The worthy Drouet concluded with Count Rzewusky, who declared that he was ready to sign a statement of all these facts with his own blood, that Cagliostro might well have been the victim of some plot; a hypothesis calculated to please d’Eon, who had become more and more inclined to see snares and pitfalls everywhere. A little later the same Drouet sent news of his family: his brother-in-law, O’Gorman, had obtained the Cross of Saint Louis; his eldest nephew was doing very well. “Before long,” Drouet adds, “he will be promoted to the rank of lieutenant-colonel; and in three years’ time he will make a good marriage, which will render him independent. His two younger brothers went abroad last October for a two years’ cruise; at the end of the expedition they will both receive their commissions as lieutenants in the navy.” And Drouet exhorts “sa chère amie” to love her nephews as they thoroughly deserve it. He also begs her to be patient in the settlement of her affairs. This liquidation was indeed a long business. No sooner had d’Eon arrived in London than he entered an action against the heirs of Lord Ferrers. He accused the late earl of not having employed for the payment of his debts, as stipulated by special mandate, the money remitted to him in exchange for the papers of the secret correspondence, in execution of the covenant signed, on October 5, 1775, by the Sieur Caron de Beaumarchais and the Demoiselle d’Eon. He won his suit as far as the main point was concerned, but the judgment could not be carried into effect on account of the impediments of every description raised by the heirs. Consequently d’Eon wrote, on April 1, 1787, to his friend M. de la Flotte, chief clerk at the Foreign Office, complaining that “this restitution of money which was to have made her happy and serene was becoming the worry of her life.” He expressed himself extremely sorry to be still living in England; but added that, as long as he could not return to France with honour, he would not return at all.