The National Register.
London, England, 1813-03-21 00:00:00

TILE NATIONAL R,EGIST.ER_

and Mr. Edmeades to be surgeons ant. __
Highness. On receiving my waryont for such; app.
pointmetat, I declined accepting the,hotiour of being- pi
pointed apothecary, being -inconsistent with my eheraCtof,:
being educated'as surgeon, and having had an• honorary de-
gree of physic conferred on me. Her -Royal Highness con'
descended to appoint me her surgeon only. Hit Lordship
rang to know if Mr. Lowten was come: he, was in'the next
room. His Lordship left me tor a few minUtes, returned..
and introduced me to Mr. Lowten, with• much politeness
as Dr. Mills, repeating the assurance of what passed being_
confidential. I asked Mr. Lowten the date of the declare.'
tion that had been asserted to be made by me. Ile said in.
the year 1802. I then with permission of his Lordship gave.
the history of my appointment, adding, since then. bad.
never recut the Princes as a patient. Once she sent for me.
to bleed her. I was from home. Mr. Edmeades went; nor
had I visited any one in the, hnuse, except one Mary, and,
that was in a eery had case of.surgery ; t was not.sure whether.
it was before or after my appointment. Mr. Lowten asked
me the date of it; i t him I did not recollect He ob•
served from my warmth of expressing my contradiction of
the deposition that I saw it in a wrong light; that I might
suppose, and very innocently, -her Royal Highness to be
. pregnant, and then the inquiries were as innocently made.
I answered, that the idea of pregnancy never entered my
head ; that 1 never attended her Royal highness in any
sexual complaint; whether she ever had on.Y 1 nevi'. knew.
Mr. Lowten said, I might think so from her increase .of siae.
I answered, No—l never did think her pregnant, therefore
never could say it, and that the deposition Was 'an itifitrnot4
falsehood. His Lordship then observed, that he'perCeiya
there must be a mistake, and that Mr. Edmeades was Alte;
person meant, whom he wished to see. I said-. he was, them
at Oxford, and did not return before Saturday. His Lord,- •
ship asked if he came through London. 1 said I could not,
tell.
Finding nothing now arising from conversation, 'asked.
to retire. His Lofdship attended me out of the room.witie
great politeness.
When I carne home I sent his Lordship a letter, with the,
date'of my warrant,' April 10, 180 i. He answered.
my lit=
ter, with thanks for my immediate attention, and wished to
see Mr. Edmeades- on Sunday 'morning. This letter...came;
on the Saturday ; early on :the Sunday I sent Timothy to
let his Lordship know Mr. Edmeades would not return titr,
Monday. On Tuesday I promised he should attend, which:
he did.
The preceding memorandum is an exact copy of what. I-
.
made the day after I had seen Lord Mpita:
(Signed) . SAM. GILLAM MILLS.
Crontue-hill, Greenwich, Ane. 20. 1606.
This is the 'inner marked B, referred
to in the affidavit of i tr. Edmeades.
Sworn before we, this 26th Sept.
1806. (Signed) THO. LEAVI.
DEPOSITION OF SOPHIA AUSTIN.
I know the child which is now with the Princes. of Wales; t
am the mother of it ; I was delivered of it four year, ago lith of
next Jnly, at Brownlow-street Hospital. have Wit in there
three times : William, who is with the Princess. is- the second
child I laid iss of there. It was marked in the richt hand with
red hily husband was a labourer in the Dock-yard at Dept-
ford. When peace wag proclaimed a number of v..nknien ere
dichat zed, and my husband wa4 one who was discharged. 1 went.
to the Princess with a Petition on Sathrday, to try to get my o
band restored. I lived at that time at Donford ess Row, N.-7,
with a personof the name of Bearblock ; be was a !unman. The
day I wentlo the Princess with tile Petition watt a fortnight btfure.
the 6th of November. M. Lituuet, a baker, in Nov-sncet, wthi.
A

- -
)e sure.eons and apothecaries to het.