The New York Herald Newspaper, September 15, 1873, Page 3

‘LOUIS XVII. Jules Favre to Prosecute the Claims of the Children of the Mysterious Sol- Disant Dauphin for the Succession to the Bourbon Crown. THE ELDEST BRANCH OF THE HOUSE. The Autobiography of the Prussian Clockmaker Who Asserted Him- self the Ro _Ecion. A STRONG CASE MADE OUT. Remarkable Action of the Empress Jose- phine and the Ooffin Exhumed by Napoleon the First, The Declarations of Jules Favre and Louis Blanc. Terrible Persecutions of the Soi-disant Louis XVII. LIFE IN ITALY AND PRUSSIA. Inhuman Obliteration of the Birth Marks in a French Prison. DESTRUCTION OF THE PROOFS. ‘What Have the Friends of Eleazar Williams To Say Concerning These Over- whelming Proofs? WHAT PRUSSIA DID FOR THE DAUPHIN, ——_—— “If I Am Not Louis XVII. P Who Am I?” THE SUIT AGAINST CHAMBORD. Cannot the Berlin Authorities Help to Clear Up the Mystery? Paris, Sept. 1, 1878, When Loais Napoleon possessed himself of the French throne he was not content to be called the second of his name. The great Napoleon had Signed an abdication in favor of his son, using for the purpose that little round table which is still shown to visitors at the Palace of Fontaine- bleau, The act was not, however, accepted by the nation, and Napoleon IL, like the legions of his successor, existed only on paper. But the Bourbons had lett a precedent for the reo- wgnition of this shadowy Emperor, which his cousin, Napoleon III., was, no doubt, glad to possess, and would not have been a parvenu if he had hesitated to follow. History can tell us much of Louis XVI. and of Louis. XVIIL, but of Louis XVIL it is almost silent. When, however, the inno- cent and unfortunate Louis XVI. paid on the scaffold the penalty due for the crimes o/ his ances- tors, his son, the child Dauphin, then about eight years old, survived hin asa prisoner in the hands of the revolutionary government, and the legiti- Mists had merely to prociaim their simple creed “THE KING 18 DEAD, LONG LIVE THE KING.”” ‘The fave of this boy-monarch is one of the saddest and darkest episodes of the great revolution which commenced in 1789 and seems not yet to have spent its force. The common belief is that after his father’s death he was placed in the charge of one simon, a shoemaker, and his wife, who ill. treated bim so much that the unfortunate child contracted @ disease which soon put an end to hia life, at the age of about ten years. A pretty pic- ture is extant, representing the seventeenth in a Ine of great kings ragged and starved in a misera- dle garret, while the iil-conditioned cobbler and his wile regard him with looks of contempt and hatred. It is certain that in June, 1796, a child of the Dauphin’s age did die in the Temple; thata sort of inquest was held on the body, when it was subsequently buried within the jail precincts. But there are grave reasons for thinking that SIMON AND HIS WIPE ‘Bad been previously bought over by the Priuce de Condé; that the Dauphin had been released with ‘their connivance, and that the child that died was m substitute used for the purpose of covering the weal Dauphin’s escape, This was a common report at the time, and proved sufficiently useful to the royalist party in La Vendée to cause the revolu- onary government considerable uneasiness. The Duchease a’Angouléme, sister and fellow prisoner of the Dauphin, and his senior by several years, has recorded her opinion that her brother had been re- moved from the Temple; and the wife of his crue; Jailer, Simon, in aiter years bore similar testimony, and even explained the mode in which she and her husband had aided his escape. The same view is held by M. Louis Blanc and M. Jules Favre, two men of great eminence, not in the habit of forming opinions lightly on important subjects. M. Favre ‘not only believes that THB DAUPHIN ESCAPED from his Jailers in 1795, but that he has since been Giscovered. It is certain that this royal ‘“‘claim- a@ut’s” children are now in Paris; that their case ‘will soon be brought before the Court of Appeals of that city, and that Monsieur Jales Favre will be their advocate. If they succeed in establishing their right to be acknowledged as the grandchildren of Louts XVI. the Count de Chambord will cease to be lineal representative of the elder Bourbons nd Henry Gift-oi-God’s puerile difficulties re- specting his “flag” will be solved in an unex- pected and unpleasant manner. It is not, by any means, the first time that the mame of NATMDORP, ® Prussian clockmaker, has been heard of in con- nection with this subject, From the Restoration, in 1816, up to his death, in 1845, this person, with obstinate plausibility, publicly gave hiutelf out to be “Charles Louis de Bourbon, Duc de Normandie,” son of Louis XVI, and heir to the French throne. He lies buried in Deift, in Holland, and his na me and titles are inscribed upon the deathgregister of that town. In his lifetime he deciared that the King of Holland was conv.nced of his identity, and had treated him with much kindness, but, of course, recognition of any sort would have been equivalent to His Majesty declaring war with France. His children have received the name of Of their roya! relative, and he has, himself, found ® faithfui friend aud biographer in the Count Gruan de is Barre (ancien procureur de roi), a gentleman of provity and position, who has fliica toward the sotdisant Louis XVII. of France but with far better discretion and judgment) the position assumed by that arch-hater of Jesuits ana afch-foolish member of the British Parliament, Mr, Whalley, towards the burly butcher who lays claim to the ancient baronetcy of the Tichbornes, The Count 4e le Barre, believing the time opportune in Arance ior vindicating tho memory Of lus deceased NEW YORK HERALD, MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 15,-1873—TRIPLE SHEET. wrapped at first in mystery and subsequently in | mitted to the carth of the Cemetery of St, friend and establishing the rights of his children to the name and lineage they claim, has lately pub- Mashed in Paris 4 SINGULAB PAMPHLET, It is in part an autobiography, in which “Louis XVII.” narrates bis history from the ‘atal journey of tne royal family of France from Versailles to Paris in 1780, @p toa period shortly antecedent tohis own death in 1645, The work is interspersed with re- marks and explanations by the Count, and is loaded with detail concerning the Pretender’s life, travels, experiences and misfortunes, The Count de 1a Barre, of whose sincerity it is impoasible to haveany doubts, likens his royal friend, somewhat irreverently, to tho Redzemer of the world. ‘I feel myself seized with poignant emotion,” writes the Count, “when I fix my thonghts upon the royal existence sunk id an ocean of tribulation, kept during half a century upon the rack of physical and mental torture; when I consider this last ruin of our legitimate monarchy, this Prince, so good, 80 affectionate, 80 Christian and evangelical, who, imitating the example of his virtuous father, par- doned bis persecators and resigued himself piously to the fatal destiny which the authors of all his misfortunes had woven for him. The contempla- tion of the cracifixions which he suffered, preserv- jog always a sweetness and calmness of temper sim- Nar to those of Christ amid the outcry of the Jews, demanding that he should be put tojaeath, distarps my spirit and bruises my heart.” Doubtless the evils that befall a king, or the divinity that 1s said to hedge him, excite the imagination more acutely than those which aflict erdinary mortals, and there can be no doubt that “Louis XVII,” if he was really the person he represented himself to be, was & man of sorrow and acquainted with grief, Wemay also take the Court’s word | for the patience and resignation with which the unrecognized monarch bore the multitudinous misiortunes of a checkered existence. But Count dele Barre cannot pretend to be an impartial judge of the ‘‘authors” of those misfortunes, They may, no doubt, in their persecation er prosecution, whichever it was, of the Pretender, have been stimulated by political hatred er personal am- bition, Butitisequdliy possible that they may have acted under the conviction that the soi- disant “Louis XVI.” was an impudent im- postor, who had thoroughly got up his care and only needed, like the now famous “Sir Roger,” the recognition of a leading member of the royal house of France to establish himself as the head of the most powerful and illustrious family in Europe. “THE NARRATIVE waich I undertake,” writes Louis XVII, ‘is destined to prove that the child who died in the Temple was not the son of Louis XVI. and of Marie Antoinette, Queen of France, and that none other than myself is the true Duke of Normandy and son of the Martyr-King.”’ If the author has not actually made out, he has certainly given an air of extreme probability to, the first proposition; yet it 18 strange if the Dauphin’s friend had made good his escape that no trace of hie existence after he left his prison should have been found, A person of such distinction and of such importance to the royal cause would, it is but reasonable to think, have been taken great care of, and the ingenuity which was employed and the risks which were rus to make good his escape would have beer continued to secure his complete safety. Still the times were fearfully out of joint, and a child of ten years might readily have been lost in the generalconfusion. When the writer proceeds to substantiate his second state- ment, that he alone was Charles Louis de Bourbon, Duke of Normandy and son of Louis XVI., he treads on more difficult ground, After his escape from the Temple, if he really did escape, nothing ap- pears to have been heard of THB UNFORTUNATE BOY, ana the accidents which had s0 completely oDlit- erated ail traces of his existence naturally raised @ corresponding difficulty in establishing his iden- tity. It will be seen, however, in the course of the narrative that attendants who had been attached to his person in Versailles, and other high officials about his father’s court, gave their support to the sot-disant Duke of Normandy and received him as their legitimate monarch, and it is certain that M. Jules Favre, after due consideration, declared that there were the gravest reasons for believ- ing the claimant’s account of himself, The writer commences hia autobiography at the early age of four and a half years. When the royal family of France, yielding to the demands of the people, left the quasi-sacred town of Versailles and came to Paris, The journey was made memor- able by scenes of violence and outrage, which pos- sibly may have imprinted the scene upon the mem- ory of an impressionable child. But anyone who consults his recollection of his own early years ‘wili discover how little he remembers of his life at the age of four and a half, LOUIS XVII. enters into the greatest detail respecting the royal journey from Versailles to Paris, tetls us what ‘room of the palace he slept in, how the King, bis father, took him up, carried him to his mother’s bedroom; how 8 person, “whom he still remem- bers,” was sent to procure his clothes and he was dressed in the presence of his parents and of his sister, subsequently the Duchesse d’Angou- leme, who was at the time seven years older than the Dauphin, and must have remembered the circumstances narrated if they were true. “During our journey from Versailles to Paris,” con- tinues the writer, “two monsters carried at the end of their bayonets two men’s heads. They marched in front of our carnage. Between them there walked a man of flerce aspect; he had a large beard and carried oa his shoulders the blood- stained axe with which, apparently, he had con- summated the horrible sacrifice.” History has already recorded the hasty and nearly successful flight of the royal family to Varennes. The Pre+ tender enters into similar minutie concerning this event, recalls to his sister how he had been put to sleep in the bottom of the carriage, and how his aunt accidentally stepped on him in entering. He was disguised in the dress of a girl and was told, if asked his name, to say it was Agiad; while his sister received at the same time the tem- porary name of Amélie, It is well known that the royal fugitives were arrestel on this journey, by which they had hoped to secure their safety, and were conveyed back to Paris in trumph by the mob. It Will not be thought sur- prising that the soi-disant Dauphin entertains far from friendly feelings towards his “uncle,” tne Count de Provence, subsequently Louis XVIII. He roundly accuses this Prince of having betrayed to Robespierre the secret of the King’s flight Others procured the arrest of the unfortunate monarch and his family. The Count, according to the writer, was intriguing on his own account and desired the destruction both of the King, his brother, and the Dauphin, his nephew, in order to pave the way to the throne for himself when order ‘was restored in France. He had been no friend of the Queen, and, it is said, refused for some time to acknowledge the legitimacy of her children, be- eving, or choosing to believe, them THE OFFSPRING OF SOME GUILTY INTRIGUE. Nor was he trusted fully by the King, his brother. The fratricide attributed to this high-placed per- sonage would have been detestable enough, but not much more than the erime of his cousin of Orleans, Philippe Egalité, father of Louts Phi- lppe, who, shortly afterwards, to farther his per- sonal ambition an curry tavor with tne leaders of the mob, voted for the execution of his amiable and harmless sovereign, and thas helped to con- summate the greatest crime of modern times, Im- prisoned in the Temple along with his parents, his aunt and sister, the writer seeks to establish his identity by giving minute detatis of daily oc- currences, of the situation of the various rooms, the position of the furniture, and relates with touching (if true) simplicity how the Queen, his mother, used frequently, when the at- tendant believed her asleep, to prostrate herself ‘at the foot of his bed and address prayer to God, “generally in the German language.” Once he heard her say, in French, “Oh, God! save him out of Thy divine mercy.” Atlast the poor child was separated from his parents and friends and given im charge of Simon, the shoemaker, and his wife, who treated him at first with the utmost rigor and contumely, but subsequently, says the writer, re- laxed in their cruel behavior towards him. From the date of this separation, which is historically true, & shadow passes between the young Dauphin and the outside world, wud his fate becomes total darkness, THB CLAIMANTS. The autobiography of “Louis XVII.,” however, claims to raise the veil and continue the history of the young Prince from the day on which he was given over to the brutal jailer, Simon, to that on which, worn out with misfortune and embitterea with disappointment, he died ot Delit, in Holland, leaving the legacy of his pretensions to the chil- drep, who are now engaged in submitting them to French justics. The supposed Dauphin declares that he was reviled by his new jaitera in the coars- est terms and thet they seemed to pejoice in ad- dressing him in the toe i gontumelious fangaage. Almost at every instant he heiird savage voices cry out, “Gapet! well, viper, come here that { nihy 668 thee!” “Wearied by these tormentors,’’ he writes, “I resolved to be killed rather than answer them.” This was a resolution which itis not incredible ® high-spirited chiid might make and act upon. The incident is of much importance in the story, for there 1s oMicial evidence of an interview be- tween the Dauphin and a commission sent by the Revolutionary government to see and examine him in the Temple, during which he would not utter a word, It is curtous tofind the name of JOSEPHINE, afterwards Empress, introduced into these strange revelations; but the writer attributes his escape from the Temple largely to her influence. She leaned towards the royalist side, and after the fall of Robespierre, her lover, Barras, rose to great in- Nuence, which, at her instance, he employed to contrive the escape of the Dauphin, A man in the confidence of Barras and Josephine, named Laurent, was placed in charge of the Dauphin in lieu of Simon, and means were at once devised to set him free. There is a discrepancy, however, between the confession of Simon’s wife aud the nar rative of “Louis XVII.” as to the mode in which this was successfally accomplished. The former declared that sie and her husband had actually taken part in the affair; that a large basket of toys had been sent to the Dauphin; that a child mute, and of his precise age, had been placed in the basket; that the Dauphin and this child had exchanged places, the mute becoming prisoner, and the Dauphin, then about nine and a half years old, being carried out in the basket, The soi-disant “Louis XVII.’s” ac- count of his own escape differa materially from this story of Simon’s wife. He states that one day he was made to swallow a dose of opium, and, being partly under its influence, saw that a mannikin with a face resembling the Dauphin’s waa placed in bis bed, while he was put to sleep in a cradle close by. He soon afterwards lost all consciousness and awoke tofind himseif ina large room on the fourth story of the Temple tower. Tne mannikin de- ceived the guard at first, but the following day the deception was discovered. Contemporaneously with the Dauphin’s abstraction from his old prison lodgings his friend out-of-doors had despatched a child in a mysterious manner toward Strasburg with the view of deluding the authorities into the belief that the young Prince had really made good his escape. He, however, re- mained in the lonely room for some time, attended by Laurent, who brought him food and other neces- saries, ‘When the Dauphin’s absence was discovered by the government they hastened to find a sub- stitute to personate him, s0 as to appease the populace and find a practical denial to the rumor of his escape, As the real Dauphin had preserved an obstinate silence since his ill-treatment by Lenoir, a mute child, procured by Josephine, was putin the place ofthe royal fugitive, and was at the same time surrounded by strict guards, no one being admitted to his presence lest the secret should be divalged ana the government exposed tothe suspicion of royalist sympathies, Subse- quently three members of THE COMMITTEE OF GENERAL SAFETY were instructed to visit the Temple and see or in- terrogate the imprisoned Dauphin. The report of the interview increases the probability of the sub- stitution of a mute for the real Dauphin, When the three commissioners entered the Prince’s apartment he took no notice of them; and, though they were very kindly disposed towards him, and addressed him in respectiul and affectionate lan- guage, he merely regarded them with a fixed stare. To their signs, however, he yielded a quick response, He walked, gave his hand and ate some fruit that had been procured for iim. The description given by the Commissioner of the prisoner did not at all accord with that of the true Dauphin. The Commissioners reported that the Prince had @ malformation ; that his arms, legs and thighs were fong and thin; that his shoulders were high and bis hair long, handsome and of a chest- nut color. The true Dauphin was periectly formed, and his hair, so far from being chestnut color, was blonde, and had been cut short by the wife of his jailer, Simon. The prisoner's OBSTINATB SILENCE (?) sorely perplexed the commissioners, and M, Har. mand observes in his report:—‘1 represented to him that his silence was the more painful to us, a8 We could only attribute it to our having the mis- fortune to be displeasing to him, and that we would therefore propose to the government to send him commissioners who would be more agreeable to him. The same regard and no answer. ‘Do you wish, monsieur, that we should retire? No answer. We then left.” It was judged prudent by the commissioners to make no public report of this interview, but a secret atate- ment concerning it was submitted to the Commit- tee of Public Safety. Certainly the conduct of the prigoner on this important occasion was quite con- sistent with the theory of the substituted mute. His demeanor was that of a child who did not understand § the words, but quickly apprehended the signs that were ad- dressed him. A considerable amount of poisoning is now alleged to have been practised by the orders of the government; but the out- come of it all was that other friends of the true Dauphin, who all this time was lying hidden away in the attic of the Temple, procured the release of the mute, and he was brought by them to the house of Josephine de Beauharnais, who was alarmed and distracted, as well she might be, at the mistake that had been committea, through which the mute, whom she had so skilfully pro vided to simulate the Dauphin, was returned on her hands. The government, determined that some child should die in the Temple in place of the Dauphin, provided from the hospitals @ sick child, whose end was “accelerated,” and this poor vic- tim died, it is said, on the 8th of June, 1795, A post-mortem examination wag held on bis body, the oficial report of which is couched in language ofsingular ambiguity. A certain citizen Sevestre reports to the convention the death of the Dauphin, whom he calls, with affected contempt, “the son of Capet.” He sends the post-mortem report made on the body of the deceased child by the doctors appointed for the purpose. They de- clare that, having been introduced by the commis- sioners into @ certain apartment, “we found THR DEAD BODY of & child which appeared to be ten years of age and which the commissioners informed us was that of the deceased Louis Capet, and which two of us recognized to be the child which they had at- tended for several days past.” The language of this report seems purposely selected to suggest doubts as to the identity of the dead child with the Dauphin. It is obvious that none of the four physicians actually knew the Dauphin, and it seems both singular apd sus picious that persons wholly unacquainted with him should have been deputed by the govern- ment to certify his death. One of the doctors re tained the poor child’s heart, and alter the Resto- ration offered it to his sister, the Duchesse d’An- gouléme, She, however, declined to accept it, and her refusal cast additional suspicion on the iden- tity of the victim. The child's body after the ex- amination was placed in & box for the purpose of being interred in the cemetery. THR FRIENDS OF THE TRUE DAUPHIN, who were still concealed in the Temple tower, gave him another dose of opium, substituted him 40 the box for the body of the child, and thus pro- cured his removat from the Temple, The dead child was subsequently interred in a yard of the Temple. The skeleton was discuvered some years afverwards; but the royal family took no notice of it, and left tho remains in their obscure resting place, When the Dauphin was removed from the box it was replaced in the conveyance and com- Elizabeth. M. de la Barre quotes @ curious ex- tract from THE “MEMOIRES DB NAPOLEON’? (vol. 1, page 211) relative to this interment. The Emperor allades to the report of the deat of Louis XVIL and observes that “Josephine, from the time ofour marriage, appeared convinced” o! its correct- ness. Napoleon made light of her beef, but subsequently feeling curious on the subject, “I caused," he remarks, “the report of the physicians to be laid before me, Iwas surprised at the phrase, ‘A body has been shown to us whith, we were in- formed, was that of the son of Capet’—as this did not not declare positively that it was the body Of the Dauphin. ct apsteae et ene FAR. govincixa PRooF. There was no other document establishing the identity. I caused search to be made in the Ceme- tery of St. Elizabeth, at the place indicated as the grave. The cofin, still well preserved, having been opened in the presence of Foucné and Savary, wasfound empty.” The whole of this surprising but, considering the times, not incredible story is worthy of “the Castle of Otranto,” but it agrees only as to the fact of the eseape with that told by the wile of the jailer, Simon, The sot-disant Dauphin declares that in the house where he was concealed on his return from the cemetery he saw the faithful Laurent, who had effected his deliverance, and also the future Empress Josephine, under whose in- structions Laurent had acted. He heard her ask Laurent what had become of the dead child, and he replied that “the little unfortunate was buried in the garden of the Temple the night after the Dauphin’s escape,” where, as already related, the skeleton of a child, aout ten years old, was subsequently discovered, Louis XVII. did not, according to his own account, leave his 3 Grriving at Berlin, at the end of 1810, he disclosed himself to the Prussian Minister of Police and asked ior the protection of the King. It wase time when Napoleon was the terror of all the monarchs of Europe, and that of Prussia not the least. When the Minister, Daturally, demanded Proofy the sol-disant Dauphin opened the collar of his -coat and extracted thence the certificate and description already referred to, signed and sealed by Louis XVI. and his Queen, It was recog: nized by the Minister as genuine, and he said, “You will see His Majesty as soon as the President of the Ministry, M. de Hardenberg, shall have read your documents.” The applicant did Got, however, gbtain the promised interview with His Majesty, but was informed, after a brief time, by M. le Coq:—“It is impossible to allow you to nn at Berlin; there ts too much danger for you and for us.” The Prussian Minister then sup- plied his guest with money, and for safety pro- cured a special patent, which enabled Him to estab- lish himseif as a burgess, under the name of Naim- dorf, in the adjoining village of Spandau. It is well known that Louis XVI. was A OLBVER MECHANIC and often amused himself py repairing the doorlocks ofhis palaces, His soi-disant son possessed the same talent, and having picked up some knowledge of watchmaking in his exile, adopted it as his calling and practised it with profit and success for many years, just as his cousin King Louis Philippe, “the only sovereign in Europe who had blacked his own boots,” practised the occupation of a schoolmaster in the country, But the important documents which Naimdorf gave to the Prussian Minister of Police he often applied for, but could never re- cover, The time has gone by when Prussia necd fear France, and if sucn papers do really exist prison in the Temple without having substantial means Of proving his identity. One of the earliest acts of his royal parents after they became prison- ers was, it seems, to draw out an accurate descrip- tion of all the marks on his body, to certify this with their seals and signature gnd to entrust it to the boy, with the strictest injunctions to preserve it carefully in case of his removal orescape, This certificate he claims to have exhibited to several persons during that portion of his life which com- menced with his escape from tne Temple in 1795 and ended in 1812 with his becoming a respectable and successful watchmaker in the town of Spandau, Prussia, under the name of Naimdorf, a position which he must have sorely regretted he ever abandoned. The royalist cause in France being lost, he declares that HE WAS TAKEN T? ITALY, where he was received with every attention by Pope Pius, and resided 1n secret for several years, Italy soon succumbed to the rising genius of Napo- leon; the Pope warned the Dauphin’s friends of the Prince’s consequent insecurity, and the latter fled in @ sailing vessel bound for England, which was, however, captured off the French coast. SSRs Tae Here he again fell into the hands of his ene- ties, and he relates how two men visited him in prison and required that he should choose between entering @ monastery or losing his life. Upon his peremptory refusal and deflance they bound him in a chair and proceeded to scarify his face, 80 23 to obliterate the marked resemblance which it seems admitted he bore to Louls XVL, and to destroy thoso birth marks (among which, he says, was the rude outline of @ dove with outstretched wings on his leit thigh) which would have always afforded powerful evidence of his identity, and would have amounted to actual proof when compared with the formal certificate of his royal parents. Re- leased from his torturers by, he cla'ms, the in- fuence of Josephine, now the wife of Napoleon, and acting in the matter without the knowledge and against the wishes of her distinguished hus- band, he was again arrested by his persecutors, and spent four years in the prison of Vincennes, There were, indeed, several false dauphins in the country at this time, and several of them—notably Kervagault—were arrested, tried publicly and, their true condition being proved, severely pun- ished for their attempted imposture. Louis XVIL declares in his autobiography that some of these fictitious dauphins were the creation of his persecutors, and were ex- pressiy designed to cast suspicion and ridicule upon his rightful claims. He also observes with considerable force that, while the government of France duly arrested, tried and punished in course of law the other pretenders, it always treated him as a dangerous political personage, whose claims were to be suppressed by force, since they could not be disproved by justice.” It is certain that this person—whether really Louis XVII. or merely Naiméorf, the watch- maker, matters not—was actually in the power of several successive governments of France; that at one time, during the reign of Louis Philippe, he lived openly in Paris under the title of Charles Louis, Duke.ol Normandy; was recognized in that capacity by many persons of high position, includ- ing the lady whe had been his personal attendaat from the day of his birtn to that of his imprison- ment in the Temple, and that he challenged the authorities to dispute his agsertion and bring him to the public trial which was the sole wish of his heart. As bis influence and adherents were increasing rapidly at this crisis of his life, the government of the day answered his challenge by suddenly making @ descent upon his house, seizing all his papers and deporting him to England in charge of the police, with a warning not to return. They treated him, in short, very much as Monsieur Thiers lately treated Prince Napoleon Jerome, when his late ex- Imperial Highness recently demanded his rights of French citizenship. It would therefore seem more than probable that the soi-disant son of Louis XVI. was a person whom the French gov- ernment had excellent reasons of some kind for denying a fair public trial at the bar of justice, ‘This trial his children are now seeking in order to establish their legitimacy and gain their civil rights, and, in the interests of justice and the elucidation of a historical enigma almost a8 puzzling as that of the “man in the “Iron Mask," we candidly hope they will ob- tain it. Their father was certainly a peaceful, in- dustrious man, who earned the good will of his fellow burgesses of Spandau, and received some special favors at the hands of the Prussian police guthorities on his first arrival in their country. Louis XVI. and Queen Marie Antoinette may not have been his parents, but the closest official in- quiries made by the Prussian government at the instance of that of France failed to discover a trace of any others, WHO aM I? His life and lineage before he settled in Spandau ‘were enveloped in mystery, and he had always the nosmall advantage of being able to say to bis op- ponents:— “If 1m not the person I represent myself to be, show the world who I reallyam; prove me to bes ar and an impostor.” Meanwhile the following extract from the opinion of go eminent @ lawyer as M. Jules Favre may be quoted in justification of tue applicant’s present proceedings :— ‘fhe undersigned counsel has made himself thorough uainted with the preceding doca- ments and has formed trom thelr serapuious exai- on : 4—That the prevended William Naimdorf is not @ Prussian nor a Pole by birth, and that so far his origin remains quite uncertain. Second—That the gravest presumptions combine in favor of the belie! that he is really Charies Louis Duke of Normandy and son of Louis XVI. Third—That he owes the persecutions of which he has been the victim, and which have also overtaken his ily, to his constant and persevering demand, during twenty-five years, for true civil rights. Fourth—That to this demand, of which the Freneh tribunals were informed, must be attributed his expulsion (rom the national territory, contrary to all law; for the Jaws relative to foreigners were Bot applicable to him, since he declared himsclf French and justice was upon the poiut of exam- ining big demagd.”” * J * ° ” . It seems to the undersigned counsel an un- heard of thing, unless h reasons of State have paralyzed the action of Justice, that sh should Tefuse to take notice of the demands of this man; that all access er, Whether civil or criminal, should be den! im; that he should weary Europe with his protestations, ang tugt no one should yet be convinced of his imposture. It is time that this scandal should cease. If Naimdorf is a clever rascal tet him ex Butif he be truly that which he declares, let all impartial men listen to his defence and judge him, that they may unite in repairing a great and pro- tracted injustice, Jofes FAVK Pints, Dosstater 10, 1840, et Naimdort declares in his autobiography that on mong the recorda of that Kingdom justice and , humanity alike require that they should be pro- duced. ART MATTERS. Pictures at Moore’s. Mr. R. E. Moore, at No. 31 Union square, has two good pictures on hand by J. B. Irving. One of these pictures is entitled “The Wine Tasters,” although we understand that Mr. Moore intends bestowing on it a cognomen that is less euphonious and @ little equivoca). The subject represented is @ clergyman calling upon a parishioner and testing the quality of his wine, the reader being left to form his own conjectures as to the circumstances under which the wine is offered, Possibly the minister is im search of communion wine, and his portiy host is putting him in the way of performing a religious duty. Posst- bly he is merely making a social call and his entertainer is pressing a common courtesy up- onhim, Be the circumstances what they may, the picture is a dehghtful study. Evidently the clergymaa is no temperance fanatic. He enjoys the taste of a good cordial, whether It be for the stomach’s solace or for auld lang syne. He stands with his and his side-face to the observer, smacking his lips and handling bis glass with the air of aconnolsseur, and yet with a er fae Plicity that ta affecting. Evidently he is a scholar and a gentleman, well bred, refined, earnest, truthful, simple-minded, unaffected, You may feel sure that he will never say @ rude thing, or Pp too severe asentence upon the faults and weaknesses of poor humanity. He is tall, slim, muscular, yet slender. Underneath the scrious- ness of the minister lurks the kindliness of the man. Here igs one who will not only preach to you from the pulpit, bat pray over youat your bedside. Do not let us rate him too soundly for enjoying a glass of wine “on the quiet.”” His entertainer 18 as distant from him in tempera- ment as Indus from the pole. You cannot see this entertainer’s face, but the glimpse you get of his ruddy cheek prefigures the rest of the counte- nance. You could build up the other features trom it ag Agassia built up the entire animal from the fossil bonc, You are sure the coun- tenance brims with kindlineas and von- hommie, It 18 round, fat, smiling and good tempered, The man would never lead in Meeting, perhaps, or be frequent in exhortation and prayer; but he would put largely into the mis- sionary box and keep the tee of the congregation well supplied. In every p! aaeee point and in inost mental points he is the autipodes of the minister; but there tg one spot in which their natures assimi- late—that is, human-heartedness, and they touch it over this glass of wine. rving's other picture is named “Catching the Goldfish,” and is not so individual or idiosyncratic, The idea, however, !s pretty ae and affection- ately worked out—a little girl [eeding some yellow- finned water imps, which jostle each other at her feet, Mr. Marra’s Colored Photographs. At the entrance to the same building, No. 31 Union equare, are to be seen some richly colored photographs, the prilliancy of whose hues are due to the cunning hand of Signor Francisco A. Marra. This eee nas monopolized @ great deal of work in this department, and presents some very excellent photographs of Salvini Tamberlik, Lucca, Nilsson and most of the prominent foreign actors rs at present among us. In the coloriug the judicious medium has been attained between tameness and creinees and Tamberiik and Sal- vini are represented im the costumes peculiar to some of their most celebrated roles, Miscellancous, Mr. George L. Frankenstein, whose stadio may be found for the present at No. 7 Weat Twenty- fourth street, has been making some clever sketches at Lake Mahopac, The opportunities af- forded him there were certainly too good to waste, and there 1s reason to believe that he will be able to make use of themin the composition of an in- teresting picture. A very fair specimen of amateur work in water colors tas just been completed by Geueral Nelson G. Williams, of this city. The scene is on the Au- sable River, among the Adirondacks, THE MEXICAN MILITAIRES. Commemoration of the Surrender of the City of MexicomArrival of the Veteran Delegations—The Line of Mareh and Orders of the Day—The Battle Flag of Monterey To Be Unfurled. The Baltimore (Md.) delegation of veterans of the Mexican war of 1840-7-8 arrived in this city yesterday morning, for the purpose of taking part in the celebration of the auniversary of the fall of the City of Mexico to-day. They were re- ceived by a detachment of veterans resident ia this city, and were escorted to the Astor House. The officers of the delegation are:—Brevet Colonel Joseph H, Ruddach, formerly First Lientenant of the Baltimore and Washington bat- talions; First Vice President Cornelius Brown, formerly ordinary seaman under Commodore Sloat, in the United States frigate Savannab; Second Vice President, Captain William B, Howard, formerly Second Ligutgnant of the Ohio Volunteers, under Colonel J. T. Mitchell; Secretary, Colonel W. Lewis Schley, formerly sergeant major of Third United States Dragoons, under Colonel Butier; Treasurer, David G. Murray, formerly ordnance sergeant of Captain Tiighman’s light batiery, of Maryland; Surgeon, Dr. Hoary Webster, Jr., ior. merly private ‘i Gaptaia ‘Taylor's cavalry ; color sergeant, Joseph Files, who lost bis left arm at Monterey, September 21, 1346. Mr. Files will carry the old banner in the procession to-day. ‘The Baltimore delegation will meet at the Astor House at half-past twelve o'clock P. M. to-day, and roceed, under the direction of Marshal Garey, to he Aldermanic Chamber in the City Hall, to report to General Ward and get their colors. Speecues will be delivered from the steps at the entrance to the civic edilice, and then the heroes of our ancient battlefields will form in line in the place assigned them in the precession. THE ORDER OF PROCESSION, The order of procession will be as toilows:— Platoon of Police. General Ward B. et May Lag Volunteers, Chief jarshal, a Bragg’s Batiery, United States Army. Marine Band. Battalion of United States M, Corps. Drum Corps of National er and ernor’s Island Battallon of National Guard. State of New York, com- m anded by Captain Desmare! Sailors Of the United states Navy, with Band. Veterans of the War of 1812 President of the United States and Governors of States. Mayor and Common Council, in Carriay Lieutenant General Sheridat Vice Admiral a rmy. tes Ar _Chatr- Arrangements, with Char! the Orator of ihe Day. uerters Third Artillery. ar. rans a Platoon of Police. COLLATION TO THE VETERANS, After the oration at Cooper Institute the veto Fort Hamilton Bat rans will proceed to the armory of the Seventy- first regiment, N. G. 8. N. Y., Colonel J. D, Vose, ‘where the volunteer battalion of that and detach- ments of other regiments will give a collation to the asee! veterans and their gues/3. mbled : OTHER DELRGATION: ariel lg aa ett 9 trains. ‘The States will be well represented, and the commemo- ration day of one of ene ont brilliant ries ‘lled upon the battle scroll of Ameriea Will be Celebrated in a manner becoming to and worthy of the nation, THE NEWARK TWEEDITES More Significant Facts for Taxpayers. A Citizen Assessed $5,500 for “Improvements” to Property Not Worth $2,000—The Star- tling Statement of a Lady—A Casd “Worse Than Highway Rob- bery”—A Bellicose “Boss” — A Herald Representa- tive Threatened To Be “Licked.” At the citizens’ mass mecting held in Newark on Thursday night last one of the prominent oceu- Pants of the platform, and fora time presiding Officer of the large and highly respectable assem- blage, Dr. Jeremiah 0. Cross, a well known repub- lican and for Many yeara and now police surgeon of the city, said, in explaining the reason why he was present, that for some time past the atmospnere had been rife with rumors discreditable to city officers and by implication to the city. Had the distinguished gentleman taken alight pains to in- form bimeelf of the actual facts, had he read care- fully the HERALD, he would surely have been con- vinced that the great gathering of bis fellow citi- zens whom he was addressing nad been moved to assemble en masse from causes much more serious, much more positive and much more un, realistic than an atmosphere merely rife with ugly rumors, As has been before proven in these columns, the Broadwell robbery Ia NOT THE ONLY ‘‘IRREGULABITY”’ which has been unearthed and shown up in the conduct and management of city affairs during the past few years. The series of startling sewer swindles aud the modus operands by which the People were barefacedly robbed with the con/ nivance of some of the city officials and through the scandalous negligence of tne higher city authorities, exposed in tne HERALD im 1871 and 1872, were so conclusive that Judge David A. Depue, presiding * Judge of the Essex County Court, deemed it his bounden duty to devote to the subject the greater part of his charge to the Grand Jury of the last September term. At the opening of the subject he used the following pointed language, which comes with greater force now than ever:— JUDICIAL EXPOSITION. Complaint will be made before you of frauds in connection with the execution of contracts for street improvements under the charter of this city. The protection of the public treasury and the owners of lands who are charged with the burden of the expenses of such improvements from fraudulent practices in the performance of such work is & subject which specially commends itself to the attention of the Grand Jury. Complaint was made, bt not until the eve of the final adjournment of the Grand Jury, and then it was given out as an excuse that the subject was too tmportant to treat. hurriedly at the taiiend of the session. The mat- ter was let go over, and, in some way not known to the public, has been smothered ever since, But these sewer and street “improvement” swindies @re not the only evidences in addition to the Broadwell affair which go to prove that there ts oe ly mae 3] cause it ‘THE PRESENT PROPLR’S UPRISING than an “atmosphere rife with ugly rumors.” There is the best of reason for believing that an almost inexhaustible mine of evidence has sc:rcely more than been opened yet in the matter of these street improvement “irregularities.” Here 1s a case which excited the investigatin, faculties. of the HERALD representative, which is now published for the firat time, and which, itis reliably asserted, is only-one of hundreds like it. In ARH eel twenty-five years and @ halt ago, Cale! . Earl urchased an acre and a half o1 meadow or swamp fina near the present Poor House. and lying on the east side of Bound Creek or Meadow Dock. He aid for it to Nathaniel Johnson the sum of $68. Firo years ago the Street Committee of the Common Council, ever on the alert to make fat jobs for con- tractors, no matter how notoriously unnecessary, ordered Frelinghuysen avenue opened up. The map was prepared, but Mr. Earl’s name waa not on it, as he satisfied himsell. It cut through propert: near his, but, according to the map, stopped at Mr. Tolar’s land, Not seeing his name on the map Mr. Earl bothered himself no more about the matter. The avenue was cut through his property and “improved” accord. ingiy. Last January the Cel owner and Mr. Earl had an interview on the subject. They visited the lace, and the city oficial told Mr. Karl he woula lave to pay his assessment jor the improvement. The city oficers didn't know him when the map was prepared, but they knew him when the job was finished. He told the surveyor flatly HE WOULD Not PAY, and the surveyor retorted that some body would have to pay, and he might as well payas anybody. Mr. Earl urged that he had never been cunsuited about the “improvement,” and repeated tuat he would not pay. His assessment for both sides of the “improvement” was $5,409 44. The original price of the entire land was only $58, ana Mr. Earl would gladly sell it to-day for $2,000. He does not think {it is worth that scarcely, so that here is @ man’s property “improved” to the ex- tent of $5, less a jew cents, and yet not worth $2,000! Mr. Karl defles the city to collect his as- Seasment, A WORSE CASE STILL ig that ofa Mrs, Van Syckle, a resident of Halsey This street was opened through from Academy to Market street. Mrs. Van Syckle’s property was benefited, the Commissioners de- clared, $6,000. The end of her house—nearly three feet—was cnt off and her household ds de- stroyed. ‘The hardships endured by the family caused, the lady alleges over her own signature, the death of her mother, ‘and these men,’ she re- marks with terribie irony, “say I am benefited!” Not acent hag she received for the damage sus- tamed. Twice she offered her house forsale. A man called, but said he would not pay the assess- ment for it. The poor lady, goaded by her Wrongs, gives vent to her leciings and says:—I consider it worse than highway robbery. Toroba detenceless and unprotected woman woutd not cause a ripple on the stream; but to rob the city, Detiold how the waters are agitated! Men stand round iu groups, with horror depicted in every countenance. One would suppose a national ca- lamity had befalien us (I suppose such a thing was never heard of before o4 a man borrowing & few hundred dollars from the public treasury without permission). The Councilmen have midnight prayer meetings and hold up their hanas with pious horror, and with eyes turned heavenward exclaim, Whose turn next? Even quiet New York is thrown {nto convuleions by such an unprecedented occurrence. There is no one in this city without guite—to whom J can go for redreds—they all, with one accord, are me they have no power! Now, with your ission, I would like to inform the autocrat who makes the laws and deals out jus- tice that I defy him--I won't pay that execrable sreearment 1 won't sell my house, neither will I go out of 1t.”” ‘These two cases, a8 already intimated, are not alone, but have companions by the score. The words of Judge Depue, above quoted, regardin; the owners of lands, are peculiarly sugyestive au: applicable. “poss” STAINSBY ATTACKS A HERALD RGPRESENTA- TIVE. In yn Council, on Friday night, a week a; aldertean Willama Stansby, who i EnoWn, as ti “Boss” of the oy, Hal Bing, lost bis temper, made a Don Quixote attack on the press for dar! wo publish facts affecting the tenure of office of the ‘Ring”’ and the personal liberty of its members; and, among other foolish things, declared himself a poor man, and challenged proof that ‘he bad made money out of certain real estate transactions, 10 his fury e made use of the remark that he was not respon- sible for what his business — might do, He invited investigation. On Saturday a local paper ublished @ statement, purporting to be copied om the records, going to prove the very aging fact that Mr. Stainsby had been ho ge god io Feal estate transactions to the extent of over $250,000, He had declared that he had pot been interested in Teal estate transactions aver- more tl 700 oF $! bat the statement published yrs the average to be $3,000, It was also sta’ that Mr. Stainsby bad been paid by the city for damages to his property in one part of the city some $15,000 odd in violation of law. To test the truth of these latter assertions and do justice to Mr. Bratnsby, @ Hewap representative, led by he accompani author of the publication, visited the City bt! Lhe an", Mat etved with marked cou! asuri Stout ‘and Comptroller Baker, and convinced thatan as regards the $18,000, injustice, so far garde . done Mr. Stainsby. KRALD man panton left Ce} st e down rushed Mr, Stainsby, boiling over wita and indignation, and, after the interchange of & few warm words, thrast nis fist in the faco of the Newark week! mapaper nan, saying that if he only bad Tim @utside the city he would “lick” hin. , He damned lies avout him, next {or pa on the, HERALD man, who thus far had pot opened his mouth, and made the same silly remark avout licking. The “honorable” af nema edifled a Jarge crowd of people that hi thered @ liberal use of lal unit for publication, The afair caused @ great deal of excitement in Newark, and gross) oxeetern we reports flew about all day yesterday. No! was hort, unless it was the “Boga,” who was voted a nice “City Foshgr” even b is own friends, FOUNDERBING OF A SCHOONER. ATLANYIO Crty, N. J., Sept. 14, 1878 The schooner Abbie E, Campbell, of Mystic, Com: foundered to-day on Brigantine Shoals, She wi bound Keat loaded with coal