Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1883-05-04
HOW EuGENIr LEFT PARIS.
Letter from "Tgse Writer of the ATticLe' I
the Editor of the London Daily Telegraph

In your issue of the 9Th there appeared
a letter from DR.. Thomas Evans, dentist,
of Paris, impugning the accuracy of state
vents contained in an article of this
months Temple Bar. entitled "The Last
Days of Dynasty" DR.. Evans asserts
that the Empress Eugene, in her flight
from Paris on Sept. 4, 1870, did not "leave
France by way of Maubenge, cross the
Belgian frontier, and then, finding it uR-
desirable to start for England from a
Belgian port, return privately to France
by way of Calais, and so reached Deauville."
He says that the Empress travelled straight
from Paris to Deauville. If so, may it be
asked why her Majesty only arrived in that
port on Wednesday, Sept. z? am aware
that it has been thought good, for dynastic
reasons, to cloak certain circumstances |
connected with the Empress flight, be-
cause they would have shown into what a
painful state OF abandonment and panic |
the illustrious lady had fallen; but the |
statement as to the Empress departure |
by way of Belgium has appeared in tho !
last two editions Of ''Vapereau," and the |
conductor of that carefully edited publica- !
ton would certainly have inserted any !
well-authenticated correction from DR.. |
Evans, had he been able to supply one. !
"Vapereau," recording all the events of
1901, was issued in 1873, and the fifth |
edition bears date 1880; since DR.. Evans |
is so much interested in the question at
issue, why was he silent during eight
years? Again, DR.. Evans affirms that he
"alone assumed the slightest responsibility
for the Empress departure from Paris
and her journey to England; and that she
Travelled under his care and in his company
up to her arrival at Chiselhurst." The
Empress did not go to Chiselhurst on
reaching England, but to Hastings, where
the Prince Imperial was staying. Several
weeks elapsed before she settled at Cam
den Place, and during all that time she
was certainly not under the care" unless
it be professionally speaking, of her den
fist. L must refer DR.. Evans to the &C
count of her Majesty's arrival in England,
which was published in the Times of Mon
day, Sept. u, 1870. In that account,
drawn as it is stated, from an authentic
source, q description is given as TO how the
Empress came to Deauville in a very dis
tracted condition of mind, and introduced
herself directly, without any Intermediary,
to Sir John Burgoyne, whose yacht, the
Gazelle, was lying in the port. Also, how
she crossed to Ryde in the Gazelle, with no
attendant except Nine. Lebreton. 1t is
expressly mentioned that Sir John Bur
goyne was ''the only gentleman of the
party" and that the Empress had declined
to be accompanied by the one gentleman
of her saite who had escorted her as far
SIS Deauville. If these allegations were in
correct, why did not DR.. Evans
write to deny them at the time, and why
did Sir John Burgoyne allow them to re-
main on record? 1 have no wish to dis
parage the kindness or the activity which
Dr.. Evans displayed in serving the Empress
at the time of her flight; but his memory
is at fault in 80 many important particu-
lars that am afraid he unconsciously ex-
aggerates the responsibilities which he as
sumed. He says that number of person
ages mentioned in the Temple Bar article
as having conferred with the Empress at
the time of her departure chad been dead
| a long while" The persons named as hav-
ing conferred with her Majesty are Prince
Richard Metternich, Viscount Ferdinand
de Lesseps,, the Chevalier Nigra, Count de
Keratry, M. Pietri, Nine. Lebreton, and
Sir John Burgoyne. Sir John died in 1871,
but all the others are still alive. After this
l may be excused from prolonging any
discussion with DR.. Evans on matters of
| fact.
Dr. Evans's Letter to the Editor Of the London
Daily Telegraph
| The many versions concerning the de-
parture of the Empress Eugene from Par
is in 1870 had up to the present time re-
Trained from confirming or refuting, if
only from sense of the delicate nature of
the subject and natural desire to avoid
any discussion which might recall painful
events to the mind of the august lady
whose sufferings have been so great The
positive, but so totally unfounded, nara
tive by the writer in Temple Bar Magazine
drew from me, however, a correction which
l certainly supposed would settle the mat
ter. AS the sole agent in the journey of
| the Empress from Paris to Deauville,
where we embarked on the yacht of Sir
John Montagu Burgoyne sailing to Ryde,
thence by train to Brighton and to Has
| tings, where l united mother and son, I
naturally concluded that any statement
| made by me on the subject
| ton; but as the ''Writer of the Ar
| as set Alright by me, and refers me to the
columns of the Times and the pages of
'Yapereau," 1 finally assert that it was
under my sole charge the Empress was
conveyed from Paris to Chislehurst via
Deauville, Ryde, Brighton, and Hastings.
AS her Majesty may at any moment be APP
pesled to on the subject, it is surely need
less for me to say more. The "Writer of
the Article" in noticing that l referred to
his or her recapitulations of personages as
having conferred with the Empress at the
time of her departure from Paris, care
fully refrains from naming M. Conte and
the Duke de Persigny-the persons TO
whom 1 referred as being deceased before
the events of September, 1870, and erron-
eously made to figure therein by the !
writer in question, who adds to other mis-
takes by confounding the Sir John Fox |
Burgoyne, baronet, with Sir j. Montagu |
Burgoyne. 1 regret that repeated mis-
representations of incidents in which l |
was so intimately concerned should have
forced me from the reserve which l have |
persistently maintained and should have |
preferred.