abolition of the slave trade, and he presided at a meeting called to promote it, where he made the first of the compact and suggestive speeches for which he afterwards became distinguished. He never spoke in public without careful preparation, his view being that, as his utterances would be regarded as practically those of the sovereign, no word should be left to the chance of the moment.
By this time the opposition had in a great measure died down which had at first sprung up against the prince in the tory ranks. When, therefore, the queen being enceinte, a regency bill, to provide against the casualty of her death, became necessary, the bill appointing the prince as regent (introduced 13 July 1840) passed through both houses, the Duke of Sussex alone dissenting. This, Lord Melbourne told the queen, was entirely due to the prince's own character. ‘Three months ago they would not have done it for him.’
Having thus seen public acknowledgment made of the status of the prince, whom he had come to ‘love as a son,’ Stockmar retired to his quiet home at Coburg, addressing to him before he left (4 Aug.) the admonition, ‘Never lose self-possession or patience; but, above all, at no time, and in no way, fail in princely worth and nobleness.’ The words were but the voice of the prince's own resolution, as his whole after life proved.
During the summer he went through a course of reading on the laws and constitution of England with Mr. Selwyn, author of the standard work on Nisi Prius, and at the same time read with the queen Hallam's ‘Constitutional History of England.’ Acting on Lord Melbourne's advice, the queen communicated all foreign despatches to him. The Eastern question, on which England seemed likely to come into collision with France, was then pressing, and it was a good introduction to the study of foreign politics, of which the prince ultimately became thorough master. His Mentor, Stockmar, with whom he kept up a close correspondence, heard of this with pleasure, and urged him to study the despatches thoroughly, as ‘besides the great knowledge thus conveyed they would beget in him a taste for general politics, which, he added, was quite indispensable for the duties of his vocation.’
In November Stockmar came back to London on the urgent solicitation of the prince, who wished to have him near on the first accouchement of the queen, Stockmar being a skilled physician as well as a politician of the highest order. The Princess Charlotte had died with her hand in his twenty-four years before, when, had his warnings to her physicians been taken, her life might have been saved. All went happily now at the birth (21 Nov.) of the princess royal, for the wise old physician's injunctions against excitement of every kind were rigidly enforced by the prince.
Stockmar remained in England till May 1841, assisting the prince with his counsels, and watching the development of his character with loving but sternly critical eyes. ‘Your royal highness's conduct,’ he wrote (7 May 1841), ‘should always be regulated by conviction, based upon a clear perception of what is true.’ He must be on his guard against whatever was false or mistaken in sentiment, and ‘never be satisfied with mere talk where action is alone appropriate.’ This was the task the prince must set before him, hard as it was; ‘it was worthy of him, within his power to achieve, and, unless achieved, it was idle for him to hope for any genuine triumph as a man or as a prince.’
When the letter containing these words reached the prince, the Melbourne administration was tottering to its fall. This event had been for some time apparent to the queen and prince, and he used his influence to prepare the way with the queen for a change which could not be contemplated by her majesty without some degree of pain, attached as she was to Lord Melbourne and his friends. Party spirit ran high. The tories thought that on a former occasion they had not been fairly treated by Lord Melbourne's party, and it was important that they should have no room for complaint should the turn of events place Sir Robert Peel in power. A debate on a vote of no confidence, which left the ministry in a minority of ninety-one (28 Aug. 1841), brought about this result. In Lord Melbourne the queen lost not only a first minister, but also a very dear friend, and to her the separation was necessarily most painful. At this moment the kindness and tact of the prince smoothed every difficulty. It was a source of great satisfaction, both to Lord Melbourne and the queen, that in resigning his position he was able to assure her majesty that he had ‘formed the highest opinion of the prince's judgment, temper, and discretion;’ that his ‘advice and assistance would be of inestimable advantage’ to the queen, and that she could not ‘do better than have recourse to it, whenever it was needed, and rely on it with confidence.’
The change of ministry was effected with satisfaction on all sides. Sir R. Peel used afterwards to say that, on first coming into official contact with the prince, he felt no slight embarrassment, remembering that the
