OCR Text |
Show HE OF GEORGE DOES NOTPLEflSE Four English Monarchs Who Hare Borne the Name Have Tarnished Records. ' PROFLIGATE OR IGNORANT. ACCORDING TO HISTORY 1 Hope Is Strong That New Ruler Will Remove Stigma From the Name. Special Cable to The Tribune. LONDON, May 7. Without any dis-loyalty dis-loyalty to their new king, the English oeoplo do not like his name. George V. may becomo thc loved monarch, even though he does not possess the endearing endear-ing qualities of the late King Edward VJJ., but ho must prove hunsolf a very wise and good ruler to rid tho name of George of thc unBavory odor atluchcd to it in the history of British Brit-ish royalty. Not one of the four Georges who havo ant upon the throne provious to the new king brought any lustor to the English crown. Tho first George was an imported prince, who had mado a record as a brave officer in the Hanoverian army, and an indiscrimin ate lover of women. His reputation in the latter respect was fully maintained during his reign over a country whose language ho could not speak. George II. was as deficient in morals mor-als as his father, and the boat tilings of his roign wero due first to Walpolo and next to Pitt, the former lib first primo minister and tho lattor his latest. The next. George was a ooarso-minded, unread boor, who could see no beauty in a Shakespearean play, but would laugh himself nlmost into fits on seeing see-ing a clown swallowing a string of sausngos. He tried to be a real king, but did not. know how. One of the worst results of his pig-headed ob- Continued 011 Page Pour NAME OF GEORGE DOEvS NOT PLEASE Continued from Pago One. stinacy was the provocation of the American revolution He died insane. The fourth Goorge wns boru a century cen-tury beforo tho present king. His marriage to Mrs. Fitzhcrbert was only one of tho scandals of his reign. Ho was known Sometimes as "the first gentleman of Europe." because of his gracious manners, which were mere varnish. var-nish. At heart he was a profligate. George V.. as Prince of Wales, has shown none of the qualities that have eiven the name its royal ill-savor. In fact, he has been regarded as being proper to the verge of dullness. Therefore, There-fore, his chance of making the twentieth twen-tieth century George a name brilliant, in contrast with "the four Georges," whom Thackeray has held up to lasting last-ing scorn, looks to be a very fair one. |