ROYAL FAMILY

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22412, 7 May 1936, Page 11

ROYAL FAMILY

FINANCIAL PROVISION CIVIL LIST CRITICISED OPPONENTS IN COMMONS By Telegraph—Press Association—Copyright LONDON. May 6 Several members of the Left in the House of Commons did not hesitate to-day to attack the monarchical system when Mr. Neville Chamberlain, Chancellor of the Exchequer, brought up a report on the King's Civil List. The official spokesman of the Labour Party, Mr. Pethick-Law-rence, however, said the party recognised that the Crown was the bul-< wark of democratic government. Labour did not favour extravagant ceremony, but believed that the waste which had attended 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 — Caithness and Sutherland) said the House should not approach the ques- . tion 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 (Independent Labour —Shettleston, Glasgow) said that if he 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. Objection Taken to Expenditure rf Mr. McGovern said the proposal Jo provide the King with £IIO,OOO for hia personal purse was outrageous if contrasted with the 17s a week given ,i» an unemployed man. h Mr. A. McLaren (Labour —Burslera, Stoke-on-Trent): The House is not giving the King anything. v.ti Mr. McGovern proceeded to refer to the monarchy as "a purely decorative job, the symbol of exploitation and robbery." He described the monarchical itistitution as a useless thing in a modem State. Mr. G. Hardie (Labour —Springburii, Glasgow) contrasted the provision Of £IO,OOO for a possible wife of the King with the condition of children beiifg born in the East End of Glasgow that night. Mr. Hardie protested against the provision for relatives of the King, whereas, he said, other people had to keep their own relatives. He also criticised the £70,000 for Queen Mary, while widows received 7s 6d or 2s 6d a week. He did not believe the King would approve of it if he were a free agent. Sir Stafford Cripps (Labour —Bristol East) said he believed these large sums were necessary in the present circumstances, which arose from the traditional demands of the aristocracy. ✓ Deleat of Amendments 1 Mr. W. Gallacher (Communist —West Fife) said he 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 of the Civil List by £IOOO as a protest was defeated by 238 votes to 102. Mr. C. Stephen (Independent Labour —Gamlachie, Glasgow) moved an amendment to omit the additional provision for the Duke and Duchess of York and their children, but this was defeated by 261 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 motions were carried by 284 votes to 17 and by 291 to 3, a third being passed without a division.