It would be to throw away an opportunity for mirth to omit the lines with which Whitehead greeted the birth of a son of the Prince of Wales.
These were enthusiastically acclaimed by a contemporary as "a beautiful, prophetic compliment to the future monarch," but the present generation may conceivably find another epithet.
"Thanks, Nature! thanks! the finish"d piece we own, And worthy Frederick"s love, and Britain"s throne.
Th" impatient G.o.ddess first had sketch"d the plan, Yet ere she durst complete the wond"rous man, To try her power, a gentler task design"d, And formed a pattern of the softer kind.[39]
But now, bright boy, thy more exalted ray Streams o"er the dawn, and pours a fuller day: Nor shall, displeased, to thee her realms resign, The earlier promise of the rising line.
And see! what signs his future worth proclaim, See! our _Ascanius_ boast a n.o.bler flame!
On the fair form let vulgar fancies trace Some fond presage in ev"ry dawning grace; More unconfined, poetic transport roves, Sees all the soul, and all the soul approves: Sees regal pride but reach the exterior part, And big with virtues beat the little heart; Whilst from his eyes soft beams of mercy flow, And liberty supreme smiles on his infant brow.
Now, in herself secure, shall Albion rise, And the vain frowns of future fate despise; See willing worlds beneath her sceptre bend, And to the verge of Time her fame extend."
[39] A poetic allusion to the Princess Royal.
[Ill.u.s.tration:
_Photo by Emery Walker_
_From a painting by Richard Wilson_
PRINCE GEORGE OF WALES, PRINCE EDWARD OF WALES, AND DR. AYSCOUGH]
A prince"s education begins early, and George was not more than six years of age when he was put into harness. The first tutor selected for him was Dr. Francis Ayscough,[40] whose princ.i.p.al claim to distinction was as brother-in-law to "good Lord Lyttelton," for at best he has been described as a well-meaning but uninspired pedagogue, and at worst, by Walpole, as "an insolent man, unwelcome to the clergy on suspicion of heterodoxy, and of no fair reputation for integrity."[41] Ayscough, as a courtier, was not unsuccessful, for, introduced by Lyttelton[42] and Pitt to Frederick, Prince of Wales, he contrived to ingratiate himself with that invertebrate royal personage; but as an instructor of youth he was not the right man in the right place. He was ignorant of the course to pursue in laying the foundation of a lad"s education, and when George was eleven years old, the Princess of Wales found to her dismay her son could not read English, although (so Ayscough a.s.sured her) he could make Latin verses. This latter accomplishment could not be accepted as of sufficient importance to excuse ignorance of more practical subjects, and a new preceptor, George Scott, was introduced on the recommendation of Lord Bolingbroke, who, Walpole states significantly, "had lately seen the Prince two or three times in private." This appointment marks the beginning of the intrigues that centred round the young Prince.
[40] Francis Ayscough, afterwards Dean of Bristol (1700-1766). Clerk of the Closet to Frederick, Prince of Wales, 1740.
[41] Walpole: _Memoirs of George II_.
[42] George Lyttelton (1709-1773), created Baron Lyttelton 1756.
Tempted by the promise of an earldom, in October, 1750, Lord North[43]
became Governor--"an amiable, worthy man," says Walpole, "of no great genius, unless compared with his successor;" but this arrangement did not long endure, for the Pelhams, finding themselves in power, thought it behoved them to endeavour to retain it perpetually by surrounding the future king with their creatures. Lord North retired in April, 1751, and, when the post had been offered to and declined by Lord Hartington, he was replaced by Lord Harcourt,[44] a Lord of the Bedchamber to the King, a "civil and stupid" person who, though unfitted for the post by his ignorance of most things save hunting and drinking, was thought unlikely to interfere with the ministers" plans. The real agent of the Pelhams was the sub-governor, Andrew Stone,[45] the Duke of Newcastle"s private secretary, "a dark, proud man, very able and very mercenary," in high favour with George II. Scott remained as Sub-Preceptor, and with him as Preceptor was now put Dr. Hayter, Bishop of Norwich,[46] a sensible man of the world. Lord Suss.e.x, Lord Robert Bertie, and Lord Downe were appointed Lords, and Peachy, Digby and Schulze, Grooms of the Bedchamber to the young Prince; while his Treasurer was Colonel John Selwyn, who, dying in December, was succeeded by Cresset, the holder of the same position in the Household of the Princess, now Dowager Princess of Wales.
[43] Francis, third Baron North (1704-1790), created Earl of Guilford, 1753.
[44] Simon, first Earl Harcourt (1714-1777).
[45] Andrew Stone (1703-1773), sometime Under-Secretary of State.
[46] Thomas Hayter (1702-1762), Bishop of Norwich, 1749; Bishop of London, 1761.
For a while there was peace in the tutors" camp, but soon dissension broke out, and it became an open secret that Harcourt and Hayter were in opposition to Stone and Scott. The quarrel began when Hayter found in the Prince of Wales"s hands a copy of Father d"Orleans"s "_Revolution d"Angleterre_," a work written at the instigation of James II of England to justify his measures. Stone was taxed with having introduced it into the royal apartments, when he denied ever having seen it in thirty years, and expressed his willingness to stand or fall by the truth or falseness of the accusation; but when Hayter showed a desire to take him at his word, it was admitted that the Prince had the book, and the defence set up was that Prince Edward had borrowed it of his sister Augusta. Then other works not suitable for use in the training of a const.i.tutional monarch were, it is said, discovered to be in the possession of the Prince; and though Stone and Scott aped humility and regret, they contrived notwithstanding to irritate their superior officers, until one day Hayter lost his temper, and removed Scott from the royal chamber "by an imposition of hands, that had at least as much of the flesh as the spirit in the force of the action."[47] When matters came to this pa.s.s, Cresset took a hand in the quarrel, and finally Murray[48] added fuel to the flame by telling the Bishop that Stone should be shown more consideration. Hayter replied, "He believed that Mr. Stone found all proper regard, but that Lord Harcourt, the chief of the trust, was generally present;" to which Murray retorted, "Lord Harcourt, pho! he is a cypher, and must be a cypher, and was put in to be a cypher." That was the last straw. There are men who are cyphers without knowing it, and men who know they are cyphers and do not resent their unimportance, but there are few who can with impunity be told that they are cyphers, and of these Harcourt was not one, for, with all his faults, he was not the man to acquiesce in the use of himself as a cat"s-paw.
[47] Walpole: _Memoirs of George II_.
[48] William Murray, afterwards first Earl of Mansfield (1705-1763).
When the King returned in November, 1752, from Hanover, Harcourt complained that dangerous and arbitrary principles were being instilled into the Prince, and stated it was useless for him to remain as Governor unless those who were misleading the lad were removed from their official positions about his person. A few days after this protest was registered, the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Lord Chancellor sent word that by the King"s command they would wait on Lord Harcourt for further particulars of his grievance, but the latter declined to receive them on the ground that, "His complaints were not proper to be told but to the King himself." At a private interview with George II on December 6, Harcourt tendered his resignation, which was accepted; but a similar concession was not granted to the Bishop of Norwich, whose resignation the King preferred to receive through the medium of the Archbishop of Canterbury.[49]
[49] Shortly after, Dr. Hayter"s portrait was published, with these lines beneath it:
"Not gentler virtues glow"d in Cambray"s breast; Not more his young Telemachus was bless"d, Till envy, faction, and ambitious rage, Drove from the Court the pious sage; Back to his flock with transport he withdrew, And but one sigh--an honest one--he knew, "O guard my royal pupil, Heaven," he said, "Let not his youth be like my age betray"d; I would have formed his footsteps in Thy way, But vice prevails, and impious men have sway."
[Ill.u.s.tration: _From an old print_
AUGUSTA, PRINCESS DOWAGER OF WALES]
The position of the Governor and Preceptor had gradually become untenable, for they were exposed to the cross-influences of the Princess Dowager of Wales and the ministers, and, in their efforts to secure for themselves the favour of their charge, they took no trouble to win the good graces of the Princess or to live at peace with their subordinates. "The Bishop, thinking himself already minister to the future King, expected dependence from, never once thought of depending upon, the inferior governors. In the education of the two Princes, he was sincerely honest and zealous; and soon grew to thwart the Princess whenever, as an indulgent, or perhaps a little as an ambitious mother (and this happened but too frequently), she was willing to relax the application of her sons. Lord Harcourt was minute and strict in trifles; and thinking that he discharged his trust conscientiously if on no account he neglected to make the Prince turn out his toes, he gave himself little trouble to respect the Princess, or to condescend to the Sub-governor."[50] To this testimony must be added that of Bubb Dodington, who declared that Lord Harcourt not only behaved ill to the Princess Dowager and spoke to the children of their dead father in a manner most disrespectful, but also did all in his power to alienate them from their mother. "George," he says, "had mentioned it once since Lord Harcourt"s departure, that he was afraid he had not behaved as well to her sometimes as he ought, and wondered how he could be so misled."[51] The Princess was therefore overjoyed to be rid of Lord Harcourt, not only for these reasons, but for another that will presently be discussed.
[50] Walpole: _Memoirs of George II_.
[51] Bubb Dodington: _Diary_.
Stone and Scott retained their posts, but it was not found easy to replace the men who had resigned. Ministers desired to appoint as Preceptor Dr. Johnson,[52] the new Bishop of Gloucester, but the Whigs were so bitterly opposed to the nomination, and had the support of the Archbishop"s objections, that eventually Dr. Thomas[53] was given the office. "It was still more difficult to accommodate themselves with a Governor," Walpole has recorded. "The post was at once too exalted, and they had declared it too unsubstantial, to leave it easy to find a man who could fill the honour, and digest the dishonour of it."[54]
Overtures were made in several quarters but without success, until at last, at the request of the King, Lord Waldegrave[55] consented to accept the responsibility. This he did only after "repeated a.s.surances of the submission and tractability of Stone," and then with great reluctance, for he was a man of pleasure rather than of affairs, and reluctant to be embroiled in intrigue. "If I dared," he said to a friend, "I would make this excuse to the King, "Sir, I am too young to govern, and too old to be governed."" Even this appointment was censured by the Whigs, for, though Waldegrave was a man of great common sense and undoubted honour, it was objected that "his grandmother was a daughter of King James; his family were all Papists, and his father had been but the first convert"!
[52] James Johnson (1705-1774), Bishop of Gloucester, 1752; Bishop of Worcester, 1759.
[53] John Thomas (1696-1781), successively Bishop of Peterborough (1747), Salisbury (1757) and Winchester (1761).
[54] Walpole: _Memoirs of King George II_.
[55] James, second Earl Waldegrave (1715-1763), married Maria Walpole, a natural daughter of Sir Edward Walpole by Mrs. Clement, a milliner. After the death of her first husband the Countess secretly married on September 6, 1766, William Henry, Duke of Gloucester, and the union was publicly announced when the Royal Marriage Act was introduced into Parliament.
The refusal of Lord Harcourt to discuss his complaints with any one but the King was doubtless due to the fact that he traced the objectionable doctrines taught to his pupil to Lord Bute.[56] In his earlier years Bute had taken no part nor, indeed, shown any interest in politics. In 1723, at the age of twenty, he had succeeded to the earldom on the death of his father; had married Mary, only daughter of Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, and so came into possession of the Wortley estates; and, though in 1737 elected representative peer of Scotland, had spent most of his time on his estates, occupying himself with the theoretical and practical study of agriculture and architecture.
[56] John Stuart, third Earl of Bute (1715-1792).
A great change in Bute"s life was made in 1747 through a chance meeting with Frederick, Prince of Wales. The Earl was then staying at Richmond, and one day his neighbour, an apothecary, drove him over to Moulsey Hurst to see a cricket match that had been organized by the Prince. It came on to rain, the game had to be stopped, and Frederick retired to his tent, proposing a rubber of whist to while away the time until the weather should clear. Only two other players could be found, but some one espied Bute in the carriage and, learning that he could play, invited him to make up the table. The Prince, who had never before met him, was charmed with his manners, and invited him to Kew. "How often do great events arise from trifling causes," exclaims the worthy but sententious Seward. "An apothecary keeping his carriage may have occasioned the Peace of Paris, the American War, and the National a.s.sembly in France." Without going so far as that chronicler, it may be said that the game of whist had far-reaching effects.
[Ill.u.s.tration: _From a print published 1754 for "Stowe"s Survey"_
LEICESTER HOUSE]
Bute became a member of his patron"s court,[57] where his influence became a factor that could not be ignored. Nor did his power at Leicester House wane after the death of the Prince, for he was high in the Princess"s favour, which latter good fortune was attributed not so much to his intellectual attainments as to his personal qualities.
Scandal was busy coupling his name with that of the lady he served: indeed, for years there was no caricature so popular with the public as that of the Boot and the Petticoat, the symbols of the Peer and the Princess. What truth there was in this charge, if, indeed, there was any truth at all, is not, and probably never will be, known; but at the time the intimacy was almost universally a.s.sumed. "It had already been whispered that the a.s.siduities of Lord Bute at Leicester House, and his still more frequent attendance in the gardens at Kew and Carlton House, were less addressed to the Prince of Wales than to his mother," says Walpole. "The eagerness of the pages of the back-stairs to let her know whenever Lord Bute arrived (and some other symptoms) contributed to dispel the ideas that had been conceived of the rigour of her widowhood.
On the other hand, the favoured personage, naturally ostentatious of his person, and of haughty carriage, seemed by no means desirous of concealing his conquest. His bows grew more theatric; his graces contracted some meaning; and the beauty of his leg was constantly displayed in the eye of the poor captivated Princess.... When the late Prince of Wales affected to retire into gloomy _allees_ with Lady Middleton, he used to bid the Princess walk with Lord Bute. As soon as the Prince was dead, they walked more and more, in honour of his memory."[58] The same authority was on another occasion even more explicit. "I am as much convinced of the amorous connexion between Bute and the Princess Dowager as if I had seen them together," he said;[59]
and what he said was thought by the more reticent.
[57] He was appointed Lord of the Bedchamber to the Prince of Wales in September, 1750.
[58] Walpole: _Memoirs of George II_.
[59] _Walpoliana._
Whether there was "amorous connexion" or not, Bute was the most detested man of his day, and the more prominently he came before the public the more violent was the abuse heaped upon him. "Bute was hated with a rage of which there have been few examples in English history. He was the b.u.t.t for everybody"s abuse; for Wilkes"s devilish mischief; for Churchill"s slashing satire; for the hooting of the mob that roasted the boot, his emblem, in a thousand bonfires; that hated him because he was a favourite and a Scotchman, calling him "Mortimer," "Lothario," I know not what names, and accusing his royal mistress of all sorts of crimes--the grave, lean, demure, elderly woman, who, I daresay, was quite as good as her neighbours."[60]
[60] Thackeray: _The Four Georges_.
In those days to be a Scotchman was alone enough to secure the cordial ill-will of the English, for national rivalries had not then been even partially eliminated; and it was said that Bute used his power to promote his countrymen, which, though to-day it does not seem a very heinous crime, was then regarded as a sin unequalled in horror by any enumerated in the decalogue. An amusing defence of Bute against this charge is made by Huish who, however, was certainly unconscious of the humour of the pa.s.sage. "The truth of this charge rests upon no solid foundation. That Bute brought forward his countrymen is true enough, but it was by extending to them the patronage of office, not, except in some few instances, by directly introducing them to the personal favour of the King."[61] One of these exceptions was Charles Jenkinson,[62] Bute"s private secretary, who, when his master had, ostensibly, at least, retired from the direction of affairs, was the go between the King and the ex-minister.