The Franklin Syndicate, a Scam That Serves as the Basis of “Mr. Darcy’s Bargain”

When I came upon the idea of a “bargain” between Darcy and Elizabeth, I required an impetus to bring them together in my vagary, Mr. Darcy’s Bargain. That impetus was a scam perpetrated on the citizens of Meryton by none other than our favorite villain, George Wickham. I created a scheme based on a real-life swindler by the name of William “520 Percent” Miller. I found Miller’s scheme fascinating because of its simplicity, and how easily it is to part a fool and his money.

Miller founded a scheme known as the Franklin Syndicate. The syndicate began in March 1899 in Brooklyn, New York, where the then 25-years-old Miller convinced three members of the church he attended to permit him to invest some of their money in the stock market. He promised each a profit of 10% weekly. He told them he had access to “inside information,” which would make the investment a sure deal. The first investor was Oscar Bergstrom, age 20. He presented Miller $10 on 16 March 1899 and received a receipt stating: “The principal guarantied (sic) against loss. Dividends weekly from $1 upwards till principal is withdrawn.”

Eventually, Miller convinced his three investors to recruit others. He offered them a 5% commission on each new investment. As the scheme took hold, Miller even began to place advertisements in newspapers all about the U. S. The scam was successful enough for him to spend some $32,000 in advertising in some 800 newspapers during the summer of 1899. He even mailed out official looking documents to those who sent him money. Miller took advantage of the relaxed business practices accepted in the U. S. at the time. He even hired a PR person, once Cecil Leslie, who placed articles of a positive nature in newspapers.

He hired some 22 employees who stuffed boxes and drawers with cash in his business location. The Malefactor Register described the hold Miller had on others. It is reported that he took between $20,000 and $70,000 per day. One of his partners, Edward Schlessinger, demanded his 1/3 cut daily. Schlessinger smartly hid away part of his money, but Miller never did.

Another partner was Colonel Robert Ammon, a New York attorney, who suggested that Miller incorporate Franklin Syndicate. That way they could reclaim the receipts Miller provided all the investors previously. Miller offered investors shares in the corporation, but to know how many shares each would have, the person needed to return the original receipts.

Eventually, Ammon pulled a scam of his own when word came down that Miller was wanted by the authorities. Ammon had much of his wealth transferred to Ammon’s accounts at Wells, Fargo & Company Bank. Miller escaped to Montreal, but was tracked there and brought back to Kings County, New York. Miller was sentenced to 10 years in prison. He was released after six years. He opened a grocery store which he ran until he died of tuberculosis, caught while he was incarcerated.

BOOK BLURB:

When Elizabeth Bennet appears on his doorstep some ten months after her refusal of his hand in marriage, Darcy uses the opportunity to “bargain” for her acceptance of a renewal of his proposal in exchange for his assistance in bringing Mr. Wickham to justice. In Darcy’s absence from Hertfordshire, Wickham has practiced a scheme to defraud the citizens of Meryton of their hard-earned funds. All have invested in a Ten Percent Annuity scheme, including Mr. Bennet, and her family and friends are in dire circumstances. Elizabeth will risk everything to bring her father to health again and to save her friends from destitution, but is she willing to risk her heart? She places her trust in Darcy’s thwarting Wickham’s manipulations, but she is not aware that Darcy wishes more than her acquiescence. He desires her love. And what will happen if Darcy does not succeed in bringing Mr. Wickham to justice? Will that end their “bargain,” or will true love prevail?

mdb-front-cover-1

PURCHASE LINKS: 

Amazon:   https://www.amazon.com/dp/1540317218/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1479045960&sr=8-1&keywords=mr.+Darcy%27s+Bargain

Kindle:  https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01N3VELUT/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1479045960&sr=8-2&keywords=mr.+Darcy%27s+Bargain

Kindle Unlimited https://www.amazon.com/kindle-dbs/hz/subscribe/ku?passThroughAsin=1540317218&_encoding=UTF8&shoppingPortalEnabled=true

Book Bub https://www.bookbub.com/books/mr-darcy-s-bargain-a-pride-and-prejudice-vagary-by-regina-jeffers-and-a-lady

EXCERPT:

“The young lady says she will not leave without speaking to you, sir.”

Darcy scowled at his butler. His servant had interrupted Darcy’s meeting with his solicitor to say a Mr. Gardiner pleaded for a bit of Darcy’s time. “What young lady?” Darcy demanded.

Even as he asked the question, he was aware of the hitch in his voice. How often had he fantasized about the woman who haunted his dreams marching into his home and demanding he love her? He fought the urge to close his eyes and bring forth an image of Elizabeth Bennet. More than ten months had passed since he left her in the parlor of Mr. Collins’ cottage at Hunsford–left her to her misinterpretations. He had thought to present her with a letter of explanation regarding his part in separating her elder sister from Mr. Bingley and a defense of his interactions with Mr. Wickham, but after walking the length of the plantation at Rosings Park three times, Darcy abandoned the task. The letter remained unopened in the drawer of the night table beside his bed.

Advertisement

“A Miss Bennet, sir.”

Darcy did not know whether satisfaction was a proper response, but he knew the emotion nonetheless.

He spoke to the solicitor, “If you will pardon me, Hess, I suspect I should discover what brings these strangers to my threshold.”

Mr. Hess stood to gather his papers. “I understand, Mr. Darcy. I will have someone deliver the new documents later today. If you require my services after you have had time to examine the contract, send me word.”

“Thacker, see Mr. Hess out and then provide me ten minutes before you escort Mr. Gardiner and the lady up.”

“As you wish, Mr. Darcy.”

Darcy felt a bit foolish requesting a few minutes to settle his composure before he looked upon Elizabeth Bennet again. Needless to say, the “Miss Bennet” waiting below could be another of Mr. Bennet’s daughters or even another young lady with the same surname, but Darcy doubted any other female would act so boldly as to call upon him and to demand to speak to him. Only Miss Elizabeth would dare to invade his privacy.

Although it was early in the day, Darcy poured himself a stiff drink and swallowed it quickly. He thought he had placed the memory of Elizabeth Bennet behind him, but, in truth, doing so was impossible. A book lying open on a table with an embroidered bookmark keeping the place brought him anguish. The scent of fresh cut lavender had him searching his house for a lost dream. Little things brought the lady’s image rushing to his memory. The passion she prompted in him was not an emotion Darcy knew previously or since.

“Yet, the lady shunned your offer of marriage,” he reminded his foolish hope. “If she were coming to Darcy House for you, Miss Elizabeth would not require another’s escort.”

To rid himself of misplaced aspirations, over the previous months, Darcy had relived each of Elizabeth’s accusations until they had shredded his heart completely. “The feelings which you tell me have long prevented the acknowledgment of your regard can have little difficulty in overcoming it after this explanation.” and “Can you deny that you have done it? and “Who that knows what his misfortunes have been can help feeling an interest in him?” and “You are mistaken, Mr. Darcy, if you suppose that the mode of your declaration affected me any other way than as it spared me the concern which I might have felt in refusing you, had you behaved in a more gentleman-like manner.”

“Perhaps I should have taken the lady into my arms and kissed her into submission,” he murmured.

A knock upon his study door sent Darcy’s musings darting off into the deepest recesses of his mind. He turned as the door opened, and Thacker ushered “her” into his private retreat. He noted a man of some girth and dark hair stood behind her, but Darcy’s gaze remained locked upon Elizabeth’s countenance.

God! But he missed her! She was more beautiful than he recalled.

Although he told himself repeatedly it was best to forget her, in reality, his heart sang with the possibility of renewing their acquaintance. Perhaps he could claim an opportunity to make amends. When Elizabeth refused him, for the first time in his life, Darcy held no means of solving the problem before him–that of his obsession with the woman.

A clearing of the gentleman’s throat brought Darcy from his considerations. He belatedly recalled his manners and offered the pair a bow of greeting. Schooling his expression, he said, “Miss Elizabeth, what a pleasant surprise.”

Surprise was the correct word, but how pleasant the experience would be was yet to be seen.

“Mr. Darcy,” she said so softly he found the experience disconcerting. Did she fear he would turn her away?

“Please come in and have a seat. Would you care for refreshments?” He gestured her to the chairs arranged before his desk.

“No, sir,” Elizabeth said in politeness. “We shall attempt to keep our business short.” She folded her hands upon her lap. “If you will permit it, sir,” she continued in stiff tones, “I would give you the acquaintance of my uncle.”

The man remained standing. Darcy knew the look of her Uncle Phillips for he took Phillips’s companionship on several occasions when Darcy resided at Netherfield. The man before him must be the uncle from Cheapside.

“Certainly.”

Elizabeth repeated the required niceties. “Mr. Darcy, may I present my uncle, Mr. Gardiner. Uncle, this is Mr. Darcy, the gentleman from Derbyshire of whom I spoke.”

Darcy liked the idea of Elizabeth speaking of him without absolute disdain.

“Thank you, Mr. Darcy, for receiving us without notice,” the gentleman repeated as he assumed the seat beside his niece.

Advertisement

Darcy sat carefully so as not to crease his breeches. Somehow, he wished to appear at his best before Elizabeth. He thought it odd. Up until this very moment gray clouds filled the London skies outside his Town house’s windows, but as he turned to rest his gaze upon the woman who owned his heart, a single ray of sunshine claimed its target: the back of Elizabeth Bennet’s head. The effect was a flicker of fire dancing through the red strands of her auburn locks.

He could never know enough of her. Darcy permitted his eyes to drift over her features. Dark circles rested upon her cheeks. Needless to say, she had experienced more than one sleepless night, and Darcy wondered what brought her to distress.

“It has been nearly a year, Miss Elizabeth,” he stated the obvious as a beginning to their conversation. “I pray your family is in health.”

Tears misted Elizabeth’s eyes. “All but my father, sir,” she pronounced in strained tones. “Mr. Bennet experienced an episode recently.”

Mr. Gardiner reached for Elizabeth’s hand, and Darcy wished to slap the man’s hand away so Darcy might comfort her instead.

“Something serious?” he asked in empathetic tones.

Darcy knew first hand the devastation of losing a parent. He had felt at a loss since his revered father’s passing. That is until he encountered Elizabeth Bennet in Hertfordshire. He had latched his hopes to the woman, praying she would assist him in making sense of his obligations, but he found himself still adrift.

“Perhaps I should answer for our Lizzy,” Mr. Gardiner suggested. “The doctor believes my Brother Bennet knew a spell with his heart. We pray for a speedy recovery.”

“I am sorry to hear it, Miss Elizabeth,” Darcy said in sincere sympathy. “I long recognized your devotion to Mr. Bennet. Yours is a relationship many would admire.”

Her voice held her emotions, but Elizabeth pronounced, “Such is my purpose in calling upon your household, sir. I would never think to disturb your peace unless the situation was not dire. I require your assistance.”

“My assistance?” Darcy questioned. “Are you in need of a more knowledgeable physician? I assure you Doctor Nott is excellent. I will gladly speak to the man upon your behalf.”

Elizabeth shot a pleading glance to her uncle, but Gardiner only nodded his encouragement. It shook Darcy to his core to view Elizabeth so distraught. In his memories of her, she was the most independent woman of his acquaintance.

“Although I am certain Mr. Bennet would thrive under Doctor Nott’s care, I was hoping you might intervene in a business affair, which brought on my father’s condition.”

Darcy struggled not to flinch. “You wish me oversee one of Mr. Bennet’s business negotiations?” Darcy would find doing so beyond the pale. He could not fathom Mr. Bennet asking him to act in the man’s place.

Before Elizabeth could respond, Gardiner smoothly claimed the lead.

“Mayhap I should explain the situation.”

Despite remaining uncomfortably tense, Darcy nodded his agreement. He suspected Gardiner’s tale would set Darcy’s sedate world into a whirlwind.

“Mr. Bennet, my Brother Phillips, Sir William Lucas, and many others among Meryton’s elite foolishly invested large sums in what they assumed was an offer that would provide them a quick tidy profit. Unfortunately, if what Elizabeth and I believe proves true, Mr. Bennet’s neighbors will lose more than their initial investments. As the situation appeared dire, when she realized the farce, our Elizabeth spoke to her father of her fears.”

“Which precipitated Mr. Bennet’s attack,” Elizabeth said with a catch in her throat. “My father’s current situation is my fault. I should have kept my counsel. If my foolish tongue causes Papa to…” She looked away quickly, but Darcy noticed how her bottom lip trembled.

“Like my Sister Bennet and Lizzy’s sisters,” Mr. Gardiner stated the obvious, “Elizabeth does not only fear the loss of a beloved husband and father, but also the eventual ascension of Mr. Collins as master of Longbourn.”

“Is Mr. Bennet’s condition so severe?” Darcy inquired in earnest.

“My Brother Bennet is not upon his death bed,” Gardiner assured, “but the physician believes him more fragile because of the questionable nature of this situation. Doctor Doughty knows of the financial maneuverings for the good physician also placed funds in the scheme. He remains silent on the subject only at Elizabeth’s encouragement. Our Lizzy convinced Doughty to hold his tongue until she could recruit my assistance and…”

“And mine,” Darcy finished the man’s sentence. “If you would, Mr. Gardiner, please explain the nature of this investment.”

Gardiner appeared relieved by Darcy’s response. “When Elizabeth summoned me to Longbourn, I took the liberty to study the papers presented to Mr. Bennet. Only a man who held knowledge of the law would recognize the circular nature of the contracts. The terms appear quite simple, but there is no means for this venture to prove anything but a disaster. How my Brother Phillips overlooked the obvious is beyond my understanding!”

Darcy said evenly, “Most country men of law rarely encounter complicated contracts.”

“I suppose so,” Gardiner continued, “but I make it fair practice never to sign any legal papers I do not fully understand. Yet, Bennet and the others trusted the man with whom they did business. Moreover, the lure of a quick profit was more than any of Mr. Bennet’s neighbors could withstand.”

“What were the terms of the proposition?” Darcy asked, intrigued by the tale.

Gardiner shook his head in what appeared to be disbelief. “Pure profit,” the man announced. “Ten percent interest paid bi-weekly. If a person invested a hundred pounds, he would earn more than twenty pounds per month.”

Darcy’s eyebrow shot upward in recognition of the ludicrous scheme. “Invest one hundred and earn an additional twenty,” he said in honest disapproval. “How could anyone think earning a fortune so easy?”

“The legal language provides the contract the appearance of complicated negotiations. Needless to say, not all the investors provided one hundred pounds. If I understand the situation correctly, some of Mr. Bennet’s servants combined their savings with others from Sir William’s staff. They agreed to split the profit, while others placed more than a hundred in the scheme.”

“And has anyone known the stated profit?” Darcy inquired. It interested him that someone devised such an ingenious plan.

Elizabeth resumed the tale. “All were presented with the required first interest payment.” She glanced in worry to Darcy. “Then the master of this plan encouraged the investors to add the interest to the initial fund. Next time they would receive eleven pounds for each one hundred ten pounds. That would be one and twenty pounds for a one month’s profit.”

“The investors readily agreed,” Darcy summarized.

“Naturally,” Elizabeth acknowledged. “The easiest coins anyone ever made.” Sarcasm marked her tone.

“And who managed to convince the good citizens of Meryton to part with their hard-earned funds?” he asked.

Elizabeth glanced away as if she hoped to earn reassurance. At length, her gaze returned to Darcy’s. “Mr. Wickham,” she said without emotion.

At length, Darcy understood the lady’s turning to him for assistance. Elizabeth had placed her trust in Wickham only to have the man betray her. The idea of her coming willingly to his household had taken root, and a flicker of expectation had claimed Darcy’s heart, only to be drenched by the woman’s tears for a scoundrel.

“Elizabeth tells me you hold knowledge of Mr. Wickham’s previous manipulations,” Gardiner spoke in businesslike tones, but Darcy’s interest in the investigation had waned.

“I do, but…” he began.

Elizabeth interrupted. “Please, Mr. Darcy. I know we last parted with ill-chosen words, but there is no other who could devise a means to recover the initial funds from a man such as Mr. Wickham. I fear he has spent the hard-earned pennies of so many. I blame myself for I did not listen to the doubts I held long before returning to Longbourn from Kent. I egregiously disabused your chronicle of Mr. Wickham’s reputation, as well as the warnings of my Aunt Gardiner and Mrs. Collins. I fully accept my faults, but I beg you not to punish others who require your benevolence because you wish no contact with me.”

Posted in American History, British history, Georgian England, Georgian Era, Great Britain, hero, heroines, historical fiction, history, Jane Austen, laws of the land, Living in the Regency, Pride and Prejudice, publishing, reading habits, real life tales, Regency era, research, writing | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

“Mirror, Mirror on the Wall,” the Employment of Film Devices Used to Tell a Story in Austen Adaptations

I am quite confident that if you have spent even a few minutes speaking to me, you will know, I love most [not ALL] film adaptations of Jane Austen’s works. In 1995, I would rush through grading papers, lesson plays, overseeing my son’s homework, etc., every Thursday evening at 9 P.M. to watch the Colin Firth version of the tale. Ten years later, I was already a Matthew Macfadyen fan since I discovered him in Wuthering Heights, so I was thrilled with the 2005 film arrived. I am NOT one to criticize either version, for one of my college degrees involved film and theatre productions as story telling. Yes, I own the DVDs of both versions and can love both for very different reasons.

As I mentioned above, in my past life, I once was a media literacy consultant and teacher, and I have studied film, especially this one. Taught film. Analyzed film. Etc. Today, however, I would like to take another look into the proverbial “mirror” of this film, something many likely overlooked, while I was covering my mouth the first time I saw the film in a movie theatre, for I was overjoyed to view the technique used so efficiently in moving the events of Austen’s book forward.

Often in the visual representations of Jane Austen’s works, the filmmaker employs props or artifacts as visual cues to Austen’s themes of flawed impressions, misconceptions, and false interpretations. For example, in Austen’s Emma, Harriet’s sketch serves as a means to reveal how the other characters feel about Emma’s friend. Mr. Elton flatters Emma’s representation of her subject rather than remark on Harriet. Mr. Woodhouse’s sensibility and his need for fires in all the hearths shows through when he says Harriet has been subjected to the elements when she is portrayed without a shawl. Even Mr. Knightley gives the viewer a clue to how he feels about Emma’s efforts to raise Harriet up in Society. Upon observing the sketch, he says Emma has made Harriet “too tall.”

The resetting of the miniature of Captain Benwick in Persuasion serves as a the perfect symbol for Captain Harville’s and Anne’s “debate” over the constancy of females and males in love. In Mansfield Park, the distorted and mistaken impressions of the characters plays out in theatricals. Edward Ferrars’ ring is a prime example. In Sense and Sensibility, Elinor Dashwood mistakenly believes it is a lock of her hair encased within. In truth, the lock belongs to Lucy Steele.

ladyfromshangai

These “mistaken interpretations” and many more of Austen’s subtle thematic layers appear in the film versions of Austen’s works in the form of a mirror. It is a bit of irony that Austen never uses the prop as part of her story lines (except in the case of Sir Walter Elliot in Persuasion). Yet, Hollywood loves a good prop, and a mirror can tell the viewer so many unspoken tales. The mirror is often used in film to double a shot’s space or to display a character’s feelings or even to take on metaphorical dimensions. Film history gives up multiple examples of the use of the mirror as important role (Orson Welles’s 1948 The Lady from Shanghai; Walt Disney’s 1939 Snow White, etc.). 

ppmirror

A mirror in its stillness reflects a “fundamental absence,” as Christian Metz terms the prop’s use. It is a reflection within a reflection. Ariane Hudelet says in “Deciphering Appearances in Jane Austen’s Novels and Films” that “To look at a heroine looking at herself transforms the character into a self-spectacle, a motif we could link with the emphasis on interiority in Austen’s novels. The mirror objects can thus stand for conflicting notions of blindness or introspection, vanity or revelation, according to the films and sequences. Whether it is used as a symbol to reflect the characters’ thoughts or nature, or as a metaphor of the relationships between the characters which can sometimes contrast with the contents of the dialogue and reveal ironic distance, the mirror image constitutes a privileged example of the way Austen’s very modern questioning of the perception of reality can become a post-modern questioning of the reception and distortion of images.”

So, when we as viewers encounter a filmic scene in which the director has used a mirror, we immediately translate the prop’s use to represent introspection on the part of the character. Or we may immediately interpret the character’s self-absorption. Or we may recognize the illusory blindness of the character. In Joe Wright’s 2005 adaptation of Pride and Prejudice, the scene where Elizabeth Bennet “reflects” on Mr. Darcy’s letter is a very poignant one in the film. She discovers her own misconstructions. Those are summarized by Elizabeth’s response to Charlotte Lucas’s inquiry to her mindset. “I hardly know.”

Wright’s film relies on stillness to create the conflict. Following the proposal scene in the pouring rain, the viewer follows Elizabeth’s slow progression through Hunsford cottage to stand before the mirror. We, the viewers, are on the inside of the mirror, looking back at Elizabeth’s inner journey. The scene begins with Elizabeth sitting on her bed. This is what is known as a medium close shot. She does not move. It is a back lit shot to create a claire-obscure effect. Elizabeth moves along a narrow corridor to stand before the mirror. In his commentary on the DVD, Joe Wright says, “We are her,” in referring to the viewing audience becoming Elizabeth’s reflection.

Time progresses behind Elizabeth, but she remains still and expressionless. Darcy appears behind her to deliver his letter. Images are purposely blurred to tell the viewer that these characters have often misconstrued the other.

Elizabeth is learning about Mr. Darcy but also about herself. Her “vision” is both blurred and clear. She turns around to find what she now sees clearly as having disappeared. When she can finally recognize Darcy for the man he is, he is no longer available. Wright uses the mirror as an image of revelation. In the novel, Elizabeth looks long and hard at an image of Darcy in the Pemberley gallery. She recognizes the man she should have seen from the beginning.

Now, it is your turn. Tell me other instances of when the mirror is used as a prop in an Austen adaptation. I, personally, can think of several others, but I’ll leave it to you to list some before I pour forth others. We can even explore the use of the mirror in other modern films if you like.

Posted in Austen actors, drama, film, film adaptations, Jane Austen | Tagged , , , , , | 4 Comments

“Bonus” Traitor Thursday ~ Celebrating 250 Years of the United States as a Separate Nation: Benjamin Rush, Signer of the Declaration of Independence and “Father of American Psychiatry”

  This year, the United States of America celebrates 250 years of   being a nation. Throughout this year, I will highlight those who   took a stand, specifically in signing The Declaration of   Independence. I will feature a variety of signers each month  throughout 2026. Today, we have Benjamin Rush, who was 30 years of age when he signed America’s declaration. A physician by trade, Rush was the father of 13 children. He died in April 1813 at the age of 67.

Although he had his detractors, Benjamin Rush was considered (USHistory.org) an “eminent physician, writer, educator, humanitarian, and as interesting a figure as one could find in the formation of the United States. A wildly popular and much loved man, he was nonetheless a fallible character. He was born in December of 1745 in Byberry, Pennsylvania, some twelve miles from Philadelphia. His father died when Benjamin was six, and his mother placed him in the care of his maternal uncle Dr. Finley, who became his teacher and advisor for many years. In 1759 he attended the College of Philadelphia, where he ultimately attained a Bachelor of Arts degree. He continued his education with a Dr. Redman of Philadelphia for four years and then crossed the Atlantic to attend to an M.D. at Edinburgh. He spent several years in Europe studying and practicing medicine, French, Italian, Spanish, and science. He returned in 1769, opened a private practice in Philadelphia, and was appointed Professor of Chemistry at the College of Philadelphia.”

He was close friends with Thomas Paine. From Signing Their Lives Away (from Denise Kernan and Joseph D’Agnest, page 128), we find an example of Rush’s ability to describe the reality (from a letter he wrote to John Adams): “Do you recollect the pensive and awful silence which pervaded the house when we were called up one after another, to the table of the President of the Congress to subscribe what was believed by many at that time to be our own death warrants?”

Rush was beloved in the city for his work among the poor classes,[establishing the first free medical clinic in America, the Philadelphia Dispensary. He tended patients in the 1793 outbreak of yellow fever in Philadelphia, even succumbing to the disease himself. Rush also proved a popular professor at the college. Eventually, “Rush published the first American textbook on Chemistry. In 1773, he contributed editorial assays to the papers about the Patriot cause and also joined the American Philosophical Society. He was active in the Sons of Liberty in Philadelphia during that time. In June of 1776 he was elected to attend the provincial conference to send delegates to the Continental Congress. He was appointed to represent Philadelphia that year and so signed the Declaration of Independence.” (USHistory.org)

File:Dr Benjamin Rush.png - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia en.wikipedia.org

File:Dr Benjamin Rush.png – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org

The following year, he served as surgeon-general of the middle department of the Continental Army. Not all was to Rush’s liking during this tenure. “He was critical of the administration of the Army Medical service under Dr. William Shippen. He complained to Washington, who deferred to the Congress. Ultimately Congress upheld Shippen and Rush resigned in disgust. As the war continued and Army forces under General Washington suffered a series of defeats, Rush secretly campaigned for removal of Washington as commander in chief, and went so far as to write an anonymous letter to then Governor Patrick Henry of Virginia. He was caught in the act and confronted by Washington, at which point he bowed out of any activities related to the war.” (USHistory.org)

Signing Their Lives Away (page 128) provides us with a bit more information on the incident with Washington. “But the writing that had the greatest negative effect on his career came after the Continental Arm had been defeated at Brandywine and Germantown. Rush had penned more than one letter criticizing General Washington, but the one he wrote in January 1778 to Governor Patrick Henry of Virginia suggesting that the army would be better off with Thomas Conway, Horatio Gates, or Charles Lee as a leader would forever associate Rush with ‘Conway Cabal,’ an episode of political and military back-and-forth that aimed to have Washington replaced as head of the colonial armies. Rush sent the letter anonymously, but when it made its way into Washington’s hands, the general recognized the handwriting.” 

He took a public stance in favor of the Federal constitution and served the Pennsylvania convention that approved the constitution in 1789. Later, Rush served as Treasurer of the U. S. Mint (1797-1813). In 1791, he became a professor of medical theory and clinical practice for the newly consolidated University of Pennsylvania. He was also a social activist, a prominent advocate for the abolition of slavery, an advocate for scientific education for the masses, including women, and for public medical clinics to treat the poor.

“Benjamin Rush was a regular writer, and many notes about the less well known signers of the Declaration come from his observations on the floor of Congress. Other members of Congress, Franklin, and John Adams foremost, had some harsh observations to make about Rush. He was handsome, well-spoken, a gentleman and a very attractive figure-he was also a gossip and was quick to rush to judgement about others. He was supremely confident of his own opinion and decisions, yet shallow and very unscientific in practice. His chief accomplishment as a physician was in the practice of bleeding the patient [and his use of mercury]. It was said that he considered bleeding to be a cure for nearly any ailment. Even when the practice began to decline, he refused to reconsider the dangers of it.” (USHistory.org)

“Despite the fact that bloodletting was a common medical practice since ancient times, he [Rush] was attacked in print by a newsman, who said Rush’s treatments had killed more patients than they saved. Rush sued for libel, but prosecution of the case was repeatedly delayed. The case wasn’t settled until late 1799, but George Washington’s death – which occurred December 14, 1799, before the libel case was settled – exacerbated Rush’s woes. Though Rush did not attend Washington at his deathbed, one of Rush’s disciples did, using leeches to suck five to nine pints of blood from poor old George. People blamed Rush’s teachings for Washington’s death. Rush finally won the law suit, but his medical practice suffered…” (Signing Their Lives Away, page 129)

“Rush penned America’s first textbook about mental ailments, Medical Inquiries and Observations upon Diseases of the Mind, and his work in the field of mental health earned him the moniker ‘The Father of American Psychiatry.’ (In keeping with his tendency to implement dubious medical treatments, Rush also contributed the ‘tranquilizing chair’ to the psychiatric community, a restraining and sensory-deprivation device that bound limbs and fitted a box with a small opening over patients’ heads, ‘calming’ them by restricting blood flow to their brains.) He was even visited in 1803 by Meriwether Lewis. The legendary explorer would later pack Dr. Rush’s anti-bilious pills nicknamed ‘Rush’s Thunderbolts,’ on his great journey west.” (Signing Their Lives Away, page 130)

Ironically, it was Rush who brought the feud between Thomas Jefferson and John Adams to an end. According to Kiernan and D’Agnest (page 130), Rush had a dream in which Jefferson and Adams ended their quarrel and reestablished a “friendly” correspondence. Rush also predicted that the two would died at “nearly the same time.” Rush shared this dream with the pair, who did reconcile their differences and who died on the same day, 4 July 1826. 

Also See: 

The Society of the Descendants of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence

Posted in American History, British history, Declaration of Independence, Great Britain, real life tales | Tagged , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Celebrating the Release of “Midnight at Pemberley” from Ulysses Press

During the middle of 2025, Ulysses Press, the publishing house with which I published many of my Jane Austen variations, contacted me about rereleasing “Darcy’s Passions” and “Vampire Darcy’s Desire.” With “Darcy’s Passions,” they left the title as it was. However, with “Vampire Darcy’s Desire,” they changed the title to “Midnight at Pemberley.” They presented both books with new covers, more of the nature of what we see on the Continent, as people would say in the Regency era.

“Midnight at Pemberley” explores the roots of the various legends of vampires. Mr. Darcy is a dhampir, the offspring of a vampire and a human. I presented the idea of his following in the footsteps of his father, who was also a dhampir.

For those of you unfamiliar with the term, a dhampir is a half-man, half-vampire, a hybrid creature. They are the offspring of a human and a vampire. Dhampirs typically possess all of the supernatural strengths of a vampire—such as enhanced speed, strength, and senses—but retain human characteristics like a heartbeat and the ability to walk in sunlight.

The concept of the half-vampire originated in Balkan folklore. According to regional myths, a dhampir was the child produced from a union between a living human and a vampire. In these stories, male vampires were often believed to have a lingering sexual desire for their former wives or local women, and the resulting offspring were uniquely capable of seeing and hunting down the undead.

The half-vampire archetype is a staple in popular culture, bridging the gap between the mortal and immortal worlds:

  • Blade (Marvel): Perhaps the most famous half-vampire is Eric Brooks (Blade), a human-vampire hybrid who possesses all the vampiric strengths but none of their traditional weaknesses. He uses these powers to hunt rogue vampires.
  • Vampire Hunter D: This iconic sci-fi series features “D,” a legendary, enigmatic dampier (half-human, half-vampire) who wanders a post-apocalyptic world.
  • Twilight (Renesmee): The franchise features vampire-human hybrids who age rapidly to maturity, share traits of both species, and have unique abilities like projecting thoughts.

Check out this You Tube video that explains the concept. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/STOO1-rUQqA

Heirs of the Night Season 2 Episode 12 | Race to the Knot – Full Episode

To the idea of a dhampir, I added the ballad, Lord Thomas and Fair Elinor. “Lord Thomas and Fair Elinor” (also known as “Fair Annet” or “The Brown Girl”) is a tragic English folk ballad (Child Ballad #73). It tells the story of Lord Thomas, who is torn between his true love, Elinor, and a wealthy “brown girl” chosen by his mother. I made these characters Darcy and Elizabeth’s ancestors, and their “curse” has been passed down to them. George Wickham is a powerful vampire, having been turned to one by Lady Eleanor in my tale.

The story comes to a massive fight in a graveyard in northern Northumberland, the part that was once still in Scotland proper. The story is set for a sequel, but I have not found time to write the sequel, though it remains in my head and a slew of notes to make it come to life.

A gothic romance where passion defies death and Mr. Darcy’s darkest secret could destroy him—and the woman he loves.

When Fitzwilliam Darcy arrives in Hertfordshire, his proud reserve hides a secret far darker than Elizabeth Bennet could ever imagine. Beneath his impeccable manners and quiet intensity lies a hunger that defies nature itself—and a past shadowed by loss, betrayal, and blood.

Drawn to the spirited Elizabeth despite every warning of danger, Darcy struggles to protect her from the truth of what he has become. But when the mysteries of Pemberley’s moonlit halls begin to unravel, Elizabeth finds herself caught between desire and dread, uncovering a love powerful enough to challenge immortality itself.

From candlelit ballrooms to graveyards veiled in mist, Midnight at Pemberley transforms Jane Austen’s classic tale into a sweeping gothic romance of passion, redemption, and forbidden desire. With her signature mastery of Regency detail and emotional depth, Regina Jeffers reimagines the world of Pride and Prejudice in a story where love is eternal—and eternity comes at a price.

Kindle – https://www.amazon.com/Midnight-Pemberley-Vampire-Prejudice-Retelling-ebook/dp/B0GTZ7VRV4/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1AP3RC6064N41&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.lqVW6SGZcQolKtaz9yclYb_TzxZFIW8d504oaxAxi3mAF3dcDyKoGyy7FRsPB2U4z8TL6zbEkG8ALugf4my-0ukdmGtNTggcZzpKzfjNKPc-dk9l62Mx0K3ZbfHcLv5_HJ9hujxNF-QbYZtM6DeEawJOZV-KF1gVCucjF-aFm2im6vGTtrbcO0IROjUSGdrO6GF7DwbkvycOm0WeEJcPGo8_xQMk26a48gNlZwGGaHU.XThvVm8-4V1bOXp99pVZfL3mhJIVTU4KmnCsV9F6HGA&dib_tag=se&keywords=midnight+at+pemberley&qid=1784307100&sprefix=midnight+at+pemberley%2Caps%2C184&sr=8-1

Note: If you find “Midnight at Pemberley” too expensive, please remember that “Vampire Darcy’s Desire” is still available. There are only minor changes in this new version.

Posted in blog hop, book release, books, British history, drama, George Wickham, Georgian England, Georgian Era, gothic and paranormal, hero, heroines, historical fiction, history, Jane Austen, legends, marriage, paranormal, Pride and Prejudice, publishing, Regency era, Regency romance, research, suspense, Vagary, vampires | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Traitor Tuesday ~ Celebrating 250 Years of the United States as a Separate Nation: William Whipple, Signer of the Declaration of Independence, a Man Whose Slaves Fought Along Side Him

Today we have a look at another signer of the Declaration of Independence, one of which you likely are not familiar. William Whipple was 46 years of age when he signed The Declaration of Independence. A merchant by trade, he died in 1785 at the age of 55. 

www.ushistory.org/ declaration/signers/ whipple.htm

http://www.ushistory.org/
declaration/signers/
whipple.htm

William Whipple was born in 1730 in Kittery, Maine. His father William was a brewer and his mother the daughter of Robert Cutts, a distinguished ship builder. As a teen, he was sent off to sea to claim his fortune, and he became a Ship’s Master by the time he was 21. Most of his voyages were to the West Indies, Africa, and Europe, which indicates that he was aboard a slave ship. His diligence to duty and responsibility earned him a fortune. In 1759, he and his brother formed a partnership and established themselves as merchants on Bow Street on Spring Hill in Portsmouth, New Hampshire.

We recognize in history many of the time held slaves, and Whipple was one these men. What made him “different” was the fact that his slave, one named Prince, fought along side of Whipple during the Revolutionary War. Some 5000 slaves fought for the Americans during the war, but more fought for the British for the British offered “freedom” to those who fought for them. Prince, by the way, was not granted his freedom until 1784. He is buried in the same cemetery as was his master, William Whipple, another uncommon event. 

Whipple was not so fortunate in love. His fiancé left him at the altar. Later, he married a cousin, who was then 35 years of age in 1767. Her name was Catherine Moffat. The couple moved into the Moffat home in 1769: It was a Georgian colonial, which is still standing in Portsmouth.

He became popular and was elected to local offices, representing Portsmouth in the provincial congress. “In the provincial congress, which met at Exeter, January, 1775 to elect delegates to the Continental Congress in Philadelphia, Whipple represented the town of Portsmouth. He also represented that town in the provincial congress, which was assembled at Exeter the following May, and by that body was appointed one of the provincial committee of safety. In 1776 he was appointed a delegate to the Continental Congress. Sensing the increasing sentiment for freedom, Whipple wrote as follows to Josiah Bartlett on January 7, 1776: ‘This year, my Friend, is big with mighty events. Nothing less than the fate of America depends on the virtue of her sons, and if they do not have virtue enough to support the most Glorious Cause ever human beings were engaged in, they don’t deserve the blessings of freedom.’

“Whipple was present in Congress and voted for independence on July 2, the Declaration of Independence on July 4, and signed the Declaration on August 2.

“’The memorable day which gave birth to the declaration of independence afforded, in the case of William Whipple,’ as a writer observes, ‘is a striking example of the uncertainty of human affairs, and the triumphs of perseverance. The cabin boy, who thirty years before had looked forward to a command of a vessel as the consummation of all his hopes and wishes, now stood amidst the congress of 1776, and looked around upon a conclave of patriots, such as the world had never witnessed. He whose ambition once centered in inscribing his name as commander upon a crew list, now affixed his signature to a document, which has embalmed it for posterity.'” (The Society of the Descendants of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence)

New Hampshire was the first colony to declare independence from King George III.

Congressional protocol said that votes for independence were taken from the northernmost colony to the southernmost one. Therefore, Whipple and his co-signer from New Hampshire, Josiah Bartlett, were the first to cast their votes for independence, and their signatures are the first two after that of John Hancock. (Denise Kiernan and Joseph D’Agnest, Signing Their Lives Away, page 18)

“The following year New Hampshire dissolved the Royal government and reorganized with a House of Representatives and an Executive Council. Whipple was made a Council member, a member of the Committee of Safety, and was promptly elected to the Continental Congress. He served there through 1779, though he took much leave for military affairs. In 1777 he was made Brigadier General of the New Hampshire Militia. General Whipple led men in the successful expedition against General Burgoyne at the battles of Stillwater and Saratoga.

He served as the superintendent of the commissary’s and quartermaster’s departments after the forming of the new government, where he oversaw the efficiency of the system. 

“After the war Whipple was appointed an associate justice of the Superior Court of New Hampshire. He suffered from a heart ailment for several years and he died, fainting from atop his horse while traveling his court circuit, in November of 1785.” (USHistory)

“In 1782, he was appointed receiver of public moneys for the state of New Hampshire, from Robert Morris, the superintendent of finance appointed by the Congress. The duties devolving upon him were both arduous and unpopular. The collection of money was, at that time, extremely difficult. Whipple experienced many vexations in the exercise of his commission; and at length, in 1784, found it necessary, on account of the infirm state of his health, to relinquish his office. About the same time that he received this appointment, he was created a judge of the superior court of judicature. He began now, however, to be afflicted with strictures in the breast, which prevented him from engaging in the more active scenes of life. He was able, however, to ride the circuits of the court for two or three years, but owing to an affection of the heart, his effectiveness was limited.

“In the fall of 1785, while riding the circuit, this disorder so rapidly increased, that he was obliged to return home. From this time he was confined to his room, until the 28th day of November, when he expired, in the 55th year of his age. He was buried in the North Cemetery, as was his servant ‘Prince,’ whose grave marker indicates that he was a soldier in the American army.

www.dsd1776.com/ signers-by-state/ william-whipple/

http://www.dsd1776.com/
signers-by-state/
william-whipple/

“The mind of Mr. Whipple was naturally strong, and his power of discrimination quick. In his manners, he was easy and unassuming; in his habits correct, and in his friendships constant. Although his early education was limited, his subsequent intercourse with the world, united to his natural good sense, enabled him to fill with ability the various offices to which he was appointed.

“Few men have exhibited a more honest and persevering ambition to act a worthy part in the community, and few, with his advantages, have been more successful in obtaining the object of their ambition.

‘On December 9, 1785, the New Hampshire Gazette noted: “On Monday the 28th of November, died, universally lamented, the Hon. Gen. William Whipple, Judge of the Superior Court of New Hampshire. ‘In him concentrated every principle that exalts the dignity of man. His disinterested patriotism and public services are now known to all. And when newspaper encomiums are lost in oblivion, the pen of the historian shall preserve the remembrance of his virtue in the breast of succeeding generations. During the long course of unequaled sufferings, he endured his lot with a firmness correspondent to the greatness of his mind.

‘He viewed his approaching dissolution with a heroic fortitude, in full confidence, that He who made him knew best how to dispose of him. In his extremist agonies, his mind was still revolving schemes for the happiness of mankind, and those sentiments of benevolence which distinguished him while living, were the last that died in him. He was generous and humane, and the elements so mixed in him that nature might rise up and say THIS WAS A MAN.” (The Society of the Descendants of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence)

Posted in American History, British history, Declaration of Independence, Great Britain, real life tales | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Being a Woman in Jane Austen’s England

“Single women have a dreadful propensity for being poor—which is one very strong argument in favour of matrimony.” Jane Austen wrote to Fanny Knight, 13 March 1817

Feminism made a long overdue showing in the 18th Century. Society, as a whole debated important issues, and, naturally, well-informed women began to question their place in the whole structure. These women were not called “feminists,” but rather “female philosophers.” They were nonmilitant . . . no bra burners among them. Rather, I should say, no corset burners among them. Against what we might expect, they did not protest for legal rights. Instead, they focused on the lack of education for females and on the moral autonomy and authority of males within the family structure. Early female writers included Mary Astell and Catherine Macaulay. Although few would call her a feminist, Jane Austen spoke of such issues in her writing. Austen simply gave us sympathetic female characters. Yet, how can we believe that she grudgingly dedicated a novel to a prince she did not admire and then think that Jane Austen was not aware of the moral debate going on about her.

As mentioned above, feminism in Regency England was not a formal movement but emerged as quiet resistance and intellectual critique against severe patriarchal constraints where women had few rights, limited education, and economic dependence primarily on marriage for status, with writers like Jane Austen subtly challenging norms through providing her readers with intelligent, independent heroines and highlighting women’s need for agency within a restrictive society. Figures like Austen, along with early Bluestockings and pioneers like Mary Anning [1799 – 1847], carved out spaces for intellectual and personal freedom despite expectations to be silent, chaste, and confined. 

Being a woman in Jane Austen’s England meant a life of limited options, centered on securing a good marriage for financial stability, as economic independence and professions were largely inaccessible. Women were expected to cultivate “accomplishments” (music, drawing, dancing) for social appeal, manage households, and maintain reputation, facing societal scorn as “spinsters” if unmarried, though Austen’s novels subtly challenged these constraints by highlighting intelligent, capable heroines navigating rigid rules, limited education, and the precariousness of their positions. 

Key Constraints on Regency Women:

  • Legal Subordination: Under “coverture,” married women had no separate legal identity, property, or control over finances; everything went to the husband.
  • Economic Vulnerability: Marriage was crucial for security, as jobs were limited (governess, teacher) and often beneath their class, with little to no financial independence.
  • Social & Educational Limitations: Women needed “accomplishments” (music, sewing, dancing) for marriage, but formal education was discouraged, and unmarried women faced social stigma.
  • Patriarchal Control: Society dictated women’s roles, emphasizing duty to husbands, fathers, and male relatives, with reputation being paramount. 

Perhaps the most controversial figure of the feminist movement of this time period was a teacher and novelist: Mary Wollstonecraft. She wrote A Vindication of the Rights of Women in 1792. The book sets the “female perspective” in the context of post-revolutionary Europe. The downfall of the book is its emphasize on rational principles. That is also the strength of the book. Wollstonecraft created a firestorm of sorts and alienated many readers by attacking male icons such as John Milton and Rousseau because both men advocated subjugation of the woman in a man’s world. When I taught high school English, most specifically Advanced Placement Language, where the students studied the power of words and what the choice of vocabulary said of specific time periods, my female students (and some of the males) saw parallels to the pro-feminist speeches found in the 1960s and 70s in the U.S. One of Wollstonecraft’s more controversial comments dealt with how the English education system for girls taught them how to attract a man but not how to run a man’s house once they landed him. Nor how to raise his children.

In 1798, Mary’s husband, William Godwin, wrote a Memoir of her life. This was shortly after Wollstonecraft’s death. Mary lost her life to childbirth. (That child, Mary Godwin, became the wife of Percy Shelley and the author of Frankenstein.) Godwin told the world of his wife’s suicide attempts and of her bearing an illegitimate child, as well as an exaggerated version of Mary’s rejection of Christianity. Mary was labeled an atheist and a whore. Such labels destroyed what good Wollstonecraft created with in her work.

Fulfilling Your Life as a Woman in the Regency Era

Was the Regency Era a Good Time to Be a Woman?

“Woman’s Place” in Jane Austen’s England?

Regency Era Realities: Was It Truly a Good Time to Be a Woman?

Posted in British history, customs and tradiitons, England, Georgian England, Georgian Era, Great Britain, history, Jane Austen, Living in the Regency, Regency era, Regency personalities | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

What Exactly Did It Mean to be an Officer on Half Pay in Jane Austen’s England?

Question from a follower: I’ve often wondered about the term “half-pay officer.” Does an officer who sells out still receive half pay or only officers who retire without selling their commissions (if there is such a thing). My question concerns a major who sold out after Waterloo. Does he still receive half-pay?

First, let us clarify what “Half Pay Officers” mean.

Definition: Half-Pay (h.p.) was used from the 18th to early 20th centuries in reference to the British Army or the Royal Navy to refer to the pay or allowance an officer received when in retirement or not in actual service.

The half-pay option developed during the late 17th and early 18th centuries, which was about the same time as the concept of purchasing commissions and promotions by officers found its footing. The officers who were not required at that time could go on half-pay voluntarily or be required to do so until they were summoned to return to their regiments. For example, all listed half-pay officers were required to return to service during the 1715 Jacobite Rising. Many well-to-do officers used this loophole after the Napoleonic Wars, especially if their regiments were ordered to other wars and uprisings, such as those in India. They simply purchased new appointments to regiments assigned to home service in Britain. The Secretary of War was responsible for approving or rejecting transfers to and from the half-pay list.

This list includes the wars which finished out the 1800s:

Half-Pay officers were similar to what we now think of a reserve officers. My husband spent thirty years in the U.S. Army, but most were with the Army Reserves. In Britain during the 19th century, officers who were retired or otherwise not required for active service received half of the salary of their fully-commissioned counterparts.

“The half-pay list could also serve as a means of ridding the service of ineffective or incompetent officers who had too much political influence to be dismissed entirely. Such officers would be placed on half-pay and never recalled to active service. In periods of extended conflict, the half-pay lists became a significant expense for militaries when it was coupled with the selling of half pay-commissions, which was common in the British Army.” [Half-pay]

Further Explanation: Wondrium Daily explains the term in this manner: “Because of the cost of entering this career, commissioned army officers were largely drawn from the upper classes. A commission might be purchased for, say, 2000 pounds, to take up a position that paid 200 pounds a year. Thus, it might pay off after 10 years of service, depending on tours of action and active duty.

“Officers could request permission to be on half-pay. Unless some crisis necessitated a regiment’s call to active duty, individual requests were routinely approved, especially with the right connections, as favors. Some officers used this route, the leave of absence, to avoid going abroad with their regiments.

“When, in [the PBS series] Sanditon, Lady Denham refers with such disdain to half-pay officers coming to their resort town, that’s what she’s talking about. These were often officers on hiatus, or even on vacation, at reduced pay. Her complaint is both that they have lesser social status and less money to spend.”

Follow-Up Question: So if an officer bought his commission and sold it upon retiring, he was paying for his own retirement? i.e., he just paid for his pension up front? Then, if he died, what happened to that money? A pretty good deal for the Army. It sounds like the military didn’t actually pay any pension, they just gave you back what you paid them for the honor of fighting and possibly dying.

Yes, it was an excellent deal. As officers, up until 1790, were overwhelmingly gentry [thus ‘gentlemen’] the expectation was most officers did not require the money to survive or to support their families, and upper class families were doing their civil duty by buying a commission and then supporting them while serving. As Colonels ran their regiments as a business, this was also important. After all, one was purchasing a commission in a regiment, not the army. The idea that officers did not require the money while being the upper crust of society, they:

  1. Were expected to supply their uniforms and all equipment.
  2. They were paid a quarterly salary that simply did not cover the expenses of being an officer in the army at any rank.
  3. There was no need for pensions or much in the way of compensation for those serving their country. The officer was a part of a rich family.

This slowly changed during the wars, because the war covered some 20 years and so many officers were required, the middle class, and in some cases [about 5%] enlisted men were commissioned without buying a commission.

Another Question: Did someone who paid for their commission receive an additional pension as well? It doesn’t sound like it from your response. So the paid commission officer paid for his own retirement and the free commission officer didn’t?

No, there was no pension for a purchased commission, for the reasons given above. The upper class did not require the money. The families were expected to support their sons monetarily while in the army.  I just read “A Light Infantryman with Wellington”, the letters of Captain George Ulrich Barlow. Throughout his service, Barlow was receiving money from his family, not just his father, but uncles and cousins too.

Book Blurb: This series of letters was written by a light infantry officer on campaign, as a lieutenant with the 52nd Foot in Spain and a captain with the 69th Foot in Belgium and France. George Ulrich Barlow saw action at Ciudad Rodrigo, Badajoz, Vitoria, San Sebastian, Nivelle, Nive and Orthez. He transferred to the 69th Foot as a captain and served with them in Belgium at the battles of Quatre Bras and Waterloo and then remained with the Army of Occupation in France until 1818. His involvement in the fighting and his honest views of some of the famous characters he met during his service are enlightening, including his first audience with Wellington at Freineda in Portugal. There are also interesting asides in his correspondence including his father’s difficulties over his governorship of Madras and his brother’s involvement in a major mutiny at the Royal Military College.

Additional Question: If I am understanding correctly, I see the incentive as the “free commission” route is the best deal? One does not have to pay for one’s pension (outside of the bribe fee), and there is an improved social status which is otherwise impossible to attain in Regency England? i.e., it was very difficult to improve one’s social status in this era. Even making money was frowned upon (the merchant class). But the new status only went so far? (shunned later by one being equal in military rank if not in birth). So how far did the “officer” status really go socially?

Exactly. How far did the status go ‘socially?’  During the war, pretty far, particularly if one could move up the ranks. Everyone was equal in the regimental Mess. After the war? Not as much, which created some resentment among the middle class officers who were now seen again as less that socially acceptable among the gentry. Obviously, retiring as a colonel was much better than as a captain. Read “The Reminiscences and Recollections of Captain Gronow, being anecdotes of the camp, court, clubs and society 1810-1860”  He gives great descriptions of the social relationships and social movement of war and post-war officers. [copies are available at many book outlets, as well as on Google]

An Aside: I had understood that officers never fraternized with soldiers, that it was an unwritten code. Is this true?

True,  a rule no more unwritten than gentlemen did not ‘fraternize’ with the lower classes. Same social structure Officers=upper class  NCOs=Middle Class  Enlisted=Lower classes. Officers communicated with NCOs [Who actually did all the professional work], but rarely with the enlisted men.  

One More Question: I’m very interested in this topic. I have thought a lot about “honor” lately, what that used to mean, and if anyone cares about honor anymore. i.e., if honor is so removed from our culture (people question why one would do anything if it does not serve him/her, one is almost thought to be “stupid”, and getting away with something is revered as clever instead of dishonorable) that it is difficult to write about honor as a subject readers can relate to and understand. When we watch a film and someone fights a duel of honor, the modern viewer wonders why anyone would risk his life for his perceived ‘honor’, mentally labeling the character as foolish and naive. I can understand that perspective, but having character, knowing the difference between right and wrong, and putting someone else before oneself does not seem to be revered and is even ridiculed. If honor is defined as one’s reputation and one’s character, how is honor defined if none of that matters? i.e., if the only thing that matters is what one can get for oneself? Sometimes we really are in living history, our culture is changing, and it feels like the ground is boiling underneath our feet. I’m not meaning to go on a diatribe, but I’m trying to come to terms with what honor used to mean, what it means today, and how to write a novel from the perspective of a different culture and make it sympathetic to the modern reader.

The self-serving and self-sacrificing parts of Regency Honor is not that hard to understand.

1. Only the Gentry and Upper Class were seen as possessing or concerned with ‘Honor,’ as they understood it.

2. Honor was the reputation of you AND your family. So often duels were fought to ‘preserve one’s honor,’ which was one’s social reputation. Honor was part of an upper class family’s duty to the Crown, to serve and support the government and the running of society.

3. Winning ‘glory’ was in part garnering more honor for the and his family. All this goes way back to the Sun King and earlier where the main responsibility or goal of a prince was to win glory and honor for the family . . . either through war or extravagant spending . . . or both.

4. Saving face, personal pride, winning social acceptance or more acceptance today is not all that different from the Regency period honor. It was just seen as being achieved differently at times. ;

The wars and the infusion of middle class officers widened and generalized the ideals of honor and what it meant to be a gentleman, actions slowly superseded the notions of family honor and rank. One can see this conflict in “Pride and Prejudice”.  Darcy feels to be a ‘gentleman’ means to make and enforce social distinctions, where Elizabeth sees it more as an issue of proper behavior. In the end, she still has to argue with Darcy’s aunt about whether as a gentleman’s daughter she is equal to Darcy in social status, while Lady Catherine de Bourgh operating on the older distinctions says, yes, but who are your family, aunts and uncles? During the Regency there were deep social changes going on and Jane Austen really illustrates them. In each of her books she contrasts class and rank against behavior and ethics. Being a Gentleman went from being a specific social rank to being primarily a code of behavior. 

“This is not to be borne. Miss Bennet, I insist on being satisfied. Has he, has my nephew, made you an offer of marriage?”

“Your ladyship has declared it to be impossible.”

“It ought to be so; it must be so, while he retains the use of his reason. But your arts and allurements may, in a moment of infatuation, have made him forget what he owes to himself and to all his family. You may have drawn him in.”

“If I have, I shall be the last person to confess it.”

“Miss Bennet, do you know who I am? I have not been accustomed to such language as this. I am almost the nearest relation he has in the world, and am entitled to know all his dearest concerns.”

“But you are not entitled to know mine; nor will such behaviour as this, ever induce me to be explicit.”

“Let me be rightly understood. This match, to which you have the presumption to aspire, can never take place. No, never. Mr. Darcy is engaged to my daughter. Now what have you to say?”

Only this; that if he is so, you can have no reason to suppose he will make an offer to me.”

Lady Catherine hesitated for a moment, and then replied:

“The engagement between them is of a peculiar kind. From their infancy, they have been intended for each other. It was the favourite wish of his mother, as well as of hers. While in their cradles, we planned the union: and now, at the moment when the wishes of both sisters would be accomplished in their marriage, to be prevented by a young woman of inferior birth, of no importance in the world, and wholly unallied to the family! Do you pay no regard to the wishes of his friends? To his tacit engagement with Miss de Bourgh? Are you lost to every feeling of propriety and delicacy? Have you not heard me say that from his earliest hours he was destined for his cousin?”

“Yes, and I had heard it before. But what is that to me? If there is no other objection to my marrying your nephew, I shall certainly not be kept from it by knowing that his mother and aunt wished him to marry Miss de Bourgh. You both did as much as you could in planning the marriage. Its completion depended on others. If Mr. Darcy is neither by honour nor inclination confined to his cousin, why is not he to make another choice? And if I am that choice, why may not I accept him?”

“Because honour, decorum, prudence, nay, interest, forbid it. Yes, Miss Bennet, interest; for do not expect to be noticed by his family or friends, if you willfully act against the inclinations of all. You will be censured, slighted, and despised, by everyone connected with him. Your alliance will be a disgrace; your name will never even be mentioned by any of us.”

“These are heavy misfortunes,” replied Elizabeth. “But the wife of Mr. Darcy must have such extraordinary sources of happiness necessarily attached to her situation, that she could, upon the whole, have no cause to repine.”

“Obstinate, headstrong girl! I am ashamed of you! Is this your gratitude for my attentions to you last spring? Is nothing due to me on that score? Let us sit down. You are to understand, Miss Bennet, that I came here with the determined resolution of carrying my purpose; nor will I be dissuaded from it. I have not been used to submit to any person’s whims. I have not been in the habit of brooking disappointment.”

“That will make your ladyship’s situation at present more pitiable; but it will have no effect on me.”

“I will not be interrupted. Hear me in silence. My daughter and my nephew are formed for each other. They are descended, on the maternal side, from the same noble line; and, on the father’s, from respectable, honourable, and ancient—though untitled—families. Their fortune on both sides is splendid. They are destined for each other by the voice of every member of their respective houses; and what is to divide them? The upstart pretensions of a young woman without family, connections, or fortune. Is this to be endured! But it must not, shall not be. If you were sensible of your own good, you would not wish to quit the sphere in which you have been brought up.”

“In marrying your nephew, I should not consider myself as quitting that sphere. He is a gentleman; I am a gentleman’s daughter; so far we are equal.“

“True. You are a gentleman’s daughter. But who was your mother? Who are your uncles and aunts? Do not imagine me ignorant of their condition.“

“Whatever my connections may be,” said Elizabeth, “if your nephew does not object to them, they can be nothing to you.”

Other Sources:

Reading the Regency

Half-Pay and Prize Money

Advancement in the British Army

How Could an Officer Retire from Army Service in Regency England

Enlisting in the British Army During the Regency

Posted in aristocracy, British history, customs and tradiitons, Georgian England, Georgian Era, historical fiction, history, military, Napoleonic Wars, real life tales, Regency era, research | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Crossing the Irish Sea in the Early 1800s, Not for the Faint of Heart

I have written several books of late that feature my characters traveling to Ireland from different points in England. One of the more recent ones was my Taming Lord Truist, the second book of the Strong Women Duo that accompanied Loving Lord Lindmore. In Taming Lord Truist, I had my main characters come into Ireland along the eastern coastline and then move inland by wagon and horseback.

For Book 3 of my new romantic suspense/mystery series from Dragonblade Publishing, Lyon in Disguise: The Lyon’s Den Connected World, my characters travel north first to Scotland so they may marry and then on to Ireland and the Kenmare area of County Kerry. That meant they came into Cork City, which was a whole other problem to face, but my hero was from County Cork, so it made sense in a senseless situation.

Lyon in Disguise is currently on PreOrder on Amazon, with a 17 December 2025 release date.

One must understand that in 1812, the time in which my story is set, travelers would be at the will of the wind, for steam travel did not occur until the 1830s. The Rambles, Sketches, Tours website tells us, “Before the advent of steam engines, getting to your destination was an adventure in itself.  These days, 24 hours’ worth of travel can take you to the other side of the world.  In the eighteenth century, before steamships and railways, the “short” journey from London to Dublin could take more than a week. First you had to make your way to a port town, usually by coach or on horseback. There were four main ports from which to make the crossing: Port Patrick (Scotland) to Donaghadee (County Down), Bristol to Cork, and Liverpool (England) or Holyhead (Wales) to Dublin. The crossing itself was entirely dependent on the tides and the weather: some travellers wrote about ships that battled 27- or 40-hour storms – and after battling the elements for so long, some ships were forced to turn back, even if they were already in sight of Ireland’s shores. Besides fierce headwinds, some ships had to contend with the lack of wind, sitting becalmed upon the sea with no means of moving until the wind returned. In addition to the elements (or lack thereof), ships that took the southern-most route between Bristol and Cork also risked encounters with Spanish and French privateers. The introduction of steam power in 1819 took much of the uncertainty and discomfort out of the sea crossing, with the result that most trips could be made in 24 hours or less – from Holyhead to Dublin took only six hours by steamship.”

Map of the route from Chester to Holyhead and a chart of Holyhead. from ‘A Short Account of Holyhead in the Isle of Anglesea’ 1783 ~ https://sublimewales.wordpress.com/places/holyhead-and-the-irish-sea/

Meanwhile, Early Tourists from Wales tells us, “Boats from Bristol could call at many ports and creeks along the south coast (the main ones being Newport, Cardiff, Swansea, Carmarthen, Tenby, Milford Haven), and those from Liverpool called at ports along the north coast, especially those on either side of the Menai Straits (Beaumaris, Bangor and Caernarfon). Although boats called at ports along the west Coast (Fishguard, Cardigan, Aberaeron, Aberystwyth, Borth, Barmouth, Port Madog), the treacherous waters around St David’s Head and Anglesey, made trips from these locations to ports along the south and north Wales coasts much more dangerous.”

Other Sources:

Bush, John. Hibernia Curiosa. A Letter from a Gentleman in Dublin, to His Friend at Dover in Kent. Giving a General View of the Manners, Customs, Dispositions, &c. of the Inhabitants of Ireland. With Occasional Observations on the State of Trade and Agriculture in that Kingdom … Collected in a Tour through the Kingdom in the Year 1764 … London: Printed for W. Flexney, [1769]. [Internet Archive]

Finerty, John F. Ireland in Pictures: A Grand Collection of Over 400 Magnificent Photographs of the Beauties of the Green Isle: Comprising Views of the Most Famous Buildings, Historical Places, Romantic Scenery, Venerable Ruins, Rich Art Treasures, etc., etc. Chicago: J. S. Hyland, 1898. [Digital Library]

***************************

Lyon in Disguise: Lyon’s Den Connected World 

A handsome rake meets his match in a red-headed enchantress who is his enemy!

They may be on different sides of the law, but Lord Navan Beaufort is not going to permit that to stop him from protecting Miss Audrey Moreau. Navan has never thought truly to love anyone, but when he laid eyes on the red-headed beauty, his world shifted. Unfortunately, the lady appears to prefer Lord Alexander Dutton to him, though Navan has rarely had the opportunity to speak to her privately. That is, until he saves her from a fire one miraculous night. From there forward, she is his hope. His future.

Miss Audrey Moreau depends exclusively on her Uncle Jacobi for a home and protection. The man rescued her from a bayman’s plantation in the West Indies when she was five; yet, she well knows the “Marquis of Honfleur’s” schemes. She thought once Jacobi was caught, all would be well, but even from his jail, the man means to rain down harm upon her.

Can two lost souls find happiness together, when everyone in whom they had previously placed their trust have left them alone in the world?

Tropes You’ll Love:

  • Enemies to lovers
  • Self-declared bachelor
  • Friends to lovers
  • Adversaries
  • Damsel in distress
  • Best friend’s sister
  • Different worlds/experiences
  • Soul mates
  • Emotional scars
  • Fish out of water

Read in Kindle Unlimited!

Enjoy book one in a new series within The Lyon’s Den Connected world by Regina Jeffers.

Book 1 – Lyon in the Way

Book 2 – Lyon’s Obsession

Book 3 – Lyon in Disguise

Book 4 – Lost in the Lyon’s Garden

Book 5 – Lyon on the Inside

Amazon https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0G1V963YZ

Posted in aristocracy, British history, British Navy, customs and tradiitons, Dragonblade Publishers, Georgian England, Georgian Era, Great Britain, hero, heroines, historical fiction, history, Ireland, Living in the Regency, publishing, real life tales, Regency era, Regency personalities, Regency romance, research, travel, writing | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Traitor Tuesday ~ Celebrating 250 Years of the United States as a Separate Nation: Thomas Stone, A Man Who Loved His Wife and a Signer of the Declaration of Independence

stone.jpgNot as vocal as his compatriots, Thomas Stone is one of the lesser known signers of the Declaration of Independence. He served his country when called to do so, but preferred a quiet life with family over a life in the limelight. Thomas Stone was born at Poynton Manor in Charles County Maryland in 1743. He was educated by a Scottish school-master, and according to legend, he loved learning, even as a boy, and, as the story goes, rode 10 miles on horseback every day to attend school. Later, he studied law at the office of Thomas Johnson, Maryland’s first governor. He was admitted to the Bar in 1764 and set up practice in Frederick, Maryland, which was moderately successful. In 1768, he married Margaret Brown. Her dowry allowed them to purachase land near Port Tobacco, and in 1771, the Stones built Habre-de-Venture. The pair were extremely happy together and had three children. Over time, Stone’s law practice grew, and he built a reputation for promoting anti-British policies. He was a prosperous landowner and moderately successful lawyer.

He began his public service on a county committee of correspondence, whose job was to establish lines of communication with other colonies for the purpose of trade, transportation, etc. According to Denise Kiernan and Joseph D’Agnest in Signing Their Lives Away (page 163, Quirk Books, ©2009), “In 1774, he received some early – but not necessarily positive – public exposure in the developing battle between the patriots and the motherland when he acted as a prosecutor in a case against a man who had refused to pay the poll tax being collected to support the Anglican clergy. By that time, taxes had long been a touchy subject for the colonists, and supporting the Crown’s position in this matter did not boost Stone’s popularity among the patriots. The defense team was made up of William Paca, Thomas Johnson, and Samuel Chase, all of who would later be at Congress when Stone took his seat. He lost the case.”

Thomas_Stone.jpgStone was elected to Continental Congress in 1774 and was re-elected several years in a row. He was not as vocal as some of the other Congressmen, but we do know that he was was pro-independence, even though he supported reconciliatory measures to begin with and the State of Maryland limited his ability to vote for extreme patriotic measures.

The Maryland legislature was cautious of the rebellious spirit which had taken over in Boston after the Boston Tea Party. Maryland ordered the delegates of their state not to vote for independence without the prior approval of the state. Therefore, Stone and the other Maryland signers, Samuel Chase and William Paca, frustrated some of the Congressmen who were very strongly in favor of separation from England. When, however, it appeared that separation was the only choice, Maryland gave the go ahead, and the Maryland delegates voted in favor of independence. They all signed the Declaration of Independence, but Thomas Stone hoped that America would peacefully resolve things with England, as he was a pacifist and hoped to avoid loss of life.

He was a member of the committee that framed the Articles of Confederation. During this time, his wife came to visit him in Philadelphia. At the time, smallpox was running rampant through the colonies, so Thomas had Margaret inoculated. The process involved removing pus from an infected person’s lesions to be transferred under the skin of person receiving the inoculation. When the person came down with a mild case of smallpox, he/she was placed in quarantine he recovered, but Margaret Stone never fully overcame the process. It affected her poorly. She grew very sick; and though she initially recovered, her health was never the same. She continued to decline over the years.

After signing the Declaration, Thomas took Margaret home, and didn’t take further part in the Congress at Philadelphia, only attending a few meetings when Congress met in Annapolis in 1784. When the Maryland legislature began to question whether they’d made a mistake joining the confederacy, Stone joined the Maryland legislature in order to help win them over. He helped explain the Articles until Maryland agreed to sign them.

After representing Maryland at the Mount Vernon Conference, he was elected to Congress again in 1783 and served as chairman, but retired at the end of his term. He was elected to attend the Constitutional Convention in 1787, but declined the office because of his wife’s failing health.

She died 1787, and Stone never got over the grief. Four months after Margaret’s death, his physician recommended a sea voyage to cheer him up. He decided to travel to England, but died in Alexandria, Virginia, while waiting for the ship. He was forty-four years old. Little else is known of Thomas Stone, as no letters or papers accounting his life have ever been found.

stonethomas42812_1411708581-1.jpg

Sources:

Find a Grave 

Revolutionary War 

The Society of the Descendants of the Signers of the Declaration of Independencehttps://www.dsdi1776.com/

U. S. History: Signers of the Declaration of Independence

Wikipedia “Thomas Stone”

Posted in American History, British history, Declaration of Independence, Georgian England | Tagged , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Is There “Comedy” in Jane Austen’s Novels

According to Literary Devices, “Comedy is a literary genre and a type of dramatic work that is amusing and satirical in its tone, mostly having a cheerful ending. The motif   of this dramatic work is triumph over unpleasant circumstance by creating comic effects, resulting in a happy or successful conclusion. There are five types of comedy in literature:

Romantic comedy involves a theme of love leading to a happy conclusion. We find romantic comedy in Shakespearean plays and some Elizabethan contemporaries. These plays are concerned with idealized love affairs. It is a fact that true love never runs smoothly; however, love overcomes difficulties and ends in a happy union.

“Ben Johnson is the first dramatist who conceived and popularized comedy of humors. The term humor derives from the Latin word humor, which means “liquid.” It comes from a theory that the human body has four liquids, or humors, which include phelgm, blood, yellow bile, and black bile. It explains that, when human beings have a balance of these humors in their bodies, they remain healthy.

Comedy of Manners deals with intrigues and relations of ladies and gentlemen living in a sophisticated society. This form relies upon high comedy, derived from sparkle and wit of dialogues, violations of social traditions, and good manners, by nonsense characters like jealous husbands, wives, and foppish dandies. We find its use in Restoration dramatists, particularly in the works of Wycherley and Congreve.

Sentimental drama contains both comedy and sentimental tragedy. It appears in literary circles due to reaction of the middle class against obscenity and indecency of Restoration Comedy of Manners. This form, which incorporates scenes with extreme emotions evoking excessive pity, gained popularity among the middle class audiences in the eighteenth century.

Tragicomedy contains both tragic and comedic elements. It blends both elements to lighten the overall mood of the play. Often, tragicomedy is a serious play that ends happily.”

English literature has a long history of comedic novels. “The phrase Romantic novel has several possible meanings. Here it refers to novels written during the Romantic era in literary history, which runs from the late 18th century until the beginning of the Victorian era in 1837. But to complicate matters there are novels written in the romance tradition by novelists like Sir Walter Scott, Nathaniel Hawthorne, George Meredith. In addition the phrase today is mostly used to refer to the popular fiction genre that focusses on romantic love. The Romantic period is especially associated with the poets William Blake, William Wordsworth, Samuel Taylor Coleridge, George Byron, Percy Shelley and John Keats, though two major novelists, Jane Austen and Walter Scott, also published in the early 19th century.” (English novel)  Later, England gave us the likes of Charles Dickens, Lewis Carroll, Oscar Wilde, etc. 

tumblr_mah5pqbeii1qzz6vno1_5001.png

One thing that is obvious when studying Austen’s works is that her books are not all great comic hits. Let’s face it: Persuasion, Emma, and Mansfield Park lack the comedic elements found in Pride and Prejudice, Sense and Sensibility, Northanger Abbey, and my comedic favorite, Lady SusanPride and Prejudice provides us with a parade of comedic characters: Mr. Bennet (charming, but indolence), Mrs. Bennet (obsessed with marrying off her daughters), Lydia and Kitty Bennet (silly girls), Mary Bennet (moralizing), Jane Bennet (too good to be true, crafted in Cinderella’s image), Caroline Bingley and Louisa Hurst (snobbish and conniving women), Sir William Lucas (living beyond his means), Mr. Collins (bungling and long-winded), and Lady Catherine de Bourgh (proud beyond reason). Only Darcy and Elizabeth escape the stroke of the comic elements, for they are the “romance” in the romantic comedy. Although often they do not act with reason at times in the story, especially with their initial dismissal of each other as a potential mate, they are not characters to be laughed at. Note Austen’s many hints to that fact: 

“I AM EXCESSIVELY DIVERTED.”

Elizabeth laughed heartily at this picture of herself, and said to Colonel Fitzwilliam, “Your cousin will give you a very pretty notion of me, and teach you not to believe a word I say. I am particularly unlucky in meeting with a person so well able to expose my real character, in a part of the world where I had hoped to pass myself off with some degree of credit. Indeed, Mr. Darcy, it is very ungenerous in you to mention all that you knew to my disadvantage in Hertfordshire — and, give me leave to say, very impolitic too — for it is provoking me to retaliate, and such things may come out, as will shock your relations to hear.”

“I AM NOT AFRAID OF YOU,” SAID HE, SMILINGLY.

“She began now to comprehend that he was exactly the man who, in disposition and talents, would most suit her. His understanding and temper, though unlike her own, would have answered all her wishes. It was an union that must have been to the advantage of both: by her ease and liveliness, his mind might have been softened, his manners improved; and from his judgement, information, and knowledge of the world, she must have received benefit of greater importance.” 

The acknowledged lovers talked and laughed, the unacknowledged were silent. Darcy was not of a disposition in which happiness overflows in mirth; and Elizabeth, agitated and confused, rather knew that she was happy than felt herself to be so; for, besides the immediate embarrassment, there were other evils before her. She anticipated what would be felt in the family when her situation became known; she was aware that no one liked him but Jane; and even feared that with the others it was a dislike which not all his fortune and consequence might do away.

“But, Lizzy, you look as if you did not enjoy it.  You are not going to be missish, I hope, and pretend to be affronted at an idle report.  For what do we live, but to make sport for our neighbors, and laugh at them in our turn?” 

“Nothing so easy, if you have but the inclination,” said Elizabeth. “We can all plague and punish one another. Teaze him — laugh at him. — Intimate as you are, you must know how it is to be done.”

“But upon my honour I do not. I do assure you that my intimacy has not yet taught me that. Teaze calmness of temper and presence of mind! No, no — I feel he may defy us there. And as to laughter, we will not expose ourselves, if you please, by attempting to laugh without a subject. Mr. Darcy may hug himself.”

“Mr. Darcy is not to be laughed at!” cried Elizabeth. “That is an uncommon advantage, and uncommon I hope it will continue, for it would be a great loss to me to have many such acquaintance. I dearly love a laugh.”

“Miss Bingley,” said he, “has given me credit for more than can be. The wisest and the best of men, nay, the wisest and best of their actions, may be rendered ridiculous by a person whose first object in life is a joke.”

“Certainly,” replied Elizabeth — “there are such people, but I hope I am not one of them. I hope I never ridicule what is wise or good. Follies and nonsense, whims and inconsistencies do divert me, I own, and I laugh at them whenever I can. — But these, I suppose, are precisely what you are without.”

“Laugh as much as you chuse, but you will not laugh me out of my opinion. My dearest Lizzy, do but consider in what a disgraceful light it places Mr. Darcy, to be treating his father’s favourite in such a manner, — one, whom his father had promised to provide for. — It is impossible. No man of common humanity, no man who had any value for his character, could be capable of it. Can his most intimate friends be so excessively deceived in him? oh! no.”

hugh grant edward ferrars.jpg In Austen’s works and others that followed, the comedy is used to depict a series of stumbles before the hero and heroine are joined in a “happily ever after” type marriage. The couple manages to fall into one mess after the other and climbs over, through, and around a number of obstacles before they can claim what the reader hopes will be an ideal marriage. Those obstacles follow a particular pattern or motif: 

  1. intervention by a busybody, know-it all (i.e., Darcy and the Bingley sisters’ intervention in the life of Charles Bingley and Jane Bennet in Pride and Prejudice and Emma’s intervention in the life of Harriet Smith and Robert Martin in Emma)
  2. prior commitments (i.e., Darcy’s supposed engagement to his cousin Anne de Bourgh in Pride and Prejudice and Edward Ferrars’s engagement to Lucy Steele in Sense and Sensibility)
  3. opposition of the old to the idea of young love (i.e., Lady Russell opposes Anne Elliot aligning herself with Captain Frederick Wentworth in Persuasion; Fanny Price’s coming to live at Mansfield Park was originally argued by Sir Thomas, who worried about his sons’ approximation with a girl of no fortune. Also in Mansfield Park,  Mrs. Norris is far more concerned with rank and status than her sister, Lady Bertram. She doesn’t view Fanny Price with same respect and care she reserves for her Bertram nieces, Maria and Julia. She is generally dismissive of Fanny especially, and is very callous about Fanny’s health and well-being—much to Edmund’s intense annoyance and displeasure. 
  4. initial hostilities between the hero and heroine based on misunderstandings (i.e. Darcy and Elizabeth are placed behind the eight ball due to their faulty first impressions.)
  5. misjudging the true hero, preferring instead the “perfection” of the conniving pretty boy (i.e., Elizabeth Bennet’s preference for George Wickham and Marianne Dashwood’s preference for Mr. Willoughby)
  6. manipulations of the hero’s rival (i.e., George Wickham’s tales of woes to destroy Darcy’s reputations, George Wickham’s elopement with Lydia Bennet, and John Thorpe’s keeping Catherine Morland from Henry Tilney)
33b27bc4-6e6a-473f-ac23-68a621e00430.jpg

Some often criticize Austen for not adding more social commentary to her stories—the slave trade, the lack of rights of women, etc.—but such does not fit the characteristics of the romantic comedy. That does not mean that Austen does not address the realities of life during the Regency era. Austen includes characters such as Lady Russell in Persuasion, who speaks of Anne’s inability to live on her own while Captain Wentworth is away at war. Then there is James Morland in Northanger Abbey. James is a bit naive, though he seems to suspect that something is seriously amiss with Isabella’s behavior fairly early. James definitely learns a harsh lesson about trusting people and forming relationships in the book, and it is a lesson that he imparts to Catherine, like a good, protective older brother. We see the same sensibility from Charlotte Lucas, who in Pride and Prejudice, agrees to marry Mr. Collins, although she would rather remain unmarried. She accepts what she cannot change and makes the best of it. All these characters bring social injustices to light, but these failures of humanity do not swallow up the tale. The simply remind the reader of what could happen in the real world. They do not take away from the happy ending expected in a romantic comedy. 

Posted in British history, Georgian England, Georgian Era, hero, heroines, historical fiction, Jane Austen, Regency era, research, romance | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments