Evening Post. TUESDAY, OCTOBER 27, 1925. ON THE STEPS OF THE THRONE

Evening Post, Volume CX, Issue 102, 27 October 1925, Page 4

Evening Post. TUESDAY, OCTOBER 27, 1925. ON THE STEPS OF THE THRONE

Writing in 1872—tho' yeav in which the only serious republican agitation of our time in England reached its climax and an offensive pamphlet on Queen Victoria's income, "What Does She Do With It?" and scurrilous attacks on the Prince of Wales in "The Coming X——" aud "The Siliad" were attracting inordinate attention— Bagchot criticised the recent tendency to regard the Crowh as/the head of our morality." The virtues of George 111. and Victoria had, he said, sunk deep into the popular heart. Yet the vices of the other Georges and of William IV., which-had made, a'less profound impression, were enough to show that "Eoyalty cannot take credit for domestic excellence."

The plain fact is, Bagehot proceeded, that to the disposition of all others most likely to go wrong, to an excitable disposition, the place of a constitutional King has greater temptations than almost any other, and fewer suitable occupations than almost any other. All the world and all the tho glory of it, whatever is most attractive, whatever is most seductive, lias always been offered to the Prince of Wales of the day, and always will be. It is not rational to expect the best virtue where temptation is applied in tho most trying form at the frailest- time of human life. Tho occupations of a constitutional Monarch are grave, formal, important, but never exciting;, they have nothing to stir eager blood, awaken high imagination, work off wild thoughts. . . . . How few Princes have ever felt the anomalous impulse for real work; how uncommon is that impulse anywhere,; how little are the circumstances of Princes calculated to foster it; how little can it be relied on as an ordinary breakwater to their habitual temptations !

As a matter of fact, though Bagehotwas not concerned to emphasise the point, the temptations of the Heir Apparent arc far more powerful than those of the •Sovereign. The King is bound to be about the busiest man in his kingdom; but, so far as any definite official obligations go, the I'rince of Wales may be the" idlest.

On men like George 111., says Bagohol, with a predominant taste for business occupations, tho routine duties of constitutional Royalty have, doubtless a calm and chastening effect.

And oven those who kve not calmed and chastened may at least be saved by this arduous daily round from some of the mischief which Satan finds for idle hands to do. The mischief which Satan has sometimes put into the idle hands of the Prince of Wales is the role of a leader of Opposition, 'it is almost incredible to this generation that in the Great Westminster Election, which was fought within ten years after the American Declaration of Independence, while George 111. scut 280 of his Guards to vote in a body as householders for the Government candidate, tho Prince of Wales publicly backed the Opposition, and wore over his uniform the colours which l.''ox had borrowed from the vYmerican insurgents, and Fox. himself reciprocated by displaying 11n*. .I'rincc.'s feathers on his btiniicrs. A King marshalling his soldiers and hi.s household to (lie hustings and a .Prince of Wales sporting the colours of the rebels who had broken up tluj Umpire and nearly broken his father's heart —such was electioneering in 1781!

Great chunyi's had overtaken linylaud b t v the middle of Victoria's

reign, but the problem of an unoccupied Prince of Wales was still unsolved. Far less flagrant and indecent than it had been in the eighteenth century, the trouble remained a serious one. Sir Sidney Lee thus describes the aspect which it had assumed a year or two before Bagehot wrote : —

While performing with admirable grace the ceremonial and social functions attaching to his station, and whilo keenly studying current and political events from a detached and irresponsible point of view, (.lie Prince somewhat suffered in moral robustness tlirough the denial to him of genuine political responsibility, and his exclusion from settled and solid occupation. The love of pleasure in his nature which hud been carefully repressed in boyhood sought. in adult life free scope amid the ambiguities of his public position. Thp, gloom of his mother's court helped tn provoke reaction against conventional strictness. From the early years of his married life reports spread abroad that he was a centre of fashionable frivolity, favouring company of low rank and involving himself in heavy debt.

Though Edward VII. 's oflicial biographer euphemistically speaks of the reports as exaggerated and suggests that it was among the "austere" that they had damaged the Prince's reputation, he does not conceal the fact that in 1870 the Priuee had to lace "more or less inimical" demonstrations at the theatre and on the racecourse —places in which the "austere" and the strait-laced do not usually attend in sufficient numbers to fix the moral standards at an inconvenient height. It was, according to Sir Sidney Lee, the intense sympathy aroused by the almost fatal illness of the Prince shortly afterwards that changed the current of public feeling and prepared the way for the new lease of popularity which the Monarchy has since enjoyed.

And now after the lapse of another half-century the trouble with the Prince of Wales has become milder still. It has indeed become so mild that most of us had probably no idea that there was any "at all until we read tho extracts from Mr. A. G. Gardiner's article in the "Daily News" which were cabled s'esterday. For that reason the surprise . with which they have been read has doubtless been accompanied by a good deal of resentment. But, whether we agree with the article or not, it is right to recognise that the subject is one of immense public coucorn, that i(; is thercfoi'c a fit subject for public discussion, and that Mr. Gardiner has mingled with his candour a. disarming, because obviously genuine, combination of courtesy, respect, and oven admiration. The gist of his criticism is contained in the sen-, tence:— The Prince has now passed tho age of ,i .Prince Charming, and lias reached tho ago of seriousness and responsibility.

Mr. Gardiner "considers that the Prince has not yet any set work in hand of a serious and responsible nature that will serve as an adequate preparation for the immense responsibilities of the future.

It is, says Lord Esher, a serious difficulty in a constitutional Monarchy such as ours that no adequate place is provided for tlie Heir Apparent to the Throne.

Is not this still the root of the trouble—if there be any trouble left?