THE WOLF AND THE LAMB.
THE INDICTMENT OF STRUENSEE—HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION—COARSE
JESTS—THE LIAISON WITH THE QUEEN—THE EVIDENCE—BRANDT'S
ASSAULT ON THE KING—TREATMENT OF
THE PRINCE ROYAL—THE MINISTER OF STATE—ABOLITION
OF THE COUNCIL—DISBANDMENT OF THE GUARDS—ALLEGED
FORGERY—THE QUEEN'S BOUQUET—THE SENTENCE DEMANDED.
In the meanwhile, Fiscal-General Wiwet received the
king's orders on April 2 to indict Counts Struensee
and Brandt before the appointed tribunal. As defenders
of the accused, Uldall was selected for Struensee,
and Bang for Brandt. The Fiscal-General appointed
April 10 for the opening of the trial. As, however,
some preliminary investigations had to be made, the
trial was deferred till April 21, on which day the
Fiscal produced his proofs, and the sentence he demanded
in writing.
High and well born, highly noble and well born,
gentlemen: most graciously appointed commissioners
in the charges against Counts Struensee and Brandt.
I laid before this exalted commission on the 10th
of the present month his royal Majesty's most gracious
commands to me, to proceed against Counts
Struensee and Brandt for their crimes. Hence it is
only necessary to deduce, prove, and hand in the indictment
for sentence; and as such deduction, proof,
and demand of sentence, I most submissively deliver
this my memorial.
So certain and true as the proverb generally is,
"that severe lords do not reign long," it is equally
certain that such severe lords, during their brief authority,
can produce as much harm as cannot be
redressed in double the length of time.
The Danish and Norwegian subjects have been for
many hundred years accustomed to be treated mercifully,
as their fidelity and sincerity deserves. The
affection and veneration which they feel for their king
cannot be described, and they are in return beloved
by their regent. They generally feel a deep reverence
for the Supreme Being and God's word, are all
sensible, and have a feeling of shame for sins committed:
they are quiet, and everybody lives securely
in the country, so that foreigners said: "It is pleasant
to live here," and built themselves all sorts of abodes
among us, though without despising and offending the
nation. But, during the last few years, this has become
quite different, and has assumed a strange and
confused aspect. Attempts have been made to render
the king—that dearest part of everything temporal to
his people—odious to his subjects, and the latter in
turn to him. No one could obtain access to his Majesty
unless he belonged to the party which did not
mean well with him. Impudence and contempt were
emboldened to rise against so highly venerable a royal
house. The Almighty and His word were rendered
ridiculous. People strove to drive away virtue and
honour, and to open a gate to immorality, seeing no
shame in it, but evidently seeking honour in it. The
audacity was carried so far that the authority which
the nation voluntarily committed to Frederick III.
and his descendants, was solely exercised by a subject,
and was even about to be extended, so that the man
who exercised it might be absolute.
Like the nation, their language was despised. It
was heart-torture for every honest man and lover of
honour to see and hear all that which can be read
in printed documents.
The ruin of families was like the deed of a fallen
angel. But who was this fallen angel? It was John
Frederick Struensee, the most foolhardy person who
can be imagined, and who for this reason deserves the
name of more than vir unius seculi, formerly a doctor,
up to the present time a count, but of whom (as I
hope), before I let him go, nothing will be left but
horror, condemnation, and punishment.
Count Struensee was born at Halle, in 1737.
His father is the present superintendent in Holstein.
He studied medicine at Halle, passed his examination
there, and lived at Gundern with his uncle, who was
the private physician of Prince von Stolberg. A year
later, 1758, he became city physician of Altona, where
he received, as is said, veniam occidendi per totam
urbem, which liberty he afterwards employed as cabinet
minister, per utrumque regnum. After he had
been physician for ten years at Altona, he became,
in the year 1768, physician in ordinary to his royal
Majesty, when his Majesty travelled abroad, as may
be seen from his statement of February 25.
It required either a supernatural intellect or great
daring and foolhardiness to undertake, in his twenty-first
year, to be city physician and surgeon in Altona;
but I believe the latter, because at the expiration of
a short period he also took on himself to be the state
physician; and we must consequently conclude from
this, that he was as good a doctor for the city as he
was in the state, and that the number of deaths in
Altona, in his times, necessarily exceeded the births,
unless the number of the latter was augmented by
him in another way.[85] The reputation follows the
man. I derive everything from documentary evidence,
and in this his most intimate friend, Count
Enevold Brandt, said, in his reply to question 122,
"That seven or eight years ago it was generally
known of Struensee that he had no religion, and that
he had intercourse with women at an early age, which
was reproved by many respectable people."
This "medicus," of whom common report says that
he was not particularly well provided with his father's
blessing, and hence could found no hopes on the promises
of the fifth commandment, formed the acquaintance
of Count Enevold Brandt, at the time he was attending
the late Privy Councillor Söhlenthal, Brandt's
step-father. He revealed to Count Brandt that he
should like to be a physician in ordinary at the Danish
court, just as if Denmark had a want of clever doctors,
and required them as much as France did the Danish
Winslöw.[86] Count Brandt promised him his good
offices. Count Struensee was therefore engaged to
travel with his Majesty abroad, not because his royal
Majesty's health required this, but in order that he
might be at hand in any unforeseen emergency, and
because a physician fills up the number of the suite
of such exalted personages, without being exactly regarded
as superfluous. I have credible information
that during the journey, when he found time heavy
on his hands, he mocked at religion and the word of
God (just as at a later date people mocked at his and
his partisans' regulations, projects, and ridiculous enterprises),
and would celebrate his pretended victory
by a contemptuous laugh. I should be able to prove
this, and mention it here, partly because in a criminal
case nothing must be forgotten that throws light on
the character or conduct of the culprit, and partly to
contradict Struensee's excuse, that it was not his intention
to inflict any injury on religion.
When he returned home he remained with his most
gracious Majesty as physician, and to read to his Majesty
whatever his Majesty might order him to read;
and for this purpose waited on the king every morning,
mid-day, and evening, as will be seen from his
answer to question 1. Count Struensee, who had already
determined to acquire honour and wealth, no
matter in what way, from the "respect and purse" of
the Danish and Norwegian nation, clearly saw that it
would not do to serve two masters in the way he intended,
and that he, as a foreigner, who had just come
into a country where he had no connexions, would be
unable to sustain himself. He easily perceived that,
while he secured his fortunes on one side, his misfortune
could be founded on the other. To be constantly
about his Majesty, would be so much as to neglect
those plans which must remain hidden from the king.
Nor could the duty of being constantly about the
king's person be safely entrusted to any one. It
must be some one, in whose care he could trust as
fully as in Count Brandt, who, as he was compelled
by command to keep away from court, would be attached
to him if he again procured him admission to
it. Thus it came about that Count Brandt received
leave to return to court, though he did not occupy
any permanent post till the departure of Chamberlain
Warnstedt, when he was attached to his Majesty, and
the duty was imposed on him of so watching the king
that no one reached him, and if any one came, of reporting
to Struensee who it was and what was said,
which Brandt faithfully carried out. All this is to be
seen in Brandt's statements before the commission on
March 2, to question 8.
I will now submissively proceed to prove the nature
of both Count Struensee and Count Brandt's
behaviour in their intercourse with his most gracious
Majesty.
After Count Struensee had, in this way, secured his
position—for up to then this had not been fully the
case—he writes about it in his reply to Count Brandt's
warnings: "Après avoir gagné la confiance, la faveur
du roi et de la reine et le crédit dans le public, et cela
par mes propres forces, avec tout le risque et toutes
les peines attachées à une telle entreprise que vous
n'auriez certainement pas supporté: et laquelle, j'ose
l'assurer, vous n'auriez pas fini, je vous appelle et je
partage avec vous l'effet, et tout les agréments qui en
pouvaient resulter." But what could have induced
him, when Count Brandt, in his aforesaid warning,
gave him to understand his annoyance in a rather
harsh way, to urge the said Count Brandt to remain
at his post, when he writes in the following terms:
"Examinez votre position et les motifs qui vous y
tiennent! Rangez d'un côté les agréments et de
l'autre les désagréments et comparez cela avec vos
situations passées et avec celles auxquelles vous pouvez
attendre et faites alors la conclusion." When he
was certain of a friend who would watch the king and
pay attention to everything that happened or was said,
who was to take care that none should reach the king
who might repeat the general dissatisfaction at a report
which wounded every honest heart, and other things
which it would lead me too far to mention, he began
very seriously to play the master and prove how it
was his intention to become the first man, if not nominally
and in respect, still in might and authority. He
filched the greatest power in the most impudent way,
as I shall presently prove, and he also acquired adherents,
not substantial ones, but men who wished to
make their fortune, and obtain something through this
omnipotent maître des requêtes.
There was one thing, however, that prevented him
from acting as he wished, namely, the High Royal
Council, which was composed of respectable men, most
of whom were children of the country, and all, from
youth up, educated and instructed in state science, and
knew the constitution, the laws, and the nation. This
college must consequently be abolished; and it was
done under the excuse that his Majesty was impeded
by it, and could not exercise his sovereign power with
perfect liberty. But the meaning of this and other
things was speedily detected when the maître des requêtes
presented himself as privy cabinet minister, and
the man whom all the king's subjects, high or low, or
whosoever they might be, must obey as the king's representative,
and whose orders, with his signature,
must be as much respected as the king's. Thus this
ambitious man, through greed for gain and that he
might fully satisfy his pleasures, dared to undertake
the affairs of two kingdoms, and, though inexperienced
in the language and laws of the country, alone
do that which so many worthy men had divided among
them, and had found plenty to do in managing the
business of their respective departments. Under the
pretext that the council impeded the king, he had the
audacity to abolish it, but to assume greater authority
than the council ever possessed, as I shall more fully
prove.
This daring measure taken by him was regarded as
the second which would, some day, break his neck,
and, by his ruin, put an end to that of the country.
A privy cabinet minister was seen to choose people
as his advisers from whom not much good could be
expected,—partly because they had been educated like
him, and understood nothing about what they undertook
as statesmen, or in other qualities; partly, because
they were selfish projectors and persons who wished to
be fattened like him, though not to so great a degree.
He regarded himself as the person who was summoned
to promote the prosperity of Denmark and Norway
and the welfare of the king; but everything must be
altered, no matter whether the changes were useful or
not, so long as they were made. He and his adherents
tried to turn everything topsy-turvy. The
official, when he rose in the morning, did not know
whether he would not lose bread and office before
evening. A proof of his foolhardiness, but also of his
intention to strengthen his position, is, that he proposed
his brother, who was "Professor Matheseos" at Liegnitz,
in Silesia, as a deputy of finances in Denmark
and Sweden, a man who may be good enough as a
mathematician, though there is no want of natives
possessed of the science, but must be as experienced
in the management of the finances as a blind man in
astronomy. Hence his summons here could have had
no other object but, with united strength, to attack
and conquer the royal exchequer, in which Struensee
made various large and important grasps for himself
and his adherents. He did not forget himself and his
companions. Many thousand rix-dollars, even whole
sums of 60,000 dollars, were, with false cunning and
impudence, stolen from the royal exchequer against
his Majesty's will and pleasure, solely to enrich himself
and his adherents, so that they might be in a good
humour with him. On the other hand, he never hesitated
to rob other people of their income; and, in order
to make it the more painful, it was generally done in a
jeering manner. With the cabinet orders he behaved
dishonestly; he issued them without the king's permission;
and he did not bring them forward in the
order that his duty commanded, as I shall most submissively
prove. As he showed by his acts, his resolution
was to treat the nation with harshness, with
contempt, and as a people that had no "sentiments."
His own words, in the answer to Count Brandt's warnings,
are as follow: "Vous me reprochez que j'inspire
la peur à tout le monde, et vous m'en deviez faire
compliment parce que c'est la seule ressource pour
un état énervé, affaibli, avec une cour et tout un
public intriguant et un maître faible par respect et
qui a le même penchant pour le changement que son
peuple;" and in another passage: "Le conte et la
complaisance ont été la source du malheur de Danemarc."
But is it surprising that he should treat the
people with contempt, when he ventured to do the
same to its head, as I shall prove?
It might have been supposed that the affairs of the
kingdom would have given him enough to do: but he
still thought proper to play the doctor, by his own explanation,
through affection for the royal family. His
Royal Highness the Prince Royal was to be educated
in accordance with his (here the right expression fails
me) sentiments. I shall return to this presently, for
which reason I will mention it now as shortly as
possible, but no man of sense could understand how
this could go on well for any time, for it seemed as if
the doctor first wished to deprive the prince of his
health, in order to show that he was capable of restoring
it,—an attempt by which the two kingdoms
could not be benefited. The other amiable royal
personages, whom his craft and power could not prevent
from being an obstruction to him in his undertakings,
he was seen to treat with a certain degree of
indifference. The exalted commissioners know as
well as I that I am speaking the language of truth:
for I could prove by many thousands of witnesses, the
universal sorrow which was felt at seeing the king's
brother, who was certainly the king's best friend,
separated from him in a very marked way. The king's
servants trembled at Struensee; he was so harsh to his
own servants, that he threatened them with the "Blue
Tower:" he reproved them because they were not
used to wait on great people, by which he alluded to
himself, which he could do the more safely, as these
people either were not aware of his former servitude,
or did not dare remind him of it, and which had been
a service with honest men, it is true, but not with
great persons. From these facts, however, his audacity
and extraordinary foolhardiness can be seen, for he
was not only harsh to his servants, (who, according to
his principles, could not expect a government post,
but must live on the means which they had saved up
after years of extraordinary roguery,) but was even so
impudent as to reprimand the servants in the presence
of the exalted person whose subject and fellow-servant
of servants he was. He not only interfered in things
which he did not understand, but also appointed persons
to offices in colleges of whose duties they were
ignorant, from which many people concluded that he
wished to convert everything into a chaos, or perform
some extraordinary feat as a physician—as, for instance,
prove that land animals were best fitted to the sea; as
otherwise, this man's enterprises cannot be comprehended,
and as they are mad things, I can only represent
them in this ridiculous manner, in which I employ
his own expression which he used against his
king: "that is ridiculous." He despised the language
and laws of the country. Everything must be translated
for him into German, by which the work was
doubled for others, and affairs could not be expedited
so quickly, although it seemed in other respects as if
he wished everything to be done at the double.
He overturned the laws which served to maintain
honesty and respectability, but after his fall they
regained their old validity, which is a sufficient proof
for me in this respect.
In addition to the exalted ministers, other persons of
noble birth and rank were treated by him with contumely,
whence they could not remain at court, but
retired to their estates and retrenched their expenses,
by which the city of Copenhagen lost considerably
through the reduced value of house property, and the
inhabitants through the loss of the custom of the nobles.
He did not like Copenhagen: it seemed to him
too large for a city in Denmark. Consequently, he
wished to weaken its power and prestige, and he was
so daring as to take away the privileges accorded to
its citizens, which they gained by risking their life and
blood for their king, the royal family, and the Fatherland.
On the other hand, he sought to amuse the
mob by various displays of fireworks, free night toping
and other jollities and carnal pleasures, which, however,
he wished so contrived that they could be carried on
without infection.[87]
It would surely lead too far to reckon up all the
follies which were set in work by this foolhardy person.
And in the midst of all this he believed he had
de Daniâ bené meritus, so it was no excessive honour
for him to become a Danish count.
Foolhardiness is seen in all his undertakings. He
considers himself worthy of so great an honour,
because he has had for two years an opportunity of
leading a horrible life in Denmark. To be raised to
this height has always been reckoned a proof of worthiness,
and services rendered to the king and the kingdoms.
In this instance, however, it is quite the contrary.
Count Struensee regarded all that which is
called rank or title as something which must not be
sought after, but be bestowed on specially distinguished
men, who have rendered themselves worthy of it
through their services,—Exempli gratiâ, his brother,
who was made Councillor of Justice, on account of his
knowledge of finances. If he became a count, therefore,
it must be assumed how great his services had
been. The only humility he displayed in the receipt
of this dignity was, that he procured his friend, Chamberlain
Brandt, the same honour, although the latter
had not taken such interest in the prosperity of the
country as Count Struensee. But as we may say of
him and Struensee, vivimus ex rapto, they must be
equal in the honours as in the plunder. Though the
Order (of Matilda) was so innocent when received
from the exalted hand which founded it, Count
Struensee entertained the daring design of being
honoured immediately after with the Order of the
Elephant.
All this impudence, in the midst of his most brilliant
and powerful position, lowered him in the eyes
of all people: his recipes for the state were regarded
as quacksalvery; his services as dead flies in an apothecary's
gallipot. Both himself and his adherents
could not hold their tongues; partly, because they
wished to know beforehand what people would say
about this or the other design which was going to be
carried out; partly, because in case of need they
wished to be able to place themselves in a position of
defence, or fly to Kronborg; for in Copenhagen they
had nothing good to expect. But the discontent increased
so greatly, that as many "one thousand million
execrations" were heaped upon him, as there
were brilliants in the golden shield which his running
footman wears in his cap. This discontent with his
conduct could not remain hidden from him. Count
Brandt, who is to some extent to be pitied, on account
of the friendship which he formed with Count Struensee,
but cannot be excused, warned him: the daily
pasquinades published about the count and his band,
and of which he was informed every morning, at
length disquieted him. The Horse Guards were abolished,
and no longer stood in his way. The Foot
Guards must also be got rid of. This was effected;
but in a way which proves that Count Struensee in
this affair also behaved like a villain to his king and
benefactor.
The émeute which took place on the Christmas eve
rendered him equally attentive and timid. I shall
revert to the proofs of this. When the royal family,
with whom he lived, came to town, such precautions
were taken that people must believe that the king was
afraid of his subjects; but Count Struensee, with his
fellow-conspirators, intended to make himself Protector,
even if he did not at once take the king's life.
The gates of Copenhagen were ordered always to
stand open, so that if necessary it might be a refuge
for those outside the city.
When his royal Majesty came to the capital, he
drove through the streets as if flying before an enemy,
so that no one might approach the king, and impart
to him his well-meant thoughts.
When Count Struensee's conscience (for that is
always found in a man) convinced him that his actions,
judging from the value which the inhabitants of the
land, high and low, attached to them, would be but
badly rewarded, he resolved to venture on extremities.
I must most submissively and conscientiously
assert, that I do not know what his motto was; but
judging from his conduct, it must be believed that it
agreed with the character which is given of the Greek
robbers, in the words:—
"Fidens animi atque in utrumque paratus,
Seu versare dolos seu certæ occumbere morti."
After the return to Copenhagen, after the body-guard
had been dismissed, and the guard of the palace
confided to other troops, the latter received rations in
addition to their pay, and contrary to all custom,
which reminds me of the answer given to the thief in
the fable:—"Ita subita me jubet benignitas vigilare,
facias ne meâ culpâ lucrum."
When the report spread in the city that the count
was meditating dangerous designs, because the inhabitants
were annoyed at being ruled by a doctor medicinæ,
and as, too, the doctor was afraid of being dissected
by the populace, though not secundum artem,
and for the benefit of his colleagues, he chose another
town commandant, who could terrify the whole city
with his voice and gestures, and the cannon were also
to be loaded for the same purpose. It may be supposed
what was intended to take place at the palace.
I do not believe there was any intention to lay hands
on the person of his royal Majesty and take his life.
But suppose an insurrection had broken out, not
against the king—for everybody knows that he is innocent—but
against this impudent count, this foolhardy
person, it is only a necessary consequence that
he and his partisans must have audaciously attacked
the king in order to save themselves, and in such an
event Count Struensee knew himself to be secure, as
may be seen from his answer to Count Brandt.
It is certainly a proof of the peculiar consciousness
which Count Struensee possessed about his conduct
in Denmark being that of the most foolhardy and
contemptible person conceivable, when he fears the
people, among whom he tried to insinuate himself.
But, on the other hand, it is also a proof that the
Danish and Norwegian nation, although they at times
endure what cannot be offered to any other, still love
God, the king, the royal family, and good manners.
Hence their wishes and sighs were raised to Him,
through whom kings reign, who did not forget the
prayers of Christian III. when the land was groaning
in the days of a former Count, and who with a mighty
arm and in an instant, put an end to the shame which
the king, the royal house, and the kingdoms, had been
compelled to endure.[88]
How great the joy of the people was when the
change took place, and how great its dissatisfaction at
the preceding state of things had been, was seen on
January 17, whence the count might have learned
quam caduca sit ista felicitas. And how excessively
great the joy at this change was in other circles also,
was seen at the court held on the birthday of his royal
Majesty, where sincere anxiety for the country and
affection for the king met, and where the oppressed
man greeted the liberated man with a loving kiss, and
forgot his own wretched position in his love for the
royal family.
For the sake of future ages, when my present indictment
may perhaps be seen by many, I must remark,
that it is only a short narrative of all that has
happened, but, as I think, it will suffice to give a
perfect explanation of the misdeeds of this count, and
show that the sentence I demand is in conformity with
the law, and adapted to his crimes. I must not, therefore,
be reproached with having attempted to render
him ridiculous, especially in an action which demands
the utmost earnestness, for a distinction must be
drawn between a minister who may have committed
an error, and a mountebank who wishes to be a minister,
and, as such, was an enemy of the country, and
must therefore be treated with the same harshness as
he displayed to others. But, in order that Count Struensee
and every one may thoroughly learn that nothing
is brought forward which might be regarded as a
charge without proof, I will now, in accordance with
the most gracious command given me, proceed to
bring my charges against him, together with the
evidence.
To reckon up all the crimes committed by him
would be a most useless task, the more so when we
reflect that the count has only one head, and that
when that is lost by a crime, the other offences would
be superfluous. I will hence close my deduction with
the words—
"——Longa est injuria, longæ
Ambages, sed summa sequar fastigia rerum."
First.
"Count Struensee crept into the familiarity of the
highest lady in the land, to such a degree that it went
beyond the limits that are drawn between persons of
different sexes, who cannot and must not be connected."
As I am commanded to indict Count Struensee—and
I regard the above as one of the greatest crimes
committed by him, and as the first which hurled him
into the others—I bring it forward first: for it is certainly
the most foolhardy one, which no one forgives
him, and for which he cannot be excused.
I here produce the testimony on oath of Fräulein
von Eyben, not in order to prove what is sufficiently
explained, but only to request it may be remarked
how Struensee strove to be present at places when
there was an opportunity for him to acquire what he
desired, and how the indifference with which he was
at first regarded by the person whose confidence he
afterwards gained, proves that it was not he who was
tempted, but that his "inhuman" impudence, his
bold, crafty, and villanous conduct, were powerful
enough to attain that which virtue and education
never grant, and that he is the more criminal, because
he brought others into despair, in order to acquire
honours himself.[89]
As proofs of this most audacious deed committed
by Count Struensee, I produce—(1) The examination
of Counts Struensee and Brandt and Professor
Berger, made on February 20. The first two hundred
and eighteen questions, and the twenty asked him
on the 21st, contain Count Struensee's explanations of
his intercourse with the exalted lady, and her intimacy
with him, but all of which he reckons among
the things she would have so. That he could be excused
as a doctor, and she also, as there is in this no
confession of the crime, I need not stay to disprove,
as there is better evidence. (Here follow five passages
from the report of the examination.) In these
passages, Count Struensee, voluntarily and with great
emotion, publicly confessed the most audacious crime
committed by him. The commissioners possess his
signature, as well as this most important document.
(2) The said Count Struensee's confession signed
with his own hand. (3) Her royal Majesty Caroline
Matilda's declaration of the truth of Struensee's confession,
dated Kronborg, March 9, 1772. (4) Fräulein
von Eyben's deposition. (5) Count Brandt's
statement of February 22. These statements are confirmed
by Professor Berger's deposition. From all
these documents we perceive Count Struensee's atrocious
conduct; how, without shame he advanced with
the greatest security in his crimes, and especially in
the one which can only be thought of with horror,
when we look at the person hurled into shame by
him, and notice how he behaved, as if he wished the
whole world to learn his deeds.
His frequent unannounced running in to the queen:
his lengthened stay: his riding and driving out with
her: the giving and receiving of presents—all this
confirms the truth of the evidence, and shows that he
has not spoken falsely.
For this reason, he has in this matter committed the
crime of high treason in the highest degree. He has
openly acted against the fidelity which he owed the
king his master, and the reverence he should have displayed
toward their Majesties. He has deprived the
king of the confidence, love, and personal security (i.e.
the certainty of alone possessing the queen's person)
which his Majesty had a right to expect after so
sacred a promise, entered into in the sight of God;
he has tried to affix a stain on the royal family, in
order thus to attain dignities and power.
What honest man in the country, however mean he
may be, would not feel most highly insulted by such a
thing! But how awful is the thought of such an insult
offered to the highest persons! a crime which the
legislator has not even supposed, and which it would
be improper to mention. But if a verbal insult of the
king is bad, how much greater is the crime of disgracing
the king and queen by an action! I do not,
therefore, require to dwell longer on this head; for the
facts and the confession of the deed cannot be denied,
and ere I end, Count Struensee can peruse his crime
and its well-merited punishment in 6—4—1 of the
law. I therefore refer him to this passage of the law.
Secondly.
"Count Struensee was not only informed that his
royal Majesty was ill-treated by Count Brandt, and
even assaulted, but he also advised it; hence he neither
prevented it, nor took measures to prevent it, and
he himself also treated his royal Majesty in a contemptuous
way."
From my deduction, the evidence and the indictment
of Count Brandt, the court will learn how the
affair happened: how his Majesty was attacked by the
aforesaid Count Brandt in his cabinet, abused, and
treated in an unexampled manner. As far as I am
aware, there is no instance of such a thing in history—there
is, unfortunately, of royal murders; but none
of such treatment. That Count Struensee was not
only aware of this fact, but urged Count Brandt to
commit it, and approved of the crime, is proved by
the following:—
Count Brandt declares that after his Majesty had
threatened to beat him with a stick, Count Struensee
said to him, at six o'clock on the same evening, "I
have reproved the king, and he answered me, 'Brandt
is a coward; he has no courage, and I will fight with
him.'" Struensee then said further to Brandt, "What
will you do? You must go to the king one evening
and say, 'You insist upon fighting with me: here I
am; if you want anything, come on;'" and he added,
that this had repeatedly occurred with Count Holck.
When Brandt returned from the king, the queen had
begun her game of cards, and, when it was ended,
Struensee stood by the stove, where Brandt told him
what had occurred; to which Struensee answered,
"That is right: now you will have peace; but not a
soul must know it." Count Struensee not only confesses
that he had spoken about it previously with
Count Brandt, but also that he was informed by him
of what had happened, as will be seen from Struensee's
answer to quest. 402-412.
That the count himself also forgot the respect he
owed the king, is further proved by his addressing him
harshly, as is seen by the evidence of the witness
Detlev Christopher Aabyn: "If he will not bathe, he
shall be beaten;" and the other statements of the same
witness.
In the same way, then, as Count Brandt, as I have
shown, has rendered himself guilty of the crime of
high treason by his audacious deed and harsh treatment
of the king—for which Count Struensee even
promises him a reward, as we read in his reply to
Count Brandt's warnings concerning the harshness
with which he is obliged to treat the king: "la reconnaissance
que la reine vous aura, si vous reussissiez, et
les marques incontestables que vous en avez dejà reçu,
vous en recompenseront"—Count Struensee, as adviser,
seducer, and accomplice, has been guilty of the
same crime, and must be punished for it by the same
penalty.
Thirdly.
"Count Struensee harshly treated the king's son,
his Royal Highness Crown Prince Frederick, so that
it seems as if it had been his sole intention to remove
the crown prince from the world, or, at least, to bring
him up so that he would be incapable of reigning."
In addition to all that is known, and has been seen,
by so many persons, the exalted commission learns
from Hans Heinrich Majoll's declaration and Gündel
Marie Schönberg's evidence, that this treatment applied
to a tender child was a fruit of the brain of this
impudent and foolhardy man. Had he not found it
to his advantage to remain a doctor, if he had not
given orders in this affair, it might be said in his excuse
that the education of the crown prince in no way
concerned the maître des requêtes or the cabinet minister.
But everything was done by his orders, although
he, as a doctor, must have been aware that it
is utterly impossible to rear children in such a way.
I am convinced Count Struensee will be unable to
mention any instance of such a way of child-rearing
as he recommended. He therefore ordered it thus
through special malice against the innocent prince, in
order, as I have already said, to get him out of the
way, or try what results such a training would have.
But, in either case, he offends most grievously against
the royal personage, as the crown prince could not be
allowed to be his "testing rag."
I will not say any more about this matter, for which
there is no apology, even though Count Struensee
were to appeal—as his remarks seem to indicate—to
the training or keep of irrational animals. Count
Struensee, who was not trained in this way, has as
fat a paunch as if he were Vitellius. There is a
difference between pampering children so that not a
breath of air may reach them, and giving them too
little food, and making them endure hunger and cold.
Animals have more care for their young, and Count
Struensee will not attain the honour of being placed
in the same class with them. As he asserts that he
possesses intelligence, all this was done by him through
sheer arrogance and malice against the king's son,
whose life was endangered by his advice given as
doctor; and as God has hitherto held His hand over
him, it is no merit of Struensee that he is still alive.
But I am of opinion that any man who endangers the
life of royal children, is fully as worthy of punishment
as one who tries to take their life; and hence deserves
to be sentenced in accordance with the law 6—4—1.
Fourthly.
"Count Struensee has grievously offended, and
committed the crime of high treason, by usurping
the royal authority, passing resolutions in the place
of his royal Majesty, and attaching his own signature
to these resolutions."
Count Struensee's evil intentions against the king
and his subjects are especially displayed in this matter,
even though he and some of his defenders (if he really
have any) may regard it as perfectly innocent. Count
Struensee considers that, as he only intended to undertake
things which would prove advantageous, there was
no harm in it. But the contrary has been shown; and
it would be something incredible if a person who knew
nothing previously of state affairs, should become competent,
in a period of two years, to govern two kingdoms.
Who can believe that a person who considers
himself the most honourable man in the country, entertaining
the best intentions for the king and the
state, but who possesses no religion, and consequently
can have no other intentions but the satisfaction
of his desires,—that such a man should try to
persuade a nation like the Danish and Norwegian that
he is the man who will promote everybody's fortunes
in the kingdom? I here write what must be regarded
as incredible, if we were not so perfectly convinced of
it. Count Struensee has committed crimes which the
meanest man in the kingdom, who has but the most
general ideas about morality and the reverence he
owes his king, will regard as the most detestable. It
is true that an evident crime entails on the culprit the
extremest public contumely,—as, for instance, robbing
one's neighbour; seducing his wife, &c. But it is
unanswerable, under the appearance of friendship,
fidelity, true love of the welfare of the country, disinterestedness,
and sparing the royal treasury, for a
man to strive to put his fingers into everything, and
to rule with unbounded authority instead of the regent,—in
a word, to make a brilliant display of his
villany (I call things by their right names). Count
Struensee alleges that the cause of the abolition of the
council of state was partly that his royal Majesty was
not satisfied with the condition of the country and the
indebtedness in which the kingdom was; partly, that
he was impeded by the council. If his Majesty himself
had the idea of abolishing the council, Count Struensee
ought to have opposed it in a different way from
that which he employed in coercing the king to bathe.
But it was his duty to represent to the king his master
that his royal Majesty, having only recently ascended
the throne, required advice; and if among the councillors
there were some who did not possess his Majesty's
confidence, others could be found to fill their
place; that a monarch, however wise he may be, still
remains a man; that, although the King of Denmark
was not bound to retain advisers, still it was to his
honour and profit to have them; and that he who
was instructed in medical science was not fitted to
undertake the management of such affairs. Everybody
knows that a king should never love hypocrisy.
But truth can be expressed in various ways. A truth
urged in a coarse manner is an insult; an attempt to
apply it sarcastically is a mockery; but when expressed
with honourable straightforwardness, it is
useful, and the latter is the duty of an honest subject.
Count Struensee, however, was so daring as to
take on himself the functions of many men.
In my historical preface, I have called attention to
the fact, how strange it appeared to all who are aware
that a knowledge of the welfare of kingdoms cannot
be acquired by whistling or dancing, when he attained
the most gracious royal order and instruction of July
14, 1771, to be privy cabinet minister. From this
instruction, which was communicated to the colleges,
we learn that Count Struensee not only exercised a
power which not even the great chancellor of the
kingdom possessed in former times, but exercised it
as fully as only his royal Majesty could do himself.
It is true there was an appearance as if everything
still depended on his Majesty's approbation; but if the
matter is looked into more closely, this is only delusion
and juggling. For if everything in the cabinet
is decided by Count Struensee, and his orders and
regulations are to have the same value as the king's
commands, it is clear that if anything was issued from
the cabinet which opposed existing regulations and
resolutions, and that this should be returned to the
cabinet for alteration, the eventual decision depended
on the count himself. And what assurance was given
the king and his subjects that nothing wrong would
be done by the cabinet minister when he possessed
the power himself to examine, defend, and approve
everything he had resolved on?
When Count Struensee had the fortune, favour, and
honour to come to the Danish court and stand well
there, he probably took the Danish and Norwegian
subjects for such cattle, that they might be called together
and led to the shambles by a cabinet resolution
of his, without being allowed to murmur, for in no other
way can we explain his daring to undertake such an
enterprise. Any man who presumes to manage the
affairs of a kingdom, and direct them instead of the
king, must be acquainted with the duties of the king
to his subjects, and the duties of the subjects to the
king. He must be a simple doctor who merely knows
that there is a heart in the human body, but not where
it is seated, and what parts are connected with it or
have influence over it. Any man who did not wish
merely to play the harlequin, but maintain his honour,
ought to be acquainted with the duties of the regent
and the people. Struensee could have seen in the
Danish and Norwegian code, and in the Lex Regia of
Frederick III. of blessed memory, signed on November
14, 1665, that sovereignty, but not despotism, is
granted to the king. There is not a subject of his
Majesty who would feel offended because the king
rules with unlimited power, for that is his right. Any
one who asserts that the king can alter the >Lex Regia
without the assent of the nation, and against the
will of all classes, is a traitor, hypocrite, and scoundrel.
The royal law, which the kings must obey, and
which is a sine quâ non on their part and that of their
subjects, cannot be altered by the king, without at
once overthrowing and restricting his rule, for it is
ordered (as Frederick III. could order his descendants
as primus adquirens), that the royal law shall not
be altered, and the right to the monarchy is solely
derived from this supreme royal law, as an immutable
fundamental law for both kingdoms.
(Wiwet here quotes the two passages of the Lex
Regia, 3 and 26, referring to this. As I have given
them already literally, they may be omitted here.)
If Count Struensee was so stupid that he knew
nothing about the royal law, although he undertook
to be director of the kingdom, his audacity might
perhaps be expiated in prison, in a mad-house, or on
the pillory. But as he has declared that he was acquainted
with the contents and prescriptions of the
royal law, but is at the same time of opinion that
there is no harm in appropriating the king's authority
for the purpose of pulling the skin of the subjects over
their ears, he has on this point been guilty of the crime
of high treason in a high degree. Just as little as an
alteration can be effected in the king's hereditary
government, which insults the king, can this be done
in another way, even though it might appear as if
it were done in favour of the king. The royal law
must so remain unchanged that Count Struensee can
introduce no other form of government but that prescribed
by it. The apology with which Count Struensee
tries to excuse his enterprise I need not contradict,
for the king cannot forgive his audacity. The
honour, life, and property of the people, were entrusted
to the autocracy of the descendants of Frederick
III., but to no one else. Any one, therefore,
who attempts to appropriate this power, offends against
the reverence which he owes the king.
Fifthly.
Even if Count Struensee could be for a moment excused
for acquiring, in contradiction to the royal law,
such authority as was granted him in the cabinet decree
of July 14, 1771, he still remains criminal, because
he did not behave honestly after the contents of this
instruction, from which it is plainly seen that he did
not employ this power to relieve his royal Majesty,
but merely to play the part which he had invented for
himself and his colleagues. To mention all the intrigues
of which he was guilty in this respect, is superfluous,
and would lead me too far. I consider,
therefore, that one example will be sufficient. Should
it appear to the count, however, that I have not sufficiently
convicted him of being a clumsy criminal, I
have various further proofs at his service.
When Count Struensee had effected the dismissal of
the Horse Guards, the Foot Guards were also to be dismissed
from their duty at the palace. The matter was
connected in this way: Count Struensee apprehended
that he might some day receive the reward of his
crimes, and therefore he must see to his precautions.
The natives of the country, as a wall of defence round
the royal house, were a thorn in his eye, and hence
such obstacles must be removed for coming events.
Consequently, he drew up a cabinet decree of December
21, 1771, concerning the disbandment of the Foot
Guards, of which his royal Majesty was not informed.
These men were to be placed in other regiments, because,
as the count alleges, equality ought to prevail among all
officers and soldiers, as they all served the same king;
while the true reason was, that the count, in the event
of ill-success, did not wish to have them against him,
as they might assist in seizing him by the ear. But
when this order became known, and the Guards refused
to obey it, he procured a royal order of December 24,
by which his Majesty most graciously granted discharges
to those Guards, who would not perform duty
at the palace with the grenadiers. This was an extraordinarily
foolhardy action, as will be seen from the
following facts:—
First. His Majesty never knew anything about such a
dismissal of the body-guard: for this reason it has been
re-embodied, which proves that the disbandment took
place against the king's will. Secondly. His Majesty
did not sign the said order. Thirdly. Count Struensee,
when he extorted his royal Majesty's approbation for
the disbandment of the Guards, represented that they
refused to do duty at the palace with the grenadiers,
which was an evident falsehood, as the Guards only refused
to enter other regiments. Fourthly. Although,
from December 21 to 24, there were various resolutions
which ought to have been approved by the king,
Struensee did not lay them before his Majesty, solely
from the motive of having the former orders of December
21 confirmed by the approbation of the last.
He therefore acted falsely as regards the commands and
resolutions, the drawing-up of which, and laying before
the king for approbation, depended on him as privy
cabinet minister, and thus acted contrary to the law
I—I—I.
Sixthly.
After Count Struensee had acquired the mastery
over his Majesty's treasury, both the private and the
special cabinet treasury, he contrived to turn it to his
own advantage. It would lead me too far if I mentioned
all the cunning tricks done by him, and the
commission will pardon me if I do not lay all the
instances before it. Count Struensee has, therefore,
no reason to complain, for all his malversations are
not mentioned, and, indeed, they are countless. He
takes 10,000 dollars, and 3,000 at the new year, procures
Count Brandt 3,000, so that he may not overthrow
and betray him, and the Countess Holstein a
gratification of 3,000 dollars, because she has lost her
money at play, although her royal Majesty graciously
and justly refuses it, for the earnings of 3,000 poor
women by spinning pay for her extravagance. One
gratification after the other is granted to Falckenskjold,[90]
that chosen instrument for all events, that sheet-anchor
on which the whole machine (so Count Struensee calls
his arrangements) depended, and who was well aware
that, if the count's rule broke up, he (the colonel)
would also lose his regiment. For his brother he procures
money from the king's treasury, on the grounds
that a financier must have money to prevent him from
stealing; for such is the right conclusion that should
be drawn from his defence.
That Count Struensee is as great a villain as was ever
rung in and out of a German fair, any one can see from
the fact that he obtained money and office for his brother.
I will not refer to the circumstance that the king was
obliged to pay for the journey of a person to an office
of which the person summoned had no knowledge.
My God, what a mockery of so many worthy men,
who meant sincerely by the king and country! But
to propose his brother as deputy of finances, and to
give him 3,000 dollars so that he might not plunder
the king in other ways of an equal sum, is so extraordinarily
audacious and foolhardy, that it renders Count
Struensee most excessively contemptible. Who could
invent such motives without prostituting himself, and
revealing that in such dealing no true honour was intended!
In the same way as Count Struensee managed to
procure his brother money, he also continued to obtain
considerable sums for himself and his confidants.
When he acquired full authority over the king's treasury,
on learning that it was by no means a matter of
indifference to his Majesty whether there was money
in the treasury or not, he requested his Majesty, upon
some money being paid in, most graciously to give
him and Brandt a trifle, probably under the same pretext
as he afterwards employed for his brother. His
Majesty therefore gave—
| To the Queen |
10,000 |
dollars. |
|
| To Count Brandt |
6,000 |
" |
and |
| To him, Count Struensee |
6,000 |
" |
|
| |
——— |
|
|
| Making a total of |
22,000 |
dollars, |
|
which is perfectly correct. But after his Majesty's
approval of the donations had been obtained, Count
Struensee, who was able to take the money out of the
king's special treasury—for he cannot prove that he
took it from anywhere else—hit on the idea of adding
a 0, so that the document now reads
| To the Queen |
10,000 |
dollars. |
|
| To Count Brandt |
60,000 |
" |
and |
| To him, Count Struensee |
60,000 |
" |
|
| |
——— |
|
|
| Together |
130,000 |
dollars. |
|
As in reckoning up this did not agree with the
22,000 dollars, in order to avoid an alteration of both
the figures 2, the matter was thus arranged:
| To the Queen |
10,000 |
dollars. |
|
| To Count Brandt |
60,000 |
" |
|
| To Count Struensee |
60,000 |
" |
and |
| To Falckenskjold |
2,000 |
" |
|
| |
——— |
|
|
| Total |
132,000 |
dollars. |
|
Apart from the fact that any one can easily detect
how the two ciphers were added, and also that a
figure 2 has been altered into a 3, it is clear, as Counts
Brandt and Struensee themselves, will be obliged to
confess, that there is the greatest reason for regarding
the affair with suspicion; and it will be proved an
evident forgery, when we take into consideration the
following facts:—1. His royal Majesty has himself
declared that he did not give them 60,000 dollars.
2. It is remarkable that in the same document by
which the king gave his two subjects and servants
60,000 dollars apiece, he granted his consort only
10,000; and 3. All the proofs brought forward by the
count in this matter, hobble.
He has, therefore, in addition to the insult offered
his Majesty by robbing him of so large a capital, been
guilty of peculation in this instance also, and offended
against the regulations of the law 6—4—10.
Seventhly.
Furthermore, Count Struensee was an accomplice,
adviser, and helper, in selling her royal Majesty's
costly bouquet, which was composed of precious stones,
and taxed at the value of 40,000 dollars, for 10,000
dollars in Hamburg, and entrusting the sale to Etats-rath
Waitz, although this concerned an article which
served as an ornament to the queen regnant of the
country, and ought not to have been taken from her.
(Here come eight passages from the evidence.) In
this he has not only acted faithlessly, in allowing so
valuable an ornament to be sold for so ridiculous a
price, but it was also quite unnecessary to dispose of a
valuable in such a way "to the prostitution of its
owner."
Eighthly.
In order that this intrigue and other disgraceful
undertakings might not come to the knowledge of the
king, he gave orders that all letters addressed to his
Majesty should be delivered in the cabinet, so that he
might be the first to learn everything, and, if necessary,
take those measures which his safety demanded,
and be the conductor and defender of any proceedings
that might be found requisite.
Ninthly.
At length, when Struensee perceived that matters
were not going on right, and that he was about to be
attacked, he tried to defend himself. Those persons
whom he feared were dismissed; the citizens only remained,
but these he fancied he could easily terrify.
Hence, after obtaining the nomination of another commandant,
he gave orders to have the cannon held in
readiness. It is true that he denies this, and only
acknowledges that he gave Major-General Gude orders
to hold everything in readiness which would serve for
the maintenance of good order. But when we consider
that this was not necessary, as such cases are always
provided for in Copenhagen, we presume this unusual
regulation was either the fruit of an apprehension that
he was at length about to receive the reward of his
actions, or that it had reference to a measure that was
about to be taken and defended. That he intended to
fly and take some one with him, in the event of his
not being able to hold his ground, is seen from litt. F.,
pp. 33, 41, and 52.
I consider, therefore, that I have proved Count
Struensee's enormous crimes against his royal Majesty,
the royal family, and the kingdoms; and that he has
been guilty of high treason in many ways. The
punishment I demand consequently is—
"That Count John Frederick Struensee, for the
crimes committed by him, be condemned to have lost
his dignity of count, his honour, life, and property;
and that, after his coat of arms has been broken by
the executioner, his right hand be cut off while he is
alive, his body quartered and exposed on a wheel, his
head and hand stuck on a pole, and also that his fortune
be confiscated to the king, and his heirs, if he have
any, forfeit their rank and birth."
F. W. Wiwet.
Copenhagen, April 21, 1772.
I am afraid that my translation of this unexampled
document will be regarded as extremely inelegant;
but this could not be avoided, if the literal meaning
were to be adhered to. The original itself is written
in the most barbarous style; wherever the advocates
Danish runs short he helps himself out with a German
word, which he generally misapplies, and puts in scraps
of Latin here and there, which have the most absurd
counter-sense. As my object, however, was to give
an exact idea of charges which would not have hung
a dog in this country, I have thought it advisable to
sacrifice elegance to correctness.
Ere I conclude this chapter, I may be permitted to
supply one example of the way in which the judges
tried to scrape up evidence against the unfortunate
ex-minister. On the same day when the Russian
minister, Filosofow, insulted Struensee so grossly, as
has been already recorded, a report was spread that
the latter had quarrelled with one of the first gentlemen
in the land, and treacherously assailed him, sword
in hand; but this rumour died out as rapidly as it had
been propagated. After the arrest of Struensee, and
the difficulty felt of proving the already resolved death-sentence
by credible testimony, the president of the
court, Justiciary Baron von Juel-Wind, went to this
gentleman, and asked him if he were disposed to
bring a charge against Struensee before the commission?
The gentleman nobly rejected such a proposal,
and answered, that he was accustomed to
pity the unfortunate, and not increase their misery;
besides, there was not the slightest truth in the
rumour.
This proves that even Wiwet's diatribes were not
considered sufficient evidence of Struensee's guilt, and
that every opportunity was sought to bolster up the
case. It is very possible, however, that the judges
were more successful with other witnesses whom they
tried to suborn, and therefore the evidence, such as it
is, ought to be regarded with extra suspicion.