The New Zealand Graphic AND LADIES' JOURNAL. SATURDAY, JANUARY 1891.

New Zealand Graphic, Volume IX, Issue 5, 30 January 1892, Page 108

The New Zealand Graphic AND LADIES' JOURNAL. SATURDAY, JANUARY 1891.

The death of the Duke of Clarence has formed the most sensational topic of conversation during the last week. Influenza and its consequences swept otl the unfortunate prince with its usual rapidity, and the world was scarcely conscious of his illness before the news of his decease was being noised abroad to the four corners of the earth. There have been crises in the history of mankind , and there may l>e like crises again) when the welfare of millions of human beings has been dependent upon the existence of a certain person In the past whole populations have been known to pass from one ruler to another by the mere fact of a marriagede eonrenanre, and, indeed, without such means the consolidation of European nationalities could scarcely have been eflected. Only within the last century have the European peoples, following the example of the English, begun to renounce the passivity with whichtheyformerlysubruittedtheir destinies to be influenced by individuals. The feeling of personal loyalty is decaying fast everywhere, and while a monarch like Francis Joseph of Austria still rules peacefully with a sort of hereditary absolutism, the submission to it is voluntary on the part of his subjects, and depends upon their esteem for his admirable qualities. Their affection is for the man, an 1 not for the family he represents. The feeling of personal loyalty among the British people has for centuries been of a rather tepid sort. After cutting off the head of King Charles I. the English became, indeed, a dreadful warning and cause of scoffing unto their neighbours, and for more than a hundred years afterwards they did without any strong feeling of loyalty towards dynasty or individual ruler. During this period the sentiment which kept the people of England united (for those of Scotland and Ireland were very doubtful in their allegiance) was that which animates them to-day. the national feeling that they were English, and would rule others rather than be ruled> and elect whatever family they preferred to the throne. It was not until the accession of George 111. that the sense of personal esteem for the monarch was again in some degree restored to patriotic sentiment. The long war with France served to intensify this, and counteracted the influence of the sons of George 111., whose questionable habits tended to disgust the public with the representatives of the monarchy. After the cessation of chronic discord between France and Europe, however, came the development of modern democratic ideas which are in every land sapping the foundations of hereditary thrones. That the loyalty to the British monarch has endured so unaltered during the last fifty years is owing greatly to the fact that our assumed the crown as a mere girl, and was deprived of her consort in the prime of her years. The sight of a woman and a widow conscientiously discharging merely nominal functions has been sufficient to conciliate even theoretical republicans, and the enormous extension of the British Empire during that period now promises to give a longer lease of rule to the Guelph line by virtue of necessity. Modern peoples are fast learning to govern themselves, and modern monarchs, es;>ecially those of England, are growing more and more mere passive embodiments of national feeling. They symbolise the unity of the race. At present the sen«e that the rulers of the British Empire are trot really English but of imported foreign stock prevails at home, though not so strongly as when the Hanoverian race first assumed its regal inheritance across the German • •eean. The general regret shown at the death of Cardinal Manning by English teople of all shades of opinion, from Calvinists to agnostics, is an evidence of the strong feeling

of national pride which now ignores even sectarian bigotry in its judgments, and could England boast of a truly British race of rulers, there is no doubt that the feeling of personal liking for the monarch would be much greater than it is. As a matter of fact, since the death of Queen Elizabeth the English people, despite their talk about loyalty, have pinned their faith to the rulers who served their purposes and governed them as they desired to Ire governed. When these showed an inclination to tyrannise they were presented with the national ‘ walking-ticket,’ and so intense was their love for liberty that the English have consented to be rnled by an alien race which by intermarriage has always remained alien in blood from the people. Nowmore than ever the expediency of preserving the nominal sovereignty of the Guelphs appears even to those of strong democratic proclivities, and the wider is the view taken of the destiny of the English-speaking people the greater does this necessity appear to become.

Thanks to increasing facilities of communication, the modern tendency is to greater unity rather than to separation. Formerly in Europe people of the same blood were proud of their narrowness, and the citizens of neighbouring towns were prompt to engage in battle upon questions which in these days appear perfectly ridiculous. The minds of our ancestors were the reverse of cosmopolitan, and as in the case of savage tribes, there was a tendency in two strains of the same stock to grow estranged and hostile to each other owing to isolation and cessation of mental contact. The secession of the United States from England was an instance of this, and the repulsion between the mother and the daughter would have grown incalculably but for the daily multiplying bonds of attraction across the Atlantic, which are fast reducing it to the dimensions of the proverbial ■ Herring Pond.' A like isolation of the colonies is being prevented by those modern agents, steam and electricity, and the sense of a world-wide Empire is now growing more rapidly in Greater than in Lesser Britain. For the creation of this an hereditary monarchy or Commonwealth seems indispensable, in which, however, hereditary peers would probably play no part. A supteme head is necessary to every Government, if only to exclude ambitious soldiers and politicians. The elective principle has not proved altogether a success in the United States, and would clearly be impracticable for any but a solidly compacted community. If the idea of British mlidarite is ever to be realized, it will be embodied in a Democratic Imperalism, or an Imperial Commonwealth, the head of which will be hereditary. Hence, should this idea grow, we may look amid many political changes in England for a persistency of the monarchy as the common link of the race and the expression of national sentiment. In these days nothing is sacred. A Dr. Robinson, of London, has been instituting experiments with newly-born infants evidencing the connection between the human race and the monkey tribe. These experiments the Pall Mall 'iaz-tte has graphically reproduced in illustrations on its pages, which form a very interesting, if not altogether palatable study. When the Darwinian theory regarding the descent of man was first promulgated twenty-two years ago, it provoked an outburst of disapprobation, and the great scientist was assailed by many as virulently as if he had offered them a personal insult. Some opponents took a highly chivalrous position, and asked if he dared to connect their women with an animal race, quite over looking the fact that the kinship of European divinities with crones of the Digger-Indian or An daman-islander sort could not for a moment be disputed, and also that at the outstart of life the belle of the season was not so very much to look at after all. Such tricks has strong imagination, however, that while the notion of an anima! origin for men might Ire mooted, the same idea with regard to women was shunned. Habit and scientific evidence have since then compelled a sort of acceptance of Darwin's theories. As the scope of human knowledge expands and the number of persons of both sexes who devote themselves to the study of science increases, the new explanations of what was before unexplained gain ground. Ever since Galileo and Kepler revealed the principles which underlie the universe and Newton discovered gravitation, the march of science has been victorious

and irresistible. Gradually even man has been brought within the scope of everlasting natural laws, and the development not only of his body but of his mind is being noted in the domain of language, of laws, and of morals. Little bylittle the old doctrine of a self-centred human race with a universe existing around for its sole and special benefit is being discredited, and mankind is being shown as only a very subordinate part of the great whole.