THE MARRIAGE OF PRINCE LEOPOLD.

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2533, 22 May 1882, Page 3

THE MARRIAGE OF PRINCE LEOPOLD.

The House of Common* was, says the correspondent of the “ Argue,the ecene of a strange debate, in which extreme views found rough utterance. Ur Gladstone on a previous evening had brought down a message from the Queen, couched in the usual formal terms, which invited her " faithful Commons” to moke fitting provision for Prince Leopold on the occasion of his marriage. There is no one of the Eojal family who stands higher in papular estimation than the young Prince. He has exhibited same qualities near akin to those of the Prinaa Consort, and his speeches have been distinguished by their tr:»dthof as well as their practical wisdom. Mr Labonchere, in giving notice of opposition, therefore, could not rest his case on personal grounds. Some little amusement wag caused by the fact that Mr Bright and other* kept their hats on during the reading of the message, and there was a sudden development of interest in certain hostile quarters a* to thi* supposed violation of etiquette. All such minor points were howevei overwhelmed in the tide of emotion that eddied round the subject last evening. Mr Gladstone moved two resolutions, the first proposing an annuity of £IO,OOO for Prince Leopold, in addition to the £15,000 he now receives ; and the second a payment of £6OOO a year to the Princess Helena, in case she should survive her husband. Mr Labouohere opposed the vote, first because the civil list wa* sufficient to support the children ofjthe Crown; second, because there was no State reason in the marriage; and, third, because the present allowance was sufficient. Mr Broadhurst, in support, said that these votes created strong feeling amongst the working classes. The present income of the Princs was £278 a week, mere than many men had for a year to keep a family upon. Mr Healy—in cool matter-of-fact tones, one hand in hi* pocket—carried the argument much further. He was opposed to “ giving these people anything whatever.’’ He did not doubt Prince Leopold’s high qualitier, but the best thing he could do with them was to earn hi* living. Ho had never seen a Prince, did not know what one was like, but thought he should set a good example. Mr Story followed in a similar strain, objecting to the keeping of titled persons in idleness. He concluded, after a running fire of comments, by suggesting that noble lords and goldeticks, who were not ashamed to play the part of flunkeys, should be abolished, and the money so saved be appropriated for the support of Prince Leopold, The discussion thus provoked had the nature of a lively and ludicrous interlude, though not without its serious significance. The division resulted in 387 for the vote, and 42 again t it.