BIRTH AND EARLY YEARS
King Edward VII. was born on 9th November 1841, at Buckingham Palace.
The Duke of Wellington, who was in the Palace at the time, is said to
have asked the nurse, Mrs. Lily, “Is it a boy?” “It’s a _Prince_, your
Grace,” answered the justly offended woman.
The news was received with great enthusiasm throughout the country, and
Queen Victoria and Prince Albert had thousands of letters and telegrams
of congratulation not only through official sources at home and abroad
but from many of Her Majesty’s humblest subjects all over the world.
_Punch_ celebrated the event in some verses beginning--
Huzza! we’ve a little Prince at last,
A roaring Royal boy;
And all day long the booming bells
Have rung their peals of joy.
And the little park guns have blazed away,
And made a tremendous noise,
Whilst the air has been filled since eleven o’clock
With the shouts of little boys.
At the moment of his birth the eldest son of the Sovereign became Duke
of Cornwall. This dukedom was the first created in England. It was
created by King Edward III. by charter, wherein his son, Edward the
Black Prince, was declared Duke of Cornwall, to hold to himself and his
heirs, Kings of England, and to their first-born sons; and it is in
virtue of that charter that the eldest son of the Sovereign is by law
acknowledged Duke of Cornwall the instant he is born.
At the same time King Edward III. granted by patent certain provision
for the support of the dukedom, including the Stannaries, in Cornwall,
together with the coinage of tin, and various lands, manors, and
tenements, some of which lay outside the county of Cornwall, but were
nevertheless deemed to be part of the duchy. From these rents and
royalties King Edward VII. derived, when he was Duke of Cornwall, a
revenue of about £60,000 a year.
The little prince also became at his birth Duke of Rothesay, Earl of
Carrick, Baron of Renfrew, Lord of the Isles, and Great Steward of
Scotland (by act of the Scottish Parliament in 1469), but he was not
born Prince of Wales. King George IV. was only a week old when he was
created Prince of Wales and Earl of Chester by letters patent, but King
Edward VII. had to wait nearly a month--till 4th December 1841--for
these dignities.
The picturesque origin of the title of Prince of Wales is well
known--how King Edward I. promised the turbulent Welsh barons to
appoint them a prince of their own, one who was born in Wales and
could not speak a word of English, and on whose life and conversation
there was no stain at all. Having engaged the consent of the barons
beforehand, he showed them his infant son, Prince Edward, who had been
born in Carnarvon Castle but a few days before, and who was thereupon
acclaimed as the first Prince of Wales. The dignity thus became
established as personal, not hereditary, which could be granted or
withheld at the pleasure of the Sovereign.
The Earldom of Chester was an early creation which was annexed to the
Crown for ever by letters patent in the thirty-first year of King Henry
III., when Prince Edward, his eldest son, was immediately granted the
dignity. Edward the Black Prince received the Earldom of Chester when
he was only three years old, before he was created Duke of Cornwall.
Queen Victoria’s recovery was rapid, as will be seen from the following
entry in Her Majesty’s _Journal_ on 21st November, the birthday of the
Empress Frederick (Princess Royal of England):--
“Albert brought in dearest little Pussy [the Princess Royal] in such
a smart white merino dress trimmed with blue, which Mama [the Duchess
of Kent] had given her, and a pretty cap, and placed her on my bed,
seating himself next to her, and she was very dear and good. And as my
precious, invaluable Albert sat there, and our little Love between us,
I felt quite moved with happiness and gratitude to God.”
A little less than a month after the birth of her eldest son, Queen
Victoria wrote to her uncle, Leopold I., King of the Belgians:--
“I wonder very much who my little boy will be like. You will understand
_how_ fervent are my prayers, and I am sure everybody’s must be, to see
him resemble his Father in _every, every_ respect, both in body and
mind.”
Christmas with its Christmas tree brought a new fund of delight to the
Royal parents. “To think,” wrote the Queen in her _Journal_, “that we
have two children now, and one who enjoys the sight already, is like
a dream!” Prince Albert also wrote to his father:--“To-day I have two
children of my own to give presents to, who, they know not why, are
full of happy wonder at the German Christmas tree and its radiant
candles.”
The christening of the Prince of Wales took place on 25th January
1842, in St. George’s Chapel, Windsor, for although Royal baptisms had
hitherto been celebrated within the Palace, both the Queen and Prince
Albert felt it to be more in harmony with the religious sentiments
of the country that the future King should be christened within a
consecrated building.
As can be easily understood, the choice of sponsors for the Prince
of Wales was a matter of considerable delicacy. Finally the King of
Prussia was asked to undertake the office, and Baron Stockmar gives
the following interesting account of how His Majesty brushed aside the
intrigues which were immediately set on foot:--
“Politicians, as their habit is, attached an exaggerated political
importance to the affair. The King, who foresaw this, wrote to
Metternich, and in a manner asked for his advice. The answer was
evasive; and on this the King determined not to give himself any
concern about the political intrigues which were set on foot against
the journey. Certain it is, that the Russians, Austrians, and even the
French, in the person of Bresson (their Ambassador at Berlin) manœuvred
against it. They were backed up by a Court party, who were persuaded
that the King would avail himself of the opportunity to promote,
along with Bunsen and the Archbishop of Canterbury, his pet idea of
Anglicanizing the Prussian Church. When the King’s decision to go
became known, Bresson begged that he would at least go through France,
and give the Royal Family a meeting; but this was declined.”
The King of Prussia arrived on the 22nd, and was met by Prince Albert
at Greenwich and conducted to Windsor.
King Edward’s other sponsors were his step-grandmother, the Duchess of
Saxe-Coburg, represented by the Duchess of Kent; the Duke of Cambridge;
the young Duchess of Saxe-Coburg (Queen Victoria’s sister-in-law),
represented by the Duchess of Cambridge; Princess Sophia, represented
by the Princess Augusta of Cambridge; and Prince Ferdinand of
Saxe-Coburg.
Nothing was omitted to make the Prince of Wales’s christening a
magnificent and impressive ceremony. There was a full choral service,
and a special anthem had been composed by Mr. (afterwards Sir) George
Elvey for the occasion. When Prince Albert was told of this, and asked
when it should be sung, he answered, “Not at all. No anthem. If the
service ends by an anthem, we shall all go out criticising the music.
We will have something we all know--something in which we can all
join--something devotional. The Hallelujah Chorus; we shall all join
in that, with our hearts.” The Hallelujah Chorus ended the ceremony
accordingly.
[Illustration: THE CHRISTENING OF KING EDWARD VII.
_From the Painting by Sir George Hayter_]
“It is impossible,” wrote Queen Victoria in her _Journal_, “to describe
how beautiful and imposing the effect of the whole scene was in the
fine old chapel, with the banners, the music, and the light shining on
the altar.” It was significant of the young Queen’s native simplicity
that the Prince was only christened Albert, after his father, and
Edward, after his grandfather, the Duke of Kent.
Both Queen Victoria and Prince Albert soon showed that they were
determined to allow nothing like publicity to come near their
nurseries, and the public obtained but few glimpses of the Prince of
Wales as a child. Prince Albert’s intimate friend and adviser, Baron
Stockmar, wrote a year after his birth to one of his friends:--
“The Prince, although a little plagued with his teeth, is strong upon
his legs, with a calm, clear, bright expression of face.” Before he was
eighteen months old His Royal Highness had already sat for his portrait
several times.
King Edward VII. was barely four months old when Baron Stockmar drew
up a very long memorandum on the education of the Royal children. In
this document he laid down that the beginning of education must be
directed to the regulation of the child’s natural instincts, to give
them the right direction, and above all to keep the mind pure. “This,”
he went on, “is only to be effected by placing about children only
those who are good and pure, who will teach not only by precept but by
living example, for children are close observers, and prone to imitate
whatever they see or hear, whether good or evil.” In the frankest
manner the shrewd old German physician proceeded to point out that
the irregularities of three of George III.’s sons--George IV., the
Duke of York, and William IV.--had weakened the respect and influence
of Royalty in this country, although the nation ultimately forgave
them, because, “whatever the faults of those Princes were, _they were
considered by the public as true English faults_”; whereas the faults
of some of their brothers, who had been brought up on the Continent,
though not at all worse, were not condoned, owing to the power of
national prejudice.
[Illustration: QUEEN VICTORIA, THE EMPRESS FREDERICK, AND KING EDWARD
VII.
_From the Painting by S. Cousins, A.R.A._]
The conclusion at which Baron Stockmar consequently arrived was, “that
the education of the Royal infants ought to be from its earliest
beginning _a truly moral and a truly English one_.” It ought therefore
to be entrusted from the beginning only to persons who were themselves
morally good, intelligent, well informed, and experienced, who should
enjoy the full and implicit confidence of the Royal parents. The Baron
did not mince matters with regard to “the malignant insinuations,
cavillings, and calumnies of ignorant or intriguing people, who are
more or less to be found at every Court, and who invariably try to
destroy the parents’ confidence in the tutor.”
These principles commended themselves to Queen Victoria and Prince
Albert, and Her Majesty wrote the following interesting letter to Lord
Melbourne on the subject:--
“WINDSOR CASTLE, _24th March 1842_.
“We are much occupied in considering the future management of
our nursery establishment, and naturally find considerable
difficulties in it. As one of the Queen’s kindest and most
impartial friends, the Queen wishes to have Lord Melbourne’s
opinion upon it. The present system will not do, and must be
changed; and now how it is to be arranged is the great question
and difficulty.… Stockmar says, and very justly, that our
occupations prevent us from managing these affairs as much
our own selves as other parents can, and therefore that we
must have some one in whom to place _implicit confidence_. He
says, a lady of rank and title with a sub-governess would be
the best. But where to find a person so situated, fit for the
place, and, if fit, one who will consent to shut herself up in
the nursery, and entirely from society, as she must, if she is
_really_ to superintend the whole, and not accept the office,
as in my case, Princess Charlotte’s, and my aunts’, merely for
title, which would be only a source of annoyance and dispute?
“My fear is, that even if such a woman were to be found, she
would consider herself not as only responsible to the Prince
and Queen, but more to the country, and nation, and public, and
I feel she ought to be responsible only to _us_, and _we_ to
the country and nation. A person of less high rank, the Queen
thinks, would be less likely to do that, but would wish to be
responsible only to the parents. Naturally, too, we are anxious
to have the education as simple and domestic as possible. Then
again, a person of lower rank is less likely to be looked up
to and obeyed, than one of some name and rank. What does Lord
Melbourne think?”
[Illustration: KING EDWARD VII.
_From an old Print published in 1843_]
In his reply Lord Melbourne fully concurred in Baron Stockmar’s
suggestion that a lady of rank should be appointed, and the choice
of the Royal parents fell upon Lady Lyttelton, who had been a
lady-in-waiting from 1838, and who appeared to possess the precise
qualifications which the post demanded. The daughter of George John,
second Earl Spencer, and his wife Lavinia, daughter of the first Earl
of Lucan, she was born in 1787, married, in 1813, William Henry,
afterwards third Lord Lyttelton, and died in 1870. Lady Lyttelton
was installed as governess to the Royal children in April 1842, and
discharged her duties with equal ability and devotion. Early in 1851
she laid down her office. Her young charges parted from her with sad
hearts and tearful eyes, as Sir Theodore Martin records in the _Life
of the Prince Consort_, while from the Queen and Prince Albert she
received marked proofs of the deep gratitude which they felt for all
that she had done.
In 1846 King Edward accompanied his parents on two yachting excursions,
in August and September, on board the Royal yacht _Victoria and
Albert_. Writing in her _Journal_ on 2nd September, Queen Victoria
says, with a pretty touch of maternal pride:--
“After passing the Alderney Race it became quite smooth; and then
Bertie put on his sailor’s dress, which was beautifully made by the man
on board who makes for our sailors. When he appeared, the officers and
sailors, who were all assembled on deck to see him, cheered, and seemed
delighted with him.”
Then, when the yacht arrived at Mounts Bay, Cornwall, Her Majesty
records on 5th September that “when Bertie showed himself the people
shouted ‘Three cheers for the Duke of Cornwall.’”
Again, at Falmouth, on 7th September, the Queen says:--
“The Corporation of Penryn were on board, and very anxious to see
‘The Duke of Cornwall,’ so I stepped out of the pavilion on deck with
Bertie, and Lord Palmerston told them that that was ‘The Duke of
Cornwall’; and the old Mayor of Penryn said that ‘he hoped he would
grow up a blessing to his parents and to his country.’”
At Sunny Corner, just below Truro, the whole population “cheered, and
were enchanted when Bertie was held up for them to see. It was a very
pretty, gratifying sight.”
Princess Mary of Cambridge, afterwards the much-loved and lamented
Duchess of Teck, gives a delightful picture of the Royal children in a
letter written in 1847 to Miss Draper, her governess. Princess Mary was
then about fourteen, and King Edward was rather more than five years
old:--
“We paid a visit to the Queen at Windsor on New Year’s Eve, and left
there on the 2nd. The Queen gave me a bracelet with her hair, and was
very kind to me. The little Royal children are sweet darlings; the
Princess Royal is my pet, because she is remarkably clever. The Prince
of Wales is a very pretty boy, but he does not talk as much as his
sister. Little Alfred, the fourth child, is a beautiful fatty, with
lovely hair. Alice is rather older than him; she is very modest and
quiet, but very good-natured. Helena, the baby, is a very fine child,
and very healthy, which, however, they all are.”
[Illustration: KING EDWARD VII. AT THE AGE OF THREE
_From the Painting by W. Hensel, in the possession of the German
Emperor_]
In August 1847, Queen Victoria and Prince Albert, with the Queen’s
half-brother, the Prince of Leiningen, went for a tour round the
west coast of Scotland, taking with them their two eldest children,
the Prince of Wales and the Princess Royal. This is notable as King
Edward’s first visit to Scotland, for he was too young to accompany his
parents on their first tour in Scotland in 1842; while when the Queen
and Prince Albert visited Blair-Atholl in 1844 they only took with
them the little Princess Royal.
Of this tour round the west coast of Scotland we obtain some delightful
details in the late Queen’s _Leaves from the Journal of Our Life in the
Highlands_. The Royal party started from Osborne in the Royal yacht
_Victoria and Albert_, and they took the opportunity, after leaving
Dartmouth, of visiting the Scilly Islands. The Queen writes:--
“Albert (who, as well as Charles, has not been unwell, while I suffered
very much) went with Charles and Bertie to see one of the islands.
The children recover from their sea-sickness directly.” By “Charles,”
it should be explained, is meant the Prince of Leiningen. Naturally,
when the Royal yacht arrived in Welsh waters, there was the greatest
enthusiasm among the inhabitants at the sight of their little Prince.
It must be remembered that at that time practically nothing was known
by the general public about the Royal children, for their parents
had very wisely resolved that they should as far as possible enjoy a
natural, happy childhood, that being the best possible preparation for
the public life that awaited them. However, evidently no harm was done
by the notice which was taken of the Royal children on this tour. At
Milford Haven their loving mother writes:--
“Numbers of boats came out, with Welshwomen in their curious
high-crowned men’s hats, and Bertie was much cheered, for the people
seemed greatly pleased to see the ‘Prince of Wales.’” Then again at
Rothesay, when the yacht had passed up the Clyde:--
“The children enjoy everything extremely, and bear the novelty and
excitement wonderfully. The people cheered the ‘Duke of Rothesay’ very
much, and also called for a cheer for the ‘Princess of Great Britain.’
Everywhere the good Highlanders are very enthusiastic.”
With regard to her son’s title of Duke of Rothesay, Queen Victoria
appends the following interesting note:--
“A title belonging to the eldest son of the Sovereign of Scotland, and
therefore held by the Prince of Wales as eldest son of the Queen, the
representative of the ancient Kings of Scotland.”
[Illustration: THE KING IN 1847
_From the Painting by Winterhalter_]
At Inveraray, which was next visited, the little Prince first met his
future brother-in-law, the Marquis of Lorne, whom the Queen describes,
in words which have often been quoted but will bear repetition, as
“just two years old, a dear, white, fat, fair little fellow with
reddish hair, but very delicate features, like both his father and
mother: he is such a merry, independent little child. He had a black
velvet dress and jacket, with a ‘sporran,’ scarf, and Highland bonnet.”
Naturally a good deal of interest was taken in the little Prince of
Wales by those who had an opportunity of seeing him. When the great
geologist, Sir Charles Lyell, went to Balmoral, the Queen’s eldest
son, “a pleasing, lively boy,” gave him an account of the conjuring of
Anderson, the “Wizard of the North,” who had just then shown the Court
some marvellous tricks. Said the Prince in an awestruck tone:--
“He cut to pieces Mamma’s pocket-handkerchief, then darned it and
ironed it so that it was as entire as ever; he then fired a pistol,
and caused five or six watches to go through Gibbs’s head; but Papa
knows how all these things are done, and had the watches really gone
through Gibbs’s head he could hardly have looked so well, though he was
confounded.”
Gibbs, it should be mentioned, was a footman.
The late Archbishop Benson, before he went up to Cambridge, was tutor
to the sons of Mr. Wicksted, then tenant of Abergeldie Castle. Writing
to his mother on 15th September 1848, young Mr. Benson gives the
following interesting description of a glimpse which he had of the King
as a little boy:--
“The Prince of Wales is a fair little lad, rather of slender make, with
a good head and a remarkably quiet and thinking face, above his years
in intelligence I should think. The sailor portrait of him is a good
one, but does not express the thought that there is on his little brow.
Prince Alfred is a fair, chubby little lad, with a quiet look, but
quite the Guelph face, which does not appear in the Prince of Wales.”
[Illustration: THE LANDING OF QUEEN VICTORIA, PRINCE ALBERT, AND THEIR
CHILDREN AT ABERDEEN
_From a Painting by Cleland_]
In September 1848 Queen Victoria and Prince Albert established
themselves with their six children at Balmoral, and Her Majesty
records her first impressions of the place which was to be for so
many years her much-loved Northern home. After describing her own and
Prince Albert’s rooms, she says, “Opposite, down a few steps, are the
children’s and Miss Hildyard’s three rooms.” Only a few days later
we hear of the little Prince of Wales going out with his parents for
a “drive” in the Balloch Buie. “We then mounted our ponies, Bertie
riding Grant’s pony on the deer-saddle, and being led by a gillie,
Grant walking by his side.” Grant, it should be explained, was head
keeper, and much trusted by the Queen and Prince Albert, and for him
was built a pretty lodge called Croft, a mile from Balmoral. “We
scrambled up an almost perpendicular place to where there was a little
_box_, made of hurdles and interwoven with branches of fir and heather,
about five feet in height. There we seated ourselves with Bertie.” It
can readily be imagined with what excitement the little Prince waited
for nearly an hour till his father obtained a shot. The Queen records
how her son helped her over the rough ground until they all gathered
round the magnificent “Royal” which had fallen to Prince Albert’s gun.
The life at Balmoral was as far as possible shorn of Royal state, and
was much the same, no doubt, as that which was led under many another
hospitable roof-tree in the country round about. Queen Victoria
devoted herself to her husband and children. Thus she records, on 11th
September 1849, “The morning was very fine. I heard the children repeat
some poetry in German.”
The life at Windsor Castle was scarcely less simple. Writing to an
intimate friend, the late Duchess of Teck thus describes a dramatic
performance at the Castle in January 1849, in which King Edward
appeared, in spite of an accident which he had had a few days before:--
“Last Wednesday we went to Windsor Castle to remain till Friday. The
visit went off very well indeed. The Queen and the children are looking
very well, and the latter much grown. The poor little Prince of Wales
has disfigured his face by falling on an iron-barred gate, and the
bridge of his nose and both his eyes are quite black and bruised, but
fortunately no bones were broken. The first evening we danced till
twelve o’clock. Next day, … dinner was very early, and at eight o’clock
the Play began. ‘Used Up’ and ‘Box and Cox’ were chosen for that night,
and I was much pleased at seeing two very amusing pieces. They were
very well acted, and we all laughed a great deal. The Theatre was well
arranged, and the decorations and lamps quite wonderfully managed. It
was put up in the Rubens-room, which is separated from the Garter-room
by one small room where the Private Band stood. In the Garter-room was
the Buffet, and in the centre hung one of the beautiful chandeliers
from the pavilion at Brighton. The four elder children appeared at the
Play, and the two boys wore their ‘kilts.’ The two little girls had on
white lace gowns, over white satin, with pink bows and sashes. Princess
Royal wears her hair in a very becoming manner, all twisted up into a
large curl, which is tucked into a dark blue or black silk net, which
keeps it all very tidy and neat.”
[Illustration: THE KING AND THE EMPRESS FREDERICK AS CHILDREN
_From the Painting by Sir W. C. Ross, A.R.A._]