Bonnie Prince Charlie: Charles Edward Stuart (Pimlico) (116 page)

1
A S V, Francia, 491 f.256.

2
A S V, Francia 491 f.267; Morelli, ii, p. 140.

3
The Princesse de Talmont pined away during their separation. She said her carnival had been a sad affair. She had been to no balls, avoided all society, and spent Mardi Gras in her ‘cage’. She mentions having seen the duchesse de Montbazon: ‘I spoke today with a woman who loves you to madness’ (R A Stuart Box 4/1/63). For further letters from her to the prince in Avignon see Box 4/1/62–5.

4
Henri Lion,
Le président Hénault 1685–1770
(Paris, 1903), pp.77–8.

5
For confirmation of the prince’s stay from the Stuart Papers see Box 1/310; Box 4/1/86. Writing in January 1750, Elisabeth Ferrand tried to tempt him back to Paris by saying that the nuns would endeavour to make his stay at the convent more comfortable than last season (R A Stuart Box 4/1/23).

6
Maurice Tourneur, ed.,
Correspondance de Grimm, Diderot, Raynal, Meister
(Paris, 1882), xii, p.343.

7
Lucien Perey,
Le president Hénault et Madame du Deffand
(Paris, 1893), p.301.

8
David Daiches,
Charles Edward Stuart
(1973), p.282. Cf. also Bongie,
Love of a Prince
, op.cit., pp.273, 315. A definitive study of the relationship between the two ladies will be provided by Professor Bongie in his next book.

9
Tourneur,
Correspondance de Grimm, Diderot, etc
., op.cit., xii, p.343.

10
R A Stuart 298/8.

11
R A Stuart 298/32; Box 4/1/85.

12
R A Stuart 298/61.

13
R A Stuart 298/152. The prince’s illicit presence in Paris at this time was widely suspected. Cf. S P 105/309 ff.91, 96.

14
R A Stuart 316/101.

15
R A Stuart 298/152. James immediately wrote to tell his son that it was inconceivable that he would be allowed to stay in Venice (R A Stuart 298/73).

16
Morelli, ii, pp. 161–2. Cf. A S V, Francia, 491 f.301. For the nuncio’s explicit statement of personal sympathy see Morelli, ii, p. 153. Once again, it seems, the prince had exercised his famous charm.

17
Morelli, ii, pp.161–2.

18
Ibid
., ii, p. 164.

19
R A Stuart 298/74.

20
R A Stuart 298/62, 75.

21
Morelli, ii, pp.167–8; A S V, Francia 491 f.303.

22
R A Stuart Box 1/305.

23
Browne, iv, p.60; R A Stuart 298/106.

24
Morelli, ii, pp.161–2, 167–8.

25
R A Stuart 311/95.

26
G. Maugras,
La cour de Lunéville au 18
siècle (Paris, 1904), p.398; cf. also Maugras,
Dernières Années du roi Stanislas
(Paris, 1906); Pierre Boye,
La cour Polonaise de Lunéville 1737–1766
(Nancy, 1926).

27
For the letter see R A Stuart 298/77. For the circumstances of its delivery and reception see Butler,
Choiseul
, op. cit., pp.811–12.

28
R A Stuart 303/131.

29
See S P Tuscany 56 ff.367, 374; S P France 233 f.299; Morelli, ii, p.200.

30
R A Stuart 298/178.

31
R A Stuart 298/134; 299/44.

32
R A Stuart Box 2/114; S P Tuscany 53 f.230.

33
R A Stuart 298/106.

34
R A Stuart 300/83; 316/207.

35
R A Stuart 299/87.

36
Letters in the Stuart Papers definitely place him in Paris on 9 and 17 November 1749 (R A Stuart 301/30).

37
D’Argenson, v, p.481.

38
R A Stuart 301/30.

39
S P France 232 f.261; 233 ff.73–7.

40
Luynes, ix, p.430.

41
S P Tuscany 56 f.312.

42
D’Argenson, vii, pp.279–80.

43
Frederick the Great,
Politische Correspondenz
, vi, pp.559, 572; A S V Francia 491 f.283; S P 105/309 f.85; Morelli, ii, pp.141–2, 149.

44
A S V, Francia 491 f.275; Morelli, ii, pp.156–7; D’Argenson, v, p.483.

45
S P France 233 f.206; S P 105/309 f.91; Morelli, ii, pp.141–2, 156–7.

46
A S V, Francia 491 ff.285, 291.

47
Browne, iv, pp.57, 63; R A Stuart 297/41.

48
A S V, Francia 491 ff.260, 291; S P France 232 f.217; 245 F.135.

49
Princess Radziwill later married Count Ignacy Morawski in 1764 (C.F. Jacobi,
Europäische Genealogisches Handbuch
(Leipzig, 1800), i, p.533).

50
Morelli, ii, p.479; S P Tuscany 53 f.244.

51
For the rumour’s many manifestations see A S V, Francia 491 f.275; Add. MSS, 34,445 f.98; S P France 244 f.179; S P 105/309 f.98; D’Argenson, v, p.444.

52
A S V, Francia 491 f.265; D’Argenson, vi, p.386.

53
R A Stuart 306/8; D’Argenson, vi, p.37.

54
The title Andrew Lang gives to his survey of the prince’s mythical adventures during the ‘obscure years’ (Lang,
Pickle the Spy
, pp.44–66).

55
Barbier, iii, p.141.

56
D’Argenson, vi, p.37.

57
S P France 232 f.192; 246 f.119; S P Tuscany 58 f.135;
Walpole Correspondence
, 20, p.168.

58
Add. MSS 33050 f.126.

59
Add. MSS 32,868 f.394; Morelli, ii, pp.168–9; D’Argenson, v, p.492.

60
S P France 241 ff.148, 220, 279; 249 ff.190, 192.

61
S P France 241 f.178.

62
Heeckeren,
Benoit-Tencin Correspondance
, ii, p.273.

63
R A Stuart Box 3/147.

64
See S P France 248 ff.304, 309–11.

65
S P France 237 ff.68, 72; 241 f.178.

66
Add. MSS 32,854 f.254.

67
R A Stuart 282/123.

68
R A Stuart 315/106; 316/106, 117.

69
R A Stuart Box 4/1/61.

70
R A Stuart Box 4/1/69–70.

71
R A Stuart 316/122.

72
R A Stuart 316/121.

73
R A Stuart Box 4/1/15.

74
R A Stuart Box 4/1/54, 56.

75
See the following examples: (1) Talmont to the prince. ‘You’re destroying me. You’re killing me. I’m in a rage. I’m unworthy of your madness and cruelty’ (R A Stuart Box 4/1/52). ‘You’ve outraged my heart which you never truly knew’ (R A Stuart 316/100). ‘You are opinionated, indomitable and closed to justice.’ (2) The prince to Talmont. ‘I’m astonished at your coldness’ (R A Stuart Box 4/1/54). ‘If you want to be in my
life
, everything must change on your side’ (R A Stuart 315/105).

76
The princess threatened to stay away until Charles Edward became more docile and
submitted to her will
(italics mine) R A Stuart Box 4/1/56.

77
R A Stuart 305/118.

78
R A Stuart 316/109, 120.

79
R A Stuart 315/103.

80
See the princess’s autobiographical fragment written to Goring (R A Stuart Box 4/1/79).

81
R A Stuart 305/117.

82
R A Stuart 316/118.

83
R A Stuart 315/107.

84
R A Stuart Box 4/1/79.

85
R A Stuart 306/13.

86
R A Stuart 306/91.

87
R A Stuart Box 4/1/74.

88
R A Stuart Box 4/1/79A.

89
R A Stuart 307/177.

90
R A Stuart Box 4/1/74.

91
R A Stuart Box 2/133; Box 4/1/54.

92
Stowe MSS 158 f.248.

93
She often complained that he would never confide in her the secrets of his ‘great affairs’ (R A Stuart Box 4/1/55).

94
R A Stuart 309/90–1.

95
R A Stuart 316/98.

96
R A Stuart Box 4/1/68, 79, 80.

97
R A Stuart 315/105.

98
R A Stuart Box 1/324.

99
R A Stuart 310/30.

100
R A Stuart Box 1/323.

101
R A Stuart 311/32.

102
R A Stuart 312/164; Box 4/1/78.

103
R A Stuart Box 4/1/1.

104
R A Stuart Box 4/1/4.

105
R A Stuart Box 4/1/7–8.

106
R A Stuart Box 4/1/37–9.

107
Ferrand and Vassé found it hard to understand the prince’s violent mood swings and ascribed his behaviour to rank ingratitude (R A Stuart Box 4/1/7–8, 13).

108
In
Pickle the Spy
, Andrew Lang identifies ‘
le philosophe
’ as Montesquieu. In
The Companions of Pickle
, he changes his mind and identifies him as Condillac, on the basis of Elisabeth Ferrand’s friendship with the founder of Sensationalism. Both conjectures are wrong. As R A Stuart Box 4/1/1 clearly shows, ‘
le philosophe
’ always denoted Helvetius.

109
R A Stuart 316/225.

110
Some examples of the doggerel, written in French and English:

Hier j’ai pris un émétique sévère

Et demain je me purge par derrière

Pour le soir je prends un ver de bière

Je me fou de L’univers

Et du ciel et de la terre

I never sit down

But will on a throne

To shite or to prone

(all at R A Stuart 316/190).

111
R A Stuart Box 2/112–13. The prince’s remarks on religion always display the utmost cynicism. Cf. ‘The only religion I know is my sword’ (Luynes, ix, p.264).

112
R A Stuart 311/45. The quarrel was patched up in November through Goring’s mediation. For once the prince acted contrite (R A Stuart 312/151).

113
R A Stuart Box 1/324.

114
For details see R A Stuart Box 4/1/80–2.

115
R A Stuart Box 4/1/79.

116
R A Stuart 298/28, 52.

117
R A Stuart Box 4/1/79A.

118
Ibid
.

119
Ibid
.

120
R A Stuart 318/151.

121
R A Stuart 319/6.

122
R A Stuart 319/141.

123
R A Stuart Box 4/1/83.

124
R A Stuart Box 4/1/79A.

125
R A Stuart 320/16, 65, 120; 321/35.

126
R A Stuart Box 4/1/79A.

127
Ibid
.

128
R A Stuart 316/129.

129
R A Stuart 322/125; 323/15.

130
Lettres de la marquise du Deffand à Horace Walpole
(Paris, 1824), iii, pp.47–9.

131
Browne, iv, pp.64–5; R A Stuart 301/63; 302/55.

132
R A Stuart 324/124.

133
R A Stuart 326/74.

134
R A Stuart 326/168.

135
R A Stuart 327/20.

136
R A Stuart 327/142.

1
Pelham MSS Ne.2086.

2
For confirmation that these were the prince’s target groups see R A Stuart 300/37.

3
Cf. Mézières to Maurepas, 29 August 1744, 3 June 1746, M P.

4
R A Stuart 301/97.

5
R A Stuart 308/14.

6
A E C P, Angleterre, 429 ff.157–9.

7
R A Stuart 306/142.

8
R A Stuart 304/55; 306/88.

9
H M C, 15, ii, p.250; R A Stuart 309/13; 310/13. James could not resist the opportunity of a lecture. ‘As to the new power of Regency you want, you must be sensible that you have acted towards me, for these five years past, in a manner which noways deserves so great a mark of trust and kindness, but far be it from me to
act
, especially towards you, by pique or resentment. It is true the treatment you give me is a continual heartbreak to me, but it excites my compassion more than my anger … if you seem to forget that you are my son, I can never forget I am your father’ (Browne, iv, p.73).

10
This was quickly picked up by Sir Horace Mann (Mahon,
The Decline of the Last Stuarts. Extracts from Despatches
(1843, Roxburghe Club), p.9.

11
R A Stuart 310/69.

12
Lang,
Pickle the Spy
, op. cit., p.104.

13
R A Stuart 308/84. For the Pelhams’ fear of a Cumberland regency see R A Stuart 320/66.

14
R A Stuart 310/116.

15
R A Stuart 316/221; 318/136.

16
R A Stuart Box 3/1.

17
Louis Dutens,
Mémoires d’un voyageur qui se repose
(London, 1806), 5 vols, II, pp.119–25.

18
For Holker’s career see André Remond,
John Holker, manufacturier et grand fonctionnaire en France au XVIII
^e
siècle (Paris, 1946).

19
R A Stuart Box 3/1.

20
R A Stuart 310/116.

21
J. Y. T. Greig, ed.,
Letters of David Hume
(Oxford, 1932), ii, p.272.

22
William King,
Political and Literary Anecdotes
(1819), p.196; Mahon,
Last Stuarts
, op. cit., p.96.

23
R A Stuart Box 2/264A.

24
Mahon,
History
, op. cit., iv, pp.7–9.

25
Martin Haile,
James Francis Edward
(1907), p.372.

26
Dutens,
Mémoires
, op. cit., iii, p.48.

27
For the prince’s own statement on this point and his confirmation of the abjuration see R A Stuart Box 1/454B.

28
Fitzmaurice,
Life of Shelburne
, i, p.272;
Walpole Correspondence
, 22, pp.324–5. The exact church in which the ceremony took place is disputed, but the most likely candidate is St Mary-le-Strand.

29
King,
Anecdotes
, op. cit., p.199.

30
Ibid
., p.201.

31
Ibid
., p. 199.

32
R A Stuart Box 3/1.

33
R A Stuart 310/116.

34
R A Stuart Box 3/1.

35
For further references to the prince’s 1750 visit to London see R A Stuart 349/68 and 350/42.

36
R A Stuart Box 1/326; 312/151; 313/65.

37
R A Stuart 311/32.

38
There is no direct record of the Berlin meeting in the Stuart Papers (which are very thin for this period), but for confirmation see SP France 233 f.400; 235 f.17; 240 f.126. Cf. also Edith Cuthell,
The Scottish Friend of Frederick the Great. The last Earl Marischal
(1915), 2 vols, i, p.241.

39
Add. MSS 33050 f.199.

40
R A Stuart Box 1/333.

41
R A Stuart 321/58.

42
R A Stuart 320/176.

43
R A Stuart 320/171.

44
The shrewdest observers saw that unless George II died too, the passing of Frederick alone, with five sons to succeed him, was not especially favourable for the Jacobite cause (Benedict XIV to Tencin, 28 April 1751, Morelli, ii, p.381).

45
R A Stuart 324/61,86.

46
S P France 242 ff.41,44.

47
S P France 233 f.354.

48
S P France 241 f.104; 242 f.46.

49
William Coxe,
Memoirs of the Administration of the Rt Hon. Henry Pelham
(1829), 2 vols, ii, p.404.

50
R A Stuart Box 1/337.

51
R A Stuart Box 1/336.

52
R A Stuart 323/37.

53
R A Stuart 323/35.

54
R A Stuart 325/5,17; 326/63.

55
Romney Sedgwick, ed.,
The History of Parliament; the House of Commons 1715–1754
(1970), 2 vols, i, pp.287–8.

56
R A Stuart 398/89.

57
Add. MSS 33050 f.197.

58
Sir Charles Petrie, ‘The Elibank Plot 1752–53’,
Royal Historical Society Transactions
, 4th series, 14, pp.175–96.

59
R A Stuart 348/94.

60
‘Two Fragments of Autobiography of Earl Marischal Keith’,
Miscellany of the Scottish History Society
, V, 3rd series (1933), p.367.

61
Sedgwick,
House of Commons
, op. cit., ii, pp.121–2.

62
Add. MSS 33050 f.199.

63
Ibid
., ff.196–7, 387.

64
A E C P, Angleterre, 431 ff.4–10; A E M D, Angleterre, 40 ff.222–37.

65
R A Stuart 318/123.

66
Add. MSS 33050 f.373.

67
Ibid
., f.196.

68
R A Stuart 347/70.

69
H M C, 11, vii, p.44. The Irish proposed embarking their men at Dublin, Drogheda, Rush and Sherrish and either landing them in six hours in North Wales or within twenty-four hours in Scotland (Add. MSS 33050 f.389).

70
Add. MSS 33050 f.381.

71
R A Stuart 333/39.

72
R A Stuart 330/141.

73
R A Stuart 332/145.

74
See below p.420.

75
For Pickle’s role in the Elibank Plot see Lang,
Pickle the Spy
, pp.145
ets eq
.

76
R A Stuart 330/1041.

77
R A Stuart 340/106.

78
R A Stuart 334/49,103; 335/90; 336/3.

79
R A Stuart 334/139,158; 335/14,18.

80
Her letter to James on 17 March 1752 contains not a word about the plot (R A Stuart 330/89).

81
S P France 245 f.144.

82
Add, MSS 32,840 f.268.

83
R A Stuart 337/31.

84
R A Stuart 334/118,150,166; cf. S P Tuscany 58 ff.162–3.

85
R A Stuart 340/32.

86
Add. MSS 3050 f.199.

87
S P France 245 f.11.

88
Pelham MSS Ne.2097.

89
R A Stuart 348/94.

90
Ibid
.

91
Add. MSS 33050 ff.389–90.

92
Pelham MSS Ne.2101.

93
Pelham MSS Ne.2199b; 2122–3b; 2200b.

94
Lang,
Pickle the Spy
, p.201.

95
Pelham MSS Ne.2122.

96
Stowe MSS 158 ff.204–10.

97
Add. MSS 32,844 f.104;
Daily Advertiser
, 12, 17, 19 April; 1 May 1753.

98
Gentleman’s Magazine
, 1753, p.292; Walpole,
Memoirs of the Reign of George II
, i, pp.333, 353–4.

99
Add. MSS 33050 f.196.

100
Pelham MSS Ne.2132–7. This is of course the famous episode immortalised in R. L. Stevenson’s
Kidnapped
. For confirmation of Alan Breck Stewart as the assassin (he received an increase in his Jacobite pension for the exploit), see R A Stuart Box 1/374A.

101
Marischal to Frederick, 16 February 1753,
Politische Correspondenz
, ix, pp.356–7.

102
Same to same, 7 May 1753,
Politische Correspondenz
, ix, pp.436–8.

103
S P France 248 ff.273,283.

104
Frederick to Michell, 16 June 1753,
Politische Correspondenz
, ix, pp.447–8.

105
See the exhaustive Jacobite analysis at R A Stuart 341/69.

106
S P France 240 ff.149,168,176.

107
S P France 241 ff.220, 279.

108
S P France 244 f.179. The rumour reached Rome where it was once again loftily dismissed by James (Morelli, ii, p.479).

109
Add. MSS 33050 f.409.

110
‘Had you entered into the view I formerly gave you, you had been probably at this time the father of a family, with a wife whom it would not have been beneath you to have married had you been in England.… I could almost say I would rather see you married to a private gentlewoman than that you should not be it at all.… If this letter has the same fate with many others I have writ to you, I might have saved myself the trouble of writing it’ (James to Charles Edward, 30 December 1750, R A Stuart 314/125; Browne, iv, pp.77–8).

111
King,
Anecdotes
, op. cit., p.201.

112
L M
, iii, pp.132–5; R A Stuart 341/58.