London in the Jacobite times, Volume IIDoran, Dr. (John)
History
London in the Jacobite times, Volume II
Doran, Dr. (John)
London (England) -- History -- 18th century
Walpole reflects, but exaggerates, the opinions of London fashionable
society, on the marriage of Charles Edward. He knows little about the
bride. ‘The new Pretendress is said to be but sixteen, and a Lutheran.
I doubt the latter. If the former is true, I suppose they mean to carry
on the breed in the way it began――by a spurious child. A Fitz-Pretender
is an excellent continuation of the patriarchal line.’ At that time
the Royal Marriage Bill, which prohibited the princes and princesses
of the Royal Family from marrying without the consent of the Sovereign,
or, in certain cases, of Parliament, was being much discussed.
‘Thereupon,’ Mr. Chute says, ‘when the Royal Family are prevented from
marrying, it is a right time for the Stuarts to marry. This event
seems to explain the Pretender’s disappearance last autumn; and though
they sent him back from Paris, they may not dislike the propagation of
thorns in our side.’
In a subsequent letter, Walpole continues the subject. ‘I do not
believe,’ he says, ‘that she is a Protestant, though I have heard
from one who should know, General Redmond, an Irish officer in the
French service, that the Pretender himself abjured the Roman Catholic
religion at Liége, a few years ago, and that, on that account, the
Irish Catholics no longer make him remittances. This would be some, and
the only apology, but fear, for the Pope’s refusing him the title of
king. What say you to this Protestantism? At Paris they call his income
twenty-five thousand pound sterling a year. His bride has nothing but
many quarters. The Cardinal of York’s answer last year to the question
of _whither his brother was gone_? is now explained. “You told me,” he
replied, “_whither_ he should have gone a year sooner.”’
[Sidenote: _THE LAST HEADS ON TEMPLE BAR._]
The London papers of the 1st of April contained other information not
uninteresting to Jacobites. It was in this form:――‘Yesterday, one of
the rebel heads on Temple Bar fell down. There is only one head now
remaining.’ The remaining head fell shortly after. They were popularly
said to be those of Towneley and Fletcher; and, as before noticed,
there is a legend that Towneley’s head is still preserved in London.
The late Mr. Timbs, in his ‘London and Westminster,’ gives this account
of ‘the rebel heads’ and their farewell to the Bar:――‘Mrs. Black,
the wife of the editor of the ‘Morning Chronicle,’ when asked if she
remembered any heads on Temple Bar, used to reply in her brusque,
hearty way: “Boys, I recollect the scene well. I have seen on that
Temple Bar, about which you ask, two human heads――real heads――traitors’
heads――spiked on iron poles. There were two. I saw one fall (March
31st, 1772). Women shrieked as it fell; men, as I have heard, shrieked.
One woman near me fainted. Yes, boys, I recollect seeing human heads
on Temple Bar.”’ The spikes were not removed till early in the present
century.
[Sidenote: _DALRYMPLE’S ‘MEMOIRS.’_]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account