Mary Baddeley and Henry Clinton
While intended as just a little humorous commentary on Clinton obviously having forgotten to check his own narrative, I thought I should contextualise it a little more, and underpin his narrative with a little more historical substance.
I have written about the two before in an ask about morganatic marriages/ historical relationships characterised by starkly differing social backgrounds before, but given Mary Baddeley gets written off as Clinton's "mistress" even in the latest scholarship (I am looking at you, Julie Flavell!) I thought it would be quite interesting to shine a less biased light on their relationship based on my more casual post of yesterday.
Firstly, I'll give you a chronology of events underpinned with quotes from Clinton's lengthy memorandum which I fondly call How I Met Your (Quasi-)Stepmother, written nineteen years after they met for his two oldest sons. Clinton does not give any specific dates, but historian William B. Wilcox has previously been able to pinpoint estimated timeframes based on historical events.
Secondly, I'll take it upon myself to refute Clinton's statement made in the first quote by delving into his past and connecting Mary Baddeley and her son John, whom Clinton helped raise, to Maria Elizabeth Dixon, Clinton's previous partner in an affair, and their daughter Sophia.
Come for the history, stay for the kitchen psychology and family secrets.
Between June and November 1775: He first met Mary Baddeley when someone informed him the tale of a soldier rumoured to have been demoted because his pregnant wife refused to grant sexual favours to an officer of the regiment. Clinton, wanting to help, interviewed the couple and found the soldier, a certain Thomas Baddeley, work as a carpenter on the side and employed the pregnant wife, Mary Baddeley as his housekeeper.
He recalled that upon meeting her, he was instantly struck by her “very interesting appearance and history and situation.’’
January 1776: After some months as his employee, Clinton had not only discovered that Mary Baddeley's formidable managerial skills saved him a great deal in household expenses, but also his feelings for her, but kept, initially at least, quiet: “I could have been tempted even at that time to a connection with her, [but] her conduct was so uniformly discreet that I never dare[d] hint it.”
Respecting that Mary Baddeley, married, with a history of officers sexually harrassing her, only weeks away from giving birth and his employee, preferred keeping things professional did not keep him from fretting over what would become of her in his absence. Having originally wanted to take her with him, he had to face the reality of her being too far advanced in her pregnancy to travel and offered her "money to assist her in the difficulties she was about to enter" instead, which she however refused to take, insisting that the only money she would accept were "what she considered as her wages."
Between August 1777 and winter 1777/1778: After a great many events, both personal and on the grander scale of the war, have happened for both Clinton and Mary Baddeley, he is surprised to meet her again in New York and shocked to find she suffered "ill treatment from the chief of the reg[iment], childbirth, poverty, sickness, and finally shipwreck (and in winter) [...] She came to me a poor, wretched being; and I took her in."
At some point then, sure she found him at least likeable, he seems to have tested the waters and was met with polite refusal: "Such a character, a very fine person, [...] I could not withstand. But, though I am persuaded she had a great esteem for me, I never for many months could gain an inch."
Things however changed over time, presumably also because at this point in Clinton's narrative, the villain of his story emerges: Thomas Baddeley, who, according to Clinton, tried to get Mary to sleep with the general in exchange for a promotion and was an overall dubious character who lead a "dissipated" lifestyle.
One wonders how the initial event that brought the Baddeleys to Clinton's attention may have come about, though this is mere conjecture. Unwilling to de facto prostitute herself for the benefit of her husband, it seems Mary and Thomas grew apart- and Mary in turn, rather ironically, closer with the man Thomas wanted her to sleep with.
At this point, things between Mary Baddeley and Clinton got physical- to a certain degree, at least: "[t]hough she admitted me to certain liberties, I never could prevail on her to grant the last." While not comfortable (yet) to have sex with him, presumably because such would have been giving into what her husband wanted, "certain liberties" may have included basically any types of physically showing affection that can be executed with one's clothes kept on.
A rather surprising twist to the story came along however when Mary "detected her h[usband] in an intrigue with a common strumpet. She came to me directly, told him she would, and surrendered. Whether it was the sincerity and warmth of my attachment to her or the want of both in him I don’t know; but she certainly avoided him as much as she in decency could, and attached herself to me. And I will be free to own I did all I could to fix her in that disposition, by representing the danger of her connection with a man capable of such depraved conduct."
It is thus a little untruthful when Clinton, speaking of approximately 1781-1783 says "I never, as I hope for pardon from the great God, even had an idea of taking her from her h[usband], though I confess that under his tolerance ... I should ever have wished to continue a connection with her, as I had a son by her I was much attached to. His, the husband’s, unexpected death determined that business; and from that instant from duty and inclination I have been fixed to her, and have had many children by her."
A Tale of Two (Three?) Babies
Clinton is not being quite honest, possibly to protect the sensibilities of his legitimate heirs to whom he addressed his memorandum when he claims to have been "fixed to her" from the moment on the sudden death of her husband (which he irrationally blamed himself for, by the way; the man died of a fever) opened an avenue for safely continuing a relationship with Mary Baddeley. First off, they had been in a monogamous relationship for several years when Mary was pregnant with their first child, Henry, somewhere between 1780 and 1782, showing that baby Henry (d. 1797) was hardly his motivation to continue it; if anything, Henry may rather have been the logical, welcomed consequence of a long-term relationship in which both partners were already involved in raising a child together, Mary and Thomas Baddeley's son John.
If any child played a part in reassuring Clinton in his endeavour to win Mary Baddeley's heart, it was John (1776-1825):
Clinton had pretty much ever since meeting her for the first time in 1775 considered her, if not as a romantic partner initially, more as part of his family than a mere household servant.
This is evidenced by his immediate acceptance of her child with Thomas Baddeley as a non-negotiable part of (being together with) her, going so far as to even signal his willingness to take on the role of a father to the child in the sense that he was fully prepared to assume the responsibility for the care of mother and child required during the birth and postpartum period in his home, and when such revealed itself as impossible due to Mary Baddeley no longer being able to travel, he attempted to at least offer her financial support.
The baby, John Baddeley, once his mother and Clinton had reconnected and embarked upon a relationship, subsequently grew up in the Clinton-Baddeley household and was part of the ever-growing family:
John was introduced to Clinton's in-laws from his marriage to his late wife and aristocratic connexions, going so far that while his younger half-brother Henry was left in the care of attendants on the day Clinton endeavoured to introduce Mary to his family, John was brought along. He also received an inheritance from Clinton and of his six children, four were named in honour of members of the Clinton family: Paul Frederick Henry Baddeley, Harriet Elizabeth Baddeley, Augusta Charlotte Cobourg Baddeley and William Henry Clinton Baddeley. Only Grace Mary, the oldest (named for her mother and paternal grandmother) and the youngest, John Frazer Lodington Baddeley, do not share a connection to the Clintons through their name. It is also important to note that John was eighteen when Clinton died; his first child was born twelve years later, indicating that contact with his quasi-step-siblings, Clinton's legitimate children, continued over the years.
From John Baddeley's will, more a heart-wrenching farewell-letter to his wife and children than a distribution of his worldly effects, the picture of a man emerges whose character strikingly resembled Clinton's from his self-confessed "very anxious disposition" to a similarly close, involved and loving relationship with his own children: "remember me with affection as a parent who would have laid down his life to protect yours."
The quoted excerpts from John Baddeley's will.
But why was Clinton so protective of a child that was not even his, and even at a point in time when he could not have been sure he would ever be in a relationship with his mother?
Warburg, Germany, August 1760: Clinton's Forgotten Daughter
My theory is that in John Baddeley, Clinton saw history repeating itself; during the Seven Years' War, Clinton, then adjutant to the Hereditary Prince of Brunswick, appears to have stayed in Warburg in what's modern-day North Rhine-Westphalia, between the aftermath of the Battle of Warburg (31 July 1760) and the Prince's departure from the town (24 August 1760). The way matters look like, Clinton was not always attending to his superior; he did find time for a short-lived romance with a woman called Maria Elizabeth Preußen, a resident of the town, which resulted in the birth of a daughter, Sophia Dixon.
Little is known about Maria Elizabeth Preußen, but given that she must have married a Mr. Dixon between finding out she was pregnant and the birth of Sophia, it is highly likely she was widowed at the time she and Clinton had an affair, and presumably British, as the spelling of her middle name (in German, the spelling "Elisabet(h)" is more common) , her re-marriage to a British individual and subsequent move to Britain indicate.
Over the years, Clinton was in sporadic contact with the mother of his first-born child, but, as far as is documented at least, never met his daughter; it is highly probable that Clinton was not welcome at the Dixons' even when both families resided in London in order to not give any grounds to rumours that might hurt the reputation of Mrs. Dixon or her daughter, or her husband may not have been fond of the idea of his wife's former affair being back in her life; last but not least, and which seems the most plausible explanation to me, given Sophia was legally the daughter of her mother's husband and growing up in a traditional family, the parents could simply have decided that it would be in the interest of Sophia's wellfare if her biological father was not involved in her upbringing.
Fifteen years later, when Mary Baddeley was in a similar situation as Elizabeth Dixon, pregnant and with the soldier-father of her child unavailable in a wartime environment (or in the case of Thomas Baddeley, utterly disinterested in his child to the point he does not even seem to have fought for custody of his son, who would have lived with Clinton alongside his mother), he may have felt that it was his duty to be helpful now that he was in the position to be of assistance to the expecting mother, a belief that was likely only further consolidated by his romantic intentions for Mary Baddeley. Perhaps John became, if not an ersatz, in some way however a second chance for Clinton to prove himself as an involved, responsible father, a role more important to him than his title of general, as letters between him and his cousin, the Duke of Newcastle, evidence in which he threatens to desert in order to be reunited with his children in England.
In his will, Clinton provided both for Mary Baddeley, and on a smaller scale for Maria Elizabeth Dixon by granting both women annuities of £200 and £100 respectively, as well as providing Sophia with an inheritance of £1,000, the same sum each of his children by Mary Baddeley received (albeit locked in a trust until they reached majority).
Clinton providing annuities for the mothers of his combined six illegitimate children, ranging from approximately 24 (Sophia Dixon) to one year of age (Frederick Clinton-Baddeley) at his death, in his will. I have additionally highlighted the information he gives on Maria Elizabeth Dixon, the only information on her I was able to find.
While we do not have any (yet published) contemporary evidence of Mary Baddeley's side of the story, every indication on Clinton's part points to the fact that his intentions for her transcended a mere sexual relationship.
Contrary to that, he sought an active role in the life of her infant son and was attentive to the welfare of mother and son to the point he embraced the latter as part of his family, integrating him not only into his growing family with Mary Baddeley, but also seeking to build a relationship between John and his legitimately-born children from his marriage to Harriet Carter.
While generally an involved parent, Clinton did not have the opportunity with his illegitimate daughter Sophia Dixon, whose mother was in a somewhat similar situation as Mary Baddeley when the latter joined his household in the latter half of 1775, perhaps thus inspiring him to attempt providing support to the latter even when romantic motives were yet out of the question after not having been in the position to do so for Sophia's mother 15 years earlier.
As far as can be ascertained, their relationship was at all times monogamous, and Clinton, even almost two decades after they met, spoke of his feelings Mary Baddeley, who remained his partner until his death in 1795. Their relationship appears to have been marked by care, affection, and respect; Clinton repeatedly highlighted his blind trust in Mary Baddeley's skills managing his finances better than he had previously done and mentions her character having captivated him.
They supported each other mutually in different ways; Clinton blindly relied on her support managing his household and finances while in America, whereas he provided Mary Baddeley, and her son, with a safe, and stable environment.
While the couple never married, a choice that may have been made because Clinton heavily relied on and personally esteemed his sister-in-law Elizabeth Carter who had raised his (legitimate) children in his absence and to whose position in the family a new wife would have been a potential threat (the reason why Clinton established a seperate household for Mary Baddeley, and even included Elizabeth Carter in the process of house-hunting). Besides, they had nothing to gain by solemnising their union after having lived openly together for five years and sharing a son by the time Mary's husband had died.
Albeit not complying with the contemporary social standards for what a family should look like, they seem to have been happy as a couple, and a family that, rather than a ménage of a rich patron and his mistress, bears a resemblance to more modern concepts of blended families.
Clinton's memorandum as quoted in Willcox, William Bradford: Portrait of a General. Sir Henry Clinton in the War of Independence. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1964.
Will of Sir Henry Clinton of Corpham, Shropshire (PROB 11/1271/91), National Archives Kew [accessed 19 February 2022; Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0].].
Will of John Baddeley of Dublin (PROB 11/1709/338), National Archives Kew [accessed 19 February 2022; Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0].].
