48

HISTORY OF MALTA.

to the commissioners, and brought proof of the corruption. Hisrepresentations obtained a delay of eight days, in order to give ahearing to the witnesses in favour of the marshal. More thansixty persons of known integrity appeared in this short space oitime, whose testimony entirely crushed the depositions given in bythe false witnesses.

Alter heaving the report of the commissioners, and afterwardsthe sentence pronounced by the provost, it was declared, in lullcouncil, that the loss of Tripoli was not occasioned by any treason,or co-operation with the enemy, on the part of the marshal or theknights, but entirely to be attributed to the cowardice of the Cala-brians ; that, in truth, there was no imperial constitution, nor anylaw, which,. in such a case, decreed any particular punishment forthe governors and officers ; but that, according to the statutes ofthe order, any governor might be dismissed from his charge, who,without an express permission from the grand-master and the coun-cil, abandoned a fort which w as entrusted to him to defend. Inconsequence of which it was concluded, by universal consent,“ lliat the marshal, together with the knights Sousa, Errera, andFusta, should be deprived of the habit and cross of the order, forhaving contributed to the loss of Tripoli.”

A sign of discontent which escaped the grand-master, suf-ficiently proved that he was dissatisfied with this sentence. Thetiuth w r as, he never would have included the three Spanish knightsm the accusation, had he not wished to take off all suspicion of hishav ing persecuted the marshal from national hatred: and he had