their military evolutions, were not only the theme of his admiration, but they were held forth as the pattern to be adopted in the English army, whenever the Bishop of Osnaburg should possess power and influence enough to enforce their introduction.

The review being completed, the time had arrived for the attention of the Princes to the important duties of their toilet, preparatory to their appearance at the dinner-table of some high official, at which, as far as Prince William was concerned, it was a meeting, dull, formal, and uninstructive. His contracted knowledge of the German language, and the total ignorance of the Hanoverian functionaries of the English, prevented any social intercourse taking place between them, so that his conversation was necessarily confined to his own countrymen, which, combined with the extraordinary formality, which invariably characterizes the meetings of the higher ranks in Germany, and the absence of the greatest charm of all social meetings, namely, female society, rendered the hours passed at the tables of the Hanoverian nobility, irksome and unpleasant.

Out of compliment to the English Princes, the English custom of drinking after dinner was introduced, that is to say, that the bottles and the glasses were allowed to be placed on the table; but in regard to conviviality, or any generous relaxation of the heart and mind, which distinguishes the after hours of a dinner party in England, the very reverse was the case. The Bishop of Osnaburg was always a hearty drinker, and although Prince William was rather more abstemious, yet there were moments of conviviality in which he took particular pleasure, and when influenced by his love of fun and humour, he generally rendered himself the most conspicuous individual at the table. The German nobleman at the head of his company knews nothing of the circulation of the bottle; the guests help themselves according to their pleasure, and as the German is at no time a very affable or conversable creature, the meeting generally passes over with ennui and distaste.

The early hour at which the theatre opens at Hanover, was

also a great check upon the conviviality of the table, and although Prince William could understand very little of the declamatory part of the performance, yet an appearance in the theatre being a proof of being one of the haut ton, in the same manner as an attendance at the Opera House in London on a Saturday night, is an outward demonstration of belonging to the lite of the fashionable world, it was not to be supposed that the royal Princes would commit so great an offence against the fashionable customs of Hanover, as to absent themselves from a place, where the haut ton of the city congregated, and which was attended for other purposes than witnessing the robbers of Schiller, or the Virgins of the Sun of Kotzebue. In this respect, perhaps, no great difference exists between the theatre of Hanover and the Opera House of London, for in both are enacted scenes of immorality, intrigue, and vice, which place the moral sentiments of the upper classes in a most disreputable light. It must, however, be conceded to on the part of the frequenters of the theatre of Hanover, that they do not wish all the world to see what is going on in the boxes, for to each is attached a curtain, which is either drawn close, or kept wholly open according to the nature of the scene which is enacting within; in the Opera House at London, however, neither disguise nor concealment is considered in the least degree requisite.

The performance at the Hanoverian theatre, being limited to either a tragedy or a comedy, without any of the tomfooleries, which disgrace the English, stage the whole of it is finished by seven o'clock, when the saloons of the literati and the politicians are opened, and certain places of amusements, offer their enticements to the dissolute youth of Hanover, amongst which are the gambling houses. It was to the latter that the Bishop of Osnaburg and Prince William generally resorted, and although the latter was by no means so much addicted to that destructive vice as the former, yet he was made the subject of a most vicious example, and became initiated in all the arts and stratagems of the professed gambler, at that period of his life, when the character of the

individual is formed, by which he is to appear in the world, and on which depends his misery or his happiness.

The foregoing, may be considered as a birds-eye view of the manner in which the Royal Princes passed their time, which was supposed by their father, to be employed in the general improvement of their mind, and in the acquisition of those branches of knowledge, which were to fit them for properly, fulfilling that important station of life to which they were born.

General Bude and Captain Merrick were ignorant of the true principles on which the education of a British Prince ought to be founded. They knew little of the history of that country to which their royal pupil belonged, and still less of those, through which it was their intention to lead him. They had acquired but a very faint knowledge of the polity of nations, and as to any model on which to erect the character of the royal youth entrusted to their charge, it was a subject to which they paid little or no attention It was the advice of Machiavel, a man, whose fate it has been to be much celebrated and little understood, like Thomas Paine of this country, that every individual who is destined to be either a statesman or a commander, should form to himself at his entrance into public life, some great model of imitation from the conspicuous characters of preceding ages. By the ancients, this practice was generally observed, and it might be of equal service to the moderns, but was this practice ever put in force with the education of the royal youths of Great Britain? On what model was it attempted to form their characters, or what part of history, ancient or modern, was laid before them as the object of their immediate study? Cæsar, and Hannibal, and Alexander, with their victories, and their conquests might not have been unknown to the Bishop of Osnaburg, but great as those men appear in the age in which they lived, yet the models which ought to have been laid before the royal youths should have been taken from modern history, from those men, who have not lived in the midst of institutions which are now

become obsolete and antiquated, but who have been placed in the same situations with themselves, who have had the same dangers to encounter, the same system to pursue, the same objects of ambition for their motive, the same honour and offices for their reward. Or will it be said, that in modern history no such models are to be found; could either General Bude or Captain Merrick, have told their royal pupil that no modern historian had left, multas nobis imagines, non solum ad intuendum, verum etiam ad imitandum. It is too much the fashion of modern tutors, especially those to whom the education of royalty and nobility is intrusted, to refer their pupils to ancient history, for their examples of whatever is great or good in the human character, as if all their praises were to be engrossed by the mighty names of Greece and Rome. Are there none in later times, the beams of whose glory might shine directly upon a youthful royal mind with a more intense and vivifying influence? Are there none, who have "as greatly lived, as bravely died?" None, who have been willing martyrs to liberty or to religion? None, who extended the range of human intellect? None, who forgetful of themselves, have devoted their families, their persons, or their fortunes to the general interests of the human race? None, who from the eminence of historical renown, may appear as beacons to those who were about to commence the voyage of life, and as being connected with royalty, environed with the most imminent perils; were there none who might teach the scions of royalty that true, that genuine heroism which consists in daring to do all that is honourable, and in abstaining from everything that is disgraceful or tainted with vice. Were no examples to be found which could teach them that genuine enthusiasm, which is no more than a warmer perception of the best feelings and holiest aspirations of our nature, whose whole conduct in short, may inspire courage in action, and fortitude in suffering, virtue throughout the course of existence, and fearlessness at its close? Such an assertion could only be made by those, who are bigots to ancient, or who are ignorant of modern

history. George III., was anything but a well-educated man; George IV., was educated more in the shining, than the substantial attainments of human knowledge; the taste of the Duke of York, was more confined to low and vulgar obscenity, than to the acquisition of solid or useful learning, and it cannot be concealed that the mind of the Duke of Clarence was not directed by his tutors, to those sources of knowledge, without the acquisition of which no character can be either great or grand. Immersed in old and antiquated prejudices. George III., appeared to have forgotten all the characters and achievements in the latter ages of the world, and if any of the achievements of those characters bore on the enfranchisement of their countrymen, from the yoke of despotism and tyranny, they were denounced as improper and dangerous, to be held forth as examples for his royal sons. Such names as Wallace or Hampden, Doria or Tell, Paoli or Kosciusko, were too much en mauvaise odeur with George III., to allow the mouths of his children to be familiar with them. Modern history was in many instances too much tainted with the spirit of liberalism, to be a favourite part of the study, in which a Bude or a Merrick was to engage their royal pupil. The heavenborn rights of royalty; its indefeasible, its imperscriptible privileges, were to be the continual theme of instruction, and those passages from modern history were particularly to be culled out, which went to show that there existed a right divine in kings to govern, and a moral, irrevocable obligation in subjects to obey, but at the same time, it never entered into the capacity of the royal tutors, that Princes who are born to govern, can never govern well, unless they be thoroughly versed in the knowledge of the different forms of Government by which the destinies of nations are determined, and on which depend their rank which they hold in the scale of human civilization.

There is scarcely a country in Europe, from which the royal tutors might not have selected some model or example, which might have been a great advantage to their pupil. Has the north of Europe never seen a Gustavus or a Peter? The south a Lorenzo or