The “real throne,” as against the ornamental, formed a very material part of it. It chimed with Disraeli’s outlook on English institutions as “popular, but not democratic.” Since _Sybil_ was written, the “subject” is no longer “a serf,” but for a long time the “sceptre” tended to remain “a pageant.” The constitutional possibilities and opportunities of kingship under our limited monarchy are even now, perhaps, hardly realised. Before I close this chapter, I intend to say something of their historical lineage. There is a satirical passage about George the Fourth among the brilliant flippancies of _Vivian Grey_, which may amuse us before coming to close quarters with the serious side of sovereignty: “The first great duty of a monarch is to know how to bow skilfully. Nothing is more difficult, ... a royal bow may often quell a rebellion, and sometimes crush a conspiracy. Our own Sovereign bows to perfection. His bow is eloquent, and will always render an oration ... unnecessary, which is a great point, for harangues are not regal. Nothing is more undignified than to make a speech. It is from the first an acknowledgment that you are under the necessity of explaining, or conciliating, or convincing, or confuting; in short, that you are not omnipotent, but opposed.” “The Monarchy of the Tories is more democratic than the Republic of the Whigs!” exclaimed Disraeli, as I have already quoted, in his early _Spirit of Whiggism_. “I think,” cried Canning in 1812, “that we have the happiness to live under a limited monarchy, not under a crowned republic;” while, six years later, Canning again denounced most forcibly the error of those “who argue as if the constitution of this country was a broad and level democracy inlaid (for ornament’s sake) with a peerage and topped (by sufferance) with a crown.” This belief inspired the same statesman when, towards the agitated close of his days, he speaks in a letter to Mr. Croker of his reliance on the “vigour of the Crown” in conjunction with the “body of the people.” This, too, was the belief that inspired Disraeli. “_The monarch and the multitude._” Monarchy should be neither a gewgaw nor an abstraction, but a centre of national enthusiasm. “It is enthusiasm alone that gives flesh and blood to the skeletons of opinions.” From the beginning of the first to the close of the fifth decade of last century kingship had been on its trial in England. “The Tories,” wrote Disraeli in _The Press_, “already recognised the necessity of employing all the popular elements of the Constitution in support of its monarchical foundation.”