in the United Kingdom
under which the Sovereign
could wisely refuse a request of the Prime Minister
to dissolve Parliament, if the existing Parliament is "still vital, viable, and capable of doing its job", if "a General Election would be detrimental to the national economy", and if the Sovereign "could rely on finding another prime minister who could govern for a reasonable period with a working majority in the House of Commons
."
The letter
During public discussion in 1950 of the King's potential response to the slim majority of the newly reelected Labour Party, the Lascelles Principles were formally stated in a letter by Sir Alan Lascelles, Private Secretary
to King George VI, under the pseudonym "Senex" to the Editor of The Times
, published 2 May 1950:
To the Editor of The Times
Sir,—It is surely indisputable (and common 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 matter 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
King-Byng AffairThe King–Byng Affair was a Canadian constitutional crisis that occurred in 1926, when the Governor General of Canada, the Lord Byng of Vimy, refused a request by his prime minister, William Lyon Mackenzie King, to dissolve parliament and call a general election....
in Canada in 1926, they appeared to be, but in the event the third proved illusory.
I am, &c.,
SENEX.
April 29.
—http://archive.timesonline.co.uk/tol/viewArticle.arc?toDate=1950-05-03&fromDate=1950-05-02¤tPageNumber=1&resultsPerPage=10&sortBy=default&offset=0&viewName=&addFilters=&removeFilters=&addCat=&queryKeywords=senex§ionId=1040&currPgSmartSet=1&pageId=ARCHIVE-The_Times-1950-05-02-05&articleId=ARCHIVE-The_Times-1950-05-02-05-007&xmlpath=&pubId=17&totalResults=1&addRefineFilters=&removeRefineFilters=&addRefineCat=&next_Page=false&prev_Page=false&date_dd_From=2&date_mm_From=05&date_yyyy_From=1950&date_dd_to_range=3&date_mm_to_range=05&date_yyyy_to_range=1950&date_dd_from_precise=2&date_mm_from_precise=05&date_yyyy_from_precise=1950&isDateSearch=false&dateSearchType=range&refineQuerykeywordText="Dissolution of Parliament: Factors in Crown's Choice"], The Times, 2 May 1950, page 5
Thus, the letter asserts the constitutional power of the Sovereign to deny a dissolution, describes the conditions for a wise exercise of that power, and references precedent
s when requests for parliamentary dissolution during these conditions were refused by Governors-General of British Commonwealth countries, who represent the Sovereign.
English historian Peter Hennessy
has stated that the second of the three conditions has since been "dropped from the canon", being no longer included in internal Cabinet Office
guidance.