"We hereby are pleased to create Olive of c.u.mberland d.u.c.h.ess of Lancaster, and to grant our royal authority for Olive, our said niece, to bear and use the t.i.tle and arms of Lancaster, should she be in existence at the period of our royal demise.
"Given at our Palace of St. James"s, May 17, 1773.
CHATHAM.
J. DUNNING."
A little before this time (in 1772) Dr. Wilmot had been presented to the living of Barton-on-the-Heath, in Warwickshire, and thither his grand-daughter Olive went with him, pa.s.sing as his niece, and was educated by him. When she was seventeen or eighteen years old she was sent back to London, and there became acquainted with Mr. de Serres, an artist and a member of the Royal Academy, whom she married in 1791.
The union was not a happy one, and a separation took place; but, before it occurred, Mrs. Ryves, the elder pet.i.tioner, was born at Liverpool in 1797. After the separation Mrs. Serres and her daughter lived together, and the former gained some celebrity both as an author and an artist. They moved in good society, were visited by various persons of distinction, and in 1805 were taken to Brighton and introduced to the Prince of Wales, who afterwards became George IV.
Two years later (in 1807) Dr. Wilmot died at the mature age of eighty-five, and the papers in his possession relating to the marriage, as well as those which had been deposited with Lord Chatham, who died in 1778, pa.s.sed into the hands of Lord Warwick. Mrs. Serres during all this time had no knowledge of the secret of her birth, until, in 1815, Lord Warwick, being seriously ill, thought it right to communicate her history to herself and to the Duke of Kent, and to place the papers in her hands.
Having brought his case thus far, the counsel for the pet.i.tioners was about to read some doc.u.ments, purporting to be signed by the Duke of Kent, as declarations of the legitimacy of Mrs. Ryves, but it was pointed out by the court that he was not ent.i.tled to do so, as, according to his own contention, the Duke of Kent was not a legitimate member of the royal family. Therefore, resigning this part of his case, he went on to say that Mrs. Serres, up to the time of her death in 1834, and the pet.i.tioners subsequently, had made every effort to have the doc.u.ments on which they founded their claim examined by some competent tribunal. They now relied upon the doc.u.ments, upon oral evidence, and upon the extraordinary likeness of Olive Wilmot to the royal family, to prove their allegations.
As far as the portraits of Mrs. Serres were concerned, the court intimated that they could not possibly be evidence of legitimacy, and refused to allow them to be shown to the jury. The doc.u.ments were declared admissible, and an expert was called to p.r.o.nounce upon their authenticity. He expressed a very decided belief that they were genuine, but, when cross-examined, stammered and ended by throwing doubts on the signatures of "J. Dunning" and "Chatham," who frequently appeared as attesting witnesses. The doc.u.ments themselves were exceedingly numerous, and contained forty-three so-called signatures of Dr. Wilmot, sixteen of Lord Chatham, twelve of Mr. Dunning, twelve of George III., thirty-two of Lord Warwick, and eighteen of the Duke of Kent.
The following are some of the most remarkable papers:--
"I solemnly certify that I privately was married to the princess of Poland, the sister of the King of Poland. But an unhappy family difference induced us to keep our union secret. One dear child bless"d myself, who married the Duke of c.u.mberland, March 4th, 1767, and died in the prime of life of a broken heart, December 5th, 1774, in France.
J. WILMOT."
"_January_ 1, 1780."
There were two other certificates to the same effect, and the fourth was in the following terms:--
"I solemnly certify that I married the Princess of Poland, and had legitimate issue Olive, my dear daughter, married March 4th, 1767, to Henry F., Duke of c.u.mberland, brother of His Majesty George the Third, who have issue Olive, my supposed niece, born at Warwick, April 3d, 1772.
G.R. J. WILMOT.
ROBT. WILMOT.
CHATHAM."
"_May_ 23, 1775.
"As a testimony that my daughter was not at all unworthy of Her Royal Consort the Duke of c.u.mberland, Lord Warwick solemnly declares that he returned privately from the continent to offer her marriage; but seeing how greatly she was attached to the Duke of c.u.mberland, he witnessed her union with His Royal Highness, March 4th, 1767.
Witness, J. WILMOT.
WARWICK ROBT. WILMOT."
"We solemnly certify in this prayer-book that Olive, the lawful daughter of Henry Frederick Duke of c.u.mberland and Olive his wife, bears a large mole on the right side, and another crimson mark upon the back, near the neck; and that such child was baptised as Olive Wilmot, at St. Nicholas Church, Warwick, by command of the King (George the Third) to save her royal father from the penalty of bigamy, &c.
J. WILMOT.
WARWICK.
ROBT. WILMOT."
"I hereby certify that George, Prince of Wales, married Hannah Wheeler, _alias_ Lightfoot, April 17th, 1759; but, from finding the latter to be her right name, I solemnized the union of the said parties a second time, May the 27th, 1759, as the certificate affixed to this paper will confirm."
Witness (torn). "J. WILMOT."
"Not to be acted upon until the king"s demise."
"With other sacred papers to Lord Warwick"s care for Olive, my grand-daughter, when I am no more. J.W."
"MY DEAR OLIVE,--As the undoubted heir of Augustus, King of Poland, your rights will find aid of the Sovereigns that you are allied to by blood, should the family of your father act unjustly, but may the great Disposer of all things direct otherwise. The Princess of Poland, your grandmother, I made my lawful wife, and I do solemnly attest that you are the last of that ill.u.s.trious blood. May the Almighty guide you to all your distinctions of birth. Mine has been a life of trial, but not of crime!
J. WILMOT."
"_January_, 1791."
"If this pacquet meets your eye let not ambition destroy the honour nor integrity of your nature. Remember that others will be dependent on your conduct, the injured children, perhaps, of the good and excellent consort of your king--I mean the fruit of his Majesties first marriage--who may have been consigned to oblivion like yourself; but I hope that is not exactly the case; but as I was innocently instrumental to their being, by solemnizing the ill-destined union of power and innocence, it is but an act of conscientious duty to leave to your care the certificates that will befriend them hereafter! The English nation will receive my last legacy as a proof of my affection, and when corruption has desolated the land, and famine and its attendant miseries create civil commotion, I solemnly command you to make known to the Parliament the first lawful marriage of the king, as when you are in possession of the papers, Lord Warwick has been sacredly and affectionately by myself entrusted with, their const.i.tutional import will save the country! Should the necessity exist for their operation, consult able and patriotic men, and they will instruct you. May Heaven bless their and your efforts in every sense of the subject, and so shall my rejoiced spirit with approving love (if so permitted) feel an exultation inseparable from the prosperity of England.
J. WILMOT."
"GEORGE R.
"We are hereby pleased to recommend Olive, our niece, to our faithful Lords and Commons for protection and support, should she be in existence at the period of our royal demise; such being Olive Wilmot, the supposed daughter of Robert Wilmot of Warwick.
J. DUNNING.
ROBT. WILMOT. _January 7th_, 1780."
Mrs. Ryves, the pet.i.tioner, was the princ.i.p.al witness called. She gave her evidence very clearly and firmly, and when offered a seat in the witness-box declined it, saying that she was not tired, and could stand for ever to protect the honour of her family. She said she recollected coming from Liverpool to London with her father and mother when she was only two years and a half old, and narrated how she lived with them conjointly up to the date of the separation, and with her mother afterwards. It was then proposed to ask her some questions as to declarations made by Hannah Lightfoot, the reputed wife of George III., but the Lord Chief-Justice interposed with the remark that there was no evidence before the court as to the marriage of the king with this woman. The pet.i.tioner"s counsel referred to the two following doc.u.ments:--
"_April_ 17, 1759.
"The marriage of these parties was this day duly solemnized at Kew Chapel, according to the rites and ceremonies of the Church of England, by myself, J. WILMOT.
GEORGE P.
HANNAH."
"Witness to this marriage, W. PITT.
ANNE TAYLER."
"_May_ 27, 1759.
"This is to certify that the marriage of these parties, George, Prince of Wales, to Hannah Lightfoot, was duly solemnized this day, according to the rites and ceremonies of the Church of England, at their residence at Peckham, by myself, J. WILMOT.
GEORGE GUELPH.
HANNAH LIGHTFOOT."
"Witness to the marriage of these parties, WILLIAM PITT.
ANNE TAYLER."
Upon this, the Lord Chief-Justice again interposed, saying, "The Court is, as I understand, asked solemnly to declare, on the strength of two certificates, coming I know not whence, written on two sc.r.a.ps of paper, that the marriage--the only marriage of George III. which the world believes to have taken place--between his Majesty and Queen Charlotte, was an invalid marriage, and consequently that all the sovereigns who have sat on the throne since his death, including her present Majesty, were not ent.i.tled to sit on the throne. That is the conclusion to which the court is asked to come upon these two rubbishy pieces of paper--one signed "George P," and the other "George Guelph."
I believe them to be gross and rank forgeries. The court has no difficulty in coming to the conclusion--even a.s.suming that the signatures had that character of genuineness which they have not--that what is a.s.serted in these doc.u.ments has not the slightest foundation in fact."
Lord Chief-Baron Pollock expressed his entire concurrence in the opinion of the Lord Chief-Justice. After explaining that it was the province of the court to decide any question of fact, on the truth or falsehood of which the admissibility of a piece of evidence was dependent, he declared that these doc.u.ments did not at all satisfy him that George III. was ever married before his marriage to Queen Charlotte; that the signatures were not proved to be even like the king"s handwriting; and that the addition of the word "Guelph" to one of them was satisfactory proof that the king, at that date Prince of Wales, did not write it--it being a matter of common information that the princes of the royal family only use the Christian name.
Sir James Wilde also a.s.sented, characterizing the certificates as "very foolish forgeries," but adding that he was not sorry that the occasion had arisen for bringing them into a court of justice, where their authenticity could be inquired into by evidence, as the existence of doc.u.ments of this sort was calculated to set abroad a number of idle stories for which there was probably not the slightest foundation.
The evidence as to Hannah Lightfoot being thus excluded, the examination of Mrs. Ryves, the pet.i.tioner, was continued. She remembered proceeding to Brighton, in 1805, where herself and her mother were introduced to the Prince of Wales, afterwards George IV.
The prince had subsequently many conversations with them, and had bestowed many kindnesses on them. She knew the Duke of Kent from a very early age--he being a constant visitor at their house from 1805 till the time of his death. In the spring of 1815 Lord Warwick"s disclosure was made, and the Duke of Kent acknowledged the relationship even before he saw the proofs which were at the time at Warwick Castle. Thither the earl went to procure them, at the expense of Mrs. Serres, he being at this time so poor that he had not the means to go; indeed, Mrs. Ryves a.s.serted that sometimes the earl was so terribly impoverished that he had not even a sheet of note-paper to write upon.
His mission was successful; and on his return he produced three sets of papers, one of which he said he had received from Dr. Wilmot, another set from Lord Chatham, and the third set had been always in his possession. One packet was marked "Not to be opened until after the king"s death," and accordingly the seal was not broken; but the others were opened, and the papers they contained were read aloud in the presence of the Duke of Kent, who expressed himself perfectly satisfied that the signatures of George III. were in his father"s handwriting, and declared that, as the Earl of Warwick might die at any moment, he would thenceforward take upon himself the guardianship of Mrs. Serres and her daughter. The sealed packet was opened in the latter part of 1819, and Mrs. Ryves, when questioned as to its contents, pointed out doc.u.ments for the most part relating to the marriage of Dr. Wilmot and the Polish princess. Among other doc.u.ments was the following:--
"Olive, provided the royal family acknowledge you, keep secret all the papers which are connected with the king"s first marriage; but should the family"s desertion (be) manifested (should you outlive the king) then, and only then, make known all the state secrets which I have left in the Earl of Warwick"s keeping for your knowledge. Such papers I bequeath to you for your sole and uncontrolled property, to use and act upon as you deem fit, according to expediency of things. Receive this as the sacred will of JAMES WILMOT."
"_June --st_, 1789.
Witness, WARWICK."
Mrs. Ryves maintained that up to the moment of the opening of the sealed packet her mother had believed herself to be the daughter of Robert Wilmot and the niece of Dr. Wilmot, and she did not know of any Olive Wilmot except her aunt, who was the wife of Mr. Payne. When the first information as to her birth was given to her by Lord Warwick, she supposed herself to be the daughter of the Duke of c.u.mberland by the Olive Wilmot who was afterwards Mrs. Payne, and had no idea that her mother was the daughter of Dr. Wilmot, and was another person altogether. There was a great consultation as to opening the packet before the king"s death; but the Duke of Kent persisted in his desire to know its contents, and the seals were broken. The Duke of Kent died on the 26th of January, 1820, and George III. in the following week, on the 30th of the same month.