THE KING’S BIRTHDAY

Taranaki Daily News, 4 June 1934, Page 9

THE KING’S BIRTHDAY

LIFE OF BELOVED MONARCH MORAL COURAGE APPRECIATED. EXAMPLE GIVEN HIS PEOPLE.

To designate the place in history of King George V. is not for any presentday writer, but on the occasion of his 69th birthday, celebrated throughout the British Empire to-day, it is not out of place to pay tribute to a life which since the day Prince George was born at Marlborough House has become increasingly precious to English-speaking people. Certain it is that his name will live, and that fifty, one hundred or two hundred years hence he will be appreciated for his moral courage and his domestic example. There are engaging incidents on record to give us a picture of Prince

George as a boy, writes the well-known author Hector Bolitho. He was brought up in awe of his father, whose genial nature never lessened his sense of princely right. But the authority he exercised over his sons was never relentless or unsympathetic. The healthy spirits of boyhood were never treated brutally at Marlborough House. When Prince George and his elder brother were sent to the training ship Britannia, they showed “as much healthy naughtiness” as their contemporaries.

‘ Prince George was twelve when he became the youngest cadet on board the “Britannia.” He was conscientious; the flame of duty, which was to be the guiding force of his reign was already alive in him. It was his chief inheritance from his Coburg grandfather. Aesthetic tastes and devotion to scholarship did not go with the inherited conscientiousness, but, when he was a boy, there were already signs of the similarity in character. The signs were to increase as the years passed.

PRINCE GEORGE A MAN’S MAN.

From the “Britannia” the Princes went to the “Bacchante,” in which they toured the world. There was no hint yet that Prince George would become heir to the throne, through his brother's death. He was therefore educated as a second son, with the consequent differences in aims and responsibilities. A sailor’s life suited him; he was a man’s man, and his character and tastes were of the mould that thrives in a wardroom or an officers’ mess. In the “Bacchante” the Princes travelled as far as Australia and New Zealand.

Prince George’s education was a problem, upon which Queen Victoria and the Prince of Wales were not in full agreement. Haunted by recollections of his

own childhood, the Prince of Wales was alarmed when his mother wished to interfere in the education of her grandchildren. There had been grim episodes in his education; the lonely weeks at White Lodge, with none but generals and aged tutors to talk to. He never complained openly about the straightjacket of discipline which had been imposed upon him as a child, but he did his best to prevent a repetition of the story in the teaching of his sons. ENGAGEMENT AND MARRIAGE. The Queen was wholly pleased by the announcement of Prince George’s engagement in 1893. By this time Queen Victoria may have come to doubt the glory of marriages of English Princes and Princesses with ruling families on the Continent. One of her sons, Prince Alfred, had married a daughter of the Tsar, but this had not buried the' hatchet of the Crimea, nor had it stemmed the ambitions of Russia toward India and Constantinople. Her daughter had married in Prussia and had been Empress for a brief few months, but all that was left over from the splendid marriages was the pompous and dangerous young Emperor William 11. Neither contentment nor

glory had come to Queen Victoria through the ambitious alliances in Europe. Nor had the cause of royalty in England been strengthened by them. The Queen turned to the calm union between her grandson and a princess already loved and well known in the land, with infinite pleasure. She said, "Thank God, George has married such a good woman.” The marriage with an English Princess had strange influences on British history between 1909 and 1918. As the rift between Germany and England became wider, there were no international complications as far as the Royal family was concerned. The Empress Frederick was dead and there were no longer compromising ties 'with the German Court. King Edward had never liked his German nephew and he had voiced his feelings upon the steps of Sandringham one day, when the Emperor was driving away after a visit. King Edward had turned to his friends and said, "Thank God he has gone.”

THE KING DURING THE WAR.

In 1914, when war was declared, British people were not obliged to look anxiously toward the Court and anticipate any cleavage in feeling or emotions there. The Court reacted with the country and, from the beginning to the end. of the war, the King and Queen represented a focus for loyalty and devotion.

It can be said, perhaps, that King George was the one man at the head of affairs during the war who never made a mistake. His difficult position called for tact, patience and foresight which bewilders us. Perhaps some future historian will be able to see this aspect of his story in a true light which is denied to us now. To suggest that the King was

a cipher during the war is nonsense. This was the continuous accusation of the Germans, and one of their war-time toys, sold in the street, was a wooden image of King George, dressed as a Roman citizen. The implication was that his voice was no more important than the man in the street. But this was wickedly untrue. His influence was a permanent support in the shifting tides of battle, and it is terrible to think of the possible effect upon loyalty if the nation had lacked his moral leadership. Politicians came and went; Mr. Asquith retired and Mr. Lloyd George rose, with his flaming sword. We might have been a demoralised people if we had lacked one permanent, trusted leader, while politicians and generals changed places and favour. The fall of monarchies after the war has only seemed to make King George’s throne more secure, and, the indignities which came to kingship in other countries did not touch him. It was no longer possible for sceptics to say that King George was a figure-head. He had never failed his people and a genuine affection, in no sense passive, went out to him and to his Queen wherever they went. Londoners going home past Buckingham Palace would look at the simple stone facade and feel more safe and contented for the life which went on behind it. RESPECT FROM ALL PARTIES. While the personal influence of royalty has increased in the past 50 years, the political power has decreased and the present King has been obliged to receive many violent reformers among his Ministers. • The manner in which he has essayed this is truly a proof of greatness. King George has no time for bores and he hates humbug. Where the Socialist Ministers who come to him were sincere men they found a man eager to understand them, willing to discover the best in them.

The King’s patience and foresight has carried him through the radical changes in a way perhaps Queen Victoria or King Edward would never have achieved. In time, when the letters of to-day are released for historians to pore over, this aspect of his achievement will assume importance. When the poker-backed Tories sickened at the appointment of Mr. MacDonald as Prime Minister, the King repeated an adage which he has remembered from his days on the Bacchante: “In the Navy we have a motto, ‘Keep your hair on’.” It was a homely and wise piece of advice in a troublous time. His sanity gave the Socialist Government every chance. And it can be said that the Socialists, without exception, fell under the spell of his justice, his frank humour and his almost hidden, unsentimental kindliness. The recent humiliation of Sir Stafford Cripps over his foolish attack on the King’s rights is proof of the esteem in which the monarch is held by the Socialist Ministers. Speaking at Nottingham, Sir Stafford Cripps mentioned the “opposition from Buckingham Palace,” which the Socialist Government would have to face if it came into power. The violence of the answers made by Socialists is almost amusing. Like one man they rose in the King’s defence. Sir Stafford Cripps, who is normally a rather intelligent man, was suddenly sent off, plus cap and bells, with his tail between his legs. Lord Snowden, one of the most bitter men in the country, said that Sir Stafford Cripps had made a fool of himself. Mr. J. H. Thomas deplored his “impudence and ignorance”; Mr. Bernard Shaw said that Buckingham Palace was the one place where he would be safe. Lord Allen, former secretary of the L.L.P., called it “a crazy outburst.” Three days afterwards Sir Stafford Cripps climbed down completely and drank the toast, “The King, God Bless Him,” at a luncheon in London.

The King , might well have smiled during this wrangle. He might well have recalled his simple advice, "Keep your hair on.” It is hot easy for us to realise what this incident means in history; a monarch defended by a group of Labour agitators, against one of their own blood. It could not happen with any other people, nor with any other King.