The treachery of this officer could not, however, long remain secret. “The English Ambassador, learning the details, complained loudly to Vergennes, who, irritated to find himself again compromised, laid the blame on Beaumarchais withdrawing the permission newly accorded to set sail.” (Loménie II, p. 137.) Du Coudray then wrote a long letter full of lame excuses. Beaumarchais, furious on learning the truth, replied as follows:
“Paris, January 22, 1777.
“As your conduct, sir, in this affair is inexplicable, I will not waste time in trying to comprehend it. All that concerns me is to guarantee myself and my friends against occurrences of the same kind in future. As the veritable owner, therefore, of the Amphitrite, I send herewith an order to Captain Fautrelle, to take absolute command. You are sagacious enough to see that I have not taken so decisive a step without previously consulting powerful and judicious friends. Have the kindness, sir, to conform to it, or find another vessel to take you wherever you please, with no pretension on my part to hinder you in any respect, except in matters which relate to myself and which tend to injure me.”
When Deane learned of the disgraceful conduct of the man in whom he had reposed such entire confidence, he withdrew the commission which he had granted him, and the 8th of February wrote to Beaumarchais. “The strange, ungrateful and perfidious conduct of this man, mortifies and embarrasses me strangely, and as I wish with all my heart that I had never seen him, I wish equally that he may never see America.” Beaumarchais at once forwarded this letter to Vergennes, begging him to prevent du Coudray from setting out for the new world. An order from Vergennes arrived commanding him to return to his garrison at Metz. Instead of obeying, he hastened to Versailles, where, as has been shown, he had powerful protection. He succeeded in being privately presented to Franklin and through the intervention of the ministers of war and the navy, du Coudray received from Franklin a recommendation to Congress, which recommendation Deane himself finally consented to sign, although with reluctance, for he informed Beaumarchais at once of the act, assuring him that he had done no more than admit that du Coudray was a good officer. Vergennes, not wishing a quarrel either with the Comte de St. Germain or with M. de Sartine (minister of war and the navy), was obliged to close his eyes to the action of the officer, who at once hastened to set sail for America. (See Doniol II, p. 317.)
The 11th of February, Beaumarchais wrote to Vergennes: “Everyone knows the evil which that officer wishes to do me. Having made to myself a law to explain to no one the wise and pressing motives which oppose themselves to the departure of that officer, and owing to the necessity of preventing his indiscretions, I am liable to be taxed with a design to persecute him, whom on the contrary I have from the first endeavored to advance and have aided in sincere good faith.... It is neither in my character nor in my principles to revenge myself on anyone—I should be obliged to pass my life at that odious business....”
“Neither the orders of Vergennes nor the interference of Beaumarchais or Deane having prevented du Coudray from crossing the Atlantic, the evil which followed was inevitable. Arrived in America, he hastened to accuse Beaumarchais of the very acts which he himself had attempted to perform, and he accused not him alone, but in consequence Silas Deane of complicity, as well as the Comte de Vergennes.” (Doniol II, p. 353.)
“Dreaming of great position in America, he built upon the order to retain him on the continent, and gave it out as an intrigue of Beaumarchais.” He at once issued a pamphlet to Congress, in which he explained, “It is to my credit alone, and to my zeal in your service, that you are indebted for the extent of the aid accorded to your commissioner, and in nothing to the Sieur de Beaumarchais; everything was finished when he arrived.” He further dilated upon the greed of gain which characterized the French agent, and accused him of fraud in his dealings with the colonies. To minds already prepossessed with similar ideas, this pamphlet was not calculated to increase the confidence of Congress in the good faith either of their commissioner or of his friend. During the two months preceding the open exposure of the perfidy of this officer, the difficulty of the situation of Beaumarchais hardly can be overestimated. “Denounced by the conspiracies of du Coudray as being only incited by desire for lucre; obliged to resort to complicated expediencies in order to spare the Government the recriminations of the English, constrained to defend himself against the mistrust aroused even in the spirit of M. de Vergennes by his at times inevitable indiscretions; forced to fall back on justifications which might seem equivocal, he lent himself to doubt, even to suspicion.” (Doniol II, p. 308.) On the 30th of January he wrote to M. de Vergennes:
“When one writes to a minister whom one respects and cherishes, one is very much embarrassed to find terms to explain a fact like the one that suffocates me. After Mr. Deane had shown during a month a very bad humor, and saying to myself the whole time that there was something very mysterious in the delay of the vessels at Havre, I was anxious to have an explanation of his offensive tone. He replied that, tired himself of not knowing where the blame lay, he had the honor to send you a memoir by M. Lee, and that the latter reported that Your Excellency had clearly assured him that for a long while there had been no obstacle on the part of the ministry and that if I said there was, it could only be an imposture of mine or of M. Montieu. Pardon, M. le Comte, if after swallowing all the other bitter pills without complaint, this rests in my throat and strangles me in passing. Your Excellency will perhaps be so good as to cast a glance over the four letters that I join to this, written by me to M. de Sartine the 3rd, 18th, 22d and 29th of January. They will inform you of the true state of affairs if it is possible that you are ignorant of it, and you will tell me afterwards up to what point you order me to keep silent and sacrifice myself. This blow crushes me and makes me desire that my whole conduct as a vigilant man and faithful servitor be promptly examined and with the utmost rigor. It is impossible for me to take an instant’s repose until you have accorded me this grace. Read, I beg you, my letters to M. de Sartine and judge of my suffering.”
Vergennes immediately replied, and the whole situation grew brighter. Beaumarchais wrote the next day, February 1, 1777, “I sincerely thank you for your goodness in tranquilizing me. I have force against everything except your discontent. Never judge me without hearing me, this is the only favor I ask. I know well that you are accused of irresolution, which is very far from your character. Afterwards they cast upon me the reflections of their discontent, making you speak, so that I may feel it more keenly—I will never believe anything again. I have the intimate consciousness that I do my best and even the best that can be done under the circumstances. Across all the obstacles that surround me, a small success pays me for great labor. I feel myself already light-hearted again since yesterday’s letters have told me that three of my vessels have started.” Beaumarchais was thus after so many delays given full power to act. On the 4th of February, 1777, he wrote to Vergennes: