By the request of the Long Island Historical Society, I am induced to record the reasons of my belief that the late Rev. Eleazer Williams was "the Lost Prince," "the Dauphin," "the Louis XVII." of French history. I do not persuade myself that the following narrative will prove to be convincing to all readers; for, the problem, "Have we had a Bourbon among us?" is complex and recondite, admitting of no positive demonstration short of authentic records; which it may have been for the interest of various parties in France to suppress. Nevertheless, the facts which have constrained my judgment are too singular to be rejected as evidence, and may serve to confirm, in some measure, what has been written by the late Rev. Mr. Hanson, in the old Putnam's Monthly and in his two books, and by other writers less familiar to us, who have taken the same side of the question.

I. In the month of August, 1844, the Rev. Eleazer Williams, on his way to Boston, visited Newport, R. I., where I was some time rector, to ask aid for his missionary work among the Indians. He was the guest of Mrs. Com. O. H. Perry. Amid the books that covered the centre-table in the parlor of this hospitable mansion, were some volumes of

This paper, received after our number for July was published, is a refutation-as unexpected as it is interesting-of the editorial note in that number, assuming that the theory of Mr. Williams' royal origin was finally disposed of and disproved by the article from his literary executor. It is proper for us to say here, plainly, that the present paper is written by the Rev. FRANCIS VINTON, S. T. D., assistant-minister of Trinity Church, N. Y.,-a gentleman whose high character as a clergyman and as a learned and logical investigator will command at once the most entire confidence in the impartial accuracy of his statements, and great respect for his conclusions-which so strongly lean toward the belief that Eleazer Williams was really Louis XVII. of France.-Ed. Putnam's Mag.

French Revolutionary History, containing biographical sketches of notable persons, and illustrated by engravings of their portraits, in fine wood-cuts. These volumes were the gifts of Admiral Casey to Mrs. Perry, sent to her from Paris, after his return to France, in acknowledgment of her courtesy to him and to the officers of his squadron while lying in Newport Harbor. Admiral Casey, it will be remembered, commanded the ships which brought over the Prince de Joinville and his suite to America, about 1840, and remained at Newport while the Prince was engaged in his Western tour; during which he visited Williams with the surgeon of the fleet and his private secretary. The account of this interview is detailed by both parties, in Mr. Hanson's book on "The Lost Prince."

Candles had just been brought into the parlor of Mrs. Perry, when Williams and I drew nigh to the table to amuse ourselves for the hour. Not a word had been said of these books, nor of the conjecture (which was then a mere rumor) of the identity of Williams with the Dauphin; neither did I, at that time, entertain the slightest idea of any relationship between them. Williams had not spoken on the question, nor in any way alluded to it; neither did he know that the books on the centretable were of the character described. But we drew near to the lights, by a natural impulse, to vary our occupation in a sort of "kill-time" way, and (I will confess it) to relieve myself from the task of entertaining a visitor who was commonly reserved and silent, and whose conversation at no time was particularly interesting and never instructive.

Thus we were engaged for a half-hour or so. I was reading some author, while Williams was turning over the

leaves of the volumes of the "French Revolutionary Annals." All at once I was startled by a sudden movement, and on looking up, I saw Williams sitting upright and stiff in his chair, his eyes fixed and wide open, his hands clenched on the table, his whole frame shaken and trembling, as if a paralysis had seized him. I thought it had. I exclaimed "What is the matter?" and I rose quickly to rouse him; for no answer came. It was a minute or more before he could speak. But with great effort he raised his hand, and, pointing to one of the wood-cut portraits, at the bottom of the page, said, in a hollow voice and with great difficulty of utterance,

"That image has haunted me, day and night, as long as I can remember. 'Tis the horrid vision of my dreams. What is it? Who is it?"

I looked. There was no name on the page. On turning the leaf, I read that this number was the "Portrait of Simon," to whose care the Dauphin of France, son of Louis XVI. and Marie Antoinette, was committed in the prison of the Temple.

I shut the book; for while it was open Williams gazed at the picture as if fascinated, while overwhelmed with unutterable horror.

Some time elapsed before he recovered his equanimity. And then, for the first time, I talked with him on the rumor of his birth and parentage. He told me that the Prince de Joinville had visited him at Green Bay (as Mr. Hanson afterward related), and also that the surgeon (to whom, at his request, he had shown certain scars of scrofula upon the leg), said to him,

"Mon Dieu! you have rights which you know not of," and then suddenly checked himself.

Our conversation turned on the story of the Dauphin and on Williams' recollections of his own life. There was no assuming, on his part, of any other position than that of a gentleman (which he eminently was) who had been cast among Indians in early youth, and who had been educated above them in good

schools, and who had done service to his country in the War of 1812; and, finally, had been called into the holy ministry of the Protestant Episcopal Church, and was now devoting himself to the welfare of those sons of the forest with whom his lot had been cast in early life, in the hope of promoting their civilization and their spiritual salvation, as their humble and contented missionary.

Williams assumed no other character than this, and rather seemed disturbed at the conjecture of his inheritance of any other name. There was no air of pretension-no attempt at speculation -no seeming personal interest in the matter suggested to him of his royal birth.

He could not account for his agitation at the sight of the portrait of "Simon;" and when I reopened the book at the page, he gazed at the picture without emotion, as if the spectre had been laid, and the associations with it had been buried and covered up in the mysterious tomb of the soul. Those wonderful memories, which the sudden apparition of Simon's portrait had revived, seemed to be mercifully remanded to their sepulchre. Williams retired to his chamber, and slept well. Meanwhile, we of the family, who had been conversing with him, puzzled ourselves with the explanation of the phenomenon of the evening, with as much satisfaction as puzzles generally afford.

But the conclusion to which my thoughts have arrived, after due consideration, is simply this, that it was the Soul, through Memory, bearing witness to Itself, affirming the identity of Williams and the Dauphin.

II. My next personal connection with the question of THE DAUPHIN happened in this wise :

The publication of Mr. Hanson's article in Putnam's Monthly, in February, 1853, occasioned many inquiries "when the Rev. Mr. Williams would again officiate in Grace Church, Brooklyn Heights." He had more than once done so, without remark; but now he was a celebrity. It was contrary to my prin.

ciples and my taste to encourage the implied motive for attending divine worship, and I determined to gratify no prurient curiosity to see Mr. Williams while engaged in his ministerial office. On the first Sunday in February, 1853, I expected him to assist me in the Holy Communion; but I scrupulously withheld, even from every member of my family, any hint of my expectation. Indeed, Mr. Williams had failed me once before, and his promise at this time was conditional; so that I myself was not certain of his coming.

The organ had commenced, and the time was fully up, when Mr. Williams appeared, just as I was about to proceed from the vestry-room. He robed himself hastily in his surplice, and was directed to one of the stalls on the opposite side, which required him to walk across the choir, or chancel, of the church.

On the following Monday morning an esteemed parishioner, a German gentleman of high standing, called on me in my study to ask, "who he was that officiated with me on yesterday morning."

I replied that "it was the Rev. Eleazer Williams."

He then said that there happened to be in his pew, as his guest, His Royal Highness, Prince Paul William, Duke of Wurtemberg, cousin to the present King of Wurtemberg and to the Czar Nicholas, travelling in this country under the title of Gen. Count Heidenheim; who, when Mr. Williams walked across the chancel, asked my parishioner, Mr.

"Who is that? Who is that man? It is so! If there is any thing in family likeness, he is a Bourbon!"

Mr. R replied that he did not know who it was. But the Duke could not be quiet, but said, “It is so! He is a Bourbon! He is a Bourbon, no doubt! He is the image of Charles X.”

points, viz., that Charles X was very like Louis XVI. ;-that Prince Talley. rand knew all about the abduction of the Dauphin, which was connived at by the authorities of France; and when his Memoirs should be published (if there were no suppression of facts), the world would know of it too;-that the Jesuits knew all about it; and if Williams had been a Roman Catholic (supposing him to be the Dauphin), he would have been in France long ago;→ that Robespierre and Count de Provence (afterward Louis XVIII.) were mutually interested in procuring the abduction of the Dauphin (inasmuch as he would not die a natural death under extreme cruelty): Robespierre, because he wished that the Revolution should maintain the reputation of a political revolution, and not be damaged by the imputation of being a war against children; the Count de Provence, because the Dauphin, as Louis XVII., would stand in the way of his succession to the crown;

that Chateaubriand would not take the oath of allegiance to Louis XVIII., on the ground that Louis XVII. was yet alive and in America; and that Chateaubriand's journey to America had for its object, among others, to discover the lost Dauphin;-that Count D'Artois (afterward Charles X.) would not swear allegiance to his brother until very late (when his own succession was in prospect), because of his scruples as a Legitimist, and his allegiance to his nephew.

These circumstances, and others quite as remarkable, were the disclosures of my friend Mr. R—, as having been the staple of the conversation of the Duke on that Sunday afternoon, after he had had a vision of Eleazer Williams.

azer Williams and the Dauphin of France!" And his call on Monday morning was (as he states in a note now before me, dated March 3, 1853) "principally as a reason for retracting my previous unbelief, which I considered too rashly and too strongly expressed."

Mr. R- wrote, in pencil, the title of the Duke on a slip of paper, and I made a note of some points of the conversation on the other side; where, also, I find it written, that "Mr. Edward H. Holbrook, of Boston, was present in my study, and heard Mr. Rsay the above."

The following is an exact copy of this memorandum :

Copy of memorandum made on a slip of paper immediately after Mr. R-'s communication.*

"MONDAY, Feb. 7, 1853.

"Mr. R-gave me the address opposite" (side of the paper, in pencil,)" and said: The Duke testified yesterday to Mr. R- at his table at dinner, that the rumor was current' (interlined) Chateaubriand has said to him (the Duke) that the Dauphin was taken to America, and was now alive there.' When the Duke saw E. Williams in Grace Church, Brooklyn, yesterday, he said to Mr. R-(sitting in his pew), that Williams was a Bourbon, no doubt, it family features are evidence. The Duke has seen Louis XVIII. and Charles X., &c.

"Mr. Edward H. Holbrook, of Boston, was present in my study, and heard Mr. R― say the above, &c. F. V."

The address on the opposite side of the paper, given in pencil, is,

"His Royal Highness Prince Paul William, Duke of Wurtemberg, Gen. Count Heidenheim, cousin to Emperor Nicholas."

At this time there was no pledge of secrecy, as to this important communication; nor the apprehension of any harm to result from its contemporaneous publication. Accordingly, I took an early opportunity to acquaint Mr. Hanson with the general scope of it, and referred him to Mr. R

for the particulars, to be printed in his forthcoming second article in Putnam's Monthly. To my surprise, Mr. Hanson informed me that Mr. R- declined to confirm

I have carefully compared this with the original memorandum, and it agrees exactly, except in one thing, the full name of Mr. R.-G. P. P.

what he had said in the presence of Mr. Holbrook and myself; for which reluctance he gave the following very excellent reasons, in a letter to me, dated

"Street, New York, March 3, 1853. "Reverend and Dear Sir: With respect to the opinion of the Duke of Wurtemberg, in reference to the Rev. E. Williams, his explicit request to have his name kept out of any publication on the subject forbids me from complying with your request for a written statement of such opinion, further than simply to say, that the Duke, when seeing the Rev. E. Williams assist you in the services of your church, on the first Sunday in February, was very much struck with the marked Bourbon features and the general appearance of the reverend gentleman.

"And for the above-mentioned reason, I shall much prefer that, even to this simple fact, no allusion should be made in any publication. What I stated verbally to you, and to Mr. W(his particular friend), was meant for a confi. dential communication, and principally for the reason for retracting my previous unbelief. which I considered too rashly and too strongly expressed.

"I cannot omit, however, to rectify a misapprehension which seems to have been created by that confidential communication, viz., that the Duke had heard from the late Mr. Chateaubriand himself that the Dauphin had been sent to this country, &c. This, as far as I know, was not the case. In short, the Duke spoke more of reports and rumers, than of facts. "With great respect and esteem, "Yours, R-."

On further consultation I learned that the contemporaneous publication of this testimony (such as it is) "would very much compromise the Duke on his return to Europe among the Legitimist circles of royalty." I reported to Mr. Hanson that the information with which I had thought to furnish him could not properly be included in his new article. But, forasmuch as I had revealed the particulars of the Duke's impulsive testimony, and my informant was reluctant to stand by me (for very good present reasons), I thought it just that at least the substance of what he had said should be confirmed by my informant, in writ ing; both for my own satisfaction and justification and for the truth of his tory, whenever the time should come to publish it.

My informant conceded the justice of

this demand with characteristic courtesy, only requiring that the document should not be used publicly, nor printed while the parties concerned are living, but kept among my private documents, as among my curiosities of history.

The following is an exact copy of the memorandum :

(Cory.)

"Memorandum for Preservation.

"In Putnam's Monthly Review for February, 1853, is an article by the Rev. J. H. Hanson, entitled, Is there a Bourbon amongst us?' in which the writer attempts to identify the Rev. Eleazer Williams, Deacon in the Prot. Epis. Church, with the Dauphin, Louis XVII. "This article is causing much speculation, and has created no little interest among intelligent people, both here and in Europe. Mr. Hanson is to continue the inquiry in Putnam of April.

"On the first Sunday in February (Feb. 6, 1853), the Rev. E. Williams assisted me in the Holy Communion. His Royal Highness, Prince Paul William, Duke of Wurtemberg, cousin to the present king of Wurtemberg and to [this was interlined by Mr. R.] Czar Nicholas (now travelling in this country under the title of Gen. Count Heidenheim), chanced to be in Grace Church, Brooklyn Heights, that morning, in the pew of his friend R-, Esq. my parishioner, who, on the following day, informed me of the following particulars: On seeing Rev. Mr. Williams, His Royal Highness said to his friend with emphasis, 'It is so-that's a Bourbon, no doubt.' And afterwards, in conversation, at the house of Mr. R-, the Duke added, that Mr. Williams' resemblance to and general appearance with Charles X. is more striking than his likeness to Louis XVIII., who was less like Louis XVI.

"His Royal Highness had been acquainted with both Sovereigns. Furthermore, His Royal Highness on the same occasion stated that in the legitimist circles in France, he had heard it currently reported, that the Dauphin, Louis XVII., had been taken to America, and might be now alive there, and that Mr. Chateaubriand was conversant with the fact" [here follows a clause interpolated by Mr. R-in his own handwriting] and taking all in all, he himself had no doubt, that the Rev. E. Williams was the Dauphin.

"Mr. Hanson, having heard the rumor of this circumstantial evidence, has requested me by letter to communicate the above statement to him for publication in the April number of Putnam's Monthly, now in press.

"But as Mr. R- had informed me that His Royal Highness earnestly deprecated being in print on this subject, I could not gratify Mr. Hanson without conferring with Mr. R―.

66

March 5, 1853. "At the Rev. Dr. V-'s request, I herewith confirm the preceding statement, on the first two pages of this sheet (of which this is the third), as substantially correct. The Duke of Wurtemberg was in the pew, No. 100, when he saw the Rev. E. Williams in the chancel, at the distance of about sixty feet.

"I cannot forbear, however, to add, that the Duke, being of rather an impulsive and sanguine temper, may have used, in the conversation alluded to, much stronger language than he would have been willing to subscribe to in writing for it is obvious that, under the circumstances, the conclusion of the Rev. E. Williams being no doubt the Dauphin, or even a Bourbon, would have been extremely rash. "R-."

(Signed,)

"P. S.-It is distinctly understood that no other use is to be made of this paper, than that it is to be kept, by Dr. V-among his private documents; as only on that condition I was induced to confirm, in writing, statements that were made under the injunction, if not of strict privacy, but certainly of avoiding a general publicity. A-R-."

I have preserved this documentary evidence for fifteen years, as "a curiosity of history." But the time is come to publish it. In that short period of time Mr. Williams has died, the Duke of Wurtemberg has died, the kingdom of Wurtemberg is abolished, and public faith in legitimate kings is dead and buried. And, even while I am writing this article (intended, originally, for the Long Island Historical Society), the July number of Putnam's (revived) Magazine contains a paper of Mr. Williams' literary executor, entitled, "The Last of the Bourbon Story; " while the edit

*I have carefully verified the above by the original paper, in the handwriting of Dr. Vinton and of Mr. R. The only difference is the omission, in the copy, of the full name of Mr. R-.-G. P.P.