118
Kaspar Hauser.
“It was, in the first place, a political necessity ; 1n the second
place, a favour to the victim. The Courtof . . . . . was aware of
the moral dangers threatening its protégé, and decided to remove
him at once to that grade of heavenly greatness, for which he was
already ripe; and so it is that by a wonderful direction of destiny,
he has to thank the robbers of his throne and of his life for the
high degree of blessedness which he now enjoys.”
Pollnitz sent his sarcastic essay of twenty-eight quarto pages to
the chief officials of Middle Franconia. The President, Herr
von Stichauer, gave it over to the Minister of the Interior, with
the remark that the writer appeared to be insane, and the
Minister, accepting this explanation, laid the matter before the
King, with the suggestion that Herr von Péllnitz be strongly
advised not to publish the document.
Lord Stanhope did not wait for the publication of his book to
make known his change of feeling respecting “the orphan of
Europe,” whom he had once pretended to love so dearly.
He wrote to the papers that, in consequence of more exact
knowledge of Kaspar Hauser’s character and history, he was forced
to pronounce him a miserable impostor; he even ventured to
state that soon after the young man’s death he was led to change
his opinion concerning him through information received at
Karlsruhe; whereas, his letters to Hickel and to Feuerbach prove
that he began to give expression to his pretended doubts almost
immediately after leaving Ansbach in Tanuary, 1832.
The six months mentioned by Meyer as the period necessary
to elapse before his justification of himself and his crimination of
Kaspar Hauser should be ready for the world, passed by; but
Meyer's book did not appear.
Stanhope wrote to him from Karlsruhe (July 24, 1834), that he
was expecting the publication with impatience, and requested him
to send twelve copies, free of cost and postage, to certain persons
mentioned in an enclosed list.
The publisher was to send the account for payment to the
