A History of the Knights of Malta/Chapter 21

CHAPTER XXI.

• The punishments of the fratemity
• List of prohibitions
• Criminal records
• Local government of the Maltese
• The bailiwick of Brandenburg.

In a previous chapter a description has been given of the various tribunals held at the chef-lieu, one of which was the criminal council or council of state. The name of this court naturally leads to an account of the crimes and punishments common amongst the fraternity.

The punishments to which a member of the Order was subject were as follow:—First, the Septaine. This penalty obliged the offender to fast for seven successive days, on the Wednesday and Friday of which his diet was restricted to bread and water only. He was not permitted to leave his dwelling during the period except for the purpose of attending Divine service. The statutes laid down that on the Wednesday and Friday he was to receive corporal discipline at the hands of a priest (usually the vice-prior) in the conventual chtu’ch during the recitation of the psalm Deus misereatur nostri, etc., but this latter portion of the punishment fell into disuse after the sixteenth century. The Quarantaine was similar to the Septaine, excepting that it lasted forty consecutive days, the restrictions as to food being the same. In both cases the culprit was forbidden to wear arms. If a more severe measure than either of the above were required, imprisonment was resorted to, no limit in duration being affixed by the statutes. Loss of seniority was another penalty to which offending members were frequently sentenced, and if a still more severe punishment were necessary they were deprived of their habit either for a certain definite time or for ever. The latter sentence was, of course, equivalent to expuision from the ranks of the fraternity.

No sentence of death was recognized in the code, but if a knight were guilty of a crime so heinous as to require such a penalty he was stripped of his habit as a preliminary measure, and then being no longer a member of the Order, he was handed over to the civil power, and treated like an ordinary criminal. The records of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries mention several instances of capital punishment which had been inflicted in this manner on quondam members of the fraternity. The method most usually adopted for carrying out the last sentence of the law was l.orrowed from the Turks, and consisted in fastening tip the condemned criminal in a sack, and throwing him alive into the Marsa Muscetto. The application of torture was not expressly authorized by the statutes, but, at the same time, it was nowhere forbidden, and the criminal records show that it was resorted to very frequently for the purpose of extorting confessions from suspected persons. No rank was so elevated as to save a prisoner from this cruel test. It will be remembered that during the second siege of Rhodes the chancellor D’Amaral was subjected to the question in order to elicit a confession of traitorous correspondence on his part, and that this was by no means a solitary instance may be seen by a study of the criminal documents now in the Record Office at Malta.

The eighteenth division of the statutes is devoted to an enumeration of the various acts forbidden to the brotherhood, and the punishments which were to follow their perpetration. No member was to make a testamentary disposition of more than the one-fifth part of his property, the remainder reverting to the public treasury. lie was never to become a partisan in the quarrels of secular persons, whether princes or private individuals. He was not to interfere in the administration of justice by interceding for an offending brother, lie was not to wander from his commandery, or priory, so as, in the words of the statute, “to make a vagabond of himself.” This regulation prevented members from leaving the precincts of their own commanderies or priories, except on good cause shewn, and then only with the written permission of the commander in the case of a simple knight, of the grand-prior in the case of a commander, and of the Grand-Master himself in the case of a grand-prior. Any person connected with the Order finding an offender against this statute “enacting the vagabond” was bound to secure him and give notice of his imprisonment to the grand-prior under whose jurisdiction he was. The same regulation held good in the convent at Malta.

Members were strictly prohibited from making use of letters of recommendation, either to the Grand-Master or to members of his council, with a view to secure priority of nomination to any office or dignity, under the penalty of the loss of ten years’ seniority. No privateering expeditions against the infidel were permitted without sanction having previously been obtained from the Grand-Master and council. This sanction was, however, always readily granted, and the time spent in such cruises allowed to count as part of the necessary caravans to be fulfilled by each knight during his stay at the convent. No safe conduct was to be given to any infidel or corsair except by the Grand-Master and council, who alone were authorized to establish truces with the natural enemy of the Order. No member was to intermeddle in the wars of Christian princes, or to take any part therein, even on the side of his own native country.

Any member appearing in public without the distinctive dress of his profession—that is, the Cross in white linen sewn upon his robe—was for the first offence to undergo the quarantaine, for the second to be imprisoned for three months. and for the third to be stripped of his habit. The following (leeree was made against turbulence in the auberges:—“ If any of the brethren behave insolently and in a turbulent manner in the auberges where they dine, and if amidst the tumult and noise they break the doors, the windows, the chairs, or the tables, or any articles of that nature, or if they upset or disarrange them with reckless audacity, they shall be punished by the Grand-Master and council in such manner as may be decreed, even to the loss of their seniority. If they conduct themselves still more outrageously, and beat the pages, the servants, or the slaves of the conventual bailiffs, for the first offence, if no blood be spilt, they shall be punished with the quarantaine, for the second they shall be imprisoned, and for the third they shall lose two years’ seniority. If, on the other hand, blood shall have been spilt, no matter how slight the wound may have been, for the first offence they shall undergo six months’ imprisonment, and if the wound be serious and dangerous they shall lose seniority. If any member shall insult another in the palace of the Grand-Master, he shall lose three years’ seniority if he has it already, or if not, then as soon as he shall have attained it; for an insult in an auberge he shall lose two years. If the disputants come to Mows they shall be stripped of their habit, and if either party be wounded they shall lose their habit without remission, and if he be killed the survivor shall be handed over to the secular power.”

The following are the crimes for which the statutes decreed the loss of habit in perpetuity:—“Those convicted of being heretics, guilty of unnatural offences, assassins, or thieves; those who have joined the ranks of the infidel, amongst whom are to be classed those who surrender our standard or other ensign when it is unfurled in presence of the enemy; also those who abandon their comrades during the fight, or who give shelter to the infidel, together with all who are parties to, or cognizant of so great a treason.” Privation of habit for one year was to be inflicted upon any one who, “when under arms, shall have left the ranks to plunder, also upon any one who brings an accusation against another without being able to substantiate his charge.” “A knight who has committed a murder shall be deprived of his habit in perpetuity and kept in prison in order to prevent others from becoming so hardened as to commit a similar crime, and that the company of our brethren may be quiet and peaceable. Whoever wounds any person treason. ably in secret or by malice prepen8e shall lose his habit in perpetuity.”

The question of duelling was rather curiously dealt with in the statutes and customs of the Order. It was strictly forbidden by the former, and the severest penalties were attached to any infringement of the law which ran thus:—“To check the impiety of those who, neglecting the safety of their souls, invite others to a duel and expose their bodies to a cruel death, we decree that if one brother provoke another, or if he defy him either by speech or in writing, by means of a second, or in any other manner, and that the one who is called out does not accept the duel, in addition to the penalties decreed by the sacred council, and by the constitution of Gregory XIII. of blessed memory, the appellant shall be deprived of his habit in perpetuity without any remission. If his antagonist accept the challenge, even if neither party appear on the ground, they shall nevertheless both be deprived of their habits without hope of pardon. But should they both have proceeded to the place of assignation, even though no blood should have been spilt, they shall not only be deprived of their habit, but shall afterwards be handed over to the secular power. In addition, we decree that whoever shall have been the cause of any such duel or defiance, or who shall have given either advice, assistance, or counsel, either by word or deed, or who upon any pretence whatever shall have persuaded any one to issue a challenge, if it shall be proved that he accompanied him to act as his second he shall be condemned to lose his habit. The same penalty we likewise attach to those who shall be proved to have been present at a duel, or of having posted or caused to be posted a cartel of defiance in any spot whatever.”

The above law relates only to a regular premeditated duel, but brawls and fracas are punished under the following statute:—“If a brother strike another brother, he shall perform a quarantaine; if he strike him in such a manner that blood be drawn elsewhere than from the mouth or nose, he shall be stripped of his habit; if he shall have attempted to wound him with a knife, a sword, or a stone, and has not succeeded in doing so, he shall perform a quarartaine.” This statute was moderated by a subsequent one, passed at a chapter-general during the rule of La Cassière, giving the Grand-Master and council authority to mitigate the rigour of the penalty.

The laws against duelling were, in practice, found to be so severe, and the difficulty of checking the evil so great in a fraternity which embraced in its ranks so many young and hotheaded spirits—men keenly alive to an affront and ever ready to resent it, and who regarded personal courage as the first of all human virtues—that some modification or evasion was absolutely necessary. It became gradually tacitly recognized that duels might be held in a particular locality set apart for the purpose without incurring the above-mentioned penalties. It had been expressly stipulated that no fighting was permitted either upon the ramparts or without the town. There exists, however, in the town of Valetta, a street so narrow as to be called, par excellence, the “Strada Stretta,” and this was the spot marked out as a kind of neutral territory in which irascible cavaliers might expend their superfluous courage without fear of incurring the severer penalties of the law. The fiction which led to this concession was that a combat in this street might be looked upon in the light of a casual encounter—the result of some jostling or collision brought about by the extreme narrowness of the road. The Strada Stretta consequently became eventually the great rendezvous for affairs of honour. The seconds posted themselves one on either side at some little distance from their principals, and, with their swords drawn prevented the passers-by from approaching the scene until the conffict had been brought to a conclusion. The records of the criminal council in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries teem with entries of stabbing, wounding, and killing, most of which were the result either of premeditated duels or of casual encounters. When they were the former the punishment depended greatly upon whether or not the duel had taken place at the authorized spot, and if so the penalty was comparatively trifling, being either a quarantaine or two months’ imprisonment.

The punishment for duelling being thus severe, it was necessary for the statutes to provide some protection to the peaceably disposed from the violence of passion and ill-temper and from the insult of hatred or jealousy. We consequently find the following decree under the head of insults:—“If a brother, in the heat of his anger, whilst quarrelling with another brother, shall make use of insulting language, he shall be punished by the quarantaine, even though he shall subsequently admit that he has spoken falsely and shall apologize for the insult. If he shall boldly give him the lie direct, he shall lose two years’ seniority, and if he strike him with a stick or give him a blow with his hand, he shall lose three years.”

The questions of quarrelling and duelling having been disposed of, the statutes proceed to provide against the nuisance to respectable and steady-going householders of midnight revellers disturbing their slumbers. The following regulation proves that fast young men in the middle ages were as groat a nuisance to their neighbours, and committed much the same 36’ class of follies, as in the present day:—“Whoever shall enter into the house of a citizen without being invited, and against the wish of the head of the family, or who shall disturb the social gatherings of the people during their festivals, dances, weddings, or other similar occasions, shall lose two years of seniority without hope of pardon; and if, either by day or by night, they do any damage to the doors or windows of the people, then, in addition to the above-named penalties, they shall suffer a rigid imprisonment for as long as may be decreed by the Grand-Master and council. Any member of the Order joining in masquerades or ballets shall suffer loss of seniority.” This statute was still further defined by an addition made by the Grand-Master Claude de la Sangle, probably in consequence of the prevalence of the practices alluded to:—“If any one shall be so bold as to damage doors or windows by night, or shall stop them up with plaster or stain them with dirt, or shall throw stones at them, shall lose three years of seniority, leaving it to the discretion of the Grand-Master and council to decree, if they see fit, a severer punishment.”

The original profession of a member of the Order of St. John having included the three vows of obedience, poverty, and chastity, the statutes, after having decreed such penalties as were necessary to check any transgression of the two first of these vows, proceeded to deal with the last. The question of chastity was one not so easy to legislate for in an institutions constituted like that of the Hospital. On the one hand, as a religious fraternity devoted to the service of God and the practice of charity and all good works, it was impossible to recognize any license or infraction of the strictest laws of continence and chastity. The monk, in his cloistered retreat, mortifying all sensual appetites by constant fasts and ever-recurring vigils, was not supposed to be more free from earthly passions than the knight of St. John. We all know, however, how widely even the secluded inmates of the monasteries constantly strayed from the strict paths of virtue, and it was not to be anticipated that the members of the military Orders, surrounded as they were with such vastly increased temptations, could have maintained themselves more free from vice and immorality. Even Raymond du Puy, in his original rule, drawn up at a time when religious enthusiasm and monastic austerity were at their height, dealt with this question somewhat tenderly, lie first of all strove to guard his members from temptation. “Whenever they may be in a house, or in church, or wherever else women may be present, let them mutually protect one another’s chastity. Nor let women wash either their (the brethren’s) hands or their feet, or make their beds, and so may the God that dwelleth on high watch over them in that matter. Amen.” Afterwards he deals with the sin when committed, and it will be observed that punishment is awarded not for the commission of the sin, but for the being found out. “If any of the brethren shall have fallen by the force of his evil passions into any of the, sins of the flesh, which God forbid, if he have sinned in secret, let him repent in secret, and let him impose upon himself a suitable penance; if, however, his sin shall have been discovered publicly and beyond contradiction, let him in the same place where he may have committed the sin, on the Sabbath day, after mass, when the congregation shall have left the church, be stripped in the sight of all, and let him be scourged and beaten most severely with thongs or rods by his superior, or by such other brethren as the superior shall depute to perform this duty, and then let him be expelled from our institution. Afterwards, however, if God shall have enlightened his heart, and he shall return to the Hospital, and shall confess himself to have been a guilty sinner, and a transgressor of the laws of God, and shall promise amendment, let him be again received, and a suitable penance be imposed upon him, and for a whole year let him be considered as on his probation, and during this period let the brethren observe his conduct, and afterwards let them act as seems best to them in the matter.” If such were the rules made in the first years, of the Order’s existence, wheu the monastic element greatly overpowered the , secular, we may suppose that, as time went on, more and more latitude was allowed. Composed as the fraternity was of the youth of high and noble families, not secluded, like their predecessors of the days of du Puy, from female society, but mingling with the gayest of either sex, taught to look upon military renown rather than ascetic piety as the rightful adornment of their profession, it was not to be expected that they would, or even could, act up to the strict letter of the vow they had taken. The statutes of the later times do not, therefore, attempt to forbid a dereliction of chastity; they content themselves with checking all open display of immorality. “It has been very rightly ordained that no member of our brotherhood, of whatever position or rank he may be, shall be permitted to support, maintain, or consort with women of loose character either in their own houses or abroad. If any one, abandoning his honour and reputation, shall be so barefaced as to act in opposition to this regulation, and shall render himself publicly infamous, after having been three times warned by his superior to desist from this vice, we decree, after the expiration of forty days from the date of his first warning, he shall, if a commander, be deprived of his commandery, and if a simple brother of the convent, he shall lose his seniority. If any member of our Order shall be so barefaced as to recognize and publicly to adopt as his own a child who may be born to him from an illegitimate connection (such as is not recognized by law), and attempt to bestow on him the name of his family, we decree that he shall never hold either office, benefice, or dignity in our Order. We further decree that all associates of loose women who may be ranked as incestuous, sacrilegious, and adulterers shall be declared incapable of possessing any property or of holding any office or dignity in our Order. And we designate as an associate of loose women not only those who are notorious evil livers and have had judgment passed on them as such, but also any one who, without sense of shame or fear of God, and forgetting his profession, shall entertain and support a woman of doubtful character, notorious for her bad life and evil conversation, or who shall reside with her constantly.”

These statutes were so ambiguously worded, and left so many loopholes for evasion, that it is not surprising they should gradually have become a dead letter. The presence of a large number of women of light character within the convent became a public scandal at a very early period, and many Grand-Masters, even during the residence of the Order at Rhodes, sought by the most rigorous measures to mitigate the evil. Their efforts were, however, fruitless, and as the fraternity lost more and more of the religious enthusiasm which had stimulated its first members, so did the dissolute conduct of the knights become more outrageously opposed to the principles of their profession. After the successful termination of the siege of Malta had left the brethren in undisputed sovereignty of that island, and had raised their military renown to the highest possible pitch, they appear to have become intoxicated with the admiration they had excited throughout Europe, and throwing off all restraint, to have abandoned themselves to the most reckless debauchery. At this period the city of Valetta was positively teeming with women of loose character. The streets were thronged with the frail beauties of Spain, Italy, Sicily, and the Levant, nor were the dark-eyed houris of Tripoli and Tunis wanting to complete an array of seduction and temptation too strong for aught but a saint to resist. Saints, however, there were but few in the convent in those days, so that the demireps and their supporters had it all their own way. We have seen that during the governance of La Cassière the attempt of that Grand-Master to check the evil led to an open revolt, and his own imprisonment, a sentence which was carried into effect amidst the derisive jeers of crowds of flaunting Cyprians whom he had in vain endeavoured, for decency’s sake, to banish into the neighbouring casals.

This period may be noted as the worst and most openly immoral epoch in the history of the fraternity. The evil, to a certain .extent, brought with it its own remedy, and after a while the knights became themselves scandalized at the notoriety of their licentiousness. Still, the morality at Malta remained at a very low ebb, and up to the latest date of the Order’s residence there its society abounded with scandalous tales and sullied reputations. The vice prevalent in the island was probably no more than that of any other locality where the bulk of the population was young and unfettered by the obligations of marriage. 1’he error lay in supposing that a vow of chastity, rendered compulsory upon all seeking admission, could by any possibility act as a check upon the natural depravity of youth, unrestrained as it was in any other manner.

The following extracts from the records of the criminal council during the sixteenth century have been selected as samples of the various sorts of crimes brought before that tribunal. Many of them were of frequent occurrence, the most constant being those of homicide from duelling and stabbing. Indeed, the entries of these two crimes seem interminable, and mark a most disorderly and quarrelsome spirit. This is, perhaps, not surprising when it is remembered that youths of so many different nations were congregated together, who could ill brook even an idle jest when uttered by a member of a rival langue.

Cav. Giugliochico Bois Langue, for the theft of a golden chalice of the value of 360 ducats and other jewels from the sacristy of St. Laurence Church, which he pledged with the Jews, was sentenced, in 1526, to be deprived of his habit in perpetuity.

Cav. Giovanni de Cerdan, for stabbing Cay. Galcerano Torres, was sentenced, in 1531, to be deprived of his habit.

Cav. Galcerano Palan, for deserting from the convent, was sentenced, in 1532, to be deprived of his habit.

Cav. Carlo de Piscie and Cav. Godof redo Regnanlt, for killing four men in a galley (vide Chapter XV.), were sentenced, in 1533, to be deprived of their habits and handed over to the civil power.

Corn. d’Orleans and Corn. Antonio de Vareques, for being concerned in the same tumult, were sentenced to be simply deprived of their habits.

Cav. Ferncino Cheron, for sacrilege and the theft of pearls and a ring from the chapel of Our Lady of Phllermo, was sentenced, in 1536, to be deprived of his habit.

Cav. Pietro de Onaya and Cay. Sanchio Longa, for creating a disturbance during the eve of Christmas day, by disguising themselves as ladies and mixing with the ladies during the midnight mass, were sentenced, in 1536, to be imprisoned until the arrival in Malta of the Grand-Master (D’Omedes).

Clement West, Turcopoier of England, for want of respect to the Grand-Master and council (vide Chapter XXII.), was sentenced, in 1539, to be placed in close arrest until the arrival of the Grand-Master (D’Omedes), who added four months to the sentence.

Cav. Pietro Neglia, for breaking into a nunnery in the night time, was sentenced, in 1539, to be banished to Goso for six months.

The Marshal Gaspar La Vallier, Cav. Simon do Loss, captain of cavalry, Cav. Pietro de Ferrere, treasurer, and Cav. Antonio Fuster, for the loss of Tripoli (dde Chapter XVI.), were sentenced, in 1551, to be deprived of their habits, and the marshal to be further handed over to the civil power.

Cav. Oswald Massingberd, for the theft of a slave (Chapter XXII.), was sentenced, in 1552, to be imprisoned for two months.

Cav. Filippo de Arnico, for the theft of a silver salver from the palace of the Grand-Master, was sentenced, in 1553, to be deprived of his habit.

Cav. Alfonso de Madrigal, for the falsification of letters from the Grand-Master, for a sum of 3,050 scudi, was sentenced, in 1554, to be deprived of his habit.

Cav. Emanuel Villaframe, for murder, was sentenced, in 1555, to be deprived of his habit and handed over to the civil power.

Cav. Pietro Daispone and Cay. Ludovico Marsifia, for stabbing, were sentenced, in 1555, to undergo the quarantaine.

Cav. Carlo Fleury, for the rape of Gerolama Olivier, wife of Agostino, was sentenced, in 1555, to imprisonment for one year.

Cav. Giacomo Sandilandes, for suspected theft and sacrilege in the church of St. Antonio, was sentenced to undergo torture till the crime be confessed, and then to be deprived of his habit and handed over to the civil power.

Com. Vincenzo Lobello, for abandoning the convent and entering another Order (just prior to the siege of Malta), was sentenced, in 1565, to be deprived of his commandery.

Cav. Giovanni do Pegna and Cav. Gaspar de Samano, being suspected authors of libels against the Grand-Master (La Valette, vide Chapter XIX.), were sentenced, in 1567, to ten years’ imprisonment, with immunity to whoever betrays the author.

Cav. St. Clement, for the loss of two galleys to the Turks, (ride Chapter XIX.), was deprived of his habit in 1570.

Cav. Antonio Melo, Cav. Emiio Fossati, and Cav. Giovanni Perea, for introducing themselves in disguise and under feigned names to Cav. Giorgio Correa, attacking and treacherously killing him, were sentenced, in 1577, to be deprived of their habits. This was the first punishment carried into effect in the new conventual church of St. John at Valetta.

Cav. Pompeo Marmillo and Cav. Mugio Delizorri, for passing false money, were sentenced, in 1584, to be deprived of their habits.

Fr. Vineenzo La Monti, priest of obedience, for incest, was sentenced, in 1602, to serve on board the galleys for four years.

Alexander Price, servant-at-arms, for clipping money, was sentenced, in 1609, to be deprived of his habit and handed over to the civil power.

Cæsar Russo, servant-at-arms, for becoming a Moslem, was deprived of his habit in 1611.

Sister Mary Grazia Grisoni, of the Order of St. John at Florence, for poisoning Sister Porgia de Bartolini of the same Order, was sentenced, in 1583, to be deprived of her habit and handed over to the civil power.

Of course in some instances these punishments were mere formal decrees, the delinquents being out of reach at the time. Whenever the conduct of a member once professed became such as to render him unworthy to continue on the roll, he was, as a matter of form, arraigned before the council and stripped of his habit, even though he had previously absconded.

Before the islands of Malta and Gozo fell into the possession of the Order through the act of donation granted by Charles V., they had been an appanage of the Spanish monarchy, and attached to the viceroyalty of Sicily. Their local government had consisted of a hakem, or governor, who was commandant of the military within the islands, and intructed with ample power to maintain public tranquillity. Under him were four giurati, who acted as a council on all questions of finance, and two catapani. for all matters relating to food, the bulk of which was imported from Sicily. An officer, called il secreto, received the duties payable on imports, and another, called il portolano, was the superintendent of the harbours. Once a year an assembly, or parliament, was convened, which was divided into the three classes of nobles, clergy, and commons. This assembly prepared lists of candidates for the various above-mentioned offices, the viceroy selecting from such lists the persons by whom they were to be filled.

When the Order of St. John superseded the government of the emperor, the leading features of the former administration were retained. The assembly, it is true, soon became a dead letter, and the nomination to the various offices was made direct by the Grand-Master in council; still the selection was invariably from among the Maltese, and their ancient customs and privileges were interfered with as little as possible. Their code of laws remained in force, and was recognized by the fraternity, the duty of carrying it into effect being left almost entirely in the hands of the inhabitants. There were three legal courts, each presided over by a native judge, the first for criminal causes, the second for civil causes, and the third for appeals from the other two. A knight was appointed to preside over the entire department, which was called the castellany, but he in no way interfered with the administration of justice. He was replaced every second year by a fresh nomination. No member of the Order was, as such, amenable to the native tribunals, but in cases where the crime rendered it advisable that he should be punished by the sentence of those courts, he was stripped of his habit as a preliminary measure, and then handed over to their jurisdiction as a secular person.

Throughout the residence of the knights in the island, a broad line of demarcation was drawn between themselves and the native population. The Maltese had always been a highly aristocratic community, many of their families having been ennobled at a very remote period, and the whole power of government was vested in the hands of this upper class. No more exclusive or oligarchical a body existed anywhere throughout Europe, and traces of this state of things may still be perceived. The Order of St. John, eminently aristocratic though it was in its own constitution, and naturally jealous of all encroachments upon that privileged class from which its members were recruited, and whence all its power and wealth had been drawn, appeared, in its connection with Malta, to have been actuated by more liberal ideas and views than its predecessors. The Grand-Master and council no sooner assumed the reins of government than they materially enlarged the basis of power by extending the area from which they selected their native employés. One natural result of this policy was a slight coldness and alienation on the part of the class which had hitherto monopolized the entire government of the island, and this, coupled with the natural reserve of the Maltese character, always acted to prevent any real amalgamation between the two parties.

The Maltese, as such, were not admitted into the highest class of the Order. Those of them who could bring forward the necessary proofs of nobility, and were otherwise eligible, could, it is true, be received as members of the langue of Italy. In a few cases this was permitted, exceptionally, even after marriage, on the condition that the ladies should retire from the island for the period of their accouchernent. The number, however, who availed themselves of the privilege was but trifling; and even they were not ranked in the same category as the other members of the langue, being incapable of becoming either Grand-Masters or conventual bailiffs. The Order was, consequently, always regarded by the natives as a foreign body, and but little friendship or cordiality was to be traced in their social intercourse. It must not be inferred from this that the Maltese were really dissatisfied with the rule of the knights. That government was certainly a despotism, and one of the strongest kind; still, it was well suited to the habits of the people, and usually maintained with equity and moderation. Those cravings for liberty and freedom of personal action which characterize the Anglo- Saxon temperament are not so strongly felt in southern latitudes. The decrees, therefore, of the Grand-Master and his council met with ready and cheerful obedience from those who felt no very urgent desire to undertake the responsible duty of their own control. The knights placed themselves on a decided eminence over those they governed, and when the interests of the two parties clashed, it was but natural that the Maltese, being the weaker should be compelled to give way. Still, on the whole, they had not much cause for complaint, and there can be no doubt that the transfer of the island to the Order of St. John had brought many very solid advantages to its inhabitants.

Instead of a few officials and a slender garrison, they now saw Malta made the nucleus and the head-quarters of the most powerful and wealthy fraternity in Europe. Every land contributed its quota to the stream of wealth which from that day began to flow thither. The hamlet of the Bourg became a considerable town, and its suburbs extended themselves over the adjacent peninsula and the intervening mainland. Ere long a new city sprang up, exceeding in extent and magnificence anything which the wildest flight of imagination could have pictured in bygone years, adorned with auberges, churches, and other public buildings, by a brotherhood whose ample revenues enabled it thus to beautify its capital. Stores of grain accumulated in the public magazines; ramparts and forts sprang up to protect the island from the piratical descents of the Algerine corsairs, and Malta gradually rose from the insignificant position into which she had for so many years sunk, to be ranked as the most important fortress and the most flourishing community in the Mediterranean.

These were not slight benefits nor small privileges. The Order which had conferred such advantages on its subjects might well stand excused for some display of arrogance and despotism. After all, it was only with the highest class, the exclusive Maltese nobility, that the new government brought itself into anything approaching unpopularity, and even then it was not so much the despotism of the ruling power as the liberalism which had opened the way to office in favour of a lower grade than its own, which had engendered the dislike. Below it there was a rising class containing much of the talent and ambition of the island, and it was amongst these that the council sought for candidates to fill the posts hitherto invariably monopolized by the nobility. With them, therefore, the Order stood in high favour, and whilst, on the one hand, the old aristocracy held itself aloof, and, on the other, the lower class bowed in uncomplaining submission to the sway of a power sufficiently energetic to compel its obedience, this section, comprising all the energy and activity of the country, became faithful adherents to the system by which their own emancipation from the dictation of the aristocracy had been secured.

Into this portion of Maltese society the knights of St. John found a ready and welcome admission. Even here, however, there were distinctions drawn between the various langue, some of which were far more popular than others. The French members did not find much favour with the ladies who swayed the empire of fashion within this coterie. They were too arrogant, self-sufficient, and boastful ever to be received as chosen favourites, or to find a ready welcome into the domestic privacy of the Maltese. More than one case had occurred in which this braggart tendency on the part of Frenchmen, ever ready to suppose their attractions irresistible, had led to unpleasant results, and had clouded the fair fame of lathes whose only fault had, perchance, consisted in permitting rather too free an offering of adulation on the part of their knightly admirers. Whilst the French were thus neglected, there were other langues the members of which were more fortunate. The Germans, in particular, seem to have borne the palm of popularity. Their natural reserve and phlegmatic temperament prevented them from falling into the errors of their more vivacious confreres, and they were generally admitted to a footing of intimacy and freedom which the latter were never permitted to attain. The Spaniards were also great favourites, for much the same reason, and unless the tales recorded on this point are false, they were most successful in their intercourse with the dames of the island.

With the lower class the rule of the knights was very popular. The works of fortification on which they were always engaged for the strengthening of their position yielded a continuous source of employment to the labouring population, whilst the ample stores of food retained in the magazines of Valetta and Vittoriosa secured them from the miseries of famine which in olden times had so frequently been the scourge of the island. The Grand-Master also sought to ingratiate himself by constantly providing them with amusements. Their privileges in this respect were very numerous, and always maintained with the utmost regularity. Indeed, even at the present time, nearly a century after the departure of the Order, distinct traces remain of this fact in the numerous festas which on every conceivable occasion are held in all the towns and casals. The expenditure for these festas, principally caused by the elaborate illuminations which invariably form their greatest attraction, is now defrayed by collections and offerings from the public in the vicinity. In the time of the knights the money was to a large extent provided from the public treasury.

The most entertaining of these festivals was the carnival, always observed in Malta with much splendour and variety of costume. The privilege of holding a carnival was granted by the Grand-Master not only on the three days immediately preceding the commencement of Lent, but at any other time when the Order desired to celebrate an event of unusual importance. These extra carnivals were called Babarro. On Shrove Tuesday a Cocagna was given to the people. This was a vast wooden structure reared in St. George’s Square, in front of the Grand-Master’s palace, and decorated with flowers, ribbons, and flags. The Cocagna was hung with provisions and fruits of all kinds. Live poultry, ham, eggs, sausages, joints of meat, etc., were mixed with wreaths of flowers and clusters of fruit, the whole presenting a most tempting display to the assembled multitude. At a given signal there was a general scramble, and the good things became the property of those sufficiently active and fortunate to seize upon and carry them off. A master of the ceremonies was appointed to superintend on this occasion, and to give the signal for onslaught. He was termed Il Gran Visconti, and for the day the administration of the police was intrusted to his care.

The great festival of the Order, St. John’s day, was naturally observed with much rejoicing. In the afternoon horse races were held for prizes presented by the Grand-Master. The singularity of these races consisted in the course selected for the purpose. The main street of Valetta, the Strada Reale, extends in a straight line from Fort St. Elmo to the Porta Reale, a distance of upwards of half a mile. This was the course over which the races were run, and as it was in the heart of the town all traffic had to be stopped during their continuance. They differed from those run in the Corso at Rome and in other cities, inasmuch as the horses were not riderless. On the 1st of May the old custom of the greasy pole was introduced, which the Maltese were very expert in mounting. This was erected in the square in front of the Grand-Master’s palace.

In short, every effort appears to have been made by the executive power to render the people contented with their lot, so far as that could be insured by a plentiful supply of amusement and festivity. In this they acted with a due discrimination as to the peculiar temperament of the Maltese. Docile and tractable in the highest degree, they merely required the excitement of a little innocent recreation to quell any feeling of discontent that might have arisen against a government in which their interests were invariably compelled to yield to those of the fraternity, and where they had scarcely any voice in the legislation. That that government was exercised beneficially, as a general rule, the rapid progress made by the island clearly proves; still, there were doubtless many laws enacted which pressed hardly on the population. The character of the Maltese is very simple and attractive. Frugal, sober, and industrious, they seem to possess more virtues, and to be afflicted with less vices than any other of the races of southern Europe, so that a little liberality in the matter of sports and holidays prevented any ebullition of discontent at their political disadvantages. It must not, however, be imagined that this docility on their part arose from any spirit of craven fear or from want of resolution. The events which marked the close of the eighteenth century, during the brief rule of the French, shew clearly that the islanders are not wanting in firmness or courage, and that when roused by real wrongs and oppressions, they are capable of the noblest exertions and the most heroic constancy in their struggles for freedom.

There yet remains to describe a curious offshoot of the fraternity, which, although it seceded from the parent stem at an early date, always kept up a connection with it, and which exists and flourishes at the present time. This is the Bailiwick of Brandenburg.

The earliest establishment of the Order of St. John in that part of Germany seems to have dated from the year 1160, when the Margrave Albert the Bear returned thither from his pilgrimage in Palestine. Its possessions at this time, which were inconsiderable, were situated between the rivers Elbe and Weser. They were superintended by a vice-preceptor, under the supreme control of the grand-prior of Germany. That priorate, in addition to Germany proper, included all the countries in which the German language was spoken, viz., Bohemia, Hungary, Poland, and Denmark. On the suppression of the Templars in the early part of the fourteenth century, their possessions in Germany were transferred to the Order of St. John, as had been the case in England and elsewhere. The property of the latter Order was thus greatly augmented in the provinces of Saxony, Pomerania, Mecklenburg, and Brandenburg. The knights in those districts soon became restless at the subordinate position which they occupied in the grand-priorate, and eventually sought to form themselves into an independent unit. After a long struggle, in which they were warmly supported by the Margraves of Brandenburg, they definitely seceded from. the priorate, and erected themselves into a bailiwick, under the title of Brandenburg. For many years they were treated by the Order as rebels, as they refused to pay any responsions or to be under control. The schism continued until the year 1382, when a reconciliation was effected. The treaty was made between Conrad von Braunsberg, as grand-prior of Germany, and Bernedt von der Schulenburg, the bailiff of Brandenburg, and was in the same year confirmed by the Grand-Master Ferdinand d’Heredia. In this agreement it was decided that the knights of the bailiwick should be allowed to select their own Master, provided the choice were confirmed by the grand-prior of Germany. On the other hand, responsions to the amount of 2,400 gold forms were to be paid to the treasury of the Order in their chef-lieu. Things continued in this state till the Reformation, when the members of the bailiwick, having embraced the Protestant religion, once more seceded and placed themselves under the protection of the Margrave of Brandenburg. Many attempts were subsequently made to bring about a new reconciliation, for a long time ineffectually. At last Frederick the Great, wishing to aid his brother Ferdinand, who was the then bailiff of Brandenburg, succeeded in effecting a reunion. The chevalier Manchon, an officer in the Prussian service, was appointed negotiator in 1763. He proceeded to the grand-priory of Germany, under commission to demand the confirmation of Prince Ferdinand in his dignity, and to settle the dispute as to the discontinuance of payments by the bailiwick of Brandenburg. It was then agreed that the ancient connection between the Order and the Lutheran knights should be renewed, and that the latter should once more pay responsions into the general treasury, in the same manner as the Roman Catholic commanderies. From that time the knights of Brandenburg were treated as brethren by the Order, and recognized as knights of St. John. ^[1]

Things continued in this state until the French Revolution and the expulsion of the Order from Malta shattered its organization. The bailiwick of Brandenburg underwent the same fate as the other branches of the fraternity. By an edict of the 30th October, 1810, it was ordained that in Prussia all monasteries, chapters, commanderies, and bailiwicks should be treated as the property of the state, and be gradually secularized. With regard to the bailiwick of Brandenburg the king had resolved to postpone the execution of the decree until the death of the Herren Meister. who was then in his 81st year, being the same Ferdinand, brother of Frederic the Great, already referred to as Master of the bailiwick in 1763. That prince, however, declared that for the sake of example he would not avail himself of the royal grace. A compact was accordingly entered into between the commissioners of the state and the Master, by which the details of the transfer were settled. By deed signed in Berlin on the 12th January, 1811, the prince ceded and renounced to the state the Mastership of Sonnenberg and its commanderies. The king accepted this act on the 23rd January, 1811, and by a further deed, dated 23rd May, 1812, ratified the complete dissolution and extinction of the bailiwick of Brandenburg, and the sequestration of all its property to the state. He at the same time founded a new and royal Order of the knights of St. John, making himself its sovereign protector, and the aged Prince Ferdinand its Grand-Master. Into this Order he received all who had been knights of the bailiwick of Brandenburg.

The Royal Prussian Order of St. John existed in this form till the year 1852, when King Frederick William IV., by a mandate dated on the 15th October, restored the original bailiwick of Brandenburg as far as the cancelling of the edict of his predecessor could effect that purpose. Corporate rights were bestowed on the revived bailiwick, and its internal constitution was regulated by statutes. On the 13th February, 1853, the king, as patron and sovereign of the institution nominated as commanders the eight oldest knights surviving of those who had received the accolade at Sonnenberg. These commanders assembled for the election of a Herren Meister, two candidates having been named by the king, between whom the selection was to be made. The choice fell unanimously upon Prince Charles of Prussia, and his nomination was confirmed by the king on the 17th May, 18.33. The reception of the prince by the Order, and his installation as Herren Meister, took place in the presence of the sovereign in the royal chapel at Charlottenburg. The old custom of informing the grand-prior of Germany of the election of a new Herren Meister was observed so far as practicable. The priorate of Germany and its grand-prior no longer existed, consequently t.he new Herren Meister addressed a letter to the lieutenant of the Grand-Master, Count Colloredo, at Rome, informing him that the bailiwick of Brandenburg was restored, and that he, Prince Charles, had been elected Herren Meister. Since then correspondence has always been maintained between the bailiwick and the authorities of the Order at Rome. This revived branch has since become well known throughout Europe under the name of the “Johanniter.” It has performed noble service on the lines of the parent institution by rendering aid to the wounded in the German campaigns of 1866 and 1870, and it took an active part in carrying out the Geneva convention.

1. These particulars will be found fully recorded in Boisgelins’ “Malta,” vol. i., where the authorities for the statements are quoted. They include a letter from the grand-prior of Germany to Prince Ferdinand, and one to the chapter-general, both dated 16th May, 1763, a letter from the procurator of the treasury to the receiver of the Order in Germany, dated 11th September, 1763, and a magisterial edict of the Grand-Master Emanuel Pinto, dated 9th May, 1764.