CHAPTER X.

Removal to Buckingham Palace—First Levée—Dissolves Parliament—Beauty of her Elocution—Splendid Reception by the City of London—Settlement of the Queen’s Income—Her Daily Life—Her admirable Knowledge of, and Devotion to, the Business of the State—Reverence for the Lord’s Day.

Greatly to the regret of the inhabitants of Kensington, the Queen, with her mother, took her final departure from the abode where she was born, and in which she had spent so many happy days, and proceeded to Buckingham Palace, on July 13th. The Queen, on this occasion, looked pale, and her countenance had a very natural, and easily accounted for, aspect of deep regret. Immediately afterwards she held a Court Levée. It was, of course, thronged by her loyal subjects who had the privilege of entrée; but there was no appearance of fatigue in her face, voice, or manner, and the day passed off with spirit and brilliancy. She seemed to have acquired (so say the court chroniclers of the period), if possible, increased grace and dignity. She wore a rich lama dress, her head glittered with diamonds, and her breast was covered with the insignia of the Garter and other orders. A pair of embroidered velvet slippers covered feet which, resting on the cushion, were observed and admired by all as “exquisitely small.”

On the 17th of July she went in state to the House of Lords to dissolve the Parliament, in accordance with constitutional usage and enactment on the demise of the Crown. After thanking both Houses for their expressions of condolence on the death of her uncle, and for the zeal and assiduity with which they had discharged their duties, especially for their efforts to mitigate the severity of the penal code, she concluded by saying:—

I ascend the throne with a deep sense of the responsibility which is imposed upon me; but I am supported by the consciousness of my own right intentions, and by my dependence upon the protection of Almighty God. It will be my care to strengthen our institutions, civil and ecclesiastical, by discreet improvement wherever improvement is required, and to do all in my power to compose and allay animosity and discord. Acting upon these principles, I shall, upon all occasions, look with confidence to the wisdom of Parliament and the affections of my people, which form the true support of the dignity of the Crown, and ensure the stability of the Constitution.

The admirable manner in which the speech was read—her singularly musical voice being heard, without the slightest appearance of effort, in every corner of the House of Lords—was the subject of the admiration of all who heard it. It was, indeed, known that she was a fine singer, and frequently entertained her mother’s guests by singing to them, her mother accompanying her on the piano; nevertheless, the lucidity of her tones, and the entire absence of any discomposure to disturb them, surprised every one, and no one more so than her mother.

STATE VISIT TO THE CITY.

The Queen went in great state to the City on Lord Mayor’s Day, November 9. This royal entry was one of the greatest sights which had ever been beheld in the City. The Queen, looking remarkably well, magnificentlyattired in pink satin shot with silver, was greeted with deafening cheers from a crowd far denser than any she had ever seen, along her whole route from Marlborough House (her temporary residence until Buckingham Palace was completed for her occupation) to the Guildhall. The houses along the thoroughfares by which the cavalcade passed were hung with bright-coloured cloths, with green boughs, and with what flowers the earth could afford at the late season of the year. Flags and heraldic banners darkened the dim November light across the Strand, Fleet Street, and Cheapside; and every pedestal that could be improvised supported a bust of Queen Victoria. At Temple Bar the Lord Mayor and Aldermen, mounted on artillery horses from Woolwich, each of the steeds being held by the head by the soldier who was accustomed to bestride him, awaited their distinguished guest. The Lord Mayor, dismounting and taking the City Sword in his hand, delivered the keys, which were graciously returned, while more vociferous cheers than ever rent the air. On which, the Lord Mayor, re-mounting and holding the City Sword aloft, rode before Her Majesty through the City, the cortége of mounted Aldermen following her carriage. The open space before St. Paul’s was occupied by hustings, crowded by the Liverymen of the City Companies and the Christ’s Hospital boys. One of these, in conformity with an old usage, having presented an address to the Queen, and the whole of the boys having sung “God save the Queen,” the procession went on its way. At the Guildhall, which, with all its adjacent chambers, was sumptuously fitted up, a loyal address was read by the Recorder, and suitably acknowledged. After this came a sumptuous banquet,from which Her Majesty retired, to see on her way back the whole line of the route brilliantly illuminated.

The first message which the Queen sent to Parliament when it re-assembled, was a truly characteristic one: it asked for a suitable provision for her royal mother. This provision was loyally made, and in the same short winter session her own civil list was settled. William IV. had enjoyed a civil list amounting to £510,000, while, from the accession of George III. to the death of his eldest son, it had been fixed at £1,030,000. Her Majesty’s civil list was fixed at £385,000 per annum, and her privy purse, being the only sum over which she had complete personal control, and from which her private charities had to be disbursed, was fixed at £60,000. Out of the £385,000 the calculation, based by order of Parliament upon the accounts of the late reign, was that £131,260 would go for salaries of the Household, from the Master of the Horse and Mistress of the Robes, down to the humblest scullion and stable-helper; and £172,500 in tradesmen’s bills.

During the early days of her maiden reign, the Queen rose at eight, occupied a remarkably short time in dressing, and then discharged such routine business as signing despatches until the breakfast hour, which was invariably a quarter before ten. At that hour, she without fail sent one of her attendants toinvitethe Duchess of Kent to breakfast. From the day of her ascending the throne, to remove the slightest ground for suspicion as to any undue influence, the strictest etiquette was preserved between mother and daughter; the former never approaching the latter unless specially summoned, and carefully abstaining fromconversing about the business of the State. Twelve o’clock was the time appointed for conferences with her Ministers. After the usual complimentary salutation, she at once proceeded to the business of the day. If a document were handed to her, she read it without comment, and no remark passed her own lips or those of the Ministers present, until its perusal was concluded. After retiring from the Council-room, the interval was passed until dinner in riding or walking. At dinner, the first Lord-in-waiting took the head of the table; opposite to him, the chief Equerry-in-waiting. Her Majesty’s chair was half way down on the right, the various guests being seated according to their ranks. Next to Her Majesty, on the right hand, was the nobleman of highest degree; next to him, the Duchess of Kent, and so on. On Her Majesty’s left, the same rule was observed, the Baroness Lehzen, who acted as Secretary to the Queen, being always near her. The Queen left the table early for the drawing-room, where her musical tastes were regaled almost invariably, and her own proficiency very frequently displayed.

REVERENCE FOR SUNDAY.

The following incident, which was made public during the first year of the Queen’s reign, made a very pleasing impression upon the well-conditioned portion of the public. A certain noble Minister arrived at Windsor at a late hour on Saturday night. On being introduced, he said, “I have brought down for your Majesty’s inspection some documents of great importance; but, as I shall be obliged to trouble you to examine them in detail, I will not encroach on the time of your Majesty to-night, but will request your attention to-morrow morning.” “To-morrow morning?” repeated the Queen;“to-morrow is Sunday, my lord.” “True, your Majesty, but business of the State will not admit of delay.” “I am aware of that,” replied the Queen, “and, as your lordship could not have arrived earlier at the Palace to-night, I will, if those papers are of such pressing importance, attend to their contents after church to-morrow morning.” So to church went the Queen and the Court, and to church went the noble lord; when, much to his surprise, the discourse was on the duties and obligations of the Christian Sabbath. “How did your lordship like the sermon?” asked the Queen. “Very much indeed, your Majesty,” replied the nobleman. “Well, then,” retorted Her Majesty, “I will not conceal from you that, last night, I sent the clergyman the text from which he preached. I hope we shall all be improved by the sermon.” The Sunday passed without a single word being said relative to the State papers, and at night, when Her Majesty was about to withdraw—“To-morrow morning, my lord, at any hour you please,” said the Queen, turning to the nobleman—“as early as seven, my lord, if you like, we will look into the papers.” The nobleman said that he could not think of intruding on Her Majesty at so early an hour; he thought nine o’clock would be quite soon enough. “No, no, my lord,” said the Queen; “as the papers are of importance, I wish them to be attended to very early. However, if you wish it to be nine, be it so.” And accordingly, the next morning at nine, Her Majesty was seated ready to receive the nobleman and his papers.

THE QUEEN CROWNED.

Novel Features in the Coronation—Its Cost—Large Amount of Money Circulated—Splendour of the Procession—Enormous Crowds—The Scene within the Abbey—Arrival of the Queen—The Regalia and Sacred Vessels—Costume of the Queen—Astonishment of the Turkish Ambassador at the Scene—The Coronation Ceremony—The Queen’s Oath—The Anointing—The Crown placed on her Head—The Homage—An Aged Peer—The Queen’s Crown—The Illuminations and general Festivities—Fair in Hyde Park—The Duke of Wellington and Marshal Soult at the Guildhall.

The great event of the year 1838 was the Coronation, which took place on the 28th of June. It was conducted after the abridged model of that of the Queen’s immediate predecessor. The Coronation of George IV. had cost £243,000; that of William IV., £50,000. The charges on the occasion of the crowning of Queen Victoria amounted to about £70,000. This slight excess over the cost of the last Sovereign’s solemn investiture with regal power was explained by the Chancellor of the Exchequer as having been in no sense occasioned by any part of the ceremonial peculiarly connected with the Sovereign, but it had been incurred with a view of enabling the great mass of the people to participate in this national festivity. The great novelty on the occasion was the omission of the walking procession of all the estates of the realm, and the banquet in Westminster Hall, with the feudal services attendant thereon. Many of the upper classesgrumbled not a little at these omissions; but the general public were more than proportionately gratified. For in lieu of the disused ceremonies, a public procession through the streets was substituted. This enabled all to witness the splendid pageant, and induced a very large private expenditure and circulation of money. It was estimated that no less than £200,000 were paid for the use of windows and other positions of vantage in the line of the procession. The price of single seats ranged from five shillings to ten guineas; and the Duke of Buckingham, in his “Courts and Cabinets of William IV. and Victoria,” alleges that single windows in Pall Mall and St. James’s Street produced no less than £200. Persons of distinction behaved with a becoming liberality and splendour. Marshal Soult, the old opponent of Wellington, who specially represented on the occasion the Court of the Tuileries, and who was received by the crowds with great enthusiasm, appeared in a splendid state carriage that had been used by the Prince of Condé. The Russian Ambassador purchased for £1,600 a similar chariot, which had already done the same duty for the Duke of Devonshire, at St. Petersburg, on a like occasion. Another diplomat gave £250 for the loan for the day of a vehicle befitting his rank; while many more had to content themselves with carriages whose normal function it was to minister to the state of the civic magnates, and which were hastily repainted and decorated for the auspicious occasion.

The day was one of the brightest on which the Queen, with her proverbial good fortune in this respect, has ever appeared amongst her subjects. At early morn, the first rays of the blazing Midsummer sun slanted down throughthe windows of Westminster Abbey upon the jewels of whole rows of peeresses, and the illuminations which turned night into day remained in full magnificence until the dawn of the succeeding morning. At dawn, a salvo of artillery from the Tower caused all the population to be astir, and the population was on this day increased by the importation of four hundred thousand visitors. The behaviour of the enormous multitude which first lined the streets and then spread itself over the town, was beyond all praise. Courtesy and mutual forbearance were conspicuous, and no accident or offence occurred to mar the pleasing impressions of the ceremonial.

ORDER OF THE PROCESSION.

The route of the procession was as follows:—From Buckingham Palace, up Constitution Hill, along Piccadilly, St. James’s Street, Pall Mall, Cockspur Street, Charing Cross, Whitehall, and Parliament Street, to the great west door of Westminster Abbey. The most novel feature of the procession was the carriages of the Foreign Ambassadors, to which we have already alluded, with their jägers in gorgeous or grotesque uniforms. These came in the order in which they had arrived on their special missions to this country; the carriages of the regular resident Ambassadors came in their ordinary order of precedence. Next followed the members of the Royal Family, the Duchess of Kent preceding the carriages of the surviving sons of George III. To the Queen’s Barge Master, with forty-eight watermen, succeeded twelve of the Royal carriages, containing the Ladies and Gentlemen of the Household. Next came mounted, three and three, the high functionaries of the Army. And after Royal huntsmen, yeomen, prickers, marshalmen, foresters, and a host of other minor functionaries—the whole of themounted Household Troops being here and there interspersed at intervals in the cavalcade—came the grand state coach, containing Her Majesty the Queen, with the Duchess of Sutherland, Mistress of the Robes. On either side of the carriage rode Lord Combermere, Gold Stick in Waiting, and the Earl of Ilchester, Captain of the Yeomen of the Guard. The Earl of Albemarle, as Master of the Horse, and the Duke of Buccleuch, as Captain-General of the Royal Scottish Archers, rode behind. A squadron of Life Guards brought up the rear.

Meanwhile, within the Abbey, a painful sleepiness had oppressed those who had sat so many hours in cramped positions; many of them in galleries perched up high under the roofs of the aisles. Suddenly, a burst of music, rushing among the arches and ringing from the roof, aroused and entranced all, who peered eagerly down upon the procession of small figures; the central one looking the slightest and most fragile of all. At half-past eleven, the Queen reached the door of the Abbey, where she was received by the great officers of State, the noblemen bearing the Regalia, and the bishops carrying Patina, Chalice, and Bible. Having retired to her Robing-room, the procession formed and proceeded towards the altar, which was laden with magnificent gold plate, and beside which stood St. Edward’s Chair. Besides the elements which are common to all great English regal processions, and which it is, therefore, not requisite to recapitulate, the Regalia, which only appear on such occasions, were thus distributed:—St. Edward’s Staff, the Golden Spurs, the Sceptre with the Cross, the Curtana, and two Swords of Investiture, were borne respectively by the Duke of Roxburgh, Lord Byron, Duke ofCleveland, Duke of Devonshire, Marquis of Westminster, and Duke of Sutherland. The coronets of the princes of the blood were borne by noblemen; their trains by knights or peers’ sons. Next came the Earl Marshal, Duke of Norfolk, with his staff, Lord Melbourne with the Sword of State, and the Duke of Wellington, with his staff, as Lord High Constable; the Dukes of Richmond, Hamilton, and Somerset bore the Sceptre and Dove, St. Edward’s Crown, and the Orb; the Bishops of Bangor, Winchester, and London carried the Patina, Chalice, and Bible. The Queen, who was supported on one side by the Bishop of Bath and Wells, on the other by the Bishop of Durham, wore a royal robe of crimson velvet, furred with ermine and broidered with gold lace. She wore the collars of her orders, and on her head a circlet of gold. Eight peers’ daughters bore her train, most, if not all of them, old friends of her happy childish tours to the mansions of the aristocracy, and distinguished by their personal attractions. About fifty ladies of rank, occupying various positions in the household, succeeded, and the procession was concluded by Officers of State and Yeomen of the Guard.

THE CORONATION.

The chief and most picturesque incidents in the Coronation ceremony must be briefly narrated. The Queen looked extremely well, and “had a very animated countenance;” but perhaps the splendid attire of some of the foreign ambassadors attracted more attention than even the Sovereign to whose court they were accredited. The costume of the Prince Esterhazy was by far the most gorgeous; his dress, even to his boot-heels, sparkled with diamonds. The Turkish Ambassador seemed specially bewildered at the general splendour of the scene: forsome moments he stopped in astonishment, and had to be courteously admonished to move to his allotted place.

As the Queen advanced slowly to the centre of the choir, she was received with hearty plaudits, and the musicians sang the anthem, “I was glad.” At its close, the boys of Westminster School, privileged of old to occupy a special gallery, chanted “Vivat Victoria Regina.” On this the Queen moved to a chair, midway between the Chair of Homage and the altar; and there, after a few moments’ private devotion, kneeling on a fald-stool, she sat down, and the ceremony proper began. First came the “recognition.” The Archbishop of Canterbury, accompanied by some half-dozen of the greatest civil dignitaries, advanced and said, “Sirs, I here present unto you Queen Victoria, the undoubted Queen of this realm; wherefore, all you who have come this day to do your homage, are you willing to do the same?” On this, all Her Majesty’s subjects present shouted, “God Save Queen Victoria!” the Archbishop turning in succession to the north, south, and west sides of the Abbey, and the Queen doing the same. The bishops who bore them, then placed the Patina, Chalice, and Bible on the altar; the Queen, kneeling, made her first offering, a pall, or altar-cloth, of gold. The Archbishop having offered a prayer, the Regalia were laid on the altar; the Litany and Communion services were read, and a brief sermon preached, by various prelates. The preacher was the Bishop of London, and his text was from the Second Book of Chronicles, chapter xxxiv., verse 31—“And the king stood in his place, and made a covenant before the Lord, to walk after the Lord, andto keep his commandments, and his testimonies, and his statutes, with all his heart, and with all his soul, to perform the words of the covenant which are written in this book.”

After the sermon, the Queen swore—the Archbishop of Canterbury putting the oath—that she would maintain the law and the established religion. Then Her Majesty—the Sword of State being carried before her—went to the altar, and laying her right hand upon the Gospel, said, kneeling, “The things which I have here-before promised, I will perform and keep. So help me, God!” Having kissed the book, and signed a transcript of the oath presented to her by the Archbishop, she knelt upon her fald-stool, while the choir sang, “Veni, Creator, Dominus.”

THE HOMAGE OF THE PEERS.

Now, sitting in King Edward’s Chair, four Knights of the Garter holding the while over her head a canopy of cloth of gold, her head and hands were anointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury; after which he said his prayer, or blessing, over her. In quick succession followed the delivery of the Spurs, Sword of State, &c. The Dean of Westminster, having taken the crown from the altar, handed it to the Archbishop, who reverently placed it on the Queen’s head. This was no sooner done, than there arose from every part of the edifice a tremendous shout—“God save the Queen!” accompanied with lusty cheers and the waving of hats and handkerchiefs. At the same moment, the Peers and Peeresses put on their coronets, the Bishops their caps, and the Kings of Arms their crowns; the trumpets sounded, the drums were beat, and volleys fired from the Tower and Park guns. After the Benediction and Te Deum, theQueen was “enthroned,” or “lifted,” as the formulary has it, from the chair in which she had first sat into the Chair of Homage, where she delivered the sceptre, &c., to noblemen, while she received fealty of her more distinguished subjects. The Archbishop first knelt and did homage for himself and all the spiritual peers; next came the Princes of the blood, who merely touched the crown, kissed her left cheek, swore the oath of homage, and retired without kneeling; then the Peers in succession came—seventeen dukes, twenty-two marquises, ninety-four earls, twenty viscounts, and ninety-two barons. Each Peer knelt bareheaded, and kissed Her Majesty’s hand. Lord Rolle, who was upwards of eighty, stumbled and fell in going up the steps; the Queen at once stepped forward, and held out her hand to assist him. While the Peers were doing homage, the Earl of Surrey, Treasurer of the Household, threw silver coronation medals about the choir and lower galleries; and when the homage was completed the Members of the House of Commons, who occupied a special gallery, indicated their loyalty by giving nine lusty cheers. It was almost a quarter to four when the procession came back along the nave. The return cavalcade along the streets was even more attractive than that of the morning, for the royal and noble personages now wore their coronets, and the Queen her crown. The crown was especially admired. That which had been made for George IV. weighed upwards of seven pounds, and as it was considered too heavy for the Queen, a new one was constructed by Messrs. Rundell and Bridge, of less than half the weight. It was formed of hoops of silver, covered with precious stones, over a cap of richblue velvet, surmounted with a ball enriched by diamonds. Amongst its other gems was a large heart-shaped ruby, which had been worn by the Black Prince; this was set in front.

CORONATION FESTIVITIES.

In the evening the Queen entertained a hundred guests to dinner at Buckingham Palace, and at a late hour witnessed from the roof the fireworks in the Green Park. At Apsley House, the Duke of Wellington gave a ball, to which two thousand guests were invited. All the Cabinet Ministers gave state dinners. A fair was held in Hyde Park on the day of the coronation—Thursday—and until the end of the week. The area allotted comprised nearly one-third of the Park. On Friday, the Queen visited the fair, which was studded with theatres, refreshment booths, and stalls for the sale of fancy articles. The illuminations and fireworks gave great satisfaction, as did the fact that the whole of the theatres were opened gratuitously at the Queen’s express desire. Among other festivities, at home and abroad, which succeeded and were held in honour of the coronation of Victoria, may be mentioned a grand review by Her Majesty in Hyde Park; a magnificent banquet at the Guildhall, at which the old Waterloo antagonists, Wellington and Soult, were toasted in combination; the feasting of 13,000 persons on one spot at Cambridge; the laying of the first stone of the St. George’s Hall, at Liverpool, and at Leghorn of an English Protestant Church; and a great public dinner, in Paris, presided over by Sir Sidney Smith, the hero of St. Jean d’Acre.

THE BEDCHAMBER PLOT.

Resignation of Lord Melbourne’s Cabinet—Sir Robert Peel sent for—Fails to Form a Cabinet—His Explanation—The Queen Refuses to Dismiss her Ladies of the Bedchamber—Supported by her late Ministers—Sir Robert Peel’s Objections—The Queen will not give way—The Whigs recalled to Power—Public Opinion on the Dispute—The Whig Ministers blamed, but the Queen exculpated.

In April, 1839, Lord Melbourne’s administration, which had been rapidly losing its once great popularity, obtained only the small and nominal majority of five, in a very important matter connected with the government of Jamaica. The Ministers accordingly tendered their resignations early in May, and Her Majesty was graciously pleased to accept them. As usual under such circumstances, the Parliament was prorogued for a few days. After the lapse of a week, the Houses re-assembled, and Lord John Russell, who had been the Whig leader of the House, immediately rose and said that since he had last addressed them, Sir Robert Peel had received authority from Her Majesty to form a new Administration, and that the attempt of the Right Honourable Baronet having failed, Her Majesty had been graciously pleased to permit that gentleman to state the circumstances which had led to that failure.

On her accession, the Queen had left the selection ofthe Ladies of the Household entirely to her uncle Sussex, and Lord Melbourne—the one of whom had been a Whig all his life, and the other, though but a comparatively recent convert, was the head of the Whig party. They had somewhat indiscreetly selected at least all the important female members of the Household, those to whom a young girl would be likely to look up confidingly for information and guidance, from the ranks of the Whig aristocracy. On Tuesday, the 29th of May, the resignations of the Melbourne Cabinet were announced to Parliament. The next day, at two o’clock, in answer to her summons, Sir Robert Peel waited upon the Queen. She had first sent for the Duke of Wellington, but he recommended his former lieutenant and future leader as premier. The Queen, with characteristic truthfulness, which was none the less admirable that it was too girlishly outspoken to be judicious, or at all in accordance with the spirit of the constitution, at once greeted Sir Robert with an avowal that she was much grieved to part with her late Ministers, whose conduct she entirely approved. This was rather an awkward beginning. Nevertheless, he proceeded with the formation of his Cabinet, and the next day submitted a list of names to the Queen, including the Duke of Wellington, Lords Lyndhurst, Aberdeen, Ellenborough, Stanley, Sir James Graham, and Mr. Goulburn. As to the Household, he had hardly thought about it, and indeed he said he did not know who constituted the female part of it. He took the Red Book to learn who they were, and was at once struck with the completeness of the arrangements for surrounding the Queen with the nearestrelations of the Whig Ministers. For example, he afterwards put this point most strongly to the House:—

Sir, let me take that particular question on which my difficulty would arise. Who can conceal from himself that my difficulties were not Canada; that my difficulties were not Jamaica; that my difficulties were Ireland? (ironical cheers). I admit it freely, and thank you for the confirmation of my argument which these cheers afford. And what is the fact? I, undertaking to be a Minister of the Crown, and wishing to carry on public affairs through the intervention of the present House of Commons, in order that I might exempt the country from the agitation, and, possibly, the peril of a dissolution—I, upon that very question in a minority of upwards of twenty members. A majority of twenty-two had decided in favour of the policy of the Irish Government [that is, of the Irish policy of Lord Melbourne]. The chief members of the Irish Government, whose policy was so approved of, were the Marquis of Normanby, and the noble lord opposite, the member for Yorkshire [Lord Morpeth, afterwards the Earl of Carlisle]. By whom are the chief offices in the Household at this moment held? By the sister of Lord Morpeth [the Duchess of Sutherland], and the wife of the Marquis of Normanby. But the question is—Would it be considered by the public that a Minister had the confidence of the Crown, when the relatives of his immediate political opponents held the highest offices about the person of the Sovereign? My impression decidedly was that I should not appear to the country to be in possession of that confidence; and that impression I could not overcome; and upon that impression I resolved to act. Who were my political opponents? Why, of the two I have named, one, the Marquis of Normanby, was publicly stated to be a candidate for the very same office which it was proposed I should fill—namely, the office of Prime Minister. The other noble lord has been designated as the leader of this House; and I know not why his talents might not justify his appointment, in case of the retirement of his predecessor. Is it possible—I ask you to go back to other times; take Pitt, or Fox, or any other Minister of this proud country, and answer for yourselves this question—is it fitting that one man shall be the Minister, responsible for the most arduous charge that can fall to the lot of man, and that the wife of the other—that other his most formidable political enemy—shall, with his express consent, hold office in immediate attendance on theSovereign? Oh no! I felt it was impossible—I could not consent to this. Yes, feelings more powerful than reasoning on those precedents told me that it was not for my own honour or the public interests that I should consent to be Minister of England. The public interests may suffer nothing by my abandonment of that high trust; the public interests may suffer nothing by my eternal exclusion from power; but the public interests would suffer, and I should be abandoning my duty to myself, my country, and, above all, to the Queen my sovereign, if I were to consent to hold power on conditions which I felt to be—which I had the strongest conviction were—incompatible with the authority and with the duty of a Prime Minister.

THE QUEEN AND SIR ROBERT PEEL.

Sir Robert had informed Her Majesty that he did not propose any change in the offices in question below the grade of Ladies of the Bedchamber. He took it for granted that the ladies who held higher offices would save him any appearance of want of courtesy by voluntarily resigning. Ere this, however, had been stated, the Queen having expressed a desire that her own and her mother’s old friend, Lord Liverpool (who, it may be remarked, was of the Tory party), should be appointed to some office, Sir Robert at once requested the Queen’s permission to offer him the office of Lord Steward, or any other which he might select. The only other names which he submitted to her were those of Lords Ashley (now Shaftesbury), and Sydney. So far all was well. But when he went on to say that he was most ready to apply a similar principle to, and consult Her Majesty’s wishes in, the selection of her ladies, the Queen remarked that she should reserve all these appointments, and indeed did not intend to make any present change. In a subsequent interview with the Duke of Wellington, the Queen reiterated the same desire and intention. Meanwhile, after her interviewswith Peel and Wellington, Her Majesty sent for Lord John Russell, and put the direct question to him, Was she right in her determination? He at once replied that she was right; on which she naïvely asked him to support her now, as she had supported the Cabinet of which he had been a member. Lord John having consulted Lord Melbourne, they called their ex-colleagues together, and advised the Queen to send the following note to Sir Robert Peel, which she did:—

Buckingham Palace, May 10, 1839.The Queen, having considered the proposal made to her yesterday by Sir Robert Peel, to remove the Ladies of her Bedchamber, cannot consent to adopt a course which she conceives to be contrary to usage and repugnant to her feelings.

Buckingham Palace, May 10, 1839.

The Queen, having considered the proposal made to her yesterday by Sir Robert Peel, to remove the Ladies of her Bedchamber, cannot consent to adopt a course which she conceives to be contrary to usage and repugnant to her feelings.

On receipt of this, Sir Robert Peel, acting in perfect concert with the Duke of Wellington, communicated with Her Majesty in a remarkably courteous letter, of which this was the concluding and decisive paragraph:—

Having had the opportunity, through your Majesty’s gracious consideration, of reflecting upon this point, he humbly submits to your Majesty that he is reluctantly compelled, by a sense of public duty and of the interest of your Majesty’s service, to adhere to the opinion which he ventured to express to your Majesty. He trusts he may be permitted, at the same time, to express to your Majesty his grateful acknowledgments for the distinction which your Majesty conferred upon him, by requiring his advice and assistance in the attempt to form an Administration, and his earnest prayers that whatever arrangements your Majesty may be enabled to make for that purpose, may be most conducive to your Majesty’s personal comfort and happiness, and to the promotion of the public welfare.

WELLINGTON AND LORD MELBOURNE.

It was generally believed at the time, as Sir Archibald Alison himself confesses, that Peel did not regret this royal rebuff; for “he was by no means sanguine,”says the Tory historiographer, “as to the success of his mission, nor annoyed at the failure of the attempt to fulfil it.” Theproandconwere put with equal terseness and skill by Lord Melbourne and the Duke of Wellington. The words of the latter were:—“It is essential that the Minister should possess the entire confidence of Her Majesty, and with that view should exercise the usual control permitted to the Minister by the Sovereign in the construction of the Household. There is the greatest possible difference between theHousehold of the Queen Consort and the Household of the Queen Regnant—that of the former, who is not a political personage, being comparatively of little importance.”

Lord Melbourne, on the other hand, thus justified the advice which his Royal Mistress had received from him and adopted:—“I frankly declare that I resume office unequivocally and solely for this reason, that I will not abandon my Sovereign in a situation of difficulty and distress, and especially when a demand is made upon Her Majesty with which, I think, she ought not to comply—a demand inconsistent with her personal honour, and which, if acquiesced in, would render her reign liable to all the changes and variations of political parties, and render her domestic life one constant scene of unhappiness and discomfort.”

The public at large, even those who thought heractionwrong, accorded to the Queen sympathy rather than blame. It was well known that she had been dexterously surrounded by the wives and sisters and daughters of the great Whigs, and that on these ladies all her ardent and girlish affections were bestowed. This made thepeople all the more angry that the male heads of the Whig houses now gave her unconstitutional advice. Not only her youth and inexperience, but the very warmth of the affection which she had displayed, and, above all, the fact that she was the chief sufferer on the occasion, all pleaded for her. Indeed, it may be said that the quickly-forgotten “Bedchamber Plot” rather endeared the Sovereign to her subjects than otherwise. Both of her uncles who preceded her on the throne had been exceedingly capricious and disloyal to their ministers. Under these reigns there was a constant sense, in the breasts of ministers and in the breasts of the people, of the precariousness of the existence of even the most popular cabinets. It certainly cannot be said that in the early summer of 1839 Lord Melbourne’s cabinet was popular. Nevertheless, though the ministers were blamed, the people were charmed by the Queen’s ingenuousness, bravery, and steadiness of attachment. It is but just to state that on every future occasion of the change of an Administration, the Queen has, without the slightest demur, conceded the point, the consideration of which we now dismiss. And with the transparent candour of her nature, Her Majesty has caused it to be made known that the Prince Consort had much to do with producing this result.

COURTSHIP AND BETROTHAL.

Desire of the Coburg Relatives for a Marriage between Victoria and Albert—Favourable Impressions mutually made by Victoria and Albert—Prince Albert’s Letter on the Queen’s Accession—Opposition of King William IV. to the Marriage—Correspondence between the Cousins—King Leopold urges on the Marriage—The Queen’s Reluctance to become Betrothed—Her subsequent Regret at this—The Prince craves a definite Determination—His Second Visit to England—Betrothed at last—Returns to Germany to say Farewell.

We have already seen that the marriage of Prince Albert with his cousin was strongly desired by their common relatives from a very early period of their lives. It was the “ardent wish” of their grandmother, and she freely communicated that wish to her son and daughter, Prince Leopold and the Duchess of Kent. There are strong indications that the astute King Leopold never lost sight of this end from the date of his mother’s death in 1831. Soon after the visit of the brothers to their “aunt Kent” in 1836, the rumour began to prevail in England that Prince Albert was thefiancéof the future Queen. The idea, however, was premature. So we know on the Queen’s authority, who has caused it to be stated that “nothing was then settled.”

In the letters which the Prince sent to his father and others, during his stay at Brussels and elsewhere,immediately after his first visit to England, he made frequent reference to the general impressions thence derived, and especially to his young cousin. Of such allusions, this is a fair specimen:—“A few days ago I received a letter from aunt Kent, enclosing one from our cousin. She told me I was to communicate its contents to you, so I send it on with a translation of the English. The day before yesterday I received a second and yet kinder letter from my cousin, in which she thanks me for my good wishes on her birth-day. You may easily imagine that both these letters gave me great pleasure.” And when the news of the death of King William and the accession of Victoria arrived, he informed his father, on the authority of his uncle Leopold, that the new reign had commenced most successfully (this, perhaps, in allusion to the anticipated attempt at acoup d’étatby the Duke of Cumberland), that his cousin Victoria had shown astonishing self-possession, although English parties were violently excited, and that the Duchess of Kent had found strenuous support against “violent attacks in the newspapers.” This last statement we have, however, good reasons for saying had reached the young Prince in a somewhat exaggerated form; we mean, so far as the “violence” of the attacks was concerned.

To the Queen herself the Prince wrote a letter, consolatory in her bereavement, and congratulatory on her accession. This was the first letter which he sent her written in English. He prayed Heaven to assist her now that she was “Queen of the mightiest land in Europe,” with the happiness of millions in her hand, and asked her “to think sometimes of her cousinsin Bonn [where they were then pursuing their University studies], and to continue that kindness you favoured them with till now.”

RUMOURS ABOUT MARRIAGE.

On the accession of the Queen, the rumour of her marriage with Prince Albert became ten times more prevalent. The judicious King Leopold thought it wise, for a time at least, to discourage this expectation, and to withdraw the attention of the English from the Prince. Hence it was that he counselled those journeys into Austria, South Germany, Switzerland, and Italy, in which we have already traced the steps of the Prince. This was chiefly dictated by the distracted state of parties in England, which the King of the Belgians thought it better to permit time to allay ere the matrimonial project was brought specifically forward. “United as all parties are,” wrote Prince Albert to his father, from the inspiration of his uncle, “in high praise of the young Queen, the more do they seem to manœuvre and intrigue with and against each other. On every side there is nothing but a network of cabals and intrigues, and parties are arrayed against each other in a most inexplicable manner.”

Whilst making his “grand tour,” the Prince kept up an occasional correspondence with his cousin. From Switzerland he sent her an album of the places which he visited, from the top of the Rigi a dried Alpine rose, and from Ferney an autographic scrap of Voltaire, which he received from an old servant of the great philosopher.

By the early part of 1839, the tour was concluded, and we find the Prince once more at Brussels with his uncle. Leopold now spoke to him more fully anddefinitely than he had hitherto done about his prospects in life and the state of his affections. It very clearly appears that the marriage with the Queen had been gradually becoming more and more an understood thing. It appears equally clear that the Queen was averse, as yet, to committing herself to a distinct and final engagement. She was willing to marry, but wished to defer the contraction of the union. She thought both herself and her cousin too young; and the interests of her people, rather than any personal backwardness, influenced her wish that both she and her husband should be older ere they became man and wife. She regretted afterwards this delay, and felt that the harassments of the Bedchamber Plot and other still more painful incidents which we have thought it preferable not to rake up and reproduce in these pages, would have been borne by her with more equanimity had she had the natural protection of a husband six months or a year ere the date of her marriage. It was probably this postponement of any definite settlement that occasioned Prince Albert’s absence from England at the Coronation, in June, 1838. His father was invited, and received at the hands of his niece the honour of the Order of the Garter. The Dowager Duchess of Gotha was very proud of this, and proud also to recollect that her son-in-law possessed the noblest knightly order of Christendom, which her own father of Hesse-Cassel, and her father-in-law of Gotha, had also worn and treasured.

OBJECTIONS TO THE MARRIAGE.

In more than one quarter the marriage, which all members of the Coburg family felt to be so eligible, and in which their feelings were so much involved, met with a considerable amount of opposition. By a curiouscoincidence, a Prince of Orange had been the suitor favoured by George IV. for the hand of his daughter; but she selected the man of her own choice—Leopold, a Coburg Prince. And a Prince of Orange (nephew of the rejected aspirant to the hand of the Princess Charlotte) was the man thought by William IV., as long as he lived, to be the best future husband of his niece and successor; and his niece, too, selected, like her cousin Charlotte, as the man of her choice, a Prince of the House of Coburg. King William did all in his power to discourage the attachment between Victoria and Albert. He was so strongly set against this match that he did all that he could even to prevent Prince Albert’s visit to England in 1836; and although he never spoke to his young niece on the subject himself, she afterwards learned that he had devised no fewer than five matrimonial alternatives for her selection—that of the late Prince Alexander of the Netherlands always having the preference and priority. In justice to the memory of King William it must, however, be stated that the Dowager Queen Adelaide afterwards told her niece that her uncle would never have striven to control or restrain her affections if he had had any idea that they had been strongly bestowed in any particular quarter.

It was in the early part of 1839, that King Leopold first wrote seriously to his niece on the subject—about the same time that we have seen that he made a similar verbal communication to his nephew. He received a favourable response from both, but with this difference, that the lady craved an indefinite delay. This idea of delay the Prince dealt with in a very honest and manly manner. He had, he said, no objections topostponement; but, nevertheless, thought he had a fair right, if he were to keep himself free, and thereby be compelled to decline any other career or line of life which might open itself out to him, to have some definite assurance or understanding that the engagement would be without doubt contracted. This concession, however, the equally natural bashfulness of the Queen would not suffer her to make. However, all came right in the end, and the Queen has very candidly confessed in her riper years, that if she had known as a girl what she afterwards learned as a woman, that she even seemed to beplayingwith her somewhat undemonstrative but not the less devoted lover, she would not have exacted the semi-sacrifice which the Prince’s self-respect caused him to feel uneasy at, but to which the true courtesy of his nature induced him to submit. Hedidwait till 1839, but the Queen afterwards learned that he came to England in that year prepared to declare that, in the case of further postponement, he must decline to consider himself bound in any way for the future.

Back to Index Next