Royal Snuffles, Laborite Defiance
GREAT BRITAIN
Royal Snuffles, Laborite Defiance
For the first time since he nearly died of pneumonia two years ago, George V last week opened Parliament. Bareheaded the venerable monarch drove with Queen Mary from Buckingham Palace to the House of Lords, arrived snuffling. Repeatedly during the majestic procedure His Majesty cleared his throat as though it tickled. Once he broke a sentence in the middle to cough.
On the dais close to Their Majesties, Edward of Wales also had a cold. When he could stand his own snuffling no longer, H. R. H. daringly extracted a handkerchief from beneath his imposing, ermine-collared robe and blew his nose. "It was tremendously human and so very much like the Prince," cabled the New York Time's sensitive Charles A. Selden. "That white handkerchief served as a most restful spot for the eyes. . . . General Dawes served the same useful purpose. . . . His Chicago full evening dress was a relieving splash of black and white against the blue, green, gold and scarlet of the court dress worn by other envoys."
Socialist Speech. This was the first Parliament ever opened by George V with a Labor Cabinet in office. His speech from the throne was therefore the first ever written for His Majesty's utterance by Socialists.* It was noticed that as the Socialist Lord Chancellor, Sir John Sankey, knelt and presented the speech his hand trembled. Grasping the document firmly the King-Emperor began to read in a voice which, when he was not clearing his throat, rang loudly and distinctly through the oblong, Gothic hall. Excerpts:
"My Lords and Members of the House of Commons:
"It has given me much pleasure to receive my Ministers from the dominions and representatives of India who are attending the Imperial Conference. . . .
"I hope soon to welcome representatives of the princes and people of India, who are about to join with members of all parties in both houses of Parliament to consider the future constitutional position of India [next week] . . .
"My relations with the foreign powers continue to be friendly.
"I was very glad to entrust my son, the Duke of Gloucester, with the duty of representing me at the coronation of the Emperor of Ethiopia. . . .
"I follow with grave concern and sympathy continuance of heavy unemployment among so many of my people. . . . I propose immediately to set up a commission to inquire into the entire question of unemployment insurance and in particular to allegations of abuse of its provisions. . . .
"Measures will be submitted to you . . . for amending the laws relating to trade disputes and trade unions. . . .
"A measure of electoral reform will be submitted to you. . . .
"Bills will also be laid before you to enable ratification of the Washington Hours Convention and of the International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea, and for the establishment of a new statutory authority to deal with passenger traffic in London.
"I pray that under the blessing of God the outcome of your deliberations may advance the happiness and well-being of my people."
Bribe or Bait? Ostentatiously humdrum in style, the two sentences italicized above were in fact the sensational nub of the King-Emperor's speech: the Labor Party's speech. The first pledges Scot MacDonald to risk the very life of his Labor Cabinet by asking Parliament to repeal the Trade Disputes and Trade Unions Bill, which was passed to prevent a recurrence of Great Britain's paralyzing "General Strike" (TIME, May 10 to May 24, 1926). It has generally been expected that the Liberal Party would side against the Labor Cabinet on this issue and thus produce the Cabinet's fall; but Scot MacDonald's second pledge last week seemed to mean that he had bought Liberal support at the high price of agreeing to support the Liberal Party's demand for "electoral reform."
What Liberals mean by this phrase is apparent from certain glaring facts. At the last election? 5,260,050 Liberal votes sent to Parliament only 59 Liberal M. P.'s But 8,669,469 Conservative votes made 260 Conservative M. P.'s and 8,416,557 Labor votes returned 287 Labor M. P.'s. In other words the British electoral system is such that 88,983 votes were required to elect one Liberal, while only 29,326 votes were required to elect a Laborite and 33,343 sufficed for a Conservative. This explains why the Conservatives, having received more votes than the Labcrites, actually won fewer seats in Parliament.*
Plainly Great Britain's electoral system is ripe and rotten for reform. Everyone assumed at first last week that Prime Minister MacDonald, by promising this reform, had bought the votes of Liberal Leader David Lloyd George & cohorts, would use them to repeal the Trade Disputes and Trade Unions Bill. But prominent Liberals refused to confirm any such bargain. The promise of reform was evidently not a bribe, but a bait.
Conference "Killed." Conservative Leader Stanley Baldwin wanted to know why His Majesty had not so much as mentioned Palestine. He also hounded the Prime Minister about the Imperial Conference.
Goaded, Scot MacDonald made his most important public statement in recent months. He revealed that the Labor Cabinet, dominated by Free-Trader Philip Snowden, has decided to refuse the dominion prime ministers' demand that Great Britain lay a tariff on non-Empire foodstuffs, such a tariff being intended to result in larger purchases of foodstuffs by the Mother Country from her dominions. Briefly, momentously the Prime Minister said:
"The first thing and in some cases the last thing every dominion Premier has asked has been for us to tax wheat. We cannot do it!"
Thus defiantly Scot MacDonald stated the fact that millions of Great Britain's laboring men will not stand for a tax or tariff of any sort which they think might raise the price of bread. His words were widely said to have "killed the Conference" which made no progress last week, prepared to adjourn.
Yellow Flag. Hottest criticism of the speech from the Throne came from sallow, fiery Laborite left winger James Maxton, M.P. He flayed the speech as not Socialist, accused Scot MacDonald of "running up the yellow flag of Liberalism." But a Maxton motion that the House "humbly regrets" the non-Socialist character of the Royal speech was defeated by 156 votes to 11.
*At the opening of the Labor Government's first Parliament (TIME, July 15, 1929) the Lord Chancellor, Sir John Sankey, substituted for George V, still convalescent, read Socialist MacDonald's first speech. Labor's first government (TIME, January-November 1924) witnessed no opening of Parliament.
*Explanation: Supposing that 30,000 votes are cast in one constituency as follows: 13,000 for the Labor candidate; 9,000 for the Liberal; 8,000 for the Conservative. The net result is that 17,000 Liberal and Conservative votes are absolutely wasted, while but 13,000 suffice to elect the Labor candidate. In Germany, under the same circumstances, the Labor candidate would still have been elected but the other votes would have been credited to the party for which they were cast. After the election each German party totals up the "left over votes" it gets in this way, and for every 60,000 such votes the party is permitted to choose and to send to the Reichstag one Deputy. Thus no votes are wasted in Germany, millions in Great Britain and in the U. S.
This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.