Full resolution (JPEG) - On this page / på denna sida - Sidor ...
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
Below is the raw OCR text
from the above scanned image.
Do you see an error? Proofread the page now!
Här nedan syns maskintolkade texten från faksimilbilden ovan.
Ser du något fel? Korrekturläs sidan nu!
This page has never been proofread. / Denna sida har aldrig korrekturlästs.
544 SWEDENBORG IN THE HOUSE OF NOBLES. [Doc. 196.
therefore burdened by a heavy war-tax. In addition to this
the whole commerce of Sweden lay prostrate in consequence
of the enormous rate of exchange which prevailed at the time,
and the great amount of irredeemable paper money with which
the country had been flooded (see Document 174 ). When
the Diet met at the end of 1760, the members of the Senate
at whose instigation the war had been undertaken, had to
bear the brunt of the general dissatisfaction, and in February
1761, Barons Palmstjerna and Scheffer, in conjunction with
Baron von Höpken, who had been prime minister, were com
pelled to resign their positions in the Senate.
Soon after a re-action set in in their favour; Swedenborg
being one of the first who raised his voice in defence of the
character of Baron von Höpken, in Document 195 ; afterwards
he spoke in favour of the re-instatement of all the three
senators in their former places of honour, in Document 196.
The authenticity of these two documents is beyond any
doubt: for Document 195 was copied by Bengt Bergius,46 the
Academician, according to his own statement, from the author’s
original, and as he, at the same time, copied many other
private letters of Swedenborg, we may take it for granted that
he was well acquainted with his handwriting; Document 196,
however, is still preserved in Swedenborg’s handwriting in a
volume entitled “ Riksdagsskrifter” among his manuscripts in
the Academy of Sciences in Stockholm .
By these two documents the following points are established :
First, that Swedenborg was strongly opposed to the re
introduction of an absolute monarchy into Sweden, and that he
did not look disapprovingly upon the severe measures which
were resorted to by the Diet and the Senate, and hence
by von Höpken, Palmstjerna, and Scheffer, in 1756 in defence of
what he calls “the excellent form of government” of Sweden.
Secondly, that he excused the declaration of war against
Prussia, which had been advised by Palmstjerna and Scheffer,
on the plea that it was done to preserve the alliance of France,
which he considered as one of the fundamental pillars of
safety for the Swedish commonwealth.
Thirdly, that he seemed to be actuated by a feeling of
friendship for the Prime Minister of Sweden, Baron von Höpken,
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
