Andrew Lang.

Pickle the spy; online

. (page 3 of 23)
Online LibraryAndrew LangPickle the spy; → online text (page 3 of 23)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

familiar. We shall meet other pseudo-Chaikb*s.


works of art, lias become somewhat petulant, if not
arrogant, but he is still ' a lad with the bloom of a
lass.' A shade of aspiring melancholy marks a
portrait done in France, just before the expedition
to Scotland. Le Toque's fine portrait of the Prince
in armour (1748) shows a manly and martial but
rather sinister countenance. A plaster bust, done
from a life mask, if not from Le Moine's bust in
marble (1750), was thought the best likeness by Dr.
King. This bust was openly sold in Eed Lion Square,
and, when Charles visited Dr. King in September
1750, the Doctor's servant observed the resemblance.
I have seen a copy of this bust, and the medal
struck in 1750, an intaglio of the same date, and
a very rare profile in the collection of the Duke
of Atholl, give a similar idea of the Prince as he
was at thirty. A distinguished artist, who outlined
Charles's profile and applied it to another of Her
present Majesty in youth, tells me that they are
almost exact counterparts.

Next we come to the angry eyes and swollen
features of Ozias Humphreys's miniature, in the Duke
of Atholl's collection, and in his sketch published in
the ' Lockhart Papers' (1776), and, finally, to the
fallen weary old face designed by Gavin Hamilton.
Charles's younger brother, Henry, Duke of York,
was a prettier bo}*, but it is curious to mark the
prematurely priestly and ' Italianate ' expression of
the Duke in youth, while Charles still seems a merry
lad. Of Charles in boyhood many anecdotes are


told. At the age of two or three he is said to have
been taken to see the Pope in his garden, and to have
refused the usual marks of reverence. Walton, the
English agent in Florence, reports an outbreak of
ferocious temper in lToo. 1 Though based on gossip,
the story seems to forebode the later excesses of
anger. Earlier, in 1727, the Due de Liria, a son
of Marshal Berwick, draws a pretty picture of the
child when about seven years old : —

' The Kins of England did not wish me to leave
before May 4, and I was only too happy to remain at
his feet, not merely on account of the love and re-
spect I have borne him all my life, but also because
I was never weary of watching the Princes, his sons.
The Prince of Wales was now six and a half, and,
besides his great beauty, was remarkable for dexterity,
grace, and almost supernatural cleverness. Not only
could he read fluently, but he knew the doctrines of
the Christian faith as well as the master who had
taught him, He could ride ; could fire a gun ; and,
more surprising still, I have seen him take a cross-
bow and kill birds on the roof, and split a rolling
ball with a shaft, ten times in succession. He speaks
English, French, and Italian perfectly, and altogether
he is the most ideal Prince I have ever met in the
course of my life.

' The Duke of York, His Majesty's second son, is
two years old, and a prodigy of beauty and strength.' 2

1 Ewald, i. 41.

2 Document os Incditos. Madrid. 1883. Vol. xciii. 18.



Gray, certainly no Jacobite, when at Borne with
Horace Walpole speaks very kindly of the two gay
young Princes. He sneers at their melancholy
father, of whom Montesquieu writes, ' ce Prince
a une bonne pliysionomie et noble. 11 paroit triste,
pieux! 1 Young Charles was neither pious nor

Of Charles at the age of twenty, the President de
Brosses (the author of 'Les Dieux Fetiches') speaks
as an unconcerned observer. ' I hear from those
who know them both thoroughly that the eldest has
far higher worth, and is much more beloved by his
friends ; that he has a kind heart and a high courage ;
that he feels warmly for his family's misfortunes, and
that if some day he does not retrieve them, it will not
be for want of intrepidity.' 2

Charles's gallantry when under fire as a mere
boy, at the siege of Gaeta (1734), was, indeed, greatly
admired and generally extolled. 3 His courage has
been much more foolishly denied by his enemies than
too eagerly applauded by friends who had seen him
tried by every species of danger.

Aspersions have been thrown on Charles's per-
sonal bravery ; it may be worth while to comment on
them. The story of Lord Elcho's reproaching the
Prince for not heading a charge of the second line
at Culloden, has unluckily been circulated by Sir

1 Voyages de Montesquieu. Bordeaux, 1894. P. 250.

2 Letters of De Brosses, as translated by Lord Stanhope, iii. 72.

3 See authorities in Ewald, i. 48-50.

//. SnfiMire.paud

':%: i^,,,,,- ,./^/ '„/;■.,



Walter Scott. On February 9, 1S2G, Scott met Sir
James Stuart Denham, father was out in the
Forty-live, and whose uncle was the Lord Elclio of
that date. Lord Elclio wrote memoirs, still unpub-
lished, but used by Mr. Ewald in his ' Life of the
Prince.' Elclio is a hostile witness : for twenty years
he vainly dunned Charles for a debt of I.500Z.
According to Sir James Stuart Denham, Elclio asked
Charles to lead a final charge at Culloden, retrieve
the battle, or die sword in hand. The Prince rode
off the field, Elclio calling him ' a damned, cowardly
Italian .'

No such passage occurs in Elcho's diary. He says
that, after the flight, he found Charles, in the belief
that he had been betrayed, anxious only for his Irish
officers, and determined to go to France, not to join
the clans at Euthven. Elclio most justly censured
him, and resolved ' never to have anything more to
do with him,' a broken vow ! l As a matter of fact,
Sir Eobert Strange saw Charles vainly trying to rally
the Highlanders, and Sir Stuart Thriepland of Fingask
gives the same evidence. 2

In his seclusion during 1750, Charles wrote a
little memoir, still unpublished, about his Highland
wanderings. In this he says that he was ' led off the
field by those about him,' when the clans broke at
Culloden. ' The Prince then changed his horse, his


1 Ewald, ii. 30. Scott's Journal, i. 114.

2 Dennistoun's Life of Strange, i. 63, and an Abbotsford manu-

c 2


own having been wounded by a musket-ball in the
shoulder.' *

The second-hand chatter of Hume, in his letter to
Sir John Pringle (February lo, 1773), is unworthy
of serious attention.

Helvetius told Hume that his house at Paris had
sheltered the Prince in the years following his ex-
pulsion from France, in 1748. He called Charles
' the most unworthy of mortals, insomuch that I have
been assured, when he went down to Nantz to em-
bark on his expedition to Scotland, he took fright
and refused to go on board ; and his attendants,
thinking the matter gone too far, and that they
would be affronted for his cowardice, carried him in
the night time into the ship, pieds et mains lies.'

The sceptical Hume accepts this absurd state-
ment without even asking, or at least without giving,
the name of Helvetius's informant. The adventurer
who insisted on going forward when, at his first
landing in Scotland, even Sir Thomas Sheridan, with
all the chiefs present, advised retreat, cannot con-
ceivably have been the poltroon of Hume's myth.
Even Hume's correspondent, Sir John Pringle, was
manifestly staggered by the anecdote, and tells Hume
that another of his fables is denied by the very wit-
ness to whom Hume appealed. 2 Hume had cited
Lord Holdernesse for the story that Charles's presence

1 Stuart Papers, in the Queen's Library. Also the Lockhart
Papers mention the wounding of the horse.

2 Life and Correspondence of David Hume. Hill Burton, ii.


in London in 17-53 (1750 seems to be meant) was
known at the time to George II. Lord Holdernesse
declared that there was nothing in the tale given by
Hume on his authority ! That Charles did not join
the rallied clans at Kuthven after Culloden was the
result of various misleading circumstances, not of
cowardice. Even after 1746 he constantly carried
his life in his hand, not only in expeditions to Eng-
land (and probably to Scotland and Ireland), but
in peril from the daggers of assassins, as will later
be shown.

High-spirited and daring, Charles was also hardy.
In Italy he practised walking without stockings, to
inure his feet to lon^ marches : he was devoted to
boar-hunting, shooting, and golf. 1 He had no touch
of Italian effeminacy, otherwise he could never have
survived his Highland distresses. In travelling he
was swift, and incapable of fatigue. * He has,' said
an early observer, ' the habit of keeping a secret.''
Many secrets, indeed, he kept so well that history is
still baffled by them, as diplomatists were perplexed
between 1749 and 1766. 2

We may discount Murray of Broughton's eulogies
on Charles's Greek, Latin, and Hebrew, and his know-
ledge of history and philosophy, though backed by the
Jesuit Cordara. 3 Charles's education had been inter-
rupted by quarrels between his parents about Catholic

1 Jacobite Memoirs. Lord Elcho's MS. Journal. Ewald, i. 77.

2 State Papers Domestic. 1745. No. 79.

3 Genuine Memoirs of John Murray of Brougliton. La Spedizione
di Carlo Stuart.


or Protestant tutors. His cousin and governor,
Sir Thomas Sheridan (a descendant of James II.),
certainly did not teach him to spell; his style in
French and English is often obscure, and, when it
is clear, we know not whether he was not inspired
by some more literary adviser. In matters of taste
he was fond of music and archeology, and greatly
addicted to books. De Brosses, however, considered
him ' less cultivated than Princes should be at his
a<">~e ' and d'Amenson savs that his knowledge was
scanty and that he had little conversation. A few of
his books, the morocco tooled with the Prince of
Wales's feathers, remain, but not enough to tell us
much about his literary tastes. On these, however,
we shall give ample information. In Paris, after
Culloden, he bought Macchiavelli's works, probably
in search of practical hints on state-craft. In spite
of a proclamation by Charles, which Montesquieu
applauded, he certainly had no claim to a seat in
the French Academy, which Montesquieu playfully
offered to secure for him.

In brief, Charles was a spirited, eager boy, very
capable of patience, intensely secretive, and, as he
showed in 1745-1746, endowed with a really extra-
ordinary clemency, and in one regard, where his
enemies were concerned, with a sense of honour
most unusual in his generation. His care for the
wounded, after Prestonpans, is acknowledged by the
timid and Whiggish Home, in his 'History of the
Rebellion,' and is very warmly and gracefully ex-


pressed in a letter to his father, written atHolyrood. 1
He could not be induced to punish miscreants who
attempted his life and snapped pistols in his face.
He could hardly be compelled to retort to the English
offer of 30,000/. for his head by issuing a similar
proclamation about ' the Elector.' ' I smiled and
treated it' (the proclamation of a reward of 30,000/.
for his head) ' with the disdain it deserved, upon
which they ' (the Highlanders) ' flew into a violent
rage, and insisted upon my doing the same by him.'
This occurs in a letter from Charles to James, Sep-
tember 10, 174-3, dated from Perth. A copy is found
among Bishop Forbes's papers. Here Charles de-
plores the cruelties practised under Charles II. and
James II., and the consequent estrangement of the
Duke of Argyll. 2

In brief, the contest between Charles and Cum-
berland was that of a civilised and chivalrous com-
mander against a foe as treacherous and cruel as a
Huron or an Iroquois. On this point there is no
possibility of doubt. The English Government
offered a vast reward for Charles, dead or alive.
The soldiers were told significantly, by Cumberland,
that he did not want prisoners. On the continent
assassins lurked for the Prince, and ambassadors
urged the use of personal violence. Meanwhile the
Prince absolutely forbade even a legitimate armed

1 Treasury Papers. 1745. No. 214. First published by Mr.
Ewabt, i. 21.").

2 Jacobite Memoirs, p. 32.


attack directed mainly against his enemy, then red-
handed from the murder of the wounded.

With this loyalty to his foes, with this clemency
to enemies in his power, Charles certainly combined
a royal grace, and could do handsome things hand-
somely. Thus, in 1745, some of the tenants of
Oliphant of Gask would not don the white cockade
at his command. He therefore 'laid an arrest or
inhibition on their corn-fields.' Charles, finding the
grain hanging dead-ripe, as he marched through
Perthshire, inquired the cause, and when he had
learned it, broke the ' taboo ' by cutting some ears
with his sword, or by gathering them and giving
them to his horse, saying that the farmers might
now, by his authority, follow his example and break
the inhibition. 1

Making every allowance for an enthusiasm of
loyalty on the part of the narrators in Bishop Forbes's
MS. 'Lyon in Mourning' (partly published by Eobert
Chambers in 'Jacobite Memoirs 2 ), it is certain that
the courage, endurance, and gay content of the
Prince in his Highland wanderings deserve the high
praise given by Smollett. Thus, in many ways we
see the elements of a distinguished and attractive
character in Charles. His enemies, like the rene-
gade Dr. King, of St. Mary's Hall (ob. 1763), in his

1 Chambers's Rebellion of 1745, i. 71. The authority is ' Tra-

2 I have read parts of Forbes's manuscript in the Advocates'
Library, but difficulties were made when I wished to study it for this


posthumous ' Anecdotes,' accused the Prince of
avarice. He would borrow money from a lady, says
King, while he had plenty of his own ; he neglected
those who had ruined themselves for his sake. Henry
Goring accused the Prince of shabbiness to his face,
but assuredly he who insisted on laying down money
on the rocks of a deserted fishers' islet to pay for
some dry fish eaten there by himself and his com-
panions — he who gave liberally to gentle and simple
out of the treasure buried near Loch Arkaig, who
refused a French pension for himself, and asked
favours only for his friends — afforded singular proofs
of Dr. King's charge of selfish greed. The fault grew
on him later. After breaking with the French Court
in 1748, Charles had little or nothing of his own to
give away. His Sobieski jewels he had pawned for
the expenses of the war, having no heart to wear
them, he said, ' on this side of the water.' He was
often in actual need, though we may not accept
d'Argenson's story of how he was once seen selling his
pistols to a gun-maker. 1 If ever he was a miser, that
vice fixed itself upon him in his utter moral ruin.

Were there, then, no signs in his early life of the
faults which grew so rapidly when hope was lost ?
There were such signs. As early as 1742, James
had observed in Charles a slight inclination to wine
and gaiet}^, and believed that his companions,
especially Francis Strickland, 2 were setting him

1 D'Argenson's Mcmoircs.

2 This gentleman died at Carlisle in 1745, according to Bishop
Forbes. Jacobite Memoirs, p. 4.


against his younger brother, the Duke of York, who
had neither the health nor the disposition to be a
roysterer. 1

Again, on February 3, 1747, James recurs, in a
long letter, to what passed in 1742, ' because that is
the foundation, and I may say the key, of all that
has followed.' Now in 1742 Murray of Broughton
paid his first visit to Home, and was fascinated by
Charles. This unhappy man, afterwards the Judas
of the cause, was unscrupulous in private life in
matters of which it is needless to speak more fully,
He was, or gave himself the air of being, a very
stout Protestant. James employed him, but probably
liked him little. It is to be gathered, from James's
letter of February 3, 1747, that he suspected Charles
of listening to advice, probably from Murray, about
his changing his religion. ' You cannot forget how
you were prevailed upon to speak to your brother '
(the devout Duke of York) ' on very nice and delicate
subjects, and that without saying the least thing to
me, though we lived in the same house. . . . You
were then much younger than you are now, and
therefore could be more easily led by specious argu-
ments and pretences. ... It will, to be sure, have
been represented to you that our religion is a great
prejudice to our interest, but that it may in some
measure be remedied by a certain free way of
thinking and acting.' 2

1 Stuart MSS. in Windsor Castle.

2 Stuart Papers. Browne's History of the Highland Clans, iii.


Iii 1749 James made a disagreeable discover)',
which lie communicated to Lord Lismore. A cassette,
or coffer, belonging to Charles, had, apparently, been
left in Paris, and, after many adventures on the road,
was brought to Borne bv the French ambassador.
James opened it, and found that it contained letters
' from mvself and the Queen.' Bat it also offered
proof that the Prince had carried on a secret corre-
spondence with England, long before he left Eome
in 1744. Probably his adherents wished James to
resign in his favour. 1

As to religion, Dr. Kino;- admits that Charles was
no bigot, and d'Argenson contrasted his disengaged
way of treating theology with the exaggerated
devoutness of the Duke of York. Even during the
march into England, Lord Elcho told an inquirer
that the Prince's religion 'was still to seek.' As-
suredly he would never make shipwreck on the
Stuart fidelity to Catholicism. All this was deeply
distressing to the pious James, and all this dated from
1742, that is, from the time of Murray of Broughton's
visit to Eome. Indifference to religious strictness
was, even then, accompanied by a love of wine, in
some slight degree. Already, too, a little rift in the
friendship of the princely brothers was apparent ;
there were secrets between them which Henry must
have communicated to James.

As for the fatal vice of drink, it is hinted at on
April 15, 1747, by an anonymous Paris correspondent

1 James to Lismore. June 23, 1749. Stuart MSS.


of Lord Dunbar's. Charles had about him ' an Irish
cordelier,' one Kelly, whom he employed as a secre-
tary. 1 Kelly is accused of talking contemptuously
about James. ' It were to be wished that His Eoyal
Highness would forbid that friar his apartment,
because he passes for a notorious drunkard . . . and
His Eoyal Highness's character, in point of sobriety,
lias been a little blemished on this friar's account.' 2

The cold, hunger, and fatigue of the Highland
distresses had, no doubt, often prompted recourse to
the national dram of whiskey, and Charles would put
a bottle of brandy to his lips ' without ceremony,' says
Bishop Forbes. The Prince on one occasion is said
to have drunk the champion ' bowlsman ' of the
Islands under the table. 3

What had been a jovial feast became a custom,
a consolation, and a curse, while there is reason, as
has been seen, to suppose that Charles, quite early
in life, showed promise of intemperance. In happier
circumstances these early tastes might never have
been developed into a positive disease. James himself,
in youth, had not been a pattern of strict sobriety,
but later middle age found him almost ascetic.

We have sketched a character endowed with
many fine qualities, and capable of winning devoted
affection. We now examine the rapid decline of a
nature originally noble.

Returned from Scotland in 1746, Prince Charles

1 See Appendix A.

2 Stanhope. Vol. iii. Appendix, p. xl.

3 Jacobite Memoirs.


brought with him a head full of indigested romance,
a heart rich in chimerical expectations. He now
prided himself on being a plain hardy mountaineer.
He took a line of his own; he concealed his measures
from the spy-ridden Court of his father in Borne ; he
quarrelled with his brother, the Duke of York, when
the Duke accepted a cardinal's hat. He broke
violently with the French king, who would not aid
him. He sulked at Avignon. He sought Spanish
help, which was refused. He again became the
centre of fashion and of disaffection in Paris. Ladies
travelled from England merely to see him in his box
at the theatre. Princesses and duchesses ' pulled
caps for him.' Naturally cold (as his enemies
averred) where women were concerned, he was now
beleaguered, besieged, taken by storm by the fair.
He kept up the habit of drinking which had been
noted in him even before his expedition to Scotland.
He allowed his old bojnsh scepticism (caused by a
mixed Protestant and Catholic education) to take
the form of studied religious indifference. After
defying and being expelled by Louis XV., he adopted
(what has never, perhaps, been observed) the wild
advice of d'Argenson (' La Bete,' and Louis's ex-
minister of foreign affairs), he betook himself to a life
of darkling adventures, to a hidden and homeless exile.
In many of his journeys he found Pickle in his path,
and Pickle finally made his labours vain. The real
source of all this imbroglio, in addition to an exas-
perated daring and a strangely secretive tempera-


merit, was a deep, well-grounded mistrust of the
people employed by his father, the old ' King- over
the water.' Whatever James knew was known in
London by next mail. Charles was aware of this,
and was not aware that his own actions were almost
as successfully spied upon and reported. He there-
fore concealed his plans and movements from James,
and even — till Pickle came on the scene — from
Europe and from England. The result of his reti-
cence was an irremediable rupture between ' the
King and the Prince of Wales — over the water,' an
incurable split in the Jacobite camp.

The general outline here sketched must now be
filled up in detail. The origo mail was the divisions
among the Jacobites. Ever since 171-5 these had
existed and multiplied. Mar was thought to be a
traitor. Atterbury, in exile, suspected O'Brien
(Lord Lismore). The Earl Marischal and Kelly 1
were set against James's ministers, Lord Sempil,
Lord Lismore, and Balhaldie, the exiled chief of the
Macgregors. Lord Dunbar (Murray, brother of Lord
Mansfield) was in James's disgrace at Avignon
Sempil, Balhaldie, Lismore were ' the King's party,'
opposed to Marischal, Kelly, Sheridan, LalJy Tollen-
dal, 'the Prince's party.' Each sect inveighed
against the other in unmeasured terms of reproach.
This division widened when Charles was in France,
just before the expedition to Scotland.

^ 1 The Kelly of Atterbury's Conspiracy, long a prisoner in the Tower.
It is fair to add that Bulkeley, Montesquieu's friend, defended Kelly.


One of James's agents in Paris, Lord Sempil,
writes to him on July 5, 1745, with warnings against
the Prince's counsellors, especially Sir Thomas
Sheridan (Charles's governor, and left-handed cousin)
and Kelly. They, with Tally Tollendal and others,
arranged the descent on Scotland without the know-
ledge of James or Sempil, whom Charles and his
party bitterly distrusted, as they also distrusted
Tord Lismore (O'Brien), James's other agent. While
the Prince was in Scotland (1745-1746), even before
Prestonpans, the Jacobite affairs in France were
perplexed by the action of Lismore, Sempil, and
Balhaldie, acting for James, while the old Earl
Marischal (who had been in the rising of 1715, and
the Gdenshiel affair of 1719) acted for the Prince.
With the Earl Marischal was, for some time, Lord
Clancarty, of whom Sempil speaks as ' a very
brave and worthy man.' x On the other hand,
Oliver Macallester, the spy, describes Clancarty, with
whom he lived, as a slovenly, drunken, blaspheming
rogue, one of whose eyes General Braddock had
knocked out with a bottle in a tavern brawl ! Clan-
carty gave himself forth as a representative of the
English Jacobites, but d'Argenson, in his ' Memoires,'
says he could produce no names of men of rank
in the party except his own. D'Argenson was
pestered by women, priests, and ragged Irish adven-
turers. In September 1745, the Earl Marischal and
Clancarty visited d'Argenson, then foreign minister

1 Stuart Tapers. Browne, iii. 433. September 13, 1745.


of Louis XV. iii the King's camp in Flanders. They
asked for aid, and the scene, as described by the spy
Macallester, on Clancarty's information, was curious.
D'Amenson taunted the Lord Marischal with not
being at Charles's side in Scotland. To the slovenly

1 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Online LibraryAndrew LangPickle the spy; → online text (page 3 of 23)