Washington telegraph., 1853-03-09

VOr OF The mouse OK orleans, and made mag
nlhcent promises o: an almost regal establish
ment, wherever Sir. w. might desire it,
provided the parchment was signed. Alb
surd as all this may seem at first vet the
date, place and exact time of the alleged in
terview are given. Now here is a complete
issue on which De Jo;nville can Iaeet MIR.
Williams. The latter has staked every
thing, it will be seen, by raising the ques-
| tion OF yeracity. II the Prince denies it
Mr.. w. lis ruined man. In months
| time the bold assertion will have crossed
the Atlantic, where, in consequence of its
particularly and directness, it cannot fail to
attract such attention that the Prince will
most probably feel it incumbent Oh him to
take SOME public notice Of the affair. Should
fiat denial he the result, the world may
regard Mr.. w. as liar. This he must
have foreseen, and consequently his making
the assertion proves either its truth, or that
efIrontery never before existed such as Mr..
| W's.
We are not, by any means, the advocate
of Mr.. W's. claims We consider his case,
as Scotch jury would say, mot proven"
that is as having, in its present condition,
enough strength to raise a presumption in
/ his favor. but not sufficient to do more. One
fact against him, on a first view, is, that he
recollects nothing Of his childhood, asserting
! that up to his thirteenth year he was almost
idiotic, at which time lie suddenly came to
his right plind in consequence of severe
confusion received in play. Yet his advo-
Gates seek to turn this very circumstance to
his favor, by declaring that the Dauphin is
known to have been reduced to comparative
| idiocy by The savage treatment OF bis iailors
| 1t can scarcely be expected, even if Mr. W.
is really the son OF Louis XVI. that he will
ever be able to establish his iieutity conclu-
| sively, for ali those persons who could be
witnesses in his behalf are probably dead
before this, and his relations, if aware of the
truth, will certainly make no confessions
The result of the public controversy which
the article in Putuan's Magazine is intend
ed to challenge, will lead to no results, pro-
| badly, except to add smother to those mystic
rious stories, Of which history is full, about
lost aud banished princes, such as Nero,
Richard Of York, the Emperor of Germany,
and other half apocryphal persons
There is one point on which, as we think,
the writer in Putnam does not sufficiently
dwell. He leaves. the great question of all.
the inquiry whether the Dauphin really died
| in the Temple, almost unnoticed contentng
himself with remarking that there has been
always an impression in Paris that the child
did not die in 1895, as asserted. We have
now before us copy of the proces-verba of
the autopsy, intended to verify the Dauph-
ms death, signed by the four examining
physicians, and communicated officially to
the French Assembly. We have always
considered this document to be a very slspici-
Gus one, The physicians only testify that
they saw corpse, which was declared to
them to be that of the Dauphin. and which
they recognized as that of the child on whom
| they had been in attendance for some days
past. As it was the policy OF those ia power,
at that time, to get lid Of the son Of Louis
XVI, and as they appear TO have shrumk
from secret assassination, there is nothing
impossible in the idea that they sent him
out oi the country and then spread the rli-
NOR Of his death, and procured dying child
of his age to personate him. Certainly the
proces-verbal is very loose one, and worth
next to nothing On a question of identity.
To return to ,Ir. Williams. His strange
story does not appear to have been forced hy
| himself on public notice, but to have been
drawn out, somewhat unwillingly. from him
| by others Dir. Hawks vouches for his gen.
eral probity and reputation for single-mind-
ed piety, and expresses a conviction that he
is, by the constitution of his mind, incapable
of tabricating chain Of circumStantial evi-
dence such as his case presents. Whether
he turns out impostor, or dupe, or real
Bourbon, his case will form a chapter in the
curiosities Of history, and there we leave it
for the present.
From the NJ T. Eucnng Post
In connection with the extracts which we
have published from the article in Putnam's s
Monthly on the Rev. Eleazar Williams. and
which is now exciting a great deal of contro-
versy in all quarters, it may be interesting
to give some particulars in relation to the
matchmaker, Naundorff, to whom allusion is
made in that paper. The Home Journal
for December 18th. 1850, gives a short ac-
count of this pretender, as well as of Herva-
gault and Bruneau, who also laid claims to
the honors of royalty. There was still an
other who styled himself Baron de Richie
mont, but neither of these three made much
impression beyond limited circle of back
ers Gruae de la Barre. Jealous adherent
to NaundorfF published shortly after his
death treatise, entitled:
"Lutrigues deroileeS on Louis XVII.
dernier roi iegitiDle de France. Rater-
dam, 1S46-4S"
In this book he examines the claims of
Naundorff S rivals, and asserts that these
three pretenders were one and the same per-
son, brought forward by interested parties