The Sun.
London, England, 1868-02-10 00:00:00

MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN NE {VS.

(From the Westminster Gazette.)
VIENNA, February 1, 1868.
In a former letter I gave your readers an
account, taken from official documents, and
communicated to the public by the Historisch
Politische Bliitter, of an act of gross inter-
ference with the course of justice, perpetrated
by our Progressist Minister of Justice in the
case of Schindler, a member of the Cham-
ber. easilytTiiihseyexmoaityedinevery circle, high and
what a sensa-
tionlow. Every one shared in the excitement, and
was anxious to see whether the minister would
be bold enough to venture to call the His-
torisch Politische BUitter and the writer of the
narrative respectively, to account for this un-
pleasant disclosure. If the cause were brought
to trial, no doubt the Judges and the State
Procurators would be called as witnesses,
though themselves parties in the case, and the
end of the scandal would have been more
But the Minister
more,
prudent course
og
fl arj nu
sgt o
othanjn tdhgeo
dtbeginningtho nao.
Imperial Procurator-
Generalthe called a sena
Ka justifi-
cationthrough
to the Historisch Politische Bliitter, and
eobgahnor, t, h
weha
to the Wiener Kirchen Zeitung also, because
it had referred to the letter of the Historisch
Politische Bliitter. That periodical has now,
with the utmost fairness, given the so-caller}
justification of the Procurator-General in full,
but at the same time inserted the reply of the
sender of the article in question. This so-called
justification is in truth essentially nothing but
a confused and shuffiing evasion of the- prin-
cipal facts. I can only confirm the statements
given in the reply. The explanation of the
Procurator-General does not even refer to the
alleged facts. So far, indeed, from this being
the case, facts the most important—facts lead-
ing to most serious consequences are not even
questioned or denied—but are in truth treated
in a manner which, to sat the least, casts a
rather singular light on the legal compiler
of this said document." To give your readers
some idea of the manner in which the Pro-
curator-General conducts his defence, I will
cite one example. How does he meet the asser-
tion that more than half-a-dozen practising
lawyers of eminence were of opinion that
Schindler's case was one of a criminal offence?
What does the ProcuratorAeneral say to this
fact ? Why, that " whether 'this be the case
or not, may be put aside." In addition to this,
the following remarkable statement made in
the Historisch Politische Blatter—namely, that
in the course of the sitting the State Procura-
tor stated that he only differed from the Pro-
curator-General in Schindler's case in this—
that the latter, who now by the direction of
the Minister of Justice has to justify his words,
considered that Schindler's act was a fraud,
while he, the State Procurator, considered it
to be an embezzlement. The correspondent
of the Historisch Politische _Batter appeals
the Judges as witnesses of the truth of thee-a
bove, and closes with the pungent remark,
that perhaps it was out of modesty that the
Procurator-General declines to say whether,
' among those who held that Schindler's pro-
ceedings constituted a criminal offence for
which he might be legally prosecuted and
punished, a lawyer of note was to be found. It
would be superfluous to say more on this
subject. Europe can here witness how zeal-
ously our Progressist Austrian Ministry are
running towards the same goal as the Ministers
of " united " Italy !
Here in general, at least in all that concerns
our public life, we are going rapidly down hill,
or, rather, to express myself more graphically,
we are ever sinking deeper and deeper in the
swamps and quagmires of pseudo-Liberalism.
One cannot but feel particularly grieved for
the Emperor and the Imperial family, in whom
a pure will and good principles are certainly
not wanting. Their fault chiefly consists in
their being too like most other Austrian Catho-
lics. An Austrian Catholic is timid, that is his