THE MARRIAGE OF PRINCE LEOPOLD.

Temuka Leader, Issue 9418, 13 June 1882, Page 3

THE MARRIAGE OF PRINCE LEOPOLD.

The House of Commons, says the Argus correspondent, writing on March 24, was, last night, the scene of a strange debate, in which extreme views found rough utterance. Mr Gladstone on the previous evening had brought down a message from the Queen, couched in the usual formal terms, which invited her “ faithful Commons ” to make fitting provision for Prince Leopold on the occasion of his marriage. Mr Labouchere, in giving notice of opposition, therefore, could not rest his case on personal grounds. Some little amusement was caused by the tact that Mr Bright and others kept their hats on during the reading of the message,and there was a sudden development of interest in certain hostile quarters as to this supposed violation of etiquette. All such minor points, were however, 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 survives her husband. Mr Labouchere opposed the vote, first, because the civil list was sufficient to support the children of the 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 smongst the working classes. The present income of the Prince was £278 a week, more than many men had for .a year to keep a family upon. Mr Healey —in cool, matter-of-fact tones, one hand in his pocket—carried the matter still further. He was opposed to ‘ giving these people anything whatever.’ He did not doubt Prince Leopold’s high qualities, but the best thing he could do with them was to earn his living. He had never seen a prince, did not know what one was like, but thought he should set a good example. Mr Storey followed in a similar strain, objecting to the keeping of titled people in idleness. He concluded, after a running fire of comments, by suggesting that noble lords and goldsticks, who were not ashamed to play the part of flunkeys, should be abolished, and the money so saved 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 against it.