254

CHAPTER XXIV.

Attachments of the Princes-Prince of Wales-Duke of York -Duke of Clarence-The picture of the felicity of Bushy— Its interruption-The scene at Cheltenham-And Mrs. Jordan's letters on the separation-The result in a generous provision for Mrs. Jordan and the children.

BEFORE I can possibly touch upon any disagreement between the Royal Duke and Mrs. Jordan, it seems necessary to look at the position of some other members of his illustrious house, and enquire how far it was calculated to fulfil the wishes of their venerable parent, their condition in the state, or the reasonable expectations of the public. As I consider the union of the Prince of Wales with his cousin, the Princess Caroline of Brunswick, to have disposed for ever of the question as to Mrs. Fitzherbert, nothing beyond an idle curiosity can exist, to know whether, with benevolent intention, in any form, a ceremony of marriage, known at the time, by both, to be invalid, passed between the parties. I always considered Horne Tooke's pam

phlet on the subject to be designedly mischievous. He calls the lady in question, throughout, her Royal Highness the Princess of Wales; talks of the marriage as positive; and compliments her Royal Highness on her exalted station, and the public on her eminent virtues-and at the same time points out, with peculiar industry, the provisions of the Act, which constitutes the marrying of a papist a forfeiture of the Crown of these realms. The degrading notion, that there is an impropriety in the marriage with a subject; in other words, "that a beautiful English woman is unworthy to be the companion of an English prince, is a ridiculous phantom, imported into this land only with the House of Hanover." Assuming the marriage to be indubitable, and that the lady in question was a papist, he thus boldly and characteristically expresses himself. "I should be more than willing, even anxious, to barter the papist marriage for the responsibility of counsellors, and the independence of the representative body; being much more easily contented to trust the Sovereign with a PAPIST WIFE, than with a corrupt PARLIAMENT To be sure nor would his trust be any consider

able burthen to him with such a parliament as HE fancied incorrupt, opposed to every thing like rank and pre-eminence, and before whom monarchs and nobles would be as dust in the balance.

One of his best sophisms is, the utterly refusing to believe that any DISAVOWAL of the marriage in question ever was or could be given from authority. "I consider," says he, "the story of a disavowal to be itself an additional slander on a much misunderstood and misrepresented young man. I have no doubt (for he is young, and a prince) that some things (though I know them not) might possibly be changed for the better in his conduct. But I will not believe that at any time, and least of all in the moment and manner as reported, such a disavowal (be the marriage true or false,) or any thing tending to lessen the character of the lady, could possibly be authorised by him. No, I will never believe it, because I remember very well what a half-civilized barbarian [PETER the GREAT] replied to his uncivilized counsellors, who advised him to give up a MAN, not a WOMAN, to the extreme necessity of his situation. No,' replied the Prince; I can resign my dominions, even up

to the walls of my metropolis; for in happier circumstances they may hereafter be recovered; but the forfeiture of HONOUR in a sovereign can never be retrieved."

The reported compromise-" We will pay your debts; we will complete Carlton House, but we cannot augment your INCOME, until you are married." UNTIL you are married! What a picture of meanness and degeneracy does this report exhibit! Administration and opposition concurring in nothing but unblushingly to palm a falsehood on the world. The conduct on neither side will bear the honest reasoning of a plain mind. You will not augment the income-you think it then sufficient. If sufficient, the debts should not have been contracted. If they should not have been contracted they should not be paid. Is there any thing defective in this short argument? Perhaps not, but it is too rigorous; it suits better the coldness of a judge, than the affection of a parent--I think so too. But his Majesty was a son before he was a father. He therefore refuses to believe that the Ministers seriously can be authorized to discharge the debts of the present Prince of Wales,

while those of his grandfather, FREDERICK, forty years standing, remain unpaid.

This is indeed dexterous-but enough has been said to shew the Prince's situation.

I remember Sheridan's once stating in the House, from authority, that, whatever had been the errors of a certain lady in point of faith, she adhered to them no longer," a declaration entirely nugatory, if the nation could never be affected by the consequences of her opinions. The tone, too, assumed by that lady, when, at her own instance, a choice had been made, by a great personage, which she disposed of almost as soon as it was made, (I allude to Mrs. Crouch,) seemed to indicate power as well as caprice, in one who must be propitiated, for sundry weighty reasons. But this had passed away, and however deeply it might offend the revered monarch, it had the apology, at first, of nature and passion, which did not equally sanction the long welcome afforded to every political opponent of that parent's government.

The Duke of York, the King's favourite son, had, with the full concurrence of his family, married the Princess Royal of Prussia; thus preceding