] Have you got a reference for that, Caroline?

It's mentioned as such in Tomalin, Shields, LeFaye and Noakes- htey all assume that he wasn't. The interesting one,as always, is LeFaye- she's very scrupulous in her wording, and I've found that if she doesn't have proof of something, then she's quite clear that what she's talking about is only supposition. Some of the wilder theories she just refuses to touch. Yet she is very positive on this matter-not only that the Count misrepresented himself to Eliza nd Mrs Hancock, but also that they deceived him as to E's financial situation before the marriage.