Henry Fielding: A Memoir | Page 7

amount to about £150; and he positively declares that he
has expended more annually on the maintenance and education of the
said complainants, ever since the death of their mother, than the clear
income of the said estate amounts to, and that he shall continue to take
"a Tender and affectionate care of all his said Children." Further, he
professes himself a "protestant of the Communion of the Church of
England," and asserts that he shall and will breed his said children
Protestants of that communion. He protests that his second wife is not
an Italian; nor did she keep an eating-house. He suggests that Lady
Gould took her house at Salisbury "as well with an Intent to
convenience herselfe by liveing in a Towne" as for the inspection of his
children. He "denyeth that he ever Comended the Manner of Education
of young persons in monasterys if it be meant in Respect of Religion."
Finally, he says that he has spent much money on improving the estate;
that the income from the estate is hardly sufficient to maintain his
children according to their station in the world since he is "nearly
related to many Noble Familys"; and he "veryly believes in his
conscience he can better provide for his said Children by reason of his
relation to and Interest in the said noble Familys than their said
Grandmother (who is now in an advanced age, being seventy yeares old
or thereabouts)."
Here, it is plain, was a very pretty family quarrel. No man likes his
mother-in-law to say that he has married the keeper of an Italian
eating-house, especially if the fact is correct; or that he is perverting his
young children's trust money. Neither was Lady Gould likely to be
pacified by her son-in-law's remark that she was now "in an advanced
age"; while his suggestion that his "noble" family would be of far more
advantage to his children than that of the respectable Goulds would
have the added sting of undeniable truth.
The next extant move in the fray bears date five months later, July 18
1721, and includes a petition by 'Dame Sarah Gould' that the children
be not removed from the places where they then were until the case be
heard; and Lady Gould adds that if the children's persons or estates be
"under ye management or power of ye said Mr Fielding and his now

wife ye Estate would not be managed to ye best advantage and their
Education would not be taken care of and there would be a great hazard
that ye children might be perverted to ye Romish Religion." Then
follows an order in Chancery, under the same date, "that ye eldest son
of ye Defend't. Fielding ... be continued at Eaton School where he now
is and that ye rest of ye children be continued where they now are."
The next document merely records the inclusion of Henry's
five-year-old brother Edmund among the plaintiffs. And this is
followed by a brief Chancery order of November 30 1721, that "ye,
plaintiff Henry Fielding who is not [_sic_] at Eaton Schoole be at
liberty to go to ye said Dame Sarah Gould, his Grandmother and next
friend during ye usual time of recess from School at Xmas."
After these Christmas holidays spent by Henry Fielding with Lady
Gould, doubtless at her house in Salisbury, the Chancery records pass
on to the April following, 1722, when the boy's uncle and trustee
Davidge Gould makes a statement "sworn at Sharpham Park," which
concludes that the witness hears and believes that Edmund Fielding
"has already three children by his present wife who is reputed to be of
the Romish church." In this same month comes another order from the
court that Henry be at liberty to leave Eton for the Whitsun holidays
1722, and to go to Lady Gould's house. In May Edmund Fielding
appears as "of the Parish of Saint James, in the County of Middlesex,"
and also as his children's "next Friend and Guardian." But two days
later the long suit is concluded by the decision of the court, and here
Colonel Fielding is, as heretofore, defendant, Lady Gould being the
children's "next friend."
The case came before the Lord Chancellor on the 28th of May 1722,
and was "debated in the presence of learned Counsels." The trust was
upheld, and Edmund Fielding was required to deliver possession of the
estate, rendering account of the rents and profits thereof since the death
of his first wife; but he was to have "any and what" allowance for
improvements, and for the children's maintenance and education. And
it was further ordered that the children then at school continue at such
schools till further order, and that "upon any breaking up at ye usuall

times they do go