larger duty of a citizen to the laws of his country. The evidence against Froggatt, if reliable, would undoubtedly be strong as applied to the case of a man who knew that notes had been obtained by fraud; it was confirmed in one point, for Froggatt was proved to have paid a Clydesdale note into his banking account. If the evidence as to the sending the telegram to Rotterdam was true, there was an absolute and deliberate attempt to assist the prisoners at Rotterdam to escape. Froggatt certainly attempted to get the French Directory from Mrs. White's, and exceeded the bounds of his duty if he did it to assist the convicts, as the whole transaction seemed to indicate. In conclusion, his lordship left the matter as affecting all the defendants individually or collectively in the hands of the jury. On the conclusion of the summing up on Tuesday, November 20, the jury retired to consider their verdict at about half-past three, and returned in three-quarters of an hour. They found Clarke not guilty, the four other prisoners guilty, recommending Druscovich and Palmer to mercy, the former on account of the circumstances under which he was first induced to become acquainted with the convicts and his previous good character, the latter on account of his previous good character and the absence of any evidence proving bribery. Cheers mingled with some few manifestations of disapproval followed the announcement of Clarke's acquittal, but they were speedily silenced: Mr. Clarke (addressing the Judge)—My lord, there are other indictments, and I do not know whether the Crown proposes to proceed on those indictments against my client Clarke. If it be not their intention so to proceed, I should ask that he be discharged. The Solicitor-General-I can hardly answer that question at this moment. I think my learned friend had better wait. Mr. Montagu Williams and Mr. Straight both briefly addressed the Court, asking for merciful consideration of the facts that the detectives would lose their places, salaries, and pensions. The defendant Palmer said : "I have a few words to say, my lord, to which I hope you will listen before you pass sentence upon me. I have already served nearly twentythree years in the police, honestly, faithfully, and fearlessly until this charge was brought against me. I have been in custody nearly four months. I hope that will have weight, and likewise the recommendation of the jury. One thing I wish to say publicly in court in reference to what was stated by the convict Kurr at Bow Street against me, although it was not stated here. He said that I had 50l. from Street. I declare, my lord, before my Maker, that is a most abominable, wicked, and foul lie. I never had such a sum or anything in my life from Street. Last, but not least, I ask you, my lord, to consider those who are nearest and dearest to me-my wife and children. I have a wife and children-I have six children, five of them entirely dependent upon me for support. I trust, on their behalf, you will pass on me as lenient a sentence as you can. [The prisoner, as he spoke of his family, was manifestly labouring under feelings of deep emotion.] The defendant Froggatt said his position was one of utter ruin in every way, brought about by the machinations of these men trying to get him into their toils: "If I exceeded my duty as a solicitor, I have been punished most severely and most onerously. I do appeal to you, my lord, most sincerely not to punish me with severity. I, like Palmer, have a wife and child, and I shall be utterly ruined. I implore you, my lord, to pass as light a sentence as you can upon me." Both Meiklejohn and Druscovich also spoke, the latter saying that, during the De Goncourt inquiry, he had never given any information to the convicts. He added :-"If I have departed from my usual course in this inquiry, it was for the purpose of avoiding a public scandal; also for the purpose of avoiding bringing some of my colleagues into trouble, and not for the purpose of enabling the convicts to escape." Baron Pollock then proceeded to pass sentence. He said it was impossible for any person to have been present during the course of the long inquiry without being thoroughly satisfied with the conclusion at which the jury had, no doubt, most unwillingly arrived. "The crime," said the Judge, "with which you have been charged is the crime of conspiracy at common law -a crime which can be punished only by fine or imprisonment. By a statute, however, of somewhat recent date-so recent as 14 and 15 Vic.—where the conspiracy is to obstruct or defeat the course of public justice, the Court, in the event of a verdict of Guilty' being found, has the power to award imprisonment with hard labour. I cannot help thinking how inadequate seems the sentence which the law awards for the offence of which you have been convicted. The spirit and the rule of the law of England has been, and I trust always will be, to make a wide distinction between offences committed either under sudden impulse or under the pressure of want or poverty and offences committed by persons placed in a position of trust." His lordship proceeded to say that he felt it to be his duty, and his only duty, to pass the sentence that Druscovich, Meiklejohn, and Palmer be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for the period of two years. The Judge continued-" With regard to you, Edward Froggatt, your position is not identical with that of the other prisoners. In some sense I can feel still more what a wretched and unfortunate career yours has been. There are no persons who know the duties and vicissitudes of the profession to which you belong but must feel for you in your present position, especially when, as you have yourself said, the necessary consequences of the crime go beyond any sentence the law can pass upon you. The sentence in your case will be that you be imprisoned for two years with hard labour." Froggatt, the moment he heard the sentence pronounced, threw up his arms and exclaimed, "My God! My lord, do lessen my sentence." Subsequently, Chief-Inspector Clarke was formally released upon his own recognisances in 100l. to appear, if called upon on a future occasion, to answer other counts in the indictment. APPENDIX. STATE PAPERS AND DOCUMENTS. I. CIRCULAR OF PRINCE GORTCHAKOW, AND CORRESPONDENCE RESPECTING THE PROTOCOL ON THE AFFAIRS OF TURKEY. St. Petersburg, January 19, 1877 M. L'AMBASSADEUR.-The refusal opposed by the Porte to the wishes of Europe involves the Eastern crisis in a new phase. The Imperial cabinet has from the outset considered this question as an European one, which should not and cannot be solved but by the unanimous agreement of the Great Powers. As a matter of fact all exclusive and personal considerations were disclaimed by all the cabinets, and the difficulty resolved itself into inducing the Government of Turkey to govern the Christian subjects of the Sultan in a just and humane manner, so as not to expose Europe to permanent crises which are revolting to its conscience, and endanger its tranquillity. It was, therefore, a question of common unanimity and interest. The Imperial Cabinet has accordingly endeavoured to bring about an European concert to appease this crisis and prevent its return. It has come to an agreement with the Austro-Hungarian Government, as the one most immediately interested, in order to submit to the European Cabinets propositions which might serve as a basis for a general understanding and common action. These propositions, set forth in Count Andrassy's despatch of the 18th December, 1875, had obtained the adhesion of all the Great Powers, and also of the Porte. The want of executive sanction having, however, rendered this agree ment abortive, the Cabinets were placed, by the Berlin Memorandum, in a position to pronounce on the principle of an eventual concert, having in view more effectual measures for realising their mutual aim. The agreement not having proved unanimous, and diplomatic action being thus interrupted, the Cabinets recommenced negotiations in consequence of the aggravation of the crisis by the massacres in Bulgaria, the revolution in Constantinople, and the war with Servia and Montenegro. On the initiative of the English Government they agreed upon a basis and guarantees of pacification to be discussed at a conference to be held at Constantinople. This conference arrived during its preliminary meetings at a complete understanding, both as to the conditions of peace and as to the reforms to be introduced. The result was communicated to the Porte as the fixed and unanimous wish of Europe, and met with an obstinate refusal. Thus after more than a year of diplomatic efforts attesting the importance attached by the Great Powers to the pacification of the East, the right which they have, in view of the common welfare, to assure that pacification, and their firm determination to bring it about, the Cabinets again find themselves in the same position as at the commencement of this crisis, which has been moreover aggravated by bloodshed, heated passions, accumulated ruin, and the prospect of an indefinite prolongation of the deplorable state of things which hangs over Europe, and justly preoccupies the attention of both peoples and Governments. The Porte makes light of her former engagements, of her duty as a member of the European system, and of the unanimous wishes of the Great Powers. Far from having advanced one step towards a satisfactory solution, the Eastern question has become aggravated, and is at the present moment a standing menace to the peace of Europe, the sentiments of humanity, and the conscience of Christian nations. Under these circumstances, before determining on the steps which it may be proper to take, His Majesty the Emperor is desirous of knowing the limits within which the Cabinets with whom we have till now endeavoured, and still desire, so far as may be possible, to proceed in common, are willing to act. The object held in view by the Great Powers was clearly defined by the proceedings of the Conference. The refusal of the Turkish Government threatens both the dignity and the tranquillity of Europe. It is necessary for us to know what the Cabinets, with whom we have hitherto acted in common, propose to do with a view of meeting this refusal, and insuring the execution of their wishes. You are requested to seek information in this respect, after reading, and leaving a copy of the present despatch to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Accept, &c. (Signed) No. 2. GORTCHAKOW. THE EARL OF DERBY TO LORD A. LOFTUS. Foreign Office, February 15, 1877. MY LORD,-The Russian Ambassador having called upon me on the 14th ultimo, I took the opportunity of speaking to his Excellency respecting the circular dispatch from Prince Gortchakow of the 19th ultimo, of which he had been good enough to communicate a copy to me on the 5th instant. I said that since that circular was written, circumstances had changed, and that Her Majesty's Government, after giving it their best consideration, with an earnest desire to meet the views of His Imperial Majesty the Emperor in a friendly and conciliatory spirit, had determined that it would be better to defer their reply to it until events should have developed themselves, and it was seen what was the effect of the recent change of Government at Constantinople, both in reference to the administrative reforms which had been promised, and the negotiations for peace now pending between the Porte and Servia and Montenegro. on his return from Paris, where he had en to meet General Ignatiew. His Excellency placed in my hands draft Protocol, which his Government ropose for signature by the six owers. I told Count Schouvaloff that I would take the earliest opportunity of subnitting this proposal to my colleagues, and would acquaint his Excellency with the view taken of it by them. I accordingly saw his Excellency again this afternoon after a Cabinet Council had been held, and informed him that Her Majesty's Government were ready to agree in principle to such a Protocol, provided he could come to an understanding as to its terms. I then proceeded to discuss the wording of the Protocol with his Excellency, who promised to report my observations to his Government. THE EARL OF DERBY TO LORD A. LOFTUS. Foreign Office, March 13, 1877. MY LORD,--The Russian Ambassador, when handing to me the draft Protocol inclosed in my dispatch of this day's date, accompanied it by a statement of the views and wishes of his Government to the following effect: The object of General Ignatiew's journey, Count Schouvaloff stated, had been to furnish explanations as to the real views of the Cabinet of St. Petersburg, and to facilitate a pacific solution. After the sacrifices which Russia had imposed upon herself, the stagnation of her industry and of her commerce, and the enormous expenditure incurred by the mobilisation of 500,000 men, she could not retire nor send back her troops without having obtained some tangible result as regards the improvement of the condition of the Christian populations of Turkey. The Emperor was sincerely desirous of peace, but not of peace at any price. The Governments of the other Powers were at this moment preparing their answers to the Russian Circular. The Russian Government would not express any opinion by anticipation on these replies, but they foresaw in them the possibility of a great danger. For if the replies were not identical, what would be the position of the Imperial Cabinet? The agreement of the Powers, so fortunately established at the Conference, might be broken up in consequence of the shales of opinion manifested in the replies of the several Cabinets; would not that be a deter mining cause to induce Russia to seek for a solution, either by means of a direct understanding with the Porte, or by force of arms? Under these circumstances it appears to the Russian Government that the most practical solution, and the one best fitted to secure the maintenance of general peace. would be the signature by the Powers of a Protocol which should, so to speak, terminate the incident. This Protocol might be signed in London by the representatives of the Great Powers, and under the direct inspiration of the Cabinet of St. James. The Protocol would contain no more than the principles pon which the several Governments would have based their reply to the Russian Circular. It would be desirable that it should affirm that the present state of affairs was one which concerned the whole of Europe, and should place on record that the improvement of the condition of the Christian population of Turkey will continue to be an object of interest to all the Powers. The Porte having epeatedly declared that it engaged to introduce reforms, it would be desirable to enumerate them on the basis, of Safvet Pasha's Circular. In this way there could be no subsequent misunderstanding as to the promises made by Turkey. As a period of some months would not be sufficient to accomplish these reforms, it would be preferable not to fix any precise limit of time. It would rest with all the Powers to determine by general agreement whether Turkey was progressing in a satisfactory manner in her work of regeneration. The Protocol should mention that Europe will continue to watch the progressive execution of the reforms by means of their diplomatic representa tives. |