The Creevey Papers
Thomas Creevey to Elizabeth Ord, 11 August 1821
“Cantley, Aug. 11.
“. . . The death of this poor woman under all its
circumstances is a most striking event and gave me an infernal lump in my
throat most part of Thursday. . . . Nothing in my mind could be so calculated
to injure this poor woman as the extraordinary overture made by Brougham to the Government in 1819. It seems
that, at his request or by his direction, the Queen came from Italy to Lyons in the autumn of that year for
the sole purpose of meeting Brougham there, to consult
with him upon her situation; but, forsooth, ‘he could not go—he
was busy.’ This is all the excuse he makes
for himself, and then he seems to think it odd she was very angry at this
disappointment. He admits, likewise, that on this occasion she became very ill.
So he was to have gone to her at Milan in the Easter of 1820, as you know he
told me, when he asked me to go with him. . . . But he never mentioned having
so lately brought the poor woman to Lyons for nothing. When I recall to mind
how often, during our journey to Middleton at that time,* he spoke of the Whig
candidates for office with the most sovereign contempt—how he hinted at
his own intercourse with the Crown and Ministers, and conveyed to me the
impression that he thought himself more likely to be sent for to make a
Ministry than any one else—how clear it is that the accomplishment of
this divorce was to be the ways and means by which his purposes were to be
effected.† . . . There
* See vol. i. p. 295. † Mr.
Creevey was not singular in his suspicion of Brougham. Writing on 12th April, 1821,
J. W. Croker observes:
“Brougham, it is said, grossly has sold the Queen. There is no doubt that he
has withdrawn himself a good deal from her, and I believe has been
for some time in underground communication with Carlton
House.” Again on April 22nd:
“Brougham and Denman sworn in the day before yesterday as Attorney-
and Solicitor-General to the Queen. Brougham, I
hear, wished to secure the profits without the inconveniences of the
appointment, and offered not to assume it if Government would give him
a patent of precedence, but the Chancellor refused” [The Croker
Papers, i. 172-3] |
![]()
![]()
| 24 | THE CREEVEY PAPERS | [Ch I. |
![]()
is one subject which gives me some uneasiness—in the
making of her will, the Queen wished to leave some diamonds to
Victorine, the child of Bergami, of whom she was so fond. This was not liked by
Brougham and her other lawyers, so the bequest does
not appear in the will; but the jewels are nevertheless to be conveyed to
Victorine. This, you know, is most delicate
matter—to be employed on her deathbed in sending her jewels from
Lady Anne Hamilton and Lady Hood to Bergami’s
child appears to me truly alarming. I mean, should it be known, and one is sure
it will be so, for Taylor had a letter
from Denison last night mentioning such
a report, and being quite horrified at it. On the other hand, when I expressed
the same sentiment to Brougham, he thought nothing of it.
His creed is that she was a child-fancier: that
Bergami’s elevation was all owing to her
attachment to Victorine, and he says his conviction is
strengthened every day of her entire innocence as to
Bergami. This, from Brougham, is
a great deal, because I think it is not going too far to say that he absolutely
hated her; nor do I think her love for her Attorney
General was very great.”
Baron Bartolomeo Bergami (1820 fl.)
Queen Caroline's Italian chamberlain and reputed lover; he placed his sister Angelica,
Countess of Oldi as a maid in waiting.
Henry Peter Brougham, first baron Brougham and Vaux (1778-1868)
Educated at Edinburgh University, he was a founder of the
Edinburgh
Review in which he chastised Byron's
Hours of Idleness; he
defended Queen Caroline in her trial for adultery (1820), established the London University
(1828), and was appointed lord chancellor (1830).
Queen Caroline of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel (1768-1821)
Married the Prince of Wales in 1795 and separated in 1796; her husband instituted
unsuccessful divorce proceedings in 1820 when she refused to surrender her rights as
queen.
Thomas Creevey (1768-1838)
Whig politician aligned with Charles James Fox and Henry Brougham; he was MP for Thetford
(1802-06, 1807-18) Appleby (1820-26) and Downton (1831-32). He was convicted of libel in
1813.
John Wilson Croker (1780-1857)
Secretary of the Admiralty (1810) and writer for the
Quarterly
Review; he edited an elaborate edition of Boswell's
Life of
Johnson (1831).
William Joseph Denison (1770-1849)
Banker, landowner, and politician, he was a Whig MP for Camelford (1796-1802), Hull
(1806-07), Surrey (1818-32), and West Surrey (1832-49). He was the brother of Lady
Conyngham, mistress to George IV.
Thomas Denman, first baron Denman (1779-1854)
English barrister and writer for the
Monthly Review; he was MP,
solicitor-general to Queen Caroline (1820), attorney-general (1820), lord chief justice
(1832-1850). Sydney Smith commented, “Denman everybody likes.”
Lady Anne Hamilton (1766-1846)
The daughter of Archibald Hamilton, ninth duke of Hamilton; she was lady-in-waiting to
Princess Caroline.
A Secret History of the Court of England from the
Accession of George III to the Death of George IV (1832) was published under her
name and without her consent.
John Scott, first earl of Eldon (1751-1838)
Lord chancellor (1801-27); he was legal counsel to the Prince of Wales and an active
opponent of the Reform Bill.
Michael Angelo Taylor (1757 c.-1834)
Educated at Corpus Christi College, Oxford, he was MP (1784-34) for a variety of
constituencies; originally a Tory he gravitated to the Whigs over the course of his long
career.
