Florizel's Folly

by John Ashton

BUT how about Fox's denial of the Prince's marriage with Mrs. Fitzherbert? was that to pass unnoticed? Certainly not, and there was a slight disturbance in Florizel's matrimonial establishment, which may as well be told in Lord Stourton's suave diction.

'The first signal interruption to this ill-fated engagement arose from the pecuniary difficulties of his Royal Highness, when, on the question of the payment of his debts, Mr. Fox thought himself justified by some verbal, or written permission of the Prince, to declare to the House of Commons that no religious ceremony had united the parties. This public degradation of Mrs. Fitzherbert so compromised her character and her religion, and irritated her feelings, that she determined to break off all connection with the Prince, and she was only induced to receive him again into her confidence, by repeated assurances that Mr. Fox had never been authorised to make the declaration; and the friends of Mrs. Fitzherbert assured her, that, in this discrepancy as to the assertion of Mr. Fox and the Prince, she was bound to accept the word of her husband. She informed me that the public supported her, by their conduct, on this occasion; for, at no period of her life, were their visits so numerous to her house, as on the day which followed Mr. Fox's memorable speech; and, to use her own expression, the knocker of her door was never still during the whole day.

'I told her that I understood there was a scrap of paper from the Prince to Mr. Fox; that Sir John Throckmorton, a friend of his, had assured me of the fact of the Prince wishing much to obtain possession of it; but, though written on a dirty scrap of paper, it was much too valuable to be parted with. She said that she rather doubted the fact. I think that the difference between the assertions of the Prince and Mr. Fox may be accounted for under a supposition (which I have also heard) either that there was some ambiguity in the expressions used, or that Mr. Fox might have referred to what had passed, antecedently, at Devonshire House, without being privy to their subsequent more formal engagements.

'However this may be, an accommodation took place between Mrs. Fitzherbert and the Prince, though she, ever afterwards, resolutely refused to speak to Mr. Fox. She was, however, obliged to see him sometimes, and was much urged by the Prince to a reconciliation; but, though of a forgiving disposition upon other occasions, and even benefiting some who most betrayed her confidence, she was inflexible on this point, as it was one of the only means left her to protect her reputation. She thought she had been ill-used, in a most unjustifiable manner, by this public declaration before the House of Commons; especially as she had been waited upon by Mr. Sheridan, who had informed her, that some explanation would, probably, be required by Parliament, on the subject of her connection with the Heir apparent. She then told him, that they knew she was like a dog with a log round its neck, and they must protect her. She went so far with respect to Mr. Fox, that when, afterwards, during his administration, he made overtures to her, in order to recover her good will, she refused, though the attainment of the rank of Duchess was to be the fruit of their reconciliation. On naming this circumstance to me, she observed that she did not wish to be another Duchess of Kendal.'[50]

Gillray published a satirical print on May 21, 1787, entitled 'Dido Forsaken. Sic transit gloria Reginæ.' Mrs. Fitzherbert, crucifix in hand, is seated on a heap of ruins, in utter despair, whilst a breeze, blown by Pitt and Dundas, carries away her crown, orb, sceptre, and coronet, as Princess of Wales. In a boat named Honor, bound for Windsor, sail away the Prince, Fox (who steers), Lord North, and Burke. The Prince says, 'I never saw her in my life.' Fox clinches this with, 'No, never in his life, Damme.' North and Burke asseverate 'No, never.' On the ground lie fetters, an axe, rods, and a harrow, 'for the conversion of heretics,' being a delicate allusion to Mrs. Fitzherbert being a Roman Catholic.

However, the difference between the couple was made up, and they were in Brighton together early in July. The Prince evidently used some of his newly-got money on his seaside residence, for we read in the Morning Herald for July 3, 1787: 'Last Tuesday morning (26 June) as the painters were beautifying the great dome of the Prince of Wales's house at Brighthelmstone, the scaffolding broke down, whereby several of the workmen were killed, and others terribly wounded. His Royal Highness has caused enquiry to be made into the condition of their families, in order to give them relief.'

We hear very little of his stay at Brighton during this year. The Morning Herald of July 24 tells us: 'The Prince, we are happy to say, has derived much benefit from the air of Brighthelmstone, and the exercise which he has taken in its environs. We have never seen his Royal Highness in better health, or more apparent spirits than in his evening walks on the Steyne. His companions in these promenades, exclusive of the gentlemen of his suite, are, in general, Mrs. F——, with the Countess of Talbot, and Lady Stawell.'

In the same newspaper of August 6, we find under the heading 'Brighthelmstone, Aug. 3. This scene feels, at present, a temporary desertion from the general resort of the visitants to the races of Lewes. The Prince has also left it this morning, on hearing of the arrival of his brother, the Duke of York, from the Continent.

'The races above mentioned derived more celebrity from the brilliant attendance with which they were honoured, than from the sport which they afforded. The betting on the first day was so generally on the side of Marplot that eighty guineas to sixty, and immediately before starting sixty to forty were offered and refused. Mr. Fox took the odds that were offered against Balloon, to the amount of about five hundred pounds, and Mr. Tetherington is said to have cleared upwards of a thousand by the success of his horse Marplot.