New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1881-07-25
THE SULTAN'S MURDERERS.
THEIR TRIAL AND CONDEMNATION.

Frs THAT ATTEMPTED To MAKE A VIGoRors
DEFENcE-DEMANpING JUSTICE IN VAIN AND
REFUSED AN OPPORTUNITY To CRosS-ExAuISE
wirNESsEs-TURKIsH JUDICIAL METHODS Ex-
TMPLTIED.
CoNsTANTINOPLE, July 2-The great State trial
OF the ALLEGED murerers of Abdul Aziz is the tonic
winch throws into the shade even the question of
money ior daily supplies. On Sunday the Govern
ine"' sent out to the Legations. newspaper corre-
spohdents and other favored persons tickets of adj
,'iiSs"n 10 the Court. Up to that moment il had
peeh penal offence 10 allude 10 tho subject few
"aYs before The ConsfaRfinopLc Mescage,. had been
suppressed Tor announcing that the trial was soon
TO occur. little trcmor of surprise ran through
,he community Therefore. when the Government
D'oNc 'he silence by announcing that the trial
would begin on Monday at Q o'clock
The place of trial was a tent pitched in ,l,c oar-
ocns OF the Sultaus palace. The tent WAS largo
enough 10 seat 300 or 400 people Il was lined viii,
lich hrocaGe and furnished in a sumpiuous manner
Around 1t were 1oweT-bcds and shady groves
sre'chlng away down the hill 10 the Cheragan
iaiace' where AbGul Aziz died. On the hill above
IL was llldiz Kiosk, The residence OF the nrcsent
Sultan, aud in front Of II was the magnificent ,,e
OF the Bosphorls and the Asiatic shores Aboot 10
strangers were present during the trial Five Indpes
occupied the great arnchairs and around them were
arTayed clerks, officials and lawyers besides nanny
nigh Turkish fnncuonarles. Beng within the palace
who had not the permit Of entrance from the Govern
ment This fact left all the arraugcme,it a plofound
secret nntli the moment Of opening the court At
ii O'Clock on Monday the trial commenced with tbe
reading OF the Indictment This document charged
thirteen persons. including the ex-Sultan Murad
and hs mother, Midhat Pacla, Nouri Pacha. NAH
moud Pacha and the aged ex-Grand Vizier.
Mehemet Rushdi Pacha, with completely in tho
murder of the late Sultan. The Public Prosecutor
then demanded the punishment of these persons
according to the law.
TIE TESTIMONY OF THE MURDFRrRs
These forinalities commenced the trial The er
Sultan and his mother We're not present nor was
Mehemet RuShli. The other prisoners. cxcen,ing
two, having pleaded not guilty. the taking of testl
mony proceeded. The testimony consisted prac i
cally of the statement of two professional pulis,
who confessed the crime. These men said that
they had been hired by Mahmoud Damad
and Nouri PacEas TO kill Abdul Aziz in
consideration of a sum of $50 dcwn and a
pension OF $4,000 per annum. They then described
In detail the manner Of the assassination but this
with the rest of their testimony was brought into
court lii the form of written Statement and
omitted very many details Of lively interest Then
followed a strange medley Of questions answers.
aidavits and declarations referring now % one and
now TO another Of The prisoners. confusion worse
confounded of vague and pointless testimony which
il was almost impossible 10 follow OF direct evil
dence IN support of the statement OF the two pugi-
lists there was none. The four eunuchs who were
said by the assassas to have aided them were not
IN court and Of their testimony only misty outline
given The Public Prosecutor accounted for
their absence by saying that they had been privately
examined and pardoned 10y the sultan Therefore
they could not be called, In the midst sf this con.
fusion of general unhurdening of hearsav and per-
sonal opinion on The part Of the witnesses the pris-
onors every now and then would burst cut into We
/ hapn nrf,f pl
aid them. Facts were few. but the duplicating sup
positions were unlimited. The prisoners wer, over
whelmed, Mahmoud Damad even 10 the extent of
shedding tears in court. The Chamberlain Fahri
Bey who has all along been said To have confessed
guilt. was frantic and aiect, he vuCifcrorsly de-
MED all Wedge % the murder cr plead for his
life from the mercy OF the Sultan The two puei-
lists. who alone had acknowledged part in tho
murder were careless and sclf-coInpo>ed an de-
meanor, while Midhat Paoha alone was manly and
dignied.
the DEFENCE OF MIDHAT PACuA
The interest of the trial ccntring no,e particn-
larlv about Mdhat Pacha found its highest mitch
on the second day. when Milhat was again called
into court TO defend himself. The defence was
long address, interrupted by the public prosecutor
at various points with charges of alschood against
Midhat. and interrupted once by the President of
the Conrt. who happcaed 10 think 10 ask the pris-
oner what sort OF food he enjoying in prison
Midhat Pacha the only one of The prisoners who
seemed To have knowledge of his rights tho
courage to assert them and the power 10
continue line of argument i'm spite of
Interruptions He pointed ont that the only
testimony brought against him directly was
that of who undertook 10 prove his
participation i'm the murder bv declaring that he had
made pnbic expressions of hostility to Abdul Aziz
The testimony absurd, he said because if Grim
inal. he at least gifted with sense enough 10 be
silent III public 10 the crime. The case of the
Government 10 Midhat was very weak and
Midhat brougAt out this fact in a clear light lie
then remarked mat hc had been Informed of the
name OF the man who would defend HIM n the trial
bat that the man did not appear FOR two davs AZ
terward lac came and read TO Mdhat part OF the in
dictment and went away. The next day lac did not
come. The fourth DAY he came hut had no sooner
taken his seat than official Of the court came
into the room and prepared 10 take notes OF tho
conversation. Upon this said Mdhat, Il told
my counsel 10 60 and lie went and did not conc
back"
The gentleman in question at this point raised
smile b. arising 10 say, in injured tone that the
reason why he did not attend MidLat was that Ae
was suffering from ague if the Court did NOT be-
heye him. would their cxcellencies please appoint a
doctor to examine him the spot. A. To tic
presence of third party at The interview
between Nlilhat and his counsel it was Lot
answered. One of the leading Turkish papers OF
the city remarks that Midhat'S assumption of iniuty
thereby is udicrous, "sncc it is evident 10 all
honest minds that the interests Of Justice forbid
private interviews between prisoners and their
lawyers"
Midhat next went on 10 call attention 10 tie fact
that the murder of the Sultan had not been proved