Yesterday week, Sir Wilfrid Lawson raised a discussion in the
House of Commons as to the propriety of putting up a monument to the Prince Imperial in Westminster Abbey, which at least suc- ceeded in eliciting a great deal of objection to that course from most opposite quarters. The Irishmen, indeed, were divided, Sir Patrick O'Brien intimating that to the Irish the name of Napo- leon was sacred, and appearing to think that Irishmen would be, pleased to see in Westminster Abbey a monument to any Napo- leon whatever. But Mr. Justin IWCarthy and Mr. Finigen both took the common-sense view that this was a question of national taste, not of private feeling, and that it was a blunder in national taste to erect a public monument to a French pretender, who died in the attempt to make his name more popular in France. Among English Members, Mr. Beresford Hope, a strong Cori-
servative, was decidedly against the proposal ; while Mr. Burt,. on behalf of the working-classes, maintained that if the Prince was to have such a monument, the two troopers who died at his side should have one, too. On behalf of the Dean, the case made was very apologetic. Sir S. Northcote deprecated importing any political significance into the proposal, but it is the circumstances of the case, not individual discretion, which import that significance into it. Mr. Childers pleaded for the monument, on the ground that the two Wesley& are commemorated in Westminster Abbey. But the two Wesleys mark an epoch in the history of the English Church, and the late Prince has no historical significance for England at all. In fact, all the reasons were on one side of the discussion, and all the excuses on the other.
Previous page
