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 9 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 9 of 22)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

window at the left, vou will see her there. He looked
up, and said, « Thefe she is. ' He said, " Will you in-^
,5*?!™^ me to her." I said, ^' No, my Lord, I cannot
introduce you; you know where she is, and if you wish

jy^ ' ^^^ ^^ introduce yourself."
^, VI ^^ observe what became of Lord Berkeley after
th^?™ We parted,
j^u^ ^^y <Ud ^rd Berkeley go after that ?— I cannoi

Did be go into the house r—No, he did not- j,

^^fpoke of dining somewhere ? — Yes, Idinedadav

oriwotefore at the late Sir Edmund Jeynes': heUv^

S ^PP^*^^ to the house where Lady Berkeley was. '-

urn you observe Lord Berkeley go 'into the house, at


nliat year ^^ this?™It was between the lath o£
Januaiy, aurf / ^^t exactly say, but I think the Ma^

fflontii in 178s ^^^^^ ► ^ ^

C^rou ^y\'^^^lY whether the first time when 1-otA

^I^ ^^^ &i^V was whom he had aeei^io :Fw.

otOdober. ?*^ vLt^-^^^ was it before or after Af_^^

( lOi )

Jmraar^ and the May month of the foUowiifg y^r ; but
I cannot bring the period to my recollection.

Did not that which you havci stated pass in <h& yeai*
rr84, and have y6u not constantly said so ? — I could not
recollect exactly the year ; I know that it was after the
time that I sold the castle to Farren that Lord Berkeley
saw mfe in the shop, but I could not tell the time, whether
It was in 1784 or 1785, as I said before j but it wa^ be-
tween January 1784, and the May month in 1785.

When you saw Mary Cole in Farren's shop, wAS it in
Jaiiuary 1784 ? — -No, I said I sold the! fc'oWs to Farren ort
tbe 15th of January, 1784.

Will you venture to state you have any distinct reool*
l^K!tion of any date after that of the year or month ?-*-I
know it was between January, 1784, and the May riionth
iiv 1785 ; and it was soon after Farren was in goal that I
was in the shop at the time ; but I do not recollect whether
Lord Berkeley came by at that time.

Do you remember when Farren went to goal ; — No ;
but I think it was soon after January ; whether it was in
February I cannot say.

When you use the words January and February^ do you
mean in the year 1784 ? — Yes.

Andall which you speak of passed soon after that time ?
-^I do not say that Lord Berkeley saw me in the shop at
ftiattime', it 'might be in February ; I did not minute it
down, and therefore cannot tell ; but I recollect very well
it was between January, 1784, and May, 1785.

You say it' was very soon after Farren went to giol ? —
Yes, that I was in the shop ; but I was in the shop with
Mrs. Farren after that.

Was that two months after that? — Yes, I dare say it
was ; for I was in the shop after Mrs. Farren left off the
payment of the money, on the 30th of October, 1784.'

You have no distinct recollection of the dates? — I never
minuted them down.


Though you do not particularly recollect dfeites, ar^you

?irite «upe that the payment continued to October, 1784 ?—
atari convinced of that ; I have a memdirandum of that, le
Are you sure that it was aftier thait time that youw^rein

( 105 )

I asked Mrs. Fairen; sbe had told rae she would paj a
guinea a week, and I went to her to ask why it was not
paid^ and she said sbe had not means to paj any more.

Was it after that, that that passed in Southgate-street,
which you have described ? — Yes, it was considerably after ;
it was at the time Lord Berkeley saw Lady Berkeley tl
the window ; that was in the May month to. the best qf
my recollection.

The May month of what year ? — 1785.
Examined by the Lords. .

Recollect how Lord Berkeley was dressed when that
passed relative to the house in the Southgate-street, when
ne asked you to point out the lady ? — I tmnk he was in his
r^mentals, but 1 cannot say exactly; for sometimes he
wore a blue coat with a red coUar when he was not in the

Do you remember that he was either in regimentals, or
a blue coat with a red collar, when this pa^ed ? — ^Yes.

Had you occasion to press Mrs. Farren for payment
down to the 30th of October, 1784 ?— No, for ^ paid mt
very regularly.

Did you press Mrs. Farren for the payment of the mo-
ney immediately after the 30th of October, 1784, or^fter
a lapse of time, she not ha\'ing continued her payments?
— I cannot exactly say to the date, but I recollect very well
that I came up the Westgate-street, and I turned into the
shop, and said, " Mrs. Farren, you have not been so good
as your word." I did not press her more for the money,
she said she was very much distressed, and I did dot think
any thing more about it.

How much was due from Mr. Farren ? — Seven guises^*

Then it must have been seven weeks subsequent to the
SOth October ? — No, seven guineas was what remained
due ; Mrs. Farren paid rae very honourably, and I believe
would have continued it, if it had been in her power.

Do you think Lord Berkeley passed by the first time you
made application to Mrs. Farren or uot?— That I cannot

William Hill, who kept the White Hart, next the hoim
of Cole, in Southgate-street, remembenMl seeing Miffl
Mary Cole there, and then as the militia were drawn up"
in tliA street. tlinii0>ht that he Raw Lord BeikeleV oav ha

( 106 )

ship spoke to her : respecting her dress, he said she ap-
peared like a lady's maid, or a person in that condition ;
he knew nothing of William Tudor, or an aunt of that
name. '

Charles Gwinnett of Barnwood, proved his being well
acquainted with the family of the Cfoles ; he remembered
Willia6i going to London about 1786, at which time he
never recollected his being called by the name of Tudor ;
he never heard of Lord Berkeley being at Cole's house.
William Griflfith produced the register of the burial of
the elder Cole.

£sther Edwards, formerly Pickering, proved seeing
Mrs. Farren and her two sisters in or about October,'
1786, at her house, No. 15, New Street Sauare, London.

Mrs. Elizabeth Hicks, daughter of Mr. Hupsman, proved
she was in Berkeley, the whole of 1784, and till tne be-
ginning of February, 1785, on the 6th of which she went
to London. Before that period she knew Lord Berke-
ley had been at Berkeley some time. She then with her
father. Lord Berkeley, and Admiral Prescott, went to
London, where she remained eight week?, setting out
into the country from Lord Craven's house on the 3d of

She said she returned to Berkeley in company with
Lord Berkeley and Admiral Prescott, by Lord Berkeley's
appointment, who said, he would take her back with him,
and did so by calling for her in his carriage at Lord
Craven's, about seven o'clock in the morning. On being
asked when Lord Berkeley apprized her of his intention
to return, she could not recollect exactly to a day or two,
but said Lord Berkeley made the appointment by saying,
I will take you back to Berkeley on Sunday. At Berkeley
she attended church constantly, but never to the best of
her recollection, heard the banns of marriage proclaimed
between Lord Berkeley and Mary Cole. She seldom
missed going to church; nothing but illness ever pre-
vented her. In the register of tne marriage at Berkeley
the.words, " The mark of Richard Barns," she did not
think was at all like her father's writing.

EliTiahpfh Hnnsman thfi widow. rnnfirm#^L^J|^^^@^|i(f^{^

( 107 )

his,*' Mr. Hupsman's ^^ hand-writiii^/' In the register
of the banns of Lord Berkeley she obsenred there was a
fiunt similarity in the words Hopsman. The entry she
did not think was in the hand-writin^r of her husband.

Dining with Lord Berkeley in lt96 or 1797, after the
second marriage, she observed that Lady Berkeley pos«
sessed a considerable degree of ascendency over him, and
that the concerns and control of the fiunily were principally
managed by her.

Being asked if Lord Berkeley attended church when
in the countiy, she answered very seldom, and she had no
recollection of his being there in the months of November
and December, 1 784. The cause of Mr. Hupsman's
quitting Berkeley, she believed to be owing to his pecu-
niary circumstances.

Ifenry Boniface, butler and house steward to Lord
Berkeley, never heard of any such thin^ as banns between
liord Berkeley and Mary Cole : and being asked when did
Lady Berkeley first come to Berkeley Castle ? he answered
* On Sunday morning the 1 1th of November, 1787, she
left Cranford, and arrived at the castle on Monday the
12th." To the Question, do you know Mr. Tudor ? he
answered ** No, I have never seen him to my knowledge,
I should not know him if I was to see him."

Being asked if he remembered a lady living with Lord
Berkeley of the name of Bailey ? he answered she lived
at Cranford with Lord Bei^eley a ffood while, he could
not recollect how many years. He left Lord Berkeley in


Sarah Jones, who lived servant in the castle upwards
q{ twenty years, left it in 1785, at which time she had
never seen the present Lady Berkeley there, ncM* ever
heard of any banns.

Bfaigaret Hicks, the widow of the Rev. Robert Hicks,
being called in, could not identify the supposed writing
.(^ t& Rev. Mr. Hupsman; nor did she recollect any
ladies, one or two excepted, visiting Lady Berkeley prior
to 1796, who till then was received in the country as Miss

Sir Isaac Heard, gorier king of arms, stated his having

Digitized byVjOOQlC

( Ite )

WilBam Cole, junior, at Wootton, proved, that being in
the habit of going to school with him at Gloucester about
fbui* years, never heard him addi^essed by any of his family
otherwise than Bill or Billy Cole; he still thought it pos-
sible, that the latter might have an aunt of the name of
Tudor without communicating it to him ; he also men-
tioned, that Cole's eldest daughter was married to Farren
before the father's death, at which time the other two
daughters, Mary and Susan, were living under his roof:
some time after whicli, he understood they went to Lon-
don; could not say how lon^ Mary had been at Mrs.
Clarke's school after the » eath of her father ; he thought it
Itiight be hal f a year or more.

William Hudd gave his evidence to the same effect; he
as well as Mr. Gwinnett, used to accompany William Cole
from Wootton to Gloucester, when the latter went to school
at Mr. Cooke's, in Oxbody-lane, and the former at Mr.
Mutlow's. Robert Long, of Huckleycote, about two
miles from Wootton, who lived as an apprentice to Farren,
the son-in-law of Cole, senior, never heard the younger, ^
William Cole, called Tudor in his life.

William Strain, journeyman to Mr. Cole, corpoborated,
this evidence ; he left his master because he could not pay
him his wages ; though he received it when he went away.

John Gwinnett foUpwed the two precedinjg evidences
with respect to the situation of Wiiliam Coie ; but he 1)eing
employed as a porler in London by Mrs. Tumour at the
latter end of 1785, was sent to the Gloucester Coffee-
House to me^t Marv Cole, and to take her down to her
sister's house in Charles-street, Berkeley-square, to which
place he walked with her, carrying her luggage. At that,
time, she >vas dressed very plain. This was about Michael-
mas, 1785. Mrs. Tumour at that time did not pas^ as a
married woman. He was employed in her house about a
fcrtnight, while he was out of place, but nevei' saw or
heard any thing of Lord Berkeley.

John Clarke, officiating clerk of Berkeley^ proved, that
lie filted that situation from 1782 to 1797, e^epting when
absent about 1791. Pruett, who died in 1798, had^ome-

Digitized byVjOOQlC

sfc.!;*''* tL '"not

"** fhet- " *Onne of our

^''>'»Joii ^ ""^ '^'^ ^"^ ^
?re .^l;' »o«etiieT vtiA

>ror'>^ •^^^ l**,^i«^, and of^^^ »«>a ^ '^^ar ^

^4:''^?'>:^-iSt the chnd^^""^ * cr'^fi^

''^ 4c?* r^ li*'- »t the ti. '^"»- ^

( 110 )

brother, and my connections, and I had heard that mj
lord had children, and that there was a lady the mother of
the children.

Did you, who were very intimate, and had been inti-
mate with Lord Berkeley for many years, visit that lady ?
—No, I never in my life saw the laay or the children.

Were you in the habit of visiting at Lord Berkeley's
house during the time wl^ile that lady was living with him ?
' — No, I used to see Lord Berkeley at our different friends'
houses, and my own, but I never was at his house.
Examined by the Lords.

Do you recollect by whom that picture was painted ? — I
never heard \ a mere acquaintance had said to me, " there
is my lord's picture in the exhibition, and his children ;" and
1 naturally said to him, " I hear there is your picture in
the exhibition, and your children, and they are fine chil-
dren ;" and he maae answer, he was leaning against the
table between the windows of the room, and he put his
hand to his forehead when he made the answer, and he walk-
ed down* the room and returned to near where I was sit-
ting, and he sat down himself, and said what I have stated.

Did you ever mention this fact at the time ? — Not at
that time ; but I did mention it in the year 1799, when the
subject was recalled to my mind, and the subject "was dis-
cussed in this house ; after that period I never mentioned
it again except to my intimate friends till about six weeks
ago, when I happened to be in conversation with some in-
timate friends, and I unguardedly repeated these words;
they were repeated somewhere else, and I was ordered to
come here. I never thought of repeating them else.

To whom did you mention that fact in the year 1799 ? —
To some of my particular fi'iends; I could produce

Could you name any one of them ? — Would they be
called here if I named them ? it is an awkward thing for
ladies to appear here ; but I could quote my son, who
could remember my having mentioned them ; 1 could cer-
tainly quote ladies.

What is your brother's name ? — Mr. Mears ; his town
house is in Fark-lane. My brother was a friend of Lord
Berkeley's, and in his regiment; they were intimate
friends from the time I can remember. °'3' '"'' ' ^

Beniamin Sadler, one of the executors of the late Mr.

( 111 )

produced the books of the deceased, in none of which the
name of William Tudor appeared. Bills for medicines
for Mrs. Farren and her sisters were also produced, which
amounting to upwards of eleven pounds, did not appear
to hare b^n paid. The witness did not know that William
Cole, or Tudor, ever was an apprentice to Mr. Parker,
he not being in Gloucester at the time.

Mr. Solicited General stated, that one of the witnesses
who had been examined (Mrs. Foote), was veiy anxious
that a circumstance in her evidence should be explained,
which he had communicated to his learned friend Serjeant
JBest, who also wished that the circumstance should be
stated to their lordships; namely, the offer made to Mrs.
Poote, of fifty pounds, which undoubtedly was offered
to her, but it was oflFered under these circumstances : she
had been desired by Lady Berkeley to ascertain, by re-
ference to her books, some dates. Lady Berkeley was not
informed at that time that a similar application had been
made to Mrs. Foote on our behalf, and finding that
it was necessary that a journey to Gloucester should be
made by Mrs. Foote to possess herself of those books,
and it being thought that the expences of a journev to
Gloucester and back might be inconvenient to that lady,
the ofler was made at the time when it was understood
that she was to undertake that joumejr for the purpose
of ffiving the result of it by communicating the dates to
Lady Berkeley. Mrs. Foote, therefore, wished it to be
understood, that the offer was made to her only by way
of complete indemnity for the expences of a journey to be
undertaken at the request and on behalf of the individual
trho applied to her ; the money she considers to have
been offered as an act of generosity, and as the mere ex-
pence of that journey, Lady Berlteley not understand-
ing they were to be paid from any other quarter, for
Mrs. Foote had been desired not to communicate that she
had been apjplied to by any person to obtain these memo-
randa, and ror the expence of obtaining which she would
be remunerated by the individual who had applied to her.
Mr. Solicitor General expressed a hope, that he was not
doing wrong in explaining this, and was particularly j
stnTimiQ to do \f l<»«t it «KoiiM ooprat** in the smallest de:^ ^

( 112 )

knew what the person who made the oflTer did not know,
that she was to be paid the expences of her journey firom
another quarter.

Mr. .Fohn Hathaway, apprentice to Mr. Parker in Sep-
tember, 1783, knew a young man there named Cole, but
never in the presence of his master ever heard hira called
by that of Tudor ; nor during his seven year's apprentice-
ship ever heard him under any other name. He never
understood that William Cole was an apprentice there,
but only on trial at Mr. Parker's.

Mrs. Elizabeth May went to Mrs. Clarke's school in
1780, when Mary Cole used to come on Monday as a day
scholar only, whom she said, left it about the month of
September following, after a music meeting, during the
time Elizabeth May was at that school ; she neither saw
nor heard of Lord Berkeley. As to attention fi'om him to
Mary Cole, she had never heard of it till after she had
done school ; she read in the newspaper of the marriage,
and was surprised to find there were debates about such a

Sarah Barnes, who lived servant with Susanna Cole in
April, 1793, in Grafton -street, stated the name of the
latter was Edge, and afterwards Hayward. She lived
with her fi-om April, 1793, till August, 1794, during which
she had seen a person of the name of Tudor visit her
mistress repeatedly. Mrs. Edge it also appeared had lived
at No. 9, Devonshire-street, Portland-place, in some de-
gree of rank and splendour. Mr. Tudor, she said, mar-
ried a girl of the name of Lydia Sharpe, formerly servant
with Mrs. Edge, viz. in 1791, having first seen her' at the
house ^f Mrs. Clayburn, formerly Sirs. Fanen, another
sister. Tudor, after his marriage, sometimes slept two or
three nights at the house of Mrs. Edge, who married Mr.
Hayward in 1794, and then left the kingdom with him.
A Mr. Taylor had supported Mrs. Edge till that event
took place. At that time she understood from Mrs. Edge
that her sister Maria passed as Lady Berkeley. Mr.
Tudor was acquainted with Mr. Taylor, and frequently
dined With Tiim. She never saw Lord Berkeley in De-
vonshire-street. Cc^nLa]o

»» X Tfc • 11.^ Digitized i3v>^jAJ(JVLV^

( 113 )

Did you live as governess in the familv of Lord HexV^isj
from the ytar 179^^.' — From 1792 till 1799.

Do you entertain any malice or ill-will towards either
Lady Berkeley, or any one of the family r — Oh, none upoo
my oath.

Do you come here from any otlier motive than to fpeak
the truth of w liat you know r — From no o\her ; beiug ordered
hy their Lordlhips.

Did you communicate to Lady Berkeley, or to any person
en her behalf, any part of the subject on which you were to
be examined as a witness: — I did impart to Mr. Bruce, a
friend of Lady Berkeley's.

When was it that you commuuicated any thing to Mr.
Bruce, at what time was it iLat ycu coniiiiunicated any thing
to Mr. Bruce? — Prior to my seeing Mr. Griihth, the day
before; I do not recollect the day of the month.

In what month did you come to be governess in the fa-
mily r — In August 179-> and quitted it in July 1799^ I think

Do you at any time remember hearing, in the year 1793,
I^dv Berkeley say whether she was mariiea or not to Lord
Berkeley? — In May 1793 Miss Mary Berkeley was extremely
ill : Doctor Denmiin was called in, and (»f course prescribed
for the infant, who was under my immediate care. The me-
dicine being lahellt-d for ^siiss 'rud^.r, 1 chjccJed to giving it
to the child without enquirii.g of the nioihcr whether llie
should have it adiniinstercd or not. On shewing her the
phiul she said, that not hehig married to Lord, Berkeley, she
imagined Doctor Denman tiiOught the childien were not
allowed to take his Lordship's name, or words to that effect ;
us nearly as I can detail them they are verbatim.

Do you remember at any time seeing Mr. Tudor at the
bouse after his return from abroad: — I do.

Was he at that time married or single?^ — I am not certain
whether he was married exactly at that time; but Miss
Tudor told me soon after my being there that he was mar-
ried, and she was extremely angry with hmi upon the occa-
sion^ insomuch that I overiiea: d a great deal of convei-sation
in the room adjoining that in which I was sittmg, aud she
sent him awav iu a jjreat passion.

Digitized by


( 114 )

Berkeley and her brother on the occasion you have described ?

Do you remember hearing from Jiady Berkeley in a day
or two aflervvards, aiiy thing that passed between her and
Mr. I'ndurr — She brought in a letter into the room where I
was sitting, and said it came from her brother; she read a
paragraph from it, in which he said he had done what her
rogue of quaHty would not dare do, that he had married to
protect innocence and virtue.

Did you enquire whether that letter had been shewn to
Lord Berkeley .^ — I did, and lier answer w as in the artirnia-
tive. I enquired tlicn what l^ord Berkeley said; and she
told me he ^aid that he must \\ol notice it, othenvise he
must fight a duel.

Do you recollect when the ^liliria was called out in the
year 1793 ? — They were called out, 1 think, I cannot exactly
describe the dates, it might be 1 7f)3 or 1794. But the first
time his Lordship was called out to the Militia Miss Tudor
M as extremi^ly unhappy, and feared that I^ord Berkeley might
meet with some one in the country whom he might marry,
and forget her and her children.

Did Lady Berkeley express that fear to you? — Li my hear-
ing, to Lord Berkeley.

She expressed to Lord Berkeley a fear that he might marry
some one else? — Yes.

What did Lord Berkeley say to that? — He bid her dry up
her tears, and not be foolish.

Vyheuyou lived there, what part of the year did they usually
reside at Berkeley Casller — November, December, January,
and february; and sometimes 1 beheve we may have been
there in part of March.

Upon occasion of leaving the Castle to come up to ano-
ther place of residence, do you remember any particular di-
rections being given by Miss Tudor upon that subject r —
From the first year of my residing there up to \1<^(), it was
^iiss Tndor's express wish that we should never leave any
thing behind us, (^itliei my.selt" or vav< of t'lie females.

Did ^liss "^i'-idor give any reason why nothing was to be
h'ft at the Castle r — i'he reayon she gave me was, that if any

Digitized byCjOOQlC

( 115 )

For that reason were all the articles belongine^ the famiiv
removed every time you left the Castle: — Every ihiv.g.

Do you kiK.w, that whenever ihey leit the Castle, not
only ihe family, but the ser\ an:s. removed ail tlial belougcd
to them from the Castle: — Always.

W as there any other reason for tiiat llran tlie reason you
have given: — No other: 1 ne\er eiquired any other.

Do you remember cbout December 1795, or January
17*^^), your beinn uiAvell and contiiied to your room r — I do.

Lpnn that occasion, do you remember IjLud Berktlcy and
Miss Tudor beinp: in an adjf>iuing room: — Hieir bed -room
jollied mine, and thtv were talking, con\eising veiy loud
one morning when 1 was in my room, but the subject of diat
convervdtion I do not Lncw. Lord Berkeley was coming
ont of ihe room, and Mjss Tudor followed him with these
words; she excljinicd, ** \\ hy will not you marr\ me, my
L-ord:" his answer was, " f cannot." She repeated it a se-
cond time, his answer was the same; a third time, and he
iHiid, ^' I tell you 1 cannot \et; diy up your tears, and come
down to dinner." ^liss Tudor wailed a few minutes in the
passage, and then came into mv room. " ITie con\ ersation
dropped there.

How did she appear w hen she came into your room :< —
Her eyes very much swollen with weeping.

As nearly as you can recollect, fix the precise time when
this conversation took place: — 1 cannot exactly say, whether
it was the latter end of December 1195, or January 179t).

Can you be sure tliat it was not later than January 1796?
^-I am certain it was not later.

Had you irom tliat time, and until the month of May
in that year l/^K), occasion frequently to observe the appear*
ance and conduct of Miss Tudor: — She was frequently in
tears in my Lord's presence, in so nuich, that her hi other
said, be could not tell where she could find her tears, or

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 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 9 of 22)