Life and Times of Her Majesty Caroline Matilda, Vol. 3 (of 3): Queen of Denmark and Norway, and Sister of H. M. George III. of EnglandWraxall, Lascelles, Sir
History
Life and Times of Her Majesty Caroline Matilda, Vol. 3 (of 3): Queen of Denmark and Norway, and Sister of H. M. George III. of England
Wraxall, Lascelles, Sir
Caroline Mathilde, Queen, consort of Christian VII, King of Denmark, 1751-1775; Denmark -- History -- Christian VII, 1766-1808
Count Brandt persistently denies having beaten the king, or audaciously
raised his hand against his Majesty; he only proved himself to be strong
and brave, without seriousness or passion, by his Majesty's commands.
His Majesty's own most gracious conduct to Count Brandt also proves that
everything passed off without anger and annoyance, as his Majesty showed
the count the signal favour of kissing him on the spot, and requesting
him to remain and kill the time with conversation, which Count Brandt
did by the king's orders, and all of which points to the disposition of
their minds, and proves that they were not excited, as is also confirmed
by Count Struensee's statement in the examination of March 21, that
Count Brandt, when he went in to the king, was not at all irritated,
but perfectly calm. After this time his Majesty also promoted him to
be _grand maître de la garderobe_, and carried on his confidential
intercourse with him for several months as before, all of which speaks
for the nature of this affair. In Count Brandt's heart reigned no
bitterness against the king, and no contempt: trembling from veneration,
he performed the action which he would have regarded as audacious, had
it not been for the king's command. It is true that Count Brandt, a few
days previously, laid a riding whip upon a pianoforte standing in the
king's ante-chamber, but only did so thoughtlessly, which he afterwards
regretted, and as ill-deeds consist in actions carried out but not in
inconsiderate designs, this occurrence cannot be reckoned as a crime on
the part of Count Brandt.
If Count Brandt employed some expressions against the king which,
according to the strict letter, would be highly criminal, he only
employed them in the tone of all the rest, and consequently only in jest.
I pass over the statements of the witnesses examined, as these people
neither heard nor saw the occurrence, but only testify what they heard
said about it. On the other hand, the declaration which his Majesty laid
before the commission, through his page of the chamber Schack, is of the
extremest importance. I read it to Count Brandt, and he has requested me
to make the following explanation about it:--
"He did not remember this 'passage' in the way that it flowed from the
page's lips: he considers himself too insignificant to contradict a
declaration which emanated from the king his master, and only emboldens
himself in dust and fetters to mention, that if his Majesty were most
graciously disposed to take this affair seriously, as the declaration
made by page of the chamber Schack appears to intimate, he regards
himself as lost, and will not from this moment attempt any further
justification, but will at once throw himself at his Majesty's feet, and
seek his salvation in the king's clemency; but in the most submissive
confidence in his Majesty's mercy, he would venture most humbly to remind
him of the circumstances already mentioned."
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account