Here is the script of a dialogue between the presenter Lucy Worsley and Alexandra Loske, from the University of Sussex, talking about Princess Charlotte's laboring
Lucy: He's talking here about a uterine discharge "of a dark green colour. That doesn't sound good.
Alexandra: No, this is a sign that the baby is in distress or already dead. It means the baby has been so badly affected by the process of labour, that it starts pooing in the womb and then swallowing this substance.
Alexandra and Lucy reads text together: Eventually, Charlotte does give birth, after 50 hours of labour. The baby is stillborn. They rub his body with salt and mustard but no animation was ever restored.
Lucy: That must have been so frustrating. He was legitimate, he'd come to term, he was the right gender, but then it all went wrong.
Alexandra: Exactly, this was the most important baby in the whole of Great Britain.
Lucy: And the mother seems to have survived, doesn't she?
Alexandra: She's doing reasonably well. She's quite composed and says 'Well, if this is God's will, then, that's it. And she feels tired, she wants to rest and at midnight Charlotte started complaining about a singing in her ears and she feels unwell, she throws up. and very tragically, she dies at about 2:30 in the morning'
At the beginning of the dialogue Lucy uses present tense talking about the matter or a situation. After reading a historical text written by Sir Richard Croft, she suddenly changed the tense from present to past. The dialogue turns from situation to history. Alexandra follows the suit. And then out of a sudden, she changes the tense back to present again. Why does she do so? What's so special about the sentence that she is using past tense?
Strangely, there are two tenses in one sentence
They rub his body with salt and mustard but no animation was ever restored.
The whole dialogue can be found at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SN5XQk9Cr6k