Rupert Prince Palatine Part 3

Her untiring solicitations and Rupert's own martial spirit, combined with the fact that the Elector, having completed his negotiations, was now ready to return with his brother, prevailed. The King at last consented to let them go, and in June 1637 they embarked at Greenwich, arriving safely at the Hague, after a stormy pa.s.sage in which both suffered severely. The parting in England had been reluctant on both sides. "Both the brothers went away very unwillingly, but Prince Rupert expressed it most, for, being a-hunting that morning with the King, he wished he might break his neck, and so leave his bones in England."[32]

{30}

But, in the opinion of Elizabeth and Roe, that pleasant holiday had ended none too soon. "You have your desire for Prince Rupert," wrote the latter. "I doubt not he returns to you untainted, but I will not answer for all designs upon him. The enemy is a serpent as well as a wolf, and, though he should prove impregnable, you do well to preserve him from battery."[33] Later the boy confessed that a fortnight more in England would have seen him a Roman Catholic. Elizabeth thereupon poured forth bitter indignation on her sister-in-law, but Henrietta only retorted, with cheerful defiance, that, had she known Rupert's real state of mind, he should not have departed when he did.

So far as Rupert was concerned, the visit had not been, from the mother's point of view, a success. The only one of her brother's schemes for the boy's advantage of which she approved, unhappily commended itself very little to Rupert himself; this was no less than the time-honoured device of marrying him to an heiress. The lady selected was the daughter of the Huguenot Duc de Rohan, and in September 1636 the Elector had written to his mother: "Concerning my brother Rupert, M. de Soubise hath made overture that, with your Majesty's and your brother's consent, he thinks M. de Rohan would not be unwilling to match him with his daughter.... I think it is no absurd proposition, for she is great both in means and birth, and of the religion."[34] The death of the Duc de Rohan delayed the conclusion of the treaty, which dragged on for several years. In 1638 King Charles renewed relations with the widowed d.u.c.h.ess, through his Amba.s.sador at Paris, Lord Leicester. "For Prince Robert's service, I represented unto her as well as I could, how hopeful a prince he was, and she said she had heard much good of him, that he was very handsome, and had a great deal of wit {31} and courage,"[35] wrote the Amba.s.sador. But Cardinal Richelieu was by no means willing to let such a fortune as that of the Rohans, fall to a heretic foreigner, and without his consent, and that of Louis XIII, nothing could be done.

The difficulties in the way were great, and though the d.u.c.h.ess was well inclined to Rupert, both on account of his religion and of his Royal blood, she was not blind to the fact that neither of these would support either himself or his family. He would, she supposed, settle down in France, but great though her daughter's fortune was, it would not, she declared, maintain a Royal prince in Paris; and she desired to know what King Charles would do for his nephew. Leicester could only reply vaguely that the King would "take care" of his nephew, and of any future children. He was, however, admitted to an interview with the young lady, whom he facetiously told, that he "came to make love unto her, and that, if it were for myself, I thought she could hardly find it in her heart to refuse me, but it being for a handsome young prince, countenanced by the recommendation of a great king, I did take upon myself to know her mind.... She gave me a smile and a blush, which I took for a sufficient reply."[36]

Owing to the opposition of the Cardinal, no formal betrothal took place, but Marguerite de Rohan evidently regarded her unwilling lover with favour, for when he fell into the hands of the Emperor she showed herself loyal to him. Leicester, on receiving the news of Rupert's capture, hastened to interview the d.u.c.h.ess, but found her still well inclined. "I cannot find that she is at all changed," he reported.

"She answered also for her daughter, and related this pa.s.sage to me.

Some one had said to Mademoiselle de Rohan: 'Now that Prince Rupert is a prisoner, you should do well to abandon the thought of him, and to entertain the addresses of your servant, the Duc de Nemours.' {32} To which she answered: 'I am not engaged anywhere; but, as I have been inclined, so I am still, for it would be a _lachete_ to forsake one because of his misfortunes, and some generosity to esteem him in the same degree as before he fell into it."[37]

Her generosity was not felt as it deserved. Rupert did not want to be married; he had already plenty of interests and occupations, and he could not be brought to regard the matter from a practical point of view. Eighty thousand pounds a year, united to much other valuable property and the expectation of two more estates, could not induce the penniless Palatine to sacrifice his liberty. In 1643 Marguerite would await the recalcitrant suitor no longer, and the incident closed with a very curious letter, written by King Charles to Maurice. Evidently the King was loth that such a fortune should be lost to the family, after all his trouble.

"Nepheu Maurice," he wrote, "though Mars be now most in voag, yet Hymen may sometimes be remembyred. The matter is this: Your mother and I have bin somewhat ingaged concerning a marriage between your brother Rupert and Mademoiselle de Rohan. Now her friends press your brother for a positive answer, which I find him resolved to give negatively.

Therefore I thought fit to let you know, if you will, by your ingagement, take your brother handsomely off. And indeed the total rejecting of this alliance may do us some prejudice, whether ye look to these, or to the German affairs; the performance of it is not expected until the times shall be reasonably settled, but I desire you to give me an answer, as soon as you can, having now occasion to send to France, because delays are sometimes as ill taken as denials. So hoping, and praying G.o.d for good news from you,

"I rest, your loving oncle, "C. R."[38]

{33}

But Maurice was not to be moved by his uncle's eloquence, and his answer was as positively negative as that of his brother had been.

Subsequently the neglected lady wedded Henri Chabot, a poor gentleman of no particular distinction, with whom she was, possibly, happier than any Palatine would have made her.

[1] Domestic State Papers. Elizabeth to Roe. 12/22, April, 1634.

[2] Lansdowne MSS. 817. Fol. 157-168.

[3] Benett MSS. Warburton. Vol. I. p. 450.

[4] Lansdowne MSS. 817. British Museum.

[5] Dom. State Papers. Chas. I. Vol. 300. fol. 1. 18/28 May, 1635.

[6] Letters and Despatches of Thomas Wentworth. Earl Strafford. Ed.

1739. Vol. I p. 489.

[7] Bromley Letters, p. 73.

[8] Dom. State Papers. Chas. I. 320. 2; 1 May, 1636.

[9] Dom. State Papers. Eliz. to Vane, Feb. 2, 1636. Chas. I. Vol.

313. f. 12.

[10] Dom. State Papers. Roe to Elizabeth, July 20, 1636. Chas. I.

Vol. 339. f. 21.

[11] Lilly. Character of Charles I.

[12] Bromley Letters, p. 86.

[13] Dom. State Papers. Chas. I. 320. f. 2. 1 May, 1636.

[14] Dom. State Papers. Chas. I. 318. f. 16. 4 April, 1636.

[15] Ibid. 325. f. 47. 4 June, 1636.

[16] Ibid. 318. f. 16. April 4, 1636.

[17] Howell's Letters, p. 257, 4 Jan. 1636.

[18] Dom. State Papers. Roe to Eliz. Chas. I. 350. 16. 17 March, 1637.

[19] Bromley Letters, p. 86.

[20] Hausser, Geschichte der Rheinischen Pfalz. Vol. II. p. 546.

[21] Bromley Letters, p. 85.

[22] Bromley Letters, p. 88.

[23] Dom. S. P. Decree of University, Aug. 12, 1636.

[24] Ibid. 5 Sept. 1636.

[25] Dom. State Papers. Geo. Goring to Lord Goring, 4 Feb. 1637.

Chas. I. 346. f. 33.

[26] Ibid. Roe to Elizabeth, May 8, 1637.

[27] Dom. S. P. Laud to Eliz. Aug. 7, 1637.

[28] Ibid. Eliz. to Laud. May 19, 1637.

[29] Ibid. June 10, 1637. Chas. I. 361.

[30] Ibid. Laud to Eliz. June 22, 1637.

[31] Ibid. Eliz. to Roe. June 7, 1637.

[32] Stafford Papers. Vol. II. p. 85. June 24, 1637.

[33] Dom. State Papers. Roe to Eliz. June 19, 1637.

[34] Bromley Letters, p. 56.

[35] Collins Sydney Papers, 1746. Vol. II. p. 549. 8 May, 1638.