The Sun.
London, England, 1864-11-01 00:00:00

The Great Polish Trial at Berlin.

Last week's session was opened on the 17th. The pro-
ceedings commenced by the reading of certificates from the
president of the Posen police, Herr von Baereusprung and
others relative to M. Rekowski, all of which testified to
his being a quiet, respectable man, who did not mix in
politics. Some unimportant evidence was then taken in the
care of M. Brodnicki, after which a witness named Gluz-
kowsk was heard against M. Mittlestadt, whom he accused
of having called upon him for taxes, and threatened him
with punishment by the National Government on his re-
fusing to pay. The documents he put in in proof of these
statements were examined by the experts, who, however,
disagreed in their judgment upon them, the Germans de-
claring they were in M. ldittelstadt's handwriting, and the
Poles that they were not. The same difference of opinion
was shown in the case of the document attributed to Count
Brinski.

The defence then submitted that Messrs, Rekowski,
Brodnicki, Malczewski, Krasicki, and Kieraki be liberated,
and Count Brinski given a fortnight's leave.
The Court refused to liberate any of these gentlemen,
and announced that Messrs. Rekowski and Brinski might
be granted leave if they asked for it in writing,
After some discussion regarding a letter attributed to
General Taczanowski, which, it was alleged, compromised
Dr. Niegolewski, the accused Abbe Cichowski and J. Bana■
szak were examined. It was alleged by the prosecution
that the estate of M. Casimir Chlapowski, son of the well-
known general of that name, was one of the centres of re•
v'dution in Posen, and that materials of war were manu-
factured there by Banaszak, under the superintendence of
the Abbe Cichowski. The abbe, however, denied having had
anything to do with the matter, and Banaszak said he had
made the arms, &c., at the order of an unknown person
who promised to pay him well for them.
The Court here stopped the proceedings, after refusing to
liberate M. Jackowski. _ .

•
On the 18th evidence was taken in the case of the
gentlemen who had taken part in the Skorzencin expedi •
tion, but nothing was elicited against them. Herr Elven here
pointed out that in the charge .sheet three persons were ac-
cused of high treason in making an indirect attack on the
integrity of the Prussian State, whereas the criminal code
only regarded acts tending directly to high treason as trea-
sonable.
The Crown Prosecutor rejoined that this was a slip in the
charge-sheet, inasmuch as he regarded war egainst Russia
as a direot act of hostility to Prussia in the sense of the
code.
The Abl6 Gouski was then examined. lie admitted that
he had given money to volunteers proceeding to the king-
dom of Poland, but said he had no intention of assisting in
designs against Prussia.
The Court now liberated the Abbe Cichowski and Banes-
zak, on the condition that they appeared again on the Ist
Novcraber ; but refused to liberate the gentletneu telong-
ing to the Skotz9nein expedition. B ►ron Seydewitz and
M. Mrowinski protested against this decision, deelarin
that thy had always respected the Prussian law and never
violated it.

M. S. Maciejewski was then brought up for examination.
The chief evidence against this gentleman lay in the so called
" Paris papers," regarding the admissibility of which a
lively discussion took place.
Herr Brachvogel protested against the papers being read.
When it was announced that they had been seized by
the French Government and sent to the Prussian Govern-
ment through the Russian Embassy in Paris, the French
Government contradicted this steemont in its organ the
Moniteur, and the contradiction was confirmed by tho
JOlel'2l4( de gt,retor4oNry, It therefore appeared that these

The President--I think we may now leave this subject.
Dr Niegolewski—Not at all, Documents may at any
moment be produced which proved that the Posou p once
have presented to the Court a forged proclamation as areal
one.

The matter then dropped,
After cone fifiThei•Tiffelicti-had been taken in the case
of M. de Martwell, who denied having taken any part in the
insurrection, the Court liberated M. Zablocki till the Ist
November, but refused to liberate M. Czlpski.
The proceedings on the 20th began with the examination
of M.. 1. Rohr, the next of the accused on the list.
M. Rohr deposed as follows—ln 1846 I left Berlin and
proceeded to Lithuania to prepare an insurrection there. I
was arrested and severely examined during two years, at the
end of which time I was sentonced by a military tribunal to
15 years' hard labour in Siberia. The Czar altered the sen-
tence, ordering me first to receive 1,000 blows with a stick,
and if I survived, to work for 12 years in the mines of Sibc.
ria. I survived the torture, and the general in command
was disgraced by the Czar because I had not died under it.
I was then sent in chains to Tobolsk, whence I proceeded on
foot with a company of malefacors to Siberia. My journey
lasted more than 11 months. There I remained seven or
eight years, and was pardoned after the treaty of Paris,
since which I worked in the office of Makowski and Co., at
Dantzic.

After some unimportant evidence, H6rr Elven proposed
that the accused be liberated, paying at the same time a
high tribute to his patriotism and the courage with which
he bore his almost unexampled sufferings.
F. W. Johannson, merchant, of Konigsberg, was next
called. He said he had never sold arms to the Poles, and
that he wished he could have given them more assistance
tban he did.

After a sharp discussion regarding the manner in which
the prosecution conducted their case, in the course of which
the president admitted that it was not quite clear that the
prosecution were right, the Court liberated Mr. dchannson
temporarily, but refused to liberate M. Rohr, atter which it
adjourned to the 22d.