LON 
borough, to inquire into the truth of thefe declarations, 
and to examine evidence. Thefe noble lords made a 
.Report on the 14-th of July, 1806, from which we muft 
make a few extracts. “ We firfl examined on oath the 
principal informants, fir John Douglas and Charlotte his 
wife; who both pofitively fwore, the former to his having 
obferved the fact of the pregnancy of her royal highnefs, 
and the latter to all the important particulars contained 
in her former declaration, and above referred to. Their 
examinations are circumftantial and polltive. The moll 
material of thefe allegations being thus far fupported by 
the oath of the parties from whom they had proceeded, 
we then felt it to be our duty to follow up the inquiry by 
the examination of fuch other perfons as we judged belt 
able to afford us information as to the fadts in queftion. 
We thought it beyond all doubt, that in the courfe of 
inquiry many particulars muft be learnt, which would be 
necelfarily conclulive on the truth or falfehood of thefe 
declarations; fo many perfons muff have been witnefl'es 
to the appearance of an actual exifting pregnancy ; fo 
many circumftances muft have been attendant upon areal 
delivery ; and difficulties fo numerous and infurinounta- 
ble muft have been involved in any attempt to account 
for the infant in queftion as the child of another woman, 
if it had been in fa <51 the child of the princefs, that we 
entertained a full and confident expe< 5 tation of arriving at 
complete proof, either in' the affirmative or negative, on 
this part of the fubjeCt.—-This expectation was not dis¬ 
appointed. We are happy to declare our perfect convic¬ 
tion, that there is no foundation whatever for believing that 
the child now with the princefs of Wales is the child of 
her royal highnefs, or that (lie was delivered of any child 
in the year 1802 ; nortiasany thing appeared to us which 
would warrant the belief that ffie was pregnant in that 
year, or at any other period within the compafs of our 
inquiries. The identity of the child now with the 
princefs, its parents, age, the place and date of its birth, 
the time and circumltance of its being firft taken under 
her royal highnefs’s protection, are all eftablifhed by fuch 
a concurrence both of pofitive and circumftantial evi¬ 
dence, as can in our judgment leave no queftion on this 
part of the fubjeft. That child was, beyond all doubt, 
born in Brownlow-ftreet hofpital, on the nth day of 
July, 1802, of the body of Sophia Aultin ; and was firft 
brought to the princefs's houfe in the November following. 
“ We do not, however, feel ourfelves at liberty, much 
as we fhould wifh it, to clofe our Report here. Befides 
the allegations of the pregnancy and delivery of the 
princefs, thofe declarations contain other particulars re- 
fpecting the condudt of her royal highnefs, fuch as muft, 
efpecially confidering her exalted rank and ftation, necef- 
farily give occafion to very unfavourable -interpretations. 
From the various depofitions and proofs annexed to this 
Report, particularly from the examination of Robert Bid- 
good, William Cole, Frances Lloyd, and Mrs. Lifle, your 
majefty will perceive that leveral ftrong circunvftances of 
this defeription have been pofitively l'worn to by wit- 
nefi'es, who cannot., in our judgment, be fufpedted of any 
unfavourable bias, and whofe veracity, in this refpedf, we 
have feen no ground to queftion. On the precife bearing 
arid eft'edt of the fadls thus appearing, we conceive it to 
be our duty to report—that, as on the one hand the fadls 
of pregnancy and delivery are to our minds fatisfadlorily 
difproved, fo on the other hand we think the circum¬ 
ftances to which we now refer, particularly thofe dated 
to have paffed between her royal highnefs and captain 
Manby, muft be credited until they fhal 1 receive fome de- 
cifive contradidlion ; and, if true, are juftly entitled to 
the mod Serious confideration'.” 
As this Report left dome little (lain, on the fcore of 
levity, upon the charadterof the princefs, her royal high¬ 
nefs add retied a letter to his majefty, commenting on the 
evidence, and indeed “ proteftiug againft the legality of 
the commilTion, and all proceedings under it.” In Ja¬ 
nuary 1807, his majefty (with the advice of his cabinet- 
Tol. XIII. No. 909. 
DON. 325 
council) was pleafed to fend a Mefiage to the princefs, 
dating, that “ it is no longer necefl'ary for him to decline 
receiving the princefs into his royal prefence. The king 
fees with great.fatisfadlion the agreement of his confiden¬ 
tial fervants, in the decided opinion exprefled by the four 
lords, upon the falfehood of the accufations of pregnancy 
and delivery brought forward againft the princefs by lady 
Douglas. On the other matters produced in the courfe of 
the inquiry, the king is advifed, that none of the fa< 51 s or 
allegations Hated in the preliminary examinations, carried 
on in the abfence of the parties interefted, are to he con- 
fidered as legally or conclufively eftablifhed. But in thofe 
examinations, and even in the anfwer drawn in the name 
of the princefs by her legal advifers, there have appeared 
circumftances of conduct on the part of the princefs, 
which his majefty could never regard but with ferious 
concern. The elevated rank which the princefs holds in 
this country, and the relation in which (he (lands to his 
majefty and the royal family, muft always deeply involve 
both the interefts of the Hate, and the perfonal feelings of 
his majefty, in the propriety and correCtnefs of her con¬ 
duit; and his majefty cannot, therefore, forbear to ex- 
prefs, in the conclufion of the bufinefs, his defire and ex¬ 
pectation, that fuch a conduct may in future be obferved 
by the princefs, as may fully juftify thofe marks of pa¬ 
ternal regard and affeclion which the king always wifhes 
to (how to every part of the royal family. His majefty 
has direited that this Melfage fhould be tranfmitted to 
the princefs of Wales by his lord-chancellor ; and that 
copies of the proceedings which have taken place on this 
fubjeCt fhould alfo be communicated to his dearly be¬ 
loved fon, the prince of Wales.” 
A minute of council followed on the 22d of April, 1807, 
which was mod confolatory to the princefs. “After the 
molt deliberate confideration of the evidence which has 
been brought before the commiffioners, and of the pre¬ 
vious examinations, as well as of the anfwer and obferva- 
tions which have been fubmitted to your majefty upon 
them, they feel it necefl'ary to declare their decided con¬ 
currence in the clear and unanimous opinion of the com- 
miffioners, confirmed by that of all your majefty’s late 
confidential fervants, that the two main charges alleged 
againft her royal highnefs the princefs of Wales, of preg¬ 
nancy and delivery, are completely difproved ; and they 
further fubmit to your majefty their unanimous opinion, 
that all the other particulars of conduEl, brought in accufa- 
tion againft her royal highnefs, to which the character of 
criminality can be aferibed, are either ftuisfaCtorily con¬ 
tradicted, or reft upon evidence of fuch a nature, and 
which was given under fuch circumftances, as render it, 
in the judgment of your majefty’s confidential fervants, 
undferving of credit. Your majefty’s confidential fervants, 
therefore, concurring in that part of the opinion of your 
late fervants, as dated in their minute of the 25th of Ja¬ 
nuary, that there is no longer any necefnty for your ma¬ 
jefty being advifed to decline receiving the princefs into 
your royal prefence, humbly fubmit to your majefty, that 
it is efl'entialiy necefl'ary, in juftice to her royal highnefs, 
and for the honour and interefts of your majefty’6 illus¬ 
trious family, that her royal highnefs the princefs of 
Wales (hould be admitted, with as little delay as poiiible, 
into your tnajefty’s royal prefejjce; and that (lie (hould be 
received, in a manner due to her rank and ftation, in 
your majefty’s court and family.” 
The princefs was now received at court; it was hoped 
that every thing was forgotten and forgiven ; and fome 
good people indulged themfelves with the fond expecta¬ 
tion of feeing the prince and princefs of Wales united in 
fupporting the true dignity and character of the court.—• 
Vain" hopes ! The fame wicked fpies and informers were 
at work; and, in the year i'8iz, when the king’s diforder 
was become hopelefs, by which the princefs had loft her 
belt friend, the former accufations againft her.royal high¬ 
nefs began to be repeated with aggravations ; ap.d fre.fti in- 
finuatious were propagated as to levity of conduct. The 
f O conlequence 
