D’Eon and Wilkes—Fickle Louis XV.!—Literary labours—Doubts raised as to D’Eon’s sex—Princess Dashkoff—Heavy gambling transactions on D’Eon’s sex—Insult resented—Irritation at being thought a female—Indignant denial of being concerned in the bets made—State of penury—Offers of relief from Poniatovsky, now King of Poland—Saves England from war—Officially reported to be a female—Personal appearance—Death of Louis XV.—D’Eon’s estimate of the late king—Count de Broglio’s report on D’Eon to Louis XVI.—System of secret correspondence abolished—D’Eon to continue his reports in cypher.
The expulsion of John Wilkes from the House of Commons and his trial for libel, and D’Eon’s conviction on a similar charge, both of which took place in 1764, were almost contemporary events, and although the Chevalier abstained from taking any part in the riots of that year, he never failed, when opportunity offered, to show his sympathy for Wilkes and Liberty! After the great agitator had returned to England in 1768, and was undergoing his sentence of twenty-two months’ imprisonment in King’s Bench for seditious libel and blasphemy, D’Eon one day sent him a present of twelve smoked tongues, with a note in which he expressed the wish that ‘the tongues might have the eloquence of Cicero and the nicety of speech of Voltaire,’ to laud him worthily upon the anniversary of his birth, which, in the future, would ever be regarded as that of English liberty.’[248]
A singular letter from Louis XV. to the Count de Broglio, dated February 12, 1767, commences thus:—
‘You know that D’Eon is a madman, and perhaps a dangerous one, but there is nothing better to be done with madmen than to lock them up, and certainly in England he is recognised as such, and cannot be of any use to the English except to afford them amusement, and enable them to make fun of M. de Guerchy. I do not know what instructions M. de Fuentes has had, or expects to receive, in regard to him.[249] For all that, all I have promised him must be performed, but nothing more. I have a deadly hatred to madmen....’
Yet the man who was considered insane only when it suited the King to say so, was retained as secret agent enjoying the royal confidence, and upon the Baron de Breteuil, nominated ambassador to Holland, being sent to England in 1768 on a special mission, he was ordered ‘to see and confer with D’Eon,’ which, however, he was to do ‘in the most secret manner possible.’[250]
For the next few years D’Eon beguiled his leisure in literary labours, spending his summers chiefly at Staunton Harold, Earl Ferrers’ seat in Leicestershire. He retired late and rose early, worked fifteen hours a day, partook of one meal only, at two P.M., and refused to receive any visitors except on Sundays. His ordinary residence from July 1769, when he quitted 32 Brewer Street, and 1772, when he returned to those his old quarters, was Petty France, Westminster, the house he occupied having a garden bordering on the park, and to which he removed to be near his friend, Mr. Cotes. He produced ‘Les Loisirs du Chevalier D’Eon, &c., in thirteen volumes,[251] which he dedicated to his friend and protector, the now disgraced and exiled Duke de Choiseul.
‘... It is, my lord, in the land of philosophy and liberty, where one learns not to bestow praise except on virtue and merit, that my mind, freed from prejudice, publicly exposes the traits that characterise you.’
THE CHEVALIER D’EON.
1770.
Commenting on this dedication, a newspaper article thus eulogises D’Eon:—
‘There is as great a singularity in the character of the Chevalier D’Eon, as in our ignorance of his sex. The rule of his life is peculiar to himself; no other man or woman would, in the same position, write and behave as he does. Is it reason, virtue, or caprice that dictates his conduct, and makes him in his manners the reverse of our men of fashion? Let our readers judge from the following fact. Our courtiers adore the man upon whom fortune smiles, and rail at him as soon as he is no longer in favour; the Chevalier follows an unjustly disgraced minister in his exile, and there pays him the tribute of praise he refused him in the time of his prosperity. When the French Court conceal their esteem for the Duke de Choiseul, and bend the knee to the favourite they despise, to that duke the Chevalier dedicates his “Loisirs”—him he openly dares to commend! That oddity will not make a fortune at St. James’; it cannot be applauded when folly holds the place of merit, and immorality rides triumphant over the ruins of religion!’[252]
The work was well received, and especially, it was said, at Berlin, where the notices it contained on political administration, and particularly that branch relating to finance, caused so favourable an impression on the ministers, for they found therein a quantity of new and extremely useful ideas, that his Prussian Majesty ordered they should immediately be put into operation for the benefit of the public and of the Government.[253]
The Chevalier’s popularity, chiefly amongst those who interested themselves in the politics of the day, had never waned since his first introduction into English society, much of the favour he enjoyed being due to his genial and agreeable manners, his openness of character, and the dignity and spirit of independence with which he bore his trials; but in the year we have reached—1769—his name, somewhat more freely canvassed, began to attain unenviable notoriety, for doubts were being seriously entertained as to the nature of his sex, and what was at first whispered from mouth to ear became openly revealed, until public opinion had fairly fastened on the idea that the Chevalier D’Eon was not a man at all but a woman! And when the Princess Dashkoff, who chanced to arrive in England at this juncture, related that D’Eon, whom she perfectly well knew at St. Petersburg, had been received and entertained by the Empress Elizabeth with all the intimacy to which his believed in sex admitted him, further doubts existed in the minds of a few only; and what had been suspected was boldly advanced as a certainty, the Count de Châtelet, French ambassador in London, among the number, writing to tell Louis XV. he was persuaded that the Chevalier was a fille. According to a biographical memoir in the ‘Gentleman’s Magazine,’ vol. liii., the first indications that led to a suspicion of D’Eon’s sex was a wound received in a duel.
John Taylor, the author of ‘Monsieur Tonson,’ who had met the Chevalier in advanced life, was assured by a very old friend of his father, one well acquainted with D’Eon at this period, that his manners were captivating and that he might have married most advantageously, as several ladies of good family and with large fortunes had made overtures to him at their country seats where he visited; but that upon all such occasions he immediately left the house, whence it was inferred he quitted the place on account of his being really of the female sex.[254]
It was the fashion in England for all matters of dispute to become the subject of betting, and gambling transactions attained extraordinary proportions, the lead being taken at Brooks’s, White’s, and other clubs, as Walpole relates in some curious anecdotes. The uncertainty of the sex of a noted character was too fair an opportunity to be wasted, and gambling policies of insurance were effected to large amounts, as shown in the opposite statement, giving an idea of the extent to which such transactions were carried within the first few months of their being started, reaching, as they subsequently did, considerably larger proportions.
Insurance on the Sex of Monsieur the Chevalier D’Eon.[256]
| Dr. | |||||||||
| 1770. | £ | s. | d. | ||||||
| March 28. | To premium on | 600l. | at 15 gs. per cent | 94l. | 10s. | ||||
| Policy. | 10s. | 6d. | |||||||
| 95 | 0 | 6 | |||||||
| March 30. | To premium on | 200l. | at 15 gs. per cent. | 31 | 10 | 0 | |||
| Do. | 300l. | do. | 47 | 5 | 0 | ||||
| Do. | 200l. | do. | 31 | 10 | 0 | ||||
| Do. | 100l. | do. | 15 | 15 | 0 | ||||
| April 10. | Do. | 500l. | do. | 78l. | 15s. | ||||
| Policy. | 10s. | 6d. | |||||||
| 79 | 5 | 6 | |||||||
| April 30. | To premium on | 500l. | at 20 gs. per cent. and Policy | 105 | 10 | 6 | |||
| Do. | 1,000l. | at 10 gs. per cent. | 105 | 0 | 0 | ||||
| 3,400l. | 510 | 16 | 6 | ||||||
| To profit | 658 | 13 | 6 | ||||||
| 1,169 | 10 | 0 | |||||||
| Cr. | ||||||
| 1770. | £ | s. | d. | |||
| June 19. | By | 300l. | compromised at 50 per cent. | 150 | 0 | 0 |
| ” | 2,300l. | sold at 40 per cent. | 920 | 0 | 0 | |
| ” | 300l. | sold at 20 per cent. | 60 | 0 | 0 | |
| ” | 500l. | sold at 20 per cent. | 100 | 0 | 0 | |
| 3,400l. | 1,230 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Brokerage at 5 per cent. | 60 | 10 | 0 | |||
| 1,169 | 10 | 0 | ||||
| Whereof par ¼ of the profit is 164l. 13s. 4d. | ||||||
To add to the chagrin endured at the gross liberties taken with his name, the Chevalier was reproached by his enemies with being an accomplice in the scandalous jobbing affairs and a sharer in the plunder, charges he indignantly repudiated when unburdening himself to his old friend the count.[255]
‘... I am grieved to hear, and even to read in the English papers, all the extraordinary reports that reach from Paris, London, and even St. Petersburg, on the uncertainty of my sex, and which gain ground in a country of enthusiasts such as this, and to such an extent, that policies of insurance for considerable sums are being publicly effected upon so indecent a subject, both at Court and in the city. I held my peace for a long time. My silence only served to increase suspicion and the number of insurances. I consequently repaired, last Saturday, to the Exchange and to the several neighbouring coffee-houses, where all kinds of insurances and stock-jobbing take place, and there, in uniform, walking-stick in hand, I obliged the money-broker Bird, who was the first to start one of these impudent insurances, to beg my pardon. Yielding the choice of weapons, I challenged to fight anybody who might consider himself the most incredulous, the bravest, or the most insolent of the entire assembly, and several thousands were present. All treated me with great courtesy, and in their amazement not one of those male adversaries, in this great city, dared either to cross sticks or to fight me, even though I remained in their midst from noon until two o’clock, to afford them ample time to decide amongst themselves. I took my leave, making my address generally known in the event of any one changing his mind. This is the way in which such people should be taken in hand and silenced. They are most insolent in the liberties they take, even with the greatest persons at Court, and the more reason with me, a private individual whom they know to be exiled from France, and lonely. Bird assured me, in the face of his apologies, that he and his colleagues were able to effect the most extraordinary insurances or wagers, even in regard to the royal family, except, in observance of an Act of Parliament, so far as concerned the life of the King, the Queen, and their children, and that he was employed by a great lady, whose name he refused to communicate, to effect an insurance on my sex....’
‘... I beg of you, sir, not to be displeased with your old aide-de-camp, if you read in the Gazette, or elsewhere, that on the 7th of this month I broke my cane across two Englishmen for taking impudent liberties with my name. My conduct has been approved by military men and others alive to a sense of honour. Since making my two visits to the city, nobody has dared, either at court or anywhere about town, to make a wager, publicly, on the nature of my sex, of which I have stamped virile proofs on the faces of two insolent fellows....’
‘Some of my discreet friends have recommended me to leave London for a month or two, and travel quietly in Ireland under an assumed name, for I am not known there. In spite of my threats and the blows I have dealt, and of my conduct through life, an inconceivable mania for effecting insurances to a considerable amount on the uncertainty of my sex has again taken hold of people in the city, and I am cautioned, from several quarters, that some rich persons entertain the idea of having me carried off, by artifice, force, or stratagem, so that the point may be settled in defiance of me, a thing I will not tolerate, and which, should the attempt be made, will place me under the cruel necessity of killing somebody.... I can declare to you, sir, upon my honour, that I am not interested to the value of even one sou in these bets and insurances.... I am sufficiently mortified at being what nature has made me, and that the dispassion of my natural temperament should induce my friends to imagine, in their innocence, and this in France, in Russia, and in England, that I am of the female sex. The malice of my enemies has confirmed all this since the beginning of my misfortunes, which I have not by any means deserved, and of which I should have been rid long ago. I leave all to the King’s and to your own kindness of heart....’[257]
The tone of swagger repeated in the above letters, would dispose to the belief that D’Eon was exaggerating the degree of front he had shown to those Englishmen who were taking unwarrantable liberties with his name; but the measure of his veracity would appear to be out of the question. In the ‘Public Advertiser’ of November 16, 1774, it was stated that—
‘the Chevalier D’Eon with justice complains of our public prints; they are eternally sending him to France, when he is body and soul fixed in this country; they have lately confined him to the Bastille, when he fled to England as a country of liberty, and they lately made a woman of him, when not one of his enemies dared to put his manhood to the proof. He makes no complaint of the English ladies.’
That the calumnies of which D’Eon continued to be the object were not chargeable to all classes of society, is to be inferred from a notice which appeared in the papers a few days later, announcing—
‘Earl Ferrers, Sir John Fielding, Messieurs Addington and Wright, and other worthy magistrates and gentlemen, and their ladies, did the Chevalier the honour to dine with him in Brewer Street, Golden Square, a convincing proof that he is not confined in the Bastille, as certain weak and wicked persons have popularly asserted, ignorant of the justice and honour his worth and merit have deserved.’
Being at dinner one day with his friend Angelo, D’Eon was informed of the presence, in the next room, of a Jew named Treves who would, on condition that he discovered his sex, on the instant pay him one thousand pounds; when, says Henry Angelo, he flew into such a violent passion, that it was with much difficulty his father could restrain him in his rage against the Israelite.
For the second time in his life the Chevalier found himself to be in imminent peril of being kidnapped in the interests of those who had heavy stakes on his sex, and were pressing for having the question resolved off-hand. Leaving London, he wandered restlessly in the north, until he saw in the papers that his disappearance was causing anxiety to his friends, who were offering a handsome reward and the payment of all reasonable expenses for any intelligence that should lead to his recovery, if concealed or restrained of his liberty. He was described as being dressed, upon leaving his home, in scarlet faced with green, and wearing the cross of Saint Louis; he had a new plain hat with silver button, loop and band, and his sword, but no cane. Inquired after and sought, and no trace of him being obtainable, a caveat was entered at Doctors’ Commons against his goods, on the supposition that he was dead. Hastening back he informed his friend, Mr. Fountain, of Litchfield Street, who had been most active in searching after him, of his arrival in London, in a note which appeared in the papers[258] the following morning with the announcement:—
‘This night, about eleven o’clock, the Chevalier D’Eon, whose extraordinary disappearance above six weeks ago has been the subject of much conversation and inquiry, arrived in good health at his house in Petty France, Westminster.’
Then, in due course, he presented himself before Lord Mayor Crosby,[259] as the most public way of testifying that he was alive, and made an affidavit to the effect that—
‘he never had, and never would have any part, directly or indirectly, in the policies of insurance made on his sex; that he had never touched and never would touch a single guinea from any person or persons, on account of the said insurances; that he never would enter into any negotiations with any person or persons, however considerable the sums that had been offered to him, and which had amounted to 25,000l., to prove, judicially, his sex.’
In reporting his proceedings to de Broglio the Chevalier wrote:—
‘I have only had time to travel over the North of England, and a part of Scotland. Two important reasons prevented me from going to Ireland as I had intended. 1. My funds were insufficient. 2. Because, whilst on my travels, I noticed in the English papers that the public, ever jealous of its liberties, was much alarmed, and that my own friends were greatly concerned at my supposed abduction, and that all the doors of the house I occupy had been sealed. I returned immediately to reassure the public and my friends, as well as to attend to my private affairs. With regard to the cypher and King’s papers, I had, as you are aware, insured their safety before I went away, and they would not have been found, at least not unless the house was razed to the ground.
‘By last Tuesday’s post I sent to you the “Public Advertiser,” which contains the declaration I made, under oath, before the Lord Mayor, that I am not interested to the value of one shilling, directly or indirectly, in the policies of insurance that have been effected on my person. It is not my fault if the rage for betting, on all matters, is a national disorder amongst Englishmen, who will frequently risk even more than the fortune they possess on a single horse-race. I do not care for all their policies of insurance, their articles, newspapers, prints, or themselves either, and they are aware of it. I have given proof, and will again do so to their hearts’ content, that I am not only a man, but a captain of dragoons with sword in hand. It is not my fault if the Court of Russia, and notably, the Princess Dashkoff, has assured the English Court that I am a female. It is not my fault if the Duke de Praslin has caused secret, and almost public, inquiry to be pursued in France to confirm this fact, whilst his friend de Guerchy sneakingly spread the report at this Court that I am a hermaphrodite! Anyhow, it is not my fault if I exist such as nature formed me; perfectly or imperfectly formed, I have ever, heart and soul, faithfully served the King in politics as in war. I am in a condition to serve him better than ever, and shall be at all times ready to fly, at his bidding, whithersoever he may send me.’[260]
D’Eon never allowed anything to interfere with his first object in life, that of supplying his royal master with the fullest information on every subject of interest; this, however, was not to be effected without resources of some kind; and as it was his misfortune ever to be left without funds, even to not receiving his pension with any degree of regularity, he became fast involved in serious difficulties, which obliged him to live in a state of misery that became a terrible burden for one of his past life and habits to bear. He might have been the possessor of thousands had he been less patriotic, less scrupulous, and less resolved to put up with his every-day distressing privations. Patent as the Chevalier’s condition was to everybody, still did he stand accused of being a confederate in the dishonest transactions of which he was the innocent cause. At length relief appeared to be at hand. Poniatovsky, King of Poland, who had not forgotten the pleasant evenings he had enjoyed at sword practice with D’Eon at St. Petersburg, wrote with his own hand to offer him an asylum and employment, and for the second time, driven by want and despair, did the faithful servant’s loyalty waver, for he asked permission of his cruel master to accept the invitation. But it was not to be, as de Broglio notified in his reply, approved in the King’s hand.
‘... I am not surprised that the King of Poland should have said such kind things to you through his chamberlain. This prince is acquainted with you, has heard you well spoken of in Russia, and knows how useful you might be to him; but you should also bear in mind that you cannot serve the King elsewhere so usefully as in London, especially under present circumstances; nor is there any other place where you can be in greater safety against the malice of your enemies than in London. Continue, therefore, your correspondence with me and his Majesty; it is the wish of the King, who again bids you not leave England without his orders. But his Majesty approves of the correspondence you have been invited to entertain with the King of Poland. There is nothing to be apprehended in this. Being convinced of your attachment and loyalty, his Majesty authorises me to leave you at full liberty in this matter. I have only to call your attention to all that may be of interest to his Majesty, and to assure you that I shall have much pleasure in bringing to the notice of the King your services upon the present and upon all future occasions.’[261]
Much of D’Eon’s correspondence with the King at this time was pseudonymous, the assumed name being William Wolff. There is no probability, whatever, of the subjects of it becoming generally known, but it may be said that the Chevalier saved England, France, and Spain from a ruinous war that was nearly taking place on account of the dispute relative to the Falkland Islands. This was done through his secret communications with Louis XV., to whom he represented the worthlessness of those islands and their barrenness.[262]
De Broglio’s letter of May 11, given above, was entrusted to Drouet[263] for delivery to the Chevalier, the startling report he made upon quickly returning to France, as the result of his interview with D’Eon, being immediately communicated by de Broglio to Louis XV.
‘... I must not omit to inform your Majesty that the suspicions entertained on the sex of this extraordinary personage are well founded. M. Drouet, who had received my instructions to do his best to verify them, has assured me, since his return, that he has succeeded and is able to certify ... that M. D’Eon is a female, and nothing but a female (fille), of which he has all the attributes ... we must admit that this statement forms the climax to his history.... He begged M. Drouet to keep the secret, justly observing that if discovered his occupation were gone. May I entreat your Majesty to be pleased to allow that the confidence he has reposed in his friend be not betrayed, and that he will have no cause to regret what he has done....’[264]
Let us here note that although D’Eon was described at this period as having a rather effeminate countenance, blue eyes, small features, and as being pale, he had a dark beard, wore a wig and cue, and ever appeared in the same dress—that of an officer of dragoons, red with pea-green lapels and silver lace. He stood about five feet seven inches, and was rather inclined to corpulency.[265]
Whether or no de Broglio and the King believed in Drouet’s bewildering assertion, made with so much circumstance, it is certain that no action was taken either to the prejudice or in favour of D’Eon, who was left in trust of his old office, and again forced to appeal pitifully to the count.
‘... I am in want ... having ceded to my mother the whole of my patrimony, and pensioned my old nurse, and having to support my nephews.... I venture to say, that had I been born actually as weak and timid as I appear to have been destined by nature, great evils would have been the consequences. I shall never regret having sacrificed myself to save the counsellor from sorrows and your family from troubles....’[266]
D’Eon was sighing to leave England, and negotiations with a view to his being permitted to return to France had been conducted from time to time since the fall of de Choiseul (1770) by the new minister, the Duke d’Aiguillon; but the Chevalier comprehensively notes, with reference to that minister’s proposals—Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.[267] When the reiterated appeal for succour reached its destination, the count was again in exile at his seat, Ruffec.
In the early part of 1774, Versailles was visited by an epidemic which ran through the palace, infecting some fifty or more of its inmates (amongst them the King’s daughters, Adelaide, Victoire, and Sophie), and of whom about a dozen, including Louis XV., were carried off.[268] Those curious to know what were the last days of the profligate and careless monarch will find, on consulting Sismondi, how a death-bed repentance was wrested from him by his confessor, the unflinching and unimpeachable Abbé Mandoux; how the old Marshal de Richelieu remonstrated angrily, and how the fils emancipé received absolution at the hands of the disconcerted Cardinal de la Roche-Aymon, the grand aumônier, who read the royal confession.
‘Although the King owes an account of his conduct to God only, he declares that he repents having been the cause of any scandal amongst his subjects, and that he wishes to live solely for the maintenance of religion and the happiness of his people.’
The interment was anything but royal, for the corpse of le Bien-aimé was hurried in the darkness of the night to the tomb—not its last resting-place—amidst the execrations of the numbers who had turned out to see the procession as it hastily passed their way, and who kept shouting the late King’s favourite cry on the hunting field, tayau! tayau!—and hallali! hallali! his favourite cry at the death, as his remains were being borne into St. Denis.
Wishing to rid himself of a tipsy customer, the keeper of a drinking-shop warned the troublesome fellow that the funeral of Louis XV. was about to pass. ‘What!’ was the answer, ‘we were dying of hunger so long as ce b—— là lived, and are we to die of thirst now that he is dead?’[269]
D’Eon’s faith in the good intentions of his master had never deserted him, but now that master was dead; and yet, though the Chevalier lived to see the country he loved so well reap what Louis XV. had sown, his estimate of that monarch’s character never changed!
‘After having been so long concealed under the shadow of the wings and of the secret protection of Louis XV., in losing him I lost all. Soon after his death I became like a victim who has been publicly sacrificed. An unjust idea has ever been entertained of the character and talents of Louis XV. If the truth were but known, it would be allowed that this prince was endowed with great penetration, great judgment, and a profound knowledge of men and things. The only quality in which he was deficient, was the needed strength of character to control his ministers and ambassadors as became a King. Had Heaven endowed me with one-half the goodness of the King, my master, and my master with one-half of my firmness, not one-half of all that occurred would ever have come to pass. I need not be miserable for the rest of my days, nor fancy that my honour is tarnished, because Louis XV. would never disclose to his ministers the nature of my extraordinary position, or openly uphold the secret orders and instructions he caused to be secretly conveyed to me.’[270]
Scarcely had Louis XVI. ascended the throne, than the Count de Broglio addressed a memorandum to the new King, in which was recapitulated the history of the late sovereign’s secret correspondence from the beginning, and describing the mode in which it had been conducted. The count exposed the anomaly of his position, then and during the two-and-twenty years that he had been secretly employed by Louis XV.; suggested the probable causes of his exile, maintained he had never fallen away from the royal favour, and asked his Majesty’s instructions, for his guidance, under the peculiar circumstances in which he found himself. The King’s reply—laconic, formal, and unsigned—simply acknowledged the receipt of the despatch, enjoined the count to continue to observe the strictest secrecy, and informed him that inquiries should be made in the proper quarter for the reasons that induced the late King to order him into exile.[271] De Broglio followed up his memorandum with several letters, soliciting permission in one of them to communicate certain matters with which he considered it necessary his Majesty should become acquainted:—
‘... I will commence with what concerns the Sieur D’Eon. I conceive it to be possible that your Majesty has heard him unfavourably spoken of, and that you are therefore astonished at finding him included amongst the number of those persons honoured with the confidence of the late King. I cannot forbear observing that he was initiated in the secret correspondence at the time it was under the direction of the Prince de Conti. He was sent to Petersburg by that prince in 1756, after which he was specially chosen by the Dukes de Praslin and de Nivernois for the negotiations for peace in London, in 1762; and the late King having at that time important designs on England, ordered him to make direct reports. He was then made Minister Plenipotentiary in England, during the interval between the Embassage of the Duke de Nivernois and the arrival of the Count de Guerchy. It is evident that it was this special mark of confidence which gave him reason to hope he would receive support in his misplaced contentions with that ambassador, who, on his part, exhibited perhaps too much hastiness at first, and a little want of tact afterwards; but this does not excuse the faults of the Sieur D’Eon, whose excessive hastiness was beyond all bounds, and gave rise to unseemly incidents between persons honoured as they were by the offices they respectively held. The Duke de Praslin exercised such extreme severity upon that occasion, that the Sieur D’Eon was not to be tranquillised, and the latter, unable to return to France, and driven to despair and into difficulties, was well-nigh failing in his allegiance to his Majesty and about to divulge the secret confided to him, which would have shockingly compromised the sacred name of the late King, and especially in such a country as England. I was for a long time in the greatest fear. I asked his Majesty what I was to do, and took the liberty to represent to him that anything was preferable to allowing the subject of the secret correspondence to be known in England. I received orders to send my secretary to England. He knew the Sieur D’Eon, and appeased him a little, and it was at length arranged that he should remain in London for the purpose of communicating intelligence; but it was necessary to guarantee to him, in the late King’s own hand, a monthly allowance of one thousand livres, which he has enjoyed ever since.[272]
‘This singular being (because the Sieur D’Eon is a female) is, more so than many others, a compound of good qualities and of faults, and he carries the one and the other to extremes. It will be necessary that I should have the honour of entering into the minutest details on this subject, so soon as your Majesty will have definitely decided in the matter of the secret correspondence. In the meantime, I venture to take the liberty to entreat that his case be not determined until I shall have submitted my respectful observations thereon to your Majesty. I must not conclude these observations on the Sieur D’Eon without having the honour of stating that he occasionally signs his letters, “William Wolff.” ...’[273]
All the details of the secret correspondence, as they were fully treated upon by the Count de Broglio, proved entirely novel to the King, who promptly put an end to the system. The money allowed for this secret service by Louis XV. amounted to 120,000 livres annually, his confidential agents, with one sole exception, being in the service of the State, and in receipt of established salaries—as ambassadors, ministers, residents or secretaries of Embassy; but to several, the reduction of their emoluments by discontinuance of the secret correspondence allowances would prove a serious inconvenience, the count therefore submitted a plan for ensuring to his former colleagues, the faithful depositaries of State secrets, a life-pension as a reward for their loyalty and discretion. Approving the scheme, the King responded liberally, and life-pensions, varying from 1,100 livres to 20,000 livres per annum, were settled upon the various members of the abolished department, D’Eon excepted, whose case necessitated special and careful consideration.
As to the count himself and his recall from exile, he insisted upon a thorough investigation into his conduct, whether as regarded his personal acts or his correspondence, both of which too clearly proved how completely removed from the slightest taint had been his loyalty and integrity of purpose.
‘I have found amongst the King’s effects,’ wrote Louis XVI., ‘several maps and papers, such as you have intimated to me, and have tied them together. I have since made every inquiry respecting yourself, and find that in all you did you acted in accordance with the King’s orders. You have therefore my permission to return to Paris or to Court at Compiègne.... I approve of your writing to the several ministers to instruct them to discontinue the correspondence. I send you a rough draft of the letters which you must send to me for my signature. As regards yourself, sir, you will collect the whole of your papers upon your arrival in Paris, for delivery to M. de Vergennes, after which you may take your rest.’[274]
The Count de Vergennes had succeeded as Minister for Foreign Affairs[275] upon the disgrace and exile of the Duke d’Aiguillon, the avowed enemy of the de Broglios, and whose attitude towards D’Eon had been one of dangerous hostility. Rejoicing in his fall and full of hope in the new order of things, the Chevalier appealed to de Broglio for intercession in his behalf with the young King.
‘His late Majesty and you have deigned to approve, by your letters of August 22, 1766, &c., my conduct in delivering to M. Durand and the Baron de Breteuil the secret papers you required. You equally approved my conduct, by letter of February 10, 1767, in communicating to the Prince de Masseran[276] the discovery I had made of England’s design to invade Mexico and Peru in the approaching war, on the plan devised by the Sieur Caffaro, that is to say, the Marquis d’Aubaret, for which he receives 600l. sterling per annum from the English ministry.... You also approved, by letter of September 23, 1769, my vigilance in giving you eight months’ notice of the naval expedition projected by Russia against the Turks, and of which you were a witness. His Majesty, as also the King of England, deigned to approve my conduct in the affair of Dr. Musgrave on the subject of the peace, which created so great a sensation in London in 1769 and 1770. I will not worry you by entering into particulars on the various testimonies of approbation you have deigned to give me, on behalf of his Majesty, as to my zeal in keeping you informed of interesting events that have already occurred, that are now passing, and are yet to take place.
‘It is time, after the cruel loss we have experienced of our Counsellor-in-Chief[277] at Versailles, who, in the midst of his own court, had less power than a king’s advocate at the Châtelet; who, through incredible weakness, ever suffered his faithless servants to triumph over his secret servants who were true to him, and who had ever more largely favoured his declared enemies rather than his real friends; it is time, I say, that you should inform the new King, who loves truth, and of whom it is said that he is as firm as his illustrious grandfather was weak; it is time, for us both, that you should inform this young monarch of your having been the secret minister of Louis XV. during upwards of twenty years, and of my having been under-minister, under his orders and yours; that during the last twelve years I have sacrificed my fortune, advancement, and happiness, in desiring to obey, to the letter, his secret order of June 3, 1763,[278] and the secret instructions relating thereto;’ ...
that for particular reasons, known only to the late King, he thought it his duty to sacrifice him, openly, to the wrath of his ambassador de Guerchy, to that of his ministers, and to the hysterics of de Pompadour; but that his sense of justice and kindness of heart had never, in secret, allowed him to abandon him, but that he had, on the contrary, given him, in his own hand his royal promise to reward and justify him in the future.