Queen Caroline – Part 12

That evening a humiliated Caroline fell ill and took laudanum. The cause of her illness was probably a bowel obstruction or cancer but perhaps evidently there were rumours that she had been poisoned. Her exact cause of death was never to be determined as she refused to allow a post mortem.

Whatever the cause of her final illness, it was clear that she was dying and she put her affairs in order, making peace with one of the prosecution witnesses, her former ladies maid Louise Demont.

In her will she left her estate to William Austin and her jewels to Pergami’s daughter.

As to her remains, her wish was that her body be taken back to Brunswick in a coffin inscribed Caroline, Injured Queen of England.

She died on 7 August 1821.

Hone did not feel bound to expressing condolences at the Queen’s passing. He laid Caroline’s death at the door of the authorities and rallied against their hypocrisy.

At the time of her death, George was in Ireland. In days following his couriers remarked that his mood was one of gaiety that they had not seen in years.

He ordered the minimum period of mourning – 3 weeks

Caroline was not afforded a state funeral.  The government’s main concern, as it had been for most of her life, was for Caroline to left Britain as quickly as possible

“An Irish wake, or the Whisky Club singing a requiem to the manes of the persecuted and – Queen”; George IV, William Curtis, Castlereagh, Bloomfield and others sit around a table with glasses of whisky in their hands. A satire on the death of the Queen and the dinner given in Dublin on 23 August.

Queen’s funeral procession left Brandenberg House on 14 August 1821

The progress from Brandenburg House to Hammersmith began before 6 am and was a dignified affair. Thousands of mourners, including many women, lined the route despite the torrential rain to pay their respects to a funeral procession headed by children from the Latimer’s Charity School strewing flowers.

The government proscribed route was to go skirt around the North of the City of London before heading through East London.  Crowds who had been assembling in Hyde Park were determined disrupt these plans and reroute the procession through the city of London.

The first flashpoint was at 9.30 am at Kensington Church. To prevent the cortege from heading north to Bayswater, via Church Street, the crowd rendered the thoroughfare impassable by wagons, trenches and even burst water pipe. The procession was held, perhaps not entirely by coincidence, outside the home of William Cobbett, a leading radical and Caroline’s erstwhile press secretary.

A standoff remained until 11 am when the chief magistrate of Bow Street, Sir Robert Baker, arrived with a troop of Life Guards.  Baker having surveyed the situation, gave orders for the procession to down Kingsbridge toward Hyde Park. The crowd had won round one.

Further standoffs took place at Hyde Park Gate and Hyde Park Corner where the mourners who following the cortege were swelled by the masses including members of trade associations who had been gathering in the Park since 6 am. On the orders of the Prime Minister, military reinforcements were called in and forced the procession northward.

As the top of Park Lane, crowds blocked the route and missiles were thrown in which a solider lost his eye. The solider was preventing from running his sword through a man by the chief magistrate. The procession was north of the city heading eastward.

It was at Cumberland Gate that the simmering violence erupted. The crowds had blocked the gate and the guardsmen forced it open and were clearing a path northwards. The crowds swarmed around the military’s horses, grabbing their reins and threw stones. The magistrate read the Riot Act and the military unleashed their swords and rifles.

The Peterloo massacre had taken place 2 years virtually to the day and memory of it must have been in everyone’s minds. When the crowds showered the soldiers with brickbats, stones and any missile to hand. The first shots were fired over the heads of the crowd but subsequently fired into the crowd. Bullets passed through some of the carriages in the cortege, their inhabitants were lucky to escape with the lives. Less fortunate was Richard Honey, a carpenter, who was shot dead. He had been a spectator. George Francis, a bricklayer, who had been a part of the crowd also died. Several others were severely injured.

The soldiers only stopped fire when an army officer, turned MP Sir Robert Wilson, intervened. In the ceasefire, negotiations took place with City officials and a route through the City was agreed. The procession passed through Temple Bar Gate and continued through without out further event through to the City and the East End towards Colchester.

The behaviour of the military shocked the public and the jurors of the subsequent inquests. They recorded verdicts of “wilful murder against a life guardsman unknown” for the death of George Francis, and “Manslaughter against the officers and soldiers of the 1st Guards” for the death of Richard Honey. Despite these shocking verdicts, no individual was ever specifically named as having been responsible or prosecuted for the deaths. On the contrary, Sir Robert Wilson was dismissed from the army for remonstrating with Life Guards.

At 4 am the coffin was placed briefly in St Peter’s Church Colchester. In an unseemly tussle ensued in which . Caroline’s Dr Lushington and other executors affixed to the coffin a plaque only to have it removed by the King’s representative, Mr. Taylor, with a Latin inscription approved by the King. The reported loud and threatening language was finally brought to an end when the mayor brought in the local militia to disperse the opposing sides. The coffin left the church three hours later

Caroline’s body left England from Harwich on 16 August 1821 on board on the Glasgow frigate.

Queen Caroline – Part 11

George’s long postponed coronation took place on the 19th of July 1821 at Westminster Abbey.

Caroline made her intentions clear that she expected to be crowned queen consort. The officials responsible were equally clear that she was not welcome. Even 3 days before the event, Caroline again informed the Duke of Norfolk who as in charge of the ceremony and that she expected to be conducted to her seat received his prompt reply “it is not his majesty’s pleasure to comply”

Coronation of George IV – Guildhall Library Collections

The ceremony was consciously planned to outshine the coronation of Napoleon as Emperor of France in 1804. The Prince spared no expense for his coronation which took place on the 19th July 1821. He spent approximately £243,00 on the ceremony which equates to about £21,751,000 in today’s money.

To accommodate over 4600 participants in Westminster Abbey, scaffolding was erected and accommodation for 3000 attendees in the adjoining Westminster Hall. To accommodate the attendees, the interior of Westminster Hall had been removed and pavilion constructed.

plan of Westminster Hall – Gentleman’s magazine]

Despite this clear statement Caroline was encouraged by Wood to, in effect, gate-crash the coronation giving her to believe that the crowds would not suffer her not being crowd and there was even the suggestion if not crowned by the state, she would be crowned by the City.

At 6 am, Caroline arrived in her carriage arrived at Westminster Hall to applause from a section of the crowd. However after some “anxious agitation” on the part of the soldiers and officials supervising the door, the door was closed.

The queen approached on the arm of Lord Hood, but was asked for her ticket by the commander of the guard. Replying that she was the queen and didn’t need a ticket, she was firmly turned away. When Caroline and Lord Hood tried to enter by a side door, it was slammed in their faces.

Their attempt to find another entrance was blocked by a line of armed soldiers, so they then made for the House of Lords, which was connected to the hall, but when she was denied entry there too, the queen returned to her carriage.

After about 20 minutes the party arrived at the abbey and approached the door which leads into Poet’s Corner.  Lord Hood addressed the doorkeeper, who was probably one of the professional boxers who had been hired for the event, announcing; “I present to you your queen, do you refuse her admission?” The doorkeeper replied that he could admit no one without a ticket. Lord Hood had his own ticket, but the doorkeeper was insistent that this would only allow one person entry and the queen refused to enter alone.

After further fruitless argument, the queen’s party retreated, the crowds shouting “Shame! Shame!” as she left in her carriage

After which the lavish coronation proceeded without another hitch. George was triumphant and emerged to the roar of the crowds, Caroline was in disgrace.

Queen Caroline – Part 10

Although the trial in Parliament had been paused. In the press, it was The Times took the lead in fuelling press outrage at the Queen’s treatment, running brazen attacks on a ‘debauched’ king. A popular petitioning campaign in her support eventually attracted over a million signatures

Brandenburg House and watermen in support of the Queen – GL collections

And Caroline’s supporters took to the streets. Large public meetings and processions in support of the Queen had begun to sweep the nation. The issue ‘took possession of every house or cottage in the kingdom’, recalled William Hazlitt. ‘Every man, woman and child took part in it …nothing was thought of but the fate of the Queen’s trial’.50,000 protesters carrying anti-government banners were parading on a weekly basis through central London. By October the numbers meeting at Piccadilly had reached 100,000. They came even by boat in their tens of thousands to Caroline’s secluded residence Bradenburgh House in Hammersmith with deputations. And in contrast to the events of Peterloo in 1819, the government stood by and did virtually nothing. Meetings organized in support of Caroline couldn’t easily be denounced as Seditious Meetings Act 1819.

The respectable middle classes and an unprecedented number of women attended meetings in support of Caroline. For a large number, if not a majority, they were drawn to the meetings for reformist or radical policies. Their support for Caroline was based in respect for the Constitution and loyalty to historic institutions. Their opposition to the Queen’s trial was because it an assault to the constitution and dangerous to the honour and dignity of the Crown. Meetings called for these purposes were always going to find a sympathetic magistrate would grant permission to hold the meeting.

The strategy didn’t go entirely to plan. There were a couple of damaging slip-ups, Lieutenant Flynn, a naval veteran of 16 years, fainted when he was caught out during cross-examination.Another lieutenant, Joseph Howham, one of Caroline’s foundlings from Montagu House perhaps gave one of the most unconvincing explanations as to why Caroline and Pergami shared a tent. Apparently it was because Caroline was afraid of pirated.Even Queen’s Counsel, Denman, who implied Caroline’s guilt when he suggested that Caroline should be allowed to go away and sin no more.

As ever, it was down to Brougham to make good any damage. He claimed that he had evidence of conspiracy which witnesses had be financially induced to give false witness and that he would call for an investigation – an investigation which would have led back to George

Account of the Queen’s defense – GL collections

Queen’s “triumph”

On 6 November 1820, the House of Lords finally delivered its verdict on Queen Caroline’s alleged crime of adultery. It came as no surprise that she was found guilty, but the margin of victory was slender: a mere nine votes.

Within days the government of Lord Liverpool dropped its case, fearful that it would be defeated in the House of Commons, and perhaps mindful that the king could be impeached for his illegal first marriage. The country erupted into a frenzy of celebrations at ‘the death of the Bill’. Across the country, supporters organised, processions, marches, bell-ringings, fireworks, gun salutes. There were also occasional outbreaks of disorder.

From the political showman at home – GL collections

On 11 November, central London was illuminated. One of the ways to illuminate a dwelling was to mount a transparency of an image on a window and position a light source behind it to create a luminous effect. Press reports picked out William Hone’s “splendid illumination’ on display at his shop on Ludgate Hill for four days. According to the emphatic text beneath the image, the transparency was displayed for the whole four days ‘in celebration of the VICTORY obtained by the THE PRESS for the LIBERTIES OF THE PEOPLE, which had been assailed in the Person of The Queen’. Perhaps foreshadowing Caroline’s demise in popularity Hone gives equal force to Liberty and the sacred printing press but reduced Caroline to a trophy-like roundel portrait in a laurel wreath. In Hone’s understanding of the affair, Caroline is as much the product as the producer of ‘the liberties of the people’.

Image from LMA

On 29 November Caroline attended a service of thanksgiving at St Paul’s cathedral. She was accompanied by 500 horsemen and a crowd of 50,000 people. It was intentionally provocative and a carefully orchestrated imitation of a coronation. Although the service was a stage-managed, anti-government spectacle. The psalm ordered for the service was no. 140—’Deliver me, O Lord, from the evil man”. They were were careful not to break the law and include Caroline’s name in the litany

With the government on the back foot and republican uprisings in Europe, the mood seemed ripe to turn Caroline’s victory into political action. The Examiner reported of a meeting of the alderman of the City of London at which it was agreed to ask the king to dismiss the government. Alderman Robert Waithman insisted that without reform, ‘a revolution or the establishment of a military government must ensue’. To give itself some breathing space, the government prorogued Parliament until 23 January. Caroline was in a position to make demands a royal residence, an annuity and the re-inclusion of her name in the liturgy. The Government were keen to get Caroline out of the country and made her an offer of an annuity of £50,000. The sticking point was the liturgy. In public statements she announced that she was resolute on the issue.

However in late February Caroline probably made her biggest error. She accepted the £50,000 with the government not making a concession on the liturgy. She had given in to the government. Brougham was furious, she had sold out and ‘she had destroyed her image as the victim of oppression, at one with the people’ Caroline was disillusioned. She reportedly wrote, ‘No one in fact, care [sic] for me . . . and this business had been more cared for as a political affair, than as a cause of a poor forlorn woman’.

Queen Caroline – Part 9

Queen Caroline – Part 9

Caroline’s Trial.

The Pains and Bills Bill of 1820

George was a legal used to get around his own adultery. The usual route to get a divorce was through the ecclesiastical courts. In legal terminology, George did not have clean hands and the courts were unlikely render a judgement against one spouse when the other had committed the same offence.

Lord Erskine, the authority of Parliamentary procedure, objected on the grounds that Caroline was not charged with adultery but a nebulous charge of ‘a most unbecoming and degrading Intimacy” with Pergami. A charge which made Caroline vulnerable to the evidence which would be little more than mudslinging

Divorce in Georgian England require an Act of Parliament. But an Act was usually the final stage of the divorce process.  Usually the wronged spouse would go to the ecclesiastical courts to obtain a legal separation before going to the civil courts to obtain a verdict of criminal conversation. Only then did some extremely wealthy go to Parliament to obtain an Act of Parliament – required if the husband wished to remarry. 

George could not follow this route because George had not in legal parlance “clean hands”. The ecclesiastical courts would not grant a favourable judgement to a party who had committed the same offence which George clearly had.  A further complication was that letter from April 1796 which George had stated they should not be ‘answerable to each other.

House of Lords

On 17 August 2020 Lord Liverpool presented the Bill in the House of the Lords the bill to deprive Caroline of her royal status and dissolve her marriage.

The ensuring parliamentary debate ran for 52 days from August to November to the exclusion of any other business. It was in effect a public trial of Queen Caroline in which the odds were against her. The Lords acted both judges and jurors, Caroline was not permitted prior notice of the evidence against, or to speak in her own defence.

For women, the proceeding brought to centre stage the double standard in England’s divorce law. Women could be divorced for adultery, to divorce a man other additional factors were required. A point which was raised by Caroline defence and conceded by the prosecution

‘The counsel for the Queen seemed to think that there was no difference between adultery committed by a man and by a woman. This ​ was a most extraordinary proposition, whether considered legally or with reference to its effects upon society”.

The prosecution’s case run from 19 August to 17 September and they called over 50 witnesses against Caroline, the main witnesses were  Italian servants.

Xenophobia and their low social status doubtless undermined the credibility of the testimony with the Lords and with the wider British public.

The prosecution’s first witness was Theodore Majocchi, appointed as a man servant by Pergami, and had worked in Caroline’s household since her time in Naples until 1818

His appearance at the trial clearly shocked Caroline to exclaim “Ah Theodore” before eventually according to the Times, she fled from from the room in “a burst of agony”. A reaction taken by some to be disgust at his  betrayal and to others it was a sign of guilt.

Brougham advise that Caroline stay away from the debate chamber after this. Caroline  much of the trial in an side room playing cards.

His answers to the attorney general’s questions in clear and concise detail. Over the course of the next few hours Majocchi delivered a testimony in which he confirmed that he had seen Caroline entering Bartolomeo Pergami’s bedroom; that the couple frequently held hands in public; and that Pergami would often ‘assist’ the Queen when she was bathing. And recalled in minute detail the sleeping arrangements of Caroline and Bergami over several years.  At Milan, for example, the two rooms “were separated only by a wall”, with a “secret staircase” leading to a landing onto which the doors of the two rooms opened “about seven or eight feet” apart.

However, Majocchi’s credibility as a witness collapsed when he was subjected to a rigorous cross-examination. It became quickly apparent that that Majocchi, who could provide confident and detailed responses about the alleged infidelities he had witnessed, he was completely unable to provide even basic details about Caroline’s household and daily routine.

During his cross examination Majocchi, when asked mundane matters of the Queen’s household which trusted member of the household would not, he had uttered the phrase “non mi ricordo” “I can’t remember” almost 200 times. It was clear that Majocchi had been coached to give to give evidence against the Queen

Non mi ricordo became a national joke and was picked up by pro-Caroline supporters. William Hone rushed out this pamphlet. It draw attention to the Crown’s obvious attempt to pervert the course of justice by briefing hostile witnesses to testify against the Queen.

In it, George Cruikshank replaces the King for Majocchi in the witness box and in the text George responds to each question about his own infidelities with Majocchi infamous Non mi ricordo.

And this pamphlet cut through to the public. It was reprinted at least 29 times indicating that people bought it in large numbers.

and that not only bought them but plenty evidence that it was read.  In this GL copy, is not usual where a contemporary reader puts the name to the titles, underlined key points and comments.

The influence of this pamphlet (and the Queen’s Matrimonial Ladder) clearly worried the authorities. They tried to silence them through bribery. Cruikshank accepted £100, and other  payments for illustrations for pro-George pamphlets but he ignored his promise not to provide satirical images of the King to Hone and other radical publishers. Hone was visited by a member of the royal household and offered £500 in exchange for a pledge not to produce any more satires about the King. Hone, ever the ideologue, dismissed the man by saying “Could you make it £5,000? Even if you did, I should refuse it.”

The prosecution’s other main witness was Louise Demont. Demont was an intelligent worman and in her capacity as one of Caroline’s maid would have been privy to the intimate details of Caroline’s household.  She testified she had seen Caroline leave Pergami’s bedroom wearing only a nightdress, corroborated evidence that Caroline and Pergami had shared a tent and a bath during the cruise.

Brougham demolished her credibility on cross-examination. She had been dismissed from Caroline’s household for lying [information provided to the defence by Demont’s sister] and been living in England under the assumed name of “Countess Colombier”. The interference that she had been paid handsomely by the authorities for her testimony would have been clear.

The prosecution’s case concluded on 7 September for the summer recess.

Queen Caroline – Part 8

Image from the Museum of London

King George III died on 29 January 1820 and George became George IV of  United Kingdom and Hannover. Caroline was no longer the Princess of Wales but Queen Consort. The dynamics of their relationship had changed yet again. George was simply not prepared to accept the notion of a Queen Caroline.

George’s first salvo was to deny Caroline public recognition of her royal status. Foreign dignitaries were informed that Caroline was not regarded as royal and was not to be extended the diplomatic niceties normally afforded to the monarch’s spouse. Foreign ambassadors and even the pope no longer received her

On the domestic front, George succeeded, against his government’s advice, in removing getting Caroline’s name was removed from the liturgy of the Church England. In other words, clergymen across the country were instructed not to mention the Queen in Sunday prayers for the Royal Family. It was a fairly easy win for George as the Church of England was the Establishment / Tory Party at prayer.

This was more than a petty snub. Whilst Caroline was a fit enough person to be commended to the Almighty in prayer, it was would be difficult to argue that she should not be afforded her status as George’s consort.

The issue also brought the Queen Caroline affair in the lives of every Anglican churchgoer and made churches one of the many arenas in which Caroline’s case was fought. Every church service churchgoers and clergymen were obliged to take a stand on this. And for those sympathetic to Caroline, it was a weekly reminder of the George’s treatment of his wife as well as the Church of England’s subservience to the monarch

Caroline was incensed by the removal of her name from the liturgy and it was under advice of Matthew Wood former Lord Mayor of London turned London MP she refused the bribe of £50k a year in exchange for promising never to return to Britain or its dominions and relinquishing her title Queen Consort.

Wood met Caroline in Calais and escorted her back to England on board the Prince Leopold (a mail ship) arriving at Dover on 5 June 1820 where she was given a tumultuous welcome plus a royal salute from the commandant of the garrison plus a guard of honour.  Huge crowds of ecstatic fans welcomed her return and she was mobbed all the way to London.

Caroline returned to London in triumph on 6 June 1820, in an open carriage through thronging crowds in the metropolis to stay initially with Wood at his home in London’s Mayfair. With Matthew Wood as an advisor, Caroline’s campaign became virtually indistinguishable from that of political reformers. Her advisors were drawn from London’s radical circles. Her responses to thousands of addresses or petitions she received were overtly political written by leading radicals such as William Cobbett.

The public were not the only ones to acknowledge Caroline. 5,000 sailors marched pass to pay their own respects to the Queen. On 15 June Guards in the Kings Mews mutinied showing that the government could not be sure that it would rely on the loyalty of the military.

On the very same day as Caroline arrived back in England George submitted to both Houses of Parliament evidence obtained by the Milan Commission in two identical green bags. He had initiated divorce proceedings against his wife. 

A House of Lords Committee of 15 peers opened the green bag of evidence and a week later reported back that there was sufficient evidence of Caroline’s improper relations with Pergami and recommended the introduction of a Bill of Pains and Penalties. 

And postponed his coronation scheduled for 1 August 1820.  The decks were cleared for the Queen’s trial.

Queen Caroline – Part 7

Protest rally – from Guildhall Library’s collections

The government was unpopular because of its indifference to the mass unemployment and starvation in Britain following the end of the Napoleonic Wars. MPs were primarily landowners unaccountable to the mass of British people and enacted laws for their benefit. The infamous Corn Laws were a case in point. Reformers calling for universal male suffrage and  new constituencies in the new populous industrial centres such as Manchester to make Parliament more accountable.

Image from London Metropolitan Archives

The  British government was merely indifferent to the needs of the populace but actively hostile to reformers were calling for universal male suffrage and parliamentary reform. Probably the most notorious example is the Peterloo Massacre of August 1819 where eighteen people died when cavalry charged into a crowd of around 60,000 people who had gathered to petition for parliamentary representation.

The government fought against reformers not only with force but with the law. In 1817 it suspended Habeas Corpus allowing imprisonment of opponents without trial. Following Peterloo, the government doubled down on repressive legislation limiting further the means through which people could protest. The Seditious Meetings Act made it illegal to hold a meeting of more than 50 people without the approval of a magistrate. Through the Seditious Libels Act 1819 reformist or radical authors, printers and publishers faced 14 years transportation.

Spa Fields Defendants from Guildhall Library Collections

And the other weapon in the government arsenal to oppose its opponents was its network of spies and paid-informers. [not unlike the methods used against Caroline]    Notorious show trials, based on the evidence of agent provocateurs, were relatively common during Caroline’s exile. The Spa Fields Riots defendants were fortunate to be acquitted in 1816 when the role of the government agent was discovered. In 1817, three men involved in uprising in Pentrich, Derbyshire were not so fortunate. They were hanged, drawn and quartered.

And it is in this context it is understandable that the government were willing to pay Caroline to stay abroad despite the weight of evidence against her.

In 1814 Caroline had demonstrated her ability to harness public opinion behind her.  In the intervening years, the opposition to George and the government had grown. The last thing the government wanted was the return of Caroline to become a rallying point for the widespread dissent.

Queen Caroline – Part 6

Portrait of Princess Charlotte – donated by Caroline to the City, now held by Guildhall Art Gallery

It was in Pesaro in November 1817 that Caroline found out that her daughter Charlotte had died in childbirth and she found out by chance.

George refused to communicate with Caroline even in these circumstances.  He left the task to  Charlotte’s husband Leopold. Leopold was too grief-stricken to write to Caroline and she found out weeks later by courier on his way to inform the Pope.

Charlotte’s death changed the dynamics of their marriage again. Caroline was now longer the mother of a future British sovereign and George had one less reason to remain married. In fact, one could argue that it had a pressing reason to divorce Caroline. If they divorce, it was possible that he could remarry and produce another legitimate heir.

In 1818 three commissioners, known as the Milan Commission, arrived in Italy to obtain sworn testimonies of Caroline’s adultery. Caroline got wind of the latest commission and instructed Brougham to negotiate a divorce. The negotiations faltered when she was told that she would have to admit adultery.

Negotiations nevertheless continued as the government was highly motivated to keep Caroline out of England. George was as unpopular as ever  but the government was equally so.

Image from The Political House that Jack Built by William Hone Guildhall Library Collections

George had been become even more unpopular as a new generation of satirists took over from James Gilray. Commons themes were his extravagance, indifference to affairs of state and of course his womanising.

William Hone, in collaboration with George Cruikshank, brought satire of George to a wider audience through producing cheap pamphlets. The dandy at sixty [From the political house that Jack Built 1819] presents a man who had never appeared to grow up playing at being a solider rather than focusing on the affairs of state.

One of George’s longstanding grievances against his father that he was not allowed to join the military.

Although this image may appear tame but men had gone to prison merely implying in print that George he as an ageing dandy.

Hone’s view of the Regent’s bomb from Guildhall Library’s collections

In this broadside, Hone uses the presentation of the Cadiz memorial (which still exists) to ridicule George’s corpulence backside and his extravagance. In 19^th century London, bomb was pronounced bum. The subject is the Cadiz memorial (which still exists today). The gift from Spain was a basic canon. The elaborate mounting was added according to George’s taste.

Throughout Caroline’s exile, George’s mistress was the married Marchioness of Hertford. In this respect George was going against the grain of European royalty were public mistresses were coming unseemly. Lady Hertford’s tenure however was coming to end in 1819 as Lady Hertford had been supplanted in George’s affections by Marchioness Conyngham. Although she kept a low profile during the Queen’s trial, George was besotted with her until his death in 1830.

Queen Caroline – Part 5

By 1814 Caroline had feuding with her husband for nearly 20 years and she clearly had grown weary. She agreed to an exile in exchange for an annual allowance of £35,000 and an assurance that she would retain her royal status, she would leave England for an indefinite period. Caroline and her small entourage, including William Austin, left England on 9 August 1814.

The Royal Wanderer, Guildhall Library copy

Caroline had hoped that in Europe she would be “a merry happy soul”.  For three years she appeared the social life she had missed out in Britain in Milan, Naples, Genoa before settling down to a relatively quiet life in Pesaro in 1817 after an extended pilgrimage to the Holy Land in 1816.

However, Caroline was, in reality, little freer than she had been in Blackheath. Her every movement was being monitored by spies employed by the British government and her husband. 

And a curious, shady character named Baron Ompteda was bribing servants for any evidence of Caroline’s impropriety.

Her  itinerary showed her initially visiting Milan then Naples and Genoa before purchasing the extensive Villa d’Este in Lake Como in mid-1815. After 6 months, Caroline and her suite were on the move again. She embarked on an extended archaeological tour visiting Tunis, Malta, the Holy Land before returning to Lake Como in August 1816.

From Guildhall Library’s collections

Debts forced her to sell Villa d’Este and she settled down in a more private, smaller (although still substantial villa) in Pesaro in 1817 and stayed there until her return to England in 1820.

In Naples, Caroline formed a close attachment to members of the Napoleonic regime in exile, Napoleon’s brother Lucien, his sister Caroline and especially Napoleon’s brother in law Joachim Murat, the King of Naples. For political reasons, the handsome Murat cultivated a relationship with Caroline, showering with gifts and attention which Caroline eagerly reciprocated.  Surprisingly, bearing in mind, Caroline’s image in England, Caroline became anti-British and pro-Napoleon.

In 1815, the political scandal merged with a personal scandal when it was rumoured that Caroline may have become Murat’s mistress. A rumour was not squashed when Caroline appeared as a half-naked muse at the ball. In the end, the Prime Minister Lord Liverpool ordered Caroline, to leave Naples

Caroline left Naples with her entourage which included Bartolomeo Pergami who had more than a passing resemblance to Joachim Murat.

Bartolomeo Pergami from Guildhall Library’s collections

Caroline apparently met Pergami, a handsome, married, ex solider, in Milan in 1814 and employed him as a servant waiting at table.  In a matter of months, he became her courier. As English members of her entourage left, Pergami replaced them with his associates and members of his own family. By 1817 the household in Pesaro included his sister, mother, brother and even his daughter, but not his wife.

Caroline was extraordinarily generous to Pergami. In 1815, she bought him an estate and he became Baron della Franchena. This title was followed by a Knighthood of Malta. During their extended Mediterranean tour he became Knight of the Holy Sepulchre.  And in Jerusalem, Caroline even instituted, without any actual authority, a new Order of Saint Caroline, of Jerusalem, of which Pergami was made Grand Master.

From 1816 Caroline’s closeness to Pergami was obvious to all.  For example, on her Mediterranean tour, an English navy vessel, The Leviathan, took her to Sicily. The English Captain Pechall objected to Pergami’s presence at his table. Caroline, rather than dismissing Pergami, chose to dine in her own quarters with Pergami for the rest of the voyage.

On her return journey from the Holy Land, Caroline opted to charter her own vessel. A tent was erected on deck, presumably due to heat.  Caroline and Pergami slept in the tent together throughout the voyage.

From 1816 Pergami accompanied Caroline to all public events. It was assumed that they were lovers. As Henry Brougham’s own brother, James wrote “they are to all appearances, man and wife, never was anything so obvious”.

Caroline was not hiding, if anything she appeared to be flaunting, her relationship with Pergami, in the full knowledge that George’s spies had been reporting back on her movements. Either Caroline was reckless that she did not care about the consequence or took George’s apparent lack of action as acquiescence.

Queen Caroline – Part 4

Six years after her initial threat to go public it was in 1813 that an essentially domestic feud became a public and political issue with the assistance an ambitious and brilliant lawyer turned Whig MP Henry Brougham. Brougham launched what was essentially a propaganda campaign against the Prince Regent.

Address by the Corporation photo from London Metropolitan Archives

Brougham’s first salvo was a public letter nominally addressed to George which first appeared in Morning Chronicle 10 Feb 1813 but was extensively reprinted and sold as penny broadsides.

The letter portrayed Caroline was a loving wife, whose reputation had been tarnished but who fervently wished to be reunited with her husband and daughter. Only the stubbornness of the Prince Regent was stood in the way of this happy reunion.

The letter elicited the sympathy not only of the general public even from those who knew that the reality was more nuanced. Caroline’s own daughter “My mother was wicked, but she would not have turned so wicked had not my father been much more wicked still”

A public relations war took place in the press. George leaked Lady Douglas’s testimony from the “Delicate Investigation“ to which Brougham responded with the testimonies of Caroline’s servants and Mrs Austin.

George made a gave tactical error when he instigated another secret investigation into Caroline conduct.

The investigation stood by the original findings of 1806 and when word of the new investigation leaked out he had handed Caroline another victory and piqued the already considerable interest in the contents of the Book which was eventually published in 1813.

Caroline emerged as the victor from this round. Enormous crowds flocked to Kensington Palace to congratulate her on triumphing against “a conspiracy against her life and honour” including the City officials including the ambitious son of a provincial chemist, Matthew Wood. Political opponents of the government were allying themselves with Caroline and making a parallel between George’s cruelty and neglect of his family and with his treatment, via his government, of his subjects and the nation.

In Parliament, George Canning gave a probably not entirely altruistic speech stating that she had been proved pure and innocent and that the business should be ended for ever.

The public perceived Caroline as a wronged wife and mother.  Jane Austen spoke for many when she wrote “Poor woman, I shall support her as long as I can, because she is a Woman and because I hate her Husband”.

In private her life was unravelling. She was heavily in debt; she moved out of Montagu House to smaller accommodation provided for her in Bayswater. To the royal family Caroline was a social pariah; she lonely and vulnerable gold-diggers offering flattery or attention.  A case in point was the Sapio Family, a family of Italian musicians. She became obsessed with the family, in particular the handsome son and sold everything he could lay hands on to buy a cottage in Bayswater for the family. Her mental health was also deteriorating. Dinner guests were left open mouthed to witness her sticking pins in a wax effigy of her husband and tossing it into the fire.

Public antipathy to George increased when the Book was published in full later in 1813. Along with George, it was the Douglasses who bore the brunt of public disgust.

Douglas pilloried – London Metropolitan Archives

Queen Caroline – Part 3

Montagu House – image from Guildhall Library

Rejected by George, Caroline eventually settle in Montagu House in Blackheath in 1798. Charlotte remained in the custody of George. Caroline was free to visit her daughter but Charlotte was not allowed to stay with her mother.

Caroline took George at his word that she could do as she pleased.  Raucous parties in which Caroline alleged danced in various states of undress were the order of the day. A number of gentleman visitors were believed to be her lovers. Several naval officers, the painter Thomas Lawrence and the Tory politician George Canning were rumoured have been particularly close to the Princess of Wales.

William Austin – image from Guildhall Library

In November 1802 a three-month boy, William, arrived at Montagu House. Caroline, who clearly was very fond of children, she had briefly taken in around 8 or 9 other children. But in contrast to these others, William became her de facto adopted son.

Charlotte lavished all her maternal instincts on this child – even feeding and changing the boy she nicknamed Wilkin.

Rumours of the goings on at Montagu House and in particular William were circulating by 1803. Caroline’s neighbour and one-time companion, Lady Douglas was identified as the main source.

When Caroline found out she cut off contact, sending a number of obscene letters to them to make her point. The Douglas retaliated by hawking around their stories about Caroline to the royal family. And contrary to prevailing impression of George as a vengeful husband, he was initially was completely uninterested. He clearly wanted nothing to do with Caroline especially as he rekindled his relationship with his wife Mrs Fitzherbert. It was three years later, when the rumours about William parentage were widespread that George lobbied his father to conduct a secret investigation.

 In May 1806 Lady Douglas testified that Caroline had, in 1801, told her she was pregnant and that she intended to pass the child off as George’s. [Caroline had slept two nights at Carlton House during the 1801]. If true Caroline had obviously committed and had considered defrauding her daughter of her right to succession to the British throne.

[For what is worth, Douglas was probably telling the truth at least about Caroline pretending to be pregnant. It was something she had done before and was to do again. But whether Lady Douglas actually believed Caroline is another matter]

In July 1806, the Commission established that Sophia Austin, wife of an unemployed Deptford docker, was William’s mother. Lady Douglas was found guilty of perjury. Caroline did not get off scot free though.  For her “levity of conduct” Caroline’s access to Charlotte was limited to supervised visits.

By the end of 1806 George evidently had decided to divorce Caroline. The Commission’s findings were undoubtedly a factor but Caroline’s mounting debts were probably an added incentive. As her husband, he would be obliged to settle them.

The Book – image from Guildhall Library

Caroline’s response to an impending divorce was to threaten to go public.

Spence Perceval, who at the time was an out of favour, Tory politician drafted the infamous “Book”. The Book refuted the numerous charges Lady Douglas had made against her along with a public letter to George III protesting her innocence and railing against the secret investigation.

Her threat was a serious one. Approximately 2000 copies were privately printed.

George III had a choice either squash his son’s plan for a divorce or face a public scandal. In the event, the book was not published straightaway as Perceval found himself back in government in March 1807. It was no longer in his interests for the book to be published and the Government spend over £10,000 recovering copies which had gone AWOL.

But the mere threat of the Book becoming public was sufficient to shelve plans of divorce at least until 1811.

 [In 1811 when George became Prince Regent due to his father’s descent into madness, it was the government itself which used the book to blackmail George.]

In 1811, George III became permanently incapacitated and George became Prince Regent and Caroline’s life got immeasurably more difficult.  George III had had genuine affection of his niece and was one of her few allies. Without his father’s restraining hand Caroline was publicly shunned and her access to Charlotte was restricted to once on fortnight, subject to George’s permission which was not often forthcoming.