Before proceeding to the next reign, let me remark that the George and
Garter of Charles II. had as many adventures or misadventures as those
of his father. In the fight at Worcester his collar and garter became
the booty of Cromwell, who despatched a messenger with them to the
Parliament, as a sign and trophy of victory. The king’s lesser George,
set with diamonds, was preserved by Colonel Blague. It passed through
several hands with much risk. It at length fell again into the hands of
the Colonel when he was a prisoner in the Tower. Blague, “considering
it had already passed so many dangers, was persuaded it could yet
secure one hazardous attempt of his own.” The enthusiastic royalist
looked upon it as a talisman that would rescue him from captivity.
Right or wrong in his sentiment, the result was favorable. He succeeded
in making his escape, and had the gratification of restoring the George
to his sovereign.
The short reign of James II. offers nothing worthy of the notice of
the general reader with respect to this decoration; and the same
may be said of the longer reign of William III. The little interest
in the history of the order under Queen Anne, is in connection with
her foreign nominations, of which due notice will be found in the
succeeding section. Small, too, is the interest connected with these
matters in the reign of George I., saving, indeed, that under _him_ we
find the last instance of the degradation of a knight of the garter,
in the person of James, Duke of Ormund, who had been attainted of
high treason. His degradation took place on the 12th July, 1716. The
elections were numerous during this reign. The only one that seems to
demand particular notice is that of Sir Robert Walpole, First Lord of
the Treasury. He gave up the Bath on receiving the Garter in 1726,
and he was the only commoner who had received the distinction since
Sir George Monk and Sir Edward Montague were created, sixty-six years
previously.
The first circumstance worthy of record under George II. is, that
the color of the garter and ribbon was changed from light blue to
dark, or “Garter-blue,” as it is called. This was done in order to
distinguish the companions made by Brunswick from those assumed to
be fraudulently created by the Pretender Stuart. Another change was
effected, but much less felicitously. What with religious, social, and
political revolution, it was found that the knights were swearing to
statutes which they could not observe. Their consciences were disturbed
thereat--at least they said so; but their sovereign set them at ease
by enacting that in future all knights should promise to break no
statutes, except on dispensation from the sovereign! This left the
matter exactly where it had been previously.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account