Bonnie Prince Charlie: Charles Edward Stuart (Pimlico) (87 page)

This piece of consummate folly immediately alienated Albani. Justifiably, he protested that his efforts had been made in good faith and in confidence. Henry had no right to try to pre-empt the issue.
⁶³
Henry lost a valuable ally. Albani was so angry at Cardinal York’s faithlessness and duplicity that he was minded to denounce him publicly. His friends dissuaded him on the grounds that it was he himself who would look most foolish in such an exposure. Ominously, Albani proceeded instead to underline the distinction between a promise of welcome to the papal states – which he
had
made to Charles Edward – and the very different question of his recognition as
king
, which had never been promised.
⁶⁴

Henry had made powerful enemies. The Pope’s selection of cardinals for the conclave that would decide Charles Edward’s fate reflected this. The strongly pro-Stuart Cardinal Negroni was pointedly excluded.
⁶⁵
Included was the notorious Hanoverian spy Cardinal Alessandro Albani, whose presence on the payroll of British intelligence was an open secret.
⁶⁶
The other cardinals selected were either creatures of the Pope or dyed-in-the-wool supporters of the House of Austria. The full complement of the congregation held at the Quirinal on 14 January 1766 to decide whether or not to recognise Charles Edward as king was so weighted as to make the decision appear a foregone conclusion. Apart from Secretary of State Torregiani and Alessandro Albani, the others present were cardinals Rezzonico, Cavalchini, Ferroni, Antonelli, Castelli, Deprossi, Sorberoni and Stoppani.
⁶⁷

The conclave was immediately sworn to the secret of the Inquisition. Then Henry’s long memoir was read out. This was generally considered very weak in its argumentation.
⁶⁸
Once it had been read, the Pope proceeded to outline his objections to Henry’s theses. His basic premise was that the interests of Catholicism in general must take precedence over those of the House of Stuart. At the moment the Catholic religion was tolerated in England. Large numbers of Catholics were emigrating from England to north America, holding out the hope that the Americas might some day be solidly Catholic. All this would be in jeopardy if the English were provoked into abandoning their policy of leniency.
⁶⁹
Not only would Catholics be driven out of England, but English tolerance for Catholic missionaries in foreign lands, especially north America, would cease. Bringing the
savages
to God surely had to have a higher priority in the eyes of the Church than the interests of the House of Stuart.
⁷⁰
Besides, the Pope pointed out, it was chimerical to hope for the restoration of Catholicism in England through the return of the Stuarts. It was now two hundred years since Pius V had excommunicated Queen Elizabeth.
⁷¹

Summing up, the Pope pointed to a number of reasons why it was folly for the Vatican to recognise the Stuart prince as Charles III. The interests of Catholicism, the continuity of good relations between the Vatican and England, even the trade of the papal states depended on not provoking the English into retaliatory measures over the Stuarts.

Henry had lost the support of Cardinal Rezzonico through his treatment of Francesco Albani. But even Rezzonico was unhappy with this cavalier survey of the state of affairs. What about the fact that Clement had recognised James as king of England and his son as Prince of Wales?
⁷²
If the Jacobite doctrine of divine right and passive obedience was jettisoned, what was the basis for papal recognition of the kingdom of Naples, or the duchies of Parma and Piacenza? In particular, if continuity was being stressed, how was it possible that Charles Edward had been recognised since 1720 as heir apparent to the English throne but now suddenly no longer was?
⁷³
Moreover, if the Vatican recognised the House of Hanover as legitimate, it would also have to accept that any future actions, however draconian, that that regime took against English Catholics were justifiable; you could not logically recognise a regime as legitimate while repudiating its actions as illegitimate.
⁷⁴

Alessandro Albani tried to shift the argument back to practicalities. If the Pope recognised Charles Edward, the English would bombard Ancona and Civitavecchia.
⁷⁵
Admiral Matthews had come close to this in 1745.
⁷⁶
It was even conceivable that a military force would be landed on the territory of the papal states.
⁷⁷

At this point Charles Edward’s one and only clear supporter in the conclave came forward to answer these and other points. Cardinal Stoppani scouted the idea that the English would take military action in retaliation for recognition of the prince.
⁷⁸
This had not happened when the Vatican recognised James III, even though there were more compelling reasons then, as Jacobite rebellion was endemic in Britain. Was it really conceivable that the English would spend a vast sum of money sending warships against the papal states? Landing troops was a childish fantasy, since ‘scorched earth’ tactics could be used against the invader. Even a naval attack on the papal states was
politically
perilous, since it would look like an assault on the entire Catholic religion. In any case, Alessandro Albani’s arguments could be turned on their head. If England was as stable as he claimed, the authorities there could afford to treat the recognition of ‘Charles III’ with contempt.

Stoppani then launched a strong attack on the other arguments so far marshalled.
⁷⁹
It was absurd to argue that Catholics would be expelled from Canada if Charles Edward was recognised as king. Quite apart from the poor propaganda image presented to the world, the English had other factors to ponder. Many of England’s most important trading partners were Catholic nations. Would England really jeopardise such commerce just because the Pope recognised Charles Edward? It was absurd, too, to argue that missionaries would be driven from north America. The civil authorities knew very well that the Indians there were held in check by the moderating influence of the missionaries. To expel them would be to remove an important element in the social cement of the American colonies.

Stoppani’s arguments had a powerful effect on his audience. A consensus seemed to be emerging that the Pope should postpone any definite decision until he saw the line France and Spain were going to take.
⁸⁰
Some of the anti-Stuart cardinals even advocated expelling Charles Edward when he came to Rome, simply to test the proposition that Spain and France would welcome him with open arms.
⁸¹

But Clement XIII dug in his heels. It was for him to lead, not follow.
⁸²
Again he brought his audience back to the question of political legitimacy: since England had a settled regime, it was absurd to pretend that some wandering prince was its rightful ruler. Besides, whereas there had been an equation between the interests of James and of Catholicism, this did not apply to his son. Both James and his father James II had actually sacrificed good chances of restoration to the English throne rather than abandon their Catholic faith.
⁸³
Charles Edward, on the other hand, seemed to be a religious turncoat, an apostate twice over. Could he really be relied on to be a good Catholic monarch and, if not, did not the very foundation of Stoppani’s argument collapse – that Vatican credibility depended on recognition of Charles Edward?
⁸⁴

Finally, the Pope pointed out that Stoppani’s argument about the bombardment was too clever by half. It was precisely the domestic turmoil he had referred to that had stayed the British military hand in that epoch and created the context in which it was meaningful to speak of James III as a legitimate monarch.

It was time for a final decision. Aubeterre was known to be exerting
tremendous
pressure on the Pope for recognition, but was this Choiseul’s own policy or merely Aubeterre’s personal predilection?
⁸⁵
It was common knowledge that Aubeterre had instructions to press the Pope hard to suppress the Jesuit orders but logically that should run counter to support for the supposedly pro-Jesuit Stuarts. Besides, Clement had good intelligence from Paris on British diplomatic pressure there.
⁸⁶
He also knew that the Imperial court opposed recognition. Prince Kaunitz was actually lobbying other European courts not to support the Stuarts.
⁸⁷
Clement felt that this was an occasion for boldness. He asked for a vote to be taken. With Stoppani alone opposing, it was decided not to grant the prince recognition as Charles III of England, Scotland and Ireland.
⁸⁸

It fell to Torregiani to convey the bad news to Henry.
⁸⁹
The consequence was that when Charles Edward arrived in Rome, instead of being welcomed as Charles III, he found himself a virtual pariah.

The prince had a hard journey to the Eternal City, via Strasbourg, Innsbruck, Bologna and Florence. He was still suffering from a cold and a sore head when he set out from Paris to brave the rigours of winter.
⁹⁰
In Italy the bad news came north to meet him. As a way out of his embarrassment, Henry suggested that the prince stay at the palace at Caprarola belonging to the kingdom of Naples. This would place the prince in a royal palace, outside the Pope’s jurisdiction, yet no more than half a day’s journey from Rome.
⁹¹

But the prince insisted on pressing on to Rome. He argued that Cardinal Albani’s famous letter of October 1765
guaranteed
him papal recognition. Andrew Lumisden met him two posts beyond Florence, only to find that his royal master had just narrowly escaped death.
⁹²
On the road one post out from Bologna his coach had overturned. Several passengers were hurt, but not the prince. The coach itself came very close to crashing over a precipice. Although Lumisden testified that the prince had lost none of his charm, he was in a bad way physically, with excessively swollen legs and feet.

Charles was pleased to learn that the queen’s apartment in the Palazzo Muti had been prepared for him. He asked Lumisden to see to it that his baggage passed the Ponte Molle unexamined. Then he continued his journey, halting at San Quirico and Montefiascone. The trip was a terrible one. All the roads to Rome were sheeted in snow and ice.
⁹³
Charles Edward had a cold coming of it in every sense.

On the evening of Thursday 23 January 1766 the prince entered Rome, a city he had last seen twenty-two years before.
⁹⁴
Henry had organised a claque to call out ‘
Viva Il Re!
’ when he entered the Piazza
S. Apostoli
.
⁹⁵
This was scarcely enough to assuage his brother’s wounded feelings. Charles Edward felt that he had been lured to Rome under false pretences. He was bitter at what he considered Henry’s incompetent lobbying of the Pope.
⁹⁶

The prince’s supporters tried to encourage him, in three main ways. There had always been those in the Jacobite movement who considered that it was a mistake for the prince to go to Rome in any circumstances whatever.
⁹⁷
These people now advanced the consoling argument that the estrangement of prince and Pope would work in his favour with English Jacobites worried about the bugbear of ‘popery’, and would appeal to the same constituency that had applauded his defiance of Louis XV in 1748.
⁹⁸

Another familiar comforting tenet was that Clement XIII could not live long and that the issue would have to be considered anew by his successor. As Lumisden put it: ‘The government here is different from that of any other country. It is a continual flux that depends on the precarious life of an old man. As soon as this Pope dies, there is a total change of government. A new Pope produces a new Ministry, who lie under no obligation to pursue the measures of the former.’
⁹⁹

The third argument was that France and Spain could yet be mobilised to force Clement XIII to reverse his decision. Still in hopes, Charles Edward sent off letters to Louis XV, Charles III of Spain and Ferdinand, king of the Three Sicilies.
¹⁰⁰
These hopes proved the most groundless of all. France took its cue on this matter from the Vatican; Spain in turn followed the French lead. As soon as Clement’s decision was known, Choiseul and Praslin reprimanded Aubeterre for his pro-Stuart stance and ordered him to toe the line.
¹⁰¹
Similar orders to their ministers were issued at Naples and Madrid. Aubeterre became the laughing-stock of Europe.
¹⁰²
Serrant’s mission in Spain turned into an abysmal farce.
¹⁰³

Horace Mann was jubilant. France, Spain, the Vatican, all quaked at the might of the British.
¹⁰⁴
This triumph, said Mann, was ‘the most glaring proof of the submission to George III of the Court which excommunicated Elizabeth and all her descendants … if it is not sufficient, I will send the Pope to St. James’s with his triple crown, that the king may tip it off with his foot’.
¹⁰⁵

Not surprisingly, the prince spent his first month in Rome in a state of even more acute depression than normal. For the first few days he got out of bed only for dinner and supper, under the excuse that he was recovering from the effects of the overturning of the coach.
¹⁰⁶
So as to avoid meeting the Pope, he adopted the title of
Baron
Douglas, while actually arrogating to himself royal privileges. The day after his arrival, Henry went back to see the Pope to renew his brother’s claims. An acrimonious discussion took place. Henry was so angry at the Pope’s unyielding posture that he decided to take matters into his own hands.
¹⁰⁷

Openly defying the Pope, he took to carrying Charles around the streets of Rome in his coach, with his brother on the right-hand side, evincing a deference which cardinals were supposed to show to a crowned head.
¹⁰⁸
Similarly thumbing his nose at his own court, Cardinal Orsini, the Neapolitan minister, visited Charles Edward and treated him like a king.
¹⁰⁹
Cardinal Guglielmi also caused scandal by addressing Charles as ‘Your Majesty’.
¹¹⁰
Finally, the Jesuits, then locked in a life-and-death struggle with the Papacy, saw a chance to use the prince as a wedge. The rectors of the Scots and Irish Jesuit colleges both recognised him as ‘Charles III’.
¹¹¹