Times, ii. 312). He constantly advocated retrenchment and a sound commercial policy, and he vigorously opposed the repressive measures known as the Six Acts. At the same time he looked on the radicals with dislike, and in a letter to Lord Grey of 1 Nov. 1819 urged that the whigs should declare their separation from them (Life and Times, ii. 351). He did good service both in drawing attention to the importance of popular education and in devising means for its attainment. Having obtained the reappointment of the education committee in 1818, he instituted an inquiry into charity abuses, which he extended to the universities and to Eton and Winchester. Some scandalous revelations were made, and the governing bodies bitterly resented the inquisition. In 1819 Brougham was kept from the house for some weeks by a dangerous illness. On his return on 23 June Peel made an attack on the conduct of the committee, which he met with a full defence (Speeches, iii. 180). In June 1820 he brought in two bills providing for the compulsory building, the government, and the maintenance of parochial schools. His proposals were disliked by the dissenters and fell through. After the death of his father in 1810, Brougham when not in London made his home at Brougham Hall. In 1821 he married Mary Anne, daughter of Thomas Eden, and widow of John Spalding. By her he had two daughters; the elder died in infancy, the younger in 1839.
From 1811 and perhaps from an earlier date Brougham was constantly consulted by the Princess of Wales. His statement that he was also the constant adviser of the Princess Charlotte is certainly exaggerated (Life and Times, ii. 145). He seems, however, to have given her some prudent advice in 1813 (ib. 174), and to have been consulted by her, through Lady Charlotte Lindsay, respecting her marriage in 1814. When the princess escaped from Warwick House to her mother's residence in Connaught Place on the evening of 11 July, the Princess of Wales sent for Brougham, who helped to persuade her to return (Autobiography of Miss Knight, i. 307, 309). The dramatic story he tells of his leading the young princess to a window and showing her the crowds gathering for a Westminster election (Edin. Rev. April 1838, lvii. 34; Life and Times, ii. 230) has been denied and ridiculed by another Edinburgh reviewer, on the ground that 'on the day in question there was neither a Westminster election nor nomination' (Edin. Rev. April 1869, cxxix. 583). The story may or may not be true, but that on that day Sir Francis Burdett nominated Lord Cochrane as member for Westminster before 'a very numerous meeting in Palace Yard' is beyond question (Times, 12 July 1814), and the circumstances of Cochrane's candidature are sufficient to account for the popular excitement to which Brougham refers.
He strongly advised the Princess of Wales not to go abroad. In July 1819 he proposed acting on her behalf, though in this case without authority from her, that she should reside permanently abroad, should consent to a separation, and not use her husband's title on condition that her allowance (35,000l.), then dependent on the king's life, should be secured to her (Yonge, Life of Lord Liverpool, ii. 16). When the princess became queen, she appointed Brougham her attorney-general, and he was accordingly called within the bar on 22 April 1820. A few days before he received a proposal from Lord Liverpool offering the queen 50,000l. a year on the same conditions that Brougham had named the year before. This proposal he did not make known to the queen, who was then at Geneva. On 4 June he and Lord Hutchinson, who acted for the king, met her at St. Omer, being sent to propose terms of separation and to warn her against coming to England. It was then too late, and the queen crossed to Dover the next day. Even when at St. Omer, Brougham forbore to inform her of the proposal made by the minister the preceding April, nor did Lord Liverpool become aware that his proposal had been withheld from her until 10 June (ib. 53-62). Had Brougham delivered the message with which he was entrusted, the whole scandal of the queen's trial would probably have been avoided. In that case, however, he would have lost the opportunity of playing the most conspicuous part in a famous scene. He never gave any satisfactory explanation of his conduct. Brougham was called before the lords in the matter of the bill of degradation and divorce on 21 Aug. when he exposed the untrustworthiness of Majocchi, the principal witness for the crown. His speech for the defence took up 3 and 4 Oct.; the peroration, so he told Macaulay, he had written over seven times. The result of the trial brought him an extraordinary amount of popularity, and the 'Brougham's Head' became a common tavern sign. On 3 and 4 July 1821 he unsuccessfully argued the queen's right to coronation before the privy council, and tried in vain to prevent her from attempting to force her way into the abbey. He attended her funeral in August. The next month he obtained the conviction of one Blacow, a clergyman,
