THE ENGLISH BENEDICTINES
AND THE STUARTS

Dom Stephen Marron
Douai Magazine 1:4 (1921) 249-259

There are in our archives a few Stuart papers, of no general interest maybe, but having at least this particular interest, that they witness to the fidelity of the Benedictines to the Stuarts, even to the last days of that royal house. They are mostly letters written by Charles Edward to the Prior of our monastery, then situate in Paris; consequently they will not be out of place here. Before giving them however, it will not be amiss to preface a few notes on the growth of an intimacy between the monks and the Stuarts.

Everyone knows that the Benedictines came to convert England at the end of the sixth century and remained there till their suppression, by Henry VIII. and Elizabeth. They were revived again at the beginning of the 17th century, for a second mission to England. It is worthy of note that Providence brought them back to this country at the very time that the Stuarts ascended the English throne. In the spring of 1603, as James was coming down from Scotland to receive the English crown, the first band of Benedictine missioners was crossing from the continent. Here then were two new forces to which English Catholics looked with hope. They expected much from the son of Mary Queen of Scots, and not a little from the Benedictine mission. It is well known that some of the foremost English Catholics had striven earnestly for this revival, that the monks might contribute to the Catholic situation in England and to the task of reconversion, their traditional spirit of moderation, conciliation and loyalty. 'James II. is noted to have said,'records Weldon, 'that he could not but bare in mind that there was such a connection betwixt ye Royalty of England formerly and its Benedictin Monachisme That where ye Kings had a Palace ye Benedictins had a convent' [1] It was thus from the days of St. Augustine: and the picture of the early monks approaching in procession King Ethelbert of Kent, with its foreshadowing of subsequent success, was one that appealed strongly to many Catholics in those troublous days. The policy of first gaining the sympathy and co-operation of the sovereign was characteristic of the missioners who converted Anglo-Saxon England. As with St. Augustine in Kent, so too was it with St. Paulinus in Northumbria and with others elsewhere. 'The first object of the missionaries' writes Lingard, 'was invariably the same, to obtain the patronage of the prince' [2] They strove, moreover, 'most carefully to avoid every offensive and acrimonious expression, to inform the judgment without alienating the affections' 'Non quasi insultando vel irritando' says the monk bishop Daniel, 'sed placide et magna moderatione.' [3] In this lay the secret of their success.

1. Weldon's MSS. Memorials, Vol. I, p. 172.
2. Lingard's Anglo-Saxon Church, 1844, Vol. I, p. 42.
3. Lingard, ibid, p. 39.

The monk missioners of the 17th century knew that the like was expected of them. Indeed they had taken St. Bennet's habit with the intention of following thus in the footsteps of their predecessors. The fathers assembled at St. Edmund's, Paris, 1617, for what may be called their first General Chapter, decreed that 'no one design or counsel, speak or write any thing savouring of sedition, contempt or injury against the kingdom, state or civil magistrate.' [4] The vexed question of the Oath of Allegiance, which met them practically at the outset, and engaged them throughout the reigns of James I. and Charles I., was a severe test. To pursue that subject in detail would take too long. Suffice it to note that the English monks maintained an attitude of conciliation throughout, and it is not without significance that when in Charles' reign the sovereign Pontiff designed a private mission to England, with a view to a possible rapprochement, he chose an English Benedictine, Dom Leander, for the delicate task. [5] Likewise, when Charles I. sent Captain Arthur Brett as his envoy to Rome, he bade him take as adviser Dom Wilford, the English Benedictine Procurator in Curia, whom he described as 'a moderate man, of good affection towards our service, and one whom you may trust.' [6]

4. Weldon, l.c., p. 73.
5. Butler's Memoirs of English Catholics, 1822, Vol. II, p. 311 sqq.
6. Taunton's English Black Monks of St. Benedict, Vol. II, p . 159.

It is no matter for wonder then, that what had been should be again, that an attachment should spring up between the monks and the prince, between the Benedictines and the Stuarts thus providentially sent simultaneously to England. At any rate, as the century wore on, so it came to be. 'King Charles II. and the Duke of York always professed a particular affection for the Benedictines,' writes Dr. Guilday, 'and the Nuncio reports to Rome (July 22nd, 1660) that the English monks had contributed very much to the Stuart party, so much so that Chancellor Hyde held them up to the Jesuits and all other English Ecclesiastics as models of loyalty to the king.' [7]

7. Dr. Guilday's English Catholic Refugees on the Continent, p. 226.

What chiefly brought this loyalty to popular notice was that well thumbed and picturesque event, the service rendered by Dom John Huddleston to the fugitive King Charles II., in his escape from the Parliamentarians, after the Battle of Worcester. Of this Clarendon wrote, 'He owed very much to the diligence and fidelity of some ecclesiastical persons of the Romish persuasion, especially to those of the Order of St. Bennet, which was the reason that he expressed more favours after his Restoration to that order than to any other, and granted them some extraordinary privileges about the service of the Queen, not concealing the reason why he did so.' [8] That this was Charles' ostensible pretext for his favours to the monks is, no doubt, true ; but it would be incorrect to conclude that through Dom Huddleston, Charles first became acquainted with the Benedictines and their goodwill towards his royal person and house. One would be nearer the truth in asserting that the king the more readily accepted Dom Huddleston's services and entrusted to him his royal person precisely because he was already aware of the fidelity of the monks and was moreover personally and intimately acquainted with some of Dom John's confreres. Dom Dunstan Everard he certainly knew personally, and Dom Paul Robinson and others too, long before the Battle of Worcester. It may be remarked in this connexion, that when Charles invited the Benedictines to establish a convent at the palace for the Queen's service, as referred to by Clarendon, this signal favour came through the ministry not of Dom Huddleston but of Charles' older friend, Dom Paul Robinson, to whom consequently was addressed the General Chapter's letter of thanks. [9] The king also knew the nuns. He had visited the Benedictine nuns at Ghent the year before the battle, and conceived an affection for them, afterwards manifested by princely gifts. [10] As a sovereign, he must also have been aware of the conciliatory efforts of the monks re the Oath of Allegiance, and no doubt shared his father's opinion of the Benedictine, as 'a moderate man, of good affection towards our service, and one whom you may trust'

8. History of the Rebellion. Oxford, 1731. Vol. Ill, part 2, p. 428.
9. MSS. Minutes of Chapter, 1661.
10. Annals of the English Benedictines of Ghent, pp. 24, 38 and 39.

Be that as it may, Dom Huddleston's act it was that gave Benedictine loyalty a certain popularity, and served Charles as a pretext to his people for the favours bestowed. That a body of English monk priests should be granted a recognised status at the palace, in days when priests were still proscribed, was certainly a remarkable favour. A body of religious had been tolerated in the previous reign, at the Chapel of Queen Henrietta, but they were French, brought over by the Queen from her own country, and that was different. The Duke of York later took two Benedictines for the service of his Duchess, and when he succeeded to the throne, he established at St. James' an even larger number than were previously at his brother's palace. James, as is well known, became a Catholic while yet Duke of York. Charles II. was reconciled ot the Church on his deathbed, and that by Dom Huddleston, whom the Duke of York summoned to the dying king. But it is clear that Charles had long been convinced of the true Faith. I venture to suggest that the vivid remembrance he ever retained of his day in Huddleston's chamber at Moseley, was due to something that appealed to him even more than his escape from capture. It was this. He found there a certain Catholic treatise, the Short and Plain Way to the Faith and Church, written by Huddleston's uncle, Dom Richard Huddleston: this he perused and greatly admired. Anyone who compares with this treatise the private papers of the king, published after his death, and containing a reasoned argument for the truth of the Catholic Church will recognise the fount of the King's convictions and realise the deep effect it made on his mind. Weldon says of these papers that they 'seem even to ye very manner of expression to breathe ye same spirit and genius with that of ye book.' [11]

11. Weldon, l.c., p. 534.

In 1685 James II. ascended the throne. Of the 7th century mission Lingard says, : in about 80 years was successfully completed the conversion of the Anglo-Saxons.' [12] Of the 17th century mission it may be said, that within a like period after their arrival, the monks had the consolation of seeing on the English throne a Catholic king, zealous for the Catholic cause. The goodwill of the prince was secured, but the people were yet to be won and here was all the difference between conversion and reconversion. The temper of the nation was yet uncertain and suspicious, while James was over zealous and headstrong; nor had he the power of an Ethelbert or an Edwin, He pushed forward the Catholic cause with imprudent haste. The people grew restive, and when at length the birth of a son gave prospects of a Catholic succession, the storm broke and shortly the king and his royal household were exiles in Paris, and the Royal convent of the Benedictines came to an end.

12. Lingard, l.c., Vol. I, p. 39.

In the vicinity of James' palace of exile, S. Germain en Laye, stood the English monastery of St. Edmund, King and Martyr. The Prior at that time was Fr. Francis Fenwick, whom the king had formerly known in London, and to whom he had shown many marks of friendship. He later appointed him his agent in Rome, where Fr. Francis died, and was buried in the English College. At this time too, our worthy chronicler, Br. Bennet Weldon, was still living, and he gives us occasional references to James' visits to the monks and his retreats at St. Edmund's. One account we venture to give. Br. Bennet after recounting the fact that the king spent the Holy Week of 1694 in retreat at the monastery, continues: 'Often besides, before and since, His Majesty has honoured us with afternoon visits, concerning which it will not be amiss to relate here what once happened in Fa Fenwick's time. His Majesty mightily delighted to take us so, that we could not meet him in that very respectfull manner as we desired, so that one rainy day coming wrapped up in his cloke out of his coach, ye Porter, who was then a secular man and who lived with us out of devotion, though thro his age his sight was none of ye best, yet he seldom mistook himself in his affairs, but now he did, for he took ye King only for a gentleman, not aware of his Star, and therefore began to capitulate with him as to his entring ye house till he had acquainted Fa Prior. His Majesty with his unimaginable accustomed bounty and goodness, desired ye man at least since it rained he might come in to be dry, and while ye old man trudged to acquaint ye worthy superior, ye King followed him into ye Cloister, where Fa Fenwick coming down found him walking all alone very contentedly, but was sore abashed at ye porter's having been so overseen in his gentleman, but His Majesty's piety took great delight in ye pleasantness of ye mistake and ye Community advertized presently waited on His Majesty.' [13]

13. Weldon, I.e., Vol. II, p. 266.

Visits of the Queen, the Princess Royal and the Prince of Wales are likewise duly chronicled. In 1701 James II. died and was laid to rest in the Church of his English monks. St. Edmund's thenceforth became a favourite burial place for loyalists. The Princess Royal Louise Marie was also buried there and the valiant Duke of Berwick, killed by cannon-ball at the siege of Phillipsbourg, 'was laid as he desired beside his royal father in the chapel of the English Benedictines.' [14] There too, found a resting place Viscount Stafford's son Francis Stafford, who at James' request had been given a refuge for his last days in St. Edmund's monastery.

14. A. Shield. The King over the Water, p. 392.

In June, 1706, five years after his father's death, James III. attained his legal majority and on his father's anniversary he made a solemn visit to the royal tomb.

His Majesty was received by ye Community with R F Prior at ye head of us, at ye Convent door (for so His Majesty had ordered it) at 9 a'clock in ye morning, and presently went up ye Church to his Royal Father's tomb. He heard two Masses in ye Chapel at ye ist of which he communicated and after ye 2nd was said thrice Domine Salvum fac regem etc.: then he heard a 3rd Mass in Black to which was joined a De Profundis and Prayer for his Royal Father. His Majesty passed through and honoured our guestroom with his royal presence: there was a breakfast, but His Majesty took only half a biscuit in his hand saying it was a fasting day, viz., Ember Friday, and he had no necessity. [15]
15. Weldon, l.c., p. 525.

On March 7th, 1708, James set out from Paris for his expedition to Scotland, 'and on ye 10th we began public prayers for his Majesty's happy success, by a Mass of ye H Ghost before ye B. Sacrament publicly exposed, and we continued them with ye same solemnity ye 2 days following, with a huge concourse of people who thereby shewed their goodwill and hearty wishes for his Majesty's happy successe.' Thus Weldon, who later records that the King 'could not reach Scotland, being pursued by ye English whose navy was stronger, wherefore he returned and came to do his devotions at ye tomb of His Royal Father, ye 5th of May ye Eve of St. John Port-Latin.' [16]

16. Weldon, l.c., pp. 594 and 599.

Princess Louise Marie died in 1712 and was buried at St. Edmund's. James was too ill to attend his sister's funeral, in fact his own condition was so serious that he was not informed of her death till eight days after the event. Weldon gives a detailed account of the funeral and the chief personages present. 'To the queen's extreme grief no public panegyric could be preached . . . lest the sensitive English Government should be offended at so critical a moment.' [17] Indeed it was a critical moment for James. The treaty of peace which was then in process, was destined to force him from France, and before the end of that year he departed from Paris. Now, too, Br. Bennet's chatty chronicle ends, for death shortly silenced its author. His successor, Dom William Hewlett, is more brief and has nothing of Stuart interest save the occasional chronicling of the burial of some more interesting loyalist. Nor do such of our archives as survived the French Revolution give us anything to the point for this period. They contain however a most interesting volume of letters, 1712—1726, which one may be pardoned for mentioning, although they have no direct bearing on our subject. They are written by Dempster, secretary of the Queen mother, and are first drafts or summaries of his letters to Sir Toby-Bourke, James' minister in Spain, and to Cardinal Gualterio, Protector of England. They naturally contain a good deal of Stuart information and would no doubt repay perusal, but they have nothing to our point. How did they find their way to their present destination?

17. A. Shield, I.e., p. 173.

We may now pass on to our later Stuart papers. The first is of 1745, an interesting year. By this time James III. had married Clementina Sobieska, was settled at the Muti Palace in Rome, and had two sons, Charles Edward, and Henry. In January, 1744, Prince Charles had gone to Paris expecting aid from Louis of France for an expedition to regain the English crown; but Louis had disappointed him and the Prince after many months of weary waiting, was now meditating an independent expedition to Scotland, where Murray was preparing a rising in his favour. King James apparently was not informed of all this, and certainly would never have countenanced any expedition without French aid. The Prince had probably informed his father, April 26th, that he had hopes of French help for an expedition, through the influence of the Princess of Conti, and James replies thus from Albano, May 18th, 1745; which is our first paper:

'I came here, My Dearest Carluccio, on Friday morning and found it very cold, but I hope the weather is now settling fair : I walked yesterday morning in the Villa Barberini with the Pope, who came on Saturday to Castello : Your Brother is gone this morning to dine with Duchess Corsini at Nettuno. You would scarce know him, he is grown so tall; he is, I thank God, very well in his health and I am in hopes the air of this place will be of some help to mine. The weather has been so bad that I did not receive yours of the 26th Aprile till Saturday morning, in return to which I have little to say, for what can be said on certain subjects ? more than has been it already. As long as there is war there is hopes, and those who may be useful must be managed : Tho in general, considering the spirit which I see with grief is reigning amongst our people on this side of the sea, You must keep a strict hand and eye over them. Let none of them think they know all you know, and make them sensible they want you more-than you want them, and by that means you will be easyer and our affairs go better. ^Morgan writes to me a great dale about your Campaigne and the Princess of Conti; for my part I have no hopes of her succeeding in her endeavours to serve you ; But still everything is possible and therefore I cannot too often recommend to you in that case to carry few people with you and to be attentive to what relates to your expenses, with a proper management you may make a little go a great way, and without it you will be ill served, and a great dale of money be thrown away. You have really nobody about you that understand anything of those matters, and as Morgan and O'Sulivan certainly do, I should think you could not do better than to leave to their management the buying of your Equipage, and all that relates to it, to your table and in general to all your expences. I cannot but do Morrice and Kerry the justice to say that they never complain'd to me that you would not see them, tho at the same time I am perhaps as little pleased with them as you, but still I have no manner of apprehension of their turning coats for there are very few on this side of the sea who would get anything but shame by acting such a part, so that in reality all such entirely depend on us. I dont remember I have anything else to say at present, and so I shall bid you adieu and go and take my walk. Beseeching God to bless you and direct you and tenderly embracing you
James R.

How this letter came to us it is impossible to say. No monastic chronicle for that period has come down to us, for Dom Hewlett's ends with 1742. In view of subsequent correspondence between Charles and the monks, it is not improbable that they had some hand in the prince's service at that time. Maybe the letter was directed to St. Edmunds for delivery, as were other letters later. The Prince's place of residence during his stay in Paris was liable to change, and was kept secret. As he wrote to his father; 'The situation I am now in is very particular, for nobody nose where I am or what is become of me, so that I am entirely Burried as to the publick and cant but say but that it is a very great constrent upon me for I am obliged very often not to stur out of my room for fier of some bodys noing my face.' [18] Possibly moreover the letter arrived too late for delivery to the Prince for it was from Navarre that Charles wrote on June 12th announcing to his father the expedition as 'a thing that would be a great surprise'; and on June 22nd he sailed for Scotland on board the 'Doutelle,' with seven companions, among whom was 'O'Sulivan.' So began the '45, of which every schoolboy knows.

18. Andrew Lang. Prince Charles Edward Stuart, p. 70.

Our next paper is of 1777 and is from Charles to the Prior. James has been dead eleven years and the Prince is Charles III. How different from the courageous and bonnie Prince who won all hearts in 1745. The failure of that expedition embittered his spirit. For many years he led a roving life. | After his father's death he refused to settle down in Rome, as his father had done, because the Pope would not acknowledge him as king. He was known as Count of Albany. In 1772 he married Louise de Stolberg, and in 1774 settled at Florence. Three years later he acquired the S. Clemente Palace, where 'C.R. 1777' on the weathercock still commemorates his residence. It is from here that he writes to the Prior. Mr. Andrew Lang in his Prince Charles Edward Stuart, quotes some of the Prince's letters to a Mr. Cowley, whom the author ventures to identify with the ever loyal Oliphant of Gask. Mr. Cowley however, is no other than our Prior, Fr. Gregory Cowley, and our letters are a few of the same series. They are written in the well known boyish hand, grammar and spelling of the Prince. The first is dated from Florence, April 25th, 1777:

I received yrs of ye 31 March and all as mentioned; as I may have some more money in a Little time by ye selling of my funds at Rome would be glad to by more actions. It will do me a pleasure therefore you should Inform me whenever they fall or rise. There is a Book of which I wrote to you some time ago about, do not remember ye precise title of it. But it treats of putting and guarding to proffit. As it is to be founde at Paris tho printed a la Typographic de Bouillion, and not very bulki as I believe, you may send it to me by ye first poste. The house I am in has a guarding to it, and expect every moment of guaining a Lawsute that I was obliged to make for ye purcessing of it. Being fit for any Soverain, a deliteful situation, tho in Town one is as being in ye Country ; so you may imagine my impatience to guet it.
Your sincere friend Charles R.
In ye packet there are four letters.

The next is dated June 5th, 1778:

I got yrs of ye 12th March and all as mentioned: as to ye effects in Waters hands of mine there certainly should be some existing, but have no list of them by me, and remember very fiew, as Medals Armurs a Busto in Plaster Arms some Books Raisors Caises Ribins fans and other transoms that used to guet from England, having received during his Life severall of them things But there are still's remaining, which stands on his conscience to deliver: As well as ye remittances under cant naims. I cant but think that War must break out at Laste.
Your sincere Friend Charles R.
There are four letters.

So writes the once gallant, but now much deserted and impoverished, Prince. Shortly we catch a glimpse of a new trouble. In 1780, to add to his sorrows, his wife Louise, Countess of Albany, deserted him. She had complained of ill treatment, the poet Alfieri appeared as an ardent sympathiser, and finally in December of that year she took refuge in a neighbouring convent. Madame de Matzan, her intimate friend, thus writes to Prior Cowley a few days after the event: Florence, Dec. 29th, 1780:

Madam the Countess of Albany has doubtless already informed you, Sir, of her separation from the Count. I have followed her to the Convent here and shall moreover go with her to the Convent of the Urselines in Rome, whither she goes with the consent of the Cardinal of York and the Holy Father. Will you do me the favour, Sir, of sending direct to me at Rome henceforth, such letters as may be addressed to you for me. Madam the Countess will reimburse you the expenses of my letters. Will you also allow me, Sir, to address to you a case which contains a Saints Body. Under the cerecloth is the address of my sister. I beg you to put it on the box after removing your own, and to have the box put on the diligence that goes to Strasbourg and thence to Colmar, unless I send you another address. Accept Sir the assurance of my deep esteem and respect with which I have the honour to be your most humble and obedient servant
de Matzan, Canoness de Migette. [19]
19. Translated from the original French.

In 1781 Charles writes a short letter to Fr. Augustine Kellet, procurator at St. Edmund's, under date June Ist.

I received yrs of ye 8th May and all as mentioned. Nothing more occurring at present, muste waite again to hear from you which will be tomorrow, expecting also great neuse by what is saide here which wants confirmation and more particularitys reguarding ye number of ye ships taken from ye English, which was bringing ye plunder maide on ye Hollanders in so treacherous a maner : so remain your sincere friend, Charles R.

Meanwhile the Prior had informed Charles that he and Fr. Kellet were about to go to London for General Chapter ; which elicits from Charles the following, dated June 29th, 1781:

I received yrs of ye 5th and all as mentioned. The maps you sent to Marsels are in my hand. It seems they have not been long on ye Rode, and I am vastly pleased with them. I am sory now to be obliged to tell you, as you are going to England, that I am in very great Strets for want of money, and this occacioned by ye Extravagances of my wife ; so that you canot do me a greater service at present than to procure me an Imediate assistance from such honest people as are in a situation of helping me without deranging themselves. I canot finde any ressurce on this side of ye water, which is a thing I can scarce beleive myself. Be pleased to settle a corespondence either by him that succeeds ye worthy man decesed or sum other, so that ye letters for Mr Peter Forde shou'd come safely to Paris for him as was formerly by your means. I shall always address my Letters to you at Paris until! you let me know who I can aply to there in ye absence of both you and Mr Kellet ; wishing ye travellers a quick and hapy return.
I remain, yr Sincere Friend, Charles R.

Dom Maurus Shaw was apparently appointed to correspond with the King during the Prior's absence, and the Prior on his return communicated with Charles once more, from whom he received the following, November 23rd, 1781:

I received ye two packets as I expected and all as mentioned, Mr Shaw's letter of ye 23 Octo and yrs of ye 30th. be pleased to thank Mr Shaw for ye attention he had during your absence. I much aprouve of ye Choise you have maide in ye femall corespondence, you are to tell her so by ye first poste and fix a name imediately with her as also an address at London by which any letters from Mr Peter Forde may arive safe in hand. It deranges me very much to finde you have Little or no hoeps of help in money matters tother side of ye water, finding none at Rome you may judge of my distress occasioned all by the extravagance (or madness) of my wife, joined with an extreme weakness in others ; you are to desier Mr Spontance not to lose an instante in sending me my accounts, as he wrote to me Laste he was only waiting for you for to send them to me, so remain
yr Sincere Friend, Charles R.

We have no more letters from Charles till October, 1785. Those quoted by Andrew Lang fit in here, and are of 1783. But before Charles' next comes one from his natural daughter Charlotte. She had been living for many years in a French convent, but in 1784 when Charles had obtained a formal separation from his wife, he called his daughter to him to comfort him in his declining years, and created her Duchess of Albany. About this time his wife Louise went to Paris where, much to Charles' annoyance, she paraded as Queen of England, and the English houses there, St. Edmund's included, fell under the King's displeasure for receiving her. What further exasperated matters was that she was, at the same time, pressing a claim for 400,000 francs from the impecunious Charles. Charlotte writes to the Prior, Florence, August 26th, 1785:

I was charmed, dear Fr. Prior, to know you of late in Paris, and I thank you most heartily for sending me news of yourself. Such efforts at reconciliation as could cause me no fear of compromising myself, while endeavouring to pacify my father in his discontent towards you for the reception of Madame, have engaged me anew of late to soothe him, but with no happy success. He cannot think without anger of the welcome she received, especially in the English convents. What troubles me most deeply, dear Fr Prior, is the opposition shown by the business people towards M de Vulpian, in regard to certain proposals not indeed accepted by my father, but which I had taken upon myself to authorise, in notifying M de Vulpian that instead of 6,000 francs, which the king had reluctantly agreed to, he might go as far as 10,000. But they are now demanding 400,000 livres from one who has nothing, so to speak, but certain life annuities. That is preposterous.' I have been at pains to hide all this from the king, hoping for maturer counsels, and in the desire that things should right themselves without much ado; of this I do not repent. If they persist in their demand, I send you herewith a letter which I beg of you to pass on to milord. Farewell, Dear Fr Prior, you know my sentiments towards you, they are of the sincerest. Be so good as to remit the enclosed to the Princess de Montbazon.' [20]
20. Original in French.

Charles however seems to have softened somewhat towards the Prior, for he writes to him in quite friendly strain from Florence, October 7th, 1785:

I received your last letter of the 19th of the past month and by the same courier I received a letter from Bussoni touching the affair of the Isle de Re, and in accord with his advice is my reply to him. I have notified him that I have given orders to Stuart to draw on him for 20,000 francs and to place them to my account when he shall have paid them. After an absence of 9 days and a successful journey on the 5th inst, my dear daughter the Duchess of Albany returned from Monte freddo, a village in the Papal States, whither she had gone to see the Cardinal Duke of York, my brother. She was overwhelmed with her reception. Compliments, endearments, the tenderest expressions, all were employed by my brother to prove to my dear daughter his love and attachment. Behold our union reestablished for ever, and I cannot express to you the consolation I feel, in seeing this indissoluble reunion, and in owing it all to my dear daughter, whom I love with all my heart, whom I shall ever love more and who is so worthy of it.
Your good friend Charles R. [21]
2l. Original in French.

This is the last of our letters from Charles. He died in January, 1788, and Charlotte did not long survive him for she passed away in November, 1789, leaving the bulk of her property to the Cardinal (Henry IX.) Our final paper is dated December 24th, 1789, and is from the Cardinal to Fr. Parker, Prior of St. Edmund's, authorising him to transfer to the banker Busoni certain Stuart jewels, which the Prior had in his keeping. The transfer was effected on March ist, 1790. It was the last service rendered by the monks to the Stuarts. The Revolution was about to lay a heavy hand on the Prior and his monastery, and shortly too the hand of death was on the last of the Stuarts.