Page:English laws for women in the nineteenth century.djvu/79

67 made a party question; and one or two of the Tory ladies, known to be on especial terms of familiar friendship with the Duke of Cumberland (then King of Hanover), openly boasted, that in their own little set of Royal and Political personages, they would treat the jury verdict of twelve untitled English gentlemen, as "non avenu;" that the Whig ladies, and such personal friends as I might have on the Tory side, might do what they pleased; but that even if the Court itself supported the verdict of acquittal, it would require only a little time and patience (on the principle laid down by Sir R. Peel, that those who could personally approach the Queen must necessarily influence Her Majesty), to bring about a change. I know this boast was especially made by a lady, whose husband has since held Court appointments, and who sedulously cultivated many Royal friendships. And that such assumption was not considered—among her own party, at least—"the baseless fabric of a vision," is certainly proved by the stress laid, in May 1839, on the privilege of dismissing all the Queen's ladies, except such as were under the rank of Ladies of the Bedchamber. The Royal decision was afterwards made public.—

"Buckingham Palace, May 10th, 1839. "The Queen hating considered the proposal made to her yesterday by Sir Robert Peel to remove the Ladies of her Bedchamber, cannot consent to adopt a course which she conceives to he contrary to usage, and which is repugnant to her feelings."—

Sir Robert's reply was a respectfully worded refusal to take office with that restriction. In the Ministerial explanation of May 13th, 1839, he expressly stated, that— "no question arose as to the formation of the administration, or as to the principles on which the Government was to he formed or conducted. The difficulty related exclusively to that portion of the household which is filled by the in Her Majesty's service. Her Majesty conceded what could he wished or expected,