Thomas de Quincey - "Memorials and Other Papers V1"

Leon de Tinseau - "Ma Cousine Pot Au Feu"

Alexandre Dumas - "Histoire d'un casse noisette"

Algernon Blackwood - "The Centaur"

A  /  B  /  C  /  D  /  E  /   F  /  G  /  H  /  I  /  J  /   K  /  L  /  M  /  N  /  O   P  /  R  /  S  /  T  /  U  /  V  /  W  /  X  /  Y  /  Z

Tales And Novels, Volume 1 by Maria Edgeworth

M >> Maria Edgeworth >> Tales And Novels, Volume 1




Mr. Warendorff, at this instant, uncovered the Prussian Vase, and then
pointed to a Jew, and to the master of the porcelain manufactory, who
stood beside him, ready to give their evidence. We omit that part of Mr.
Warendorff's speech which contained the facts that have been already
related. The Prussian Vase was handed to the jury: the verses in praise
of Frederick the Great were read, and the word _tyrant_ was seen,
afterward, with the utmost surprise. In the midst of the general
indignation, Mr. Warendorff called upon the Jew to come forward and give
his evidence. This Jew was an old man, and there was something remarkable
in his looks. His head was still; his neck was stiff; but his eyes moved
with incessant celerity from side to side, and he seemed uneasy at not
being able to see what was passing behind him: there was a certain
firmness in his attitude, but his voice trembled when he attempted to
speak. All these circumstances prepossessed Laniska's friends against the
Jew the moment he appeared; and it was justly observed, that his having
the misfortune to be a Jew was sufficient to prejudice many of the
populace against him, even before a word he uttered reached their ears.
But impartial spectators judged that the poor man was only terrified at
being called upon to speak in so large an assembly. Solomon (for that was
the name of the Jew), after having taken an oath upon the Talmud that he
would speak nothing but the truth, made the following answers to the
questions put to him by Mr. Warendorff:--

_Mr. Warendorff_.--"Did you ever see this vase before?"

_Solomon_.--"Yes."

_Mr. Warendorff_.--"Where? when? Tell all you know about it to the
gentlemen of the jury."

_Solomon_.--"The first time I saw that vase was in the gallery of
paintings, at the king's palace of Sans Souci; to the best of my
recollection, it was on the night of the first day of the month, about
ten o'clock, or, perhaps, it might be eleven: I wish to be exact; but I
cannot be certain as to the hour precisely."

_Mr. Warendorff_.--"The exact hour is not of any consequence: proceed.
Tell us how you came to see this vase. Take your time to speak. We are in
no hurry: the truth will appear sooner or later."

_Solomon_.--"His majesty himself put the vase into my hands, and
commanded me to pack it up, with some other china, which he was going to
send as a present to a gentleman at Paris. I am something of a judge of
china myself, being used to selling small pieces of it up and down the
town and country. So I was struck with the first sight of this beautiful
vase; I looked at it very carefully, and wiped away, with my
handkerchief, the dust which had settled on the white figures: here is
the very handkerchief. I wiped the vase all over; but, when I came to rub
the bottom, I stopped to read the verses _on the character of Frederick
the Great_; and having read these, I rubbed the white letters quite
clean: the ground on which they were written was blue. I found that some
of the blue colour came off upon my handkerchief, which surprised me a
good deal. Upon examining further, I perceived that the colour came off
only in one spot, of about an inch long, and half an inch broad. The king
was at this time standing with his back to me, looking at a new picture
which had just been hung up in the gallery; but hearing me make an
exclamation ('_Father Abraham!_' I believe it was that I said), his
majesty turned round. 'What is the matter with you, Solomon? You look
wondrous wise,' his majesty was pleased to say. 'Why do you call on
Father Abraham at this time of day? Do you expect that he will help you
to pack up that china--hey, Solomon, my friend?' I had no power to answer
this question, for by this time, to my utter astonishment, I had
discovered that, on the spot where I had rubbed off the blue paint, there
was a word written--the word was _tyrant_. '_On the character of
Frederick, the great tyrant!_' Said I to myself--'what can this mean?'
The king snatched the vase from my hands, read what I had read, saw the
paint which had been rubbed off upon my handkerchief, and without saying
one word left the gallery. This is all I know about the matter."

The Jew bowed to the court, and Mr. Warendorff told him that, having
closed his evidence, he might depart. But Albert rose to desire that the
judge would order him to remain in court, as he purposed to examine, or,
according to the English term, to _cross-examine_ him further, at a
proper time. The judge ordered the Jew to remain in court. The next
witness called, on the part of the crown, was the master of the porcelain
manufactory of Berlin; to whom Mr. Warendorff put the following
questions:--

_Q_.--"Have you seen the verses which are inscribed on the foot of this
vase?"

_Answer_.--"Yes, I have."

_Q_.--"Do you recollect what words are written over the verses?"

_Answer_.--"I do: the words are--'On the character of Frederick, the
great tyrant.'"

_Q_.--"Do you know by whom those words and these verses were written?"

_Answer_.--"I believe that they were written by Count Augustus Laniska."

_Q_.--"How do you know? or why do you believe it?"

_Answer_.--"I was present when Sophia Mansfeld, the woman by whom the
vase was designed, told the count that she did not know how to write, and
that she would be obliged to him if he would write the inscription
himself on it. The vase at this time had not been put into the furnace.
It was in what we call biscuit. The Count Laniska took a proper tool, and
said that he would write the inscription as she desired. I saw him
writing on the bottom of the vase for some minutes. I heard him afterward
call to one of the workmen, and desire that he would put the vase into
the furnace: the workman accordingly carried it into the next room to the
furnace, as I believe."

_Q_.--"Did you see the inscription on the vase after it was taken out of
the furnace? and was the word 'tyrant' then on it?"

_Answer_.--"I did not see the vase immediately upon its being taken out
of the furnace; but I saw it about an hour afterward. At that time I read
the inscription: the word 'tyrant' was not then visible on the vase; the
place where it now appears was blue. I carried it myself, along with some
others, to the king's palace at Sans Souci. The night of the first day of
this month his majesty sent for me, and showed me the word _tyrant_ on
the vase: I had never seen it there till then. It could not have been
written after the china was baked: it must have been written whilst the
biscuit was soft; and it must have been covered over with the blue paint
after the vase was taken out of the furnace. I believe the word was
written by Count Laniska, because I saw nobody else write upon the vase
hut him; because the word exactly resembles the handwriting of the rest
of the inscription; and because I, upon a former occasion, heard the
count make use of that very word in speaking of Frederick the Great."

Here the master of the porcelain manufactory finished speaking, and was
going, with Mr. Warendorff's permission, to retire; but Albert signified
his intention to cross-examine him also, and the judge commanded that he
should remain in court. The two next witnesses who were produced and
examined were the workman who carried the vase to the furnace, and the
man whose business it was to put the biscuit into the furnace. Neither of
these witnesses could write or read. The workman deposed, that he carried
the Prussian Vase, as he was desired, to the furnace; that no one touched
it on the way thither. The man whose business it was to put the biscuit
into the furnace swore that he put it along with several other vases into
the furnace; that he attended the fire, and that no one touched any of
them till they were baked and taken out by him. Here the evidence for the
prosecution closed. Mr. Warendorff observed, that he should forbear to
expatiate further upon the conduct of the prisoner; that he had been
ordered by his sovereign to speak of him with all possible moderation;
that he earnestly hoped the defence that should be made for Count Laniska
might be satisfactory; and that the mode of trial which had been granted
to him by the king was a sufficient proof of the clemency of his majesty,
and of his earnest desire to allow the prisoner every possible means of
re-establishing his character in the eyes of the public. Albert now rose.
The Count Laniska, who had appeared unmoved during Mr. Warendorff's
oration, changed countenance the moment Albert rose in his defence; the
Countess Laniska leaned forward over the rails of the gallery in
breathless anxiety: there was no sound heard in the whole gallery, except
the jingling of the chain of the king's sword, with which he was playing.

"I shall not attempt, gentlemen," said Albert, "to move your sympathy by
a pathetic description of my own feelings _as a man, and as an advocate_.
Whatever mine may be, it is my wish and my duty to repress them. I have
need of that calm possession of my understanding, which will be necessary
to convince yours of the innocence of my friend. To convince is my
object. If it were in my power, I should, upon the present occasion,
disdain to persuade. I should think it equally incompatible with my own
honour and that of the Count Laniska. With these sentiments, I refrain,
Prussians, from all eulogium upon the magnanimity of your king. Praises
from a traitor, or from the advocate of a traitor, must be unworthy of a
great monarch, or of a generous people. If the prisoner before you shall
be proved to be no traitor, he will doubtless have opportunities of
expressing by actions, better than I can by words, his gratitude to his
sovereign, for having allowed him this public trial by his equals--men
who are able to discern and to assert the truth. It cannot have escaped
their observation, that no positive evidence whatever has yet been
produced against the prisoner. No one has yet been heard to swear that he
_saw_ Count Laniska write the word _tyrant_ upon this vase. The first
witness, Solomon the Jew, has informed us of what our senses could not
leave us room to doubt, that the word is actually engraved upon the
porcelain: further, he has told us that it was covered over with blue
paint, which he rubbed off with his handkerchief. All this may be true;
but the wisdom of Solomon, united to that of Baron Warendorff, has failed
to point out to us any certain connexion between this blue paint, this
handkerchief, and the supposed guilt of the Count Laniska. The master of
the porcelain manufactory came next, and I apprehended that, as being a
more respectable witness than the Jew, it was reserved for him to supply
this link in the chain of evidence. But this respectable witness simply
swore, that he heard a woman say she could not write or read; that she
asked Count Laniska to write an inscription upon a vase for her; that, in
consequence of this request, the count wrote something upon the vase, he
does not pretend to know what; but he believes that the word _tyrant_
must have been one of the words then written by the count, because he saw
no one else write on the vase; because the hand-writing of that word
resembles the rest of the inscription; and because the count, in his
hearing, had, upon a former occasion, made use of the same expression in
speaking of the king. I recapitulate this evidence, to show that it is in
no part _positive_: that it all rests upon circumstances. In order to
demonstrate to you that the word in question could not have been written
by any person but Laniska, two witnesses are produced--the workman who
carried the vase to the furnace, and he who put it into the fire. The one
has positively sworn that no person touched the vase on the way to the
furnace. The other as positively swears that no one meddled with the vase
after it was put into the furnace.

"It is granted that the word could not have been engraved after the
biscuit was baked. The witness, however, has not sworn, or asserted, that
there was no interval of time between his receiving the vase and his
putting it into the fire. What became of it during this interval? How
long did it last? Will the witness swear that no one touched it during
this interval?

"These are questions which I shall put to him presently. I hope I have
established my first assertion, that you have no _positive_ evidence of
the prisoner's guilt.

"You well know, gentlemen, that where positive evidence of any supposed
fact cannot be produced, our judgments must be decided by the balance of
_probabilities_; and it is for this reason that the study of
probabilities, and the power of comparing them, has, in a late celebrated
essay, been called _the Science of Judges_.[5] To you, judges of my
friend, all the probabilities of his supposed guilt have been stated.
Weigh and compare them with those which I shall produce in favour of his
innocence. His education, his character, his understanding, are all in
his favour. The Count Laniska must be much below the common standard of
human virtue and capacity, if, without any assignable motive, he could
have committed an action at once so base and so absurd as this of which
he is accused. His temper is naturally or habitually open and impetuous,
even to extreme imprudence. An instance of this imprudence, and of the
manner in which it was pardoned by the king, has been stated to you. Is
it probable that the same man should be both ingenuous and mean? Is it
probable that the generosity with which he was treated made no impression
upon his heart? His heart must, upon this supposition, be selfish and
unfeeling. Look up, gentlemen, towards that gallery--look at that anxious
mother! those eager friends! Could Laniska's fate excite such anxiety, if
he were selfish and unfeeling? Impossible! But, suppose him destitute of
every generous sentiment, you cannot imagine Count Laniska to be a fool.
You have been lately reminded that he was early distinguished for his
abilities by a monarch, whose penetration we cannot doubt. He was high in
the favour of his sovereign: just entering upon life--a military life;
his hopes of distinction resting entirely upon the good opinion of his
general and his king: all these fair expectations he sacrifices--for
what? for the pleasure--but it could be no pleasure--for the folly of
writing a single word. Unless the Count Laniska be supposed to have been
possessed with an insane desire of writing the word _tyrant_, how can we
account for his writing it upon this vase? Did he wish to convey to
France the idea, that Frederick the Great is a tyrant? A man of common
sense could surely have found, at least, safer methods of doing so than
by engraving it as his opinion upon a vase which he knew was to pass
through the hands of the sovereign whom he purposed thus treacherously to
insult. The extreme improbability that any man in the situation, with the
character, habits, and capacity of Count Laniska, should have acted in
this manner amounts, in my judgment, almost to a _moral impossibility_. I
knew nothing more, gentlemen, of this cause, when I first offered to
defend Laniska at the hazard of my liberty: it was not merely from the
enthusiasm of friendship that I made this offer; it was from the sober
conviction of my understanding, founded upon the accurate calculation of
moral probabilities.

[Footnote 5: Voltaire--Essai sur les Probabilites en fait de Justice.]

"It has been my good fortune, gentlemen, in the course of the inquiries
which I have since made, to obtain further confirmation of my opinion.
Without attempting any of that species of oratory which may be necessary
to cover falsehood, but which would encumber instead of adorning truth, I
shall now, in the simplest manner in my power, lay the evidence before
the court."

The first witness Albert called was the workman who carried the vase to
the man at the furnace. Upon his cross-examination, he said that he did
not deliver the vase into the hands of the man at the furnace, but that
he put it, along with several other pieces, upon a tray, on a table,
which stood near the furnace.

_Albert_.--"You are certain that you put it upon a tray?"

_Witness_.--"Quite certain."

_Albert_.--"What reason have you for remembering that circumstance
particularly?"

_Witness_.--"I remember it, because I at first set this vase upon the
ledge of the tray, and it was nearly falling. I was frightened at that
accident, which makes me particularly remember the thing. I made room
upon the tray for the vase, and left it quite safe upon the tray: I am
positive of it."

_Albert_.--"That is all I want with you, my good friend."

The next witness called was the man whose business it was to put the
vases into the furnace.

_Albert_.--"Did you see the witness who was last examined put this vase
upon a tray when he left it under your care?"

_Witness_.--"I did."

_Albert_.--"You are certain that he put it _upon the tray?_ What reason
have you to remember that circumstance particularly?"

_Witness_.--"I remember it, because I heard the witness cry out, 'There,
William, I had like to have thrown down this cursed vase; but, look you
here, I've left it quite safe upon the tray.' Upon this, I turned and
looked, and saw that vase standing upon the tray, safe, with some
others."

_Albert_.--"Do you recollect any thing else that passed?"

_Witness_.--"Only that the witness told me I must put it--the vase, I
mean--into the furnace directly; and I answered to that, 'All in good
time; the furnace is not ready yet; it will go in along with the rest.'"

_Albert_.--"Then you did not put it into the furnace immediately after it
was left with you?"

_Witness_.--"No, I did not--but that was not my fault--I could not; the
furnace was not hot enough."

_Albert_.--"How long do you think it was, from the time it was left upon
the tray, till you put it into the furnace?"

_Witness_.--"I don't know--I can't be positive: it might be a quarter of
an hour, or twenty minutes; or it might be half an hour. I cannot be
positive, sir; I cannot be positive."

_Albert_.--"You need not be positive. Nobody wants you to be positive.
Nobody wants to entrap you, my good friend. During this quarter of an
hour, or twenty minutes, or half an hour, that you speak of, did you ever
lose sight of this vase?"

_Witness_.--"To be sure I did. I did not stand watching it all the while.
Why should I? It was safe enough."

_Albert_.--"Do you recollect where you found the vase when you took it to
put it into the furnace?"

_Witness_.--"Yes: it was standing as it might be here, in the middle of
the table."

_Albert_.--"Do you recollect whether it was standing _upon_ the tray or
not?"

_Witness_.--"It was not _upon_ the tray, as I recollect: no, I'm sure it
was not, for I carried to the furnace first the tray and all that was on
it, and then I remember, I came back for this, which was standing, as I
said before, as it might be here, in the middle of the table."

_Albert_.--"Was any body, except yourself, at the furnace, or in the
room, from the time that this vase was brought to you, till you put it
into the furnace?"

_Witness_.--"Not as I remember. It was our dinner-time. All the men,
except myself, were gone to dinner: I stayed to mind the furnace."

_Albert_.--"It was you, then, that took this vase off the tray, was it?"

_Witness_.--"No, it was not. I never took it off the tray. I told you it
was not upon the tray with the others; I told you it was upon the table,
as it might be here."

_Albert_.--"Yes, when you were going to put it into the furnace, you said
that you saw it standing in the middle of the table; but you recollect
that you saw the workman who brought it put it upon the tray. You told us
you remembered that circumstance perfectly."

_Witness_.--"Yes, so I do."

_Albert_.--"The vase could not have got off the tray of itself. You did
not take it off. How came it off, do you think?"

_Witness_.--"I don't know. I can't tell. Somebody, to be sure, must have
taken it off. I was minding the furnace. My back was to the door. I don't
recollect seeing any body come in; but many might have come in and out,
without my heeding them."

_Albert_.--"Take your own time, my good friend. Recollect yourself;
perhaps you may remember."

_Witness_.--"Oh, yes, now you put me upon recollecting, I do remember
that Solomon the Jew came in, and asked me where Sophia Mansfeld was; and
it certainly must have been he who took the vase off the tray; for now I
recollect, as I looked round once from the furnace, I saw him with it in
his hand; he was looking at the bottom of it, as I remember: he said,
here are some fine verses, or some such thing; but I was minding the
furnace. That's all I know about the matter."

_Albert_.--"That is enough."

The next witness who came forward was the husband of Sophia Mansfeld.--He
deposed, that on the 29th of April, the day on which the Prussian Vase
was finished, as stated by the former evidence, and sent to be put into
the furnace, he met Sophia Mansfeld in the street: she was going home to
dinner. He asked to see the vase: she said that it was, she believed, put
into the furnace, and that he could not then see it; that she was sorry
he had not come sooner, for that he could have written the inscription on
it for her, and that would have spared her the shame of telling Count
Laniska that she could not read or write. She added, that the count had
written all that was wanting for her. The witness, being impatient to see
the vase, went as fast as he could to the manufactory, in hopes of
getting a sight of it before it was put into the furnace. He met Solomon
the Jew at the door of the manufactory, who told him that he was too
late, that all the vases were in the furnace; he had just seen them put
in. The Jew, as the witness now recollects, though it did not strike him
at the time, was eager to prevent him from going into the furnace-room.
Solomon took him by the arm, and walked with him up the street, talking
to him of some money which he was to remit to Meissen, to Sophia
Mansfeld's father and mother.

_Albert_ asked the witness on whose account this money was to be remitted
by the Jew to Meissen.

_Witness_.--"The money was to be remitted on Sophia Mansfeld's account."

_Albert_.--"Did she borrow it from the Jew?"

_Witness_.--"No; the Jew owed it to her for work done by her. She had the
art of painting on glass. She had painted some glasses for a large magic
lantern, and several small pictures on glass. She did these things at the
hours when she was not obliged to be at the manufactory. She rose very
early in the morning and worked hard. She sold her work to the Jew upon
condition that he would remit the price agreed upon to her father and
mother, who were old, and depended on her for support."

_Albert_.--"Was the money punctually remitted to her father and mother by
the Jew?"

_Witness_.--"Not a farthing of it was remitted by him, as Sophia
discovered since her return to Meissen."

_Albert_.--"Did you ever hear this Jew say any thing about Sophia
Mansfeld's returning to Saxony?"

_Witness_.--"Yes; I once heard the Jew say that he hoped she never would
leave Berlin, because she was of great use to him. He advised me to
settle in Berlin. This passed about six weeks ago. About a week before
the prize was decided by the king, I met the Jew, and told him Sophia had
good hopes of getting back to Saxony. He looked very much vexed, and
said, 'She is not sure of that.'"

_Albert_.--"Did you ever hear this Jew speak of Count Laniska?"

_Witness_.--"Yes, about two months ago I saw him in the street when I was
speaking to Solomon, and I asked the Jew who he was. He answered, 'He is
the Count Laniska--a man that I hate, and on whom I will be revenged some
time or other.' I asked why he hated the count. The Jew replied, 'Because
the Christian dog has made the corps of Jews his laughing-stock. This
day, when my son was going through his manual exercise before the king,
Count Laniska was holding his sides with laughter. I'll be revenged upon
him some time or other.'"

_Albert_.--"I have no occasion, sir, to trouble you with any farther
questions."

The next witness who appeared was a druggist of Berlin. He deposed, that,
on the 30th of April, Solomon the Jew came to his shop and asked for blue
paints; that, after trying the colours very carefully upon the back of a
letter, which he took out of his pocket, he bought a small quantity of a
shade of blue, which the witness produced in court.

Albert ordered that the paint should be handed to the gentlemen of the
jury, that they might compare it with the blue ground of the Prussian
Vase. With this it was found, upon comparison, to match exactly.

_Albert to the druggist_.--"Do you know what became of the paper upon
which you say the Jew tried your colours?"

_Witness_.--"Yes; here it is. I found it under the counter, after the Jew
went away, and I kept it to return to him, as I saw there was an account
on the other side of the paper, which I imagined he might want. He never
happened to call at my shop afterwards, and I forgot that I had such a
paper, till you, sir, called upon me about a week ago, to make inquiry on
this subject. You desired me to keep the paper carefully, and not to let
any one know that it was in my possession, till the day on which the
trial of Count Laniska was to come on. I have complied with your request,
and here is the paper."

If you think books have dumbed down …
Alison Flood: Today we can take our laptops on the road, but could we use them to produce On The Road?

Kerouac's On the Road manuscript travels to the Midlands

John Crace swallows a very thirsty volume

Documentary to lay bare 'Narnia Code'

He wrote it in just three weeks, furiously and loudly tap-tap-tapping away on his typewriter on 12ft long reels of paper so that he did not have to stop, just writing writing writing fuelled only, he said, by coffee…

It became one of the most important American novels of the last century and yesterday the original manuscript - a scroll taped together with eight reels of paper - of Jack Kerouac's On The Road was unfurled in the UK for the first time.
Fifty years after the novel which more or less defined the Beat generation, was published in Britain, the Barber Institute in Birmingham is showing what is now one of the most valuable literary manuscripts in existence as part of its exhibition Jack Kerouac: Back On the Road.

The exhibition's curator Professor Dick Ellis said there had been a lot of competition to get the scroll which is itself spending a lot of time on the move, having toured a string of US cities and hitting the road to Rome once this show is over. "We're very excited indeed," he said. "This is an iconic manuscript. It is a record of the huge effort Kerouac put into composing it. It was 20 days of typing 6,500 words a day, flat out, in spontaneous composition. He wanted to record things with the most possible accuracy using the spontaneous technique. His typewriter became a compositional instrument.

"Truman Capote once accused Kerouac of typing rather than writing, I would say he was learning the ability of using the typewriter like a jazz instrument, like a saxophone. He also had an incredible memory. And he had great speed at typing, he became a lightning typist. He came to be able to use a typewriter in a way that has not been seen before or since. Kerouac said he wrote fast because the road was fast."

About 22 of the scroll's 120ft will be on display in a specially built cabinet and while visitors will have to slightly tilt their heads, Ellis believes they will get a much deeper knowledge of what Kerouac was all about. It comes to Birmingham courtesy of Jim Irsay, owner of the Indianapolis Colts, who bought it for $2.4m (£1.6m) in 2001 before agreeing to a tour. Of course, in the published novel, there are paragraph breaks but in the scroll, there are none. Kerouac did not have the time. The exhibition runs until January 28.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds