In the evidence of Frau Schiötte, we find two special instances of this: first, when she pretends that her Majesty's amendment lasted a fortnight after the warning, but that then the thing grew again worse than ever, although Frau Blechinberg says that she noticed nothing suspicious for some weeks after the time; and again, when Frau Schiötte employs the expression that her Majesty gave herself a great deal of trouble about the bolt of a door at Frederiksberg which would not fasten. That the queen had the bolt mended may have been caused by very innocent motives, especially as Frau Schiötte herself confesses that the chamber-people had no orders to close the bolt; but the expression that the queen "gave herself a deal of trouble," or "was wild about it," is excessively improper, and displays an animosity from which a witness ought to be exempt. As her Majesty, therefore, had such keen observers in those who were about her person, it is not surprising that they should draw different conclusions, which served in confirmation of the ideas by which they were already preoccupied. No innocence is conceivable which would not succumb under such suspicious examination, and the law has foreseen the consequences of this, and recognised the fairness that every one should be safe in his own house and among his own servants. Hence it orders that "such witnesses should not be heeded."[80] If we now ask what the facts are, by which an improper intimacy carried to extremes between the queen and Count Struensee can be proved from the evidence of the witnesses, the answer is--None. That the queen showed the count favour and confidence, cannot be denied. But who ever saw or heard that they went beyond the limits of honour? Where is the man who is able to say that the queen has broken the fidelity which she owed to her consort, or can mention a single fact which would prove the certainty of such a crime? And does not the silence of all about any convincing act prove the truth of maid Bruhn's answer to question 6, "that she never witnessed any impropriety on the part of the queen"? Regarded generally, all the witnesses appeal to their own acts. They say, they concluded that Struensee was a long time with the queen, because they were not summoned; they fancied that the queen and Struensee were on familiar terms. But on what are these suppositions founded, except on rumour, and the power which it possessed over the imagination?