A COMMISSION OF INQUIRY ON ROYALTY

(1876.)

The subjects for our solemn consideration are the seclusion of her Most

Gracious Majesty, and the complaints thereanent published in several

respectable journals. In order to investigate the matter thoroughly, we

constituted ourselves (the unknown number x) into a special Commission

of Inquiry. We are happy to state that the said Commission has concluded

its arduous labors, and now presents its report within a week of its

appointment; surely the most prompt and rapid of commissions. The cause

of this celerity we take to be the fact that the Commissioners were

unsalaried; we being unanimously of opinion that had we received good

pay for the inquiry throughout the period of our session, we could have

prolonged it with certain benefit, if not to the public yet to

ourselves, for a great number of years. If, therefore, you want a

Commission to do its work rapidly vote no money for it. And do not fear

that the most headlong haste in gathering evidence and composing the

report will diminish the value of such report; for when a Commission has

lasted for years or months it generally rises in a quite different state

of the subject matter from that in which it first sat, and the report

must be partly obsolete, partly a jumble of anachronisms. In brief, it

may be fairly affirmed as a general rule that no Commission of Inquiry

is of any value at all; the appointment of one being merely a dodge by

which people who don’t want to act on what they and everybody else see

quite well with their naked eyes, set a number of elderly gentlemen to

pore upon it with spectacles and magnifying glasses until dazed and

stupid with poring, in the hope that this process will last so long that

ere it is finished the public will have forgotten the matter altogether.

And now for the result of our inquiries on this subject, which is not

only immensely important, but is even sacred to our loyal hearts.

A West-end tradesman complains bitterly that through the absence of the

Court from Buckingham Palace, and the diminished number and splendor of

royal pomps and entertainments, the “Season” is for him a very poor

season indeed. The Commissioners, find that the said tradesman (whose

knowledge seems-limited to a knowledge of his business, supposing he

knows that) is remarkably well off; and consider that West-end tradesmen

have no valid vested interest in Royalty and the Civil List, that at the

worst they do-a capital trade with the aristocracy and wealthy classes

(taking good care that the punctual and honest shall amply overpay their

losses by the unpunctual and dishonest); that if they are not satisfied

with the West-end, they had better try the East-end, and see how that

will suit them; and, in short, that this tradesman is not worth

listening to.

Numerous fashionable and noble people (principally ladies) complain that

they have no Court to shine, in. The Commissioners think that they shine

a great deal too much already, and in the most wasteful manner, gathered

together by hundreds, light glittering on light; and that if they really

want to shine beneficially in a court there are very many very dark

courts in London where the light of their presence would be most

welcome.

It is complained on behalf of their Royal Highnesses the Prince and

Princess of Wales that they have to perform many of the duties of

royalty without getting a share of the royal allowance. The

Commissioners think that if the necessary expenses of the heir to the

throne are really too heavy for his modest, income, and are increased by

the performance of royal duties, he had better send in yearly a bill to

his Mamma for expenses incurred on her account, and a duplicate of the

same to the Chancellor to the Exchequer; so that in every Budget the

amount of the Civil List shall be equitably divided between her Majesty

and her Majesty’s eldest son, doubtless to their common satisfaction.

It is complained on behalf of various foreign royal or ruling personages

that while they in their homes treat generously the visiting members of

our royal family, they are treated very shabbily when visiting here. The

Commissioners think that Buckingham Palace, being seldom or never wanted

by the Queen, and very seldom wanted for the reception of the English

Court, should be at all times open for such royal or ruling visitors;

that a Lord Chamberlain, or other such noble domestic servant should be

detailed to attend on them, and see to their hospitable treatment in all

respects; and that to cover the expenditure on their account a fair

deduction should be made from her Majesty’s share of the Civil List,

which deduction, being equitable her Majesty would no doubt view with

extreme pleasure.

It is complained on the part of her Majesty’s. Ministers, that when they

want the royal assent and signature to important Acts of Parliament,

they have to lose a day or two and undergo great fatigue (which is

peculiarly hard on men who are mostly aged, and all overworked) in

travelling to and from Osborne or Balmoral. The Commissioners think the

remedy plain and easy, as in the two preceding cases. Let a law be

passed assuming that absence, like silence, gives, consent; so that

whenever her Majesty is not in town, the Speaker of the Commons or the

Lord Chancellor, or other great officer of State, be empowered to seal

and sign in her name, and generally to perform any of her real and royal

duties, on the formal demand of the Ministry, who always (and not the

Queen) are responsible to Parliament and the country for all public

acts.

A taxpayer complains that for fourteen years her Majesty has been

punctually drawing all moneys allotted to support the royal dignity,

while studiously abstaining from all, or nearly all, the hospitalities

and other expensive functions incident to the support of the said

dignity. The Commissioners consider that her Majesty is perchance

benefiting the country more (and may be well aware of the fact) by

taking her money for doing nothing than if she did something for it;

that if she didn’t take the said money, somebody else would (as for

instance, were she to abdicate, the Prince of Wales, become King, would

want and get at least as much); so that while our Government remains as

it is, the complaint of the said taxpayer is foolish.

Another Taxpayer, who must be a most mean-minded fellow, a stranger to

all sacred sympathies and hallowed emotions, says: “If a washerwoman,

being stupified by the death of her husband, neglected her business for

more than a week or two, she would certainly lose her custom or

employment, and not all the sanctity of conjugal grief (about which

reverential journalists gush) would make people go on paying her for

doing nothing; and if this washerwoman had money enough of her own to

live on comfortably, people would call her shameless and miserly if she

asked for or accepted payment while doing nothing; and if this

washerwoman had a large family of boys and girls around her, and shut

herself up to brood upon her husband’s death for even three or four

months, people would reckon her mad with selfish misery. The

Commissioners (as soon as they recover from the stupefaction of horror

into which this blasphemy has thrown them) consider and reply that there

can be no proper comparison of a Queen and a washerwoman, and that

nobody would think of instituting one, except a brute, a Republican, an

Atheist, a Communist, a, fiend in human form; that anyhow if, as this

wretch says, a washerwoman would be paid for a week or two without

working, in consideration of her conjugal affliction, it is plain that a

Queen, who (it will be universally allowed) is at least a hundred

thousand times as good as a washerwoman, is therefore entitled to at

least a hundred thousand times the “week or two” of salary without

performance of duty—that is, to at least 1,923 or 3,846 years, whereas

this heartless and ribald reprobate himself only complains that our

beloved Sovereign has done nothing for her wage throughout “fourteen

years.” The Commissioners therefore eject this complainant with

ineffable scorn; and only wish they knew his name and address, that they

might denounce him for prosecution to the Attorney-General.

A Malthusian (whatever kind of creature that may be) complains that her

Majesty has set an example of uncontrolled fecundity to the nation and

the royal family, which, besides being generally immoral, is likely, at

the modest estimate of £6,000 per annum per royal baby, to lead to the

utter ruin of the realm in a few generations. The Commissioners, after

profound and prolonged consideration, can only remark that they do not

understand the complaint any better than the name (which they do not

understand at all) of the “Malthusian;” that they have always been led

to believe that a large family is a great honor to a legitimately united

man and woman; and that, finally, they beg to refer the Malthusian to

the late Prince Consort.

A devotedly loyal Royalist (who unfortunately does not give the name and

address of his curator) complains that her Majesty, by doing nothing

except receive her Civil List, is teaching the country that it can get

on quite as well without a monarch as with one, and might therefore just

as well, and indeed very much better, put the amount of the Civil List

into its own pocket and call itself a Republic. The Commissioners remark

that this person seems the most rational of the whole lot of

complainants (most rational, not for his loyalty, but most rational as

to the grounds of his complaint, from his own point of view; in

accordance with the dictum, “A madman reasons rightly from wrong

premises; a fool wrongly from right ones,”) and that his surmise is very

probably correct—namely, that her Majesty is really a Republican in

principle, but not liking (as is perfectly natural in her position) to

publicly profess and advocate opinions so opposed to the worldly

interests of all her friends and relatives, has been content to further

these opinions practically for fourteen years past by her conduct,

without saying a word on the subject. The Commissioners, however, find

one serious objection to this surmise in the fact that if her Majesty is

really a Republican at heart, she must wish to exclude the Prince of

Wales from the Throne; while it seems to them that the intimate

knowledge she must have of his wisdom and virtues (not to speak of her

motherly affection) cannot but make her feel that no greater blessing

could come to the nation after her death than his reigning over it. As

this is the only complaint which the Commissioners find at once

well-founded and not easy to remedy, they are happy to know that it is

confined to the very insignificant class of persons who are “devotedly

loyal Royalists.”

The Commissioners thus feel themselves bound to report that all the

complaints they have heard against our beloved and gracious Sovereign

(except the one last cited, which is of no importance) are without

foundation, or frivolous, or easily remedied, and that our beloved and

gracious Sovereign (whom may Heaven long preserve!) could not do better

than she is now doing, in doing nothing.

But in order to obviate such complaints, which do much harm, whether ill

or well founded, and which especially pain the delicate susceptibilities

of all respectable men and women, the Commissioners have thought it

their duty to draw up the following project of a Constitution, not to

come into force until the death of our present beloved and gracious

Sovereign (which may God, if so it please Him, long avert!), and to be

modified in its details according to the best wisdom of our national

House of Palaver.

Satires and Profanities · 第 23 / 29 题