The Lady In Red: An Eighteenth-Century Tale Of Sex, Scandal, And Divorce (26 page)
Read The Lady In Red: An Eighteenth-Century Tale Of Sex, Scandal, And Divorce Online
Authors: Hallie Rubenhold
Tags: #*Retail Copy*, #History, #Non-Fiction, #European History, #Biography
BOOK: The Lady In Red: An Eighteenth-Century Tale Of Sex, Scandal, And Divorce
9.7Mb size Format: txt, pdf, ePub
Sir Richard swore via oath that he had recently given ‘orders to Mary Sotheby and Lucetta Jones, two servants in my family to collect together the cloathes and wearing apparel of my wife … in order that they might be delivered to her’. These articles and ‘other ornaments of her person’ were then, on his orders, sent to Lady Worsley. He confirmed that this comprised everything, ‘all the cloathes and wearing apparel’ left in his custody, before pausing and adding, ‘ … save and except the jewels and a quantity of fine and common laces, most of which had been worn by Lady Worsley while she cohabited with me’. These items ‘of great expense’ he announced defiantly, ‘I … detain in my custody’. This would not be an absolute capitulation. Although he now stood in contempt of a court order, he was loath to allow her all that she demanded. The baronet would not permit £7,000 worth of gold and precious gems to simply slide through his fingers; some of it, he would argue, had been purchased with his money. What became of the two gowns of fine point lace is unknown, and the jewels were later sold by mutual consent rather than returned.
The ripples caused by the
Epistle
were felt in areas beyond Sir Richard and Lady Worsley’s private lives. Its success had demonstrated to hungry publishers that there was profit still to be milked from the Worsleys’ stories. In less than a fortnight after the
Epistle
’s sensational appearance,
The Memoirs of Sir Finical Whimsy and His Lady
, a work which disclosed the secret history of the couple’s flawed marriage became available for public consumption. The pamphlet jostled for attention with
The Genuine Anecdotes and Amorous Adventures of Sir Richard Easy and Lady Wagtail
which arrived just over a week later. The race to publish these exposés was intense, as the author of this later pamphlet concedes that midway through his narrative he ‘was almost induced to drop the pen upon seeing an advertisement in the papers of the publication of
The Memoirs of Sir Finical Whimsy
’. Rather than ‘committing these pages … to the flames’ he ‘immediately communicated them to the printer’. Well into the second half of the year, a steady flow of witty rhymes and bawdy dialogue, such as that featured in
A Poetical Address from Mrs Newton to Lady W——
,
The Devil Divorced
, and
The Whore. A Poem Written by a Lady of Quality
, continued to dry on the racks of the printing shops. By the end of the summer the
Monthly Review
was writing with exasperation that ‘surely the public are, by this time tired of Lady Worsley
whatever may be the case with respect to her husband or her gallants’. They weren’t.
Epistle
were felt in areas beyond Sir Richard and Lady Worsley’s private lives. Its success had demonstrated to hungry publishers that there was profit still to be milked from the Worsleys’ stories. In less than a fortnight after the
Epistle
’s sensational appearance,
The Memoirs of Sir Finical Whimsy and His Lady
, a work which disclosed the secret history of the couple’s flawed marriage became available for public consumption. The pamphlet jostled for attention with
The Genuine Anecdotes and Amorous Adventures of Sir Richard Easy and Lady Wagtail
which arrived just over a week later. The race to publish these exposés was intense, as the author of this later pamphlet concedes that midway through his narrative he ‘was almost induced to drop the pen upon seeing an advertisement in the papers of the publication of
The Memoirs of Sir Finical Whimsy
’. Rather than ‘committing these pages … to the flames’ he ‘immediately communicated them to the printer’. Well into the second half of the year, a steady flow of witty rhymes and bawdy dialogue, such as that featured in
A Poetical Address from Mrs Newton to Lady W——
,
The Devil Divorced
, and
The Whore. A Poem Written by a Lady of Quality
, continued to dry on the racks of the printing shops. By the end of the summer the
Monthly Review
was writing with exasperation that ‘surely the public are, by this time tired of Lady Worsley
whatever may be the case with respect to her husband or her gallants’. They weren’t.
Sir Richard, unlike his wife, had no wish to court publicity or flirt with the press. He wanted to remain invisible until the newspapers and Grub Street were distracted by another wealthy cuckold’s misfortunes. Undoubtedly, the longevity of the scandal’s appeal, which was continually fed by Lady Worsley’s antics, surprised him. The appearance of the
Epistle
was for him the final straw. If Seymour had learned to utilise the press to smear his name, he might harness it in order to defend himself. Exactly two months after the publication of
An Epistle from Lady Worsley to Sir Richard Worsley
the baronet offered a response.
The Answer of Sir Richard Worsley to the Epistle of Lady Worsley
, a reply in verse, issued from his own pen.
Epistle
was for him the final straw. If Seymour had learned to utilise the press to smear his name, he might harness it in order to defend himself. Exactly two months after the publication of
An Epistle from Lady Worsley to Sir Richard Worsley
the baronet offered a response.
The Answer of Sir Richard Worsley to the Epistle of Lady Worsley
, a reply in verse, issued from his own pen.
As Sir Richard had not hired a poet to express his sentiments, the hurt and betrayal in his verses is more immediate. He, ‘thy suppliant husband’, pleads with her to be moved ‘by compassion’s tear, if not connubial love’ to end her public persecution of him. It is the ceaseless defamation of his name which he finds unbearable, that ‘the Grub Street Syrens … now strain their hackney’d throats with
Worsley’s
name, and
Worsley’s
crimes and
Worsley’s
verse proclaim’. What must he do, the baronet begs, ‘to save from Slander’s tongue my injur’d name?’ before displaying, in heartfelt words, his injuries;
Worsley’s
name, and
Worsley’s
crimes and
Worsley’s
verse proclaim’. What must he do, the baronet begs, ‘to save from Slander’s tongue my injur’d name?’ before displaying, in heartfelt words, his injuries;
Too late I now complain–the fatal dart
Grows to my side, and rankles in my heart.
The whisper’d tale escapes from ear to ear,
Lurks in a smile, and wounds me in a sneer.
Grows to my side, and rankles in my heart.
The whisper’d tale escapes from ear to ear,
Lurks in a smile, and wounds me in a sneer.
Unable to endure her battery of words and humiliating stunts, Worsley concedes defeat. The actions he has taken, defensive or otherwise, seem only to rebound on him. ‘Fruitless is my aim’, he confesses, ‘and vain the toil’, as ‘Back on myself the blunted darts recoil’. Lady Worsley’s scheme to ‘damn us both to never dying fame’ by swelling ‘our mutual shame’ had been successful.
In addition to stirring the reader’s sympathy for what he had suffered by his ‘insatiate wife’s’ behaviour, Worsley used his
Answer
to denounce his betrayers. Sir Richard wanted the world to see that Seymour was not solely responsible for his disgrace. The blame could equally be laid at the feet of the so-called gentlemen who had breached the masculine honour code and colluded against him in court. As he had with Bisset, he regarded this treachery
as a severe crime, as serious as the one committed by his wife. While acknowledging that Lady Worsley could have kept silent about the freedom he granted her and allowed him ‘to have tamely borne, the destin’d horns, unknowing …’ he would not have been made ‘the leader of the cornute band’, the king of the cuckolds, were it not for her conspirators. It was with their assistance that ‘at a public bar’, the Court of the King’s Bench, his ‘follies reign’d, the food of ev’ry ear’. Accordingly, Worsley’s condemnation of this ‘too victor’ous band’, these ‘young nobles’ whose lives are ruled by ‘am’ rous joys and wanton loves’, is sharp. ‘You’, he addresses them, ‘who on record betray’d’ me must remember that it is ‘by noble deeds’ that one will acquire ‘a deathless name’, not through acts of ‘am’rous dalliance’ with an insatiable Messalina whose sexual desires even ‘your efforts never could remove’ and who
you
, the renowned lovers, were ultimately incapable of satisfying. ‘I rise above your breed,’ the baronet boasted with angry arrogance, and ‘More splendid honors deck my greater name’.
Answer
to denounce his betrayers. Sir Richard wanted the world to see that Seymour was not solely responsible for his disgrace. The blame could equally be laid at the feet of the so-called gentlemen who had breached the masculine honour code and colluded against him in court. As he had with Bisset, he regarded this treachery
as a severe crime, as serious as the one committed by his wife. While acknowledging that Lady Worsley could have kept silent about the freedom he granted her and allowed him ‘to have tamely borne, the destin’d horns, unknowing …’ he would not have been made ‘the leader of the cornute band’, the king of the cuckolds, were it not for her conspirators. It was with their assistance that ‘at a public bar’, the Court of the King’s Bench, his ‘follies reign’d, the food of ev’ry ear’. Accordingly, Worsley’s condemnation of this ‘too victor’ous band’, these ‘young nobles’ whose lives are ruled by ‘am’ rous joys and wanton loves’, is sharp. ‘You’, he addresses them, ‘who on record betray’d’ me must remember that it is ‘by noble deeds’ that one will acquire ‘a deathless name’, not through acts of ‘am’rous dalliance’ with an insatiable Messalina whose sexual desires even ‘your efforts never could remove’ and who
you
, the renowned lovers, were ultimately incapable of satisfying. ‘I rise above your breed,’ the baronet boasted with angry arrogance, and ‘More splendid honors deck my greater name’.
Throughout his
Answer
Worsley does not shy away from suggesting that his passions are not as ‘fired’ as that of his wife’s. He refers to himself as a man ‘of old’, who looks to the cool, rational behaviour of the ancients and who admires ‘the gorgeous temple of Diana’, representative of chastity and restraint. The baronet offers no apologies for his sexual shortcomings and writes with surprising candidness about his bedroom failures;
Answer
Worsley does not shy away from suggesting that his passions are not as ‘fired’ as that of his wife’s. He refers to himself as a man ‘of old’, who looks to the cool, rational behaviour of the ancients and who admires ‘the gorgeous temple of Diana’, representative of chastity and restraint. The baronet offers no apologies for his sexual shortcomings and writes with surprising candidness about his bedroom failures;
… I try’d the combat to sustain,
Then first essay’d, but first essay’d in vain.
Exhausted, spent, unequal to the fight,
I wish’d the morn, and curst the ling’ring night.
Then first essay’d, but first essay’d in vain.
Exhausted, spent, unequal to the fight,
I wish’d the morn, and curst the ling’ring night.
His wife’s appetite wore him out and although he was ‘oft’ entreated to pursue the race’ he eventually came to ‘shun … the loath’d embrace’. Worsley seems not to have cared what impact this admission might have on his masculine reputation. To his mind, Seymour’s ‘boundless rage of lust’ was unnatural in a woman. In response to the
Epistle
’s attack on ‘modern Beaux’, with ‘their looks, their air’ and their ‘pretty forms’, he springs to their defence. He claims that she regards them as ‘a doubtful sex’, not ‘men, nor women, yet so mix’d together’ simply because they cannot staunch her lava flow of sexual desire. Worsley then makes a frank admission and addresses her directly; you have been urging ‘me in print with vaunting terms’ to explain why
Epistle
’s attack on ‘modern Beaux’, with ‘their looks, their air’ and their ‘pretty forms’, he springs to their defence. He claims that she regards them as ‘a doubtful sex’, not ‘men, nor women, yet so mix’d together’ simply because they cannot staunch her lava flow of sexual desire. Worsley then makes a frank admission and addresses her directly; you have been urging ‘me in print with vaunting terms’ to explain why
I, th’acknowledg’d guardian of thy fame,
Should, like a pander, prostitute thy name,
And at a public bath in open day,
To the wild gaze of youth thy charms display?
What madness, dost thou say, could fire my brain,
To help a wife to an admiring swain?
Should, like a pander, prostitute thy name,
And at a public bath in open day,
To the wild gaze of youth thy charms display?
What madness, dost thou say, could fire my brain,
To help a wife to an admiring swain?
And so he confesses that he had hoped to lighten his own burdens and ‘calm thy mad wishes’ through the assistance of other men, ‘brought … jointly to my aid’. Only then, he believed might ‘Their
pointed efforts
… have cool’d thy flame’.
pointed efforts
… have cool’d thy flame’.
Although Worsley concludes his missive with the same venomous sentiments expressed by his wife that he ‘hates her person’ as much as he ‘dreads her heart’, he intended to use the
Answer
not as a destructive weapon but a defensive one. Since February, the baronet had been subjected to a relentless tide of slander. His appeal to the public’s sympathy was an attempt to stop the attack as well as to counter Lady Worsley’s accusations. He did not wish to rekindle Grub Street’s dwindling memories of his ‘twelve penny verdict’ or to once again cause society’s critics to pass moral judgement against him. Instead, he wanted to issue a subtle but effective rebuttal.
Answer
not as a destructive weapon but a defensive one. Since February, the baronet had been subjected to a relentless tide of slander. His appeal to the public’s sympathy was an attempt to stop the attack as well as to counter Lady Worsley’s accusations. He did not wish to rekindle Grub Street’s dwindling memories of his ‘twelve penny verdict’ or to once again cause society’s critics to pass moral judgement against him. Instead, he wanted to issue a subtle but effective rebuttal.
The Answer of Sir Richard Worsley to the Epistle of Lady Worsley
was printed once. It could be purchased at the shops of only three booksellers. In spite of having the Worsley name in its title, which would have guaranteed its sale at bookstalls across the British Isles, its availability was confined to the capital alone. Beyond an announcement of its publication on the 21st of June, the newspapers did not mention it. By bribing the
Morning Herald
and the
Morning Post
as well as the two most scandal-laden monthly journals,
Town and Country Magazine
and the
Rambler
, Sir Richard had taken the usual precautions to ensure that his verses would not be discussed, satirised or debated. It is likely that he knew his response would not bear too much scrutiny, that there would be only ridicule, not public sympathy for a man who could neither satisfy nor control his wife and who used his lack of virility as a defence for his actions. It is also probable that he feared his work would prompt others to come forward with additional tales of his sexual failings. At the time of publication, rumours were already in the air that Worsley had once pursued a number of fashionable courtesans, but that Sophia Baddeley, Elizabeth Armistead, Gertrude Mahon and Kitty Frederick had all
jilted him for unspecific reasons. The author of
The Genuine Anecdotes and Amorous Adventures of Sir Richard Easy and Lady Wagtail
claimed that the baronet had been ‘frustrated in the amorous pursuit’ and that he was ‘despised by the first rate
impures
’. Vanity, rather than lust had been his motive for courting them.
was printed once. It could be purchased at the shops of only three booksellers. In spite of having the Worsley name in its title, which would have guaranteed its sale at bookstalls across the British Isles, its availability was confined to the capital alone. Beyond an announcement of its publication on the 21st of June, the newspapers did not mention it. By bribing the
Morning Herald
and the
Morning Post
as well as the two most scandal-laden monthly journals,
Town and Country Magazine
and the
Rambler
, Sir Richard had taken the usual precautions to ensure that his verses would not be discussed, satirised or debated. It is likely that he knew his response would not bear too much scrutiny, that there would be only ridicule, not public sympathy for a man who could neither satisfy nor control his wife and who used his lack of virility as a defence for his actions. It is also probable that he feared his work would prompt others to come forward with additional tales of his sexual failings. At the time of publication, rumours were already in the air that Worsley had once pursued a number of fashionable courtesans, but that Sophia Baddeley, Elizabeth Armistead, Gertrude Mahon and Kitty Frederick had all
jilted him for unspecific reasons. The author of
The Genuine Anecdotes and Amorous Adventures of Sir Richard Easy and Lady Wagtail
claimed that the baronet had been ‘frustrated in the amorous pursuit’ and that he was ‘despised by the first rate
impures
’. Vanity, rather than lust had been his motive for courting them.
Fleet Street and Grub Street had become Sir Richard’s persecutors and they dogged him to the point of despair. Their printed words and satires spread like poison into every corner of society, ensuring that knowledge of his misdeeds was distributed equally among men of politics, religion and law. It was with this last group that his greatest concern lay. Through the first half of May 1782, his suit for a Separation from Bed and Board was still pending at Doctors’ Commons. On the 15th, Judge William Wynne announced his decision to approve the separation. As anticipated, Lady Worsley was awarded the continuance of her annual pin money, amounting to £400. Additionally, her widow’s jointure ‘of two thousand pounds per annum’ and ‘the use of a dwelling house for her life … at the rent of three hundred pounds per annum’ were safeguarded. To the baronet’s annoyance, this clause also contained a number of perks, such as her entitlement to £200 worth of ‘household linen, china, furniture and plate’ that she might select from ‘his town dwelling house at his decease’. His wife would be well provided for in the event of his death. While these terms were not as severe as he had wished, to his mind they were not wholly unreasonable either. However, Judge Wynne’s legal ruling contained something far more objectionable.
It is likely that a Separation from Bed and Board had appealed to Worsley’s frugal instincts as well as his need for revenge. In contrast to a parliamentary divorce, husbands were rarely required to support their estranged wives with alimony payments. Provisions for pin money and a widow’s jointure remained as enforceable clauses in the marriage contract, but Sir Richard could look forward to wiping his hands of any additional financial obligations to Seymour. When the baronet presented his case for separation, it appeared to him to be a straightforward situation where his adulterous wife was clearly in the wrong. Judge Wynne, a Londoner, who read the newspapers and passed the windows of the print shops, who dined in the company of gossips, had begun to think otherwise. Although he did not want to condone the behaviour of an adulteress, Wynne ruled that this was an unusual case requiring special consideration. Sir Richard’s contribution to the destruction of his marriage meant that he should bear some responsibility for his
wife’s uncertain future. Therefore, in addition to the award of £400 annual pin money, he ordered that yearly alimony payments of a further £600 be made. This £1,000 in total was to be given to her in monthly sums, the first instalment of which, the judge proclaimed to Worsley’s solicitor, ‘was now due in fifteen days’.
wife’s uncertain future. Therefore, in addition to the award of £400 annual pin money, he ordered that yearly alimony payments of a further £600 be made. This £1,000 in total was to be given to her in monthly sums, the first instalment of which, the judge proclaimed to Worsley’s solicitor, ‘was now due in fifteen days’.
The baronet was outraged. He ordered that Heseltine issue an immediate ‘protest against the decree’ which he ‘found to be too much favouring Dame Seymour Dorothy Worsley’ to his ‘very great detriment and prejudice’. The appeal against the ruling was then moved into the higher Court of Arches where on the 4th of June, Sir Richard’s attorney appeared again to issue a complaint that ‘Sir Richard Worsley … was very much injured and aggrieved by … the ruling’. The demand for alimony was an insult. Notwithstanding James Heseltine’s fervent objections, the decision remained, with the minor concession that, rather than monthly, the instalments were to be paid on a quarterly basis.
All of his attempts at vindication had been crushed and Worsley was incensed. Incredibly, he had lost every skirmish to his wife; an enemy less well endowed and less justified in her cause. However, in this final struggle he refused to concede defeat. For the next six years, the baronet’s attorneys would continue to dispute the finer details of the separation and attempt to overturn the award of £600 alimony.
Other books
The Grass Tattoo (#2 - The Craig Modern Thriller Series) by Catriona King
The Thorn in His Side by Kim Lawrence
Things Forbidden by Raquel Dove
Buddies by Ethan Mordden
Witness Protection (Defenders of Love Book 1) by LaRoche, Carolyn
The Barrow by Mark Smylie
The Dark Ones by Smith, Bryan
The Widow and the Wastrel by Janet Dailey
Surviving the Improbable Quest by Anderson Atlas
Melt by Quinn, Cari
