Reconciliation of the Prince and Mrs. Fitzherbert--Her scruples,
etc.--The Prince at Brighton--Satirical prints--The Prince and
the Pavilion--Increase of income--The Prince and his regiment--A
race--Guests at the Pavilion--The Prince and his daughter.
It was in this year that the separation of the Prince and the titular
Princess of Wales was complete, and Florizel's heart (if he had such a
thing) went back to his wife. Let us hear Lord Stourton's account of
their reconciliation:
'When she thought her connection with the Prince was broken off for
ever, by his second union, she was placed by him in difficulties from
the same earnest and almost desperate pursuit, as she had been exposed
to during the first interval of his attachment. Numbers of the Royal
Family, both male and female, urged a reconciliation, even upon a
principle of duty.
'However, as she was, by his marriage with Queen Caroline, placed in a
situation of much difficulty, involving her own conscience, and making
it doubtful whether public scandal might not interfere with her own
engagements, she determined to resort to the highest authorities of her
own Church upon a case of such extraordinary intricacy. The Rev. Mr.
Nassau, one of the chaplains of Warwick Street Chapel, was, therefore,
selected to go to Rome and lay the case before that tribunal, upon
the express understanding that, if the answer should be favourable,
she would again join the Prince; if otherwise, she was determined
to abandon the country. In the meantime, whilst the negotiation was
pending, she obtained a promise from his Royal Highness that he would
not follow her into her retreat in Wales, where she went to a small
bathing place. The reply from Rome, in a Brief, which, in a moment
of panic, she destroyed, fearful of the consequences during Mr.
Percival's administration, was favourable to the wishes of the Prince;
and, faithful to her own determination to act, as much as possible,
in the face of the public, she resisted all importunities to meet him
clandestinely. The day on which she joined him again at her own house,
was the same on which she gave a public breakfast to the whole town of
London, and to which he was invited.
'She told me, she hardly knew how she could summon resolution to pass
that severe ordeal, but she thanked God she had the courage to do so.
The next eight years were, she said, the happiest of her connection
with the Prince. She used to say that they were extremely poor, but
as merry as crickets; and, as a proof of their poverty, she told me
that once, on their returning to Brighton from London, they mustered
their common means, and could not raise £5 between them. Upon this,
or some such occasion, she related to me, that an old and faithful
servant endeavoured to force them to accept £60, which he said he had
accumulated in the service of the best of Masters and Mistresses. She
added, however, that even this period, the happiest of their lives, was
much embittered by the numerous political difficulties which frequently
surrounded the Prince.'
We can scarcely, nowadays, when the judicial separation of man and
wife is an everyday occurrence, and divorce is rendered as easy as
possible, properly conceive Mrs. Fitzherbert's feelings in this matter
of reconciliation. We must, however, remember that she was a strict
Catholic, that her Church teaches that marriage is indissoluble, except
by death, and that she invoked and followed the highest ecclesiastical
authorities for guidance. Let us hear a modern opinion of her conduct.
It occurs in the _Dublin Review_ of October, 1854, p. 21, in a
criticism of 'Lord Holland's Memoirs':
'The doctrine of the Catholic Church regarding marriage is plain
and simple. She teaches that the marriage contract itself, which is
perfected by the words, "I take thee for my wife," on the part of the
man, and "I take thee for my husband," on the part of the woman, or by
any other words, or signs, by which the contracting parties manifest
their intention of taking each other for man and wife, is a sacrament.
Protestants are apt to fall into the mistake that it is the priest
who administers the sacrament to the wedded pair. He does no such
thing. As far as the validity of the contract and of the sacrament
is concerned, even when the contracting parties are both Catholics,
the priest need not utter a word. His presence is only necessary as a
_witness_ to the contract between the parties. Up to the time of the
Council of Trent, the presence of a priest was not necessary for the
validity of either the contract, or the sacrament. Nor was it by any
means to confer the sacrament that the Council enacted a law requiring
his presence. The law was made in consequence of the abuses which
arose from clandestine marriages, because an immoral person who had
married without witnesses, could, afterwards, deny the existence of the
contract, and wed another publicly, and in the face of the Church. To
prevent this abuse, the Council of Trent enacted that the parish priest
of one of the contracting parties, or some other priest deputed by him,
and two other witnesses should, _for the future_ (_in posterum_), be
present (_præsente parocho_) at the marriage contract. The presence of
the two other witnesses is required exactly in the same way as that of
the parish priest. The law is simply that marriage should be contracted
in the presence of three witnesses, one of whom should, necessarily, be
the parish priest.
'Nor was this law made, at once, obligatory, even on Catholics. By an
ordinance of the Council, it was not to have effect _in any parish_
until thirty days after it had been published there. This allowed
a large discretion to each bishop with regard to the time of its
publication in his diocese, and, in fact, it is not long since it has
been introduced into England.
'But it does not, and never did apply to any marriage in these
countries, where one of the parties is not a Catholic. Neither in such
marriages, which are called mixed, nor in those contracted between
parties, neither of whom belong to the Catholic Church, is the presence
of any priest required for the validity of either the contract, or
sacrament. It is not even necessary that the contracting parties should
_know_ that marriage is a sacrament. The sacrament exists wherever
Christians marry as Christ intended; and, if they be properly disposed,
they will receive grace to live happily together, and to bring up their
children in the fear and love of God.
'Mrs. Fitzherbert's marriage was, therefore, perfectly valid, both as a
contract and as a sacrament, in the eyes of the whole Catholic Church,
and to imagine that she alone, of all those who professed the same
faith, should look upon it as invalid, is monstrously absurd. Neither
the Pope, nor the whole Church could have annulled it, nor allowed her
to marry another.
'But it was illegal! Why, so was the whole Catholic religion, at the
same period. It was, not very long ago, unlawful to celebrate Mass, but
the sacrifice was not, therefore, invalidly offered. To say that Mrs.
Fitzherbert considered the marriage ceremony to be nonsense, because
it was illegal, at the time when the penal code against Catholics--and
especially that part of it which regarded matrimony--was in full
operation, is about as reasonable, as to prove that she did not believe
in transubstantiation, because the law declared it to be damnable and
idolatrous.'
For the next two or three years we hear little about the Prince, the
newspapers leaving his doings unrecorded. We learn (May 15, 1797) that
'On last Thursday evening, the Prince of Wales, accompanied by a single
gentleman, arrived at his Pavilion at Brighton. His Royal Highness,
the next day, reviewed the Monmouth and Brecon Militia, on the Downs,
near the above place. To-day, we hear, the Prince leaves Brighton,
having come there only for a few days, by the advice of Dr. Warren, for
the benefit of the sea air. His Royal Highness has lost much of his
corpulence since he was last at Brighton.'
He went again, on July 24, to be present at the races, and it is
recorded that, on October 23, 'The Prince of Wales amused himself
with a day's shooting at Petworth, on an invitation from the Earl of
Egremont. The next day, his Royal Highness being on his way to London,
with post horses, very narrowly escaped being overturned, about a mile
and a half on the other side of Cuckfield, where the horses, by some
means, took the carriage off the main road to the side of a bank, and
with an inclination that threatened its overturn, for the space of many
yards, but fortunately, and owing to the lowness of the carriage, it
was kept upon its wheels.'
He was present at the races on August 1, 2, and 3, 1798, and a
newspaper remarks that 'The change of society and manners which has
taken place at the Pavilion, gives the most heartfelt satisfaction to
every lover of his country; it is, now, every way worthy of the Heir
apparent of the British Empire.'
In 1799 we hear of him being at Brighton, both in July and October. In
1800 he was at the races in August, when his horse Knowsley won a race.
In the 'Brighton New Guide,' fourth edition, there is a good view of
the Pavilion as it was in 1800, with the following text:
'Adjoining to Marlborough House stands the MARINE PAVILION, built by
his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, in the year 1784.
'This handsome structure extends upwards of 200 feet in front, towards
the Steyne; the centre is a circular building, with a lofty dome,
supported by pillars; on each side are two elegant rooms on the ground
floor, with bed chambers over them: in addition to these, in the spring
of 1802, two wings were added, which gives a light, airy appearance to
the building; gravel walks, grass plats, and plantations towards the
Steyne, add a great degree of elegance to the whole.
'The front, towards the street, forms a square, with a handsome
colonnade in the middle, supported by columns; in the wings are
commodious apartments for his Royal Highness's suite; in the court is
the figure of a negro supporting a dial, executed in a superior style
of beautiful sculpture.'
The Prince was at Brighton in 1801. _Vide_ the following extract from a
newspaper:
'_Rejoicings for Peace._ _Oct. 14._--On Monday, the joyful tidings of
Peace were celebrated here; the bells rang from six in the morning
till twelve at night; never was the satisfaction of the people
more fully displayed. Young and old wore ribbons emblematic of the
occasion--_Peace and Plenty!_ The sea fencibles fired a _feu de joie_,
marched from thence to the Prince's house, and gave him three loud
huzzas: with that liberality which has ever marked our Royal guest,
he ordered them two hogsheads of beer. Brilliant illuminations took
place in the evening; the whole town appeared in a blaze. The most
distinguished were those of his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales,
flambeaux burning round his house, and every window lighted. This happy
day closed with a ball and supper at the Castle, attended by near five
hundred visitors; at one o'clock the room was opened with the most
sumptuous entertainment; every delicacy that could be procured.'
The Prince was in Brighton in 1802, and in the latter part of the year
hunted almost daily with his harriers, and had concerts at the Pavilion
two or three times a week. He left it for the season on December 27.
A newspaper cutting tells us that 'The charitable donations and willing
assistance which Mrs. Fitzherbert has bestowed, and continues to bestow
on the unfortunate individuals of this place, have justly endeared her
to the inhabitants of every description.'
But the miserable caricaturist, who knew nothing of her noble nature,
depicts her in a scurrilous drawing (October 21, 1802), entitled 'A
BRIGHTON BREAKFAST, OR MORNING COMFORTS.' Mrs. Fitzherbert and Lady
Lade are at breakfast; Mrs. Fitzherbert is pouring Hollands into a
huge tumbler labelled 'Comfort,' and says, 'Won't you take another
Comforter? We must make haste, I expect Noodle here presently.' Lady
Lade, who takes Brandy, says, 'I think your Comforters are bigger than
my John's.'
The next day brought out another satirical print, indicative of the
Prince's intimacy with the Lades. It is called 'Birds of a Feather
Flock Together; Diversions of Brighton.' Sir John Lade and the
Prince are on the box of an open carriage, in which are seated Mrs.
Fitzherbert and a lady (Miss Snow). Sir John is lashing one of the four
horses, and says to the Prince, 'There, B----t it, don't you see?
that's the Cut.' Miss Snow observes to Mrs. Fitzherbert, 'Did Noodle
bring your physic this morning?' To which she replies, 'Oh, yes, he
calls regularly every morning.'
We read in the _Sussex Weekly Advertiser_ (February 28, 1803) that
'The Prince's Pavilion at Brighton is undergoing other considerable
alterations and improvement, under the direction of Mr. Holland, the
architect; and is ordered to be got ready for the residence of his
Royal Highness, at an early part of the ensuing season.'
On October 14, 1800, just before Weltje died, the Prince took from him
a lease of the Pavilion for ninety-nine years at a rent, annually,
of £1,150, and on April 18, 1803, he went to Brighton to see how the
alterations were getting on. 'His Royal Highness slept at the house,
late Weltje's, adjoining the Pavilion, the repairs and alterations of
which are not yet completed. The Prince, after minutely inspecting the
works going on, returned to town on Thursday.'
In this extravagance he was somewhat justified, for on February 16 the
Chancellor of the Exchequer brought before the House of Commons the
following message from the King:
'GEORGE R.
'His Majesty having taken into consideration the period which has
elapsed since the adoption of those arrangements which were deemed,
by the wisdom of Parliament, to be necessary for the discharge of
the incumbrances of the Prince of Wales; and, having adverted to the
progress which has been made in carrying them into effect, recommends
the present situation of the Prince to the attention of this House.
'Notwithstanding the reluctance and regret which his Majesty must
feel in suggesting any addition to the burthens of his people, he is
induced to resort, in this instance, to the experienced liberality and
attachment of his faithful Commons, in the persuasion that they will
be disposed to take such measures, as may be calculated to promote the
comfort, and support the dignity of so distinguished a branch of his
Royal Family.'
On February 23 the House went into Committee to consider the King's
message; and the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Addington) pointed out
that on the 5th of the previous January £563,895 had been paid off the
Prince's debt of £650,000, and that the whole would be discharged in
July, 1806. He moved 'That his Majesty be enabled to grant a yearly
sum, or sums of money, out of the Consolidated Fund of Great Britain,
not exceeding, in the whole, the sum of Sixty thousand pounds; to
take place, and be computed from the 5th day of January, 1803, and to
continue until the 5th day of July, 1806, towards providing for the
better support of the station and dignity of his Royal Highness, the
Prince of Wales.' This resolution was agreed to.
In September, 1803, the royal stables, now the Dome, were commenced,
and that the Prince was there in October we have evidence in the
following newspaper cutting:
'_Oct. 2._--The Prince of Wales, at the conclusion of the Concert at
the Pavilion, some time after midnight, on Thursday last, addressing
himself to Colonel Leigh, expressed an anxious desire to know in how
short a time his regiment of dragoons could be under arms, and ready to
face the enemy, should necessity require their exertions in the night.
The Colonel immediately proposed, as the best method of satisfying
his Royal Highness, instantly to ride to, and order an alarm to be
sounded at the barracks; and, afterwards, to return, and give his Royal
Highness a correct account of the conduct of his troops. This measure
being approved by the Prince, the Colonel's horse was soon brought to
the door, and he set off, with all possible speed to see it carried
into effect.
'On reaching the advanced guard at the entrance of the barracks, the
Colonel commanded a black trumpeter on duty, to sound to arms. The
man, in obedience to the mandate, raised the trumpet to his lips; but
the surprise of the moment so greatly overpowered him, that he wanted
breath to put it in execution. An English trumpeter, who overheard the
order, as he lay in bed, in an instant arose, dashed open the window
of his room, and without waiting for further advice, put the bugle to
his mouth, gave the proper signal, and the troops, in every part, were,
in an instant, in motion. The greater part of the soldiers had been in
bed many hours; the whole of them were properly accoutred, and on their
horses, together with the flying artillery, in readiness to depart, in
time sufficient to have reached Brighton within 15 minutes after the
bugle gave the alarm. The barracks are situated something better than a
mile and a half to the north of the town.'
The following excerpt from the _Annual Register_ shows the diversions
of Brighton:
'_Aug. 20, 1803._--A whimsical exhibition took place on the race ground
at Brighton. Captain Otto, of the Sussex Militia, booted, and mounted
by a grenadier of 18 stone weight, was matched to run 50 yards, against
a poney, carrying a feather, to run 150; but Capt. Otto's rider tumbled
over his neck, which he was very near cracking; and, consequently,
he lost the bet. The next match was, the same gentleman, mounted by
the same grenadier, to run 50 yards, against a noble lord, carrying
a feather, who was to run 100. He was considerably distanced by the
latter.'
The following is taken from the _Times_ of September 7, 1804:
'BRIGHTON ANECDOTE.--Some ill timed pleasantry was played off, a few
days ago, at Brighton, on a respectable _Law Officer_ and his wife, who
have made a summer excursion there. An invitation, couched in due form,
and bearing all the marks of authenticity, was sent to them, desiring
their company at the Pavilion in the evening. The Gentleman and Lady,
justly proud of the distinguished honour thus conferred on them, they
knew not how, attended at the hour appointed, and were ushered into
the Saloon, in which were many persons of distinction, to whom they
were wholly unknown. Some embarrassment necessarily ensued, but it
was increased to a ten fold degree, when they were announced to the
_illustrious_ Master of the house, who had no recollection either of
his guests, or the invitation in his name; an explanation ensued, and
his Royal Highness, with all that urbanity that distinguishes him as
the most finished Gentleman in Europe, was pleased to declare "that he
felt himself much indebted to the ingenious person, who (by forging
his invitation, in order, perhaps, to sport with their feelings) had
afforded him the pleasure of their society and acquaintance, however
unexpected; and that he was perfectly happy in the opportunity of
receiving them." His Royal Highness conducted himself towards them
during the whole of the evening with the most liberal and marked
attention, and thus converted a _rencontre_, which was produced by
the most malignant motives, into a source of honour and perfect
satisfaction.'
Of the Prince's connection with Brighton in 1804 we have very little
trace. He was averse to having his doings chronicled, probably because
they were immediately pictorially satirized; but we have a very fine
one by Gillray, called THE RECONCILIATION, published on November 20,
1804.
The Prince and the King had been at daggers drawn, principally as
to the guardianship of the little Princess Charlotte. A peace was
temporarily patched up between them, and the King wrote on November 7
to the Chancellor that he was ready to receive the Prince. The letter
being forwarded to the latter, he at once replied:
'BRIGHTON,
'_Nov. 8, 1804_.
'The Prince of Wales, without delay, acknowledges the receipt of
the Chancellor's letter; and will, in consequence of the gracious
intention signified from his Majesty, be in London to-morrow evening,
with Lord Moira, who has just arrived at Brighthelmstone. The Earl of
Moira is authorised by the Prince to wait upon the Chancellor at any
hour on Saturday morning, that his lordship may please to appoint.'
The meeting between father and son took place on November 12, and next
day the King wrote to the Princess of Wales:
'WINDSOR CASTLE,
'_Nov. 13, 1804_.
'MY DEAREST DAUGHTER IN LAW, AND NIECE,
'Yesterday, I and the rest of the family had an interview with
the Prince of Wales, at Kew. Care was taken on all sides to avoid
all subjects of altercation, or explanation, consequently, the
conversation was neither instructive, nor entertaining; but it leaves
the Prince of Wales in a situation to show whether his desire to
return to the family, is only verbal, or real, which time, alone,
can prove. I am not idle in my endeavours to make inquiries that may
enable me to communicate some plan for the advantage of the dear
child. You and I, with so much reason, must interest ourselves; and
its effecting my having the happiness of living more with you, is no
small incentive to my forming some ideas on the subject, but you may
depend on their not being decided upon, without your thorough and
cordial concurrence; for your authority as a mother, it is my object
to support.
'Believe me, at all times,
'My dearest daughter and niece,
'Your most affectionate Father in Law and Uncle,
'GEORGE R.'
Nothing really came of this so-called 'Reconciliation,' and soon father
and son were as much estranged as ever. Gillray gives us a picture of
the Prodigal Son's return. '_And he arose and came to his Father; and
his Father saw him, and had compassion and ran, and fell on his neck,
and kissed him._' The Prince of Wales is in tatters, with his empty
pockets turned inside out, his stockings slipping down, and his shoes
down at heel. Lord Moira and Pitt stand by, looking on, and Queen
Charlotte, with her arms outspread, and two of the Princesses, are
beaming with delight.
[Illustration: Decorative motif]
[Illustration: Decorative panel]