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
case 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. Mittelstadt's handwriting, and the
Poles that they were not. Tho 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 Kiereki 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. Bann•
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•
volution 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
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 against Russia
as a direct act of hostility to Prussia in the sense of the
code.
The Abbe Gouski was then examined. He admitted that
he had given money to volunteers proceeding to the king-
dom of Poland, but said ho had no intention of assisting in
designs against Prussia.
The Court now liberated the Abbe Cichowski and Banns-

zak, on the condition that they appeared again on the Ist
November; but refused to liberate-the gentlemen belong-
ing to the Skorzencin expedition. Baron Seydewitz and
M. Mrowinski protested against this decision, declaring
that they had always respected the Prussian law and never
violated it.
M. S. Maciejewaki 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.
Ilerr 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 statement in its organ the
Monitcur, and the contradiction was confirmed by the
J-Olirna do St. Aterslvurg, It therefore appeared that these