The Journal of the Siam Society Vol. LXIV, Part 1-2, 1976 - Khamkoo

14 Nicholas Tarling
tion' was preferable. It could, however, be counselled only cautiously,
and the use opponents of the extremists made of alleged British readiness
to intervene was somewhat embarrassing and might even be counterproductive.
The best solution was a constitutional monarchy. For that,
it would seem, King Prajadhipok was working. But be could make only
limited use of a British threat to intervene. His other resources were
limited, too.
* * *
King Vajiravudh had employed favourites. Seeing himself as
recapturing the spirit of King Chulalongkorn, King Prajadhipok had
displaced them with princely ministers. But this was to hamper him
when he came to believe that Siam must move in the direction of constitutional
monarchy. On his visit to the U.S. in 1931, be told the press
he intended to grant a constitution. 48 But the plans drawn up for the
inauguration of a constitution on the I 50th anniversary of the Cbakri
dynasty were not carried out because of opposition from the princes. 49
The King gave way, although, according to Prince Tewawong Warothai,
warning them 'that the inevitable result would be a coup d'etat and a
military dictatorship,.so Granting a constitution might have averted
the revolution; certainly it would have affected its course.
Interpretations of the King's conduct after the revolution vary,
both in contemporary reports and among historians. But the interpretation
that seems to make most sense suggests that the .King's aim
continued to be a constitutional monarchy, and that he struggled with
such means as he possessed to bring it about. The revolution, once
begun, had to be accepted. Immediate abdication, or the encouragement
of right-wing reaction, bad to be avoided; they might only precipitate
chaos and foreign intervention. It was necessary to proceed to constitutional
monarchy from therevolution, instead of from absolutism.
48)
49)
Chula Chakrabongse, The Twain Have Me;, London," n.d., p. 135.
Batson, pp. 82-85.
50) Johns to Simon, 29 June 1932, No. 137, F.O. 371/16261 (F5918/4260/40).