Lyrics
William! 1
Glorious repression 2
Articulate, immaculate, glorious revolution 3
Coast to coast 4
Lord guide me soft
From coast to coast
God guide me soft
I come for your goods 5
I come for your goods
Pray guide me soft
Pray guide me soft
Coast to coast
Lord guide me soft
Coast to coast
God guide me soft
I come for your goods
I come for your goods
Pray guide me soft
From coast to coast
Lord guide me soft
From coast to coast
Lord guide me soft
Commentary
< Post in progress >
But is King Billy a pet thing with you. Is there any political point to be made?
“Nah, not particularly. To tell you the truth, until I got into doing this it was a period that I knew sod all about. I’m pretty well up on the period before and after but, apart from the obvious stuff, I didn’t know much about William Of Orange. So I guessed a lot of it, like. And it was weird ‘cos a lot of it turned out to be true.
“Like he couldn’t stand music apparently. Typical Dutch. Ha! When he came to court he got rid of all James’ musicians. I didn’t know this but I’d already written the thing about ‘Can’t dance, can’t sing / Cursed for ever is William Of Orange‘.”
So he isn’t a personal hero of yours?
“No, but he was organised, he knew what he was doing. The fellow before him had been pretty disorganised. They had the right idea then. If the king was crap they got rid of him …
“… So you’ve got to admire William for knowing what he was doing. Plus I just think the idea is hilarious. This Dutch bloke walking into one of the greatest countries in the world and just taking it over.”
Mark E. Smith, interview with NME. See Maconie, 1988, p.49.
“Guide Me Soft” appeared on the CD and cassette formats of I Am Kurious, Oranj (1988) – it’s not on the LP. Mark E. Smith gets the sole credit. According to The Track Record, the track features a sample from “Hip Priest“. Apparently never played live by the group, “Guide Me Soft” also wasn’t part of the original ballet, I Am Curious, Orange.
It’s not a universally appreciated song. Tommy Mackay speaks for many when he says, “Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz… Wake me up when it’s over.” (2018, p.103), but it does have its proponents. Dave Thompson, in what is otherwise not a positive assessment of I Am Kurious, Oranj, includes “Guide Me Soft” in the “when it’s good, it’s excellent” category of album tracks, noting its “near detuned acoustics” and “tipsy mumbling” (2003, p.104.). Steve Pringle’s assessment is neutral: “… little more than two scratchy chords (from what sound like an unamplified electric guitar), an indistinct bass rumble and a skeletal glockenspiel.” He also notes its “modest lyric… delivered in a wilfully tuneless croon.” (2022, p.208).
The lyrics take the form of a prayer, with M.E.S. seemingly in character as William of Orange/William III.
“I come for your goods”: the genealogy of a migratory anecdote
At the original Annotated Fall at doomby.com, user @Crimm pointed out, brilliantly, that this line is probably based on a “slip of the tongue” attributed to William III: “I come for your good, I come for all your goods” (see the entry for “Guide Me Soft”, comment #1, 27 February 2018). @Crimm helpfully cited their source (which seems unlikely to have been Mark E. Smith’s), which they had found in Google Books. Here is the relevant passage:
Is not this embarrassment more or less the case with every man in a high station, who has not a complete knowledge of the idioms of the language he is to speak in? King William the Third, in answering, extemporaneously, a loyal address upon his first landing in England, when he meant to say, I come for your good, for the good of you all, unluckily said, “I come for your good, for ALL YOUR GOODS!” This was enough to shut his mouth ever after.
Source: Waterhouse, Benjamin (1831). An Essay on Junius and his Letters. Boston: Gray and Bowen. p.12, footnote. Available in The Internet Archive.
I did some follow-up research, and pointed out in response to @Crimm that although some published versions of this evidently apocryphal anecdote are about William III or his retinue, the cast varies: other versions concern George I or his entourage, among other targets. I believe the phrase for this phenomenon is “migratory anecdote”. It’s an urban legend, or more precisely a political joke, gone ‘viral’, adapting to new contexts over time.
The Waterhouse version does not contain all the elements found in other versions of the story. At root, the anecdote is satire at the expense of a foreign-born monarch or aristocrat, in which a linguistic misunderstanding accidentally reveals a predatory truth (most versions are hostile to the outsider, but there are a few where this is not the case). Some versions make fun of the foreigner’s accent: “goot” sometimes substitutes for “good”, for example. In many versions, a ‘witty local’ delivers a punchline which is missing from Waterhouse; sometimes the local is named, but sometimes they are an anonymous member of an indigenous mob.
Warning: The write-up of my research is, inevitably, extremely long and detailed. If you are really sure you want to read it, click here at your own risk.
The Archetype (1730)
The 1831 date of @Crimm’s source is relatively late; the story was over a century old by then.
The central pun on “good” (wellbeing) and “goods” (property) is likely to be a very old one, so tracing its origin is probably impractical. I have found that it occurs in a mid-seventeenth century tract:
O how many Invaders hath England had! as well as those poor souls, now under the Altar crying, how long Lord? Have not the Irish invaded? and were not more sent for to invade? and are they not called Roman Catholic subjects, to prepare them to be the better entertained by the disaffected subjects here? have not Scotland invaded? and the Welch invaded? the Walloones invaded? and what think you English men, did they come for your good? or for your goods? for your cure? or for a curse? to save you? or to destroy you?
Source: Beech, William (1650). A View of England’s Present Distempers, occasioned by the late revolution of government in this nation… Together with some motives, grounds and instructions to the Souldiery, etc. London: William Raybould. p.53. Available via Google Books.
Note that this predates both William III (who invaded Britain in 1688 and reigned from 1689 to 1702) and George I (who reigned from 1714 to 1727).
The earliest more-or-less complete version of the anecdote that I have managed to find so far doesn’t mention William of Orange or George I. Dating from 1730 (and therefore postdating William III and George I), it comes from a satirical book about British life supposedly written by an Ottoman envoy and physician named Ali Mohammed Hadgi, and translated from the original Arabic by Anthony Hilliar. But Hadgi is fictional and Hilliar is the actual author. The book begins, wonderfully, “The Britons are a people happy in their climate, miserable in themselves…”
Here, then, is what I am tentatively treating as the archetype of the anecdote (I have ignored the idiosyncratic italicisation and corrected and modernised some of the spelling of the original):
A foreign duchess, who has resided some time in England, and against whom the rabble had conceived many unjust prejudices, passing in her sedan through London, was greatly insulted by them. Her Grace, to pacify the mob, told them, she was come for all their goods: Ay, d-mn you, cry’d the Fellows, and for all our Chattels too.
[Hadji, Ali Mohammed] (1730). A Brief and Merry History of Great-Britain: containing an account of the religions, customs, manners, humours, characters, caprice, contrasts, foibles, factions, etc. of the people. Dublin: James Hoey. pp.35-36. Available in Google Books and the Internet Archive.
This source is sometimes dated earlier than 1730, but on internal evidence I see no reason to dispute the stated date.
Notice that in this early version, the duchess is anonymous, and her nationality is not specified.
It is also important to point out that this is not the only story of a woman associated with royalty being confronted by a hostile crowd while travelling in a carriage:
Nell enjoyed being back in the (likely) town * of her birth, and her refuge during the plague. During the day she took rides through the streets to visit some of her old haunts. It was on one such occasion that her coach was mistaken for Louise’s ** and surrounded by an angry mob of Whig sympathisers, who banged on the sides and poured forth their curses. Nell signalled the driver to halt and, sticking her head out of the window, cried out good-humouredly, ‘Pray, good people, be civil, I am the Protestant whore.’ Immediately, the curses turned to cheers, caps were tossed in the air, and a path cleared for her coach. Waving and smiling, she passed on.
Beauclark, Charles (2005). Nell Gwyn: mistress to a king. New York: Atlantic Monthly Press. p.307. Available in The Internet Archive.
* In Beauclark’s narrative, this takes place in Oxford, 1681. However, he also says that “Three cities have been put forward as the birthplace of Nell Gwyn – London, Oxford and Hereford – but in each case the evidence is weak.” (p.9).
** “Louise” is Louise de Kéroualle, the French mistress of King Charles II, and by implication the “Catholic whore”.
Inevitably, there are different versions of the Nell Gwyn story in circulation. For my purposes, it suffices to note that Nell Gwyn lived 1650-1687, and that therefore you would imagine any story about her would predate stories about William III or the Hanoverians. However, it seems the earliest published version dates to 1774, which is later than the earliest published version of the goods and chattels anecdote, with which it shares the motif of a woman travelling in a carriage being confronted by a mob. So although Nell Gwyn predates William III and George I, it could be that the goods and chattels anecdote influenced the Protestant whore anecdote rather than vice versa. The similarity hasn’t, so far as I know, been pointed out before. On the other hand, is the similarity so great? There isn’t a strong reason to think the stories are genetically related.
See MacLeod, Catharine and Alexander, Julia Marciari (2001). Painted Ladies: women at the court of Charles II. London: National Portrait Gallery. p.168; see also Conway, Alison (2010). The Protestant Whore: courtesan narrative and religious controversy in England, 1680-1750. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, in which it is noted that “This anecdote is repeated in almost every Gwyn biography that has been written… These sources do not provide primary source material to document their claims.” (p.186, note 3). Nonetheless, Conway thinks the incident did occur, and that the story existed as an oral tradition (see Conway, Alison (2006). “Known Fact or Urban Legend? Nell Gwynn’s Oxford Pronouncement.” Notes and Queries, Vol. 53 (2), June, pp.209-210 [Link]).
I am more sceptical than Conway, both about the “Oxford Pronouncement” and the goods and chattels anecdote. But both could be based on real events, and I cannot prove that they are not. Nell Gwyn could have said the words attributed to her, somewhere, and of course I defer to Conway’s expert assessment of the nature of the relevant evidence. And, also, a foreigner in England could have said “I have come for your goods”, and could have received the sarcastic reply, “And our chattels too”.
So although an examination of the histories of the goods and chattels anecdote leads me to question its provenance, I of course acknowledge that it could have circulated orally prior to emerging in print (a point Alison Conway makes about the Nell Gwyn story). The credibility of the anecdote is still, in my view, undermined by the fact that it doesn’t appear in any sources contemporary to the events, and that it takes the form of a joke pressed into propagandist service. Also, the same punning exchange is unlikely to have occurred in both Williamite and Hanoverian contexts, although that doesn’t necessarily mean it didn’t happen in either of them.
Is a Williamite or Hanoverian origin is more likely? If pushed, I would suggest that it is probably significant that the 1730 archetype is closer in form to some Hanoverian variants than to any of the Orange-Nassau cluster of variants, and that, after all, 1730 is only three years after George I’s death in 1727.
In what follows, versions of the goods and chattels anecdote are classified into clusters by content or cast, and organised chronologically by source.
A. The Orange-Nassau Cluster
– A.1 The Bentinck Variant
William Bentinck (1649-1709) was a ‘favourite’ of William of Orange, who was made Earl of Portland in 1689 (reviving an extinct title).
Bentinck was often referred to as “Mynheer Bentinck”. “Mynheer” (or “mijnheer”, “meneer”, “minheer”, and other variants) is a Dutch equivalent of the German phrase “mein herr”, meaning “mister” or “sir” – a form of address for a gentleman.
For more on Bentinck see: Onnekink, David (2006). “‘Mynheer Benting Now Rules over Us’: The 1st Earl of Portland and the Re-Emergence of the English Favourite, 1689-99.” The English Historical Review, Vol. 121 (492), June. pp.693-713. Available: Jstor.
The earliest published association of Bentinck with the anecdote that I have so far discovered dates to 1771, in the context of a contemporary case involving the then Duke of Portland, but there are four subvariants, which I call the Price Recension (the earliest one), the Wynn Recension, the Butcher’s Recension, and the Cumbrian Recension.
– – A.1.1 The Price Recension (1771)
The late decision of the House of Commons in favour of the Duke of Portland in a matter of private property, puts us in mind of the saying of a Welsh gentleman to his predecessor Minheer Bentinck upon the famous opposition against his exorbitant grants in the principality of Wales. Minheer Bentinck had thought proper, in his broken English, to address the representatives of that county with a view to slacken their endeavours. He begun by acquainting the company, “Gentlemen, gentlemen, I be come here for all your goods.” “Aye, by G-d (says Mr. Price *) and our chattels too.”
Source: The Cambridge Chronicle and Journal, Vol. IX (435), 23 February 1771. p.1. Available via: newspapers.com.
* “Mr. Price” is presumably Robert Price (1655-1733). Price led a campaign against King William III’s grant of Welsh land to Bentinck c1695. For more on Price, see: Evans, E.D. (2013). “A Welsh Lawyer In Six Reigns: Robert Price (1655–1733).” Transactions of the Honourable Society of Cymmrodorion, New Series, Vol. 19. pp.57-82. Available online.
The obvious implication of the writer recalling the “saying of a Welsh gentleman” is that it predates 1771. But if so, and if it was previously published, I haven’t found it yet.
The decision referred to is part of a long-running legal case involving William Cavendish-Bentinck, 3rd Duke of Portland. Cavendish-Bentinck inherited the title in 1762 and died in 1809. In 1767, James Lowther, the 1st Earl of Lonsdale, had successfully petitioned for Cavendish-Bentinck’s ownership of estates in Carlisle, Cumberland, to be revoked on the grounds that the use of the land was breaching the rules of the grant. The case grew out of a political dispute and was the occasion of a notable pamphlet war until it was finally resolved in the Duke of Portland’s favour in 1776. However, the legal battle left him near-bankruptcy and he ended up having to sell the land.
Here’s another version:
Mynheer Bentinck, ancestor to the present Duke of P-, having obtained an extraordinary grant of Crown Lands in Wales, there was a great opposition to it by the gentlemen of the country. Mr. B. went down himself and convened all that were concerned, and told them in his broken English, “Gentlemen, me be come down for all your goods. “Ay, by G-d,” said Mr. Price, “and our chattels too, I believe.”
Source: [Croft, John] (1792). Scrapeana: fugitive miscellany. Place of publication and publisher unnamed. p.227. Available in Google Books.
– – A.1.2 The Wynn Recension (1773)
Some iterations of the story substitute Sir Watkin Wynn(e) (one of the Williams-Wynn baronets, presumably the Jacobite 3rd Baronet (d. 1749), for Robert Price. The earliest source of this variant is a book of material posthumously attributed to Philip Stanhope, 4th Earl of Chesterfield (1694-1773):
When Mynheer Bentinck, grandfather to the present Duke of Portland, went to Wales to be present at a meeting of the gentlemen of that country, he attempted to make a speech in broken English, and addressed them in the following manner: Gentlemen I be com deer for all your goods; “Ay, ay,” replied Sir Watkin Wynn, “and our chattels too.”
Source: Lord Chesterfield’s Witticisms; or, the grand pantheon of genius, sentiment, and taste. Containing… London: Richard Snagg, 1773. p.59. Available via The Internet Archive.
This version of the story was plagiarised almost word-for-word nearly twenty years later:
When Mynheer Bentinck, grandfather to the present Duke of Portland, went to Wales to be present at a meeting of the gentlemen of that country, he attempted to make a speech in broken English, and addressed them in the following manner: Gentlemen I bee come here for all your goods. Aye, aye, replied Sir Watkin Wynne, and our chattles too.
Source: The Funny Jester, or, the cream of harmony and humour. A grand collection… Compiled by Sir Toby Tickleside. Gainsbrough: J.M. Mozley, 1791. p.65. Available via The Internet Archive.
– – A.1.3 The Butcher’s Recension (1802)
Where the butcher has parachuted in from, I don’t know!
The Earl of Portland, who came over with King William, being once haranguing a multitude in favour of his master, said, “I do assure you he be come for your goots.” – “No doubt of it,” hollows out a butcher, “and our chattels too.”
Source: New Joe Miller; or, The Tickler. Containing Near Two Thousand Good Things...Vol II. 2nd edition. London: J. Ridgway, 1802. p.106, para 311. Available via Google Books.
This version can also be found in the following sources:
- The Merry Companion: or new jest-book containing a great variety of original anecdotes, and of other selected articles, as well as a copious collection of epigrams, etc. 2nd ed., corrected and revised. Leipzig: C.E. Kollmann, 1818. p.102, para 270. Available via HathiTrust. [In this version, “goots” becomes “goats”.]
- Keane, Percival (ed.) (1873). Good, Bad, and Indifferent. A Book of Jests and Anecdotes. London: Simpkin, Marshall, and Co. p.87. Available in Google Books. [“The Earl of Portland, who came over with King William, once haranguing a multitude in favour of his master, said, “I do assure you he be come for your goots.” – “No doubt of it,” halloos out a butcher, “and our chattels too.” [From an old edition of “Miller;” the same story is told of Louise de Querouaille, Duchess of Portsmouth, mistress of Charles II. – Ed.]”]
– – A.1.4 The Cumbrian Recension (1843)
In 1843 several newspapers printed accounts of a meeting of the Anti-Corn Law League, during which a speaker refers to the story while commenting on the forthcoming parliamentary by-election in Kendal, Cumbria, which took place in November following the death of the sitting MP. Henry Warburton, the Radical candidate, defeated George Bentinck, the Conservative candidate. The following passage is taken from a representative report of the pre-poll meeting:
Mr. Moore said that Kendal had been canvassed by Mr. Warburton, and two-thirds of the constituency had promised to support him as a free trader. He was to be opposed, it was said, by a Mr. Bentinck, a gentleman of Dutch extraction. His ancestor came over with William, and on one occasion, in addressing a constituency, said, “Gentlemen, I come here for all your goods;” to which someone immediately responded, “And our chattels too;” but he believed that in Kendal Mr. Bentinck would find that he would receive neither “goods nor chattels.”
Morning Herald, 27 October 1843, p.6.
– A.2 The Brixham Variant
– – A.2.1 The Spence Recension (1820)
– A.3 The True Briton’s Variant (1772)
The Morning Chronicle carried on its front page a long letter from ‘A True Briton’ (who was a regular correspondent, of the nature of columnist) concerning Robert Price’s campaign against William III’s grant of Welsh land to William Bentinck (see A.1, above). ‘Briton’ may have been True, but he was not Accurate, since his letter incorrectly states that the land was granted to William III’s father. But in any case, ‘A True Briton’ ends his letter with a unique version of the anecdote. Nobody else, as far as I know, has attributed the exchange to a Dutch soldier and a publican.
… which puts me in mind of a Dutch soldier who came over with the Prince of Orange, and quartered on a publican in Lambeth, who having a quarrel with the publican, the fellow being very saucy and abusive, the publican reproved him; but the Dutch soldier answered, “Me be rite, me be rite; me will have it so, for we be come for all your goods.” “Aye, d-n you, says the publican, I fear you are, and for all our chattels too, before you leave us.”
‘A True Briton’ (1772). Morning Chronicle and London Advertiser, #1082, 10 November. p.1.
B. The Hanoverian Cluster
Two variants of the goods and chattels anecdote concern Hanoverian aristocrats in carriages being confronted by a mob. One branch involves George II’s daughter Princess Amelia, and another branch involves George I’s mistresses (or alleged mistress in one case).
It will be recognised that the story of the anonymous Duchess in our 1730 archetype was published just a few years after George I’s death in 1727, and that it resembles these two families of variants.
Ragnhild Hatton’s highly regarded 1978 biography of George I (George I: Elector and King) provides useful historical background to the goods and chattels anecdote. I have reproduced her version below under “Twentieth Century Recensions.”
Relevantly, Hatton comments on the Hanoverian court’s knowledge of English, noting that “George’s knowledge of English was not extensive, but it was not as limited (or non-existent) as once believed.” (1978, p.130). She describes the anecdote as “probably apocryphal” but nonetheless uses it as evidence of how common “faulty plurals” (like “goods” instead of “good”) were among “contemporary Germans in England.” (1978, p.131).
– B.1 Amelia’s Variant (1786)
Princess Amelia was the daughter of George II and Queen Caroline. Amelia died on 31 October 1786, after which her name was attached to the goods/chattels anecdote in the newspapers.
An ANECDOTE.
Source: The Weekly Entertainer, and West of England Miscellany, Vol. 8 (202), 13 November 1786. p.468. Available via The Internet Archive.
A number of the populace having collected round the carriage of Queen Caroline, several years since, when the Princess Amelia was in it, the Queen hinted to the Princess that it was a favourable opportunity to make a speech to them. On this the Princess, letting down the glass of her carriage, began – “Mine peoples, we be come here for your goods.” – “Yes, d-n me (replied a fellow in the crowd), for our goods, and our chattles too!”
– B.2 King George I’s Variant (1788)
When George the First came to the throne he spoke in broken English, “Dat he was come for all their goods,” “Yes, by G-d,” says a blunt fellow, “and for all our chattels too.”
Source: The Times (1788), 2 August. p.2.
The Times was copied by other newspapers:
- Salisbury Journal (1788), 4 August. p.3.
– – B.2.1 The Athenaeum Recension (1865)
“Your story of ‘for our goods’,” says a Correspondent, “reminds me that George the First when he landed in England said to some of the crowd assembled, ‘I come for your goods,’ (meaning for your welfare), and that one of the crowd replied (alluding to the good things the Germans would pick up), ‘Aye, and chattels too, I expect.’”
Source: The Athenaeum, issue 1980, 7 October 1865. p.471. Available via The Internet Archive.
The “story of ‘for our goods’” that the Athenaeum‘s correspondent is referring to appeared in issue 1978, dated 23 September 1865, p.403: “The native land of the Davenports, which they have quitted to come to us, “for our goods,” (to quote the excuse used by Madame Walmoden, of chaste memory, when she and another titled German courtesan were rabbed by a London mob,) seems, at last, waking up to some sense of the stupid infamy of these so-called spiritualists…”
Note that the mention of “Madame Walmoden” is a reference to Amalie von Wallmoden, Countess of Yarmouth (1704-1765), mistress of King George II.
The Athenaeum‘s story was repeated more-or-less word-for-word in many other publications. You can tell The Athenaeum is the ultimate source because either it is cited by name, or the unique-to-The-Athenaeum parenthetical clarifications are reproduced:
Athenaeum cited:
- South Bucks Free Press (1865). “Epitome of News: British and Foreign”. Vol. IX (463), 14 October. p.5.
- The Worcester Herald (1865). “Gleanings”. Vol. 73 (3800), 14 October. p.6.
- The Australian Journal (1866). “Facetiae and Scraps”. Vol. 1 (21), Week ending 20 January. p.336. Available in Google Books.
Athenaeum uncited:
- The London Reader of Literature, Science, Art and General Information, “Facetiae”. Vol. 6 (141), 20 January 1866. p.382. Available via The Internet Archive.
- Family Herald: a domestic magazine of useful information and amusement (1866). “Random Readings”. Vol. 23 (1187), week ending 27 January. p.624. Available in Google Books.
- Penny Illustrated Weekly News (1866). “Varieties”. Vol. III (141), 24 February. p.591.
– B.3 The Maypole & The Elephant Variant
One of the most widely published variants of the goods and chattels anecdote focuses on George I’s alleged mistresses (specifically, the supposedly favourite pair he brought over from Hanover). They are not always named, but if they are, they are identified (not necessarily accurately) as:
- Ehrengard Melusine von der Schulenburg (1667-1743). She was given various titles including Duchess of Kendal (1719). Melusine was nicknamed The Maypole in England, on account of being very thin.
- Sophia Charlotte von Kielmansegg (1675-1725). She was made Countess of Darlington in 1722. Born Countess Sophia Charlotte of Platen-Hallermund, and therefore sometimes referred to as “Countess Platen” or “von Platen”, she married Baron Johann Adolf von Kielmansegg in 1701. Sophia was described by Horace Walpole as “enormous”, and was nicknamed “The Elephant”, or “The Elephant and Castle”.
Melusine was George I’s mistress; he had three children by her. But according to Ragnhild Hatton there is no evidence that Sophia – who was George I’s half-sister – was involved in a sexual relationship with the King:
Inevitably the foreign aspect of their new king and his retinue, coupled with George’s reserve in respect of his private life, gave rise to speculation and rumours. The fact that La Schulenburg and Sophia Charlotte von Kielmansegg often travelled in the same carriage probably started the story that they were both George’s mistresses… There is of course no reason why a half-sister should not be a mistress. The publicity given to early nineteenth-century scandals of incest may help to account for the persistent characterization of Sophia Charlotte as George’s mistress down to our own day, though some historians have assumed that incest had by then become fashionable because of the royal example set in the eighteenth century. Sophia Charlotte was, however, exceptionally devoted to her own husband, and incest was never imputed to George by anyone close to the royal circle. It should be noted that George’s mother went out of her way in 1701 to deny to a correspondent the truth of rumours that the then as yet unmarried Sophia Charlotte von Platen was George’s mistress: she stressed that, to her certain knowledge, it was not so, the nearest Sophia would go on paper with regard to the blood relationship between her son and his half-sister… In England the veiled hint of a physical relationship between them voiced by a confectioner of the royal household was regarded as scandalous by officials who found nothing shocking in the common talk of Melusine being the king’s mistress.
Hatton, Ragnhild (1978). George I: Elector and King. London: Thames and Hudson. pp.134-135. Available in The Internet Archive.
– – B.3.1 The Glasgow Recension (1823)
George I. imported two favourite mistresses with him from Hanover; Madam Schulemberg, afterwards Duchess of Kendal, and Madam Kilmansegge, whom he created Countess of Darlington. Both were extremely disgusting. The former being very spare and haggard in her appearance, and the latter, an overswoln female Falstaff, who receives in this, and many other songs of the period, the elegant appellation of Sow. These beauties afforded great scope for the sarcasms of the Jacobites, which, in many instances, were very biting and gross. One of them being insulted by a mob, cried out of her coach, in the best English she could, “Coot people, why do you wrong us? We be come for your coots.” ” Yes,” cried one of the crowd, “and for all our chattels too, I think. – See Lord Orford’s Reminiscences *
Jacobite Melodies: a collection of the most popular legends, ballads and songs of the adherents to the house of Stuart; with historical and explanatory notes (1823). Glasgow: Richard Griffin & Co. / London: T & J Allman. p.48, footnote. Available in The Internet Archive.
* Although the footnote asks us to “see” this source, the anecdote has not been copied verbatim from it.
The joke of the Sow, refers to the Countess of Darlington, a mistress of the latter *, whom he brought over with him from Hanover. Having been excessively fat, she never got any other name from the Jacobites than the Sow. It is reported of this lady, that being insulted by a mob one day, she cried out of her coach in the best English she could, “Coot peoples, vy do you wrong us? We be come for all your coots.” – “Yes, damn ye!” cried one of the crowd, “and for all our chattels, too, I think.”
Jacobite Minstrelsy; with Notes, and Historical Details in relation to the House of Stuart, from 1640 to 1784 (1829). Glasgow: Richard Griffin and Co. p.45, footnote. Available via HathiTrust.
* George I.
– – B.3.2 Russell’s Recension (1826)
The King had brought with him from Hanover two mistresses; one of them named Mademoiselle Schulemburgh, afterwards made Duchess of Kendal, the other the Countess Platen. The general opinion was, that these women and other foreigners imported at the same time, were intent only upon robbing the treasury and palace of money and jewels. The crowd did not hesitate to express their suspicion and dislike on every opportunity. One day a German lady of the court, assaulted by these maledictions, as she was passing in the street, put her head out of the carriage window and cried out, “Why do you abuse us, good people? We come for all your goods.” One of the crowd answered in a voice equally loud, “Yes, d-n you, and for all our chattels too.”
Russell, Lord John (1826). History of the principal states of Europe from the peace of Utrecht. Vol. II. London: John Murray. p.6. Available in The Internet Archive.
Russell’s version was reprinted in The Globe and Traveller 5 June 1843, p.3.
– – B.3.3 Clarke’s Recension (1832)
In the early part of his reign, or, at least, on his arrival in this country, George the First was far from unpopular; but his decidedly foreign appearance and manners, when they became known, lowered him materially in public estimation. His two German mistresses, who were created Duchess of Kendal, and Countess of Darlington, shortly after his accession, became seriously offensive to the people, by whom they were satirically called the may-pole and the elephant and castle. It is related of one of these ladies, that being abused by the mob, she put her head out of the coach, and cried, in bad English, “Good people, why you abuse us? We come for all your goods.” – “Yes, d-n you,” answered a fellow in the crowd, “and for our chattels too!”
[Clarke *] (1832). The Georgian era: memoirs of the most eminent persons, who have flourished in Great Britain, from the accession of George the First to the demise of George the Fourth. In four volumes. London: Vizetelly, Branston and Co. Vol. I, p.20. Available in The Internet Archive.
The Georgian Era gets an enjoyably vicious and thorough kicking in The Quarterly Review, April 1835. pp.448-473. Available at HathiTrust. The reviewer is anonymous, but appears to have been J.W. Croker **. Mind you, I haven’t fact-checked the review!
* There is no author or editor’s name visible on the scanned editions of the book available in The Internet Archive or HathiTrust: “Clarke” is the attribution given to the item in the British Library catalogue.
** “I am going to cut up ‘The Georgian Era’ for you – rare game; but I know not what else to do.” writes Croker in a letter to QR publisher John Murray dated 12 March 1835. Reproduced in Smiles, Samuel (1891). Memoir and Correspondence of the Late John Murray… London: John Murray. Vol II, p.380. Available in Google Books.
– – B.3.4 John Bull’s Recension (1840)
This is a condensed version of the story, in which an anonymous “John Bull” delivers the ‘chattels’ punchline. Here’s the earliest example I’ve found:
When George the First imported a mistress from Hanover, who was hissed by the populace, she called out from her carriage window – “Goot people, ve come for your goods!” “Yes, d- you, and chattels too,” was John Bull’s reply.
The Globe and Traveller (1840). No. 11,971. 9 October. p.2.
Repeated by many other newspapers, including:
- The Sun (1840). “From the evening papers of yesterday (From The Globe)”. No. 15,005. 10 October. p.4.
- Carlisle Journal (1840). “Miscellaneous Intelligence”. No. 2188. 24 October. p.4.
- The Northern Liberator and Champion (1840). Vol. IV (160), 7 November. p.7. [“your goods” becomes “your goots” here]
- The Argus, or, Broad-Sheet of the Empire (1840). “The Eyes of Argus”. Vol. II (94), 15 November. p.3. [“Good people, ve come for your goots.”]
- Northern Star and Leeds General Advertiser (1840). “Varieties”. Vol. IV (159). 28 November. p.3.
– – B.3.5 Twentieth Century Recensions
… nothing probably would have overcome the prejudice against the ladies who followed George to this country. These were the Countess Ehrengard Melusina von der Schulenburg, who, in 1716, was created Duchess of Munster in the Irish peerage, and three years after Duchess of Kendal, by which latter title she is more generally known, and the Baroness von Kelmansegg (née Platen), who was presently elevated to the dignity of Countess of Darlington. It was generally assured * that these ladies were the King’s mistresses, and they were accordingly disliked not only at Court but also by the mob. One of them when driving in London was assailed by terms of abuse – as she understand scarcely any English, she could only go by the tone of the voices – and putting her head out of the coach said: “Good people, why you abuse us? We come for all yours goods.” “Yes, damn you,” cried someone, “and for our chattels, too.” The man in the crowd only voiced the general opinion, and, it must be said, the general opinion was not far removed from the truth.
Source: Melville, Lewis (1925). Lady Mary Wortley Montagu: her life and letters (1689-1762). Boston/New York: Houghton Mifflin Company. p.105. Available via HathiTrust.
* I assume Melville intended “assumed” here.
Melusine and Sophia Charlotte shared a carriage which was stopped by an unfriendly mob. The following exchange then took place. La Schulenburg, ‘Good people, why do you plague us so? We have come for your own goods.’ Mob: ‘Yes, and for our chattels, too.’
Hatton, Ragnhild (1978). George I: Elector and King. London: Thames and Hudson. p.131. Available in The Internet Archive.
C. The Miscellaneous Cluster
The following reference works include a version of the anecdote:
- Robertson, Connie (ed.) (1988). The Wordsworth Book of Humorous Quotations. Ware, Herts: Wordsworth Editions. “We are come for your good, for all your goods.” p.72. Attributed to George II. Source not cited.
A version of the story is included in K. Merle Chacksfield’s Glorious Revolution 1688 (dated 1988, but actually published in August 1987 according to listings in the Bookseller – it was also reviewed by various newspapers in the autumn of 1987):
Then William’s own barge, bearing the Prince himself, was seen to be approaching. It was low tide, and the Prince’s boat grounded in the shallow water. He, standing up in the boat, said to the waiting crowd on shore, “Mine good people, I am come for your goods. I am come for all your goods” – meaning, in all probability, “for your good”. A Mr. Youlden replied, “You’m welcome,” to which William answered, “If I am welcome come and carry me ashore,” whereupon a Brixham fisherman by the name of Peter Varwell waded out to the boat and brought the Prince ashore on his shoulders.
Chacksfield, 1988, p.28.
Footnotes
- Obviously “William”, given the 1688 tercentenary theme of the ballet, refers to King William III (William II of Scotland), otherwise known as William of Orange. ↩︎
- In 1688, William of Orange invaded England, and James II fled into exile in France. Parliament decided James had abdicated and vacated the throne, and William and his wife Mary (who was the eldest daughter of James) were offered the Crown as joint sovereigns instead. These events are known as “The Glorious Revolution“. To Catholics it was far from “glorious” because it represented the overthrow of a Catholic King and the end of a period of religious toleration (from their point of view, Protestants would disagree). The phrase “glorious repression” might therefore be an ironic Catholic point of view. But if it’s William of Orange’s prayer then more likely it’s a too too-honest Protestant supremacist perspective. ↩︎
- “Glorious Revolution” is unambiguously the Protestant point of view. ↩︎
- “Coast to coast” might simply refer to William of Orange’s journey from Hellevoetsluis, Holland to Brixham, Torbay, England, in 1688, but I do have a feeling that the line is maybe quoted or paraphrased from somewhere. But where? I have no idea.
William Wordsworth’s sonnet, “William The Third” (originally published in Ecclesiastical Sketches, 1821, subsequently retitled Ecclesiastical Sonnets.) includes the lines, “Calm as an under-current, strong to draw / Millions of waves into itself, and run, / From sea to sea, impervious to the sun / And ploughing storm, the spirit of Nassau / Swerves not, (how blest if by religious awe / Swayed, and thereby enabled to contend / With the wide world’s commotions) from its end / Swerves not, diverted by a casual law.”
“Scotch Drink”, a poem by Robert Burns (1786), contains the lines, “Thee Ferintosh! oh sadly lost! / Scotland lament frae coast to coast! / Now colic grips, an’ barkin’ hoast / May kill us a’; / For loyal Forbes’ charter’d boast / Is ta’en awa’!” (See Eighteenth-Century Poetry Archive and “A Very Tall Tale”, blog post by the West Highland Museum).
Also, and really just for completeness, Coast to Coast were a pop group whose biggest hit, “(Do) The Hucklebuck” reached #5 in the UK Charts in 1981 (See Official Charts webpage). It was kind-of semi-covered by The Fall in a section of “C’n’C-Hassle Schmuck“. ↩︎ - See “I come for your goods”: the genealogy of a migratory anecdote“, above, for my unnecessarily deep dive into the history of this line, which Smith has appropriated from an apocryphal satirical anecdote about William of Orange. Historically, however, the satire is often directed at other targets, and William of Orange was not even the original target. ↩︎
Sources / Links
- The Annotated Fall: “Guide Me Soft” [Archived]
- Chacksfield, K. Merle (1988). Glorious Revolution 1688. Wincanton, Somerset: Wincanton Press. [Available in The Internet Archive]
- Hatton, Ragnhild (1978). George I: Elector and King. London: Thames and Hudson. [Available in The Internet Archive]
- Mackay, Tommy (2018). 40 Odd Years of The Fall. Place of publication unknown: Greg Moodie.
- Maconie, Stuart (1988). “The History Man Whose Head Expanded.” New Musical Express, 17 September. pp.48-49, 54.
- Pringle, Steve (2022). You Must Get Them All: The Fall on Record. [paperback edition]. Pontefract: Route Publishing Ltd. [Online store]
- Thompson, Dave (2003). A User’s Guide to the Fall. London: Helter-Skelter Publishing.
- The Track Record: “Guide Me Soft”