| [This item 
        is related to the entry in the Naples Encyclopedia on Nisida and Carlo Poerio.]
 From Littell's 
          Living Age, September 13, 1851, a New York magazine that featured 
          reprints from foreign journals. Living Age took this item from 
          the British journal,  The Spectator. It is a review 
          of the then recent pamphlet written by British statesman William Ewart 
          Gladstone (1809-98), exposing the horrors of the prison system of the 
          Kingdom of Naples in the mid-nineteenth century.  
 MR. GLADSTONE’S 
          PAMPHLET ON NAPLES.  Of all 
          the events of this year, at home or abroad, one of the most striking 
          is the publication of Mr. Gladstone’s pamphlet on the State Prosecutions 
          of Naples (“Two Letters to the Earl of Aberdeen on the State Prosecutions 
          of the Neapolitan Government." By the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, M. 
          P. for the University of Oxford. Second edition.” Published by 
          Mr. Murray.) If the mere announcement has caused such a demand as to 
          call forth a second edition almost before the first was published, the 
          perusal of it will excite a still greater sensation in this country, 
          and, though for different reasons, on the continent. In this country 
          it will create sentiments of surprise and horror. Although the general 
          character of the statements is not new, they come before the world with 
          an aspect wholly novel. From this pamphlet the cautious Englishman will 
          learn with amazement that the charges of the Italian Patriots against 
          the government of Naples are not only true, but even fall short of the 
          reality; that the case stated with every conceivable precaution, not 
          by a Pepe or a Mazzini, but by a Gladstone—a leader of our own 
          Conservative party, a man only too scrupulous and fastidiously exact—is 
          stronger than they ever conceived it to be.  The very 
          precautions that he uses to exclude everything but his own main object—to 
          avoid everything like a cumulative case against Naples—give to 
          his narrative an appalling force. The reader understands that he is 
          perusing only a part of the whole history against that iniquitous government. 
          Before stating the facts, Mr. Gladstone expressly sets aside any political 
          or social question: whether of logical relation or of legal right, arising 
          out of the constitution; he treats that as a mere dream or fiction. 
          He excludes the question of Sicily. He raises no political questions 
          except those which are forced upon him by the details that he has to 
          relate. He begins, as a member of the great conservative party in Europe, 
          with a bias in favor of established government. We need not tell our 
          readers who Mr. Gladstone is; with what high constitutional feelings, 
          with what disciplined reasoning, with what a deep sense of responsibility, 
          he must enter upon a statement of the kind—a statement deliberately 
          received by a noble man not less than himself distinguished for high–minded 
          conservatism, Lord Aberdeen, minister for foreign affairs in Sir Robert 
          Peel’s administration.  Such is 
          the writer. He begins by contradicting the “general impression 
          that the organization of the governments of Southern Italy is defective—that 
          the administration of justice is tainted with corruption—that 
          instances of abuse or cruelty among subordinate public functionaries 
          are not  uncommon, and that political offences are punished with 
          severity, and with no great regard to the forms of justice.” This 
          vague supposition has no relation to the actual truth of the Neapolitan 
          case.  It is not 
          mere imperfection, not corruption in low quarters, not occasional severity, 
          that I am about to describe: it is incessant, systematic, deliberate 
          violation of the law, by the power appointed to watch over and maintain 
          it. It is such violation of human and written law as this, carried on 
          for the purpose of violating every other law unwritten and eternal, 
          human and divine; it is the wholesale persecution of virtue when united 
          with intelligence, operating upon such a scale that entire classes may 
          with truth be said to be its object, so that the government is in bitter 
          and cruel as well as utterly illegal hostility to whatever in the nation 
          really lives and moves and forms the main-spring of practical progress 
          and improvement; it is the awful profanation of public religion, by 
          its notorious alliance, in the governing powers, with the violation 
          of every moral law under the stimulant of fear and vengeance; it is 
          the perfect prostitution of the judicial office, which has made it, 
          under veils only too threadbare and transparent, the degraded recipient 
          of the vilest and clumsiest forgeries, got up willfully and deliberately, 
          by the immediate advisers of the crown, for the purpose of destroying 
          the peace, the freedom, ay, and, even if not by capital sentences, the 
          life, of men among the most virtuous, upright, intelligent, distinguished, 
          and refined of the whole community; it is the savage and cowardly system 
          of moral as well as in a lower degree of physical torture, through which 
          the sentences extracted from the debased courts of justice are carried 
          into effect.  The effect 
          of all this is, total inversion of all the moral and social ideas. Law, 
          instead of being re-spected, is odious. Force, and not affection, is 
          the foundation of government. There is no association, but a violent 
          antagonism, between the idea of freedom and that of order. The governing 
          power, which teaches of itself that it is the image of God upon earth, 
          is clothed in the view of the overwhelming majority of the thinking 
          public with all the vices for its attributes.  I have 
          seen and heard the strong and too true expression used, "This is the 
          negation of God erected into a system of government."  General 
          belief calculates that the political prisoners in the kingdom of the 
          Two Sicilies are in number between fifteen or twenty and thirty thousand; 
          the government seems to confess to two thousand, but the reader of Mr. 
          Gladstone's pamphlet will not believe the Neapolitan government; facts 
          and figure stated by Mr. Gladstone, official but not possible to be 
          concealed, show that the estimate of two thousand is unreasonable. Amongst 
          the persons imprisoned or exiled was the whole "Opposition" in the Chamber 
          of Deputies elected under the constitution.  The law 
          of Naples required that personal liberty shall be inviolable except 
          under warrant of a court of justice; but, in fact, men are continually 
          seized, "by the score, by the hundred, by the thousand, without any 
          warrant whatever, sometimes without even any written authority at all, 
          or anything beyond the word of a policeman—constantly without 
          any statement whatever of the nature of the offense." The lowest creatures 
          are employed as police agents; the prisoner is taunted into sedition, 
          or charges are fabricated; the courts refuse to receive evidence in 
          favor of the prisoner. As a specimen of the treatment, Mr. Gladstone 
          relates in detail the case of Carlo Poerio, a distinguished lawyer, 
          a late cabinet minister, a strict constitutionalist of the respectable 
          English pattern. He was accused, by means of repeated forgeries and 
          barefaced fabrications, of belonging to a republican sect; his accuser 
          was Jervolino, a disappointed applicant for some low office; one of 
          his fellow–prisoners, a noble, was vainly urged by the director 
          of police, under promises of "arrangement" and threats of "destruction," 
          to testify to Poerio's acquaintance with certain revolutionary handbills; 
          at the trial, Jervolino could answer no questions about the pretended 
          society; a witness deposed that Jervolino received a pension of twelve 
          ducats a month from the government; Poerio was allowed to call no more 
          witnesses; his judge was one of the persons threatened to be assailed 
          by the pretended society, and the same judge makes no secret of his 
          opinion that all persons charged by the king's government ought to be 
          found guilty.  One specimen 
          of this judge's effrontery may be given.  In two 
          cases it happened to be within the knowledge off the counsel for the 
          prisoners that the perjured witnesses against them did not even know 
          them by sight. In one of these the counsel desired to be allowed to 
          ask the witness to point out the accused persons among the whole number 
          of those charged, who were all sitting together. The court refused permission. 
          In the other case, the counsel challenged the witness to point out the 
          man of whose proceedings he was speaking. If I am rightly informed, 
          Navarro, whom I have so lately mentioned, affecting not to hear the 
          question, called out to the prisoner, “Stand up, Signor Nisco; 
          the court has a question to ask you.” This was done, and counsel 
          then informed that he might pursue his examination. A laugh of bitter 
          mockery ran through the court.  Poerio 
          was condemned to twenty-four years of irons. In February last, Poerio, 
          and sixteen of the co-accused, (with few of whom, however, he had any 
          previous acquaintance,) were confined in the Bagno of Nisida, near the 
          Lazaretto. For one half hour in the week, a little prolonged by the 
          leniency of the Superintendent, they were allowed to see their friends 
          outside the prison. This was their sole view of the natural beauties 
          with which they were surrounded. At other times they were exclusively 
          within the walls. The whole number of them, except I think one, then 
          in the infirmary, were confined night and day in a single room of about 
          sixteen palms in length by ten or twelve in breadth, and about ten in 
          height; I think with some small yard for exercise. Something like a 
          fifth must be taken off these numbers to convert palms into feet. When 
          the beds were let down at night there was no space whatever between 
          them; they could only get out at the foot, and, being chained two and 
          two, only in pairs. In this room they had to cook or prepare what was 
          sent them by the kindness of their friends. On one side the level of 
          the ground is over the top of the room; it, therefore, reeked with damp 
          and from this, tried with long confinement, they declared they suffered 
          greatly. There was one window, of course unglazed; and let not an Englishman 
          suppose that this constant access of the air in the Neapolitan climate 
          is agreeable or innocuous; on the contrary, it is even more important 
          to health there than here to have the means of excluding the open air, 
          for example, before and at sunset. Vicissitude of climate, again, is 
          quite as much felt there as here, and the early morning is sometimes 
          bitterly cold.  Their chains 
          were as follows. Each man wears a strong leathern girth round him above 
          the hips. To this are secured the upper ends of two chains. One chain 
          of four long and heavy links descends to a kind of double ring fixed 
          round the ankle. The second chain consists of eight links, each of the 
          same weight and length with the four; and this unites the two prisoners 
          together, so that they can stand about six feet. apart. Neither of these 
          chains is ever undone, day or night. The dress of common felons, which, 
          as well as the felon’s cap, was there worn by the late cabinet 
          minister of King Ferdinand of Naples, is composed of a rough and coarse 
          red jacket, with trousers of the same material—very like the cloth 
          made in this country from what is called devil’s dust; the trousers 
          are nearly black in color. On his head he had a small cap which makes 
          up the suit; it is of the same material. The trousers button all the 
          way up, that they may he removed at night without disturbing the chains. 
           The weight 
          of these chains, I understand, is about eight rotoli, or between sixteen 
          and seventeen English pounds for the shorter one, which must be doubled 
          when we give each prisoner his half of the longer one. The prisoners 
          have a heavy limping movement, much as if one leg had been shorter than 
          the other. But the refinement of suffering in this case arises from 
          the circumstance that here we have men of education and high feeling 
          chained incessantly together. For no purpose are these chains undone: 
          and the meaning of these last words must be well considered—they 
          are to be taken strictly.  Poerio 
          has since been transferred to a worse and more secluded dungeon at Ischia. 
           "Crimine 
          ab uso disce omnes;" this is only one specimen of many. Mr. Gladstone 
          visited other prisons, tasted the black bread, was not enabled to taste 
          the loathsome soup. But we break off; the reader; the reader of this 
          must procure the pamphlet—he will not lay it down till he has 
          read it through, and he will then understand how tempted we are to multiply 
          these specimens.  Mr. Gladstone 
          has refrained from publishing the first letter, in order that Lord Aberdeen, 
          as an individual, might make a friendly representation to the government 
          of Naples. The statement having been met by special pleading, Mr. Gladstone 
          publishes his letter; with a second, explaining the cause of the delay. 
           On the 
          government of Naples I had no claim whatever; but as a man I felt and 
          knew it to be my duty to testify to what I had credibly heard, or personally 
          seen, of the needless and acute sufferings of men. Yet, aware that such 
          testimony, when once launched, is liable to be used for purposes neither 
          intended nor desired by those who bear it, and that in times of irritability 
          and misgiving, such as these are on the Continent of Europe, slight 
          causes may occasionally produce, or may tend and aid to produce, effects 
          less inconsiderable, I willingly postponed any public appeal until the 
          case should have been seen in private by those whose conduct it principally 
          touched. It has been so seen. They have made their option.  But in 
          this second letter he goes somewhat further back; tracing the cause 
          of judicial corruption in the political corruption of the Neapolitan 
          government. He cites the constitution empowering the people to elect 
          that Parliament whose entire opposition has been driven into imprisonment 
          or exile; establishing a “limited, hereditary, and constitutional 
          monarchy, under representative forms; "establishing a Chamber of Peers 
          and Deputies; declaring that “no description of impost can be 
          decreed except in virtue of a law; “also that personal liberty 
          is guaranteed,” except under “due warrant of law.” 
          Now in fact this constitution is violated in all essentials; how personal 
          liberty is respected, we have seen; there exists no Chamber of Peers 
          or Deputies; “all taxes are imposed and levied under royal authority 
          alone;"  in short, “the monarchy of Naples is perfectly absolute 
          and unlimited.” Knowing these facts, the reader will be shocked 
          to peruse the adjuration which is in the preamble to the constitution, 
          given by King Ferdinand, as he says, “of our own full, free, and 
          spontaneous will”—  In the 
          awful name of the Most Holy and Almighty God, the Trinity in Unity, 
          to whom alone it appertains to read the depths of the heart, and whom 
          we loudly invoke as the judge of the simplicity of our intentions, and 
          of the unreserved sincerity with which we have determined to enter upon 
          the paths of the new political order  Having 
          heard with mature deliberation, our Council of State;  We have 
          decided upon proclaiming, and we do proclaim, as irrevocably ratified 
          by us, the following Constitution.  In that 
          awful name!  But even 
          that is justified—not by the precedents of the king’s two 
          immediate predecessors, though they are strictly applicable—but 
          by a deliberate attempt to corrupt the Neapolitan mind. A book has been 
          published and forced into general use, entitled “Catechismo Filosofico, 
          per Uso delle Scuole Inferiori;"  the authorship of which is ascribed 
          to an ecclesiastic at the head of the Commission of Public Instruction. 
          It is a catechism for young scholars, in the form of a dialogue between 
          master and scholar; and is avowedly intended to counteract the false 
          philosophy of the liberals, who are described as vicious and bad men. 
          It  teaches that the royal power is unlimited, because it is of 
          divine origin; that "the people cannot of itself establish fundamental 
          laws in a sate," because such laws "are of necessity a limitation of 
          the sovereignty," which would then be longer "the highest paramount 
          power ordained of God for the well–being of society;" and that 
          a sovereign is bound to keep a constitution which he had "promised or 
          sworn to maintain"—only provided it is not opposed to the general 
          interests of the state."  In a word, 
          says the Catechism, an oath never can become an obligation to commit 
          evil; and therefore cannot bind a sovereign to do what is injurious 
          to his subjects. Besides, the Head of the Church has authority from 
          God to release consciences from oaths, when he judges that there is 
          suitable cause for it.  Mr. Gladstone 
          has seen that a similar system prevails in Lombardy, Modena, and Rome. 
          he testifies to the patience, the fortitude, and the indestructible 
          kindliness of the Neapolitans; he evidently wonders at their forbearance. 
          He has learned for himself what Absolutism is in its working; and of 
          that working, in one department, the English public now has a view on 
          evidence above suspicion. 
 back 
          to index 
 |