Dissolution Of Parliament

Citation metadata

Author: SENEX.
Date: May 2, 1950
From: The Times(Issue 51680)
Publisher: NI Syndication Limited
Document Type: Letter to the editor
Length: 78,122 words
Source Library: Times Newspapers Limited

Main content

Article Preview :
005 0FFO-1950-MAY02-005-007-001 5

| DISSOLUTION OF

PAPLIAMENT

FACTORS IN CROWN'S

CHOICE

| DISSOLUTION OF

PAPLIAMENT

FACTORS IN CROWN'S

CHOICE

005 0FFO-1950-MAY02-005-007-001 5

TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES Sir,-It is surely indisputable (and conimon sense) that a Prime Minister may ask-not demand-that his Sovereign will grant him a dissolution of Parliament; and that the Sovereign, if he so chooses, may refuse to grant this request. The problem of such a choice is entirely personal to the Sovereign, though he is, of course, free to seek informal advice from anybody whom he thinks fit to consult.

In so far-as this mnatter.can be publicly discussed, it can be properly assumed that no wise Sovereign-that is, one who has at heart the true interest of the country, the constitution, and the Monarchy-would deny a dissolution to his Prime Minister unless he were satisfied that: (1) the existing Parliament was still vital, viable, and capable of doing its job; (2) a General Election would be detrimental to the national economy; (3) he could rely on finding another Prime Minister who could carry on his Government, for a reasonable period, with a working majority in the House of Commons. When Sir Patrick Duncan refused a dissolution to his Prime Minister in South Africa in 1939, all these conditions were satisfied: when Lord Byng did the same in Canada in 1926, they appeared'to be, but in the event the third proved illusory.

I am. &c..

SENEX.

April 29.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES Sir,-It is surely indisputable (and conimon sense) that a Prime Minister may ask-not demand-that his Sovereign will grant him a dissolution of Parliament; and that the Sovereign, if he so chooses, may refuse to grant this request. The problem of such a choice is entirely personal to the Sovereign, though he is, of course, free to seek informal advice from anybody whom he thinks fit to consult.

In so far-as this mnatter.can be publicly discussed, it can be properly assumed that no wise Sovereign-that is, one who has at heart the true interest of the country, the constitution, and the Monarchy-would deny a dissolution to his Prime Minister unless he were satisfied that: (1) the existing Parliament was still vital, viable, and capable of doing its job; (2) a General Election would be detrimental to the national economy; (3) he could rely on finding another Prime Minister who could carry on his Government, for a reasonable period, with a working majority in the House of Commons. When Sir Patrick Duncan refused a dissolution to his Prime Minister in South Africa in 1939, all these conditions were satisfied: when Lord Byng did the same in Canada in 1926, they appeared'to be, but in the event the third proved illusory.

I am. &c..

SENEX.

April 29.

Source Citation

Source Citation Citation temporarily unavailable, try again in a few minutes.   

Gale Document Number: GALE|CS84888226