diff options
Diffstat (limited to '18679-h')
| -rw-r--r-- | 18679-h/18679-h.htm | 8669 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 18679-h/images/image01.jpg | bin | 0 -> 21760 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 18679-h/images/image02.jpg | bin | 0 -> 17949 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 18679-h/images/image03.png | bin | 0 -> 5568 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 18679-h/images/image03b.png | bin | 0 -> 31896 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 18679-h/images/image04.png | bin | 0 -> 3088 bytes |
6 files changed, 8669 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/18679-h/18679-h.htm b/18679-h/18679-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..beda113 --- /dev/null +++ b/18679-h/18679-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,8669 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" + "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> + +<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> + <head> + <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=iso-8859-1" /> + <title> + The Project Gutenberg eBook of Historical Mysteries, by Andrew Lang + </title> + <style type="text/css"> +/*<![CDATA[ XML blockout */ +<!-- + p { margin-top: .75em; + text-align: justify; + margin-bottom: .75em; + } + h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6 { + text-align: center; /* all headings centered */ + clear: both; + } + hr { width: 33%; + margin-top: 2em; + margin-bottom: 2em; + margin-left: auto; + margin-right: auto; + clear: both; + } + + table {margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;} + + body{margin-left: 10%; + margin-right: 10%; + } + + .pagenum { /* uncomment the next line for invisible page numbers */ + /* visibility: hidden; */ + position: absolute; + left: 92%; + font-size: smaller; + text-align: right; + } /* page numbers */ + + .blockquot{margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%;} + + .center {text-align: center;} + .smcap {font-variant: small-caps;} + .u {text-decoration: underline;} + + .footnotes {border: none;} + .footnote {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%;} + .footnote .label {position: absolute; right: 84%; text-align: right;} + .fnanchor {font-weight: bold; font-size: .8em; text-decoration: none;} + + .poem {margin-left:10%; margin-right:10%; text-align: left;} + .poem br {display: none;} + .poem .stanza {margin: 1em 0em 1em 0em;} + .poem span.i0 {display: block; margin-left: 0em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;} + .poem span.i2 {display: block; margin-left: 2em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;} + .poem span.i4 {display: block; margin-left: 4em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;} + .poem span.i6 {display: block; margin-left: 6em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;} + .poem span.i8 {display: block; margin-left: 8em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;} + .poem span.i10 {display: block; margin-left: 10em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;} + .poem span.i16 {display: block; margin-left: 16em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;} + .poem span.i17 {display: block; margin-left: 17em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;} + // --> + /* XML end ]]>*/ + </style> + </head> +<body> + + +<pre> + +The Project Gutenberg EBook of Historical Mysteries, by Andrew Lang + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + + +Title: Historical Mysteries + +Author: Andrew Lang + +Release Date: June 25, 2006 [EBook #18679] + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1 + +*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK HISTORICAL MYSTERIES *** + + + + +Produced by Suzanne Shell, Linda Cantoni, and the Online +Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net + + + + + + +</pre> + + +<p style="text-align: center"> +<img src="images/image01.jpg" width="331" height="500" alt="cover" /></p> + +<h1>HISTORICAL MYSTERIES</h1> + + +<h3>BY</h3> + +<h2>ANDREW LANG</h2> + + +<h3>WITH A FRONTISPIECE</h3> + +<h3><i>SECOND EDITION</i></h3> + +<p style="text-align: center"> +LONDON<br /> +SMITH, ELDER, & CO., 15 WATERLOO PLACE<br /> +1905<br /> +</p> + +<p style="text-align: center">[All rights reserved]</p> + +<p style="text-align: center"> </p> + +<p style="text-align: center"> +<a name="frontispiece"> +<img src="images/image02.jpg" width="310" height="400" alt="Elizabeth Canning" /></a></p> + +<p style="text-align: center"><b>Elizabeth Canning.</b></p> + +<p style="text-align: center"><i>William Smith 1754 Pinx. Mac Ardell. Mezzo.</i></p> + +<p style="text-align: center"><i>London: Smith, Elder & Co., 15 Waterloo Place, S.W.</i></p> + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<h2>PREFACE</h2> + + +<p><span class="smcap">These</span> Essays, which appeared, with two exceptions, in <i>The Cornhill +Magazine</i>, 1904, have been revised, and some alterations, corrections, +and additions have been made in them. 'Queen Oglethorpe,' in which +Miss Alice Shield collaborated, doing most of the research, is +reprinted by the courteous permission of the editor, from <i>Blackwood's +Magazine</i>. A note on 'The End of Jeanne de la Motte,' has been added +as a sequel to 'The Cardinal's Necklace:' it appeared in <i>The Morning +Post</i>, the Editor kindly granting leave to republish.</p> + +<p>The author wishes to acknowledge the able assistance of Miss E.M. +Thompson, who made researches for him in the British Museum and at the +Record Office.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<h2>CONTENTS</h2> + + +<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="contents"> +<tbody> +<tr><td style="text-align: right"> </td><td style="text-align: left"> </td><td style="text-align: right">PAGE</td></tr> +<tr><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#I">I.</a></td><td style="text-align: left">THE CASE OF ELIZABETH CANNING</td><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#Page_1">1</a></td></tr> +<tr><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#II">II.</a></td><td style="text-align: left">THE MURDER OF ESCOVEDO</td><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#Page_32">32</a></td></tr> +<tr><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#III">III.</a></td><td style="text-align: left">THE CAMPDEN MYSTERY</td><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#Page_55">55</a></td></tr> +<tr><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#IV">IV.</a></td><td style="text-align: left">THE CASE OF ALLAN BRECK</td><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#Page_75">75</a></td></tr> +<tr><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#V">V.</a></td><td style="text-align: left">THE CARDINAL'S NECKLACE</td><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#Page_99">99</a></td></tr> +<tr><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#VI">VI.</a></td><td style="text-align: left">THE MYSTERY OF KASPAR HAUSER: THE CHILD OF EUROPE</td><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#Page_118">118</a></td></tr> +<tr><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#VII">VII.</a></td><td style="text-align: left">THE GOWRIE CONSPIRACY</td><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#Page_143">143</a></td></tr> +<tr><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#VIII">VIII.</a></td><td style="text-align: left">THE STRANGE CASE OF DANIEL DUNGLAS HOME</td><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#Page_170">170</a></td></tr> +<tr><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#IX">IX.</a></td><td style="text-align: left">THE CASE OF CAPTAIN GREEN</td><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#Page_193">193</a></td></tr> +<tr><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#X">X.</a></td><td style="text-align: left">QUEEN OGLETHORPE (<i>in collaboration with Miss Alice Shield</i>)</td><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#Page_214">214</a></td></tr> +<tr><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#XI">XI.</a></td><td style="text-align: left">THE CHEVALIER D'ÉON</td><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#Page_238">238</a></td></tr> +<tr><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#XII">XII.</a></td><td style="text-align: left">SAINT-GERMAIN THE DEATHLESS</td><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#Page_256">256</a></td></tr> +<tr><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#XIII">XIII.</a></td><td style="text-align: left">THE MYSTERY OF THE KIRKS</td><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#Page_277">277</a></td></tr> +<tr><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#XIV">XIV.</a></td><td style="text-align: left">THE END OF JEANNE DE LA MOTTE</td><td style="text-align: right"><a href="#Page_297">297</a></td></tr> +</tbody> +</table> + +<p style="text-align: center">PORTRAIT OF ELIZABETH CANNING. <i> +<a href="#frontispiece">Frontispiece.</a></i></p> + +<p style="text-align: center"><a href="#ADS">Advertisements</a></p> + +<p style="text-align: center"><a href="#FOOTNOTES">Footnotes</a></p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_1" id="Page_1">[Pg 1]</a></span></p> +<h2>HISTORICAL MYSTERIES</h2> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<h2><a name="I" id="I"></a>I</h2> + +<h2><i>THE CASE OF ELIZABETH CANNING</i></h2> + + +<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="poem"> + <tbody> + <tr> + <td> +Don't let your poor little<br /> +<span style="margin-left: 2em;">Lizzie be blamed!<br /></span> +<span style="margin-left: 10em;"><span class="smcap">Thackeray.</span></span></td> + </tr> + </tbody> + </table> + +<p> </p> + + +<p>'<span class="smcap">Everyone</span> has heard of the case of Elizabeth Canning,' writes Mr. John +Paget; and till recently I agreed with him. But five or six years ago +the case of Elizabeth Canning repeated itself in a marvellous way, and +then but few persons of my acquaintance had ever heard of that +mysterious girl.</p> + +<p>The recent case, so strange a parallel to that of 1753, was this: In +Cheshire lived a young woman whose business in life was that of a +daily governess. One Sunday her family went to church in the morning, +but she set off to skate, by herself, on a lonely pond. She was never +seen of or heard of again till, in the dusk of the following Thursday, +her hat was found outside of the door of her father's farmyard. Her +friend discovered her<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_2" id="Page_2">[Pg 2]</a></span> further off in a most miserable condition, +weak, emaciated, and with her skull fractured. Her explanation was +that a man had seized her on the ice, or as she left it, had dragged +her across the fields, and had shut her up in a house, from which she +escaped, crawled to her father's home, and, when she found herself +unable to go further, tossed her hat towards the farm door. Neither +such a man as she described, nor the house in which she had been +imprisoned, was ever found. The girl's character was excellent, +nothing pointed to her condition being the result <i>d'une orgie +échevelée</i>; but the neighbours, of course, made insinuations, and a +lady of my acquaintance, who visited the girl's mother, found herself +almost alone in placing a charitable construction on the adventure.</p> + +<p>My theory was that the girl had fractured her skull by a fall on the +ice, had crawled to and lain in an unvisited outhouse of the farm, and +on that Thursday night was wandering out, in a distraught state, not +wandering in. Her story would be the result of her cerebral +condition—concussion of the brain.</p> + +<p>It was while people were discussing this affair, a second edition of +Elizabeth Canning's, that one found out how forgotten was Elizabeth.</p> + +<p>On January 1, 1753, Elizabeth was in her eighteenth year. She was the +daughter of a carpenter in Aldermanbury; her mother, who had four +younger children, was a widow, very poor, and of the best character. +Elizabeth was short of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_3" id="Page_3">[Pg 3]</a></span> stature, ruddy of complexion, and, owing to an +accident in childhood—the falling of a garret ceiling on her +head—was subject to fits of unconsciousness on any alarm. On learning +this, the mind flies to hysteria, with its accompaniment of diabolical +falseness, for an explanation of her adventure. But hysteria does not +serve the turn. The girl had been for years in service with a Mr. +Wintlebury, a publican. He gave her the highest character for honesty +and reserve; she did not attend to the customers at the bar, she kept +to herself, she had no young man, and she only left Wintlebury's for a +better place—at a Mr. Lyon's, a near neighbour of her mother. Lyon, a +carpenter, corroborated, as did all the neighbours, on the points of +modesty and honesty.</p> + +<p>On New Year's Day, 1753, Elizabeth wore her holiday best—'a purple +masquerade stuff gown, a white handkerchief and apron, a black quilted +petticoat, a green undercoat, black shoes, blue stockings, a white +shaving hat with green ribbons,' and 'a very ruddy colour.' She had +her wages, or Christmas-box, in her pocket—a golden half guinea in a +little box, with three shillings and a few coppers, including a +farthing. The pence she gave to three of her little brothers and +sisters. One boy, however, 'had huffed her,' and got no penny. But she +relented, and, when she went out, bought for him a mince-pie. Her +visit of New Year's Day was to her maternal aunt, Mrs. Colley, living +at Saltpetre Bank (Dock Street, behind the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_4" id="Page_4">[Pg 4]</a></span> London Dock). She meant to +return in time to buy, with her mother, a cloak, but the Colleys had a +cold early dinner, and kept her till about 9 <span class="smcap">p.m.</span> for a hot supper.</p> + +<p>Already, at 9 <span class="smcap">p.m.</span>, Mr. Lyon had sent to Mrs. Canning's to make +inquiries; the girl was not wont to stay out so late on a holiday. +About 9 <span class="smcap">p.m.</span>, in fact, the two Colleys were escorting Elizabeth as far +as Houndsditch.</p> + +<p>The rest is mystery!</p> + +<p>On Elizabeth's non-arrival Mrs. Canning sent her lad, a little after +ten, to the Colleys, who were in bed. The night was passed in anxious +search, to no avail; by six in the morning inquiries were vainly +renewed. Weeks went by. Mrs. Canning, aided by the neighbours, +advertised in the papers, mentioning a report of shrieks heard from a +coach in Bishopsgate Street in the small morning hours of January 2. +The mother, a Churchwoman, had prayers put up at several churches, and +at Mr. Wesley's chapel. She also consulted a cheap 'wise man,' whose +aspect alarmed her, but whose wisdom took the form of advising her to +go on advertising. It was later rumoured that he said the girl was in +the hands of 'an old black woman,' and would return; but Mrs. Canning +admitted nothing of all this. Sceptics, with their usual acuteness, +maintained that the disappearance was meant to stimulate charity, and +that the mother knew where the daughter was; or, on the other hand, +the daughter had fled to give birth to a child<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_5" id="Page_5">[Pg 5]</a></span> in secret, or for +another reason incident to 'the young and gay,' as one of the counsel +employed euphemistically put the case. The medical evidence did not +confirm these suggestions. Details are needless, but these theories +were certainly improbable. The character of La Pucelle was not more +stainless than Elizabeth's.</p> + +<p>About 10.15 <span class="smcap">p.m.</span> on January 29, on the Eve of the Martyrdom of King +Charles—as the poor women dated it—Mrs. Canning was on her knees, +praying—so said her apprentice—that she might behold even if it were +but an apparition of her daughter; such was her daily prayer. It was +as in Wordsworth's <i>Affliction of Margaret</i>:</p> + +<div class="poem"><div class="stanza"> +<span class="i0">I look for ghosts, but none will force<br /></span> +<span class="i2">Their way to me; 'tis falsely said<br /></span> +<span class="i0">That ever there was intercourse<br /></span> +<span class="i2">Between the living and the dead!<br /></span> +</div></div> + +<p>At that moment there was a sound at the door. The 'prentice opened it, +and was aghast; the mother's prayer seemed to be answered, for there, +bleeding, bowed double, livid, ragged, with a cloth about her head, +and clad in a dirty dressing-jacket and a filthy draggled petticoat, +was Elizabeth Canning. She had neglected her little brother that +'huffed her' on New Year's Day, but she had been thinking of him, and +now she gave her mother for him all that she had—the farthing!</p> + +<p>You see that I am on Elizabeth's side: that farthing touch, and +another, with the piety,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_6" id="Page_6">[Pg 6]</a></span> honesty, loyalty, and even the superstition +of her people, have made me her partisan, as was Mr. Henry Fielding, +the well-known magistrate.</p> + +<p>Some friends were sent for, Mrs. Myers, Miss Polly Lyon, daughter of +her master, and others; while busybodies flocked in, among them one +Robert Scarrat, a toiler, who had no personal knowledge of Elizabeth. +A little wine was mulled; the girl could not swallow it, emaciated as +she was. Her condition need not be described in detail, but she was +very near her death, as the medical evidence, and that of a midwife +(who consoled Mrs. Canning on one point), proves beyond possibility of +cavil.</p> + +<p>The girl told her story; but what did she tell? Mr. Austin Dobson, in +<i>The Dictionary of National Biography</i>, says that her tale 'gradually +took shape under the questions of sympathising neighbours,' and +certainly, on some points, she gave affirmative answers to leading +questions asked by Robert Scarrat. The difficulty is that the +neighbours' accounts of what Elizabeth said in her woful condition +were given when the girl was tried for perjury in April-May 1754. We +must therefore make allowance for friendly bias and mythopœic +memory. On January 31, 1753, Elizabeth made her statement before +Alderman Chitty, and the chief count against her is that what she told +Chitty did not tally with what the neighbours, in May 1754, swore that +she told them when she came home on January 29, 1753. This point<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_7" id="Page_7">[Pg 7]</a></span> is +overlooked by Mr. Paget in his essay on the subject.<a name="FNanchor_1_1" id="FNanchor_1_1"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a></p> + +<p>On the other hand, by 1754 the town was divided into two factions, +believers and disbelievers in Elizabeth; and Chitty was then a +disbeliever. Chitty took but a few notes on January 31, 1753. 'I did +not make it so distinct as I could wish, not thinking it could be the +subject of so much inquiry,' he admitted in 1754. Moreover, the notes +which he then produced were <i>not</i> the notes which he made at the time, +'but what I took since from that paper I took then' (January 31, 1753) +'of hers and other persons that were brought before me.' This is not +intelligible, and is not satisfactory. If Elizabeth handed in a paper, +Chitty should have produced it in 1754. If he took notes of the +evidence, why did he not produce the original notes?</p> + +<p>These notes, made when, and from what source, is vague, bear that +Elizabeth's tale was this: At a dead wall by Bedlam, in Moorfields, +about ten <span class="smcap">p.m.</span>, on January 1, 1753, two men stripped her of gown, +apron, and hat, robbed her of thirteen shillings and sixpence, 'struck +her, stunned her, and pushed her along Bishopsgate Street.' She lost +consciousness—one of her 'fits'—and recovered herself (near Enfield +Wash). Here she was taken to a house, later said to be 'Mother +Wells's,' where 'several persons' were. Chitty, unluckily, does not +say what sort of persons, and on that point all<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_8" id="Page_8">[Pg 8]</a></span> turns. She was asked +'to do as they did,' 'a woman forced her upstairs into a room, and cut +the lace of her stays,' told her there were bread and water in the +room, and that her throat would be cut if she came out. The door was +locked on her. (There was no lock; the door was merely bolted.) She +lived on fragments of a quartern loaf and water '<i>in a pitcher</i>,' with +the mince-pie bought for her naughty little brother. She escaped about +four in the afternoon of January 29. In the room were 'an old stool or +two, <i>an old picture</i> over the chimney,' two windows, an old table, +and so on. She forced a pane in a window, 'and got out on a small shed +of boards or penthouse,' and so slid to the ground. She did not say, +the alderman added, that there was any hay in the room. Of bread there +were 'four or five' or 'five or six pieces.' '<i>She never mentioned the +name of Wells.</i>' Some one else did that at a venture. 'She said she +could tell nothing of the woman's name.' The alderman issued a warrant +against this Mrs. Wells, apparently on newspaper suggestion.</p> + +<p>The chief points against Elizabeth were that, when Wells's place was +examined, there was no penthouse to aid an escape, and no old picture. +But, under a wretched kind of bed, supporting the thing, was a +picture, on wood, of a Crown. Madam Wells had at one time used this +loyal emblem as a sign, she keeping a very ill-famed house of call. +But, in December 1745, when certain Highland and Lowland gentlemen +were<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_9" id="Page_9">[Pg 9]</a></span> accompanying bonny Prince Charlie towards the metropolis, Mrs. +Wells removed into a room the picture of the Crown, as being apt to +cause political emotions. This sign may have been 'the old picture.' +As to hay, there <i>was</i> hay in the room later searched; but penthouse +there was none.</p> + +<p>That is the worst point in the alderman's notes, of whatever value +these enigmatic documents may be held.</p> + +<p>One Nash, butler to the Goldsmiths' Company, was present at the +examination before Chitty on January 31, 1753. He averred, in May +1754, what Chitty did not, that Elizabeth spoke of the place of her +imprisonment as 'a little, square, darkish room,' with 'a few old +pictures.' Here the <i>one</i> old picture of the notes is better evidence, +if the notes are evidence, than Nash's memory. But I find that he was +harping on 'a few old pictures' as early as March 1753. Elizabeth said +she hurt her ear in getting out of the window, and, in fact, it was +freshly cut and bleeding when she arrived at home.</p> + +<p>All this of Nash is, so far, the better evidence, as next day, +February 1, 1753, when a most tumultuous popular investigation of the +supposed house of captivity was made, he says that he and others, +finding the dungeon not to be square, small, and darkish, but a long, +narrow slit of a loft, half full of hay, expressed disbelief. Yet it +was proved that he went on suggesting to Lyon, Elizabeth's master, +that people should give money<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_10" id="Page_10">[Pg 10]</a></span> to Elizabeth, and 'wished him success.' +The proof was a letter of his, dated February 10, 1753. Also, Nash, +and two like-minded friends, hearing Elizabeth perjure herself, as +they thought, at the trial of Mrs. Wells (whom Elizabeth never +mentioned to Chitty), did not give evidence against her—on the most +absurdly flimsy excuses. One man was so horrified that, in place of +denouncing the perjury, he fled incontinent! Another went to a dinner, +and Nash to Goldsmiths' Hall, to his duties as butler. Such was then +the vigour of their scepticism.</p> + +<p>On the other hand, at the trial in 1754 the neighbours reported +Elizabeth's tale as told on the night when she came home, more dead +than alive. Mrs. Myers had known Elizabeth for eleven years, 'a very +sober, honest girl as any in England.' Mrs. Myers found her livid, her +fingers 'stood crooked;' Mrs. Canning, Mrs. Woodward, and Polly Lyon +were then present, and Mrs. Myers knelt beside Elizabeth to hear her +story. It was as Chitty gave it, till the point where she was carried +into a house. The 'several persons' there, she said, were 'an elderly +woman and two young ones.' Her stays were cut by the old woman. She +was then thrust upstairs into a room, wherein was <i>hay</i>, <i>a pitcher of +water</i>, and bread in pieces. Bread may have been brought in, water +too, while she slept, a point never noted in the trials. She 'heard +the name of Mother Wills, or Wells, mentioned.'<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_11" id="Page_11">[Pg 11]</a></span></p> + +<p>Now Scarrat, in 1754, said that he, being present on January 29, 1753, +and hearing of the house, 'offered to bet a guinea to a farthing that +it was Mother Wells's.' But Mrs. Myers believed that Elizabeth had +mentioned hearing that name earlier; and Mrs. Myers must have heard +Scarrat, if he suggested it, before Elizabeth named it. The point is +uncertain.</p> + +<p>Mrs. Woodward was in Mrs. Canning's room a quarter of an hour after +Elizabeth's arrival. The girl said she was almost starved to death in +a house on the Hertfordshire road, which she knew by seeing the +Hertford coach, with which she was familiar, go by. The woman who cut +her stays was 'a tall, black, swarthy woman.' Scarrat said 'that was +not Mrs. Wells,' which was fair on Scarrat's part. Elizabeth described +the two young women as being one fair, the other dark; so Scarrat +swore. Wintlebury, her old master, and several others corroborated.</p> + +<p>If these accounts by Mrs. Myers, Mrs. Woodward, Scarrat, Wintlebury, +and others are trustworthy, then Elizabeth Canning's narrative is +true, for she found the two girls, the tall, swarthy woman, the hay, +and the broken water-pitcher, and almost everything else that she had +mentioned on January 29, at Mother Wells's house when it was visited +on February 1. But we must remember that most accounts of what +Elizabeth said on January 29 and on January 31 are fifteen months +after date, and are biassed on both sides.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_12" id="Page_12">[Pg 12]</a></span></p> + +<p>To Mother Wells's the girl was taken on February 1, in what a company! +The coach, or cab, was crammed full, some friends walked, several +curious citizens rode, and, when Elizabeth arrived at the house, Nash, +the butler, and other busybodies had made a descent on it. The officer +with the warrant was already there. Lyon, Aldridge, and Hague were +with Nash in a cab, and were met by others 'riding hard,' who had +seized the people found at Mrs. Wells's. There was a rabble of persons +on foot and on horse about the door.</p> + +<p>On entering the doorway the parlour was to your left, the house +staircase in front of you, on your right the kitchen, at the further +end thereof was a door, and, when that was opened, a flight of stairs +led to a long slit of a loft which, Nash later declared, did not +answer to Elizabeth's description, especially as there was hay, and, +before Chitty, Elizabeth had mentioned none. There was a filthy kind +of bed, on which now slept a labourer and his wife, Fortune and Judith +Natus. Nash kept talking about the hay, and one Adamson rode to meet +Elizabeth, and came back saying that she said there <i>was</i> hay. By +Adamson's account he only asked her, 'What kind of place was it?' and +she said, 'A wild kind of place with hay in it,' as in the neighbours' +version of her first narrative. Mrs. Myers, who was in the coach, +corroborated Adamson.</p> + +<p>The point of the sceptics was that till Adamson<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_13" id="Page_13">[Pg 13]</a></span> rode back to her on +her way to Wells's house she had never mentioned hay. They argued that +Adamson had asked her, 'Was there hay in the room?' and that she, +taking the hint, had said 'Yes!' By May 1754 Adamson and Mrs. Myers, +who was in the cab with Elizabeth, would believe that Adamson had +asked 'What kind of place is it?' and that Elizabeth then spoke, +without suggestion, of the hay. The point would be crucial, but nobody +in 1754 appears to have remembered that on February 21, three weeks +after the event, at the trial of Mother Wells, Adamson had given +exactly the same evidence as in May 1754. 'I returned to meet her, and +asked her about the room. She described the room with some hay in it +... an odd sort of an empty room.'</p> + +<p>Arriving at Mother Wells's, Elizabeth, very faint, was borne in and +set on a dresser in the kitchen. Why did she not at once say, 'My room +was up the stairs, beyond the door at the further end of the room'? I +know not, unless she was dazed, as she well might be. Next she, with a +mob of the curious, was carried into the parlour, where were all the +inmates of the house. She paid no attention to Mrs. Wells, but at once +picked out a tall old woman huddled over the fire smoking a pipe. She +did this, by the sceptical Nash's evidence, instantly and without +hesitation. The old woman rose. She was 'tall and swarthy,' a gipsy, +and according to all witnesses inconceivably hideous, her underlip was +'the size of a small child's arm,' and she was<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_14" id="Page_14">[Pg 14]</a></span> marked with some +disease. 'Pray look at this face,' she said; 'I think God never made +such another.' She was named Mary Squires. She added that on January 1 +she was in Dorset—'at Abbotsbury,' said her son George, who was +present.</p> + +<p>In 1754 thirty-six people testified to Mary Squires's presence in +Dorset, or to meeting her on her way to London, while twenty-seven, at +Enfield alone, swore as positively that they had seen her and her +daughter at or near Mrs. Wells's, and had conversed with her, between +December 18, 1752, and the middle of January. Some of the Enfield +witnesses were of a more prosperous and educated class than the +witnesses for the gipsy. Many, on both sides, had been eager to swear, +indeed, many had made affidavits as early as March 1753.</p> + +<p>This business of the cross-swearing is absolutely inexplicable; on +both sides the same entire certainty was exhibited, as a rule, yet the +woman was unmistakable, as she justly remarked. The gipsy, at all +events, had her <i>alibi</i> ready at once; her denial was as prompt and +unhesitating as Elizabeth's accusation. But, if guilty, she had +enjoyed plenty of time since the girl's escape to think out her line +of defence. If guilty, it was wiser to allege an <i>alibi</i> than to +decamp when Elizabeth made off, for she could not hope to escape +pursuit. George Squires, her son, so prompt with his 'at Abbotsbury on +January 1,' could not tell, in May 1754, where he had passed the +Christmas<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_15" id="Page_15">[Pg 15]</a></span> Day before that New Year's Day, and Christmas is a notable +day. Elizabeth also recognised in Lucy Squires, the gipsy's daughter, +and in Virtue Hall, the two girls, dark and fair, who were present +when her stays were cut.</p> + +<p>After the recognition, Elizabeth was carried through the house, and, +according to Nash, in the loft up the stairs from the kitchen she +said, in answer to his question, 'This is the room, for here is the +hay I lay upon, but I think there is more of it.' She also identified +the pitcher with the broken mouth, which she certainly mentioned to +Chitty, as that which held her allowance of water. A chest, or nest, +of drawers she declared that she did not remember. An attempt was made +to suggest that one of her party brought the pitcher in with him to +confirm her account. This attempt failed; but that she had mentioned +the pitcher was admitted. Mrs. Myers, in May 1754, quoted Elizabeth's +words as to there being more hay exactly in the terms of Nash. Mrs. +Myers was present in the loft, and added that Elizabeth 'took her +foot, and put the hay away, and showed the gentlemen two holes, and +said they were in the room when she was in it before.'</p> + +<p>On February 7, Elizabeth swore to her narrative, formally made out by +her solicitor, before the author of <i>Tom Jones</i>, and Mr. Fielding, by +threats of prosecution if she kept on shuffling, induced Virtue Hall +to corroborate, after she had vexed his kind heart by endless +prevarications.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_16" id="Page_16">[Pg 16]</a></span> But as Virtue Hall was later 'got at' by the other +side and recanted, we leave her evidence on one side.</p> + +<p>On February 21-26 Mary Squires was tried at the Old Bailey and +condemned to death, Virtue Hall corroborating Elizabeth. Mrs. Wells +was branded on the hand. Three Dorset witnesses to the gipsy's <i>alibi</i> +were not credited, and Fortune and Judith Natus did not appear in +court, though subpœnaed. In 1754 they accounted for this by their +fear of the mob. The three sceptics, Nash, Hague, and Aldridge, held +their peace. The Lord Mayor, Sir Crispin Gascoyne, who was on the +bench at the trial of Squires and Wells, was dissatisfied. He secured +many affidavits which seem unimpeachable, for the gipsy's <i>alibi</i>, and +so did the other side for her presence at Enfield. He also got at +Virtue Hall, or rather a sceptical Dr. Hill got at her and handed her +over to Gascoyne. She, as we saw, recanted. George Squires, the +gipsy's son, with an attorney, worked up the evidence for the gipsy's +<i>alibi</i>; she received a free pardon, and on April 29, 1754, there +began the trial of Elizabeth Canning for 'wilful and corrupt perjury.'</p> + +<p>Mr. Davy, opening for the Crown, charitably suggested that Elizabeth +had absconded 'to preserve her character,' and had told a romantic +story to raise money! 'And, having by this time subdued all remains of +virtue, she preferred the offer of money, though she must wade through +innocent blood'—that of the gipsy—'to attain it.'<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_17" id="Page_17">[Pg 17]</a></span></p> + +<p>These hypotheses are absurd; her character certainly needed no saving.</p> + +<p>Mr. Davy then remarked on the gross improbabilities of the story of +Elizabeth. They are glaring, but, as Fielding said, so are the +improbabilities of the facts. Somebody had stripped and starved and +imprisoned the girl; that is absolutely certain. She was brought +'within an inch of her life.' She did not suffer all these things to +excite compassion; that is out of the question. Had she plunged into +'gaiety' on New Year's night, the consequences would be other than +instant starvation. They might have been 'guilty splendour.' She had +been most abominably misused, and it was to the last degree improbable +that any mortal should so misuse an honest quiet lass. But the grossly +improbable had certainly occurred. It was next to impossible that, in +1856, a respectable-looking man should offer to take a little boy for +a drive, and that, six weeks later, the naked body of the boy, who had +been starved to death, should be found in a ditch near Acton. But the +facts occurred.<a name="FNanchor_2_2" id="FNanchor_2_2"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> To Squires and Wells a rosy girl might prove more +valuable than a little boy to anybody.</p> + +<p>That Elizabeth could live for a month on a loaf did not surprise Mrs. +Canning. 'When things were very hard with her,' said Mrs. Canning, +'the child had lived on half a roll a day.' This is that other touch +which, with the story of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_18" id="Page_18">[Pg 18]</a></span> the farthing, helps to make me a partisan of +Elizabeth.</p> + +<p>Mr. Davy said that on January 31, before Chitty, Elizabeth 'did not +pretend to certainty' about Mrs. Wells. She never did at any time; she +neither knew, nor affected to know, anything about Mrs. Wells. She had +only seen a tall, swarthy woman, a dark girl, and a fair girl, whom +she recognised in the gipsy, her daughter, and Virtue Hall. Mr. Davy +preferred Nash's evidence to that of all the neighbours, and even to +Chitty's notes, when Nash and Chitty varied. Mr. Davy said that Nash +'withdrew his assistance' after the visit to the house. It was proved, +we saw, by his letter of February 10, that he did not withdraw his +assistance, which, like that of Mr. Tracy Tupman, took the form of +hoping that other people would subscribe money.</p> + +<p>Certain varieties of statement as to the time when Elizabeth finished +the water proved fatal, and the penthouse of Chitty's notes was played +for all that it was worth. It was alleged, as matter of fact, that +Adamson brought the broken pitcher into the house—this by Mr. Willes, +later Solicitor-General. Now, for three months before February 1, +Adamson had not seen Elizabeth Canning, nor had he heard her +description of the room. He was riding, and could not carry a gallon +pitcher in his coat pocket. He could not carry it in John Gilpin's +fashion; and, whatever else was denied, it was admitted that from the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_19" id="Page_19">[Pg 19]</a></span> +first Elizabeth mentioned the pitcher. The statement of Mr. Willes, +that Adamson brought in the pitcher, was one that no barrister should +have made.</p> + +<p>The Natus pair were now brought in to say that they slept in the loft +during the time that Elizabeth said she was there. As a reason for not +giving evidence at the gipsy's trial, they alleged fear of the mob, as +we saw.</p> + +<p>The witnesses for the gipsy's <i>alibi</i> were called. Mrs. Hopkins, of +South Parrot, Dorset, was not very confident that she had seen the +gipsy at her inn on December 29, 1752. She, if Mary Squires she was, +told Mrs. Hopkins that they 'sold hardware'; in fact they sold soft +ware, smuggled nankin and other stuffs. Alice Farnham recognised the +gipsies, whom she had seen after New Christmas (new style). 'They said +they would come to see me after the Old Christmas holidays'—which is +unlikely!</p> + +<p>Lucy Squires, the daughter, was clean, well dressed, and, <i>teste</i> Mr. +Davy, she was pretty. She was not called.</p> + +<p>George Squires was next examined. He had been well tutored as to what +he did <i>after</i> December 29, but could not tell where he was on +Christmas Day, four days earlier! His memory only existed from the +hour when he arrived at Mrs. Hopkins's inn, at South Parrot (December +29, 1752). His own counsel must have been amazed; but in +cross-examination Mr. Morton showed that,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_20" id="Page_20">[Pg 20]</a></span> for all time up to December +29, 1752, George's memory was an utter blank. On January 1, George +dined, he said, at Abbotsbury, with one Clarke, a sweetheart of his +sister. They had two boiled fowls. But Clarke said they had only 'a +part of a fowl between them.' There was such a discrepancy of evidence +here as to time on the part of one of the gipsy's witnesses that Mr. +Davy told him he was drunk. Yet he persisted that he kissed Lucy +Squires, at an hour when Lucy, to suit the case, could not have been +present.</p> + +<p>There was documentary evidence—a letter of Lucy to Clarke, from +Basingstoke. It was dated January 18, 1753, but the figure after 175 +was torn off the postmark; that was the only injury to the letter. Had +there not been a battalion of as hard swearers to the presence of the +gipsies at Enfield in December-January 1752-1753 as there was to their +absence from Enfield and to their presence in Dorset, the gipsy party +would have proved their case. As matters stand, we must remember that +the Dorset evidence had been organised by a solicitor, that the route +was one which the Squires party habitually used; that by the +confession of Mr. Davy, the prosecuting counsel, the Squires family +'stood in' with the smuggling interest, compact and unscrupulous. They +were 'gipsies dealing in smuggled goods,' said Mr. Davy. Again, while +George Squires had been taught his lesson like a parrot, the +prosecution dared not call<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_21" id="Page_21">[Pg 21]</a></span> his sister, pretty Lucy, as a witness. +They said that George was 'stupid,' but that Lucy was much more dull. +The more stupid was George, the less unlikely was he to kidnap +Elizabeth Canning as prize of war after robbing her. But she did not +swear to him.</p> + +<p>As to the presence of the gipsies at Mrs. Wells's, at Enfield, as +early as January 19, Mrs. Howard swore. Her husband lived on his own +property, and her house, with a well, which she allowed the villagers +to use, was opposite Mrs. Wells's. Mrs. Howard had seen the gipsy girl +at the well, and been curtsied to by her, at a distance of three or +four yards. She had heard earlier from her servants of the arrival of +the gipsies, and had 'looked wishfully,' or earnestly, at them. She +was not so positive as to Mary Squires, whom she had seen at a greater +distance.</p> + +<p>William Headland swore to seeing Mary Squires on January 9; he fixed +the date by a market-day. Also, on the 12th, he saw her in Mrs. +Wells's house. He picked up a blood-stained piece of thin lead under +the window from which Elizabeth escaped, and took it to his mother, +who corroborated. Samuel Story, who knew Mary Squires from of old, saw +her on December 22 in White Webs Lane, so called from the old house +noted as a meeting-place of the Gunpowder Plot conspirators. Story was +a retired clockmaker. Mr. Smith, a tenant of the Duke of Portland, saw +Mary Squires in his cowhouse on December 15, 1752. She wanted leave<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_22" id="Page_22">[Pg 22]</a></span> +to camp there, as she had done in other years. The gipsies then lost a +pony. Several witnesses swore to this, and one swore to conversations +with Mary Squires about the pony. She gave her name, and said that it +was on the clog by which the beast was tethered.</p> + +<p>Loomworth Dane swore to Mary Squires, whom he had observed so closely +as to note a great hole in the heel of her stocking. The date was Old +Christmas Day, 1752. Dane was landlord of the Bell, at Enfield, and a +maker of horse-collars. Sarah Star, whose house was next to Mrs. +Wells's, saw Mary Squires in her own house on January 18 or 19; Mary +wanted to buy pork, and hung about for three-quarters of an hour, +offering to tell fortunes. Mrs. Star got rid of her by a present of +some pig's flesh. She fixed the date by a document which she had given +to Miles, a solicitor; it was not in court. James Pratt swore to talk +with Mary Squires before Christmas as to her lost pony; she had then a +man with her. He was asked to look round the court to see if the man +was present, whereon George Squires ducked his head, and was rebuked +by the prosecuting counsel, Mr. Davy, who said 'It does not look +well.' It was hardly the demeanour of conscious innocence. But Pratt +would not swear to him. Mary Squires told Pratt that she would consult +'a cunning-man about the lost pony,' and Mr. Nares foolishly asked why +a cunning woman should consult a cunning man? 'One black fellow will +often tell you that he can<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_23" id="Page_23">[Pg 23]</a></span> and does something magical, whilst all the +time he is perfectly aware that he cannot, and yet firmly believes +that some other man can really do it.' So write Messrs. Spencer and +Gillen in their excellent book on <i>The Native Tribes of Central +Australia</i> (p. 130); and so it was with the gipsy, who, though a 'wise +woman,' believed in a 'wise man.'</p> + +<p>This witness (Pratt) said, with great emphasis: 'Upon my oath, that is +the woman.... I am positive in my conscience, and I am sure that it +was no other woman; this is the woman I saw at that blessed time.' +Moreover, she gave him her name as the name on the clog of the lost +pony. The affair of the pony was just what would impress a man like +Pratt, and, on the gipsies' own version, they had no pony with them in +their march from Dorset.</p> + +<p>All this occurred <i>before</i> Pratt left his house, which was on December +22, 'three days before New Christmas.' He then left Enfield for +Cheshunt, and his evidence carries conviction.</p> + +<p>In some other cases witnesses were very stupid—could not tell in what +month Christmas fell. One witness, an old woman, made an error, +confusing January 16 with January 23. A document on which she relied +gave the later date.</p> + +<p>If witnesses on either side were a year out in their reckoning, the +discrepancies would be accountable; but Pratt, for example, could not +forget when he left Enfield for Cheshunt, and Farmer<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_24" id="Page_24">[Pg 24]</a></span> Smith and Mrs. +Howard could be under no such confusion of memory. It may be +prejudice, but I rather prefer the Enfield evidence in some ways, as +did Mr. Paget. In others, the Dorset evidence seems better.</p> + +<p>Elizabeth had sworn to having asked a man to point out the way to +London after she escaped into the lane beside Mrs. Wells's house. A +man, Thomas Bennet, swore that on January 29, 1753, he met 'a +miserable, poor wretch, about half-past four,' 'near the ten-mile +stone,' in a lane. She asked her way to London; 'she said she was +affrighted by the tanner's dog.' The tanner's house was about two +hundred yards nearer London, and the prosecution made much of this, as +if a dog, with plenty of leisure and a feud against tramps, could not +move two hundred yards, or much more, if he were taking a walk abroad, +to combat the object of his dislike. Bennet knew that the dog was the +tanner's; probably he saw the dog when he met the wayfarer, and it +does not follow that the wayfarer herself called it 'the tanner's +dog.' Bennet fixed the date with precision. Four days later, hearing +of the trouble at Mrs. Wells's, Bennet said, 'I will be hanged if I +did not meet the young woman near this place and told her the way to +London.' Mr. Davy could only combat Bennet by laying stress on the +wayfarer's talking of 'the tanner's dog.' But the dog, at the moment +of the meeting, was probably well in view. Bennet knew him, and Bennet +was not asked, 'Did the woman<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_25" id="Page_25">[Pg 25]</a></span> call the dog "the tanner's dog," or do +you say this of your own knowledge?' Moreover, the tannery was well in +view, and the hound may have conspicuously started from that base of +operations. Mr. Davy's reply was a quibble.</p> + +<p>His closing speech merely took up the old line: Elizabeth was absent +to conceal 'a misfortune'; her cunning mother was her accomplice. +There was no proof of Elizabeth's unchastity; nay, she had an +excellent character, 'but there is a time, gentlemen, when people +begin to be wicked.' If engaged for the other side Mr. Davy would have +placed his '<i>Nemo repente fuit turpissimus</i>'—no person of unblemished +character wades straight into 'innocent blood,' to use his own phrase.</p> + +<p>The Recorder summed up against Elizabeth. He steadily assumed that +Nash was always right, and the neighbours always wrong, as to the +girl's original story. He said nothing of Bennet; the tanner's dog had +done for Bennet. He said that, if the Enfield witnesses were right, +the Dorset witnesses were wilfully perjured. He did not add that, if +the Dorset witnesses were right, the Enfield testifiers were perjured.</p> + +<p>The jury brought in a verdict of 'Guilty of perjury, but not wilful +and corrupt.' This was an acquittal, but, the Recorder refusing the +verdict, they did what they were desired to do, and sentence was +passed. Two jurors made affidavit that they never intended a +conviction. The whole point had<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_26" id="Page_26">[Pg 26]</a></span> turned, in the minds of the jury, on +a discrepancy as to when Elizabeth finished the water in the broken +pitcher—on Wednesday, January 27, or on Friday, January 29. Both +accounts could not be true. Here, then, was 'perjury,' thought the +jury, but not 'wilful and corrupt,' not purposeful. But the jury had +learned that 'the court was impatient;' they had already brought +Elizabeth in guilty of perjury, by which they meant guilty of a casual +discrepancy not unnatural in a person hovering between life and death. +They thought that they could not go back on their 'Guilty,' and so +they went all the way to 'corrupt and wilful perjury'—murder by false +oath—and consistently added 'an earnest recommendation to mercy'!</p> + +<p>By a majority of one out of seventeen judges, Elizabeth was banished +for seven years to New England. She was accused in the Press of being +an 'enthusiast,' but the Rev. William Reyner, who attended her in +prison, publicly proclaimed her a good Churchwoman and a good girl +(June 7, 1754). Elizabeth (June 24) stuck to her guns in a +manifesto—she had not once 'knowingly deviated from the truth.'</p> + +<p>Mr. Davy had promised the jury that when Elizabeth was once condemned +all would come out—the whole secret. But though the most careful +attempts were made to discover her whereabouts from January 1 to +January 29, 1753, nothing was ever found out—a fact most easily +explained by<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_27" id="Page_27">[Pg 27]</a></span> the hypothesis that she was where she said she was, at +Mother Wells's.</p> + +<p>As to Elizabeth's later fortunes, accounts differ, but she quite +certainly married, in Connecticut, a Mr. Treat, a respectable yeoman, +said to have been opulent. She died in Connecticut in June 1773, +leaving a family.</p> + +<p>In my opinion Elizabeth Canning was a victim of the common sense of +the eighteenth century. She told a very strange tale, and common-sense +holds that what is strange cannot be true. Yet something strange had +undeniably occurred. It was very strange if Elizabeth on the night of +January 1, retired to become a mother, of which there was no +appearance, while of an amour even gossip could not furnish a hint. It +was very strange if, having thus retired, she was robbed, starved, +stripped and brought to death's door, bleeding and broken down. It was +very strange that no vestige of evidence as to her real place of +concealment could ever be discovered. It was amazingly strange that a +girl, previously and afterwards of golden character, should in a +moment aim by perjury at 'innocent blood.' But the eighteenth century, +as represented by Mr. Davy, Mr. Willes, the barrister who fabled in +court, and the Recorder, found none of these things one half so +strange as Elizabeth Canning's story. Mr. Henry Fielding, who had some +knowledge of human nature, was of the same opinion as the present +candid inquirer. 'In this case,' writes the author of <i>Tom Jones</i>, +'one of the most simple<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_28" id="Page_28">[Pg 28]</a></span> girls I ever saw, if she be a wicked one, +hath been too hard for me. I am firmly persuaded that Elizabeth +Canning is a poor, honest, simple, innocent girl.'</p> + +<p><i>Moi aussi</i>, but—I would not have condemned the gipsy!</p> + +<hr style="width: 45%;" /> + +<p>In this case the most perplexing thing of all is to be found in the +conflicting unpublished affidavits sworn in March 1753, when memories +as to the whereabouts of the gipsies were fresh. They form a great +mass of papers in State Papers Domestic, at the Record Office. I owe +to Mr. Courtney Kenny my knowledge of the two unpublished letters of +Fielding to the Duke of Newcastle which follow:</p> + +<p>'My Lord Duke,—I received an order from my Lord Chancellor +immediately after the breaking up of the Council to lay before your +Grace all the Affidavits I had taken since the Gipsy Trial which +related to that Affair. I then told the Messenger that I had taken +none, as indeed the fact is the Affidavits of which I gave my Lord +Chancellor an Abstract having been all sworn before Justices of the +Peace in the Neighbourhood of Endfield, and remain I believe in the +Possession of an Attorney in the City.</p> + +<p>'However in Consequence of the Commands with which your Grace was +pleased to honour me yesterday, I sent my Clerk immediately to the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_29" id="Page_29">[Pg 29]</a></span> +Attorney to acquaint him with the Commands, which I doubt not he will +instantly obey. This I did from my great Duty to your Grace, for I +have long had no Concern in this Affair, nor have I seen any of the +Parties lately unless once when I was desired to send for the Girl +(Canning) to my House that a great number of Noblemen and Gentlemen +might see her and ask her what Questions they pleased. I am, with the +highest Duty,</p> + +<p style="text-align: right">'My Lord,</p> + +<p style="text-align: right"> +'Your Grace's most obedient<br /> +and most humble Servant,<br /> +</p> + +<p style="text-align: right">'<span class="smcap">Henry Fielding.</span></p> + +<p> +'Ealing; April 14, 1753.<br /> +<span style="margin-left: 1.5em;">'His Grace the Duke of Newcastle.'</span><br /> +</p> + +<p> +'<i>Endorsed</i>: Ealing, April 14th, 1753<br /> +<span style="margin-left: 2.5em;">Mr. Fielding.</span><br /> +<span style="margin-left: 2.5em;">R. 16th.'</span><br /> +</p> + +<hr style="width: 25%;" /> + +<p>'My Lord Duke,—I am extremely concerned to see by a Letter which I +have just received from Mr. Jones by Command of your Grace that the +Persons concerned for the Prosecution have not yet attended your Grace +with the Affidavits in Canning's Affair. I do assure you upon my +Honour that I sent to them the moment I first received your Grace's +Commands, and having after three Messages prevailed with them to come +to me I desired them to fetch the Affidavits that I might send them to +your Grace, being not able to wait on you in Person. This they said +they could not do, but would go to Mr. Hume Campbell their<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_30" id="Page_30">[Pg 30]</a></span> Council, +and prevail with him to attend your Grace with all their Affidavits, +many of which I found were sworn after the Day mentioned in the Order +of Council. I told them I apprehended the latter could not be admitted +but insisted in the strongest Terms on their laying the others +immediately before your Grace, and they at last promised me they +would, nor have I ever seen them since.</p> + +<p>'I have now again ordered my Clerk to go to them to inform them of the +last Commands I have received, but as I have no Compulsory Power over +them I cannot answer for their Behaviour, which <i>indeed I have long +disliked</i>, and have therefore long ago declined giving them any +advice, nor would I <i>unless in Obedience to your Grace have anything +to say to a set of the most obstinate fools I ever saw, and who seem +to me rather to act from a Spleen against my Lord Mayor, than from any +motive of Protecting Innocence, tho' that was certainly their motive +at first</i>.<a name="FNanchor_3_3" id="FNanchor_3_3"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> In Truth, if I am not deceived, I suspect that they +desire that the Gipsey should be pardoned, and then to convince the +World that she was guilty in order to cast the greater Reflection on +him who was principally instrumental in obtaining such Pardon. I +conclude with assuring your Grace that I have acted in this Affair, as +I shall on all Occasions, with the most dutiful Regard to your +Commands, and that if my Life had been at Stake, as many know, I +could<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_31" id="Page_31">[Pg 31]</a></span> have done no more. I am, with the highest Respect,</p> + +<p style="text-align: right">'My Lord Duke,</p> + +<p style="text-align: right"> +'Yr. Grace's most obedient<br /> +and most humble Servant,<br /> +</p> + +<p style="text-align: right">'<span class="smcap">Henry Fielding.</span></p> + +<p> +'Ealing; April 27, 1753.<br /> +<span style="margin-left: 1.5em;">'His Grace the Duke of Newcastle.'</span><br /> +</p> + +<p> +<i>Endorsed</i>: 'Ealing: April 27th, 1753.<br /> +<span style="margin-left: 2.5em;">Mr. Fielding.'</span><br /> +</p> + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_32" id="Page_32">[Pg 32]</a></span></p> +<h2><a name="II" id="II"></a>II</h2> + +<h2><i>THE MURDER OF ESCOVEDO</i></h2> + + +<p> </p> + + +<p>'<span class="smcap">Many</span> a man,' says De Quincey, 'can trace his ruin to a murder, of +which, perhaps, he thought little enough at the time.' This remark +applies with peculiar force to Philip II. of Spain, to his secretary, +Antonio Perez, to the steward of Perez, to his page, and to a number +of professional ruffians. All of these, from the King to his own +scullion, were concerned in the slaying of Juan de Escovedo, secretary +of Philip's famous natural brother, Don John of Austria. All of them, +in different degrees, had bitter reason to regret a deed which, at the +moment, seemed a commonplace political incident.</p> + +<p>The puzzle in the case of Escovedo does not concern the manner of his +taking off, or the identity of his murderers. These things are +perfectly well known; the names of the guilty, from the King to the +bravo, are ascertained. The mystery clouds the motives for the deed. +<i>Why</i> was Escovedo done to death? Did the King have him assassinated +for purely political reasons, really inadequate, but magnified by the +suspicious royal<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_33" id="Page_33">[Pg 33]</a></span> fancy? Or were the secretary of Philip II. and the +monarch of Spain rivals in the affections of a one-eyed widow of rank? +and did the secretary, Perez, induce Philip to give orders for +Escovedo's death, because Escovedo threatened to reveal to the King +their guilty intrigue? Sir William Stirling-Maxwell and Monsieur +Mignet accepted, with shades of difference, this explanation. Mr. +Froude, on the other hand, held that Philip acted for political +reasons, and with the full approval of his very ill-informed +conscience. There was no lady as a motive in the case, in Mr. Froude's +opinion. A third solution is possible: Philip, perhaps, wished to +murder Escovedo for political reasons, and without reference to the +tender passion; but Philip was slow and irresolute, while Perez, who +dreaded Escovedo's interference with his love affair, urged his royal +master on to the crime which he was shirking. We may never know the +exact truth, but at least we can study a state of morals and manners +at Madrid, compared with which the blundering tragedies of Holyrood, +in Queen Mary's time, seem mere child's play. The 'lambs' of Bothwell +are lambs playful and gentle when set beside the instruments of Philip +II.</p> + +<p>The murdered man, Escovedo, and the 'first murderer,' as Shakespeare +says, Antonio Perez, had both been trained in the service of Ruy +Gomez, Philip's famous minister. Gomez had a wife, Aña de Mendoza, +who, being born in 1546, was aged thirty-two, not thirty-eight (as M. +Mignet<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_34" id="Page_34">[Pg 34]</a></span> says), in 1578, when Escovedo was killed. But 1546 may be a +misprint for 1540. She was blind in one eye in 1578, but probably both +her eyes were brilliant in 1567, when she really seems to have been +Philip's mistress, or was generally believed so to be. Eleven years +later, at the date of the murder, there is no obvious reason to +suppose that Philip was constant to her charms. Her husband, created +Prince d'Eboli, had died in 1573 (or as Mr. Froude says in 1567); the +Princess was now a widow, and really, if she chose to distinguish her +husband's old secretary, at this date the King's secretary, Antonio +Perez, there seems no reason to suppose that Philip would have +troubled himself about the matter. That he still loved Aña with a +constancy far from royal, that she loved Perez, that Perez and she +feared that Escovedo would denounce them to the King, is M. Mignet's +theory of the efficient cause of Escovedo's murder. Yet M. Mignet +holds, and rightly, that Philip had made up his mind, as far as he +ever did make up his mind, to kill Escovedo, long before that +diplomatist became an inconvenient spy on the supposed lovers.</p> + +<p>To raise matters to the tragic height of the <i>Phædra</i> of Euripides, +Perez was said to be the natural son of his late employer, Gomez, the +husband of his alleged mistress. Probably Perez was nothing of the +sort; he was the bastard of a man of his own name, and his alleged +mistress, the widow of Gomez, may even have circulated the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_35" id="Page_35">[Pg 35]</a></span> other +story to prove that her relations with Perez, though intimate, were +innocent. They are a pretty set of people!</p> + +<p>As for Escovedo, he and Perez had been friends from their youth +upwards. While Perez passed from the service of Gomez to that of +Philip, in 1572 Escovedo was appointed secretary to the nobly +adventurous Don John of Austria. The Court believed that he was +intended to play the part of spy on Don John, but he fell under the +charm of that gallant heart, and readily accepted, if he did not +inspire, the most daring projects of the victor of Lepanto, the Sword +of Christendom. This was very inconvenient for the leaden-footed +Philip, who never took time by the forelock, but always brooded over +schemes and let opportunity pass. Don John, on the other hand, was all +for forcing the game, and, when he was sent to temporise and +conciliate in the Low Countries, and withdraw the Spanish army of +occupation, his idea was to send the Spanish forces out of the +Netherlands by sea. When once they were on blue water he would make a +descent on England; rescue the captive Mary Stuart; marry her (he was +incapable of fear!); restore the Catholic religion, and wear the +English crown. A good plot, approved of by the Pope, but a plot which +did not suit the genius of Philip. He placed his leaden foot upon the +scheme and on various other gallant projects, conceived in the best +manner of Alexandre Dumas. Now Escovedo, to whom Don<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_36" id="Page_36">[Pg 36]</a></span> John was +devotedly attached, was the soul of all these chivalrous designs, and +for that reason Philip regarded him as a highly dangerous person. +Escovedo was at Madrid when Don John first went to the Low Countries +(1576). He kept urging Philip to accept Don John's fiery proposals, +though Antonio Perez entreated him to be cautious. At this date, 1576, +Perez was really the friend of Escovedo. But Escovedo would not be +advised; he wrote an impatient memorial to the King, denouncing his +stitchless policy (<i>descosido</i>), his dilatory, shambling, idealess +proceedings. So, at least, Sir William Stirling-Maxwell asserts in his +<i>Don John of Austria</i>: 'the word used by Escovedo was <i>descosido</i>, +"unstitched."' But Mr. Froude says that <i>Philip</i> used the expression, +later, in reference to <i>another</i> letter of Escovedo's which he also +called 'a bloody letter' (January 1578). Here Mr. Froude can hardly be +right, for Philip's letter containing that vulgar expression is of +July 1577.</p> + +<p>In any case, in 1576 Philip was induced, by the intercession of Perez, +to overlook the fault, and Escovedo, whose presence Don John demanded, +was actually sent to him in December 1576. From this date both Don +John and Escovedo wrote familiarly to their friend Perez, while Perez +lured them on, and showed their letters to the King. Just as Charles +I. commissioned the Duke of Hamilton to spy on the Covenanted nobles, +and pretend to sympathise with them, and talk in their godly style, +so<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_37" id="Page_37">[Pg 37]</a></span> Philip gave Perez orders to entrap Don John and Escovedo. Perez +said: 'I want no theology but my own to justify me,' and Philip wrote +in reply, 'My theology takes the same view of the matter as your own.'</p> + +<p>At this time, 1577, Perez, though a gambler and a profligate, who took +presents from all hands, must have meant nothing worse, on M. Mignet's +theory, than to serve Philip as he loved to be served, and keep him +well informed of Don John's designs. Escovedo was not yet, according +to M. Mignet, an obstacle to the amours of Perez and the King's +mistress, the Princess d'Eboli. Sir William Stirling-Maxwell, on the +other hand, holds that the object of Perez already was to ruin Don +John; for what reason Sir William owns that he cannot discover. Indeed +Perez had no such object, unless Don John confided to him projects +treasonous or dangerous to the Government of his own master, the King.</p> + +<p>Now did Don John, or Escovedo, entrust Perez with designs not merely +chivalrous and impracticable, but actually traitorous? Certainly Don +John did nothing of the kind. Escovedo left him and went, without +being called for, to Spain, arriving in July 1577. During his absence +Don John defeated the Dutch Protestants in the battle of Gemblours, on +January 31, 1578. He then wrote a letter full of chivalrous loyalty to +Escovedo and Perez at Madrid. He would make Philip master indeed of +the Low Countries; he<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_38" id="Page_38">[Pg 38]</a></span> asked Escovedo and Perez to inspire the King +with resolution. To do that was impossible, but Philip could never +have desired to murder Escovedo merely because he asked help for Don +John. Yet, no sooner did Escovedo announce his return to Spain, in +July 1577, than Philip, in a letter to Perez, said, 'we must hasten to +despatch him before he kills us.' There seems to be no doubt that the +letter in which this phrase occurs is authentic, though we have it +only in a copy. But is the phrase correctly translated? The words +'<i>priesa á despacherle antes que nos mate</i>' certainly may be rendered, +'we must be quick and despatch <i>him</i>' (Escovedo) 'before he kills +<i>us</i>.' But Mr. Froude, much more lenient to Philip than to Mary +Stuart, proposes to render the phrase, 'we must despatch Escovedo +quickly' (<i>i.e.</i> send him about his business) 'before he worries us to +death.' Mr. Froude thus denies that, in 1577, Philip already meant to +kill Escovedo. It is unlucky for Mr. Froude's theory, and for Philip's +character, if the King used the phrase <i>twice</i>. In March 1578 he wrote +to Perez, about Escovedo, 'act quickly <i>antes que nos mate</i>,—before +he kills us.' So Perez averred, at least, but is his date correct? +This time Perez did act, and Escovedo was butchered! If Perez tells +truth, in 1577, Philip meant what he said, 'Despatch him before he +kills us.'</p> + +<p>Why did Philip thus dread Escovedo? We have merely the published +statements of Perez, in his account of the affair. After giving the +general<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_39" id="Page_39">[Pg 39]</a></span> causes of Philip's distrust of Don John, and the ideas which +a deeply suspicious monarch may very well have entertained, +considering the adventurous character of his brother, Perez adds a +special charge against Escovedo. He vowed, says Perez, that, after +conquering England, he and Don John would attack Spain. Escovedo asked +for the captaincy of a castle on a rock commanding the harbour of +Santander; he was <i>alcalde</i> of that town. He and Don John would use +this fortress, as Aramis and Fouquet, in the novel of Dumas, meant to +use Belle Isle, against their sovereign. As a matter of fact, Escovedo +had asked for the command of Mogro, the fortress commanding Santander, +in the spring of 1577, and Perez told Philip that the place should be +strengthened, for the protection of the harbour, but not entrusted to +Escovedo. Don John's loyalty could never have contemplated the use of +the place as a keep to be held in an attack on his King. But, if Perez +had, in 1577, no grudge against Escovedo as being perilous to his +alleged amour with the Princess d'Eboli, then the murderous plan of +Philip must have sprung from the intense suspiciousness of his own +nature, not from the promptings of Perez.</p> + +<p>Escovedo reached Spain in July 1577. He was not killed till March 31, +1578, though attempts on his life were made some weeks earlier. M. +Mignet argues that, till the early spring of 1578, Philip held his +hand because Perez lulled his fears; that Escovedo then began to +threaten to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_40" id="Page_40">[Pg 40]</a></span> disclose the love affair of Perez to his royal rival, and +that Perez, in his own private interest, now changed his tune, and, in +place of mollifying Philip, urged him to the crime. But Philip was so +dilatory that he could not even commit a murder with decent +promptitude. Escovedo was not dangerous, even to his mind, while he +was apart from Don John. But as weeks passed, Don John kept insisting, +by letter, on the return of Escovedo, and for <i>that</i> reason, possibly, +Philip screwed his courage to the (literally) 'sticking' point, and +Escovedo was 'stuck.' Major Martin Hume, however, argues that, by this +time, circumstances had changed, and Philip had now no motive for +murder.</p> + +<p>The impression of M. Mignet, and of Sir William Stirling-Maxwell, the +biographer of Don John, is quite different. They hold that the +Princess d'Eboli, in 1578, was Philip's mistress; that she deceived +him with Perez; that Escovedo threatened to tell all, and that Perez +therefore hurried on his murder. Had this been the state of affairs, +would Escovedo have constantly accepted the invitations of Perez to +dinner? The men would necessarily have been on the worst of terms, if +Escovedo was threatening Perez, but Escovedo, in fact, kept on dining +with Perez. Again, the policy of Perez would have been to send +Escovedo where he wanted to go, to Flanders, well out of the way, back +to Don John. It seems probable enough, though not certain, that, in +1567, the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_41" id="Page_41">[Pg 41]</a></span> Princess and Philip were lovers. But it is, most unlikely, +and it is not proved, that Philip was still devoted to the lady in +1578. Some of the Princess's family, the Mendozas, now wanted to kill +Perez, as a dishonour to their blood. At the trial of Perez later, +much evidence was given to show that he loved the Princess, or was +suspected of doing so, but it is not shown that this was a matter +about which Philip had any reason to concern himself. Thus it is not +inconceivable that Escovedo disliked the relations between Perez and +the Princess, but nothing tends to show that he could have made +himself dangerous by revealing them to the King. Moreover, if he spoke +his mind to Perez on the matter, the two would not have remained, as +apparently they did, on terms of the most friendly intercourse. A +squire of Perez described a scene in which Escovedo threatened to +denounce the Princess, but how did the squire become a witness of the +scene, in which the Princess defied Escovedo in terms of singular +coarseness?</p> + +<p>At all events, when Philip consulted the Marquis of Los Velez on the +propriety of killing Escovedo rather than sending him back to Don +John, the reasons, which convinced the Marquis, were mere political +suspicions.</p> + +<p>It was at that time a question of conscience whether a king might have +a subject assassinated, if the royal motives, though sufficient, were +not such as could be revealed with safety in a court of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_42" id="Page_42">[Pg 42]</a></span> justice. On +these principles Queen Mary had a right to take Darnley off, for +excellent political causes which could not safely be made public; for +international reasons. Mary, however, unlike Philip, did not consult +her confessor, who believed her to be innocent of her husband's death. +The confessor of Philip told him that the King had a perfect right to +despatch Escovedo, and Philip gave his orders to Perez. He repeated, +says Perez, in 1578, his words used in 1577: 'Make haste before he +kills us.'</p> + +<p>As to this point of conscience, the right of a king to commit murder +on a subject for reasons of State, Protestant opinion seems to have +been lenient. When the Ruthvens were killed at Perth, on August 5, +1600, in an affair the most mysterious of all mysteries, the Rev. +Robert Bruce, a stern Presbyterian, refused to believe that James VI. +had not planned their slaughter. 'But your Majesty might have secret +reasons,' said Bruce to the King, who, naturally and truly, maintained +his own innocence. This looks as if Mr. Bruce, like the confessor of +Philip, held that a king had a right to murder a subject for secret +reasons of State. The Inquisition vigorously repudiated the doctrine, +when maintained by a Spanish preacher, but Knox approved of King +Henry's (Darnley's) murder of Riccio. My sympathies, on this point, +are with the Inquisition.</p> + +<p>Perez, having been commissioned to organise the crime, handed on the +job to Martinez, his<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_43" id="Page_43">[Pg 43]</a></span> steward. Martinez asked a ruffianly page, +Enriquez, 'if I knew anybody in my country' (Murcia) 'who would stick +a knife into a person.' Enriquez said, 'I will speak about it to a +muleteer of my acquaintance, as, in fact, I did, and the muleteer +undertook the business.' But later, hearing that a man of importance +was to be knifed, Enriquez told Perez that a muleteer was not noble +enough: the job 'must be entrusted to persons of more consideration.'</p> + +<p>Enriquez, in 1585, confessed for a good reason; Perez had absurdly +mismanaged the business. All sorts of people were employed, and, after +the murder, they fled, and began to die punctually in an alarming +manner. Naturally Enriquez thought that Perez was acting like the +Mures of Auchendrane, who despatched a series of witnesses and +accomplices in their murder of Kennedy. As they always needed a new +accomplice to kill the previous accomplice, then another to slay the +slayer, and so on, the Mures if unchecked would have depopulated +Scotland. Enriquez surmised that <i>his</i> turn to die would soon come; so +he confessed, and was corroborated by Diego Martinez. Thus the facts +came out, and this ought to be a lesson to murderers.</p> + +<p>As the muleteer hung fire, Perez determined to poison Escovedo. But he +did not in the least know how to set about it. Science was hardly in +her infancy. If you wanted to poison a man in Scotland, you had to +rely on a vulgar witch, or<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_44" id="Page_44">[Pg 44]</a></span> send a man to France, at great expense, to +buy the stuff, and the messenger was detected and tortured. The Court +of Spain was not more scientific.</p> + +<p>Martinez sent Enriquez to Murcia, to gather certain poisonous herbs, +and these were distilled by a venal apothecary. The poison was then +tried on a barndoor fowl, which was not one penny the worse. But +Martinez somehow procured 'a certain water that was good to be given +as a drink.' Perez asked Escovedo to dinner, Enriquez waited at table, +and in each cup of wine that Escovedo drank, he, rather +homœopathically, put 'a nutshellful of the water.' Escovedo was no +more poisoned than the cock of the earlier experiment. 'It was +ascertained that the beverage produced no effect whatever.'</p> + +<p>A few days later, Escovedo again dined with the hospitable Perez. On +this occasion they gave him some white powder in a dish of cream, and +also gave him the poisoned water in his wine, thinking it a pity to +waste that beverage. This time Escovedo was unwell, and again, when +Enriquez induced a scullion in the royal kitchen to put more of the +powder in a basin of broth in Escovedo's own house. For this the poor +kitchenmaid who cooked the broth was hanged in the public square of +Madrid, <i>sin culpa</i>.</p> + +<p>Pious Philip was demoralising his subjects at a terrible rate! But you +cannot make an omelet without breaking eggs. Philip slew that girl of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_45" id="Page_45">[Pg 45]</a></span> +his kitchen as surely as if he had taken a gun and shot her, but +probably the royal confessor said that all was as it should be.</p> + +<p>In spite of the resources of Spanish science, Escovedo persisted in +living, and Perez determined that he must be shot or stabbed. Enriquez +went off to his own country to find a friend who was an assassin, and +to get 'a stiletto with a very fine blade, much better than a pistol +to kill a man with.' Enriquez, keeping a good thing in the family, +enlisted his brother: and Martinez, from Aragon, brought 'two proper +kind of men,' Juan de Nera and Insausti, who, with the King's +scullion, undertook the job. Perez went to Alcala for Holy Week, just +as the good Regent Murray left Edinburgh on the morning of Darnley's +murder, after sermon. 'Have a halibi' was the motto of both gentlemen.</p> + +<p>The underlings dogged Escovedo in the evening of Easter Monday. +Enriquez did not come across him, but Insausti did his business with +one thrust, in a workmanlike way. The scullion hurried to Alcala, and +told the news to Perez, who 'was highly delighted.'</p> + +<p>We leave this good and faithful servant, and turn to Don John. When +he, far away, heard the news he was under no delusions about love +affairs as the cause of the crime. He wrote to his wretched brother +the King 'in grief greater than I can describe.' The King, he said, +had lost the best of servants, 'a man without the aims and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_46" id="Page_46">[Pg 46]</a></span> craft +which are now in vogue.' 'I may with just reason consider <i>myself</i> to +have been the cause of his death,' the blow was really dealt at Don +John. He expressed the most touching anxiety for the wife and children +of Escovedo, who died poor, because (unlike Perez) 'he had clean +hands.' He besought Philip, by the love of our Lord, 'to use every +possible diligence to know whence the blow came and to punish it with +the rigour which it deserves.' He himself will pay the most pressing +debts of the dead. (From Beaumont, April 20, 1578.)</p> + +<p>Probably the royal caitiff was astonished by this letter. On September +20 Don John wrote his last letter to his brother 'desiring more than +life some decision on your Majesty's part. Give me orders for the +conduct of affairs!' Philip scrawled in the margin, 'I will not +answer.' But Don John had ended his letter 'Our lives are at stake, +and all we ask is to lose them with honour.' These are like the last +words of the last letter of the great Montrose to Charles II., 'with +the more alacrity and vigour I go to search my death.' Like Montrose +Don John 'carried with him fidelity and honour to the grave.' He died, +after a cruel illness, on October 1. Brantôme says that he was +poisoned by order of the King, at the instigation of Perez. 'The side +of his breast was yellow and black, as if burned, and crumbled at the +touch.' These things were always said when a great personage died in +his bed. They are probably untrue, but a king who could +conscientiously murder his brother's<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_47" id="Page_47">[Pg 47]</a></span> friend could as conscientiously, +and for the same reasons, murder his brother.</p> + +<p>The Princess d'Eboli rewarded and sheltered one of the murderers of +Escovedo. They were all gratified with chains of gold, silver cups, +abundance of golden <i>écus</i>, and commissions in the army; all were sent +out of the country, and some began to die strangely, which, as we saw, +frightened Enriquez into his confession (1585).</p> + +<p>At once Perez was suspected. He paid a visit of condolence to young +Escovedo: he spoke of a love affair of Escovedo's in Flanders; an +injured husband must be the guilty man! But suspicion darkened. Perez +complained to the King that he was dogged, watched, cross-examined by +the <i>alcalde</i> and his son. The Escovedo family had a friend in +Vasquez, another royal secretary. Knowing nothing of the King's guilt, +and jealous of Perez, he kept assuring the King that Perez was guilty: +that there was an amour, detected by Escovedo: that Escovedo perished +for a woman's sake: that Philip must investigate the case, and end the +scandal. The woman, of course, was the Princess d'Eboli. Philip cared +nothing for her, now at least. Mr. Froude says that Don Gaspar Moro, +in his work on the Princess, 'has disproved conclusively the imagined +<i>liaison</i> between the Princess and Philip II.' On the other hand, +Philip was darkly concerned in litigations about property, <i>against</i> +the Princess; these affairs Vasquez conducted, while Perez naturally +was on the side of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_48" id="Page_48">[Pg 48]</a></span> the widow of his benefactor. On these points, more +than a hundred letters of Vasquez exist. Meanwhile he left, and the +Escovedo family left, no stone unturned to prove that Perez murdered +Escovedo because Escovedo thwarted his amour with the Princess.</p> + +<p>Philip had promised, again and again, to stand by Perez. But the +affair was coming to light, and if it must come out, it suited Philip +that Vasquez should track Perez on the wrong trail, the trail of the +amour, not follow the right scent which led straight to the throne, +and the wretch who sat on it. But neither course could be quite +pleasant to the King.</p> + +<p>Perez offered to stand his trial, knowing that evidence against him +could not be found. His accomplices were far away; he would be +acquitted, as Bothwell was acquitted of Darnley's death. Philip could +not face the situation. He bade Perez consult the President of the +Council, De Pazos, a Bishop, and tell him all, while De Pazos should +mollify young Escovedo. The Bishop, a casuist, actually assured young +Escovedo that Perez and the Princess 'are as innocent as myself.' The +Bishop did not agree with the Inquisition: he could say that Perez was +innocent, because he only obeyed the King's murderous orders. Young +Escovedo retreated: Vasquez persevered, and the Princess d'Eboli, +writing to the King, called Vasquez 'a Moorish dog.' Philip had both +Perez and the Princess arrested, for Vasquez was not to be put down; +<i>his</i> business in con<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_49" id="Page_49">[Pg 49]</a></span>nection with the litigations was to pursue the +Princess, and Philip could not tell Vasquez that he was on the wrong +trail. The lady was sent to her estates; this satisfied Vasquez, and +Perez and he were bound over to keep the peace. But suspicion hung +about Perez, and Philip preferred that it should be so. The secretary +was accused of peculation, he had taken bribes on all hands, and he +was sentenced to heavy fines and imprisonment (January 1585). Now +Enriquez confessed, and a kind of secret inquiry, of which the records +survive, dragged its slow course along. Perez was under arrest, in a +house near a church. He dropped out of a window and rushed into the +church, the civil power burst open the gates, violated sanctuary, and +found our friend crouching, all draped with festoons of cobwebs, in +the timber work under the roof. The Church censured the magistrates, +but they had got Perez, and Philip defied the ecclesiastical courts. +Perez, a prisoner, tried to escape by the aid of one of Escovedo's +murderers, who was staunch, but failed, while his wife was ill treated +to make him give up all the compromising letters of the King. He did +give up two sealed trunks full of papers. But his ally and steward, +Martinez, had first (it is said) selected and secreted the royal notes +which proved the guilt of Philip.</p> + +<p>Apparently the King thought himself safe now, and actually did not +take the trouble to see whether his compromising letters were in the +sealed trunks or not! At least, if he did know<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_50" id="Page_50">[Pg 50]</a></span> that they were absent, +and that Perez could produce proof of his guilt, it is hard to see +why, with endless doubts and hesitations, he allowed the secret +process for murder against Perez to drag on, after a long +interruption, into 1590. Vasquez examined and re-examined Perez, but +there was still only one witness against him, the scoundrel Enriquez. +One was not enough.</p> + +<p>A new step was taken. The royal confessor assured Perez that he would +be safe if he told the whole truth and declared openly that he had +acted by the royal orders! Perez refused, Philip commanded again (Jan. +4, 1590). Perez must now reveal the King's motive for decreeing the +murder. If Philip was setting a trap for Perez that trap only caught +him if he could not produce the King's compromising letters, which, in +fact, he still possessed. Mr. Froude asserts that Philip had heard +from his confessor, and <i>he</i> from the wife of Perez, that the letters +were still secreted and could be produced. If so, Perez would be safe, +and the King's character would be lost. What was Philip's aim and +motive? Would he declare the letters to be forgeries? No other mortal +(of that day) wrote such an unmistakable hand as his, it was the worst +in the world. He must have had some loophole, or he would never have +pressed Perez to bear witness to his own crime. A loophole he had, and +Perez knew it, for otherwise he would have obeyed orders, told the +whole story, and been set free. He did not. Mr. Froude supposes that +he did not<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_51" id="Page_51">[Pg 51]</a></span> think the royal authority would satisfy the judges. But +they could not condemn Perez, a mere accessory to Philip, without +condemning the King, and how could the judges do that? Perez, I think, +would have taken his chance of the judges' severity, as against their +King, rather than disobey the King's command to confess all, and so +have to face torture. He did face the torture, which proves, perhaps, +that he knew Philip could, somehow, escape from the damning evidence +of his own letters. Philip's loophole, Major Martin Hume thinks, was +this: if Perez revealed the King's reasons for ordering the murder, +they would appear as obsolete, at the date of the deed. Pedro alone +would be culpable. In any case he faced torture.</p> + +<p>Like most people in his circumstances, he miscalculated his own power +of bearing agony. He had not the endurance of the younger Auchendrane +murderer: of Mitchell, the choice Covenanting assassin: of the gallant +Jacobite Nevile Payne, tortured nearly to death by the minions of the +Dutch usurper, William of Orange. All of these bore the torment and +kept their secrets. But 'eight turns of the rope' opened the mouth of +Perez, whose obstinacy had merely put him to great inconvenience. Yet +he did not produce Philip's letters in corroboration; he said that +they had been taken from him. However, next day, Diego Martinez, who +had hitherto denied all, saw that the game was up, and admitted the +truth of all that Enriquez had confessed in 1585.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_52" id="Page_52">[Pg 52]</a></span></p> + +<p>About a month after the torture Perez escaped. His wife was allowed to +visit him in prison. She had been the best, the bravest, the most +devoted of women. If she had reason for jealousy of the Princess, +which is by no means certain, she had forgiven all. She had moved +heaven and earth to save her husband. In the Dominican church, at high +mass, she had thrown herself upon the King's confessor, demanding +before that awful Presence on the altar that the priest should refuse +to absolve the King unless he set Perez free.</p> + +<p>Admitted to her husband's prison, she played the trick that saved Lord +Ogilvy from the dungeon of the Covenanters, that saved Argyle, +Nithsdale, and James Mòr Macgregor. Perez walked out of gaol in the +dress of his wife. We may suppose that the guards were bribed: there +is <i>always</i> collusion in these cases. One of the murderers had horses +round the corner, and Perez, who cannot have been badly injured by the +rack, rode thirty leagues, and crossed the frontier of Aragon.</p> + +<p>We have not to follow his later adventures. The refusal of the +Aragonese to give him up to Castile, their rescue of him from the +Inquisition, cost them their constitution, and about seventy of them +were burned as heretics. But Perez got clear away. He visited France, +where Henry IV. befriended him; he visited England, where Bacon was +his host. In 1594 (?) he published his <i>Relaciones</i> and told the world +the story of Philip's conscience. That story must not be relied on, of +course, and the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_53" id="Page_53">[Pg 53]</a></span> autograph letters of Philip as to the murder of +Escovedo are lost. But the copies of them at the Hague are regarded as +authentic, and the convincing passages are underlined in red ink.</p> + +<p>Supposing it possible that Philip after all secured the whole of the +autograph correspondence, and that Perez only succeeded in preserving +the copies now at the Hague, we should understand why Perez would not +confess the King's crime: he had only copies of his proofs to show; +and copies were valueless as evidence. But it is certain that Perez +really had the letters.</p> + +<p>'Bloody Perez,' as Bacon's mother called him, died at Paris in +November 1611, outliving the wretched master whom he had served so +faithfully. Queen Elizabeth tried to induce Amyas Paulet to murder +Mary Stuart. Paulet, as a man of honour, refused; he knew, too, that +Elizabeth would abandon him to the vengeance of the Scots. Perez ought +to have known that Philip would desert him: his folly was rewarded by +prison, torture, and confiscation, which were not more than the man +deserved, who betrayed and murdered the servant of Don John of +Austria.</p> + +<div class="blockquot"><p><span class="smcap">Note</span>.—This essay was written when I was unaware that Major +Martin Hume had treated the problem in <i>Transactions of the +Royal Historical Society</i>, 1894, pp. 71-107, and in +<i>Españoles é Ingleses</i> (1903). The latter work doubtless +represents Major Hume's final views. He has found among the +Additional MSS. of the British Museum (28,269) a quantity of +the contemporary letters of Perez, which supplement the +copies, at the Hague, of other letters destroyed<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_54" id="Page_54">[Pg 54]</a></span> after the +death of Perez. From these MSS. and other original sources +unknown to Mr. Froude, and to Monsieur Mignet (see the +second edition of his <i>Antonio Perez</i>; Paris, 1846), Major +Hume's theory is that, for <i>political</i> reasons, Philip gave +orders that Escovedo should be assassinated. This was in +late October or early November, 1577. The order was not then +carried out; the reason of the delay I do not clearly +understand. The months passed, and Escovedo's death ceased, +in altered circumstances, to be politically desirable, but +he became a serious nuisance to Perez and his mistress, the +Princess d'Eboli. Philip had never countermanded the murder, +but Perez, according to Major Hume, falsely alleges that the +King was still bent on the murder, and that other statesmen +were consulted and approved of it, <i>shortly before the +actual deed</i>.<a name="FNanchor_4_4" id="FNanchor_4_4"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> Perez gives this impression by a crafty +manipulation of dates in his narrative. When he had Escovedo +slain, he was fighting for his own hand; but Philip, who had +never countermanded the murder, was indifferent, till, in +1582, when he was with Alva in Portugal. The King now +learned that Perez had behaved abominably, had poisoned his +mind against his brother Don Juan, had communicated State +secrets to the Princess d'Eboli, and had killed Escovedo, +not in obedience to the royal order, but using that order as +the shield of his private vengeance. Hence Philip's +severities to Perez; hence his final command that Perez +should disclose the royal motives for the destruction of +Escovedo. They would be found to have become obsolete at the +date when the crime was committed, and on Perez would fall +the blame.</p></div> + +<div class="blockquot"><p>Such is Major Hume's theory, if I correctly apprehend it. +The hypothesis leaves the moral character of Philip as black +as ever: he ordered an assassination which he never even +countermanded. His confessor might applaud him, but he knew +that the doctors of the Inquisition, like the common +sentiment of mankind, rejected the theory that kings had the +right to condemn and execute, by the dagger, men who had +been put to no public trial.</p></div> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_55" id="Page_55">[Pg 55]</a></span></p> +<h2><a name="III" id="III"></a>III</h2> + +<h2><i>THE CAMPDEN MYSTERY</i></h2> + +<p> </p> + +<h3>I</h3> + +<p><span class="smcap">The</span> ordinary historical mystery is at least so far clear that one or +other of two solutions must be right, if we only knew which. Perkin +Warbeck was the rightful King, or he was an impostor. Giacopo Stuardo +at Naples (1669) was the eldest son of Charles II., or he was a +humbug. The Man in the Iron Mask was <i>certainly</i> either Mattioli or +Eustache Dauger. James VI. conspired against Gowrie, or Gowrie +conspired against James VI., and so on. There is reason and human +nature at the back of these puzzles. But at the back of the Campden +mystery there is not a glimmer of reason or of sane human nature, +except on one hypothesis, which I shall offer. The occurrences are, to +all appearance, motiveless as the events in a feverish dream. 'The +whole Matter is dark and mysterious; which we must therefore leave +unto Him who alone knoweth all Things, in His due Time, to reveal and +to bring to Light.'</p> + +<p>So says the author of 'A True and Perfect Account of the Examination, +Confession, Trial,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_56" id="Page_56">[Pg 56]</a></span> and Execution of <i>Joan Perry</i>, and her two Sons, +<i>John</i> and <i>Richard Perry</i>, for the Supposed Murder of <i>Will +Harrison</i>, Gent., Being One of the most remarkable Occurrences which +hath happened in the Memory of Man. Sent in a Letter (by <i>Sir Thomas +Overbury</i>, of <i>Burton</i>, in the County of <i>Gloucester</i>, Knt., and one +of his Majesty's Justices of the Peace) to <i>Thomas Shirly</i>, Doctor of +Physick, in London. Also Mr. <i>Harrison's</i> Own account,' &c. (London. +Printed for John Atkinson, near the Chapter House, in <i>St. Paul's +Church-Yard</i>. No date, but apparently of 1676.)</p> + +<p>Such is the vast and breathless title of a pamphlet which, by +undeserved good luck, I have just purchased. The writer, Sir Thomas +Overbury, 'the nephew and heir,' says Mr. John Paget, 'of the unhappy +victim of the infamous Countess of Somerset' (who had the elder Overbury +poisoned in the Tower), was the Justice of the Peace who acted +as <i>Juge d'Instruction</i> in the case of Harrison's disappearance.<a name="FNanchor_5_5" id="FNanchor_5_5"></a><a href="#Footnote_5_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</a></p> + +<p>To come to the story. In 1660, William Harrison, Gent., was steward or +'factor' to the Viscountess Campden, in Chipping Campden, +Gloucestershire, a single-streeted town among the Cotswold hills. The +lady did not live in Campden House, whose owner burned it in the Great +Rebellion, to spite the rebels; as Castle Tirrim was burned by its +Jacobite lord in the '15. Harrison inhabited a portion of the building +which<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_57" id="Page_57">[Pg 57]</a></span> had escaped destruction. He had been for fifty years a servant +of the Hickeses and Campdens, his age was seventy (which deepens the +mystery), he was married, and had offspring, including Edward, his +eldest son.</p> + +<p>On a market day, in 1659, Mr. Harrison's house was broken into, at +high noon, while he and his whole family were 'at the Lecture,' in +church, a Puritan form of edification. A ladder had been placed +against the wall, the bars of a window on the second story had been +wrenched away with a ploughshare (which was left in the room), and +140<i>l.</i> of Lady Campden's money were stolen. The robber was never +discovered—a curious fact in a small and lonely village. The times, +however, were disturbed, and a wandering Cavalier or Roundhead soldier +may have 'cracked the crib.' Not many weeks later, Harrison's servant, +Perry, was heard crying for help in the garden. He showed a +'sheep-pick,' with a hacked handle, and declared that he had been set +upon by two men in white, with naked swords, and had defended himself +with his rustic tool. It is curious that Mr. John Paget, a writer of +great acuteness, and for many years police magistrate at Hammersmith, +says nothing of the robbery of 1659, and of Perry's crazy conduct in +the garden.<a name="FNanchor_6_6" id="FNanchor_6_6"></a><a href="#Footnote_6_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a> Perry's behaviour there, and his hysterical invention +of the two armed men in white, give the key to his<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_58" id="Page_58">[Pg 58]</a></span> character. The two +men in white were never traced of course, but, later, we meet three +men not less flagitious, and even more mysterious. They appear to have +been three 'men in buckram.'</p> + +<p>At all events, in quiet Campden, adventures obviously occurred to the +unadventurous. They culminated in the following year, on August 16, +1660. Harrison left his house in the morning (?) and walked the two +miles to Charringworth to collect his lady's rents. The autumn day +closed in, and between eight and nine o'clock old Mrs. Harrison sent +the servant, John Perry, to meet his master on the way home. Lights +were also left burning in Harrison's window. That night neither master +nor man returned, and it is odd that the younger Harrison, Edward, did +not seek for his father till very early next morning: he had the +convenience, for nocturnal search, of a moon which rose late. In the +morning, Edward went out and met Perry, returning alone: he had not +found his master. The pair walked to Ebrington, a village half way +between Campden and Charringworth, and learned that Harrison had +called, on the previous evening, as he moved home through Ebrington, +at the house of one Daniel. The hour is not given, but Harrison +certainly disappeared when just beyond Ebrington, within less than a +mile from Campden. Edward and Perry next heard that a poor woman had +picked up on the highway, beyond Ebrington, near some whins<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_59" id="Page_59">[Pg 59]</a></span> or furze, +a hat, band, and comb, which were Harrison's; they were found within +about half a mile of his own house. The band was bloody, the hat and +comb were hacked and cut. Please observe the precise words of Sir +Thomas Overbury, the justice who took the preliminary examinations: +'The Hat and Comb being hacked and cut, and the Band bloody, but +nothing more could there be found.' Therefore the hat and comb were +not on Harrison's head when they were hacked and cut: otherwise they +must have been blood-stained; the band worn about the throat was +bloody, but there was no trace of blood on the road. This passage +contains the key to the puzzle.</p> + +<p>On hearing of the discovery of these objects all the people rushed to +hunt for Harrison's corpse, which they did not find.</p> + +<p>An old man like Harrison was not likely to stay at Charringworth very +late, but it seems that whatever occurred on the highway happened +after twilight.</p> + +<p>Suspicion fell on John Perry, who was haled before the narrator, Sir +Thomas Overbury, J.P. Perry said that after starting for Charringworth +to seek his master on the previous evening, about 8.45 <span class="smcap">p.m.</span>, he met by +the way William Reed of Campden, and explained to him that as he was +timid in the dark he would go back and take Edward Harrison's horse +and return. Perry did as he had said, and Reed left him 'at Mr. +Harrison's Court gate.' Perry dallied there till<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_60" id="Page_60">[Pg 60]</a></span> one Pierce came +past, and with Pierce (he did not say why) 'he went a bow's shot into +the fields,' and so back once more to Harrison's gate. He now lay for +an hour in a hen house, he rose at midnight, and again—the moon +having now risen and dispelled his fears—he started for +Charringworth. He lost his way in a mist, slept by the road-side, +proceeded in the dawn to Charringworth, and found that Harrison had +been there on the previous day. Then he came back and met Edward +Harrison on his way to seek his father at Charringworth.</p> + +<p>Perry's story is like a tale told by an idiot, but Reed, Pierce, and +two men at Charringworth corroborated as far as their knowledge went. +Certainly Perry had been in company with Reed and Pierce, say between +nine and ten on the previous night. Now, if evil had befallen Harrison +it must have been before ten at night; he would not stay so late, if +sober, at Charringworth. Was he usually sober? The cool way in which +his wife and son took his absence suggests that he was a +late-wandering old boy. They may have expected Perry to find him in +his cups and tuck him up comfortably at Charringworth or at Ebrington.</p> + +<p>Till August 24 Perry was detained in prison, or, odd to say, at the +inn! He told various tales; a tinker or a servant had murdered his +master and hidden him in a bean-rick, where, on search being made, +<i>non est inventus</i>. Harrison, and the rents<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_61" id="Page_61">[Pg 61]</a></span> he had collected, were +vanished in the azure. Perry now declared that he would tell all to +Overbury, and to no other man. To him Perry averred that his mother +and brother, Joan and Richard Perry, had murdered Harrison! It was his +brother who, by John Perry's advice and connivance, had robbed the +house in the previous year, while John 'had a Halibi,' being at +church. The brother, said John, buried the money in the garden. It was +sought for, but was not found. His story of the 'two men in white,' +who had previously attacked him in the garden, was a lie, he said. I +may add that it was not the lie of a sane man. Perry was conspicuously +crazy.</p> + +<p>He went on with his fables. His mother and brother, he declared, had +often asked him to tell them when his master went to collect rents. He +had done so after Harrison started for Charringworth on the morning of +August 16. John Perry next gave an account of his expedition with his +brother in the evening of the fatal day, an account which was +incompatible with his previous tale of his doings and with the +authentic evidence of Reed and Pierce. Their honest version destroyed +Perry's new falsehood. He declared that Richard Perry and he had +dogged Harrison, as he came home at night, into Lady Campden's +grounds; Harrison had used a key to the private gate. Richard followed +him into the grounds; John Perry, after a brief stroll, joined him +there and found his mother (how did she come thither?) and Richard<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_62" id="Page_62">[Pg 62]</a></span> +standing over the prostrate Harrison, whom Richard incontinently +strangled. They seized Harrison's money and meant to put his body 'in +the great sink by Wallington's Mill.' John Perry left them, and knew +not whether the body was actually thrown into the sink. In fact, <i>non +est inventus</i> in the sink, any more than in the bean-rick. John next +introduced his meeting with Pierce, but quite forgot that he had also +met Reed, and did not account for that part of his first story, which +Reed and Pierce had both corroborated. The hat, comb, and band John +said that he himself had carried away from Harrison's body, had cut +them with his knife, and thrown them into the highway. Whence the +blood on the band came he neglected to say.</p> + +<p>On the strength of this impossible farrago of insane falsehoods, Joan +and Richard Perry were arrested and brought before Overbury. Not only +the 'sink' but the Campden fish-pools and the ruinous parts of the +house were vainly searched in quest of Harrison's body. On August 25 +the three Perrys were examined by Overbury, and Richard and the mother +denied all that John laid to their charge. John persisted in his +story, and Richard admitted that he and John had spoken together on +the morning of the day when Harrison vanished, 'but nothing passed +between them to that purpose.'</p> + +<p>As the three were being brought back from<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_63" id="Page_63">[Pg 63]</a></span> Overbury's house to Campden +an unfortunate thing happened. John was going foremost when Richard, a +good way behind, dropped 'a ball of inkle from his pocket.' One of his +guards picked it up, and Richard said that it 'was only his wife's +hair-lace.' At one end, however, was a slip-knot. The finder took it +to John, who, being a good way in front, had not seen his brother drop +it. On being shown the string John shook his head, and said that 'to +his sorrow he knew it, for that was the string his brother strangled +his master with.' To this circumstance John swore at the ensuing +trial.</p> + +<p>The Assizes were held in September, and the Perrys were indicted both +for the robbery in 1659 and the murder in 1660. They pleaded 'Guilty' +to the first charge, as some one in court whispered to them to do, for +the crime was covered by the Act of Pardon and Oblivion passed by +Charles II. at his happy Restoration. If they were innocent of the +robbery, as probably they were, they acted foolishly in pleading +guilty. We hear of no evidence against them for the robbery, except +John's confession, which was evidence perhaps against John, but was +none against <i>them</i>. They thus damaged their case, for if they were +really guilty of the robbery from Harrison's house, they were the most +likely people in the neighbourhood to have robbed him again and +murdered him. Very probably they tied the rope round their own necks +by taking advantage of the good King's indemnity.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_64" id="Page_64">[Pg 64]</a></span> They later withdrew +their confession, and probably were innocent of the theft in <span lang="el" title="Transcriber's Note: original has 1559">1659</span>. +</p> + +<p>On the charge of murder they were not tried in September. Sir +Christopher Turner would not proceed 'because the body of Harrison was +not found.' There was no <i>corpus delicti</i>, no evidence that Harrison +was really dead. Meanwhile John Perry, as if to demonstrate his +lunacy, declared that his mother and brother had tried to poison him +in prison! At the Spring Assizes in 1661, Sir B. Hyde, less legal than +Sir Christopher Turner, did try the Perrys on the charge of murder. +How he could do this does not appear, for the account of the trial is +not in the Record House, and I am unable at present to trace it. In +the <i>Arminian Magazine</i>, John Wesley publishes a story of a man who +was hanged for murdering another man, whom he afterwards met in one of +the Spanish colonies of South America. I shall not here interrupt the +tale of the Perrys by explaining how a hanged man met a murdered man, +but the anecdote proves that to inflict capital punishment for murder +without proof that murder has been committed is not only an illegal +but an injudicious proceeding. Probably it was assumed that Harrison, +if alive, would have given signs of life in the course of nine or ten +months.</p> + +<p>At the trial in spring all three Perrys pleaded 'not guilty.' John's +confession being proved against him, 'he told them he was then mad and +knew not what he said.' There must have been <i>some</i><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_65" id="Page_65">[Pg 65]</a></span> evidence against +Richard. He declared that his brother had accused others besides him. +Being asked to prove this, he answered 'that most of those that had +given evidence against him knew it,' but named none. So evidence had +been given (perhaps to the effect that Richard had been flush of +money), but by whom, and to what effect, we do not know.</p> + +<p>The Perrys were probably not of the best repute. The mother, Joan, was +supposed to be a witch. This charge was seldom brought against popular +well-living people. How intense was the fear of witches, at that date, +we know from the stories and accounts of trials in Glanvil's +<i>Sadducismus Triumphatus</i>. The neighbours probably held that Joan +Perry would, as a witch, be 'nane the waur o' a hanging.' She was put +to death first, under the belief that any hypnotic or other unholy +influence of hers, which prevented her sons from confessing, would be +destroyed by her death. We are not aware that post-hypnotic suggestion +is removed by the death of the suggester; the experiment has not been +tried. The experiment failed in Joan's case. Poor Richard, who was +hanged next, could not induce the 'dogged and surly' John to clear his +character by a dying declaration. Such declarations were then held +irrefragable evidence, at least in Scotland, except when (as in the +case of George Sprot, hanged for the Gowrie conspiracy) it did not +suit the Presbyterians to believe the dying man. When John<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_66" id="Page_66">[Pg 66]</a></span> was being +turned off, he said that 'he knew nothing of his master's death, nor +what was become of him, but they might hereafter (possibly) hear.' Did +John know something? It would not surprise me if he had an inkling of +the real state of the case.</p> + + +<h3>II</h3> + +<p>They <i>did</i> hear; but what they heard, and what I have now to tell, was +perfectly incredible. When 'some' years (two apparently) had passed, +Will Harrison, Gent., like the three silly ewes in the folk-rhyme, +'came hirpling hame.' Where had the old man been? He explained in a +letter to Sir Thomas Overbury, but his tale is as hard to believe as +that of John Perry.</p> + +<p>He states that he left his house in the afternoon (not the morning) of +Thursday, August 16, 1660. He went to Charringworth to collect rents, +but Lady Campden's tenants were all out harvesting. August seems an +odd month for rent-collecting when one thinks of it. They came home +late, which delayed Harrison 'till the close of the evening.' He only +received 23 <i>l.</i>, which John Perry said, at his first examination in +1660, had been paid by one Edward Plaisterer, and Plaisterer +corroborated. Harrison then walked homeward, in the dusk probably, +and, near Ebrington, where the road was narrow, and bordered by whins, +'there met me one horseman who said "<i>Art thou there?</i>"' Afraid of +being ridden over, Harrison<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_67" id="Page_67">[Pg 67]</a></span> struck the horse on the nose, and the +rider, with a sword, struck at him and stabbed him in the side. (It +was at this point of the road, where the whins grew, that the cut hat +and bloody band were found, but a thrust in the side would not make a +neck-band bloody.) Two other horsemen here came up, one of them +wounded Harrison in the thigh. They did not now take his 23<i>l.</i>, but +placed him behind one of them on horseback, handcuffed him, and threw +a great cloak over him.</p> + +<p>Now, is it likely that highwaymen would carry handcuffs which closed, +says Harrison, with a spring and a snap? The story is pure fiction, +and bad at that. Suppose that kidnapping, not robbery, was the motive +(which would account for the handcuffs), what had any mortal to gain +by kidnapping, for the purpose of selling him into slavery, a 'gent.' +of seventy years of age?</p> + +<p>In the night they took Harrison's money and 'tumbled me down a +stone-pit.' In an hour they dragged him out again, and he naturally +asked what they wanted with him, as they had his money already. One of +these miscreants wounded Harrison again, and—stuffed his pockets full +of 'a great quantity of money.' If they had a great quantity of money, +what did they want with 23<i>l.</i>? We hear of no other robberies in the +neighbourhood, of which misdeeds the money might have been the +profits. And why must Harrison carry the money? (It has been suggested +that, to win popular favour, they repre<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_68" id="Page_68">[Pg 68]</a></span>sented themselves as +smugglers, and Harrison, with the money, as their gallant purser, +wounded in some heroic adventure.)</p> + +<p>They next rode till late on August 17, and then put Harrison down, +bleeding and 'sorely bruised with the carriage of the money,' at a +lonely house. Here they gave their victim broth and brandy. On +Saturday they rode all day to a house, where they slept, and on Sunday +they brought Harrison to Deal, and laid him down on the ground. This +was about three in the afternoon. Had they wanted to make for the sea, +they would naturally have gone to the <i>west</i> coast. While one fellow +watched Harrison, two met a man, and 'I heard them mention seven +pounds.' The man to whom seven pounds were mentioned (Wrenshaw was his +name, as Harrison afterwards heard—where?) said that he thought +Harrison would die before he could be put on board a ship. <i>Que diable +allait-il faire dans cette galère?</i> Harrison was, however, put on +board a casual vessel, and remained in the ship for six weeks.</p> + +<div class="poem"><div class="stanza"> +<span class="i0">Where was the land to which the ship would go?<br /></span> +<span class="i0">Far, far ahead is all the sailors know!<br /></span> +</div></div> + +<p>Harrison does not say into what 'foam of perilous seas, in faery lands +forlorn' the ship went wandering for six mortal weeks. Like Lord +Bateman:</p> + +<div class="poem"><div class="stanza"> +<span class="i0">He sailéd East, and he sailéd West,<br /></span> +<span class="i0">Until he came to famed Turkee,<br /></span> +<span class="i0">Where he was taken and put in prison,<br /></span> +<span class="i0">Till of his life he was wear—ee!<br /></span> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_69" id="Page_69">[Pg 69]</a></span></div></div> + +<p>'Then the Master of the ship came and told me, and <i>the rest who were +in the same condition</i>, that he discovered three Turkish ships.' 'The +rest who were in the same condition'! We are to understand that a +whole cargo of Harrisons was kidnapped and consigned captive to a +vessel launched on ocean, on the off chance that the captain might +meet three Turkish rovers who would snap them up. At this rate of +carrying on, there must have been disappearances as strange as +Harrison's, from dozens of English parishes, in August 1660. Had a +crew of kidnappers been taking captives for purposes of private fiscal +policy, they would have shipped them to the Virginian plantations, +where Turkish galleys did not venture, and they would not have +kidnapped men of seventy. Moreover, kidnappers would not damage their +captives by stabbing them in the side and thigh, when no resistance +was made, as was done to Harrison.</p> + +<p>'The rest who were in the same condition' were 'dumped down' near +Smyrna, where the valuable Harrison was sold to 'a grave physician.' +'This Turk he' was eighty-seven years of age, and 'preferred Crowland +in Lincolnshire before all other places in England.' No inquiries are +known to have been made about a Turkish medical man who once practised +at Crowland in Lincolnshire, though, if he ever did, he was likely to +be remembered in the district. This Turk he employed Harrison in the +still room, and as a hand in the cotton fields, where he once knocked +his<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_70" id="Page_70">[Pg 70]</a></span> slave down with his fist—pretty well for a Turk of eighty-seven! +He also gave Harrison (whom he usually employed in the chemical +department of his business) 'a silver bowl, double gilt, to drink in, +and named him Boll'—his way of pronouncing bowl—no doubt he had +acquired a Lincolnshire accent.</p> + +<p>This Turk fell ill on a Thursday, and died on Saturday, when Harrison +tramped to the nearest port, bowl and all. Two men in a Hamburg ship +refused to give him a passage, but a third, for the price of his +silver-gilt bowl, let him come aboard. Harrison was landed, without +even his bowl, at Lisbon, where he instantly met a man from Wisbech, +in Lincolnshire. This good Samaritan gave Harrison wine, strong +waters, eight stivers, and his passage to Dover, whence he came back +to Campden, much to the amazement of mankind. We do not hear the names +of the ship and skipper that brought Harrison from Lisbon to Dover. +Wrenshaw (the man to whom seven pounds 'were mentioned') is the only +person named in this delirious tissue of nonsense.</p> + +<p>The editor of our pamphlet says, 'Many question the truth of this +account Mr. Harrison gives of himself, and his transportation, +believing he was never out of England.' I do not wonder at their +scepticism. Harrison had 'all his days been a man of sober life and +conversation,' we are told, and the odd thing is that he 'left behind +him a considerable sum of his Lady's money in his house.'<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_71" id="Page_71">[Pg 71]</a></span> He did not +see any of the Perrys on the night of his disappearance. The editor +admits that Harrison, as an article of merchandise, was not worth his +freight to Deal, still less to Smyrna. His son, in his absence, became +Lady Campden's steward, and behaved but ill in that situation. Some +suspected that this son arranged the kidnapping of Harrison, but, if +so, why did he secure the hanging of John Perry, in chains, on +Broadway hill, 'where he might daily see him'?</p> + +<p>That might be a blind. But young Harrison could not expect John Perry +to assist him by accusing himself and his brother and mother, which +was the most unlooked-for event in the world. Nor could he know that +his father would come home from Charringworth on August 16, 1660, in +the dark, and so arrange for three horsemen, in possession of a heavy +weight of specie, to stab and carry off the aged sire. Young Harrison +had not a great fardel of money to give them, and if they were already +so rich, what had they to gain by taking Harrison to Deal, and putting +him, with 'others in the same condition,' on board a casual ship? They +could have left him in the 'stone-pit:' he knew not who they were, and +the longer they rode by daylight, with a hatless, handcuffed, and +sorely wounded prisoner, his pockets overburdened with gold, the more +risk of detection they ran. A company of three men ride, in broad +daylight, through England from Gloucestershire to Deal. Behind one of +them sits<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_72" id="Page_72">[Pg 72]</a></span> a wounded, <i>and hatless</i>, and handcuffed captive, his +pockets bulging with money. Nobody suspects anything, no one calls the +attention of a magistrate to this extraordinary <i>démarche</i>! It is too +absurd!</p> + +<p>The story told by Harrison is conspicuously and childishly false. At +every baiting place, at every inn, these weird riders must have been +challenged. If Harrison told truth, he must have named the ship and +skipper that brought him to Dover.</p> + +<p>Dismissing Harrison's myth, we ask, what could account for his +disappearance? He certainly walked, on the evening of August 16, to +within about half a mile of his house. He would not have done that had +he been bent on a senile amour involving his absence from home, and +had that scheme of pleasure been in his mind, he would have provided +himself with money. Again, a fit of 'ambulatory somnambulism,' and the +emergence of a split or secondary personality with forgetfulness of +his real name and address, is not likely to have seized on him at that +very moment and place. If it did, as there were no railways, he could +not rush off in a crowd and pass unnoticed through the country.</p> + +<p>Once more, the theory of ambulatory somnambulism does not account for +his hacked hat and bloody band found near the whins on the road beyond +Ebrington. Nor does his own story account for them. He was stabbed in +the side and thigh, he says. This would not cut his hat or<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_73" id="Page_73">[Pg 73]</a></span> ensanguine +his band. On the other hand, he would leave pools and tracks of blood +on the road—'the high way.' 'But nothing more could there be found,' +no pools or traces of blood on the road. It follows that the hacked +hat and bloody band were a designed false trail, <i>not</i> left there by +John Perry, as he falsely swore, but by some other persons.</p> + +<p>The inference is that for some reason Harrison's presence at Campden +was inconvenient to somebody. He had lived through most troubled +times, and had come into a changed state of affairs with new masters. +He knew some secret of the troubled times: he was a witness better out +of the way. He may conceivably have held a secret that bore on the +case of one of the Regicides; or that affected private interests, for +he was the trusted servant of a great family. He was therefore +spirited away: a trail certainly false—the cut hat and bloody +band—was laid. By an amazing coincidence his servant, John Perry, +went more or less mad—he was not sane on the evening of Thursday, +August 16, and accused himself, his brother, and mother. Harrison was +probably never very far from Campden during the two or three years of +his disappearance. It was obviously made worth his while to tell his +absurd story on his return, and to accept the situation. No other +hypothesis 'colligates the facts.' What Harrison knew, why his absence +was essential, we cannot hope to discover. But he never was a captive +in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_74" id="Page_74">[Pg 74]</a></span> 'famed Turkee.' Mr. Paget writes: 'It is impossible to assign a +sufficient motive for kidnapping the old man ... much profit was not +likely to arise from the sale of the old man as a slave.' Obviously +there was no profit, especially as the old man was delivered in a +wounded and imperfect condition. But a motive for keeping Harrison out +of the way is only hard to seek because we do not know the private +history of his neighbours. Roundheads among them may have had +excellent reasons, under the Restoration, for sequestering Harrison +till the revenges of the Restoration were accomplished. On this view +the mystery almost ceases to be mysterious, for such mad +self-accusations as that of John Perry are not uncommon.<a name="FNanchor_7_7" id="FNanchor_7_7"></a><a href="#Footnote_7_7" class="fnanchor">[7]</a></p> + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_75" id="Page_75">[Pg 75]</a></span></p> + +<h2><a name="IV" id="IV"></a>IV</h2> + +<h2><i>THE CASE OF ALLAN BRECK</i></h2> + +<p> </p> + +<p><span class="smcap">Who</span> killed the Red Fox? What was the secret that the Celts would not +communicate to Mr. R.L. Stevenson, when he was writing <i>Kidnapped</i>? +Like William of Deloraine, 'I know but may not tell'; at least, I know +all that the Celt knows. The great-grandfather and grandfather of a +friend of mine were with James Stewart of the Glens, the victim of +Hanoverian injustice, in a potato field, near the road from +Ballachulish Ferry to Appin, when they heard a horse galloping at a +break-neck pace. 'Whoever the rider is,' said poor James, 'he is not +riding his own horse.' The galloper shouted, 'Glenure has been shot!'</p> + +<p>'Well,' said James to his companion, 'whoever did it, I am the man +that will hang for it.'</p> + +<p>Hanged he was. The pit in which his gibbet stood is on the crest of a +circular 'knowe,' or hummock, on the east side of the Ballachulish +Hotel, overlooking the ferry across the narrows, where the tide runs +like a great swift river.</p> + +<p>I have had the secret from two sources; the secret which I may not +tell. One informant<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_76" id="Page_76">[Pg 76]</a></span> received it from his brother, who, when he came +to man's estate, was taken apart by his uncle. 'You are old enough to +know now,' said that kinsman, 'and I tell you that it may not be +forgotten.' The gist of the secret is merely what one might gather +from the report of the trial, that though Allan Breck was concerned in +the murder of Campbell of Glenure, he was not alone in it.</p> + +<p>The truth is, according to tradition, that as Glenure rode on the +fatal day from Fort William to his home in Appin, the way was lined +with marksmen of the Camerons of Lochaber, lurking with their guns +among the brushwood and behind the rocks. But their hearts failed +them, no trigger was drawn, and when Glenure landed on the Appin side +of the Ballachulish Ferry, he said, 'I am safe now that I am out of my +mother's country,' his mother having been of clan Cameron. But he had +to reckon with the man with the gun, who was lurking in the wood of +Letter More ('the great hanging coppice'), about three-quarters of a +mile on the Appin side of Ballachulish Ferry. The gun was not one of +the two dilapidated pieces shown at the trial of James of the Glens, +nor, I am told, was it the Fasnacloich gun. The real homicidal gun was +found some years ago in a hollow tree. People remember these things +well in Appin and Glencoe, though the affair is a hundred and fifty +years old, and though there are daily steamers bringing the +newspapers. There is even a railway, not remarkable for speed, while +tourists, English,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_77" id="Page_77">[Pg 77]</a></span> French, and American, are for ever passing to view +Glencoe, and to write their names in the hotel book after luncheon, +then flying to other scenes. There has even been a strike of long +duration at the Ballachulish Quarries, and Labour leaders have +perorated to the Celts; but Gaelic is still spoken, second sight is +nearly as common as short sight, you may really hear the fairy music +if you bend your ear, on a still day, to the grass of the fairy knowe. +Only two generations back a fairy boy lived in a now ruinous house, +noted in the story of the Massacre of Glencoe, beside the brawling +river: and a woman, stolen by the fairies, returned for an hour to her +husband, who became very unpopular, as he neglected the means for her +rescue; I think he failed to throw a dirk over her shoulder. Every now +and then mysterious lights may be seen, even by the Sassenach, +speeding down the road to Callart on the opposite side of the narrow +sea-loch, ascending the hill, and running down into the salt water. +The causes of these lights, and of the lights on the burial isle of +St. Mun, in the middle of the sea strait, remain a mystery. Thus the +country is still a country of prehistoric beliefs and of fairly +accurate traditions. For example, at the trial of James Stewart for +the murder of Glenure, one MacColl gave damaging evidence, the +MacColls being a sept subordinate to the MacIans or Macdonalds of +Glencoe, who, by the way, had no hand in the murder. Till recently +these MacColls were still disliked for the part<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_78" id="Page_78">[Pg 78]</a></span> played by the +witness, and were named 'King George's MacColls.'</p> + +<p style="text-align: center"> </p> + +<p style="text-align: center"> +<img src="images/image03.png" width="318" height="400" alt="map" /></p> + +<p style="text-align: center">[<a href="images/image03b.png">Enlarge</a>]</p> + +<p style="text-align: center"> </p> + +<p>But we must come to the case of Allan Breck. To understand it, some +knowledge of topography is necessary. Leaving Oban by steamer, you +keep on the inside of the long narrow island of Lismore, and reach the +narrow sea inlet of Loch Creran on your right. The steamer does not +enter it, but, taking a launch or a boat, you go down Loch Creran. On +your left is the peninsula of Appin; its famous green hills occupy the +space bounded by Loch Creran on the south and Glencoe on the north. +Landing near the head of Loch Creran, a walk of two miles takes you to +the old house of Fasnacloich, where Allan Breck was wont to stay. Till +two or three years ago it belonged to the Stewarts of Fasnacloich, +cadets of the chief, the Laird of Appin; all Appin was a Stewart +country and loyal to the King over the Water, their kinsman. About a +mile from Fasnacloich, further inland, is the rather gloomy house of +Glenure, the property of Campbell of Glenure, the Red Fox who was shot +on the road under Letter More. Walking across the peninsula to Appin +House, you pass Acharn in Duror, the farm of James Stewart of the +Glens, himself an illegitimate kinsman of the Laird of Appin. To the +best of my memory the cottage is still standing, and has a new roof of +corrugated iron. It is an ordinary Highland cottage, and Allan, when +he stayed with James, his kinsman and guardian, slept in the barn. +Appin House is<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_79" id="Page_79">[Pg 79]</a></span> a large plain country house, close to the sea. Further +north-east, the house of Ardshiel, standing high above the sea, is +visible from the steamer going to Fort William. At Ardshiel, Rob Roy +fought a sword and target duel with the laird, and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_80" id="Page_80">[Pg 80]</a></span> Ardshiel led the +Stewarts in the rising of 1745; Appin, the chief, held aloof. The next +place of importance is Ballachulish House, also an old house of +Stewart of Ballachulish. It is on the right hand of the road from +Ballachulish Pier to Glencoe, beneath a steep wooded hill, down which +runs the burn where Allan Breck was fishing on the morning of the day +of Glenure's murder, done at a point on the road three-quarters of a +mile to the south-west of Ballachulish House, where Allan had slept on +the previous night. From the house the road passes on the south side +of the salt Loch Leven (not Queen Mary's Loch Leven). Here is +Ballachulish Ferry, crossing to Lochaber. Following the road you come +opposite the House of Carnoch, then possessed by Macdonalds (the house +has been pulled down; there is a good recent ghost story about that +business), and the road now enters Glencoe. On high hills, well to the +left of the road and above Loch Leven, are Corrynakeigh and +Coalisnacoan (the Ferry of the Dogs), overtopping the narrows of Loch +Leven. Just opposite the House of Carnoch, on the Cameron side of Loch +Leven, is the House of Callart (Mrs. Cameron Lucy's). Here and at +Carnoch, as at Fasnacloich, Acharn, and Ballachulish, Allan Breck was +much at home among his cousins.</p> + +<p>From Loch Leven north to Fort William, with its English garrison, all +is a Cameron country. Campbell of Glenure was an outpost of Whiggery +and Campbells, in a land of loyal Stewarts,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_81" id="Page_81">[Pg 81]</a></span> Camerons, and Macdonalds +or MacIans of Glencoe. Of the Camerons, the gentle Lochiel had died in +France; his son, a boy, was abroad; the interests of the clan were +represented by Cameron of Fassifern, Lochiel's uncle, living a few +miles west by north of Fort William. Fassifern, a well-educated man +and a burgess of Glasgow, had not been out with Prince Charles, but +(for reasons into which I would rather not enter) was not well trusted +by Government. Ardshiel, also, was in exile, and his tenants, under +James Stewart of the Glens, loyally paid rent to him, as well as to +the commissioners of his forfeited estates. The country was seething +with feuds among the Camerons themselves, due to the plundering by +——, of ——, of the treasure left by Prince Charles in the hands of +Cluny. The state of affairs was such that the English commander in +Fort William declared that, if known, it 'would shock even Lochaber +consciences.' 'A great ox hath trodden on my tongue' as to <i>this</i> +business. Despite the robbery of Prince Charles's gold, deep poverty +prevailed.</p> + +<p>In February, 1749, Campbell of Glenure had been appointed Factor for +Government over the forfeited estates of Ardshiel (previously managed +by James Stewart of the Glens), of Lochiel, and of Callart. In the +summer of 1751, Glenure evicted James from a farm, and in April, 1752, +took measures for evicting other farmers on Ardshiel estates. Such +measures were almost unheard of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_82" id="Page_82">[Pg 82]</a></span> in the country, and had, years +before, caused some agrarian outrages among Gordons and Camerons; +these were appeased by the King over the Water, James VIII. and III. +James Stewart, in April, 1752, went to Edinburgh, and obtained a legal +sist, or suspension of the evictions, against Glenure, which was +withdrawn on Glenure's application, who came home from Edinburgh, and +intended to turn the tenants out on May 15, 1752. They were assailed +merely as of Jacobite name and tendencies. Meanwhile Allan Breck—who +had deserted the Hanoverian army after Prestonpans, had joined Prince +Charles, fought at Culloden, escaped to France, and entered the French +army—was lodging about Appin among his cousins, perhaps doing a +little recruiting for King Louis. He was a tall thin man, marked with +smallpox.</p> + +<p>Cruising about the country also was another Jacobite soldier, 'the +Sergent More,' a Cameron, later betrayed by ——, of ——, who robbed +the Prince's hoard of gold. But the Sergeant More had nothing to do, +as has been fancied, with the murder of Glenure. The state of the +country was ticklish; Prince Charles expected to invade with Swedish +forces, under the famous Marshal Keith, by the connivance of Frederick +the Great, and he had sent Lochgarry, with Dr. Archibald Cameron and +others, to feel the pulse of the western clans. As Government knew all +about these intrigues from Pickle the Spy, they were evicting Jacobite +tenants from Ardshiel's lands, and meant to do the same,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_83" id="Page_83">[Pg 83]</a></span> by agency of +Campbell of Glenure, in Lochaber, Lochiel's country.</p> + +<p>On Monday, May 11, Campbell, who intended to do the evictions on May +15, left Glenure for Fort William, on business; the distance is +computed at sixteen miles, by the old hill road. Allan Breck, on the +11th, was staying at Fasnacloich, near Glenure, where the fishing is +very good. When Glenure moved north to Fort William, Allan went to +James Stewart's cottage of Acharn. Glenure's move was talked of, and +that evening Allan changed his own blue coat, scarlet vest, and black +velvet breeches for a dark short coat with silver buttons, a blue +bonnet, and trousers (the Highlanders had been diskilted), all +belonging to James Stewart. He usually did make these changes when +residing with friends. In these clothes next day (Tuesday, May 12) +Allan, with young Fasnacloich, walked to Carnoch, the house of +Macdonald of Glencoe, situated just where the Water of Coe or Cona +enters Loch Leven. The dowager of the house was natural sister of +James of the Glens, and full sister of the exiled Stewart of Ardshiel. +From Carnoch, Allan, on the same day, crossed the sea-strait to +Callart opposite, where Mrs. Cameron was another half-sister to James +of the Glens. On Wednesday Allan recrossed, called at Carnoch, and +went to stay at Ballachulish House. On Thursday, when Glenure would +certainly return home by Ballachulish Ferry, Allan, about mid-day, was +seen to go fishing up<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_84" id="Page_84">[Pg 84]</a></span> Ballachulish burn, where he caught no trout, +and I do not wonder at it.</p> + +<p>The theory of the prosecution was that, from the high ground to the +left of the burn he watched the ferry, having one or two guns, though +how he got them unobserved to the place is the difficulty; he could +not have walked the roads from Acharn unobserved with a gun, for the +Highlanders had been disarmed. At this point he must have had the +assistance and the gun of <i>the other man</i>. Allan came down from the +hill, asked the ferryman if Glenure had crossed, and returned to his +point of observation. About five o'clock in the afternoon, Glenure, +with a nephew of his, Mungo Campbell, a 'writer' or solicitor, crossed +the ferry, and was greeted and accompanied for three-quarters of a +mile on his homeward way by old Stewart of Ballachulish, who turned +back and went to his house. A sheriff's officer walked ahead of +Glenure, who, like Mungo, was mounted. Behind both, mounted, was +Campbell's servant, John Mackenzie. The old road was (and is) a rough +track, through thick coppice. There came a shot, and Glenure, pierced +by two balls, fell and died.</p> + +<p>John Mackenzie, Glenure's servant, now rode onwards at a great gallop +to find Campbell of Ballieveolan, and on his way came to Acharn and +met James Stewart, with the two ancestors of my friend, as already +described. He gave the news to James, who 'wrung his hands and +expressed great concern at what had happened, as what might<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_85" id="Page_85">[Pg 85]</a></span> bring +innocent people to trouble.' In fact, he had once, or oftener, when +drinking, expressed a desire to have a shot at Glenure, and so had +Allan. But James was a worthy, sensible man when sober, and must have +known that, while he could not frighten the commissioners of forfeited +estates by shooting their agent, he was certain to be suspected if +their agent was shot. As a matter of fact, as we shall see, he had +taken active steps to secure the presence of a Fort William solicitor +at the evictions on Friday, May 15, to put in a legal protest. But he +thought it unadvisable to walk three or four miles and look after +Glenure's corpse; the Highlanders, to this day, have a strong dread or +dislike of corpses. That night James bade his people hide his arms, +four swords, a long Spanish gun, and a shorter gun, neither of which +weapons, in fact, did the trick, nor could be depended on not to miss +fire.</p> + +<p>Where, meanwhile, was Allan? In the dusk, above Ballachulish House, he +was seen by Kate MacInnes, a maid of the house; they talked of the +murder, and she told Donald Stewart, a very young man, son-in-law of +Ballachulish, where Allan was out on the hillside. Donald Stewart +averred that, on hearing from Kate that Allan wanted to see him (Kate +denied that she said this), he went to the hill, accused Allan of the +crime, and was told, in reply, that Allan was innocent, though, as a +deserter from the Hanoverian army, and likely to be suspected, he must +flee the country. Other talk passed, to which we shall return. At +three in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_86" id="Page_86">[Pg 86]</a></span> the morning of Friday, May 15, Allan knocked at the window +of Carnoch House (Glencoe's), passed the news, was asked no questions, +refused a drink and made for the sheiling, or summer hut, high on the +hill side of Coalisnacoan, whence you look down on the narrows of Loch +Leven.</p> + +<p>There we leave Allan for the moment, merely remarking that he had no +money, no means of making his escape. As he is supposed by the +prosecution to have planned the slaying of Glenure with James Stewart +on May 11, it seems plain that James would then have given him money +to use in his escape, or, if he had no money by him, would have sent +at once to Fort William or elsewhere to raise it. He did not do this, +and neither at Carnoch, Callart, nor Ballachulish House did Allan +receive any money.</p> + +<p>But, on May 12, when Allan went to Carnoch and Callart, James sent a +servant to a very old Mr. Stewart, father of Charles Stewart, notary +public. The father was a notary also, and James, who wanted a man of +law to be at the evictions on May 15, and thought that Charles Stewart +was absent in Moidart, conceived that the old gentleman would serve +the turn. But his messenger missed the venerable sportsman, who had +gone a-fishing. Learning later that Charles had returned from Moidart, +James, at 8 <span class="smcap">a.m.</span> on May 14 (the day of the murder), sent a servant to +Charles at Fort William, bidding him come to the evictions on May 15, +'as everything must go wrong without a person that<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_87" id="Page_87">[Pg 87]</a></span> can act, and that +I can trust.' In a postscript he added, 'As I have no time to write to +William (Stewart), let him send down immediately 8<i>l.</i> to pay for four +milk cows I bought for his wife at Ardshiel.' His messenger had also +orders to ask William Stewart for the money.</p> + +<p>Nothing could seem more harmless, but the prosecution might have +argued that this letter was, as to the coming of the notary, a +'blind,' and that the real object was, under the plea of sending for +the notary, to send the messenger for William Stewart's 8<i>l.</i>, +destined to aid Allan in his escape.<a name="FNanchor_8_8" id="FNanchor_8_8"></a><a href="#Footnote_8_8" class="fnanchor">[8]</a> There was no proof or even +suggestion that, on May 12, James had asked old Mr. Stewart to send +money for Allan's use, or had asked William Stewart, as having none by +him he would have done—that is, if James had concerted the murder +with Allan. If, on May 14, James was trying to raise money to help a +man who, as he knew, would need it after committing a murder on that +day, he showed strange want of foresight. He might not get the money, +or might not be able to send it to Allan. In fact, that day James did +not get the money. The prosecution argued that the money was sent for +on May 14, to help Allan Breck, and did not even try to show that +James had sent for money on May 12; when it would have arrived in good +time. Indeed James did not, on May 12, send any message to William +Stewart at Fort William, from whom, not from Charles or the old<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_88" id="Page_88">[Pg 88]</a></span> +gentleman, he tried to raise the cash on May 14. A friendly or a just +jury would have noted that if James planned a murder on the night of +May 11, and had no money, his very first move, on May 12, would be to +try to raise money for the assassin's escape. No mortal would put off +that step till the morning of the crime; indeed, it is amazing that +Allan, if he meant to do the deed, did not first try to obtain cash +for his escape. The relations of Glenure suspected, at the time, that +Allan was not the assassin, that he fled merely to draw suspicion away +from the real criminal (as he does in <i>Kidnapped</i>), and they even +wished to advertise a pardon for him, if he would come in and give +evidence. These facts occur in a copious unpublished correspondence of +the day between Glenure's brothers and kinsmen; Mr. Stevenson had +never heard of these letters.<a name="FNanchor_9_9" id="FNanchor_9_9"></a><a href="#Footnote_9_9" class="fnanchor">[9]</a> Thus, up to the day of the murder, +Allan may not have contemplated it; he may have been induced, +unprepared, to act as accessory to <i>the other man</i>.</p> + +<p>The point where, according to the prosecution, the evidence 'pinched' +James of the Glens was his attempt to raise money on May 14. What +could he want with so large a sum as 8<i>l.</i>, so suddenly, as he had no +bill to meet? Well, as a number of his friends were to be thrown out +of their farms, with their cattle, next day, James might need money +for their relief, and it seems<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_89" id="Page_89">[Pg 89]</a></span> certain that he had made no effort to +raise money at the moment when he inevitably must have done so, if +guilty, that is, on May 12, immediately after concerting, as was +alleged, the plot with Allan Breck. Failing to get money from William +Stewart at Fort William on May 14, James did on May 15 procure a small +sum from him or his wife, and did send what he could scrape together +to Allan Breck at Coalisnacoan. This did not necessarily imply guilt +on James's part. Allan, whether guilty or not, was in danger as a +suspected man and a deserter; James was his father's friend, had been +his guardian, and so, in honour, was bound to help him.</p> + +<p>But how did he know where Allan was to be found? If both were guilty +they would have arranged, on May 11, a place where Allan might lurk. +If they did arrange that, both were guilty. But Donald Stewart, who +went, as we have said, and saw Allan on the hillside on the night of +the murder, added to his evidence that Allan had then told him to tell +James of the Glens where he might be found, that is, at Coalisnacoan. +These tidings Donald gave to James on the morning of May 15. James +then sent a pedlar, Allan's cousin, back to William Stewart, got +3<i>l.</i>, added, in the evening of the 16th, more money of his own, and +sent it to Allan. There was a slight discrepancy between the story of +the maid, Kate MacInnes, and that of Donald Stewart, as to what +exactly passed between them, concerning Allan, on the night of the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_90" id="Page_90">[Pg 90]</a></span> +murder, and whether Allan did or did not give her a definite message +to Donald. The prosecution insisted on this discrepancy, which really, +as James's advocate told the jury, rather went to prove their want of +collusion in the manufacture of testimony. Had their memories been +absolutely coincident, we might suspect collusion—that they had been +'coached' in their parts. But a discrepancy of absolutely no +importance rather suggests independent and honest testimony. If this +be so, Allan and James had arranged no trysting-place on May 11, as +they must have done if Allan was to murder Glenure, and James was to +send him money for his escape.</p> + +<p>But there was a discrepancy of evidence as to the hour when the pedlar +sent by James to Fort William on May 15 arrived there. Was he +despatched after the hour when Donald Stewart swore that he gave +Allan's message to James of the Glens, or earlier, with no knowledge +on James's part of the message carried by Donald? We really cannot +expect certainty of memory, after five months, as to hours of the +clock. Also James did not prove that he sent a message to Allan at +Coalisnacoan, bidding him draw on William Stewart for money; yet on +Friday, May 15, James did, by the pedlar, bid William Stewart give +Allan credit, and on Saturday, May 16, Allan did make a pen from a +bird's feather, and ink with powder and water, and write a letter for +money, on the strength of James's credit, to William Stewart. This is<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_91" id="Page_91">[Pg 91]</a></span> +certainly a difficulty for James, since he suggested John Breck +MacColl, a tenant of Appin's at Coalisnacoan, for the intermediary +between Allan and William Stewart, and Allan actually did employ this +man to carry his letter. But Allan knew this tenant well, as did +James, and there was nobody else at that desolate spot, Coalisnacoan, +whom Allan could employ. So lonely is the country that a few years ago +a gentleman of my acquaintance, climbing a rocky cliff, found the +bones of a man gnawed by foxes and eagles; a man who never had been +missed or inquired after. Remains of pencils and leather shoe strings +among the bones proved that the man had been a pedlar, like James +Stewart's messenger, who had fallen over the precipice in trying to +cross from Coalisnacoan to the road through Glencoe. But he never was +missed, nor is the date of his death known to this day.</p> + +<p>The evidence of the lonely tenant at Coalisnacoan, as to his +interviews with Allan, is familiar to readers of <i>Kidnapped</i>. The +tenant had heard of the murder before he saw Allan. Two poor women, +who came up from Glencoe, told the story, saying that '<i>two men</i> were +seen going from the spot where Glenure was killed, and that Allan +Breck was one of them.' Thus early does the mysterious figure of <i>the +other man</i> haunt the evidence. The tenant's testimony was not regarded +as trustworthy by the Stewart party; it tended to prove that Allan +expected a change of clothes and money to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_92" id="Page_92">[Pg 92]</a></span> be sent to him, and he also +wrote the letter (with a wood-pigeon's quill, and powder and water) to +William Stewart, asking for money. But Allan might do all this relying +on his own message sent by Donald Stewart, on the night of the murder, +to James of the Glens, and knowing, as he must have done, that William +Stewart was James's agent in his large financial operations.</p> + +<p>On the whole, then, the evidence, even where it 'pinches' James most, +is by no means conclusive proof that on May 11 he had planned the +murder with Allan. If so, he must have begun to try to raise money +before the very day of the murder. James and his son were arrested on +May 16, and taken to Fort William; scores of other persons were +arrested, and the Campbells, to avenge Glenure, made the most minute +examinations of hundreds of people. Meanwhile Allan, having got 5<i>l.</i> +and his French clothes by the agency of his cousin the pedlar, +decamped from Coalisnacoan in the night, and marched across country to +the house of an uncle in Rannoch. Thence he escaped to France, where +he was seen in Paris by an informant of Sir Walter Scott's in the dawn +of the French Revolution; a tall, thin, quiet old man, wearing the +cross of St. Louis, and looking on at a revolutionary procession.</p> + +<p>The activities of the Campbells are narrated in their numerous +unpublished letters. We learn from a nephew of Glenure's that he had +been 'several days ago forewarned,' by whom we<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_93" id="Page_93">[Pg 93]</a></span> cannot guess; +tradition tells, as I have said, that he feared danger only in +Lochiel's country, Lochaber, and thought himself safe in Appin. The +warning, then, probably came from a Cameron in Lochaber, not from a +Stewart in Appin. In coincidence with this is a dark anonymous +blackmailing letter to Fassifern, as if <i>he</i> had urged the writer to +do the deed:</p> + +<p>'You will remember what you proposed on the night that Culchena was +buried, betwixt the hill and Culchena. I cannot deny but that I had +breathing' (a whisper), 'and not only that, but proposal of the same +to myself to do. Therefore you must excuse me, when it comes to the +push, for telling the thing that happened betwixt you and me that +night.... If you do not take this to heart, you may let it go as you +will.' (June 6, 1752.)</p> + +<p>Fassifern, who had no hand in the murder, 'let it go,' and probably +handed the blackmailer's letter over to the Campbells. Later, ——, +—— of ——, the blackest villain in the country, offered to the +Government to accuse Fassifern of the murder. The writer of the +anonymous letter to Fassifern is styled 'Blarmachfildich,' or +'Blarmackfildoch,' in the correspondence. I think he was a Mr. Millar, +employed by Fassifern to agitate against Glenure.</p> + +<p>In the beginning of July a man, suspected of being Allan, was arrested +at Annan on the Border, by a sergeant of the Royal Welsh Fusiliers. He +really seems to have changed clothes with Allan;<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_94" id="Page_94">[Pg 94]</a></span> at least he wore gay +French clothes like Allan's, but he was not that hero. Young +Ballachulish, at this time, knew that Allan was already across the +sea. Various guesses occur as to who <i>the other man</i> was; for example, +a son of James of the Glens was suspected, so there <i>was</i> another man.</p> + +<p>The 'precognitions,' or private examinations of witnesses before the +trial, extended to more than seven hundred persons. It was matter of +complaint by the Stewart party that 'James Drummond's name appeared in +the list of witnesses;' this is Mr. Stevenson's James More, really +MacGregor, the son of Rob Roy, and father of Catriona, later Mrs. +David Balfour of Shaws, in <i>Kidnapped</i> and <i>Catriona</i>. 'James More's +character is reflected upon, and I believe he cannot be called worse +than he deserves,' says one of the Campbells. He alleges, however, +that in April, before the murder, James of the Glens visited James +More, then a prisoner in Edinburgh Castle, 'caressed him,' and had a +private conversation with him. The abject James More averred that, in +this conversation, James of the Glens proposed that James More's +brother, Robin Oig, should kill Glenure for money. James More was not +examined at the trial of James of the Glens, perhaps because he had +already escaped, thanks to Catriona and collusion; but his evidence +appears to have reached the jury, almost all of them Campbells, who +sat at Inveraray, the Duke<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_95" id="Page_95">[Pg 95]</a></span> of Argyll on the bench, and made no +difficulty about finding James of the Glens 'Guilty.' To be sure, +James, if guilty, was guilty as an accessory to Allan, and that Allan +was guilty was not proved; he was not even before the court. It was +not proved that the bullets which slew Glenure fitted the bore of +James's small gun with which Allan was alleged to have perpetrated the +murder, but it was proved that the lock of that gun had only one +fault—it missed fire four times out of five, and, when the gun did +not miss fire, it did not carry straight—missed a blackcock, sitting! +<i>That</i> gun was not the gun used in the murder.</p> + +<p>The jury had the case for James of the Glens most clearly and +convincingly placed before them, in the speech of Mr. Brown for the +accused. He made, indeed, the very points on which I have insisted; +for example, that if James concerted a murder with Allan on May 11, he +would not begin to hunt for money for Allan's escape so late as May +14, the day of the murder. Again, he proved that, without any +information from James, Allan would <i>naturally</i> send for money to +William Stewart, James's usual source of supply; while at Coalisnacoan +there was no man to go as messenger except the tenant, John Breck +MacColl. A few women composed his family, and, as John MacColl had +been the servant of James of the Glens, he was well known already to +Allan. In brief, there was literally no proof of concert, and had the +case<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_96" id="Page_96">[Pg 96]</a></span> been heard in Edinburgh, not in the heart of the Campbell +country, by a jury of Campbells, a verdict of 'Not Guilty' would have +been given: probably the jury would not even have fallen back upon +'Not Proven.' But, moved by clan hatred and political hatred, the +jury, on September 24, found a verdict against James of the Glens, +who, in a touching brief speech, solemnly asserted his innocence +before God, and chiefly regretted 'that after ages should think me +guilty of such a horrid and barbarous murder.'</p> + +<p>He was duly hanged, and left hanging, on the little knoll above the +sea ferry, close to the Ballachulish Hotel.</p> + +<p>And <i>the other man</i>?</p> + +<p>Tradition avers that, on the day of the execution, he wished to give +himself up to justice, though his kinsmen told him that he could not +save James, and would merely share his fate; but, nevertheless, he +struggled so violently that his people mastered and bound him with +ropes, and laid him in a room still existing. Finally, it is said that +strange noises and knockings are still heard in that place, a +mysterious survival of strong human passions attested in other cases, +as on the supposed site of the murder of James I. of Scotland in +Perth.</p> + +<p>Do I believe in this identification of <i>the other man</i>? I have marked +every trace of him in the documents, published or unpublished, and I +remain in doubt. But if Allan had an accessory<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_97" id="Page_97">[Pg 97]</a></span> in the crime, who was +seen at the place, an accomplice who, for example, supplied the gun, +perhaps fired the shot, while Allan fled to distract suspicion, that +accessory was probably the person named by legend. Though he was +certainly under suspicion, so were scores of other people. The crime +does not seem to me to have been the result of a conspiracy in Appin, +but the act of one hot-headed man or of two hot-headed men. I hope I +have kept the Celtic secret, and I defy anyone to discover <i>the other +man</i> by aid of this narrative.</p> + +<p>That James would have been quite safe with an Edinburgh jury was +proved by the almost contemporary case of the murder of the English +sergeant Davies. He was shot on the hillside, and the evidence against +the assassins was quite strong enough to convict them. But some of the +Highland witnesses averred that the phantasm of the sergeant had +appeared to them, and given information against the criminals, and +though there was testimony independent of the ghost's, his +interference threw ridicule over the affair. Moreover the Edinburgh +jury was in sympathy with Mr. Lockhart, the Jacobite advocate who +defended the accused. Though undeniably guilty, they were acquitted: +much more would James of the Glens have obtained a favourable verdict. +He was practically murdered under forms of law, and what was thought +of the Duke of Argyll's conduct on the bench is familiar to readers of +<i>Kidnapped</i>. I have never seen a copy of the pamphlet put<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_98" id="Page_98">[Pg 98]</a></span> forth after +the hanging by the Stewart party, and only know it through a reply in +the Campbell MSS.</p> + +<p>The tragedy remains as fresh in the memories of the people of Appin +and Lochaber as if it were an affair of yesterday. The reason is that +the crime of cowardly assassination was very rare indeed among the +Highlanders. Their traditions were favourable to driving 'creaghs' of +cattle, and to clan raids and onfalls, but in the wildest regions the +traveller was far more safe than on Hounslow or Bagshot Heaths, and +shooting from behind a wall was regarded as dastardly.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_99" id="Page_99">[Pg 99]</a></span></p> +<h2><a name="V" id="V"></a>V</h2> + +<h2><i>THE CARDINAL'S NECKLACE</i></h2> + +<p> </p> + +<p>'<span class="smcap">Oh</span>, Nature and Thackeray, which of you imitated the other?' One +inevitably thinks of the old question thus travestied, when one reads, +in the fifth edition, revised and augmented, of Monsieur +Funck-Brentano's <i>L'Affaire du Collier</i>,<a name="FNanchor_10_10" id="FNanchor_10_10"></a><a href="#Footnote_10_10" class="fnanchor">[10]</a> the familiar story of +Jeanne de Valois, of Cardinal Rohan, and of the fatal diamond +necklace. Jeanne de Valois might have sat, though she probably did +not, for Becky Sharp. Her early poverty, her pride in the blood of +Valois, recall Becky's youth, and her boasts about 'the blood of the +Montmorencys.' Jeanne had her respectable friends, as Becky had the +Sedleys; like Becky, she imprudently married a heavy, unscrupulous +young officer; her expedients for living on nothing a year were +exactly those of Mrs. Rawdon Crawley; her personal charms, her fluent +tongue, her good nature, even, were those of that accomplished lady. +Finally she has her Marquis of Steyne in the wealthy, luxurious +Cardinal de Rohan; she robs him to a tune beyond<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_100" id="Page_100">[Pg 100]</a></span> the dreams of Becky, +and, incidentally, she drags to the dust the royal head of the fairest +and most unhappy of queens. Even now there seem to be people who +believe that Marie Antoinette was guilty, that she cajoled the +Cardinal, and robbed him of the diamonds, fateful as the jewels of +Eriphyle.</p> + +<p>That theory is annihilated by M. Funck-Brentano. But the story is so +strangely complicated; the astuteness and the credulity of the +Cardinal are so oddly contrasted; a momentary folly of the Queen is so +astonishing and fatal; the general mismanagement of the Court is so +crazy, that, had we lived in Paris at the moment, perhaps we could +hardly have believed the Queen to be innocent. Even persons greatly +prejudiced in her favour might well have been deceived, and the people +'loveth to think the worst, and is hardly to be moved from that +opinion,' as was said of the Scottish public at the date of the Gowrie +conspiracy.</p> + +<p>An infidelity of Henri II. of France to his wedded wife, Catherine de +Médicis, and the misplaced affection of Louis XV. for Madame du Barry, +were the remote but real causes that helped to ruin the House of +France. Without the amour of Henri II., there would have been no +Jeanne de Valois; without the hope that Louis XV. would stick at +nothing to please Madame du Barry, the diamond necklace would never +have been woven.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_101" id="Page_101">[Pg 101]</a></span></p> + +<p>Henri II. loved, about 1550, a lady named Nicole de Savigny, and by +her had a son, Henri de Saint-Remy, whom he legitimated. Saint-Remy +was the great, great, great, great-grandfather of Jeanne de Valois, +the flower of minxes. Her father, a ruined man, dwelt in a corner of +the family <i>château</i>, a predacious, poaching, athletic, broken scion +of royalty, who drank and brawled with the peasants, and married his +mistress, a servant-girl. Jeanne was born at the <i>château</i> of +Fontette, near Bar-sur-Aube, on April 22, 1756, and she and her +brother and little sister starved in their mouldering tower, kept +alive by the charity of the neighbours and of the <i>curé</i>, who begged +clothes for these descendants of kings. But their scutcheon was—and +Jeanne never forgot the fact—argent, three <i>fleurs de lys</i> or, on a +fesse azure. The <i>noblesse</i> of the family was later scrutinised by the +famous d'Hozier and pronounced authentic. Jeanne, with bare feet, and +straws in her hair, is said to have herded the cows, a discontented +indolent child, often beaten by her peasant mother. When her father +had eaten up his last acre, he and the family tramped to Paris in +1760. As Jeanne was then but four years old, I doubt if she ever +'drove the cattle home,' as M. Funck-Brentano finds recorded in the +MSS. of the advocate Target, who defended Jeanne's victim, Cardinal +Rohan.</p> + +<p>The Valois crew lived in a village near Paris. Jeanne's mother turned +Jeanne's father out of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_102" id="Page_102">[Pg 102]</a></span> doors, took a soldier in his place, and sent +the child to beg daily in the streets. 'Pity a poor orphan of the +blood of Valois,' she piped; 'alms, in God's name, for two orphans of +the blood of Valois!' When she brought home little she was cruelly +flogged, so she says, and occasionally she deviated into the truth. A +kind lady, the Marquise de Boulainvilliers, investigated her story, +found it true, and took up the Valois orphans. The wicked mother went +back to Bar-sur-Aube, which Jeanne was to dazzle with her opulence, +after she got possession of the diamonds.</p> + +<p>By the age of twenty-one (1777), Jeanne was a pretty enchanting girl, +with a heart full of greed and envy; two years later she and her +sister fled from the convent where her protectress had placed them: a +merry society convent it was. A Madame de Surmont now gave them +shelter, at Bar-sur-Aube, and Jeanne married, very disreputably, her +heavy admirer, La Motte, calling himself Count, and to all appearance +a stupid young officer of the <i>gendarmerie</i>. The pair lived as such +people do, and again made prey of Madame de Boulainvilliers, in 1781, +at Strasbourg. The lady was here the guest of the sumptuous, vain, +credulous, but honourable Cardinal Rohan, by this time a man of fifty, +and the fanatical adorer of Cagliostro, with his philosopher's stone, +his crystal gazers, his seeresses, his Egyptian mysteries, and his +powers of healing diseases, and creating diamonds out of nothing.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_103" id="Page_103">[Pg 103]</a></span></p> + +<p>Cagliostro doubtless lowered the Cardinal's moral and mental tone, but +it does not appear that he had any connection with the great final +swindle. In his supernormal gifts and graces the Cardinal did +steadfastly believe. Ten years earlier, Rohan had blessed Marie +Antoinette on her entry into France, and had been ambassador at the +Court of Maria Theresa, the Empress. A sportsman who once fired off +1,300 cartridges in a day (can this be true?), a splendid festive +churchman, who bewitched Vienna, and even the Emperor and Count +Kaunitz, by his lavish entertainments, Rohan made himself positively +loathed—for his corrupting luxury and his wicked wit—by the austere +Empress. She procured Rohan's recall, and so worked on her daughter, +Marie Antoinette, the young Queen of France, that the prelate, though +Grand Almoner, was socially boycotted by the Court, his letters of +piteous appeal to the Queen were not even opened, and his ambitions to +sway politics, like a Tencin or a Fleury, were ruined.</p> + +<p>So here are Rohan, Cagliostro, and Jeanne all brought acquainted. The +Cardinal (and this is one of the oddest features in the affair) was to +come to believe that Jeanne was the Queen's most intimate friend, and +could and would make his fortune with her; while, at the same time, he +was actually relieving her by little tips of from two to five louis! +This he was doing, even after, confiding in Jeanne, he handed to her +the diamond necklace for the Queen, and, as he believed, had<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_104" id="Page_104">[Pg 104]</a></span> himself +a solitary midnight interview with her Majesty. If Jeanne was so great +with the Queen as Rohan supposed, how could Jeanne also be in need of +small charities? Rohan was a man of the world. His incredible +credulity seems a fact so impossible to accept that it was not +accepted by public opinion. The Queen, people could not but argue, +must have taken his enormous gifts, and then robbed and denounced him. +With the case before our eyes of Madame Humbert, who swindled scores +of hard-headed financiers by the flimsiest fables, we can no longer +deem the credulity of the Cardinal incredible, even though he +displayed on occasion a sharpness almost as miraculous as his +stupidity.</p> + +<p>Rohan conferred a few small favours on Jeanne; her audacity was as +great as that of Madame Humbert, and, late in 1781, she established +herself both at Paris and in Versailles. The one card in her hand was +the blood of the Valois, and for long she could not play it to any +purpose. Her claims were too old and musty. If a lady of the name of +Stewart were to appear to-day, able to prove that she was of royal +blood, as being descended from Francis, Earl of Bothwell (who used to +kidnap James VI., was forfeited, and died in exile about 1620), she +could not reasonably expect to be peculiarly cherished and comforted +by our royal family. Now Jeanne's claims were no better, and no +nearer, in 1781, than those of our supposed Stewart adventuress in +1904. But Jeanne was<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_105" id="Page_105">[Pg 105]</a></span> sanguine. Something must be done, by hook or by +crook, for the blood of the Valois. She must fasten on her great +relations, the royal family. By 1783 Jeanne was pawning her furniture +and dining at the expense of her young admirers, or of her servants, +for, somehow, they were attached to a mistress who did not pay their +wages. She bought goods on her credit as a countess, and sold them on +the same day. She fainted in the crowd at Versailles, and Madame +Elizabeth sent her a few louis, and had her tiny pension doubled. +Jeanne fainted again under the eyes of the Queen, who never noticed +her.</p> + +<p>Her plan was to persuade small suitors that she could get them what +they wanted by her backstairs influence with her royal cousin; she had +a lover, Retaux de Villette, who was an expert forger, and by April +1784, relying on his skill, she began to hint to Rohan that she could +win for him the Queen's forgiveness. Her Majesty had seen her faint +and had been full of kindness. Nothing should be refused to the +interesting daughter of the Valois. Letters from the Queen to Jeanne, +forged by Villette on paper stamped with blue <i>fleurs de lys</i>, were +laid before the eyes of the infatuated prelate. Villette later +confessed to his forgeries; all confessed; but as all recanted their +confessions, this did not impress the public. The letters proved that +the Queen was relenting, as regarded Rohan. Cagliostro confirmed the +fact. At a <i>séance</i> in Rohan's house, he introduced a niece of +Jeanne's<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_106" id="Page_106">[Pg 106]</a></span> husband, a girl of fifteen, who played the part of crystal +gazer, and saw, in the crystal, whatever Cagliostro told her to see. +All was favourable to the wishes of Rohan, who was as easy of belief +as any spiritualist, being entirely dominated by the Neapolitan. +Cagliostro, none the less, knew nothing of the great final <i>coup</i>, +despite his clairvoyance.</p> + +<p>So far, in the summer of 1784, the great diamond fraud had not risen +into Jeanne's consciousness. Her aim was merely to convince the +Cardinal that she could win for him the Queen's favour, and then to +work upon his gratitude. It was in July 1784 that Jeanne's husband +made the acquaintance of Marie Laguay, a pretty and good-humoured but +quite 'unfortunate' young woman—'the height of honesty and +dissoluteness'—who might be met in the public gardens, chaperoned +solely by a nice little boy. Jeanne de Valois was not of a jealous +temperament. Mademoiselle Laguay was the friend of her husband, the +tawdry Count. For Jeanne that was enough. She invited the young lady +to her house, and by her royal fantasy created her Baronne Gay d'Oliva +(<i>Valoi</i>, an easy anagram).</p> + +<p>She presently assured the Baronne that the Queen desired her +collaboration in a practical joke, her Majesty would pay 600<i>l.</i> for +the freak. This is the Baronne's own version; her innocence, she +averred, readily believed that Marie Antoinette desired her +assistance.</p> + +<p>'You are only asked to give, some evening, a note and a rose to a +great lord, in an alley of the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_107" id="Page_107">[Pg 107]</a></span> gardens of Versailles. My husband will +bring you hither to-morrow evening.'</p> + +<p>Jeanne later confessed that the Baronne really was stupid enough to be +quite satisfied that the whole affair was a jest.</p> + +<p>Judged by their portraits, d'Oliva, who was to personate the Queen, in +an interview with the Cardinal, was not at all like Marie Antoinette. +Her short, round, buxom face bears no resemblance to the long and +noble outlines of the features of the Queen. But both women were fair, +and of figures not dissimilar. On August 11, 1784, Jeanne dressed up +d'Oliva in the <i>chemise</i> or <i>gaulle</i>, the very simple white blouse +which Marie Antoinette wears in the contemporary portrait by Madame +Vigée-Lebrun, a portrait exhibited at the Salon of 1783. The ladies, +with La Motte, then dined at the best restaurant in Versailles, and +went out into the park. The sky was heavy, without moon or starlight, +and they walked into the sombre mass of the Grove of Venus, so styled +from a statue of the goddess which was never actually placed there. +Nothing could be darker than the thicket below the sullen sky.</p> + +<p>A shadow of a man appeared: <i>Vous voilà!</i> said the Count, and the +shadow departed. It was Villette, the forger of the Queen's letters, +the lover and accomplice of Jeanne de Valois.</p> + +<p>Then the gravel of a path crackled under the feet of three men. One +approached, heavily cloaked. D'Oliva was left alone, a rose fell from<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_108" id="Page_108">[Pg 108]</a></span> +her hand, she had a letter in her pocket which she forgot to give to +the cloaked man, who knelt, and kissed the skirt of her dress. She +murmured something; the cloaked Cardinal heard, or thought he heard, +her say: 'You may hope that the past is forgotten.'</p> + +<p>Another shadow flitted past, whispering: 'Quick! Quick! Come on! Here +are Madame and Madame d'Artois!'</p> + +<p>They dispersed. Later the Cardinal recognised the whispering shadow +that fled by, in Villette, the forger. How could he recognise a +fugitive shade vaguely beheld in a dark wood, on a sultry and starless +night? If he mistook the girl d'Oliva for the Queen, what is his +recognition of the shadow worth?</p> + +<p>The conspirators had a jolly supper, and one Beugnot, a friend of +Jeanne, not conscious of the plot, escorted the Baronne d'Oliva back +to her rooms in Paris.</p> + +<p>The trick, the transparent trick was played, and Jeanne could extract +from the Cardinal what money she wanted, in the name of the Queen that +gave him a rose in the Grove of Venus. Letters from the Queen were +administered at intervals by Jeanne, and the prelate never dreamed of +comparing them with the authentic handwriting of Marie Antoinette.</p> + +<p>We naturally ask ourselves, was Rohan in love with the daughter of the +Valois? Does his passion account for his blindness? Most authors have<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_109" id="Page_109">[Pg 109]</a></span> +believed what Jeanne later proclaimed, that she was the Cardinal's +mistress. This the divine steadily denied. There was no shadow of +proof that they were even on familiar terms, except a number of erotic +letters, which Jeanne showed to a friend, Beugnot, saying that they +were from the Cardinal, and then burned. The Cardinal believed all +things, in short, and verified nothing, in obedience to his dominating +idea—the recovery of the Queen's good graces.</p> + +<p>Meanwhile, Jeanne drew on him for large sums, which the Queen, she +said, needed for acts of charity. It was proved that Jeanne instantly +invested the money in her own name, bought a large house with another +loan, and filled it with splendid furniture. She was as extravagant as +she was greedy; <i>alieni appetens, sui profusa</i>.</p> + +<p>The Cardinal was in Alsace, at his bishopric, when in +November-December 1784, Jeanne was brought acquainted with the +jewellers, Böhmer and Bassenge, who could not find a customer for +their enormous and very hideous necklace of diamonds, left on their +hands by the death of Louis XV. The European Courts were poor; Marie +Antoinette had again and again refused to purchase a bauble like a +'comforter' made of precious stones, or to accept it from the King. +'We have more need of a ship of war,' she said, and would not buy, +though the jeweller fell on his knees, and threatened to drown +himself. There were then no American millionaires, and the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_110" id="Page_110">[Pg 110]</a></span> thickest +and ugliest of necklaces was 'eating its head off,' for the stones had +been bought with borrowed money.</p> + +<p>In the jewellers Jeanne found new victims; they, too, believed in her +credit with the Queen; they, too, asked no questions, and held that +she could find them a purchaser. Jeanne imposed on them thus, while +the Cardinal was still in Alsace. He arrived at Paris in January 1785. +He learned, from Jeanne, that the Queen wished him to deal for her +with the jewellers! She would pay the price, 60,000<i>l.</i>, by quarterly +instalments.</p> + +<p>The Cardinal could believe that the Queen, who, as he supposed, had +given him a darkling interview, would entrust him with such a +commission, for an article which she had notoriously refused. But +there is a sane spot in every man's mind, and on examining the +necklace (January 24, 1785), he said that it was in very poor taste. +However, as the Queen wanted to wear it at a ceremony on February 2, +he arranged the terms, and became responsible for the money. His +guarantee was a document produced by Jeanne, and signed 'Marie +Antoinette de France.' As Cagliostro pointed out to Rohan later, too +late, the Queen could not possibly use this signature. Neither the +prelate nor the tradesmen saw the manifest absurdity. Rohan carried +the necklace to Jeanne, who gave it to the alleged messenger of the +Queen. Rohan only saw the <i>silhouette</i> of this man, in a dusky room, +through a glass<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_111" id="Page_111">[Pg 111]</a></span> door, but he later declared that in him he recognised +the fleeting shade who whispered the warning to fly, in the dark Grove +of Venus. It was Villette, the forger.</p> + +<p>Naturally people asked, 'If you could not tell the Queen from Mlle. +d'Oliva when you kissed her robe in the grove, how could you +recognise, through a dim glass door, the man of whom you had only +caught a glimpse as a fleeting shadow? If you are so clever, why, it +<i>was</i> the Queen whom you met in the wood. You cannot have been +mistaken in her.'</p> + +<p>These obvious arguments told against the Queen as well as against the +Cardinal.</p> + +<p>The Queen did not wear the jewels at the feast for which she had +wanted them. Strange to say, she never wore them at all, to the +surprise of the vendors and of the Cardinal. The necklace was, in +fact, hastily cut to pieces with a blunt heavy knife, in Jeanne's +house; her husband crossed to England, and sold many stones, and +bartered more for all sorts of trinkets, to Grey, of New Bond Street, +and Jeffreys, of Piccadilly. Villette had already been arrested with +his pockets full of diamonds, but the luck of the House of Valois, and +the astuteness of Jeanne, procured his release. So the diamonds were, +in part, 'dumped down' in England; many were kept by the La Mottes; +and Jeanne paid some pressing debts in diamonds.</p> + +<p>The happy La Mottes, with six carriages, a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_112" id="Page_112">[Pg 112]</a></span> stud of horses, silver +plate of great value, and diamonds glittering on many portions of +their raiment, now went off to astonish their old friends at +Bar-sur-Aube. The inventories of their possessions read like pages out +of <i>The Arabian Nights</i>. All went merrily, till at a great +ecclesiastical feast, among her friends the aristocracy, on August 17, +1785, Jeanne learned that the Cardinal had been arrested at +Versailles, in full pontificals, when about to celebrate the Mass. She +rushed from table, fled to Versailles, and burned her papers. She +would not fly to England; she hoped to brazen out the affair.</p> + +<p>The arrest of the Cardinal was caused thus: On July 12, 1785, the +jeweller, Böhmer, went to Versailles with a letter of thanks to the +Queen, dictated by Rohan. The date for the payment of the first +instalment had arrived, nothing had been paid, a reduction in price +had been suggested and accepted. Böhmer gave the letter of thanks to +the Queen, but the Controller-General entered, and Böhmer withdrew, +without waiting for a reply. The Queen presently read the letter of +thanks, could not understand it, and sent for the jeweller, who had +gone home. Marie Antoinette thought he was probably mad, certainly a +bore, and burned his note before the eyes of Madame Campan.</p> + +<p>'Tell the man, when you next see him, that I do not want diamonds, and +shall never buy any more.'<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_113" id="Page_113">[Pg 113]</a></span></p> + +<p>Fatal folly! Had the Queen insisted on seeing Böhmer, all would have +been cleared up, and her innocence established. Böhmer's note spoke of +the recent arrangements, of the jeweller's joy that the greatest of +queens possesses the handsomest of necklaces—and Marie Antoinette +asked no questions!</p> + +<p>Jeanne now (August 3) did a great stroke. She told Bassenge that the +Queen's guarantee to the Cardinal was a forgery. She calculated that +the Cardinal, to escape the scandal, would shield her, would sacrifice +himself and pay the 60,000<i>l.</i></p> + +<p>But the jewellers dared not carry the news to the Cardinal. They went +to Madame Campan, who said that they had been gulled: the Queen had +never received the jewels. Still, they did not tell the Cardinal. +Jeanne now sent Villette out of the way, to Geneva, and on August 4 +Bassenge asked the Cardinal whether he was sure that the man who was +to carry the jewels to the Queen had been honest? A pleasant question! +The Cardinal kept up his courage; all was well, he could not be +mistaken. Jeanne, with cunning audacity, did not fly: she went to her +splendid home at Bar-sur-Aube.</p> + +<p>Villette was already out of reach; d'Oliva, with her latest lover, was +packed off to Brussels; there was no proof against Jeanne; her own +flight would have been proof. The Cardinal could not denounce her; he +had insulted the Queen by supposing that she gave him a lonely +midnight<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_114" id="Page_114">[Pg 114]</a></span> tryst, a matter of high treason; the Cardinal could not +speak. He consulted Cagliostro. 'The guarantee is forged,' said the +sage; 'the Queen could not sign "Marie Antoinette de France." Throw +yourself at the King's feet, and confess all.' The wretched Rohan now +compared the Queen's forged notes to him with authentic letters of +hers in the possession of his family. The forgery was conspicuous, but +he did not follow the advice of Cagliostro. On August 12, the Queen +extracted the whole facts, as far as known to them, from the +jewellers. On August 15, the day of the Assumption, when the Cardinal +was to celebrate, the King asked him: 'My cousin, what is this tale of +a diamond necklace bought by you in the name of the Queen?'</p> + +<p>The unhappy man, unable to speak coherently, was allowed to write the +story, in fifteen lines.</p> + +<p>'How could you believe,' asked the Queen with angry eyes, 'that I, who +have not spoken to you for eight years, entrusted you with this +commission?'</p> + +<p>How indeed could he believe it?</p> + +<p>He offered to pay for the jewels. The thing might still have been +hushed up. The King is blamed, first for publicly arresting Rohan as +he did, an enormous scandal; next for handing over the case, for +public trial, to the Parlement, the hereditary foes of the Court. +Fréteau de Saint-Just, one of the Bar, cried: 'What a triumph for +Liberal ideas! A Cardinal a thief! The Queen implicated! Mud on the +crosier and the sceptre!'<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_115" id="Page_115">[Pg 115]</a></span></p> + +<p>He had his fill of Liberal ideas, for he was guillotined on June 14, +1794!</p> + +<p>Kings and queens are human beings. They like a fair and open trial. +Mary Stuart prayed for it in vain, from the Estates of Scotland, and +from Elizabeth. Charles I. asked for public trial in vain, from the +Estates of Scotland, at the time of the unsolved puzzle of 'The +Incident.' Louis XVI. and Marie Antoinette had the publicity they +wanted; to their undoing. The Parlement was to acquit Rohan of the +theft of the necklace (a charge which Jeanne tried to support by a +sub-plot of romantic complexity), and that acquittal was just. But +nothing was said of the fatal insult which he had dealt to the Queen. +Villette, who had forged the royal name, was merely exiled, left free +to publish fatal calumnies abroad, though high treason, as times went, +was about the measure of his crime. Gay d'Oliva, whose personation of +the Queen also verged on treason, was merely acquitted with a +recommendation 'not to do it again.' Pretty, a young mother, and +profoundly dissolute, she was the darling of Liberal and <i>sensible</i> +hearts.</p> + +<p>Jeanne de Valois, indeed, was whipped and branded, but Jeanne, in +public opinion, was the scapegoat of a cruel princess, and all the mud +was thrown on the face of the guiltless Queen. The friends of Rohan +were all the clergy, all the many nobles of his illustrious house, all +the courtly foes of the Queen (they began by the basest calumnies,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_116" id="Page_116">[Pg 116]</a></span> +the ruin that the people achieved), all the friends of Liberal ideas, +who soon, like Fréteau de Saint-Just, had more of Liberalism than they +liked.</p> + +<p>These were the results which the King obtained by offering to the +Cardinal his choice between the royal verdict and that of the public +Court of Justice. Rohan said that, if the King would pronounce him +innocent, he would prefer to abide by the royal decision. He <i>was</i> +innocent of all but being a presumptuous fool; the King might, even +now, have recognised the fact. Mud would have been thrown, but not all +the poached filth of the streets of Paris. On the other hand, had +Louis withheld the case from public trial, we might still be doubtful +of the Queen's innocence. Napoleon acknowledged it: 'The Queen was +innocent, and to make her innocence the more public, she wished the +Parlement to be the judge. The result was that she was taken to be +guilty.' Napoleon thought that the King should have taken the case +into his own hand. This might have been wisdom for the day, but not +for securing the verdict of posterity. The pyramidal documents of the +process, still in existence, demonstrate the guilt of the La Mottes +and their accomplices at every step, and prove the stainless character +of the Queen.</p> + +<p>La Motte could not be caught. He had fled to Edinburgh, where he lived +with an aged Italian teacher of languages. This worthy man offered to +sell him for 10,000<i>l.</i>, and a pretty plot was<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_117" id="Page_117">[Pg 117]</a></span> arranged by the French +ambassador to drug La Motte, put him on board a collier at South +Shields and carry him to France. But the old Italian lost heart, and, +after getting 1,000<i>l.</i> out of the French Government in advance, +deemed it more prudent to share the money with the Count. Perhaps the +Count invented the whole stratagem; it was worthy of the husband and +pupil of Jeanne de Valois. That poor lady's cause was lost when +Villette and Gay d'Oliva were brought back across the frontier, +confessed, and corroborated each other's stories. Yet she made a +wonderfully good fight, changing her whole defence into another as +plausible and futile, before the very eyes of the Court, and doing her +best to ruin Rohan as a thief, and Cagliostro as the forger of the +Queen's guarantee. The bold Neapolitan was acquitted, but compelled to +leave the country, and attempt England, where the phlegmatic islanders +trusted him no more than they trusted Madame Humbert. We expended our +main capital of credulity on Titus Oates and Bedloe, and the +warming-pan lie—our imaginative innocence being most accessible in +the region of religion. The French are more open to the appeal of +romance, and to dissolute honesty in the person of Miss Gay d'Oliva, +to injured innocence as represented by Jeanne de Valois. That class of +rogues suits a gay people, while we are well mated with such a +seductive divine as Dr. Oates.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_118" id="Page_118">[Pg 118]</a></span></p> +<h2><a name="VI" id="VI"></a>VI</h2> + +<h2><i>THE MYSTERY OF KASPAR HAUSER: THE CHILD OF EUROPE</i></h2> + +<p> </p> + +<p><span class="smcap">The</span> story of Kaspar Hauser, a boy, apparently idiotic, who appeared, +as if from the clouds, in Nuremberg (1828), divided Germany into +hostile parties, and caused legal proceedings as late as 1883. Whence +this lad came, and what his previous adventures had been, has never +been ascertained. His death by a dagger-wound, in 1833—whether +inflicted by his own hand or that of another—deepened the mystery. +According to one view, the boy was only a waif and an impostor, who +had strayed from some peasant home, where nobody desired his return. +According to the other theory, he was the Crown Prince of Baden, +stolen as an infant in the interests of a junior branch of the House, +reduced to imbecility by systematic ill-treatment, turned loose on the +world at the age of sixteen, and finally murdered, lest his secret +origin might be discovered.</p> + +<p>I state first the theory of the second party in the dispute, which +believed that Kaspar was some<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_119" id="Page_119">[Pg 119]</a></span> great one: I employ language as +romantic as my vocabulary affords.</p> + +<hr style="width: 45%;" /> + +<p>Darkness in Karlsruhe! 'Tis the high noon of night: October 15, 1812. +Hark to the tread of the Twelve Hours as they pass on the palace +clock, and join their comrades that have been! The vast corridors are +still; in the shadows lurk two burly minions of ambitious crime, +Burkard and Sauerbeck. Is that a white moving shadow which approaches +through the gloom? There arises a shriek, a heavy body falls, 'tis a +lacquey who has seen and recognised <i>The White Lady of the Grand Ducal +House</i>, that walks before the deaths of Princes. Burkard and Sauerbeck +spurn the inanimate body of the menial witness. The white figure, +bearing in her arms a sleeping child, glides to the tapestried wall, +and vanishes through it, into the Chamber of the Crown Prince, a babe +of fourteen days. She returns carrying <i>another</i> unconscious infant +form, she places it in the hands of the ruffian Sauerbeck, she +disappears. The miscreant speeds with the child through a postern into +the park, you hear the trample of four horses, and the roll of the +carriage on the road. Next day there is silence in the palace, broken +but by the shrieks of a bereaved though Royal (or at least Grand +Ducal) mother. Her babe lies a corpse! The Crown Prince has died in +the night! The path to the throne lies open to the offspring of the +Countess von Hochberg, morganatic wife<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_120" id="Page_120">[Pg 120]</a></span> of the reigning Prince, Karl +Friedrich, and mother of the children of Ludwig Wilhelm August, his +youngest son.</p> + +<p>Sixteen years fleet by; years rich in Royal crimes. 'Tis four of a +golden Whit Monday afternoon, in old Nuremberg, May 26, 1828. The town +lies empty, dusty, silent; her merry people are rejoicing in the green +wood, and among the suburban beer-gardens. One man alone, a shoemaker, +stands by the door of his house in the Unschlitt Plas: around him lie +the vacant streets of the sleeping city. His eyes rest on the form, +risen as it were out of the earth or fallen from the skies, of a boy, +strangely clad, speechless, incapable either of standing erect or of +moving his limbs. That boy is the Royal infant placed of yore by the +White Shadow in the hands of the cloaked ruffian. Thus does the Crown +Prince of Baden return from the darkness to the daylight! He names +himself <span class="smcap">Kaspar Hauser</span>. He is to die by the dagger of a cruel courtier, +or of a hireling English Earl.</p> + +<p>Thus briefly, and, I trust, impressively, have I sketched the history +of Kaspar Hauser, 'the Child of Europe,' as it was presented by +various foreign pamphleteers, and, in 1892, by Miss Elizabeth E. +Evans.<a name="FNanchor_11_11" id="FNanchor_11_11"></a><a href="#Footnote_11_11" class="fnanchor">[11]</a> But, as for the 'authentic records' on which the partisans +of Kaspar Hauser based their version, they are anonymous, +unauthen<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_121" id="Page_121">[Pg 121]</a></span>ticated, discredited by the results of a libel action in +1883; and, in short, are worthless and impudent rubbish.</p> + +<p>On all sides, indeed, the evidence as to Kaspar Hauser is in +bewildering confusion. In 1832, four years after his appearance, a +book about him was published by Paul John Anselm Von Feuerbach. The +man was mortal, had been a professor, and, though a legal reformer and +a learned jurist, was 'a nervous invalid' when he wrote, and he soon +after died of paralysis (or poison according to Kasparites). He was +approaching a period of life in which British judges write books to +prove that Bacon was Shakespeare, and his arguments were like theirs. +His <i>Kaspar Hauser</i> is composed in a violently injudicial style. 'To +seek the giant perpetrator of such a crime' (as the injustice to +Kaspar), 'it would be necessary ... to be in possession of Joshua's +ram's horns, or at least of Oberon's horn, in order, for some time at +least, to suspend the activity of the powerful enchanted Colossi that +guard the golden gates of certain castles,' that is, of the palace at +Karlsruhe. Such early Nuremberg records of Kaspar's first exploits as +existed were ignored by Feuerbach, who told Lord Stanhope, that any +reader of these 'would conceive Kaspar to be an impostor.' 'They ought +to be burned.' The records, which were read and in part published, by +the younger Meyer (son of one of Kaspar's tutors) and by President +Karl Schmausz, have disappeared, and, in 1883, Schmausz<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_122" id="Page_122">[Pg 122]</a></span> could only +attest the general accuracy of Meyer's excerpts from the town's +manuscripts.</p> + +<p>Taking Feuerbach's romantic narrative of 1832, we find him averring +that, about 4.30 <span class="smcap">p.m.</span> on Whit Monday, May 26, 1828, a citizen, +unnamed, was loitering at his door, in the Unschlitt Plas, Nuremberg, +intending to sally out by the New Gate, when he saw a young peasant, +standing in an attitude suggestive of intoxication, and apparently +suffering from locomotor ataxia, 'unable to govern fully the movements +of his legs.' The citizen went to the boy, who showed him a letter +directed to the captain of a cavalry regiment. The gallant captain +lived near the New Gate (654 paces from the citizen's house), and +thither the young peasant walked with the citizen. So he <i>could</i> +'govern fully the movements of his legs.' At the house, the captain +being out, the boy said, 'I would be a horseman as my father was,' +also 'Don't know.' Later he was taken to the prison, up a steep hill, +and the ascent to his room was one of over ninety steps. Thus he could +certainly walk, and when he spoke of himself he said 'I' like other +people. Later he took to speaking of himself as 'Kaspar,' in the +manner of small children, and some hysterical patients under +hypnotism. But this was an after-thought, for Kaspar's line came to be +that he had only learned a few words, like a parrot, words which he +used to express all senses indifferently. His eye-sight, when he first +appeared, seems to have been<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_123" id="Page_123">[Pg 123]</a></span> normal, at the prison he wrote his own +name as 'Kaspar Hauser,' and covered a sheet of paper with writing. +Later he could see best in the dark.</p> + +<p>So says Feuerbach, in 1832. What he does not say is whence he got his +information as to Kaspar's earliest exploits. Now our earliest +evidence, on oath, before a magistrate, is dated November 4, 1829. +George Weichmann, shoemaker (Feuerbach's anonymous 'citizen'), then +swore that, on May 26, 1828, he saw Kaspar, not making paralysed +efforts to walk, but trudging down a hilly street, shouting 'Hi!' ('or +any loud cry'), and presently asking, 'with tolerable distinctness,' +'New Gate Street?' He took the boy that way, and the boy gave him the +letter for the captain. Weichmann said that they had better ask for +him at the New Gate Guard House, and the boy said 'Guard House? Guard +House? New Gate no doubt just built?' He said he came from Ratisbon, +and was in Nuremberg for the first time, but clearly did not +understand what Weichmann meant when he inquired as to the chances of +war breaking out. In May 1834 Weichmann repeated his evidence as to +Kaspar's power of talking and walking, and was corroborated by one +Jacob Beck, not heard of in 1829. On December 20, 1829, Merk, the +captain's servant, spoke to Kaspar's fatigue, 'he reeled as he +walked,' and would answer no questions. In 1834 Merk expanded, and +said 'we had a long chat.' Kaspar averred that he could read and +write, and had<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_124" id="Page_124">[Pg 124]</a></span> crossed the frontier daily on his way to school. 'He +did not know where he came from.' Certainly Merk, in 1834, remembered +much more than in 1829. Whether he suppressed facts in 1829, or, in +1834, invented fables, we do not know. The cavalry captain (November +2, 1829) remembered several intelligent remarks made by Kaspar. His +dress was new and clean (denied by Feuerbach), he was tired and +footsore. The evidence of the police, taken in 1834, was remote in +time, but went to prove that Kaspar's eyesight and power of writing +were normal. Feuerbach absolutely discredits all the sworn evidence of +1829, without giving his own sources. The early evidence shows that +Kaspar could both walk and talk, and see normally, by artificial and +natural light, all of which is absolutely inconsistent with Kaspar's +later account of himself.</p> + +<p>The personal property of Kaspar was a horn rosary, and several +Catholic tracts with prayers to the Guardian Angel, and so forth. +Feuerbach holds that these were furnished by 'devout villains'—a very +sound Protestant was Feuerbach—and that Kaspar was ignorant of the +being of a Deity, at least of a Protestant Deity. The letter carried +by the boy said that the writer first took charge of him, as an +infant, in 1812, and had never let him 'take a single step out of my +house.... I have already taught him to read and write, <i>and he writes +my handwriting exactly as I do</i>.' In the same hand was a letter in +Latin<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_125" id="Page_125">[Pg 125]</a></span> characters, purporting to come from Kaspar's mother, 'a poor +girl,' as the author of the German letter was 'a poor day-labourer.' +Humbug as I take Kaspar to have been, I am not sure that he wrote +these pieces. If not, somebody else was in the affair; somebody who +wanted to get rid of Kaspar. As that youth was an useless, false, +convulsionary, and hysterical patient, no one was likely to want to +keep him, if he could do better. No specified reward was offered at +the time for information about Kaspar; no portrait of him was then +published and circulated. The Burgomaster, Binder, had a portrait, and +a facsimile of Kaspar's signature engraved, but Feuerbach would not +allow them to be circulated, heaven knows why.</p> + +<p>How Kaspar fell, as it were from the clouds, and unseen, into the +middle of Nuremberg, even on a holiday when almost every one was out +of town, is certainly a puzzle. The earliest witnesses took him for a +journeyman tailor lad (he was about sixteen), and perhaps nobody paid +any attention to a dusty travelling tradesman, or groom out of place. +Feuerbach (who did not see Kaspar till July) says that his feet were +covered with blisters, the gaoler says that they were merely swollen +by the tightness of his boots.</p> + +<p>Once in prison, Kaspar, who asked to be taken home, adopted the <i>rôle</i> +of 'a semi-unconscious animal,' playing with toy horses, 'blind though +he saw,' yet, not long after, he wrote a minute account of all that he +had then observed. He could<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_126" id="Page_126">[Pg 126]</a></span> only eat bread and water: meat made him +shudder, and Lord Stanhope says that this peculiarity did occur in the +cases of some peasant soldiers. He had no sense of hearing, which +means, perhaps, that he did not think of pretending to be amazed by +the sound of church bells till he had been in prison for some days. +Till then he had been deaf to their noise. This is Feuerbach's story, +but we shall see that it is contradicted by Kaspar himself, in +writing. Thus the alleged facts may be explained without recourse even +to a theory of intermittent deafness. Kaspar was no more deaf than +blind. He 'was all there,' and though, ten days after his arrival, he +denied that he had ever seen Weichmann, in ten days more his memory +for faces was deemed extraordinary, and he minutely described all +that, on May 26 and later, he had observed. Kaspar was taught to write +by the gaoler's little boy, though he could write when he came—in the +same hand as the author of his mysterious letter. Though he had but +half a dozen words on May 26, according to Feuerbach, by July 7 he had +furnished Binder with his history—pretty quick work! Later in 1828 he +was able to write that history himself. In 1829 he completed a work of +autobiography.</p> + +<p>Kaspar wrote that till the age of sixteen he was kept in 'a prison,' +'perhaps six or seven feet long, four broad, and five high.' There +were two small windows, with closed black wooden shutters. He lay on +straw, lived on bread and water, and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_127" id="Page_127">[Pg 127]</a></span> played with toy horses, and blue +and red ribbons. That he could see colours in total darkness is a +proof of his inconsistent fables, or of his 'hyperæsthesia'—abnormal +acuteness of the senses. 'The man' who kept him was not less +hyperæsthetic, for he taught Kaspar to write in the dark. He never +heard any noise, but avers that, in prison, he was alarmed by the town +clock striking, on the first morning, though Feuerbach says that he +did not hear the bells for several days.</p> + +<p>Such is Kaspar's written account (1829); the published account of July +1828, derived from 'the expressions of a half-dumb animal' (as +Feuerbach puts it), is much more prolix and minute in detail. The +animal said that he had sat on the ground, and never seen daylight, +till he came to Nuremberg. He used to be hocussed with water of an +evil taste, and wake in a clean shirt. 'The man' once hit him and hurt +him, for making too much noise. The man taught him his letters and the +Arabic numerals. Later he gave him instructions in the art of +standing. Next he took him out, and taught him about nine words. He +was made by the man to walk he knew not how far, or how long, the man +leading him. Nobody saw this extraordinary pair on the march. +Feuerbach, who maintains that Kaspar's feet were covered with cruel +blisters, from walking, also supposes that 'perhaps for the greater +part of the way' he was carried in a carriage or waggon! Whence then +the cruel blisters caused by walking? There is<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_128" id="Page_128">[Pg 128]</a></span> medical evidence that +his legs were distorted by confinement, but the medical <i>post-mortem</i> +evidence says that this was not the case. He told Binder that his +windows were shuttered: he told Hiltel, the gaoler, that from his +windows he saw 'a pile of wood and above it the top of a tree.'</p> + +<p>Obviously Kaspar's legends about himself, whether spoken in June 1828, +or written in February 1829, are absurdly false. He was for three +weeks in the tower, and was daily visited by the curious. Yet in these +three weeks the half-conscious animal 'learned to read tolerably well, +to count, to write figures' (<i>that</i> he could do when he arrived, +Feuerbach says), 'he made progress in writing a good hand, and learned +a simple tune on the harpsichord,' pretty well for a half-unconscious +animal.</p> + +<p>In July 1828, after being adopted by the excited town of Nuremberg, he +was sent to be educated by and live with a schoolmaster named Daumer, +and was studied by Feuerbach. They found, in Kaspar, a splendid +example of the 'sensitive,' and a noble proof of the powers of 'animal +magnetism.' In Germany, at this time, much was talked and written +about 'somnambulism' (the hypnotic state), and about a kind of 'animal +magnetism' which, in accordance with Mesmer's theory, was supposed to +pass between stars, metals, magnets, and human beings. The effects +produced on the patient by the hypnotist (now ascribed to +'suggestion') were attributed to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_129" id="Page_129">[Pg 129]</a></span> a 'magnetic efflux,' and +Reichenbach's subjects saw strange currents flowing from metals and +magnets. His experiments have never, perhaps, been successfully +repeated, though hysterical persons have pretended to feel the +traditional effects, even when non-magnetic objects were pointed at +them. Now Kaspar was really a 'sensitive,' or feigned to be one, with +hysterical cunning. Anything unusual would throw him into convulsions, +or reduce him to unconsciousness. He was addicted to the tears of +sensibility. Years later Meyer read to him an account of the Noachian +Deluge, and he wept bitterly. Meyer thought this rather too much, the +Deluge being so remote an event, and, after that, though Meyer read +pathetic things in his best manner, Kaspar remained unmoved. He wrote +a long account of his remarkable magnetic sensations during and before +the first thunderstorm after his arrival at Nuremberg. Yet, before his +appearance there, he must have heard plenty of thunderstorms, though +he pretended that this was his first. The sight of the moon produced +in him 'emotions of horror.' He had visions, like the Rev. Ansel +Bourne, later to be described, of a beautiful male figure in a white +garment, who gave him a garland. He was taken to a 'somnambulist,' and +felt 'magnetic' pulls and pushes, and a strong current of air. Indeed +the tutor, Daumer, shared these sensations, obviously by virtue of +'suggestion.' They are out of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_130" id="Page_130">[Pg 130]</a></span> fashion, the doctrine of animal +magnetism being as good as exploded, and nobody feels pulled or pushed +or blown upon, when he consults Mrs. Piper or any other 'medium.'</p> + +<p>From a letter of Feuerbach of September 20, 1828, we learn that +Kaspar, '<i>without being an albino</i>,' can see as well in utter darkness +as in daylight. Perhaps the man who taught Kaspar to write, in the +dark, <i>was</i> an albino: Kaspar never saw his face. Kaspar's powers of +vision abated, as he took to beef, but he remained hyperæsthetic, and +could see better in a bad light than Daumer or Feuerbach. Some +'dowsers,' we know, can detect subterranean water, by the sensations +of their hands, without using a twig, or divining rod, and others can +'spot' gold hidden under the carpet, with the twig. Kaspar, merely +with the bare hand, detected (without touching it?) a needle under a +table cloth. He gradually lost these gifts, and the theory seems to +have been that they were the result of his imprisonment in the dark, +and a proof of it. The one thing certain is that Kaspar had the +sensitive or 'mediumistic' temperament, which usually—though not +always—is accompanied by hysteria, while hysteria means cunning and +fraud, whether conscious or not so conscious. Meanwhile the boy was in +the hands of men credulous, curious, and, in the case of Daumer, +capable of odd sensations induced by suggestion. From such a boy, in +such company, the truth could not be expected, above all if, like some +other<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_131" id="Page_131">[Pg 131]</a></span> persons of his class, he was subject to 'dissociation' and +obliviousness as to his own past.</p> + +<p>Rather curiously we find in Feuerbach's own published collection of +Trials the case of a boy, Sörgel, who had 'paroxysms of second +consciousness ... of which he was ignorant upon returning to his +ordinary state of consciousness.' We have also the famous case of the +atheistic carpenter, Ansel Bourne, who was struck deaf, dumb, and +blind, and miraculously healed, in a dissenting chapel, to the great +comfort of 'a large and warm congregation.' Mr. Bourne then became a +preacher, but later forgot who he was, strolled to a distant part of +the States, called himself Browne, set up a 'notions store,' and, one +day, awoke among his notions to the consciousness that he was Bourne, +not Browne, a preacher, not a dealer in cheap futilities. Bourne was +examined, under hypnotism, by Professor William James and others.<a name="FNanchor_12_12" id="FNanchor_12_12"></a><a href="#Footnote_12_12" class="fnanchor">[12]</a></p> + +<p>Many such instances of 'ambulatory automatism' are given. In my view, +Kaspar was, to put it mildly, an ambulatory automatist, who had +strayed away, like the Rev. Mr. Bourne, from some place where nobody +desired his return: rather his lifelong absence was an object of hope. +The longer Kaspar lived, the more frequently was he detected in every +sort of imposture that could make him notorious, or enable him to +shirk work.</p> + +<p>Kaspar had for months been the pet mystery<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_132" id="Page_132">[Pg 132]</a></span> of Nuremberg. People were +sure that, like the mysterious prisoner of Pignerol, Les Exiles, and +the Isle Sainte-Marguerite (1669-1703?), Kaspar was some great one, +'kept out of his own.' Now the prisoner of Pignerol was really a +valet, and Kaspar was a peasant. Some thought him a son of Napoleon: +others averred (as we saw) that he was the infant son of the Grand +Duke Karl of Baden, born in 1812, who had not died within a fortnight +of his birth, but been spirited away by a lady disguised as the +spectral 'White Lady of Baden,' an aristocratic <i>ban-shie</i>. The subtle +conspirators had bred the Grand Duke Kaspar in a dark den, the theory +ran, hoping that he would prove, by virtue of such education, an +acceptable recruit for the Bavarian cavalry, and that no questions +would be asked. Unluckily questions were now being asked, for a boy +who could only occasionally see and hear was not (though he could +smell a cemetery at a distance of five hundred yards), an useful man +on a patrol, at least the military authorities thought not. Had they +known that Kaspar could see in the dark, they might have kept him as a +guide in night attacks, but they did not know. The promising young +hussar (he rode well but clumsily) was thus left in the hands of +civilians: the Grand Ducal secret might be discovered, so an assassin +was sent to take off the young prince.</p> + +<p>The wonder was not unnaturally expressed that Kaspar had not smelled +out the villain,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_133" id="Page_133">[Pg 133]</a></span> especially as he was probably the educational +albino, who taught him to write in the dark. On hearing of this, +later, Kaspar told Lord Stanhope that he <i>had</i> smelled the man: +however, he did not mention this at the time. To make a long story +short, on October 17, 1829, Kaspar did not come to midday eating, but +was found weltering in his gore, in the cellar of Daumer's house. +Being offered refreshment in a cup, he bit out a piece of the +porcelain and swallowed it. He had 'an inconsiderable wound' on the +forehead; to that extent the assassin had effected his purpose. +Feuerbach thinks that the murderer had made a shot at Kaspar's throat +with a razor, that Kaspar ducked cleverly, and got it on the brow, and +that the assassin believed his crime to be consummated, and fled, +after uttering words in which Kaspar recognised the voice of his +tutor, the possible albino. No albino or other suspicious character +was observed. Herr Daumer, before this cruel outrage, had remarked, in +Kaspar, 'a highly regrettable tendency to dissimulation and +untruthfulness,' and, just before the attack, had told the pupil that +he was a humbug. Lord Stanhope quoted a paper of Daumer's in the +<i>Universal Gazette</i> of February 6, 1834 (<i>Allgemeine Zeitung</i>), in +which he says that 'lying and deceit were become to Kaspar a second +nature.' When did they begin to become a second nature? In any case +Daumer clove to the romantic theory of Kaspar's origin. Kaspar left +Daumer's house and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_134" id="Page_134">[Pg 134]</a></span> stayed with various good people, being accompanied +by a policeman in his walks. He was sent to school, and Feuerbach +bitterly complains that he was compelled to study the Latin grammar, +'and finally even Cæsar's Commentaries!' Like other boys, Kaspar +protested that he 'did not see the use of Latin,' and indeed many of +our modern authors too obviously share Kaspar's indifference to the +dead languages. He laughed, in 1831, says Feuerbach, at the popish +superstition 'of his early attendants' (we only hear of one, and about +<i>his</i> theological predilections we learn nothing), and he also laughed +at ghosts. In his new homes Kaspar lied terribly, was angry when +detected, and wounded himself—he said accidentally—with a pistol, +after being reproached for shirking the Commentaries of Julius Cæsar, +and for mendacity. He was very vain, very agreeable as long as no one +found fault with him, very lazy, and very sentimental.</p> + +<p>In May 1831 Lord Stanhope, who, since the attack on Kaspar in 1829, +had been curious about him, came to Nuremberg, and 'took up' the hero, +with fantastic fondness. Though he recognised Kaspar's mythopœic +tendencies, he believed him to be the victim of some nefarious +criminals, and offered a reward of 500 florins, anonymously, for +information. It never was claimed.</p> + +<p>Already had arisen a new theory, that Kaspar was the son of an +Hungarian magnate. Later, Lord Stanhope averred, on oath, that +inquiries<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_135" id="Page_135">[Pg 135]</a></span> made in Hungary proved Kaspar to be an impostor. In 1830, a +man named Müller, who had been a Protestant preacher, and was now a +Catholic priest, denounced a preacher named Wirth, and a Miss Dalbonn, +a governess, as kidnappers of Kaspar from the family of a Countess, +living near Pesth. Müller was exposed, his motives were revealed, and +the newspapers told the story. Kaspar was therefore tried with +Hungarian words, and seemed to recognise some, especially Posonbya +(Pressburg). He thought that some one had said that his father was at +Pressburg: and thither Lord Stanhope sent him, with Lieutenant Hickel. +This was in 1831, but Kaspar recognised nothing: his companions, +however, found that he pretended to be asleep in the carriage, to hear +what was said about him. They ceased to speak of him, and Kaspar +ceased to slumber. A later expedition into Hungary, by Hickel, in +February 1832, on the strength of more Hungarian excitement on +Kaspar's part, discovered that there was nothing to discover, and +shook the credulity of Lord Stanhope. He could not believe Kaspar's +narrative, but still hoped that he had been terrorised into falsehood. +He could not believe both that the albino had never spoken to Kaspar +in his prison, and also that 'the man always taught me to do what I +was told.' To Lord Stanhope Kaspar averred that 'the man with whom he +had always lived said nothing to him till he was on his journey.' Yet, +during his imprisonment, the man had taught<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_136" id="Page_136">[Pg 136]</a></span> him, he declared, the +phrases which, by his account, were all the words that he knew when he +arrived at Nuremberg.</p> + +<p>For these and other obvious reasons, Lord Stanhope, though he had +relieved Nuremberg of Kaspar (November 1831), and made ample provision +for him, was deeply sceptical about his narrative. The town of +Nuremberg had already tried to shift the load of Kaspar on to the +shoulders of the Bavarian Government. Lord Stanhope did not adopt him, +but undertook to pay for his maintenance, and left him, in January +1832, under the charge of a Dr. Meyer, at Anspach. He had a curator, +and a guardian, and escaped from the Commentaries of Julius Cæsar into +the genial society of Feuerbach. That jurist died in May 1833 +(poisoned, say the Kasparites), a new guardian was appointed, and +Kaspar lived with Dr. Meyer. Finding him incurably untruthful, the +doctor ceased to provoke him by comments on his inaccuracies, and +Kaspar got a small clerkly place. With this he was much dissatisfied, +for he, like Feuerbach, had expected Lord Stanhope to take him to +England. Feuerbach, in the dedication to Lord Stanhope of his book +(1832), writes, 'Beyond the sea, in fair old England, you have +prepared for him a secure retreat, until the rising sun of Truth shall +have dispersed the darkness which still hangs over his mysterious +fate.' If Lord Stanhope ever made this promise, his growing scepticism +about Kaspar prevented him from fulfilling it. On December 9,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_137" id="Page_137">[Pg 137]</a></span> 1833, +Meyer was much provoked by Kaspar's inveterate falseness, and said +that he did not know how to face Lord Stanhope, who was expected to +visit Anspach at Christmas. For some weeks Kaspar had been sulky, and +there had been questions about a journal which he was supposed to +keep, but would not show. He was now especially resentful. On two +earlier occasions, after a scene with his tutor, Kaspar had been +injured, once by the assassin who cut his forehead; once by a pistol +accident. On December 14, he rushed into Dr. Meyer's room, pointed to +his side, and led Meyer to a place distant about five hundred yards +from his house. So agitated was he that Meyer would go no further, +especially as Kaspar would answer no questions. On their return, +Kaspar said, 'Went Court Garden—Man—had a knife—gave a +bag—struck—I ran as I could—bag must lie there.' Kaspar was found +to have a narrow wound, 'two inches and a half under the centre of the +left breast,' clearly caused by a very sharp double-edged weapon. In +three or four days he died, the heart had been injured. He was able to +depose, but not on oath, that on the morning of the 14th a man in a +blouse (who had addressed him some days earlier) brought him a verbal +message from the Court gardener, asking him to come and view some clay +from a newly bored well, where, in fact, no work was being done at +this time. He found no one at the well, and went to the monument of +the rather forgotten poet Uz. Here a man<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_138" id="Page_138">[Pg 138]</a></span> came forward, gave him a +bag, stabbed him, and fled. Of the man he gave discrepant +descriptions. He became incoherent, and died.</p> + +<p>There was snow lying, when Kaspar was stabbed, but there were no +footmarks near the well, and elsewhere, only one man's track was in +the Hofgarten. Was that track Kaspar's? We are not told. No knife was +found. Kaspar was left-handed, and Dr. Horlacher declared that the +blow must have been dealt by a left-handed man. Lord Stanhope +suggested that Kaspar himself had inflicted the wound by pressure, and +that, after he had squeezed the point of the knife through his wadded +coat, it had penetrated much deeper than he had intended, a very +probable hypothesis.</p> + +<p>As for the bag which the assassin gave him, it was found, and Dr. +Meyer said that it was very like a bag which he had seen in Kaspar's +possession. It contained a note, folded, said Madame Meyer, as Kaspar +folded his own notes. The writing was in pencil, in <i>Spiegelschrift</i>, +that is, it had to be read in a mirror. Kaspar, on his deathbed, kept +muttering incoherences about 'what is written with lead, no one can +read.' The note contained vague phrases about coming from the Bavarian +frontier.</p> + +<p>After Kaspar's death, the question of 'murder or suicide?' agitated +Germany, and gave birth to a long succession of pamphlets. A wild +woman, Countess Albersdorf ('<i>née</i> Lady Graham,' says Miss Evans, who +later calls her 'Lady Caroline Albersdorf'), saw visions, dreamed +dreams, and published<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_139" id="Page_139">[Pg 139]</a></span> nonsense. Other pamphlets came out, directed +against the House of Baden. In 1870 an anonymous French pamphleteer +offered the Baden romance, as from the papers of a Major von +Hennenhofer, the villain in chief of the White Lady plot. Lord +Stanhope was named as the ringleader in the attacks on Kaspar, both at +Nuremberg and Anspach. In 1883 all the fables were revived in a +pamphlet produced at Ratisbon, a mere hash of the libels of 1834, +1839, 1840, and 1870. Dr. Meyer was especially attacked, his sons +defended his reputation by an action for libel on the dead, an action +which German law permits. There was no defence, and the publisher was +fined, and ordered to destroy all the copies. In 1892 the libels were +repeated, by 'Baron Alexander von Artin:' two documents of a palpably +fraudulent character were added, the rest was the old stuff. The +reader may find it in Miss Evans's <i>Kaspar Hauser</i> (1892). For +example, Daumer knew a great deal. He even, in 1833, received an +anonymous letter from Anspach, containing the following statement: +'Lord Daniel Alban Durteal, advocate of the Royal Court in London, +said to me, "I am firmly convinced that Kaspar Hauser was murdered. It +was all done by bribery. Stanhope has no money, and lives by this +affair."' Daumer and Miss Evans appear to have seen nothing odd in +relying on an anonymous letter about Lord Daniel Alban Durteal!</p> + +<p>Lord Stanhope, says Miss Evans, 'was known to have subsisted +principally upon the sale of his<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_140" id="Page_140">[Pg 140]</a></span> German hymnbook, and other +devotional works, for which he was a colporteur.' Weary of piety, Lord +Stanhope became a hired assassin. Perhaps this nonsense still has its +believers, seduced by 'Lady Caroline Albersdorf, <i>née</i> Lady Graham,' +by Lord Daniel Alban Durteal, and by the spirit of Kaspar himself, +who, summoned by Daniel Dunglas Home, at a <i>séance</i> with the Empress +Eugénie, apparently, announced himself as Prince of Baden. No +authority for this interesting ghost of one who disbelieved in ghosts +is given.</p> + +<p>It is quite possible that Kaspar Hauser no more knew who he was than +the valet of 1669-1703 knew why he was a prisoner, no more than Mr. +Browne, when a dealer in 'notions,' knew that he was Mr. Bourne, a +dissenting preacher. Nothing is certain, except that Kaspar was an +hysterical humbug, whom people of sense suspected from the first, and +whom believers in animal magnetism and homœopathy accepted as some +great one, educated by his Royal enemies in total darkness—to fit him +for the military profession.</p> + +<p>It is difficult, of course, to account for the impossibility of +finding whence Kaspar had come to Nuremberg. But, in 1887, it proved +just as impossible to discover whither the Rev. Ansel Bourne had gone. +Mr. Bourne's lot was cast, not in the sleepy Royalist Bavaria of 1828, +but in the midst of the admired 'hustle' of the great Western +Republic. He was one of the most remarkable men in the country, not a +yokel of sixteen.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_141" id="Page_141">[Pg 141]</a></span> He was last seen at his nephew's store, 121 Broad +Street, Providence, R.I., on January 17. On January 20, the hue and +cry arose in the able and energetic press of his State. Mr. Bourne, as +a travelling evangelist, was widely known, but, after a fortnight +unaccounted for, he arrived, as A.J. Browne, at Norristown, Pa., sold +notions there, and held forth with acceptance at religious meetings. +On March 14 he awoke, still undiscovered, and wondered where he was. +He remembered nothing since January 17, so he wired to Providence, +R.I., for information. He had a whole fortnight to account for, +between his departure from Providence, R.I., and his arrival at +Norristown, Pa. Nobody could help him, he had apparently walked +invisible, like Kaspar on his way to Nuremberg. He was hypnotised by +Professor William James, and brought into his Browne condition, but +could give practically no verifiable account of Browne's behaviour in +that missing fortnight. He said that he went from Providence to +Pawtucket, and was for some days at Philadelphia, Pa., where he really +seems to have been; as to the rest 'back of that it was mixed up.' We +do not hear that Kaspar was ever hypnotised and questioned, but +probably he also would have been 'mixed up,' like Mr. Bourne.</p> + +<p>The fable about a Prince of Baden had not a single shred of evidence +in its favour. It is true that the Grand Duchess was too ill to be +permitted to see her dead baby, in 1812, but the baby's<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_142" id="Page_142">[Pg 142]</a></span> father, +grandmother, and aunt, with the ten Court physicians, the nurses and +others, must have seen it, in death, and it is too absurd to suppose, +on no authority, that they were all parties to the White Lady's plot. +We might as well believe, as Miss Evans seems to do, on the authority +of an unnamed Paris newspaper, that a Latin letter, complaining of +imprisonment, was picked up in the Rhine, signed 'S. Haues Spraucio,' +that the words ought to be read 'Hares Sprauka,' and that they are an +anagram of Kaspar Hauser. This occurred in 1816, when Kaspar, being +about four years of age, could not write Latin. No one in the secret +could have hoped that the Royal infant and captive would be recognised +under the name of Spraucio or even of Sprauka. Abject credulity, love +of mystery, love of scandal, and political passions, produced the +ludicrous mass of fables to which, as late as 1893, the Duchess of +Cleveland thought it advisable to reply. In England it is quite safe +to accuse a dead man of murder, or of what you please, as far as the +Duchess understood the law of libel, so she had no legal remedy.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_143" id="Page_143">[Pg 143]</a></span></p> +<h2><a name="VII" id="VII"></a>VII</h2> + +<h2><i>THE GOWRIE CONSPIRACY</i></h2> + +<p> </p> + +<p><span class="smcap">The</span> singular events called 'The Gowrie Conspiracy,' or 'The Slaying of +the Ruthvens,' fell out, on evidence which nobody disputes, in the +following manner. On August 5, 1600, the King, James VI., was leaving +the stables at the House of Falkland to hunt a buck, when the Master +of Ruthven rode up and had an interview with the monarch. This +occurred about seven o'clock in the morning. The Master was a youth of +nineteen; he was residing with his brother, the Earl of Gowrie, aged +twenty-two, at the family town house in Perth, some twelve or fourteen +miles from Falkland. The interview being ended, the King followed the +hounds, and the chase, 'long and sore,' ended in a kill, at about +eleven o'clock, near Falkland. Thence the King and the Master, with +some fifteen of the Royal retinue, including the Duke of Lennox and +the Earl of Mar, rode, without any delay, to Perth. Others of the +King's company followed: the whole number may have been, at most, +twenty-five.</p> + +<p>On their arrival at Perth it appeared that they<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_144" id="Page_144">[Pg 144]</a></span> had not been +expected. The Earl had dined at noon, the Royal dinner was delayed +till two o'clock, and after the scanty meal the King and the Master +went upstairs alone, while the Earl of Gowrie took Lennox and others +into his garden, bordering on the Tay, at the back of the house. While +they loitered there eating cherries, a retainer of Gowrie, Thomas +Cranstoun (brother of Sir John of that ilk), brought a report that the +King had already mounted, and ridden off through the Inch of Perth. +Gowrie called for horses, but Cranstoun told him that his horses were +at Scone, across the Tay, two miles off. The gentlemen then went to +the street door of the house, where the porter said that the King had +<i>not</i> ridden away. Gowrie gave him the lie, re-entered the house, went +upstairs, and returning, assured Lennox that James had certainly +departed. All this is proved on oath by Lennox, Mar, Lindores, and +many other witnesses.</p> + +<p>While the company stood in doubt, outside the gate, a turret window +above them opened, and the King looked forth, much agitated, shouting +'Treason!' and crying for help to Mar. With Lennox and most of the +others, Mar ran to the rescue up the main staircase of the house, +where they were stopped by a locked door, which they could not break +open. Gowrie had not gone with his guests to aid the King; he was +standing in the street, asking, 'What is the matter? I know nothing;' +when two of the King's household, Thomas and James Erskine, tried to +seize him, the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_145" id="Page_145">[Pg 145]</a></span> 'treason' being perpetrated under Gowrie's own roof. +<i>His</i> friends drove the Erskines off, and some of the Murrays of +Tullibardine, who were attending a wedding in Perth, surrounded him. +Gowrie retreated, drew a pair of 'twin swords,' and, accompanied by +Cranstoun and others, made his way into the quadrangle of his house. +At the foot of a small dark staircase they saw the body of a man +lying—wounded or dead. Cranstoun now rushed up the dark stairs, +followed by Gowrie, two Ruthvens, Hew Moncrieff, Patrick Eviot, and +perhaps others. At the head of the narrow spiral stair they found, in +a room called the Gallery Chamber, Sir Thomas Erskine, a lame Dr. +Herries, a young gentleman of the Royal Household named John Ramsay, +and Wilson, a servant, with drawn swords. A fight began; Cranstoun was +wounded; he and his friends fled, leaving Gowrie, who had been run +through the body by Ramsay. All this while the other door of the long +Gallery Chamber was ringing under the hammer-strokes of Lennox and his +company, and the town bell was summoning the citizens. Erskine and +Ramsay now locked the door opening on the narrow stair, at which the +retainers of Gowrie struck with axes. The King's party, by means of a +hammer handed by their friends through a hole in the other door of the +gallery, forced the lock, and admitted Lennox, Mar, and the rest of +the King's retinue. They let James out of a small turret opening from +the Gallery Chamber, and, after some dealings with<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_146" id="Page_146">[Pg 146]</a></span> the angry mob and +the magistrates of Perth, they conveyed the King to Falkland after +nightfall.</p> + +<p>The whole results were the death of Gowrie and of his brother, the +Master (his body it was that lay at the foot of the narrow staircase), +and a few wounds to Ramsay, Dr. Herries, and some of Gowrie's +retainers.</p> + +<p>The death of the Master of Ruthven was explained thus:—When James +cried 'Treason!' young Ramsay, from the stable door, had heard his +voice, but not his words. He had sped into the quadrangle, charged up +the narrow stairs, found a door behind which was the sound of a +struggle, 'dang in' the door, and saw the King wrestling with the +Master. <i>Behind them stood a man, the centre of the mystery, of whom +he took no notice.</i> He drew his whinger, slashed the Master in the +face and throat, and pushed him downstairs. Ramsay then called from +the window to Sir Thomas Erskine, who, with Herries and Wilson, ran to +his assistance, slew the wounded Master, and shut up James (who had no +weapon) in the turret. Then came the struggle in which Gowrie died. No +more was seen of the mysterious man in the turret, except by a +townsman, who later withdrew his evidence.</p> + +<p>Such was the whole affair, as witnessed by the King's men, the +retainers of Gowrie, and some citizens of Perth. Not a vestige of plot +or plan by Gowrie and his party was discoverable. His friends +maintained that he had meant, on that day,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_147" id="Page_147">[Pg 147]</a></span> to leave Perth for +'Lothian,' that is, for his castle at Dirleton, near North Berwick, +whither he had sent most of his men and provisions. James had summoned +the Master to meet him at Falkland, they said, and Gowrie had never +expected the return of the Master with the King.</p> + +<p>James's own version was given in a public letter of the night of the +events, which we only know through the report of Nicholson, the +English resident at Holyrood (August 6), and Nicholson only repeated +what Elphinstone, the secretary, told him of the contents of the +letter, written to the King's dictation at Falkland by David Moysie, a +notary. At the end of August James printed and circulated a full +narrative, practically identical with Nicholson's report of +Elphinstone's report of the contents of the Falkland letter of August +5.</p> + +<p>The King's narrative is universally accepted on all hands, till we +come to the point where he converses with Alexander Ruthven, at +Falkland, before the buck-hunt began. There was such an interview, +lasting for about a quarter of an hour, but James alone knew its +nature. He says that, after an unusually low obeisance, Ruthven told +the following tale:—Walking alone, on the previous evening, in the +fields near Perth, he had met 'a base-like fellow, unknown to him, +with a cloak cast about his mouth,' a common precaution to avoid +recognition. Asked who he was, and what his errand 'in so solitary a +part, being far from all ways,' the fellow was taken aback.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_148" id="Page_148">[Pg 148]</a></span> Ruthven +seized him, and, under his arm, found 'a great wide pot, all full of +coined gold in great pieces.' Ruthven keeping the secret to himself, +took the man to Perth, and locked him in 'a privy derned house'—that +is, a room. At 4 <span class="smcap">a.m.</span> he himself left Perth to tell the King, urging +him to 'take order' in the matter at once, as not even Lord Gowrie +knew of it. When James said that it was no business of his, the gold +not being treasure trove, Ruthven called him 'over scrupulous,' adding +that his brother, Gowrie, 'and other great men,' might interfere. +James then, suspecting that the gold might be foreign, brought in by +Jesuits for the use of Catholic intriguers, asked what the coins and +their bearer were like. Ruthven replied that the bearer seemed to be a +'Scots fellow,' hitherto unknown to him, and that the gold was +apparently of foreign mintage. Hereon James felt sure that the gold +was foreign and the bearer a disguised Scots priest. He therefore +proposed to send back with Ruthven a retainer of his own with a +warrant to Gowrie, then Provost of Perth, and the Bailies, to take +over the man and the money. Ruthven replied that, if they did, the +money would be ill reckoned, and begged the King to ride over at once, +be 'the first seer,' and reward him 'at his own honourable +discretion.'</p> + +<p>The oddity of the tale and the strangeness of Ruthven's manner amazed +James, who replied that he would give an answer when the hunt was +over.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_149" id="Page_149">[Pg 149]</a></span> Ruthven said the man might make a noise, and discover the whole +affair, causing the treasure to be meddled with. He himself would be +missed by Gowrie, whereas, if James came at once, Gowrie and the +townsfolk would be 'at the sermon.' James made no answer, but followed +the hounds. Still he brooded over the story, sent for Ruthven, and +said that the hunt once ended he would accompany him to Perth.</p> + +<p><i>Here James adds that, though he himself knew not that any man was +with Ruthven, he had two companions, one of whom, Andrew Henderson, he +now despatched to Gowrie, bidding him prepare dinner for the King.</i> +This is not part of James's direct evidence. He was <i>unknowing and +unsuspecting that any man living had come</i> with Ruthven.</p> + +<p>Throughout the chase Ruthven was ever near the King, always urging him +'to hasten the end of the hunting.' The buck was slain close to the +stables, and Ruthven would not allow James to wait for a second horse: +that was sent after him. So the King did not even tarry to 'brittle' +the buck, and merely told the Duke of Lennox, Mar, and others that he +was riding to Perth to speak with Gowrie, and would return before +evening. Some of the Court went to Falkland for fresh horses, other +followed slowly with weary steeds. They followed 'undesired by him,' +because a report rose that the King had some purpose to apprehend the +oppressive Master of Oliphant.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_150" id="Page_150">[Pg 150]</a></span> Ruthven implored James not to bring +Lennox and Mar, but only three or four servants, to which the King +answered 'half angrily.'</p> + +<p>This odd conduct roused suspicion in James. He had been well +acquainted with Ruthven, who was suing for the place of a Gentleman of +the Bedchamber, or Cubicular. 'The farthest that the King's suspicion +could reach to was, that it might be that the Earl, his brother, had +handled him so hardly, that the young gentleman, being of a high +spirit, had taken such displeasure as he was beside himself;' hence +his curious, agitated, and moody behaviour. James, as they rode, +consulted Lennox, whose first wife had been a sister of Gowrie. Lennox +had never seen anything of mental unsettlement in young Ruthven, but +James bade the Duke 'accompany him into that house' (room), where the +gold and the bearer of it lay. Lennox thought the story of the gold +'unlikely.' Ruthven seeing them in talk, urged that James should be +secret, and bring nobody with him to the first inspection of the +treasure. The King thus rode forward 'between trust and distrust.' +About two miles from Perth, Ruthven sent on his other companion, +Andrew Ruthven, to Gowrie. When within a mile of Perth, Ruthven +himself rode forward in advance. Gowrie was at dinner, having taken no +notice of the two earlier messengers.</p> + +<p>Gowrie, with fifty or sixty men, met James 'at the end of the Inch;' +the Royal retinue was<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_151" id="Page_151">[Pg 151]</a></span> then of fifteen persons, with swords alone, and +no daggers or 'whingers.' Dinner did not appear till an hour had gone +by (say 2 <span class="smcap">p.m.</span>). James whispered to Ruthven that he had better see the +treasure at once: Ruthven bade him wait, and not arouse Gowrie's +suspicions by whispering ('rounding'). James therefore directed his +conversation to Gowrie, getting from him 'but half words and imperfect +sentences.' When dinner came Gowrie stood pensively by the King's +table, often whispering to the servants, 'and oft-times went in and +out,' as he also did before dinner. The suite stood about, as was +custom, till James had nearly dined, when Gowrie took them to their +dinner, separately in the hall; 'he sat not down with them as the +common manner is,' but again stood silent beside the King, who +bantered him 'in a homely manner.'</p> + +<p>James having sat long enough, Ruthven whispered that he wished to be +rid of his brother, so James sent Gowrie into the hall to offer a kind +of grace-cup to the suite, as was usual—this by Ruthven's desire. +James then rose to follow Ruthven, asking him to bring Sir Thomas +Erskine with him. Ruthven requested James to 'command publicly' that +none should follow at once, promising that 'he should make any one or +two follow that he pleased to call for.'</p> + +<p>The King then, expecting attendants who never came because Ruthven +never summoned them, walked alone with Ruthven across the end of the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_152" id="Page_152">[Pg 152]</a></span> +hall, up a staircase, and through three or four chambers, Ruthven +'ever locking behind him every door as he passed.' We do not know +whether James observed the locking of the doors, or inferred it from +the later discovery that one door was locked. Then Ruthven showed 'a +more smiling countenance than he had all the day before, ever saying +that he had him sure and safe enough kept.' At last they reached 'a +little study' (a turret chamber), where James found, 'not a bondman, +but a freeman, with a dagger at his girdle,' and 'a very abased +countenance.' Ruthven locked the turret door, put his hat on his head, +drew the man's dagger, pointed it at the King's breast, 'avowing now +that the King behoved to be in his will and used as he list,' +threatening murder if James cried out, or opened the window. He also +reminded the King of the death of the late Gowrie, his father +(executed for treason in 1584). Meanwhile the other man stood +'trembling and quaking.' James made a long harangue on many points, +promising pardon and silence if Ruthven at once let him go. Ruthven +then uncovered, and promised that James's life should be safe if he +kept quiet; the rest Gowrie would explain. Then, bidding the other man +ward the King, he went out, locking the door behind him. He had first +made James swear not to open the window. In his brief absence James +learned from the armed man that he had but recently been locked up in +the turret, he knew not why. James bade him<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_153" id="Page_153">[Pg 153]</a></span> open the window 'on his +right hand.' The man did as he was commanded.</p> + +<p>Here the King's narrative reverts to matter not within his own +observation (the events which occurred downstairs during his own +absence). His narrative is amply confirmed, on oath, by many nobles +and gentlemen. He says (here we repeat what we began by stating) that, +during his own absence, as his train was rising from dinner, one of +the Earl's servants, Cranstoun, came hastily in, assuring the Earl +that the King had got to horse, and 'was away through the Inch' (isle) +of Perth. The Earl reported this to the nobles, and all rushed to the +gate. The porter assured them that the King had not departed. Gowrie +gave the porter the lie, but, turning to Lennox and Mar, said that he +would get sure information. He then ran back across the court, and +upstairs, and returned, running, with the news that 'the King was +gone, long since, by the back gate, and, unless they hasted, would not +be overtaken.'</p> + +<p>The nobles, going towards the stables for their horses, necessarily +passed under the window of the turret on the first floor where James +was imprisoned. Ruthven by this time had returned thither, 'casting +his hands abroad in a desperate manner as a man lost.' Then, saying +that there was no help for it, the King must die, he tried to bind the +royal hands with his garter. In the struggle James drew Ruthven +towards the window, already open. At this nick of time, when the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_154" id="Page_154">[Pg 154]</a></span> +King's friends were standing in the street below, Gowrie with them, +James, 'holding out the right side of his head and his right elbow,' +shouted for help. Gowrie stood 'ever asking what it meant,' but +Lennox, Mar, and others, as we saw, instantly ran in, and up the chief +staircase to find the King. Meanwhile James, in his agony, pushed +Ruthven out of the turret, 'the said Mr. Alexander's head under his +arms, and himself on his knees,' towards the chamber door which opened +on the dark staircase. James was trying to get hold of Ruthven's sword +and draw it, 'the other fellow doing nothing but standing behind the +King's back and trembling all the time.' At this moment a young +gentleman of the Royal Household, John Ramsay, entered from the dark +<i>back</i> staircase, and struck Ruthven with his dagger. 'The other +fellow' withdrew. James then pushed Ruthven down the back stairs, +where he was slain by Sir Thomas Erskine and Dr. Herries, who were +coming up by that way. The rest, with the death of Gowrie, followed. A +tumult of the townsmen, lasting for two or three hours, delayed the +return of James to Falkland.</p> + +<p>Such is the King's published narrative. It tallies closely with the +letter written by Nicholson, the English agent, to Cecil, on August 6.</p> + +<p>James had thus his version, from which he never varied, ready on the +evening of the fatal day, August 5. From his narrative only one +inference can be drawn. Gowrie and his brother had<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_155" id="Page_155">[Pg 155]</a></span> tried to lure +James, almost unattended, to their house. In the turret they had an +armed man, who would assist the Master to seize the King. Events +frustrated the conspiracy; James was well attended; the armed man +turned coward, and Gowrie proclaimed the King's departure falsely to +make his suite follow back to Falkland, and so leave the King in the +hands of his captors. The plot, once arranged, could not be abandoned, +because the plotters had no prisoner with a pot of gold to produce, so +their intended treason would have been manifest.</p> + +<p>How far is James's tale corroborated? At the posthumous trial of the +Ruthvens in November, witnesses like Lennox swore to his quarter of an +hour of talk with Ruthven at Falkland before the hunt. The <i>early</i> +arrival of Andrew Henderson at Gowrie's house, about half-past ten, is +proved by two gentlemen named Hay, and one named Moncrieff, who were +then with Gowrie on business to which he at once refused to attend +further, in the case of the Hays. Henderson's presence with Ruthven at +Falkland is also confirmed by a manuscript vindication of the Ruthvens +issued at the time. None of the King's party saw him, and their +refusal to swear that they did see him shows their honesty, the point +being essential. Thus the circumstance that Gowrie ordered no dinner +for the King, despite Henderson's early arrival with news of his +coming, shows that Gowrie meant to affect being taken by surprise. +Again, the flight<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_156" id="Page_156">[Pg 156]</a></span> of Henderson on the very night of August 5 proves +that he was implicated: why else should a man fly who had not been +seen by anyone (except a Perth witness who withdrew his evidence) in +connection with the fatal events? No other man fled, except some of +Gowrie's retainers who took open part in the fighting.</p> + +<p>James's opinion that Ruthven was deranged, in consequence of harsh +treatment by his brother, Gowrie, is explained by a dispute between +the brothers about the possession of the church lands of Scone, which +Gowrie held, and Ruthven desired, the King siding with Ruthven. This +is quite casually mentioned in a contemporary manuscript.<a name="FNanchor_13_13" id="FNanchor_13_13"></a><a href="#Footnote_13_13" class="fnanchor">[13]</a> Again, +Lennox, on oath, averred that, as they rode to Perth, James told him +the story of the lure, the pot of gold. Lennox was a man of honour, +and he had married Gowrie's sister.</p> + +<p>Ruthven, on his return to Gowrie's house, told a retainer, +Craigingelt, that he 'had been on an errand not far off,' and +accounted for the King's arrival by saying that he was 'brought' by +the royal saddler to exact payment of a debt to the man. Now James had +just given Gowrie a year's immunity from pursuit of creditors, and +there is no trace of the saddler's presence. Clearly Ruthven lied to +Craigingelt; he had been at Falkland, <i>not</i> 'on an errand not far +off.'</p> + +<p>That Cranstoun, Gowrie's man, brought the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_157" id="Page_157">[Pg 157]</a></span> news, or rumour, of the +King's departure was admitted by himself. That Gowrie went into the +house to verify the fact; insisted that it was true; gave the lie to +the porter, who denied it; and tried to make the King's party take +horse and follow, was proved by Lennox, Lindores, Ray (a magistrate of +Perth), the porter himself, and others, on oath.</p> + +<p>That the King was locked in by a door which could not be burst open is +matter of undisputed certainty.</p> + +<p>All these are facts that 'winna ding, and downa be disputed.' They +<i>were</i> disputed, however, when Henderson, Gowrie's factor, or steward, +and a town councillor of Perth, came out of hiding between August 11 +and August 20, told his story and confessed to having been the man in +the turret. He said that on the night of August 4 Gowrie bade him ride +very early next day with the Master of Ruthven to Falkland, and return +with any message that Ruthven might send. He did return—when the Hays +and Moncrieff saw him—with news that the King was coming. An hour +later Gowrie bade him put on a shirt of mail and plate sleeves, as he +meant to arrest a Highlander in the Shoe-gait. Later, the King +arriving, Henderson was sent to Ruthven, in the gallery, and told to +do whatever he was bidden. Ruthven then locked him up in the turret, +giving no explanation. Presently the King was brought into the turret, +and Henderson pretends that, to a faint extent, he hampered the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_158" id="Page_158">[Pg 158]</a></span> +violence of Ruthven. During the struggle between Ramsay and Ruthven he +slunk downstairs, went home, and fled that night.</p> + +<p>It was denied that Henderson had been at Falkland at all. Nobody swore +to his presence there, yet it is admitted by the contemporary +apologist, who accuses the King of having organised the whole +conspiracy against the Ruthvens. It was said that nobody saw Henderson +slink away out of the narrow stair, though the quadrangle was crowded. +One Robertson, however, a notary of Perth, gave evidence (September +23) that he did see Henderson creep out of the narrow staircase and +step over the Master's dead body; Robertson spoke to him, but he made +no reply. If Robertson perjured himself on September 23, he withdrew +his evidence, or rather, he omitted it, at the trial in November. His +life would not have been worth living in Perth—where the people were +partisans of the Ruthvens—if he had adhered to his first statement. +In the absence of other testimony many fables were circulated as to +Henderson's absence from Perth all through the day, and, on the other +hand, as to his presence, in the kitchen, during the crisis. He was +last seen, for certain, in the house just before the King's dinner, +and then, by his account, was locked up in the turret by the Master. +Probably Robertson's first story was true. Other witnesses, to shield +their neighbours, denied having seen retainers of Gowrie's who most +assuredly were present at the brawls in the quad<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_159" id="Page_159">[Pg 159]</a></span>rangle. It was never +explained why Henderson fled at once if he was not the man in the +turret. I therefore conceive that, as he certainly was at Falkland, +and certainly returned early, his story is true in the main.</p> + +<p>Given all this, only one of two theories is possible. The affair was +not accidental; James did not fall into a panic and bellow 'Treason!' +out of the window, merely because he found himself alone in a +turret—and why in a secluded turret?—with the Master. To that theory +the locked door of the gallery is a conclusive reply. Somebody locked +it for some reason. Therefore either the Ruthvens plotted against the +King, or the King plotted against the Ruthvens. Both parties had good +grounds for hatred, as we shall show—that is, Gowrie and James had +motives for quarrel; but with the young Master, whose cause, as +regards the lands of Scone, the King espoused, he had no reason for +anger. If James was guilty, how did he manage his intrigue?</p> + +<p>With motives for hating Gowrie, let us say, the King lays his plot. He +chooses for it a day when he knows that the Murrays of Tullibardine +will be in Perth at the wedding of one of the clan. They will defend +the King from the townsfolk, clients of their Provost, Gowrie. James +next invites Ruthven to Falkland (this was asserted by Ruthven's +defenders): he arrives at the strangely early hour of 6.30 <span class="smcap">a.m.</span> James +has already invented the story of the pot of gold, to be confided to +Lennox, as<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_160" id="Page_160">[Pg 160]</a></span> proof that Ruthven is bringing him to Perth—that he has +not invited Ruthven.</p> + +<p>Next, by secretly spreading a rumour that he means to apprehend the +Master of Oliphant, James secures a large train of retainers, let us +say twenty-five men, without firearms, while he escapes the suspicion +that would be aroused if he ordered them to accompany him. James has +determined to sacrifice Ruthven (with whom he had no quarrel +whatever), merely as bait to draw Gowrie into a trap.</p> + +<p>Having put Lennox off with a false reason for his accompanying Ruthven +alone in the house of Gowrie, James privately arranges that Ruthven +shall quietly summon him, or Erskine, to follow upstairs, meaning to +goad Ruthven into a treasonable attitude just as they appear on the +scene. He calculates that Lennox, Erskine, or both, will then stab +Ruthven without asking questions, and that Gowrie will rush up, to +avenge his brother, and be slain.</p> + +<p>But here his Majesty's deeply considered plot, on a superficial view, +breaks down, since Ruthven (for reasons best known to himself) summons +neither Lennox nor Erskine. James, observing this circumstance, +rapidly and cleverly remodels his plot, and does not begin to provoke +the brawl till, being, Heaven knows why, in the turret, he hears his +train talking outside in the street. He had shrewdly provided for +their presence there by ordering a servant of his own to spread the +false<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_161" id="Page_161">[Pg 161]</a></span> rumour of his departure, which Cranstoun innocently brought. +Why did the King do this, as his original idea involved no need of +such a stratagem? He had also, somehow, persuaded Gowrie to credit the +rumour, in the face of the porter's denial of its possibility, and to +persist in it, after making no very serious attempt to ascertain its +truth. To succeed in making Gowrie do this, in place of thoroughly +searching the house, is certainly the King's most striking and +inexplicable success.</p> + +<p>The King has thus two strings to his nefarious bow. The first was that +Ruthven, by his orders, would bring Erskine and Lennox, and, just as +they appeared, James would goad Ruthven into a treasonable attitude, +whereon Lennox and Erskine would dirk him. The second plan, if this +failed (as it did, because Ruthven did not obey orders), was to +deceive Gowrie into bringing the retinue under the turret window, so +that the King could open the window and cry 'Treason!' as soon as he +heard their voices and footsteps below. This plan succeeds. James +yells out of the window. Not wanting many spectators, he has, somehow, +locked the door leading into the gallery, while giving Ramsay a hint +to wait outside of the house, within hearing, and to come up by the +back staircase, which was built in a conspicuous tower.</p> + +<p>The rest is easy. Gowrie may bring up as many men as he pleases, but +Ramsay has had<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_162" id="Page_162">[Pg 162]</a></span> orders to horrify him by saying that the King is slain +(this was alleged), and then to run him through as he gives ground, or +drops his points; this after a decent form of resistance, in which +three of the King's four men are wounded.</p> + +<p>'Master of the human heart,' like Lord Bateman, James knows that +Ruthven will not merely leave him, when goaded by insult, and that +Gowrie, hearing of his brother's death, will not simply stand in the +street and summon the citizens.</p> + +<p>To secure a witness to the truth of his false version of the matter +James must have begun by artfully bribing Henderson, Gowrie's steward, +either simply to run away, and then come in later with corroboration, +or actually to be present in the turret, and then escape. Or perhaps +the King told his man-in-the-turret tale merely 'in the air;' and then +Henderson, having run away in causeless panic, later 'sees money in +it,' and appears, with a string of falsehoods. 'Chance loves Art,' +says Aristotle, and chance might well befriend an artist so capable +and conscientious as his Majesty. To be sure Mr. Hill Burton says 'the +theory that the whole was a plot of the Court to ruin the powerful +House of Gowrie must at once, after a calm weighing of the evidence, +be dismissed as beyond the range of sane conclusions. Those who formed +it had to put one of the very last men in the world to accept of such +a destiny into the position of an unarmed man who, without any +preparation, was to render himself into the hands of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_163" id="Page_163">[Pg 163]</a></span> his armed +adversaries, and cause a succession of surprises and acts of violence, +which, by his own courage and dexterity, he would rule to a determined +and preconcerted plan.'<a name="FNanchor_14_14" id="FNanchor_14_14"></a><a href="#Footnote_14_14" class="fnanchor">[14]</a></p> + +<p>If there was a royal plot, <i>without a plan</i>, then James merely +intended to raise a brawl and 'go it blind.' This, however, is almost +beyond the King's habitual and romantic recklessness. We must prefer +the theory of a subtly concerted and ably conducted plan, constructed +with alternatives, so that, if one string breaks, another will hold +fast. That plan, to the best of my poor powers, I have explained.</p> + +<p>To drop the figure of irony, all this hypothesis is starkly +incredible. James was not a recklessly adventurous character to go +weaponless with Ruthven, who wore a sword, and provoke him into +insolence. If he had been ever so brave, the plot is of a complexity +quite impossible; no sane man, still less a timid man, could conceive +and execute a plot at the mercy of countless circumstances, not to be +foreseen. Suppose the Master slain, and Gowrie a free man in the +street. He had only to sound the tocsin, summon his devoted townsmen, +surround the house, and ask respectfully for explanations.</p> + +<p>Take, on the other hand, the theory of Gowrie's guilt. Here the +motives for evil will on either side may be briefly stated. Since the +murder of Riccio (1566) the Ruthvens had been the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_164" id="Page_164">[Pg 164]</a></span> foes of the Crown. +Gowrie's grandfather and father were leaders in the attack on Mary and +Riccio; Gowrie's father insulted Queen Mary, while caged in Loch Leven +Castle, by amorous advances—so she declares. In 1582 Gowrie's father +captured James and held him in degrading captivity. He escaped, and +was reconciled to his gaoler, who, in 1584, again conspired, and was +executed, while the Ruthven lands were forfeited. By a new revolution +(1585-1586) the Ruthvens were reinstated. In July 1593 Gowrie's +mother, by an artful ambuscade, enabled the Earl of Bothwell again to +kidnap the King. In 1594 our Gowrie, then a lad, joined Bothwell in +open rebellion. He was pardoned, and in August 1594 went abroad, +travelled as far as Rome, studied at Padua, and, summoned by the party +of the Kirk, came to England in March 1600. Here he was petted by +Elizabeth, then on almost warlike terms with James. For thirty years +every treason of the Ruthvens had been backed by Elizabeth; and Cecil, +ceaselessly and continuously, had abetted many attempts to kidnap +James. These plots were rife as late as April 1600. The object always +was to secure the dominance of the Kirk over the King, and Gowrie, as +the natural noble leader of the Kirk, was recalled to Scotland, in +1600, by the Rev. Mr. Bruce, the chief of the political preachers, +whom James had mastered in 1596-97. Gowrie, arriving, instantly headed +the Opposition, and, on June 21, 1600, successfully resisted the +King's request for supplies, rendered<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_165" id="Page_165">[Pg 165]</a></span> necessary by his hostile +relations with England. Gowrie then left the Court, and about July 20 +went to hunt in Atholl; his mother (who had once already lured James +into a snare) residing at his Perth house. On August 1 Gowrie warned +his mother of his return, and she went to their strong castle of +Dirleton, near North Berwick and the sea, while Gowrie came to his +Perth house on August 3, it being understood that he was to ride to +Dirleton on August 5. Thither he had sent on most of his men and +provisions. On August 5, we know he went on a longer journey.</p> + +<p>We have shown that a plot by James is incredible. There is no evidence +to prove a plot by Gowrie, beyond the whole nature of the events, and +the strange conduct of himself and his brother. But, if plot he did, +he merely carried out, in the interests of his English friends, the +traditional policy of his grandfather, his father, his mother, and his +ally, Bothwell, at this time an exile in Spain, maturing a conspiracy +in which he claimed Gowrie as one of his confederates. While the King +was a free man, Gowrie could not hope to raise the discontented +Barons, and emancipate the preachers—yet more bitterly +discontented—who had summoned him home. Let the King vanish, and the +coast was clear; the Kirk's party, the English party, would triumph.</p> + +<p>The inference is that the King was to be made to disappear, and that +Gowrie undertook to do it. Two witnesses—Mr. Cowper, minister of +Perth,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_166" id="Page_166">[Pg 166]</a></span> and Mr. Rhynd, Gowrie's old tutor—averred that he was wont to +speak of the need of extreme secrecy 'in the execution of a high and +dangerous purpose.' Such a purpose as the trapping of the King by a +secret and sudden onfall was the mere commonplace of Scottish +politics. Cecil's papers, at this period and later, are full of such +schemes, submitted by Scottish adventurers. That men so very young as +the two Ruthvens should plan such a device, romantic and perilous, is +no matter for marvel.</p> + +<p>The plot itself must be judged by its original idea, namely, to lure +James to Perth, with only two or three servants, at an early hour in +the day. Matters fell out otherwise; but, had the King entered Gowrie +House early, and scantly attended, he might have been conveyed across +Fife, disguised, in the train of Gowrie as he went to Dirleton. Thence +he might be conveyed by sea to Fastcastle, the impregnable eyrie of +Gowrie's and Bothwell's old ally, the reckless intriguer, Logan of +Restalrig. The famous letters which Scott, Tytler, and Hill Burton +regarded as proof of that plot, I have shown, by comparison of +handwritings, to be all forged; but one of them, claimed by the forger +as his model for the rest, is, I think, a feigned copy of a genuine +original. In that letter (of Logan to Gowrie) he is made to speak of +their scheme as analogous to one contrived against 'a nobleman of +Padua,' where Gowrie had studied. This remark, in a postscript, can +hardly have been invented by<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_167" id="Page_167">[Pg 167]</a></span> the forger, Sprot, a low country +attorney, a creature of Logan's. All the other letters are mere +variations on the tune set by this piece.</p> + +<p>A plot of this kind is, at least, not impossible, like the quite +incredible conspiracy attributed to James. The scheme was only one of +scores of the same sort, constantly devised at that time. The thing +next to impossible is that Henderson was left, as he declared, in the +turret, by Ruthven, without being tutored in his <i>rôle</i>. The King's +party did not believe that Henderson here told truth; he had accepted +the <i>rôle</i>, they said, but turned coward. This is the more likely as, +in December 1600, a gentleman named Robert Oliphant, a retainer of +Gowrie, fled from Edinburgh, where certain revelations blabbed by him +had come into publicity. He had said that, in Paris, early in 1600, +Gowrie moved him to take the part of the armed man in the turret; that +he had 'with good reason dissuaded him; that the Earl thereon left him +and dealt with Henderson in that matter; that Henderson undertook it +and yet fainted'—that is, turned craven. Though nine years later, in +England, the Privy Council acquitted Oliphant of concealing treason, +had he not escaped from Edinburgh in December 1600 the whole case +might have been made clear, for witnesses were then at hand.</p> + +<p>We conclude that, as there certainly was a Ruthven plot, as the King +could not possibly have invented and carried out the affair, and that +as<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_168" id="Page_168">[Pg 168]</a></span> Gowrie, the leader of the Kirk party, was young, romantic, and +'Italianate,' he did plan a device of the regular and usual kind, but +was frustrated, and fell into the pit which he had digged. But the +Presbyterians would never believe that the young leader of the Kirk +party attempted what the leaders of the godly had often done, and far +more frequently had conspired to do, with the full approval of Cecil +and Elizabeth. The plot was an orthodox plot, but, to this day, +historians of Presbyterian and Liberal tendencies prefer to believe +that the King was the conspirator. The dead Ruthvens were long +lamented, and even in the nineteenth century the mothers, in +Perthshire, sang to their babes, 'Sleep ye, sleep ye, my bonny Earl o' +Gowrie.'<a name="FNanchor_15_15" id="FNanchor_15_15"></a><a href="#Footnote_15_15" class="fnanchor">[15]</a></p> + +<p>A lady has even written to inform me that she is the descendant of the +younger Ruthven, who escaped after being stabbed by Ramsay and +Erskine, fled to England, married, and had a family. I in vain replied +that young Ruthven's body was embalmed, exhibited in the Scottish +Parliament, and hacked to pieces, which were set on spikes in public +places, and that after these sufferings he was unlikely to marry. The +lady was not to be shaken in her belief.</p> + +<p>In <i>The Athenæum</i> for August 28, 1902, Mr. Edmund Gosse recognises +Ramsay the Ruthven<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_169" id="Page_169">[Pg 169]</a></span> slayer as author of a Century of English Sonnets +(1619), of which Lord Cobham possesses a copy apparently unique. The +book was published at Paris, by Réné Giffart. The Scottish name, +Gifford, was at that time spelled 'Giffart,' so the publisher was of +Scottish descent.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_170" id="Page_170">[Pg 170]</a></span></p> +<h2><a name="VIII" id="VIII"></a>VIII</h2> + +<h2><i>THE STRANGE CASE OF DANIEL DUNGLAS HOME</i></h2> + +<p> </p> + +<p><span class="smcap">The</span> case of Daniel Dunglas Home is said, in the <i>Dictionary of +National Biography</i>, to present a curious and unsolved problem. It +really presents, I think, two problems equally unsolved, one +scientific, and the other social. How did Mr. Home, the son of a +Scottish mother in the lower middle class at highest, educated (as far +as he was educated at all) in a village of Connecticut, attain his +social position? I do not ask why he was 'taken up' by members of +noble English families: 'the caresses of the great' may be lavished on +athletes, and actors, and musicians, and Home's remarkable +performances were quite enough to make him welcome in country houses. +Moreover, he played the piano, the accordion, and other musical +instruments. For his mysterious 'gift' he might be invited to puzzle +and amuse royal people (not in England), and continental emperors, and +kings. But he did much more than what Houdin or Alexis, a conjuror and +a clairvoyant, could do. He successively married, with the permission +and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_171" id="Page_171">[Pg 171]</a></span> good will of the Czar, two Russian ladies of noble birth, a feat +inexplicable when we think of the rules of the continental <i>noblesse</i>. +A duc, or a prince, or a marquis may marry the daughter of an American +citizen who has made a fortune in lard. But the daughters of the +Russian <i>noblesse</i> do not marry poor American citizens with the good +will of the Czar. By his marriages Home far outwent such famous +charlatans as Cagliostro, Mesmer, and the mysterious Saint Germain the +deathless. Cagliostro and Saint Germain both came on the world with an +appearance of great wealth and display. The source of the opulence of +Saint Germain is as obscure as was the source of the sudden enrichment +of Beau Wilson, whom Law, the financier, killed in a duel. Cagliostro, +like Law, may have acquired his diamonds by gambling or swindling. But +neither these two men nor Mesmer, though much in the society of +princes, could have hoped, openly and with the approval of Louis XV. +or Louis XVI., to wed a noble lady. Yet Home did so twice, though he +had no wealth at all.</p> + +<p>Cagliostro was a low-born Neapolitan ruffian. But he had a presence! +In the Memoirs of Madame d'Oberkirch she tells us how much she +disliked and distrusted Cagliostro, always avoiding him, and warning +Cardinal Rohan against him—in vain. But she admits that the man +dominated her, or would have dominated her, by something inexplicable +in his eyes, his bearing, and his<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_172" id="Page_172">[Pg 172]</a></span> unaccountable knowledge, as when he +publicly announced, on a certain day, the death of the great Empress, +Maria Theresa, of which the news did not arrive till five days later. +Now Home had none of this dominating personality. He has been +described to me, by a lady who knew him in his later years, when he +had ceased to work drawing-room miracles in society, as a gentle, +kindly, quiet person, with no obvious fault, unless a harmless and +childlike vanity be a fault. Thus he struck an observer not of his +intimate circle. He liked to give readings and recitations, and he +played the piano with a good deal of feeling. He was a fair linguist, +he had been a Catholic, he was of the middle order of intelligence, he +had no 'mission' except to prove that disembodied spirits exist, if +that were a legitimate inference from the marvels which attended him.</p> + +<p>Mr. Robert Bell in <i>The Cornhill Magazine</i>, Vol. II., 1860, described +Home's miracles in an article called 'Stranger than Fiction.' His +account of the man's personality is exactly like what I have already +given. Home was 'a very mild specimen of familiar humanity.' His +health was bad. 'The expression of his face in repose' (he was only +twenty-seven) 'is that of physical suffering.... There is more +kindliness and gentleness than vigour in the character of his +features.... He is yet so young that the playfulness of boyhood has +not passed away, and he never seems so thoroughly at ease with himself +and others<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_173" id="Page_173">[Pg 173]</a></span> as when he is enjoying some light and temperate +amusement.'</p> + +<p>Thus there was nothing in Home to dominate, or even to excite personal +curiosity. He and his more intimate friends, not marchionesses but +middle-class people, corresponded in a style of rather distasteful +effusiveness. He was a pleasant young man in a house, not a Don Juan. +I have never heard a whisper about light loves—unless Mr. Hamilton +Aïdé, to be quoted later, reports such a whisper—not a word against +his private character, except that he allowed a terribly vulgar rich +woman to adopt him, and give him a very large sum of money, later +withdrawn. We shall see that she probably had mixed motives both for +giving and for withdrawing the gift, but it was asserted, though on +evidence far from sound, that 'the spirits' had rapped out a command +to give Home some thirty thousand pounds. Spirits ought not to do +these things, and, certainly, it would have been wiser in Home to +refuse the widow's gold even if they did. Beyond this one affair, and +an alleged case of imposture at a <i>séance</i>, Home's private character +raised no scandals that have survived into our knowledge. It is a very +strange thing, as we shall see, that the origin of Home's miracles in +broad daylight or artificial light, could never be traced to fraud, +or, indeed, to any known cause; while the one case in which imposture +is alleged on first-hand evidence occurred under conditions of light +so bad as to make detection as<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_174" id="Page_174">[Pg 174]</a></span> difficult as belief in such +circumstances, ought to have been impossible. It is not easy to feel +sure that we have certainly detected a fraud in a dim light; but it is +absurd to believe in a miracle, when the conditions of light are such +as to make detection difficult.</p> + +<p>Given this mild young musical man, the problems of how he achieved his +social successes, and how he managed to escape exposure, if he did his +miracles by conjuring, are almost equally perplexing. The second +puzzle is perhaps the less hard of the two, for Home did not make +money as a medium (though he took money's worth), and in private +society few seized and held the mystic hands that moved about, or when +they seized they could not hold them. The hands melted away, so people +said.</p> + +<p>A sketch of Home's life must now be given.<a name="FNanchor_16_16" id="FNanchor_16_16"></a><a href="#Footnote_16_16" class="fnanchor">[16]</a> He was born in 1833, at +Currie, a village near Edinburgh. In his later years he sent to his +second wife a photograph of the street of cottages beside the burn, in +one of which he first saw the light. His father had a right to bear +the arms of the Earls of Home, with a <i>brisure</i>, being the natural son +of Alexander, tenth Earl of Home.<a name="FNanchor_17_17" id="FNanchor_17_17"></a><a href="#Footnote_17_17" class="fnanchor">[17]</a><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_175" id="Page_175">[Pg 175]</a></span> The Medium's ancestor had +fought, or, according to other accounts, had shirked fighting, at +Flodden Field, as is popularly known from the ballad <i>The Sutors of +Selkirk</i>. The maiden name of Home's mother was Macneil. He was adopted +by an aunt, who, about 1842, carried the wondrous child to America. He +had, since he was four years old, given examples of second sight; it +was in the family. Home's mother, who died in 1850, was +second-sighted, as were her great-uncle, an Urquhart, and her uncle, a +Mackenzie. So far there was nothing unusual or alarming in Home's +case, at least to any intelligent Highlander. Not till 1850, after his +mother's death, did Home begin to hear 'loud blows on the head of my +bed, as if struck by a hammer.' The Wesley family, in 1716-17, had +been quite familiar with this phenomenon, and with other rappings, and +movements of objects untouched. In fact all these things are of +world-wide diffusion, and I know no part of the world, savage or +civilised, where such events do not happen, according to the evidence.</p> + +<p>In no instance, as far as I am informed, did anything extraordinary +occur in connection with Home which cannot be paralleled in the +accounts of Egyptian mediums in Iamblichus.<a name="FNanchor_18_18" id="FNanchor_18_18"></a><a href="#Footnote_18_18" class="fnanchor">[18]</a></p> + +<p>In 1850 America was interested in 'The Rochester Knockings,' and the +case of the Fox<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_176" id="Page_176">[Pg 176]</a></span> girls, a replica of the old Cock Lane case which +amused Dr. Johnson and Horace Walpole. The Fox girls became +professional mediums, and, long afterwards, confessed that they were +impostors. They were so false that their confession is of no value as +evidence, but certainly they were humbugs. The air was full of talk +about them, and other people like them, when Home, aged seventeen, was +so constantly attended by noises of rappings that his aunt threw a +chair at him, summoned three preachers, an Independent, a Baptist, and +a Wesleyan (Home was then a Wesleyan), and plunged into conflict with +the devil. The furniture now began to move about, untouched by man, +and Home's aunt turned him out of the house. Home went to a friend in +another little town, people crowded to witness the phenomena, and the +press blazoned the matter abroad. Henceforth, Home was a wonder +worker; but once, for a whole year—February 1856 to February +1857—'the power' entirely deserted him, and afterwards, for shorter +periods.</p> + +<p>In 1852 he was examined by the celebrated American poet, Bryant, by a +professor of Harvard, and others, who reported the usual physical +phenomena, and emphatically declared that 'we know we were not imposed +upon or deceived.' 'Spirits' spoke through the voice of the entranced +Home, or rapped out messages, usually gushing, and Home floated in the +air, at the house of Mr. Ward Cheney, at South Manchester, +Con<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_177" id="Page_177">[Pg 177]</a></span>necticut. This phenomenon is constantly reported in the Bible, in +the Lives of the Saints by the Bollandists, in the experiences of the +early Irvingites, in witch trials, in Iamblichus, and in savage and +European folklore. Lord Elcho, who was out with Prince Charles in the +Forty-Five, writes in his unpublished Memoirs that, being at Rome +about 1767, he went to hear the evidence in the process of canonising +a saint, recently dead, and heard witnesses swear that they had seen +the saint, while alive, floating about in the air, like Home. St. +Theresa was notorious for this accomplishment. Home's first feat of +this kind occurred 'in a darkened room,' a very dark room indeed, as +the evidence shows. It had been darkened on purpose to try an +experiment in seeing 'N rays,' which had been recently investigated by +Reichenbach. Science has brought them recently back into notice. The +evidence for the fact, in this case, was that people felt Home's feet +in mid air. 'I have been lifted in the light of day only once, and +that was in America;' also, in the light of four gas lamps 'in a room +in Sloane Street.'</p> + +<p>After attracting a good deal of notice in New York, Home, on April 9, +1855, turned up at Cox's Hotel, Jermyn Street, where Mr. Cox gave him +hospitality as a <i>non</i>-'paying guest.' Now occurred the affair of Sir +David Brewster and Lord Brougham. Both were capable of hallucinations. +Lord Brougham published an account of a common death-bed wraith, which +he saw once while in a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_178" id="Page_178">[Pg 178]</a></span> bath (the vision coincided with the death of +the owner of the wraith), and Sir David's daughter tells how that +philosopher saw that of the Rev. Mr. Lyon, in St. Leonard's College, +St. Andrews, a wraith whose owner was in perfect health. Sir David +sent letters, forming a journal, to his family, and, in June (no day +given) 1855, described his visit to Home. He says that he, Lord +Brougham, Mr. Cox, and Home sat down 'at a moderately sized table, +<i>the structure of which we were invited to examine</i>. In a short time +the table shuddered and a tremulous motion ran up our arms.... The +table actually rose from the ground, when no hand was upon it. A +larger table was produced, and exhibited similar movements. An +accordion was held in Lord Brougham's hand, and gave out a single +note.... A small hand-bell was then laid with its mouth on the carpet, +and after lying for some time, it actually rang when nothing could +have touched it. The bell was then placed upon the other side, still +upon the carpet, and it came over to me, and placed itself in my hand. +It did the same to Lord Brougham. These were the principal +experiments: we could give no explanation of them, and could not +conjecture how they could be produced by any kind of mechanism.... We +do not believe that it was the work of spirits.'</p> + +<p>So Sir David wrote in a private letter of June 1855, just after the +events. But the affair came to be talked about, and, on September 29, +1855, Sir David wrote to <i>The Morning Advertiser</i>. He<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_179" id="Page_179">[Pg 179]</a></span> had seen, he +said, 'several mechanical effects which I was unable to explain.... +But I saw enough to convince myself that they could all be produced by +human feet and hands,' though he also, in June, 'could not conjecture +how they could be produced by any kind of mechanism.' Later, October +9, Sir David again wrote to the newspaper. This time he said that he +might have discovered the fraud, had he 'been permitted to take a peep +beneath the drapery of the table.' But in June he said that he 'was +invited to examine the structure of the table.' He denied that 'a +large table was moved about in a most extraordinary way.' In June he +had asserted that this occurred. He declared that the bell did not +ring. In June he averred that it rang 'when nothing could have touched +it.' In October he suggested that machinery attached to 'the lower +extremities of Mr. Home's body' could produce the effects: in June 'we +could not conjecture how they could be produced by any kind of +mechanism.' On Sir David's death, his daughter and biographer, Mrs. +Gordon, published (1869) his letter of June 1855. Home then scored +rather freely, as the man of science had denied publicly, in October +1855, what he had privately written to his family in June 1855, when +the events were fresh in his memory. This was not the only case in +which 'a scientist of European reputation did not increase his +reputation' for common veracity in his attempts to put down Home.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_180" id="Page_180">[Pg 180]</a></span></p> + +<p>The adventures of Home in the Courts of Europe, his desertion of the +errors of Wesleyan Methodism for those of the Church of Rome, his +handsome entertainment by diamond-giving emperors, his expulsion from +Rome as a sorcerer, and so forth, cannot be dealt with here for lack +of space. We come to the great Home-Browning problem.</p> + +<p>In 1855, Home met Mr. and Mrs. Browning at the house of a Mr. Rymer, +at Ealing, the first of only two meetings.<a name="FNanchor_19_19" id="FNanchor_19_19"></a><a href="#Footnote_19_19" class="fnanchor">[19]</a> On this occasion, says +Home, a wreath of clematis rose from the table and floated towards +Mrs. Browning, behind whom her husband went and stood. The wreath +settled on the lady's head, not on that of Mr. Browning, who, Home +thought, was jealous of the favour. This is manifestly absurd. Soon +after, all but Mr. Rymer were invited to leave the room. Two days +later, Mr. Browning asked to be allowed to bring a friend for another +<i>séance</i>, but the arrangements of the Rymers, with whom Home was +staying, made this impossible. Later, Home, with Mrs. Rymer, called on +the Brownings in town, and Mr. Browning declined to notice Home; there +was a scene, and Mrs. Browning (who was later a three-quarters +believer in 'spirits') was distressed. In 1864, after Mrs. Browning's +death, Mr. Browning published <i>Mr. Sludge, the Medium</i>, which had the +air of a personal attack on Home as a detected and confessing American +impostor. Such is<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_181" id="Page_181">[Pg 181]</a></span> Home's account. It was published in 1872, and was +open to contradiction. I am not aware that Mr. Browning took any +public notice of it.</p> + +<p>In July 1889 the late Mr. F.W.H. Myers and Professor W.F. Barrett +published, in the <i>Journal of the Society for Psychical Research</i>, p. +102, the following statement: 'We have found no allegations of +<i>fraud</i>' (in Home) 'on which we should be justified in laying much +stress. Mr. Robert Browning has told to one of us' (Mr. Myers) 'the +circumstances which mainly led to that opinion of Home which was +expressed in <i>Mr. Sludge, the Medium</i>.' It appears that a lady (since +dead) repeated to Mr. Browning a statement made to her by a lady and +gentleman (since dead) as to their finding Home in the act of +experimenting with phosphorus on the production of 'spirit lights,' +'which (so far as Mr. Browning remembers) were to be rubbed round the +walls of the room, near the ceiling, so as to appear when the room was +darkened. This piece of evidence powerfully impressed Mr. Browning; +but it comes to us at third hand, without written record, and at a +distance of nearly forty years.'</p> + +<p>Clearly this story is not evidence against Home.</p> + +<p>But, several years ago, an eminent writer, whom I need not name, +published in a newspaper another version. Mr. Browning had told him, +he said, that, sitting with Home and Mrs. Browning (apparently alone, +these three) in a darkened room, he saw a white object rise above the +table.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_182" id="Page_182">[Pg 182]</a></span> This Home represented as the phantasm of a child of Mr. and +Mrs. Browning, which died in infancy. Mr. Browning seized the +phantasm, which was Home's naked foot.</p> + +<p>But it must be remembered that (1) Mr. and Mrs. Browning had no child +which died in infancy; and (2) Mrs. Browning's belief survived the +shock. On December 5, 1902, in the <i>Times Literary Supplement</i>, a +letter by Mr. R. Barrett Browning appeared. He says: 'Mr. Hume, who +subsequently changed his name to Home' ('Home' is pronounced 'Hume' in +Scotland), 'was detected in a "vulgar fraud," for I have heard my +father repeatedly describe how he caught hold of his foot <i>under</i> the +table.' In the other story the foot was <i>above</i> the table; in the new +version no infant phantasm occurs. Moreover, to catch a man's foot +under a table in itself proves nothing. What was the foot doing, and +why did Mr. Browning not tell this, but quite a different story, to +Mr. Myers? We 'get no forrarder.'</p> + +<p>On November 28, 1902, Mr. Merrifield, in the <i>Times Literary +Supplement</i>, published a letter on August 30 (?), 1855, from Mrs. +Browning to Miss De Gaudrion, as to the <i>séance</i> with the Brownings at +Ealing. Mrs. Browning enclosed a letter from Mr. Browning, giving his +impressions. '<i>Mine, I must frankly say, were entirely different</i>,' +wrote Mrs. Browning; and Home says: 'Mrs. Browning was much moved, and +she not only then but ever since expressed her entire belief and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_183" id="Page_183">[Pg 183]</a></span> +pleasure in what occurred.' In her letter, Mrs. Browning adds: 'For my +own part, and in my own conscience, I find no reason for considering +the medium in question responsible for anything seen or heard on that +occasion.' But 'I consider that the seeking for intercourse with any +particular spirit would be apt to end either in disappointment or +delusion,' and she uses the phrase 'the supposed spirits.'</p> + +<p>This lady who wrote thus at the time cannot conceivably have been +looking for the ghost of a child that never was born, and been +deceived by Home's white foot, which Mr. Browning then caught hold +of—an incident which Mrs. Browning could not have forgotten by August +30, 1855, if it occurred in July of that year. Yet Mr. —— has +published the statement that Mr. Browning told him that story of +Home's foot, dead child, and all, and Mr. —— is a man of undoubted +honour, and of the acutest intelligence.</p> + +<p>Mr. Browning (August 30, 1855) assured Miss De Gaudrion that he held +'the whole display of hands,' 'spirit utterances,' &c., to be 'a cheat +and imposture.' He acquitted the Rymers (at whose house the <i>séance</i> +was held) of collusion, and spoke very highly of their moral +character. But he gave no reason for his disbelief, and said nothing +about catching hold of Home's foot either under or above the table. He +simply states his opinion; the whole affair was 'melancholy stuff.' +How can we account for the story of Mr. Browning<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_184" id="Page_184">[Pg 184]</a></span> and Home's foot? Can +poets possess an imagination too exuberant, or a memory not wholly +accurate?</p> + +<p>But Mr. Merrifield had written, on August 18, 1855, a record of an +Ealing <i>séance</i> of July 1855. About fourteen people sat round a table, +in a room of which two windows opened on the lawn. The nature of the +light is not stated. There was 'heaving up of the table, tapping, +playing an accordion under the table, and so on.' No details are +given; but there were no visible hands. Later, by such light as exists +when the moon has set on a July night, Home gave another <i>séance</i>. +'The outlines of the windows we could well see, and the form of any +large object intervening before them, though not with accuracy of +outline.' In these circumstances, in a light sufficient, he thinks, +Mr. Merrifield detected 'an object resembling a child's hand with a +long white sleeve attached to it' and also attached to Home's shoulder +and arm, and moving as Home moved. A lady, who later became Mrs. +Merrifield, corroborated.<a name="FNanchor_20_20" id="FNanchor_20_20"></a><a href="#Footnote_20_20" class="fnanchor">[20]</a></p> + +<p>This is the one known alleged case of detection of fraud, on Home's +part, given on first-hand evidence, and written only a few weeks after +the events. One other case I was told by the observer, very many years +after the event, and in this case fraud was not necessarily implied. +It is only fair to remark that Mr. F.W.H. Myers thought these +'phantasmal arms instructive in more than one respect,' as supplying +'a missing<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_185" id="Page_185">[Pg 185]</a></span> link between mere phantasms and ectoplastic phenomena.'<a name="FNanchor_21_21" id="FNanchor_21_21"></a><a href="#Footnote_21_21" class="fnanchor">[21]</a></p> + +<p>Now this is the extraordinary feature in the puzzle. There are many +attested accounts of hands seen, in Home's presence, in a good light, +with no attachment; and no fraud is known ever to have been detected +in such instances. The strange fact is that if we have one record of a +detection of Home in a puerile fraud in a faint light, we have none of +a detection in his most notable phenomena in a good light. To take one +example. In <i>The Nineteenth Century</i> for April 1896 Mr. Hamilton Aïdé +published the following statement, of which he had made the record in +his Diary, 'more than twenty years ago.' Mr. Aïdé also told me the +story in conversation. He was 'prejudiced' against Home, whom he met +at Nice, 'in the house of a Russian lady of distinction.' 'His <i>very</i> +physical manifestations, I was told, had caused his expulsion from +more than one private house.' Of these aberrations one has not heard +elsewhere. Mr. Aïdé was asked to meet M. Alphonse Karr, 'one of the +hardest-headed, the wittiest, and most sceptical men in France' (a +well-merited description), at a <i>séance</i> with Home. Mr. Aïdé's +prejudice, M. Karr's hard-headed scepticism, prove them witnesses not +biassed in favour of hocus-pocus.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_186" id="Page_186">[Pg 186]</a></span></p> + +<p>The two arrived first at the villa, and were shown into a very large, +uncarpeted, and brilliantly lighted salon. The furniture was very +heavy, the tables were 'mostly of marble, <i>and none of them had any +cloths upon them</i>.' There were about twenty candles in sconces, all +lit, and a moderator lamp in the centre of 'the ponderous round +rosewood table at which we were to sit.' Mr. Aïdé 'examined the room +carefully,' and observed that wires could not possibly be attached to +the heavy furniture ranged along the walls, and on the polished floor +wires could not escape notice. The number present, including Home, was +nine when all had arrived. All hands were on the table, but M. +Alphonse Karr insisted on being allowed to break the circle, go under +the table, or make any other sort of search whenever he pleased. 'This +Home made no objection to.' Raps 'went <i>round</i> under the table, +fluttering hither and thither in a way difficult to account for by the +dislocation of the medium's toe' (or knee), 'the common explanation.' +(I may remark that this kind of rapping is now so rare that I think +Mr. Frederick Myers, with all his experience, never heard it.) Mr. +Aïdé was observant enough to notice that a lady had casually dropped +her bracelet, though she vowed that it 'was snatched from her by a +spirit.' 'It was certainly removed from her lap, and danced about +under the table....'</p> + +<p>Then suddenly 'a heavy armchair, placed against the wall at the +further end of the <i>salotto</i>,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_187" id="Page_187">[Pg 187]</a></span> ran violently out into the middle of +the room towards us.' Other chairs rushed about 'with still greater +velocity.' The heavy table then tilted up, and the moderator lamp, +with some pencils, slid to the lower edge of the table, but did not +fall off. Mr. Aïdé looked under the table: Home's legs were inactive. +Home said that he thought the table would 'ascend,' and Alphonse Karr +dived under it, and walked about on all fours, examining everybody's +feet—the others were standing up. The table rose 'three or four +feet,' at highest, and remained in air 'from two to three minutes.' It +rose so high that 'all could see Karr, and see also that no one's legs +moved.' M. Karr was not a little annoyed; but, as 'Sandow could not +have lifted the table evenly,' even if allowed to put his hands +beneath it, and as Home, at one side, had his hands above it, clearly +Home did not lift it.</p> + +<p>All alike beheld this phenomenon, and Mr. Aïdé asks 'was I +hypnotised?' Were all hypnotised? People have tried to hypnotise Mr. +Aïdé, never with success, and certainly no form of hypnotism known to +science was here concerned. No process of that sort had been gone +through, and, except when Home said that he thought the table would +ascend, there had been no 'verbal suggestion;' nobody was told what to +look out for. In hypnotic experiment it is found that A. (if told to +see anything not present) will succeed, B. will fail, C. will see +something, and so on, though these subjects have been duly +hypnotised,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_188" id="Page_188">[Pg 188]</a></span> which Mr. Aïdé and the rest had not. That an unhypnotised +company (or a company wholly unaware that any hypnotic process had +been performed on them) should all be subjected by any one to the same +hallucination, by an unuttered command, is a thing unknown to science, +and most men of science would deny that even one single person could +be hallucinated by a special suggestion not indicated by outward word, +gesture, or otherwise. We read of such feats in tales of 'glamour,' +like that of the Goblin Page in <i>The Lay of the Last Minstrel</i>, but to +psychological science, I repeat, they are absolutely unknown. The +explanation is not what is technically styled a <i>vera causa</i>. Mr. +Aïdé's story is absolutely unexplained, and it is one of scores, +attested in letters to Home from people of undoubted sense and good +position. Mr. Myers examined and authenticated the letters by post +marks, handwriting, and other tests.<a name="FNanchor_22_22" id="FNanchor_22_22"></a><a href="#Footnote_22_22" class="fnanchor">[22]</a></p> + +<p>In one case the theory of hallucination induced by Home, so that +people saw what did not occur, was asserted by Dr. Carpenter, +F.R.S.<a name="FNanchor_23_23" id="FNanchor_23_23"></a><a href="#Footnote_23_23" class="fnanchor">[23]</a> Dr. Carpenter, who was a wondrously superior person, wrote: +'The most diverse accounts of a <i>séance</i> will be given by a believer +and a sceptic. One will declare that a table rose in the air, while +another (who had been watching its feet) is confident that it never +left the ground.' Mr. Aïdé's statement proves that this explanation +does not fit<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_189" id="Page_189">[Pg 189]</a></span> <i>his</i> case. Dr. Carpenter went on to say what was not +true: 'A whole party of believers will affirm that they saw Mr. Home +float in at one window and out at another, whilst a single honest +sceptic declares that Mr. Home was sitting in his chair all the +time.'<a name="FNanchor_24_24" id="FNanchor_24_24"></a><a href="#Footnote_24_24" class="fnanchor">[24]</a> This was false. Dr. Carpenter referred to the published +statement of Lord Adare (Dunraven) and Lord Lindsay (the Earl of +Crawford), that they saw Home float into a window of the room where +they were sitting, out of the next room, where Home was, <i>and float +back again</i>, at Ashley Place, S.W., December 16, 1868. No 'honest +sceptic' was present and denied the facts. The other person present, +Captain Wynne, wrote to Home, in a letter printed (with excisions of +some contemptuous phrases) by Madame Home, and read in the original +MS. by Mr. Myers. He said: 'I wrote to the <i>Medium</i> to say I was +present as a witness. I don't think that any one who knows me would +for one moment say that I was a victim to hallucination or any humbug +of that kind.' Dr. Carpenter, in 1871, writing in the <i>Quarterly +Review</i> (Vol. 131, pp. 336, 337), had criticised Lord Lindsay's +account of what occurred on December 16, 1868. He took exception to a +point in Lord Lindsay's grammar, he asked why Lord Lindsay did not +cite the two other observers, and he said (what I doubt) that the +observations were made by moonlight. So Lord Lindsay had said; but the +curious may consult the almanack. Even<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_190" id="Page_190">[Pg 190]</a></span> in a fog, however, people in a +room can see a man come in by the window, and go out again, 'head +first, with the body rigid,' at a great height above the ground.</p> + +<p>Mr. Podmore has suggested that Home thrust his head and shoulders out +of the window, and that the three excited friends fancied the rest; +but they first saw him in the air outside of the window of their +room.<a name="FNanchor_25_25" id="FNanchor_25_25"></a><a href="#Footnote_25_25" class="fnanchor">[25]</a> Nothing is explained, in this case, by Dr. Carpenter's +explanation. Dr. Carpenter (1871) discredited the experiments made on +Home by Sir William Crookes and attested by Sir William Huggins, +because the latter was only 'an amateur in a branch of research which +tasks the keenest powers of observation,' not of experiment; while, in +the chemical experiments of Sir William Crookes, 'the ability he +displayed was purely <i>technical</i>.' Neither gentleman could dream 'that +there are <i>moral</i> sources of error.'<a name="FNanchor_26_26" id="FNanchor_26_26"></a><a href="#Footnote_26_26" class="fnanchor">[26]</a></p> + +<p>Alas, Dr. Carpenter, when he boldly published (in 1876) the thing that +was not, proved that a 'scientist' may be misled by 'moral sources of +error'!</p> + +<p>In 1890, in <i>Proceedings of the S.P.R.</i>, Sir William Crookes published +full contemporary accounts, noted by himself, of his experiments on +Home in 1871, with elaborate mechanical tests as to alteration of +weights; and recorded Home's feats in handling red-hot coals, and +communicating the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_191" id="Page_191">[Pg 191]</a></span> power of doing so to others, and to a fine cambric +handkerchief on which a piece of red-hot charcoal lay some time. +Beyond a hole of half an inch in diameter, to which Home drew +attention, the cambric was unharmed. Sir William tested it: it had +undergone no chemical preparation.</p> + +<p>Into the details of the mechanical tests as to alterations of weights +I cannot go. Mr. Angelo Lewis (Professor Hoffman), an expert in +conjuring, says that, accepting Sir William's veracity, and that he +was not hallucinated, the phenomena 'seem to me distinctly to be +outside the range of trick, and therefore to be good evidence, so far +as we can trust personal evidence at all, of Home's power of producing +motion, without contact, in inanimate bodies.' Sir William himself +writes (1890): 'I have discovered no flaw in the experiments, or in +the reasoning I based upon them.'<a name="FNanchor_27_27" id="FNanchor_27_27"></a><a href="#Footnote_27_27" class="fnanchor">[27]</a> The notes of the performances +were written while they were actually in course of proceeding. Thus +'the table rose completely off the ground several times, whilst the +gentlemen present took a candle, and, kneeling down, deliberately +examined the position of Mr. Home's knees and feet, and saw the three +feet of the table quite off the ground.' Every observer in turn +satisfied himself of the facts; they could not all be hallucinated.</p> + +<p>I have not entered on the 'spiritual' part of the puzzle, the +communications from 'spirits' of matters not <i>consciously</i> known to +persons present,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_192" id="Page_192">[Pg 192]</a></span> but found to be correct. That is too large a +subject. Nor have I entered into the case of Mrs. Lyon's gift to Home, +for the evidence only proved, as the judge held, that the gift was +prompted, at least to some extent, by what Home declared to be +spiritual rappings. But the only actual witness to the fact, Mrs. Lyon +herself, was the reverse of a trustworthy witness, being a foolish +capricious underbred woman. <span lang="el" title="Transcriber's Note: so in original">Hume's</span> +mystery, as far as the best of the drawing-room miracles are +concerned, is solved by no theory or combination of theories, neither +by the hypothesis of conjuring, nor of collective hallucination, nor +of a blend of both. The cases of Sir David Brewster and of Dr. +Carpenter prove how far some 'scientists' will go, rather than appear +in an attitude of agnosticism, of not having a sound explanation.<a name="FNanchor_28_28" id="FNanchor_28_28"></a><a href="#Footnote_28_28" class="fnanchor">[28]</a></p> + +<div class="blockquot"><p><span class="smcap">Note</span>.—Since this paper was written, I have been obliged by +several interesting communications from a person very +intimate with Home. Nothing in these threw fresh light on +the mystery of his career, still less tended to confirm any +theory of dishonesty on his part. His legal adviser, a man +of honour, saw no harm in his accepting Mrs. Lyon's +proffered gift, though he tried, in vain, to prevent her +from increasing her original present.</p></div> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_193" id="Page_193">[Pg 193]</a></span></p> +<h2><a name="IX" id="IX"></a>IX</h2> + +<h2><i>THE CASE OF CAPTAIN GREEN</i></h2> + +<p> </p> + +<p>'<span class="smcap">Play</span> on Captain Green's wuddie,'<a name="FNanchor_29_29" id="FNanchor_29_29"></a><a href="#Footnote_29_29" class="fnanchor">[29]</a> said the caddy on Leith Links; +and his employer struck his ball in the direction of the Captain's +gibbet on the sands. Mr. Duncan Forbes of Culloden sighed, and, taking +off his hat, bowed in the direction of the unhappy mariner's monument.</p> + +<p>One can imagine this little scene repeating itself many a time, long +after Captain Thomas Green, his mate, John Madder or Mather, and +another of his crew were taken to the sands at Leith on the second +Wednesday in April 1705, being April 11, and there hanged within the +floodmark upon a gibbet till they were dead. Mr. Forbes of Culloden, +later President of the Court of Session, and, far more than the +butcher Cumberland, the victor over the rising of 1745, believed in +the innocence of Captain Green, wore mourning for him, attended the +funeral at the risk of his own life, and, when the Porteous Riot was +discussed in Parliament, rose in his place and attested his conviction +that the captain was wrongfully done to death.</p> +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_194" id="Page_194">[Pg 194]</a></span></p> +<p>Green, like his namesake in the Popish Plot, was condemned for a crime +of which he was probably innocent. Nay more, he died for a crime which +was not proved to have been committed, though it really may have been +committed by persons with whom Green had no connection, while Green +may have been guilty of other misdeeds as bad as that for which he was +hanged. Like the other Green, executed for the murder of Sir Edmund +Berry Godfrey during the Popish Plot, the captain was the victim of a +fit of madness in a nation, that nation being the Scottish. The cause +of their fury was not religion—the fever of the Covenant had passed +away—but commerce.</p> + +<p>'Twere long to tell and sad to trace the origin of the Caledonian +frenzy. In 1695 the Scottish Parliament had passed, with the royal +assent, an Act granting a patent to a Scottish company dealing with +Africa, the Indies, and, incidentally, with the globe at large. The +Act committed the occupant of the Scottish throne, William of Orange, +to backing the company if attacked by alien power. But it was unlucky +that England was then an alien power, and that the Scots Act infringed +the patent of the much older English East India Company. Englishmen +dared not take shares, finally, in the venture of the Scots; and when +the English Board of Trade found out, in 1697, the real purpose of the +Scottish company—namely, to set up a factory in Darien and anticipate +the advantages dreamed of by France in the case of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_195" id="Page_195">[Pg 195]</a></span> M. de Lesseps's +Panama Canal—'a strange thing happened.' The celebrated philosopher, +Mr. John Locke, and the other members of a committee of the English +Board of Trade, advised the English Government to plagiarise the +Scottish project, and seize the section of the Isthmus of Panama on +which the Scots meant to settle. This was not done; but the Dutch +Usurper, far from backing the Scots company, bade his colonies hold no +sort of intercourse with them. The Scots were starved out of their +settlement. The few who remained fled to New York and Jamaica, and +there, perishing of hunger, were refused supplies by the English +colonial governors. A second Scottish colony succumbed to a Spanish +fleet and army, and the company, with a nominal capital of 400,000<i>l.</i> +and with 220,000<i>l.</i> paid up, was bankrupt. Macaulay calculates the +loss at about the same as a loss of forty millions would have been to +the Scotland of his own day; let us say twenty-two millions.</p> + +<p>We remember the excitement in France over the Panama failure. +Scotland, in 1700, was even more furious, and that led to the hanging +of Captain Green and his men. There were riots; the rioters were +imprisoned in the Heart of Midlothian—the Tolbooth—the crowd +released them; some of the crowd were feebly sentenced to the pillory, +the public pelted them—with white roses; and had the Chevalier de St. +George not been a child of twelve, he would have had a fair chance of +recovering his throne. The trouble was tided<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_196" id="Page_196">[Pg 196]</a></span> over; William III. died +in 1702. Queen Anne came to the Crown. But the bankrupt company was +not dead. Its charter was still legal, and, with borrowed money, it +sent out vessels to trade with the Indies. The company had a vessel, +the 'Annandale,' which was seized in the Thames, at the instance of +the East India Company, and condemned for a breach of that company's +privileges.</p> + +<p>This capture awakened the sleeping fury among my fiery countrymen +(1704). An English ship, connected with either the English East India +Company or the rival Million Company, put into Leith Road to repair. +Here was a chance; for the charter of the Scots company authorised +them 'to make reprisals and to seek and take reparation of damage done +by sea and land.' On the strength of this clause, which was never +meant to apply to Englishmen in Scottish waters, but to foreigners of +all kinds on the Spanish Main, the Scottish Admiralty took no steps. +But the company had a Celtic secretary, Mr. Roderick Mackenzie, and +the English Parliament, in 1695, had summoned Mr. Mackenzie before +them, and asked him many questions of an impertinent and disagreeable +nature. This outrageous proceeding he resented, for he was no more an +English than he was a Japanese subject. The situation of the +'Worcester' in Scottish waters gave Roderick his chance. His chief +difficulty, as he informed his directors, was 'to get together a +sufficient number of such genteel, pretty fellows as would, of their<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_197" id="Page_197">[Pg 197]</a></span> +own free accord, on a sudden advertisement, be willing to accompany me +on this adventure' (namely, the capture of the 'Worcester'), 'and +whose dress and behaviour would not render them suspected of any +uncommon design in going aboard.' A scheme more sudden and daring than +the seizure, by a few gentlemen, of a well-armed English vessel had +not been executed since the bold Buccleuch forced Carlisle Castle and +carried away Kinmont Willie. The day was Saturday, and Mr. Mackenzie +sauntered to the Cross in the High Street, and invited genteel and +pretty fellows to dine with him in the country. They were given an +inkling of what was going forward, and some dropped off, like the less +resolute guests in Mr. Stevenson's adventure of the hansom cabs. When +they reached Leith, Roderick found himself at the head of eleven +persons, of whom 'most be as good gentlemen, and (I must own) much +prettier fellows than I pretend to be.' They were of the same sort as +Roy, Middleton, Haliburton, and Dunbar, who, fourteen years earlier, +being prisoners on the Bass Rock, seized the castle, and, through +three long years, held it for King James against the English navy.</p> + +<p>The eleven chose Mr. Mackenzie as chief, and, having swords, pistols, +'and some with bayonets, too,' set out. Mackenzie, his servant, and +three friends took a boat at Leith, with provision of wine, brandy, +sugar, and lime juice; four more came, as a separate party, from +Newhaven; the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_198" id="Page_198">[Pg 198]</a></span> rest first visited an English man-of-war in the Firth, +and then, in a convivial manner, boarded the 'Worcester.' The +punch-bowls were produced, liquor was given to the sailors, while the +officers of the 'Worcester' drank with the visitors in the cabin. +Mackenzie was supposed to be a lord. All was festivity, 'a most +compleat scene of a comedy, acted to the life,' when, as a Scottish +song was being sung, each officer of the 'Worcester' found a pistol at +his ear. The carpenter and some of the crew rushed at the loaded +blunderbusses that hung in the cabin; but there were shining swords +between them and the blunderbusses. By nine at night, on August 12, +Mackenzie's followers were masters of the English ship, and the +hatches, gunroom, chests, and cabinets were sealed with the official +seal of the Scottish African and East India Company. In a day or two +the vessel lay without rudder or sails, in Bruntisland Harbour, 'as +secure as a thief in a mill.' Mackenzie landed eight of the ship's +guns and placed them in an old fort commanding the harbour entry, +manned them with gunners, and all this while an English man-of-war lay +in the Firth!</p> + +<p>For a peaceful secretary of a commercial company, with a scratch +eleven picked up in the street on a Saturday afternoon, to capture a +vessel with a crew of twenty-four, well accustomed to desperate deeds, +was 'a sufficient camisado or onfall.' For three or four days and +nights Mr. Mackenzie had scarcely an hour's sleep. By the end of +August he<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_199" id="Page_199">[Pg 199]</a></span> had commenced an action in the High Court of Admiralty for +condemning the 'Worcester' and her cargo, to compensate for the +damages sustained by his company through the English seizure of their +ship, the 'Annandale.' When Mackenzie sent in his report on September +4, he added that, from 'very odd expressions dropt now and then from +some of the ship's crew,' he suspected that Captain Green, of the +'Worcester,' was 'guilty of some very unwarrantable practices.'</p> + +<p>The Scottish Privy Council were now formally apprised of the affair, +which they cautiously handed over to the Admiralty. The Scottish +company had for about three years bewailed the absence of a ship of +their own, the 'Speedy Return,' which had never returned at all. Her +skipper was a Captain Drummond, who had been very active in the Darien +expedition; her surgeon was Mr. Andrew Wilkie, brother of James +Wilkie, tailor and burgess of Edinburgh. The pair were most probably +descendants of the Wilkie, tailor in the Canongate, who was mixed up +in the odd business of Mr. Robert Oliphant, in the Gowrie conspiracy +of 1600. Friends of Captain Drummond, Surgeon Wilkie, and others who +had disappeared in the 'Speedy Return,' began to wonder whether the +crew of the 'Worcester,' in their wanderings, had ever come across +news of the missing vessel. One George Haines, of the 'Worcester,' +hearing of a Captain Gordon, who was the terror of French privateers, +said: 'Our sloop was more terrible<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_200" id="Page_200">[Pg 200]</a></span> upon the coast of Malabar than +ever Captain Gordon will be to the French.' Mackenzie asking Haines if +he had ever heard of the 'Speedy Return,' the missing ship, Haines +replied: 'You need not trouble your head about her, for I believe you +won't see her in haste.' He thought that Captain Drummond had turned +pirate.</p> + +<p>Haines now fell in love with a girl at Bruntisland, aged nineteen, +named Anne Seaton, and told her a number of things, which she promised +to repeat to Mackenzie, but disappointed him, though she had blabbed +to others. It came to be reported that Captain Green had pirated the +'Speedy Return,' and murdered Captain Drummond and his crew. The Privy +Council, in January 1705, took the matter up. A seal, or forged copy +of the seal, of the Scottish African and East India Company was found +on board the 'Worcester,' and her captain and crew were judicially +interrogated, after the manner of the French <i>Juge d'Instruction</i>.</p> + +<p>On March 5, 1705, the Scottish Court of Admiralty began the trial of +Green and his men. Charles May, surgeon of the 'Worcester,' and two +negroes, Antonio Ferdinando, cook's mate, and Antonio Francisco, +captain's man, were ready to give evidence against their comrades. +They were accused of attacking, between February and May, 1703, off +the coast of Malabar a vessel bearing a red flag, and having English +or Scots aboard. They pursued her in their sloop, seized and killed +the crew, and stole the goods.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_201" id="Page_201">[Pg 201]</a></span></p> + +<p>Everyone in Scotland, except resolute Whigs, believed the vessel +attacked to have been Captain Drummond's 'Speedy Return.' But there +was nothing definite to prove the fact; there was no <i>corpus delicti</i>. +In fact the case was parallel to that of the Campden mystery, in which +three people were hanged for killing old Mr. Harrison, who later +turned up in perfect health. In Green's, as in the Campden case, some +of the accused confessed their guilt, and yet evidence later obtained +tends to prove that Captain Drummond and his ship and crew were all +quite safe at the date of the alleged piracy by Captain Green. None +the less, it does appear that Captain Green had been pirating +somebody, and perhaps he was 'none the waur o' a hanging,' though, as +he had an English commission to act against pirates, it was argued +that, if he had been fighting at all, it was against pirates that he +had been making war. Now Haines's remark that Captain Drummond, as he +heard, had turned pirate, looks very like a 'hedge' to be used in case +the 'Worcester' was proved to have attacked the 'Speedy Return.'</p> + +<p>There was a great deal of preliminary sparring between the advocates +as to the propriety of the indictment. The jury of fifteen contained +five local skippers. Most of the others were traders. One of them, +William Blackwood, was of a family that had been very active in the +Darien affair. Captain Green had no better chance with these men than +James Stewart of the Glens in face of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_202" id="Page_202">[Pg 202]</a></span> a jury of Campbells. The first +witness, Ferdinando, the black sea cook, deponed that he saw Green's +sloop take a ship under English colours, and that Green, his mate, +Madder, and others, killed the crew of the captured vessel with +hatchets. Ferdinando's coat was part of the spoil, and was said to be +of Scottish cloth. Charles May, surgeon of the 'Worcester,' being on +shore, heard firing at sea, and, later, dressed a wound, a gunshot he +believed, on the arm of the black cook; dressed wounds, also, of two +sailors, of the 'Worcester,' Mackay and Cuming—Scots obviously, by +their names. He found the deck of the 'Worcester,' when he came on +board, lumbered with goods and chests. He remarked on this, and +Madder, the mate, cursed him, and bade him 'mind his plaister box.' He +added that the 'Worcester,' before his eyes, while he stood on shore, +was towing another vessel, which, he heard, was sold to a native +dealer—Coge Commodo—who told the witness that the 'Worcester' 'had +been fighting.' The 'Worcester' sprang a leak, and sailed for five +weeks to a place where she was repaired, as if she were anxious to +avoid inquiries.</p> + +<p>Antonio Francisco, Captain Green's black servant, swore that, being +chained and nailed to her forecastle, he heard the 'Worcester' fire +six shots. Two days later a quantity of goods was brought on board +(captured, it would seem, by the terrible sloop of the 'Worcester'), +and Ferdinando then told this witness about the killing of the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_203" id="Page_203">[Pg 203]</a></span> +captured crew, and showed his own wounded arm. Francisco himself lay +in chains for two months, and, of course, had a grudge against Captain +Green. It was proved that the 'Worcester' had a cipher wherein to +communicate with her owners, who used great secrecy; that her cargo +consisted of arms, and was of such slight value as not to justify her +voyage, unless her real business was piracy. The ship was of 200 tons, +twenty guns, thirty-six men, and the value of the cargo was but +1,000<i>l.</i> Really, things do not look very well for the enterprise of +Captain Green! There was also found a suspicious letter to one of the +crew, Reynolds, from his sister-in-law, advising him to confess, and +referring to a letter of his own in which he said that some of the +crew 'had basely confessed.' The lady's letter and a copy of +Reynolds's, admitted by him to be correct, were before the Court.</p> + +<p>Again, James Wilkie, tailor, had tried at Bruntisland to 'pump' Haines +about Captain Drummond; Haines swore profane, but later said that he +heard Drummond had turned pirate, and that off the coast of Malabar +they had manned their sloop, lest Drummond, whom they believed to be +on that coast, should attack them. Other witnesses corroborated +Wilkie, and had heard Haines say that it was a wonder the ground did +not open and swallow them for the wickedness 'that had been committed +during the last voyage on board of that old [I omit a nautical term of +endearment]<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_204" id="Page_204">[Pg 204]</a></span> <i>Bess</i>.' Some one telling Haines that the mate's uncle +had been 'burned in oil' for trying to burn Dutch ships at Amsterdam, +'the said George Haines did tell the deponent that if what Captain +Madder [the mate] had done during his last voyage were known, he +deserved as much as his uncle had met with.' Anne Seaton, the girl of +Haines's heart, admitted that Haines had told her 'that he knew more +of Captain Drummond than he would express at that time,' and she had +heard his expressions of remorse. He had blabbed to many witnesses of +a precious something hidden aboard the 'Worcester;' to Anne he said +that he had now thrown it overboard. We shall see later what this +object was. Anne was a reluctant witness. Glen, a goldsmith, had seen +a seal of the Scots East India Company in the hands of Madder, the +inference being that it was taken from the 'Speedy Return.'</p> + +<p>Sir David Dalrymple, for the prosecution, made the most he could of +the evidence. The black cook's coat, taken from the captured vessel, +'in my judgment appears to be Scots rugg.' He also thought it a point +in favour of the cook's veracity that he was very ill, and forced to +lie down in court; in fact, the cook died suddenly on the day when +Captain Green was condemned, and the Scots had a high opinion of dying +confessions. The white cook, who joined the 'Worcester' after the +sea-fight, said that the black cook told him the whole story at that +time. Why did the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_205" id="Page_205">[Pg 205]</a></span> 'Worcester' sail for thirty-five days to repair her +leak, which she might have done at Goa or Surat, instead of sailing +some 700 leagues for the purpose? The jury found that there was 'one +clear witness to robbery, piracy, and murder,' and accumulative +corroboration.</p> + +<p>The judges ordered fourteen hangings, to begin with those of Green, +Madder, and three others on April 4. On March 16, at Edinburgh, Thomas +Linsteed made an affidavit that the 'Worcester' left him on shore, on +business, about January 1703; that fishing crews reported the fight of +the sloop against a vessel unknown; they left before the fight ended; +that the Dutch and Portuguese told him how the 'Worcester's' men had +sold a prize, and thought but little of it, 'because it is what is +ordinary on that coast,' and that the 'Worcester's' people told him to +ask them no questions. On March 27 George Haines made a full +confession of the murder of a captured crew, he being accessory +thereto, at Sacrifice Rock, between Tellicherry and Calicut; and that +he himself, after being seized by Mackenzie, threw his journal of the +exciting events overboard. Now, in his previous blabbings before the +trial, as we have seen, Haines had spoken several times about +something on board the 'Worcester' which the Scots would be very glad +to lay hands on, thereby indicating this journal of his; and he told +Anne Seaton, as she deponed at the trial, that he had thrown the +precious something overboard. In his<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_206" id="Page_206">[Pg 206]</a></span> confession of March 27 he +explained what the mysterious something was. He also declared (March +28) that the victims of the piracy 'spoke the Scots language.' A +sailor named Bruckley also made full confession. These men were +reprieved, and doubtless expected to be; but Haines, all the while +remorseful, I think, told the truth. The 'Worcester' had been guilty +of piracy.</p> + +<p>But had she pirated the Scottish ship, the 'Speedy Return,' Captain +Drummond? As to that point, on April 5, in England, two of the crew of +the 'Worcester,' who must somehow have escaped from Mackenzie's raid, +made affidavit that the 'Worcester' fought no ship during her whole +voyage. This would be more satisfactory if we knew more of the +witnesses. On March 21, at Portsmouth, two other English mariners made +affidavit that they had been of the crew of the 'Speedy Return;' that +she was captured by pirates, while Captain Drummond and Surgeon Wilkie +were on shore, at Maritan in Madagascar; and that these two witnesses +'went on board a Moca ship called the "Defiance,"' escaped from her at +the Mauritius, and returned to England in the 'Raper' galley. Of the +fate of Drummond and Wilkie, left ashore in Madagascar, they naturally +knew nothing. If they spoke truth, Captain Green certainly did not +seize the 'Speedy Return,' whatever dark and bloody deeds he may have +done off the coast of Malabar.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_207" id="Page_207">[Pg 207]</a></span></p> + +<p>In England, as Secretary Johnstone, son of the caitiff Covenanter, +Waristoun, wrote to Baillie of Jerviswoode, the Whigs made party +capital out of the proceedings against Green: they said it was a +Jacobite plot. I conceive that few Scottish Whigs, to be sure, marched +under Roderick Mackenzie.</p> + +<p>In Scotland the Privy Council refused Queen Anne's demand that the +execution of Green should be suspended till her pleasure was known, +but they did grant a week's respite. On April 10 a mob, partly from +the country, gathered in Edinburgh; the Privy Council, between the mob +and the Queen, let matters take their course. On April 11 the mob +raged round the meeting-place of the Privy Council, rooms under the +Parliament House, and chevied the Chancellor into a narrow close, +whence he was hardly rescued. However, learning that Green was to +swing after all, the mob withdrew to Leith sands, where they enjoyed +the execution of an Englishman. The whole affair hastened the Union of +1707, for it was a clear case of Union or war between the two nations.</p> + +<p>As for Drummond, many years later, on the occasion of the Porteous +riot, Forbes of Culloden declared in the House of Commons that a few +months after Green was hanged letters came from Captain Drummond, of +the 'Speedy Return,' 'and from the very ship for whose capture the +unfortunate person suffered, informing their friends that they were +all safe.' But the 'Speedy Return'<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_208" id="Page_208">[Pg 208]</a></span> was taken by pirates, two of her +crew say, off Madagascar, and burned. What was the date of the letters +from the 'Speedy Return' to which, long afterwards, Forbes, and he +alone, referred? What was the date of the capture of the 'Speedy +Return,' at Maritan, in Madagascar? Without the dates we are no wiser.</p> + +<p>Now comes an incidental and subsidiary mystery. In 1729 was published +<i>Madagascar, or Robert Drury's Journal during Fifteen Years' Captivity +on that Island, written by Himself, digested into order, and now +published at the Request of his Friends</i>. Drury says, as we shall see, +that he, a lad of fifteen, was prisoner in Madagascar from <i>about</i> +1703 to 1718, and that there he met Captain Drummond, late of the +'Speedy Return.' If so, Green certainly did not kill Captain Drummond. +But Drury's narrative seems to be about as authentic and historical as +the so-called <i>Souvenirs of Madame de Créquy</i>. In the edition of +1890<a name="FNanchor_30_30" id="FNanchor_30_30"></a><a href="#Footnote_30_30" class="fnanchor">[30]</a> of Drury's book, edited by Captain Pasfield Oliver, R.A., +author of <i>Madagascar</i>, the Captain throws a lurid light on Drury and +his volume. Captain Pasfield Oliver first candidly produces what he +thinks the best evidence for the genuineness of Drury's story; namely +a letter of the Rev. Mr. Hirst, on board H.M.S. 'Lenox,' off +Madagascar, 1759. This gentleman praises Drury's book as the best and +most authentic, for Drury says that he was wrecked in the 'Degrave,' +East Indiaman, and his story 'exactly<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_209" id="Page_209">[Pg 209]</a></span> agrees, as far as it goes, with +the journal kept by Mr. John Benbow,' second mate of the 'Degrave.' +That journal of Benbow's was burned, in London, in 1714, but several +of his friends remembered that it tallied with Drury's narrative. But, +as Drury's narrative was certainly 'edited,' probably by Defoe, that +master of fiction may easily have known and used Benbow's journal. +Otherwise, if Benbow's journal contained the same references to +Captain Drummond in Madagascar as Drury gives, then the question is +settled: Drummond died in Madagascar after a stormy existence of some +eleven years on that island. As to Drury, Captain Pasfield Oliver +thinks that his editor, probably Defoe, or an imitator of Defoe, +'faked' the book, partly out of De Flacourt's <i>Histoire de Madagascar</i> +(1661), and a French authority adds another old French source, +Dapper's <i>Description de l'Afrique</i>. Drury was himself a pirate, his +editor thinks: Defoe picked his brains, or an imitator of Defoe did +so, and Defoe, or whoever was the editor, would know the story that +Drummond really lost the 'Speedy Return' in Madagascar, and could +introduce the Scottish adventurer into Drury's romance.</p> + +<p>We can never be absolutely certain that Captain Drummond lost his +ship, but lived on as a kind of <i>condottiere</i> to a native prince in +Madagascar. Between us and complete satisfactory proof a great gulf +has been made by fire and water, 'foes of old' as the Greek poet +says,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_210" id="Page_210">[Pg 210]</a></span> which conspired to destroy the journal kept by Haines and the +journal kept by Benbow. The former would have told us what piratical +adventures Captain Green achieved in the 'Worcester;' the latter, if +it spoke of Captain Drummond in Madagascar, would have proved that the +captain and the 'Speedy Return' were not among the 'Worcester's' +victims. If we could be sure that Benbow's journal corroborated +Drury's romance, we could not be sure that the editor of the romance +did not borrow the facts from the journal of Benbow, and we do not +know that this journal made mention of Captain Drummond, for the only +valid testimony as to the captain's appearance in Madagascar is the +affidavit of Israel Phippany and Peter Freeland, at Portsmouth, March +31, 1705, and these mariners may have perjured themselves to save the +lives of English seamen condemned by the Scots.</p> + +<p>Yet, as a patriotic Scot, I have reason for believing in the English +affidavit at Portsmouth. The reason is simple, but sufficient. Captain +Drummond, if attacked by Captain Green, was the man to defeat that +officer, make prize of his ship, and hang at the yardarm the crew +which was so easily mastered by Mr. Roderick Mackenzie and eleven +pretty fellows. Hence I conclude that the 'Worcester' really had been +pirating off the coast of Malabar, but that the ship taken by Captain +Green in these waters was not the 'Speedy Return,' but another, +unknown. If so, there was no great<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_211" id="Page_211">[Pg 211]</a></span> miscarriage of justice, for the +indictment against Captain Green did not accuse him of seizing the +'Speedy Return,' but of piracy, robbery, and murder, though the affair +of the 'Speedy Return' was brought in to give local colour. This fact +and the national excitement in Scotland probably turned the scale with +the jury, who otherwise would have returned a verdict of 'Not Proven.' +That verdict, in fact, would have been fitted to the merits of the +case; but 'there was mair tint at Shirramuir' than when Captain Green +was hanged.<a name="FNanchor_31_31" id="FNanchor_31_31"></a><a href="#Footnote_31_31" class="fnanchor">[31]</a> That Green was deeply guilty, I have inferred from the +evidence. To Mr. Stephen Ponder I owe corroboration. He cites a +passage from Hamilton's <i>New Account of the East Indies</i> (1727), chap. +25, which is crucial.</p> + +<p>'The unfortunate Captain Green, who was afterwards hanged in Scotland, +came on board my ship at sunset, very much overtaken in drink and +several of his men in the like condition (at Calicut, February 1703). +He wanted to sell Hamilton some arms and ammunition, and told me that +they were what was left of a large quantity that he had brought from +England, but had been at Madagascar and had disposed of the rest to +good advantage among the pirates. I told him that in prudence he ought +to keep these as secrets lest he might<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_212" id="Page_212">[Pg 212]</a></span> be brought in trouble about +them. He made but little account of my advice, and so departed. About +ten in the night his chief mate Mr. Mather came on board of my ship +and seemed to be very melancholy.... He burst out in tears and told me +he was afraid that he was undone, that they had acted such things in +their voyage that would certainly bring them to shame and punishment, +if they should come to light; and he was assured that such a company +of drunkards as their crew was composed of could keep no secret. I +told him that I had heard at Coiloan (Quilon) that they had not acted +prudently nor honestly in relation to some Moors' ships they had +visited and plundered <i>and in sinking a sloop with ten or twelve +Europeans in her</i> off Coiloan. Next day I went ashore and met Captain +Green and his supercargo Mr. Callant, who had sailed a voyage from +Surat to Sienly with me. Before dinner-time they were both drunk, and +Callant told me that he did not doubt of making the greatest voyage +that ever was made from England on so small a stock as 500<i>l.</i></p> + +<p>'In the evening their surgeon accosted me and asked if I wanted a +surgeon. He said he wanted to stay in India, for his life was uneasy +on board of his ship, that though the captain was civil enough, yet +Mr. Mather had treated him with blows for asking a pertinent question +of some wounded men, who were hurt in the engagement with the sloop. I +heard too much to be contented with their<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_213" id="Page_213">[Pg 213]</a></span> conduct, and so I shunned +their conversation for the little time I staid at Calicut.</p> + +<p>'Whether Captain Green and Mr. Mathew had justice impartially in their +trial and sentence I know not. I have heard of as great innocents +condemned to death as they were.'</p> + +<p>The evidence of Hamilton settles the question of the guilt of Green +and his crew, as regards some unfortunate vessel, or sloop. Had the +'Speedy Return' a sloop with her?</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_214" id="Page_214">[Pg 214]</a></span></p> +<h2><a name="X" id="X"></a>X</h2> + +<h2><i>QUEEN OGLETHORPE</i></h2> + +<p style="text-align: center"><b>(<i>In collaboration with</i> <span class="smcap">Miss Alice Shield</span>).</b></p> + +<p> </p> + +<p>'<span class="smcap">Her</span> Oglethorpe majesty was kind, acute, resolute, and of good +counsel. She gave the Prince much good advice that he was too weak to +follow, and loved him with a fidelity which he returned with an +ingratitude quite Royal.'</p> + +<p>So writes Colonel Henry Esmond, describing that journey of his to +Bar-le-Duc in Lorraine, whence he brought back 'Monsieur Baptiste,' +all to win fair Beatrix Esmond. We know how 'Monsieur Baptiste' stole +his lady-love from the glum Colonel, and ran after the maids, and +drank too much wine, and came to the King's Arms at Kensington the day +after the fair (he was always 'after the fair'), and found Argyll's +regiment in occupation, and heard King George proclaimed.</p> + +<p>Where in the world did Thackeray pick up the materials of that +brilliant picture of James VIII., gay, witty, reckless, ready to fling +away three crowns for a fine pair of eyes or a neat pair of ankles? +His Majesty's enemies brought against him precisely the opposite kind +of charges. There<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_215" id="Page_215">[Pg 215]</a></span> is a broad-sheet of 1716, <i>Hue and Cry after the +Pretender</i>, which is either by Swift or by one of 'the gentlemen +whom,' like Captain Bobadil, he 'had taught to write almost or +altogether as well as himself.' As to gaiety in James, 'you tell him +it is a fine day, and he weeps, and says he was unfortunate from his +mother's womb.' As to ladies, 'a weakness for the sex remarked in many +popular monarchs' (as Atterbury said to Lady Castlewood), our +pamphleteer tells the opposite tale. Two Highland charmers being +introduced 'to comfort him after the comfort of a man,' James +displayed 'an incredible inhumanity to beauty and clean linen,' merely +asking them 'whether they thought the Duke of Argyll would stand +another battle?' It is hard on a man to be stamped by history as +recklessly gay and amorous, also as a perfect Mrs. Gummidge for +tearful sentiment, and culpably indifferent to the smiles of beauty. +James is greatly misunderstood: the romance of his youth—sword and +cloak and disguise, pistol, dagger and poison, prepared for him; story +of true love blighted by a humorous cast of destiny; voyages, perils, +shipwrecks, dances at inns—all is forgotten or is unknown.</p> + +<p>Meanwhile, who was her 'Oglethorpean majesty,' and why does the +pamphleteer of 1716 talk of 'James Stuart, <i>alias</i> Oglethorpe'? By a +strange combination of his bad luck, James is called Miss Oglethorpe's +ungrateful lover by Thackeray, and Miss Oglethorpe's brother by the +pamphleteer,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_216" id="Page_216">[Pg 216]</a></span> and by Whig slander in general. Thackeray, in fact, took +Miss Oglethorpe from the letter which Bolingbroke wrote to Wyndham, +after St. Germains found him out, as St. James's had done, for a +traitor. Bolingbroke merely mentions Fanny Oglethorpe as a busy +intriguer. There is no evidence that she ever was at Bar-le-Duc in her +life, none that she ever was 'Queen Oglethorpe.' We propose to tell, +for the first time, the real story of this lady and her sisters.</p> + +<p>The story centres round The Meath Home for Incurables! This excellent +institution occupies Westbrook Place, an old house at Godalming, close +to the railway, which passes so close as to cut off one corner of the +park, and of the malodorous tanyard between the remnant of grounds and +the river Wey that once washed them. On an October day, the Surrey +hills standing round about in shadowy distances, the silence of two +centuries is scarcely broken by the rustle of leaves dropping on their +own deep carpet, and the very spirit of a lost cause dwells here, +slowly dying. The house stands backed by a steep wooded hill, beyond +which corn-fields 'clothe the wold and meet the sky;' the mansion is a +grey, two-storied parallelogram flanked by square towers of only +slighter elevation; their projecting bays surmounted by open-work +cornices of leafy tracery in whiter stone.</p> + +<p>The tale used to run (one has heard it vaguely in conversation) that +the old house at Godalming is haunted by the ghost of Prince Charlie, +and one<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_217" id="Page_217">[Pg 217]</a></span> naturally asks, 'What is <i>he</i> doing there?' What he was doing +there will appear later.</p> + +<p>In 1688, the year of the <i>Regifugium</i>, Westbrook Place was sold to +Theophilus Oglethorpe, who had helped to drive</p> + +<div class="poem"><div class="stanza"> +<span class="i6">the Whigs<br /></span> +<span class="i0">Frae Bothwell Brigs,<br /></span> +</div></div> + +<p>and, later, to rout Monmouth at Sedgemoor. This gentleman married +Eleanor Wall, of an Irish family, a Catholic—'a cunning devil,' says +Swift. The pair had five sons and four daughters, about whom county +histories and dictionaries of biography blunder in a helpless fashion. +We are concerned with Anne Henrietta, born, probably, about 1680-83, +Eleanor (1684), James (June 1, 1688, who died in infancy), and Frances +Charlotte, Bolingbroke's 'Fanny Oglethorpe.' The youngest brother, +James Edward, born 1696, became the famous philanthropist, General +Oglethorpe, governor of Georgia, patron of the Wesleys, and, in +extreme old age, the 'beau' of Hannah More, and the gentleman who +remembered shooting snipe on the site of Conduit Street.</p> + +<p>After the Revolution Sir Theophilus was engaged with Sir John Fenwick, +was with him when he cocked his beaver in the face of the Princess of +Orange, had to fly to France, after the failure at La Hogue, and in +1693 was allowed to settle peacefully at Westbrook Place. Anne and +Eleanor were left in France, where they were brought up as Catholics +at St. Germains, and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_218" id="Page_218">[Pg 218]</a></span> befriended by the exiled James and Mary of +Modena. Now in 1699 Theophilus, one of the Oglethorpe boys, was sent +out to his father's old friend Mr. Pitt, Governor of Fort St. George +in India, the man of the Pitt Diamond. His outfit had to be prepared +in a hurry, and a young gentlewoman, Frances Shaftoe, was engaged to +help with the sewing of his several dozens of linen shirts, 'the +flourishing of neckcloths and drawing of cotton stripes;' as young +gentlewomen of limited means were used to do before they discovered +hospitals and journalism. This girl, who developed a political romance +of her own, was of good Northumberland family, related to Sir John +Fenwick and the Delavals. Her father, a merchant in Newcastle, had +educated her 'in a civil and virtuous manner,' and she had lived there +about eighteen years, behaving herself discreetly, modestly, and +honestly, as nine Northumbrian justices of the peace were ready to +testify under their hand. The strange story she later told of her +experiences at Westbrook and afterwards cannot, therefore, be wholly +dismissed as a tale trumped up for political purposes, though its most +thrilling incident is so foolish a lie as to discredit the whole.</p> + +<p>On the Saturday before Christmas 1699 (so ran her later +'revelations,'<a name="FNanchor_32_32" id="FNanchor_32_32"></a><a href="#Footnote_32_32" class="fnanchor">[32]</a> made in 1707) she took the coach from Godalming, +obedient to instructions by letter from Sir Theophilus. A little way +down the Strand he joined her in the coach, accompanied<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_219" id="Page_219">[Pg 219]</a></span> by two young +ladies—friends, she was told, of Lady Oglethorpe; and for some time +she knew no more of who they were and whence they came. They were very +secret, appeared in no company, but made themselves useful in the +pleasant, homely ways of English country life of that time: helped +with the sewing, made their own bed, swept their chamber, dressed the +two little girls, Mary and Fanny, and waited on each other. Presently +it turned out that they were Anne and Eleanor Oglethorpe, who had been +eleven years in France, at the Court of James II., where they were +known as Anne and Eleanor Barkly. They had taken advantage of the +peace to come secretly 'over a long sea,' and had waited at the house +of their mother's brother-in-law, Mr. Cray the City wine-merchant, +until Parliament was up and their father could take them home for +Christmas. A member of Parliament must not be compromised by the +presence of Catholic daughters from St. Germains, whom it was treason +even to harbour.</p> + +<p>Fanny Shaftoe was admitted into the family, she says, on quite +familiar terms, but 'always behaved very meek and humble, ready to +help any of the servants to make beds or to take care of the little +boy' (the General) 'when his nurse was busy helping in the garden.' +Anne and Eleanor were merry, friendly girls, and chatted only too +freely with Fanny Shaftoe over the sewing. She certainly heard a great +deal of 'treason' talked. She heard how Sir Theophilus and his wife +went<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_220" id="Page_220">[Pg 220]</a></span> back and forward, disguised, between England and St. Germains; +how Lady Oglethorpe had taken charge of the Queen's diamonds when she +fled from Whitehall and safely returned them three years later, +travelling as an old doctor-woman in a riding-hood, selling powders +and plasters in a little basket. There was unseemly jubilation over +the death of Queen Anne's son, the little Duke of Gloucester, in July +1700—though Fanny admits they were sorry at first—and somewhat +partisan comparisons were drawn between him, 'a poor, soft child who +had no wit' (he was really a very promising, spirited boy), and the +little Prince of Wales, 'who was very witty.'</p> + +<p>To this careless chatter Fanny Shaftoe added exaggerations and +backstairs gossip, and an astounding statement which lived as the +feeblest lie <i>can</i> live. Anne Oglethorpe, she said, informed her that +the real Prince of Wales (born June 10, 1688) had died at Windsor of +convulsions when five or six weeks old; that Lady Oglethorpe hurried +up to town with her little son James, born a few days before the +Prince, and that the Oglethorpe baby died, or <i>was lost on the road</i>. +The truth was a secret between her mother and the Queen! All they knew +was that their little brother never turned up again. Anne added, +confusing the story by too much detail, as all accounts of the royal +fraud are confused, that the children had been sick together; that the +Prince had then died, and her brother had been substituted for him.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_221" id="Page_221">[Pg 221]</a></span></p> + +<p>In November 1700 Frances Shaftoe (according to her later revelations) +left Westbrook: her mother had written from Newcastle to say her +sister was dying. Anne and Eleanor were very sympathetic—they were +really nice girls. Lady Oglethorpe was very kind, and gave her four +guineas for her eleven months' services; and she seems to have been +satisfied with it as handsome remuneration. She asserts, +inconsistently, that she had much ado to get away; but she never went +to Newcastle. Three months later, being still in London, she was sent +for to a house in the Strand, where she met Anne Oglethorpe. Anne gave +her a letter from her mother, which had been kept back because Anne +had expected to come up sooner to town, otherwise she would have sent +it. Anne had a cold and a swelled face. She and Eleanor were going to +France, and she persuaded Fanny to go with them. To make a long tale +short, they shut her up in a convent lest she should blab the great +secret, 'James Stuart is really James Oglethorpe!'</p> + +<p>In September 1701 James II. died, and Lady Oglethorpe carried to the +Princess Anne the affecting letter of farewell he wrote to her, +commending his family to her care. Anne and Eleanor went to England in +November 1702, and from that date until Easter 1706 Fanny Shaftoe says +she heard no more about them. In April 1702 Sir Theophilus died, and +was buried in St.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_222" id="Page_222">[Pg 222]</a></span> James's, Piccadilly, where the memorial erected by +his widow may be seen.</p> + +<p>Theophilus, the heir, probably remained a while in the far East with +Pitt; but there were Oglethorpes nearer home to dabble in the Scots +plot of that year (1704). In June several Scottish officers—Sir +George Maxwell, Captain Livingstone, and others, amounting to fifteen +or sixteen, with three ladies, one of whom was Anne Oglethorpe, +embarked at the Hague for Scotland. Sir George had tried in vain to +procure a passport from Queen Anne's envoy, so, though it was in +war-time, they sailed without one. Harley informed by Captain Lacan, +late of Galway's Foot in Piedmont, told Lord Treasurer Godolphin, who +had the party arrested on landing. The Queen, who plotted as much as +anybody on behalf of her brother, was indulgent to fellow-conspirators, +and, though it was proved their purpose had been 'to raise commotions +in Scotland,' they were soon set at liberty, and the informer sent +back to Holland with empty pockets.<a name="FNanchor_33_33" id="FNanchor_33_33"></a><a href="#Footnote_33_33" class="fnanchor">[33]</a></p> + +<p>Anne Oglethorpe, nevertheless, having crossed without a pass, lay at +the mercy of the Government, but, as with Joseph in Egypt, her +misfortune turned into her great opportunity. The late Mr. H. Manners, +in an article in the <i>Dictionary of National Biography</i>,<a name="FNanchor_34_34" id="FNanchor_34_34"></a><a href="#Footnote_34_34" class="fnanchor">[34]</a> supposes +she had been King James's mistress before she left St. Germains.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_223" id="Page_223">[Pg 223]</a></span> Now, +see how Thackeray has misled historians! <i>He</i> makes <i>Fanny</i> +Oglethorpe, James's mistress, 'Queen Oglethorpe,' at Bar-le-Duc in +1714. And, resting on this evidence, Mr. Manners represents <i>Anne</i> +Oglethorpe as James's mistress at St. Germains in 1704! Anne left St. +Germains before James was sixteen, and her character is blasted by the +easy plan of mistaking her for her younger sister, who was no more +Queen Oglethorpe than <i>she</i> was.</p> + +<p>Poor Anne did not 'scape calumny, perhaps deserved it. Boyer says that +Godolphin and Harley quarrelled for her smiles, which beamed on Harley +(Lord Oxford, Swift's 'Dragon'), and 'an irreconcilable enmity' arose. +In 1713 Schutz describes Anne Oglethorpe as Oxford's mistress, but she +had troubles of her own before that date. She arrived in England, a +Jacobite conspirator, in 1704. Her wit and beauty endeared her to +Harley, and she probably had a foot in both camps, Queen Anne's and +King James's.</p> + +<p>But in 1706 strange rumours came from the North. Mrs. Shaftoe had, +after five years' silence, received letters from her daughter Fanny, +the sempstress, by a secret hand, and was filling Newcastle with +lamentations over trepanning, imprisonment, and compulsory conversion, +with the object of making Fanny a nun. A young English priest, agent +for supplying the Catholic squires of Northumberland with chaplains, +was sent to France by her Catholic cousin, Mrs. Delaval, to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_224" id="Page_224">[Pg 224]</a></span> find out +the truth. The consequence of his inquiries was that Anne Oglethorpe +was arrested in England, and charged before the Queen and Council with +trepanning and trying to force Fanny Shaftoe to become a nun. Anne +flung herself at the Queen's feet and implored mercy. She escaped +being sent to Newgate, but was imprisoned in a Messenger's house to +await further proceedings, and ordered to produce Fanny Shaftoe as a +witness.</p> + +<p>Eleanor Oglethorpe was in France, and rushed to the convent where +Fanny Shaftoe was held captive, told her how Anne was in prison on her +account, and entreated her to sign a statement that she had come to +France and become a Catholic of her own free will. But Fanny refused. +Her long detailed story was printed and published for the prosecution +in 1707, at the moment when the Chevalier's chances in Scotland were +most promising. Had he landed only with his valet, says Ker of +Kersland, Scotland would have been his. Cameronians and Cavaliers +alike would have risen. But the French Admiral would not put him on +shore. As for Anne she was discharged, having great allies; but Fanny +Shaftoe's story did its work. James Stuart, for Whig purposes, was +'James Oglethorpe,' Anne's brother. Fanny's narrative was republished +in 1745, to injure Prince Charlie.</p> + +<p>Restored to society and Harley, Anne queened it royally. If we believe +old Tom Hearne, whose<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_225" id="Page_225">[Pg 225]</a></span> MSS. are in the Bodleian, Anne practically +negotiated the Treaty of Utrecht. She found a French priest, whose +sister was in the household of Madame de Maintenon, she wrote +mysterious letters to him, he showed them to Louis XIV., and the +priest was presently lurking in Miss Oglethorpe's town house. Harley +visited his Egeria; she introduced the abbé; Gauthier (the abbé +himself?) and Messager were appointed by France to treat. Harley +insisted on the surrender of Dunkirk! Louis offered Anne Oglethorpe +2,000,000 livres if she would save Dunkirk for France. Her +Oglethorpean majesty refused the gold, but did Louis's turn, on +condition that he would restore King James! For all this magnanimity +we have only Tom Hearne's word. Swift, for example, was not likely to +reveal these romantic circumstances about the Lady and the Dragon.</p> + +<p>Swift does not mention Anne in his letters, but being so deep in the +greatest intrigues of the day and in the smallest, she was a valuable +source of information to Thomas Carte, the nonjuring historian and her +lifelong correspondent, when he was gathering materials for his Life +of the first Duke of Ormond and his <i>History of England</i>. In 1713, +Nairne, James's secretary, desires Abram (Menzies) to inquire if Mrs. +<i>Oglethorpe</i> had credit with Honyton (Harley), and how far?<a name="FNanchor_35_35" id="FNanchor_35_35"></a><a href="#Footnote_35_35" class="fnanchor">[35]</a> +Schutz, the Hanoverian envoy, writes to Bothmar,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_226" id="Page_226">[Pg 226]</a></span> November 21, 1713: +'Miss Oglethorpe, the Lord Treasurer's mistress, said that the +Pretender was to travel, and she said it on the very day the news came +from Holland that the Bishop of London had declared to the +plenipotentiaries who are there, that the Queen entreated their +masters not to receive the Pretender in their dominions.'<a name="FNanchor_36_36" id="FNanchor_36_36"></a><a href="#Footnote_36_36" class="fnanchor">[36]</a> She knew +all the particulars of Harley's opposition to the Duke of Ormond's +schemes for improving the army, and what the Exchequer could and could +not supply to back them.<a name="FNanchor_37_37" id="FNanchor_37_37"></a><a href="#Footnote_37_37" class="fnanchor">[37]</a> She knew all about Lady Masham's quarrel +with her cousin, Lord Oxford, in 1713, over the 100,000<i>l.</i> in ten per +cents which Lady Masham had expected to make out of the Quebec +expedition and Assiento contract, had not his lordship so 'disobliged +her.' Anne acted as intermediary, hunting up her friend the Duke of +Ormond, with whom her mother had great influence, and fetching him to +meet Lady Masham at Kensington—who told him how ill the Queen was, +and how uneasy at nothing being done for her brother, the Chevalier. +If Ormond would but secure Lady Masham 30,000<i>l.</i> of the 100,000<i>l.</i>, +she would join with him, and he should have the modelling of the army +as he pleased. Ormond also failed to oblige Lady Masham, but +Bolingbroke, whom she hated, snatched his opportunity in the quarrel +and got her the money; in return for which service, Lady Masham had +Harley turned<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_227" id="Page_227">[Pg 227]</a></span> out of office and Bolingbroke set in his place. And +then Queen Anne died.</p> + +<p>Miss Oglethorpe also knew that Sir Thomas Hanmer and Bishop Atterbury +were the two persons who sent the messenger (mentioned only as Sir +C.P. in the Carte Papers) to warn Ormond to escape to France in 1715. +Women seem to have managed the whole political machine in those days, +as the lengthy and mysterious letters of 'Mrs. White,' 'Jean Murray,' +and others in the Carte MSS. testify.</p> + +<p>We are not much concerned with the brothers of the Oglethorpe girls, +but the oldest, Theophilus, turned Jacobite. That he had transferred +his allegiance and active service to King James is proved by his +letters from Paris to James, and to Gualterio in 1720 and 1721.<a name="FNanchor_38_38" id="FNanchor_38_38"></a><a href="#Footnote_38_38" class="fnanchor">[38]</a> +According to the second report on the Stuart Papers at Windsor, he was +created a baron by James III in 1717. In 1718 he was certainly +outlawed, for his younger brother, James Edward (the famous General +Oglethorpe), succeeded to the Westbrook property in that year.</p> + +<p>In July 1714 Fanny Oglethorpe, now about nineteen, turns up as an +active politician. The Chevalier at Bar and his adherents in Paris, +Scotland, and London, were breathlessly waiting for the death of Queen +Anne, which was expected to restore him to the throne of his +ancestors. Fanny had been brought up a Protestant by her mother in +England, under whose auspices she had served<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_228" id="Page_228">[Pg 228]</a></span> her apprenticeship to +plotting. Then she came to France, but Fanny cannot have been +Thackeray's 'Queen Oglethorpe' at Bar-le-Duc. In the first place, she +was not there; in the second, a lady of Lorraine was reigning +monarch.<a name="FNanchor_39_39" id="FNanchor_39_39"></a><a href="#Footnote_39_39" class="fnanchor">[39]</a></p> + +<p>With the fall of Oxford in 1714 ended Anne's chief opportunity of +serving her King. The historian therefore turns to her sister Eleanor, +who had been with her in the Fanny Shaftoe affair, but remained in +France. Penniless as she was, Eleanor's beauty won the heart of the +Marquis de Mézières, a great noble, a man over fifty, ugly, brave, +misshapen. Theirs, none the less, was a love match, as the French +Court admiringly proclaimed. 'The frog-faced' Marquis, the vainest of +men, was one of the most courageous. Their daughters became the +Princesses de Montauban and de Ligne, whose brilliant marriages caused +much envy. Of their sons we shall hear later. Young Fanny Oglethorpe, +a girl of twenty in 1715, resided with her sister Eleanor (Madame de +Mézières), and now Bolingbroke, flying from the Tower, and become the +Minister of James, grumbles at the presence of Fanny, and of Olive +Trant, among the conspirators for a Restoration. Olive, the Regent's +mistress, was 'the great wheel of the machine,' in which Fanny 'had +her corner,' at Saint Germains. 'Your female teazers,' James calls +them in a letter to Bolingbroke. Not a word is said of a love affair.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_229" id="Page_229">[Pg 229]</a></span></p> + +<p>How the Fifteen ended we all know. Ill-managed by Mar, perhaps +betrayed by Bolingbroke, the rising collapsed. Returning to France, +James dismissed Bolingbroke and retired to Avignon, thence to Urbino, +and last to Rome. In 1719 he describes 'Mrs. Oglethorpe's letters' as +politically valueless, and full of self-justifications, and 'old +stories.' He answers them only through his secretary; but in 1722 he +consoled poor Anne by making her a Countess of Ireland. Anne's bolt +was shot, she had had her day, but the day of her fair sisters was +dawning. Mr. John Law, of Lauriston <i>soi-disant</i>, had made England too +hot to hold him. His great genius for financial combinations was at +this time employed by him in gleek, trick-track, quadrille, whist, +loo, ombre, and other pastimes of mingled luck and skill. In +consequence of a quarrel about a lady, Mr. Law fought and slew Beau +Wilson, that mysterious person, who, from being a poverty-stricken +younger son, hanging loose on town, became in a day, no man knows how, +the richest and most splendid of blades. The Beau's secret died with +him; but Law fled to France with 100,000 crowns in his valise. Here +the swagger, courage, and undeniable genius of Mr. Law gained the +favour of the Regent d'Orléans, the Bank and the Mississippi Scheme +were floated, the Rue Quincampoix was crowded, France swam in a dream +of gold, and the friends of Mr. Law, 'coming in on the ground-floor,' +or buying stock before issue<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_230" id="Page_230">[Pg 230]</a></span> at the lowest prices, sold out at the +top of the market.</p> + +<p>Paris was full of Jacobites from Ireland and Scotland—Seaforth, +Tullibardine, Campbell of Glendaruel, George Kelly (one of the Seven +Men of Moidart), Nick Wogan, gayest and bravest of Irishmen, all +engaged in a pleasing plan for invading England with a handful of +Irish soldiers in Spanish service. The Earl Marischal and Keith his +brother (the Field-Marshal) came into Paris broken men, fleeing from +Glenshiel. <i>They</i> took no Mississippi shares, but George Kelly, Fanny +Oglethorpe, and Olive Trant, all <i>liés</i> with Law and Orléans, +'plunged,' and emerged with burdens of gold. Fanny for her share had +800,000 livres, and carried it as her dowry to the Marquis des +Marches, whom she married in 1719, and so ceased conspiring. The +Oglethorpe girls, for penniless exiles, had played their cards well. +Fanny and Eleanor had won noble husbands. Poor Anne went back to +Godalming, where—in the very darkest days of the Jacobite party, when +James was a heart-broken widower, and the star of Prince Charles's +natal day shone only on the siege of Gaeta—she plotted with Thomas +Carte, the historian.</p> + +<p>The race of 1715 was passing, the race of 1745 was coming on, and +touching it is to read in the brown old letters the same loyal +names—Floyds, Wogans, Gorings, Trants, Dillons, Staffords, +Sheri<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_231" id="Page_231">[Pg 231]</a></span>dans, the Scots of course, and the French descendants of the +Oglethorpe girls. Eleanor's infants, the de Mézières family, had been +growing up in beauty and honour, as was to be expected of the children +of the valiant Marquis and the charming Eleanor. Their eldest +daughter, Eléonore Eugénie, married Charles de Rohan, Prince de +Montauban, younger brother of the Duc de Montbazon, whose wife was the +daughter of the Duc de Bouillon and Princess Caroline Sobieska, and so +first cousin to the sons of James III. That branch of Oglethorpes thus +became connected with the royal family, which would go far towards +rousing their hereditary Jacobitism when the Forty-Five cast its +shadow before.</p> + +<p>In May 1740, Madame de Mézières took it into her head to run over to +England, and applied to Newcastle for a pass, through Lady Mary +Herbert of Powis—a very <i>suspect</i> channel! The Minister made such +particular inquiries as to the names of the servants she intended to +bring, that she changed her mind and did not go. One wonders what +person purposed travelling in her suite whose identity dared not stand +too close scrutiny. There was a brave and eager Prince of Wales over +the water, nearly twenty, who had some years ago fleshed his maiden +sword with honour, and who was in secret correspondence on his own +account with his father's English supporters. Could he have had some +such plan even<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_232" id="Page_232">[Pg 232]</a></span> then of putting fate to the touch? He is reported in +Coxe's <i>Walpole</i> to have been in Spain, in disguise, years before.</p> + +<p>In 1742 Eleanor had the sorrow of losing a daughter in a tragic way. +She had recently become a canoness of Povesay, a very noble +foundation, indeed, in Lorraine, where the Sisters wore little black +ribbons on their heads which they called 'husbands.' She was +twenty-five, very pretty, and most irreligiously devoted to shooting +and hunting. Though these chapters of noble canonesses are not by any +means strict after the use of ordinary convents, there were serious +expostulations made when the novice insisted upon constantly carrying +a gun and shooting. She fell one day when out with her gun as usual. +It went off and killed her on the spot.</p> + +<p>Whatever Eleanor aimed at in 1740 by a journey to England, was baulked +by Newcastle's caution. In 1743 the indefatigable lady, 'and a +Scottish lord,' submitted a scheme to Louis XV., but it was thwarted +by de Noailles. Then Prince Charles rode secretly out of Rome, landed, +like Napoleon, at Fréjus, and at the expedition of Dunkirk met the +Earl Marischal and young Glengarry.</p> + +<p>The Chevalier de Mézières, too, Eleanor's son, went to Dunkirk with +Saxe to embark for England. There was a great storm, and the ships +went aground. Several officers and soldiers jumped into the sea, and +some were drowned. The Chevalier de Mézières came riding along the +shore, to hear<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_233" id="Page_233">[Pg 233]</a></span> that a dear friend was drowning. The sea was going +back, but very heavy, and de Mézières rode straight into the raging +waters to seek his friend. The waves went over his head and carried +away his hat, but he persevered until he had seized a man. He dragged +him ashore, to find it was a common soldier. He hastened back, and +saved several soldiers and two or three officers. His friend, after +all, had never been in danger.</p> + +<p>The Saxe expedition never sailed, so Eugène de Mézières went to beat +Hanoverians elsewhere, and was wounded at Fontenoy. Consequently he +could not follow the Prince to Scotland. His mother, Eleanor, plunged +into intrigue for the forward party (Prince Charlie's party), +distrusted by James at Rome. 'She is a mad woman,' said James. She and +Carte, the historian, were working up an English rising to join the +Prince's Scottish adventure, but were baffled by James's cautious, +helpless advisers. Then came the Forty-Five. Eleanor was not subdued +by Culloden: the undefeated old lady was a guest at the great dinner, +with the splendid new service of plate, which the Prince gave to the +Princesse de Talmond and his friends in 1748. He was braving all +Europe, in his hopeless way, and refusing to leave France, in +accordance with the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle. When he was imprisoned +at Vincennes, Eleanor was threatened. Catholic as she was, she frankly +declared that Prince Charles had better declare himself a Protestant, +and marry a German Protestant Princess.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_234" id="Page_234">[Pg 234]</a></span> He therefore proposed to one, +a day or two before he disappeared from Avignon, in February 1749, and +he later went over to London, and embraced the Anglican faith.</p> + +<p>It was too late; but Eleanor Oglethorpe was not beaten. In October +1752 'the great affair' was being incubated again. Alexander Murray, +of the Elibank family, exasperated by his imprisonment for a riot at +the Westminster election, had taken service with Prince Charles. He +had arranged that a body of young Jacobite officers in foreign +service, with four hundred Highlanders under young Glengarry, should +overpower the Guards, break into St. James's Palace, and seize King +George; while the Westminster mob, Murray's lambs, should create an +uproar. Next day Glengarry would post north, the Highlanders would +muster at the House of Touch, and Charles would appear among his +beloved subjects. The very medal to commemorate the event was struck, +with its motto, <i>Laetamini Cives</i>. The Prince was on the coast in +readiness—nay, if we are not mistaken, the Prince was in Westbrook +House at Godalming!</p> + +<p>This we conjecture because, in that very budding time of the Elibank +Plot, Newcastle suddenly discovered that the unwearied Eleanor +Oglethorpe, Marquise de Mézières, was in England,—had arrived +secretly, without any passport. He tracked her down at Westbrook +House, that lay all desolate and deserted, the windows closed, the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_235" id="Page_235">[Pg 235]</a></span> +right-of-way through the grounds illegally shut up. General Oglethorpe +after 1746 had abandoned his home, for he had been court-martialled on +a charge of not attacking Cluny and Lord George Murray, when the +Highlanders stood at bay, at Clifton, and defeated Cumberland's +advanced-guard. The general was acquitted, but, retiring to his wife's +house at Carham, he deserted Westbrook Place.</p> + +<p>The empty house, retired in its woodlands, on the Portsmouth road, +convenient for the coast, was the very place for Prince Charles to +lurk in, while Murray and Glengarry cleared the way to the throne. And +so, in fact, we find Eleanor Oglethorpe secretly ensconced at +Westbrook Place while the plot ripened, and local tradition still +shows the vault in which 'the Pretender' could take refuge if the +house was searched. All this, again, coincides with the vague legend +of the tall, brown-haired ghost who haunts Westbrook Place,—last home +of a last hope.</p> + +<p>The young Glengarry, as we know, carried all the tale of the plot to +the English Prime Minister, while he made a merit of his share in it +with James at Rome. Eleanor, too, was run to earth at Westbrook Place. +She held her own gallantly. As to having no passport, she reminded +Newcastle that she <i>had</i> asked for a passport twelve years ago, in +1740. She was now visiting England merely to see her sister Anne, who +'could not outlast the winter,' but who did so, none the less. Nor +could Anne have been so very ill, for on arriving at Dover<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_236" id="Page_236">[Pg 236]</a></span> in October +Eleanor did not hasten to Anne's sick-bed. Far from that, she first +spent an agreeable week—with whom? With my Lady Westmoreland, at +Mereworth, in Kent. Now, Lord Westmoreland was the head of the English +Jacobites, and at Mereworth, according to authentic family tradition, +Prince Charles held his last Council on English ground. The whole plot +seems delightfully transparent, and it must be remembered that in +October Newcastle knew nothing of it; he only received Glengarry's +information early in November.</p> + +<p>The letter of Madame de Mézières, with her account of her innocent +proceedings, is written in French exactly like that of the Dowager +Countess of Castlewood, in <i>Esmond</i>. She expressed her special +pleasure in the hope of making Newcastle's personal acquaintance. She +went to Bath; she made Lady Albemarle profoundly uncomfortable about +her lord's famous mistress in Paris, and no doubt she plunged, on her +return, into the plots with Prussia for a Restoration. In the Privy +Council, in November 1753, her arrest was decided on. Newcastle jots +down, on a paper of notes: 'To seize Madame de Mézières with her +papers. No expense to be spared to find the Pretender's son. Sir John +Gooderich to be sent after him. Lord Anson to have frigates on the +Scotch and Irish coasts.'</p> + +<p>By 1759 Eleanor was, perhaps, weary of conspiring. Her daughter, the +Princesse de Ligne, was the fair patroness of that expedition which<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_237" id="Page_237">[Pg 237]</a></span> +Hawke crushed in Quibéron Bay, while Charles received the news at +Dunkirk.</p> + +<p>All was ended. For seventy-two years the Oglethorpe women had used +their wit and beauty, through three generations, for a lost cause. +They were not more lucky, with the best intentions, than Eleanor's +grandson, the Prince de Lambesc. With hereditary courage he rescued an +old woman from a burning cottage, and flung her into a duck-pond to +extinguish her blazing clothes. The old woman was drowned!</p> + +<p>Not long ago a lady of much wit, but of no occult pretensions, and +wholly ignorant of the Oglethorpes, looked over Westbrook Place, then +vacant, with the idea of renting it. On entering it she said, 'I have +a feeling that very interesting things have happened here'! Probably +they had.<a name="FNanchor_40_40" id="FNanchor_40_40"></a><a href="#Footnote_40_40" class="fnanchor">[40]</a></p> + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_238" id="Page_238">[Pg 238]</a></span></p> +<h2><a name="XI" id="XI"></a>XI</h2> + +<h2><i>THE CHEVALIER D'ÉON</i></h2> + +<p> </p> + +<p><span class="smcap">The</span> mystery of the Chevalier d'Éon (1728-1810), the question of his +sex, on which so many thousand pounds were betted, is no mystery at +all. The Chevalier was a man, and a man of extraordinary courage, +audacity, resource, physical activity, industry, and wit. The real +mystery is the problem why, at a mature age (forty-two) did d'Éon take +upon him, and endure for forty years, the travesty of feminine array, +which could only serve him as a source of notoriety—in short, as an +advertisement? The answer probably is that, having early seized +opportunity by the forelock, and having been obliged, after an +extraordinary struggle, to leave his hold, he was obliged to clutch at +some mode of keeping himself perpetually in the public eye. Hence, +probably, his persistent assumption of feminine costume. If he could +be distinguished in no other way, he could shine as a mystery; there +was even lucre in the pose.<a name="FNanchor_41_41" id="FNanchor_41_41"></a><a href="#Footnote_41_41" class="fnanchor">[41]</a></p> +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_239" id="Page_239">[Pg 239]</a></span></p> +<p>Charles d'Éon was born on October 7, 1728, near Tonnerre. His family +was of <i>chétive noblesse</i>, but well protected, and provided for by +'patent places.' He was highly educated, took the degree of doctor of +law, and wrote with acceptance on finance and literature. His was a +studious youth, for he was as indifferent to female beauty as was +Frederick the Great, and his chief amusements were fencing, of which +art he was a perfect master, and society, in which his wit and gaiety +made the girlish-looking lad equally welcome to men and women. All +were fond of 'le petit d'Éon,' so audacious, so ambitious, and so +amusing.</p> + +<p>The Prince de Conti was his chief early patron, and it was originally +in support of Conti's ambition to be King of Poland that Louis XV. +began his incredibly foolish 'secret'—a system of foreign policy +conducted by hidden agents behind the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_240" id="Page_240">[Pg 240]</a></span> backs of his responsible +ministers at Versailles and in the Courts of Europe. The results +naturally tend to recall a Gilbert and Sullivan comic opera of +diplomacy. We find magnificent ambassadors gravely trying to carry out +the royal orders, and thwarted by the King's secret agents. The King +seems to have been too lazy to face his ministers, and compel them to +take his own line, while he was energetic enough to work like Tiberius +or Philip II. of Spain at his secret Penelope's task of undoing by +night the warp and woof which his ministers wove by day. In these +mysterious labours of his the Comte de Broglie, later a firm friend of +d'Éon, was, with Tercier, one of his main assistants.</p> + +<p>The King thus enjoyed all the pleasures and excitements of a +conspirator in his own kingdom, dealing in ciphered despatches, with +the usual cant names, carried in the false bottoms of snuff-boxes, +precisely as if he had been a Jacobite plotter. It was entertaining, +but it was not diplomacy, and, sooner or later, Louis was certain to +be 'blackmailed' by some underling in his service. That underling was +to be d'Éon.</p> + +<p>In 1755 Louis wished to renew relations, long interrupted, with +Elizabeth, Empress of Russia, the lady whom Prince Charlie wanted to +marry, and from whose offered hand the brave James Keith fled as fast +as horses could carry him. Elizabeth, in 1755, was an ally of England, +but was known to be French in her personal sym<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_241" id="Page_241">[Pg 241]</a></span>pathies, though she was +difficult of access. As a messenger, Louis chose a Scot, described by +Captain Buchan Telfer as a Mackenzie, a Jesuit, calling himself the +Chevalier Douglas, and a Jacobite exile. He is not to be found in the +<i>Dictionary of National Biography</i>. A Sir James and a Sir John +Douglas—if both were not the same man—were employed as political +agents between the English and Scottish Jacobites in 1746, and, in +1749, between the Prince and the Landgrave of Hesse. Whatever the true +name of the Douglas of Louis XV., I suspect that he was one or the +other of these dim Jacobites of the Douglas clan. In June 1755 this +Chevalier Douglas was sent by Louis to deal with Elizabeth. He was +certainly understood by Louis to be a real Douglas, a fugitive +Jacobite, and he was to use in ciphered despatches precisely the same +silly sort of veiled language about the fur trade as Prince Charles's +envoys had just been using about 'the timber trade' with Sweden.</p> + +<p>Douglas set forth, disguised as an intellectual British tourist, in +the summer of 1755, and it is Captain Buchan Telfer's view that d'Éon +joined him, also as a political agent, in female apparel, on the road, +and that, while Douglas failed and left Russia by October 1755, d'Éon +remained at St. Petersburg, attired as a girl, Douglas's niece, and +acting as the <i>lectrice</i> of the Empress, whom he converted to the +French alliance! This is the traditional theory, but is almost +certainly erroneous.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_242" id="Page_242">[Pg 242]</a></span> Sometimes, in his vast MSS., d'Éon declares that +he went to Russia disguised in 1755. But he represents himself as then +aged twenty, whereas he was really twenty-seven, and this he does in +1773, before he made up his mind to pose for life as a woman. He had a +running claim against the French government for the expenses of his +first journey to Russia. This voyage, in 1776, he dates in 1755, but +in 1763, in an official letter, he dates his journey to Russia, of +which the expenses were not repaid, in 1756. That is the true +chronology. Nobody denies that he did visit Russia in 1756 attired as +a male diplomatist, but few now believe that in 1755 he accompanied +Douglas as that gentleman's pleasing young niece.</p> + +<p>MM. Homberg and Jousselin, in their recent work,<a name="FNanchor_42_42" id="FNanchor_42_42"></a><a href="#Footnote_42_42" class="fnanchor">[42]</a> declare that +among d'Éon's papers, which lay for a century in the back shop of a +London bookseller, they find letters to him, from June 1756, written +by Tercier, who managed the secret of Louis XV. There are no known +proofs of d'Éon's earlier presence in Russia, and in petticoats, in +1755.</p> + +<p>He did talk later of a private letter of Louis XV., of October 4, +1763, in which the King wrote that he 'had served him usefully in the +guise of a female, and must now resume it,' and that letter is +published, but all the evidence, to which we shall return, tends to +prove that this paper is an ingenious deceptive 'interpolation.' If +the King<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_243" id="Page_243">[Pg 243]</a></span> did write it, then he was deceiving the manager of his +secret policy—Tercier—for, in the note, he bids d'Éon remain in +England, while he was at the same time telling Tercier that he was +uneasy as to what d'Éon might do in France, when he obeyed his +<i>public</i> orders to return.<a name="FNanchor_43_43" id="FNanchor_43_43"></a><a href="#Footnote_43_43" class="fnanchor">[43]</a> If, then, the royal letter of October +4, 1763, testifying to d'Éon's feminine disguise in Russia, be +genuine, Louis XV. had three strings to his bow. He had his public +orders to ministers, he had his private conspiracy worked through +Tercier, and he had his secret intrigue with d'Éon, of which Tercier +was allowed to know nothing. This hypothesis is difficult, if not +impossible, and the result is that d'Éon was not current in Russia as +Douglas's pretty French niece and as reader to the Empress Elizabeth +in 1755.</p> + +<p>In 1756, in his own character as a man and a secretary, he did work +under Douglas, then on his second visit, public and successful, to +gain Russia to the French alliance; for, dismissed in October 1755, +Douglas came back and publicly represented France at the Russian Court +in July 1756. This was, to the highest degree of probability, d'Éon's +first entrance into diplomacy, and he triumphed in his mission. He +certainly made the acquaintance of the Princess Dashkoff, and she, as +certainly, in 1769-1771, when on a visit to England, gave out that +d'Éon was received by Elizabeth in a manner more appropriate to a +woman than a man.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_244" id="Page_244">[Pg 244]</a></span> It is not easy to ascertain precisely what the +tattle of the Princess really amounted to, but d'Éon represents it so +as to corroborate his tale about his residence at Elizabeth's Court, +as <i>lectrice</i>, in 1755. The evidence is of no value, being a biassed +third-hand report of the Russian lady's gossip. There is a mezzotint, +published in 1788, from what professes to be a copy, by Angelica +Kauffmann, of a portrait of d'Éon in female costume, at the age of +twenty-five. If these attributions are correct, d'Éon was masquerading +as a girl three years before he went to Russia, and, if the portrait +is exact, was wearing the order of St. Louis ten years before it was +conferred on him. The evidence as to this copy of an alleged portrait +of d'Éon is full of confusions and anachronisms, and does not even +prove that he thus travestied his sex in early life.</p> + +<p>In Russia, when he joined Douglas there in the summer of 1756, d'Éon +was a busy secretary of legation. In April 1757, he went back to +Versailles bearing rich diplomatic sheaves with him, and one of those +huge presents of money in gold, to Voltaire, which no longer come in +the way of men of letters. While he was at Vienna, on his way back to +St. Petersburg, tidings came of the battle of Prague; d'Éon hurried to +Versailles with the news, and, though he broke his leg in a carriage +accident, he beat the messenger whom Count Kaunitz officially +despatched, by thirty-six hours. This unladylike proof of energy and +endurance procured for d'Éon a gold snuff-box (Elizabeth only gave +him<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_245" id="Page_245">[Pg 245]</a></span> a trumpery snuff-box in tortoiseshell), with the King's +miniature, a good deal of money, and a commission in the dragoons, for +the little man's heart was really set on a military rather than a +diplomatic career. However, as diplomat he ferreted out an important +secret of Russian internal treachery, and rejected a bribe of a +diamond of great value. The money's worth of the diamond was to be +paid to him by his own Government, but he no more got that than he got +the 10,000 livres for his travelling expenses.</p> + +<p>Thus early was he accommodated with a grievance, and because d'Éon had +not the wisdom to see that a man with grievances is a ruined man, he +overthrew, later, a promising career, in the violence of his attempts +to obtain redress. This was d'Éon's bane, and the cause of the ruinous +eccentricities for which he is remembered. In 1759 he ably seconded +the egregious Louis XV. in upsetting the policy which de Choiseul was +carrying on by the King's orders. De Choiseul's duty was to make the +Empress mediate for peace in the Seven Years' War. The duty of d'Éon +was to secure the failure of de Choiseul, without the knowledge of the +French ambassador, the Marquis de l'Hospital, of whom he was the +secretary. Possessed of this pretty secret, d'Éon was a man whom Louis +could not safely offend and snub, and d'Éon must therefore have +thought that there could scarcely be a limit to his success in life. +But he disliked Russia, and left it for good in August 1760.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_246" id="Page_246">[Pg 246]</a></span></p> + +<p>He received a life pension of 2,000 livres, and was appointed +aide-de-camp to the Maréchal de Broglie, commanding on the Upper +Rhine. He distinguished himself, in August 1761, by a very gallant +piece of service in which, he says, truly or not, he incurred the +ill-will of the Comte de Guerchy. The pair were destined to ruin each +other a few years later. D'Éon also declares that he led a force which +'dislodged the Highland mountaineers in a gorge of the mountain at +Einbeck.' I know not what Highland regiment is intended, but D'Éon's +orders bear that he was to <i>withdraw</i> troops opposed to the +Highlanders, and a certificate in his favour from the Duc and the +Comte de Broglie does not allude to the circumstance that, instead of +retreating before the plaids, he drove them back to the English camp. +It may therefore be surmised that, though D'Éon often distinguished +himself, and was wounded in the thigh at Ultrop, his claim of a +victory over a Highland regiment is—'an interpolation.' De Broglie +writes, 'we purpose retreating. I send M. d'Éon to withdraw the Swiss +and Grenadiers of Champagne, who are holding in check the Scottish +Highlanders lining the wood on the crest of the mountain, whence they +have caused us much annoyance.' The English outposts were driven in; +but, after that was done, the French advance was checked by the +plaided Gael: d'Éon did not</p> + +<div class="poem"><div class="stanza"> +<span class="i4">quell the mountaineer<br /></span> +<span class="i0">As their tinchel quells the game.<br /></span> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_247" id="Page_247">[Pg 247]</a></span></div></div> + +<p>Not a word is said about his triumph even in the certificate of the +two de Broglies which d'Éon published in 1764.</p> + +<p>In 1762, France and England, weary of war, began the preliminaries of +peace, and d'Éon was attached as secretary of legation to the French +negotiator in London, the Duc de Nivernais, who was on terms so +intimate with Madame de Pompadour that she addressed him, in writing, +as <i>petit époux</i>. In the language of the affections as employed by the +black natives of Australia, this would have meant that de Nivernais +was the recognised rival of Louis XV. in the favour of the lady; but +the inference must not be carried to that length. There are different +versions of a trick which d'Éon, as secretary, played on Mr. Robert +Wood, author of an interesting work on Homer, and with the Jacobite +<i>savant</i>, Jemmy Dawkins, the explorer of Palmyra. The story as given +by Nivernais is the most intelligible account. Mr. Wood, as under +secretary of state, brought to Nivernais, and read to him, a +diplomatic document, but gave him no copy. D'Éon, however, opened +Wood's portfolio, while he dined with Nivernais, and had the paper +transcribed. To this d'Éon himself adds that he had given Wood more +than his 'whack,' during dinner, of a heady wine grown in the +vineyards of his native Tonnerre.</p> + +<p>In short, the little man was so serviceable that, in the autumn of +1762, de Nivernais proposed to leave him in England, as interim +Minister, after<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_248" id="Page_248">[Pg 248]</a></span> the Duc's own return to France. 'Little d'Éon is very +active, very discreet, never curious or officious, neither distrustful +nor a cause of distrust in others.' De Nivernais was so pleased with +him, and so anxious for his promotion, that he induced the British +Ministers, contrary to all precedent, to send d'Éon, instead of a +British subject, to Paris with the treaty, for ratification. He then +received from Louis XV. the order of St. Louis, and, as de Nivernais +was weary of England, where he had an eternal cold, and resigned, +d'Éon was made minister plenipotentiary in London till the arrival of +the new ambassador, de Guerchy.</p> + +<p>Now de Guerchy, if we believe d'Éon, had shown the better part of +valour in a dangerous military task, the removal of ammunition under +fire, whereas d'Éon had certainly conducted the operation with courage +and success. The two men were thus on terms of jealousy, if the story +is true, while de Nivernais did not conceal from d'Éon that he was to +be the brain of the embassy, and that de Guerchy was only a dull +figure-head. D'Éon possessed letters of de Broglie and de Praslin, in +which de Guerchy was spoken of with pitying contempt; in short, his +despatch-boxes were magazines of dangerous diplomatic combustibles. He +also succeeded in irritating de Praslin, the French minister, before +returning to his new post in London, for d'Éon was a partisan of the +two de Broglies, now in the disgrace of Madame de Pompadour and of +Louis XV.; though the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_249" id="Page_249">[Pg 249]</a></span> Comte de Broglie, 'disgraced' as he was, still +managed the secret policy of the French King.</p> + +<p>D'Éon's position was thus full of traps. He was at odds with the +future ambassador, de Guerchy, and with the minister, de Praslin; and +would not have been promoted at all, had it been known to the minister +that he was in correspondence with, and was taking orders from, the +disgraced Comte de Broglie. But, by the fatuous system of the King, +d'Éon, in fact, was doing nothing else. De Broglie, exiled from Court, +was d'Éon's real master, he did not serve de Guerchy and de Praslin, +and Madame de Pompadour, who was not in the secret of her royal lover.</p> + +<p>The King's secret now (1763) included a scheme for the invasion of +England, which d'Éon and a military agent were to organise, at the +very moment when peace had been concluded. There is fairly good +evidence that Prince Charles visited London in this year, no doubt +with an eye to mischief. In short, the new minister plenipotentiary to +St. James's, unknown to the French Government, and to the future +ambassador, de Guerchy, was to manage a scheme for the ruin of the +country to which he was accredited. If ever this came out, the result +would be, if not war with England, at least war between Louis XV., his +minister, and Madame de Pompadour, a result which frightened Louis XV. +more than any other disaster.</p> + +<p>The importance of his position now turned<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_250" id="Page_250">[Pg 250]</a></span> d'Éon's head, in the +opinion of Horace Walpole, who, of course, had not a guess at the true +nature of the situation. D'Éon, in London, entertained French visitors +of eminence, and the best English society, it appears, with the +splendour of a full-blown ambassador, and at whose expense? Certainly +not at his own, and neither the late ambassador, de Nivernais, nor the +coming ambassador, de Guerchy, a man far from wealthy, had the +faintest desire to pay the bills. Angry and tactless letters, +therefore, passed between d'Éon in London and de Guerchy, de +Nivernais, and de Praslin in Paris. De Guerchy was dull and clumsy; +d'Éon used him as the whetstone of his wit, with a reckless +abandonment which proves that he was, as they say, 'rather above +himself,' like Napoleon before the march to Moscow. London, in short, +was the Moscow of little d'Éon. When de Guerchy arrived, and d'Éon was +reduced to <i>secrétariser</i>, and, indeed, was ordered to return to +France, and not to show himself at Court, he lost all self-control. +The recall came from the minister, de Praslin, but d'Éon, as we know, +though de Praslin knew it not, was secretly representing the King +himself. He declares that, at this juncture (October 11, 1763), Louis +XV. sent him the extraordinary private autograph letter, speaking of +his previous services in female attire, and bidding him remain with +his papers in England disguised as a woman. The improbability of this +action by the King has already been exposed. (Pp. <a href='#Page_242'>242</a>, <a href="#Page_243">243</a> <i>supra</i>.)<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_251" id="Page_251">[Pg 251]</a></span></p> + +<p>But when we consider the predicament of Louis, obliged to recall d'Éon +publicly, while all his ruinous secrets remained in the hands of that +disgraced and infuriated little man, it seems not quite impossible +that he may have committed the folly of writing this letter. For the +public recall says nothing about the secret papers of which d'Éon had +quantities. What was to become of them, if he returned to France in +disgrace? If they reached the hands of de Guerchy they meant an +explosion between Louis XV. and his mistress, and his ministers. To +parry the danger, then, according to d'Éon, Louis privately bade him +flee disguised, with his cargo of papers, and hide in female costume. +If Louis really did this (and d'Éon told the story to the father of +Madame de Campan), he had three strings to his bow, as we have shown, +and one string was concealed, a secret within a secret, even from +Tercier. Yet what folly was so great as to be beyond the capacity of +Louis?</p> + +<p>Meanwhile d'Éon simply refused to obey the King's public orders, and +denied their authenticity. They were only signed with a <i>griffe</i>, or +stamp, not by the King's pen and hand. He would not leave London. He +fought de Guerchy with every kind of arm, accused him of suborning an +assassin, published private letters and his own version of the affair, +fled from a charge of libel, could not be extradited (by virtue of +what MM. Homberg and Jousselin call 'the law of <i>Home Rule</i>!'), +fortified<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_252" id="Page_252">[Pg 252]</a></span> his house, and went armed. Probably there really were +designs to kidnap him, just as a regular plot was laid for the +kidnapping of de la Motte, at Newcastle, after the affair of the +Diamond Necklace. In 1752 a Marquis de Fratteau was collared by a sham +marshal court officer, put on board a boat at Gravesend, and carried +to the Bastille!</p> + +<p>D'Éon, under charge of libel, lived a fugitive and cloistered +existence till the man who, he says, was to have assassinated him, de +Vergy, sought his alliance, and accused de Guerchy of having suborned +him to murder the little daredevil. A grand jury brought in a true +bill against the French ambassador, and the ambassador's butler, +accused of having drugged d'Éon, fled. But the English Government, by +aid of what the Duc de Broglie calls a <i>noli prosequi</i> (<i>nolle</i> being +usual), tided over a difficulty of the gravest kind. The granting of +the <i>nolle prosequi</i> is denied.<a name="FNanchor_44_44" id="FNanchor_44_44"></a><a href="#Footnote_44_44" class="fnanchor">[44]</a> The ambassador was mobbed and took +leave of absence, and Louis XV., through de Broglie, offered to d'Éon +terms humiliating to a king. The Chevalier finally gave up the warrant +for his secret mission in exchange for a pension of 12,000 livres, but +he retained all other secret correspondence and plans of invasion. As +for de Guerchy, he resigned (1767), and presently died of sheer +annoyance, while his enemy, the Chevalier, stayed in England as London +correspondent of Louis XV. He reported, in 1766, that Lord Bute was a +Jacobite,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_253" id="Page_253">[Pg 253]</a></span> and de Broglie actually took seriously the chance of +restoring, by Bute's aid, Charles III., who had just succeeded, by the +death of the Old Chevalier, to 'a kingdom not of this world.'</p> + +<p>The death of Louis XV., in 1774, brought the folly of the secret +policy to an end, but in the same year rumours about d'Éon's dubious +sex appeared in the English newspapers on the occasion of his book, +<i>Les Loisirs du Chevalier d'Éon</i>, published at Amsterdam. Bets on his +sex were made, and d'Éon beat some bookmakers with his stick. But he +persuaded Drouet, an envoy from France, that the current stories were +true, and this can only be explained, if explained at all, by his +perception of the fact that, his secret employment being gone, he felt +the need of an advertisement. Overtures for the return of the secret +papers were again made to d'Éon, but he insisted on the restoration of +his diplomatic rank, and on receiving 14,000<i>l.</i> on account of +expenses. He had aimed too high, however, and was glad to come to a +compromise with the famous Beaumarchais. The extraordinary bargain was +struck that d'Éon, for a consideration, should yield the secret +papers, and, to avoid a duel with the son of de Guerchy, and the +consequent scandal, should pretend to be a woman, and wear the dress +of that sex. In his new capacity he might return to France and wear +the cross of the Order of St. Louis.</p> + +<p>Beaumarchais was as thoroughly taken in as<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_254" id="Page_254">[Pg 254]</a></span> any dupe in his own +comedies. In d'Éon he 'saw a blushing spinster, a kind of Jeanne d'Arc +of the eighteenth century, pining for the weapons and uniform of the +martial sex, but yielding her secret, and forsaking her arms, in the +interest of her King. On the other side the blushless captain of +dragoons listened, with downcast eyes, to the sentimental compliments +of Beaumarchais, and suffered himself, without a smile, to be compared +to the Maid of Orleans,' says the Duc de Broglie. 'Our manners are +obviously softened,' wrote Voltaire. 'D'Éon is a Pucelle d'Orléans who +has not been burned.' To de Broglie, d'Éon described himself as 'the +most unfortunate of unfortunate females!' D'Éon returned to France, +where he found himself but a nine days' wonder. It was observed that +this <i>pucelle</i> too obviously shaved; that in the matter of muscular +development she was a little Hercules; that she ran upstairs taking +four steps at a stride; that her hair, like that of Jeanne d'Arc, was +<i>coupé en rond</i>, of a military shortness; and that she wore the shoes +of men, with low heels, while she spoke like a grenadier! At first +d'Éon had all the social advertisement which was now his one desire, +but he became a nuisance, and, by his quarrels with Beaumarchais, a +scandal. In drawing-room plays he acted his English adventures with +the great play-writer, whose part was highly ridiculous. Now d'Éon +pretended to desire to 'take the veil' as a nun, now to join the +troops being sent to America. He was consigned to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_255" id="Page_255">[Pg 255]</a></span> retreat in the +Castle of Dijon (1779); he had become a weariness to official mankind. +He withdrew (1781-85) to privacy at Tonnerre, and then returned to +London in the semblance of a bediamonded old dame, who, after dinner, +did not depart with the ladies. He took part in fencing matches with +great success, and in 1791 his library was sold at Christie's, with +his swords and jewels. The catalogue bears the motto, from Juvenal,</p> + +<div class="poem"><div class="stanza"> +<span class="i0">Quale decus rerum, si virginis auctio fiat,<br /></span> +</div></div> + +<p>no doubt selected by the learned little man. The snuff-box of the +Empress Elizabeth, a gift to the diplomatist of 1756, fetched 2<i>l.</i> +13<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i>! The poor old boy was badly hurt at a fencing match in +his sixty-eighth year, and henceforth lived retired from arms in the +house of a Mrs. Cole, an object of charity. He might have risen to the +highest places if discretion had been among his gifts, and his career +proves the <i>quantula sapientia</i> of the French Government before the +Revolution. In no other time or country could 'the King's Secret' have +run a course far more incredible than even the story of the Chevalier +d'Éon.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_256" id="Page_256">[Pg 256]</a></span></p> +<h2><a name="XII" id="XII"></a>XII</h2> + +<h2><i>SAINT-GERMAIN THE DEATHLESS</i></h2> + +<p> </p> + +<p><span class="smcap">Among</span> the best brief masterpieces of fiction are Lytton's <i>The +Haunters and the Haunted</i>, and Thackeray's <i>Notch on the Axe</i> in +<i>Roundabout Papers</i>. Both deal with a mysterious being who passes +through the ages, rich, powerful, always behind the scenes, coming no +man knows whence, and dying, or pretending to die, obscurely—you +never find authentic evidence of his decease. In other later times, at +other courts, such an one reappears and runs the same course of +luxury, marvel, and hidden potency.</p> + +<p>Lytton returned to and elaborated his idea in the Margrave of <i>A +Strange Story</i>, who has no 'soul,' and prolongs his physical and +intellectual life by means of an elixir. Margrave is not bad, but he +is inferior to the hero, less elaborately designed, of <i>The Haunters +and the Haunted</i>. Thackeray's tale is written in a tone of mock +mysticism, but he confesses that he likes his own story, in which the +strange hero, through all his many lives or reappearances, and through +all the countless loves on which he fatuously plumes himself, retains +a slight German-Jewish accent.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_257" id="Page_257">[Pg 257]</a></span></p> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_258" id="Page_258">[Pg 258]</a></span></p><p>It appears to me that the historic original of these romantic characters +is no other than the mysterious Comte de Saint-Germain—not, of course, +the contemporary and normal French soldier and minister, of 1707-1778, +who bore the same name. I have found the name, with dim allusions, in +the unpublished letters and MSS. of Prince Charles Edward Stuart, and +have not always been certain whether the reference was to the man of +action or to the man of mystery. On the secret of the latter, the +deathless one, I have no new light to throw, and only speak of him for +a single reason. Aristotle assures us, in his <i>Poetics</i>, that the +best known myths dramatised on the Athenian stage were known to very +few of the Athenian audience. It is not impossible that the story of +Saint-Germain, though it seems as familiar as the myth of Œdipus or +Thyestes, may, after all, not be vividly present to the memory of +every reader. The omniscient Larousse, of the <i>Dictionnaire Universel</i>, +certainly did not know one very accessible fact about Saint-Germain, +nor have I seen it mentioned in other versions of his legend. We read, +in Larousse, 'Saint-Germain is not heard of in France before 1750, when +he established himself in Paris. No adventure had called attention to +his existence; it was only known that he had moved about Europe, lived +in Italy, Holland, and in England, and had borne the names of Marquis +de Montferrat and of Comte de Bellamye, which he used at Venice.'</p> + +<p>Lascelles Wraxall, again, in <i>Remarkable Adventures</i> (1863), says: +'Whatever truth there may be in Saint-Germain's travels in England and +the East Indies, it is indubitable that, for from 1745 to 1755, he was +a man of high position in Vienna,' while in Paris he does not appear, +according to Wraxall, till 1757, having been brought from Germany by +the Maréchal de Belle-Isle, whose 'old boots,' says Macallester the +spy, Prince Charles freely damned, 'because they were always stuffed +with projects.' Now we hear of Saint-Germain, by that name, as +resident, not in Vienna, but in London, at the very moment when Prince +Charles, evading Cumberland, who lay with his army at Stone, in +Staffordshire, marched to Derby. Horace Walpole writes to Mann in +Florence (December 9, 1745):</p> + +<p>'We begin to take up people ... the other day they seized an odd man +who goes by the name of Count Saint-Germain. He has been here these +two years, and will not tell who he is, or whence, but professes that +he does not go by his right name. He sings, plays on the violin +wonderfully, composes, is mad, and not very sensible. He is called an +Italian, a Spaniard, a Pole; a somebody that married a great fortune +in Mexico, and ran away with her jewels to Constantinople; a priest, a +fiddler, a vast nobleman. The Prince of Wales has had unsatiated +curiosity about him, but in vain. However, nothing has been made out +against him; he is released, and, what convinces me he is not a +gentle<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_259" id="Page_259">[Pg 259]</a></span>man, stays here, and talks of his being taken up for a spy.'</p> + +<p>Here is our earliest authentic note on Saint-Germain; a note omitted +by his French students. He was in London from 1743 to 1745, under a +name not his own, but that which he later bore at the Court of France. +From the allusion to his jewels (those of a deserted Mexican bride?), +it appears that he was already as rich in these treasures as he was +afterwards, when his French acquaintances marvelled at them. As to his +being 'mad,' Walpole may refer to Saint-Germain's way of talking as if +he had lived in remote ages, and known famous people of the past.</p> + +<p>Having caught this daylight glimpse of Saint-Germain in Walpole, +having learned that in December 1745 he was arrested and examined as a +possible Jacobite agent, we naturally expect to find contemporary +official documents about his examination by the Government. Scores of +such records exist, containing the questions put to, and the answers +given by, suspected persons. But we vainly hunt through the Newcastle +MSS. and the State Papers, Domestic, in the Record Office, for a trace +of the examination of Saint-Germain. I am not aware that he has +anywhere left his trail in official documents; he lives in more or +less legendary memoirs, alone.</p> + +<p>At what precise date Saint-Germain became an intimate of Louis XV., +the Duc de Choiseul, Madame de Pompadour, and the Maréchal de<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_260" id="Page_260">[Pg 260]</a></span> +Belle-Isle, one cannot ascertain. The writers of memoirs are the +vaguest of mortals about dates; only one discerns that Saint-Germain +was much about the French Court, and high in the favour of the King, +having rooms at Chambord, during the Seven Years' War, and just before +the time of the peace negotiations of 1762-1763. The art of compiling +false or forged memoirs of that period was widely practised; but the +memoirs of Madame du Hausset, who speaks of Saint-Germain, are +authentic. She was the widow of a poor man of noble family, and was +one of two <i>femmes de chambre</i> of Madame de Pompadour. Her manuscript +was written, she explains, by aid of a brief diary which she kept +during her term of service. One day M. Senac de Meilhan found Madame +de Pompadour's brother, M. de Marigny, about to burn a packet of +papers. 'It is the journal,' he said, 'of a <i>femme de chambre</i> of my +sister, a good kind woman.' De Meilhan asked for the manuscript, which +he later gave to Mr. Crawford, one of the Kilwinning family, in +Ayrshire, who later helped in the escape of Louis XVI. and Marie +Antoinette to Varennes, where they were captured. With the journal of +Madame du Hausset were several letters to Marigny on points of +historical anecdote.<a name="FNanchor_45_45" id="FNanchor_45_45"></a><a href="#Footnote_45_45" class="fnanchor">[45]</a></p> +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_261" id="Page_261">[Pg 261]</a></span></p> +<p>Crawford published the manuscript of Madame du Hausset, which he was +given by de Meilhan, and the memoirs are thus from an authentic +source. The author says that Louis XV. was always kind to her, but +spoke little to her, whereas Madame de Pompadour remarked, 'The King +and I trust you so much that we treat you like a cat or a dog, and +talk freely before you.'</p> + +<p>As to Saint-Germain, Madame du Hausset writes: 'A man who was as +amazing as a witch came often to see Madame de Pompadour. This was the +Comte de Saint-Germain, who wished to make people believe that he had +lived for several centuries. One day Madame said to him, while at her +toilet, "What sort of man was Francis I., a king whom I could have +loved?" "A good sort of fellow," said Saint-Germain; "too fiery—I +could have given him a useful piece of advice, but he would not have +listened." He then described, in very general terms, the beauty of +Mary Stuart and La Reine Margot. "You seem to have seen them all," +said Madame de Pompadour, laughing. "Sometimes," said Saint-Germain, +"I amuse myself, not by making people believe, but by letting them +believe, that I have lived from time immemorial." "But you do not tell +us your<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_262" id="Page_262">[Pg 262]</a></span> age, and you give yourself out as very old. Madame de Gergy, +who was wife of the French ambassador at Venice fifty years ago, I +think, says that she knew you there, and that you are not changed in +the least." "It is true, madame, that I knew Madame de Gergy long +ago." "But according to her story you must now be over a century old." +"It may be so, but I admit that even more possibly the respected lady +is in her dotage."'</p> + +<p>At this time Saint-Germain, says Madame du Hausset, looked about +fifty, was neither thin nor stout, seemed clever, and dressed simply, +as a rule, but in good taste. Say that the date was 1760, +Saint-Germain looked fifty; but he had looked the same age, according +to Madame de Gergy, at Venice, fifty years earlier, in 1710. We see +how pleasantly he left Madame de Pompadour in doubt on that point.</p> + +<p>He pretended to have the secret of removing flaws from diamonds. The +King showed him a stone valued at 6,000 francs—without a flaw it +would have been worth 10,000. Saint-Germain said that he could remove +the flaw in a month, and in a month he brought back the +diamond—flawless. The King sent it, without any comment, to his +jeweller, who gave 9,600 francs for the stone, but the King returned +the money, and kept the gem as a curiosity. Probably it was not the +original stone, but another cut in the same fashion, Saint-Germain +sacrificing 3,000 or 4,000 francs to his practical joke. He also said +that he could in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_263" id="Page_263">[Pg 263]</a></span>crease the size of pearls, which he could have proved +very easily—in the same manner. He would not oblige Madame de +Pompadour by giving the King an elixir of life: 'I should be mad if I +gave the King a drug.' There seems to be a reference to this desire of +Madame de Pompadour in an unlikely place, a letter of Pickle the Spy +to Mr. Vaughn (1754)! This conversation Madame du Hausset wrote down +on the day of its occurrence.</p> + +<p>Both Louis XV. and Madame de Pompadour treated Saint-Germain as a +person of consequence. 'He is a quack, for he says he has an elixir,' +said Dr. Quesnay, with medical scepticism. 'Moreover, our master, the +King, is obstinate; he sometimes speaks of Saint-Germain as a person +of illustrious birth.'</p> + +<p>The age was sceptical, unscientific, and, by reaction, credulous. The +<i>philosophes</i>, Hume, Voltaire, and others, were exposing, like an +ingenious American gentleman, 'the mistakes of Moses.' The Earl +Marischal told Hume that life had been chemically produced in a +laboratory, so what becomes of Creation? Prince Charles, hidden in a +convent, was being tutored by Mlle. Luci in the sensational philosophy +of Locke, 'nothing in the intellect which does not come through the +senses'—a queer theme for a man of the sword to study. But, thirty +years earlier, the Regent d'Orléans had made crystal-gazing +fashionable, and stories of ghosts and second-sight in the highest +circles were popular. Mesmer had not<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_264" id="Page_264">[Pg 264]</a></span> yet appeared, to give a fresh +start to the old savage practice of hypnotism; Cagliostro was not yet +on the scene with his free-masonry of the ancient Egyptian school. But +people were already in extremes of doubt and of belief; there might be +something in the elixir of life and in the philosopher's stone; it +might be possible to make precious stones chemically, and +Saint-Germain, who seemed to be over a century old at least, might +have all these secrets.</p> + +<p>Whence came his wealth in precious stones, people asked, unless from +some mysterious knowledge, or some equally mysterious and illustrious +birth?</p> + +<p>He showed Madame de Pompadour a little box full of rubies, topazes, +and diamonds. Madame de Pompadour called Madame du Hausset to look at +them; she was dazzled, but sceptical, and made a sign to show that she +thought them paste. The Count then exhibited a superb ruby, tossing +aside contemptuously a cross covered with gems. 'That is not so +contemptible,' said Madame du Hausset, hanging it round her neck. The +Count begged her to keep the jewel; she refused, and Madame de +Pompadour backed her refusal. But Saint-Germain insisted, and Madame +de Pompadour, thinking that the cross might be worth forty louis, made +a sign to Madame du Hausset that she should accept. She did, and the +jewel was valued at 1,500 francs—which hardly proves that the other +large jewels were genuine, though Von Gleichen<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_265" id="Page_265">[Pg 265]</a></span> believed that they +were, and thought the Count's cabinet of old masters very valuable.</p> + +<p>The fingers, the watch, the snuff-box, the shoe buckles, the garter +studs, the solitaires of the Count, on high days, all burned with +diamonds and rubies, which were estimated, one day, at 200,000 francs. +His wealth did not come from cards or swindling—no such charges are +ever hinted at; he did not sell elixirs, nor prophecies, nor +initiations. His habits do not seem to have been extravagant. One +might regard him as a clever eccentric person, the unacknowledged +child, perhaps, of some noble, who had put his capital mainly into +precious stones. But Louis XV. treated him as a serious personage, and +probably knew, or thought he knew, the secret of his birth. People +held that he was a bastard of a king of Portugal, says Madame du +Hausset. Perhaps the most ingenious and plausible theory of the birth +of Saint-Germain makes him the natural son, not of a king of Portugal, +but of a queen of Spain. The evidence is not evidence, but a series of +surmises. Saint-Germain, on this theory, 'wrop his buth up in a +mistry' (like that of Charles James Fitzjames de la Pluche), out of +regard for the character of his royal mamma. I believe this about as +much as I believe that a certain Rev. Mr. Douglas, an obstreperous +Covenanting minister, was a descendant of the captive Mary Stuart. +However, Saint-Germain is said, like Kaspar Hauser, to have murmured +of dim memories<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_266" id="Page_266">[Pg 266]</a></span> of his infancy, of diversions on magnificent +terraces, and of palaces glowing beneath an azure sky. This is +reported by Von Gleichen, who knew him very well, but thought him +rather a quack. Possibly he meant to convey the idea that he was +Moses, and that he had dwelt in the palaces of the Ramessids. The +grave of the prophet was never known, and Saint-Germain may have +insinuated that he began a new avatar in a cleft of Mount Pisgah; he +was capable of it.</p> + +<p>However, a less wild surmise avers that, in 1763 the secrets of his +birth and the source of his opulence were known in Holland. The +authority is the 'Memoirs' of Grosley (1813). Grosley was an +archæologist of Troyes; he had travelled in Italy, and written an +account of his travels; he also visited Holland and England,<a name="FNanchor_46_46" id="FNanchor_46_46"></a><a href="#Footnote_46_46" class="fnanchor">[46]</a> and +later, from a Dutchman, he picked up his information about +Saint-Germain. Grosley was a Fellow of our Royal Society, and I +greatly revere the authority of a F.R.S. His later years were occupied +in the compilation of his Memoirs, including an account of what he did +and heard in Holland, and he died in 1785. According to Grosley's +account of what the Dutchman knew, Saint-Germain was the son of a +princess who fled (obviously from Spain) to Bayonne, and of a +Portuguese Jew dwelling in Bordeaux.</p> + +<p>What fairy and fugitive princess can this be,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_267" id="Page_267">[Pg 267]</a></span> whom not in vain the +ardent Hebrew wooed? She was, she must have been, as Grosley saw, the +heroine of Victor Hugo's <i>Ruy Blas</i>. The unhappy Charles II. of Spain, +a kind of 'mammet' (as the English called the Richard II. who appeared +up in Islay, having escaped from Pomfret Castle), had for his first +wife a daughter of Henrietta, the favourite sister of our Charles II. +This childless bride, after some ghostly years of matrimony, after +being exorcised in disgusting circumstances, died in February 1689. In +May 1690 a new bride, Marie de Neubourg, was brought to the grisly +side of the crowned mammet of Spain. She, too, failed to prevent the +wars of the Spanish Succession by giving an heir to the Crown of +Spain. Scandalous chronicles aver that Marie was chosen as Queen of +Spain for the levity of her character, and that the Crown was +expected, as in the Pictish monarchy, to descend on the female side; +the father of the prince might be anybody. What was needed was simply +a son of the <i>Queen</i> of Spain. She had, while Queen, no son, as far as +is ascertained, but she had a favourite, a Count Andanero, whom she +made minister of finance. 'He was not a born Count,' he was a +financier, this favourite of the Queen of Spain. That lady did go to +live in Bayonne in 1706, six years after the death of Charles II., her +husband. The hypothesis is, then, that Saint-Germain was the son of +this ex-Queen of Spain, and of the financial Count, Andanero, a man, +'not born in the sphere of Counts,'<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_268" id="Page_268">[Pg 268]</a></span> and easily transformed by +tradition into a Jewish banker of Bordeaux. The Duc de Choiseul, who +disliked the intimacy of Louis XV. and of the Court with +Saint-Germain, said that the Count was 'the son of a Portuguese Jew, +<i>who deceives the Court</i>. It is strange that the King is so often +allowed to be almost alone with this man, though, when he goes out, he +is surrounded by guards, as if he feared assassins everywhere.' This +anecdote is from the 'Memoirs' of Gleichen, who had seen a great deal +of the world. He died in 1807.</p> + +<p>It seems a fair inference that the Duc de Choiseul knew what the Dutch +bankers knew, the story of the Count's being a child of a princess +retired to Bayonne—namely, the ex-Queen of Spain—and of a +Portuguese-Hebrew financier. De Choiseul was ready to accept the +Jewish father, but thought that, in the matter of the royal mother, +Saint-Germain 'deceived the Court.'</p> + +<p>A queen of Spain might have carried off any quantity of the diamonds +of Brazil. The presents of diamonds from her almost idiotic lord must +have been among the few comforts of her situation in a Court +overridden by etiquette. The reader of Madame d'Aulnoy's contemporary +account of the Court of Spain knows what a dreadful dungeon it was. +Again, if born at Bayonne about 1706, the Count would naturally seem +to be about fifty in 1760. The purity with which he spoke German, and +his familiarity with German princely Courts—where I do not remember +that Barry Lyndon ever<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_269" id="Page_269">[Pg 269]</a></span> met him—are easily accounted for if he had a +royal German to his mother. But, alas! if he was the son of a Hebrew +financier, Portuguese or Alsatian (as some said), he was likely, +whoever his mother may have been, to know German, and to be fond of +precious stones. That Oriental taste notoriously abides in the hearts +of the Chosen People.</p> + +<div class="poem"><div class="stanza"> +<span class="i0">Nay, never shague your gory locks at me,<br /></span> +<span class="i0">Dou canst not say I did it.<br /></span> +</div></div> + +<p>quotes Pinto, the hero of Thackeray's <i>Notch on the Axe</i>. 'He +pronounced it, by the way, I <i>dit</i> it, by which I <i>know</i> that Pinto +was a German,' says Thackeray. I make little doubt but that +Saint-Germain, too, was a German, whether by the mother's side, and of +princely blood, or quite the reverse.</p> + +<p>Grosley mixes Saint-Germain up with a lady as mysterious as himself, +who also lived in Holland, on wealth of an unknown source, and Grosley +inclines to think that the Count found his way into a French prison, +where he was treated with extraordinary respect.</p> + +<p>Von Gleichen, on the other hand, shows the Count making love to a +daughter of Madame Lambert, and lodging in the house of the mother. +Here Von Gleichen met the man of mystery and became rather intimate +with him. Von Gleichen deemed him very much older than he looked, but +did not believe in his elixir.</p> + +<p>In any case, he was not a cardsharper, a swindler, a professional +medium, or a spy. He<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_270" id="Page_270">[Pg 270]</a></span> passed many evenings almost alone with Louis +XV., who, where men were concerned, liked them to be of good family +(about ladies he was much less exclusive). The Count had a grand +manner; he treated some great personages in a cavalier way, as if he +were at least their equal. On the whole, if not really the son of a +princess, he probably persuaded Louis XV. that he did come of that +blue blood, and the King would have every access to authentic +information. Horace Walpole's reasons for thinking Saint-Germain 'not +a gentleman' scarcely seem convincing.</p> + +<p>The Duc de Choiseul did not like the fashionable Saint-Germain. He +thought him a humbug, even when the doings of the deathless one were +perfectly harmless. As far as is known, his recipe for health +consisted in drinking a horrible mixture called 'senna tea'—which was +administered to small boys when I was a small boy—and in not drinking +anything at his meals. Many people still observe this regimen, in the +interest, it is said, of their figures. Saint-Germain used to come to +the house of de Choiseul, but one day, when Von Gleichen was present, +the minister lost his temper with his wife. He observed that she took +no wine at dinner, and told her she had learned that habit of +abstinence from Saint-Germain; that <i>he</i> might do as he pleased, 'but +you, madame, whose health is precious to me, I forbid to imitate the +regimen of such a dubious character.' Gleichen, who tells the +anecdote, says that he was present when<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_271" id="Page_271">[Pg 271]</a></span> de Choiseul thus lost his +temper with his wife. The dislike of de Choiseul had a mournful effect +on the career of Saint-Germain.</p> + +<p>In discussing the strange story of the Chevalier d'Éon, we have seen +that Louis XV. amused himself by carrying on a secret scheme of +fantastic diplomacy through subordinate agents, behind the backs and +without the knowledge of his responsible ministers. The Duc de +Choiseul, as Minister of Foreign Affairs, was excluded, it seems, from +all knowledge of these double intrigues, and the Maréchal de +Belle-Isle, Minister of War, was obviously kept in the dark, as was +Madame de Pompadour. Now it is stated by Von Gleichen that the +Maréchal de Belle-Isle, from the War Office, started a <i>new</i> secret +diplomacy behind the back of de Choiseul, at the Foreign Office. The +King and Madame de Pompadour (who was not initiated into the general +scheme of the King's secret) were both acquainted with what de +Choiseul was not to know—namely, Belle-Isle's plan for secretly +making peace through the mediation, or management, at all events, of +Holland. All this must have been prior to the death of the Maréchal de +Belle-Isle in 1761; and probably de Broglie, who managed the regular +old secret policy of Louis XV., knew nothing about this new +clandestine adventure; at all events, the late Duc de Broglie says +nothing about it in his book <i>The King's Secret</i>.<a name="FNanchor_47_47" id="FNanchor_47_47"></a><a href="#Footnote_47_47" class="fnanchor">[47]</a></p> +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_272" id="Page_272">[Pg 272]</a></span></p> +<p>The story, as given by Von Gleichen, goes on to say that Saint-Germain +offered to conduct the intrigue at the Hague. As Louis XV. certainly +allowed that maidenly captain of dragoons, d'Éon, to manage his hidden +policy in London, it is not at all improbable that he really entrusted +this fresh cabal in Holland to Saint-Germain, whom he admitted to +great intimacy. To the Hague went Saint-Germain, diamonds, rubies, +senna tea, and all, and began to diplomatise with the Dutch. But the +regular French minister at the Hague, d'Affry, found out what was +going on behind his back—found it out either because he was sharper +than other ambassadors, or because a personage so extraordinary as +Saint-Germain was certain to be very closely watched, or because the +Dutch did not take to the Undying One, and told d'Affry what he was +doing. D'Affry wrote to de Choiseul. An immortal but dubious +personage, he said, was treating, in the interests of France, for +peace, which it was d'Affry's business to do if the thing was to be +done at all. Choiseul replied in a rage by the same courier. +Saint-Germain, he said, must be extradited, bound hand and foot, and +sent to the Bastille. Choiseul thought that he might practise his +regimen and drink his senna tea, to the advantage of public affairs, +within those venerable walls. Then the angry minister went to the +King, told him what orders he had given, and said that, of course, in +a case of this kind it was superfluous to inquire as to the royal +pleasure. Louis XV. was<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_273" id="Page_273">[Pg 273]</a></span> caught; so was the Maréchal de Belle-Isle. +They blushed and were silent.</p> + +<p>It must be remembered that this report of a private incident could +only come to the narrator, Von Gleichen, from de Choiseul, with whom +he professes to have been intimate. The King and the Maréchal de +Belle-Isle would not tell the story of their own discomfiture. It is +not very likely that de Choiseul himself would blab. However, the +anecdote avers that the King and the Minister for War thought it best +to say nothing, and the demand for Saint-Germain's extradition was +presented at the Hague. But the Dutch were not fond of giving up +political offenders. They let Saint-Germain have a hint; he slipped +over to London, and a London paper published a kind of veiled +interview with him in June 1760.</p> + +<p>His name, we read, when announced after his death, will astonish the +world more than all the marvels of his life. He has been in England +already (1743-17—?); he is a great unknown. Nobody can accuse him of +anything dishonest or dishonourable. When he was here before we were +all mad about music, and so he enchanted us with his violin. But Italy +knows him as an expert in the plastic arts, and Germany admires in him +a master in chemical science. In France, where he was supposed to +possess the secret of the transmutation of metals, the police for two +years sought and failed to find any normal source of his<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_274" id="Page_274">[Pg 274]</a></span> opulence. A +lady of forty-five once swallowed a whole bottle of his elixir. Nobody +recognised her, for she had become a girl of sixteen without observing +the transformation!</p> + +<p>Saint-Germain is said to have remained in London but for a short +period. Horace Walpole does not speak of him again, which is odd, but +probably the Count did not again go into society. Our information, +mainly from Von Gleichen, becomes very misty, a thing of surmises, +really worthless. The Count is credited with a great part in the +palace conspiracies of St. Petersburg; he lived at Berlin, and, under +the name of Tzarogy, at the Court of the Margrave of Anspach. Thence +he went, they say, to Italy, and then north to the Landgrave, Charles +of Hesse, who dabbled in alchemy. Here he is said to have died about +1780-85, leaving his papers to the Landgrave; but all is very vague +after he disappeared from Paris in 1760. When next I meet +Saint-Germain he is again at Paris, again mysteriously rich, again he +rather disappears than dies, he calls himself Major Fraser, and the +date is in the last years of Louis Philippe. My authority may be +cavilled at; it is that of the late ingenious Mr. Van Damme, who +describes Major Fraser in a book on the characters of the Second +Empire. He does not seem to have heard of Saint-Germain, whom he does +not mention.</p> + +<p>Major Fraser, 'in spite of his English (<i>sic</i>) name, was decidedly not +English, though he spoke the language.' He was (like Saint-Germain) +'one<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_275" id="Page_275">[Pg 275]</a></span> of the best dressed men of the period.... He lived alone, and +never alluded to his parentage. He was always flush of money, though +the sources of his income were a mystery to every one.' The French +police vainly sought to detect the origin of Saint-Germain's supplies, +opening his letters at the post-office. Major Fraser's knowledge of +every civilised country at every period was marvellous, though he had +very few books. 'His memory was something prodigious.... Strange to +say, he used often to hint that his was no mere book knowledge. '"Of +course, it is perfectly ridiculous,"' he remarked, with a strange +smile, '"but every now and then I feel as if this did not come to me +from reading, but from personal experience. At times I become almost +convinced that I lived with Nero, that I knew Dante personally, and so +forth."'<a name="FNanchor_48_48" id="FNanchor_48_48"></a><a href="#Footnote_48_48" class="fnanchor">[48]</a> At the major's death not a letter was found giving a clue +to his antecedents, and no money was discovered. <i>Did</i> he die? As in +the case of Saint-Germain, no date is given. The author had an idea +that the major was 'an illegitimate son of some exalted person' of the +period of Charles IV. and Ferdinand VII. of Spain.</p> + +<p>The author does not mention Saint-Germain, and may never have heard of +him. If his account of Major Fraser is not mere romance, in that +warrior we have the undying friend of Louis XV. and Madame de +Pompadour. He had drunk at Medmenham with Jack Wilkes; as Riccio he +had<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_276" id="Page_276">[Pg 276]</a></span> sung duets with the fairest of unhappy queens; he had extracted +from Blanche de Béchamel the secret of Goby de Mouchy. As Pinto, he +told much of his secret history to Mr. Thackeray, who says: 'I am +rather sorry to lose him after three little bits of <i>Roundabout +Papers</i>.'</p> + +<p>Did Saint-Germain really die in a palace of Prince Charles of Hesse +about 1780-85? Did he, on the other hand, escape from the French +prison where Grosley thought he saw him, during the French Revolution? +Was he known to Lord Lytton about 1860? Was he then Major Fraser? Is +he the mysterious Muscovite adviser of the Dalai Lama? Who knows? He +is a will-o'-the-wisp of the memoir-writers of the eighteenth century. +Whenever you think you have a chance of finding him in good authentic +State papers, he gives you the slip; and if his existence were not +vouched for by Horace Walpole, I should incline to deem of him as +Betsy Prig thought of Mrs. Harris.</p> + +<div class="blockquot"><p><span class="smcap">Note</span>.—Since the publication of these essays I have learned, +through the courtesy of a Polish nobleman, that there was +nothing mysterious in the origin and adventures of the Major +Fraser mentioned in pp. <a href='#Page_274'>274</a>-276. He was of the Saltoun +family, and played a part in the civil wars of Spain during +the second quarter of the nineteenth century. Major Fraser +was known, in Paris, to the father of my Polish +correspondent.</p></div> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_277" id="Page_277">[Pg 277]</a></span></p> +<h2><a name="XIII" id="XIII"></a>XIII</h2> + +<h2><i>THE MYSTERY OF THE KIRKS</i></h2> + +<p> </p> + + +<p><span class="smcap">No</span> historical problem has proved more perplexing to Englishmen than +the nature of the differences between the various Kirks in Scotland. +The Southron found that, whether he worshipped in a church of the +Established Kirk ('The Auld Kirk'), of the Free Church, or of the +United Presbyterian Church (the U.P.'s), it was all the same thing. +The nature of the service was exactly similar, though sometimes the +congregation stood at prayers, and sat when it sang; sometimes stood +when it sang and knelt at prayer. Not one of the Kirks used a +prescribed liturgy. I have been in a Free Kirk which had no pulpit; +the pastor stood on a kind of raised platform, like a lecturer in a +lecture-room, but that practice is unessential. The Kirks, if I +mistake not, have different collections of hymns, which, till recent +years, were contemned as 'things of human invention,' and therefore +'idolatrous.' But hymns are now in use, as also are organs, or +harmoniums, or other musical instruments. Thus the faces of the Kirks +are similar and sisterly:</p> + +<div class="poem"><div class="stanza"> +<span class="i8">Facies non omnibus una<br /></span> +<span class="i0">Nec diversa tamen, qualem decet esse sororum.<br /></span> +<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_278" id="Page_278">[Pg 278]</a></span></div></div> + +<p>What, then, the Southron used to ask, <i>is</i> the difference between the +Free Church, the Established Church, and the United Presbyterian +Church? If the Southron put the question to a Scottish friend, the +odds were that the Scottish friend could not answer. He might be a +member of the Scottish 'Episcopal' community, and as ignorant as any +Anglican. Or he might not have made these profound studies in Scottish +history, which throw glimmerings of light on this obscure subject.</p> + +<p>Indeed, the whole aspect of the mystery has shifted, of late, like the +colours in a kaleidoscope. The more conspicuous hues are no longer +'Auld Kirk,' 'Free Kirk,' and 'U.P.'s,' but 'Auld Kirk,' 'Free Kirk,' +and 'United Free Kirk.' The United Free Kirk was composed in 1900 of +the old 'United Presbyterians' (as old as 1847), with the overwhelming +majority of the old Free Kirk, while the Free Kirk, of the present +moment, consists of a tiny minority of the old Free Kirk, which +declined to join the recent union. By a judgment (one may well call it +a 'judgment') of the House of Lords (August 1, 1904), the Free Kirk, +commonly called 'The Wee Frees,' now possesses the wealth that was the +old Free Kirk's before, in 1900, it united with the United +Presbyterians, and became the United Free Church. It is to be hoped +that common sense will discover some 'outgait,' or issue, from this +distressing imbroglio. In the words which Mr. R.L. Stevenson, then a +sage of twenty-four, penned in 1874, we may say 'Those who are<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_279" id="Page_279">[Pg 279]</a></span> at all +open to a feeling of national disgrace look forward eagerly to such a +possibility; they have been witnesses already too long to the strife +that has divided this small corner of Christendom.' The eternal +schisms of the Kirk, said R.L.S., exhibit 'something pitiful for the +pitiful man, but bitterly humorous for others.'</p> + +<p>The humour of the present situation is only too manifest. Two +generations ago about half of the ministers of the Kirk of Scotland +left their manses and pleasant glebes for the sake of certain ideas. +Of these ideas they abandoned some, or left them in suspense, a few +years since, and, as a result, they have lost, if only for the moment, +their manses, stipends, colleges, and pleasant glebes.</p> + +<p>Why should all these things be so? The answer can only be found in the +history—and a history both sad and bitterly humorous it is—of the +Reformation in Scotland. When John Knox died, on November 24, 1572, a +decent burgess of Edinburgh wrote in his Diary, 'John Knox, minister, +deceased, who had, as was alleged, the most part of the blame of all +the sorrows of Scotland, since the slaughter of the late Cardinal,' +Beaton, murdered at St. Andrews in 1546. 'The sorrows of Scotland' had +endured when Knox died for but twenty-six years. Since his death, 332 +years have gone by, and the present sorrows of the United Free Kirk +are the direct, though distant, result of some of the ideas of John +Knox.</p> + +<p>The whole trouble springs from his peculiar<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_280" id="Page_280">[Pg 280]</a></span> notions, and the notions +of his followers, about the relations between Church and State. In +1843, half the ministers of the Established Kirk in Scotland, or more, +left the Kirk, and went into the wilderness for what they believed to +be the ideal of Knox. In 1904 they have again a prospect of a similar +exodus, because they are no longer rigid adherents of the very same +ideal! A tiny minority of some twenty-seven ministers clings to what +it considers to be the Knoxian ideal, and is rewarded by all the +wealth bestowed on the Free Kirk by pious benefactors during sixty +years.</p> + +<p>The quarrel, for 344 years (1560-1904), has been, we know, about the +relations of Church and State. The disruption of 1843, the departure +of the Free Kirk out of the Established Kirk, arose thus, according to +Lord Macnaghten, who gave one of the two opinions in favour of the +United Free Kirk's claim to the possessions held by the Free Kirk +before its union, in 1900, with the United Presbyterians. Before 1843, +there were, says the sympathetic judge, two parties in the Established +Church—the 'Moderates' and the 'Evangelicals' (also called 'The Wild +Men', 'the Highland Host' or the 'High Flyers'). The Evangelicals +became the majority and 'they carried matters with a high hand. They +passed Acts in the Assembly ... altogether beyond the competence of a +Church established by law.... The State refused to admit their claims. +The strong arm of the law restrained their extravagancies.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_281" id="Page_281">[Pg 281]</a></span> Still they +maintained that their proceedings were justified, and required by the +doctrine of the Headship of Christ ... to which they attached peculiar +and extraordinary significance.'</p> + +<p>Now the State, in 1838-1843, could not and would not permit these +'extravagancies' in a State-paid Church. The Evangelical party +therefore seceded, maintaining, as one of their leaders said, that 'we +are still the Church of Scotland, the only Church that deserves the +name, the only Church that can be known and recognised by the +maintaining of those principles to which the Church of our fathers was +true when she was on the mountain and on the field, when she was under +persecution, when she was an outcast from the world.'</p> + +<p>Thus the Free Kirk was <i>the</i> Kirk, and the Established Kirk was +heretical, was what Knox would have called 'ane rottin Laodicean.' Now +the fact is that the Church of Scotland had been, since August 1560, a +Kirk established by law (or by what was said to be a legal +Parliament), yet had never, perhaps, for an hour attained its own full +ideal relation to the State; had never been granted its entire claims, +but only so much or so little of these as the political situation +compelled the State to concede, or enabled it to withdraw. There had +always been members of the Kirk who claimed all that the Free Kirk +claimed in 1843; but they never got quite as much as they asked; they +often got much less than they wanted; and the full sum of their +desires could be granted by<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_282" id="Page_282">[Pg 282]</a></span> no State to a State-paid Church. Entire +independence could be obtained only by cutting the Church adrift from +the State. The Free Kirk, then, did cut themselves adrift, but they +kept on maintaining that they were <i>the</i> Church of Scotland, and that +the State <i>ought</i> in duty to establish and maintain <i>them</i>, while +granting them absolute independence.</p> + +<p>The position was stated thus, in 1851, by an Act and Declaration of +the Free Kirk's Assembly: 'She holds still, <i>and through God's grace +ever will hold</i>, that it is the duty of civil rulers to recognise the +truth of God according to His word, and to promote and support the +Kingdom of Christ without assuming any jurisdiction in it, or any +power over it....'</p> + +<p>The State, in fact, if we may speak carnally, ought to pay the piper, +but must not presume to call the tune.</p> + +<p>Now we touch the skirt of the mystery, what was the difference between +the Free Kirk and the United Presbyterians, who, since 1900, have been +blended with that body? The difference was that the Free Kirk held it +to be the duty of the State to establish <i>her</i>, and leave her perfect +independence; while the United Presbyterians maintained the absolutely +opposite opinion—namely, that the State cannot, and must not, +establish any Church, or pay any Church out of the national resources. +When the two Kirks united, in 1900, then, the Free Kirk either +abandoned the doctrine of which,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_283" id="Page_283">[Pg 283]</a></span> in 1851, she said that 'she holds it +still, and through God's grace ever will hold it,' or she regarded it +as a mere pious opinion, which did not prevent her from coalescing +with a Kirk of contradictory ideas. The tiny minority—the Wee Frees, +the Free Kirk of to-day—would not accept this compromise, 'hence +these tears,' to leave differences in purely metaphysical theology out +of view.</p> + +<p>Now the root of all the trouble, all the schisms and sufferings of +more than three centuries, lies, as we have said, in some of the ideas +of John Knox, and one asks, of what Kirk would John Knox be, if he +were alive in the present state of affairs? I venture to think that +the venerable Reformer would be found in the ranks of the Established +Kirk, 'the Auld Kirk.' He would not have gone out into the wilderness +in 1843, and he would most certainly have opposed the ideas of the +United Presbyterians. This theory may surprise at a first glance, but +it has been reached after many hours of earnest consideration.</p> + +<p>Knox's ideas, as far as he ever reasoned them out, reposed on this +impregnable rock, namely that Calvinism, as held by himself, was an +absolutely certain thing in every detail. If the State or 'the civil +magistrate,' as he put the case, entirely agreed with Knox, then Knox +was delighted that the State should regulate religion. The magistrate +was to put down Catholicism, and other aberrations from the truth as +it was in John Knox, with every<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_284" id="Page_284">[Pg 284]</a></span> available engine of the law, corporal +punishment, prison, exile, and death. If the State was ready and +willing to do all this, then the State was to be implicitly obeyed in +matters of religion, and the power in its hands was God-given—in +fact, the State was the secular aspect of the Church. Looking at the +State in this ideal aspect, Knox writes about the obedience due to the +magistrate in matters religious, after the manner of what, in this +country, would be called the fiercest 'Erastianism.' The State 'rules +the roast' in all matters of religion and may do what Laud and Charles +I. perished in attempting, may alter forms of worship—always provided +that the State absolutely agrees with the Kirk.</p> + +<p>Thus, under Edward VI., Knox would have desired the secular power in +England, the civil magistrate, to forbid people to kneel at the +celebration of the Sacrament. <i>That</i> was entirely within the +competence of the State, simply and solely because Knox desired that +people should <i>not</i> kneel. But when, long after Knox's death, the +civil magistrate insisted, in Scotland, that people should kneel, the +upholders of Knox's ideas denied that the magistrate (James VI.) had +any right to issue such an order, and they refused to obey while +remaining within the Established Church. They did not 'disrupt,' like +the Free Church; they simply acted as they pleased, and denounced +their obedient brethren as no 'lawful ministers.' The end of it all +was that they stirred up the Civil War, in which<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_285" id="Page_285">[Pg 285]</a></span> the first shot was +fired by the legendary Jenny Geddes, throwing her stool at the reader +in St. Giles's. Thus we see that the State was to be obeyed in matters +of religion, when the State did the bidding of the Kirk, and not +otherwise. When first employed as a 'licensed preacher,' and agent of +the State in England, Knox accepted just as much of the State's +liturgy as he pleased; the liturgy ordered the people to kneel, Knox +and his Berwick congregation disobeyed. With equal freedom, he and the +other royal chaplains, at Easter, preaching before the King, denounced +his ministers, Northumberland and the rest. Knox spoke of them in his +sermon as Judas, Shebna, and some other scriptural malignants. Later +he said that he repented having put things so mildly; he ought to have +called the ministers by their names, not veiled things in a hint. Now +we cannot easily conceive a chaplain of her late Majesty, in a sermon +preached before her, denouncing the Chancellor of the Exchequer, say +Mr. Gladstone, as 'Judas.' Yet Knox, a licensed preacher of a State +Church, indulged his 'spiritual independence' to that extent, and took +shame to himself that he had not gone further.</p> + +<p>Obviously, if this is 'Erastianism,' it is of an unusual kind. The +idea of Knox is that in a Catholic State the ruler is not to be obeyed +in religious matters by the true believers; sometimes Knox wrote that +the Catholic ruler ought to be met by 'passive resistance;' sometimes +that he<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_286" id="Page_286">[Pg 286]</a></span> ought to be shot at sight. He stated these diverse doctrines +in the course of eighteen months. In a Protestant country, the +Catholics must obey the Protestant ruler, or take their chances of +prison, exile, fire and death. The Protestant ruler, in a Protestant +State, is to be obeyed, in spiritual matters, by Protestants, just as +far as the Kirk may happen to approve of his proceedings, or even +further, in practice, if there is no chance of successful resistance.</p> + +<p>We may take it that Knox, if he had been alive and retained his old +ideas in 1843, would not have gone out of the Established Church with +the Free Church, because, in his time, he actually did submit to many +State regulations of which he did not approve. For example, he +certainly did not approve of bishops, and had no bishops in the Kirk +as established on his model in 1560. But, twelve years later, bishops +were reintroduced by the State, in the person of the Regent Morton, a +ruffian, and Knox did not retire to 'the mountain and the fields,' but +made the most practical efforts to get the best terms possible for the +Kirk. He was old and outworn, and he remained in the Established Kirk, +and advised no man to leave it. It was his theory, again, as it was +that of the Free Kirk, that there should be no 'patronage,' no +presentation of ministers to cures by the patron. The congregations +were to choose and 'call' any properly qualified person, at their own +pleasure, as they do now in all the Kirks,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_287" id="Page_287">[Pg 287]</a></span> including (since 1874) the +Established Church. But the State, in Knox's lifetime, overrode this +privilege of the Church. The most infamous villain of the period, +Archibald Douglas, was presented to the Kirk of Glasgow, and, indeed, +the nobles made many such presentations of unscrupulous and ignorant +cadets to important livings. Morton gave a bishopric to one of the +murderers of Riccio! Yet Knox did not advise a secession; he merely +advised that non-residence, or a scandalous life, or erroneous +doctrine, on the part of the person presented, should make his +presentation 'null and of no force or effect, and this to have place +also in the nomination of the bishops.' Thus Knox was, on occasion, +something of an opportunist. If alive in 1843, he would probably have +remained in the Establishment, and worked for that abolition of +'patronage' which was secured, from within, in 1874. If this +conjecture is right the Free Kirk was more Knoxian than John Knox, and +departed from his standard. He was capable of sacrificing a good deal +of 'spiritual independence' rather than break with the State. Many +times, long after he was dead, the National Church, under stress of +circumstances, accepted compromises.</p> + +<p>Knox knew the difference between the ideal and the practical. It was +the ideal that all non-convertible Catholics 'should die the death.' +But the ideal was never made real; the State was not prepared to +oblige the Kirk in this matter. It was the ideal that any of 'the +brethren,' conscious<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_288" id="Page_288">[Pg 288]</a></span> of a vocation, and seeing a good opportunity, +should treat an impenitent Catholic ruler as Jehu treated Jezebel. But +if any brother had consulted Knox as to the propriety of assassinating +Queen Mary, in 1561-67, he would have found out his mistake, and +probably have descended the Reformer's stairs much more rapidly than +he mounted them.</p> + +<p>Yet Knox, though he could submit to compromise, really had a +remarkably mystical idea of what the Kirk was, and of the attributes +of her clergy. The editor of <i>The Free Church Union Case</i>, Mr. Taylor +Innes (himself author of a biography of the Reformer), writes, in his +preface to <i>The Judgment of the House of Lords</i>: 'The Church of +Scotland, as a Protestant Church, had its origin in the year 1560, for +its first Confession dates from August, and its first Assembly from +December in that year.' In fact, the Confession was accepted and +passed as law, by a very dubiously legal Convention of the Estates, in +August 1560. But Knox certainly conceived that the Protestant Church +<i>in</i>, if not <i>of</i>, Scotland existed a year before that date, and +before that date it possessed 'the power of the Keys' and even, it +would perhaps seem, 'the power of the Sword.' To his mind, as soon as +a local set of men of his own opinions met, and chose a pastor and +preacher, who also administered the Sacraments, the Protestant Church +was 'a Church in being.' The Catholic Church, then by law established, +was,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_289" id="Page_289">[Pg 289]</a></span> Knox held, no Church at all; her priests were not 'lawful +ministers,' her Pope was the man of Sin <i>ex officio</i>, and the Church +was 'the Kirk of the malignants'—'a lady of pleasure in Babylon +bred.'</p> + +<p>On the other hand, the real Church—it might be of but 200 men—was +confronting the Kirk of the malignants, and alone was genuine. The +State did not make and could not unmake 'the Trew Church,' but was +bound to establish, foster, <i>and obey it</i>.</p> + +<p>It was this last proviso which caused 130 years of bloodshed and +'persecution' and general unrest in Scotland, from 1559 to 1690. Why +was the Kirk so often out 'in the heather,' and hunted like a +partridge on the field and the mountain? The answer is that when the +wilder spirits of the Kirk were not being persecuted they were +persecuting the State and bullying the individual subject. All this +arose from Knox's idea of the Church. To constitute a Church no more +was needed than a local set of Calvinistic Protestants and 'a lawful +minister.' To constitute a lawful minister, at first (later far more +was required), no more was needed than a 'call' to a preacher from a +local set of Calvinistic Protestants. But, when once the 'call' was +given and accepted, that 'lawful minister' was, by the theory, as +superior to the laws of the State as the celebrated emperor was +superior to grammar. A few 'lawful ministers' of this kind possessed +'the power of the Keys;' they could hand anybody over to Satan by +excom<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_290" id="Page_290">[Pg 290]</a></span>municating the man, and (apparently) they could present 'the +power of the Sword' to any town council, which could then decree +capital punishment against any Catholic priest who celebrated Mass, +as, by the law of the State, he was in duty bound to do. Such were the +moderate and reasonable claims of Knox's Kirk in May 1559, even before +it was accepted by the Convention of Estates in August 1560. It was +because, not the Church, but the wilder spirits among the ministers, +persevered in these claims, that the State, when it got the chance, +drove them into moors and mosses and hanged not a few of them.</p> + +<p>I have never found these facts fully stated by any historian or by any +biographer of Knox, except by the Reformer himself, partly in his +<i>History</i>, partly in his letters to a lady of his acquaintance. The +mystery of the Kirks turns on the Knoxian conception of the 'lawful +minister,' and his claim to absolutism.</p> + +<p>To give examples, Knox himself, about 1540-43, was 'a priest of the +altar,' 'one of Baal's shaven sort.' On that score he later claimed +nothing. After the murder of Cardinal Beaton, the murderers and their +associates, forming a congregation in the Castle of St. Andrews, gave +Knox a call to be their preacher. He was now 'a lawful minister.' In +May 1559 he, with about four or five equally lawful ministers, two of +them converted friars, one of them a baker, and one, Harlow, a tailor, +were in company with their<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_291" id="Page_291">[Pg 291]</a></span> Protestant backers, who destroyed the +monasteries in Perth, and the altars and ornaments of the church +there. They at once claimed 'the power of the Keys,' and threatened to +excommunicate such of their allies as did not join them in arms. They, +'the brethren,' also denounced capital punishment against any priest +who celebrated Mass at Perth. Now the lawful ministers could not think +of hanging the priests themselves. They must therefore have somehow +bestowed 'the power of the Sword' on the baillies and town council of +Perth, I presume, for the Regent, Mary of Guise, when she entered the +town, dismissed these men from office, which was regarded as an +unlawful and perfidious act on her part. Again, in the summer of 1560, +the baillies of Edinburgh—while Catholicism was still by law +established—denounced the death penalty against recalcitrant +Catholics. The Kirk also allotted lawful ministers to several of the +large towns, and thus established herself before she was established +by the Estates in August 1560. Thus nothing could be more free, and +more absolute, than the Kirk in her early bloom. On the other hand, as +we saw, even in Knox's lifetime, the State, having the upper hand +under the Regent Morton, a strong man, introduced prelacy of a +modified kind and patronage; did not restore to the Kirk her +'patrimony,'—the lands of the old Church; and only hanged one priest, +not improbably for a certain reason of a private character.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_292" id="Page_292">[Pg 292]</a></span></p> + +<p>There was thus, from the first, a battle between the Protestant Church +and State. At various times one preacher is said to have declared that +he was the solitary 'lawful minister' in Scotland; and one of these +men, Mr. Cargill, excommunicated Charles II.; while another, Mr. +Renwick, denounced a war of assassination against the Government. Both +gentlemen were hanged.</p> + +<p>These were extreme assertions of 'spiritual independence,' and the +Kirk, or at least the majority of the preachers, protested against +such conduct, which might be the logical development of the doctrine +of the 'lawful minister,' but was, in practice, highly inconvenient. +The Kirk, as a whole, was loyal.</p> + +<p>Sometimes the State, under a strong man like Morton, or James Stewart, +Earl of Arran (a thoroughpaced ruffian), put down these pretensions of +the Church. At other times, as when Andrew Melville led the Kirk, +under James VI., she maintained that there was but one king in +Scotland, Christ, and that the actual King, the lad, James VI., was +but 'Christ's silly vassal.' He was supreme in temporal matters, but +the judicature of the Church was supreme in spiritual matters.</p> + +<p>This sounds perfectly fair, but who was to decide what matters were +spiritual and what were temporal? The Kirk assumed the right to decide +that question; consequently it could give a spiritual colour to any +problem of statesmanship: for example, a royal marriage, trade with +Catholic<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_293" id="Page_293">[Pg 293]</a></span> Spain, which the Kirk forbade, or the expulsion of the +Catholic peers. 'There is a judgment above yours,' said the Rev. Mr. +Pont to James VI., 'and that is God's; <i>put in the hand of the +ministers</i>, for "we shall judge the angels," saith the apostle.' +Again, '"Ye shall sit upon twelve thrones and judge"' (quoted Mr. +Pont), 'which is chiefly referred to the apostles, and consequently to +ministers.'</p> + +<p>Things came to a head in 1596. The King asked the representatives of +the Kirk whether he might call home certain earls, banished for being +Catholics, if they 'satisfied the Kirk.' The answer was that he might +not. Knox had long before maintained that 'a prophet' might preach +treason (he is quite explicit), and that the prophet, and whoever +carried his preaching into practical effect, would be blameless. A +minister was accused, at this moment, of preaching libellously, and he +declined to be judged except by men of his own cloth. If they +acquitted him, as they were morally certain to do, what Court of +Appeal could reverse the decision of men who claimed to 'judge +angels'? A riot arose in Edinburgh, the King seized his opportunity, +he grasped his nettle, the municipal authorities backed him, and, in +effect, the claims of true ministers thenceforth gave little trouble +till the folly of Charles I. led to the rise of the Covenant. The +Sovereign had overshot his limits of power as wildly as ever the Kirk +had tried to do, and the result was that the Kirk, having now the +nobles and the people in arms on<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_294" id="Page_294">[Pg 294]</a></span> her side, was absolutely despotic +for about twelve years. Her final triumph was to resist the Estates in +Parliament, with success, and to lay Scotland open to the Cromwellian +conquest. What Plantagenets and Tudors could never do Noll effected, +he conquered Scotland, the Kirk having paralysed the State. The +preachers found that Cromwell was a perfect 'Malignant,' that he would +not suffer prophets to preach treason, nor even allow the General +Assembly to meet. Angels they might judge if they pleased, but not +Ironsides; excommunication and 'Kirk discipline' were discountenanced; +even witches were less frequently burned. The preachers, Cromwell +said, 'had done their do,' had shot their bolt.</p> + +<p>At this time they split into two parties: the Extremists, calling +themselves 'the godly,' and the men of milder mood.</p> + +<p>Charles II., at the Restoration, ought probably to have sided with the +milder party, some of whom were anxious to see their fierce brethren +banished to Orkney, out of the way. But Charles's motto was 'Never +again,' and by a pettifogging fraud he reintroduced bishops without +the hated liturgy. After years of risings and suppressions the +ministers were brought to submission, accepting an 'indulgence' from +the State, while but a few upholders of the old pretensions of the +clergy stood out in the wildernesses of South-western Scotland. There +might be three or four such ministers, there might be only one, but +they, or he, to the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_295" id="Page_295">[Pg 295]</a></span> mind of 'the Remnant,' were the only 'lawful +ministers.' At the Revolution of 1688-89 the Remnant did not accept +the compromise under which the Presbyterian Kirk was re-established. +They stood out, breaking into many sects; the spiritual descendants of +most of these blended into one body as 'The United Presbyterian Kirk' +in 1847. In the Established Kirk the Moderates were in the majority +till about 1837, when the inheritors of those extreme views which Knox +compromised about, and which the majority of ministers disclaimed +before the Revolution of 1688, obtained the upper hand. They had +planted the remotest parishes of the Highlands with their own kind of +ministers, who swamped, in 1838, the votes of the Lowland Moderates, +exactly as, under James VI., Highland 'Moderates' had swamped the +votes of the Lowland Extremists. The majority of Extremists, or most +of it, left the Kirk in 1843, and made the Free Kirk. In 1900, when +the Free Kirk joined the United Presbyterians, it was Highland +ministers, mainly, who formed the minority of twenty-seven, or so, who +would not accept the new union, and now constitute the actual Free +Kirk, or Wee Frees, and possess the endowments of the old Free Kirk of +1843. We can scarcely say <i>Beati possidentes</i>.</p> + +<p>It has been shown, or I have tried, erroneously or not, to show that, +wild and impossible as were the ideal claims of Knox, of Andrew +Melville, of Mr. Pont, and others, the old Scottish Kirk of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_296" id="Page_296">[Pg 296]</a></span> 1560, by +law established, was capable of giving up or suppressing these claims, +even under Knox, and even while the Covenant remained in being. The +mass of the ministers, after the return of Charles II. before +Worcester fight, before bloody Dunbar, were not irreconcilables. The +Auld Kirk, the Kirk Established, has some right to call herself the +Church of Scotland by historical continuity, while the opposite +claimants, the men of 1843, may seem rather to descend from people +like young Renwick, the last hero who died for their ideas, but not, +in himself, the only 'lawful minister' between Tweed and Cape Wrath. +'Other times, other manners.' All the Kirks are perfectly loyal; now +none persecutes; interference with private life, 'Kirk discipline,' is +a vanishing minimum; and, but for this recent 'garboil' (as our old +writers put it) we might have said that, under differences of +nomenclature, all the Kirks are united at last, in the only union +worth having, that of peace and goodwill. That union may be restored, +let us hope, by good temper and common sense, qualities that have not +hitherto been conspicuous in the ecclesiastical history of Scotland, +or of England.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_297" id="Page_297">[Pg 297]</a></span></p> +<h2><a name="XIV" id="XIV"></a>XIV</h2> + +<h2><i>THE END OF JEANNE DE LA MOTTE</i></h2> + +<p> </p> + +<p><span class="smcap">In</span> the latest and best book on Marie Antoinette and the Diamond +Necklace, <i>L'Affaire du Collier</i>, Monsieur Funck-Brentano does not +tell the sequel of the story of Jeanne de la Motte, <i>née</i> de +Saint-Remy, and calling herself de Valois. He leaves this wicked woman +at the moment when (June 21, 1786) she has been publicly flogged and +branded, struggling, scratching, and biting like a wild cat. Her +husband, at about the same time, was in Edinburgh, and had just +escaped from being kidnapped by the French police. In another work +Monsieur Funck-Brentano criticises, with his remarkable learning, the +conclusion of the history of Jeanne de la Motte. Carlyle, in his +well-known essay, <i>The Diamond Necklace</i>, leaves Jeanne's later +adventures obscure, and is in doubt as to the particulars of her +death.</p> + +<p>Perhaps absolute certainty (except as to the cause of Jeanne's death) +is not to be obtained. How she managed to escape from her prison, the +Salpétrière, later so famous for Charcot's hypnotic experiments on +hysterical female patients, remains<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_298" id="Page_298">[Pg 298]</a></span> a mystery. It was certain that if +she was once at liberty Jeanne would tell the lies against the Queen +which she had told before, and tell some more equally false, popular, +and damaging. Yet escape she did in 1787, the year following that of +her imprisonment at the Salpétrière; she reached England, compiled the +libels which she called her memoirs, and died strangely in 1791.</p> + +<p>On June 21, 1786, to follow M. Funck-Brentano, Jeanne was taken, after +her flogging, to her prison, reserved for dissolute women. The +majority of the captives slept as they might, confusedly, in one room. +To Jeanne was allotted one of thirty-six little cells of six feet +square, given up to her by a prisoner who went to join the promiscuous +horde. Probably the woman was paid for this generosity by some +partisan of Jeanne. On September 4 the property of the swindler and of +her husband, including their valuable furniture, jewels, books, and +plate, was sold at Bar-sur-Aube, where they had a house.</p> + +<p>So far we can go, guided by M. Funck-Brentano, who relies on authentic +documents. For what followed we have only the story of Jeanne herself +in her memoirs: I quote the English translation, which appears to vary +from the French. How did such a dangerous prisoner make her escape? We +cannot but wonder that she was not placed in a prison more secure. Her +own version, of course, is not to be relied on. She would tell any +tale that suited her purpose. A version which con<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_299" id="Page_299">[Pg 299]</a></span>tradicts hers has +reached me through the tradition of an English family, but it presents +some difficulties. Jeanne says that about the end of November or early +in December, 1786, she was allowed to have a maid named Angelica. This +woman was a prisoner of long standing, condemned on suspicion of +having killed her child. One evening a soldier on guard in the court +of the Salpétrière passed his musket through a hole in the wall (or a +broken window) and tried to touch Angelica. He told her that many +people of rank were grateful to her for her kindness to Madame La +Motte. He would procure writing materials for her that she might +represent her case to them. He did bring gilt-edged paper, pens, and +ink, and a letter for Angelica, who could not read.</p> + +<p>The letter contained, in invisible ink, brought out by Jeanne, the +phrase, 'It is understood. Be sure to be discreet.' 'People are intent +on changing your condition' was another phrase which Jeanne applied to +herself. She conceived the probable hypothesis that her victims, the +Queen and the Cardinal de Rohan, had repented of their cruelty, had +discovered her to be innocent and were plotting for her escape. Of +course, nothing could be more remote from the interests of the Queen. +Presently the soldier brought another note. Jeanne must procure a +model of the key that locked her cell and other doors. By dint of +staring at the key in the hands of the nuns who looked after the +prisoners, Jeanne, though<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_300" id="Page_300">[Pg 300]</a></span> unable to draw, made two sketches of it, +and sent them out, the useful soldier managing all communications. How +Jeanne procured the necessary pencil she does not inform us. Practical +locksmiths may decide whether it is likely that, from two amateur +drawings, not to scale, any man could make a key which would fit the +locks. The task appears impossible. In any case, in a few days the +soldier pushed the key through the hole in the wall; Jeanne tried it +on the door of her cell and on two doors in the passages, found that +it opened them, and knelt in gratitude before her crucifix. In place +of running away Jeanne now wrote to ladies of her acquaintance, +begging them to procure the release of Angelica. Her nights she spent +in writing three statements for the woman, each occupying a hundred +and eighty pages, presumably of gilt-edged paper. Soon she heard that +the King had signed Angelica's pardon, and on May 1 the woman was +released.</p> + +<p>The next move of Jeanne was to ask her unknown friend outside to send +her a complete male costume, a large blue coat, a flannel waistcoat, a +pair of half boots, and a tall, round-shaped hat, with a switch. The +soldier presently pushed these commodities through the hole in the +wall. The chaplain next asked her to write out all her story, but +Sister Martha, her custodian, would not give her writing materials, +and it did not apparently occur to her to bid the soldier bring fresh +supplies. Cut off from the joys of literary composition, Jeanne<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_301" id="Page_301">[Pg 301]</a></span> +arranged with her unknown friend to escape on June 8. First the handy +soldier, having ample leisure, was to walk for days about 'the King's +garden,' disguised as a waggoner, and carrying a whip. The use of this +manœuvre is not apparent, unless Jeanne, with her switch, was to be +mistaken for the familiar presence of the carter.</p> + +<p>Jeanne ended by devising a means of keeping one of the female porters +away from her door. She dressed as a man, opened four doors in +succession, walked through a group of the nuns, or 'Sisters,' wandered +into many other courts, and at last joined herself to a crowd of +sight-seeing Parisians and left the prison in their company. She +crossed the Seine, and now walking, now hiring coaches, and using +various disguises, she reached Luxembourg. Here a Mrs. MacMahon met +her, bringing a note from M. de la Motte. This was on July 27. Mrs. +MacMahon and Jeanne started next day for Ostend, and arrived at Dover +after a passage of forty-two hours. Jeanne then repaired with Mr. +MacMahon to that lady's house in the Haymarket.</p> + +<p>This tale is neither coherent nor credible. On the other hand, the +tradition of an English family avers that a Devonshire gentleman was +asked by an important personage in France to succour an unnamed lady +who was being smuggled over in a sailing boat to our south-west coast. +Another gentleman, not unknown to history, actually entertained this +French angel unawares, not even knowing her name, and Jeanne, when she +departed for<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_302" id="Page_302">[Pg 302]</a></span> London, left a miniature of herself which is still in +the possession of the English family. Which tale is true and who was +the unknown friend that suborned the versatile soldier, and sent in +not only gilt-edged paper and a suit of male attire, but money for +Jeanne's journey? Only the Liberals in France had an interest in +Jeanne's escape; she might exude more useful venom against the Queen +in books or pamphlets, and she did, while giving the world to +understand that the Queen had favoured her flight. The escape is the +real mystery of the affair of the Necklace; the rest we now +understand.</p> + +<p>The death of Jeanne was strange. The sequel to her memoirs, in +English, avers that in 1791 a bailiff came to arrest her for a debt of +30<i>l.</i> She gave him a bottle of wine, slipped from the room, and +locked him in. But he managed to get out, and discovered the wretched +woman in a chamber in 'the two-pair back.' She threw up the window, +leaped out, struck against a tree, broke one knee, shattered one +thigh, knocked one eye out, yet was recovering, when, on August 21, +1791, she partook too freely of mulberries (to which she was very +partial), and died on Tuesday, August 23. This is confirmed by two +newspaper paragraphs, which I cite in full.</p> + +<p>First, the <i>London Chronicle</i> writes (from Saturday, August 27, to +Tuesday, August 30, 1791):</p> + +<p>'The unfortunate Countess de la Motte, who died on Tuesday last in +consequence of a hurt<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_303" id="Page_303">[Pg 303]</a></span> from jumping out of a window, was the wife of +Count de la Motte, who killed young Grey, the jeweller, in a duel a +few days ago at Brussels.' (This duel is recorded in the <i>London +Chronicle</i>, August 20-23.)</p> + +<p>Next, the <i>Public Advertiser</i> remarks (Friday, August 26, 1791):</p> + +<p>'The noted Countess de la Motte, of Necklace memory, and who lately +jumped out of a two-pair of stairs window to avoid the bailiffs, died +on Tuesday night last, at eleven o'clock, at her lodgings near +Astley's Riding School.'</p> + +<p>But why did La Motte fight the young jeweller? It was to Grey, of New +Bond Street, that La Motte sold a number of the diamonds from the +necklace; Grey gave evidence to that fact, and La Motte killed him. La +Motte himself lived to a bad old age.</p> + +<hr style="width: 45%;" /> + +<p>On studying M. Funck-Brentano's work, styled <i>Cagliostro & Company</i> in +the English translation, one observes a curious discrepancy. According +to the <i>Gazette d'Utrecht</i>, cited by M. Funck-Brentano, the window in +Jeanne's cell was 'at a height of ten feet above the floor.' Yet the +useful soldier, outside, introduced the end of his musket 'through a +broken pane of glass.' This does not seem plausible. Again, the +<i>Gazette d'Utrecht</i> (August 1, 1780) says that Jeanne made a hole in +the wall of her room, but failed to get her body<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_304" id="Page_304">[Pg 304]</a></span> through that +aperture. Was <i>that</i> the hole through which, in the English +translation published after Jeanne's death, the soldier introduced the +end of his musket? There are difficulties in both versions, and it is +not likely that Jeanne gave a truthful account of her escape.</p> + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> + +<p style="text-align: center"> +PRINTED BY<br /> +SPOTTISWOODE AND CO. LTD., NEW-STREET SQUARE<br /> +LONDON<br /> +</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<h2><a name="ADS" id="ADS"></a>SMITH, ELDER, & CO.'S PUBLICATIONS.</h2> + + +<p><b>THACKERAY IN THE UNITED STATES.</b> By General <span class="smcap">James Grant Wilson</span>, Author +of 'The Life of General Grant.' With 2 Photogravure Portraits, 50 +Full-page Illustrations, and numerous Illustrations in the Text. Two +Volumes. Small demy 8vo. 18<i>s.</i> net.</p> + +<p><i>TIMES.</i>—'One cannot lay it down. The countless ugly, vivid images +that were always jumping off the end of Thackeray's pen laugh +everywhere. The sparkling fun, the tender sadness, flash back across +the distance of fifty years.'</p> + + +<p><b>THACKERAY'S LETTERS TO AN AMERICAN FAMILY.</b> With an Introduction by +Miss <span class="smcap">Lucy W. Baxter</span>, and Original Drawings by Mr. <span class="smcap">Thackeray</span>. Large +post 8vo. 6<i>s.</i> net.</p> + +<p>From the <i>ACADEMY</i> Prize Review.—'A piece painted alive out of +Thackeray's career.... It is a very touching side of the great +novelist's character that is revealed in this welcome and friendly +little book, and one is grateful to Miss Baxter.'</p> + + +<p><b>HISTORICAL MYSTERIES.</b> By <span class="smcap">Andrew Lang</span>. With a Frontispiece. <span class="smcap">Second +Edition</span>. Small demy 8vo. 9<i>s.</i> net.</p> + +<p><i>VANITY FAIR.</i>—'One of the pleasantest, most absorbing, and most +learned of recent publications in the province of history.'</p> + + +<p><b>COLONIAL MEMORIES.</b> By Lady <span class="smcap">Broome</span>, Authoress, as Lady Barker, of +'Ribbon Stories,' 'Stories About——,' &c. Large post 8vo. 6s. net.</p> + +<p><i>DAILY CHRONICLE.</i>—'Lady Broome gives us real, living glimpses of the +Colonies and their ways.'</p> + + +<p><b>LETTERS AND RECOLLECTIONS OF SIR WALTER SCOTT.</b> By Mrs. <span class="smcap">Hughes</span>, of +Uffington. Edited by <span class="smcap">Horace G. Hutchinson</span>. With 3 Portraits and a +Letter in Facsimile. Small demy 8vo. 10<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i> net.</p> + +<p><i>WESTMINSTER GAZETTE.</i>—'Of absorbing interest, and a valuable +addition to the literature which has the laird of Abbotsford as its +theme.'</p> + + +<p><b>LEAVES FROM THE DIARY OF HENRY GREVILLE.</b> <span class="smcap">Third Series</span>. By <span class="smcap">Alice, +Countess of Strafford</span>. 8vo. 14s.</p> + +<p><i>TRUTH.</i>—'Excellent reading from the first page to the last. There +are many very good and quite new stories about well-known people.'</p> + + +<p><b>RETROSPECTS.</b> <span class="smcap">First Series</span>. By <span class="smcap">William Knight</span>, Emeritus Professor of +Moral Philosophy in St. Andrews University. Small demy 8vo. 9<i>s.</i> net.</p> + +<p><i>MANCHESTER GUARDIAN.</i>—'Mr. Knight gives us many interesting +anecdotes, sayings, and letters of remarkable men in the Nineteenth +Century.'</p> + + +<p><b>FROM THE LAND OF PRINCES.</b> By <span class="smcap">Gabrielle Festing</span>, Author of 'John +Hookham Frere and his Friends,' 'Unstoried in History,' &c. With an +Introduction by Sir <span class="smcap">George C.M. Birdwood</span>, M.D., K.C.I.E., C.S.I., +LL.D. Crown 8vo. 6s.</p> + +<p><i>GUARDIAN.</i>—'A very admirable and most readable work.'</p> + + +<p><b>TRAGIC DRAMA IN ÆSCHYLUS, SOPHOCLES, AND SHAKESPEARE:</b> an Essay. By +<span class="smcap">Lewis Campbell</span>, M.A. Oxon., LL.D. Glasgow, Hon. D.Litt. Oxon., +Emeritus Professor of Greek at the University of St. Andrews, Honorary +Fellow of Balliol College, &c. Large post 8vo. 7<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i></p> + +<p><i>SCOTSMAN.</i>—'Full of ripe learning and well-weighed opinions.'</p> + + +<p><b>THE CHURCH IN MADRAS:</b> BEING THE HISTORY OF THE ECCLESIASTICAL AND +MISSIONARY ACTION OF THE EAST INDIA COMPANY IN THE PRESIDENCY OF +MADRAS IN THE SEVENTEENTH AND EIGHTEENTH CENTURIES. By the Rev. <span class="smcap">Frank +Penny</span>, LL.M., late Chaplain of H.M.'s Indian Service (Madras +Establishment). With 33 Illustrations. Demy 8vo. 21<i>s.</i> net.</p> + +<p><i>SCOTSMAN.</i>—'A valuable addition to the records of British rule in +India, and the story it tells is one in which all Britons may take a +just pride.'</p> + + +<p><b>OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF ART.</b> By Dr. <span class="smcap">Wilhelm Lübke</span>. Edited, Minutely +Revised, and largely Re-written by <span class="smcap">Russell Sturgis</span>, A.M., Ph.D., +F.A.I.A., Author of 'Dictionary of Architecture and Building,' +'European Architecture,' &c. <span class="smcap">New Edition</span>. In Two Vols. Imperial 8vo. +Copiously Illustrated. 36<i>s.</i> net.</p> + +<p><i>THE WORLD.</i>—'The amount of added fact is great and important.'</p> + + +<p style="text-align: center">London: SMITH, ELDER, & CO., 15 Waterloo Place, S.W.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<h2>SMITH, ELDER, & CO.'S PUBLICATIONS.</h2> + + +<p><b>SEA-WRACK.</b> By <span class="smcap">Frank T. Bullen</span>, F.R.G.S., Author of 'The Cruise of the +"Cachalot,"' 'The Log of a Sea-Waif,' 'Deep Sea Plunderings,' &c. +Second Edition. With 8 Illustrations by <span class="smcap">Arthur Twidle</span>. Cr. 8vo. 6s.</p> + +<p><i>SPECTATOR.</i>—'Characteristic of Mr. Bullen's best work.'</p> + +<p><i>VANITY FAIR.</i>—'A delightful volume.... The seafaring man is an open +book to Mr. Bullen.'</p> + +<p><i>BRITISH WEEKLY.</i>—'A powerful and characteristic volume.... The gold +of buried argosies is tangled amidst his "Sea-Wrack."'</p> + +<p><i>DAILY CHRONICLE.</i>—'A regular lucky-bag, in which you may pick at +random and find good things.'</p> + + +<p><b>THE LIFE OF VOLTAIRE.</b> By <span class="smcap">S.G. Tallentyre</span>, Author of 'The Women of the +Salons,' Author with <span class="smcap">Henry Seton Merriman</span> of 'The Money-Spinner and +other Character Notes.' With 2 Photogravures and 16 Half-tone Blocks. +Second Edition. Two Vols. Large crown 8vo. 21s.</p> + +<p><i>STANDARD.</i>—'A virile and suggestive biography.... We hail with +pleasure the deft literary craftsmanship of the book as a whole, and +we welcome such a subtle and striking portrait of the man.'</p> + +<p><i>MANCHESTER GUARDIAN.</i>—'As a piece of pure biography there can be no +question of its brilliant success. Voltaire lives unmistakably in +these pages.'</p> + + +<p><b>THE PLOT OF THE PLACARDS AT RENNES, 1802</b> (Le Complot des Libelles). By +<span class="smcap">Gilbert Augustin Thierry</span>. Translated by <span class="smcap">Arthur G. Chater</span>. Crown 8vo. +6s.</p> + +<p><i>PALL MALL GAZETTE.</i>—'A chapter of veracious history as interesting +as any two novels.'</p> + +<p><i>VANITY FAIR.</i>—'A sound translation of a very fascinating book.... A +more light and pleasant, learned, historical study was never written.'</p> + + +<p><b>FROM MY WINDOW IN CHELSEA.</b> By Mrs. <span class="smcap">Fuller Maitland</span>, Author of 'Priors +Roothing,' &c. Small post 8vo. Tastefully bound in leather, with flap +edges. 3<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i> net.</p> + +<p><i>TIMES.</i>—'With the colour, humour, and fancy we have learnt to expect +from this writer.'</p> + +<p><i>ATHENÆUM.</i>—'We hope this dainty little book will tempt many +buyers.... This brief account of "things seen" has the freshness of +outlook and delicacy of phrase which we are accustomed to expect from +Mrs. Fuller Maitland.'</p> + + +<p><b>SAMUEL PEPYS, Lover of Musique.</b> By Sir <span class="smcap">Frederick Bridge</span>, K.B., M.V.O., +Mus. Doc., King Edward Professor of Music in the University of London. +With a Portrait of <span class="smcap">Samuel Pepys</span> and Musical Illustrations. Crown 8vo. +5s.</p> + +<p><i>TIMES.</i>—'An entertaining volume.... It tells its story pleasantly, +and it contains some useful musical illustrations and an excellent +portrait.'</p> + +<p><i>SPECTATOR.</i>—'A very pleasant little volume.... Sir Frederick +Bridge's commentary shows research as well as sympathy and +intelligence.'</p> + + +<p><b>DEBORAH OF TOD'S.</b> By Mrs. <span class="smcap">Henry de la Pasture</span>. New and Cheaper +Edition. Crown 8vo. 3<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i></p> + +<p><i>GLASGOW HERALD.</i>—'A new edition of an excellent novel, firm in +characterisation, admirable in plot and development.'</p> + + +<p><b>LEGAL T LEAVES.</b> By <span class="smcap">Edward F. Turner</span>, Author of 'T Leaves,' 'Tantler's +Sister,' 'More T Leaves,' &c. Crown 8vo. 5s.</p> + +<p><i>BRITISH WEEKLY.</i>—'Exceedingly clever and amusing, and written from +intimate personal knowledge.'</p> + +<p><i>OUTLOOK.</i>—'All capital. The author has a bright, attractive style, +abundant humour of the unhackneyed kind, and command of pathos.'</p> + +<p><i>WORLD.</i>—'Will be found an equally agreeable companion by lawyers and +laymen.'</p> + +<p><i>MANCHESTER GUARDIAN.</i>—'A book that is eminently cheerful and +cheering.'</p> + + +<p><b>TWELVE YEARS IN A MONASTERY.</b> By <span class="smcap">Joseph McCabe</span>, Author of 'Peter +Abelard,' 'Life in a Modern Monastery,' &c. New, Revised, and Cheaper +Edition. Crown 8vo. 3<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i> net.</p> + +<p><i>RECORD.</i>—'A remarkable work, which is, indeed, more valuable than +when it was first given to the world six years ago.'</p> + +<p><i>SCOTSMAN.</i>—'A thoughtful and instructive book, full of interesting +matter.'</p> + + +<p style="text-align: center">London: SMITH, ELDER, & CO., 15 Waterloo Place, S.W.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<h2>SMITH, ELDER, & CO.'S PUBLICATIONS.</h2> + + +<p><b>A. CONAN DOYLE'S NOVELS.</b> <span class="smcap">Author's Edition</span>, in 12 vols. With an +Introductory Preface and 2 Photogravure Illustrations to each Volume. +Large crown 8vo. 6<i>s.</i> each net.</p> + +<p><i>This edition of</i> <span class="smcap">Sir A. Conan Doyle's</span> <i>Novels is limited to 1,000 +sets, the first volume of each set being signed and numbered; and the +volumes are not sold separately. The Author's future work will, in due +time, be added to the edition.</i></p> + +<p><i>TRUTH.</i>—'Sure to be speedily snapped up by admirers of this popular +writer. The volumes are handsomely printed and bound.'</p> + +<p>Mr. <span class="smcap">Clement Shorter</span> in <i>THE SPHERE</i>.—'Those who have read "The White +Company," "Micah Clarke," and "The Refugees," to name but three, have +perused books which have held them with unabated interest from cover +to cover. There are only 1,000 sets of this Author's Edition, which +means that in a year or two these 1,000 sets will considerably +increase in price.'</p> + +<p><i>ACADEMY.</i>—'Author, publisher, and owners of the volumes are alike to +be congratulated.... The edition is fine and the matter contained in +it fine also.'</p> + + +<p><b>THE RISING GENERATION.</b> By <span class="smcap">Constance E. Maud</span>, Author of 'An English +Girl in Paris,' &c. With Cover designed by Mr. <span class="smcap">Jacomb Hood</span>. Crown 8vo. +6s.</p> + +<p><i>VANITY FAIR.</i>—'A book filled with charming and sympathetic studies +of child life and character.... A striking revelation of power to +observe and fathom the proceedings of children, and is written with +genuine humour and tenderness.'</p> + +<p><i>GUARDIAN.</i>—'A more thoroughly healthy, refreshing book from +beginning to end it would be difficult to find.'</p> + + +<p><b>VACATION DAYS IN GREECE.</b> By <span class="smcap">Rufus B. Richardson</span>, formerly Director of +the American School of Archæology, Athens. With 16 Illustrations and 2 +Maps. Large crown 8vo. 7<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i></p> + +<p><i>GUARDIAN.</i>—'The writer has full command of an easy, readable style.'</p> + +<p><i>TO-DAY.</i>—'Mr. Richardson has succeeded in conveying to his readers +the natural as well as the historic charm of Greece.'</p> + + +<p><b>HILL TOWNS OF ITALY.</b> By <span class="smcap">Egerton R. Williams</span>, Jun. With 36 +Illustrations from Photographs, and a Coloured Map. 8vo. 10<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i> +net.</p> + +<p><i>BRITISH WEEKLY.</i>—'A very beautiful and artistic work.... Such a work +is worth a hundred guide books.'</p> + + +<p><b>DOCTORS AND THEIR WORK;</b> or, MEDICINE, QUACKERY, and DISEASE. By <span class="smcap">R. +Brudenell Carter</span>, F.R.C.S., Knight of Justice of the Order of the +Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem, ex-President of the Medical Society +of London, &c. &c. Crown 8vo. 6s.</p> + +<p><i>SPECTATOR.</i>—'From the layman's point of view this must be accounted +one of the most sensible and practical books dealing with medicine, +disease, and quackery that have ever been published.'</p> + +<p><i>ACADEMY.</i>—'A book of this order can do nothing but good.... We may +venture a guess that our recommendation to everyone to read this +book—which certainly contains many pages worth their weight in +radium—will earn the thanks of everyone who follows it.'</p> + + +<p><b>JOHN ADDINGTON SYMONDS:</b> a Biography. By <span class="smcap">Horatio F. Brown</span>. New Edition +in 1 Volume. With a Portrait and a New Preface. Large crown 8vo. 7<i>s.</i> +6<i>d.</i></p> + +<p><i>PALL MALL GAZETTE.</i>—'An excellent presentation of a fascinating +man.'</p> + +<p><i>WORLD.</i>—'A worthy literary memorial of a singularly brilliant and +attractive personality.'</p> + + +<p><b>A REGISTER OF ADMISSIONS TO KING'S COLLEGE,</b> CAMBRIDGE, 1850-1900. With +a List of those admitted before 1850 who were living on January 1, +1903. Compiled, with Short Biographical Notes, by <span class="smcap">John J. Withers</span>, +M.A. Demy 8vo. 7<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i> net.</p> + + +<p><b>THE INFANTRY WEAPON AND ITS USE IN WAR.</b> By Lieut.-Col. <span class="smcap">C.B. Mayne</span>, +R.E. Large crown 8vo. 6<i>s.</i></p> + +<p><i>ARMY AND NAVY GAZETTE.</i>—'Of such supreme value that it should +receive immediate official sanction, and be constituted a text-book +published by authority.'</p> + +<p><i>UNITED SERVICE MAGAZINE.</i>—'Throughout the entire volume there is +unmistakable evidence of profound theoretical knowledge most happily +combined with a full measure of practical common-sense.'</p> + + +<p style="text-align: center">London: SMITH, ELDER, & CO., 15 Waterloo Place, S.W.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<h2>SMITH, ELDER, & CO.'S PUBLICATIONS.</h2> + + +<p><b>THE ROLL-CALL OF WESTMINSTER ABBEY.</b> By Mrs. <span class="smcap">A. Murray Smith</span> (E.T. +Bradley), Author of 'Annals of Westminster Abbey' &c. THIRD EDITION. +With 25 Full-page Illustrations and 5 Plans. Large crown 8vo. 6<i>s.</i></p> + +<p><i>TIMES.</i>—'It is impossible to read even the first chapter of this +highly interesting volume without forthwith realising that we have +here a work of a totally different order from the cheap book-making +which year by year selects Westminster Abbey for its subject. Such a +book as the "Roll-Call" could have been penned only by one who knows +and loves every feature in that glorious old pile; who has wandered +through its aisles every hour of the day and night; who has watched +the wondrous effects produced by the subtlest changes of light and +temperature: one, in short, who for upwards of twenty years has drunk +deeply of the spirit which haunts Westminster Abbey from end to end. +We must therefore offer a hearty welcome to this really excellent +work, and we are convinced that the great mass of historical material +which it contains will become more and more valuable as time goes on.'</p> + + +<p><b>MATTHEW ARNOLD'S NOTE-BOOKS.</b> By the Hon. Mrs. <span class="smcap">Wodehouse</span>. <span class="smcap">Second +Impression</span>. Small crown 8vo. 4<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i></p> + +<p><i>TIMES.</i>—'No one who is interested in Matthew Arnold can afford to be +without this book, which gives us the thoughts he chose as his own to +live with, and reveals him intimately without violating a single +secret.'</p> + + +<p><b>THE NOISY YEARS.</b> By Mrs. <span class="smcap">Percy Dearmer</span>, Author of 'Roundabout Rhymes' +&c. With Illustrations by <span class="smcap">Eva Roos</span>. Crown 8vo. 6<i>s.</i></p> + +<p><i>PALL MALL GAZETTE.</i>—'The "Noisy Years" is really delicious. Indeed, +among the books about those small folk who have a "kingdom of their +own," we cannot think of any other coming within reasonable distance +of it for tenderness, grace, and charming humour.'</p> + + +<p><b>THE ADVENTURES OF DOWNY V. GREEN,</b> RHODES SCHOLAR AT OXFORD. By <span class="smcap">George +Calderon</span>. FOURTH IMPRESSION. With 16 Illustrations by the Author. +Crown 8vo. 3<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i></p> + +<p><i>MONTHLY REVIEW.</i>—'Mr. George Calderon has joined in a conspiracy +with the Kiplings, the Somervilles, and other persons of ambidextrous +gifts to raise the standard of authorship to a height beyond the reach +of ordinary genius.'</p> + + +<p><b>THE STORY OF THE BOLD PÉCOPIN:</b> a Legend of the Rhine. By <span class="smcap">Victor Hugo</span>. +Done into English by <span class="smcap">Eleanor</span> and <span class="smcap">Augustine Birrell</span>. With 8 +Illustrations by <span class="smcap">H.R. Millar</span>. Fcp. 4to. 7<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i></p> + +<p><i>GENTLEWOMAN.</i>—'Too high praise cannot be given to the translators +for the manner in which they have rendered the legend into pure and +delightful English, whilst preserving the beauty of thought and the +romantic picturesqueness of the original.'</p> + + +<p><b>WELLINGTON'S LIEUTENANTS.</b> By <span class="smcap">Alexander Innes Shand</span>, Author of 'The +Life of General Sir Edward Hamley,' 'General John Jacob of Jacobabad,' +'The War in the Peninsula,' &c. With 8 Portraits and a Map. Crown 8vo. +7<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i></p> + +<p><i>YORKSHIRE POST.</i>—'A series of soldiers' memoirs which, on the whole, +make the most fascinating and exciting reading we have encountered for +a long time. There is not a dull page in the book; it is everywhere +bright and spirited.'</p> + + +<p><b>SONGS OF AN ENGLISH ESAU.</b> By <span class="smcap">Clive Phillipps-Wolley</span>, Author of 'One of +the Broken Brigade,' 'The Chicamon Stone,' &c. Fcp. 8vo. 5<i>s.</i></p> + +<p><i>TIMES.</i>—'These are bracing songs, full of the Imperial spirit, of +healthy sentiment and fresh air, and not without a true sense of +poetic style.'</p> + +<p><i>OUTLOOK.</i>—'They throb with love of Britain and Empire, and are +appropriately virile and straightforward.'</p> + + +<p><b>THE LIGHTHOUSE WORK OF SIR JAMES CHANCE,</b> BARONET. By <span class="smcap">J.F. Chance</span>. With +a Preface by <span class="smcap">James Kenward</span>, C.E., F.S.A. With 2 Portraits. 8vo. 5<i>s.</i> +net.</p> + +<p><i>SPECTATOR.</i>—'This excellent book will interest ordinary readers as +well as the experts, who will enjoy its scientific details and +figures.'</p> + + +<p><b>COLLOQUIES OF COMMON PEOPLE.</b> By <span class="smcap">James Anstie</span>, K.C. Large post 8vo. +10<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i></p> + +<p><i>TIMES.</i>—'Mr. Anstie's discussions show a clear apprehension of +philosophical arguments and counter-arguments; and the various +positions advanced and criticised are aptly and precisely stated.... +The measure of success achieved is to Mr. Anstie's credit.'</p> + + +<p style="text-align: center">London: SMITH, ELDER, & CO., 15 Waterloo Place, S.W.</p> + +<hr style="width: 45%;" /> + +<p style="text-align: center"><b>'A valuable and fitting conclusion to the great work.'—ACADEMY.</b></p> + +<p style="text-align: center">In One Volume of 1,464 pages.</p> + +<p style="text-align: center">Royal 8vo. Price <b>25/-</b> net in Cloth, or <b>32/-</b> net in Half-Morocco.</p> + +<h2>DICTIONARY OF NATIONAL BIOGRAPHY INDEX and EPITOME</h2> + +<p style="text-align: center"><b>Edited by SIDNEY LEE.</b></p> + +<hr style="width: 25%;" /> + +<p><b>This volume is intended to form a summary guide to the vast and varied +contents of the Dictionary and its Supplement. Every name, about which +substantive biographic information is given in the sixty-three volumes +in the Dictionary or in the three Supplementary Volumes, finds mention +here in due alphabetical order. An Epitome is given of the leading +facts and dates that have been already recorded at length in the pages +of the original work, and there is added a precise reference to the +volume and page where the full article appears.</b></p> + +<hr style="width: 25%;" /> + +<p><i>ATHENÆUM.</i>—'The appearance of this supplement to the "Dictionary of +National Biography" puts the coping-stone upon a work which is justly +regarded as a national possession.... We can, indeed, conceive no +volume of reference more indispensable to the scholar, literary man, +the historian, and the journalist.'</p> + +<p><i>OUTLOOK.</i>—'A complete biographical dictionary, containing names and +references, to be counted literally by the thousand, altogether +inaccessible inside the covers of any other single volume.... The +EPITOME is worthy of the DICTIONARY. Could greater praise be given?'</p> + +<p><i>TIMES.</i>—'This newly-published INDEX AND EPITOME may seem a mere +trifle compared to the rest, but is, in fact, a remarkable piece of +work.... As far as we have been able to test it, this design has been +so admirably carried out as to give the work a real value and +importance of its own.'</p> + +<p><i>WESTMINSTER GAZETTE.</i>—'A volume of the highest practical utility.... +We have tested the work by several consultations, and have found it +answer exactly to the excellent plan outlined in its preface.'</p> + +<p><i>PALL MALL GAZETTE.</i>—'This final volume will convince everyone of the +Dictionary's wonderful utility, and indeed introduce the work to many +who may not be able to afford the original volumes.'</p> + +<p><i>SCOTSMAN.</i>—'This volume of the Dictionary will soon be the +best-thumbed of them all. Only long and frequent use upon particular +occasions fully tests a book of this kind; but it needs no very +exhaustive scrutiny to reveal that the EPITOME is a work well +organised, of exact learning, and of a careful compilation. Useful in +itself, it must largely enhance the usefulness of the Dictionary which +it serves.'</p> + +<p style="text-align: center">*** <b>PROSPECTUS POST FREE ON APPLICATION.</b></p> + + +<p style="text-align: center">London: SMITH, ELDER, & CO., 15 Waterloo Place, S.W.</p> + +<hr style="width: 45%;" /> + +<p><b>PALL MALL GAZETTE.—'When the Haworth Edition was announced, we +expected something with which no other version has provided us, and we +are not disappointed.'</b></p> + +<p style="text-align: center">In 7 Volumes. Large crown 8vo. cloth, gilt top, 6<i>s.</i> each.</p> + +<h3>THE HAWORTH EDITION</h3> + +<h4>OF THE</h4> + +<h2>LIFE AND WORKS</h2> + +<h3>OF</h3> + +<h2>CHARLOTTE BRONTË</h2> + +<h3>(CURRER BELL),</h3> + +<h3>AND HER SISTERS</h3> + +<h2>EMILY AND ANNE BRONTË</h2> + +<h3>(ELLIS and ACTON BELL).</h3> + +<h4>WITH PORTRAITS AND ILLUSTRATIONS.</h4> + +<p style="text-align: center">Including Views of places described in the Works, reproduced from +Photographs specially taken for the purpose by Mr. <span class="smcap">W.R. Bland</span>, of +Duffield, Derby, in conjunction with Mr. <span class="smcap">C. Barrow Keene</span>, of Derby.</p> + +<p style="text-align: center">Introductions to the Works are supplied by Mrs. HUMPHRY WARD,</p> + +<h4>AND</h4> + +<p style="text-align: center">An Introduction and Notes to Mrs. Gaskell's 'Life of Charlotte Brontë' +by Mr. CLEMENT K. SHORTER, the eminent Brontë authority.</p> + +<hr style="width: 45%;" /> + +<p style="text-align: center">CONTENTS OF THE VOLUMES:</p> + +<p>1. <b>JANE EYRE.</b> By <span class="smcap">Charlotte Brontë</span>. With a Photogravure Portrait of +Charlotte Brontë, from a Drawing by <span class="smcap">G. Richmond</span>, a Photogravure of +Rochester and Jane Eyre, from a Water-colour Drawing by <span class="smcap">Frederick +Walker</span>, A.R.A.; a Facsimile of the Title-page of the first edition, +and 8 Full-page Illustrations.</p> + +<p>2. <b>SHIRLEY.</b> By <span class="smcap">Charlotte Brontë</span>. With a Facsimile of the Title-page of +the first edition, and 10 Full-page Illustrations.</p> + +<p>3. <b>VILLETTE.</b> By <span class="smcap">Charlotte Brontë</span>. With a Photogravure Portrait of M. +Heger, Facsimiles of the Title-page of the original edition and of a +page of the original MS., and 8 Full-page Illustrations.</p> + +<p>4. <b>THE PROFESSOR</b>, by <span class="smcap">Charlotte Brontë</span>, and <b>POEMS</b>, by <span class="smcap">Charlotte</span>, <span class="smcap">Emily</span>, +and <span class="smcap">Anne Brontë</span>, and the Rev. <span class="smcap">Patrick Brontë</span>, &c. With Facsimiles of +the Title-pages of the first editions, and 8 Full-page Illustrations.</p> + +<p>5. <b>WUTHERING HEIGHTS.</b> By <span class="smcap">Emily Brontë</span>. <b>AGNES GREY.</b> By <span class="smcap">Anne Brontë</span>. +With a Preface and Biographical Notice of both Authors by <span class="smcap">Charlotte +Brontë</span>. With a Portrait of Emily Brontë, Facsimiles of the Title-pages +of the first edition, and 8 full-page Illustrations.</p> + +<p>6. <b>THE TENANT OF WILDFELL HALL.</b> By <span class="smcap">Anne Brontë</span>. With a Portrait of +Anne Brontë, a Facsimile of the Title-page of the first edition, and 6 +Full-page Illustrations.</p> + +<p>7. <b>LIFE OF CHARLOTTE BRONTË.</b> By Mrs. <span class="smcap">Gaskell</span>. With an Introduction and +Notes by <span class="smcap">Clement K. Shorter</span>. With nearly 100 hitherto Unpublished +Letters from the Brontës, father and daughters, Photogravure Portraits +of Mrs. Gaskell and of the Rev. A.B. Nicholls, a Portrait of the Rev. +Patrick Brontë, 11 New Illustrations, Facsimiles of a Letter by +Charlotte Brontë, and of a page from Charlotte Brontë's MS. of 'The +Secret,' &c. &c.</p> + +<p>*** <b>The LIFE AND WORKS OF THE SISTERS BRONTË are also to be had in 7 +vols. small post 8vo. limp green cloth, or, cloth boards, gilt top, +price 2<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i> each: and in small fcp. 8vo. bound in cloth, with +gilt top, with Frontispiece to each volume, price 1<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i> each; or +the Set, in gold-lettered cloth case, 12<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i></b></p> + + +<p style="text-align: center">London: SMITH, ELDER, & CO., 15 Waterloo Place, S.W.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<h2>NEW EDITION OF W.M. THACKERAY'S WORKS.</h2> + + +<p style="text-align: center"><img src="images/image04.png" width="215" height="200" alt="books" /></p> + + +<p style="text-align: center">In 13 Volumes. Large crown 8vo. cloth, gilt top, 6<i>s.</i> each.</p> + +<h3>THE BIOGRAPHICAL EDITION OF</h3> + +<h2>W.M. THACKERAY'S COMPLETE WORKS.</h2> + +<h3>THE NEW AND REVISED EDITION</h3> + +<h4>COMPRISES</h4> + +<h3>ADDITIONAL MATERIAL and HITHERTO UNPUBLISHED LETTERS, SKETCHES, and +DRAWINGS,</h3> + +<p style="text-align: center"><i>Derived from the Author's Original Manuscripts and Note-Books.</i></p> + +<h4>AND EACH VOLUME INCLUDES A MEMOIR, IN THE FORM OF AN INTRODUCTION,</h4> + +<h3>By Mrs. RICHMOND RITCHIE.</h3> + +<p style="text-align: center"> <b>—> The 13 Volumes are also supplied in Set cloth binding, +gilt top, price £3. 18s.</b></p> + + +<p>1. <b>VANITY FAIR.</b> With 20 Full-page Illustrations, 11 Woodcuts, a +Facsimile Letter, and a new Portrait.</p> + +<p>2. <b>PENDENNIS.</b> With 20 Full-page Illustrations and 10 Woodcuts.</p> + +<p>3. <b>YELLOWPLUSH PAPERS</b>, &c. With 24 Full-page Reproductions of Steel +Plates by <span class="smcap">George Cruikshank</span>, 11 Woodcuts, and a Portrait of the Author +by <span class="smcap">Maclise</span>.</p> + +<p>4. <b>THE MEMOIRS OF BARRY LYNDON: THE FITZBOODLE PAPERS,</b> &c. With 16 +Full-page Illustrations by <span class="smcap">J.E. Millais</span>, R.A., <span class="smcap">Luke Fildes</span>, A.R.A., +and the Author, and 14 Woodcuts.</p> + +<p>5. <b>SKETCH BOOKS:—THE PARIS SKETCH BOOK; THE IRISH SKETCH BOOK</b>; NOTES +OF A JOURNEY FROM CORNHILL TO GRAND CAIRO, &c. With 16 Full-page +Illustrations, 39 Woodcuts, and a Portrait of the Author by <span class="smcap">Maclise</span>.</p> + +<p>6. <b>CONTRIBUTIONS TO 'PUNCH' &c.</b> With 20 Full-page Illustrations, 26 +Woodcuts, and an Engraving of the Author from a Portrait by <span class="smcap">Samuel +Laurence</span>.</p> + +<p>7. <b>THE HISTORY OF HENRY ESMOND; and THE LECTURES.</b> With 20 Full-page +Illustrations by <span class="smcap">George du Maurier</span>, <span class="smcap">F. Barnard</span>, and <span class="smcap">Frank Dicksee</span>, +R.A., and 11 Woodcuts.</p> + +<p>8. <b>THE NEWCOMES.</b> With 20 Full-page Illustrations by <span class="smcap">Richard Doyle</span> and +11 Woodcuts.</p> + +<p>9. <b>CHRISTMAS BOOKS, &c.</b> With 97 Full-page Illustrations, 122 Woodcuts, +and a Facsimile Letter.</p> + +<p>10. <b>THE VIRGINIANS.</b> With 20 Full-page Illustrations, 6 Woodcuts, a +Photogravure, and a new Portrait.</p> + +<p>11. <b>ADVENTURES OF PHILIP; and A SHABBY GENTEEL STORY.</b> With 24 +Full-page Illustrations by <span class="smcap">Fredrick Walker</span> and the Author, 6 Woodcuts, +a Facsimile of MS., and 2 Facsimile Letters.</p> + +<p>12. <b>LOVEL THE WIDOWER; ROUNDABOUT PAPERS; DENIS DUVAL, &c.</b> With 20 +Full-page and 11 Text Illustrations by <span class="smcap">Frederick Walker</span>, A.R.A., +<span class="smcap">Charles Keene</span>, and the <span class="smcap">Author</span>, and 2 pages of MS. in facsimile.</p> + +<p>13. <b>BALLADS AND MISCELLANIES.</b> With 35 Full-page Illustrations by the +<span class="smcap">Author</span>, <span class="smcap">George Cruikshank</span>, and <span class="smcap">John Leech</span>, 35 Woodcuts, 3 Portraits of +Thackeray's Ancestors, an Engraving of the Author from a Drawing by +<span class="smcap">Samuel Laurence</span>, and a Photogravure, from a Drawing by <span class="smcap">Chinnery</span>, of +Thackeray at the age of 3, with his Father and Mother. The volume also +contains a Life of Thackeray by <span class="smcap">Leslie Stephen</span> and a Bibliography.</p> + +<p style="text-align: center">*** <i>A Prospectus of the Edition, with specimen pages, will be sent +post free on application.</i></p> + + +<p style="text-align: center">London: SMITH, ELDER, & CO., 15 Waterloo Place, S.W.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<h2>SMITH, ELDER, & CO.'S PUBLICATIONS.</h2> + + +<p><b>THE NEW NATION:</b> a Sketch of the Social, Political, and Economic +Conditions and Prospects of the Australian Commonwealth. By <span class="smcap">Percy F. +Rowland</span>; late Scholar of Hertford College, &c. Crown 8vo. 7<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i></p> + +<p><i>SIR JOHN GORST, K.C., M.P.</i>, writes respecting 'THE NEW NATION':—'I +cannot say anything which testifies more to the excellence of your +book than that I read it through from beginning to end without any +flagging of interest.'</p> + + +<p><b>A SEARCH FOR THE MASKED TAWAREKS.</b> By <span class="smcap">W.J. Harding King</span>, M.R.A.S., +F.R.G.S. With 38 Full-page Illustrations and a Map. Demy 8vo. 12<i>s.</i> +6<i>d.</i></p> + +<p style="text-align: center">*** Records of a journey across the Sahara in search of the most +aggressive and most elusive of the desert tribes.</p> + + +<p><b>CHOTA NAGPORE:</b> A LITTLE KNOWN PROVINCE OF THE EMPIRE. By <span class="smcap">F.B. +Bradley-Birt</span>, B.A. Oxon., F.R.G.S., Indian Civil Service. With an +Introduction by the Right Hon. the <span class="smcap">Earl of Northbrook</span>, G.C.S.I., +sometime Viceroy of India, a Map, and numerous Illustrations. Demy +8vo. 12<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i> net.</p> + + +<p><b>SIR HENRY WENTWORTH ACLAND, Bart., K.C.B.,</b> F.R.S., Regius Professor of +Medicine in the University of Oxford. A MEMOIR. By <span class="smcap">J.B. Atlay</span>, +Barrister-at-Law, late Scholar of Oriel College, Oxford, Author of +'Lord Cochrane's Trial before Lord Ellenborough in 1814.' With +Portraits and Illustrations. Demy 8vo. 14<i>s.</i> net.</p> + + +<p><b>LETTERS OF A DIPLOMAT'S WIFE.</b> By <span class="smcap">Mary King Waddington</span>. Eighth English +Edition. Illustrated with Portraits, Views, &c. 8vo. 10<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i> net.</p> + +<p><i>ATHENÆUM.</i>—'A most interesting book of gossip, which, considered +from the point of view of the general public, contains not a dull line +from the first to the last.'</p> + + +<p><b>GERMAN AMBITIONS AS THEY AFFECT BRITAIN</b> AND THE UNITED STATES. +Reprinted with Additions and Notes from the <i>Spectator</i>. By <span class="smcap">Vigilans +sed Æquus</span>. With an Introduction by <span class="smcap">J. St. Loe Strachey</span>. Crown 8vo. +2<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i> net.</p> + + +<p><b>QUEEN VICTORIA:</b> A BIOGRAPHY. By <span class="smcap">Sidney Lee</span>, Editor of the 'Dictionary +of National Biography.' NEW, REVISED, AND CHEAPER EDITION. With +Portraits, Map, and a Facsimile Letter. Large crown 8vo. 6<i>s.</i></p> + +<p><i>QUARTERLY REVIEW.</i>—'Mr. Sidney Lee has performed, with marked +success, a work which required, in no common measure, a combination of +assiduous labour, skilful arrangement, and unfailing tact.... Our +interest is sustained from the first page to the last.'</p> + +<p style="text-align: center">*** Also the FOURTH IMPRESSION (SECOND EDITION) of the Original +Edition. With Portraits, Maps, and a Facsimile Letter. Large crown +8vo. 10<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i></p> + + +<p><b>THE NONJURORS:</b> their Lives, Principles, and Writings. By the late <span class="smcap">J.H. +Overton</span>, D.D., Rector of Gumley and Canon of Lincoln. Author of 'The +Church in England,' 'The Anglican Revival,' &c. With a Frontispiece. +Demy 8vo. 16<i>s.</i></p> + +<p><i>TIMES.</i>—'Dr. Overton has done as much as anyone for our knowledge of +the seventeenth century Church; and his present book, though we hope +it will be very far from his last, will put a crown upon his labours. +It has all the finish of a master's work, with no loss of the fresh +enthusiasm with which he began his labours.'</p> + + +<p><b>A LONDONER'S LOG-BOOK.</b> Reprinted from the <i>Cornhill Magazine</i>. By the +Author of 'Collections and Recollections' &c. <span class="smcap">Second Impression</span>. Small +post 8vo. 5<i>s.</i></p> + +<p><i>TRUTH.</i>—'One of the most entertaining works recently published.'</p> + +<p><i>MANCHESTER GUARDIAN.</i>—'It is long since we read a volume so +continuously amusing.'</p> + + +<p><b>A WEEK IN A FRENCH COUNTRY HOUSE.</b> By <span class="smcap">Adelaide Sartoris</span>. With 2 +Illustrations by <span class="smcap">Lord Leighton</span>, P.R.A., and a Portrait of the Author. +NEW EDITION, WITH A PREFACE BY MRS. RICHMOND RITCHIE. SECOND +IMPRESSION. Large crown 8vo. 7<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i></p> + +<p><i>TIMES.</i>—'The book is, as it were, a reliquary, containing Mrs. +Sartoris's qualities; and Mrs. Ritchie has woven a delicate lace +covering for it in a pattern of wreathed memories, blossoming, +branching, intertwining—and in the midst of them a whole nosegay of +impressions which still keep their fragrance.'</p> + + +<p style="text-align: center">London: SMITH, ELDER, & CO., 15 Waterloo Place, S.W.</p> + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> + +<h2><a name="FOOTNOTES">FOOTNOTES</a></h2> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_1_1" id="Footnote_1_1"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_1"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Puzzles and Paradoxes</i>, pp. 317-336, Blackwoods, 1874.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_2_2" id="Footnote_2_2"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_2"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> Paget, p. 332.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_3_3" id="Footnote_3_3"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_3"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> My italics. Did Fielding abandon his belief in +Elizabeth?</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_4_4" id="Footnote_4_4"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_4"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> See p. <a href='#Page_38'>38</a>, <i>supra</i>.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_5_5" id="Footnote_5_5"></a><a href="#FNanchor_5_5"><span class="label">[5]</span></a> Paget, <i>Paradoxes and Puzzles</i>, p. 342. Blackwoods, +1874.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_6_6" id="Footnote_6_6"></a><a href="#FNanchor_6_6"><span class="label">[6]</span></a> See his <i>Paradoxes and Puzzles</i>, pp. 337-370, and, for +good reading, see the book <i>passim</i>.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_7_7" id="Footnote_7_7"></a><a href="#FNanchor_7_7"><span class="label">[7]</span></a> Not only have I failed to trace the records of the Assize +at which the Perrys were tried, but the newspapers of 1660 seem to +contain no account of the trial (as they do in the case of the Drummer +of Tedworth, 1663), and Miss E.M. Thompson, who kindly undertook the +search, has not even found a ballad or broadside on 'The Campden +Wonder' in the British Museum. The pamphlet of 1676 has frequently +been republished, in whole or in part, as in <i>State Trials</i>, vol. +xiv., in appendix to the case of Captain Green; which see, <i>infra</i>, p. +193, <i>et seq.</i></p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_8_8" id="Footnote_8_8"></a><a href="#FNanchor_8_8"><span class="label">[8]</span></a> Really, the prosecution did not make this point: an +oversight.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_9_9" id="Footnote_9_9"></a><a href="#FNanchor_9_9"><span class="label">[9]</span></a> They are in the possession of Mr. Walter Blaikie, who +kindly lent them to me.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_10_10" id="Footnote_10_10"></a><a href="#FNanchor_10_10"><span class="label">[10]</span></a> Hachette, Paris, 1903. The author has made valuable +additions and corrections.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_11_11" id="Footnote_11_11"></a><a href="#FNanchor_11_11"><span class="label">[11]</span></a> <i>The Story of Kaspar Hauser from Authentic Records.</i> +Swan Sonnenschein & Co., London, 1892.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_12_12" id="Footnote_12_12"></a><a href="#FNanchor_12_12"><span class="label">[12]</span></a> <i>Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research</i>, +vol. vii. pp. 221-257.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_13_13" id="Footnote_13_13"></a><a href="#FNanchor_13_13"><span class="label">[13]</span></a> 'The True Discourse of the Late Treason,' <i>State +Papers</i>, Scotland, Elizabeth, vol. lvi. No. 50.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_14_14" id="Footnote_14_14"></a><a href="#FNanchor_14_14"><span class="label">[14]</span></a> Burton, <i>History of Scotland</i>, v. 336.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_15_15" id="Footnote_15_15"></a><a href="#FNanchor_15_15"><span class="label">[15]</span></a> The story, with many new documents, is discussed at +quite full length in the author's <i>King James and the Gowrie Mystery</i>, +Longmans, 1902.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_16_16" id="Footnote_16_16"></a><a href="#FNanchor_16_16"><span class="label">[16]</span></a> I follow <i>Incidents in My Life</i>, Series i. ii., 1864, +1872. <i>The Gift of Daniel Home</i>, by Madame Douglas Home and other +authorities.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_17_17" id="Footnote_17_17"></a><a href="#FNanchor_17_17"><span class="label">[17]</span></a> Home mentions this fact in a note, correcting an error +of Sir David Brewster's, <i>Incidents</i>, ii. 48, Note 1. The Earl of Home +about 1856 asked questions on the subject, and Home 'stated what my +connection with the family was.' Dunglas is the second title in the +family.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_18_18" id="Footnote_18_18"></a><a href="#FNanchor_18_18"><span class="label">[18]</span></a> The curious reader may consult my <i>Cock Lane and Common +Sense</i>, and <i>The Making of Religion</i>, for examples of savage, +mediæval, ancient Egyptian, and European cases.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_19_19" id="Footnote_19_19"></a><a href="#FNanchor_19_19"><span class="label">[19]</span></a> <i>Incidents</i>, ii. 105.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_20_20" id="Footnote_20_20"></a><a href="#FNanchor_20_20"><span class="label">[20]</span></a> <i>Journal S.P.R.</i>, May 1903, pp. 77, 78.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_21_21" id="Footnote_21_21"></a><a href="#FNanchor_21_21"><span class="label">[21]</span></a> <i>Human Personality</i>, ii. 546, 547. By 'Ectoplastic' Mr. +Myers appears to have meant small 'materialisations' exterior to the +'medium.'</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_22_22" id="Footnote_22_22"></a><a href="#FNanchor_22_22"><span class="label">[22]</span></a> <i>Journal S.P.R.</i>, July 1889, p. 101.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_23_23" id="Footnote_23_23"></a><a href="#FNanchor_23_23"><span class="label">[23]</span></a> <i>Contemporary Review</i>, January 1876.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_24_24" id="Footnote_24_24"></a><a href="#FNanchor_24_24"><span class="label">[24]</span></a> <i>Contemporary Review</i>, vol. xxvii. p. 286.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_25_25" id="Footnote_25_25"></a><a href="#FNanchor_25_25"><span class="label">[25]</span></a> Cf. <i>Making of Religion</i>, p. 362, 1898.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_26_26" id="Footnote_26_26"></a><a href="#FNanchor_26_26"><span class="label">[26]</span></a> <i>Quarterly Review</i>, 1871, pp. 342, 343.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_27_27" id="Footnote_27_27"></a><a href="#FNanchor_27_27"><span class="label">[27]</span></a> <i>Proceedings S.P.R.</i> vi. 98.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_28_28" id="Footnote_28_28"></a><a href="#FNanchor_28_28"><span class="label">[28]</span></a> Mr. Merrifield has reiterated his opinion that the +conditions of light were adequate for his view of the object described +on p. <a href='#Page_184'>184</a>, <i>supra</i>. <i>Journal S.P.R.</i> October 1904.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_29_29" id="Footnote_29_29"></a><a href="#FNanchor_29_29"><span class="label">[29]</span></a> Gibbet.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_30_30" id="Footnote_30_30"></a><a href="#FNanchor_30_30"><span class="label">[30]</span></a> Fisher Unwin.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_31_31" id="Footnote_31_31"></a><a href="#FNanchor_31_31"><span class="label">[31]</span></a> The trial is in Howell's <i>State Trials</i>, vol. xiv. 1812. +Roderick Mackenzie's account of his seizure of the 'Worcester' was +discovered by the late Mr. Hill Burton, in an oak chest in the +Advocates' Library, and is published in his <i>Scottish Criminal +Trials</i>, vol. i., 1852.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_32_32" id="Footnote_32_32"></a><a href="#FNanchor_32_32"><span class="label">[32]</span></a> <i>Narrative of Frances Shaftoe.</i> Printed 1707.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_33_33" id="Footnote_33_33"></a><a href="#FNanchor_33_33"><span class="label">[33]</span></a> Boyer, <i>Reign of Queen Anne</i>.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_34_34" id="Footnote_34_34"></a><a href="#FNanchor_34_34"><span class="label">[34]</span></a> Article, 'Oglethorpe (Sir Theophilus).'</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_35_35" id="Footnote_35_35"></a><a href="#FNanchor_35_35"><span class="label">[35]</span></a> Carte MSS.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_36_36" id="Footnote_36_36"></a><a href="#FNanchor_36_36"><span class="label">[36]</span></a> Macpherson, <i>Hanoverian Papers</i>.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_37_37" id="Footnote_37_37"></a><a href="#FNanchor_37_37"><span class="label">[37]</span></a> Carte MSS. In the Bodleian.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_38_38" id="Footnote_38_38"></a><a href="#FNanchor_38_38"><span class="label">[38]</span></a> Gualterio MSS. Add. MSS. British Museum.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_39_39" id="Footnote_39_39"></a><a href="#FNanchor_39_39"><span class="label">[39]</span></a> Wolff, <i>Odd Bits of History</i> (1844), pp. 1-58.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_40_40" id="Footnote_40_40"></a><a href="#FNanchor_40_40"><span class="label">[40]</span></a> The facts are taken from Ailesbury's, de Luynes', +Dangeau's, and d'Argenson's <i>Memoirs</i>; from Boyer's <i>History</i>, and +other printed books, and from the Newcastle, Hearne, Carte, and +Gualterio MSS. in the Bodleian and the British Museum.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_41_41" id="Footnote_41_41"></a><a href="#FNanchor_41_41"><span class="label">[41]</span></a> The most recent work on d'Éon, <i>Le Chevalier d'Éon</i>, par +Octave Homberg and Fernand Jousselin (Plon-Nourrit, Paris, 1904), is +rather disappointing. The authors aver that at a recent sale they +picked up many MSS. of d'Éon 'which had lain for more than a century +in the back shop of an English bookseller.' No other reference as to +authenticity is given, and some letters to d'Éon of supreme importance +are casually cited, but are not printed. On the other hand, we have +many new letters for the later period of the life of the hero. The +best modern accounts are that by the Duc de Broglie, who used the +French State archives and his own family papers in <i>Le Secret du Roi</i> +(Paris, 1888), and <i>The Strange Career of the Chevalier d'Éon</i> (1885), +by Captain J. Buchan Telfer, R.N. (Longmans, 1885), a book now out of +print. The author was industrious, but not invariably happy in his +translations of French originals. D'Éon himself drew up various +accounts of his adventures, some of which he published. They are oddly +careless in the essential matter of dates, but contain many astounding +genuine documents, which lend a sort of 'doubtsome trust' to others, +hardly more incredible, which cannot be verified, and are supposed by +the Duc de Broglie to be 'interpolations.' Captain Buchan Telfer is +less sceptical. The doubtfulness, to put it mildly, of some papers, +and the pretty obvious interpolations in others, deepen the +obscurity.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_42_42" id="Footnote_42_42"></a><a href="#FNanchor_42_42"><span class="label">[42]</span></a> <i>Le Chevalier d'Éon</i>, p. 18.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_43_43" id="Footnote_43_43"></a><a href="#FNanchor_43_43"><span class="label">[43]</span></a> Broglie, <i>Secret du Roi</i>, ii. 51, note.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_44_44" id="Footnote_44_44"></a><a href="#FNanchor_44_44"><span class="label">[44]</span></a> <i>Political Register</i>, Sept. 1767; Buchan Telfer, p. +181.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_45_45" id="Footnote_45_45"></a><a href="#FNanchor_45_45"><span class="label">[45]</span></a> One of these gives Madame de Vieux-Maison as the author +of a <i>roman à clef</i>, <i>Secret Memoirs of the Court of Persia</i>, which +contains an early reference to the Man in the Iron Mask (died 1703). +The letter-writer avers that D'Argenson, the famous minister of Louis +XV., said that the Man in the Iron Mask was really a person <i>fort peu +de chose</i>, 'of very little account,' and that the Regent d'Orléans was +of the same opinion. This corroborates my theory, that the Mask was +merely the valet of a Huguenot conspirator, Roux de Marsilly, captured +in England, and imprisoned because he was supposed to know some +terrible secret—which he knew nothing about. See <i>The Valet's +Tragedy</i>, Longmans, 1903.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_46_46" id="Footnote_46_46"></a><a href="#FNanchor_46_46"><span class="label">[46]</span></a> <i>Voyage en Angleterre</i>, 1770.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_47_47" id="Footnote_47_47"></a><a href="#FNanchor_47_47"><span class="label">[47]</span></a> The Duc de Broglie, I am privately informed, could find +no clue to the mystery of Saint-Germain.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_48_48" id="Footnote_48_48"></a><a href="#FNanchor_48_48"><span class="label">[48]</span></a> <i>An Englishman in Paris</i>, vol. i. pp. 130-133. London +1892.</p></div> + + + + + + + + + +<pre> + + + + + +End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Historical Mysteries, by Andrew Lang + +*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK HISTORICAL MYSTERIES *** + +***** This file should be named 18679-h.htm or 18679-h.zip ***** +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: + http://www.gutenberg.org/1/8/6/7/18679/ + +Produced by Suzanne Shell, Linda Cantoni, and the Online +Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net + + +Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions +will be renamed. + +Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no +one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation +(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without +permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, +set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to +copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to +protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project +Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you +charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you +do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the +rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose +such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and +research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do +practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is +subject to the trademark license, especially commercial +redistribution. + + + +*** START: FULL LICENSE *** + +THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE +PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK + +To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free +distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work +(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project +Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at +http://gutenberg.org/license). + + +Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works + +1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to +and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property +(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all +the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy +all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. +If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the +terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or +entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. + +1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be +used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who +agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few +things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See +paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement +and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. See paragraph 1.E below. + +1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" +or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the +collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an +individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are +located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from +copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative +works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg +are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project +Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by +freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of +this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with +the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by +keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project +Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. + +1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern +what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in +a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check +the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement +before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or +creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project +Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning +the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United +States. + +1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: + +1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate +access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently +whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the +phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project +Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, +copied or distributed: + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + +1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived +from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is +posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied +and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees +or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work +with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the +work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 +through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the +Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or +1.E.9. + +1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted +with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution +must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional +terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked +to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the +permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. + +1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this +work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. + +1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this +electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without +prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with +active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project +Gutenberg-tm License. + +1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, +compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any +word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or +distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than +"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version +posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), +you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a +copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon +request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other +form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. + +1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, +performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works +unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing +access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided +that + +- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from + the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method + you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is + owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he + has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the + Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments + must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you + prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax + returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and + sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the + address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to + the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." + +- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies + you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he + does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm + License. You must require such a user to return or + destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium + and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of + Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any + money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the + electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days + of receipt of the work. + +- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free + distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set +forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from +both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael +Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the +Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. + +1.F. + +1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable +effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread +public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm +collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain +"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual +property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a +computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by +your equipment. + +1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right +of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project +Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal +fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT +LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE +PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE +TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE +LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR +INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH +DAMAGE. + +1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a +defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can +receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a +written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you +received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with +your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with +the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a +refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity +providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to +receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy +is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further +opportunities to fix the problem. + +1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth +in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO +WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. + +1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied +warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. +If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the +law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be +interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by +the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any +provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. + +1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the +trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone +providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance +with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, +promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, +harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, +that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do +or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm +work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any +Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. + + +Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm + +Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of +electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers +including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists +because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from +people in all walks of life. + +Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the +assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's +goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will +remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure +and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. +To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 +and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. + + +Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive +Foundation + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit +501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the +state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal +Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification +number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at +http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent +permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. + +The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. +Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered +throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at +809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email +business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact +information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official +page at http://pglaf.org + +For additional contact information: + Dr. Gregory B. Newby + Chief Executive and Director + gbnewby@pglaf.org + +Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation + +Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide +spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of +increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be +freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest +array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations +($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt +status with the IRS. + +The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating +charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United +States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a +considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up +with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations +where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To +SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any +particular state visit http://pglaf.org + +While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we +have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition +against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who +approach us with offers to donate. + +International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make +any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from +outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. + +Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation +methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other +ways including checks, online payments and credit card +donations. To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate + + +Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. + +Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm +concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared +with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project +Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. + +Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. +unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily +keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. + +Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: + + http://www.gutenberg.org + +This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, +including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to +subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. + +*** END: FULL LICENSE *** + + + +</pre> + +</body> +</html> + diff --git a/18679-h/images/image01.jpg b/18679-h/images/image01.jpg Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..3ec7f3e --- /dev/null +++ b/18679-h/images/image01.jpg diff --git a/18679-h/images/image02.jpg b/18679-h/images/image02.jpg Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..86785e4 --- /dev/null +++ b/18679-h/images/image02.jpg diff --git a/18679-h/images/image03.png b/18679-h/images/image03.png Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..c3d05b7 --- /dev/null +++ b/18679-h/images/image03.png diff --git a/18679-h/images/image03b.png b/18679-h/images/image03b.png Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..afb671b --- /dev/null +++ b/18679-h/images/image03b.png diff --git a/18679-h/images/image04.png b/18679-h/images/image04.png Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..aa84023 --- /dev/null +++ b/18679-h/images/image04.png |
