THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. MONDAY, APRIL 20, 1908. THE FUTURE OF KINGSHIP.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXI, Issue 9068, 20 April 1908, Page 4

THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. MONDAY, APRIL 20, 1908. THE FUTURE OF KINGSHIP.

I "More than any of the merely anarchist crimes which have claimed single victims by isolated blows, the tragedy at Lisbon suggests reflections not only upon the perils of kings, but upon the survival, even the aggrandisement, of the monarchical idea, and the uncertain future of democracy," writes "Calchas" in the "Fortnightly Review." "in addition to the better training of the kings, there i3*a real advantage ip the position. The throm; in a point of view where even a sovereign of very ordinary capacity may easily acquire a perception superior in some respects to that of the most brilliant of his servants. In the service of j the State the sovereign is the sole important personality who is fully | detached. All party leaders without < exception are deeply involved in party compromises. There are very many occasions when it would be grjss disloyalty on their part to be honestly themselves. This view is atfected by many considerations be- l sides the isolated merits of any im- | mediate matter at The rove- j reign's opinion alone, though being always human, it must bo occasionally prejudiced and sometimes mis- I taken, is a perfectly free | ion of mind. 'Yh'i kings :<rj bound to take a perfectly realistic view of • even their greatest men. For them | no mere bedazzlement can very well i exist. They are acquainted with j I all those personal weaknesses in , | Ministers, which are unknown to the j nation at large. The contest of tho

greatest leaders, from the point of view of the throne, must always seem somewhat like the scuffling of the kites and crows. Nothing in our time has been so remarkable a revelation on this subject as Queen Victoria's letters. We had all, whether in admiration or antagonism, looked up to statesmen like Palmerston and Beaconsficlcl and Gladstone. It was a shock to find that Queen Victoria looked down upon them. She looked down upon them not contemptuously, but literally, and because from her position she could not do otherwise. This must often have been conducive to great sanity of mind in dealing with these exorbitant personalities. Another factor in the position and future of kingship is perhaps of chief moment. Whether president of a republic or leader of a legislature, no man who is chosen by a party can adequately represent the ideal of national unity. This is the fundamental defect. There is an effort to escape the consequences across the Channel by reducing the temporary head of the nation to the role of a dignified cipher. In the United States, the President's position is to a certain extent controversial from the first to last. And there is not only the discontinuity arising from the rise and fall of parties in the Presidential elections. Even when members of the sam 3 party succeed each other, all vivid impressions are connected with the change of persons. The sense of the abstract continuity of the oilica is comparatively vague. Democracy is necessarily subject to party and the evils inseparable from party. It, therefore, needs in some part of its institutions the very strongest influence which can raimpress upon the imagination the idea of national unity. The influence of the monarchy asiisti in many subtle ways to convert party conflict into co-ordination, and to preserve some legree of continuity of policy through changing administrations. Between the benches on the right hand and the left, the Speaker embodies that spirit of the House of Commons which h above both parties, and reminds them in high moments that they are one. In the samj way political philosophy has discovered no substitute for hereditary monarchy as the expression of the historic unity of a people. So long as representative institutions rest upon a national basis, the more complete and party-riven democracy becomes, the more will it need the corrective of kingship."