“Your letter of the 6th came too late, for your first plan had been carried out already--there was no time to lose. To-morrow a new warder is to enter upon his duties--a Republican named Gommier, a good fellow from what B---- tells me, but I have no confidence in such people. I shall find it very difficult to convey food to our P----. But I shall take care of him; you need not be anxious. The assassins have been duped, and the new municipal people have no idea that the little mute has been substituted for the Dauphin. The thing to be done now is to get him out of this cursed tower--but how? B---- tells me he cannot do anything on account of the way he is watched. If there were to be a long delay I should be uneasy about his health, for there is not much air in his _oubliette_--the _bon Dieu_ would not find him there if he were not almighty! He has promised me to die rather than betray himself, and I have reason to believe that he would. His sister knows nothing; I thought it prudent to pass the little mute off on her as her real brother. Meanwhile, this poor little fellow seems quite happy, and plays his part so well, all unconsciously, that the new guard is convinced that he is merely refusing to speak. So there is no danger. Please send back our faithful messenger to me, as I have need of your help. Follow the advice he will convey to you orally, for that is the only way to our success. “The Temple Tower, November 7, 1794.” The contents of this letter, taken together with its date, accord in a remarkable way with Cormier’s communication to Lady Atkyns. There is another striking argument in favour of the authenticity of Laurent’s letters. When they were produced by the pretender Nauendorff, they were for the most part in complete contradiction to all that was known of the Dauphin’s captivity and the testimonies of those connected with it. Certain facts to which they made allusion were known to nobody. Thus Laurent states clearly on November 7 that a new warder--whom he calls Gommier instead of Gomin--is to come to the Temple next day and to be associated with him. Now, in 1835, when this letter was published, what was known of Gomin? Next to nothing, and the little that was known did not tally with Laurent’s statements. Simeon Despreaux, author of a book entitled “Louis XVIII.,” published in 1817, did not even know of Gomin’s existence. Gomin himself made a formal declaration before the magistrates that he entered the Temple about July 27, 1794, before Laurent was there at all. Many years later it was found, on examining all the documents referring to the Temple that were kept in the National Archives, that Laurent’s statements were quite correct. Some days after this letter to Lady Atkyns, Cormier informed Frotté of the great news, in the course of a visit paid him by the latter.