This letter appears to have been written by a person whose name has never been given to the public. The fraud was discovered by a gentleman who lived near the residence of Mr. Jefferson. He was informed of a letter in the Charlottesville post-office, in the well-known handwriting of Washington, addressed to one whose name was unknown in that neighborhood; and he immediately apprized Washington, not only of that fact, but that his reply was sent for by a person whose political sentiments were averse to those of the late administration. Washington furnished his informant with a copy of the correspondence; and that gentleman, on investigation, expressed his opinion that the “plot” originated with Jefferson. Washington appears to have considered that opinion of some weight, for, in a response to the letter of his informant, he said: “If the person whom you suspect, was really the author of the letter under the signature of John Langhorne, it is not at all surprising to me that the correspondence should have ended where it did; for the penetration of that man would have perceived, at the first glance, that nothing was to be drawn from that mode of attack. In what form the next invidious attempts may appear, remains to be discovered.”
There is no evidence that Mr. Jefferson had any knowledge of the matter until the forgery was exposed, and his name had been connected with it by Washington's informant, whom he denominated his “malignant neighbor.” That neighbor was John Nicholas, commonly known as “Clerk John,” who, Mr. Randall says, “was a weak-headed, absurd busybody, with that restless itching for notoriety which renders a man, destitute of ability, sense, or delicacy, almost indifferent as to the subject.”[125] Washington was naturally indignant at this attempt to ensnare him, and his feelings were much disturbed by the alleged secret attacks upon him and his public measures by Jefferson and his friends. As we have already observed, he lost confidence in the genuineness of Jefferson's professions of friendship; and, from this time, there was no correspondence between them.
At about this time, Washington received the welcome news of the liberation of his friend Lafayette, and his expected speedy departure for America. Also a pamphlet on the “Military and Political Situation of France,” by General Dumas, an officer who had served under Rochambeau at Yorktown. On the subject of his friend's release, he wrote to M. de La Colombe, who had been Lafayette's adjutant-general when the latter commanded the National Guard, and who was then in Philadelphia, saying: “I congratulate you on the happy event of the liberation of our mutual friend, whose reception in this country will be, I am sure, cordial from all descriptions of people; from none more than myself. The answer given by him to the minister is noble, and worthy of himself.[126] The only regret I should feel on his arrival in America, if it should happen soon, would be his disappointment at not finding his son here. I said all I could with decency, both to him and M. Frestel, to induce their awaiting direct accounts from the prisoners before their departure; but the eagerness of the former to embrace his parents in the first moments of their release from a cruel imprisonment, was not to be restrained.”
These two great men and loving friends never met again on earth. Circumstances caused Lafayette to remain in Europe, and his visit to America was deferred more than a quarter of a century, when he came as the Nation's Guest.
Dumas's pamphlet, to which we have just alluded, and the author's accompanying letter, awakened pleasant emotions in the bosom of Washington, for intelligence of an old companion-in-arms was conveyed. “General Rochambeau,” wrote Dumas, “is still at his country-seat near Vendôme. He enjoys there tolerably good health, considering his great age, and reckons, as well as his military family, amongst his most dear and glorious remembrances, that of the time we had the honor to serve under your command.”
This announcement gave Washington real pleasure, for he had heard from time to time vague rumors of the vicissitudes of Rochambeau—first as field-marshal, in command of the revolutionary army of the north; then as a thwarted and disappointed man, dwelling in retirement; and then as a victim prepared for the guillotine, but saved by a sudden change in public affairs. He was glad to know that the general was enjoying repose in his old age. Rochambeau survived all the tempests of the Revolution, was honored by Napoleon with the cross of grand officer of the Legion of Honor, and a marshal's pension, and died in 1807, at the age of eighty-two years.
FOOTNOTES:
[125] Life of Jefferson, ii. 371.
[126] The emperor of Austria communicated to Lafayette, through the marquis de Chasteler, his intention to liberate him from his confinement at Olmutz, on certain conditions, to which the marquis refused to accede. In his reply to De Chasteler, Lafayette said:—
“His majesty, the emperor and king, demands an assurance that, immediately after my release, I will depart for America. This is an intention which I have often manifested; but since, in the actual state of things, an assurance to this effect would seem to recognise a right to impose this condition upon me, I think it not proper to satisfy such a demand.