Monday, Jun. 02, 1952

The Royal Wage

An urgent message flew last week from Buckingham Palace to Clarence House, out of which Queen Elizabeth's family had just moved. "The Duke of Cornwall is crying," it ran. "He cannot find his rabbit." Within moments, the white angora, overlooked in the moving, was rushed to the palace by limousine, and the most pressing problem in three-year-old Prince Charles' life was solved.

His elder relatives were not so fortunate. By tradition, the heir apparent to Britain's throne has first claim on the revenue of the Duchy of Cornwall (an estimated $300,000 yearly) for his own uses, so young Charles could afford to cuddle his rabbit without worrying where his next shilling comes from. The rest of the royal family, even though the crown nominally owns huge chunks of revenue-bearing real estate, must still depend on parliamentary generosity for their livelihoods.* The royal wage scale, known as the Civil List, is drawn up within, the first six months of each new reign.

Last week, Queen Elizabeth asked Parliament to get to work on a new Civil List. Queenly and ladylike, she mentioned no figures, left the details to Parliament after merely hinting that her husband might need more than the -L-10,000 ($28,000) a year he now gets and that her sister Princess Margaret might one day be married. A committee of 22 members from all parties was set up in the House of Commons to consider the Queen's request and draw up the list. One name which would not appear on it: the Duke of Windsor, whose present allowance (an estimated $70,000 a year) came out of the pocket of his brother George VI.

* Ever since the reign of George III, Britain's sovereign has surrendered most of the crown revenue to Parliament, which in turn, acting somewhat like an insurance company, gives some of it back in the form of specific annuities to members of the royal family. The system was designed largely to prevent an impulsive monarch from throwing away his substance wholesale. Actually, what the crown surrenders in revenues is twice what it gets back in allowances. Once in control of the money, the House of Commons has been traditionally reluctant to part with it. After a rowdy argument in the House in 1840, Queen Victoria's requested -L-50,000 a year for Consort Albert was cut to -L-30,000. In 1911, George V made a deal with the House by which the monarch's allowance would be tax-free in exchange for his agreement to entertain all foreign royalty out of his own pocket. In 1937, Laborites unsuccessfully opposed George VI's -L-410,000 on the ground that, like his subjects, he should learn to economize.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.