The Sun.
London, England, 1866-03-05 00:00:00

court •
etrigLit.
--

HER MAJESTY•

WINDSOR CASTLE, March 3.
The Queen walked in the grounds this morning
with Princess Helena.
Her Royal Highness Princess Louise also went
out walking. March 4.

The Queen, Princess Helena, Princess Louise/
Princess Beatrice, and Prince Leopold, and the
ladies and gentlemen in waiting, attended Divine
service this morning in the private chapel.
The Rev. J. Shuldham preached the sermon.
There is no truth in the report that his Bela
Highness Prince Leopold is about to go abroad on
account of his health, such a step being quite nn'
necessary.

The Prince and Princess of Wales took a carriage
drive on Saturday.
In the evening their royal highnesses had a dinner
party.
The Prince and Princess of Wales, with the Son.
Mrs. F. Stonor and Lietit—Colonel Keppel in wait-
ing, attended Divine service at the Chapel Royal,
St. James's, yesterday.

An Old Scandal in a New Light.

Some mention has been made in the Court of
Probate upon one or two recent occasions of the
case of cc Ryves against the Attorney-General.°
It may not be generally known that, although the
cause has not as yet assumed a very important shape,
it involves points of historical interest ; and When
it shall have come fully before the Court it will, we
have no doubt, attract a large share of public at-
tention. The suit is undertaken by a mother and
her son, who, though they are now living in compa-
rative obscurity, aspire to the high honour of being
recognised as members of the Royal family. 111
endeavouring to accomplish their end it will be
necessary for them to inquire somewhat closely into
the private history of King George 111., and mall
curious incidents must of necessity be brought out
by the evidence and documents exhibited in refe-
rence to this part of the case; for Mrs. Ryves, the pe-
titioner, asserts that she has descended from the issue
of a private marriage contracted by the fourth bro-
ther of George 111., who was known as Prince Henri
Frederick, Duke of Cumberland. The lady to wlielll
the Prince is said to have been married was °lila,
Wilmot, the daughter of Dr. James Wilmot, rector
of Barton-on-the-Heath, in Warwickshire. His wife'
the mother of this Olive Wilmot, was a Polish Prin-
cess. How much interesting matter it will be ne-
cessary to disclose, for the purposes of this suit, re-
specting the private relations existing between the
Prince and Olive Wilmot prior to the alleged mar-
riage it is impossible to say at present ; but as the
whole suit hinges upon this point, everything inci-
dental to the intimacy of Prince Frederick and pr.
Wilmot and his family will no doubt be thorougla
canvassed.
But whether this marriage can be proved or not'
it was quite certain that it was acknowledged 5,
the time, for the gossips of the period seem to have
made it one of their stock subjects, and the daughter
born of the marriage was also publicly recognise
It seems, however, that in the course of time the
Prince got into a scrape with Mrs. Horton, a sistex.
to Col. Luttrell, who was afterwards returned mem-
ber of Parliament by Court influence in place °f
" Demagogue Wilkes." The Prince eventual
married Mrs. Horton, and, as the bigamy was come
witted in the face of the acknowledgment of tit
issue of the former marriage, it became necessarY
that something should be done to hush UP o 0
scandal. The histories referring to the period she',:
that the King about this time would not receive b's
brother at Court, and it is conjectured, with soul f
show of reason, that the prohibition arose out °
the disagreement between them consequent o°l
this bigamous marriage. The Prince, accordingly
unwillingly or unable to deny himself the pleasure
of Mrs. Horton's society, and equally loth to be de-
nied the Court, neglected his first wife, who after-
wards died in France. He also consented to a Pr?"
posal that his daughter should be brought UP
ignorance of her parentage until the scandal he':
died a natural death, and certain distinguished
personages had died too. When this had been
settled to the satisfaction of all concerned, save
those who, if the story be true, had been it%
grievously wronged, the marriage of the Prim
with Mrs. Horton was allowed to pass without
in-
terference and it is this Mrs. Horton who has COii:
tinned to be acknowledged as the only and childd,
less wife of Prince Frederick, Duke of Cumberland'
It is easily conceived that an arrangement suellthe
that which, it is said, was come to betweeu otit
Prince and the King was not concluded witb
some writing, and it is asserted that several dee
f the
ments were signed touching the legitimacy
il-
daughter of the Prince and his wife, née Olive ere
mot. These documents, it is further asserted, Wto
of
witnessed by more than one Minister of St 3, re.
the period and carefully preserved at the Icing e
the
quest. They were ultimately committed to
el
care of certain eminent persons, upon wh°,o..
solemn obligation of secrecy was laid until the hap,
pening of certain events which have long sill we
curred. The names of all these persons
have no doubt, be made known in the course °
proceedings before Sir J. P. Wilde. .
The case has already been before the public,
and
only in courts of justice, but also in Parliament.tiert
by petition to the Royal Family. The first Peti
to the Crown was made in 1819, and the last in 18.061
In 1861 Mrs. Ryves, then 64 years of age, etalbiog
a decree against the Attorney-General establix'
the marriage of her father to the lady to wile,reko
have already referred as the daughter of the euletilt
first marriage, and the chief object of the Pre .
petition is, as we have already stated, to es tarbillitselie
r)
Mrs. Ryves's descent through this lady from 'Li_ to
Henry Frederick, Duke of Cumberland, wit" the
ultimate object of proving her son's title t°
lam A
honour and dignity of the dukedom of Cu
mber
and her own right to the title of Princess of Cul'
berland. P e'
The case was introduced to the notice of
age'
anent by Sir Gerard Noel nearly half a century the
He moved for a select committee to inquire in.t°
truth of statements made in her petition, NVlnchbe
had presented three months before. It seer"! ea
was very earnest in her cause, thoroughly believed
in the genuineness of her case, and persiste',,•;,
announcing that he ,4 had it in command froin ti"ai
Royal personage" to do so and so—" for
;
to
personage he would continue to believe heroll:ter
she was proved and declared to be an un „0,
wok.
by a select committee of the House of Core l
, at
on
The petition of that day seemed to aim uet
Raab
the declaration of Mrs. Ryves's legitimacy awl,. from
descent, but also to the acquisition of a grant` baa
the Civil List. Sir Gerard Noel declared he
always believed that every member of the ,a 1 -
r°J
was
family was upon the Civil List, but here
"
member of the royal family quite unprovided for"
The present petition was filed in the Cour
Divorce, under the Legitimacy Declaration.:yu' or
August last, and the case has been set delays
hearing by a special jury, but a series of
_tits,
have caused it to be put off for another threera 11 ort
made
An application for an adjournment w
General, and opposed byDr. Smith and eral
Feb. 27 by Mr. Bourke, on behalf of tlia3esiikr.trfterllicia;
could net 1)°
doens ;trheedpdaerltayofbetchaeupseetihticonheard.
just
te
cAotmtoernetYopeo°so.
sion of a number of documents which
er
arrangedbe
arraned in time for the trial. These paP ato
f certilie •
petitioner asserts, are simply copies e „0,
lm
furnished by her or her mother to the Sov rei=s„.
we
company with petitions concerning the claims
was
have referred to. A significant obeerva b,
iePat.
umaadnetedbythSeirapJpl.
marked that it was an important ease—au. ,1113iicp011
iolnViflodrepOonstpTotineesradot. ecnorre,...
ula be r •
it that could reasonably be obtained sho
tant public case—and all information bearle6
pro"
trlCd
duced in court, and, when tried, should be
once for all.