The storm of which d’Eon appeared to think so lightly was far from
abating, however, for de Guerchy, enraged by his failure, had not yet
given up the fight. He began by attacking his adversary’s partisans,
and had just obtained from the minister an order recalling M. d’Eon
de Mouloize to France, and arbitrarily divesting him of his rank of
lieutenant of cavalry. Then, having exhausted all the resources of
official pressure, he tried less circuitous means—launching out in
a paper war which originated in the incident that occurred at Lord
Halifax’s. The English newspapers had given a discreet explanation of the
dispute on the following day. They were unfavourable to the ambassador,
who realised that the laughter was not with him. Desirous of publishing
his own version of the incident, he employed the services of a writer
called Goudard, singularly unskilful in the profession by which he earned
his livelihood. In exchange for a few guineas, Goudard delivered to de
Guerchy a little pamphlet of a harmless description, but in which the
facts were related in a light so favourable to the ambassador that d’Eon
naturally felt prompted to reply. De Guerchy knew by experience how quick
d’Eon was at repartee, and hoped that his adversary, unable to resist
such a temptation, would expose himself in consequence to the penalties
of English law, so severe in matters of libel.
However, whether he did not deem himself insulted, or whether he
suspected a trap, d’Eon kept quiet, and the ambassador was once more
disappointed in his expectations. At this juncture de Vergy came to
offer his services to de Guerchy for a modest consideration. He, too,
had reasons for taking offence at the pamphlet, and this pretext was
sufficient to envenom matters. Accordingly he published a little brochure
openly attacking the Chevalier. This time d’Eon thought it necessary
to reply, but in doing so he made use of language mild enough to put
an end to the discussion. This did not suit the ambassador, who never
allowed his sense of dignity to prevent him insisting on the last word.
He pursued the petty warfare, making one blunder after another, and
issued his “Contre-Note,” a genuine piece of bathos, a severe and absurd
condemnation of d’Eon. This publication produced the singular effect of
animating persons unconcerned in the quarrel. Anonymous lampoons written
in English were distributed among the public, also manuscript pamphlets,
some taking d’Eon’s part and some the ambassador’s. Vergy, Lescalier,
late clerk at the embassy, Henry Fielding, Justice of the Peace in
London, took up the quarrel. A woman even, called Bac de Saint-Amand,
signed a few pages which were deemed so comic that a second edition was
rapidly exhausted.
For three months, during which over twenty different publications were
produced, d’Eon contained himself; but his patience, as also his funds,
was daily diminishing. Deserted by the King and without resources he
wrote to the Duc de Choiseul asking him for permission to enter the
service of England with two of his cousins, since, as he said, “he could
not obtain justice in M. de Guerchy’s proceedings.” At the same time
he made a last appeal to the Duc de Nivernais for support, in humbler
and more friendly terms, but in which the threatening allusions were
also clear. These letters remained unnoticed, as well as those he sent
to the Duc de Broglie and to Tercier. Impelled by necessity as much
as by a desire for revenge, d’Eon then determined upon making use of
his last weapons against de Guerchy. On March 22, 1764, he published a
book, full of impertinence and gross allusions to the ambassador and the
ministers. It consisted of a vehement account of all his contentions
with de Guerchy, written in a sarcastic tone, at times full of wit, and
throughout aggressive. D’Eon reproduced, besides, the letters he had
ventured to address to his ambassador and those he had received from him;
intimate letters in which de Guerchy displayed, in a heavy, involved
style, all his shabby parsimony and perplexity at the outset of his
diplomatic career. Lastly, in a third part, d’Eon gave extracts from
the correspondence exchanged between the Duc de Praslin and the Duc de
Nivernais, which the latter had communicated to him, and in which the two
friends expressed themselves freely and confidentially upon the subject
of de Guerchy’s meagre qualifications.
These disclosures, so painful and humiliating for the ambassador, made a
great stir in London. Fifteen hundred copies of the work were sold in the
course of a few days. But the scandal did not in the least produce the
desired effect. D’Eon only lost much of the sympathy which his wit and
good-humour had formerly won for him, and which all his wanton insults
had not yet exhausted. Walpole, writing at this time to the Earl of
Hertford, British Ambassador in Paris, reflects faithfully the opinion of
Englishmen, who blamed d’Eon severely, though not without regret:
D’Eon has published (but to be sure you have already heard
so) a most scandalous quarto, abusing Monsieur de Guerchy
outrageously, and most offensive to Messieurs de Praslin and
Nivernais. In truth, I think he will have made all three
irreconcilable enemies. The Duc de Praslin must be furious
at de Nivernais’ carelessness and partiality for d’Eon, and
will certainly grow to hate de Guerchy, concluding the latter
can never forgive _him_. D’Eon, even by his own account, is
as culpable as possible, mad with pride, insolent, abusive,
ungrateful, and dishonest—in short, a complication of
abominations, yet originally ill-used by his court, afterwards
too well; above all, he has great malice, and great parts to
put that malice in play.... The Council have met to-day to
consider what to do upon it. Most people think it difficult for
them to do anything. Lord Mansfield thinks they can; but I fear
he is a little apt to be severe in such cases.
The Privy Council approved Lord Mansfield’s intentions. If the work was
not, strictly speaking, libellous, it contained defamatory insinuations
which admitted of the application of the act. Moreover, the whole
diplomatic corps supported de Guerchy in his demand for an inquiry, and
the Attorney-General brought an action for libel against d’Eon in the
King’s name, which was tried a few months later.
The sensation in London was enormous, and even greater in Paris,
where the author of the scandal was far more severely condemned, as a
contemporary who kept a diary of political and literary events relates,
under date of April 14:
M. d’Eon de Beaumont’s book has made a great stir here.
It contains letters attributed to Messieurs de Praslin,
de Nivernais, and de Guerchy, annotated by the inaccurate
editor. They give a poor idea of the talent, the wit, and the
statecraft of those who wrote them. The work is preceded by a
preface in which M. d’Eon sets forth his motives for publishing
these letters. His infamous behaviour, and the incongruity
between his conduct and his style in the statements denote a
malicious madman.
And he adds, under date of April 26:
The trial of M. d’Eon has begun, who is exciting much interest
just now as the author of a most scandalous libel and most
atrocious calumnies.
The volume so severely and justly condemned by public opinion was
destined not only to rouse indignation at Versailles, but also to cause
the utmost anxiety. Indeed, there was everything to fear from a man whose
mind was so disordered. D’Eon had confined himself so far to talking
about his own affairs; but it was by no means certain that he would
prove equally circumspect for the future, or that he would refrain from
divulging the secret and delicate negotiations in which he had been
implicated, at the time of the conclusion of the last treaties.
The Duc de Praslin decided that the book should be torn up; but while
giving this order he bethought himself of treating with the author. The
King encouraged him to do so, for he shared his minister’s apprehensions,
having just examined two letters addressed by d’Eon to Tercier, who did
not wish to answer them. Moreover, they expressed only too plainly their
author’s intentions:
I will never be the first to desert the King or my country
(wrote d’Eon in one of them); but if, unhappily, the King and
my country should think fit to sacrifice me by deserting me, I
shall be obliged, in spite of myself, to abandon the latter,
and in doing so, I will justify myself before the whole of
Europe, and nothing will be easier, as you are well aware.
I will not conceal from you, sir, that the enemies of France,
believing they may be able to take advantage of the cruel
position in which I find myself, have invited me to enter
their service. Whatever the benefits they offer, I cannot be
influenced, and I shall be guided under these circumstances by
honour only. I have answered as became me.
... The leaders of the opposition have offered me any money
I demand, on condition that I deliver to them my papers and
letters, under seal, promising to return them to me in exactly
the same state when the money is brought to me. I unbosom
myself to you, and you must feel how repugnant to me must be
such an expedient.... But if I am entirely forsaken, and if,
between this and April 22, Easter Sunday, I do not receive a
promise, signed by the King or by the Comte de Broglie, to the
effect that reparation will be made to me for all the ills I
have endured at the hands of M. de Guerchy—then, sir, I declare
to you, formally and authentically, I shall lose all hope,
and in forcing me to clear myself entirely before the King of
England, his ministry, and the two Houses of Parliament, you
must make up your mind to a war at no distant period, of which
I shall surely be but the innocent cause, and this war will be
inevitable. The King of England will be driven into it by the
force and nature of circumstances, by the voice of the nation
and the opposition.
Louis XV., who did not go so far as to believe that d’Eon had in his
portfolio the means of bringing about war with England, took the danger
with which he was threatened coolly enough; but he was aware that his
secret was in peril. M. de Praslin had not concealed his earnest desire
“to see d’Eon safe in France, under lock and key.” The minister had even
sent police officers to England, with orders to secure d’Eon, but only
alive. Louis XV., however, “could not believe his agent was a traitor.”
He judged him more justly and dispassionately than his secret ministers.
Notwithstanding his faults, his pride and his imprudence, d’Eon was
incapable of committing a disloyal action. If he had been induced to
write such compromising letters, he had done so only under compulsion,
and when driven to extremities by the excessive severity, or by the
equally excessive weakness, of the means employed against him, and also
by the obstinate silence preserved towards him by the Comte de Broglie
and Tercier. On learning of the death of Madame de Pompadour, which
occurred at this time, he believed that the secret ministers were at
last publicly to enjoy their credit with the King. But his hopes were
shattered: Louis XV. continued his double game, and the Comte de Broglie
did not feel powerful enough to take advantage of the situation by
obtruding himself upon the King, nor did he venture even to plead d’Eon’s
cause.
Deserted by everybody, the Chevalier was extremely flattered by the
offers of the Liberal party, which compared him to Wilkes, the idol
of the people and the victim of a trial for libel. His popularity was
increased rapidly in London, where his name was cheered after that of the
patriot, but he was flattered chiefly because it was hoped that he might
divulge some scandalous details with regard to the conclusion of the last
peace. The Liberals expected him to furnish them with formidable weapons
against Lord Bute, the late ministers and their successors, who were said
to have been bribed by France. Though d’Eon did not intend to respond to
their advances, he did not reject them, and he boasted of them to the
secret ministers, hoping to obtain by intimidation the aid which had been
denied to his entreaties. He was not altogether unsuccessful, since he
was causing the King grave anxiety, if not on the score of the peace of
Europe, at least on that of his secret correspondence. At the Comte de
Broglie’s suggestion, Louis XV. despatched M. de Nort to England, with
the mission of pacifying de Guerchy, but also with formal instructions
to conciliate d’Eon by advice and promises, and to discover at least the
nature of his demands. D’Eon, who had frequently met de Nort at the Comte
de Broglie’s, welcomed him with enthusiasm, and proved unexpectedly
moderate, believing that his rehabilitation was now imminent.
Hardly had he read the Comte de Broglie’s letter, brought by M. de
Nort, when, elated with the alluring promises and the flattery which it
contained, he wrote to the King on the spur of the moment:
SIRE,—I am innocent, and have been condemned by your ministers;
but from the moment that your Majesty wishes it, I place my
life, and the recollection of every outrage I have experienced
from the Comte de Guerchy, at your Majesty’s feet. Be
persuaded, Sire, that I will die your faithful subject, and
that I am more than ever in a position to serve your Majesty
for your great secret plan, of which you must never lose sight
if you wish your reign to be the period of France’s greatness,
and the humiliation and, perhaps, the total destruction of
England, which is the only power really always hostile and
formidable to your kingdom.
I am, Sire, your Majesty’s faithful servant in life and in
death,