was not the Queen's, but a mere manufacture, which the King, naturally enough, would not read, or at least would not acknowledge that he had read. "Your court became much less a scene of polished manners and of refined intercourse, than of low intrigue and scurrility. Spies, bacchanalians, tale-bearers, and foul conspirators, swarmed in those places which had before been the resort of sobriety, virtue, and honour." But the object of the letter was less to contrast the Regent's court with that of the Queen Charlotte, than to protest against the constitution of the court before which she was to be tried. In that court, she said, her accusers were her judges; the ministers who had precondemned her, commanded the majority; and the husband who sought to destroy her, exercised an influence there, perilous to the fair award of justice. She demanded to be tried according to law; “you have left me nothing but my innocence," she remarked, "and you would now, by a mockery of justice, deprive me of the reputation of possessing even that."

In the reply to the Middlesex address occurs the sole admission of blame attaching to her, through indiscretion. "My frank and unreserved disposition may, at times, have laid my conduct open to the misrepresentations of my adversaries." But "I am what I seem, and I seem what I am. I feel no fear, except it be the fear that my character be not sufficiently investigated. I challenge every inquiry. I deprecate not the most vigilant scrutiny." Against the method of carrying on the scrutiny, she continued to protest most heartily. "In the bill of Pains and Penalties," she replied to the address from Shoreditch," my adversaries first condemn me without proof, and then, with a sort of novel refinement in legislative science, proceed to inquire whether there is any proof to justify the condemnation." To the more directly popular mind, to the address of the artisans, for instance, she delivered an answer in which there is the following passage: "Who does not see that it is not owing to the wisdom of the Deity, but to the hard-heartedness of the oppressors, when the sweat of the brow during the day, is followed by the tear at its close?"

VOL. II.

BB

This

was stirring up popular opinion against the King, of whom she invariably spoke as her "oppressor." She, however, as significantly directed the public wrath against the peers, as in her reply to the Hammersmith address, wherein she says: "To have been one of the peers, who after accusing and condemning, affected to sit in judgment on Queen Caroline, will be a sure passport to the splendid notoriety of everlasting shame." The married ladies of London went up to her with an address of encouragement and sympathy. Her answer to this document contained an asseveration that she was not unworthy of the sympathy of English matrons. "I shall never sacrifice that honour," she observed," which is the glory of a woman.

I can never be debased while I observe the great maxim of respecting myself." But her reply to the inhabitants of Greenwich had even more of the matter in it that would sink deep in the bosom of mothers. After alluding to the period when she was living happily with her daughter, among those who were now addressing her, she added; Can I ever be unmindful that it was a period when I could behold that countenance which I never beheld without vivid delight, and to hear that voice which to my fond ear was like music breathing over violets? Can I forget? No, my soul will never suffer me to forget that, when the cold remains of the beloved object were deposited in the tomb, the malice of my persecutors would not even suffer the name of the mother to be inscribed upon the coffin of her child. Of all the indignities I have experienced, this is one which, minute as it may seem, has affected me as much as all the rest. But if it were minute, it was not so to my agonising sensibility." But, she observed in her reply to the Barnard Castle address, "My conscience is without a pang-and what have I to fear?" Her Majesty at the same time seldom allowed any opportunity to escape of placing the King in, if the phrase may be allowed, a metaphorical pillory. "To pretend," she thus spoke to the Bethnal Green deputation, "that his Majesty is not a party, and the sole complaining party, in this great question, is to render the whole business a mere mockery. His Majesty either does or does not desire the

divorce, which the bill of Pains and Penalties proposes to accomplish. If his Majesty does not desire the divorce, it is certain that the state does not desire it in his stead; and if the divorce is the desire of his Majesty, his Majesty ought to seek it on the same terms as his subjects; for in a limited monarchy, the law is one and the same for all." In the answer to the people of Sheffield, the same spirit is manifested. "It would have been well for me," she exclaims, "and perhaps not ill for the country, if my oppressor had been as far from malice as myself; for what is it but malice of the most unmixed nature, and the most unrelenting character, which has infested my path, and waylaid my steps during a long period of twentyfive years ?" Her complaint was, that during that quarter of a century, her adversaries had treated her as if she had been insensible to the value of character; "For why else,” she asks, in addressing the Reading deputation, "why else should they have invited me to bring it to market, and let it be estimated by gold? But- -a good name is better than riches. I do not dread poverty, but I loathe turpitude, and I think death preferable to shame." Finally, she flattered the popular ear by placing all the authorities in the realm below that of the sovereign people. In her reply to one of the City Ward addresses occurs the assertion, that "If the power of king, lords, and commons is limited by the fundamental laws of the realm, their acts are not binding when they exceed those limitations. If it be asked: 'What then, are kings, lords, and commons answerable to any higher authority?' I distinctly answer, yes. To what higher authority?' To that of God and of the people." Lord John Russell, too, told the King that the crown was held at the will and pleasure of the parliament, and the Queen, speaking on that hint, now maintained that crown and parliament were, under certain contingencies, beneath the heel of the peuple souverain.

It perplexed many of the clergy that the Princess of Wales should be continued to be prayed for up to the period of George the Third's death, but that Queen Caroline should not be named in the Liturgy after the decease of the only true

friend she ever had in the royal family. One military chaplain, a Mr. Gillespie, of a Scotch yeomanry regiment, was put under arrest for daring to invoke a blessing upon her in his extemporary prayer for the royal family-but this was the only penalty inflicted for the so-called offence.

CHAPTER X.

THE QUEEN'S TRIAL.

The Queen's reception by the House of Lords-Royal progress to the HouseThe Queen's enthusiastic reception by the populace-Their treatment of the King's party-Marquis of Anglesea-The Duke of Wellington's reply to them-The Attorney General's opening speech - Examination of Theodore Majocchi-The Queen overcome at the ingratitude of this - knowing rogue-Disgusting nature of the evidence-Other witnesses examined-Mr. Brougham's fearless defence of the Queen-Mr. Denman's advocacy not less bold-His denunciation of the Duke of Clarence-Question of throwing up the bill entertained by ministers-Stormy debatesLords Grey and Grosvenor in favour of the Queen-Duke of Montrose against her-Ministerial majority-The Queen protests against the proceedings-The ministers in a minority-The bill surrendered by Lord Liverpool-Reception of the news by the Queen-Her unspeakable grief.

THE Queen's trial, as the proceedings in the House of Lords was called, commenced on the 17th of August. They who are curious in details may consult the journals of the time; I shall probably best satisfy all readers by taking only a general view, and recording the result.

The Queen had signified her intention of attending daily in the house during the proceedings; and suitable accommodation and attendance were provided for her. In the house, at all events, she was treated as Queen consort, and she more than once adverted to the fact when about to take her seat on the throne-like chair and cushion placed at her disposal, near her counsel. Her usual course was to come up from Brandenburgh House early in the morning, to the residence of Lady Francis in St. James's Square. From the latter place she proceeded, in as much "state" as could be got up with her diminished means, to the House of Lords. On these occasions she was attended by Lady Anne Hamilton, her chamberlains Sir W.