GEORGE WILLIAM FREDERICK CHARLES, duke of Cambridge (1819-1904) , was born at Hanover on March 26, 1819. He was thus about two months older than his cousin, Queen Victoria, and was for that period in the line of succession to the British throne. In Nov. 1837, after he had served for a short time in the Hano verian army, he became a colonel in the British army and was attached to the staff at Gibraltar from Oct. 1838 to April After serving in Ireland with the 12th Royal Lancers he was appointed in April 1842 colonel of the 17th Light Dragoons (now Lancers). From 1843 to 1845 he was colonel on the staff in the Ionian islands, and was then promoted major-general. In Oct. 1846 he took command of the Limerick district, and shortly afterwards of the Dublin district. In 1850 his father died and he succeeded to the dukedom. Being appointed inspector of cavalry in 1852, he held that post until 1854, when, upon the outbreak of the Crimean War, he was placed in command of the 1st division (Guards and Highland brigades) of the British army in the East. In June of the same year he was promoted lieutenant-general. He was present at the battles of the Alma, Balaklava, and Inkerman, and at the siege of Sevastopol. On July 15, 1856, he was appointed general commanding-in-chief, on Nov. 9, 1862, field-marshal, and by letters patent, 1887, com mander-in-chief. The long period during which he held the command of the army was marked by many changes. The Crimean War led to a regrouping of the departments, which, with the whole personnel of the army, were brought under the authority of the secretary of state for war. But only in 187o, after the successes of Prussia had created a profound impression, were drastic changes introduced by Cardwell into the entire fabric of the army. The objects of the reformers of 1870 were undoubtedly wise; but some of the methods adopted were strongly resented by the duke of Cambridge, whose views were shared by the majority of officers. Further changes were inaugurated in 188o, and again the duke found much to criticize. His opinions stand recorded in the voluminous evidence taken by the numerous bodies appointed to inquire into the condition of the army. They show a sound military judgment, and, as against innovations as such, a strong attachment to the old regimental system. That this judgment and this attachment were not so rigid as was generally supposed is proved by his published correspondence. The duke invariably accepted and loyally endeavoured to carry out the measures on which the Government decided.
Throughout his long term of office the duke of Cambridge evinced a warm interest in the welfare of the soldier, and great experience combined with a retentive memory made him a master of detail work. Belonging to the older generation of soldiers, he could not easily adapt himself to the new conditions; and in dis pensing patronage he was somewhat distrustful of originality, while his position as a member of the royal family tended to narrow his scope for selection. He was thus inclined to be in fluenced by considerations of pure seniority, and to underrate the claims of special ability. He resigned the commandership in-chief on Nov. 1, 1895, and was succeeded by Lord Wolseley, the duties of the office being considerably modified He was at the same time gazetted honorary colonel-in-chief to the forces. He was made ranger of Hyde park and St. James's park in 1852, and of Richmond park in 1857; governor of the Royal military academy in 1862, and its president in 187o, and personal aide-de camp to Queen Victoria in 1882. He died on March 17, 1904, at Gloucester house, London. The chief honours conferred upon him were: G.C.H., 1825; K.G., 1835; G.C.M.G., 1845; G.C.B., 1855; K.P., 1861; K.T., 1881. From 1854 he was president of Christ's hospital. The duke of Cambridge was married to Louisa Fairbrother, who took the name of FitzGeorge. She died in 1890.
See Rev. E. Sheppard, George, Duke of Cambridge; a Memoir of his Private Life (1906) ; and Willoughby Verner, Military Life of the Duke of Cambridge (1905). For the negotiations attending his resignation see J. A. Spender, Life of Sir Henry (1923), vol. i. ch. ix. pp.