THE DIVORCE.
Here are full many men of counsel met;
Not one for me.
SWINBURNE, _Mary Stuart._
Hope, withering, fled, and Mercy sighed. Farewell!
BYRON.
We now return to the Princess at Ahlden, where she was still kept in
rigorous imprisonment. The fiction of the Princess’s so-called desertion
was maintained even in the instructions which Duke George William gave
to his commandant for the treatment of the Princess on her arrival at
Ahlden. The commandant was Seigneur de la Fortière, Grand Falconer to
the court of Celle. And the Duke wrote:—
“1. Since it is my intention that my daughter should remain at Ahlden,
and have no communication, either by letter or other means, with any
one whatsoever until she returns to her duties with the Electoral
Prince, her consort, the Seigneur de la Fortière will make himself
acquainted with these wishes of mine and what I have ordered, as I do
by this present. He is not to convey, nor permit to be conveyed by
others to my daughter, any letters except such as come with an order
signed by my hand; and in like manner he is not to dispatch, nor allow
to be dispatched, any letter of my daughter’s except with express
permission from me.
“2. In conformity with this order, the Seigneur de la Fortière will
instruct the women, valets, and other domestics in attendance on my
daughter and all who enter the castle, that those who have, or
receive, letters for any one whatsoever in, or out of, the castle must
place them in the hands of the Seigneur de la Fortière on pain of
death.
“3. All letters which come for any of the servants, or which are sent
by any on their business, will likewise be given to the Seigneur de la
Fortière, and read by him, before being allowed to pass; and those
which are allowed to go must be stamped with his seal. If the Seigneur
de la Fortière finds the slightest cause for suspicion in them, he
will send them direct to me.
“4. The Seigneur de la Fortière can have all persons searched by the
officer or soldiers of the guard who give him the slightest cause to
suspect them of being implicated in bringing forbidden messages or
letters.
“5. Except those at Ahlden in attendance on my daughter, no one else
will enter the castle without my express permission; and the
above-mentioned servants are to have no conversation with any
strangers—that is to say, with any others but those of the household
and people of Ahlden—except in the presence of the Seigneur de la
Fortière or of some one commissioned by him for that purpose; and the
Seigneur de la Fortière will give orders that as soon as strangers
arrive in the said Ahlden he shall be immediately informed of the
fact.
“6. The women and other attendants on my daughter will not go out of
the castle without the Seigneur de la Fortière’s permission, and the
remainder of the servants will only enter the castle at fixed hours to
perform their duties, and will go away again as soon as they are done.
“7. My daughter will only leave the castle to take a walk, if she
wishes, in the garden between the two moats, and then she must be
accompanied by the Seigneur de la Fortière.
“8. If my daughter wishes to take her meals in the _salon_ outside her
rooms, she will have permission to do so, and the persons whose
business it is to be in waiting, and the footmen will attend at these
meals; but the Seigneur de la Fortière will always be present, and,
after rising from table, everybody will leave my daughter except the
lady-in-waiting and her chamber attendants.
“9. The Seigneur de la Fortière will have the power to require the
officer of the guard, in virtue of the orders I have given him for
that purpose, to adopt strong measures to ensure the exact execution
and observance of the above, as far as such may be necessary.”
It is very difficult to follow accurately the successive stages of the
proceedings that followed the Princess’s arrival at Ahlden, as most of
the official documents written at the time were published with intent to
deceive, and the greater part of the divorce proceedings have been
suppressed; but Dr. Köcher, a most eminent authority on the history of
the House of Hanover, and sometime keeper of the Hanoverian Archives,
has collected together sundry fragments of documents which remain, and
has published them with comments of his own in _Sybel’s Historische
Zeitschrift_—a valuable contribution, in which he demonstrates that the
divorce trial partook of the nature of a farce, inasmuch as everything
had been determined beforehand. Schaumann, the historian, another
eminent authority, on the other hand, maintains that the divorce
proceedings were instituted from a real desire to bring about a
reconciliation between the Princess and her husband. Here we have a
conflict of opinion. But this much at least seems certain: the court of
Celle would gladly have brought about a reconciliation had it been
possible, and the court of Hanover would probably have reluctantly
agreed to one if it had been possible for them to get rid of the
Princess and at the same time to keep her territory. But the determined
attitude of the Princess to break at all hazards with the hated House of
Hanover rendered from the first any attempt at reconciliation out of the
question; and Köcher is no doubt right in his main contention. The only
point where we differ from him in his elaborate study of the divorce
question is that he seems to treat the Princess as though she were a lay
figure, to be pulled about at will, and overlooks the fact that she was
a passionate and self-willed woman, just now driven to bay by the death
of her lover, and determined at all cost to free herself from her
husband. Under no conditions would she make terms with Königsmarck’s
murderers, or return to the life she loathed; in her present state of
mind she preferred imprisonment, or even death, to such an alternative.
The only thing therefore that remained was to bring about a separation
or divorce as expeditiously, and with as little scandal, as possible.
Meanwhile the Princess in the castle of Ahlden was alone; her mother was
not permitted to see her, and the only person suffered to approach her
was a minister of religion. Soon after her arrival at Ahlden two
ministers from the court of Celle, Bernstorff and Bülow, came to wait
upon the Princess. It must have been a bitter moment for her when she
received them, for she looked to Celle for help, and none came. The two
ministers spent some hours with her, and when they left they drew up a
report of what happened in a protocol headed, “Report of what took place
at Ahlden,” which begins as follows:—
“The reason of our journey was to tell the Princess the true state of
affairs, that everything was discovered, and therefore nothing could
be denied or questioned; to tell her what would be publicly said in
her defence, and how she ought to speak in public and conduct herself
in the forthcoming divorce case”.
In this document Königsmarck is not mentioned, but it is easy to see
what is referred to in the expression “everything was discovered”. The
true reason was to be hidden, for the honour of the House; and the
Princess was to acquiesce in a divorce on the ostensible ground of her
wilful desertion. The ministers found her only too ready to fall in with
their suggestions, and the report goes on to say: “and she acquiesces in
the separation, and recognises that no other course could be taken....
They were to tell her what to do, and she would submit....”
The ministers found her cast down and despondent, but hardly what they
describe as penitent, for despite their statement “that everything was
known,” they failed to elicit an avowal of conjugal unfaithfulness. The
Princess admitted appearances were against her. They might think her
culpable or not as they pleased, but she denied the actual offence _in
toto_, and nothing ever made her swerve from this position. In this she
was borne out by Knesebeck, then far away from her beloved mistress and
in prison at Springe. This lady, though examined and cross-examined and
threatened with punishment unless she told the whole truth, absolutely
denied that the Princess had been guilty with Königsmarck, though she
admitted to “a few letters and indiscretions”. Later she was examined
again, on her removal to the fortress of Schartzfels, and she still
affirmed that the Princess was innocent, and no threats of imprisonment
or torture made her swerve from her loyalty. Years later, when she had
gained her liberty and petitioned Duke George William for her
confiscated property, she did not omit to bear witness again to the
innocence of the Princess.
This, of course, opens up the much-vexed question of how far the
Princess’s love for Königsmarck went. Some there are, like Duke Antony
Ulrich, who believe the Princess to be absolutely innocent, even in
thought. This theory, however, is untenable, since both the Princess and
Knesebeck admit, at least, to indiscretions. Others there are, like the
Duchess of Orleans, who considered the Princess absolutely bad; but
their bias is manifest, and they produce no evidence in support of their
contentions. Between these two classes are the more numerous company of
witnesses, who include such eminent names as Schaumann and Köcher. These
do not believe the Princess guilty of _actual_ unfaithfulness to her
husband. Köcher says, in summing up an elaborate argument: “We shall
probably therefore hit the mark aright when we say that the Princess
wandered on the edge of an abyss by vouchsafing to a man who was a
foreigner and of loose morals not a criminal intimacy, but a confidence
which was a slight on duty and propriety”.
But it must be remembered that Köcher[235] and Schaumann do not accept
the authenticity of the letters, which they had never examined and
have never seen, save for the few fragments published by Palmblad,
confused as to the cypher and the dates, and possibly a stray letter
in one or two essays. There remains another authority, Count
Schulenburg-Klosterrode, who believes firmly in the authenticity of
the letters, and yet agrees with Köcher that the love between the
Princess and Königsmarck was never consummated. With all the good-will
in the world, it is not easy to agree with this view, believing as we
do in the genuineness of the letters, and when we remember the fiery
passion breathed through them, the stolen meetings, the utter laxity
of the morals of the time, and last, but not least, the harshness of
the Princess’s father, who would surely never have refused to see his
only child and have condemned her to lifelong imprisonment if she had
only been guilty of “indiscretion”. When we remember all this, it must
be admitted that the evidence against her is so strong as to be almost
overwhelming. This much was certain: she loved one man and one man
only, she sacrificed everything for him, and she was faithful to her
love in life and in death. Whatever were her mistakes, she was more
sinned against than sinning.
-----
Footnote 235:
Yet Köcher knew that letters did exist, for he quotes himself the
testimony of Leibniz: “They would never have thought her so guilty at
Celle had not her letters been produced” (_Hist. Zeitschrift_, vol.
xlviii., p. 233).
-----
When Bülow and Bernstorff returned to Celle, after their interview with
the Princess at Ahlden, convinced that she was steadfast in her resolve
never to return to Hanover, and would agree to anything which would
bring about this result, short of an avowal of actual guilt, matters
were greatly simplified. The ministers of Celle were in favour of a
separation, the Hanoverian government demanded a divorce, and, as the
Princess’s attitude was utterly unyielding, Celle gave way and a divorce
was decided upon. We find Cresset about this time writing from Walsrode,
a little country town near Ahlden:—
“Our unlucky scene lies as it did, the divorce going forward, and we are
all to be quite shamed. I have been twice shooting with this Duke just
under the walls of the house where his daughter is confined. I hear she
is suddenly to be removed into the country of Hanover. Next post I will
write what I can learn of it to my Lord Duke. At present I know nothing
new. All things look tragical.”[236]
-----
Footnote 236:
Cresset’s _Despatch_, August 14, 1694. The letter which Cresset
mentions as being about to write to the Duke of Shrewsbury is not
preserved in the State Paper Office, nor indeed are any letters of his
at this time, save a few fragments probably overlooked, which have
been quoted here. There is nothing bearing on the Princess or
Königsmarck. As the English envoy’s correspondence is voluminous just
before and just after the catastrophe, these letters have been
doubtless suppressed purposely: it is a pity, as they would have
thrown great light on this vexed question.
-----
[Illustration: THE CASTLE OF AHLDEN AS IT IS TO-DAY.]
The ministers of Hanover and Celle held several conferences at Engesen,
where a plan was drawn up for the divorce of the Princess. It was
resolved to form a special Consistorial Court to try the divorce case,
and care was taken that everything should be done in due order and with
an appearance of legality. Königsmarck’s name was not to be so much as
mentioned; indeed, how could it be mentioned when his avengers were
knocking so loudly at the gates? Taking it for granted that the divorce
would be decreed, the following arrangements were then made between the
Elector and the Duke of Celle for the Princess’s safe keeping and
maintenance:—
George William agreed to keep the Princess guarded at some magistrate’s
house in _his_ country, and to settle on her the magistrate’s house at
Ahlden as her permanent residence in case of his demise. The retinue and
personal attendants and guard which were to attend the Princess were
arranged, and it was agreed that no changes should be made without the
approval of both the Elector of Hanover and the Duke of Celle. The
Princess was to be allowed a sufficient establishment for her
maintenance and that of her suite. Ernest Augustus was to allow her a
yearly sum of eight thousand thalers (£1,200), and he agreed to raise
this sum to £1,800 when her father died, and yet again by another £800
when she had completed her fortieth year—a sum total of £2,600 per
annum, not a bad allowance when we consider the value of money in those
days and the circumstances of the case. The Princess, moreover, was
heiress to considerable property from her mother, which would remain
untouched. In return, Duke George William conceded certain modifications
of his daughter’s marriage settlement, whereby the freehold lands he had
bequeathed to her should pass directly to her son, Prince George
Augustus, and the administration of the same should pass into the hands
of the Electoral Prince. On only one point were the brothers unable to
agree. Duke George William proposed that the love-letters of the
Princess (the incriminating correspondence found in Königsmarck’s rooms)
should be sent to Celle, after the divorce, to be burnt, or they should
be burnt at Hanover in the presence of the ministers of Hanover and
Celle. This suggestion found no favour with Ernest Augustus, who put the
matter off for the time being. Doubtless he feared that his brother
might relent at some future time towards his daughter, and he did not
wish to lose this damning evidence against the Princess.[237]
-----
Footnote 237:
Some of these letters are probably those now at Berlin; others
probably at Gmünden.
-----
Thus it will be seen that everything was settled before the Divorce
Court assembled, and the verdict was treated as a foregone conclusion.
The ministers drew out instructions for the judges and attorneys, and
watched over the trial that ensued step by step.
The agreement above mentioned was signed by Duke George William and the
Elector Ernest Augustus on September 1, 1694, and a few days later the
Princess was brought over from Ahlden to the magistrate’s house at
Lauenau, in Hanoverian territory, so as to be nearer the scene of the
trial. Even this slight change was not effected without difficulty, for
the Princess viewed with terror any return to the Principality of
Hanover; but she was pacified by being told that as soon as the divorce
was decreed she would be allowed to return to the territory of Celle—she
believed as a free woman. This made her all the more impatient for a
divorce and the more ready to concede anything and everything demanded
by her enemies. The story that the Princess, shortly after her arrival
at Lauenau, took the sacrament in the presence of the Hanoverian
ministers, solemnly vowing her innocence and daring Countess Platen to
do the same, is very dramatic, but lacks confirmation. It would
contradict the evidence of the few genuine documents still remaining,
which go to show that the whole policy of the ministers of both courts
was to hush up any allusion to a criminal intrigue.
Everything having been now arranged, the tribunal of the Divorce Court
began its solemn farce. The court was composed of a president and eight
judges, four lay and four spiritual, in equal numbers from Celle and
Hanover respectively. Privy Councillor Albert Philip von Bussche was
appointed President by both Hanover and Celle. All these judges were
sworn by a special oath: “To judge in this matter uprightly and honestly
to the best of our understanding, in accordance with godly and worldly
rights and the custom of the Christian Evangelical Church, and not to
let ourselves be led away or hindered by anything, whatever its name may
be”. A goodly oath indeed; and yet it had little meaning for most of
them, though some of the judges had qualms of conscience and did not
prove quite the docile tools they were expected to be.
On September 20 the Divorce Court assembled at Hanover and received the
suit of the Electoral Prince, who prayed for a dissolution of marriage
on the ground of his wife’s wilful desertion and refusal to grant him
his connubial rights. This was duly set forth in a formal document
presented to the court by the Prince’s attorney. After considering it
for two days the court sent it to the Princess at Lauenau, and requested
a reply, leaving it to her option to decide whether she would submit her
answer in writing, or make it orally by word of mouth to a deputation of
the court. This was a fair proceeding, and guarded against the
possibility of undue influence, but it did not agree with the
ministerial programme; so the Government refused to sanction the
alternative of an oral reply, lest the Princess might express herself
too freely to the deputation. Marshal von Bülow, of Celle, and Thies,
the attorney, were therefore directed by George William to go to Lauenau
instead, and obtain a written declaration from the Princess in harmony
with the policy already decided upon. Bülow was instructed, so Duke
George William’s directions read, “to seek an opportunity to speak to
the Princess alone, and endeavour to remind her to take pains before
everything else to express her answer in such terms as to give no
possible further cause for exasperation [_aigreur_]”. Further, Thies was
to be introduced to the Princess in order to learn from her directly
“whether she was agreeable to his superseding her attorney’s functions,
which, being the case, the Princess would accede to him full powers”.
Then the Princess “would furnish him with materials out of which he was
to formulate her defence; and she was, among other matters, to declare
positively whether she would, or could, ever again prevail upon herself
to return to her consort, the Electoral Prince, and, if not, whether she
would be content to accept the verdict of the court on the matter”.
The result of this mission was exactly what might have been expected.
The Princess was quite incapable of looking after her interests,
especially in this case, where they seemed to run counter to her
inclinations, for she desired the divorce above all things, and fully
believed that when it was obtained and she had obeyed her father’s and
her uncle’s wishes she might safely trust to their indulgence and
generosity. Subsequent events proved that she was wrong, but at the time
her policy seemed the right one. She authorised the attorney to act for
her as directed, and without ado signed a written declaration, declaring
in most emphatic language she would never again cohabit with her
husband.
The Princess’s declaration was withheld from the Divorce Court until it
had been examined by the ministers. Vice-Chancellor Hugo of Hanover
expressed himself dissatisfied with the wording, and he feared the
Divorce Court would not be content. He therefore drafted another, more
formally worded, to be submitted to the Princess.
As this document was in substance the same, the ducal brothers, who were
then hunting at Göhre, professed indifference as to which should be
presented; but Bülow put in a plea for the consideration of the Princess
on the ground that she might be confused by having to sign another
declaration. Bernstorff, always the enemy of the Princess, favoured the
draft of Hugo, because it would have the effect “of inducing the court
to imagine that the Princess was the much more self-willed and not to be
overruled”; and he went on to write to Hugo in favour of his draft,
saying: “It shows a more rebellious spirit [_contumacia_], and the court
will on that account have all the more cause to give a verdict of
divorce”. The matter was referred to Hugo, who naturally decided in
favour of his own draft. Thies, the Princess’s attorney, was then
directed to go again to Lauenau and obtain the Princess’s signature to
this second document. He was instructed to exhort, “in a general way,”
the Princess to a reconciliation with her husband; but that the
admonition was regarded as a mere form may be gathered from the fact
that we find Bernstorff writing: “Although he [Thies] might bring the
most powerful arguments to bear on the Princess’s case in order to talk
her over to return to her husband, he would effect nothing whatever”.
Bernstorff’s surmise was quite right; the Princess was only too ready to
play into the hands of her enemies, and Thies found her most impatient
at the delay. She anxiously asked if the suit would result in a divorce.
Her attorney replied that a definite declaration was necessary, the
other not having been definite enough. She then took a pen and
resolutely signed the new document laid before her, which was worded as
follows:—
“Now we [Sophie Dorothea] give the circumstances mentioned by the
attorney of our Consort Louis, in the charge of desertion brought
against us, their due place; but we cannot refrain from again adding
that we adhere persistently to the resolution, once drawn up and
constantly affirmed, that we will not, and cannot, ever again live in
conjugal relations with our Consort Louis, Duke of Brunswick and
Lüneburg, Prince Electoral, and we will therefore accept the verdict of
the court on the matter”.
Thies was an honourable and conscientious man, and had his doubts as to
the wisdom of the suicidal policy the Princess was pursuing. He
therefore entered upon his task of advising the Princess without seeming
to persuade; but she would not hear him. He, however, told her frankly
that the result of her declaration would assuredly be a verdict
acquitting the Prince and allowing him to marry again, and convicting
her as the guilty party, and forbidding her to marry. The Princess
answered firmly: “In spite of this, my determination is unalterable”.
Then Thies added a clause to the Princess’s declaration stating that:—
“In spite of the fact that all suitable and urgent advice from higher
authorities has been given to the Princess, and pressed finally by
myself as her appointed attorney, yet it must, to my great regret, be
stated that nothing more could be extracted from Her Serene Highness,
except the written declaration enclosed with this”.
These documents were then sent to the Divorce Court.
Despite all these elaborate stratagems and precautions, the very thing
happened which the ministers wished to avoid. The Divorce Court refused
to be satisfied with the written declaration, and insisted on the
necessity of an oral hearing. To this end a deputation of the judges was
sent to Lauenau, that they might hear the Princess’s declaration from
her own lips and judge whether any undue influence had been brought to
bear upon her.
The ministers of both Hanover and Celle were alarmed at this hitch in
the proceedings, and immediately took steps to prevent any untoward
results. Another Conference was summoned at Engesen on November 15.
It is notoriously difficult to save those who are bent on their own
destruction, as the Princess seemed to be; but in the meantime the
Duchess of Celle was making every effort on behalf of her daughter, and
seized on the opportunity afforded by this delay to urge some
concessions. The result was that, when the Conference met at Engesen,
Bernstorff brought forward, on the part of Duke George William, a motion
to the effect that the separation should only be a judicial one (_i.e._,
_a mensâ et thoro_); but the reason alleged—namely, that a complete
separation would be prejudicial to the children—did not make the
slightest impression on the Hanoverian ministers, who saw in this the
hand of the Duchess of Celle. They replied with some logic, that if a
separation of that kind was all that had been desired, it might have
been arranged by the parties themselves without the services of the
Divorce Court; and to make such a change so late in the day would cast a
slight not only on the Electoral Prince, but on the House of Hanover.
Seeing they would not give way, Bernstorff changed his tactics, and put
in a plea that the verdict might at least not be made public. But the
Hanoverian ministers declared that such a course would lead to
prejudicial interpretations; and the Conference broke up without coming
to an agreement. The Elector of Hanover strongly supported his
ministers, and sent to Celle the following communication:—
“That because, as is well known, it was decided after careful
consideration of the facts to bring forward a suit on the charge of
desertion, that the honour and high reputation of the Electoral Prince
and the Princess herself and their children might be guarded, and also
of that of our most gracious selves, their parents, so the publication
of the verdict is all the more unavoidable, as otherwise there would be
every opportunity of interpreting the cause of the separation to the
injury and prejudice of the persons just mentioned on both sides”.
And the argument went on to say that it would be equally prejudicial to
the children. Thereupon Duke George William gave way, and the Duchess of
Celle was beaten.
This interlude also goes to prove that the verdict of the Divorce Court
was already settled by the higher powers before the deputation from the
judges went to Lauenau to admonish the Princess. The deputation
consisted of two only, Molanus and the President Bussche. Molanus
entered upon his task in an earnest and honourable spirit. Bussche, who
was in the secret confidence of the ministers, contented himself with
platitudes of the commonest order. Molanus, who was a worthy divine,
treated the Princess to a long dissertation on the duties of holy
matrimony, quoting to her the First Epistle of Saint Paul to the
Corinthians vii. 10. Coming down from these heights, he proceeded to
point out to her, as her attorney had already done, that, as the
culpable party, she would not be permitted to make a second marriage,
though the privilege would be allowed to the other side. He also
reminded her of what her children would lose when deprived of their
mother, and expatiated on the grandeur of the position which the
Princess was abandoning. He suggested that the dispute should be
reconsidered under the influence of fervent prayer, at which a minister
of religion might assist. But his admonitions and his prayers made
absolutely no impression on the Princess, who declared that she could
better serve the Almighty by remaining alone, and she was thankful to
have the opportunity of withdrawing from the world. She insisted that
under no circumstances whatever would she return to the court of
Hanover, or to the Electoral Prince, her husband. In short she
reaffirmed verbally and with emphasis the declaration she had already
made in writing. It is true that she had no alternative, for everything
had been settled beforehand; but there is no reason to suppose that she
was acting under compulsion, as all along she had retained a fixed
desire to be free of Hanover at all costs. Yet, even so, the Divorce
Court refused to be satisfied. They were conscious of the doubtful
legality of the proceedings, and they were desirous of guarding their
honour and saving appearances as far as possible. So the Princess had,
for the third time, to sign a written declaration to the effect that:—
“We adhere firmly to the resolution already expressed by us in writing,
that our attorney shall not oppose anything further that may be urged
against us, but shall adhere to our previous resolution, and strive to
bring the matter to a speedy issue”.
The Divorce Court met again on December 1, and the Princess’s reply and
the report of the deputation were formally handed in. These papers were
submitted to the Prince’s attorney, and it was asked if His Highness
persisted in his suit. Two days later the Prince’s reply was handed in.
The substance of it was as follows:—
That His Highness had given this most important matter, with all the
consequences it might entail, his most careful consideration. It was
only with painful feelings he could decide to take this extreme course,
and he had left no stone unturned to bring the Princess to a better
frame of mind, and his father and father-in-law had also given
themselves personally the greatest trouble about it. But as nothing had
been effected by this means, and the issue proved that the Princess
adhered to her resolution, and her purposed desertion had been quite
clearly proved, the Prince felt bound to maintain the petition expressed
in his suit.
The sword was now ready to fall, but at the eleventh hour the Duchess of
Celle made one more effort on behalf of her daughter. We find that Duke
George William entered a request for a lightening of the intended
verdict. He took exception to the demand of the court of Hanover that
the sentence of the court should expressly forbid the Princess to marry
again, and so threatening was his tone that the judges began to hesitate
about complying with the Hanoverian orders, and the verdict was
postponed. In order to break down this opposition of the Duke of Celle,
Vice-Chancellor Hugo, who held a brief for Hanover, drew up a long legal
opinion for the direction of the Divorce Court, and sent it to
Bernstorff at Celle for approval and return. This document is very
interesting. The first part of the “opinion” deals wholly with legal
matters; the second part, which considers the peculiar arguments of the
case from the dynastic point of view of the court of Hanover, may be
quoted in full:—
“1. The Princess has given evidence of wicked intentions, of her
purposed flight from the country in secret, thereby bringing the House
into everlasting shame and disgrace. It would not have been possible for
this to occur, unless very bitter opponents who were interested in the
ruin of the House had seized the opportunity to make use of her evil
designs in their schemes.
“The House has been thereby cast into such disorder and danger as cannot
be contemplated without a shudder. We must thank the kindness of
Providence for having prevented it, and in addition consider what is to
be expected in the future from a person who has ventured already on so
desperate a scheme, and how extremely necessary it is to place not only
practical, but legal, restraints upon her, which are best carried out by
expressly forbidding her again to marry: there will thus be the less
occasion for cavilling.
“2. The judges forming the deputation have reported how strongly the
Princess desired the sentence of separation and what joy she manifested
on learning that it might soon be passed. It may be conjectured that if
she had been of a good disposition she would have been deeply grieved at
causing her own father so much pain, and bringing such injury on those
who showered kindness and affection on her. She ought further to
consider how she will fall from her high position. She ought also to
show compassion for her children. But when a mother displays joy over
her separation from her children, we may gather what is to be expected
of her.[238]
-----
Footnote 238:
But Sophie Dorothea thought she would be allowed to see her children
occasionally after the divorce. She had no idea that her retirement
involved perpetual imprisonment.
-----
“It is known, that before she conceived these evil designs, she had on
different occasions expressed a longing to be a marchioness of France
(these are people of no particular worth) rather than Princess of
Brunswick-Lüneburg, for then she would be able to amuse herself better,
whereas she was at present as good as a prisoner. Such a disposition is
easily concealed for a time, but difficult to overcome. What can we
opine from so intense a craving for a separation except that her
intention is to seek some such position as that she has already hoped
for? And such a course is all the more to be expected of her should we
not refuse her the right to marry again in the judicial verdict.”
Köcher (in whose article in _Sybel’s Historische Zeitschrift_ this is
quoted) goes on to say: “In place of the third and fourth arguments,
which are crossed out in the copy before me, the following is
interpolated in Hugo’s handwriting: ‘There are still more serious
considerations, which, however, cannot be well discussed’. The original
words, however, which can be deciphered pretty clearly under the thick
lines, are:—
“3. She has an indulgent mother, who does not grasp the position of
affairs, nor judge of them correctly, and who shows peculiarly little
affection for this Electoral House.
“4. The Princess looks forward to a very large fortune from her
mother. Her father also is not likely to forget her.
“5. [In short] We must be on our guard against the enemies of the
House, and give them as little occasion as possible for gaining a hold
on us.
“6. [To much the same effect, with arguments _ad Deum_ thrown in.]”
The “opinion” concludes with an apostrophe to the judges:—
“This most lofty House has placed its safety and dignity in your
hands, my lord judges, confiding in your prudence. Your country and
innocent people have exposed the dangers assailing them to you, and
demand your aid for their security,” etc., etc.
It was therefore mainly the fear of the influence of the Duchess of
Celle, as well as doubt of the vacillating spirit of Duke George
William, which made the Hanoverian government determined to bind the
heiress of Celle as tightly as possible, and this document shows how
anxious they were. For some days no answer was returned from Celle, and
Hugo wrote two or three times, begging for a reply. It was the final
duel between the Duchess of Celle and Bernstorff, with Duke George
William between; and the Duchess got the worst of it, for after
considerable hesitation, the Duke gave way.
It is not possible to follow the exact order of the proceedings; but
that the Duchess was beaten is obvious from the fact that on December 15
Thies handed in the final reply of the Princess, and as he repeated
again the Princess’s declaration we must conclude that an understanding
had been arrived at. The verdict, which was delivered immediately, shows
that the Princess’s enemies had won. It runs as follows:—
“In the matrimonial suit of the illustrious Prince George Louis,
Electoral Prince of Hanover, against his consort, the illustrious
Princess Sophie Dorothea, etc., we, constituted president and judges of
the Matrimonial Court of the Electorate and Duchy of Brunswick-Lüneburg,
declare and pronounce judgment. After attempts have been tried and have
failed to settle the matter amicably, and in accordance with the
documents and verbal declarations of the Princess and other detailed
circumstances, we agree that her continued denial of matrimonial duty
and cohabitation is well founded, and consequently that it is to be
considered as an intentional desertion. In consequence whereof we have
considered sentence, and now declare the ties of matrimony to be
entirely dissolved and annulled. Since in similar cases of desertion it
has been permitted to the innocent party to re-marry, while the other is
forbidden, the same judicial power will be exercised in the present
instance in favour of His Serene Highness the Electoral Prince.
“(Published in the Consistorial Court of Hanover, December 28, 1694.)”
This sentence was signed by the president and all the judges, and
delivered to the Princess at Lauenau on December 31. The same day—the
last day of that evil year—she formally signified her acceptance of the
verdict.
The result of the trial was duly communicated to the representatives of
Hanover and Celle at foreign courts, and from that time the Princess was
politically dead. Her name was never mentioned in the Electoral court of
Hanover; it was struck out of the Church prayers, and expunged from
official documents. Thrust out from the Hanoverian court, she found her
father’s court also closed to her, and she entered upon her long
captivity of thirty-two years—a captivity from which death alone was to
bring release.