STRUENSEE'S SENTENCE—HIS GENERAL CONDUCT—THE MAITRE
DES REQUETES—THE GERMAN LANGUAGE—STRUENSEE'S
DESPOTISM—THE COUNCIL OF THE THIRTY-TWO—THE
CABINET MINISTER—THE KING'S PRESENTS—STRUENSEE'S
PRECAUTIONS—HIS DOWNFALL—THE SENTENCE APPROVED—COUNT
BRANDT—HIS ASSAULT ON THE KING—HIS BEHAVIOUR—THE
ROYAL ASSENT.
STRUENSEE'S SENTENCE.[5]
Apart from the fact that Count John Frederick
Struensee has already been convicted, and has himself
confessed that he has committed a terrible crime,
which involves in an eminent degree an assault on
the king's supremacy, or the crime of high treason, and
according to the law (especially art. 1 of cap. iv. of
book vi.) deserves the severe penalty of death; it is
sufficiently notorious and proven that his whole
conduct and management during the time when he
had a share in the administration of the affairs was a
chain, which, on one side, was composed of vain and
audacious impetuosity; on the other, of tricks and
intrigues, all of which operated to secure him the whole
power and authority to the exclusion of others. At
the same time he boldly employed all the measures
which appeared to be useful in attaining his ends,
without in the slightest degree reflecting whether
they were permitted or not, and how far they
accorded with the form of government and the constitution,
the genius of the nation and the regulations
and laws, both civil and fundamental, or were in
strict opposition to them.
His great design was partly to become privy
cabinet minister, with the extraordinary and unparalleled
authority which he filched in the last month of
July, partly to exclude all the subjects from their
king, and the king from them; partly to exercise at
court and over his Majesty such an unbridled power
as has been seen with astonishment.
In order to attain this end, he strove, during his
Majesty's foreign journey, to gain his most gracious
favour by proved care for the king's health and
pleasure. When his Majesty returned, Struensee
behaved quietly, and seemed to think of nothing less
than the attachment of charges and honours, although
his ambition and his love of power desired them.
He lived at court, amused himself, demanded no
increase of his salary, and seemed to satisfy himself
with peace and voluptuousness; but in secret he
zealously strove to lay the foundation on which he
intended to raise his proud fortune.
It was not his business to learn the language of the
country, to study the position and true interest of the
kingdom, and to learn its civil laws and constitution.
This was the way which he ought to have chosen;
but about all these things he was, and remained, in the
deepest ignorance. Instead of this, he preferred to
establish the principles which his Majesty should
follow in the government, so that he might use them
in concealing his infamous propositions behind them,
and as he had every reason to apprehend that either
faithfully minded men might reveal his designs, or
that the king himself should detect them; in order to
prevent the former effect, he calumniated without
distinction all those who had the honour of being
allowed to approach the monarch, and in order to
secure the latter, he strove to acquire a powerful
protection, and to have in the king's neighbourhood
so close, constant, and trustworthy a friend, that it was
rendered almost impossible for his Majesty to penetrate
this man's ways and designs.
No sooner had he got his machine in perfect readiness
in the year 1770 than he at once set it in motion.
Since the sovereignty our kings have had a council,
composed of men who were experienced in the laws
and customs of the country, and had studied the true
state-system and real interests of the land, while, at
the same time, they knew the rules which were applicable
in cases that occurred.
It was their office to attend the king, as often as
matters of importance were to be laid before him, in
order to afford his Majesty the necessary explanations
about everything he wished to know, so that he might
give his decision.
These men, however, as members of the council,
had no vote, no expedition, no secretaries; for everything
depended on the king's will, and everything was
carried into effect by the departments concerned.
This traditional and so natural council Struensee
and his adherents[6] wished to have entirely abolished
and quashed, for this man apprehended that if such a
council existed, and even if it were composed of his
own friends, the time would arrive when it would
oppose his injurious propositions, and reveal them to
the king, as he could not exclude them (the members)
from speaking with his Majesty, and representing to
him what was best for him and the land.
For this end Struensee had previously calumniated
the ministry by all sorts of insinuations, and even
depicted in the blackest colours those of their actions
which were evidently to the advantage of the king
and the state.
His Majesty the king, who heartily loves his people,
only desires honest officials, and jealously holds to his
sovereign power, now lost his confidence in the
council, wished to appoint other men to it, and to give
it a different constitution; but Struensee, by false statements,
and the most cunning tricks, laid such obstacles
in the king's way that the council gradually ceased to
meet, and was finally solemnly abolished by a decree
of December 27, 1770.
At the same time, he became maître des requêtes,
and as it was his plan that only he should have the
right to speak to the king about the affairs, and that
all other persons should be excluded from doing so,
it appeared to him that the remaining colleges might
still lay some impediments in his way.
In order to prevent this, he represented to his
Majesty the King, who wished to be thoroughly acquainted
with the affairs sent in from the colleges for
his most gracious decision, that nothing would be more
useful for this object than for the colleges to be ordered
to deliver their written requests in a portfolio, so that
the king might be allowed the requisite time to read
through the memoirs and reflect.
By this brilliant, and apparently so useful advice,
this man gained his object of also "excluding" the
colleges from the king.
He soon seizes the portfolios, and thus becomes the
sole master to lay matters before the king at his pleasure.
If the colleges wished to produce further reasons
for the king's better information, they must apply to
Struensee, and thus he alone became what the council
and the colleges together had formerly been.
Under the pretext of a more rapid expedition of
various matters, and in order to display the royal
authority in its right supremacy, he issued cabinet
decrees, which were carried out without the colleges
concerned being informed of them,—a conduct which
necessarily produced the greatest confusion, and which
a man dared, who was neither acquainted with the
country nor its laws, its condition nor its language.
But this did not trouble him at all, so long as he could
grasp all the respect and all the power.
This ignorance of Count Struensee in everything,
which every minister in Denmark must know, and his
extremely slight efforts to obtain a knowledge of it,
entailed innumerable disadvantages, both generally and
for private persons.
In the colleges, which were formerly accustomed to
send in their reports in Danish, a special official had
to be appointed to translate them into German, so that
Count Struensee might read them in this language.
The Danish Chancery, the only college which continued
to report in Danish, had only too often opportunity
for learning that these representations were not
read at all, as only an extract of the proposition, which,
by command, was inserted in what was called the
Rotulus, was translated into German and seen by
Count Struensee, after which the resolution ensued in
the German language, and was again translated into
Danish in the Chancery. It could not fail but that
the resolution often proved equivocal, incomprehensible,
and but little adapted to the affair, of which the
man who represented it to his Majesty had only rarely
a correct idea.
Private persons who wished to send in petitions to
the cabinet, and had drawn them up in the Danish
language, ran about to find a German translator, as
they were of the possibly not incorrect opinion that
their memorial, if such was only in Danish, would not
be read, while these cheap translations often turned
out so, that it was impossible to discern what was the
real object of the petition.
Count Struensee's ignorance of the organization of
the colleges, his unwillingness to instruct himself
about it, and his exertions to reform the entire old state
constitution, and to increase the number of his adherents
by appointing persons everywhere, and to the
highest offices, who owed their fortune to him—all
this led him to lay hands on one college after the
other. And as he would not and could not work
himself, he employed other men in carrying out the
important reforms, several of whom afterwards confessed
that they had no knowledge of the advantages
and defects of the former organization of these colleges,
nor attempted to acquire it, as they were only
ordered to draw up a plan of the new arrangements
after a certain predetermined date.
After Count Struensee had drawn all power and
authority into his own hands by removing the privy
council, by weakening and reconstituting, and by the
exclusion of verbal reports, it was not long ere his
Majesty's subjects perceived the effects of his, Struensee's,
despotic principles and ideas.
As a consequence of the before-mentioned paternal
and mild government, to which people had been long
accustomed in Denmark, and which had to some
extent acquired a traditional right, every one who
had obtained a royal appointment considered himself
justified in believing that he should retain it so long as
he behaved himself properly and attended to his duties,
and therefore ran no risk of losing his post against
his will, so long as he was not declared unworthy of
it through a judicial sentence on account of malversation,
errors, or negligence. These moderate principles,
which characterised the mildness of the government,
and had many excellent results, were not at all
to Count Struensee's taste, who did not wish to be in
the least degree impeded when the object was to ruin
people, and imbue others with terror.
For this reason it was heard frequently, nay, almost
daily, that first one, then the other, royal official was
removed by a cabinet order, without their learning
what error they had committed, or in what their
offence consisted.[7]
Several persons also lost their posts without any
royal resolution on the subject being imparted to
them, and without knowing anything of it, till they
learned that their office had been given to another
man by a cabinet order. This conduct was even extended
to the dismissal of entire colleges.
The entire magistracy, consisting of from eighteen
to twenty, or even more persons, was abolished, and
a new magistracy was appointed by a cabinet order
addressed on April 3, 1771, to the president, who had
been appointed to this post only a few days previously,
and also by a cabinet decree, and who contented himself
with informing the previous members of the magistracy
by letter that they were dismissed, and the new
ones that they were to assemble at the town-hall
without the deposed members learning what offence
they had committed, or why they were discharged.
In addition to the magistracy, there was another
college or public assembly in Copenhagen, namely, the
so-called thirty-two men, as, owing to the bravery and
fidelity so solemnly displayed by the Copenhageners
during the siege, and on the establishment of the
sovereignty,[8] it was conceded among the privileges
granted to the citizens on June 24, 1664, that they
should be allowed to elect thirty-two of the best and
most respected citizens, who would, with the magistracy,
consult about the welfare of the city, and its
revenues and out-goings. In these privileges access to
his Majesty's person was also granted to the city
deputies and the magistracy.
This assembly, which was regarded as the highest of
these privileges, and had had many good results, and,
moreover, did not cost the king or city a farthing, was
also dissolved by the aforesaid cabinet order, by virtue
of which the chief president informed the men that
they were no longer permitted to meet, and ordered
the council-hall to be closed. This, and many other
instances of a similar nature, which all proved that
nothing was sacred to this equally incautious and absolute
man, and that he was as great an enemy of all
sense and mildness as he was of order and good morals,
produced a striking effect upon the nation, which
fancied itself suddenly removed under an "Oriental
climate."
Some lamented and sighed, others expressed their
amazement or bitterness in one way or the other. But
all were agreed that his Majesty's mild and paternal
heart for his subjects was still the same, if their complaints
and sighs could only penetrate to the throne,
and the real posture of the affair be represented to his
Majesty.
This, however, seemed quite impossible, owing to
the precautions which Count Struensee had taken in
this respect. He had placed his intimate friend, Count
Brandt, near the king,[9] and as he, in accordance with
the well-known proverb, nulla amicitia nisi inter bonos,
was not fully convinced of the duration of this friendship,
he sought to insure its permanence by a mutual
interest, and, as will be shown presently, at the expense
of his Majesty and the royal treasury.
Count Brandt, who was always about the king, confirmed
him in everything that Count Struensee alleged
or insinuated, and prevented everybody from having
an opportunity to convince his Majesty of the opposite
truth.
There was no council, and, so to speak, no minister.
No one succeeded in speaking alone with the king, save
those persons of whose devotion Count Struensee considered
himself assured and if it ever happened, it was
only for moments which admitted of no detailed explanation
or discussion. All the rest were held aloof
from his Majesty, which was even extended to his
Majesty's own most exalted relatives and his nearest
family, toward whom the king had formerly displayed
special tenderness and affection. But from the time
when Count Struensee had usurped the administration
of the court and of the whole country, the latter never
had an opportunity of conversing alone with the king,
as they would not have omitted to represent to his
Majesty the good of his subjects and their grief, of
which these exalted personages afterwards, when the
opportunity was offered, have given incontrovertible
proofs, which can never be sufficiently praised and recognised.
It could not fail but that Count Struensee should
render himself odious to all, through such despotic,
arbitrary, and unreasonable conduct.
His emissaries, and the adherents whom he still possessed,
tried, even though they did not dare to justify
or excuse his undertakings, at least to boast of his asserted
disinterestedness, and to spread far and wide that
he was satisfied with his moderate salary, without asking
either money or honours for himself or his friends.
How far this met with belief may be left an open
question. But it is certain that Count Struensee took
very carefully-devised measures to conceal his selfishness
at that time, and so long as it lasted. But it
was afterwards seen only too plainly that he was an
extremely interested and selfish man, of whom it may
be justly said that he pillaged his Majesty's treasury.
He had a very respectable and considerable salary,
which ought to have been sufficient, as he had everything
free at court down to the very banquets he gave.
He knew, and often enough proclaimed, in what a bad
state the public treasury and his Majesty's were from
former times.
For all that, after the council was dissolved, and
he had become maître des requêtes, he allowed hardly
three months to pass ere he, by an abuse of his Majesty's
good heart, demanded and received from his most
gracious lord a present of 10,000 dollars for himself, and
a similar sum for his friend Count Brandt. It might be
supposed that so considerable a present for these two
persons, of whom one was maître des requêtes, and the
other directeur des spectacles, and who both had only held
these offices for a short time, would have satisfied their
greediness for a while. But, instead of this, we find
that it grew and increased, for Count Struensee, after
receiving the above mentioned present in February or
March, again received in May, or at the end of two or
three months, from his Majesty 50,000 or 60,000 dollars,
and Count Brandt the same sum, so that these
two persons, in the short time of three or four months,
cost his Majesty, in addition to their regular salary,
140,000 dollars, or at least 120,000—for which of these
two sums is the correct one cannot as yet be stated
with certainty, owing to the confusion prevailing in
Count Struensee's accounts—and this in addition to
the presents which before and after this date they procured
for their good friends: such as Justiz-rath Struensee
4,000 dollars, Countess Holstein 3,000, Chamberlain
Falckenskjold 3,500 or more, and so on.
That Count Struensee's irresponsible selfishness was
duly considered and intended, is seen from the artificial
machinery which he formed, solely that he might be
able to take these sums without any one detecting
it.
For this purpose, he first proposed the abolition of
what was called the "Trésor"—which consisted of a
sum of money laid by for unforeseen expenses, and
that it should be paid into the public treasury. As
the Trésor, however, must pass through the cabinet on
its way to the public exchequer, he proposed to his
Majesty to reserve 250,000 dollars of the same, in order
to form a special cabinet treasury which would stand
under his control.
In this way Count Struensee obtained a good opportunity
for receiving considerable sums, without any one
being acquainted with the fact.
He behaved in such a way with this treasury, that
after it was established in April, 1771, and at that time
consisted of 250,000 dollars, at the end of May only
118,000 dollars remained of the original contents,
although the king had no other out-goings but these
presents.
The remaining 118,000 dollars would have gone by
degrees the same road as the others if Struensee had
been allowed sufficient time.
Count Struensee's disgraceful avarice and selfishness
are thus rendered so evident, that those persons
who proclaimed him as disinterested must fairly confess
that they knew him badly, and were not properly informed.[10]
But this is not sufficient. There is the very
strongest presumption that Count Struensee in this
traffic committed an impudent, disgraceful, and highly
criminal fraud. When the account found among
Count Struensee's papers, and approved by his Majesty,
of the income and expenditure of the special treasury
for the months of April and May, was laid before his
Majesty, as it was considered suspicious, the king at
once declared that he perfectly well remembered
having at that time given 10,000 dollars to the queen,
6,000 to Count Brandt, and other 6,000 to Count
Struensee, but no more. Just as these sums amount
to 22,000 dollars, it is on an inspection of the document
as clear as the sun that the addition was in the
first instance 22,000 dollars, but the first figure two was
converted into a three—a change which is so visible that
it is at once noticed—and that a one was afterwards
added, for which there was no other room but in front
of the line drawn underneath, which is quite contrary
to the practice in the other accounts, and in this very
one on the preceding page, where the in-comings are
calculated. Hence, then, the said sum of 22,000
dollars became 132,000, which is proved by the fact
that the two sums of 6,000 dollars for Struensee and
Brandt were converted into 60,000 by the addition of a
cipher, and 2,000 dollars were added for Falckenskjold.
This last sum seems to have been added, in order not
to be obliged to convert the second two into a cipher
in the sum of 22,000 dollars, which had become
130,000.
These suppositions, the real strength of which only
that man can comprehend who has the document in question
before him, is also confirmed by other concurrent
circumstances—as, for instance, that the account for
April and May is written by Struensee himself, while
the other extracts and calculations are written by the
secretary of the cabinet, which probably occurred
because Count Struensee wished no one to be cognizant
of the embezzlement effected by him, and further by
the fact that, from this time, Count Struensee laid no
account of the treasury before the king until the end
of October, although in June there was an out-going
of 2,000 dollars, which were given to Justiz-rath Struensee.[11]
This negligence or omission appears to have taken
place purposely, so that his Majesty, after so long an
interval, might not thoroughly remember the real
state of the treasury. To this must be added his
Majesty's own alleged and very natural conjecture
that it cannot be credited that he gave Counts Struensee
and Brandt 50,000 or 60,000 dollars apiece, while he
only made the queen a present of 10,000.
Count Struensee, who is obliged to confess the
selfishness of having requested this money of the king,
will not, however, acknowledge this embezzlement, but
asserts that his Majesty at that time, on his request,
gave him 50,000 dollars, and Count Brandt the same
sum, and that, as the 10,000 dollars previously given
had not been taken to account, they were included in
this amount. On the document being produced before
the commission, however, he was obliged to allow that
all the facts concurred against him to arouse such a
presumption, which he had no evidence to refute,
while at the same time, he regretted his want of accuracy
and his negligence.
That Count Struensee's ambition was not less than
his avidity, and that his "moderation," as regards
honours and titles, was in no way inferior to that for
money and resources, is equally self-evident.
Within two years he made such progress as others
of greater nobility and higher merit hardly make in
thirty years and more. According to the position
which he occupied, he could not fail to stand in great
honour both at court and in the city. But all this was
not enough for him.
Through constant persuasion he brought it about
that his Majesty appointed him on July 14, 1771,
privy cabinet minister, which design he contrived to
conceal up to the last moment, even from his most
intimate friends, just as he, and Chamberlain Brandt
were a few days later raised to the rank of counts.[12]
Although as privy cabinet minister he regarded
himself as the first private person in the whole kingdom,
still, the title and the authority he had hitherto
possessed did not suffice him; but he wished to have
prerogatives connected with them which were not at
all seemly for a subject, and involved a portion of the
sovereign authority which belonged to the king alone.
Count Struensee had already seized on all the power,
and as those persons who were about the king spoke
in Struensee's behalf, and his Majesty thus only heard
praises of his minister, it was perfectly natural that he
should have a certain liking for him, and as he was
nearly the only person who discussed the affairs with
his Majesty, it could not fail that the latter should
consent to everything he proposed. Thus he had
everything that he could crave; but this was not
sufficient to satisfy his immoderate ambition, as the
colleges refused to obey unless they saw the king's
signature.
This did not suit Struensee, and there are grounds
for believing that it did not agree with his secret
designs, and his wish that his signature should be
worth as much as the king's, and that the persons
concerned should obey both signatures.
This he attained by the royal order projected by
himself, which was issued to the colleges on July 15,
1771, with reference to his office as privy cabinet
minister, and was afterwards published by them; for
in the first article of this cabinet order the decrees
signed by Struensee, and provided with the cabinet
seal, were placed perfectly parallel with those signed
by his Majesty himself, and countersigned by Struensee,
and in the fourth article it is expressly ordered
that everybody should execute the cabinet orders
issued and expedited by Struensee. It is true that
this article seems to contain a certain limitation, where
it states, "so far as no royal regulation or resolution
speaks to the contrary;" but what follows on this may
be rather regarded as an extension, for, instead of
stating, as might be expected, that in such a case
execution was to be deferred until a royal resolution
was issued, it continues, "in which case, the fact is to
be immediately reported to the cabinet," so that if any
one thought it his duty to remonstrate against Struensee
or his order, he would have to apply to Struensee
himself; and if the minister then commanded him to
obey his first order and carry it out, he must do so.
This is what Count Struensee intended and practiced.
In this way, however, he filched a portion of the
sovereignty, and, from what had previously happened,
it might be concluded that he intended to exercise it
alone.
As Struensee acknowledges having read the Lex
Regia, and as he as minister must have been fully
acquainted with its contents, he must have known
that article 7 resolves "that all government decrees,
letters, and documents shall be signed by the king
himself." But the article of the royal law most applicable
here is the 26th, in which the most revered king
and first autocrat, Frederick III., appears to have had
a species of presentiment that a Struensee might one
day arise in Denmark, because it is stated in it how injurious
it is when the mildness and kindness of kings
and masters are so abused that their power and authority
are cut away in an almost imperceptible manner,
and for this reason it is recommended to, and impressed
on, the kings of Denmark zealously to watch over their
sovereignty and autocracy in order to keep it uninjured;
and the conclusion is, that if any one should dare to
desire or appropriate anything which might in any way
be prejudicial to the sovereign authority and monarchical
power of the king, everything of the sort shall be
regarded as null and void, and those who have not
hesitated to acquire such a thing, or tried to do so,
shall be punished as insulters of majesty, because they
have committed the greatest crime against the supremacy
of the royal autocracy.
Count Struensee could have read his sentence here,
if he had not committed another and equally coarse
offense against the king's highness, apart from the fact
that he was not only an accomplice and adviser, but
also an inciter of the assault made on his Majesty's
person by his intimate friend Count Brandt.
The way in which Count Struensee exercised the
power and authority entrusted to him as privy cabinet
minister does not excuse him, but, on the contrary, incriminates
him in the highest degree, because it is a
further proof that he regarded the welfare, honour,
life, and property of his Majesty's subjects as purely
dependent on his discretion.
He revoked, by cabinet orders drawn up by himself,
and under his hand, former royal resolutions, of whose
existence he was cognizant.
In the most important affairs he issued orders
without his Majesty's knowledge, and he partly neglected
the extracts from cabinet decrees imposed upon
him as a duty by the resolution of July 15, which he
was to lay before the king every week, or drew them
up in such a way that it was impossible to discover the
nature of the orders, or the effect they were intended
to produce.
When the direction of the privy treasury was entrusted
to him—for he wished to direct all the treasuries—he
thought proper to give the cashier fresh
instructions from his hand; and when the cashier represented
to him that he held a royal instruction which
could only be revoked by another royal resolution, he
gave him an answer which contained a species of reprimand,
and ordered him to obey the order and instruction
given by him, Struensee.
The pretty corps of Horse Guards, which was composed
exclusively of Danes and Norwegians, and consequently
did not please Count Struensee—or, as it
only consisted of two squadrons, was not very expensive—was
disbanded in February, 1771, by Count
Struensee's proposition, and in accordance with his
wish, but against the opinion of the college.[13]
The Fusilier Guards still remained. They consisted
of five companies, and were composed of none but
clever and trustworthy men, to whom the guard of
the royal palace, and before the apartments of the
royal house, could be safely entrusted; but they possessed
a "quality" which prevented Struensee from
being able to place confidence in them,—they were
nearly all Danes and Norwegians.
He had long resolved on the reduction of this corps,
and spoken with several persons about it, most of
whom, however, dissuaded him. At length he carried
it through, and without his Majesty's knowledge (as
the king himself has declared)[14] issued, on December
21, 1771, a cabinet order to the Generalty and Commissariat
College, by which the five companies of Foot
Guards were to be transformed into five companies of
grenadiers, and one company of them be attached to
each of the five regiments quartered in Copenhagen.
He allowed December 21, 22, and 23 to pass without
telling his Majesty anything about it, although
Struensee, on the 23rd, procured the Generalty the
royal approbation of the said order of the 21st, because
this college required a royal resolution, and refused
without it to execute the cabinet order, as it considered
the affair of too great importance, and foresaw
the consequences that would result from it.
As, however, the Guards on December 24 declared
that their capitulation must be kept, and that it was
contrary to it to make them serve in other regiments,
Struensee found himself compelled to lay the whole
matter before his Majesty, and advised that force
should be employed, and the Guards compelled to
obey. However, a royal order was issued on December
24, by which those guards who would not
serve as grenadiers were granted their discharge.
The result of this operation of Count Struensee's
therefore was, that his Majesty lost from his military
service several hundred brave, faithful, and trustworthy
men, who were all natives. Count Struensee's improper
and treacherous conduct in this affair is at
once seen on comparing the protocol kept about the
cabinet orders, with the weekly extract from them,
which was laid before his Majesty.
In the protocol we find the said order of December
21, under No. 709, quoted with the correct date.
After this, several other cabinet orders were drawn
up, to No. 733, on December 22, 23, and 24; but
the second cabinet order of December 24 is not found
among them, but a space is left open at the very end,
in order to book it afterwards. But in the extract
from the cabinet orders expedited from December 18
to 25, which was drawn up on December 31, and
afterwards laid before his Majesty, we find these two
orders of December 21 and 24 quoted together at the
end, under the numbers 22 and 23, just as if they had
been expedited at the same time and under the same
date, while, on the contrary, the cabinet orders issued
from December 22 to 23 are omitted from this extract.
From this a general idea of the completeness and trustworthiness
of these extracts may be formed.
This protocol further proves how Count Struensee—although
he had long before sufficiently provided that
no one should bring before the king either verbally or
in writing anything that might injure him, Struensee—found
himself obliged, at the time when the guards
were dismissed, to take just precautions. For under
date of December 23 he expedited two cabinet orders,
one to (the Danish chief postmaster) Etats-rath Waitz,
in Hamburg, that the packets for his Majesty sent by
post should be addressed to the cabinet, the other to
Court-Intendant Wegener, by which all letters and
parcels sent to the king, and letters and portfolios that
came in from Copenhagen, should not be delivered in
the king's ante-chamber, but in the cabinet. One of
these orders, though they immediately concerned the
king, was entirely omitted in the above-mentioned
extract, while the other was quoted imperfectly, so
that his Majesty was not at all informed of these regulations.
Just as Count Struensee more and more evinced
his distrust of the nation, so the reciprocal hatred of
the nation against him increased more and more (and
was expressed), in various ways. Thus, in the summer
of 1771, various pasquinades were in circulation,
and although their contents and style sufficiently
proved that they emanated from the common
people, still they all displayed the strongest attachment
to his Majesty's person, and a readiness to sacrifice
life and blood for him, while the bitterness had
no other object but the privy cabinet minister and his
adherents.
This, and the fact that a few sailors and others who
believed themselves insulted, went out to Hirschholm
in order to lay their complaints before his Majesty
himself, caused Count Struensee such terror, that he
made preparations and was on the point of taking
flight and running away.
As he, however—probably by the advice of his
friends—desisted from this design, it seemed as if he,
on the other hand, prepared to maintain himself in
his post, and against everybody, in every possible
way. This gave cause to various hitherto unknown
measures.
When their Majesties came to town, at which times
Count Struensee always accompanied them, they were
surrounded by an unusual escort; wherever they stopped
in town, at the palace or in the theatre, double
sentries were posted, &c.
Such a course increased the bitterness of the nation,
and especially of the Copenhageners, against Count
Struensee in more than one respect. They saw in it
a proof that he persuaded his Majesty to believe there
were among the inhabitants people who entertained
bad designs against his Majesty and the royal house.
They were confirmed in their suspicion that Count
Struensee entertained other, more extensive, ambitious,
and, at the same time, most audacious and criminal
designs.
It must also be confessed that much of what happened
during this summer, but more especially in
autumn, must confirm them in this belief, and produce
a strong presumption of it, as he has himself
been obliged to confess that several of his measures
were intended to maintain himself in every way in the
situation he occupied.
As already stated, the Horse Guards were disbanded.
As, however, Count Struensee, who always lived in
fear, wished to have some cavalry in the vicinity of
the court, an exercising troop was formed. But, ere
long, he learned that both the officers and men of this
corps were natives, so that they were not at all the
sort he wanted, whence his confidence in them was
lost, and this troop was also disbanded in the autumn.
He then ordered the Seeland Dragoons to the court
and the city, but they have given incontrovertible testimony
that they were no better disposed toward him
than the preceding dragoons.
He now obtained a resolution that two of the regiments
lying in garrison here should be removed to
other towns in the spring. But, instead of letting this
fall on the two youngest regiments, as the rule was,
he wished—for reasons known to himself, and which
it is not difficult to conjecture—that they should be
his Majesty the King's, and his brother the Prince
Frederick's, regiments, contrary to the opinion of the
Generalty, and without informing his royal highness,
the colonel of the latter regiment, or asking his assent
to it. Furthermore, he managed to have a new commandant
of Copenhagen appointed, in whom he believed
he could place full confidence.
But what heightened the distrust most, and excited
the inhabitants of Copenhagen, was the following last-discovered
circumstance, that, according to Struensee's
instructions to the commandant, cannon, with cartridges
and the proper complement of men, were held
in readiness at the arsenal, so that they could be used
at the first signal,—a regulation which was also concealed
from his Majesty.[15]
The king and the royal house, as well as the whole
nation, must at last lose all patience when they were
compelled to see, in addition to all the rest, how audaciously
he behaved in the harsh and extraordinary
education which he dared to give to the crown prince,
and by which his royal highness ran the greatest risk
of losing his health and life.
Thus, then, the bitterness was raised to the highest
pitch, and must have had the most dangerous consequences,
when a fortunate end was put to the widely-extended
designs and despotic administration of this
vain, thoughtless, arbitrary, and ambitious man.
As it is clear, therefore, that Count Struensee, in
more than one way and in more than one respect, has
both himself committed the crime of high treason in
an eminent degree, as well as participated in similar
crimes with others; and that, further, his whole administration
was a chain of violence and selfishness, which
he ever sought to attain in a disgraceful and criminal
manner; and that he also displayed contempt of religion,
morality, and good manners, not only by word
and deed, but also through public regulations, the following
sentence is passed on him, according to the
words of article 1 of chapter iv. of the 6th book of the
Danish law:—
Count John Frederick Struensee shall, as a well-deserved
punishment for himself and an example and
warning for others of the same mind, have forfeited
honour, life, and property, and be degraded from his
dignity of count, and all other honours which have
been conferred on him, and his noble coat of arms be
broken by the executioner: John Frederick Struensee's
right hand shall be cut off while he is alive, and then
his head, his body quartered and exposed on the
wheel, but his head and hand shall be stuck upon a
pole.
The commission at the Christiansborg Palace, April
25, 1772.
- J. K. JUELL-WIND.
- H. STAMPE. LUXDORPH.
- KOFOD ANCHER.
- F. C. SEVEL.
- G. A. BRAËM.
- A. G. CARSTENS.
- J. C. E. SCHMIDT.
- O. GULDBERG.
Two days after this barbarous sentence was passed,
it received the full royal confirmation in the following
words:—
We hereby approve, in all points, the sentence passed
by the Commission of Inquiry appointed by us at our
Palace of Christiansborg, which declares John Frederick
Struensee, on account of his crimen læsæ Majestatis,
in more than one point to have forfeited honour, life,
and property; he shall be degraded from his dignity of
count, and all the other dignities conferred on him; his
coat of arms shall also be broken by the executioner; his
right hand shall be cut off while he is alive, and then his
head, his body quartered and exposed on a wheel, but
his head and hand stuck on a pole. To which those
whom it concerns will pay most submissive attention.
Given at our Palace of Christiansborg, this April 27,
1772.
CHRISTIAN.
O. THOTT.
LUXDORPH. A. SCHUMACHER.
DONS. HOYER.
COUNT BRANDT'S SENTENCE.
By Count Brandt's own confession, the declaration
of the ex-cabinet minister John Frederick Struensee,
and various circumstances, it has been already proved
that Count Enevold Brandt was not only Struensee's
good friend, but also his intimate, whom he (Struensee)
entrusted with his greatest secrets.
In consideration of the gracious intimacy in which
he stood with his Majesty the King, it would have been
his duty, therefore, to prevent all the things which,
according to his own declaration when examined, he
disapproved, and must have recognised in Struensee's
life, sentiments, and undertakings, as foolish, audacious,
and detrimental both for the king and the government
and the country.
Instead of this, he, as a criminal subject and unworthy
confidential servant of the king, made common
cause with Struensee, continually remained his
confidant, and sought to sustain him.
He allowed himself to be employed by Struensee
in keeping everybody from the king, so that nothing
should be revealed to his Majesty about Struensee's
criminal conduct, and the share himself had in it.
To the great concern of all his fellow-subjects he
behaved haughtily, and not with the due respect to
his king, both in private and in the sight of all men.
He did not show the submissive reverence to the
king which every subject owes him, and expresses voluntary
from his heart on every occasion in word and
deed, but he rather opposed the king, in order to
maintain Struensee's favour, and acquire an extravagant
fortune and special advantages for himself.
The memoirs exchanged between him and Struensee
furnish a proof of his unreasonable pretension, and that
he was conscious of his reprehensible behaviour toward
the king. From this cause he should have altered his
conduct, or sooner have resigned a post which was repulsive
to him, and for which he did not consider himself
equal. But no, he did not wish to oppose his patron
and protector, who, for his own purposes, desired to
keep him, Brandt, about the king's person, while, on the
other hand, Count Brandt expected greater fortunes in
service and pecuniary affairs from him, Struensee.
As directeur des spectacles, he assisted Struensee in
producing a misunderstanding in the royal family by
contriving that a separate box should be given Prince
Frederick in the playhouse, so that his royal highness
should not be in the king's box, and thus have an opportunity
for revealing to his Majesty, Brandt and his
intimate friend's most culpable conduct.[16]
He obtained through Struensee in a short period
60,000 dollars from the royal treasury, although he
must have known, or at least could not have doubted,
that he had not earned them by his services or general
conduct.
When he thanked his Majesty for this large sum, he
did not mention the amount which Struensee had procured
him, because he knew that the matter was not
all right, and Struensee had forbidden his doing so,
lest his Majesty might thus be informed of that which
the approved extract, found among Struensee's papers,
has since revealed to his Majesty and every other person
who sees the extract.
Count Brandt has been guilty of all this criminality,
although his conscience must reveal to him at every
moment that he was acting as an unfaithful subject,
and against the duty and the bond imposed on him by
the king's gracious familiarity, and in defiance of the
warnings which the two letters from an anonymous
writer found in Brandt's pocket-book so impressively
and clearly contained, by reminding him of his duties,
and advising him what he should do if he did not wish
to risk his head.
He only allowed himself to be ruled and guided by
his arrogance, fortune-hunting, and avarice.
But though the things mentioned appear so criminal,
they cannot be compared with the crime of laying
hands on the exalted person of his Majesty the King,
which Count Enevold Brandt has himself clearly and
regularly confessed in his examination before the commission,
and as it has been proved and confirmed by
several witnesses. For this crime may be regarded
as if Count Brandt wished to hazard the king's death,
because the result of such an assault cannot be foreseen,
and an unlucky blow on a tender part has frequently
caused death.
He was angry with the king, and demanded satisfaction
of his master, whose well-deserved admonition
he ought to have accepted in penitence for his previous
conduct, and have withdrawn himself from his
(the king's) countenance, in order not to irritate him
more.
On the contrary, he consulted with his intimate
friend Struensee how and when he should assault the
king, and reflected what sort of weapon he should
employ, and held it in readiness; but after more
mature reflection, made no use of it.
After he had been warned by Struensee that the
king was now alone, and the right time had arrived,
he goes with reflection, and a firm determination to
avenge himself, in to the king, orders out the two lads
in attendance, and bolts the door, so that no one may
come in to oppose his resolution or to prevent his design,
and forces his Majesty the King, by language
and assault, to offer resistance.
While doing so, he wounds his Majesty in the neck,
bites his finger, and at the same time insults his benefactor
and king by audacious words and expressions
of such a nature that everybody must feel horrified
at repeating them.
It is true that Count Brandt has urged, in his excuse,
that his Majesty has pardoned him for this
occurrence, yet, even were it so, it can only be supposed
that his Majesty wished to overlook so great an
insult for a time. Count Brandt, however, has produced
no proof of this, and his Majesty alone is in a
position to judge how far this indulgence should
extend.
This most atrocious and audacious undertaking of
Count Brandt cannot be regarded otherwise than as an
open attack on the king's person, and the greatest
crime of high treason, which deserves the punishment
attached to such a crime in art. 1, 4th chapter of
the 6th book of the Danish law.
We, therefore, consider ourselves justified in condemning
Count Brandt, and passing the following
sentence:—
Count Enevold Brandt shall have forfeited honour,
life, and property, and be degraded from his dignity
of count, and all the other honours conferred on him;
his coat of arms shall be broken by the executioner
on the scaffold; his right hand cut off while he is
still alive; then the head; his body quartered and
exposed on the wheel; but his head and hand stuck
on a pole.
The Commission at the Christiansborg Palace, this
25th April, 1772.
- J. K. JUELL-WIND.
- H. STAMPE. LUXDORPH.
- KOFOD ANCHER.
- F. E. SEVEL.
- G. A. BRAËM.
- A. G. CARSTENS.
- J. E. E. SCHMIDT.
- O. GULDBERG.
The royal confirmation of the sentence was to the
following effect:—
We hereby approve in all points the sentence passed
by the Commission of Inquiry appointed by us at the
Christiansborg Palace, which declares that Enevold
Brandt, for his most atrocious and audacious design
and assault on our own person, shall have forfeited
honour, life, and property, and that he shall be degraded
from his dignity as count, and all the other honours
conferred on him; that his coat of arms shall be broken
by the executioner on the scaffold; after that his right
hand be cut off while he is alive; and then his head;
and that the body shall be quartered and exposed on the
wheel; but the head and hand stuck on a pole. Whereupon
those whom it concerns are ordered to act accordingly.
Given at our Palace of Christiansborg, this April
27, 1772.
CHRISTIAN.
O. THOTT.
LUXDORPH. A. SCHUMACHER.
DONS. HOYER.
These sentences are certainly among the rarest
documents which the annals of justice contain. Struensee
was convicted of a single crime; Brandt was
innocent. In the sentence, Struensee's crime is not
stated, and the whole document is a disgustingly long
narrative of undecided actions, not one of which would
offer grounds for a sentence of death. Reverdil,
usually so cool and impartial, cannot restrain his feelings
when he writes about these atrocious verdicts:—
"The sentences were minuted by Wiwet. They
were inserted in the newspapers; among others, the
Leyden Gazette. They seem expressly drawn up
to dishonour the king, the judges, and the country.
The crimes proved are confounded in them with presumptions,
offences with imprudences, faults peculiar
to favourites with those in which, as they were
covered by the king's authority, the culpability falls
on him. In the fear of not charging enough, intentions
and passions are taken into account. In the
sentence passed on Brandt, after describing the scene
of fisticuffs, which so strongly revealed the king's
imbecility, they were not ashamed to add: 'Count
Brandt has certainly alleged in his defence that the
king had pardoned him; but even supposing that the
fact was proved, it could not be understood otherwise
than that his Majesty was kind enough to suffer so
great an extremity for a time. After all, the culprit
has proved nothing in this respect, and his Majesty is
the sole judge of the extent he gives to his own indulgence.'
When this extraordinary document was
read to the man whom it concerned, he said very
justly in his way, that its author deserved a hundred
lashes with a stirrup-leather."
It is not surprising to find that the authenticity of
the sentences was not believed when they were published
in foreign countries. Thus we read in the
Annales Belgiques for May, 1772:—
"A sentence ought to state the facts simply, and
declare the penalty which is pronounced against the
man who has been guilty of them. Care should be
taken to avoid mixing up in it reasonings and epithets
which denote in the judge a disposition for vengeance
or any passion: now this pamphlet, which is offered us
under the title of a sentence, displays from one end to
the other such marked characters of a violent prejudice
against the condemned, that this in itself would be
sufficient to render it suspicious. It forms a tissue of
vague imputations which can be easily destroyed."
But the dominant faction did not trouble itself
about what might be said: sentence had been passed,
and the next matter of importance was to have it
executed before any revulsion took place in public
opinion.