« PreviousContinue »
the minds of some that I am not the son of Thomas Williams may be mistaken, and the story of Van Derheyden of Albany, in 1814, has created in my mind an idea that I may be an adopted child, as I find the Iroquois have adopted more than 16 persons of both sexes of the Canadian origin.
"March 24. I have written to Mr. L. of Boston, and sent the letters containing the mysterious news in relation to my origin. Although this melancholy subject was communicated to me in 1841, and now again, it is renewed and brought before me from another quarter, I may truly say, that as often as the subject is brought to the mind the eyes of the afflicted man are filled with tears.
"March 28. Went to Grand Kakalin, called upon Mr. Grignor, and dined with him, and soon Governor Doty joined with us.
"This evening I am invited to go to the Oneida settlement, to attend the funeral of one of the warrior chiefs. He was a communicant April 8. Went to Green Bay, and was at the Fort, and had a long conversation with He is an infidel. May the Lord show him the error of his ways. "I have had many such people to deal with."
In the foregoing journal, Mr. Williams alludes to having written twice to the Rev. Joshua Leavitt, of Boston, in relation to the communication from the South. Learning that Mr. Leavitt is now a resident in NewYork, I called on him, and inquired what he remembered on the subject. He kindly gave me the required information, and wrote me two letters, from which I extract the following:
"During my residence in Boston, from 1842 to 1848 inclusive, I was in correspondence with Mr. Eleazer Williams, and was visited by him several times, partly for relationship and partly on a matter of business, in which he wished my assistance. In the spring of the year 1848, I received from Mr. Williams one or two letters, in one of which was contained a statement concerning the decease of an old Frenchman, who declared that the Dauphin of France was still living and in this country. This statement I procured to be printed in a small daily paper in Boston, called the Chronotype, where it appeared on the 12th April, 1848. In the autumn of the same year, Mr. Williams called on me, and greatly astonished me by saying that he himself was the supposed Dauphin. He seemed much disturbed and distressed about the matter, and even terrified at the possible consequences of the disclosure, and I thought wished not to have any further publication on the subject if it could be avoided. He also expressed the regret he should feel in losing his cherished relationship to the Williams family, and declared that he should always feel towards them an unabated affection."
In the other letter, Mr. Leavitt, speaking of the disclosure made to him in the autumn of 1848, says that Mr. Williams " marked, with sadness, on the disquiet the
affair had caused him, interfering with his chosen work of the ministry, and even filling him with alarm for his personal safety." In his distress of mind, it was natural for him to apply to Mr. Leavitt, as this gentleman is connected by marriage with the Williams family, and had shown him much kindness in his troubles. A slip from the Chronotype, of April 12, 1848, is before me, containing the statement referred to, which is nearly literal in its agreement with the journal of Mr. Williams, except that the portion relating to himself is omitted, and the Island of Cuba is referred to in connection with Bellanger, which may probably have arisen from confounding the word Helena with Havana. This journal throws a curious light on the workings of Mr. Williams's mind. Deeply affected at first by the revelation of the Prince, he seems, in course of time, to have learned to treat the subject with indifference. It appeared to him entirely improbable. But the same tale comes from another quarter; and the first impression having faded away, it is looked upon as a novelty, and has no weight with him. Slowly his mind gathers itself up; awakens its recollections; renews its impressions; combines things widely separated, whose connection it did not at first perceive; and then anxiety begins, and he has recourse to a friend for advice; timidly unfolds to him his griefs and his apprehensions, and wishes to hush the affair up lest it should injure him.
4. That the French ambassador Genet in the presence of Dr. Francis and others, acknowledged that the Dauphin was both alive and in this country, and in the State of New-York in 1817.
I am happy to be able to confirm in the fullest manner, the statement of Dr. Francis by the authority of Dr. Hosack, and of the family of the late ambassador, from whom I learn that his decided opinion was that the Dauphin was alive and in this country, and an article in the Mirror relates literally many particulars mentioned to me by Dr. Francis, as having been stated by Genet in connection with the main fact.
6. As to Col. de Ferrier, during the reign of Louis XVIII., he went to France, carrying four Indians with him, and previous to leaving this country, he obtained from Mr. Williams, three separate signatures to certain documents, ostensibly by way of attestation, and one of these Indians told Mr. Williams on his return, that he had been introduced into the presence of some person of distinction, whose name he did not know, and asked many questions concerning the condition of things at Oneida, and among others who was the religious teacher of the Indians, to which he replied, Eleazer Williams,-he was further asked if he was certain that he was there, and on his answering in the affirmative, was dismissed. The journey of de Ferrier to France, is a well-known fact, and also that after this he was in frequent correspond
ence with the court. The rest I state on the authority of Mr. Williams.
9. That the name of Eleazer Williams is not in the baptismal register at Caughnawaga, is proved by the following extract from a private letter of Hon. Phineas Atwater, formerly Indian Agent, to me, dated Dec. 1, 1852.
"In a conversation between myself and Rev. Francis Marcou, priest at St. Regis, he told me the circumstances of Mr. Williams' birth; that when he was born he was so weak that it was thought he would not survive many hours, and that he was taken immediately by an Indian man to the priest for baptism; and from these circumstances his name was not recorded in the baptismal register. The fact that the name of Eleazer is not in the register of births and baptisms Marcou admitted, and gave this statement as the reason. His reputed mother was living at St. Regis at my last information, said to be more than 90 years old. She cannot speak English, and of course is entirely under the control and influence of the priest, who is prejudiced and bitter against Williams, on account of his being a Protestant minister, and also in relation to some pecuniary matters in which he has been engaged with the nation. They fear him. The priest and chiefs endeavor to prevent any intercourse between him and the tribe. I have never heard any thing derogatory to the character of Mr. Williams touching his integrity or moral character and habits."
10. That he has none of the characteristics of an Indian. 11. That he closely resembles Louis XVIII.
The person of Mr. Williams has during a few weeks past, been so closely and curiously examined by gentlemen of the highest intelligence in the community, that it may seem needless to say another word upon either of the above heads. But for the satisfaction of those at a distance, and as important for future historic reference, I give the following letter, which will explain itself, from M. Fagnani.
New-York, Feb. 14, 1853.
Rev. John H. Hanson: "MY DEAR SIR,-In complying with your request to inform you of my impressions with regard to the identity of the Rev. Mr. Williams and Louis XVII, the Dauphin of France, and what acquaintance I have of the peculiar lineaments of the Bourbon race, I must premise by informing you that of the immediate family of Louis XVI. I know nothing, beyond having seen the original portraits of them at Versailles; but with the features of the Sicilian and Spanish Bourbons, who are closely allied by intermarriage as well as blood, with those of France, and strongly resemble them, I have been familiar from childhood. To enumerate those whose portraits I have painted, beside having seen and known many others, I may mention the Dowager Queen of Naples, mother of the present King Ferdinand II.; the Prince of Capua, and Count of Trapuna, brothers of the King, and grandsons of Caroline, sister of Marie Antoinette; Queen Christina of Spain, widow of Ferdinand VII.; Isabella II, the reigning Queen of Spain; and her sister, the Duchess of Montpensier; and two daughters of the Infant Don Francis de Paul, uncle to Queen Isabella. Of the House of Hapsburg I have painted the portraits of the Arch-Duke Charles, brother of the Emperor Francis II.; and the ArchDuchess Augusta, daughter of Leopold, the present Grand Duke of Tuscany. From the particular examination an artist must necessarily make of his sitters,
many points strike him which would escape a more superficial observer. In painting the portrait of Mr. Williams, I noticed many of the peculiar characteristics which are developed in a greater or less degree in most of the princes of the House of Bourbon whose portraits I have taken. When I first saw Mr. Williams, I was more particularly impressed with his resemblance to the portraits of Louis XVI. and XVIII.; and the general Bourbonic outline of his face and head. As I conversed with him, I noticed several physiog nomical details which rendered the resemblance to the family more striking. The upper part of the face is decidedly of a Bourbon cast, while the mouth and lower part resemble the House of Hapsburg. I also observed, to my surprise, that many of his gestures were similar to those peculiar to the Bourbon race.
"Had I met Mr. Williams, unconscious that he was in any way other than his name would indicate, I should immediately have spoken of his likeness to the Bourbon family; and although a resemblance of the kind might possibly be an accidental freak of nature, still taken in connection with the facts you have brought before the public, and the quantity of corroborative testimony adduced, it leaves no doubt in my mind of the very great probability that Mr. Williams and the Dauphin are the same person. Hoping that this interesting historical problem may be speedily and satisfactorily solved, I remain, my dear sir, very truly yours, GUISEPPE FAGNANI."
In addition to this I may add that M. B. H. Muller, a French artist in New-York, who was a pupil of David and of Gros, and is intimately acquainted with the lineaments of the Bourbons, having taken a crayon sketch of Louis XVIII. after death, was at once struck with the remarkable likeness to the royal family of France, and identified the color of Mr. Williams' eyes, bright hazel, with those of the Dauphin, having frequently seen authentic portraits of him in France. But it happens that there is an excellent portrait of the Dauphin in the Bryan Gallery in Broadway, for the authenticity of which Mr. Bryan pledges himself, having purchased it at the sale of the collection of M. Prousteau de Montlouis, in Paris, in 1851. This gentleman was a Royalist, and enjoyed a high reputation as a connoisseur and collector, and his name is sufficient guarantee that whatever came from his collection is genuine. In this portrait the eyes are precisely of the same color as those of Mr. Williams, and not blue, as has sometimes been asserted of the Dauphin; the lower part of the face, jaw, and fips, which are the least changeable portions, might even now serve as a representation of Mr. Williams; and the nose is sufficient evidence that the Dauphin would have been an exception to his race, and never have had a strongly marked aquiline
"That the various marks upon his body correspond exactly with those known to have been on the body of the Dauphin."
The correspondence is far closer than I imagined when I wrote this. In the article I had stated, in agreement with Mr. Williams' declaration, that there were scrofulous marks on the knees and on no other part of the body. A hasty examination also had been made by two physicians, without
consultation, and it was supposed the marks on the knees were scrofulous. On referring to Beauchesne, I found it necessary for the identity of the Dauphin, that there should be the scars of tumors also on the wrists and elbows, and asked permission of Mr. Williams to examine his arms, when I found them in the spots indicated, though he himself had not observed them. I then obtained a formal examination of his person by Drs. Francis, Kissam, and Gerondelo, who, after consultation, and without knowing Desault's opinion, that the Dauphin was not affected with scrofula, came to a similar conclusion with respect to the origin of the scars on the body of Mr. Williams, as the reader will perceive from their certificates below.
New-York, February 12, 1858. REV. MR. HANSON: Dear Sir,-We respectfully inclose to you the following statement as the result of an examination made at your request. The physical development of Mr. Eleazer Williams, is that of a robust European, accustomed to exercise, exposure to the open air, and indicative of the benefit of generous diet, and a healthy state of the digestive organs. He might readily be pronounced of French blood. His general appearance and bearing are of a superior order: his countenance in repose is calm and benignant: his eyes hazel, expressive and brilliant, and his whole contour when animated indicates a sensitive and impressible organization. His cerebral development is nowise noticeable, and his mental manifestations are in harmony therewith. If any peculiarity is predominant, it is his apparent indifference to the pretensions or claims of his advocates. There are no traces of the aboriginal or Indian in him. Ethnology gives no countenance to such a conclusion. This fact is verified by anatomical examination, and no unsoundness of mind or monomania has been manifested, by any circumstance evinced in communion with him. His age might be estimated as approaching seventy years, After a careful éxamination of the several cicatrices which are to be seen in various parts of the surface of his body, more especially those discernible about the articulations of the knees, we are fully convinced that the joints themselves are in a perfectly normal condition, and that they have never been affected by scrofula or any deep-seated inflammation. The scars which are more numerous on the right than on the left leg, are colorless and superficial, indicating an ulcerative process of the integuments at an early period of life: these marks show no strumous diathesis, but might equally be the result of early bodily severities inflicted by, or consequent upon a protracted confinement in impure or deteriorated air, restricted or bad diet, and other deprivations, or by the habits of a wandering and imbecile youth amidst the wilds of nature. The remnants of diseased action found on the arms, above the elbows and about the wrists, though less conspicuous are of a like character. The face in the vicinity of the brows both of the right and left eye, exhibits proofs of wounds. These manifestations of injury cannot so easily be traced to a definite period of life, inasmuch as they are in some measure masked by the eyebrows themselves: but they partake of the character of incised or lacerated wounds. The cicatrix on the superior part of the right side of the forehead being somewhat more than an inch in extent, would appear to have originated from a simple incised wound.
With all consideration, your most obedient friends, JOHN W. FRANCIS, M.D. RICHD. S. KISSAM, M.D.
REV. J. H. HANSON. New-York, February 12th, 1853. Rev. and Dear Sir,-You have requested me as the medical adviser of the Rev. Eleazer Williams, to render an account of his personal characteristics, and the marks of former disease visible on his body. He has a lofty aspect, strongly marked outline of figure, obvious ly European complexion and a slight tinge of scrofulous diathesis. His age seems to border on seventy-his share of native intellect is above mediocrity, and his mind, sound in its integrity and pertinent in judg ment, is as unaspiring as his heart is cordial and affectionate. The limit of his ambition appears to be faithfully to fulfil his mission as a minister of Christ. The scars I have examined are located on both knees. particularly on the right-both elbows corresponding in character with those on the lower articulationsand both arms near the wrists, more obscure than the former. They must all have occurred in childhoodand, particularly those about the knees and elbows, are such as would be left by ulcers, produced by a morbid condition of the system brought on by unwholesome diet, exposure to damp foul air, and great depression of mind. They are in no sense scrofulous, but might have been accelerated, perhaps slightly aggravated by a superficial taint of that particular diathesis. With a sincere hope you may succeed in settling the question which the most palpable facts have propounded,-I remain, very respectfully, yours truly,
B. GERONDELO, M.D. "20. That Williams was idiotic at the age of thirteen or fourteen."
"21. That the Dauphin, at the age of ten, was reduced to the same condition by ill treatment."
"22. That since the recovery of his reason, faint, dreamy remembrances of the past have returned to the mind of Mr. W., corresponding to known scenes in the Dauphin's history."
In using the word "idiot," with reference to Mr. Williams, I failed in strictness of speech; but my meaning was sufficiently evident. A cloud rests upon his early life, which he has never been able to lift. Memory goes back with distinctness no further than to the plunge in Lake George. Previous to that he has some vague notion of the Indians roasting chestnuts at Christmas time, of lying on a carpet with his head leaning against the silk dress of a lady, of being in a room where there were persons magnificently dressed, and seeing troops exercising in a garden; but all these recollections have a faint, dreamy, and intangible character. A highly respectable lady, who was a school-mate of his, and who has signed a certificate of the facts, though too sensitive to permit her name to appear without necessity in print, tells me that, when a boy, Williams was fair and sprightly, and her father used frequently to say he looked more like a Frenchman than an Indian. One day he came in heated with exercise, and with the perspiration standing on his face. Glancing in the mirror, he started and turned round suddenly and asked her if she knew where he got those scars. She replied, "I suppose in infancy." He said her supposition was true, and that they were connected in his
mind with painful images, which he did not like to dwell on. Though generally lively and good-humored, he was subject to fits of thoughtfulness and abstraction, very unusual in a boy, and would sink down occasionally in a deep reverie, and when asked the cause of it, would reply that there were painful ideas about his childhood in his mind, which he could neither get rid of nor exactly understand.
In a communication, also from Mrs. Julia H. Jenkins, containing much which may be of future interest respecting the childhood of Mr. Williams, I am informed that, though naturally cheerful, still a tinge of thoughtful sadness would steal over him when interrogated with regard to his early history, and he would say that he did not remember much about it, and it seemed to give him much pain that he could not. The prevalent opinion in the vicinity seemed to be that he was a French boy, who had been stolen from his family by the Indians, and brought away at so early an age as to render his recollections of any other than Indian life vague and unsatisfactory. These two ladies are entirely unknown to each other; and the latter writes the recollections of her mother, who resided at Long Meadows, when young Williams first came to Mr. Ely's. It appears that at this time he was in very delicate health, subject to fits of shivering in the warmest weather; and one day Miss Grosvenor finding him in this state, wrapt him in a blanket and put him on the sunny side of the house, for which attention he gratefully said, “Missie Gomie very kind, poor Lezau." In conversation with Mr. Williams I also learn that in 1836, an Indian woman, still living at St. Regis, showed him an old hymn book, which it is hoped may be preserved, in which, before the recovery of his mind, he had scribbled some letters, and got a flogging for so doing from her husband, having, in his absence, seized a pen, dipped in the ink, and set himself to write. I find from several persons, that he made very rapid advance in his studies when put to school, and was particularly fond of writing and drawing. When I read to Mr. Williams the account given by Beauchesne, of Bellanger showing him pictures, he said, "Now there is a thing which I seem to recollect. I have some idea of being pleased with pictures in a dark room."
"23. That a decree for the banishment of the son of Louis XVI. passed the French Convention in 1794."
My authority for this statement was Adolphus, who wrote his Biographical Memoirs of the French Revolution, in 1799. He says that in the month of December, 1795, Leguinio "moved that the Committee of Government should devise the means of sending the son of Louis out of the territories of the Republic. This was decreed, but no steps were taken to put the decree in execution." According to M. Beauchesne, who doubtless is correct, this motion of
Leguinio's was referred to the committees, who were divided in opinion, but finally reported against it. It is quite sufficient for my purpose to show that the project was in agitation; since, if the end could be accomplished more safely by indirect means than by direct, the former would necessarily be chosen.
25. That there have been various attempts made to personate the Dauphin." Herr Naundorf is the only one among the Dauphin pretenders who has made much impression on the world, and he puzzled, rather than convinced, his adherents. I am of opinion that the curious history now opening on the attention of the public, will afford the best clue to the mysteries of Herr Naundorf's life. The principal strength of his cause lay in the impossibility of proving that the Dauphin was dead, and in the knowledge which the pretender possessed of the interior of the Temple. Now I give the following, merely as theory, to account for what is strange about him and his claims. According to his own story, a boy was introduced into the Temple and instructed to play the part of the Dauphin, and after the removal of the latter, carriages, with boys, were sent in different directions, so as to baffle pursuit and inquiry. It may be that so far he told the truth, that he was one of the instruments employed; that as such he was put in possession of many secrets of the Dauphin's career, and became familiar with the arrangements of the Temple, and that all this supplied him with the means of originating and carrying on the deception. The more I consider Herr Naundorf's history, the more I am inclined to think that there must be some such personal connection as this with the main thread of events. Of course a boy of the Bourbon type of countenance would be selected to personate a Bourbon. It would be easy to find plenty such in Paris, where royal blood must have run by many a bye-path into the gutter, and can therefore afford no just ground of astonishment, however startling a phenomenon it may be to find among the St. Regis Indians, a man combining in his person the physical and mental characteristics, and even the familiar gestures of the princes of Bourbon and Hapsburg. Again, if the Dauphin's escape from the Temple was contrived and connived at from political motives by the two dominant parties, nothing could be more improbable than that he would be left wandering about Europe with credentials of identity in his pocket. We can accept no theory whatever which violates entirely the fundamental probabilities of human action. If the Dauphin were taken out of the Temple alive, be would necessarily be sent out of Europe, and not be permitted to remain at large in the centre of political strife, to defeat the very object of removing him. There could be no more natural place to send him to than America, and when there, no more
likely hiding-place than among the Indians. If Bellanger, a pious Roman Catholic, were bound both by religious vows and by regard for the child's safety, to carry out the designs of those who employed his agency, he would neither keep him with him where he could be recognized, nor commit him to the care of Europeans, who would be able to show from whence he came, but would, in all probability, do just what we suppose him to have done.
Several minor items of intelligence have come to my knowledge from various quarters, which I will simply record without deducing any definite conclusions from them, since although they may have the most intimate connection with the main fact to be established, our information concerning them is too imperfect to employ them as evidence. I am informed by the Rev. Mr. Van Rensselaer, of Mount Morris, that he was acquainted with Mrs. Catherine Mancius, the daughter of Jacob Vanderheyden, the Indian trader, who, the reader of my previous article will remember, was present at the time that Mr. Williams was left among the Indians at the head of Lake George, and who afterwards, in conversation with Thos. Williams, seemed anxious to pry into the subject. Mrs. Mancius mentioned to Mr. Van Rensselaer, that when Talleyrand was in this country he made her father a visit.
Like the visit of the Duc de Liancourt to the vicinity of Lake George in 1795, and his rambles among the Indians, this incident may be accidental in its nature, but it affords another of the curious coincidences with which this affair abounds. It is certainly singular to find Talleyrand in contact with old Jacob Vanderheyden. Again, Mr. Treadway, of Malone, informs me that on mentioning this subject to Mr. Brockway, a gentleman whose statements are to be relied on, he told him that in 1832 he was at the Sault Ste. Marie, when two Frenchmen, fresh from France, arrived there, and made earnest and particular inquiry for Mr. Williams, supposing that he was there or in the neighborhood. Both were unable to speak English, and one was a Romish priest. On being informed where he lived, they immediately employed some Indians to paddle them in a canoe through the lake to Mackinac, with a view to take a steamer for Green Bay. Here my information ends. But Mr. Williams has frequently told me that strangers from abroad have inquired for him, but seemed quite unsuspicious that their visits were of any meaning or moment, and has no particular recollection of the incident referred to. My own impression is, that the secret of his birth has been in the keeping of many, and this may aid to account for its disclosure by Louis Philippe, who certainly could not have been the sole depositary of it; but if he saw a chance of its eoming to light some other way, he would be apt to forestall the revelation and turn the fact to his own advantage, by playing
Williams as a card against the Duc de Bourdeaux. I learn also through Mr. Lee, of Newport, that the Prince de Joinville was there with a fleet in 1838, and the ships staid there some time, while he went on a Western tour. It has been stated with seeming authority that the Prince, while in America, either then or afterwards, went to St. Regis, and had some communication with the Indian chiefs. This can hardly have been the case, or we should have heard of it before, unless the Prince travelled incognito. He certainly went at this time into the interior of the State of New-York, and was at Lake George. After the return of de Joinville to France, there came letters from that country to Mr. Ruggles, the French Vice Consul, making inquiries for two old ladies who had been servants of Marie Antoinette, and search was made for them throughout Rhode Island, but with what success is unknown.
In my previous article there were some typographical mistakes, and errors of transcription. The letter of M. Touchard was incorrectly dated 21 Oct., instead of 21 Nov., and in the Journal of Mr. Williams, Thursday is printed instead of Tuesday. Exception has been taken at Mr. Williams telling Capt. Shook that there must be some mistake, as he had no acquaintance with the Prince, when he had previously been led to expect an interview with him. The meaning of Mr. Williams was, that there must be an error as to the person on the part of the Prince, an idea which he expressed to de Joinville himself when he informed him of his birth, and which occurs again in the Journal in 1848. The fact was, Mr. Williams had no personal reminiscences to give probability to the statement that he was the Dauphin; he was not aware of his likeness to the Bourbons, or of the crowd of strange corroborative circumstances which now turn up; nay he did not even know that there was any doubt about the Dauphin's death, and he was just as slow to believe what he was told, dear reader, as you may have been when you first heard the story. The only true discrepancy or difficulty in the article is susceptible of easy explanation. It is in the last entry in the Journal, and resulted from the carelessness and excitement under which it was written. The steamer arrived at Green Bay about 3 o'clock, Tuesday, Oct. 19. The interview occurred that night. We then read, "Oct. 20, Wednesday. The Prince and suite left Green Bay yesterday at 12 o'clock," which would make the party leave three hours before their arrival. The explanation is, that the events mentioned are those of Oct. 20, but that they were not recorded until the 21st, and then laboring under excitement and writing in the careless way common to him in his Journal, he spoke of them as having happened yesterday. What he meant to say was, "The Prince and suite