THE TWO COUNTS.
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.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 5: This is translated _verbatim_ from the original, published
in 1772, a copy of which was forwarded me from the Danish Foreign Office.]
[Footnote 6: These adherents who aided in the suppression of the privy
council were Rantzau and Köller, that is to say, the men who figured
among the principal enemies and accusers of Struensee. It was Rantzau who
invented the decree that suppressed this council.--_Falckenskjold_, p.
205.]
[Footnote 7: Did they forget that the constitution which governs Denmark
gives the king absolute power? Could not the king dismiss one of his
officers without form of trial or the intervention of justice? Remember,
that those who brought this charge against Struensee also removed from
office persons who displeased them, and even deprived them of their
liberty and property. What I personally experienced certainly places me
in the position to judge.--_Falckenskjold_, p. 205.]
[Footnote 8: A reference to the sieges of Charles X. in 1658 and 1659,
and more especially to the violent assault by the Swedes on the night of
February 11, 1659, which was repulsed by the citizens, and to the conduct
of the Copenhageners at the Diet of 1660, when the sovereignty was handed
over to Frederick III., and the previous electoral kingdom was converted
into an agnatic-cognatic Denmark-Norway, exclusive of the German Duchies
and counties.]
[Footnote 9: This accusation is devoid of truth. Brandt could not always
be about his Majesty. The truth is, that the king was no more difficult
to approach under Struensee's administration than he had been under the
previous ministry. He was frequently alone, and I saw him arrive thus
at Gripsholm. It was after the fall of Struensee that the king, being
closely watched, was only accessible as far as pleased the dominant
party.-_Falckenskjold_, p. 205.]
[Footnote 10: I may remark that Struensee had a salary of 1,500 crowns as
secretary to the cabinet; that he afterwards had 3,000 in his quality of
councillor; that he lived inexpensively and dressed plainly; that only
a few days before his fall he set up his carriage, the magnificence of
which was imputed as a crime--it was a carriage in the English style,
without gilding or painting, lined with straw-coloured cloth. Guldberg,
who charged him with avidity, afterwards thought proper to accept a
gratification of 100,000 crowns in one sum, by a note signed by the
king.--_Falckenskjold_, p. 208.]
[Footnote 11: If Struensee's enemies had not been his accusers and
judges, they would not have compared a small present made to the queen
with what the king gave to simple private persons without fortune, whom
he had summoned and admitted to his familiarity. They would not have
pretended to be ignorant why Struensee wrote the accounts of May, 1771,
and did not write the following accounts when he had ceased to be cabinet
secretary.-_Falckenskjold_, p. 206.]
[Footnote 12: Struensee had no more power on this account than when he
was merely master of requests and private secretary to the king. The
great reforms were effected while he occupied those two posts. Besides,
according to the royal law, "the king can appoint any minister under such
title and with such power as he pleases." It was no contravention of
the law to accept an office which the king could give and revoke at his
pleasure; but, with such a law as that of Denmark, weight may be attached
to any sort of accusation. Count de St. Germain was accused of infringing
the royal law, because he proposed to raze the useless fortresses
and dress the army in blue. The first Bernstorff was also accused of
contravention of the _Lex Regia_ when he was dismissed. The persons who
condemned Struensee to death for having encroached on the absolute power
of the king, issued the following decree on February 13, 1772, or while
the trial was going on:--
"All orders shall be drawn up by the council and through the council. No
order given directly by the king shall be carried into effect, unless the
bearer of it has made application to the department which it concerns,
and this department has acknowledged the said order."-_Falckenskjold_,
p. 208.]
[Footnote 13: It was, on the contrary, Struensee's principle to
purge the army and civil service of foreigners, and only to leave
natives; the reform had already been effected in this way in the
regiment of Seeland Dragoons. Braëm, one of the commissioners to try
Struensee, was well aware of this, as he was a member of the War
Department.--_Falckenskjold_, p. 209.]
[Footnote 14: The order concerning this reform is the only one which
Struensee was accused of having issued without the king's privity. The
War Department, of which I was a member, received on December 21 the
Minutes of this order for the disbandment of the Foot Guards; it made
no protest; it did not ask that the minute should be signed by the
king, which was not necessary; the patent was immediately drawn up, and
addressed, according to custom, to the king, that it might receive his
signature and seal; the king signed this patent on December 23; such is
the exact truth. How could it be stated in the sentence that the king had
no cognizance on December 21 of a minute the patent of which he ratified
on the 23rd by his signature? How could he be ignorant on December 24 of
an order he had signed on the 23rd?--_Falckenskjold_, p. 209.]
[Footnote 15: Struensee denied this: there were no proofs, and it is well
known that this minister only gave orders in writing.]
[Footnote 16: It is a curious fact that Brandt's having given Prince
Frederick a separate box was made a capital crime; that Baron de
Bülow, the king's equerry, was exiled for giving a separate stable to
the horses of Prince Frederick; and that I was cruelly prosecuted for
having allowed the band to play at a place which Prince Frederick was
passing.--_Falckenskjold_, p. 222.]