Healing Justice Holistic Self Care for Change Makers

Illustrated Loretta Pyles - PDF Download (2025)

https://ebookultra.com/download/healing-justice-holistic-self-
care-for-change-makers-illustrated-loretta-pyles/

Visit ebookultra.com today to download the complete set of

ebooks or textbooks
Here are some recommended products for you. Click the link to
download, or explore more at ebookultra.com

Progressive Community Organizing 3. Edition Loretta Pyles

https://ebookultra.com/download/progressive-community-
organizing-3-edition-loretta-pyles/

Progressive Community Organizing A Critical Approach for a

Globalizing World 1st Edition Loretta Pyles

https://ebookultra.com/download/progressive-community-organizing-a-
critical-approach-for-a-globalizing-world-1st-edition-loretta-pyles/

The Complete Guide to Holistic Cat Care An Illustrated

Handbook 1st Edition Yarnall

https://ebookultra.com/download/the-complete-guide-to-holistic-cat-
care-an-illustrated-handbook-1st-edition-yarnall/

Developing Holistic Care for Long term Conditions 1st

Edition Carl Margereson

https://ebookultra.com/download/developing-holistic-care-for-long-
term-conditions-1st-edition-carl-margereson/
Consumer Driven Health Care Implications for Providers
Payers and Policy Makers 1st Edition Regina E. Herzlinger

https://ebookultra.com/download/consumer-driven-health-care-
implications-for-providers-payers-and-policy-makers-1st-edition-
regina-e-herzlinger/

Climate Change Justice Eric A. Posner

https://ebookultra.com/download/climate-change-justice-eric-a-posner/

Optimizing Emergency Department Throughput Operations

Management Solutions for Health Care Decision Makers 1st
Edition John M. Shiver
https://ebookultra.com/download/optimizing-emergency-department-
throughput-operations-management-solutions-for-health-care-decision-
makers-1st-edition-john-m-shiver/

The therapist s workbook self assessment self care and

self improvement exercises for mental health professionals
2nd ed Edition Jeffrey A Kottler
https://ebookultra.com/download/the-therapist-s-workbook-self-
assessment-self-care-and-self-improvement-exercises-for-mental-health-
professionals-2nd-ed-edition-jeffrey-a-kottler/

Chinese Medicine and Healing An Illustrated History 1st

Edition Tj Hinrichs (Editor)

https://ebookultra.com/download/chinese-medicine-and-healing-an-
illustrated-history-1st-edition-tj-hinrichs-editor/
Healing Justice Holistic Self Care for Change Makers
Illustrated Loretta Pyles Digital Instant Download
Author(s): Loretta Pyles
ISBN(s): 9780190663087, 0190663081
Edition: Illustrated
File Details: PDF, 14.28 MB
Year: 2018
Language: english
i

Healing Justice
ii
iii

Healing Justice
Holistic Self-​Care for
Change Makers
z
LORETTA PYLES

1
iv

1
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers
the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education
by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University
Press in the UK and certain other countries.

Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press

198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America.

© Oxford University Press 2018

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in

a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by license, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reproduction
rights organization. Inquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above.

You must not circulate this work in any other form

and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Pyles, Loretta, author.
Title: Healing justice : holistic self-care for change makers / Loretta Pyles.
Description: New York : Oxford University Press, [2018] |
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2017036635 (print) | LCCN 2017040788 (ebook) |
ISBN 9780190663094 (updf) | ISBN 9780190663100 (epub) |
ISBN 9780190663087 (alk. paper)
Subjects: LCSH: Mind and body. | Holistic education. | Social action.
Classification: LCC BF151 (ebook) | LCC BF151 .P95 2018 (print) |
DDC 158—dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017036635

1 3 5 7 9 8 6 4 2

Printed by WebCom, Inc., Canada

v

For Dora and Silvio

vi
vi

Contents

Acknowledgments xiii

Introduction xv

PART I: Healing Justice and Whole Self-​Care

1. Oppression, Trauma, and Healing Justice 3

Case Study 3
Oppression and Trauma 5
Introducing Healing Justice 9
Transformative Social Practice 11
To Care or Not to Care 14
Healing Justice as Practice 16
A Journey Toward Wholeness 17
Putting It Into Practice 19
Inquiry 19
Self-Care Practice Skill 20
Experiment for a Day 20
2. Stress and the Self-​Care Revolution 21
Case Study 21
Understanding Stress 22
The Impact of Stress 25
Stress and Your Relationship with Time 27
Chronic Stress and Stress Reduction 30
Risk, Resilience, and Coping 31
Stress Reduction Practices 34
Healing Justice as Revolutionary Act 36
vi

viii Contents

Putting It Into Practice 38

Inquiry 38
Self-Care Practice Skill 38
Experiment for a Day 39
3. The Whole Self 40
Case Study 40
Introduction 42
Beyond the Mind-​Body Split 42
The Mind-​Body Connection 44
Introducing Modern Buddhist and Yogic Philosophy 44
Mind-​Body Medicine and Neuroscience 47
Expanding the Field: The Whole Self 50
The Ecological Self 50
A Framework for Healing Justice 54
Putting It Into Practice 57
Inquiry 57
Self-Care Practice Skill 57
Experiment for a Day 58
4. A Skillful Path of Healing Justice 60
Case Study 60
Introduction 62
The Human Predicament and the Whole Self 63
A Skillful Path of Change 67
Cultivating Balance 69
Digital Technology and Healing Justice 71
The Six Capabilities in Balance 72
Mindfulness and Compassion 72
Curiosity and Critical Inquiry 75
Effort and Equanimity 77
Nurturing the Positive 80
Putting It Into Practice 82
Inquiry 82
Self-Care Practice Skill 83
Experiment for a Day 83
ix

Contents ix

PART II: Holistic Self-​Care Practices and Skills

5. Connecting to the Body 87

Case Study 87
Introduction 89
One Size Does Not Fit All 90
Eat 94
Mindless, Confused Eating 95
Eating with Intention 97
Move 99
Joyful Movement 100
Rest 103
Sleep 106
Putting It Into Practice 109
Inquiry 109
Self-Care Practice Skill 110
Experiment for a Day 110
6. Befriending the Mind-​Heart 111
Case Study 111
Introduction 112
Leaning into Emotions 114
Coping Skills for Self-​Regulating the Emotions 118
Conscious Communication 120
Working with Thoughts 122
Mindfulness-​Based Practices for Working with Thoughts 125
Putting It Into Practice 129
Inquiry 129
Self-Care Practice Skill 130
Experiment for a Day 130
7. Rediscovering Spirit 131
Case Study 131
Introduction 132
Spiritual Disconnection 134
The Path of Practice 138
Spiritual Autobiography 139
Cultural Appropriation and Spiritual/​Religious Practice 141
x

x Contents

Formal Spiritual Practice 143

Breath Practices 146
Meditation 148
Movement Practices 150
Inquiry and Reflection 152
Putting It Into Practice 155
Inquiry 155
Self-Care Practice Skill 156
Experiment for a Day 156
8. In the Fabric of Community 157
Case Study 157
Introduction 159
The Common Good 162
Empathy, Altruism, and Mirror Neurons 163
From Social Support to Social Capital: Collective Efficacy and
Community Resilience 164
Healing through Community 166
Community Ritual 167
Humor and Laughter 169
The Social Economy 170
Loving-​Kindness Practice 172
Self-​Care Practice with Others 173
The Limits of Community and Setting Boundaries 174
Putting It Into Practice 175
Inquiry 175
Self-Care Practice Skill 175
Experiment for a Day 176
9. Cultivating Connections Between Person and Planet 177
Case Study 177
Introduction 179
Nurturing Environmental Connection 182
Sensorial Attention 184
Environmental Practices that Heal 186
Walking in Nature 186
Pet Therapy 187
Transforming Relationships with Consumption, Resources,
and Money 188
xi

Contents xi

Creating a Schedule that Honors You, Your Family,

and the Planet 191
Putting It Into Practice 193
Inquiry 193
Self-Care Practice Skill 193
Experiment for a Day 194

PART III: Where the Rubber Meets the Road

10. The Healing Justice Organization 197

Case Study 197
Introduction 198
Structural Supports and Organizational Culture 199
Worker Empowerment and Organizational Structure/Culture 200
Relationships and Organizational Culture 200
Social Justice and Organizational Culture 200
Burnout in Organizations 201
Assessing the Organizational Context for Burnout 203
Organizational Approaches that Support Healing Justice 204
Feminist Organizations 204
Learning Organizations 205
Contemplative Organizations 207
Sanctuary Organizations 208
Pathways for Creating Organizational Change 209
Keeping the Big Social Justice Picture Alive and Well 209
Promoting Participatory Decision-​Making and Collective
Bargaining Rights 210
Supporting Personal and Group Development 212
Nurturing Relationships 213
Using Advocacy Skills and Setting Boundaries 213
Championing Healing Justice and Self-​Care in
the Workplace 214
Putting It Into Practice 215
Inquiry 215
Self-Care Practice Skill 216
Experiment for a Day 216
xi

xii Contents

11. Healing Justice on the Frontlines 217

Case Study 217
Introduction 218
Staying Connected, Setting Boundaries 220
Maintaining a Light Touch 222
Embodying Healing Justice on the Frontlines 224
Nurturing Relationships 224
The Mindful Pause 226
Caring for the Body 228
Sharing Healing Practices with Others 230
Making Healing Justice Accessible and Possible 235
Putting It Into Practice 236
Inquiry 236
Self-Care Practice Skill 236
Experiment for a Day 237
12. Widening the Circle and Coming Home 238
Case Study 238
Introduction 239
The Paradox of Connection and Disconnection 241
Belonging 242
Technology 243
Diversity 245
Crises 246
Practices to Support a Global/​Healing Justice Agenda 247
Right Now, It’s Like This 248
Safe, Resourced, Connected 249
Dances of Universal Peace 250
Looking Back, Going Forward 251
You 252
Your Global Community 253
Your Work 254
Conclusion 255
A Healing Justice Manifesto 256

Notes 257
Index 285
xi

Acknowledgments

This book has been a culmination of my life’s work up to this point, a

tremendous opportunity for growth, and a real labor of love. I am sincerely
grateful for all the support, feedback, and inspiration I have received dur-
ing the writing of it. While this writing was a solo journey, community
clearly played a fundamental role not only in the intersubjective under-
standings that I have attempted to articulate here but also through the
direct and indirect support of fellow sojourners, family, and friends.
I am very grateful for the feedback that I received from Dana Bliss,
Maia Duerr, Carol Horton, and additional blind reviewers. It has truly
deepened and strengthened this work. I also have to acknowledge the
countless thinkers, writers, activists, spiritual teachers, and cyber “friends”
who have helped me to formulate and clarify some of these ideas. Thanks
to Sreyashi Chakravarty for her help with the tedious work of citations and
references and to Andrew Dominello and Isaac Priyakumar for their edi-
torial support.
Hugs to Gwendolyn Adam and Shanna Goldman, who continue to
offer me tremendous support and inspiration on the path of healing jus-
tice. I am grateful to the faculty and staff of the School of Social Welfare
at UAlbany for their encouragement and support, with special thanks to
Heather Horton and Salome Raheim. I also express gratitude to my MSW
and PhD students, yoga students, workshop participants, and trainees
who humble me, teach me, and inspire me to teach.
I am especially grateful for the many times that my loving family has
listened to my woes or cheered me on—​Dawne, Tom (“Skip”), Rachel,
Seth, Aaron, Yianna, Dora, and Silvio. I offer a special shout-​out to my dear
sister-​in-​law, Melissa (“Lissy”), for her unconditional love and support.
Thanks to Insight Meditation Society where I have found refuge
through regular silent retreats that continue to heal me and awaken me
to the truths of this world. To all my Kripalu sisters and brothers, “Jai
xvi

xiv Acknowledgments

Bhagwan!” To the mountains, trees, and streams that provided the back-
drop for much of the writing, I bow to you. Hugs and snuggles to my furry
friends—​Alex, Tara, and Joey.
Last but not least, Ted Mehl. What can I say to you but this: “you’re the
best thing that every happened to me.” Thank you for editing, researching,
and helping me to think through some of this. I deeply cherish our now
almost two decades of discussions about politics, philosophy, and spirit-
ual practice. I won’t rehash how obnoxious I have been over these many
months, so I’ll just say, “I’m sorry” and “thank you.”
xv

Introduction

twenty years ago, I was working at a feminist domestic violence pro-

gram, helping battered women find refuge, and actively engaged in anti-
oppressive social practice, endeavoring with others to address issues of
violence in relation to gender, race, class, disability, and sexual orientation
in our community, our organization, the lives of the women we worked
with, and ourselves. Though very challenging, exhausting, and often vex-
ing, it was exciting to be in the trenches doing the day-​to-​day work of social
justice and to be connected to a larger feminist antiviolence movement.
This connection gave my work meaning and provided a sense of belong-
ing and identity.
At the same time, I was coping with a difficult intimate relationship that
was slowly falling apart, rehearsing the intergenerational challenges of my
childhood and culture, and feeling like a broken person. To say I wasn’t
taking very good care of myself would be an understatement. I was full
of grief and despair, I didn’t understand who I was, and I couldn’t make
sense of the world I was living in.
Burned out, I eventually left that work and started to find other ways of
understanding and helping the world and myself. Over the course of many
years, as I started slowing down, meditating, doing yoga, practicing com-
passion for myself and others, and engaging in self-​and group inquiry, I
began to have more experiences of being present and satisfied in my body,
genuinely feeling my emotions, having more cohesion between my work
life and personal passions, being more successful and impactful in my
work, and feeling deeper connections to the people and the world around
me. Though I certainly hadn’t arrived at some final destination (and most
certainly still haven’t, and clearly never will, as that is not the point), I was
on a path, a path of aligning the inner work of healing, self-​compassion,
and attending to my own suffering and internalized oppression with the
xvi

xvi Introduction

outer work of accompanying people, interrupting injustice, and effecting

change.
One experience signifies this alignment in my mind and it culmi-
nated during a five-​day Zen meditation retreat in 2000. At the time, I was
working for another antiviolence organization, but this time doing state-
wide policy advocacy work on behalf of community-​based organizations.
Unconventional though it was, I received permission to leave the retreat
for a few hours because I had an important meeting to attend with my col-
leagues. The meeting was with the governor’s chief of staff to talk about
funding for domestic violence programs that would address some of the
survivors’ economic needs. The governor had proposed unjust cuts to the
budget, and we were ready for a fight. Going into the meeting and by that
time having been meditating regularly for about a year and, in the case of
this retreat, for a couple of days from early morning until night, I felt par-
ticularly open, empowered, and clear. I was also able to work with letting
go of my expectations about the outcome of the meeting too, which I think
freed me up to allow for any possibility. I can’t remember or describe
exactly what happened in that meeting, but we came away with all of the
funding we had originally proposed. Without any struggle, they reversed
their decision and reinstated all the funding for survivors of domestic vio-
lence into the state budget.
I attribute our success that day to our solidarity and strength over
the course of many months through our ongoing work with our own
constituents and persistent advocacy with state actors. And yet perhaps
something a little magical happened that day too. We knew we were on
the side of justice and our presence was formidable. We were able to
communicate in a calm yet firm way what the right thing to do was. That
moment has always shown me the power of aligning the inner with the
outer. Who knows, perhaps if I had walked into that meeting crazy-​eyed
and burnt out, maybe we would have received the funding too. But the
experience piqued my interest in the connection between my medita-
tion work and my social change work. I am not intimating that when
you meditate everything is going to go your way, or you’ll be able to
change what political party is in office, or get your client to stop drink-
ing heavily, or end racism. Rather, I am pointing toward the prospect of
what creating a little bit of space in the mind-​heart can do, potentially
allowing one to move beyond conditioned patterning that can disem-
power and deplete a person, creating an opening for new possibilities
to emerge.
xvi

Introduction xvii

In my work today as a social work educator, researcher, community

practitioner, consultant, yoga and meditation teacher, and trainer, it has
become clear that some of the practitioners around me—​community
organizers, therapists, educators, academic colleagues, and my social
work students who are working in the field—​are suffering. Like myself,
their calling in life is to help people, to alleviate injustice, and to effect
social change. They are doing this work in public social services agen-
cies, hospitals, clinics, schools, and community-​ based organizations
and in a range of policy settings. Nevertheless, I see chronic exhaustion
from overwork in organizations that are grinding people down; corrosive
anger toward a patriarchal, racist, and capitalist system; and anxiety and
despair over the chipping away at what seems like the last vestiges of
a social safety net. My students who are taking classes and working as
unpaid interns, all on top of part-​time or full-​time paid work, are being
victimized by an unforgiving system right out of the starting gates of
their career.
All of this is happening in a context and culture where many organi-
zations and practitioners do not have the time, privilege, or inclination to
inquire into the deeper structural causes of these problems nor discern
the ways that these problems impact who they are and how they are func-
tioning. And the fallout and coping behaviors of this scenario can actually
be a little bit ugly—​petty infighting, workplace bullying, substance abuse,
caffeine and technology addiction, and unhealthy eating habits, to name a
few, not to mention mediocre job performance. And it’s not exactly their
fault; given the harsh and underresourced environments, these outcomes
are the logical conclusion. Thus, for many of the people I work with, rally-
ing cries for self-​care seem like a cruel joke.
And so my vocation has become focused on how to alleviate some of
these challenges by bringing healing practices to social workers, activists,
and other helping professionals and the organizations and movements
that they are a part of, sharing what I have learned from my years of study-
ing and practicing mindfulness and yoga in relation to social change and
human services work. While the practices inspired by mindfulness and
yoga are not a panacea for all of our problems—​neither personal ones
nor social ones—​my work has come to focus on the ways that these prac-
tices can illuminate and sustain the path for those of us who are called to
serve. Indeed, I have come to believe, like many others,1 that this personal
work—​healing one’s body, mind, and relationships—​is a necessary part of
social work.
xvi

xviii Introduction

My social work students have been saying for many years that their pro-
fessors and field supervisors are always telling them to practice self-​care
but that they never teach them how to actually do it. And so I began to pro-
actively teach them how to meditate, guiding them in mindful movement
and facilitating more opportunities for collective inquiry into and engage-
ment with the social origins of, and embodied impacts of, oppression. In
the classroom, this has allowed for more opportunities to identify creative
and responsive solutions to injustice and suffering. It was scary at first as
I sat there thinking (and still sometimes do), “They are going to hate this;”
“I’m going to get fired for this;” and many other troubling thoughts. In
spite of the voices in my head, I have persisted. And, it turns out that, by
and large, students really love it. In fact, they seem to be hungry for it. I
took this kind of work into various communities and started teaching self-​
care to practitioners, offering practical and impactful mind-​body skills as
a key, and often overlooked, support of human services, counseling, and
community organizing work. Moreover, as an activist and engaged scholar,
my colleagues and I began to incorporate healing, soul feeding, and group
visioning as a valuable part of building community and social justice seek-
ing. Consequently, this book is the outgrowth of my practice, teaching, and
study of what I, and others, have come to think of as healing justice.

Healing Justice
Healing justice is a concept and practice that has slowly been emerging in
the past decade in response to a more callous neoliberal context, amplified
by global economic policies that continue to empower an elite group of
actors, ongoing antagonism to those who are “other,” and a culture that
encourages people to disconnect from themselves and each other. An
increasingly diverse contingent of activists, particularly immigrants and
people of color, queer people, and young people, have turned toward that
which activists in the past have not necessarily attended to—​the impact of
violence and intergenerational trauma; the body, emotions, and spirit; and
individual and collective practices that can facilitate deeper understand-
ing, connection, and sustainability.
During the 2010 US Social Forum, activists created this working defi-
nition of healing justice, describing it as

a framework that identifies how we can holistically respond to and

intervene on generational trauma and violence and bring collective
xi

Introduction xix

practices that can impact and transform the consequences of oppres-

sion on our bodies, hearts and minds. Through this framework we
built two political and philosophical convergences of healing inside
of liberation.2

Chicago-​based organizer Tanuja Jagernaut further notes that healing

justice “recognizes that we have bodies, minds, emotions, hearts, and it
makes the connection that we cannot do this work of transforming soci-
ety and our communities without bringing collective healing into our
work.”3 Healing justice, as I understand it, is a practice of attention and
connection, a way of healing a sense of fracturedness or disconnection
that may be a result of trauma, oppressive socio-​cultural narratives and
practices, or the myriad ways in which humans may lose touch with each
other and themselves. It is a practice that asks social practitioners of all
kinds to cultivate the conditions that might allow them to feel more whole
and connected to themselves, the world around them, and other human
beings.
Given the unique challenges faced in the world today, where people
tend to be very connected to technology, ideologies, and people who are
like them and less connected to others who are different from them, the
natural world, and the parts of themselves that they reject, the ability to
cultivate relationships by tapping into their intuition and collective resil-
ience is as critical as ever and is something that must be reclaimed. In an
interview with YES! Magazine, social justice activist Angela Davis wrote,

I think our notions of what counts as radical have changed over

time. Self-​care and healing and attention to the body and the spir-
itual dimension—​all of this is now a part of radical social justice
struggles. That wasn’t the case before. And I think that now we’re
thinking deeply about the connection between interior life and what
happens in the social world. Even those who are fighting against
state violence often incorporate impulses that are based on state
violence in their relations with other people.4

And so, healing justice is a practice that asks people to heal each other and
themselves, change the way they relate to each other and organize them-
selves, and continually interrogate their tactics and interventions. This
book attempts to offer guidance in such work, for anyone interested in
embarking on or continuing a path of healing justice.
Other documents randomly have
different content
 House of Commons when, on the 26th of February, he brought his plan
under its notice. He contended that military expenditure had caused the
increase of £10,000,000, which he desired to reduce. Therefore he moved
that the expenditure under this head be diminished with all practicable speed.
The insular position of England was itself a sure defence against her
enemies.

JOHN BRIGHT (1857).

 Provided she did not interfere recklessly with foreign nations, she had
less to fear in 1849 than in 1835. Why, then, should the military and naval
expenditure of 1835 be exceeded? Vast sums of money, too, were spent on
the Colonies. Here also a reduction might be effected, for the English
taxpayer got no more food from the Colonies than the foreign one did. At
this period it was evident that Mr. Cobden had not put to the test the sound
maxim that “trade follows the flag.” The answer of the Chancellor of the
Exchequer was that in 1835, to the expenditure of which Mr. Cobden wanted
to revert, no adequate provision had been made for the true wants of the
country; and that, since then, many things had happened to increase
expenditure unavoidably. The introduction of steam into the Navy was an
illustration of these changes. Moreover, the Government had reduced
expenditure by about a million and a half sterling—and that was surely a
pledge of their earnestness as financial reformers.
The Tories put Mr. Herries forward to attack both parties. He blamed
Ministers for encouraging the financial reformers, and denounced Mr.
Cobden for the violence of his speeches out of doors on the subject. The
policy of the Tories was to demand that expenditure should not be lessened,
whilst there was ground for anxiety as to foreign affairs. One of their
arguments was an odd one. It was that, as the revenue was still maintained in
spite of the repeal of vast sums of taxation, there was no ground for
pretending that retrenchment was necessary because the people felt that
taxation was pressing hard on them. They did not seem to see that this was
either an argument in favour of raising revenue without imposing any taxes
at all—which was a reductio ad absurdum—or an argument to show that
reductions of taxation still left Government with enough money in hand to
defend the interests of the country, which was virtually an admission that Mr.
Cobden’s plan, if tried, could do no harm. The Free Traders made a bid for
the rural vote by arguing that, if the landed interest wanted the relief which
the Protectionists promised them, they ought to vote for the reduction in
expenditure, which would enable Parliament to grant that relief. Mr.
Cobden’s first scheme of Financial Reform was rejected by a vote of 275 to
78. But this did not allay the uneasiness of the public, who began to fret over
the extraordinary delay that took place in the production of the Budget. It
was not till the 29th of June that Sir Charles Wood made his financial
statement to the House. It was not a cheering one. The expenditure, which
was £53,287,110, had exceeded the Ministerial estimate by £1,219,379, and
it exceeded the revenue of the year by £269,378. Of course, by excluding
unexpected outlays on Irish distress, Canadian emigration, &c., a more
favourable state of accounts could be shown; but, as the excluded money had
been spent, there was really no reason for ignoring it. For the coming year
his estimated expenditure, he said, would be £52,157,696, and his estimated
receipts would yield, he hoped, a surplus over that of £94,304. Sir Charles
Wood’s strongest points were that every effort would be made to keep
current expenditure within current income, and that instead of using small
surpluses to remit small sums of taxation, they would be kept as the nucleus
of large surpluses, for the reduction of large amounts of taxation. The
Radicals and Financial Reformers were not satisfied with Sir Charles
Wood’s long list of objectionable taxes that had been removed. In spite of all
that, expenditure increased—and what was worse, there was a steady
increase in permanent burdens on the revenue, in the shape of charges for the
Public Debt. Mr. Hume demanded that Excise be done away with, and that
the example of Sir James Graham, who reduced the expenses of the
Admiralty by £1,200,000, be followed. Mr. Milner Gibson attacked the
paper duty, the newspaper stamp duty, and the tax on advertisements, as
taxes on knowledge; and he cited the petition of the Messrs. Chambers of
Edinburgh, who declared that the paper duty had stopped the continuance of
a work for the humbler classes which they were bringing out, and of which
there had been a sale of 80,000 copies. Everybody wanted some special duty
repealed, either that on hops, bricks, soap, beer, malt, tea, or timber. The
Budget was felt to be unsatisfactory, for, as Mr. Cobden said, it made the two
ends barely meet. At the close of the Session (20th of July) Mr. Herries
supplemented this discussion by starting another question—that of raising
some portion of the supplies of the State by a fixed duty on corn. The
Protectionists argued that Sir Charles Wood’s estimates were too sanguine,
and that more taxes must be imposed on the people, unless a small duty were
put on foreign corn. This was not to be a protective duty, but one merely for
revenue purposes, and as such surely it was justifiable. It would be only a tax
on food in name; in fact, the defence of the proposal was like the Irish
vagrant’s apology for the existence of her baby—“Please, sir, it’s only a very
little one.” Of course the Free Traders sprang upon Mr. Herries with great
glee. The Tories were going round the country promising the farmers
Protection. But when they came to the House of Commons all they ventured
to ask for was a small fixed duty on corn, which was to be levied not for
protective but for revenue purposes. The position was an awkward one for
Mr. Herries. Either his small fixed duty did or did not raise the price of corn.
If it did, he was deceiving the House of Commons. If it did not, he was
deceiving his clients among the farmers. His move was obviously one for
putting heart into a desponding faction.
It has been said that Mr. Cobden and Mr. Bright had come to the
conclusion that, side by side with the agitation for retrenchment, there
should be pressed forward that for Parliamentary Reform. Accordingly, Mr.
Hume introduced his motion for Parliamentary Reform in the House of
Commons on the 4th of June, demanding Household Suffrage, Vote by
Ballot, Triennial Parliaments, and something approaching to equal electoral
districts. The opposition of the Whigs, who argued that reform was
unnecessary because many good measures had been passed by Parliament,
and that to extend the franchise would endanger the Monarchy, induced the
House to reject the motion by a vote of 268 to 82.
But a topic far more interesting to the Queen, whose speciality is Foreign
Policy, was brought under the notice of the House of Commons by Mr.
Cobden a few days after Mr. Hume’s motion was disposed of. He suggested
a plan whereby wars might cease, and civilised nations might compose their
quarrels by Arbitration. On the 12th of June Cobden moved an Address to
the Crown, praying that Foreign Powers might be invited to concur in
treaties binding them to accept Arbitration in settling their disputes with each
other. The Government did not openly resist the motion. They got rid of it by
putting up Lord Palmerston to move the “previous question;” but the tone of
the debate showed that, though the House was dubious about the
practicability of Mr. Cobden’s plan, it had been profoundly impressed with
his reasoning.
 ROYAL PALACE, NAPLES.

The Whigs, embarrassed by the refusal of Jewish Members to take the

Parliamentary Oath, next introduced a Bill expunging from the form of the
oath the words “on the true faith of a Christian.” The only bitter opponents
of the measure were the Tories, for most of the Peelites, like Mr. Gladstone,
supported it. The Commons passed the measure readily enough; but in the
House of Lords the hostility of the Episcopal Bench was fatal to it. Another
measure was sacrificed to the ecclesiasticism which was then prevalent in
Parliament. That was the Bill to legalise marriage with a Deceased Wife’s
Sister, which Mr. Stuart Wortley introduced on the 3rd of May, and the most
vehement opponents of which were Mr. Goulburn, Mr. Gladstone, and Sir R.
Inglis. Mr. Wortley carried the Second Reading without much difficulty; but
when Mr. Goulburn threatened to use the forms of the House to obstruct the
further progress of the measure, it was withdrawn.
 Foreign affairs originated some acrimonious debates in both Houses
during the Session. On the 6th of March a question was put by Lord Stanley
to

LADY PALMERSTON.

Lord Lansdowne asking if it were true that a Government contractor had

been allowed to withdraw arms from a Government store, and supply them
to the insurgents in Sicily. Lord Lansdowne could not deny that the
allegation was true; and the incident not only caused a great deal of
excitement in the country, but it was one that gave much pain to the Queen,
who naturally saw in it the reckless hand of Lord Palmerston. The secret
history of the affair was this: Mr. Delane, the editor of the Times, happened
to meet a Mr. Hood—an Army contractor—accidentally. In conversation Mr.
Hood incidently mentioned to Mr. Delane that when certain Sicilian agents
applied to him for stores, he explained that he had none on hand, having
supplied all he possessed to the Government. But he observed that if he
could persuade the Government to let him have these back, he would hand
them over to the Sicilian insurrectionary agents, replacing the Government
stores in due time. The contractor applied to the Ordnance Department,
stating that his application had a political, as well as a commercial, object.
The Department, therefore, referred the matter to Lord Palmerston, who
sanctioned the transaction. The Times immediately published this story, and
its attacks on Lord Palmerston for having insulted Austria, and connived at
insurrection in Sicily, annoyed the Queen so seriously that Lord John Russell
compelled Lord Palmerston to apologise to the King of Naples, for whom he
cherished a supreme contempt. But when the scandal grew clamant, Mr.
Bankes opened up an attack in the House of Commons on Lord Palmerston.
He, however, mixed up with it a great deal of general criticism on the policy
of the Government in Italy, and gave Lord Palmerston an opportunity of
winning an easy victory by posing as a friend of freedom, and a martyr to the
doctrine of nationalities. Lord Palmerston, writes Mr. Greville, delivered, in
reply to his antagonist, “a slashing, impudent speech, full of sarcasm, jokes,
and claptrap, the whole eminently successful. He quizzed Bankes
unmercifully, he expressed ultra-Liberal sentiments to please the Radicals,
and he gathered shouts, laughter, and applause as he dashed and rattled
along.”
On the 22nd of March Lord Aberdeen headed another abortive attack on
the Foreign Policy of the Government. He complained that whereas Lord
Palmerston had been active in menacing Austria if she meddled with
Sardinia, he had spoken smooth things to Sardinia—never going further than
warning her that if she broke existing treaties, she would be doing a
dangerous thing. Aberdeen’s attack was regarded as a semi-official
expression of the ideas of the Sovereign on Lord Palmerston’s policy; and it
came to this, that Palmerston had made England an object of aversion in
every capital in Europe, by interfering between Governments and their
subjects, in a manner which brought on him the animosity of both. He had
been arrogant to the despots, and, whilst he had encouraged the rebels, he
had tamely abandoned them, whenever it became irksome to defend them. In
this debate the Foreign Office was convicted of having suppressed an
important despatch relating to Austro-Sardinian affairs in the papers laid
before Parliament. The truth is that the Cabinet did not know what was and
what was not included in the papers that Lord Palmerston chose to publish;
and Lord Palmerston sometimes did not even give his colleagues enough
information to enable them to answer questions. One example of this is
worth recording, because it directly affected the Queen. In May, Lord
Lansdowne, in reply to a question of Lord Beaumont, told the House of
Lords that “no communication whatever had been made by the Austrian
Government to ours relative to their intervention in Italy.” But Collosedo,
the Austrian Minister, had five days before that gone to Lord Palmerston and
communicated to him, by order of the Austrian Government, their objects in
interfering in Italy. Palmerston kept his colleagues in utter ignorance of this
interview; and when the truth leaked out, Lord Lansdowne had to set himself
right the best way he could. As for Palmerston, when he was challenged with
deceiving his colleagues, and suppressing the fact that this Austrian
communication had been made to him, he replied impudently that “he had
quite forgotten it.” His needlessly violent anti-Austrian policy, coupled with
delinquencies of this kind, was intensely annoying to the Queen. Writing
under the date of June 3rd, Mr. Greville, in his Journal, says, “The Duke of
Bedford told me a few days ago that the Queen had been again
remonstrating about Palmerston more strongly than ever. This was in
reference to the suppressed Austrian despatch which made such a noise. She
then sent for Lord John Russell, and told him she could not stand it any
longer, and he must make some arrangements to get rid of Lord Palmerston.
This communication was just as fruitless as all her preceding ones. I don’t
know what Lord John said—he certainly did not pacify her; but, as usual,
there it ended. But the consequences of her not being able to get any
satisfaction from her Minister have been that she has poured her feelings and
her wrongs into the more sympathetic ears of her late Ministers, and I
believe that the Queen has told Peel everything—all her own feelings and
wishes, and all that passes on the subject.”
In these circumstances an anti-Palmerstonian cabal was naturally formed.
Lord Aberdeen, a devoted friend of the Queen, attempted to organise a
movement for driving Palmerston from office; but the great obstacle was
Peel. Nothing could induce him to upset the Ministry which was pledged to
procure a fair trial for Free Trade. The Court Party, however, suggested that,
if censured, Palmerston might resign and his colleagues stay in; or that they
might all resign, and then, when it was shown that no other Government
could be formed, and that the Peelites could render the formation of another
Ministry impossible, Lord John Russell and his colleagues might come back
to power, without Lord Palmerston. The scheme failed; but, as Mr. Greville
says, the curious thing to note about it is “the carte du pays it exhibits,” and
the remarkable and most improper position which Palmerston occupied vis-
à-vis the Queen and his own colleagues. “I know not,” writes Mr. Greville,
“where to look for a parallel to such a mass of anomalies—the Queen
turning from her own Prime Minister to confide in the one who was
supplanted by him; a Minister talking over quietly and confidentially with an
outsider by what circumstances and what agency his colleague, the Minister
for Foreign Affairs, might be excluded from the Government; the Queen
abhorring her Minister, and unable to rid herself of him; John Russell,
fascinated and subjugated by the ascendency of Palmerston, submitting to
everything from him, and supporting him right and wrong, the others not
concealing from those they are in the habit of confiding in their
disapprobation of the conduct and policy of their colleague, while they are
all the time supporting the latter and excusing the former, and putting
themselves under the obligation of identifying themselves with his
proceedings, and standing or falling with them.”[2]
 SIR CHARLES NAPIER.

Ultimately, however, a confederacy was formed between Lords Aberdeen,

Stanley, and Brougham to oust Lord Palmerston during the last days of the
Session, and the Queen, like every other prudent politician in the country,
who had been alarmed by Palmerston’s restlessness, rejoiced in the prospect
of getting rid of him. Unfortunately, the only Peer of the three who was in
earnest in this business was Lord Aberdeen; and yet, when the 20th of July,
the day for the attack, drew nigh, it was certain that the Government would
be defeated. Palmerston then played his trump card. Lady Palmerston wrote
a letter to Brougham, who was to lead the attack, conveying to him some
mysterious threat, and he promptly betrayed his associates. “He made a
miserable speech,” writes Mr. Greville, “which enraged his colleagues and
all the opponents of the Government, who swore

THE BATTLE OF GUJERAT.

(and it was true) that he had sold them.” Brougham’s speech, however,
contained one good point which deserved to live. It was in it that he
condemned the interference, not only of our regular diplomatic body in the
affairs of the Mediterranean Powers, but also the interference of “that
mongrel sort of monster—half nautical, half political—diplomatic vice-
admirals, speculative ship-captains, observers of rebellion, and sympathisers
therewith.” The Government were in a minority in the House, but they
contrived to get a majority of twelve by proxies, in obtaining which Lady
Palmerston had displayed marvellous address. Thus was the great game of
faction played at the expense of the people in the early years of the Queen’s
reign. Not that the people cared much about the matter, for it was only those
who were behind the scenes who could fairly appreciate what Lord
Palmerston’s spirited policy really meant. It was Radical, but it was reckless;
and not only the Queen, but every well-informed statesman—including
Liberals like Mr. Cobden and Mr. Bright—simply lived in daily terror, lest
the Foreign Secretary might suddenly involve the country in a wanton and
purposeless European war.
Another important debate was raised by Lord Beaumont, on the 14th of
May, on French intervention in Rome. The States of the Church had long
been preparing for a revolt against Papal misgovernment. Pius IX. therefore
determined to modify the policy of his predecessors, and a hapless scheme
for satisfying the democracy, by appointing lay councillors to work with or
check a priestly government was tried—the Pope refusing to bate one jot or
tittle of his temporal authority. The lay councillors could only meet and
debate. They could not initiate reforms. No sooner had this constitution been
granted than the revolution swept over Italy, and the Romans demanded the
same concessions as had been extorted by the Neapolitans. Concessions
were given with the intention that they should be withdrawn. Rossi—once
French ambassador at Rome—was made Prime Minister, and to extricate the
country from financial embarrassment, he proposed to mortgage the property
of the Church. He was, however, assassinated when entering the Capitol; and
then the Cardinals began to retract the concessions which had been made to
Liberalism. The people rose, insisting that the Pope should protect the
Constitution, and assuring him of their fidelity. He then fled to Gaeta.
Attempts to reconcile the Pontiff and his people failed. The Roman Republic
was proclaimed, and peace established, when suddenly France interfered to
restore his Holiness. It was to prevent France from having a pretext for
interfering in Italy that Lord Minto’s mission was undertaken, and thus
another failure had to be debited to Lord Palmerston’s foreign policy.
Naturally Lords Aberdeen and Brougham taunted the Government with the
failure of the Minto mission. But taunts were powerless to extort from
Ministers a statement of their relation to the French expedition. In the House
of Commons, however, those who objected to French interference with the
Roman people succeeded in obtaining from Lord Palmerston an expression
of disapproval of the course which France had taken; but that was all.
Far and away the most important foreign debate of the Session was that
which Mr. Osborne raised on the Austro-Hungarian question in July.
Hungary had been crushed by the aid which Russia, unrebuked or
unrestrained by the shadow of a protest from Palmerston, had given her
Austrian masters; and the Liberal Party, always jealous of Austria as the
representative of Absolutist ideas, were wrathful accordingly. But the
discussion had no practical result. It was merely marked by a declaration
from Lord Palmerston, which came too late to be useful, to the effect that the
heart and soul of the country were enlisted on the side of Hungary.
For Englishmen no debate was graver than the one on the state of the
nation, which Mr. Disraeli raised at the end of the Session. He attributed the
distress in the country to Free Trade, and he attacked every branch of
Ministerial policy. But the weak point of his brilliant harangue was that it
meant nothing, for not only was he unable to take over the Government
himself, but he had no practical proposal to make, save his insinuated
suggestion to restore Protection. Sir Robert Peel’s speech, however, carried
the House in favour of the Government. It was a complete vindication of his
fiscal policy, and its conclusion was memorable, because in it he traced our
immunity from revolutionary excesses to his abandonment of taxes on food
in 1846.
Early in the year the Queen was disturbed by evil tidings from India.
Hard fighting was reported from the banks of the Chenab. The Sikhs, it was
true, were in retreat; but our victory was a barren one, as we captured neither
prisoners, guns, nor standards, and sacrificed two of our Generals (Cureton
and Havelock), who fell at the head of their regiments. In losing Cureton, her
Majesty lost the finest cavalry officer in her service. The fact was that,
though we had conquered, we had not subdued the Sikhs at the end of our
first war with them. In April, 1848, a Sikh chief murdered two British
officers at Multan. This was followed by a general outbreak, which was met
on the whole successfully by the desperate efforts of Lieutenant Edwardes
and a mere handful of men. Multan was besieged in June, 1848; but 5,000 of
our Sikh auxiliaries deserted to the enemy, and our army had to retreat. We
had not enough troops in the Punjab to control the rising, and our auxiliaries
under the Maharajah were not trustworthy. On the other hand, the rebel chief
Shere Sing, at the beginning of 1849, had 40,000 men under his orders, and
once again British supremacy in India was trembling in the balance. On the
5th of March, however, still worse news came to London. Lord Gough, with
inconceivable recklessness, had, on the 14th of January, attacked the enemy
in a strong position at Chillianwalla with a small British force worn out by
fatigue. The conditions of the combat ensured disaster. Our troops, it is true,
took the Sikh positions, but during

THE BRITISH TROOPS ENTERING MULTAN.

the night had to abandon them. The loss of life on our side was enormous,
and Lord Gough, though he fought like a hero in the thickest of the mêlée,
was not to be found at a critical moment to give orders. The news of this
disaster was received with universal indignation. The Government attempted
to allay public feeling by appointing Sir William Gomm to succeed Lord
Gough; but as Sir William was believed to be equally incompetent, a
demand for Sir Charles Napier’s appointment became clamant. “We dined,”
writes Lord Malmesbury, in his Diary on the 4th of March, “with the
Colchesters, and were introduced to Sir Charles Napier. He is a little
 SIR HARRY SMITH.

man, with grey hair brushed back from his face, with an immense hooked,
pointed nose, small eyes, and wears spectacles, very like the conventional
face of a Jew. He is appointed to retrieve our affairs in India, and when the
Duke of Wellington named him to the post he at first hesitated, until the
Duke told him if he did not go he would go himself.”[3] Why did Napier
hesitate? Because, it seems, the Directors of the East India Company not
only objected to his appointment, but threatened to prevent him from having
a seat on the Council, an insult which Napier could hardly brook. “You have
no idea of the difficulties I have had in dealing with these men,” said Sir
John Cam Hobhouse, then President of the Indian Board of Control, to Mr.
Greville. “I have brought the Government, the Duke of Wellington, and the
Queen all to bear upon them, and all in vain.” Mr. Greville advised
Hobhouse to bring another power—that of the House of Commons—to bear
on the Company. In other words, he advised the Government to go down
boldly and inform Parliament that they had appointed Napier, and if the
Directors of the Company refused to pay his salary as a Member of Council,
to ask the House to vote it. The Cabinet appointed Napier, and the Directors
acquiesced, fearing to face the responsibility of thwarting the Government in
doing what the Queen and the country desired.
But before Gough could be recalled, he redeemed the disaster of
Chillianwalla at Gujerat. The news of this successful battle, which was
fought on the 21st of February, reached the Queen on the 1st of April. It
meant that the crisis in India was over, and it lifted from her mind the burden
of a supreme anxiety. Multan, too, had fallen, and finally the East India
Company, admitting at last that it was impossible to protect their frontier
from attack, annexed the Punjab on the 29th of March, 1849, thus closing the
history of the Sikhs as an independent nation. England had found in them the
most fearless and formidable of enemies. Since the annexation of their
country, they have been the staunchest and the most loyal of the Queen’s
Indian subjects.
One serious colonial dispute must be noticed, for it led to an early
experiment in “boycotting.” Lord Grey, on the 4th of September, 1848, by an
Order in Council, had turned the Cape of Good Hope into a convict
settlement. The colonists resented this act with the hottest indignation. Angry
meetings were held at Cape Town; and the Governor, Sir Harry Smith, was
violently blamed because he refused to take on himself the responsibility of
suspending the “injurious and degrading measure.” When the first convict
ship, the Neptune, arrived in Simon’s Bay on the 19th of September, the
church bells in Cape Town were tolled in half-minute time. The Municipality
demanded that the vessel be sent back. The populace, in mass meetings,
adopted what they called “the Pledge”—an obligation to “drop connection
with any person who may assist convicted felons.” In fact, the process which
in Ireland has recently been termed “boycotting” was resorted to, and
supplies were refused to the army, navy, and all Government establishments.
The law was impotent in face of such opposition, and very soon the
Governor, Sir Harry Smith, was compelled to bake his own bread even in his
own house. The colonists finally triumphed. The Order in Council was
withdrawn, so far as it referred to the Cape, and the Neptune left, without
having landed a single convict. The episode is one of the earliest instances
on record of the successful application of “boycotting” to defeat an
unpopular policy.
 CHAPTER XXII.

FAMILY CARES AND ROYAL DUTIES.

Education of the Prince of Wales—Selection of Mr. Birch as Tutor—The Queen’s

Jealousy of her Parental Authority—Her Letter to Melbourne on the Management of
her Nursery—Her Ideas on Education—Prince Albert’s Plans for the Education of the
Prince of Wales—Stockmar’s Advice—The Visit to Ireland—The Queen at Waterford
—“Rebel Cork” en fête—The Visit to Dublin—Viceregal Festivities—The Visit to the
National Model Schools—Shiel’s Speech—The Queen and the Duke of Leinster—
Farewell at Kingstown—The Queen Dips the Royal Ensign—Loyal Ulster—The Visit
to the Linen Hall—Lord Clarendon on the Queen’s Visit—A Cruise on the Clyde—
Home in Balmoral—The Queen’s “Bothie”—The Queen’s University of Ireland—First
Plans for the Great Exhibition—Opening of the London Coal Exchange—The Queen’s
Barge—Death of Queen Adelaide.

In April, 1849, Prince Albert is found writing a letter to the Dowager

Duchess of Gotha announcing a very important event in the Queen’s family.
“The children,” he says, “grow more than well. Bertie (the Prince of Wales)
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.” Mr. Birch,
subsequently Rector of Prestwich, near Manchester, was eminently qualified
for the grave and delicate duty for which the Queen selected him. He had
taken high honours at Cambridge, and had been not only Captain of the
School, but had also served as an under-master at Eton. Yet Mr. Birch can
hardly be credited with the Scheme of Education adopted in the Royal
Family. That had been arranged by the Queen herself, in consultation with
her consort and Baron Stockmar. Her fixed idea was that the heart as well as
the head must be trained, and that not only must the education of her
children be truly moral, but it must be essentially English. She resolved to
discover the kind of tutor whom she could trust, and then, having found him,
to trust him implicitly.
The Queen, it may here be said, has ever set an example to women of
exalted rank and station by reason of the undeviating support she has given
to those who undertook the education of her children. But in doing this her
Majesty has been most jealous in asserting her parental rights, and
punctilious in recognising the high responsibilities which they involve. As
far back as 1842, in a very pretty letter to Lord Melbourne, she asked him
for advice about the reorganisation of her nursery, and a question came up as
to the choice of the lady who should superintend it. The Queen, accepting
the fact that her public duties prevented her from personally managing the
education of her family as completely as she might have wished, fully
admitted that it was necessary to appoint a lady of high rank and culture for
that purpose. But then arose the difficulty of satisfying her Majesty’s desire
to retain in her own hands the completest headship of her family. A
governess of high rank really competent to do the work as the Queen meant
that it should be done

VICTORIA CASTLE, KILLINEY—BRAY HEAD IN THE DISTANCE.

might choose to consider herself as an official responsible to the country

first, and to the parents of the Royal children afterwards. Against such an
idea the Queen most resolutely set her face. “I feel,” her Majesty writes, on
behalf of herself and her husband, that “she (the Royal governess) ought to
be responsible only to us, and we to the country and nation.”[4] It was in
pursuance of this idea that her Majesty made great sacrifices to keep her
children as closely as possible in contact with her. Many curious memoranda
from her pen exist, and through them all there runs the same thought—
simplicity and domesticity must be the leading characteristics of the training
of the Royal family. For example, whenever it was possible, the Queen
insisted on retaining in her own hands the religious education of her family,
and it is now known that she did this from a dread lest their minds might at
the most plastic period of life receive a sectarian bias. High Anglicanism was
then militant, and many intrigues were set on foot by its professors to effect
a lodgment in the Palace. The education of the Princess Royal, afterwards
Princess Imperial of Germany, was almost entirely supervised and directed
by the Queen herself, and with results much appreciated in Germany, where,
through her tact, culture, high character, and strong common sense, her
Imperial Highness has won for herself a position of unique political and
social influence. The education of the Prince of Wales, however, now came
more directly under the hands of Prince Albert; and one point of the highest
importance to decide was whether it should be conservative or

ROYAL VISIT TO IRELAND: THE QUEEN LEAVING KINGSTOWN.

liberal in its character. Prince Albert decided that it must be liberal in this
sense, that it should prepare the Heir Apparent for taking his position in a
changeful state of society, whose institutions were, to a great extent, in a
transition stage. Every effort was to be made to prevent him from getting
into his mind a notion that existing institutions were sacrosanct, and that
resistance to all change was a sacred and patriotic duty. The history of
George III. had evidently not been studied in vain. “The proper duty of
Sovereigns in this country,” wrote Stockmar to Prince Albert, “is not to take
the lead in change, but to act as a balance-wheel on the movements of the
social body.” Above all, it was determined that the education of the young
Prince must be at bottom English, and not foreign. Furnished with these
principles to guide him, and with general instructions to make the basis of
the young Prince’s training as broad and comprehensive as possible—to
make it scientific as well as classical—Mr. Birch essayed his arduous task,
aided not a little by shrewd advice from Bishop Wilberforce and Sir James
Clark, the Queen’s favourite physician.
The sweetest days of summer were clouded for the Queen in 1849 by
painful memories of the shock she received on the 19th of May. On that day
an Irishman named Hamilton, with a morbid craving for notoriety, tried to
shoot her when she was driving with her children in her carriage down
Constitution Hill. Her Majesty, with great tact, engaged the attention of her
little ones by conversation, and with a sign directed her coachman to drive
on as if nothing had happened, so that her husband, who was riding in
advance, knew nothing of the affair—not even of the attempt of the mob to
“lynch” Hamilton. His pistol was loaded with blank cartridge, but in spite of
that he was sentenced to seven years’ transportation.
It has been said that Ireland, exhausted by the abortive rebellion of 1848,
had been settling down into sullen tranquillity. There were many signs
visible of a better feeling towards the Government in the country. The Queen
accordingly suggested that it might be well to take advantage of the
improving condition of things, and pay a Royal visit to Ireland. Her Majesty,
however, primarily desired that the Irish people should benefit, and not be
burdened, by the presence of Royalty. She therefore expressed a wish that
the visit should not be made in such a form as to put the country, which had
suffered so much from distress, to any great expense. Prince Albert, ever
practical, suggested that in that case the best way of carrying out the Queen’s
idea was to make this visit a simple yachting cruise. The Queen, he said,
might call at the ports of Cork, Waterford, Wexford, Dublin, and Belfast on
her annual journey to the North of Scotland, and perchance touch at
Glasgow, thereby compensating it for the loss of the Royal visit in 1847.
Lord Clarendon fully endorsed the views of the Queen and her husband in a
letter to Lord John Russell. “Everything,” he wrote, “tends to secure for the
Queen an enthusiastic reception, and the one drawback, which is the general
distress of all classes, has its advantage, for it will enable the Queen to do
what is kind and considerate to those who are suffering.”
On the 27th of June the official intimation that the Queen was to visit
Ireland was received by the Irish people with every manifestation of delight.
If there were some who, rebels at heart, sympathised little with the tone of
popular feeling, they concealed their aversion. The sex of the Sovereign
indeed ensured her a courteous reception, from a nation proud of its
gallantry, and justly renowned for the warmth of its hospitality. It was then
finally decided that the visit should be made when Parliament rose. On the
27th of August the Queen, Prince Albert, and their four eldest children
accordingly embarked for Ireland. “It is done!” writes the amiable and
somewhat effusive Lady Lyttelton, who watched the squadron from the
windows of Osborne, till it faded from her eyes. “England’s fate is afloat ...
and we are left lamenting.” There was, however, no serious cause for
anxiety. When the Royal squadron steamed into the Cove of Cork, in the
golden light of a summer sunset, the air was soon gleaming with rockets, and
bonfires, kindled by the excitable and kindly peasantry, blazed on every
height in welcome of their Queen. The next morning, the 3rd of August,
brought a happy omen. The day was dull and grey, but no sooner did the
Queen set her foot on land at the Cove—since called Queenstown in honour
of the event—than a sudden sunburst lit up the scene with dazzling radiance.
The Royal party in the Fairy steamed up “the pleasant waters of the river
Lee,” and all along the route crowds of loyal people lined the banks,
cheering the Queen and her family as she passed along. In Cork itself
—“rebel Cork”—there was no sign of disaffection. Nothing could be
warmer or more cordial than the welcome accorded to her Majesty, who was
touched by the hearty gaiety and good humour of her excitable hosts. A true
kindly Celtic welcome, such as any Sovereign might have envied, made her
experiences of Cork sunny memories for many long years afterwards. The
extreme beauty of the women seems, however, to have produced an equally
deep impression on her Majesty, who refers to this point in her diary of the
visit.
On the 4th of August the Royal party proceeded to Waterford, which they
reached in the afternoon. Curiously enough, one of the ships in their
squadron of escort had actually been stationed there two years previously, to
overawe the rebellious people. Now all these dark and bitter memories
seemed to have passed away. Waterford vied with Cork in its loyal
demonstration, and the feeling of regret was universal that the Royal party
did not land and go through the town. Prince Albert and his two sons,
however, steamed up to the city from the anchorage opposite Duncannon
fort, ten miles from the town. Next came the visit to Dublin—never to be
forgotten in the annals of the Irish capital.
It was on the 5th of August, as the sun was going down, that the Royal
squadron reached Kingstown—threading its way with some difficulty
through the craft, gay with joyful bunting, that crowded the sea. The Queen
was greatly struck by the picturesque appearance of the place, and when she
and the Prince landed next morning, amidst a salute from the men-of-war in
the harbour, her reception was a revelation even to those who had anticipated
that she would be lovingly greeted. Never was there such cheering—
especially from the ladies, whose hearts were captivated by the Royal
children. If, said one old lady, the Queen would only consent to call one of
the young princes Patrick, all Ireland would die for her. The Royal party
soon arrived at the Viceregal Lodge, in the Phœnix Park, and the routefrom
Sandymount Station was again lined by crowds of enthusiastic and loyal
sightseers. It was noted that even the poorest houses were gay with flowers.
“It was a most wonderful and striking spectacle,” says the Queen, in her
notes of her visit—“such masses of human beings, so enthusiastic, so
excited, and yet perfect order maintained.” All that was worth seeing in
Dublin was seen, and the people were charmed with the simple, gracious
bearing of her Majesty, and the ease and freedom with which she went
among them. A memorable visit was made by the Queen to the National
Model Schools, where she and the Prince were introduced by Archbishop
Whateley to the venerable Archbishop Murray, a picturesque and patriarchal
Catholic prelate, whose saintly life and generous liberal ideas had previously
attracted the attention of Prince Albert. His Grace had indeed risked much by
protecting these schools against the attacks of some of the bigots of his
church, and the Queen was powerfully impressed with the excellence of the
system of instruction given at them. Speaking of this interesting episode in
the House of Commons, Richard Lalor Shiel—the last of the great Irish
rhetoricians—said, “Amongst the most remarkable incidents that occurred
when the Queen was in Ireland was her visit to the schools of the National
Board of Education, which took place (by accident, of course) before she
visited the College of the Holy and Undivided Trinity. It was a fine spectacle
to see the consort, so worthy of her, attended by the representatives of the
Presbyterian Church, by the Protestant Archbishop of Dublin, and by the
Catholic Archbishop of Dublin—with those venerable ecclesiastics at her
side, differing in creed, but united by the common brotherhood of
Christianity in the performance of one of the noblest duties which their
common Christianity prescribed; it was a fine thing to see the Sovereign of a
great empire surrounded by groups of those little children who gazed on her
with affectionate amazement, while she returned their looks with fondness
almost maternal; and, better than all, it was noble and thrilling, indeed, to see
the emotions by which that great lady was moved when her heart beat with a
high and holy aspiration that she might live to see the benefits of education
carried out in their full and perfect development.” There was a levée, of
course, at which four thousand persons attended to pay their respects to their
Sovereign. There was a brilliant review of the troops in the Phœnix Park,
followed by visits to the Royal Irish Academy, the College of Surgeons, and
the Royal Dublin Society, at whose cattle-shows Prince Albert was a
frequent competitor. His speech, in reply to an Address from the Society,
attracted much attention at the time, on account of his sound advice on the
economic condition of Ireland, and the grateful thanks which he gave to the
Irish people for their marks of warm attachment to the Queen and her family.
The Prince was one of the first rural economists to impress on the chiefs of
the Society the necessity for anticipating impending changes in agriculture.
He advised them to stimulate to the utmost stock-breeding in Ireland.
 VISIT OF THE QUEEN AND PRINCE ALBERT TO THE LINEN HALL, BELFAST.

A visit paid by the Queen to Carton appears to have made a strong

impression on her. Carton is the seat of the Duke of Leinster, and his delicate
attentions to her and her family, and his skill in planning a pleasant
excursion for them, elicits from her pen the remark in her “Diary” that his
Grace was “one of the kindest and best of men.” The Royal leave-taking at
Kingstown was quite an affecting ceremony. The crowd at the pier was
denser than it had ever been within living memory, and its shouts rent the air.
When the Queen heard how her kind hosts were bidding her Godspeed, she
immediately climbed up on the paddle-box and stood waving her
handkerchief in token of her appreciation of their loyalty. She directed the
ship’s engines to be slowed, so that the vessel might glide slowly past the
pier. By a felicitous inspiration she ordered the Royal Standard to be dipped
three times, in honour of the people on the shore, and as a mark of her
grateful appreciation of their affection.
 Loyal Ulster was next visited, and, as might have been expected, the
reception of the Queen in this busy hive of industry was exceptionally
effusive, even for Ireland. Belfast was en fête when the Royal visitors
landed, and old folk still speak of the scene on the quay as marking a red
letter day in their lives. Bunting was streaming everywhere in the air. Dense
crowds cheering and shouting, and waving hats and handkerchiefs, occupied
every coign of vantage, and though the Queen had only four hours to spend
in the city, she contrived, under competent guidance, to see many of the
more interesting places and institutions which illustrate the strong character
of the mixed race whose energy, ability, pertinacity, and industry have made
Ulster, with her unkindly soil and climate, the richest province in Ireland.
Ulster commands the bulk of the linen trade of the world, and, naturally, the
institutions and factories connected with that industry arrested the Queen’s
attention during her flying visit to the commercial capital of Ireland. An
alarming gale detained her the next day in Belfast Lough, but after it blew
over the Royal party steamed away to the Scottish shore.
The Royal visit to Ireland had two good results. It brought home to the
minds of the Irish people the fact that their country, and their interests, were
of great personal concern to the Queen and her husband. It demonstrated to
the rest of the United Kingdom the fact that the personal attachment of the
Irish people to the Monarchy was as strong as could be desired, and that if
they were rebels at heart it was not the Queen, but the Viceregal Bureaucracy
in Dublin Castle, who had soured their blood. Everybody who had observed
the effect of the Queen’s progress through Ireland was charmed with the
success of the expedition. “I saw Lord Lansdowne last night,” writes Mr.
Greville in his Journal (14th August), “just returned from Ireland, having had
an escape on the railroad, for the train ran off the rails. He said nothing could
surpass the success of the Queen’s visit in every respect; every circumstance
favourable, no drawbacks or mistakes, all persons and parties pleased, much
owing to the tact of Lord Clarendon, and the care he had bestowed on all the
arrangements and details, which made it all go off so admirably. The Queen
herself was delighted, and appears to have played her part uncommonly
well. Clarendon, of course, was overjoyed at the complete success of what
was his own plan,[5] and satisfied with the graciousness and attention of the
Court to him. In the beginning, and while the details were in preparation, he
was considerably disgusted at the petty difficulties that were made, but he is
satisfied now. Lord Lansdowne says the departure was quite affecting, and
he could not see it without being moved; and he thinks beyond doubt that
this visit will produce permanent good effects in Ireland.”[6] Clarendon
himself was evidently more than delighted with the effect of the Royal visit.
He informed Sir George Grey that he believed “there was not an Irishman in
Dublin who did not consider that the Queen had paid him a personal
compliment by mounting the paddle-box of her steamer as she was leaving,
and ordering the Royal Standard to be dipped in acknowledgment of the
affectionate adieus which came from the crowds on the shore.”[7] But the
odd thing was that the members of the seditious clubs who had threatened to
create disturbances when the Queen’s visit was first mooted, caught the
prevailing contagion of loyalty, and professed to be among the most
affectionate of her subjects. Still, Clarendon was far too astute a statesman to
imagine that a Royal visit would smooth away all the difficulties of his
position and administration as Viceroy. It could not, as he acknowledges in
another letter to Sir George Grey, “remove evils which are the growth of
ages.” At the same time, it indirectly helped the country by bringing some
money into it. Royalty can always beneficially direct the expenditure of
Fashion, and after the Queen had by her example shown that there was no
danger to be dreaded in visiting Ireland, rich English tourists began to go
over there holiday-making, greatly to the advantage of the people. But when
all this was apparent to the Queen’s advisers, it seems strange that they did
not then deem it their duty to devise a plan for strengthening the golden link
of the Crown between England and Ireland. If one brief Royal visit produced
such an excellent effect, why did they not propose another? If it were
impossible to provide for the residence for the Queen regularly during a
portion of the year in Ireland, it might have been possible for the Royal
Family to arrange that in their annual visit to Balmoral they should cruise
northwards along the Irish coast, and gladden some of the Irish towns and
provinces with their presence.
Ugly weather followed the Royal squadron from Belfast Lough to the
Clyde, but a singularly brilliant reception at Glasgow compensated the
Queen for any discomforts she may have endured on the voyage. The visit to
“the second city of the Empire,” as its inhabitants love to call it, was all too
brief, for the Festival of St. Grouse had been celebrated two days before, and
Prince Albert was eagerly desirous of pressing on to the moors. On the
evening of the 14th of August—the day of the reception at Glasgow—he
wrote to Stockmar a hurried note, deploring the “vile passage” on the 12th
from Belfast to Loch Ryan, and saying how much he had been impressed by
their procession, through five to six hundred thousand human beings all
cheering wildly in the streets of Glasgow.

CASTLETON OF BRAEMAR.

On the 15th of August they were at Balmoral, the Queen recording in her
“Diary” that it seemed like a dream to her after all the excitement of their
tour to be in “our dear Highland home again.” For a brief time her Majesty
was able to enjoy a real holiday. She was not much worried by politics—
which have been, after all, the chief business of her life. The seclusion, and
the dry, bracing air of Balmoral, acted like tonics on her mind and spirits. In
a letter which he wrote to Stockmar on his thirtieth birthday, which was gaily
celebrated in the family circle at Balmoral, Prince Albert said, “Victoria is
happy and cheerful, and enjoys a love and homage in this country, of which
in the summer’s tour we have received the most striking proofs. The children
are well and grow apace. The Highlands are glorious, and the game
abundant.” One of the pleasantest of surprises was prepared for the Queen a
fortnight after her arrival. It was an excursion to a small mountain cabin, or
“bothie” as the Highlanders call it, to which she had taken a fancy at Alt-na-
Giuthasach. In “Leaves from the Journal of Our Life in the Highlands,” the
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

ebookultra.com