Harriot Mellon - A Real Radical Heiress

I tire of reading reviews of historical romance novels claiming the heroine ‘wouldn’t have done that’ or ‘couldn’t have done that’, etc. There were plenty of women who went against society’s rules. However, they often had to pay the price for their actions, namely social ostracization or ridicule. But if they didn’t care, what was to stop them?

The story of Harriot Mellon is one of those that evidence that not all women in Regency England followed the rules set by society. I mentioned Harriot briefly in my post about women and bank accounts, but for Women’s History Month, let’s look closer at this actress whose unique story made her one of the richest women in England. But what’s most interesting is she kept control of her own money, even when she married, a feat which inspired my fictional heroine, Emily Reed, in my WIP The Radical Heiress.

A childhood on the move

Harriot Mellon didn’t begin life with the odds stacked in her favour. Born around 1777 to a wardrobe-keeper in a troupe of travelling players, and with uncertain paternity, she grew up in a world that polite society viewed with suspicion. Strolling players were often lumped in with ‘thieves and blackguards’, and actresses were viewed as little more than prostitutes.

By the age of 10 she was performing, and it didn’t take long for her talent to catch the right eye. Playwright Richard Brinsley Sheridan spotted her and brought her to London’s Drury Lane Theatre.

Her career blossomed. She became known for comic roles, her good nature and the ability to understudy acting giants like Sarah Siddons and Dorothea Jordan. By 1815, she was earning £12 a week, which was more than many women made in an entire year.

Mrs Sarah Siddons had worked hard to show that actresses were respectable and improved attitudes towards women in the profession. This certainly influenced Harriot, for she always behaved with propriety and employed a companion.

The actress who married a banker

While working in Cheltenham, Harriot’s life took a dramatic turn when she befriended Thomas Coutts, the much older, wealthy and influential banker behind Coutts & Co. Many suggested that she was his mistress, but several of Harriot’s biographers don’t believe this to be true.

From 1805, Coutts became Harriot’s patron, supporting her career and providing her with financial advice. He even introduced her to his 3 daughters, who had married into the aristocracy, something that they would never have permitted if they believed she was his mistress.

However, by 1811, Coutts had fallen in love with Harriot and wrote her over 60 love letters.

After the death of Coutt’s wife (who had had dementia for decades), Harriot (after much persuasion) agreed to marry Thomas in 1815. The marriage was kept secret at first, largely because his daughters were expected to explode with disapproval, and they did. While they seemed quite happy to accept the actress in a social capacity, they were unwilling to accept her as their stepmother.

The marriage appears to have been genuinely affectionate. Thomas had also advised Harriot on how to keep control of her own money by establishing certain terms in their marriage contract. Following his daughters’ treatment of his second wife, when Thomas died in 1822, he left Harriot his vast fortune, his properties and his 50% partnership in the bank.

Running Coutts & Co.

Harriot didn’t simply inherit a bank; she ran it, and she ran it well.

Harriot took an active role in decisions made in the business and promoted Thomas’s confidential clerk, Andrew Dickie, to partner in a groundbreaking move that strengthened the bank’s stability.

She also showed a surprisingly generous streak. Despite their fractured relationship, Harriot bought houses for Coutts’ daughters, supported her mother and stepfather, and made charitable donations to prisoners and others in need. She even attempted to mend relations with Thomas’s family by giving each daughter an allowance of £10,000 a year!

A scandalous second marriage

If Harriot’s first marriage raised eyebrows, her second caused an outright uproar. Once again, she was pursued by a rich man who fell head over heels for her. In 1827, at fifty (and again after much persuasion) she married William Beauclerk, Duke of St Albans, twenty-three years her junior.

Caricaturists had a field day. Society gossiped, and Harriot was scorned. But, as usual, the new duchess simply carried on. Again, Harriot secured control of her money and bank shares in the terms of her marriage contract, and it appeared her new husband was happy to relinquish control of what legally should have belonged to him.

She and the duke spent much of their time in Brighton, where she felt genuinely accepted by local society. One of the duke’s descendants has remarked that ‘Brighton people took to her more than other places’, and the blue plaque at Regency Square still marks the place of her residence there.

Despite being accused of devious and grasping behaviour in her acquisition of husbands, Harriot’s circle included admirers of real influence.

Her friend and famous author, Sir Walter Scott, said:

I have always found her a kind, friendly woman, without either affectation or insolence in the display of her wealth and most willing to do good if the means be shown to her.

A life well lived

Harriot Mellon died in 1837 as one of the wealthiest women in England. She left her husband a generous allowance and the use of 2 London properties. Eleanor Goddard, Harriot’s companion for almost 20 years, also received a generous annuity, but the bulk of her £1.8 million fortune (around £147.5 million today) went to Angela Burdett, Thomas Coutts’ granddaughter.

This wasn’t a simple handover. Harriot crafted her will with precision. Angela had to take the surname Coutts, could not touch the capital and would lose the inheritance if she married a foreigner. These conditions weren’t spiteful, but strategic. Harriot was determined to protect the bank’s future and keep it firmly in British hands.

What does Harriot’s story tell us?

Harriot Mellon’s legacy is far bigger than her wealth or titles. She reshaped what was possible for women in business long before Victorian respectability softened attitudes toward female independence.

Harriot’s story proves women could maintain control of their wealth and property, but it often depended on the type of man they married and his attitude towards her finances. Plus, despite opposition from the bank’s other male partners, she proved she could manage her husband’s company and do it well.

While receiving some spiteful backlash, Harriot endured it with grace and resilience and always maintained her respectability.

Framing Harriot’s story as a rags-to-riches tale undersells her. She wasn’t simply lucky. She was strategic, resilient, socially intelligent and financially astute. Harriot navigated a world that judged her harshly and rose to the highest ranks of society.

Her life really was, as she told Sir Walter Scott, ‘strange’ and ‘eventful’. But above all, it was extraordinary.