Chatting with Lady C - Princess Diana nanny rebuts falsities/Harry's real father/Meghan/Wallis/loot

hello ladies and gentlemen and welcome back to a new episode of chatting with lady c hello mom how are you i'm well thank you honey and you i'm very well thank you i really like um the necklace and the earrings and the bracelet and the ring yes it's a parole there's also a tiara and so many people have asked me to wear really nice stuff and of course it's a huge palava to get access to the nice stuff and to get it in and then to wear it and then to take it and get it safely delivered where it needs to be uh so it's out of harm's way uh that's so but i thought i'd do it and not so yeah but not with the tiara i thought that would be that much no well i actually think this is a bit much you know i mean i sort of think this is my elizabeth taylor look you know a caftan fabulous jewels i mean if one wore this was something else it would be different but you know since this is at home it has to be relaxed which rarely is very elizabeth taylor [Laughter] and she was not known for always hitting the right note taste wise so i'm slightly mocking myself but there we go all right so now also i suppose while i'm on the subject of or you know being responsive to what people have asked for several people have asked about that picture above the mantlepiece in the background it is by the greatest marine painter of all time constantine ivanovich ivazovsky he was a russian painter who painted primarily in the latter part of the 19th century second half of the 19th century and that is one of his rarer pictures of venice he didn't do many of venice he did a few and according to eugene that makes it far more desirable i love it do you like it yeah it's a very nice picture i love it that's right so for the mantelpiece in the family drawing room so what do you have for me today honey so for our questions today mary clark nanny to princess diana and her brother charles spencer went to the trouble of contacting the sunday times to deny his claims about their mother you have written extensively on this subject what can you tell us about where the truth lies well it's you know we seem to be living in a world where there are an awful lot of people with false memories because we live in a world where victimhood has become very desirable and over-privileged people who really should be grateful for the blessings that life has endowed them with are busy bleating about how deprived they are diana had that tendency and her brother charles does as well and mary clark i wrote i quote mary clark in both my diana biographies uh she was the most successful of all of the nannies for those two spencer children and they were a living nightmare to all of the other nannies but they were not with her and she went to great lengths to point out in the sunday times article that she approached them to to write the wrong that had been done by charles spencer about his mother but had also been done previously by diana you know that their mother wasn't maternal that their mother abandoned them it's all in my book the real diana francis shandkid did not abandon those children uh she left their father when she fell in love with peter shankier and she took the two children for the first several months with the nanny she took them back for christmas and johnny spencer her who was then johnny althrup her husband at the time he was not yet lord spencer he refused to allow her to take the children back to london she then sued him for a divorce alleging a cruelty because he used to beat her up uh he countersued alleging adultery her mother ruth lady family who was an insulable snob uh she was a great friend of richard abney who was uncle mickey's one of uncle mickey's best friends and in fact uncle mickey left him money when he died and richard aidan was a wealth of information about ruth when i was writing my first and second diary books ruth testified against her daughter and said the reason why she did it was she did not want her children being brought up in australia by her of a daughter and her wallpaper merchant husband she wanted them safe and sound on the sandringham estate where the diana was born and where the family lived in park house which had been given to the family by king george the fifth and queen mary uh if i remember correctly because uh ruth's husband and and ruth were friends of the duke and duchess of york at the time who became king george the sixth and queen elizabeth and to not divert too much uh francis to not divert too much ruth betrayed her daughter for snobbish reasons she wanted the children to be a part of the royal world and they did remain a part of the royal world and to her it was a price well worth paying francis never got over it uh there are stories that i was told that i recount including stories told by diana herself that every time the children had to be handed back their mother would cry and she was distraught she didn't want to hand them back yet charles spencer had the unmitigated goal in an interview to say that his mother wasn't maternal and so i'm delighted that mary clark approached the sunday times because you know it's unfair francis is not alive now uh so it you could say it doesn't really matter well i'm sorry you do not dishonor your mother's memory unfairly she also what was interesting is that mary clark made the point in the article that after france's lost custody of those children there was another trial where she tried to regain custody of them the children knew nothing about this both parents protected the children against the infighting that was going on behind the scenes to an extent not to the extent that they didn't know that there was tremendous animosity between their parents and it did definitely mark both charles and diana but i'm delighted that mary clark went to the trouble of redressing the balance because you know we we need to recalibrate our values in this modern world there is nothing admirable about being a victim when you are not sworn and there is nothing admirable about claiming to be deprived when you are privileged and there is nothing acceptable about being an ingrate when you should be grateful you know people need to get their values straight they need to be grateful for what they should be grateful for and condemnatory for what they need to condemn and the two cannot meet and you cannot confuse the two without confusing yourself but this also shows why harry to an extent is the complete mess he is because he has been brought up in a world by a mother and by an uncle in part neither of whom has a handle on or had a handle on the realities of their situation and instead of being grateful when they should be were busy bleating when they should not so on that note what do you think of what i said i think she is right if they've said something that she disagrees and she was the nanny so she was there quite a lot and she would have seen a lot of going on and she thinks that they were being nasty about the subject and she wanted to just get the truth out there i think she did right yeah neither charles no diana was ever prepared to give credit where it was due it's just iniquitous next question so for our next question today colleen mccollum lady c can you put to rest the idea that prince harry is charles's son and not james hewitt there have been recent reports that diana knew james hewitt two years before harry's birth which makes it likely that the resemblance between the two of them is more than accidental do you know who harry's father is is it james hewitt or prince charles do you know james hewitt what did the princess diana say about this well very interesting question and very timely considering the fact that harry has been brought up all his life with questions about his paternity but he has colluded with megan in introducing questions about his own child's birth and has allowed questions to be asked that should never have been asked which means that it doesn't bother harry at all or he's indifferent to the consequences of possible disturbance to his son i know james hewitt you know james hewitt you most likely don't remember james hewitt but he used to come to bone street occasionally when you children were young oh he's a very nice man he has been much maligned uh and he was completely thrown under the bus by diana over my first diana book but this is not the time to get into that if people want me to uh explain what happened i'm very happy to do it at some future date james told me on more than one occasion and diana told me as well that they first met at a drinks party at hazel west who was one of her ladies in waiting now hazel west and i have jamaican friends in common who also have confirmed this so i don't know why a mystery has uh arisen about this that there is no doubt that harry is prince charles's son james himself said that he was not his father that he didn't know diana at the time of harry's conception you only need to look at harry to see the placement of his eyes in his skull relative to his nose and his forehead to see that that is a mountbatten placement look at prince charles's photographs look at lord mountbatten's photographs who was prince charles's great uncle his grandmother's brother and you will see the battenberg placement directly passed down to harry that's one thing james and james is a redhead and so is harry but harry looks very much like diana's sister sarah who's also redhead charles spencer her brother has touches of ginger as opposed to being a flagrant redhead as did their father johnny spencer these rumors make for very interesting chatter and interesting reading but i am afraid they are just rumors diana did have a flirtation with somebody between the birth of william and harry and if i recall correctly it is in my first diana book if it's not in my first animal it most likely is in my second diana book so it's adding diana in private or the real dan or in both it's too long ago and i've written too much to remember what i wrote then and also as i've said before when you write something it gets edited it gets changed and you really don't remember what the edited product is you might remember what you've written but i mean we're now speaking about 30 years ago so i'm afraid that i do not remember absolutely everything i wrote in two books 30 and 20 something years ago i just don't uh i would be inhuman if i could remember such detail but diana did have a flirtation with henry pembroke now i first met henry pembroke in 1975 at a party at elizabeth balfour as she was then known as princess elizabeth of yugoslavia who was trying to set me up with henry uh he was recently divorced she thought he was the ideal barbara cartland hero which he was he was very tall very uh i felt no click and so i wasn't interested diana felt a click and they had a flirtation but there is no doubt that both those boys are charles's sons and diana you know was not dumb and there is no way she would have jeopardized her position or her children's prospects by dropping illegitimate children that was so close to the succession to the throne have you been child number three or four or five it might have been another matter but child one and two no i mean she was an aristocrat and she did know the rules of the game and she did play by them when it suited her and it certainly suited her to have legitimate children so i hope that this is the end of the matter but i know it's not going to be because this is like a bad penny that keeps on popping up this story every every few years you know it's okay so next question so for our final question today caramel bum did you cut it to wallace the duke always wanted this i certainly did curtsy to wallys i dropped a deeper curtsy to wallys every time i saw her than i ever dropped to the queen and i did it deliberately because i felt that wallis had been treated very unfairly oh she really was legally and by right a royal highness or the duke of winds uh it was very important to him that everybody acknowledged her regal status and i saw absolutely no reason to not do so and i always did it willingly happily and with alacrity and i should also say while i'm on the subject of wallis that when i spoke about her the last time i neglected to say a very important thing a comparison between wallys and megan that shows how completely divergent they were as characters wallace was not really motivated by money the way megan is motivated by money wallace was also not hypocritical and disingenuous and you know speaking through one side of her mouth when in fact she's going through the author oh wallace was not two-faced if you knew her or read her autobiography she's very upfront about the fact that she loved the things of this world and she did she had superb taste and she was known to be the greatest hostess on earth and she really was the greatest hostess on earth and she was tremendously stylish and loved luxury but she always put her principles first and i'll tell you how i know this to be a fact when wallys was married to her first husband wins spencer he was an alcoholic and he used to beat her up and they were separated then they got back together and the beatings continued and she separated from him finally she was in china for the reunion so to speak with wynn spencer she went back to america and decided she wanted a divorce her uncle saul who was one of the richest men in america and she was his sole heiress said to her wallace a warfield has never been divorced you cannot be divorced if you divorce your husband i am going to cut you out of my will he was worth two and a half million dollars which was maybe two or three hundred million today and she said well anka saul sorry i cannot be married to him he beats me up i want to be married to someone else and he said no you have to wait you cannot divorce you have to lead the life of the typical southern lady whose marriage hasn't worked and she refused to do it she got her divorce he cut her out of the will he also said to her wallis if you divorce wins spencer i am going to leave my money to a home for fallen women and did so you know he he made it absolutely clear that as far as he was concerned wallis was a fallen woman not because she would have had an affair on the side but because she had divorced her husband and he left his money to a home for fallen women but for that wallis would have been one of the great heiresses of her day she would have been richer than gloria vanderbilt who was known as one of the great heiresses of her day that tells me i don't know what it tells you but it tells me that wallys couldn't be bought and that she would not sell her soul for worldly gain she also had tremendous respect for the institution of the monarchy and she replicated for david once they were married a regal lifestyle very consciously and they were everything was absolutely coming faux and she was spontaneous about absolutely everything well megan of course has thrown two fingers to the world into where royalties concerned in the royal way and also there is no doubt that megan has kicked over the traces of a royal way of life and of the duty that a royal duchess should embark upon once she is a royal duchess to make money as she herself admitted she's done it for financial independence which when you're worth over 40 million dollars jointly with your husband is not financially independence it's greed and so and wallis was not greedy she loved luxury but when the chips were down she was honorable and she had principles and if she had to choose between them and money she chose them over money i don't think we can say the same of meghan markle because megan's one of her guiding principles is money and making money so that's it that's great i think she did a great choice you do oh yeah i think that was better her well-being and her happiness is a lot better than money definitely and the irony the irony is shortly after she divorced win spencer uncle saul died leaving his money to the home for fallen women i mean i'm sorry man you know it's not funny but you really do have to laugh you know well he was she was exactly saying what he thought of wallis wasn't here but for that wallis would never have endured or the contumely that she did she just wouldn't have because you know everybody was thought oh she's divorced but she's this great heiress and you know they would have uh found a way of accommodating her in a way that they did not because they were able to snare at her and say oh she's from nowhere and she's nothing and she's an adventurous and she's a gold digger whatever she was she was not a gold digger she wasn't and on that note i'll say thank you very much and do keep the questions coming in thank you well thank you everybody we hope you enjoyed this episode and if you did hit the like button subscribe and share with your friends thank you and goodbye

Channel: Lady Colin Campbell

Views: 98,423

Keywords:

Id: obmHGwvmsrY

Length: 27min 38sec (1658 seconds)

Published: Sat Oct 10 2020