172 6 QUEEN SHOT AT 1849 from what the Prince had said and was doing for the class to which the writer belonged. Faithful feelings,' he adds in a postscript, spurred me to this bold act, and fear of having done wrong alone deterred me from signing my name in full. I have heard many more wish to express their humble feelings in this manner, but dare not.' 4 Three days after the meeting (19th May) public indignation was raised by the tidings that the Queen, as she was returning to the Palace in an open carriage, with three of her children, had been again fired at on her way down Constitution Hill. The Prince, who was riding in advance, was not aware of what had occurred, and learned it from Her Majesty's own lips only as she alighted. Not for a moment had the Queen lost her self-possession, but motioned for her carriage to proceed and engaged the children in conversation. The crowd was furious, and but for the intervention of the police would have torn the man who fired to pieces. He proved to be an Irishman, named William Hamilton, of 4 Since 1849 the servants' question in its bearings on society has become much more difficult. The ultimate fate of domestic servants has certainly not improved, though wages are much higher, while their value to their employers as a rule is unquestionably less. If the Education Act is to do any good, one great part of the work of teachers must be to train the children of the lower ranks to fit themselves for service by a knowledge not merely of the rules on which cleanliness, thrift, and health depend, but by inspiring them with a reverence for truth in word and act, by making them understand that in life all men serve according to their station, and that true service in its humblest form is as honourable to the individual as true service in the highest. The constant service of the antique world had become a dream even in Shakspeare's time. But it is not good either for employer or employed that the only link between them should be that of wages. All men are in any case better for putting heart into their work, and simple honesty, that scorns to take wages not duly earned, would do much to raise the question of labour, not only among servants, but in all spheres, into a healthier state than has long been known. 1849 BY WILLIAM HAMILTON. 173 Adare, in the county Limerick, and to have had not even the motive of notoriety for his act. The pistol, it was clearly shown, had been charged only with powder. On the 14th of June, Hamilton was tried under the Act passed in 1842 for dealing with offences of this nature. He pleaded guilty, and was sentenced to seven years' transportation. CHAPTER XXXII. THE time had now arrived, when the Prince of Wales was to pass into the hands of a private tutor, and the course and conduct of his studies engaged the anxious thought of both the Queen and Prince. So far back as May, 1848, negotiations had been opened with Mr. Henry Birch, now the Rector of Prestwich, near Manchester, the gentleman who was ultimately entrusted with the office. This was only done, of course, after the most careful inquiry into his qualifications. Mr. Birch had been educated at Eton, where he became Captain of the School, and obtained the Newcastle Medal. He had taken high honours at Cambridge, and had been for four years Under-Master at Eton. "The impression he has left upon me,' says the Prince, in writing (6th August, 1848) to Lord Morpeth, after a preliminary interview, is a very favourable one, and I can imagine that children will easily attach themselves to him.' He was now to enter upon the duties, and the Prince announces the fact to the Dowager Duchess of Gotha in the following letter: 'The children grow more than well. Bertie will be given over in a few weeks into the hands of a tutor, whom we have found in a Mr. Birch, a young, good-looking, amiable man, who was a tutor at Eton, and who not only himself took the highest honours at Cambridge, but whose pupils have also won especial distinction. It is an important step, and God's blessing be upon it, 1849 EDUCATION OF ROYAL CHILDREN. 175 for upon the good education of princes, and especially of those who are destined to govern, the welfare of the world in these days very greatly depends. 'Windsor Castle, 10th April, 1849.' One of the earliest cares of the Queen and Prince had been to settle on what principles the education of their children should be conducted. In this, as in so much else, they had called the experience of Baron Stockmar to their aid, and he had gone into the subject with all a German's thoroughness, and with all an Englishman's practical good sense. The quaint saying of the Baron (quoted supra, vol. i. p. 95), that a man's education begins the first day of his life,' will not have been forgotten. It spoke his own rooted conviction; and nowhere more than in a palace was it needful that this conviction should be carried into practice. Good education,' the Baron says, in a Memorandum on the Education of the Royal Children, so early as the 6th of March, 1842, cannot begin too soon.' 'To neglect beginnings,' says Locke, is the fundamental error into which most parents fall.' In the child the affections and feelings develop themselves at an earlier period than the reasoning or intellectual faculties. The beginning of education must, therefore, 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 continues, 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.' After some further general remarks, the Memorandum proceeds: The first truth by which the Queen and the Prince ought to be thoroughly penetrated is, that their 176 MEMORANDUM ON EDUCATION. 1849 position is a more difficult one than that of any other parents in the kingdom: because the Royal children ought not only to be brought up to be moral characters, but also fitted to discharge successfully the arduous duties which may eventually devolve upon them as future Sovereigns. Hence the magnitude of the parental responsibility of the Sovereigns to their children; for upon the conscientious discharge of this responsibility will depend hereafter the peace of mind and happiness of themselves and their family, and as far as the prosperity and happiness of a nation depend upon the personal character of its Sovereign, the welfare of England. To this day England reveres the memory of George III. as the great upholder of the domestic virtues. History already takes the liberty of judging of his merits as a Sovereign, but it remains unanimous in its praise of his private virtues. But George III. either did not properly understand his duties as a parent or he neglected them. Three of his sons, George IV., the Duke of York, and William IV., were brought up and educated in England. The Dukes of Kent, of Cumberland, of Sussex, and of Cambridge, received great part of their education on the Continent. The errors committed by George IV., the Duke of York, and William IV., belong already to the domain of history. Unfortunately the errors of these Princes were of the most glaring kind, and we can find their explanation only in the supposition that their tutors were either incapable of engrafting on their minds during their youth the principles of truth or morality, or that they most culpably neglected their duties, or were not supported in them by the Royal parents.' Stockmar's sagacity in seeing all round a question seems here to have failed him. Parents and tutors might both have done their duty, but other forces may have been too strong for them. Their precepts, like the seed in the |