Results 1-5 of 15
It should be evident that he does no wrong. He should not be brought too closely
to real measurement. He should be aloof and solitary. As the functions of English
royalty are for the most part latent, it fulfils this condition. It seems to order, but it ...
The queen bee was taken away, but the hive went on. Eefined and original
observers have of late objected to English royalty that it is not splendid, enough.
They have compared it with the French Court, which is better in show, which
comes to ...
The very contrary is the principle of English royalty. As in politics it would lose its
principal use if it came forward into the public arena, so in society if it advertised
itself it would be pernicious. We have voluntary show enough already in London
But a little experience and less thought show- that royalty cannot take credit for
domestic excellence. Neither George L, nor George II., nor William IV. were
patterns of family merit ; George IV. was a model of family demerit. The plain fact
is, that ...
Lastly. Constitutional royalty has the function which I insisted on at length in my
last essay, and which, though it is by far the greatest, I need not now enlarge
upon again. It acts as a disguise. It enables our real rulers to change without
What people are saying - Write a review
LibraryThing ReviewUser Review - patito-de-hule - LibraryThing
Walter Bagehot was editor of the Economist and his name is still on the weekly page about England. This book describes the English Constitution and compares it favorably with the United States Constitution. Read full review