Page images
PDF
EPUB

on the point of getting in here, when an Englishman, who happened to be inside, and who was afterwards pointed out to me as being Captain Macdonald, told us that the seats were engaged, so we stepped back to look for another carriage. Just at this moment, however, was heard the cry Ready,' which gives notice of the departure of the train, and we were requested by the guard to get into the above-mentioned carriage, in which, as he assured me, there was still sufficient room. I therefore got in immediately, and gave my hand to my wife, telling her to follow quickly. The moment, however, that she appeared at the door of the carriage, Captain Macdonald grasped her shoulders with both hands and endeavoured to push her out. This violent assault on my wife naturally excited me not a little, and I pulled the aggressor back, using terms that were not exactly flattering to him. I spoke German, although I both understand and speak English, because I was too much enraged at the conduct of the Englishman to be able to express myself in a foreign language. At the same time I called on the Inspector of the station, who came up at this moment, to protect us against Captain Macdonald's violent assault, and to show either me or Captain Macdonald, who, in the meantime had laid hands on another passenger, to another carriage. This is the occurrence, as far as I had anything to do with it; and everything in the above-mentioned letter from the anonymous 'Observer' so far as it contradicts this statement is totally untrue. A friendly negotiation about the seats could not take place between Captain Macdonald and myself after the former had, on our entrance, preferred to make so violent an assault on my wife; for he by no means, as the anonymous 'Observer' erroneously maintains, laid his hand on Dr. Parow's shoulder in a friendly, or quite civil manner.' The Station Inspector did everything in his power to settle the affair, and behaved himself in the most quiet and reserved way, until Captain Macdonald gave him a most violent blow on the chest with both fists."

My Lord,

No. 20.

Lord Bloomfield to Lord J. Russell.-(Received October 22.)

Berlin, October 18, 1860.

AT an interview which I have lately had with Baron Schleinitz, I read to his Excellency your Lordship's despatch dated Coblentz, October 12, respecting the affair of Captain Macdonald, in which your Lordship states, that as an inquiry has been instituted by the Prussian Government into the conduct of M. Möller, you will wait the results of that inquiry, and not offer any comments at the present moment on the inconclusive and incomplete statements contained in Baron Schleinitz's note.

His Excellency asked if I intended to leave this despatch with him, and I replied that I was not instructed to do so, and that I had read it in order that he might not be in error as to the impressions that had been produced on Her Majesty's Government by his communications. He replied that he must take a note of the observations contained in this despatch, for he could not allow them to pass unanswered. I have, &c. (Signed)

BLOOMFIELD.

No. 21.

My Lord,

Lord Bloomfield to Lord J. Russell.-(Received October 22.)

Berlin, October 20, 1860.

IN Baron Schleinitz's note to me of the 9th instant on the Macdonald affair, a copy of which was forwarded to your Lordship in my despatch of the same date, it is stated that the Law enacted in 1850 for the protection of personal liberty had been adhered to, and I therefore deem it right to inclose for the information of Her Majesty's Government a copy of that Law, and a translation of those paragraphs which are applicable to the case in point.

I have, &c. (Signed)

BLOOMFIELD.

Inclosure in No. 21.

Prussian Law of February 12, 1850, for the Protection of the Freedom

[blocks in formation]

1. THE detention of a person can only be authorized by written warrant of a Magistrate, describing distinctly the nature of the charge and the accused. 2. The provisional arrest and detention of a person may take place without a judicial warrant:

1st. If the person is caught in the act of a penal offence, or pursued immediately afterwards.

2nd. If, even later, circumstances occur which rendered the person strongly suspected of being the originator or sharer of a penal offence, and of contemplating flight.

3. The police authorities, and other officers to whom the duty falls according to the existing laws, are empowered to exercise a watch over crimes and offences for the purpose of the foregoing arrest and detention, as also are the guard, but these last only under the circumstances described in the first paragraph of Article 1.

If, under these circumstances, the offender absconds, or his intention to abscond is strongly suspected, or there is evident reason to suppose that it will not be otherwise be possible to prove the identity of the person, then every private person is empowered to arrest the offender.

The arrested person must inmediately be brought before one of the abovementioned officers, in compliance with the regulations regarding provisional detention, or before an authority of the watch.

4. In every case of arrest, it is requisite to bring the accused before the Magistrate who has issued the warrant for such arrest. Every one who is provisionally arrested, must be set at liberty at latest in the course of the following day, or else the forms necessary for bringing him before the State Prosecutor at the proper tribunal must be complied with. The State Prosecutor must either allow an immediate release, or else without delay invite the tribunal to give judgment upon the arrest. If any one is provisionally arrested beyond the limits of the district of the tribunal, he can demand to be brought immediately before the State Procurator of the district in which he was arrested. This latter is then empowered to release the prisoner, in the case only of his proving that his arrest was caused by a misunderstanding, otherwise he is subject to be tried before the State Prosecutor of the proper tribunal.

5. Every one who is arrested provisionally or otherwise, must at latest in the course of the day following his being brought before the proper Magistrate, be so examined, that he may be made acquainted with the facts of the charge, and may be given opportunity to explain any misunderstanding

6. The officers, authorities, and guard, mentioned in Article 3, are empowered to take persons into police charge, if the protection of such person, or the maintenance of public morality, safety, and peace, urgently require this measure. Still the persons taken into police charge, must nevertheless, at latest in the course of the following day, either be set at liberty, or the necessary steps must be taken to give them over to the competent authorities.

My Lord,

No. 22.

Lord Bloomfield to Lord J. Russell.-(Received October 22.)

Berlin, October 20, 1860. CAPTAIN MACDONALD having forwarded to Her Majesty's Mission a declaration made by him before a Magistrate on the subject of the late occurrence at Bonn, with the request that it might be made generally known, I have caused a copy and translation of it to be sent to the "National Zeitung and to the "Neue Preussische Zeitung."

It appeared in the former paper this morning, and I have the honour to

inclose an extract from the journal for your Lordship's information. It will appear this evening in the other paper.

I have, &c.

[blocks in formation]

Extract from the "National Zeitung" of October 20, 1860.

CAPTAIN MACDONALD having seen in the German newspapers several erroneous accounts of the occurrence at the Railway Station at Bonn, on the 12th of September last, has made the following declaration on oath before a Magistrate, the truth of which is also attested by his sister-in-law, who was an eye-witness to the transaction;

Document.

Appeared personally before me, Colonel John Paine, of Patcham Place, Patcham, Sussex, Justice of the Peace for the county of Sussex, Captain George Varnham Macdonald, of Preston Place, Preston, Sussex, and of St. James Palace, London, late a Captain in Her Britannic Majesty's 19th Regiment, and at present Exon of Her Majesty's Royal Body Guard, and declared on oath as follows:

"As I hear there are many letters in circulation in the German papers, containing false statements of the affair in which I was engaged on the 12th of September, 1860, at Bonn, I am anxious to make the following declaration on oath before a Magistrate, that the truth may be known.

"On Wednesday, 12th of September, 1860, I was travelling from Mayence to Cologne with my sister-in-law, her husband, nurse and child. At Bonn the gentleman, nurse and child alighted to obtain refreshment, leaving me to keep their places. Some people came and filled the carriage, excepting the seats belonging to my party, on which things were left, showing that they were occupied. When Dr. Parow and his wife came in and took the two seats belonging to my party, in spite of my telling them the seats were engaged, and, in order that there should be no misunderstanding, making my sister explain it to them in German, which she speaks perfectly, I called for the Railway Official, and told him the seats were engaged, on which Dr. Parow became most insolent in his manner. Seeing the rest of my party come up, I placed my hand on his shoulder, saying, he must move, when the Railway Official (who most unaccountably seemed to take the Doctor's part) came up to the carriage and saying, 'Out with the fellow!' advanced to pull me out. I naturally resisted this injustice, and thrust him back, on which several men, who had entered the carriage by the opposite door, seized me, lifted me up and threw me out of the carriage.

"I hear that I am accused of laying hold of Dr. Parow's wife; I swear I did not touch her, or hit, or offer to hit anybody. I was particularly anxious that the journey should be made as free from excitement as possible, as my sister was ill, and I wished her kept as quiet as possible.

(L.S.)

(Signed)

"G. V. MACDONALD, "Late Captain 19th Regiment, Exon Royal Body Guard."

Also appeared personally before me, Jessie Kuhe, of 79, Lansdowne Place, Brighton, Sussex, and declared on oath as follows:

"I am the said sister-in-law of Captain George Varnham Macdonald, and was present during the whole of the above transaction, which I have read, and swear to its entire truth.

(Signed) "JESSIE KUHE."

Sworn before me, signed and sealed, and delivered this 11th day of

October, 1860.

[blocks in formation]

This document has been forwarded to the British Legation at Berlin for the information of an impartial public.

My Lord,

No. 23.

Lord Bloomfield to Lord J. Russell.-(Received October 22.)

Berlin, October 20, 1860.

MR. MORIER, upon his return from Bonn, having reported to me that it was considered by the counsel employed in the case of the English protest of considerable importance that the witnesses for the defence should, equally with the accused, be submitted to the preliminary examination conducted before the Juge d'Instruction (named in this case "Untersuchungs-Richter"), I took occasion yesterday, whilst calling on Baron Schleinitz, to represent this fact to him, and his Exceliency, having asked me to draw up my statement on paper in order to refresh his memory, I forwarded to him, in the course of the afternoon, the "Pro Memoriâ " of which the inclosed is a copy.

I was averse to putting this request in a more official form than that thus adopted, from the fear of appearing to be meddling directly with the details of a legal proceeding actually in course of progress before a Court of Law; but, on the other hand, I could not but make an effort to get a decision rescinded (it was originally settled that the witnesses for the defence should be examined before the Juge d'Instruction, and only within the last few days a counterorder, as I understand, from higher authority, ruled it otherwise) which bears so unfavourably upon the interests of the accused.

The reason of this is obvious. In this preliminary examination the depositions are taken down in writing and reduced to protocol, forming thereby a substantial and definite body of evidence upon which the trial itself proceeds. At the trial the witnesses are examined viva voce only, and their depositions are not taken down. It is evident that if the depositions of the accused, which must more or less tell against them, are alone brought in as written evidence before the Court, whilst those of the witnesses in their favour are not, the whole trial must necessarily move upon a one-sided and ex parte statement.

Under these circumstances, I took the step above described, which I hope will meet with your Lordship's approbation.

[blocks in formation]

IN the proceedings now pending at Bonn, in reference to the English protest in the Macdonald case, it is of the greatest importance that the witnesses for the defence should, equally with the accused, be examined before the Untersuchungs-Richter previously to the trial, because in this preliminary examination only, and not upon the trial, the depositions of witnesses are taken down in writing and reduced to protocol.

It was originally intended that the witnesses for the defence should be examined, but within the last few days an order from a higher authority has ruled otherwise, and the accused only are being examined, their witnesses not. The case for the defence is thereby manifestly placed at a considerable disadvantage, and, for a fair trial, it is of the utmost consequence that the new order in the matter should be revoked, and the original intention carried out, i. e., that the depositions of the witnesses for the defence should be reduced to protocol before the Untersuchungs-Richter, and become available at the trial in the same way as the protocolized depositions of the accused parties themselves.

There seems to be little doubt entertained by the persons competent to judge, that if this course were followed, the facts elicited would establish so strong a case against M. Möller as would ensure the acquittal of the accused.

No. 24.

My Lord,

Lord Bloomfield to Lord J. Russell.-(Received October 29.)

Berlin, October 27, 1860.

WITH reference to my despatch of the 2nd instant, in which a note was inclosed requesting Baron Schleinitz to obtain the necessary authority for a competent person to be permitted to take notes during the approaching trial of British subjects for libel at Bonn, I have now the honour to forward to your Lordship copy of the reply which I have this day received from his Excellency.

It appears from this communication that the intention of Mr. Consul Crossthwaite to have a full report taken down of the coming trial is not contrary to the laws of Prussia.

[blocks in formation]

My Lord,

Inclosure in No. 24.

Baron Schleinitz to Lord Bloomfield.

Berlin, le 26 Octobre, 1860. DANS votre office du 3 de ce mois vous avez réclamé mon entremise l'effet de faire obtenir au Consul de Sa Majesté Britannique à Cologne l'autorisation de faire prendre, par une personne de confiance, des notes dans les audiences publiques de la procédure qui va avoir lieu à Bonn contre quelques Anglais accusés de calomnie contre le Procureur du Roi, M. Möller.

M'étant adressé, en conséquence, à M. le Ministre de la Justice, celui-ci vient de m'informer que si M. Crossthwaite craint qu'il ne soit pas permis à la dite personne de prendre de pareilles notes, cette appréhension n'est nullement fondée. En effet, il n'existe en Prusse aucune disposition législative qui défend à qui que ce soit de suivre, la plume à la main, les débats d'un procès instruit publiquement. Aussi on ignore absolument à Bonn ce qui a pu porter M. Crossthwaite à croire qu'on lui contesterait à lui-même ou à son délégué un droit que tout autre auditeur dans une séance publique peut exercer.

Je vous prie donc, Milord, de vouloir bien donner l'assurance au Consul Britannique à Bonn que son intention de faire prendre des notes du procès dont il s'agit n'est nullement contraire à la législation Prussienne, et qu'aucun employé ne l'empêchera de la remplir.

Recevez, &c.

(Signé)

SCHLEINITZ.

(Translation.)

My Lord,

Berlin, October 26, 1860.

IN your communication of the 3rd instant, you requested my intervention in order to enable Her Britannic Majesty's Consul at Cologne to have notes taken by a confidential person at the public hearing of the proceedings about to be taken against certain Englishmen who are accused of calumniating the Procureur du Roi, M. Möller.

Having, in consequence, addressed an inquiry to the Minister of Justice, he has just informed me that if Mr. Crossthwaite is afraid that the person in question will not be allowed to take such notes, this apprehension is entirely unfounded. In fact there exists in Prussia no legislative enactment which forbids any person whatever to follow, pen in hand, the discussion of a public trial. They are entirely ignorant, therefore, at Bonn, as to what can have induced Mr. Crossthwaite to think that the right which every other person present at a public trial may exercise should be denied to him or to his deputy.

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »