322
NOTES AND QUERIES. DO s. vm. OCT. 26, 1907.
had cause for anger, as Mr. Jesse (un
wittingly) had trodden somewhat heavil
on his toes. Like Mr. Dick in ' Davi
Copperfield,' our founder was troubled wit
a King Charles's head of his own, and ther
are good reasons for supposing that hi
bete noire, Olive Wilmot Serres, soi-disan
Princess of Cumberland, had inspired manj
of the scandalous pages in the ' Authenti
Records ' and the ' Secret History.' Ac
cordingly MB. THOMS concluded that sh
was responsible for the whole legend o
Hannah Lightfoot, and he proceeded tc
dissect the authorities of Mr. Jesse with
characteristic vigour. His further contribu
tions will be found at 3 S. xi. 110, 131, 218
and the whole force of his contentions wa
directed to prove that the story of Hannah
Lightfoot was " a fiction, and nothing bui
a fiction, from beginning to end." In May
of the same year he reprinted these four
articles (along with others) in book form
and it is evident that he did not believe
that such a person as the " Fair Quaker '
ever existed.
Before long MB. THOMS regretted his pre- cipitancy. In The Athenaeum, 15 June, 1867, Mr. Jesse began his defence, and was able to produce such startling evidence as the record of Hannah Lightfoot's birth, which he discovered among the registers of the Society of Friends at Devonshire House :
"Hannah Lightfoot, daughter of Mathew Light- foot, shoemaker, and Mary his wife, born 12 Oct., 1730, in the parish of St. John's, Wapping."
Meanwhile MB. THOMS, who had begun to suspect that his former conclusions were rash, had not been idle. There are three of his letters preserved at Devonshire House, dated 11, 14, and 19 June, 1867, which show that he realized he had fallen into error. On 15 June the very day on which Mr. Jesse's letter was printed in The Athenceum a fresh article appeared in ' N. & Q.,' 3 S. xi. 484, from the editorial pen, in which he confessed his mistake, and acknowledged that the " Fair Quaker " was once a living person. It is odd that the two combatants in this historic causerie should have found the record of Hannah Lightfoot's birth at the same time, and it is to be regretted that this last article, and another which appeared in 3 S. xii. 87, are not included in MB. THOMS'S published monograph. Owing to the omission of essential facts, the oft-cited ' Hannah Lightfoot,' &c., by W. J. Thorns, is almost worthless as a contribution to the controversy, and the pamphlet is valuable only as a criticism of the machinations of Olive Serres.
Having realized his previous errors, MB.
THOMS, with the altruism of the true anti-
quary, proceeded to repair them By
references to the registers of St. George's
Chapel, Mayfair, he discovered that Hannah
Lightfoot, of St. James's, Westminster, was
actually married to one Isaac Axford, of
St. Martin's, Ludgate, at Keith's Chapel on
11 Dec., 1753 (see 'Register of Baptisms
and Marriages at St. George's Chapel,' Har-
leian Society, 1889, p. 266) ; and further,
that Isaac Axford was christened at Erie-
stoke, Wiltshire [not East Stoke], in 1734
Thus it would appear that Hannah was
twenty-three years of age at the time she be-
came a wife, while her husband was four years
her junior. In addition, MB. THOMS ascer-
tained that Isaac Axford married a second
time on 3 Dec., 1759.
Still more important were his researches among the records of Devonshire House At a quarterly meeting of the Society of Friends for Westminster, held at the Savoy on 1 Jan., 1755, it is reported:
" This meeting being informed that it is currently reported that Hannah Lightfoot is married by the Priest, and since absconded from her husband on which this meeting appoints Michl. Morton, Jms Marsham, and Mary Keene, to visit her thereon and make report." 3 S. xii. 87.
Finally on 3 March, 1756, a testimony of denial was brought against Hannah Light-
- oot, and she was expelled by the Society of
Friends. The report states that " the friends appointed" could not "obtain any intelli- gence about her or where she is " (3 S. xii. 88).
It is interesting to know that Hannah eft her husband within fourteen months of her wedding, and that he took a second wife less than six years after his first marriage.
In addition to his articles in ' N. & Q.,' MB. THOMS, still firmly persuaded that the story of Hannah Lightfoot, as far as reorge III. is concerned, is a fiction, and nothing but a fiction from beginning to end," continued the controversy with Mr. Jesse in The Athenceum, where their corre- pondence will be found on June 22, July 6 3, 20, and Aug. 3, 1767. The discussion \ s the most important that has taken place- ipon the subject, and I have described it in etail, since all who follow the debate will understand the importance of regarding with the utmost caution all evidence relating o Hannah Lightfoot which possibly was nfluenced by Olive Wilmot Serres, who, as very one knows, used the story to support er own claims to royal parentage. For ointing out the sources of information that-
