Historic Oddities and Strange EventsBaring-Gould, S. (Sabine)
History
Historic Oddities and Strange Events
Baring-Gould, S. (Sabine)
History; Mysticism; Patarines
Side by side with the Office of Gratuities came the Fiscal Office into
being, whose function it was to revise the magisterial and judicial
proceedings of the courts of justice. This also was filled by Suess with
his creatures. The ground given to the world for its establishment was
the correction of judicial errors and injustices committed by the courts
of law. It was the final court of revision, before which every decision
went before it was carried into effect. Legal proceedings, moreover,
were long and costly, and the Fiscal Court undertook to interfere when
any suit threatened to be unduly protracted to the prejudice of justice.
But the practical working of the Fiscal Court was something very
different. It interfered with the course of justice, reversing
judgments, not according to equity, but according to the bribes paid
into the hands of the board. In a very short time the sources of justice
were completely poisoned by it, and no crime, however great and however
clearly established, led to chastisement if sufficient money were paid
into the hands of the court of revision. The whole country was overrun
with spies, who denounced as guilty of imaginary crimes those who were
rich, and such never escaped without leaving some of their gold sticking
to the hands of the fiscal counsellors.
As usual with Joseph Suess, he endeavoured to keep officially clear of
this court, as he had of the Office of Gratuities, and of all others.
But the Duke nominated him assistant counsellor. Suess protested, and
endeavoured to shirk the honour; but as the Duke refused to release him,
he took care never once to attend the court, and when the proceedings
and judgments were sent him for his signature he always sent them back
unsigned; and he never was easy till relieved of the unacceptable title.
For Suess was a clever rogue. In every transaction that was public, and
of which documentary evidence was producible that he had been mixed up
with it, he acted with integrity; but whenever he engaged on a
proceeding which might render him liable to be tried in the event of
his falling into disfavour, he kept himself in the background and acted
through his agents; so that when, eventually, he was tried for his
treasonable and fraudulent conduct, documentary evidence incriminating
him was wholly wanting.
After the death of the Duke, it was estimated from the records of the
two courts that they had in the year 1736-7 squeezed sixty-five thousand
pounds out of the small and poor duchy.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account