Norwich bulletin., 1915-01-29

The German government could not positively prove that Arnim had writ ten the dispatches, but directed hi. successor at Paris, to search the archives and see that aIl the docu- ments that were supposed to be there were in the right place. The result of the search was that a large number of them were found to be missing.
 When brought before the Tribunal Arnim professed that the papers were his own as they were personal, but declaring, however, that he would soon bring them out in the in- tereSt of hlS own defense, On Oct. f, Eon Arnim was arrested and his cuun- try seat near Stetlin was searched oy a cortege from Berlin. The body of soldiers could not find any papers in Arnim $ house, although they searched carefully and he was then carried off and committed to the Berlin Metropol- itan prison. On account of his health he was released on bail, sbut was re- arrested shortly afterward and con fined to his house.
 His trial began on Dee. 9, and lasted until the 18th. The charges were ad- vanced by Dr. Tessendorf, the public prosecutor. The court itself, before which the prisoner was tried was the Tribunal of the Citv of Berlin
 The Count was accused of not haV- ing restored soon enough one set of official pa DerS. which he ultimately sent to the Foreign Office; of with holding papers belonging 10 the Foreign Office which he owned he had in his possession, and of having carried off from Paris another set of papers of which he would give no account. He was also charged with having papers which he owned he had in his possession which he would not give up and Of having the papers which he would give no account of for the express purpose of furthering is f4s md hG q publishing them.
 on the last two charges the tribunal held that there was not enough eVi- dence to show him guilty on a crimi- Ions statement, tracing the different disciplinary and legal offenses. NOn Arnim was clearly guilty of breach of discipline but there was a great difference between that and being legally guilty. In regard to the papers which he refused to giva up the court upheld him in that action If a letter is sent from the Foreign Office to a diplomatic agent merely Censuring him personally, the letter is clearly his. as it is private guidance. If a dispatch is also sent with the letter it depends on how much personal and how much State matter make up the contents. If Count Von Arnim thought that they were mostly personal rebukes censur ing. his conduct he had al right to them
  estimated the personality of the let ters. it showed that he had a bona fide reason for withdrawing them.
 The only charge that was at last left. was. that of the dispatches about ecclesiastical matters, which Arnim held he thought would not be wanted at Paris as his successor was a Cath olic and so took them with him to Berlin. and then to Carlsbad. In this, the court ruled. that even if he were right in bringing them from Paris to Berlin. he had no right to take them with him 10 Carlsbad, and he could easily discriminate that they were be- longing to the Foreign Office. He was thus found guilty of removing public documents, and was accordingly sen fenced to three months Imprisonment
 From this sentence both Arnim and the public prosecutor made an appeal with the result that the sentence was increased to nine months. The Count escaped imprisonment by leaving the country, and at Zurich published a pamphlet in which he attempted to show that the attacks upon him had been made through the personal jeal- ousy of Bismarck. For this he was accused of treason, insult to the Elm peror and labelling Bismarck, and in his absence was sentenced to five years penal servitude. This sen tence however, was never executed for he never returned to Germany and died May 19, 1881.