a

justice is to be found, when a man turns to the proper authority for it? Had the accused betaken themselves to me, the immediate superior of the Procureur du Roi Möller, they would have obtained justice, and no man would have prevented them from making my decision public. If they had not been satisfied with my decision, they might have turned to my superior, and if that did not satisfy them then they might have had recourse to the Minister of Justice.

"But what did the Procureur du Roi Möller say? With reference to this I have to remark that I caused witnesses to be summoned to establish exactly what the expressions of M. Möller were. I did not do this upon the hypothesis that if the statements of the accused were proved then immunity from punishment would follow, and no insult would have been offered, but because the degree of punishment would be affected by it. Now it is certainly true that expressions did fall which were calculated to make an impression upon the accused. Gentlemen, to be just towards the accused, I have no hesitation in now publicly declaring that I did not approve, and to this day do not approve, of the form in which the Procureur du Roi expressed himself. I was unfortunately absent from Boun from the 11th to the 28th of September. Immediately upon my return, I demanded a written explanation from M. Möller. I shall take the liberty of communicating its contents to you. The same is somewhere to the following effect: The Protests in question have reference to words with which the inspiration of the moment furnished me. I am no longer in a position to repeat these words one by one. But as far as I can recollect, I praised the English language for having a word which expressed everything which went to make up the character of a man of good behaviour and of refined manners. The glory of possessing this word, however, would be yet greater if it had grown into the flesh and blood of every Englishman. This was, however, not the case, as the English who travelled on the Continent often made themselves remarkable by their presumption, their want of shame, and their "Lümmelei." This observation, however, was not to be taken as specially referring to the accused, Captain Macdonald. He ought, however, as an officer and a man of education, to have known that it was one's duty to submit to an employé of the Police. In his country, the respect for the Police was so great that a single constable with his staff could keep thousands in check. From this statement of the facts of the case, it is evident that I did not speak in the sense described in the Protest, and that I could not have intended so to speak.'

"I will here add the observation that M. Möller, in a further declaration, said that he had not ignored the doubtful propriety of his expressions; but, on the contrary, that he had immediately perceived it after they had fallen from his lips. Moreover, the chief judicial authority of the country has not approved of the expressions used by M. Möller; but, on the contrary, I will not disguise this from you, has distinctly recorded his disapprobation of them. I will call attention to one more circumstance: the honourable character of the Procureur du Roi Möller is a sufficient voucher for the truth of his declarations; but, in addition to this, the results of the inquiry instituted have confirmed these declarations. Whether the accused, in spite of all this, will continue in suspecting the Procureur du Roi of having intended to insult them, and the whole English nation, is a question I will leave to its own merits; but I think it is high time that we should drop all doubt on the subject. Well then, if one chooses to find in the words of M. Möller something improper and out of place, I have nothing to say against it. After my return the occurrence made the impression upon me, I will openly admit, of injustice having been done to Captain Macdonald up to the moment when he struck the Inspector Hoffmann. Later, however, I came to a different conviction. I regret that Dr. Parow was not at the time cited as a witness, because the matter would then have appeared in another light. Under the first impression the inference could be made that ignorance of the language had been the principal cause of the conflict, and that Captain Macdonald had a right to the places which Dr. Parow and his wife wished to occupy; so that no cause would have been given for the expressions of M. Möller. But let us be just, and at the same time reasonable. If in the public proceedings of Courts of Justice everything were to be taken in so literal a sense, one would never have done with complaints. Every official, every man, commits faults, so I also; and so it could come to pass that I likewise should be traduced before a Court. But the defence also would often turn out to be liable to punishment, if every word spoken were weighed in a balance. The Counsel for the defence has spoken of the right of free speech. No man desires it more than I do. But where would liberty of speech be if every word that fell during the proceedings of justice were to be weighed in a gold balance? In such a case freedom of speech would altogether disappear.

"No man will say that the Procureur du Roi Möller, when he used the expressions that gave offence, was not at the time in the exercise of his office. I am therefore bound to defend him against insults. If the accused now before the Court had merely reported his words, even in a sharper form than they were delivered, and had they protested against them, and had they even been guilty of offensive language against M. Möller, the latter would have certainly seen in these steps only an act of defence against his attack, and the sense of having strictly fulfilled his duty would have sufficed him; and I for my part would not have brought an action against them. In a case of this sort, therefore, I occupy the same ground as that taken up by the Counsel for the defence. But, and this is what I mean to prove, the insults contained in the Protest are in my opinion so strong, that it is a duty which my office imposes upon me to proceed against them, after the whole Prussian bureaucracy has been, in the person of one of its officials, attacked and insulted in so unwarrantable a manner. It is now my business to prove that an insult so gross as that

described, really was offered in the present case. The author of the Protest, it is perfectly evident, had no other object in view than to produce a public scandal; and in this he only too well succeeded.

"Gentlemen, I will first of all ask you whether the statements made by the Procureur du Roi Möller, in the report read out by me, are in the main correct or not. I will not deny that the witnesses examined to-day differ on some points. But what witnesses ought one to repose most faith in? Surely more faith should be attached to those who have been occupied with the matter in virtue of their official position, than to individuals out of the public, who, as a rule, are not capable of so correctly apprehending the speeches either of the prosecution or the defence. You will agree with me that those persons who have the habit of acting in public court have more the habit of apprehending what is said, and therefore, as in the present case, deserve more confidence.

"There is, in the first place, the Kammer President Lamberg. I shall not refer to the point as to whether Möller did or did not use the words 'Anmassung,' Unverschämtheit,' and Lümmelei.' The point of the question is, whether these or similar words were used with reference to Englishmen who travel, or to a portion of the same; or whether they were also employed to designate the English who resided on the Continent. According to the statement made by M. Lamberg, M. Möller said that many Englishmen travelling on the Continent behaved themselves, &c. M. Lamberg, however, adds: 'I immediately noted down the words of M. Möller for the benefit of the interpreter, and amongst my notes I find "amongst many English, &c." Here then, Gentlemen, we have a safe point d'appui to show that the words of the Procureur du Roi were used in a restricted sense; because the President of the Chamber, the official who directed the whole proceedings, would not otherwise have so written them down. There is, however, more to be added: the Interpreter translates the words in this way, and the Counsel for the defence does not protest against the translation. It is evident enough, therefore, that they must have been correct.

"The next witness, Landgerichts-Rath Oster, equally put a restricted meaning upon the expressions of M. Möller; so also the Landgerichts-Assessor von Düsseldorff. We have, therefore, amongst three depositions that are more particularly trustworthy, not one which goes to show that the words of the Procureur du Roi had reference to the English nation, or to all travelling Englishmen, or to Englishmen residing on the Continent.

"The deposition of M. Lamberg is followed by that of the Advocate Hagen. He says that the conflict in which Captain Macdonald was involved had induced that gentleman's Counsel to observe that in conflicts between Germans and English, the former always took part against the latter. (Here we certainly know nothing of this kind of one-sidedness. Here German and English have lived peacefully side by side, and the English have ever met with a friendly reception.) The witness Hagen remarks further, that the Procureur du Roi had on his side complained of the arrogance, &c., by which Englishmen travelling on the Continent, and persons who talked English, made themselves remarkable.

66

Captain Macdonald's Counsel seized these words in a different sense, namely, as if they were directed generally against the English, which led him to make the remark that they were even offensive to himself as he had English relations. M. Hagen adds, that in consequence of the Procureur du Roi not answering this remark of the Counsel for the defence, a considerable sensation had arisen amongst the English present. The same witness however says further, that the President had recorded the words of Möller for the purpose of translation in the sense that many English who travelled, &c.

66

Consequently there was nothing in the exposition of the Procureur du Roi about English resident on the Continent, and not one single witness has deposed to such having been the case. That the words were not such as Advocate Schöler understood them to be, is further shown by a very characteristic statement made by the witness Hoffmann. He says that he and his son had at the door of the Court expressed to each other their mutual astonishment that the words of M. Möller had been interpreted to mean all the English, &c. Consequently this interpretation was immediately recognized as an incorrect one.

"We now come to the deposition of M. Schöler, which has been read out to the Court. According to it, the Procureur du Roi declared that his words did not apply to the then accused Macdonald. M. Schöler says further in what sense he understood the words, and that in consequence of them considerable movement had arisen amongst the English present; that he moreover had been struck by the President not having rendered the words as he, Schöler, had understood them. Now, I do not entertain the slightest doubt as to the perfect honour of M. Schöler; but it often happens-and I say this in presence of a number of advocates-that Counsel for the defence catch the statements made by witnesses in a sense favourable to themselves and not always correctly. I can give an instance in point. Last winter this very advocate Schöler, in a case against an employé of the Post Office tried before the Assize Court, put words into my mouth which I had never thought of, and which neither the judges nor the jury had heard, and in consequence received a rebuke from the President of the Assizes. We have consequently in this case a living instance that this very same Counsel has noted down in writing an expression as having been used about which he was mistaken.

"The defence inquires how it happened that M. Möller did not protest against the interpretation put upon his words; and deduces, from his not having done so, that he had accepted the interpretation as the correct one. I did not wish to bring M. Möller forward here as a witness. But I can say that when he heard what fell from M. Schöler, his reason

for not answering was, that M. Schöler's interpretation seemed too glaringly false to require a refutation. He was quite certain not to have spoken of the English who resided on the Continent. Moreover, as regards the habits and manner of M. Möller, whoever is acquainted with them well know that he frequently omits to protest and to answer.

"Gentlemen, allow me to pass over the remaining witnesses except the English Consul, whose deposition I have to refer to. It is true that this gentleman has expressed himself in the same sense as M. Schöler, but he has not done so with full positiveness.

"There remains to be tested whether we consider the authors of the Protest as having drawn up that Protest in ignorance (unwissentlich') or intentionally (absichtlich') or against his better knowledge ('gegen besseres wissen'). Dr. Perry has studied two years at Gottingen. He has resided for the last fifteen years in Germany. He knows our language, our manners, our qualities, and our habits. With him there could not, therefore, be a question of a misunderstanding. He says that the Procureur du Roi had spoken of the English residing upon the Continent, whereas not one of the witnesses heard this expression used.

"I must return to the word 'blackguard,' which has, with the Protest, found its way into the English papers, and so caused great exasperation. We heard, no later back than yesterday, how one of the witnesses, Cumberland, declared that it was not he who had insulted M. Möller, but M. Möller who had insulted him, by calling the English 'blackguards.' Had this been true, the exasperation experienced by the honourable gentleman (Mr. Cumberland) would have been generally shared. But it is exactly herein that the maliciousness of Mr. Perry is brought to light, viz., in extending the words used by the Procureur du Roi Möller to the English residing on the Continent, and in translating the word 'Lümmel' by the word 'blackguard.' Mr. Brensing has several times, and with great clearness, explained what was the meaning of the word blackguard in English. It means as much as a Schurke,' or a 'ganz gemeiner Kerl.' Had Möller used these terms, he would have come out of the business very differently, and would have been very differently punished. That the word 'Lümmel,' therefore, cannot be translated by blackguard, is placed beyond all doubt. Without mentioning it to Dr. Brensing, I applied to Deluis, the translator of Shakespeare, whose explanation exactly corresponds to that of Dr. Brensing. M. Deluis states that the word had originally borne the same kind of meaning as Trossbube.' Now it had equivalent signification with gemeiner Kerl,' Lumpenhund. Also that a certain kind of snuff manufactured in Ireland bore that name. In the dictionary of Sporschil the word is explained in the same manner. When

such great authorities express themselves in this way, we shall be obliged to admit that the word Lümmel' is not to be translated by blackguard, but, on the contrary, that it means something quite different. In my opinion, Dr. Perry purposely chose the expression 'blackguard,' and he has obtained his object in doing so, as all the English newspapers have been exasperated by it.

"I now come to the insult offered, and must once more go through the Protest. I have, however, in the meantime, to add one observation. As regards the actual facts connected with the Macdonald affairs, it is stated in the Protest that he had been thrown into a filthy prison. Which of all the witnesses has deposed to this having been the case? As in this case, so, throughout the entire Article, the object was plainly to be as malicious as possible."

The Procureur-Général here reads the second paragraph of the Protest, and then proceeds :

"Gentlemen,-We are bound in duty to allow, that the Counsel for the defence has endeavoured, with great acuteness, to demonstrate that these words do not contain an insult. If, as the Counsel for the defence does, one assumes that a public officer does this thing or the other from motives of private hatred, whilst exercising his public functions, such an hypothesis is most undoubtedly an insulting supposition. On this bench, for me and for the Procureur du Roi, all political passions are silent. Here, only one passion can exist, the passion for truth and justice.

"It is in itself a gross insult, to say that one has heaped abuse upon a whole nation. But what follows upon this, Gentlemen? The compilers of the Protest bring in the Princess Royal of England and the Queen of England, and the deduction is made, that in the words of M. Möller, an insult against these high persons is likewise contained. Were this true, M. Möller would have been punished according to section 77 of the Criminal Law. This paragraph is worded as follows:- Whoever shall, by word, writing, printing, drawing, by pictures, or other representations, insult the Queen, or the heir to the throne, or any other member of the Royal family, or the Regent of the Prussian State, shall be punished with imprisonment, from one month to three years. Moreover, a temporary suspension of civil rights may also, for a limited period, be added to the punishment.' Now, there cannot be the slightest doubt, that if M. Möller had been guilty of insulting the Princess Royal, he would have been punished in accordance with this paragraph, 77. Well then, what logic! As all the English have been insulted, the wife of the Crown Prince has also been insulted. Can any reasonable person be of opinion, that the Procureur du Roi would insult a nation to which the wife of the Crown Prince belonged! This is not the logic of an educated man, of a doctor of philosophy, who, moreover, describes himself as an advocate. If he were the latter, he would have been more careful in the choice of his expressions. It appears, however, from the acts, that Dr. Perry has only studied law, but not that he is an advocate. Gentlemen, I will proceed."

The Procureur-Général then reads the third paragraph, which contains the passage, Our Queen will shortly be an Englishwoman travelling on the Continent.'

"Since when is it customary in England to drag down the name of the highest person in the land into the turmoil of party strife? In the English parliament custom forbids the bringing in the name of the Queen in the low 'tracasseries' of subjects. Why then in the present case has the person of the Queen been named? Evidently, merely to give rise to scandal. The English resident' on the Continent were brought into the Protest because otherwise there would not have been the opportunity of talking of the Princess Royal. I am persuaded that the honourable gentlemen whom we here see as the coaccused of Dr. Perry will deeply lament that the person of their Queen and her illustrious daughter should have been made use of in so unworthy a manner. The commonest feeling of decency would have repined to leave these high personages, whose position places them above the everyday occurrences, out of the question.

"We now come, Gentlemen, to another passage.'

The Procureur-Général here reads the 5th paragraph of the Protest.

"It was then from malice prépense that the Procureur du Roi Möller sought to excite the hatred of the inhabitants of Bonn against the honourable English families residing here. If the reproach contained in these words is not directed towards the actual disturbance of the public peace, it would, nevertheless, if proved, have constituted a grave disciplinary delinquency."

The Procureur-Général then reads out paragraph 2 of the Disciplinary Law.

"I ask you whether, if an official, invested with the functions of Public Prosecutor, excites whilst in the exercise of his functions, and before a whole public, the inhabitants of a town to hatred, there could possibly be any doubt that such an official would be very sharply dealt with in the Disciplinary Court?

"The strongest part of the insult, however, is contained in the words in which the Procureur du Roi is accused of having made "an uncalled for and cowardly attack upon the whole British nation.' In itself, the accusation of cowardice is for every man a real insult. What would a man of honour-an officer, for instance, who had served with honour in the British army, say to such a reproach? This reminds us, however, of that which Dr. Perry said, and which the defence, in consequence, brought forward. Perry says, I used the expression "cowardly" because we were obliged to be silent whilst Möller stood upon ground where he could attack us without our being able to defend ourselves.' This put me in mind of the proverb: What you don't wish should happen to you; don't do unto others.' Do the accused believe that a Procureur-Général would stand that his subordinate officer should be called a coward? But how is the word 'cowardly' arrived at? It clearly makes the matter much worse, and there is no means of getting out of it; and this the defence very well felt.

"To my great regret, I am obliged, once more, to come back to the affair of Captain Macdonald, because I have to deduce from it that a calumnious intention existed in the Protest. That document contains the reproach that Macdonald had been illegally proceeded against. The defence is of opinion that on this point the Public Prosecution has this day met with a discomfiture. But I can only repeat, if what was afterwards proved had been clear from the beginning, the matter would have appeared in a wholly different light. There cannot be the slightest doubt, that Macdonald did not behave in the way in which a gentleman ought to behave towards a lady. As to whether you are to believe the wife of Dr. Parow, or to assume that she is guilty of perjury, is a question upon which I will waste no words. According to her deposition, Captain Macdonald laid both his hands upon her shoulders, without, however, pushing her. What, I will ask, would any of the accused have done, if a stranger had behaved in this way towards any of their wives? They would surely not have acted differently from Dr. Parow. They would have also called the stranger a 'Flegel.' We have further learnt, by Parow's deposition, that it is positively proved that Macdonald had violently forced back the Inspector Hoffmann, who had at first behaved with such politeness! The lady who accompanied Macdonald used abusive expressions with regard to German brutality, and when a money deposit was asked for, talked of an intention to rob and to cheat. Much as M. Hoffmann was provoked hereby, he contented himself, nevertheless, with calling in the police.

"After it had been at first maintained that Captain Macdonald had been arrested without just ground, it was then asserted that he had been left in prison without a proper warrant of committal having been made out. The occurrence at the Station took place on the 12th of September. On the 11th I had quitted Bonn. On the 12th, the Juge d'Instruction was obliged to undertake a journey to inquire into a case of parricide which is to come before the approaching Assizes; and from this journey he had_not returned on the 13th. The Court assembled to appoint a substitute for the Juge d'Instruction, who on the same day made out a warrant of committal. Out of this a grave charge is made against the judicial authorities. Now when such accidents as these occur, when a public officer is ill or dies, can it not happen that a warrant of committal should come to be retarded for one, two, or even three days? The reproach, therefore, made in this respect, is proved to be unfounded. I have to touch another case. It has been asked, where was Dr. Parow when the case was tried? His examination was dispensed with merely out of thoughtful care for Captain Macdonald, and in order that the matter might be quietly brought to a conclusion. Parow was summoned on the day after the occurrence before the substitute of the Juge d'Instruction. After the Inspector Hoffmann had been examined, however, the examination of Dr. Parow seemed superfluous.

Moreover, the case was to come before the Court if possible on the following day. It was therefore simply out of regard for Captain Macdonald that the examination of Dr. Parow was dispensed with, and it is under these circumstances that the assertion is made that the authorities had not the courage to proceed to his examination! Everything is done to assist Captain Macdonald, and this everything is invested with a malicious intention.

"It has been further asserted that Captain Macdonald was arrested without ground. The code of criminal procedure distinctly prescribes that foreigners who are guilty of crimes or misdemeanours are to be arrested. What official, therefore, with this rescript before him would let a foreigner go who was guilty of a misdemeanour? Such a foreigner would simply go about his business and laugh at the official. The arrest of Captain Macdonald therefore was fully justified by the code of criminal. procedure. Lastly, in order to paint the picture of Captain Macdonald's griefs in the most glaring colours, the Protest maintains that he was thrown into a filthy prison. We heard, yesterday, how totally void of foundation was this accusation. The accused, however, were determined to receive no explanations with regard to the Macdonald occurrence; they yesterday protested against the examination of Dr. Parow and his wife, and after the examination of the latter was decreed by the Court to be admissible, what did they do? They occupied themselves with reading the papers and speaking aloud to each other. Is that the respect due to a Court of Justice?

6

"We will now inquire as to the facts connected with the filthy prison. I have myself, in order to report upon the subject to the Minister of Justice, visited the locality and examined it. The witness Zarnack said yesterday that Captain Macdonald had been brought to the prison on the evening of the 12th of September, after lock-up during the witness's absence, and had passed the night in the room of the Debtors' Prison. On the following day the witness offered Captain Macdonald his own dwelling, or the room set apart for the Judges and Advocates, to spend his time in. He had asked to have coffee for his breakfast, and had obtained it. He had received his victuals from the Star,' the first hotel in the town, had spent the day in the rooms above alluded to, and the night in a room of the Debtors' Prison, which he had all to himself. But what has been related with regard to this? An attempt it is said to furnish the prisoner with a bed had failed; he had been obliged to lie upon a miserable pallet. What an atrocious distortion of the truth is this! Captain Macdonald, because he interested himself in the arrangements of the prison was everywhere shown about, and, on being set free, expressed his thanks to the Superintendent. These circumstances were yesterday brought before the notice of Mr. Anderson, and he was asked how he could have signed such a statement. You heard his answer. But what sort of explanation did he give. The whole question turns, Gentlemen, upon a close-stool. Our prisons it is true can certainly not be made into boudoirs hung with velvet and silk. The locality in which Captain Macdonald found himself was wholly separate from the remaining localities of the prison. In one word, every conceivable consideration was had for him; and now I ask you, who was it who put forward all these untruths? A man who for fifteen years has resided in Prussia, and enjoyed the protection of the Prussian Government;-who has received a concession for an educational establishment into which it is true he can only receive English boys. A proceeding of this kind is, in my eyes, disgraceful.

"Gentlemen, the Counsel for the defence made one observation which I cannot allow to pass unnoticed. He stated that the accused were Englishmen who knew nothing of the stool-of-penance feeling with which many citizens in Prussia appeared before the officials with whom they have to deal. In Prussia, no one has ever so stood before an official without finding justice. But, the defence continued, the accused are not punishable by English law. With this, in itself, we are in no way concerned, for we live in our country and according to our laws. It has, however, been maintained in a widely circulated paper that the persons who drew up the Protest would not have been punishable in England. To contradict this, I will read you out a passage from the English Laws: [This passage is then read out.] You will see from this that the misdemeanour of which the defendants are accused is punished with even far greater severity in England than here. In the present case, if it were in England, not even the exceptio veritatis would be admissible, which with us prevails, and which on this occasion would certainly have been brought to bear, if the defence had been in a position to do so. I come to a further point. M. Möller is charged with private hatred against the English; a feeling which is considered as proved by his behaviour in the Macdonald affair. We here come to the conversation between the English Consul, Mr. Crossthwaite, and M. Möller, at Endernich. The Consul remarked to the Procureur du Roi that the arrest of Macdonald would have disagreeable consequences; that the same stood in the immediate service of the Queen, and that Her Majesty's interests were not to be tampered with. Möller answered that considerations of this kind could not prevent him from acting according to the laws. We further hear from Mr. Crossthwaite that the Procureur du Roi said that if an application were made for the liberation of Captain Macdonald on bail, he would oppose the same; that the English behaved here as if they were not in a civilized country. The Consul deduced from this observation that Möller deemed it necessary to make an example of Captain Macdonald, and reported in this sense to the English Minister, Lord Bloomfield. The latter made a representation to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, who referred to the Minister of Justice, by whom I was called upon to send in a report on the subject. Möller did not admit the sense given by the Consul to this conversation, and declared on the contrary that he had wished to give every assistance to Captain Macdonald. He had,