The question has also arisen—Granted that D’Eon was obliged to appear as a woman, by command of King and ministers, such being the stipulation for his receiving the royal grant of twelve thousand livres, annually; why, after the fall of the monarchy and having lost all by the French Revolution, did he continue in the anomalous character of a female? We, in England, are able to understand, that to one who had spent so many years of his life in this country, and had become familiar with the sentiments and susceptibilities of English men and women, there was no choice. It had long been known and admitted that the Chevalière had been treated by French ministers with peculiar harshness, and she was seen to be reduced to absolute want at the advanced age of sixty-four! Under circumstances such as these, he must have felt that so long as he was believed to be a female, commiseration and assistance were to be expected; but to declare himself a man, after having adopted female attire and been admitted into the intimacies of female society over a period of sixteen years, would have been to expose himself—to summary castigation? That he did not fear; but to what would have been dreaded infinitely more than famine by one with his antecedents—the ridicule and scorn of all who knew anything about him; and so he elected to continue to the end of his days, dressing, writing, and speaking as if he were a woman, but otherwise conducting himself in all respects with the freedom belonging to a man. We adhere to our engagement not to judge the individual who presents such startling episodes in his life, and contrasts in his character. It has hitherto been his fate to be classed, it may be said, amongst the adventurers of which the last century was sufficiently prolific; these pages will perhaps assist to remove him out of that order and place him where he should stand—alone, as a physiognomical marvel. We would in a measure plead for him, in Johnson’s words in behalf of poor Goldsmith—‘Let not his failings be remembered’—for his faults were but failings. Of this victim to envy, malice, and all uncharitableness, we have read clearly enough how sinned against he was, far more than he had ever himself sinned against others. All he suffered he had to endure for serving an ungrateful King too faithfully, oblivious that _promesse des grands n’est pas héritage_, while his attachment to his country was sublime, entitling him amongst his countrymen at home to Florian’s epitaph, Il vécut toujours _en Angleterre_, Mais son cœur fut toujours ici. Loyal beyond compare, he ever continued true to one and the other, frequently under unexceptionably trying circumstances, repeating and again repeating: ‘Comme Français, je puis regarder le sacrifice de ma fortune comme la dette de mon amour pour le Roi. Comme militaire et Chevalier de Saint Louis, je dois même lui sacrifier ma vie; mais pour celui de mon honneur, il n’est pour personne!’