, that the Civil List Act, 1936, contains some new provisions.

The current Civil List is fixed .. at £410,000, allocated as follows:—Privy purse, £110,000; salaries and retiring allowances, £134,000; expenses of the household, £152,800; Royal bounty, alms, and special services, £13,200. As long as the King remained unmarried, however, the total was to be reduced by £40,000. The Treasury now bears the cost of buildings and the salaries of the Treasurer, the Controller, and the Vice-Chamberlain of the Household, these being the political offices of the establishment. From the revenues of the. Duchy of Cornwall £25,000 a year was to be added to the income of the Duke of York in recognition of the extra duties devolving upon him as heir presumptive, and the balance, at present about £79,000, was available for the King's privy purse or some of the salaries of the household. PRIVATE ESTATES. The private estates of the King are entirely at his own disposal. Unlike the Crown estates proper, these properties are subject to rates and taxes. The four Royal palaces and castles, however, are. exempt. Royal marriages are still governed by an Act passed at the instance of George 111 in 1772, which remains unaltered "despite its incongruity with the modern belief in freedom of choice." The reigning King is all powerful in this respect as far as other members of the Royal Family are concerned. The ancient law prescribes that no descendant of George 11, except the issue of princesses who marry into foreign families, may marry if under twenty-Are without the assent of the King under the Great Seal and declared in council. Any marriage which ignores this rule is null and void, wherever it may be solemnised, and those who assist in making it are subject to penalties involving : the forfeiture of property. If over twenty-five, members of the family affected .may marry with such leave, or may intimate their intention to the Privy Council, and unless within a year both Houses pass addresses disapproving such marriage it can be yalidly performed.