The life of Midhat Pasha; a record of his services, political reforms, banishment, and judicial murderAli Haydar Mithat
History
The life of Midhat Pasha; a record of his services, political reforms, banishment, and judicial murder
Ali Haydar Mithat
Midhat Paşa, 1822-1884; Statesmen -- Turkey -- Biography; Turkey -- History -- 19th century
_29th June._—“The remarks and the bearing of Midhat Pasha at
the trial yesterday produced, on the whole, a very favourable
impression on the public, and it was not difficult to perceive that
he still enjoys a certain popularity even among good Mussulmans. As
numerous Palace spies were present, the Ottoman officials carefully
endeavoured to hide any latent sympathy with the accused, but some
of them did not altogether succeed. More than once Midhat replied
very appositely in a half‐ironical tone, which was much appreciated
by the audience. All the details were at once transmitted to the
Sultan, and Sourouri Effendi doubtless congratulated himself on
having removed the Imperial displeasure from his own shoulders to
those of his colleagues. As yet no evidence has been produced proving
Midhat’s complicity, but it is not likely that he will be acquitted.
Considering that the trial has been prepared, and is being conducted
under the immediate influence of the Palace, which is filled with
Midhat’s enemies, it would be absurd to expect impartiality and
independence in the judges. I happen to know many curious facts
tending to show how absurd such an expectation would be, and I may
mention one by way of illustration. Yesterday morning, immediately
before the trial began, Sourouri Effendi had a long private audience
with the Sultan, and received from His Majesty certain instructions
as to how the proceedings should be conducted. The most interesting
part of the proceedings at the State trial yesterday was the incident
which terminated in Midhat Pasha’s refusal to continue his defence.
The facts are briefly as follows:—The President invited the accused
not to continue his defence and to intrust that duty to his counsel.
Midhat replied that he would defend himself, because he had not been
allowed to confer freely with the counsel officially appointed. He
justified his flight to the French Consulate at Smyrna, pointed
out numerous errors in the procedure, expressed astonishment at
such grave accusations being founded on such insufficient evidence,
reproached the Public Prosecutor with having accepted the testimony
of the eunuchs, who, professing to have seen the crime committed
without denouncing it, should be themselves in the dock, and
ridiculed the testimony of Marco Pasha, the chief physician of the
Palace at that time, who professed to have seen from the Asiatic
side of the Bosphorus what took place at the Palace on the European
shore, and yet could not see a wound said to have been inflicted on
the body of Abdul Aziz in the region of the heart. He then demanded
that the Court should examine the prisoners and witnesses in his
presence, as he was not present at the previous examination, and
requested that the Embassy doctors who examined the body should
be summoned, offering to defray the necessary expenses at his own
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