ROYAL COMMANDS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XL, Issue 12266, 9 May 1903, Page 5 (Supplement)

ROYAL COMMANDS.

INVITATIONS I HAT ADMIT OF NO

REFUSAL.

There are no such things as invitations issued by Royalty. When their Majesties the King and Queen make up their minds that they would like to receive a member of the peerage, the Prime Minister, an archbishop, or anyone else, they send thern a " command" to appear at Windsor, Buckingham Palace, or wherever they may De.

It is just the same should the desire to witness a theatrical performance seize them, or to hear some wonderful singer or pianoforte player. A " command" is despatched to the management of the theatre, or to a Bond-street library, and, as is the case with regard to their guests, their Majesties need never undergo the worry and anxiety of ordinary hosts and hostesses, and wonder whether their friends will be able to come. For come they must.

Supposing there were a prior engagement not even the premier duke of Fugland might write "The Duke of Norfolk regrets.'* Instead, he would have to pen a letter to the hostess whose invitation he had already accepted and ask her to excuse his presence mi account of his having received a Royal command.

When Royalty visits anywhere the invitation list of the host and hostess who are to have the honour of entertaining them is submitted to their Majesties, or their Majesties- send a list of those they desire may form the party to meet them. These invitations also rank as commands.

Theatrical commands are. never given at so short a notice as to cause inconvenience to the management, for the King and Queen are most thoughtful for the feelings of the public, as well as for those of the companies they wish to see. Therefore, it never happens that when an audience assembles one evening at a theatre it finds the doors closed in consequence of a Royal command having necessitated the temporary departure of the company.

A sufficiency of notice, but only just- a sufficiency, is afforded the company to rehearse the play on a curtailed stage, to procure scenery of the proper size, and somewhat miniature, that will fit the Royal stage, and.to get new dresses. After the performance their Majesties entertain the company at supper, and later forward, at any rate to the principal actors and actresses, a piece ot jewellery or plate as a souvenir. To Mr. and Mrs. Bourchier they sent a piece of plate in memory of their performance before the German Emperor, on the occasion when Mr. Bourchier had no time to change his stage costume, and supped in Dr. Johnson's habiliments. Illness and sudden bereavement are always considered by their Majesties reason sufficient for permission to be given to a " commanded" subject that he will not be expected to appear at Court. But permission must be sought. Such reasons are always absolutely reliable, for to be commanded is an honour so great that no one would willingly forego its fulfilment. There are also instances on record in. which the King and Queen have consented to postpone the reception of a guest who has neither been seized with illness nor suffered a bereavement.

One of these occurred very recently to the Prime Minister. Mr. Balfour had accepted an invitation to form one of the vast array of guests who attended the great Encyclopaedia Britannica dinner, and his presence was eagerly expected, when one morning he received a command from the King to go to Windsor Castle. Although he could not move a sfcep in the matter himself the hosts of the Times Encyclopaedia Britannica dinner approached Lord Knollys, who represented to His Majesty the state of affairs; and after much wonderment and suspense on the very morning of the dinner permission from the King was received by Mr. Balfour to transfer the command to another occasion, It thus happened that Mr. Balfour ate and spoke at the now historic banquet. " COURTS." Would there be any alteration made 50. the dress regulations? was a palpitating question when the King came to the throne, says a writer in the Pall Mall Magazine. Precedent there was for changes. Plumes and lappets had been introduced by one Queen: hoops forbidden by another. Her Majesty Queen Victoria had graciously accorded permission to courtiers of delicate health to wear half-high corsages and elbow sleeves. Would Queen Alexandra institute any differences. The answer was: None whatever. And no deviation was made from the announcement, though before the first Court was held rumours went about all over London that Pier Majesty would not expect the three plumes to be visible from the frontface view of their wearer, as had been the rule in the previous reign; and before the second Court the florists were fluttered by an announcement that arose in aristocratic circles that bouquets were no more to be allowed because they took up so much room.

Queen Alexandra, whom her friends have justly styled Alexandra the Faithful, steadfastly resolving to adhere to our bite monarch's prejudices, made no fresh regulations.

The lady courtier, as before, appears in full evening toilette, the corsage cut low to outline the shoulders, the sleeves extremely short. She wears a Court train of three and a-half to four yards long, white gloves, a white veil banging from three plumes, which must be white if she is not in mourning, blacfc if she is in mourning.

One lady at the first Court of their Majesties King Edward VII. and Queen Alexandra erred by wearing coloured plumes to match her gown, instead of wearing the regulation white or black ones. She was not summarily committed to the Tower, but will another time, no doubt, know better and act accordingly, in deference to Her Majesty's wishes.