THE KING AND HOME RULE.

Thames Star, Volume XLVII, Issue 14811, 18 May 1914, Page 5

THE KING AND HOME RULE.

DiHOuseing aa* •&s&s£&. made on tthe» King in the House of Commons by Mr J. Ward, Labour M.»F. forStoke-on-Trent, the Spectator■:> says: What the King hasi, im fact, done has been as far as possible to ■prevent his sub"jecttei from flying, a*" mch other's throats. He haa played the gaime-cf neither party, but has done wha* rxx- . doubt the hotheads! *n both sides , consider1 hateful—has acted the por* ■of "neu.tr'alitiy peirsomi'fiied" .which m j alfott'eid him by the Conistit(uti; on-~*he pair* of modeo'a'fcQr' an^ ~jp? "pacdifieialtor. ! He haia u^ed hb inafluemiQei im. the cause of peatee aaidl of "keeipitng; the ahip of j SMe stbady. If that" is a crime. them, and only thettt; is the _ Riaigl guilty of misdoing. Ye* hei<e .-is Mr Ward, who pr'ofesst'.? to be a leader of men, itrying. on no evidenw except some baickstatixtei g!o«sip, anS )ye--oausa he thinks i* ai ftne and popular1 thing and a pfoiof of his own sterling1 independence, to thi^ow od- j ium on the King, and *o insinuate .that -his influence lias been imp'rso .perly used. As a rule, the Labour men have shewn themselves not only honest, buiNilhorwighly Well bred in. debate. Lcti us t^tist that Mv Ward's 'example. will "not pro»ve cont'a^kTls. Fortunately for M!r Ward, nk> one I challenged him to say on whs^ grounds he had made his nuggestioni of "Royal interference against , the Liberals. If anyone had dqne so, he would ha>v« had none to1 produce, and he must have stood shamed in tiie opiiniibn o! all decent people a& the retailer of false arid ma(l4ci»uG go«lsap on n; mat^rI"'^ v?tal ?n#«ljif.