Portia 5 s Travels in sweoen.

S T 5

In many -clrcumftances the relation of Carlberg differs from thofe of Nordberg and Vol-taire . The laft remarks that no one was prefent when the King was killed except Si-quier and Megret, and that the firft of thele related the death of the King to GeneralSchwerin .

Carlberg fays quite the contrary. Neverthelefs we muff not accufe M. de Voltaire for relating circumftances fuch as they were given to him, and not improbably by thefame Siquier * ; but at the fame time we have no right to look upon as falfe the accountgiven by an individual who heard, faw, and did himfelf the things which he delcribes,and whom neither fear nor reward could induce to write any thing but what he couldvouch from actual experience f.

Different opinions were entertained of the King’s wound ; fuch as examined it, main-tained that it could not have been made from the fortrefs or the redoubts of the enemy.On a draught of the fiege of Frederidhall on which it was affirmed that the King waskilled by a fhot from the redoubts, an officer of high rank, who was at the time alfo inNorway , had written in German with his own hand, that is not true. It was generallyconceived that the blow did not come from either a Dane or a Swede . No rumourwas more common than that Siquier, the King’s aide de camp, had murdered the King.It is not doubted that he himfelf confeffed it when ill at Stockholm in 1722, but it isadded that this illnefs was accompanied with delirium. Some have imagined that re-morfe had extorted this cqnfeffion ; others again have infilled that Siquier after his re-covery, when for the benefit of the waters at Medevi, was tortured by the fame remorie,although then perfectly in his fenfes and not delirious. In cafe Siquier had been nearKaulbars and others who were Handing by the King’s feet when he was killed, it wouldnot only have been eafy, but his duty to have obtained their teftimony, and by his neg-lecting this,fufpicion is no wifediminiffied. Another circumliance is alfo equivocal: Nord-berg relates that Siquier and Megret followed the King into the trenches, but I havebeen credibly informed that Siquier had nothing to do in the trenches, and that beinginterrogated by a certain perfon as to what bufinefs he had there, he hefitated in hisanfwer.- M. de Voltaire however declares him entirely innocent. He grounds his con-viction in the firft place on a declaration made to him by Siquier himfelf. 4t I couldhave killed the King of Sweden ; but fuch was my refpeft for that hero, that if I hadbeen fo inclined, I Ihould not yet have daredand fecondly he obferves that {c Si-quier died poor, and that fuch exploits are ordinarily well paid but if the miferablewretch do notin fuch cafes receive his wages in advance, his earnings may turn out ex-tremely final!. The third circumliance which he thinks abfolves him from the charge,appears to be of greater confequence, to wit, “ that the ball which terminated His Ma-jefty’s life weighed half a pound, a ball of which weight would not enter the mouth ofa fufil.” .But how did Siquier learn that the ball was exactly of that weight, fince inSweden it is entirely unknown; probably it might be afcertained from the verbal pro-■cefs on the fubjedt of an infpeftion of the body by three Swedilh noblemen J, a copy ofwhich I give in a note fubioined.

« We

# In admitting this hypothecs, it is next to impoffible not to have violent fufpicions of Siquier, as fhallhe hereafter detailed.

f The ftatement of Colonel Carlberg was communicated by himfelf to the author, and the copy whichhe pofTelfes he is allured was written by Col. C.

f In the year 1746, on the 12th July, between five and fix in the morning, the underfigned went downinto the Maufoleum called Carolin or Palatine, on the cqueftrian ifle of the church at Stockholm , andopened the coffin of King Charles XII . defundt, whom they found in the condition and order following :a mattrafs or pillow fluffed with aromatic herbs covered the face of the King, under his head and joining

3 u a . hi*