Serres's Reputation in 1821 to 1825

by Alyssa Wu

Background

In 1822, Olivia Serres, or as she called herself, Olive, Princess of Cumberland, had her case in court on whether she truly had royal blood. In 1817, Serres had begun to speak about her claims. However, focus on her grew in 1821 as more and more newspapers began publishing articles about her.

By this time, Serres’s last relationship with J.W Parkins, an ex-sheriff of London, had come back to find her. The two had a disastrous fallout, as Serres continually refused to give back the money she owed. Their relationship deteriorated further when Parkins had contacted Serres’s ex-husband, and found out that she had also stolen money from him as well, to the point where he’d be in debtor’s prison for the rest of his life. Parkins had been busy compiling evidence against her claims. 

Parkins was a well known eccentric in London at the time, and had been involved in prosecuting many criminal cases in his time as sheriff. Accounts of him are drastically different; one article recollects his “bobadil conduct while in office”, bobadil meaning cowardly, while another article calls him a force who was easily irritated. In the New York Herald, he is described as so: “He was full of such crotchets—according to his account, half creation had combined in a "bloody plot" against him; the whole country was full of "bloody villains" trying to rob him; and in his paroxysms he would slander every body from the president to the dock loafer. He slandered Mrs. BARD, an amiable lady of this city, and was cast in heavy damages”.

Parkins had written a few articles regarding Serres in newspapers, but these mixed accounts of him make it difficult to tell how the public would respond. Either way, Parkins’ articles would raise disbelief in Serres's claims, even if it was minor.

While the public opinion of Serres was largely negative, some people and newspapers had a positive opinion of her, such as Elizabeth Macauley, and The Luminary. I will attempt to bring more focus onto the two as more research has been done on the negative reception of Serres, one example being Jan Bondesson’s The Great Pretenders. However, I will still bring in some articles that have a negative reception of Serres, such as the Blackwood Magazine, to get the bigger picture as to the public’s opinion, but also what cultural forces were like at this time.

Newspaper articles

Conservatives did not like Serres, both because she was making a mockery of the royal family, but also because she was a woman who was attempting to get power. I have already discussed why Conservatives distrusted women in power in my previous article. Here, I will attempt to grapple mainly with the other reasons.

One article from the Blackwood Magazine says this concerning Serres: 

“that though the King could make a lord, it passed in his power to make a gentleman— whereas, nowadays in the nineteenth century, the era of civilization, the epoch of Orator Hunt, Princess Caraboo, Prince Hohenlohe, Princess Olive, Joanna Southcote… and other great characters, the existence and success of whom stamp a value on the age, there is not a proprietor of that amalgam of filth” (Blackwood’s Magazine).

Blackwood’s Magazine was a Tory magazine, or in other words, conservative (E. M. Palmegiano 39). This article was typical of those in the magazine, where they often criticized other newspapers’ quality, especially the Edinburgh Review (Palmegiano 39). Hints of the conservative ideas are evident in the article. Mentioned in the article is an Orator Hunt, who was a popular figure in radical politics. Hunt advocated for the working class, especially the “mechanic and labourer” (Oxford National Biography). As Tories, they did not like him, as they wanted to keep power to the upper class. 

The other people mentioned in the list are impostors. Here, we can see the social disruptions impostors can cause. While Serres disrupted the social sphere in London, other impostors like Joanna Southcote were disrupting the religious sphere. Southcote had turned into a prophetess, believing that God was speaking through her. Like Serres, she genuinely believed her claims, showing how delusion may have played a role in some impostor’s lives (Debbie Lee 41).

This framing from a conservatory newspaper also draws attention to the differences in class divide. As much as Serres desired to frame herself as someone worthy of recognition, the fact that she had changed her story as to how royal blood connected to her made many people disbelieve her. Since her imposture was so full of logical flaws, her imposture could be read as someone mocking the rich, and seeing how far she could get from it, though it’s unlikely Serres didn’t believe her claims. Similarly, from a feminist standpoint, some women who still believed her claims may have found her inspiring, as she was still confident despite the mockery against her.

This thread of feminist thought also shows itself in Elizabeth Macauley’s pamphlet, The Wrongs of Her Royal Highness The Princess Olive of Cumberland: A Plain Unvarnished Statement of the Unparalleled Oppressions Inflicted Upon That Illustrious Lady. In the pamphlet, Macauley goes through what Serres claims, and the reasons as to why she supports her. Macauley argues that to support Serres’s case is to support justice (5).

One of Macauley’s arguments compares Serres and former kings, which would have been seen as preposterous by many, but especially for those in Conservative circles. Macauley says: 

“[o]ne of the most injurious libels against her, is that she is under a delusion of mind… But supposing her charge of insanity to be true, what then? In what way can it affect her birthright? George the Third was subject to fits of insanity… George the Fourth, at the latter part of his life, was supposed to be in a state of mental imbecility. Yet their affliction caused on them was not a crime” (13). 

While this argument may pass initial scrutiny, it is in actuality flawed. The two kings had already been confirmed to have royal blood, while in contrast, Serres’s delusion may be causing her to think that she truly also as it. Still, Macauley brings up an interesting point, as she directly questions the gender norms at the time. Instead of assuming women to be lesser, Macauley puts them as equals, and does not bring up any ideas that were popular at the time of women being too emotional as pseudo-science.

Newspapers also fought on Serres’s behalf, such as The British Luminary, or the Luminary for short. However, they did not do so based on a feminist lens, but mainly through twisting the truth, as their ideas and claims were wildly incorrect. The Luminary was a smaller newspaper in comparison to Blackwood Magazine and others; while Blackwood had run from 1817 to 1980, the Luminary had only run from 1818 to 1823 before it was incorporated into the Sunday Times. From this, we can guess that the Luminary was not extremely popular, though the owner of the paper claimed that the paper sold more than 2700 copies per day (British Newspaper Archive). Additionally, unlike Blackwood Magazine, the Luminary had a Reformist spin. 

One article where the magazine shows its incredible bias is during Serres’s court case. Here is an excerpt:

“Here was likely to be a stir with a vengeance!! and after all the hustle, bustle, and alarm… how did they contrive to refuse justice? Did they attempt to invalidate the claim? No. Did they attempt to deny the late king’s signature? No. Did they attempt to disprove the handwriting of the attesting witnesses? No such thing” (Luminary).

Other sources such as the Gentleman’s Magazine’s Historical Chronicle prove that this is completely wrong; the Chronicle has 2 pages discussing how the case went, and how Serres’s claim was invalidated by proving Serres’s stories and the various signatures she brought as respectively impossible and forged. Some people may have still believed as they could not believe that they had been duped, especially since Serres’s case lasted for 5 years, beginning in 1817. The article pulls into that emotional subconscious desire to ignore facts by using emotional language— the first sentence is sarcastic, as if the writer has no trust in the court at all. The repeated emphasis on no makes the reader angrier, and focus on demanding justice for Serres, even if all her claims are lies. This focus on emotion pushes the reader to ignore what other papers are saying and to think logically.

By looking at all three of these articles, we can see some of the political trends in London at the time. One of these forces are the Tories, but despite their focus on keeping the status quo, some undertones of feminist thought are beginning, as seen by Macauley's pamphlet. We can also see how people become enraptured with fake narratives, something which is still common today.

Other influences

There are many other articles I could have included, but there would have been too many sources for me to go in-depth as I wanted. Still, I will briefly mention other influences if others want to do more research:

People also had written articles in the press calling out how Serres’s claims had differed in the years, as Serres’s claims had drastically changed from 1817 to 1820, as seen in the Gentleman’s Magazine and this article. 

Some may have been influenced by J.W. Parkins’s writing in some newspapers; however, as discussed, one would likely have to do further research on him to decide whether his articles in the newspapers had much influence. 

If you would like to read more of the Luminaries’  work, I have included references below to read.

Works Cited

“Eludication of the Claims of Princess Olive of Cumberland.” The British Luminary, Dec. 1821, https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/viewer/bl/0002379/18211202/001/0001#.

“Ex-Sheriff Parkins.” New York Weekly Herald, Apr. 1840, https://cumbriafhs.com/smfmsgbrd/index.php?topic=3531.0.

“Historical Chronicle.” Gentleman's Magazine, 1823, https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=inu.30000080773124&view=1up&seq=671&skin=2021&q1=Olive%20princess.

“Inconsistency of the Public Press, Exemplified in the Cases of Olive of Cumberland and Sir R. Wilson.” The British Luminary, 25 Nov. 2021, https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/viewer/bl/0002379/18211125/001/0001.

Lee, Debbie. Romantic Liars: Obscure Women Who Became Impostors and Challenged an Empire. Palgrave Macmillan US, 2006.

“Letter from Princess Olive of Cumberland to Lord Sidmouth.” The British Luminary, Nov. 1821, https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/viewer/bl/0002379/18211111/004/0002#.

Macauley, Elizabeth. The Wrongs of Her Royal Highness the Princess Olive of Cumberland: Being a Plain Unvarnished Statement of the Unparalleled Oppressions Inflicted upon That Illustrious Lady. Purkess, 1833, Google Books, https://books.google.ca/books?id=8bxcAAAAcAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false.

“Mrs. Olivia Serres.” Saint James's Chronicle, Oct. 27AD, https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/viewer/bl/0002193/18211027/014/0002.

“Mrs. Olivia Serres.” Sun, Nov. 1821, https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/viewer/bl/0002194/18211123/012/0003#.

“Mrs. Olivia Wilmot Serres, Soi-Disante Princess of Cumberland.” Gentleman's Magazine, July 1822, https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=inu.30000080773132&view=1up&seq=50&skin=2021&q1=olive%20princess.

“Narrative of The History of Princess Olive of Cumberland.” The British Luminary, Dec. 1821, https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/viewer/bl/0002379/18211209/002/0001#.

Reynolds, K. D. "Serres [née Wilmot], Olivia [alias Princess Olive of Cumberland] (1772–1835), royal impostor." Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.  23. Oxford University Press. Date of access 14 Dec. 2021, <https://www-oxforddnb-com.proxy.lib.sfu.ca/view/10.1093/ref:odnb/9780198614128.001.0001/odnb-9780198614128-e-25106>

Palmegiano, E. M. Perceptions of the Press in Nineteenth-Century British Periodicals: A Bibliography. Anthem Press, 2013, Google Books, https://books.google.ca/books?id=ZeePAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA40&lpg=PA40&dq=timothy+tickler+esq&source=bl&ots=DaXiDPzYjK&sig=ACfU3U12GhSRzA1NBtmxWsF4KFntKx2RXg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjdrfqx-Nz0AhUCITQIHQVpCqoQ6AF6BAgLEAM#v=onepage&q&f=false.

“The Princess of Cumberland.” The British Luminary, July 1821, https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/viewer/bl/0002379/18210729/002/0001.

“To the Editor of the British Luminary.” British Newspaper Archive, https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/viewer/bl/0002379/18220707/012/0004#.