Portrait of Catherine II.—Her opinion of D’Eon and its fidelity—Portrait of Lord Sandwich—Of the Duke de Nivernois—D’Eon, secretary of Embassy in London—Two ‘smart pieces of work’—Kindness to French prisoners—Treaty of Peace with England—D’Eon takes the ratifications to Versailles—Delight of King and Ministers—The Marquise de Pompadour—The Count de Guerchy nominated ambassador at St. James’—The Duke de Praslin’s estimate of his qualities—The Duke tests D’Eon’s loyalty towards himself—The Prince de Soubise at Villinghausen—D’Eon’s respect for the Broglios—Is invested with the Cross of Saint Louis.
Among D’Eon’s acquirements was accuracy in the delineation of portrait character, amusement in which he freely indulged. Describing Catherine II. during the last days of Peter’s short reign, he says:—
‘The Empress is of prepossessing appearance; she is generally of an amiable disposition, although very cunning, intriguing, and vindictive. Her greatest ambition is to control affairs of importance; she is competent for administration. Her sympathies are entirely English, although she speaks French with great facility of expression. She is very fond of reading, and most of her time, since her marriage, has been spent in devouring the works of such modern French and English authors as treat most vigorously and most liberally on morality, nature, and religion. A work condemned in France is sure to meet with her entire approval. She is never without the works of Voltaire, ‘De l’Esprit’ of Helvetius, encyclopædias, and the writings of Jean Jacques Rousseau. She prides herself on her courage, on being strong-minded and a philosopher; in a word, she is by nature a little savante. She suggests to her husband changes that may result in the fall of this Emperor of apes, in the hope of reigning in his stead as regent.’[72]
Notwithstanding the sagacity and exactitude, to use the Duke de Broglie’s own words, with which this portrait is drawn, testifying to a certain amount of personal knowledge of the subject, the duke, in support of his theory that D’Eon could not at any time have been reader (lectrice)[73] to Elizabeth, reproduces a letter of questionable accuracy from Catherine II. to Grimm, to show how complete a cipher he must have been at the Russian Court. It is dated April 13, 1778.
‘The Empress Elizabeth never had a reader’ (lectrice) wrote her Majesty, ‘and M. or Mademoiselle D’Eon was not better known to her than to me, who have only known him as a sort of political drudge (galopin politique) in the service of the Marquis de l’Hôpital and of the Baron de Breteuil.’[74]
We need not stop to inquire why the Empress Catherine, attached as she was, when grand-duchess, to the party against which all D’Eon’s assaults, by command of his sovereign, were directed; and who sat up for nights, translating into French from the Russian, for the edification of Sir Hanbury Williams, all such decisions of the Council as were favourable to France, should have thus expressed herself with regard to the secretary of a brilliant French Embassy; and this in his adversity, twenty-two years after his certain appearance at the Court of Russia for the first time. Apart from D’Eon’s own observation that he dined occasionally at the table of the grand-duke, there exists a letter which tends to controvert the assertion of her Majesty.
The Marquis de l’Hôpital to M. D’Eon.
‘Plombières, August 13, 1762.
‘... And so the bully[75] has ceased to exist! What a page he will fill in history! Now let us see to the new Catherine. She has all the courage and the qualities requisite for making a great Empress, and I have agreeable recollections of having heard you frequently say so; her firmness, on certain occasions, has always been to your taste. It should also be admitted that you discovered the hidden virtues of the Princess Dashkoff; it is true that you have known her and cultivated her friendship since her earliest youth, and that you and the Chevalier Douglas encouraged her romantic temperament.’[76]
We have here, at any rate, the testimony of the French ambassador to D’Eon’s personal knowledge of the Empress Catherine, and of his intimacy with the Princess Dashkoff,[77] of whom we will have something to say hereafter.
In taking leave of Russia and its concerns, as we must now do, we are brought to the close of the Seven Years’ War, and our attention turns for a time to the relations of France with Great Britain during the administration of Lord Bute.
The preliminaries of the notable peace of 1763, between France and England, were signed at Fontainebleau on November 3, 1762, the ambassador selected to conduct the negotiations in England being the Duke de Nivernois, once ambassador at Rome, and sent to Berlin in trying circumstances (1756) to endeavour to treat with Frederick. Gaillardet and the Duke de Broglie fall into the same singular error in attributing to this nobleman a portrait by D’Eon, the latter adding disdainfully—‘the portrait was in all probability one that pleased D’Eon, for in his official correspondence the same is applied, word for word, to Lord Sandwich.’ That it was intended for the libertine English peer, of whom it was said
is clear enough, although even upon its first appearance the Duke de Praslin thought fit to apply the sketch to himself, and showed his resentment towards the author of it in a very tangible manner.
‘Sincerity and cheerfulness are the chief characteristics of this minister, who in every office and embassage enjoyed by him has always appeared, like Anacreon, crowned with roses and singing of joys in the midst of the most arduous labours. He is by nature inclined to idleness; nevertheless, he toils as if unable to live at rest, and abandons himself to this easy and idle life so soon as he feels he is free. His natural capacities and his happy state of cheerfulness, his sagacity and his activity in affairs of importance, never give him cause for uneasiness, nor do they produce wrinkles on his forehead; and although it is necessary to have lived a long time with a minister to be able to describe his character, to say what degree of courage or weakness he possesses, how far he is prudent or cunning, I am able to say, from the present moment, that —— is shrewd and discerning without being deceitful or crafty. He is but little susceptible to hatred and to friendship, although on several occasions he has appeared to be completely under the influence of the one or the other; for, on the one hand, he is separated from his wife, he hates her and does her no harm; on the other, he has a mistress, he cherishes her and does her no great good. Upon the whole, he is certainly one of the merriest and most agreeable ministers in Europe.’[78]
Repudiating the charge of the Minister for Foreign Affairs, D’Eon says:—
‘Unable to apply to himself all the good in this portrait, the Duke de Praslin has applied to himself all the evil as suiting him best; such, for instance, as the wrinkles or horns on his forehead, weakness and knavery, the little loved wife, the much loved mistress, neither of which is the better nor the worse in consequence. M. D’Eon will learn by this how circumspect one should be. He will take it as a rule that every time the portrait of a ridiculous man at a foreign court is depicted, there will always be somebody at Versailles to resemble him.’[79]
D’Eon has not left us without a rough outline of the Duke de Nivernois, to whom he was devotedly attached.
‘... His only fault is the coquetry to please everybody; coquetry which often secures to us more enemies than true friends, but which, notwithstanding, has never chilled the sentiments of admiration and gratitude that I have vowed to him.... Is any greater proof needed of the coquetry and desire to please everybody than this exemplum?
‘In Paris the duke houses and boards a Jesuit, who dines regularly every day at his table; and yet he is a friend of thirty years’ standing of the destructor of the Order of Jesuits.[80] Whilst in London he absolutely wished to be a friend at Court and in favour in the city; a friend of the party in the majority, and of the party in the minority; he also sought, comically enough, to reconcile the Duke of Newcastle and Lord Bute, Mr. Pitt and the Duke of Bedford. He was enamoured of thirty thousand maidens, and pretended to be dying of love whenever he met the charming Duchess of Grafton, and this because the duke, her husband, was one of the leaders of the Opposition.’[81]
D’Eon would have preferred a soldier’s career had he been free to choose. Ministers combined to dissuade him, the Duke de Praslin bidding him ‘hang up his sword,’ there being nothing for him to do in the army, and the Duke de Nivernois invited him to become his secretary of Embassy in London. D’Eon felt that four years’ service as secretary in Russia, ‘under critical and most important circumstances,’ to use de Nivernois’ own words, entitled him rather to advancement, and in accepting the post in London purely from personal regard for the duke, he took the liberty of making it a condition that he should return to France with the ambassador at the termination of his mission.
Accompanied by this secretary the duke crossed the Channel in September. When his lean figure appeared at the place of embarkation at Calais, an English sailor said to his mate, ‘I say, d’ye see how thin that duke is? I remember him as a fine fat fellow. This is how we’ve skinned the French swells in the war.’ And so greatly struck by his appearance was an English gentleman (Mr. C. Townsend, one of the Flag party) on seeing him for the first time that he exclaimed: ‘What! the French have sent over the preliminaries of a man to sign the preliminaries of peace!’
In the course of the transactions on the Treaty of Peace, D’Eon executed a somewhat adroit, though entirely indefensible act, which caused no little mirth and secret joy at Versailles. The negotiations so happily commenced met with an obstacle, and being checked in their progress a sort of crisis supervened, when Mr. Wood, Under Secretary of State, called on the Duke de Nivernois to confer on certain contested points, and having his portfolio with him was indiscreet enough to say that it contained the final instructions and ultimatum which Lord Egremont had directed him to transmit to the Duke of Bedford, the King’s ambassador at the Court of Versailles. Upon hearing this the duke looked at D’Eon, and then cast his eye on the portfolio. D’Eon quickly caught at the sense of this pantomime. It would be a matter of great importance to the French Court to know the nature of the instructions and the terms of this ‘fatal ultimatum.’ He made a sign to the duke, who at once invited Mr. Wood to stay to dinner and talk over matters. He wished him, he said, to taste some samples of good wine from Tonnerre.... The bait took, and whilst the duke and Mr. Wood were enjoying their bumpers, D’Eon extracted from the portfolio Lord Egremont’s despatches, caused exact copies to be taken, and forwarded them instantly to Versailles, the French courier arriving twenty-four hours earlier than Mr. Wood’s. When the Duke of Bedford called to broach the subject, de Choiseul and de Praslin, already apprised of the difficulties about to be raised, and of the British ambassador’s final instructions, were readily enabled to come to terms. This was a smart piece of work in de Nivernois’ opinion,[82] and de Praslin declared there was nobody like D’Eon, and that he was quite deserving of all the King’s favours.
D’Eon was instrumental in smoothing away another difficulty. The Duke de Nivernois had altered several articles in the ultimatum of the treaty, an act which gave umbrage to the English ministers, and Count Viri apprised him that if he did not withdraw the alterations he might as well leave the country; to which the duke replied that neither his honour nor dignity would allow of his withdrawing an ultimatum given in the name of the King. Matters were looking serious, when D’Eon proposed that the duke should tell Lords Bute and Egremont of his secretary’s excess of zeal in making alterations unknown to himself. ‘Every tongue will rail, every mouth open upon me,’ continued D’Eon. ‘With all my heart; and if you choose you may also say that you will send me back to France.’ The duke caught at the idea, and had the generosity to explain to de Praslin and to the King his indebtedness to D’Eon.[83]
The conduct of the secretary of Embassy during progress of the negotiations was all that his superiors could desire, and he earned the gratitude of many a French prisoner by his exertions in administering to their comfort. Scarcely a letter left the ambassador that was not replete with the highest encomiums.
The Duke de Nivernois to the Duke de Praslin.
‘D’Eon is at work as usual from morning to night. I cannot sufficiently extol his zeal, vigilance, amiability of disposition, and activity.... When the state of my health will force me to quit this country, in the spring, I will, with your permission, leave our little D’Eon until my successor is appointed, and I promise that he will do well and be favourably received. He is very active, very discreet, never exhibiting curiosity or officiousness; never giving cause for mistrust or acting defiantly, quod est inveniendum, because here the majority of men are like the most unmanageable of horses....’[84]
On February 10, 1763, Mr. Richard Neville Neville left Paris for London with the Treaty of Peace signed that same evening by the plenipotentiaries of Great Britain, France, and Spain;[85] a treaty that compelled France to part with all the territory she had acquired in Germany, England retaining the whole of Canada, Nova Scotia, Cape Breton, the Gulf and River of St. Lawrence, Grenada, St. Vincent, Dominica, Tobago, Senegal, some territory to the east of the Mississippi, and Minorca. Spain received Louisiana from France in exchange for Florida, given up to England, France being permitted to retain Belle-Isle, Martinique, and Guadaloupe—also Chandernagor and Pondicherry, on condition that they should not be fortified, and further engaging to demolish the defences at Dunkirk.
‘Such were the results,’ says an eminent French writer of our times, ‘of the Seven Years’ War. Fortunate for England and Prussia, of little cost to Austria, to whom an irreparable loss was simply made too evident; of no moment to Russia, who had availed herself of it for training her army, but most fatal to France, which had entrusted her colonies, her navy, her finances, and her military honour, to her debased nobles.... The minister himself who signed the Treaty of Paris will in time be considered too intelligent and too proud to be the servant of Louis XV. when France, falling a step lower, will have passed out of the hands of Madame de Pompadour into the still viler hands of Madame Dubarry.’
It was an unprecedented mark of favour on the part of George III. to confide to D’Eon the ratifications to the Treaty for conveyance to his Majesty’s ambassador at Versailles.[86] In announcing to de Praslin the approaching departure of his secretary on the proud mission, de Nivernois claimed for him, in accordance with usage, a gratuity of equal value—one thousand crowns—to that about to be received from his own Government by Mr. Neville for having brought the Treaty to London. De Praslin insisted that no English minister would ever think of entrusting such precious documents to a foreigner; it would be contrary to rule and custom, and it would therefore be idle to expect that D’Eon should be selected for the duty. It was the duke’s anxiety, he said, to serve his secretary, that had blinded him to facts and precedent. D’Eon was still young enough to be of good service, and he should take care to afford him the opportunity for earning distinction. When, later, the Foreign Minister had to acknowledge his mistake, he considered the choice of D’Eon to be a very straightforward proceeding on the part of the King of England and of his ministers, who were giving proofs of the nobility of their sentiments, and inspiring the desire and hope for the establishment and maintenance of good relations and lasting concord between the two Courts. ‘I am very glad you were stupid enough[87] to believe it impossible that the French secretary—my little D’Eon—should be the bearer of the King of England’s ratifications,’ wrote De Nivernois in reply.[88]
The Duke de Nivernois to Louis XV.
‘London, February 17, 1763.
‘Sire,—M. D’Eon, Captain in the d’Autichamp regiment of dragoons, and my Secretary of Embassy, takes to the Duke of Bedford the ratifications to the Treaty of Peace; it is a compliment on the part of the King of England. This prince avails himself with pleasure of a Frenchman for so honourable and important a mission, and I consider such a step, which is out of the usual course, as striking evidence of his desire for unity and cordial relations. I cannot refrain, Sire, upon this occasion, from bearing witness to the zeal and abilities of M. D’Eon, and I must truthfully assure your Majesty that he is in every way most worthy of your Majesty’s protection and favour as a diplomatist and soldier.’
D’Eon attributed his good luck to the kindness of the King of England, of Lord Bute, Count Viri, the Duke de Nivernois, and to his own savoir-faire. ‘He brings me luck,’ said Louis XV., who received him warmly, and shortly afterwards conferred upon him the Cross of the Royal and Military Order of Saint Louis, a gratuity of six thousand livres, and raised his salary to the maximum of one thousand crowns. De Praslin was delighted, said D’Eon was a good-looking fellow, a hard worker who had performed his mission with great diligence, and awarded him a gratuity of two thousand crowns. Even the Marquise de Pompadour expressed her satisfaction, in a letter to de Nivernois, at seeing one who it was said was an excellent person, and had served his King in several countries, employed to bring the Treaty to France. She considered it a great act of politeness on the part of the English to entrust him with the Treaty. She liked the King of England, who was full of candour and humanity, and possessed every virtue that constituted a good king.[89]
It had been arranged from the beginning that the Duke de Nivernois’ embassage should end with the completion of the negotiations, the minister nominated to succeed him being the Count de Guerchy, with whom we are already acquainted. ‘I must do him the justice to say,’ wrote the British ambassador in Paris, ‘that de Guerchy has a universal good character as a soldier and a man of honour.’[90] But the Duke of Bedford was greatly led into error in this estimate of the character of a nobleman who was selected regardless of any qualification but that of rank, his strongest recommendation being his marriage with a lady of the House of Harcourt, and his only claims to the highest ambassadorial post in the gift of the King being the favour of the Marquise de Pompadour and a short period of obscure service in the war. He is described by Gaillardet as one of those gentlemen who live nobly in noble idleness, who are charitable until their own purse is touched, ostentatious until called upon to spend, ambitious of high office for the sake of the title, and of the title for the sake of the emolument; esteeming a good estate preferable to a good education; and persuaded that one always knows enough when of good birth, in good health, and possessing a good income. De Praslin’s own opinion of the man he was about to employ as ambassador in London is best gathered from what he says of him to de Nivernois:—
‘I am still very much concerned about de Guerchy. I am not sure, however, that we are doing him good service by appointing him ambassador in London. He is not liked in this country. I dread his despatches like fire, and you know how defective despatches disparage a man and his office. A minister is often judged less by the manner in which he conducts business than by the account he gives of it. I believe that our dear friend will do well. I do not think I have anybody better fitted. But he cannot write at all; we must not deceive ourselves on this point.’[91]
De Nivernois was out of health when he accepted the mission to England at the urgent instance of the King and of his old friend the Count de Choiseul, shortly afterwards created Duke de Praslin, and he never ceased to complain of his physical sufferings from the day he began to live in a climate that did not suit him. He had always hoped to leave ‘his little D’Eon’ in charge until de Guerchy’s nomination was officially notified. He trembled for that poor novice in politics when he thought of the difficulties he should experience in a country where people were far from being like ordinary men; for this envoy of an absolute monarch, puzzled and perplexed in all probability at the large distribution of political power in England, and the number of those who shared in the responsibilities of government, gave it as his opinion that to conduct negotiations in the country to which he had been accredited was nothing short of hard labour!
We cannot resist quoting here, in their place, a few lines from a letter of de Praslin to his friend in London, which serve to expose, with what has already been said, the worth and honesty of purpose of the men who were directing the affairs of France.
‘You make me ill, my dear friend, in continually telling me that you are so.... it is true that we are both engaged in a calling that does not suit us; you will soon be out of it, and I assure you that I should be pleased had I a similar prospect.’[92]
The opportunity for leaving D’Eon in charge on the departure of the ambassador seeming to be lost, de Nivernois recommended him for appointment as Resident, an arrangement desirable in the interests of the King’s service, and one which would enable de Guerchy to receive such valuable assistance as no other person but the secretary of Embassy was qualified to render, for he was fully competent to continue the work he, the ambassador, had commenced. D’Eon’s presence was preferable to that of a stranger. Lord Bute had taken a fancy to him, which was saying a great deal, and was a piece of luck that might not fall to a new-comer. On the other hand, D’Eon was being informed by M. Sainte Foy, senior clerk at the Foreign Office, that it was earnestly desired he should remain with de Guerchy, and yet de Praslin was slow in paying the smallest attention to de Nivernois’ frequent recommendations in his favour. De Praslin had his reasons; he doubted D’Eon’s loyalty towards himself, and suspected him of being in correspondence with the exiled de Broglios. He should put him to the test, and how this was accomplished shall be related in D’Eon’s own words:—
‘One evening about midnight, towards the end of March, the Duke de Praslin put me through a kind of interrogatory. Sainte Foy was a witness. The duke said: “You were at the battle of Villinghausen, M. D’Eon; tell me all you saw and all you know with regard to that action.” I did so conscientiously, relating to him all I saw with my own eyes. My recital not being either to his taste or to that of the Count de Guerchy, his satellite, who was present, he interrupted me frequently by stamping his foot; and rising from his chair he said to me several times: “I know it to have been the contrary to what you say, and this from one of my intimate friends who was also there.” He alluded to the Count de Guerchy. He then looked at Sainte Foy. At every reply I made, the duke looked cross and gave a sardonic smile. “But, my dear D’Eon, you surely did not witness all you relate?” I persisted in assuring him, as I should do to my life’s end, that I had perfectly well seen and heard what I had told him. The duke concluded by saying: “It is your attachment to the de Broglios that makes you speak as you do.” “Faith, sir!” I replied; “it is my attachment to the truth. You question me, and I can only tell you what I myself know.” After we had left the minister, Sainte Foy scolded me in a friendly way for my want of policy. “My dear D’Eon,” he said, “I fear you will never make your fortune in this country. Be off to England as quickly as you can.” “I wish for nothing better,” was my reply.’[93]
Eighteen years after the battle of Villinghausen, D’Eon wrote:—
‘I maintain in 1779 what I asserted in 1763 at Versailles; yes, I say and maintain, notwithstanding my regard for the Prince de Soubise, notwithstanding my contempt for the Marquise,[94] notwithstanding my indifference as to the good or evil the Choiseuls may do to me, that had Soubise’s army actually attacked the enemy on the morning of July 16, 1761, in compliance with the Marshal de Broglio’s urgent request on the nights of July 15 and 16 (of which the Chevalier Nort, aide-de-camp to the Marshal, was the bearer), after the important advantage obtained by the Marshal at Villinghausen the evening of the 15th, it was clear to the whole of de Broglio’s army, with the exception of the cowardly fawners to the party at that time in power at Court; I say it was clear that the English and Hanoverian army would have been beaten and irremediably routed. I am far from being wanting in gratitude to my protectors and from entertaining the slightest feeling of hatred towards the Prince de Soubise. I respect his heart-bred virtues as I do his distinguished birth. Had he been as great a general as he is brave and attached to his King and country, and generous towards his friends and enemies, he would be worthy of being at the head of all the armies of Europe. Too much kind-heartedness, too much faith in the ignorant and in those intriguers who were obsequious to him, restrained him a hundred times, as on the morning of July 16, from executing what he had wished and what he had already ordered; that is to say, to advance on the enemy, to attack and defeat him in concert with the Marshal de Broglio.’[95]
A few days after his interview with de Praslin, D’Eon was asked confidentially by the Duchess de Nivernois if he was not in correspondence with M. de Broglio. ‘No, madam,’ said D’Eon, ‘and I am sorry for it, as I am very fond of the Marshal de Broglio, but I do not wish to trouble him with my letters; I am satisfied with writing to him on each New Year’s Day.’
‘I am very glad to hear this for your sake, my dear little friend,’ continued the duchess. ‘Let me tell you in confidence that intimacy with the House of de Broglio might be of injury to you at Court, and in the mind of de Guerchy, your future ambassador.’
D’Eon had not strayed from the truth, for it was the Count de Broglio, whose name had not been mentioned in the two conversations just related, who was his frequent correspondent, and not the marshal, with whom he communicated but seldom, supplying him with the news of the day, but chiefly with Court gossip. Speaking of de Soubise in a letter to the marshal, D’Eon says:—
‘’Twere well if the prince fought the enemy single-handed, because this athlete before girding himself for the fight was anointed with Court oil only, and it is not adapted to ward off the blows of an enemy. It might be said—there is a chance of luck, because the fate of arms is uncertain. This is not true. The fate of arms is uncertain to a great captain; but to a bad captain it is always certain.’[96]
Referring in after years to his interview with de Praslin, on the subject of the battle of Villinghausen, we find D’Eon saying:—
‘They tried to induce or to force me to speak ill of the Marshal de Broglio and his campaigns. I could not have done so even had I wished it, because I have always known the Marshal and his brother to be solely engaged in the interests of the King’s service, and in all such plans and operations as should best accrue to the advantage and to the glory of the French arms, and of those of their allies. The Marshal practised every military virtue in his own person, and it was an admirable thing to witness that, although beyond the reach of all competitors, he contested with himself for glory of which he sought to deprive his earlier actions, by the performance of still more brilliant deeds. I have always been devotedly attached to the late dear Count de Broglio,[97] not so much because he liked me and because he was the secret minister of Louis XV., but because I ever found in him the vir probus et propositi tenax of whom Horace speaks; and this, notwithstanding his numerous enemies, or, rather, the number of those who envied him for his merits. Ever as brave in the Cabinet as on the field, he was at all times faithful to God, the King, his country, his brave soldiers and his word. When, in days gone by, we were serving together, and he called me the Chevalier Bayard sans peur et sans reproche, he did so because he did not know me as thoroughly and as well as I knew him.’[98]
On March 30 D’Eon arrived in London, and was on the same day invested with the Cross of the Royal and Military Order of Saint Louis[99] by the Duke de Nivernois, at his own request as had been pre-arranged. He had brought with him some costly presents from his royal master to the Count Viri, Envoy Extraordinary from the King of Sardinia (well known in English history as being engaged in secret negotiations with Lord Bute), in recognition of his valuable services, being the first to mediate for peace between Great Britain and the two illustrious Houses of Bourbon, the King’s thanks being conveyed to the Sardinian minister in a letter from de Praslin.[100]