Little is known about Mary Allbeary (also known as Aubury), but what information there is, came originally from the late Sir Robert Mackworth-Young, KCVO, Librarian of Windsor Castle Library who corresponded with Cecil Humphery-Smith.
Mary was alleged to be a daughter of Frederick, Prince of Wales, born of an undisclosed mother. She was married on 25 August 1764 at Fort St George, Madras to Henry Brooke (1725–86) and she died twenty-three years later on 12 August 1787 at Dublin, leaving a daughter, Catherine. It is said that Catherine married in 1776 Richard FitzGerald, although this would suggest that if Catherine herself was legitimate, she can only have been eleven years of age at most upon marriage.
Frederick was the eldest son of George II but died during his father’s lifetime. He was the father of King George III and of four additional sons and four daughters, by his wife Princess Augusta youngest daughter of Frederick II, Duke of Saxe-Gotha-Altenburg.
For the last two hundred years or more, there has been a continuing and widespread belief that George Rex, of Knynsa, in Cape Province, South Africa, the first owner and settler of Knysna and sometime a Marshal and Sergeant-at-Mace of the Vice Admiralty Court at the Cape of Good Hope, was the son, legitimate or illegitimate, of Prince George of Wales, who later became King George III, by The Fair Quaker, Hannah Lightfoot, to whom, some claim, he had been married.
The belief extended to the fact that in 1797 George Rex had been secretly banished to South Africa by a worried king (as he had become thirty-seven years earlier), who by that time had a legitimate brood of his own by his Queen, Princess (Sophia) Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz, whom he had married on 8 September 1761, a fortnight before his Coronation. It is said that he was keen therefore to remove any possible source of embarrassment and so provided George Rex with a sinecure as a Marshal and Sergeant-at-Mace of the Vice Admiralty Court at the Cape of Good Hope as well as with an estate of some 24,000 acres at Knysna, and various family souvenirs and mementoes, on condition that he destroyed any records of his early life and never spoke of his origins, and that he never married, nor returned to England, dead or alive. Many of his numerous descendants firmly believe all this to be true.
During this period, no less than a dozen books and articles have been written about George Rex as well as a number of television documentaries. Whilst there is no doubt at all that George Rex existed, that he emigrated to South Africa, that he served as Marshal and Sergeant-at-Mace of the Vice Admiralty Court and that he lived and prospered at Knysna, there has been much controversy as to whether or not this belief was true, supported as it was by various circumstantial evidence, but with no hard proof.
However, the most recent and perhaps the most objective and thorough work on the subject is by Patricia Storror, called George Rex: Death of a Legend, and published by Macmillan South Africa in 1974. She has come down firmly on the side that George Rex was not the son of Prince George and Hannah Lightfoot, but was the son of George and Sarah Rex, of London. Nevertheless as there has been so much controversy and speculation over the last two hundred and forty years, it seems right to include him under Royal Loose Ends, if only to set the record straight once and for all.
A certain amount of circumstantial evidence, when taken together, had suggested that George Rex might have been born prior to 1760 and that he was the son of Prince George of Wales who was shortly to succeed his grandfather as King George III. The mother was said to have been Hannah Lightfoot, known as The Fair Quaker, who was born in 1730 and whom some claim had married George on 17 April 1759 in Kew Chapel when he would only have been fifteen years old. However, this seems unlikely, for Hannah herself is now known to have married Isaac Axford on 11 December 1753 in Keith’s Chapel, Curzon Street, in London, whereupon she appears to have been abducted, never to be seen again. It is likely that she died between 1758–59, but had she married George and had she survived, the effect of such a marriage, if it had taken place, would have been to render illegitimate all fifteen of George’s children by his official wife, Queen Charlotte. Moreover, The Oxford Dictionary of National Biography demolishes the idea that Hannah had had any issue by King George III and indeed questions whether they had ever met.
So quite simply, the dates do not add up. Nor indeed do the various fragments of circumstantial evidence, when examined individually, especially in the light of the recent discovery of George Rex’s parentage and legal career, by which the whole legend has been comprehensively rebutted. For in her book, Patricia Storror outlines the research conducted by Professor Ian Christie who established that George Rex was born on 29 August 1765, was baptised at Whitechapel on 2 September 1765 and was the eldest son of John Rex (1725–92), a distiller of Whitechapel who was sometime Master of the Distillers’ Company, and of his wife Sarah (1730–1803), a widow twice over, who had married in Whitechapel on 17 November 1764.
George went on to become a Notary Public, being admitted in 1786, and practising in London, thereby becoming an ideally qualified candidate to apply for the post of Marshal and Sergeant-at-Mace of the Vice Admiralty Court at the Cape of Good Hope to which he was appointed on 27 January 1797. George Rex also had a younger brother John and a sister Sarah, whose lives are well chronicled.
George Rex served as Marshal and Sergeant-at-Mace of the Vice Admiralty Court from 1798 to 1802 when South Africa was handed back to the Dutch. Thereafter he purchased the estate at Knysna piecemeal between 1804-30 where he prospered exceedingly, largely from the extensive sale of timber, in a country where timber was in short supply. Indeed in 1867, his eldest son, George Rex, junior, as a large landowner and leading citizen, was among a number of people to have entertained HRH Prince Alfred, Duke of Edinburgh during his visit to the Cape Colony, although subsequent research has shown that no special significance should be attached to this, as had been claimed.
Although George Rex never married, he lived successively with two common-law wives (who were mother and daughter to eachother) by whom he had a total of thirteen children (six boys and seven girls). It is probable that the reason that he did not marry, was that he had already been married in London before he came out to South Africa, and could not afford a divorce (which were impossibly expensive), but neither did he want to become a bigamist, having regard to the legal appointment he held. However this has not been substantiated.
There is evidence in the Royal Archives to suggest that Blomberg was a Royal Bastard, although probably not of King George III, but rather of one of his brothers.
In its edition of 24 April 1964, Country Life published an article The Lake that became a Valley, in which it was claimed that the Manor of Kirkby Misperton in Yorkshire had been given in 1812 by the Prince Regent to Count Blomberg, a natural son of George III. This information had come from Alumni Cantabrigienses as well as a brochure issued by the Estate Company and it gave rise to various correspondence, including an article on 27 August 1964 entitled Who was Count Blomberg?
Certainly the manor had been in the Blomberg family since 1687 when Charles John, Baron Blomberg (1658–1745), Envoy of the Duke of Courland, had married a seventeen year old widow Elizabeth, Lady Shiers. The manor passed to their eldest son, Edmund Charles (1690–1757) – whose arms are on record at the College of Arms - and thence to his nephew, William (1736–74) and to his widow Anne, upon whose death in 1798 it became escheated to the King in right of the Duchy of Lancaster.
According to the Bigland Collection of the College of Arms (XIII, 81), it appears that Frederick Blomberg was the son of a Frederick Blomberg who was the son of a George Diederic Blomberg who was the grandson of Nicholas de Blomberg, of Courland. This Nicholas was the father of Charles John, Baron Blomberg, mentioned above, who came over with King George I. Thus Nicholas was the great-grandfather of William Blomberg, the testator of Kirby over Car, who was in turn a second cousin once removed to Frederick. However, Frederick would only have been entitled to the arms of Blomberg and/or in remainder to the title of Count, providing that his great- great grandfather Nicholas was a Count (as was his son Edmund) and/or armigerous.
However, it has also been suggested that Frederick was a natural son of King George III and took his mother’s married name but his baptismal entry of 22 September 1761 in St Margaret’s Rochester shows him to be the son of Lieutenant (later Captain) Frederick B. Blomberg and Melissa (née Layng) his wife. It so happens that he was baptised two weeks after King George III’s marriage and the day after his Coronation. The last owner of the manor seems to have considered Blomberg to be the ‘heir-general’, and as a second cousin once removed, he could well have been the heir to his cousin.
But in 1801, the Rev. F. W. Blomberg, who by then was Chaplain and Private Secretary to the Prince of Wales, successfully claimed the property, although without any mention of his own alleged parentage. If his claim had been by right of descent (paternal or maternal), he would surely have mentioned his connection and it is perhaps significant that he did not. He did, however, build a large obelisk in the grounds of Kirkby Misperton in 1812 to commemorate the grant of this property to him by George, Prince of Wales, the Regent.
Alumni Cantabrigienses states that the Rev. F. W. Blomberg, DD, was a constant companion of George III’s children and that he resembled some of them. It records that Blomberg was admitted to St John’s College Cambridge on 7 October 1777 and a Fellow-Com on 18 January 1782, BA 1782, MA 1785 and a DD in 1822. He was ordained Deacon at Ely on 6 June 1784 and a priest the following year. He became Chaplain to George, Prince of Wales in 1787 and in the same year was appointed rector of Shepton Mallet, Somerset 1787–1833, Prebendary of Bristol 1790–1828, Chaplain to George, Prince of Wales 1793, Vicar of Bradford, Wiltshire 1793–99 and 1808–33, Vicar of Banwell, Somerset 1799–1808, Prebendary of Westminster 1808–22, and of St Pauls 1822–47, Vicar of St Giles, Cripplegate 1833–47, Prebendary of Bath and Wells until 1833, Canon Residentiary of St Pauls and Chaplain to Queen Victoria. He married Maria Floyer, of Bath on 29 May 1787.
The Gentleman’s Magazine of 1847 carried an obituary for him in which it was stated: ‘his family had been long attached to the Court’ and that he was educated ‘in intimate association with the children of King George III who always retained great affection for him.’
In a letter from Christopher Dobson, Librarian of the House of Lords, to Robert (later Sir) Mackworth Young, Librarian of Windsor Castle and Assistant Keeper of the Queen’s Archives, dated 8 June 1964, he stated that
‘as a young man George III had a number of ‘flirtations’ – innocent no doubt – with various young ladies including Lady Sarah Lennox. No doubt, if there was a child the circumstances and the parentage were rigorously concealed. The only thing that could not be hidden was the striking resemblance to the Royal family.’
What seems certain is that Blomberg was brought up as a child in company with the children of George III and that he is said to have had a striking likeness to the Royal family. As George III was passionately in love with Lady Sarah Lennox for two years or more before his marriage in 1761, it is perhaps unlikely that he would have been the father.
Nevertheless, there are a few references to Blomberg in the Royal Archives. In the Diary of Lady Charlotte Finch (GEO/ADDL 21/181) dated 4 January 1765, it is recorded: ‘The Queen determined to take Master Blomberg [aged only four] and allow him 50 pds a year and put him under Mrs. Cotesworth’s care.’ (sub-governess to the Royal children).
There are later references to payments made to him from 1784 until 1793 as Private Secretary to the Prince of Wales and to an annuity he received from 1805. There are references to his many Court appointments as Chaplain to POW (1787) and as Clerk of the Closet to POW (1808), as Chaplain to the Household at Carlton House (1821-37), as Deputy Clerk of the Closet and Chaplain in Ordinary (1827-37) and as Chaplain in Ordinary to Kings George IV and William IV (1827–37), but none as to his paternity. In Mackworth Young’s letter to Dobson, dated 6 June 1964, he also said:
‘There is no evidence here to show that he [Blomberg] was an illegitimate son of King George III. This does not of course disprove the story since it is quite likely that if there had been any such evidence, it would have been removed. On the other hand, I am personally doubtful about the traditions that George III had illegitimate children. There is one such tradition about the Rex family in South Africa which has proved to be false [see page 209]. In general the fathering of illegitimate children seems out of keeping with the King’s character. Unlike his father and sons, he was by no means a bounder, but had, on the contrary, an exaggerated sense of duty. He had several illegitimate half brothers (including curiously one of my predecessors), but I should be surprised to see proof that he ever had an illegitimate child of his own.’
He later wrote on 10 August:
‘There is no evidence of George III being Blomberg’s father. There seems no reason in principle why William Augustus, Duke of Cumberland or Edward Duke of York should not have been Blomberg’s father. In the latter case, the dates would fit in particularly well, as the D. of York died in 1767. In 1760 he was a dashing young naval officer with a reputation for success among the ladies, and could well have been the father of an infant born in Rochester in 1761. But there is no evidence here to support this speculation.’
However, after Blomberg’s death on 23 March 1847 aged eighty-five, two books entitled The Unseen World (1847) as well as The Journal and Memories of Thomas Whalley (1863) were published, attempting to explain Blomberg’s close associations with the Royal Family. They both claimed that Blomberg’s father, a British Officer, who had been serving in the West Indes, appeared as a ghost to two other officers serving there, asking them to go to a certain house in Scotland where in a chest certain documents would be found so as to enable his son to claim his property from Queen Charlotte. This they did and his son apparently came into his inheritance, besides also being brought up with the Royal Family. However, far fetched though it sounds, there is a reference in the Army List to a Captain Blomberg serving in the West Indes in 1765 as Captain in the 62nd American regiment, quartered in the ‘Charibbee Islands’, but there was no reference to him in the 1767 edition, so Blomberg’s father may have died there in 1767 after all. Now, the only thing that remains to remind us of this enigma is his portrait by Richard Brampton, sold at Christies on 16 April 1982.
Among the royal papers, those preceding George Crole (see page 126), relate to a William Francis who was also in receipt of payments from the Privy Purse for six years. The papers date from 1806, the probable year of his birth, and the payments began in 1817, when his mother or so-called mother, Mrs. Davies died, and were extended until 1823.
However, the impression one gains from the limited correspondence is that Mrs. Davies was troublesome, for on 29 August 1806, three days after her son had been handed over to her, against a receipt, there is a letter from Mr. Anstey to the Prince’s Private Secretary, saying
‘the same gentleman that Mrs. Davies cald her Counsel the day she made the Disturbance came and Produced the Order for the child, which I delivered. I have a recpt from him Acknowledging the same; would you Please to have it Sent to you, or remain with me until I See you; if you think it Proper to have it sent to you, Please to inform me in what manner I am to convey it.’ (RA 29958)
The various payments and receipts relate to William’s annual allowance of £200 and the payment of his school fees to a Mrs. Frances Stockdale, of Parson’s Green amounting to about another £100 per year and were payable at least from 1819–23.
The papers show that William was born prior to August 1806, being aged about eleven at the time of his mother’s death on 29 May 1817, and that he was destined for an army career, with funds available for the purchase of a commission. There is mention too of tentative travel plans for William in 1822, possibly involving friends in Madras. There is correspondence between Mr. M. Anstey (who appears to act as a go-between), Mr. Geldard of Grays Inn Square, seemingly a lawyer, and with Mr. Charles Bicknell, of Charing Cross, solicitor and attorney to the Prince of Wales and sometime a Clerk in his Household, Mr. C. F. Du Pasquier, for many years Groom of the Chamber to the Prince of Wales and Colonel the Rt. Hon. Sir John McMahon, 1st Bt, Private Secretary to the Prince of Wales / Prince Regent and Keeper of the Privy Purse (1805–17).
Moreover on 18 July 1820, suspicions were aroused as we see in the letter from R. Birnie of Bow Street to Charles Bicknall dated 18 July 1820, when he says:
‘I am still pestered by that woman named Walker who had brought a host of witnesses again, all of which state, and I must say plausibly enough, that the child was not borrowed to impose upon Du Pasquier but on a person of much higher rank; for the Lady who she judges to be the pretended Mother was of a very superior appearance, always came in her Carriage, was very particular in enquiring if the child was fair (this could not apply to Du Pasquier) and that he, Du P, always attended on her as a servant. There is an immense quantity of evidence from various persons, very well dove-tailed I assure you, but this is a Case you well know, wherein a Justice of the peace has no jurisdiction. I apprehend however that they may get into the hands of those who at this time (George IV had been crowned eight days earlier) will make a fine handle of it. It would be well if that could be prevented’ (RA 29959)
So whilst there is no conclusive proof that William Francis is another Royal Bastard, the circumstantial evidence is certainly very strong with his Private Secretary and Groom of the Chamber to the Prince of Wales arranging for the funding and welfare of a William Francis for at least six years. In all probability, William’s so-called mother was probably a paid foster mother, rather than his actual mother.
Unfortunately a search of Alumni Cantabrigienses, Alumni Oxonienses, The Army Lists, The Navy Lists, Clerical Directories, India Office Lists and others yielded not a single reference to the name. Although a search of the International Genealogical Index produced a number of entries for births or baptisms of William Francis, nothing relevant could be identified.