"How could Uldall insert in his defence Struensee's declarations about his relations with the queen? Was he ignorant of the Danish law that nullified this declaration, and prohibited the judges from paying any attention to it? How, if he was versed in the principles and duties of his profession, did he dare, in a memoir intended to be made public, to represent his client as demanding mercy for this pretended crime, and imploring the intercession of his persecutor? And how was it he did not feel that by acting thus he joined a perfidious cabal, which was abusing the unhappy Struensee with deceitful hopes of escape, in order to drag from him the means of ruining him more completely?" Another witness to the shamefulness of the charges against Struensee steps forward in honest Reverdil, himself no admirer of the favourite, but who valued truth above everything. He carefully analyses the charges. The one about the queen's bouquet was most unjust, he considers. It belonged to the queen, and she ordered it to be sold. The price it fetched was much lower than that paid for it, because princes pay long prices for jewels, and sell them cheaply, especially those of great value. The purpose for which it was sold was to get the money for making the badges for the new Order of Matilda. As regards the forgery, Reverdil's evidence is decidedly in favour of Struensee. His argument, which seems to be conclusive, is to the following effect:-- 1. At the time when this account was made out, Struensee, overwhelmed with business, had no secretary to assist him. Pleasure, audiences, races, and attentions to the queen, occupied the greater part of his time. He was ignorant of forms and their consequences: therefore, it is very credible that he cast up the account incorrectly, corrected, and presented it for signature with the erasures. The king signed without looking, and useless crimes ought not to be supposed. 2. No other trait in Struensee's life denotes an ignoble scamp or vile man: his character was rather to carry frankness to the verge of effrontery and hardness. 3. On the other hand, it lay in the king's character to refuse any pecuniary favour as long as he could, but he had no idea of the value of money, so that it was as easy to obtain from him 60,000 crowns as 6,000. They had the bad faith to take his evidence in this affair, and he declared that he remembered perfectly well having only given 6,000 crowns to each of the counts; but, with his malicious mania and his hatred for Brandt, it was impossible to trust to the fidelity of his memory, or the truth of his declarations. 4. Struensee replied to the charge with a good deal of candour; that appearances, it is true, were against him, but they were deceitful; and that, as he had already confessed more faults than were needed to destroy him, he would not deny this one, if he had committed it. He persisted in this language, without variation, to the end.