George"s Chapel, Mayfair, published in 1889 by the Harleian Society, Hannah Lightfoot married Isaac Axford, of St. Martin"s, Ludgate, at Keith"s Chapel on December 11, 1753. Therefore, her intrigue with George must have taken place when he was fifteen years of age!
So far as "The Monthly Magazine" is concerned the discussion ceased in 1822, but a new point was raised two years later in "An Historical Fragment relative to her late Majesty Queen Caroline," for, according to this work, Hannah Lightfoot had married not Axford, but the Prince of Wales. "The Queen (Caroline) at this time, laboured under a very curious and, to me unaccountable, species of delusion. She fancied herself in reality neither a queen nor a wife. She believed his present Majesty to have been actually married to Mrs. Fitzherbert; and she as fully believed that his late Majesty George the Third was married to Miss Hannah Lightfoot, the beautiful Quakeress, previous to his marriage with Queen Charlotte; and as that lady did not die until after the birth of the present King and his Royal Highness the Duke of York, her Majesty really considered the Duke of Clarence the true heir to the throne."
The marriage of Hannah Lightfoot and the Prince of Wales is insisted upon in the scurrilous "Authentic Records of the Court of England for the last Seventy Years" (which includes in its list of contents such items as "The Bigamy of George the Third" and "The Infamous and cold-blooded MURDERS of the Princess Charlotte, and of Caroline, Queen of England") and in "The Secret History of the Court of England." "The unhappy sovereign while Prince of Wales was in the daily habit of pa.s.sing through St. James"s Street and its immediate vicinity," so runs a pa.s.sage in the "Secret History." "In one of his favourite rides through that part of the town he saw a very engaging young lady, who appeared by her dress to be a member of the Society of Friends. The Prince was much struck by the delicacy and lovely appearance of this female, and for several succeeding days was observed to walk out alone.
At length the pa.s.sion of his Royal Highness arrived at such a point that he felt his happiness depended upon receiving the lady in marriage.
Every individual in his immediate circle or in the list of the Privy Council was very narrowly questioned by the Prince, though in an indirect manner, to ascertain who was most to be trusted, that he might secure, honourably, the possession of the object of his ardent wishes.
His Royal Highness, at last, confided his views to his next brother, Edward, Duke of York, and another person, who were the only witnesses to the _legal_ marriage of the Prince of Wales to the before-mentioned lady, Hannah Lightfoot, which took place at Curzon Street Chapel, Mayfair, in the year 1759. This marriage was productive of _issue_."
Later in the same book it is stated that George III, after his marriage with Princess Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz, reproached himself with cowardice because he had not avowed the earlier and secret union. "At this period of increased anxiety to His Majesty, Miss Lightfoot was disposed of during a temporary absence of his brother Edward, and from that time no _satisfactory_ tidings ever reached those most interested in her welfare. The only information that could be obtained was that a young gentleman, named Axford, was offered a large amount, to be paid on the consummation of his marriage with Miss Lightfoot, which offer he willingly accepted. The King was greatly distressed to ascertain the fate of his much-beloved and legally-married wife, the Quakeress, and entrusted Lord Chatham to go in disguise and endeavour to trace her abode; but the search proved fruitless." The "Secret History" contains other references to this story, and it is narrated how the King, during his madness in 1765 frequently demanded the presence of "the wife of his choice," and showed the utmost disgust when the Queen was brought to him; and how, on another occasion he is declared to have implored not to be disturbed with "retrospection of past irreparable injury." Many years later, Dr. Doran gives credence to the report that when Queen Charlotte sent for her eldest son on hearing of his marriage with Mrs.
Fitzherbert, he said, "My father would have been a happier man if he had remained true to his marriage with Hannah Lightfoot."
In "The Appeal for Royalty" (1858) there are given copies of two marriage certificates; the first dated Kew Chapel, April 17, 1759, signed "George P., Hannah"; the second "at this residence at Peckham,"
May 27, 1759, signed "George Guelph, Hannah Lightfoot;" the officiating clergyman being J. Wilmot, and the witnesses William Pitt and Anna Taylor. The same book contains also a copy of Hannah"s will.
"Hampstead, July 7, 1763.
"Provided I depart this life, I recommend my two sons and my daughter to the kind protection of their Royal Father, my husband his Majesty George III, bequeathing whatever property I may die possessed of to such dear offspring of my ill-fated marriage. In case of the death of each of my children, I give and bequeath to Olive Wilmot, the daughter of my best friend, Dr. Wilmot, whatever property I am ent.i.tled to, or possessed of at the time of my death.
Amen.
"(signed) HANNAH Regina.
"Witnesses J. DUNNING.
"WILLIAM PITT."
These doc.u.ments in "The Appeal for Royalty" have, however, been proved in a court of law to be "gross and rank forgeries," and, indeed, their authenticity can never, for a moment, have been accepted. Nor do the statements in the "Historical Fragment" concerning Queen Charlotte carry conviction, even though Bradlaugh, in his "House of Hanover," remarks that "Hannah Lightfoot died in the winter of 1764," and "in the early part of the year 1765, the King being then scarcely sane, a second ceremony of marriage with the Queen was then privately performed by the Rev. A. Wilmot at Kew Palace."
Still, there remains the fact that the statements in the "Authentic Records" and in "The Secret History" corroborate each other; but it would be strange if this were not so, for there is little doubt that, though the first was issued anonymously and the second bears upon the t.i.tle-page Lady Anne Hamilton, the real author of both was Mrs. Olivia Serres. When it is added that in all probability Mrs. Serres also wrote the "Historical Fragment" and that her daughter, Mrs. Ryves, was responsible for "The Appeal for Royalty," it is seen that in all probability the marriage of Hannah to the heir-apparent was made (and, most likely, invented) by one person only.[115]
[115] The arguments as to the authorship of the various works to which reference is made are set forth in the Appendix to Mr. Thoms"s _brochure_.
Mrs. Olivia Serres (1772-1834) was the daughter of James Wilmot, who, as stated above, claimed to have married Hannah Lightfoot and the Prince of Wales. She married in 1791 the marine painter, John Thomas Serres. She claimed in 1817 to be a natural daughter of Henry Frederick, Duke of c.u.mberland, and three years later declared herself the Duke"s legitimate daughter, when she a.s.sumed the t.i.tle of Princess Olive of c.u.mberland.
Her daughter, Lavinia Janetta Horton de Serres, afterwards Mrs. Ryves, called herself Princess Lavinia of c.u.mberland and d.u.c.h.ess of Lancaster, and published "The Appeal for Royalty" and other writings relating to her claim to the t.i.tle.
That George III may have married Hannah Lightfoot is not in itself unthinkable, for royalty has before and since allied itself to maids of low degree. George III"s brother, Henry, Duke of c.u.mberland, married Mrs. Horton, while William, Duke of Gloucester, chose for his wife the Dowager Countess of Waldegrave, and even after the pa.s.sing of the Royal Marriage Act the prince who was afterwards George IV went through the ceremony of marriage with a lady belonging to the Roman Catholic Church, thus defying the provisions of that Bill and of the Act of Settlement.
If George III married Hannah Lightfoot, then, as there was then no Royal Marriage Act, Hannah Lightfoot was Queen of England. There is, however, no evidence to establish even a justifiable suspicion of a marriage between the Prince of Wales and Hannah Lightfoot. It is incredible that the Great Commoner should have been a witness, and it is not to be believed that in disguise he sought for the girl. Still, Pitt may not have been a witness and neither with or without disguise may he have sought for Hannah, and yet the story may not be without some foundation. It must be admitted, however, that even the many statements as to an intrigue between the couple have been based upon hearsay: no one who knew Hannah during the time it is alleged she was the Prince"s mistress has spoken, and the nearest approach to direct testimony has been obtained from one who knew Axford or others who knew members of the Lightfoot or Axford families. Yet Jesse, Justin McCarthy, and other writers on George III, accept the theory of the intrigue, and without reserve, though it is in contradiction to all that is known of the young man"s character at that time. Indeed, George Scott, his tutor, told Mrs.
Calderwood that while the Prince of Wales "has the greatest temptation to gallant with the ladies, who lay themselves out in the most shameful manner to draw him in," their efforts did not attract the Prince, for he realized that "if he were not what he was they would not mind him"; and, at the period of the supposed romance Scott declared that his erstwhile pupil "has no tendency to vice, and has as yet very virtuous principles;" while further contradiction of the rumour may be found in a letter written in 1731 by George III to Lord North about his son"s entanglement with "Perdita" Robinson, "I am happy at being able to say that I never was personally engaged in such a transaction."
[Ill.u.s.tration:
_Photo by Emery Walker_
_From the painting by Sir Joshua Reynolds_
LADY SARAH LENNOX SACRIFICING TO THE MUSES]
CHAPTER VI
LADY SARAH LENNOX AND GEORGE III[116]
It is certain that the intrigue between the Prince of Wales and Hannah Lightfoot could not have been of long duration, for even before he ascended the throne it was patent to all beholders that he was deeply infatuated with Lady Sarah Lennox, the youngest daughter of Charles, second Duke of Richmond, and a great-granddaughter of the Merry Monarch.
[116] The author desires to acknowledge his indebtedness to "The Life and Letters of Lady Sarah Lennox. Edited by the Countess of Ilchester and Lord Stavordale (Murray, 1901)," and to express his thanks to Lord Ilchester, the owner of the copyright, for permission to insert several extracts from that work.
Lady Sarah had attracted the attention of George II one day when walking in Kensington Gardens by breaking away from her nurse or governess--she was but five years old--and addressing him without ceremony: "_Comment vous portez vous, Monsieur le roi? Vous avez une grande et belle maison ici, n"est pas?_" Her audacity pleased the sovereign, and he saw her frequently until 1751, when she was sent to Ireland to her aunt, Lady Kildare, with whom she remained until she was thirteen. Then she was placed in the care of Lady Caroline Fox[117] and not long afterwards the King, in spite of her youth, invited his favourite to court, where, however, he played and joked with her as if she was still a little child. The unexpected treatment embarra.s.sed her; she could find nothing to say, and shyly kept her eyes on the ground, whereupon the King turned from her, saying, "Pooh! she"s quite stupid." The young Prince of Wales was "struck with admiration and pity" at this sight of beauty in distress, and then and there, we are told, fell in love--thus showing an appreciation of good looks that was not common with the Georges.
[117] Afterwards the wife of Henry Fox, first Baron Holland.
Lady Sarah, who was not fifteen when she went to Court in November, 1759, was indeed, alike according to her portraits and to all contemporary chroniclers, a most lovely girl. "Her beauty is not easily described otherwise than by saying she had the finest complexion, most beautiful hair, and prettiest person that ever was seen, with a sprightly and fine air, a pretty mouth, and remarkably fine teeth, and excess of bloom in her cheeks, little eyes," said her uncle, Henry Fox.
"This is not describing her, for her great beauty was a peculiarity of countenance that made her at the same time different from and prettier than any other girl I ever saw."[118] Walpole is quite as enthusiastic about her charms in a letter to George Montagu, written in January, 1761. "There was a play at Holland House, acted by children; not all children, for Lady Sarah Lennox and Lady Susan Strangways played the women. It was "Jane Sh.o.r.e." Charles Fox was Hastings. The two girls were delightful and acted with so much nature, that they appeared the very things they represented. Lady Sarah was more beautiful than you can conceive; her very awkwardness gave an air of truth to the sham of the part, and the antiquity of the time, kept up by the dress, which was taken out of Montfaucon. Lady Susan was dressed from Jane Seymour. I was more struck with the last scene between the two women than ever I was when I have seen it on the stage. When Lady Sarah was in white, with her hair about her ears, and on the ground, no Magdalen of Correggio was half so lovely and expressive."
[118] _Lord Holland"s Memoir_ in _The Life and Letters of Lady Sarah Lennox_.
After the death of his grandfather, George III made no effort to hide the state of his feelings. Of course, the Princess Dowager came to know of her son"s attachment to Lady Sarah, and she and Lord Bute were aghast at the notion of the King marrying the girl, for such an alliance would be even more fatal to their influence on the young monarch than the frustrated union with a princess of the House of Brunswick, since in this case they would have to contend, not only against the power of a fascinating bride, but also against the intrigues of such an astute politician as Henry Fox, who had everything to gain by excluding them from the King"s councils. On the other hand, Fox, his hand strengthened by the fact that the laws of England do not forbid the sovereign to mate with a subject, did all he could to promote the union that must benefit him. So while the princ.i.p.als in that love affair played their parts, behind them was a bitter fight that was not the less severe because it could not come to open warfare.
Fox was careful that his niece, Lady Sarah, should stay at Holland House so long as the King was in town, but discreetly himself went from time to time to his house at Kingsgate in the Isle of Thanet, very wisely realizing that the strongest card in his hand was the charm of the young girl. "Though Fox went himself to bathe in the sea, and possibly even to disguise his intrigues," Walpole wrote in 1761, "he left Lady Sarah at Holland House, where she appeared in a field close to the great road (where the King pa.s.sed on horseback) in a fancy habit making hay."
The course of true love ran smoothly enough for a while. The King was young and handsome, and Lady Sarah, not averse to be a queen, received his overtures graciously. So far, indeed, had the affair progressed early in 1761, that the King confided his pa.s.sion to Lady Sarah"s friend, Lady Susan Fox Strangways,[119] with whom he had the following guarded conversation:
"You are going into Somersetshire; when do you return?"
"Not before winter, sir, or I don"t know how soon in winter."
"Is there nothing will bring you back to town before winter?"
"I don"t know of anything."
"Would you not like to see a Coronation?"
"Yes, sir. I hope I should come to see that."
"I hear it"s very popular my having put it off.... Won"t it be a much finer sight when there is a Queen?"
"To be sure, sir."
"I have had a great many applications from abroad, but I don"t like them. I have had none at home: I should like that better.... What do you think of your friend? You know who I mean; don"t you think her fittest?"
"Think, sir?"
"I think none so fit."[120]
[119] Eldest daughter of Stephen, first Earl of Ilchester, the eldest brother of Henry Fox. Lady Susan eloped in 1764 with William O"Brien, the actor.
[120] Lord Holland"s _Memoir_ in _The Life and Letters of Lady Sarah Lennox_.
According to Thomas Pitt, Lady Susan was much embarra.s.sed when the King said, "I have had no applications at home: I should like that better,"