TR fh 
Eley 
on dg 
AXE iy 
ata off, 
Ct ine I 
UDD0sed 
S100 of 
~ DIOVInes 
Jn Kgs 
Lough 
eatin, au 
15h Ply 
auser wi 
enous iy 
nally bile 
wee he 
ont 
"NOUS 
an. ang tol 
conten 
ner ston 
arcelie fl 
{ac [den 
could 
ster, Wil 
ioned, ti 
A was 
Kaspar Hauser. 
[7] 
This book contains one statement which is not found else: 
where. 
A few days after Kaspar Hauser’s death Kliiber wrote to Hof- 
mann advising that the park be searched for the weapon which 
had done the mischief, as the murderer would naturally free him- 
self as soon as possible from such a witness of his guilt. This 
advice seems not to have been heeded at the time; but Von der 
Linde says that long afterwards, when a farmer named Wagner 
was raking up leaves among the bushes in the park, he found, 
between the Hauser monument and the eastern gate, an instru- 
ment answering to the description of the wound, and gave it to the 
forester’s apprentice, Pausch (afterwards head-forester at Waller- 
stein), who delivered it over to the authorities. It had a powerful 
handle, made of ebony, and attached to the blade by a ring of 
white metal. The blade was sharp and slender, and slightly 
curved. The stiletto was examined and compared with the 
description of the wound, and declared to be capable of having 
inflicted it, while possessing no feature contradictory of such a 
supposition. 
Von der Linde is the only writer who mentions the discovery of 
he knife, and he gives no dates nor further particulars, excepting 
0 say in a note that Professor Pierson of Berlin wrote to Meyer, 
November 6, 1883, to say that Friedrich Kapp, when a student 
in Ansbach forty years before, was shown the spot in the park 
where the dagger was found. - 
This could only be another proof that Kaspar Hauser did not 
kill himself, for he could not have possessed such a knife without 
the knowledge of the family, nor bought it at the last moment 
without the fact-becoming known after his death. 
Von der Linde has only bard names for Daumer and other 
defenders of the foundling: he even goes so far as to accuse 
Daumer, Tucher, Kolb, Welcker, and * Hermann,” of having 
joined in a Kaspar Hauser plot. 
His style is exceedingly coarse, and he insults the reader by 
silly expletives, given in parenthesis, and possibly intended for