William Fitzhardinge Berkeley Fitzhardinge.

A narrative of the minutes of evidence respecting the claim to the Berkeley peerage, as taken before the Committee of privileges in 1811. Together with the entire evidence of the persons principally concerned. To which are added, facsimiles of the banns, and register of the marriage: extracted from online

. (page 4 of 22)
Online LibraryWilliam Fitzhardinge Berkeley FitzhardingeA narrative of the minutes of evidence respecting the claim to the Berkeley peerage, as taken before the Committee of privileges in 1811. Together with the entire evidence of the persons principally concerned. To which are added, facsimiles of the banns, and register of the marriage: extracted from → online text (page 4 of 22)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


taken that nobody should see him.

By what name did your ladyship go, while you were at
that house ? — I think by my own name. I think that per*
sons who knew me called me Miss Cole.

Constantly ? — I cannot recollect, but I rather suppose so^

After the marriage, and when your ladyship had taken
the name of Miss Tudor, does your ladyship mean to say,
that from the time of your coming in May to Gloucester
till you left it in August or September, you went constantly
by the name of Cole ? — I do not recollect ; those who knew
irie, I think, must have called me by the name of Cole. ^qqIp

Does your ladyship recollect any berson calling you by^



( 33 )

>?^ Was your hdysbip^s sister unacquainted with the mar-
^ Tiage? — While I was in Gloucester my sister was onac^
quainted with the marriage.

From May to August or Septanber 1785 ? — Yes.

When was your ladyship's mother acquainted with the
marriage? — ^In 1786, so &r as I recollect; but I am not
speaking positively that she had a knowledge of it at that
time.

Was your ladyship living with your mother at the time
it was settled that there was to be a marriage ? — No.

Where was your ladyship's mother then living? — lo
Gloucester, 1 believe; I was in Kent when it was settled
that I was to be married ; and my mother was then in
Gloucester.

Where was Mr. Tudor living at the time it was commu*
nicated to him that there was to be this marriage upon the
30th March, 1785 ? — ^If he was not with Mr. Parker he
must have been living with his sister, Mrs. Farren, at that
time.

Does your ladyship know who cemrounicated to lum
that there was to be this marriage on the 30tb of March,
1785 ? — ^I did it myself before the banns were published,
and before I left Kent, by letter.

Does your ladyship recollect in what month it was that
you communicated that circumstance to Mr. Tudor?—
When I wrote to him, it was fixed on what days the banns
should be published, because 1 was anxious that he should
go over to Berkeley to hear them publish^.

Was it fixed at that time on what day the marriage
should take place ? — No.

When was that communicated to Mr. Tudor? — ^It was
conmiunicated from London, bqt I cannot fix the exact
date.

In what month ?— I think in March ; I am certain it was
in March.

That was by letter too ? — ^Tt was.

Bow old was your ladyship's brother at the time he was
made the confident of this secret ?— I cannot tell, but it
mav be easily known.

About the age of sixteen?— I do not know exactly at
this moment, but I think it may be about the age roeiegle
(ioned.



Digitized by



Google



( 35 )

Tout ladjr^p ioes n^t recollect any m^Rber of the
bmily, or any persdki who had ever before called him by
thenaineof Tador? — No; I do not recollect any thing
About it.

He w^ always called W flie name of William Cole ? — t
eaiiDot say that be was; I Was not with him.

How came he to take.tip the name of Tudor in 1784?—
I always understood that we had relations of the name of
Tudor, and I remember once going to Malvern Hills to visit
tm aunt ; I had always understood from my eldest sister
that thm was some relation of the name of Tudor, but 1
cannot take inxMi me to answar more distinctly.

Your ladysnip will have the goodness to state who that
annt was ?— I cannot state who that aunt was, but I re*
member b^ig taken to Malvern Hills when I was quite t
ehikL

Does your ladyship recollect in what situation that
aunt was ?— *I thi^ she was in a veiygood situation; shft
was living in a temporary residence at Great Malvern.

A sin^e person ? — ^I cannot recollect whether she wat
iingle or married ; she had a temporary residaice at Great
Malvern.

Does your ladyship know where her usual residaice
was ? — ^No, I do not*

During ihe time your ladyship was at Southgate-street
at Mrs. Farren'Sy from the monto of May to the month at
August or September following, does your ladyship re-
member being visited by any barrister there ?— -Tes ; I do:

What was his name ? — ^Pendall.

Was your ladyship previously acquamted with him ?— I
cannot recollect whether I saw him onoe or twice. Ha
drank tea once or twice at my aster's.

Had your ^dyship ever been acquainted wi& him prior
to the time of his coming to drink tea vfith you?— I can<«
not recoUect whether I luul or not, or whether my sista^
had met him or not.

Did he come alooe or witii any other gentieoian?'^
think he came alone.

Did he repeat his visits? — ^I think he was there twice, ^
^ as I recollect rr^n^n]o

Digitized by VjOOyiC



I 36 )

Did your ladyship ever correspond with him ?— I wrote
one letter to him.

Where ? — He went the circuit, and wrote to me.

Has your ladyship a copy of that letter? — No; but 1
should like to read to the House of Lords, a letter which 1
wrote to a friend of his to shew him, six months ago, in
consequence Of his having taken great liberties in repre-
senting the transactions, because I am sure no blame or
spot whatever can be attached to my character.

Your ladyship recollects having written one letter to
him ? — Yes ; I did ; and if it could be produced, that
would at once clear up the whole thing, without my pro-
ducing the letter to wnich I have now alluded.

Your ladyship never sent, through the medium of any
person, to desire to have your letter delivered up to you? —
Wo; but I heard Mr.Fendall had talked on the subject by
insinuation, and not speaking out, that he knew a great
deal of Lady Berkeley ; and I wrote a letter to Mr. West-
laling, stating the transaction, which letter was put into
Mr. Fendall's hands, and he sent his compliments back to
me, and that he knew no more of the circumstances of the
marriage than what I stated in the letter.

Requesting fo know whether the letter she had men-
tioned might be read,

Mr. Attorney-General submitted it was not admissible :
but left it to the decision of the House.

Then her ladyship was informed, that in point of form
the letter could not now be read.

Your ladyship spoke of bein^^ acquainted with Lord
Berkeley when you were at Mrs. Clark's school ; was Lord
Berkeley living in Gloucester at the time you speak of
being acquainted with him ; at the time your ladyship
was at school? — I do not know if he was then living in
Gloucester.

At any time prior to your ladyship's leaving Gloucester
for good, was he at any time resident in Gloucester? — I
cannot answer that question.

Was not your ladyship sufficiently acquainted with
Lord Berkeley to know where he hved ?-— ^oQ^^'§|^



( 37 )

i Was that the case at the time your ladyship first became
acquainted with him? — I cannot answer that question.

Will your ladyship try to recollect whether Lord Berke-
ley was* with the militia, then assembled at Gloucester,
when your ladyship became acquainted with him ? — I can-
not recollect,

Tour ladyship remembers the militia being embodied at
Gloucester ? — i es, at times, certainly.

Can your ladyship recollect when you first saw the
militia embodied at Gloucester ? — ^No, I cannot

How long before the marriage ? — ^I do not know that
I ever saw it before the marriage, at any certain period of
time.

Your ladyship does not recollect bavins: seen Lord
Berkeley in Gloucester, with the militia, before the mar-
riage? — I cannot say whether I did or did not ; I dare say
thatlhiave; Ijut I desire not to speak positively on my
oath to that fact.

Whether it was a year, or two years, or three years be-
fore, your ladyship does not precisely recollect ? — I do not
know any thing of the militia.

The question is. Whether your ladyship saw Lord
Berkeley in Gloucester, with the militia, before the mar-
riage ? — I dare say I did.

After your ladyship went to London, in the month of
August or September 1785, where did you go to? — I had
a lodging in George-street, Hanover-square.

That lodging was taken by Lord Berkeley ? — Yes, it was.

Did your ladyship continue to live there for some time ?
— ^I remained there while my bouse in Park-street was

rreparing for my reception, and in the beginning of 17 8()
went to that house.

From the beginning of 1786 to December 1786, where
did your ladyship live in London ? — In Park-street.

All the time ? — Yes; unless I went to Cianford, wbicAil
do not at this time recollect ; I know that 1 did at un\es
gro to Cranford from London.

Js it to be understood that your ladyship, after your re-
turn to London in August or September 1785, lived alone •^
in Jodgings provided by Lord Berkeley, until the 'Uii'^i^ /^^^

Digitized by LjOOQ IC



( 38 )

No female Uved with your ladyfehip?— No female lived
me certainly*

Does your ladyship recollect how you w6nt up to Lon-
don in August or September 1785?-**'No; 1 do not
recollect

Was it in the Stage ? — I rather think it was.

Does you ladyship recollect being met by a porter at the
Gloucester coffee-house when you arrived ?— No ; 1 do not
remember having been met by a porter at the Gloucester
coffee-house.

Docs your ladyship recollect to what house you went
from the Gloucester coffee-house on your arrival when you
alighted from the stage? — To Mount-street or South-
street ; I rather think Mount-street, one of th6 lodgings I
have mentioned.

The question related to your going to London in August
or September 1785?— No; I did not uuderj^tand that; if
it was meant after I had resided in Gloucester I went to
George-street.

Is that the time your ladyship went in the stage-coach ?
—Yes ; I think it was a machine called a Diligence.

Without any companion ? — 1 think so.

There might be casual travellers; but there was no per-
son went with your ladyship to London ?— No companion
of my own.

Where did your sister Turner live at that time?— I
cannot tell.

Did your ladyship cease to be acquainted with her on
your return to London in 1785 ? — I cannot say I ceased to
be acquainted with her ; the last time I ever saw her Was
in 1786.

Did you not continue to be on the same friendly footing
with your sister Turner on your return in August 1785 as
you had been before ?— Not quite.

Did you visit one another ? — Seldom.

Was your ladyship in her house ? — Yes ; when my eldest
sister came from Gloucester she was there,

\\£»s your ladyship yourself ever living in the house, of
your sister Turner after you came to London in August oi*
September 1785? — No; not after August or September

1785 ? Digitized by Google



( ap )

Before thai ntfrmge took place it what pamh wen
Lord Berkeley and your ladyship TesidentP^^In Spring-
gardens, where I live now.

Wins j^our ladyship constantly resident for some time be*
p^re that marriage took place in Spring-gardens ?«**<-Excepfc
when I was at Cranfoid or Berkeley Castle, those and
Spring-^irdens were the usual places of our residence.

Did you for six months prior to the marriage in 1796
reside at any other place at aJl ?*-*-Perhaps I might be at
Weymouth, but I cannot exactly point out

The question is four or five months prior to May 1796?
-—I might have been at Berkeley ; I was not in London ;
I tbTnk I was not at Lambeth.

But in one of the three places yotir ladyship has men-
tioned ? — ^Yes.

Where was the first son that was horn after the Booond
marriage baptized first ?-^At St. Martin's in the Fields.

Had he been privately baptized at Spring-gardens ? - ^I
forget whether he was or not.

Does your lady^p recollect whether any private in-
^Tuctioas were given by any body for the name by which
be was to he baptized ? — ^o ; I do not recollect

Was your ladyship present when he was baptized ?— *
Yes ; I am sure I was*

What name was he baptised by?*^Tliomas M(»tMi
Fitzhardinge.

No other name ?-^No-

Was he not baptized by the name of Lord Dursley, fn
that name inserted in the roister ?

Mr. S^jeant Best oi^ected to the questicm, stating, that
the i^istry was the proper evidence.

Wbo,^if ^ny IMy, gave directions for his being registor*
ed by the name of Lord Dursley ?-^I do not recollect at
this period; but if I had been considted I should not have*
objected.

Does your ladyship reccdkct whether you did or not
know that be was roistered a3 Lord Dursley ?— I father
think I did know it ; but I would not speak too positively^

Does not your ladyship know that it was by the direction
of Lord BWkeley hinjself ffivco in writing that he was re*
gistered Lord Dursley ? — ^o ; I do not toow it ; if it vrv



Digitized by



Google



( 41 )

Did Mr. Bearcroft besides send any written opinion to
your lad]rship or Lord Berkeley ? — No ; he did not know
'wfao I was.

Does your ladyship recollect Mr. Carrington having the
care and tuition of your ladyship's children ? — Yes.

Upon what occasion was it that Mr. Carrington quitted ;
that situation, when he shortly after returned to it ? — ^It
was on account of the saiary ; he wished for more salary
than Lord Beiicel^ chose to giye.

Your ladyship, in your original examination^ stated, that
thare were reasons for concealing the first marriage, whidi
continued till the year 1794 ? — Yes.

. What were those reasons? — They were the same reasoo»
as my husband in his life-time was excused from giving
'to this house.

What were those reasons which produced a t^npoiary
concealment of the marriage? — Mr. Serjeant Best as
counsel for the claimant, informed the committee, that, on
the former, enquiry. Lord Berkeley stated, that there were
particular reasons for concealii^ the marriage, but which»
to avoid wounding the feelings of a particular person, be
did not wish then to bring forward ; to prove, however,
that they did exist, be had communicated them in private
and amongst others to His Royal Highness the Prince
R^;ent

The counsel were informed that if he meant to mak«
that statement as a ground of objection to the question
being asked, it was no legal objection.

Mr. Serjeant Best stating that he did not offer it as a ,
l^al ground of objection, he was informed that the counsel .
were to put sudi questions as they might think proper to
propose, and if not improper, the committee would enter-
taih them.

Then her ladyship withdrew.

The House havit^ adjourned to the 2d of May, bet
ladyship was again examined, and was asked.

What were the reasons, if any existed, which induced
the poncealment of the marriage in 1785, from the year
1785 to the year 1794: and which concealment terminated^



Digitized by



Google



( 43 )

That was in the year 1784 ; the question is, whether
your ladyship went to that sister, or under her roof, at any
time subsequent to March 1785, when your ladyship state*
you were married ? — I was married ; hut I never lived with
my sister after I was married ; and before that I had a
lodering.

That sister lived in London? — I cannot tell where she
lived after I was married, in any distinct place after the
year 1785.

What was the Christian name of that sister ? — Susanna, *

Whether, when your ladyship returned to London from
Gloucester about the latter end of 1785, you did not return
to the house of that sister ? — ^No, not to live there.

Did your ladyship board with that sister, or take your
meals with that sister? — Aft^r I returned from Gloucester
ID 1785, no.

Did not your ladyship visit that sister at her house or
Iddgings after your return from Gloucester the latter end
of 1785 ?— I did visit her, and took great pains to deliver
her from her situation, till the beginning of 1786; and from
that time 1 never saw her.

Was it with the knowledge of Lord Berkeley that your
ladyship visited that sister ? — ^Lord Berkeley was quite as
anxious tQ remove her from her situation as I was.

Then, except as occasional visits, you were not sleeping^
or taking your meals with her ? — I might have dined with
her, but certainly was not living with her.

Your ladyship means, you did not live with her for a
week at a time ? — Xo, I think I never was in the house of
my sister for a week together, after I returned from Glou-
cester in the year 1785.

Whether, when your ladyship went down from London
to Newport the day before your marriacre, you went with
anyl>ody or alone ? — ^I went from London alone, and ar-
rived at Newport the night before the marriage.

Going alone ? — Yes.

How did your ladyship travel ? — ^I travelled to Oxford
in a stage coach, and from Oxford in chaises.

With or without any comj^mon ? — No companion ;
there might have been travellers in the stage coach. qqIc

Your ladyship had no female ser\ant or acquaintanceTnS



( 44 )

Tour ladyship stated you remained at Newport the night
before the marriage?— Yes.

Were you alone at the inn, or did any body of your
acquaintance meet you there ? — I was alone at the inn at
Newport.

How did your ladyship go over the next morning to
Berkeley? — I walked with my brother.

. Had your ladyship ever been at Berkeley before ? —
Never.

Your brother is Mr. William Tudor ? — Yes.

He had not been with your ladyship the night before ? —
No, he came that morning.

From whence ? — From Gloucester.

Where were your ladyship's mother and two sisters at
that time ?-^One of my sisters and my mother were then
at Gloucester.

That was Mrs. Farren ? — Yes.

Was she living with her mother at that time? — No, she
was living with her husband.

But Mr. Farren might be living also with your mother?
—She might have a lodging, or she might be living with
my sister.

Did your ladyship see that sister, in any part of the
journey ? — No.

Did your ladyship, at any subsequetit time in the course
of that year, see that sister Susannah at Gloucester? — Yes,
in Gloucester.

What part of the year was that in ? — It must have been
when I was there in the summer, for I was only there once
after my marriage.

Upon what occasion did she come down to Gloucester?
' — I cannot indeed answer that question.

Did she continue anytime there?— I do not think she
staid more ^tlian a week ; but I am not clear upon that
point.

Where was your ladyship s sister during that week ? In
the same house with your ladyship? — I think in the^ame
house with me.

During that time was Lord Berkeley in the habit of
of seeing your ladyship ? — I cannot speak with certainty at

this distant period. „ , ^. , Diaitiz|d by GoOqIc

Can voiir ladvshiD recollect where Lord HerKPlPV rfe^-



-( 45 )

When he .was not at Berkeley, does your ladyship know
where he was ? — ^No, unless he was at Gloucester.

Where was he at Gloucester ? — If he was at Gloucester,
he was at the King's Head at that time.

Your ladyship continued at Gloucester, from the month
of May to the month of August or September following?—
I think it was.

Were you in the habit of being visited daily or weekly
by Lord Berkeley? — Not weekly, for I was extremely iU
for four weeks whilst I was there.

How often do you think you saw Lord Berkeley at that
time ? — At this distance I cannot say.

Did bis lordship take his meals with you ? — No, nobody
knew that his lordship visited me there.

Does your ladyship think he visited you twenty times?
— I cannot at this distant period answer that question.

Did his lordship see you at intervals of a week, or once
or twice in the week? — Not so often.

Was it once or twice in a month ? — I do not know how
to answer that question.

The enquiry is respecting the communication with your
own husband ; was you therefore in the habit of seeing
him ? — ^l cannot answer that more fully, I went to Glou-
cester to suppress a rumour of my marriage, which at that
time had gone abroad , that I was married , and to remove
my family ; and there it will appear by Mr. Parker the
surgeon's books that I was extremely ill, particularly with
a sore throat, for a month or six weeks.

Did Lord Berkeley know that ? — Yes he did.

During that time your ladyship cannot state how often
his lordship saw you ? — I am sure that I never saw Lord
Berkeley while I wa§ confined with that sore throat

Was it a severe illness ? — It was enough to confine roe
to the house.

Your ladyship had at that time no female servant at-
tending upon you ?— No, none. My sister had two female
servants ; 1 had none of my own. I went for conceal-
ment

Would not your ladyship have been better concealed if
vou had remained in London ? — It was my husband'swish

X should go there. Digitized by CjQO^Ic

^ Could not your ladyship's family have been removed to



( 46 )

Did he know that he was to visit you only by stealth
while you were there ? — He did.

Did Lord Berkeley prefer your going to Gloucester,
where he could see you only by stealth, to your remaining
in London, where he could see you every day ? — Must I
answer that question.

The question was repeated ? — If he hfid not preferred it
he would not have sent me there.

Your ladyship states, that you went to Gloucester by
the request of your husband ; when Lord Berkeley desired
your ladyship to go to Gloucester, does your ladyship know
whether his lordship was apprized that at Gloucester he
could see you only by stealth ? — Yes, certainly.

At what time was it when your ladyship's female rela-
tions, your mother and your two sisters, were made ac-
quainted with your living with Lord Berkeley ? — One sister,
my sister Farren, and my mother, when they came to
London ; my other sifter we did not care about ; but my
eldest sister opened a letter for my brother fron^ myself,
befoie she left Gloucester, from the contents of which she
was certain 1 was married ; it was signed ** Mary B."

When was that? — It was in 1785, because my sister
removed for good in that year.

In what part of 1785 ?-^After I left Gloucester.

Did tliat lead to any communication with your ladyship's
mother and sister, a^ to the footing your ladyship was on
with Lord Berkeley ? — My sister told Mr. Parker, the sur-
geon who attended me, that she knew I was married from
that circumstance ; he had attended me, for I had left
Gloucester when I wrote that letter.

Your ladyship is understood to have s-aid that the mar-
riage was at first kept a secret from every body besides
your ladyship's brother ; from your mother and sisters ?-—
Yes, surely.

Both the marriage and your ladyship's living with Lord
Berkeley were kept secret from every body except Mr.
Tudor ? — No, for my family removed from Gloucester tg
London in 1785, and they knew I was living with Lord
Berkeley ; but the confidence they had in me, with the
letter that my sister opened to my brother, impressed their
minds so strongly that I was married, that they never p
doubted it, and they thought the situation of my second



( 47 )

mother or to your sister the circumstance of your mar-
riage ?— I toH tfiem to have confidence in me r that they
knew I bad never done wrong, and they might depend
upon it I never would ; and my word was never doubted
by any one of my family : that is true.

After your marriage, and after your ladyship*s femily,
your mother and sister removed to London from Glpu-
cester the latter end of 1785, did they then know that your
ladyship was living with Lord Berkeley ? — Certainly they
knew that; my mother and my sister knew that

Why not botb of your ladyship's sisters? — I am sure my
sister Farren did, because she had seen the letter ; I cannot
tell whether the other sister did.

Did not your other sister know that your ladyship was^
living in London ?— When I was in London I dare say
she did.

When your ladyship's sister Susannah Turner was living
in London, did she know that you were living in lodgings
provided by Lord Berkeley ? — I dare say she did.

Whether either your ladyship's mother, or either of your
sisters, asked your ladyship on what footing you were
living with Lord Berkeley ? — My sister Farren never would
ask that question after she saw the letter, but she never
doubted the fact of my marriage.

Whether, in point o£ feet, either of your ladyship's
sisters or your mother ever asked you any question upon
the subject?— We have had frequent conversations upon
that isubject ; particularly with my mother ; for she went
to reside with, me in Park Street, two months before I
lay-in of my eldest son.

The question is, whether in 1783, when your ladyship's
mother and your two sisters were madeacquainted with your
living with Lord Berkeley, whether at that time either of
them ever asked your ladyship upon what footing you
were living with Lord Berkeley ? — Not my two sisters ; I


1 2 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

Online LibraryWilliam Fitzhardinge Berkeley FitzhardingeA narrative of the minutes of evidence respecting the claim to the Berkeley peerage, as taken before the Committee of privileges in 1811. Together with the entire evidence of the persons principally concerned. To which are added, facsimiles of the banns, and register of the marriage: extracted from → online text (page 4 of 22)