Kings and Princes. 79 



fifty years' tussle with the foremost statesmen of the 

 age, has won the crown both for attainments and char- 

 acter ; but the other, bless your ignorant little head ! — 

 he is a prince. 



Well, if he is, he has never done anything, you say. 

 True, but what are kings and princes for? The people 

 of England, my dear, not so very long ago, used to have 

 it beaten into them that '' the king can do no wrong." 

 As this is historically the true doctrine and has anti- 

 quity on its side, it would have been very un-English to 

 reject it ; so they quietly accepted the dogma and made 

 it true by arranging that the king should never be al- 

 lowed to do anything — it's a way these islanders have — 

 the form may be what it likes, the substance must be as 

 they wish. They never revolutionize in England — they 

 transform. What you complain of then, my red repub- 

 lican miss, is really the best proof that the prince will 

 make that modern article called a Constitutional Mon- 

 arch, and spend his days as the English man-milliner 

 Worth — setting the fashions, laying foundation stones, 

 and opening fancy bazars. Oh ! you would not be 

 such a prince or such a king. The Bruce at Bannock- 

 burn, at the head of his countrymen striking for the 

 independence of Scotland, and King Edward leading 

 his hosts, these were real kings, you say ? The kings of 

 to-day are shadows. I am not going to dispute that 

 with you. Miss ; times have changed and kings with them; 

 but were I Prince of Wales, I would be in Ireland to- 



