In the King's Bench.
"Samuel Thomas Adams of No 9 Davis street Berkeley square in the County of Middlesex solicitor maketh oath and saith that he hath seen a certain book or publication entitled "The Authentic [190]Records of the Court of England for the last Seventy Years" purporting to be published in London by J. Phillips 334 Strand 1832 and that in the said book or publication are contained the following statements or passages which this deponent has read that is to say—"
[Here the deponent, lawyer-like, set out the whole of the pretended libel, as published in the "Authentic Records," for the purpose of putting us to all the expense and trouble possible.]
"And this deponent further saith that he was coroner for the verge of the King's Palace at St. James's in the month of June one thousand eight hundred and ten before whom the inquest on the body of Joseph Sellis referred to in the aforesaid passages extracted from the said book or publication was held and that it is not true as stated in the aforesaid passages that Lord Ellenborough undertook to manage the affair by arranging the proceedings upon the said inquest or that every witness or as this deponent believes any witness was previously examined by the said Lord Ellenborough or that the first jury for the reasons in the aforesaid passages alleged or for any other reasons refused to return a verdict in consequence of which they were dismissed and a second jury summoned and empannelled to whom severally a special messenger had been sent requesting their attendance and each of whom was directly or indirectly connected with the court or the government. And this deponent further saith that it is not true that any person was omitted as a witness whose evidence was known or could be suspected to be material but on the contrary this deponent saith that when the death of the said Joseph Sellis was notified to him he as such coroner as aforesaid was required to hold an inquest on the body of the said Joseph Sellis and that it being required by a statute passed in the twenty-third year of Henry the Eighth chapter twelve that in case of death happening in any of the king's palaces or houses where his majesty should then happen to be and in respect of which death an inquest should be necessary that the jury on such inquest should be composed of twelve or more of the yeoman officers of the king's household to be returned in the manner therein particularly mentioned he this deponent in the first instance issued as such coroner as aforesaid an order that a jury should be summoned composed of the said yeoman officers of the king's household pursuant to the directions of the said statute. But [191]this deponent saith that believing it to be important that the cause and circumstances of the death of the said Joseph Sellis should be investigated in the most public and impartial manner he took upon himself the responsibility of not complying with the strict letter of such statute as aforesaid and countermanded the first order as aforesaid for summoning such jury in conformity to the said statute and instead thereof directed a jury to be summoned consisting of persons not being yeomen officers of the king's household but living at a distance from and totally unconnected with the palace of St. James's And this deponent further saith that thereupon his agent as this deponent has been informed and believes took the summoning officer to Francis Place of Charing Cross man's mercer and that the said Francis Place then mentioned to the agent of this deponent the names of many persons fit and eligible to compose such jury and out of such persons so summoned by the officer as aforesaid an impartial jury was formed of which jury the said Francis Place was foreman And this deponent saith that before such jury so summoned and duly sworn he as coroner proceeded on the first day of June one thousand eight hundred and ten to hold an inquest on the body of the said Joseph Sellis And this deponent further saith that the court which under other circumstances would have been a close one he this deponent directed to be thrown open to the public and all persons without distinction And this deponent believes the same was done and that all persons without distinction were admitted into such court amongst whom were many reporters for the newspapers who attended for the purpose of taking and did take notes of the proceedings and of the depositions of the witnesses examined upon such inquest And this deponent further saith that at the commencement of the said inquest the several informations on oath of the principal witnesses taken on that and the preceding day by John Reid Esquire the then chief magistrate of the police were read over and handed to the said jury to enable them the better to examine such witnesses respectively and such witnesses were respectively resworn before this deponent as coroner and permitted to make any addition to their evidence so given before the magistrate as aforesaid and that each and every of such witnesses had full opportunities of making any addition to such testimony which they thought proper And this deponent further saith that all the circumstances of the case as far as they could be collected were carefully and impartially scrutinized by the said jury and that all the evidence which could be collected and brought forward and that every person was called before the said jury and examined as a witness and no person was omitted [192]to be called and examined who would have been or who it could be supposed would have been a material witness And this deponent further saith that in the course of the inquiry the said jury proceeded to the apartment where the body of the said Joseph Sellis had been first discovered and was then lying and did then carefully view examine and inspect the body of the said Joseph Sellis and all the other circumstances deemed by them necessary to be examined into and ascertained in any way touching the death of the said Joseph Sellis And this deponent further saith that he locked the doors of the apartment in which the body of the said Joseph Sellis was found and did not permit the same to be inspected nor the state and position of the said body to be disturbed, from the first discovery of such body in the aforesaid apartment until the same was inspected by the said jury And this deponent further saith that on the conclusion of the investigation the said jury immediately and unanimously returned a verdict that the said Joseph Sellis voluntarily and feloniously as a felo de se murdered himself And this deponent further saith that the proceedings upon the said inquest were in all respects regular except as to the jury not consisting of the yeoman officers of the king's household and that such proceedings were themselves conducted in the most fair open and impartial manner and that the verdict so found by the jury as aforesaid was a just true and honest verdict and that there is not the smallest ground for supposing or alleging any thing to the contrary thereof[192:A]
"Sworn in Court the eighteenth
day of April 1832—By the Court."
"The first remark he had to submit to the court in this case was, that a person who applied for an extraordinary remedy by criminal information, must deny all the charges contained in the libel. The rank of the illustrious individual in this case made no difference with respect to that point. Now the court would find, by the affidavit of Mr. Adams, the coroner, that one of the main parts of this alleged libel, so far from being contradicted, was SUBSTANTIATED,—he alluded to the fact of there having been TWO JURIES summoned [193]to inquire into the circumstances relating to the death of Sellis. He did not mean to say that that fact formed any justification for the publication of the libel; but the fact itself was certainly extremely important, and Mr. Adams' affidavit contained the reasons why the mode pointed out by the act of parliament for summoning juries in such cases had been departed from. The fact of there having been two juries summoned was no doubt sufficient to induce any person to believe that there was some reason for that proceeding, which was not apparent on the face of it. Mr. Adams had described the manner in which the jury were summoned. He said he sent the summoning officer to Mr. Place, man's mercer, of Charing-cross; but Mr. Place was not the coroner for the verge of the King's Palace, and had no authority to act. He would leave it to the court to form their own opinion, whether or not this departure from the usual course was or was not for the purpose of obtaining an IMPARTIAL TRIAL. The affidavit showed that Mr. Adams had flown in the face of the act of parliament, and the statement in the Authentic Records, that there had been a second inquest, was CORROBORATED by that affidavit. Mr. Adams had referred to the act of parliament, as being that of the 23rd of Henry VIII., whereas it was that of the 33rd of Henry VIII.: that was no doubt a trifling circumstance, but it tended to show the manner in which Mr. Adams performed the duties of his office. Mr. Adams had stated that summonses had been drawn up for summoning TWO JURIES, but those for summoning the FIRST were not used; but the reason he gave was most unsatisfactory. He had no right to send to Mr. Place, and Mr. Place had no right to act as coroner; and he (Mr. Wakefield) submitted that the court ought to require an affidavit from Mr. Place to corroborate what Mr. Adams had stated. He believed it would not be difficult to show that the inquest might be quashed, as being illegal; and it certainly might have been quashed if Sellis had had any goods, which would have been subject to an extent at the suit of the crown. At all events, Mr. Adams might have been prosecuted for a breach of duty. There was another point which, though of a trifling nature, he would take the liberty of adverting to, in order to show that the inquest was illegal. By the 28 Henry VIII. c. 12, the jury in cases of this description were to be summoned from the verge of the court. Now this applied to the court sitting at Whitehall; but at the time in question the court was sitting at St. James'. The summoning, therefore, was clearly not good, and the jury, consisting of Mr. Place's junta, could not legally hold an inquest on the body of Sellis."
[194]Four other mistakes, also, in the coroner's affidavit were pointed out by Mr. Place himself in a letter to the public.
1. Mr. Adams says, "he issued an order to summon a jury of persons of the king's household, but that he rescinded the order, and summoned a jury of persons who lived at a distance, and were wholly unconnected with St. James' Palace." Mr. Adams must by these words mean that he summoned a jury from the only place to which his power extended; namely, "the verge of the court,"—a small space, and from amongst the few tradesmen who resided within its limits. I never before heard that he had issued any order to summon a jury of persons of the king's household.
2. Mr. Adams says, that his "summoning officer applied to Francis Place, of Charing Cross, for the names of persons who were eligible to compose a jury, and that out of such persons an impartial jury, of which Francis Place was the foreman, assembled on the 1st of June, 1810." Mr. Adams probably speaks from memory, and is, therefore, incorrect. He might, to be sure, have instructed his officer to apply to me; but, if he did, it was a STRANGE PROCEEDING. The officer was in the habit of summoning juries within the verge, and must have known much better than I did who were eligible. The jurors could not have been indicated by me, since, of seventeen who formed the inquest, five were wholly unknown to me, either by name or person; and amongst the seven who did not attend, there were probably others who were also unknown to me. The number of persons liable to be summoned is so small, that it has been sometimes difficult to constitute an inquest, and there is no room either for choice or selection.
3. Mr. Adams says, "the depositions of the witnesses were taken by John Read, the then chief police magistrate, and were read to the witnesses, who were severally asked if they had any thing to add to them." This, if left as Mr. Adams has put it, would imply negligence on the part of an inquest which was more than usually diligent and precise. The depositions were read, but not one of them was taken as the evidence of a witness. Every person who appeared as a witness was carefully and particularly examined, and the order in which the evidence was taken, and the words used, differ from the depositions; the evidence is also much longer than the depositions. Both are before me. The inquest examined seven material witnesses, who had not made depositions before Mr. Read.
[195]4. Mr. Adams says "the jury immediately and unanimously returned a verdict that the deceased, Joseph Sellis, voluntarily and feloniously murdered himself." The jury of seventeen persons were every one convinced that Sellis had destroyed himself, yet two of them did not concur in the verdict,—one, because he could not believe that a sane man ever put an end to his own existence; and another, because he could not satisfy himself whether or no Sellis was sane or insane.
Charing Cross, April 19, 1832.
The very morning this letter was published, we called on Mr. Place, who repeated the substance of it to us, adding that Sir Charles Wetherell had sent a person to him for his affidavit, which he REFUSED in a letter to the learned knight, condemning the whole proceeding of criminal information. Mr. Place read a copy of this letter to us, and promised he would publish it if ever a sufficient reason presented itself. It was an admirable composition, and did credit to the liberality of the writer's opinions.
As to the affidavits of the Duke of Cumberland and Neale, they contain nothing but what other people in similar situations would say,—they deny all knowledge of Sellis' murder, and of unnatural conduct. Whoever thought of requiring them to criminate themselves? But affidavits, from interested persons are not worth much. The notorious Bishop of Clogher, for instance, exculpated himself in a criminal information by an affidavit, and the result was, the man who published the truth of that wretch groaned in a jail!!! Sir Charles, therefore, had no occasion to boast of the Duke of Cumberland's charitable mode of proceeding against us by criminal [196]information, instead of commencing an ex-officio action; for in neither of these modes of procedure does the truth or falsehood of the charge form an object of consideration. We are, therefore, prevented by the Duke of Cumberland and his adherents from proving the truth of the statements we made in "The Authentic Records" in a court of law; but where resides the power that shall rob us of the glorious LIBERTY OF THE PRESS? We are the strenuous advocates of the right to promulgate TRUTH,—of the right to scrutinize public actions and public men,—of the right to expose vice, and castigate mischievous follies, even though they may be found in a palace! The free exercise of this invaluable privilege should always be conceded to the HISTORIAN, or where will posterity look for impartial information? In this character only did we publish what we believed, and still believe, to be the truth in our former work of "The Authentic Records," and which we have considerably enlarged upon in our present undertaking, merely for the purpose of fulfilling our sacred duty, and not with the idea of slandering any man! If the Duke of Cumberland had proved our statement false, we would have freely acknowledged our error, as every man ought to do who seeks fairly and honorably to sustain a noble function in the purity of its existence. We know there are writers who seek, not to enlighten, but to debase; not to find amusement, but to administer poison; not to impart information, either political, moral, or literary, but to indulge in obscenity,—to rake up forgotten falsehoods, [197]and disseminate imputed calumnies! To such, the sanctuary of private life is no longer inviolable; the feelings of the domestic circle are no longer sacred; retirement affords no protection, and virtue interposes no defence, to their sordid inroads. Upon offences like these, we would invoke the fiercest penalties of the law. The interests of society demand it, and the rights of individuals claim it! But our strictures and exposures are of a widely-different character,—not if they were false,—but because their TRUTH must be apparent to every unbiassed individual in this mighty empire! With this conviction alone we stated them, and even Sir Charles Wetherell himself said we "seemed to have no other motive in stating them only for the purpose of stating them!" We are not disposed to comment upon this part of the learned counsel's speech, as it proves all we want to prove regarding our motives.
This year was not less remarkable for the king's family sorrows than for public grievances. His majesty was nearly childish and blind. The queen dreaded the ascendency of the popular voice in favour of the Princess of Wales, and the Princess Charlotte exhibited a resolute spirit, which it was feared would end to the unhappiness of the puissant queen. The Princess Amelia suffered under indescribable sorrows, both bodily and mental, which ultimately terminated her earthly career on the 2nd of November.
Many representations were made to the public of [198]the numerous visits made to the Princess Amelia by the king, and their affecting final interview. We believe we may, with truth, say those representations were erroneous; for the king's malady was of too serious a nature to admit of any new excitement, and the peculiar regard he entertained for this daughter would not allow his hearing of her sufferings in any shape, without feeling the most acute pain.
The Prince of Wales also still pursued the most dissipated rounds of pleasure, making his very name hateful to every virtuous ear. The house of royalty, indeed, seemed divided against itself.
General historians say that the year
was not marked by any very particular events of much interest, either to kings or kingdoms; yet we must differ from them in this opinion, inasmuch as, at its commencement, the Prince of Wales was appointed Regent, and the king's person confided to the care of the queen, conjointly with archbishops, lords, and other adherents of her majesty.
The session was opened on the 12th of February; and the speech, delivered by commission, in the name of the regent, expressed unfeigned sorrow at the king's malady, by which the exercise of the royal authority had devolved upon his royal highness. It also congratulated parliament and the country on [199]the success of his majesty's arms, by land and sea, and did not forget to beg for further SUPPLIES,—so much required.
Let us here inquire the cause that prevented the amiable regent from opening the session in person. Had his mistresses detained him too late in the morning? or had they played a designed part with him, to prove their superior domination? or had he been in his most privately-retired apartments, conversing with a few of the male favourites of his household in ITALIAN? If either of these do not give the true reason of his absence, we may be sure to ascertain it upon inquiry of the vintner or faro-table keeper. Here the different degrees of morality, contrived by custom and keeping the people in ignorance, are well illustrated!
The queen was much at Windsor at this period, she being obliged, by etiquette, to hear the bulletins issued by the physicians concerning his majesty's health, or her affection for the afflicted king would not have produced so great a sacrifice on her part.
In this year, the disgraced Duke of York was restored to his former post of commander-in-chief; although, but a short period before, he was found guilty of being privy to, if not actually and personally, disposing of situations in the army, by which traffic, very large amounts had been realized by one of his royal highness' mistresses.
The money required for this year's supply amounted to fifty-six millions! The distress in all the manufacturing districts, notwithstanding, was of [200]the heaviest nature; while, instead of ministers devising means to relieve the starving poor, oppressive enactments were substituted.
Let it not here be supposed that we are condemning any constitutional enactment of government. We only wish to see the interests of the poor a little more regarded, instead of laws being made solely with a view of aggrandizing the wealthy, whose eyes already stand out with fatness. Is it not evident that the men at this period in power were resolved to continue their system of corrupt administration, in despite of all remonstrance and opposition? A long course of oppression had apparently hardened them, and so far steeled their hearts against the petitions of the suffering nation, that they actually seemed to delight in increasing the heavy burdens which already preyed upon the vitals of the community.
Our readers may probably be aware that the visits of the Princess Charlotte to her mother were always "few and far between;" but at this period, the interviews became so uncertain and restricted, that they could not be satisfactory either to the mother or the daughter. Some of the attendants always remained in the apartment with them, by the regent's command, to witness the conversation. For some time, the princess contrived to write privately to her mother, and obtained a confidential messenger to deliver her communications. This was ultimately suspected, and, after a close scrutiny, unfortunately discovered, and immediately forbidden. Her royal highness was [201]now in her fifteenth year, in good health, and possessing much natural and mental activity. It was not very probable, therefore, that the society of FORMAL LADIES, every way disproportionate to herself in years and taste, could be very agreeable to her, more especially when she knew that these very ladies were bitter enemies to her adored mother. If the Princess Charlotte had been allowed to associate with natural and suitable companions, the very decisive feature of her character would have rendered her the brightest ornament of society; but this was not permitted, and England has great cause to mourn that she was not more valued by her father and grandmother.
The elegant and accomplished Dr. Nott was now selected for the Princess Charlotte's preceptor, and he ardently exerted himself to improve the mind of his royal pupil. The very superior personal, as well as mental, qualifications of the reverend gentleman, however, soon rendered him an object of peculiar interest to the youthful princess. The ardency of her affections and the determinate character of her mind were well known to her royal relatives. They, therefore, viewed this new connexion with considerable uneasiness, and soon had occasion to suspect that her royal highness had manifested too much solicitude for the interest of her friend and tutor!
The Duke of York first communicated his suspicions on this subject to the regent, and the prince immediately went to Windsor (where the queen then was) to inform her majesty of his fears, and to [202]consult what would be the most proper and effectual measures to take. Her majesty was highly incensed at the information, and very indignantly answered, "My family connexions will prove my entire ruin." Her majesty, accompanied by the prince, drove off directly for London, and the Princess Charlotte was commanded to meet her grandmother in her chamber. With her usual independent readiness, the princess obeyed the summons, and was ushered into the presence of the haughty queen.
After some considerable period of silence, her majesty began to ask what particular services Dr. Nott had rendered, or what very superior attractions he possessed, to engage the attentions of her royal highness in such an unusual degree, as was now well known to be the case. Her royal highness rose up, and in a tone of voice, not very agreeable to the queen, said, "If your majesty supposes you can subdue me as you have done my mother, the Princess of Wales, you will find yourself deceived. The Reverend Mr. Nott has shown me more attentions, and contributed more to my happiness in my gloomy seclusion, than any person ever did, except my mother, and I ought to be grateful to him, and I WILL, whether it pleases your majesty or not!" The queen saw her purpose was defeated in the attempt to intimidate her grand-daughter, and therefore, in a milder manner, said, "You must, my dear, recollect, I am anxious for your honour and happiness; you are born to occupy the highest station in the world, and I wish you to do so becoming the proud [203]character of your royal father, who is the most distinguished prince in Europe." The queen had scarcely concluded her sentence, when her royal highness burst forth, in the most violent manner, and with an undismayed gesture, said, "Does your majesty think I am always to be under your subjection? Can I believe my royal father so great and good, when I have so long witnessed his unremitted unkindness to my neglected mother? Neither do I receive much attention from the prince; and my uncle of York is always preaching to me about virtue and submission, and your majesty well knows he does not practise either! Mr. Nott practises every amiability which he enjoins, and I esteem him exceedingly more than I do any other gentleman!" The queen was quite vexed at the unbending disposition manifested by the princess, and desired her to retire, and reflect upon the improper conduct of which she had been guilty, and, by humility and contrition, to make a suitable atonement.
While walking out of the room, the princess appeared in deep thought, and more tranquil; her majesty, imagining it to be the result of her own advice, said, "The Princess Charlotte will never want a friend if she abide by her grandmother's instructions, and properly maintain her dignity of birth." Her royal highness returned to her former situation before the queen, and exclaimed, "What does your majesty mean?" "I mean," replied the queen, "that you must not condescend to favour persons in low life with your confidence or particular respect; they [204]will take advantage of it, and finally make you the tool to accomplish their vile purposes." "Does your majesty apply these remarks to the Rev. Mr. Nott?" hastily replied the princess. "I do," said the queen. "Then hear me, your majesty; I glory in my regard for Mr. Nott. His virtues are above all praise, and he merits infinitely more than I have to give; but I resolve, from this moment, to give him all the worldly goods I can; and your majesty knows that, by law, I can make a will, though I am but little more than fifteen; and my library, jewels, and other valuables, are at my own disposal! I will now, without delay, make my will in his favour, and no earthly power shall prevent me. I am sorry your majesty prefers vicious and wicked characters, with splendid titles, to virtuous and amiable persons, destitute of such empty sounds!" The princess left the room, and the queen was more disturbed than before the interview.
The regent was soon made acquainted with the result, and recommended that no further notice should be taken of the matter, hoping that the princess would change her intention upon a more deliberate survey of the subject. But in this opinion, or hope, his royal highness was disappointed; for the princess that day signed a deed, whereby she gave positively to her friend and preceptor, Dr. Nott, her library, jewels, and all private property belonging to her, and delivered this instrument into his hand, saying, "I hope you will receive this small token as a pledge of my sincere regard for your character, [205]and high estimation of your many virtues. When I am able to give you greater testimonies of my friendship, they shall not be withheld." We need hardly say that the divine was delighted at the great attention and unexpected generosity of her royal highness. He was more; for his heart was subdued and affected.
A considerable period elapsed after this circumstance, when the queen was resolved to recover the deed at all hazards, as she feared, if the validity of such an instrument were ever acknowledged, royalty would suffer much in the estimation of the public. All the queen's deceptive plans, therefore, were tried; but failed. The prince, at length, offered a large amount as a remuneration, and finally persuaded the doctor to give up the deed! Of course a good living was also presented to him, on his retiring from the situation in which he had so long enjoyed the smile and favour of his royal pupil.
The Princess Charlotte was mortified, beyond expression, at this unexpected conduct on the part of her father and grandmother, and was not very sparing in her expressions of dislike towards them. Mr. Perceval (who was then premier) was requested by the prince to see her royal highness, and to suggest any terms of reconciliation between the princess and the queen; but he could not succeed. "What, Sir!" said her royal highness, "would you desire me to appear what I am not, and to meet her majesty as if I believed her to be my sincere friend, when I know I am hated for my dear mother's sake? No, [206]Sir! I cannot do as you desire; but I will endeavour to meet her majesty at all needful opportunities with as much gentleness of manners as I can assume. What indignities has not the queen offered to my persecuted mother? You well know, Sir, they have been unmerited, and if her majesty insults the Princess of Wales again in my presence, I shall say, 'your majesty should regulate your family affairs better, and teach lessons of virtue to your daughters, before you traduce the characters of other ladies!' You, Sir, are the regent's minister, and in his confidence, so I may venture to give you my candid opinion, and I do not consider that, by doing so, I exceed the bounds of propriety. Will you, therefore, oblige me by announcing to the prince, my father, that I am unalterably devoted in heart to my mother, and while I wish to be a dutiful child to my father, I must not even be that at the expense of principle and honourable sentiments. My grandfather always had my respect and pity."
It is scarcely necessary to say, that Mr. Perceval retired with evident symptoms of disappointment and chagrin. He immediately communicated the result of his interview to the regent and the queen, who declined making any further remonstrance, lest the princess should imagine they feared her, or were at all intimidated by her bold decisions.
In this year, Lord Sidmouth moved to bring in a bill to alter the "Toleration Act." His lordship stated, that this bill was calculated to serve the interests of religion, and promote the prosperity of the [207]Church of England! But Lord Sidmouth, for once, was disappointed. The sensation excited throughout the country was of an unprecedented description; for, within forty-eight hours, no less than three hundred and thirty-six petitions against it were poured into the House of Lords! and the House was presented, on the second reading, with five hundred more! It was consequently abandoned.
The supplies voted for the public and private services were FIFTY-SIX MILLIONS!
At the close of this year, the poor were perishing for want; yet the court became more splendid than ever! The ill-fated sovereign was as imbecile and as weak as an infant, and his representative a profligate ruler. What a condition for England!
War still raged at the commencement of
We will not, however, record the scenes of devastation and horror consequent from it; neither will we eulogize Lord Wellington for the victories he obtained. Much rather would we shed a tear at the remembrance of the slaughtered victims to kingly or ministerial ambition. Who that believes in the immortality of the soul can think of these horrid engagements without shuddering at the immense and inexpressible accountability of the destroyer? It would be utterly impossible to give an idea of the number of WIDOWS and ORPHANS who have had to mourn the [208]consequences of splendid victories, as a wholesale murdering of soldiers are denominated. How many ducal coronets have been purchased at the expense of human existence! Rather should our brows never be encircled than at such an unnatural price!
On the 13th of February, the restrictions formerly in force against the prince regent terminated; and, properly speaking, it may be declared, he then assumed the kingly power. One hundred thousand pounds were voted for him, professedly to meet the expenses attendant upon his assumption of the regal authority.
This was a moment of triumph to the queen, and the sequel will prove that her majesty took especial care to turn it to her own account. The Duke of York was fully reinstated as "Commander-in-Chief," and, therefore, ready ways and means presented themselves to her majesty. The regent engaged that the queen should have the continued sanction of his name and interest, in all the various ways she might require. Accordingly, it was soon arranged, that her majesty should receive an additional sum of ten thousand pounds per annum FOR THE CARE OF HER ROYAL HUSBAND'S PERSON!
We cannot pass by this shameful insult to the nation without making an observation upon so unnatural an act. If the queen were the kind and affectionate wife she had so very frequently been represented to be, could she have allowed herself to receive an immense payment for merely doing her duty? But a more selfish woman, and a more unfeeling wife, never [209]disgraced humanity, as this wicked acceptance of the public money fully testifies.
An additional nine thousand pounds annually were also granted to each of the princesses, whilst places and pensions were proportionally multiplied. In the case of Colonel M'Mahon, upon whom a private secretaryship had been conferred, much very unpleasant altercation took place in the House of Commons; but bribery effected that which argument proved to be wrong. It was a well-known fact, indeed, that this individual was nothing more than a pander to the regent's lust, to which infamous engagements and practices we shall hereafter refer.
On the 11th of May, as Mr. Perceval was entering the lobby of the House of Commons, he received a shot in his left breast, and, after staggering a few paces, fell down and expired. The assassin was tried on the 15th and executed on the 18th of the same month. He defended his conduct on the ground of having received much injury from the government, who had denied redress of his grievances, and, therefore, thought he had only done an act of justice in taking away the life of a member of so callous an administration.
Agreeably to the regent's message, fifty thousand pounds were voted for the use of Mr. Perceval's family, and two thousand annually to be paid to his widow. In case of her demise, however, the same amount was to be continued annually to such male descendant as might at that time be the heir, for the term of his life.
[210]Let us here inquire into the services which Mr. Perceval had rendered his country to warrant ministers in this lavish expenditure upon his family, one of whom now frequently intrudes his crude notions in the House of Commons. Mr. Perceval had been for a long period the pretended friend of the ill-fated Princess of Wales. "The Book" which he arranged, and which had been printed, but not published, in 1807, giving the particulars of the "Delicate Investigation," improperly so called, was bought up in 1809, and as much as fifteen hundred pounds GIVEN for a single copy. The rancour and malice of the unprincipled enemies and calumniators of the open-hearted Princess of Wales had been much exposed by Mr. Perceval, and by his apparent generous and manly defence in her royal highness' favour, the storm materially abated. After a long period, she was again received at court, and acknowledged innocent of the charges preferred by her assailants. Apartments were given to her at Kensington Palace, and it appeared very probable that her wishes would finally be completed, in the restoration of her beloved daughter to her society. But mark the ensuing change. Mr. Perceval was chosen by the regent to assist in his councils; and as no man can serve two causes at the same time, Mr. Perceval deserted the princess, and became the servile minister of the prince! Surely there must be something supernatural in the smile of royalty, when, in some instances, principle and conscience have fallen subdued before it! We know for an incontrovertible fact, that [211]but a few months before Mr. Perceval's acceptance of office, he delivered his sentiments concerning the Princess of Wales to a particular friend, in these words: "I am decidedly friendly to the Princess of Wales, because I am well satisfied and assured her royal highness is a much-injured lady. I am also convinced her mother-in-law had conceived an inveterate dislike to her before she arrived in this country, on account of the objections preferred by the prince against any connexion, except that which his royal highness had already formed. From these unhappy circumstances, I am obliged to believe, that the sufferings of her highness are unmerited on her part, and very much increased by the dictatorial behaviour of her majesty." At another interview with the same person, the following question was put, unreservedly, to Mr. Perceval: "Do you, Sir, think her royal highness has been deserving of the persecutions she has endured, by any deviation from virtue and propriety?" "I do not think the princess guilty," earnestly rejoined Mr. Perceval, "and I am fully satisfied, in my own mind, that if there had not existed ungenerous intentions on the part of the royal family, the affair would long since have sunk into silence. There is a gaiety and levity about her royal highness which is not usual with the English ladies generally; but, with all the exterior frivolity of the princess, when she chooses to be lively, I would prefer her infinitely to the professedly-modest and apparently-reserved of the sex in high life. I believe the princess to be playful, and incautiously witty, in [212]her deportment; but I prefer that to secret intrigue and infamous practices."
We leave our readers to judge whether this simple declaration was not honourable to the princess, and whether it does not correspond with every speech delivered by this gentleman in his public and private defence of her royal highness. Humanity, however, is weak, and the ingratiating attentions of the prince were too powerful to be resisted by Mr. Perceval. At his royal command, Virtue, Goodness, and Truth, assumed the garb of Vice, Infamy, and Falsehood. "Oh, blasting privilege of sovereignty! The bare scent of thy perfume spreads desolation to society; changes man, the noblest of God's works, into a monster; and the consequences of thy unnatural existence will most probably produce the engine to be used for thine own destruction!"
Shortly after the untimely death of Mr. Perceval, Lord Liverpool was appointed first lord of the Treasury; Mr. Nicholas Vansittart, chancellor of the Exchequer; and Lord Sidmouth, secretary of state for the home department.
On the 17th of June, Mr. Vansittart brought forward his budget,—the amount of the supplies required being more than sixty-two millions. Certainly this was not a very exhilarating or agreeable prospect to the nation of the retrenchments intended by the new ministry; but notwithstanding the divisions on the subject, it finally received the sanction of parliament. Had it not been for the corrupt state of the representation, can we suppose it possible that [213]such a sum would have been permitted to be drawn from the starving multitudes, when there existed such pecuniary distress in the manufacturing and commercial districts, unequalled in former years?
The new parliament met for business on the 30th of November, and one of its first acts was, to grant the sum of one hundred thousand pounds to Lord Wellington for the part he had taken in legal slaughter!
It may, with propriety, be submitted here, how large a grant would have been made to any man who should have presented a plan for the comfortable and honourable maintenance of the perishing millions? We fear any patriot, who had dared to press such a scheme would have soon been consigned to a damp and dreary dungeon, charged with disaffection to the monarch, or commanded, under certain protection, to set sail for another country; and, if permitted to reach the destined shore, there to be received and treated as one of the most infamous of the human race! But in these days, the will of the regent, supported by the queen, was supreme law. There was not one who ventured to insult his dignity by speaking to him TRUTH!—not one dared to stem the torrent of his royal displeasure! It is true that, when Lord Liverpool first entered office, he once hinted to his royal master the general voice of dissatisfaction which the people expressed; but the imperious regent commanded silence upon all such subjects, and desired Lord Liverpool never again to meet his highness, unless under a positive resolve not even to [214]give the most distant hint at matters so very disagreeable to the royal ear, and which were of no considerable importance! His lordship proved himself wanting in fortitude to set an example to courtiers, and the principle of his mind was, consequently, bartered for the pleasure of being the slave of a haughty prince, who had "relinquished Justice, and abandoned Mercy!"
We must here refer to a most interesting circumstance with respect to the Princess of Wales. Her royal highness was well aware of the bonds, still in existence, given by the Princes George, Frederick, and William, to the firm of Perigoux and Co., of Paris, which were to the amount of several hundred thousand pounds, as we have before named; and, in an open and friendly conversation with Messrs. Whitbread and Perceval, the princess said, "The regent and the royal dukes engaged in those bonds are perfectly aware they deserve severe exposure. Their action was not only wicked, but their intention also; as every person in any way acquainted with their concerns must be sure they undertook to pay more than their means would ever permit, seeing how deeply the country was in debt, and that the revenue did not then meet the annual amount required. And," emphatically added the princess, "if the world did but know of the LIVES SACRIFICED in this affair, to preserve the good reputation of these princely brothers, I suppose royalty would not gain much in the estimation of good people by the exposure!"
[215]The substance of this conversation soon afterwards transpired to the Prince of Wales. There cannot be a doubt that his royal highness was afraid, but he resolved not to appear so; and from that period, he and the queen were the unalterable and bitterest enemies of the princess, both publicly and privately. So, then, for the simple expression of truth, to those who were already in possession of the whole affair, was an injured princess to be pursued by the hounds of destruction until her capture should be accomplished. The prince sought an immediate divorce; but as the former attempts on this ground, in the year 1806, had failed, there appeared great difficulty in the attainment of his object. The former charges and gross calumnies were declared false, and Lady Douglas had been shunned by all good and strictly-honourable society; for, except where she was received in compliment to the queen, her invitations were, indeed, but very few. The old story was again resorted to, and as Mr. Perceval was now no more, a bold attempt was resolved on, as the last resource, to obtain the desired end.
Mr. Whitbread communicated to the Princess of Wales the scheme then forming against her honour, and that the ministry were favourable to the wishes of the regent. Her royal highness stood amazed at this unexpected information. "What!" said the princess, "is not the Prince of Wales satisfied with the former abuses he has poured upon me? Is he so abandoned, being heir-apparent, as to risk his life, or engage the vengeful disposition of the nation, in [216]the punishment due to the crimes he has committed against me? If the generous English people were informed of half the sufferings I have endured since my arrival in this country, they would never be induced to yield obedience to the commands of a prince whose virtues are not the least balance to his VICES! But," continued her royal highness, "I will go down to Windsor, and request an interview with the queen." Mr. Whitbread remonstrated, and at last the princess consented to write, and ask an audience. A courier was despatched with it, and the verbal reply of her majesty was, "She would see the Princess of Wales, provided her royal highness was at Windsor Castle by eight o'clock in the evening."
Not a moment was to be lost; the carriage was announced in a few minutes, and the princess, attended by only one lady, entered it. "Drive quickly," said her royal highness. It was only half-past seven when the princess was announced. Her royal highness was received in courtly style and unbending manner by her majesty, who, in her usual way, inquired "the cause which gives me the pleasure of a visit, so very unexpectedly, from the Princess of Wales?"
"Madam," answered her royal highness, "I am quite sensible of your surprise at my hasty request and appearance; but as I am tired of hearing the false reports in such general circulation in the court, I am resolved to ask your majesty in person, if I am likely to experience any renewal of those bitter persecutions which, in former years, were agitated to [217]my horror and surprise. I am well aware the regent would not enter upon such a business, unless he had your majesty's sanction and countenance, as well as assistance. Is it because Mr. Perceval is dead, that your majesty thinks me so unprotected as to fall immediately a prey to my base enemies?—if so, your majesty will be in the wrong; for although Mr. Perceval forsook my interest when he engaged himself in confidence to the regent, my husband, I never shall forget the gratitude I owe him for former benefits, and his letters speak volumes of truths, which it was entirely impossible for him to name or attest, unless his mind had been duly influenced by the solid foundation upon which his opinion was fixed."
Her majesty appeared vexed and astonished; then, assuming that hauteur for which she was so remarkable, said, "I do not know, princess, that I am under any necessity to answer your question, as it seems to me improper to do so. The prince regent has an unquestionable right to choose his ministers and counsellors, and also to engage their attentions and services for any purpose his royal highness may please,(?) and therefore I decline to answer any interrogatory upon the subject. Your royal highness must be aware this interview and conversation is very unpleasant to me, and I hope, in future, you will not put me to the very disagreeable task of refusing you an audience, or of permitting one, under similar circumstances. I must, therefore, desire your royal [218]highness will take some refreshment in the adjoining room, and I wish you a very good evening."
It hardly need be told that the insulted Caroline did not stay to partake of the proffered hospitality of this German princess. To be injured by the son, and insulted by the mother, was as much as human feeling could endure, and the princess reached her home in a state of mind little short of distraction. On the following morning, one of the royal dukes called upon the princess, and told her, he was informed of her journey to Windsor by an express from his mother, and also stated his opinion that no measures of an unpleasant nature were in agitation. The princess hastily answered, "Do you think I was not fully satisfied of the regent's intention upon the subject before I resolved to visit the queen? You forget, prince, that I am an injured lady. You know I was brought into this country to afford money to pay my intended husband's enormous debts, and to give him means to live in the greatest splendour with his numerous mistresses! I am deprived of the society of my only child! Injurious reports are circulated and received against my honour, and I am not even permitted to exonerate myself from these vile and slanderous imputations, because I am injured by the reigning authority."
The royal duke said, "I beg, my dear cousin, you will not permit the harsh and unfeeling conduct of the queen to operate on your mind. We all know she is revengeful in the extreme, but she always [219]favours George in every thing; and, from her very bitter conduct to you, we are well assured George is meditating some new scheme against you. One thing I promise you: I will abide by you, even presuming any thing disreputable is proved; and I only beg you will give me your private confidence, that I may be prepared for the worst."
Her royal highness, hastily rising, said, "Sir, if you intended to insult me, I feel it such; but if, from unguarded or not well-considered language, you have so very improperly expressed yourself, then I am not captious to place any ungenerous meaning upon your words! If my rectitude did not rise higher in the scale of truth and uprightness than that of your family, including both sexes, I should not have ventured the close and determinate inspection into my conduct at the will or command of my avowed foes! If it were not for my child's sake, I would satisfy you all that I am privy to TRANSACTIONS which one day or another will be punished with the vengeance of heaven, and which I solemnly believe to be my duty to explain, though it may even cause 'the cloud-capp'd towers and gorgeous palaces' to fall into one general heap of ruins!"
The duke was almost petrified with the language and manner of the princess, and strongly urged the necessity of silence upon any and all of the unfortunate or dishonourable transactions in which the family had been engaged, observing, "Your own welfare depends upon their's, and that is a [220]consideration of positive importance, which I hope your royal highness will justly appreciate!"
This suggestion of the cowardly duke produced the opposite effect to that which was intended; the princess declared that the mean sentiments of the queen had also found way into the minds of her sons, and instead of proving their royal descent by greatness of mind and action, they condescended to suggest self-preservation and self-enjoyments in preference to an open avowal of truth, and an honourable meeting with an enemy. "And," hastily said her royal highness, "is this, Sir, a specimen of the character of the English royal family? What would my ever dear and lamented father have thought of such principles and opinions? Doubtless, he would rather have followed his daughter to the tomb, and have seen her remains deposited with his ancestors, than have had her associated with persons who could sacrifice HONOUR for mean and paltry conveniences. Your royal highness must be well assured, that I am not a stranger to the unfounded and most abominable assertions or suggestions issued against my child's legitimacy; certainly, if I am only the Princess of Wales nominally, then my daughter bears a surreptitious title, and if either of us is considered as an obstacle to the interests of the nation, why are not the assertions upon that point made in an honourable and open manner. You well know, Sir, that I would sacrifice any thing and every thing for the happiness and future prosperity of my child; but I must be fully convinced, that my destruction of [221]rights or enjoyments of privileges would not produce the entire annihilation of her's also. I must be made to understand that the mother and child have separate interests, and that insults received by one are not dishonourable to the other. I have also another powerful objection to keep silence upon these heart-rending and distracting subjects, which is, Charlotte's deep-rooted aversion to those persons who have insulted me most. This feeling assures my mind that I ought not to shrink from any avowal of truth which I may in justice to this generous nation be called upon to make, and nothing less than my child's safety shall keep me from making a disclosure of the unmerited and most incomparable wicked conduct manifested towards me. If I find that likely to operate against my daughter's happiness, I will forbear; but not upon any other ground."
The determined manner of her royal highness fully satisfied the abashed duke that the sentiments thus boldly expressed were the unalterable principles entertained by the princess, and would only gather energy and force by opposition and remonstrance; he therefore very soon afterwards took his leave, and gave the outline of the conversation to his august mother, BY WHOSE EXPRESS WISH THE INTERVIEW HAD TAKEN PLACE.
The queen was posed by the firmness her royal highness had displayed; and, in reply to the communication, said, "I will not be disappointed by this seeming boldness; the princess shall feel my POWER. She shall see Charlotte still less; the [222]restrictions shall be enforced with greater severity, and she shall repent of her stupidity. Does the Princess of Wales imagine that I am to submit to her opinions upon my conduct, or to her abuse of any of my family? My only fear is that the daughter will prove AS UNBENDING AND AS DETERMINATELY RESOLUTE as the mother is, and I am therefore resolved to separate them as much as possible."
The result proved the queen's indignation and resentful disposition; as, immediately, a council was held upon the subject, and her majesty was positive in her instructions, that the restrictions between the Princess of Wales and her daughter should be more rigidly enforced.
At the commencement of the year
the princess found her situation more irksome than ever; and she resolved, therefore, to inform the prince regent of the hardships of her case, soliciting his royal highness to inform himself of all or any part of her behaviour or demeanour, to which the queen had made such heavy objections. The following is an exact copy of the letter of her royal highness to the prince: