apartments can at once hold, is much wanted. Equally so, improved offices and servants’ rooms, the want of which puts the departments of the household to great expense yearly. It will be for Sir Robert to consider whether it would not be best to remedy all these deficiencies at once, and to make use of this opportunity to render the exterior of the Palace such as no longer to be a disgrace to the country, which it certainly now is. The Queen thinks the country would be better pleased to have the question of the Sovereign’s residence in London so finally disposed of, than to have it so repeatedly brought before it.[1]
Queen Victoria to Sir Robert Peel.
The Queen has received Sir Robert Peel’s letter, and is glad that the progress in the House of Commons was so satisfactory. The Queen was much hurt at Mr Borthwick’s most im- pertinent manner of putting the question with respect to the title of King Consort, and much satisfied with Sir Robert’s answer.[2] The title of King is open assuredly to many difficulties, and would perhaps be no real advantage to the Prince, but the Queen is positive that something must at once be done to place the Prince’s position on a constitutionally recognised footing, and to give him a title adequate to that position.[3] How and when, are difficult questions. . . .
- ↑ Peel replied that, as a renewal of the Income Tax was about to be proposed, it would be better to postpone the application to Parliament till the public feeling as to the tax had been ascertained.
- ↑ A paragraph had appeared in the Morning Chronicle, giving credence to a rumour that this title was about to be conferred on the Prince, but, in answer to Mr Peter Borthwick, Sir Robert Peel positively contradicted it.
- ↑
Sir Robert Peel to the Prince Albert.
WHITEHALL, 18th February 1845. Sir,—I received yesterday the accompanying note from Mr Borthwick, and in conformity with the notice therein given, he put the question to me in the House of Commons last evening respecting the paragraph which appeared in the Aforning Chronicle respecting the intention of proposing to Parliament that your Royal Highness should assume the title of King Consort.
I very much regret that the Morning Chronicle inserted that paragraph. The prominent place assigned to it in the newspaper, and a vague intimation that there was some authority for it, have caused a certain degree of credit to be attached to it. It has been copied into all the country newspapers and has given rise to a good deal of con- jecture and speculation, which it is far from desirable to excite without necessity.
It appears to me that the editor of the Morning Chronicle acted most unwarrantably in inserting such a paragraph with a pretence of some sort of authority for it. It has produced an impression which strongly confirms the observations which I took the liberty of making to your Royal Highness on Sunday evening. I trust, however, that my decided contradiction of the paragraph will put a stop to further surmise and discussion on the subject. To Mr Borthwick’s note I add one of several letters addressed to me, which shows the proneness to speculate upon constitutional novelties. I have the honour to be, Sir, with sincere respect, your Royal Highness’s most faithful and obedient Servant, ROBERT PEEL.
