DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.70301#0023
MEMOIRS OF THE CHEVALIER D’EON. 11
It stands upon record, that the Count de Guerchy had con-
spired to assassinate the Chevalier D’Eon> neither has this
charge hitherto been refuted or answered. This not succeed-
ing, a band of ruffians was hired to kidnap that gentleman,
and carry off his papers. Though this second attempt fail-
ed, it does not follow that these important papers are still se-
cure. I was informed by Mr. Fitzherbert, so long ago as the
I7th of May, 1765, that he had then intelligence of over-
tures making to the Chevalier D’Eon, the object of which
was to get the papers out of his hands in return for a stipu-
lated sum of money. This account I communicated the fol-
lowing day to Lord Halifax, who still persisted in exposing
these precious documents to so many complicated hazards.
I say precious documents, because, if they should be unfor-
tunately lost, the affair must be for ever involved in uncertain-
ty, an uncertainty, gentlemen, which may be productive of
infinite mischiefs to the nation, and cannot tend to the advan-
tage or satisfaction of any but the guilty.
Lord Halifax, in excuse for his refusal, will probably
allege, as he did to me, his persuasion that the charge was
wholly groundless. I need not observe, how7 misplaced
and frivolous such an allegation is when applied to justify a
magistrate for not examining evidence. But I will suppose,
for argument’s sake, the persons accused to be perfectly inno-
cent. Is it not the interest and w ish of every innocent man
to have his conduct scrutinized while facts are recent, and
i truth, of consequence, easy to be distinguished from false-
hood ? Is there any tenderness in suffering a stain to remain
upon characters till it becomes difficult, or even impossible to
be wiped out ? Will, therefore, these noble persons, if their
actions have been upright, will they, I say, thank Lord Halifax
for depriving them of an early opportunity of establishing their
innocence ? Will they not regret and execrate his caution, if
the subsequent suppression, or destruction of the evidence^
should occur, with other circumstances, to fix on them the
c 2
It stands upon record, that the Count de Guerchy had con-
spired to assassinate the Chevalier D’Eon> neither has this
charge hitherto been refuted or answered. This not succeed-
ing, a band of ruffians was hired to kidnap that gentleman,
and carry off his papers. Though this second attempt fail-
ed, it does not follow that these important papers are still se-
cure. I was informed by Mr. Fitzherbert, so long ago as the
I7th of May, 1765, that he had then intelligence of over-
tures making to the Chevalier D’Eon, the object of which
was to get the papers out of his hands in return for a stipu-
lated sum of money. This account I communicated the fol-
lowing day to Lord Halifax, who still persisted in exposing
these precious documents to so many complicated hazards.
I say precious documents, because, if they should be unfor-
tunately lost, the affair must be for ever involved in uncertain-
ty, an uncertainty, gentlemen, which may be productive of
infinite mischiefs to the nation, and cannot tend to the advan-
tage or satisfaction of any but the guilty.
Lord Halifax, in excuse for his refusal, will probably
allege, as he did to me, his persuasion that the charge was
wholly groundless. I need not observe, how7 misplaced
and frivolous such an allegation is when applied to justify a
magistrate for not examining evidence. But I will suppose,
for argument’s sake, the persons accused to be perfectly inno-
cent. Is it not the interest and w ish of every innocent man
to have his conduct scrutinized while facts are recent, and
i truth, of consequence, easy to be distinguished from false-
hood ? Is there any tenderness in suffering a stain to remain
upon characters till it becomes difficult, or even impossible to
be wiped out ? Will, therefore, these noble persons, if their
actions have been upright, will they, I say, thank Lord Halifax
for depriving them of an early opportunity of establishing their
innocence ? Will they not regret and execrate his caution, if
the subsequent suppression, or destruction of the evidence^
should occur, with other circumstances, to fix on them the
c 2