MR. Coleman was Tryed at the Old Bayly, on Thursday the 28 th. of November, 1678. and was thus Charged by Oates: Vid. Trial. Pag. 17, & 18. That in November 77. the said Mr. Coleman did write Let­ters by him to St. Omers, in which he called the King Ty­rant; and that the late Marriage with the Prince of Orange, would prove the Traytor's and Tyrant's Ruine: That a Latin Letter in Mr. Coleman's Hand, was also then enclosed to Fr. La Chaise, thank­ing him for the 10000 l. which should be imploy'd (he said) to no other use, but to cut off the King. That this Letter was written by the Provincial, Strange's Directions, because pag. 19. he had hurt his Hand, and Mico his Secretary was ill: That Oates carryed the said Let­ters to Paris; That La Chaise askt him there, How the Dutchess's Secretary did? That the Answer (written by La Chaise) was sent Mr. Coleman, after it was first perused by the St. Omer [...] Fathers, in Oates his Presence; for he (the said Oates) was by a pag. 20. Patent [...] to be of the Consults, and had Power also to pag. 28. open Letters. That there was (in pag. 21▪ April 78.) a Consult of the Jesuits, at the White-Horse-Tavern in the Strand, to send Cary to Rome: That afterwards, they Adjourn­ed into several Clubs, and pitcht upon Grove and Pickering, to Kill the King; the one being to have 1500 l. and the other 30000. Mas­ses. That this Resolve was Communicated in pag. 29. Oates's hearing, to Mr. Coleman. That the Jesuits that then came over with Oates, were F. Williams, F. Pool, Sir Thomas Preston, Sir John Warner, &c. That in August, there was a Consult of the pag. 22. Benedictines, (which, in all the [...] Tryals, he positively fixes on the 21 th. of the said Month) and then Letters came from Talbot (Bishop of Dublin) that four Jesuits were to Kill the Duke of Ormona; and if they mist, Dr. Fogarthy was to Poyson him: So that, Mr. Coleman would have him presently sent away. That pag. 23. Forty Thousand black Bills were provided for Ireland. That Mr. Coleman told Fenwick, That he had found a way to send Two-Hundred-Thousand pound thither, to promote the Rebellion. That the Four other Ruffians, (procured by Fogarthy) were sent in August, to Kill the King at Windsor. That the next Day after (being pag. 72. a­bout the 21 th. of that Month) Hartcourt made a Provision of pag. 24. 80 l. to be sent them; and that Mr. Coleman gave the Messenger a Guin­ney, to be nimble and expedite. That Mr. Coleman saw the Instru­ctions, which Ashby brought from White the Provincial, (who was [Page 6] then at St. Omers) about pag. 25. 10000 l. for Sir George Wakeman, to Poy­son the King, in case the Assassines fail'd. That pag. 26. Mr. Coleman thought it too little, and took a Copy of these Instructions to send into the Country, to several Conspirators, to Encourage their Contributions. That he heard Mr. Coleman (in pag. 27. Mr. Fenwick's Chamber) acknow­ledge the Receipt of his Commission for Secretary of State; which was sealed with the Jesuits Seal, and sign'd by their General.

To this Mr. Coleman answered: That now forsooth, Oates pre­tends to be pag. 30. extreamly well acquainted with him, and a World of Intimacy, (even at Consults, and meetings about the King's Death) whereas before the Council, he told his Majesty, He did not know him: That Oates was then so far from laying any positive Treason to his Charge, (for as to the Payment of the 5000 l. to Sir George Wakeman, 'twas a Hear-say, as not pag. 40. seen by Oates) that the Board (after they had heard his Defence) did, instead of sending him to pag. 39. Newgate, commit him only to a pag. 16. Messenger, 'till his Papers were Ex­amin'd. And whereas Oates Accuses him at present, of ordering (a­bout the pag. 72. 21 th. of August) 80 l. for the Windsor-Russians, and giving of the Messenger a Guinney; He was then in Warwick-shire, having left London on the pag. 80. and 96. 15th. of August, without ever returning till the 31th. late at Night.

Oates reply'd, That he said at the pag. 30. Council, He could not swear he had seen him before; For his Eyes were bad by Candle-light, and Candle-light alters the Sight much: But when he heard him speak, he could have sworn, it was he; yet did not say so, pag. 38. because he was not askt.

Besides, he design'd then to lay no more to his Charge, than was matter for an pag. 30. Information; for Prisoners might supplant Evidence, when they know it. That the Information, which he then gave a­gainst him, was (as near as he could remember) his writing News, Letters with base Reflections. Moreover, he was so weak and tired, (through his late Fatigue and Watchings) that upon his Salvation, he could scarce stand upon his Legs; which (together with his pag. 32. Want of Mem [...]ry) was the best pag. 31. Answer he gave the Court, why he omit­ted the present weighty Matters; as also, the Account of the 80 l. and the other Particulars, in relation to the King's Murder at Wind­sor. Nor could Sir Robert Southwel witness any thing new, pag. 40. to Oates's Advantage, more than that he did in Council say; That if Mr. Coleman's Papers were searcht, there would be Matter (he believ'd) found in them, that would cost him his Neck: Which, on the one side▪ most People deemed an easie Surmise, seeing Coleman was generally known to be a great Intriguer; and on the other side, they imagin'd, Oates might as well have then Charged him with down-right Treason, if what he here alleadged, had not been a Fiction of a later Date: For 'twas impossible to say, He thought there was Hanging matter [Page 7] in a Man's Letters, and through Lassitude, or any other Pretence, not to be able to tell the King, That the same Person had Contriv'd his Death, if it were really Design'd. But as for Mr. Coleman's Ab­sence on the 21 th. of August, (as before) the Chief Justice told him, pag. 80. That if the Cause did turn on that Matter, he would stay 'till his Book were brought; (which Mr. Coleman urg'd, could prove his said Absence) but that he doubted, the Cause would not stand on that Foot; and yet, if that were the Case, it would do him little Good.

This is the Sum of the Reply to Mr. Coleman's Plea, in relation to Oates: But Sir Thomas Doleman (who was one of the Clerks of the Council) attested in Court, not only, that pag. 38. Oates said at the Board, He knew not Mr. Coleman well; and (to the best of his Remembrance) That he had no Acquaintance with him, but also, That Mr. Cole­man was Examin'd before Oates spake: Which evidently shews, that Oates knew him no better after his speaking, than before.

As for Bedlow's Charge, 'twas to this Effect: That Sir pag. 41. Henry Tichbourn told him, That he brought a Commission for Mr. Coleman, and the Lords, from the Principal Jesuits of Rome: That he carried a Pacquet from Mr. Coleman to pag. 42. La Chaise, Dated April 75. That he Delivered the said Letters to La Chaise, and brought Mr. Cole­man and Answer: That he did not understand what was in it; be­cause it was in a pag. ib. Language he did not well understand; but it was about carrying-on the Plot. That Mr. Hartcourt went to Mr. Cole­man with Letters, and took him (the said Bedlow) along with him; but made him stay over the Way: That Hartcourt afterwards beckon'd him in; and there he heard Mr. Coleman say, pag. 43. If he had a Hundred Lives, and a Sea of Blood, to carry on the Cause, he would spend it all for the Establishment of the Church here; and if there were a Hundred Heretical Kings, he would see them all Destroy'd. pag. 44. That Mr. Coleman saw him in Somerset-House-Gallery, coming from a Con­sult, with great Persons; which he is not to name here, but 'twould make the Bottom of the Plot to tremble.

Mr. Coleman made little Answer to him, besides protesting, that he never pag. 72. saw him before: Nor was there any of Mr. Coleman's Family, that had ever seen him, which had been Morally impossible, had he received and brought Letters, as he pretended. Besides, few of the Auditory could comprehend, how Bedlow did know, that the Letter, which (he said) he brought from Paris, and yet under­stood not, was about carrying on the Plot; or why Mr. Hartcourt should just call him in from over the way, for no other Reason, (for Bedlow gives not the least) but to hear Mr. Coleman's Treasonable Expressions, in his Zeal for the Church: But more especially, how the said Bedlow could carry La Chaise a Letter from Mr. Coleman, dated April 75. and yet Mr. Coleman's first Letter to h [...]m, was pag. 68. his [Page 8] Long one of September 29, 75. and came to the said Father's Hands, on the pag. 57. 22 of October following.

Now for Mr. Coleman's Letters: Though He acknowledged them full of very pag. 73. Extravagant Expressions; yet he hoped (he said) they were not Treasonable; and that Some of the pag. 16. Expressions would ex­plain, there was no Plot, or Intention to Kill the King. For the Rea­der may not only find him telling La Chaise, pag. 69. That the Labourers were few, and the Harvest great, (which assures us, that Few were con­cern'd with him;) but shewing him all along, that the promis'd Ad­vantages to the French King and Religion, were to accrew by the Dissolution of the Parliament, which MONEY (the pag. 72. Aid and As­sistance he expected from France, and not pag. 102. Force) was to Effect. No wonder then, Money being the Thing he aimed at, and hinted also by him, in almost every other Line of each Letter, if he kept no Cor­respondence ( pag. 102. & 103. as he solemnly protested, he did not) with France, af­ter the Year 75. when we see him complain in his Last Pag. 70. Letter, That his pag. 68. Christian Majesty was not with Him, and his Party, to the Degree of helping them with Ten Thousand Crowns: For the Truth is, that Court presently found, (for all his Pretences) that he had no Interest with the Duke, or with our Leading Men: Nay, we see, he could not so much as perswade his Highness, to pag. 66. Sign a Letter, which he had prepared without pag. 69. Order, (as he confesses, and the Court acknowledges) to give him Countenance with La Chaise. Be­sides, who can imagine, Mr. Coleman should expect or dream to wheedle in La Chaise, without telling him of a pag. 80. Pestilent Heresie to be subdued; of a mighty Work on their Hands, to wit, the Conver­sion of three Nations; as also, of their never having such Hopes, since the Dayes of Q. Mary, with the like Rhetorical Flowers.

Mr. Coleman, being then found Guilty upon the account of his Let­ters, (for my Lord Chief Justice told him, (as I already mention'd) † That the Cause hung not on the Matter he insisted upon, to wit, on the Consult of August, which Oates pretends him to be at) He was next day Condemned at the same Bar, where he declar'd, with all the Execrations imaginable, pag. 161. That he told the House of Commons, all that he knew of this Business: That he never heard of Propositi­on, or knew of any to Supplant the King, or Government, by Invasi­on, Disturbance▪ or the like: That he thought, ('tis true) by Liberty of Corscience, Popery might come in; and that every Body is bound, to wish all People of the Religion be professes, with much more to the same Purpose. Then being carryed back to Prison, where his Wife had only private Admittance; he was on Tuesday, the Third of December, brought to Tyburn, where he made the following Speech:

WIth these three, Mr. White the Provincial, and Mr. Fen­wick Procurator of Saint Omer's, held up their Hands at the Old Baily on the Seventeenth of December, and though they were charg'd home by Oates, yet Bedlow had so little against the said Mr. White and Fenwick, that after a Tryal of several Hours, they were for want of two Witnesses (as the Law requires in Treason) remanded to Newgate, where we will [Page 10] leave them till by and by, being now only to treat of the others.

Oates then not only repeats the beforementioned April Consult at the Vid. Trial. White-Horse-Tavern; his comming over with pag. 35. Sir John Warner, Pag. 19. Sir Thomas Preston, Fa. Williams, Nevil, Hildesley, and others: his lying pag. 36. close in the time of the said Consult at Groves's (when as the Prisoners attest that he was then pag. 34. actually at Saint Omers) but he further deposes, that Mr. Ireland was caballing in Mr. Fenwicks Chamber about a pag. 60. Fortnight or ten Days in August, and that the said Mr. Ireland gave him particularly on the first or second of September twenty Shillings. pag. 22. Then He sayes that two Jesuits were sent into Scotland to stir up the Presbiterians there; That at the aforesaid April meeting there was a formal Resolve (drawn up by p. 19. Mico their Secretary, signed by at least p. 26 Forty, and en­tered into a pag. 47. Book or Register) pag. 19, & 26. That Grove and Pickering should go on with their Attempt to Kill the King, and that the first should have 1500 l. and the other 30000. Masses: That it was to be done by pag. 23. long Pistols, something shorter than Carbines, and that the Bullets were Silver, which Grove said he would pag. 24. champ, that the wound might be uncureable. That Pickering had mist an opportunity in the preceding March, by reason his Flint was loose, for which he underwent a Penance of twenty or thirty stroakes with a Discipline. pag. 22. That the Duke was also to be deposed, if he were not! vigorous for the Cause; That he saw in their Entry book that Sir George Wake­man had accepted of 15000. l. to poyson the King if the others fail'd; That he perus'd the Entry-book of the pag. 30. Peter-pence which Grove and Smith had gathered; That pag. 32. Grove told him, that he fir'd Southwark, and that his, the said Oates's business of comming now over, was to pag. 20. Kill Doctor Tongue for Translating the Jesuits Morals.

Bedlow being called, acknowledges the Entry-book, and adds that Mr. pag. 47. Langhorn was the Register; pag. 46. That the Earl of Shaftsbury, the Duke of Buckingham, the Earl of Ossory and Duke of Ormond were to be kill'd; That pag. 41, & 44. Mr. Ireland was at Mr. Hartcourts Chamber in the latter end of August, where it was agreed (the other Plot not succeeding) Coniers should go with Pickering and Grove to New-Market, to kill the King in his Morning-walk there; That Pickering & Grove were also present in the said Chamber; pag. 49. that his Brother James Bedlow, heard him often talking of the Prisoners, and as one acquainted with Priests, and that he brought him (as the said James attested) Fifty and Sixty pòunds at a time from the Jesuits.

The Charge was solemnly deny'd by them all, and besides their own constant Loyalty, they alledg'd that of their respective pag. 67. Re­lations, who had been great Sufferers both in their Lives and For­tunes for the King; and Pickering (as to his particular) protested he never pag. 25. Shot off a Pistol in his Life, which by his very mine and [Page 11] looks seem'd not very improbable to the Spectators. Then Mr. Ire­land▪ (after Answers to the several other particulars) affirm'd, That he was constantly out of London from the third of pag. 56. August till a­bove a week after the beginning of pag. 59. September, which he prov'd by three Witnesses got together by pag. 62. chance by his Sister. He also urg'd pag. 65. that he had Witnesses, that there were more Witnesses, but that he and the rest were kept so pag. 56. strict, that they were not permitted to send for any body; nay that he was refus'd pag. 56, & 62. Paper, and expresly deny'd to send for his Witnesses. Besides Mrs. Yorke (who actually liv'd both before and after April in her Brother Grove's house) pag. 65. attested, that she saw not Oates there, which he excus'd by his being forsooth in Disguise. In conclusion, there were three that gave evidence against Mr. Ireland▪ for Oates produced one Sarah Paine (an ordinary Maid that had formerly serv'd Grove) who swore she saw him about the Twelfth of pag. 57. August in Town at the door of his Lodging; Whereupon the Prisoners were all Condemn'd, and being carried back to Newgate, Mr. Ireland writ there under his own hand a Journal which shew'd where he was every day, and who saw him from the Third of August to the Fourteenth of Septem­ber, being the time of his absence from London. The chief places were Tixhal, Holy Well, Wolver-Hampton and Boscobel; the Persons that saw him were of great Quality, as my Lord Aston and his Fa­mily; Sir John South [...] and his Family; Madam Harwel and hers; several of the Giffords of Chillington; several of Sir John Winfords Relations; Madam Crompton, and Mr. Bidolph of Bidolph; Sir Tho­mas Whitgrave, Mr. Chetwin, Mr. Gerard and his Family; Mr. Hen­ingham and his; the Pendrels of Boscobel and above Forty more; nor is there one day during the whole time [...] which there can­not be produced above a dozen of these Witnesses.

On Fryday the Twenty Fourth of January, Mr. Ireland and Mr. Grove were carried to Tyburn; where they spoke as follows.

MR. Hill (servant to Doctor Godwin) Green an antient [...]ee­ble man (Cushion-keeper of the Chappel) and Berry the Porter of Somerset-House were tryed at the Kings Bench Bar, on Munday the tenth of Feb. 1678. where Oates swore, pag. 12. that he was told by Sir Edmund Godfrey the week before he was mis­sing▪ That after the Plot was known, several Popish Lords (some of whom are now in the Tower) had threatned him, asking what he had to do with it; That other Persons desirous of the full Discovery, threatned him with the Parliament for his Remisness; That he was in a great Fright saying, He went in [...]ear of his Life by the Popish Party, as having bin often dogg'd; That he came some times to the said Oates for Encouragement, That he did encourage him, by telling him, That he would suffer for a just Cause, and the like.

Prance swore, pag. 14. That at the plow, Girald and Kelley (two Priests) did about a fortnight before the Murder, entice him to it, saying, That Sir Edmund-Godfrey was a busy, man and would do a great deal of mischief; That pag. 16. Green, Girald and Hill dogg'd Sir Edmund Godfrey to a House at St. Clements: That Green came about seven at night to tell Prance of it, (Kelly and Girald being at watch there) but the said Green did not tell him where at St. Clements Sir Edmund God­frey was, nor did any of the rest do it; That about the hour of Eight or Nine, Sir Edmund Godfrey came homewards; That Hill ran before to give the Conspirators notice of it at Sommerset-House▪ and then going to the Gate, He told Sir Edmund that two men were quarel­ling within, and desir'd him being a Justice to qualify them; that he consented to it, but when he came to the bottom of the Railes, Green threw a twisted Hand [...]ercher about his neck, and cast him be­hind the Railes, and throtled and punch'd him; That within a quar­ter after, Prance (who had bin before watching above at the Water­gate,) came down, and laying his pag. ib. hand upon the body, found the leggs to totter and shake, and then Green wrung his neck quite round. But here the Reader is to take notice, that Prance having related the matter of Fact in this manner, Mr. Attorney askt him on a sudden, if he saw Green thus w [...]ing his neck? No; (answered he, forgeting what he had just before said) but Green did afterwards tell me, that he did it; which words supris'd not a [...]ew. Then he proceeded and said, that being thus Kill'd, they carried the Corps to a pag. 18. chamber of Hills at Dr Godwins, where lying till Munday night, they brought it to a Room in the pag. 19. lower part of Sommerset-House, and then Hill▪ [Page 14] shewd it Prance by a dark Lanthorn; Green, Berry, and the rest being by. That on Tuesday, it was brought to Sir John Arundels, where lying till Wednesday, it was convey'd to the first lodging, and from thence (about twelve) in a Sedan to the pag. 20. So-ho, and then on a Horse before Hill to the place where it was afterwards found; That pag. 22. Girald and one Vernat spake to him the said Prance of a great Reward, and that there was to be a good one from my Lord Bellasis; That in the beginning of pag. 21. November, Girrald, Lewson, Vernat, one Dethick and himself met at Bow, where reading all the Writings of the said Murther, they were very merry, and a Draw­er listning, Prance threatned to kick him down stairs; but the pag. 44. Boy being call'd said he knew nothing, but that Dethic was with com­pany there, and that in reading a Paper he heard Sir Edmund-Godfrey's name, and that some body threatned to kick him.

Bedlow swore, pag. 29. That Le-Phair, Prichard, Keines, and other Priests (but Girald he knew not) did treat with him, concerning the Mur­ther of a Gentleman about the beginning of October last; That he ha­ving a mind about pag. 28. two years ago to discover the Plot, was prevented, but now drill'd them on to know the Party, that he might prevent them; but they would not tell him who it was. That they set him to insinuate pag. 29. himself into the acquaintance of Sir Edmund Godfrey not telling their Design; That on Saturday, (the day that Sir Edmund Godfery, was murther'd,) Le Phair having mist Bedlo in the morning, met him by accident in pag. 30. Lincolns-Inn-Fields about four, and at the Palsgraves Tavern told him, That a material man was to be put out of the way that night, who had all Oates's and Tongue's informations; which if not taken from him, would discover their business to that Degree, that they must stay till another Age to effect it: That Le Phair then told him he should have Four Thousand Pound for a Reward, That no worse man than my Lord Bellasis was engaged for it, and Mr. Coleman had order to pay it, yet named not Sir Edmund Godfrey to him; That he parted then with, Le Phair, but came not according to his engagement (to Somerset-House; That Le Phair met him on Monday in pag. 31. Fleetstreet and charged him with breach of promise; That he answered, That he knew not but the murthered person might be his Friend, whereupon Le Phair appointed him to meet at Eight in the Evening at Sommerset-House, and he should know more; that coming there, the said Le Phair told him the man was Kill'd; and that if he would help to carry off the Body he should have pag. 32. half the Re­ward: That he then shew'd him the body by a dark Lanthorn; but that he saw neither pag. 33. Hill, Green, nor Berry, there, Green being in the Court; That he had such a remembrance of pag. 32. Faces, that he can tell all he saw there, though the light were small. And by the way Reader, now it was (as appears by the Lords Journal) that Bedlo Deposes he saw Prance, and that Wa [...]s, † Le Phair, Atkins, and [Page 15] my lord [...]ell [...]si [...]' [...] man were wi [...]h him, being is you see quite dif­ferent Actors from those mention'd by Pra [...]er.

Then he tells [...]. T [...] [...]he Corps had a pag. 32. Cravat about the Neck, like that about his [...] now; but so streight, that he could not put his Finger between; which (Reader) one would think, were no very pro­per Instrument, to Strang [...] a strong Man so cleverly, and without Noise. That he knew Sir E. Godfrey presently, though they said, he belong'd to a Man of Quality [...] That the Jesuits now with him, (the said Bedlow) were not those, who had formerly imploy'd him to insinuate himself into this Knight's Company; and yet (Reader) his Worship inform'd us (as you see) but just before, That his present Introducer, Le Phair, was one of them, who had thus, imploy'd him. He further sayes, That for his part, he advised them to throw the Body with Weights into the River; That they thinking that not safe, answer'd, They would put it on himself. That upon asking Le Phair, How they could get him away? they said, in a Chair, and Berry was to let them out. That upon his saying, Twas too ear­ly, (Eleven or Twelve being better for their purpose) and that he would come again, Le Phair conjur'd him not to fail that Night, on the Sacrament he had taken on Thursday; for after Oa [...]es his Disco­very of the Plot, the Sacrament was Administred to him twice a Week: That he hasted away; and (having so great a Charge upon him as the pag. 33. Sacrament) he grew disturb'd, and went to Bristow, where God put it into his Mind to discover All, and so writ to the Secretary.

The Premises were endeavour'd also to be confirm'd by Four Co­lateral Testimonies; as first, by pag. 14. Mr. Robinson, of the Common-Pleas; who attested, that Sir Edm. Godfrey said to him, That he believed, he should be the first Martyr; but if they came fairly, he would not part with his Life tamely. Secondly, by one Curtis, a poor Chair-Woman belonging to Sir E. Godfrey, who said pag. 40. She saw Hill with her Master, about Nine or Ten in the Morning, on the Saturday he was Murther'd: Thirdly, by pag. 41. Hill's denying before the Council, that ever he saw Girald, whenas the Boy at the Plow prov'd in Court, that they met there. And lastly, by pag. 49. Berry's sending away the Prince (whilst this Intrigue was on foot) upon pretence, that he had Orders to acquaint all Persons of Quality, That the Queen received no, Visits: And then being askt at his Examination by the Lords, Whether he had ever had such Orders before? he then said No; which Contradicts his present Answer.

To this Charge the Prisoners answer'd with all imaginable Pro­testations, That they were Innocent: Nor did Sir Robert Southwe [...]'s Testimony advantage them a little, in the Opinion of many; for firsts he (being summon'd as a Witness for the King, to acquaint the Court with several Particulars about Prance's Examination before the Council) was askt, Whether his present Description and Account [Page 16] of Places, were suitable to what [...] which Sir Robert answered, * pag. 46. Yes: but that it was [...] had said▪ In the next place the A [...]turney General demanding whether Prance did hesitate, when he shew'd the Lords the several places in relation to the murther? He answered, That he went positively and directly, till they ask [...] him where in Sommerset- [...]ouse the Body was carried, but that then (after going into several rooms) he was in great [...] pag. 47. distraction; yet (be­cause in that Confusion, he said; Th [...] [...] we are right) the C. Justice would have it, that his doubtfulness gave credit to his Testimo­ny, since a Knight of the Post never sticks at any thing. Now as to the Prisoners themselves, they struk at the root,) for pag. 23. Hill desired that Prance's Testimony might not stand good against them; for he urg'd that the said Prance had deny'd all not only before the King, as pag. 71. Mr. Chif­fins attested, but before the Council, as Captain pag. 26. Richardson acknow­ledged; to which pag. 24. Lord C. J. answered, That no body did believe Prance's denyal, because his Discovery was so particular; & Mr. pag. 25. Atturney said▪ That whilst he was a Papist, and not sure of his Pardon, he was (tis true) under disturbances and fears, yet no soone [...] return'd he to Prison, but he desir'd the Captain to carry him back to his Majesty, offering to make good his first Confession; which gave several of the Auditory but small satisfaction, considering that a [...]o [...]ler, whose interest it was to further the Plot, might easily (if the thing were true) at the sight of a Prison obtain such a promise; besides, not a few knew how he had been us'd and what Crys were heard where he lay for many days together, as Mrs. Hill pag. 71. urg'd. But Prance's own reason for his Re­cantation, seem'd yet odder; for he said, it was out of apprehension of his pag. 70. Trade, as fearing to lose the Queens Employment, and the Catho­licks, which was the most of his business, and also because he had no Pardon. The Prisoners plea being over rul'd, and Prance his Testimony adjudg'd good. Hill calls for his Masters Niece, & Mrs. Broadstreet (who look't af­ter the house) as also the Maid in his behalf; the sum of whose Testimony was this, pag. 52. That he was a trusty servant, that he never kept ill hours, and alwayes came in by Eight of the Clock; that he could not go out afterwards, because the Maid did lock up the doors, and that they were still up till Eleven; That he was at home on pag. 53. Saturday night, when Sir E. Godfrey was kill'd, and on the Wednesday night, when carried away. That their House and staires were so little, pag. 54. that it was impossible that any thing could be brought in or out, without their knowledge; that the room (where the body is said to have lain) was not only over against the Dining-room, but a room that had the pag. 56. Key in it alwayes, and that pag. 58. every day they went often into it for something or other, and that the foot-boys staid there when any body visited the young Lady; Nay the Servant Maid, (whom pag. ib. judge Wild commen­ded, as wary in what she said) attested, that she call'd in every day at the door of that Chamber, and was the last up every night. Prance [Page 17] his main reply (having first pag. 56. declared, That he laid nothing to their Charge) was, That Mrs. Broadstreet had said before the pag. 54. Duke of Mon­mouth, that there were Six or Seven Keys; and consequently he would have it, that Hill might go out. But whether the Court thought it improbable, that any Door should have so many Keys, or that they took the young Ladies Word, who said, There was but one pag. 55. Key to that which fasten'd the Door; they never sent to the Duke, or que­stion'd Sir Robert Southwel about it. And whereas Prance also tax't Mrs. Broadstreet of saying, p. 56, & 57. That Hill was gone from them before Sir Edmond's Death, 'twas cleerly prov'd, that said Hill was then there, not only by his former Examinations, (where he sayes, He was then treating with his Landlord about his New House, and that he did not go to it, till about a Week, or a Fortnight after) but also by the Testimony of Daniel Gray, who positively affirm'd, pag. 59. That he came not to it till the 22d. of October. After this, Hill call'd on Mr. Archbold, (a Gentle­man of the Life-guard) who said, pag. 61. That his Taylor being at Hills, he went thither; and being ask't, What News? he told them, How Prance was taken about Sir E. Godfrey's Murther; whereupon Hill Re­ply'd, He was glad of it, wishing them all taken; and that next Morn­ing, the said Hill was taken out of his Bed. This Mr. Ravenscroft confirm'd; pag. 67. adding, That Hill's Wife told him the same Night, That the Neighbors spoke strangely of it; but that her Husband did defy Prance, and all his Works: From which Hill inferr'd his Inno­cence, pag. 62. since he might (as every Body also acknowledg'd) have e­scap'd, if he pleased; nor could he doubt (had he been Guilty) but that he would be empeach'd and question'd. Green also call'd for his Landlord Warrier, and his Wife, being both Protestants; and the Man attested, That pag. 63. Green came in on Saturday night (the 12th. of Octo­ber) at Seven, and went not from them till after Ten. Upon this Home-Evidence, the Judge askt him, How long after Sir Edmond's Murther he began to Recollect? he answer'd, a Month after, Green being in Prison; and that he remembred the Time particularly, be­cause Green had not bin at his House but Fourteen Dayes before he was Apprehended. 'Twas reply'd, That Green was then in Prison a­bout the Oaths: That it was the 24 th. of December, before he was secur'd upon the score of the Murther: And that he (the said War­rier) had told Captain Richardson, that he and his Wife could do Green no Good. pag. 64. To this he answered, He call'd it not then to Me­mory, though he had since done it by his Work, and the time Green came to his House; for he had been a Lodger there not above Fourteen or Fifteen Dayes in all: And besides, He never knew him out after Nine in his Life. The Woman also affirmed the same with many Particulars; but calling the Day, pag. 65. Saturday Fortnight after Michaelmass, and Michaelmass being on a Sunday, this in Rigour was the 19 th. of October; so that, their Testimony was rejected, when­as [Page 18] the Woman, it seems, meant only by the Expression, a bare Fort­night after Michaelmass; for otherwise Saturday the 19 th. being the Day after Fryday the 18 th. (which she pag. 65. expresly said, was the time when her Milk Woman told her of the finding of Sir Edm. God­frey's Body) she must have known, That what she had to say, was nothing to Green's purpose. After this, Berry calls his Maid, who witness't, pag. 70. That on the 16 th. of October, (or Night when Sir Edm. Godfrey was said to be carryed away) her Master came Home from Bowls at the Dusk of the Evening; That he was not out an Hour all Night after: That he lay within her Chamber; and that she went to Bed about Twelve. But that which surpriz'd People most, was the Testimony of the Three pag. 68. Centinels, who Watcht that Night from Seven till Four in the Morning, at the great Gate of Sommer­set-House, through which the Body was affirm'd to be carryed in the Sedan; for they attested, (and their Corporal was also with them) that there came in no Sedan, pag. 69. besides that which stands there every Night; but that none ever went out, during their respective Watch­es; it being impossible for any to pass-by, or for the Gate to be o­pen'd without their Knowledge; nor did they Drink one drop whil'st they Watch'd, nor stir'd a Pike's Length from the Gate: And more­over, that they were Examin'd twice about this very Matter by the Committee, before ever Prance was taken up.

As for the Collateral Evidence against the Prisoners; first, Mr. Ro­binson's was not insisted upon, (we suppose) because Sir Edm. God­frey did not say, He feared to be a Martyr by the Papists; and most People had heard, That he had bin very much threatned by Great Per­sons, that were not Papists. Nor did the Court longer insist on Hill's denying before the Council, that he knew Girald, when Sir Robert Southwel shew'd them, that it was pag. 48. Kelly he spoke of: And the pag. 43. Master of the Plow could not say, He had seen Kelly and Hill to­gether. Now, as for Curtis's (the Chair-Woman's) Evidence of see­ing Hill with Sir Edm. Godfrey about Nine or Ten that very Morn­ing before he was Kill'd, it was both Contradicted by pag. 60. How, (who witness't, That Hill was with him that Morning from about Nine, till Two) and by Hill himself, who protested, That she said at Newgate▪ pag. 40. She never had seen him in her Life before: To which Answer, nei­ther the Bench, nor the King's Council, nor the Woman her self, e­ver made the least Denyal or Reply. And lastly▪ as to Prince Ru­pert's Non-admittance, Berry not only declar'd, that the pag. 49. Gentle­man Ʋsher brought him his Orders about the Answer he gave to the Persons of Quality, that came to see the Queen, and that the Prince might have enter'd if he had pleas'd, since several did go in, But he added also, that he never deny'd, he had such Orders before; for (the Truth was) he had had them formerly: So that the Court, when they commanded his pag. 50. Examination to be read, found not the [Page 19] least mention there of the pretended Denyal; nor did they so much as send for the Gentleman Ʋsher, which inferr'd, they were satisfyed: And besides, every Body knew, that the Queen's receiving no Visits by day was little Advantage to the Conspirators in their Deeds of Darkness; especially, since all the Family, and who else pleas'd, might come in and out, as before. Nor was it possible, for the said Conspirators, to assure themselves of Wheedling Sir Edmond into the Palace, and more particularly, at a prefixt and certain time, which shew'd the Allegation to be vain and frivolous.

This was the Prisoners Plea; but the Jury finding them Guilty, they were Condemned the next Day; and Ten Dayes after, (viz. Fryday, the 21 th. of February) Hill and Green were carryed to Ty­burn▪ where Hill spoke thus much of the Speech, which was found in his Pocket, and being since Printed, is often put at the End of his Tyral.

ON the Thirteenth of June, 1679. the aforesaid Provincial Mr. White, and Mr. Fenwick, together with Mr. Harcourt (Rector of London) Mr. Gaven, and Mr. Turner (two other Jesuits) were Tried at the Old Bayly, being Vid. Trial. Indicted for meeting in London at a Traitorous Consult on the Twenty Fourth of April, Pag. 3. 78. where 'twas agreed upon, That the King should be-Kill'd by Grove and Pickering, and upon their failure by Four o­thers, as it has been formerly mentioned. Mr. White p. 4. & 5. told the Court, that he had already (viz. with Mr. Ireland on the Seven­teenth of last December) been Indicted, the Jury Empanell'd, Wit­nesses call'd, and he Examin'd during many Hours, and that he humbly conceiv'd, he could not by Law be put again in Jeopardy of his Life for the same Fact; for otherwise a Man might be Tri­ed 100. times. To which the Chief Justice Answered, That it was supposed, when he was Endited, there would have been Two Wit­nesses, but that fell otherwise; that he was not in Jeopardy, being discharged before the Jury went together, and that his Case was no more, than if a Witness were taken Sick, and should that hap­pen, it would not be reasonable a Malefactor should therefore escape. Chief Justice North affirm'd the same, and said, that he knew this often done, and besides that his Plea was not good, be­cause there was no Record of it extant; which surpris'd many of the Auditors to hear of the necessity of a Record about a publick Fact done in that very Court▪ and before the same Judges. Here­upon Mr. White demanded Counsel as his right, as also, whether he ought not at his former Trial to have been Condemn'd or Ac­quitted; but the Chief Justice Answering, that it lay in the Discre­tion of the Court, and that he must plead; He did it at l [...]st, and so did Mr. Fenwick (whose case was the same with his) after he [Page 21] had urg'd in his own, and in Mr. Whites behalf, this reason; pag. 6. That not being formerly proceeded against, because the Second Witness de­clared he had nothing against them, it follow'd that his Silence ought to have then discharged them, since his Evidence would certainly have Condemn'd them; which not satisfying the Chief Justice, he reply'd, that this lay in the Breast of the Court, for it was unreasonable that a Man accus'd of a Capital Crime by the express Oath of one Witness, should go Scot-free for want of a Second. Now the Consequence of Mr. Fenwick's Argument tended to this, that if the Law were so, a Man thus accus'd might possibly never be freed, though Innocent; seeing he might be remanded from one Trial to another, and so in infinitum, on pre [...]ence of more Witnes­ses; a power which many Lawyers think the freedom of England, can by no means allow.

The Dispute thus ended, and the Prisoners having all pleaded Not Guilty, Oates began the Charge, the main of which was to this ef­fect; That Mr. White pag. 12. having order'd preaching at St. Omers a­gainst the Oaths, and given them an account how ready the Irish were to rise, He summon'd a Consult (which began April Twenty Four, 78. at the White-Horse Tavern in the Strand) where they pitcht upon Cary to go to Rome, and resolv'd (the Paper being afterward signed by some at Mr. White's Chamber, others at Mr. Harcourt's, others at Mr. Ireland's and others at Mr. Fenwick's) that the King should be Kill'd as aforesaid. Moreover he affirmed, pag. 13. That Mr. White did about the beginning or middle of July send from St. Omers Instructions by Mr. Ashby, concerning Ten T [...]onsand Pounds for Sir George Wakeman to Poyson the King, and a Commission for Sir John Gage, &c. That in p. 14. & 15. July or August, but he thinks 'twas at the latter end of July, he saw Mr. Gaven in Mr. Irelands Chamber, and though he had seen Letters from the said Gaven in June (about the affairs of Stafford-shire and Shrop shire) yet he never saw him Write till then; for he there drew a pag. 15. Bill of Exchange upon Sir William Andrews, and that between the Eighth and Twelfth of August, Mr. Ireland took leave of them, as if he were to go to St. Omers. As for Harcourt and Fenwick, he affirm'd, they were with Blundel and others, on the Twenty First of the said Month at Wild-house▪ where lay before them the Eighty Pounds for the Wind­sor [...] Russians, and that Coleman coming in, gave the Messenger a Guinny. That a day after (as he thinks) there was held a Con­sult at the pag. 16. Benedictines, where Hartcourt and Fenwick were pre­sent, and there they understood of the Conspiracy against Ormond, by Bishop Tal [...]ot's Letters, who also desir'd Commissions and Money. That on the Fourth of September, White being return'd, Oates went to him, but was beaton and reviled by him; for the Jesuits suspected he had hetray'd them, they having understood, that one in such pag. 17. cloathes [Page 22] as Oates's, had been with the King; yet the said White told him, he would be friends with him, if he gave an account of the Party and Minister that went to his Majesty. Then declaring he had no more to say against the Prisoners at the Bar (except it were concerning the additional 5000. l. which by Letter from Flanders, Mr. White offer'd Sir George Wakeman, and rejoyet at the acceptance of it) heends with this, That he remembred not perfectly that Gaven was at the Consult of April, though he remembers he saw then his sub­scription, but as for pag. 21. Turner, he could positively say, he was there, at the lesser Clubs or Colloquies, to wit, in Fenwicks Chamber.

pag. 22. Dugdale follow'd Oates, and said, he had very liitle acquaintance with Mr. White, but had seen him at my Lord Astons about two or three Years ago; That White did send a Letter (enclos'd in Groves's) to Ewers, That he should Choose trusty, stout, and desperate Men to Kill the King, no matter whether Gentlemen or no: That Mr. Whites name was to it: That he knew it was his hand, be­cause he had seen him once write a Letter when he was at my Lords, as aforesaid: That Mr. Ewers, Letters were all directed to Dugdale; That he intercepted this Letter, and read it, the words pag. 29. Kil­ling the King being in it, and that the said Letter was sent by pag. ib. the ordinary Post, which seeming strange and wonderful to the pag. 44. Chief Just­ice, and all the Court, He salv'd it by a far madder Answer, viz pag. 29. That the Letters being directed to him, if they were intercepted, he should be hang'd, and they sav'd. He further said, pag. 23. That he had bin at several Consults in his own, and in Ewer's Chamber, about this mat­ter; That Gaven was the Orator to perswade people; That my Lord Stafford was at one about the Twenty second of September; That he the said Dugdale himself was then Chosen out for the Assassina­tion; That he heard of the Kings Death two years before, pag. 24. Gaven often encouraging him to it, and upon his giving them 400 l. to pray for his Soul, and promising them 100 more to go on with the Work, the said Gaven assur'd him, he should be canoniz'd for a Saint: That an Ar­my was to come from beyond Seas; That the Massacre was to be put upon on the pag. 25. Presbyterians; That the Killing of Kings was a thing which Gaven endeavor'd to prove out of Scripture, but that he could not call now the Text to mind; That he saw a Letter from pag. 26. Harcourt to Ewers on Monday the 14. of October, and in it were these words, This very Saturday night Sir Edm. Godfrey is dispatch'd; whereupon he the said Dugdale told Ewers, that he would be hang'd, if that Action did not overthrow their Design; That the next day he went to an Alehouse, and askt there, if they had heard of a Knights being kill'd at London? now that this demand of his was true, he could prove by Mr. Chetwin, who being called in, attested, pag. 27. that one Sandbidge told him on that very Tuesday, that being at the said Alehouse in the morning, a pag. 28. Girle told him that Dugdale had report­ed [Page 23] there, the Killing a Justice of Westmi [...]ster; besides the said Chet­win attested, that he discoursed with Dugdale about this Letter &c. when he came to London to be examin'd by the Council; That go­ing out of Town, he understood at his return that the said Dugdale was no witness, though his Evidence had been pag. 29. very material at the Trials of Hill, Green, and Berry.

Dugdale having ended with this Account against White, Hartcourt, Gaven, and Turner, (for he said, pag. 30. Turner did in Mr. Ewer's Cham­ber, about two Years ago, assent to the former Treason, and was to carry on the design in Worcestershire.) Prance stood up next, and said, That having made an pag. ib. Image for Mr. Harcourt, which was sent to Mary-Land, in the Portugal's Countrey, the said Mr. Hartcourt, as he paid him for it, about a Year ago, told him, There was a Design of Killing the King. But when afterwards, Mr. pag. 31. Hartcourt askt him earnestly thus; Can you say, that I ever spoke to you about such a Business? Yes (answer'd he, with an Asserveration) and one Tomp­son came with you, when you paid me for Four Candlesticks: which ei­ther Contradicts his former Evidence, or the Image must be turn­ed into Candlesticks. Then he proceeded, and said, That Mr. Fen­wick in Mr. Ireland's Chamber, talk't of pag. ib. Fifty Thousand Men, which should be raised for the Catholick Cause, under the Command of my Lord Bellasis, Powis, and Arundel; and that there should be Trade enough for him and others, in Church-Work: That he going to Mr. Fenwick's Chamber, and his Confessarius, Father James, being dead, Mr. Fenwick would have had him come to Confession to him, pag. 32. and enjoyn'd him Secresie once or twice.

Then Bedlow was call'd, who said, That he question'd not, but Mr. White and Fenwick would now object his former, slender Evidence against them; but that it was then Convenient; for otherwise, it would have stopt a Design; there being a Treaty with Mr. Reading about them two, as well as the Lords in the Tower: So that, Mr. Reading depended on him, as to the favouring the said Lords, ac­cording as he dealt with these; which made him then Apologize in Court, (as some of the Justices he believ'd, did remember) That he could not then safely declare all he had to say; and in truth, he was so far from saying all, that he did not say half of it. Now, as to the Particulars of his then Evidence, it was (he affirm'd) thus: That he had seen Mr. White at several Consults; but this he said with a Caution, viz. That he never heard Mr. White was so very much concern'd in the Plot, because he had no reaeson to say otherwise, since he heard of it from Mr. White himself, and so could not well speak it from a Hear-say. And for Mr. Fenwick, he never heard him ('tis true) give in any Answer; but yet he had seen him at the Con­sults. This was Bedlow's Prelude; but whether Satisfactory or not, the Auditors then, and the Readers now, can best judge; and [Page 24] especially since his former Charge was not as he would now have it to be; it being without any Apology or Advertisement to the Court, that he had more to say against them; as it most manifestly appears by Ireland' s Trial. Pag. 42, & 43. Ireland's Printed Tryal: For being then ask't, Whether he knew any thing of Mr. White's being present at any of the Con­sults? His Answer was, That he had the least Acquaintance with him, of any of all the Society; yet both he, and Mr. Fenwick had been se­veral times at Consultations; but he knew not the particular Resolves of them, nor had he heard them speak any thing in particular; only he was often told, that nothing was done without Fenwick; but this Evi­dence not being enough, the Jury was Discharged of them, and they Remanded to Prison. The Court taking no notice of Bedlow's Pre­tence and Plea, or of Mr. White's Demand, viz. Whether any thing he had now said, was in the last Tryal? the Chief Justice askt Bed­low, if they had told him any thing of Killing the King? who an­swered, Yes: For White had told Coleman the manner of sending the Pr [...]s. Try­al. Pag. 32. Four Ruffians to Windsor: That he saw Hartcourt take out of a Cabinet 80. or a 100 l. That Hartcourt paid them the Money by Coleman's Order, and gave the Messenger a Guinney to Drink his Health; for Coleman was gone before he (the said Bedlow) came in. Moreover, he had seen pag. 33. Mr. Fenwick at Mr. Hartcourt's and White's Chamber, when this whole Business was spoken of: That he heard from Mr. White, and others, in Mr. Hartcourt's Chamber, of Grove's and Pickering's Reward or Killing the King, as aforesaid: That Pickering had received Checks for slipping many Opportunities; For once his Flint was loose; another time there was no Power in the Pan; a third time he Charg'd the Pistol with Bullets, and no Powder; and a fourth time, (as one that was at the Tryal assur'd me, though the Common Print has omitted it) he Charg'd it with Pow­der only: Which Reader (if these Attempts had bin Bells) are all the Charges that can be Rung on them. That Mr. White was in Mr. Hartcourt's Chamber with him and others, where 'twas agreed, that the Additional 5000 l. should be given Sir George Wak [...]man; and yet pag. 17. Oats in his Evidence told us, That Mr. White order'd it by Letter from Flanders. He further sayes, That pag. 33. Fenwick was to go to New-Market along with Coniers, &c. to Destory the King there, in his Morning-Walk: That he knew nothing in particular of Turner and Gaven: That [...]e had brought Hartcourt many Pacquets from Spain, pag. 34. France, Flanders, &c. about this Affair: That he had often carryed the Papers of Business to Mr. Langhorne, to Register them: That he saw Hartcourt in Sir William Aderson's Presence, give a Bill of Exchange to Sir pag. 35. George Wakeman of 2000 l. in part of a greater Sum; That Sir George then said, 15000 l. was too small a Reward for setling Religion; but that Sir George did not read out the Merchant's Name on whom it was drawn.

[Page 25] After this, two Letters were produc'd, taken among Mr. Hartcourt's papers; The first being from Mr. pag. 37. Peters here in England, in which the 24 th. of April was mention'd, as the day of the meeting. Now because it was there enjoyn'd, that they should not appear much about Town till the meeting were over, lest their Design should be suspected; and because of the word Design, as also that Secrecy was much recommended, as in its own nature necessary, The C. Justice thought it extremly conduc'd to the making out of the Plot. As for the pag. 41. second, it was from Mr. Anderton at Rome, bearing date the 5th. of February was Twelve month, where mention being made of Patents that were sent, and Patents being in the Plural number, 'twas thought that these were the Commissions so often spoken of.

The Charge being finish'd, it became soon very dubious as to Gaven and Turner, because Oates knew them not at their Apprehension; and his own words in Court make it good; for first pag. 14. He confest, that (when he met Gaven after his apprehension in the Lobby, and was askt by a Gentleman about him) he did not well know him, nor could say any thing against him then, because being under an ill favour'd Perriwig, and being a man he knew had a good Head of Hair, he did not under­stand the MYSTERY of it, and so spar'd his Evidence, and informing the Councel against him. Again, Gaven produc'd several Staffordshire Witnesses, and among others p. 63, & 64. Sir John Winford's Neece, and her Maid, where he sojourned, who attested that they were very confi­dent of his being with them (besides other moneths) all June and July, 'till the 23th. because they remember not his absence; yet they would not pag. 65. positively say, that 'twas impossible for him to be away some days, since they had no particular Circumstances in readinesse; but both they and the rest of his p. 68. & 69. witnesses did averr, that he was in Wolver-Hampton, from the 23th. to the end of July; for then to their knowledge, he was in the Spiritual Exercise; which in truth included the very time of Oates his Accusation; for by his saying, that Gaven was in London either in pag. 14. July or August, and then absolutely agreeing that it was in pag. 19. July, it in manner follows, that the time in dispute was in the latter end of the said moneth; and besides in the pag. 15. beginning of his Charge, He himself sayes, That he believ'd it to be in the latter part of it; but when once Oates came to be prest with it, and especially with a counter-evidence, he flew back, taking the utmost extent and Compass for his Plea that he could. Now for Mr. Turner, He inform'd the Court, That Oates not only, did not know him at pag. 21. Whitehall, but call'd him there by another name; nor could Oates give the Court any better reason for it, than that Turner was at that time in a disguised habit, and a nasty Perriwig; when as the Poor man was in his ordinary Cloaths and Accoutrements; neither had he (and the voluntary surrendry of himself most evidently proves it) the least aim or design of con­cealing [Page 26] himself from any body. Mr. Turner further urg'd, that though pag. ib. Oates deposed now, That he saw him at a Colloquy in Fen­wick's Chamber, yet by his former Evidence, it was at Wild-house; to which Oates had nothing to reply, but this; That because the chiefest part of the Consult Sat at Wild house, ' twas call'd by them the Con­sult of Wild-house. As for Dugdale, the said Turner protested that he had not been in Stafford-shire these pag. 30. Four Years, which made no little impression upon many present; Since No body in all ap­pearance could seem a more unfit man for intrigues than He; and be­sides had Dugdale nam'd any of my Lord Astons Family, as Wit­nesses of the said Turner's being there later, than the time he pre­fixt, it would have been to his Confusion, not only in that point, but in all things else for the future. Nor were many less surpris'd with Mr. Hartcourt's Answer to Dugdale; for though he acknow­ledged he had written pag. 27. several Letters to Mr. Evers directed to him, yet he affirm'd he had left off corresponding divers Years; for Rea­der you must know, that about Three Years ago, he was from Pro­curator of the Province (which keeps a general and frequent corres­pondency with all the principal Members) made Rector of London. Now Dugdale to prove Mr. Hartcourt's later correspondency with him, to wit, with Evers; for Priests have generally their Letters directed to others, so that Mr. Hartcourt never took notice at Dug­dales mentioning the receipt of Letters from him; I say Dugdale, to prove a later correspondence, urges this wild and unheard of Circumstance: pag. ib. That Mr. Hartcourt having Written at least Eight Letters last Year, to Mr. Ireland, whilst he was in Stafford-shire, two of them made mention of Mr. Edward Astons Death at Paris, which Dugdale intercepting, pretended to Conjure, by telling the acci­dent, before any of the said Gentlemen's Friends knew of it; so that Mr. Ireland chid Mr. Hartcourt, for not acquainting him sooner; who reply'd▪ that he had sent him word of it; and yet it seems Mr. Ire­land, and Mr. Evers were so far from questioning Dugdale about this silly Interception and Treachery, that he was a greater Confident than ever, as chosen to Murther his Majesty himself. Mr. Hartcourt also fur­ther shew'd, how little this fellow had knowledge either of him or his Letters; for first, He came (and several of these Witnesses Reader, have under false names served other Prisoners thus) to the Gate-house to entrap him; and then he (the said Dugdale) did not so much as know his hand before the Committee, when they made him write there for a tryal; to which the Chief Justice reply'd, that Hartcourt might write more hands, as well as have more names than one: but people thought there could then be no cheat in that, since the many papers which had been taken from Hartcourt, would presently have made it ap­parent. But above all, how incredible is it, that Dugdale (who was so apprehensive, as he pag. 26. told the Court, of the danger that might en­ [...]ue [Page 27] to the main Plot or Design by Godfrey's Murther) should go to an Ale house (the very next Morning after notice or the accident) and proclaim it there, before any Man dreamt of it in the Coun­trey.

Now upon Mr. Hartcourts protesting, that, as to Bedlow (who pretended to bring him pag. 33. divers and divers Portmantles full of Let­ters) he had never seen him but twice before his Apprehension, [...]z. pag. 34. once about five Years ago, with some Letters from Dunkir [...] [...] o­thers, though under his Cover (for then Reader he was Procurator) and once again, when he borrow'd Twenty Shillings of him, as one deserted by most of his friends for his Religion. I say, upon Mr. Hartcourt's protesting thus, Bedlow reply'd, pag. 33. that he had Seven or Eight Witnesses out of Town, to make his familiarity evident and clear; but that he could not get them together, because the Trials had been so put off; whereas on the contrary (Reader) all the World knew, that they were positively order'd above Ten Days before, and and the Prisoners had accordingly provided. Mr. White now pag. 34. Question'd Bedlow, where he was a Lieutenant, as he had Vid. Ire­land' s Tryal. formerly sworn; who answering in Flanders▪ in the Prince of Frizland's Regiment of foot, He reply'd, Pag. 37. that there was no Lieutenant in all the Flanders Companies; whereupon Bedlow said, he would send for his Commission, and a while after something was brought in, pag. 36. which Chief Justice North took and look't upon, but no further words were made of it; and without any manner of doubt, 'twas a Paper of his own making; for we had several Officers in Flanders all the last War, yet no Man ever heard of him or his name there, either then or since, as a Soldier.

As for the two Letters produc'd against the Prisoners, and first as to that from Mr. Peters, it was Answered by Mr. Hartcourt, Mr. White, and the rest, pag. 37. that it was a Summons to their Triennial Congregation; there being a meeting of the Society every Three Years in France, Spain, Germany, &c. as all the World knows. That the Secresy enjoyn'd was necessary; for since every body's eye was upon them, they ought to be cautious of appearing in such numbers as might give offence, and especially at a time, when the Parliament was meeting. That as to the word pag. 38. Design (which the Chief Justice did so much insist upon) it was a hard thing to bring mens lives into danger upon the meer nicety of a Word, and especially when it was proper in it self, for they had a Design to choose a Procurator for Rome, and to consult about the whole Concern of the English Jesuits. Now as to the pag. 42. Roman Letter of February the 5 th. Mr. White Answer'd, That the Patents there mentioned were the Literae Patentes, that constituted him (on the Fourteenth of the preceding January) Provincial, That the expression (though in the Plural) was genuine and applicaple to any single man; nor did Mr. Ander­ton the Writer, know at the sending of them, whether he the said [Page 28] Mr. White would accept the Office or no; which Mr. Recorder much doubting of, (as being a too self-denying Action for a Jesuit) Oates presently affirm'd, That He was bound on pain of Damnation, not to disobey his superior, and if he choose him or others to a place, they must take it upon them; and yet every body knows (that knows any thing) that nothing is more frequent, than for a Jesuit in these Cases to reply (as they term it) to the General, and consequently to free him­self, even after Nomination.

After this, the Prisoners call'd for Witnesses to prove Mr. Ire­land's Absence out of London, from the 3d. of August to the 14th. of September, contrary to the Positive Oath both of Oats and Bed­low, which several of the Judges were against, because that Business had p. 71. received Tryal: Others urg'd, 69. That the Jury was not to take notice of any thing done at a former Tryal, unless it were then spoken of; which seemed hard and strange to many, because in reason the Accused were to lay hold of all Matters, that could lessen the Cre­dit of their Accusers, and more especially of things relating to the Plot. But the Court (even according to their own Rules) were at last, forc'd to grant them their Demand; because Oates did in this very Tryal say, That pag. 15. Ireland was in Town between the 8th. and 12th. of August, and that Mr. pag. 72. Fenwick was with him. Then the Witnesses (to wit, Sir John Southcot, my Lady, their Son and Daugh­ter) were called; pag. 73. whereupon Sir Edward Southcot the Son af­firm'd, that he was told, That Mr. Ireland came to his Uncles (my Lord Astons in Hartford-shire) on the 3 d. of August at Night, but he saw him not there, till early on the 4 th. and that he went with him, and his Family to Tixhal, (my Lord's usual Residence in Staf­ford-shire) continuing every Day with them till the sixteenth. My Lady Southcot (who was my Lord Aston's Sister) said, That he was with her from the fifth to the sixteenth. Sir John the Father, said to the same purpose, to wit, that he met Mr. Ireland at St. Albans on the fifth, and that he was in their Company for Twelve Dayes af­ter. To them succeeded Mrs. Harwel the Mother, Mrs. Harwel the Daughter, and their Maid; as also, Sir John Winford's Ncece, four Giffords of the Chillington-Family, Mr. Biddulph of Biddulph, and two of the Perdrels of Boscobel, Son and Daughter to him who had there saved the King in his Escape from Worcester. These pag. 73. proved Mr. Ireland's being at Wolverhampton from the 17 th. to the 26 th. when he returned to my Lord's at Tixhal: And five of them, to wit, p. 74, & 75. Mr. Biddulph, two of the Giffords, and the two Pendrels, at­tested, that they saw him on the 2 d. of September, some at Bosco­bel, and others hard by: which 2 d. of September, was the very Day, or the Day after, that Oates Vid. Ire­land's Tryal. Pag. 60. positively swore, Mr. Ireland gave him Twenty Shillings in London. But Oates fore-seeing this Evidence, did (notwithstanding the Fact was in Print, and that he had made [Page 29] Oath of it in that very Court, even in the Hearing of several of the Judges, and two of the Prisoners at the Bar) insi [...] now, The Pres. Tryal. That it was the Day, Pag. 71. to the best of his Remembrance; but whether it was the 1 st. 2 d. 7 th. 8 th. or 9 th. of September, he would not positively say: Whereupon Mr. Gifford (who had bin a summon'd Witness in Ireland's Tryal) stood up, and affirm'd, pag. ib. That when Oates after much pressing, would not be positive as to the Dayes in August, he came at last to a Circumstance, and aver'd, That on the 1 st or 2d. of September, Ireland gave him (in London) Twenty Shillings. The said Mr. Gifford also, and his Wife, (when the Court objected, whether it were the same Ireland that Dyed, that was in Staffordshire) declar­ed, pag. 75. That they had seen him in the Country, and afterwards Tryed and Executed. This Evidence being full and clear, and the Witnesses that appeared, Persons of great Quality, (nay, there were twice as many more in the Countrey, that could not come by reason of their Domestick Affairs) Oates had nothing to ballance it, but the Testimony of pag. 78. Sarah Paine, the Servant-Maid which he had pro­duc'd formerly in Ireland's Tryal, about his being in Town on the 12 th. of August, as I said. And here 'tis to be Remember'd, that there were two Mrs. Giffords Witnesses in this Affair, which confounds the Reader at the first sight, when he peruses the Printed Tryal; for the Short-hand-Writer makes little Distinction between those Gentlewomen; and therefore, sometimes the same Person seems, as it were, to answer Negatively and Positively to the same Question. Besides, the said Writer is not alwayes Exact (when the Witnesses are many) who speaks; so that he sayes sometimes John a Nikes spoke, when 'twas (in truth) John a Stiles.

The Prisoners then having cleverly proved this Point, strike at all that Oates had ever said; for having in Mr. Ireland's Tryal often said, That he was here at the Consult of April 1678. he endeavor'd (as a greater Satisfaction to the Court) to further prove it by these Circumstances, viz. Vid. Irel. Tryal. Pag. 35. That he came over with Fa. Williams, Pa Ne­vil, Fa. Pool, Sir Thomas Preston, Sir John Warner, Hildesley, a young Scholar, and others. So that, pres. Tryal. Pag. 45. Mr. Fenwick demanding now, Whether he did not own his coming over with the said Hildesley? Oates would have avoyded it, by Bidding him ask Questions of what he said to Day; but Mr. Fenwick insisting upon this, as necessary and pag. 46. threat­ning Oates, That he had Witnesses to prove his Asserting his thus Com­ing from beyond Sea; Oates at last owned it: whereupon Mr. Hil­desley (who is a Gentleman's Son of Quality) appear'd, and deny'd it, protesting, that he left him at St. Omers behind; which Oates granted, but would have it, that he met him at Calis the next Day; and to confirm this, alledged, that Hildesley lost his Mony there, that Fa. Williams did relieve him, and that he went not streight to London with them. Hildesley readily confest the loss of his Mo­ny, [Page 30] &c. saying; He knew how Oates understood this, to wit, by a pag. 47. Gentleman, that (having met Hildesley) came to St. Omexs, with whom Oates was very familiar on the 2 d, of May, as several Wit­nesses present would prove.

Then were called in Nineteen Witnesses from beyond Sea, Four­teen of which were from St. Omers; and among them Sir James D [...]rington's Son, Sir Philip Palmer's Son; Sir R. Dalison's Son, and Sir Richard Colester's Son; Son-in-Law to Colonel Charles Gifford, who was so instrumental in saving of the King after Worcester; but Dalison not hearing when the rest were called, appeared not, and so could not be a Witness till next Day. The Substance of the St. Omarian Evidence was this; Some remember'd (by very good Circumstances) Oates at St. Omers at, and after Hildersley's Depar­ture, which was on the 24 th. of April, New stile. Others of Bur­naby's coming to them on the First of May, who was the Person (you must know, Reader) that could tell Hildesley's Adventures, by meeting him on the Way: Others of Oates his Familiarity with the said Burnab [...] Others, that they saw Oates whil'st he was in the Infirmary: Others; that they saw him in the Spiritual Exercise: Others, that Father Nevil, and Fa. Pool were not Absent, as he said: And others told many Particulars relating to him on the latter End of April, and first Week of May; but all agreed in this, That he came to them a little before Christmass, 77. and went not away till the following June, living there the whole time as a Scholar; nor did they remember, that in all that while, he was a Night out of the Se­minary, but on at Watten, a House of theirs two Leagues distant from St. Omers. They gave also these Reasons of their Assurance, That he could not be absent without their Knowledge, because first, The whole Colledge would have Rung of it, the Discourse of Com­ing and Going being their News, and which all continually mind. Se­condly, Because he sate in the Hall, or Rectory alone, at a distinct Table from them, viz. between Theirs, and the Fathers; so that, be­ing thus in the Eye of all, every Body would have been missing him. And lastly, That from about Lady-Day to his Expulsion in June, he was Reader of the Spiritual Books in the Sodality, and therefore, he could not be away or Sunday or Holy-day, but that they must most particularly have known it.

Now, for the other pag. 60. Five Witnesses, Three of them (besides one of the former) affirmed Sir John Warner to be at Watten all April and May, because being Superior there in Fa. William's Absence, they were sure they saw him almost dayly. The like did the p. 61. & 62. Porter and Caterer, as to Sir Thomas Preston's being then at Leige; nor could the Court find the least Incoherence or Disagreement in their Evi­dence, (though they were all strictly Examin'd, and cross Question'd) but in Cox's, who being a Stranger, and speaking English ill, made [Page 31] (by his odd Expressions, and giddy Answers) the Auditors often Merry: Yet the only thing objected to him by the Court was his saying, that Oates left the Colledge in pag. 53. July, when it was on the 23 th. of June, as the Scholars, and Oates himself acknowledg'd; whereupon, answering as to this, That it was after May he was sure, and that it was no matter for the Month, whether June or July, the People laught: But his Meaning Reader, was that being sure, that Oates was never Absent (as he alwayes said) from his coming, (which was before Christmass) 'till his going away for good and all, after May, (except to Wa [...]ten, as before) it was no Matter for the Month, whether in June or July.

Though these St. Omarians had (at least in Appearance) as well by the Innocence of their VVords and Behaviour, as by their Pun­ctuality in all the Material Parts of their Evidence, given Oates a deadly Blow, yet he was far from leaving the Lists; For Sir Wil­liam Waller having a while before taken Three of these Scholars, as Papists, in Town; they upon their Examination, declar'd what they came for, and told Oates to his very Face, That he never was but one Night out of their Colledge, from December to June: So that, by this time he had provided himself for the Storm, and therefore brought into Court first; one p. 79, & 80. Walker a Minister, who deposed, That a­bout the latter End of March, or the Beginning of April, 78 (and then presently, according to Oates his usual Method, extended the Time to the Middle of the said, Month) he saw one in Disguise near Lecester-House, but could not Recollect who it was, till a little before he rose next Morning; and then having drawn him within the Scheme of his Knowledge to be Titus Oates, he went and told Sarah Ives of it at her Shop; who now attested, that Walker had said so to her in April, but she knew not the Day. Then apeared Cecily Mayo, a Servant-Maid to one Sir Richard Barker of Ba [...]bican, (who from a Parrier, had by Posted Bills, made himself a Doctor) and pag. 81. she swore; That the Week before Whitsuntide, 78 (and Whitsuntide [...]ell then, Reader, on the 19 th. of May) she saw a Man in Sir Richard Barker's Yard, whom a Servant-Boy, that is since Dead, jeer'd at, telling her, That the said Man had chang'd his Coat from Black to White, and was turn'd either Quaker or Papist. That she saw him the Week after in the Garden with a­nother, but discontented because he was no more Countenanc'd by the Family, (the Young Ladies being shie of him) and that the afore-mention'd Boy said to her, Yonder is Oates again, Does he not look like a Jesuit? Therefore, when the Plot was discover'd, she went to see Oates, and knew him; who spoke slightingly to her, seeming offended with the Family, because they had scorn'd him; but she excus'd it, as proceeding from his being then a Papist: and further told him, That she hoped, he would never forget the Bread he had Eaten there.

[Page 32] After her Philip Page (one of the same House) witness't, pag. 82. That he saw Oates there, about the beginning of May, 78. to the best of his knowledge, by the token, his Master had a Patient at that time at Islington, Sick of a Feaver, whose name he knows not; but the Doctor told the Court, she was Aldram Milvars Daughter. The Coach man also said, pag. 83. That Oates in the beginning of May, was there to ask for Dr. Tongue, and when he came out of the House he seemed troubled. Then the Knight himself being present de­posed, pag. 82. & 83. That he was at the time of the Evidence abroad in the Coun­trey, as his business often leads him; that his servants (to the best of his Remembrance) told him after Witsuntide the story of Oates his being there in two Disguises, the one in Short-hair, which made them think him turn'd Quaker, the other in a Long-Perriwig, and then they thought him turn'd Papist. That upon the visiting a Gen­tleman he fell ill, in which time Oates was gone, and upon his Re­covery, he the said Oates came to enquire for Dr. Tongue, which was the latter end of June, or beginning of July. These Witnes­ses were follow'd by one Smith and Clay. Smith was Oates his Ma­ster, as Ʋsher of Merchant Taylor's, and he positively swore, that on the First Monday in May, 78. (i. e. on the Sixth of the said Month) Oates Din'd with him, and staid Three or Four Hours after discoursing of several things. Clay was an old weak, and doating man, who being taken as a Priest, was thrown into the Gate-house, and suffer'd to see no Friend; so that Oates (to whom all Prisons were open) visiting him, and caressing him dayly, brought him also for a Witness into the Court, where he attested, that he saw (he thinks) Oates in Apil was Twelve-month at Mr. Charles Howards Lodgings in Arundel-house, and in May also at the same place, as he thinks.

To this Reply, the Jesuits make a smart Rejoynder, proving the whole (by the Contradictions that must follow) either a down-right perjury, or a mistake; for Mr. White pag. 85. remembred the Court, how that when (at that very Bar) he had formerly prest Oates to name any body, that had seen him then in Town, He had nothing to say, but that he lay privately at Groves's. Nay Reader he deem'd it, in a manner, an unreasonable thing to be then askt such a question; for directing himself to the Lord Chief Justice, he Answered in these very words (as notoriously appears in Mr. Irelands Tryal) Ireland' s Trial. Pag. 36. My Lord (saies he) when I came to London, I was order'd to keep very close; and lay at Mr. Groves's house, let him deny it if he can. This was (you see) the best of his game then, and this made him fly to the former circumstances (which the late Witnesses have now proved also false) viz. of his coming over with Hildesley, Williams, Preston, Warner, &c. whereas had the present Evidence in his behalf been true, it would have been impossible for a man of his [Page 33] ranck and acquaintance to have been more publick; and yet a great­er impossibility for him, (when demanded so pertment a question) to have forgotten all these persons, especially when the seeing of any one of them in his then pretended Condition, was a great and dangerous fault, and consequently must have imprinted them in his Memory. But Mr. Gavens chief plea was about the time of Oates his Chimerical stay in England, and therefore cry'd out Ex ore tuo te judico; for since it was (as he urg'd) only a matter of pag. 86. Six dayes, (not did the Kings pag. 77. Councel [...]tend it to be above Eight or Ten) and since (according to the computation of the Court) Hildesley pag. 85. landed on the 17th of April our stile, and consequently reacht not London, till the 19th, what could become of the Ministers Testimony, that saw him the latter end of March or middle of April, or of the School-Masters, that dined and discours'd with him on the 6th of May for four or five hours; and especially of the Knight's Family, that saw him often that moneth even after Whitsontide. Now for Clay and the invalidity of his Testimony, there shall be a fuller account of it in Mr. Langh [...]rnes Tryal, and more also said of the Rest. Mr. Ga­ven further insisted on the quality of his Witnesses and the fullness of their Testimony as to p. 87, & 89. Mr. Ireland's being out of Town in August; of the clearness of the proof in relation to Sir Thomas Preston's and Sir John Warner's absence; of the positiveness of the evidence con­cerning his own being at Wolver-hampton, at least the last week in July, and that all the Witnesses did incline rather to think him there the other weeks also, than not, with much more of this nature. Nor did Mr. Fenwick forget to tell the Court (besides the Repetition of the former unanswerable arguments) pag. 91. that there was not the least Commission found, or the least Letter to show that there were such, or any Money paid, or Armes provided, and the like; but that all depended on the word of these Witnesses. Nay if they were Guil­ty, he said, they ought to be hang'd 'twice, Once for Knaves and then for Fools, for trusting a matter of this nature to such a fellow as Oates, who was not only expell'd their Colledges, but necessitous and beg­garly even to the last moment before the Discovery. And Reader you must also remember, that (among others) one Captain Hill did witnesse, that Bedlo (who had been long his fellow prisoner in the Marshalsea) was in May was Twelve Month, (which was the May just before the Discovery) so poor there, that he lived upon the very pag. 76. Basket. But notwithstanding this, or Mr. White's wondering, how he could be thought (were he of a fighting disposition) to pag. 91. beat Oates, to whom such a secret was committed, or to send a letter by the common pag. 90. post about Killing the King as Dugdale witness't; and not­withstanding Mr. Gavans great Eloquence (which every body much commended) or Mr. pag. 91. Hartcourts appealing to the Integrity of his life for 70 years, and to the Infamy of his Accusers; or his conclu­ding [Page 34] thus, that since a Negative cannot be well proved, he hoped Inno­cence will find some to defend it; I say notwithstanding this, They were all found Guilty, and (being condemned the next day) were on the Fryday following (to wit the 20 of June) executed together at Tyburn, where they made these following Speeches.

But Reader be pleas'd first to know that they were drawn on seve­ral Hurdles: On the foremost went Mr. Thomas Whitebread, and Mr. VVilliam Harcourt. On the second, Mr. Anthony Turner, and Mr. John Gavan. And on the Third, Mr. John Fenwick. And being come to the Gallows, They were all put into one Cart.

Then Mr. Gavan said, If God give us His Grace, it's no matter where we die, at the Gallows or elsewhere. The Executioner being fastning the Halters.

Gavan said, I hope you will be civil to dying Men. Executioner. I will be civil to you.

Gavan. I hope they will give us leave to speak.

MR. Langhorn was tryed at the Old Baily on Saturday the 14th of June 1679, & to make good the charge of High Treason against him Dugdale first appeared, who proved the Plot in general, pag. 6. as having been at several Consults with the Jesuits, about the Alterati­on of the Governm [...]nt and introducing Popery, where they spoke of an Army to be raised, of Killing the King, and a Massacre; and that he knew of pag. 7. Sir Edm. Godfry's death by Ewers Letter on the Munday night, which began thus, This very Nig [...]t Sir Edm. God­fry is dispatch't: that upon his being concern'd, that the Plot might be spoild by it, Ewers said it would be put upon debauch't persons, for he was severe with such; yet he the said Dugdale, could not (it ran so much in his mind) but the next morning he spoke of it at an Alehouse hard by, and thence it was carried to Mr. Ch [...]twin.

Prance rose next, and deposed, pag. 8. that Mr. Messenger (Gentleman [Page 42] of the Horse to my Lord Arundel) was employed by his Lord, and my Lord Powis, to kill the King, and this he was told of by my Lord's Butler; That meeting Messenger, he askt him, what his reason was, that he would kill the King; who answered, He was off of it, now; which Question and Answer (Reader) made many smile: Then he proceeded & sayd, That presently 50000 men should be raised and governed by the said Lords, to kill all that were not Catholick [...]; that he heard it from Mr. Ireland, Fenwick, and Grove, who spake of it to him together; That Mr. Har [...]court acquainted him (before one Thompson) that the King was to be killed by several; and that Fenwic said, That Langhorn was to have a great hand in it; so that still we see here are new men and (mean ones too) who know of the King's Death, and tell it one another for pastime, and ordinary News.

Oates followed next, saying, pag. 9. he went into Spain in April 1677, that returning in November, he brought Letters from Mr. Langhorn's Sons, who studied there; That Mr. Langhorn at the Receit of them, was informed by him, that the Youths would enter into the Society, which much rejoyced Mr. Langhorn, being a great Votary of the Jesuits, but said, if they would continue Secular Priests, they would have great Promotions in England, since things would not last long in this Posture; That Mr. Langhorn did upon Oates his going to St. Omers in November give him a Packet, and in his Letter to the Fathers, he mentioned his writing to Fa. La Chaise, in order to their Concerns, and that Coleman had written very largely to that Father, which made him the more brief; That Mr. Langhorn writ another in March. or April, about ordering Five Pounds to his Son, that had bin in Re­bellion and turn'd Soldier, but was now reconcil'd to him by the Intercession of the Fathers; In this Letter also Mr. Langhorn ex­prest at large his great Care of the Catholick Design, and told them among other things, that the Parliament Flagging, they had a fair opportunity to give the Blow; which seem'd very odd to many, That in an ordi­nary letter of Domestick concerns, He should treat of such high and se­cret matters. Then Oates go's on and say's; That after the great Consult of April, he was order'd to acquaint Mr. Langhorn (in the Tem­ple) of the pag. 10. MINUTS, past at the said Consult, by which he un­derstood of Grove's and Pickerings employment and Reward; That Mr. Langhorn (with lifted up hands and eyes for the good successe:) did then sign also the Consult, and told him, That he had Receiv'd about fifty pag. 12. Commissions from Rome; and among others shew'd him the Commissi­ons for my L'd. Arundel, Powis, Stafford, Bellassis and Peters; as also Mr. Langhorn's own to be Advocate of the Army, which were all pag. 11. Sealed with the Jesuits Cross or Cipher, and signed by their General; the Seal and Hand being the same as that of the Patent which Oates had then in Court, viz. a pag. 14. Pattent constituting F. Stapleton. Rector of [Page 43] St Omers▪ and found it seemes among the Jesuits Papers. That He the said, Oates saw those Commissions in his Study upon his Desk; when as Mr. Langhorn appeals (in his Mem. p. 6. Memoires) to all that great Company which frequented his Chamber; whether any of them ever saw a Desk in his Study? That Mr. Langhorn gave him several pag. 12. † Ori­ginals from F. Anderton and La Chaise, who did assure them of his Constancy in carrying on the Cause, and that the French King would stand by them with pag. 13. Men and Money. That Mr. Langhorn being Sollicitor for the Jesuits, did Communicate the Design to the Bene­dictins, who promis'd 6000 l. That Mr. Langhorn call'd Sr. George Wakeman, a narrow soul'd Phisitian, for not being content with 10000. l. That he, the said Oates, never stir'd out of the pag. 14. Colledge of St. Omer from December till his coming away in April, except a Night or two at Watten, and when he went to Paris. 'Twas here (some two questi­ons before) that Mr. Langhorn began to be Nice about the time of his coming to St. Omers, &c. whereupon the Court answer'd, That all the Defences of the Papists lay in Catches about time, a thing which no man living could be positive in, which heartned Oates not a little; for he being presently askt by Mr. Langhorn, when he return'd in April in­to England, he answered, about the middle of that moneth, and that he stay'd pag. 15. under twenty dayes, a Latitude which he would now have fain granted him, by reason of his ill success in the former Tryal, though the Court never then pretended (as you vid. Whites Tryal, p. 77. saw) to extend it to above eight▪ or ten; and because he fear'd Mr. Langhorn, he de­sired the Court to ask the Questions, adding, that he knew they would be so Present Tryal, p. 14. kind, as to ask him such Questions as were reasonable. Af­ter this, Mr. Langhorn demanded whether he came with Hildestey from Dover by Coach or on Horseback? to which Oates (after much hesitation) answer'd, pag. 15. That the Question was so sudden, that he could not be positive; but at last said, that as near as he could remember, It was by Coach. This strange uncertainty amaz'd many, but more smild at it, considering that in truth, he had reason for what he did, as not knowing the question was casual, but that Mr. Langhorn might have Witnesses ready to prove how Mr. Hildesley made that journey; nay, he would not tell Mr. Langhorn positively, whether he lay at pag. 16. Grove's the first night of his coming to London, or no; though he [...] directly sworn in Irelands Tryal (as has bin menti­on'd before) vid. Irel. That he was commanded to lie close at that House; so that if he had had such Instructions, Tryal, p. 36. it was impossible for him not to re­member whether he broke them or no, and more especially at his first Arrival about so dangerous and great an affair.

Bedlow brought up the Reer, and after he had also produc't (as Oates had done before) a private Patent of the Jesuits, found by him in the search of Mr. Arthur's House, and which (Reader you must [Page 44] know) is written (forsooth) in the same Hand, and seal'd with the same Seal, as the Commissions were he had seen at Paris; I say, after this he askt (fearing there would be Witnesses to what he said) whether a pag. 18. Papist might take Notes? The Court at first thought not; But when they understood, that the Scribe was the Marchioness Dow­ager of Winchester, 'twas answer'd, That a Womans Notes would signifie no more than her Tongue; and then he thus began.

pag. 19. That Coleman carried him about three Years ago, to Mr. Lang­horn's Chamber, who in his presence register'd several Treasonable Letters for La-Chaise, &c. some of which had been read in Court at Coleman's Trial; pag. 20. That there was no a penny of money receiv'd or paid, or the least thing done in relation to the Plot, that was not registered by Mr. Langhorn. That a year and a half ago, he car­ried a Pacquet from Hartcourt to be registred, That he was regi­stred by the name of Captain Williams, and not by his own, which he wondring at, Hartcourt Answer'd, That this was but a blind Re­gister, and that there should be a new one; That one of these Let­ters, was from the Rector of the Irish College at Salamanca, who desir'd the Lords, and the rest here to be ready; for that he had provided at the Groin, as Pilgrims, several Irish cashier'd Soldiers and Bandits, as also a great many Lay-Brothers, who landing at Milford, should be joyn'd with the Army my Lord Powis was to raise, pag. 21. That in May 76. he carried a Letter to Mr. Stapleton the Benedictin, to raise money for England: That Pritchard told him; That Mr. Langhorn had Commissions; That Sir H. pag. 22. Tichbourn shew'd him three at Paris, sign'd by the General of the Jesuits, and seal'd with their Seal, like the before-mention'd Patent. That he knows only by report, of Mr. Langhorn's being privy to Grove's and Pickering's design of Killing the King; for having a mind to go to Windasor, to see what the Assassines did, he askt Hartcourt leave, as if he went to a friend at Plimouth; who Answer'd, He could not be spared, till they knew how the Gentlemen had succeeded; and that he, the said Hartcourt, was going to Mr. Langhorns, to take the MINƲTES, which was the contrivance of sending down the Assassines to New-Market. That pag. 23. the Letter, which he saw Mr. Langhorn Register to the Be­nedictins beyond Sea, was to Sollicit them to get their contributi­ons ready, since the Hearts and Arms of the party [...] ready here; and, That in the French Letter to F. La Chaise (Registred also by Mr. Langhorn) there were invitations to that King to invade us. Now upon Mr. Langhorn's saying that he understood only Law-French, as an Argument that he could be no Register, and upon Bedlow's confessing he never heard him discourse in French, Oates (to salve the difficulty) cry'd out (and thereby made not a few laugh) That he himself could neither write not read French, but he [Page 45] could Translate it. And when Bedlow▪ was askt by Mr. Langhorn, whether Mr. Coleman's Letter (Transcrib'd by him) were long like those in the Narrative or no; the said Bedlow Answer'd, The best part of half a sheet of Paper; for Coleman writ a curious fine small hand, and would thereby put a great deal in a little room; which ve­ry much surpris'd all that knew Coleman, who was far from writ­ing a curious, or fine hand, and far from a small one also. Nor was this the only thing that amaz'd the Auditors, for both Oates and Bedlow openly declar'd in Court, when Mr. Langhorn charg'd them with Rewards, Gratifications▪ and the like, that they were so far from any benefit by the Discovery, pag. 27. &▪ 28. That they were out of poc­ket 700. l. a pece, and yet the one was proved the day before, to line [...] Gaol on the vid. Whites Tryal, p. 76. Basket, and the [...] as deplorable? as a Man of [...]e [...] ­p [...]ll'd the College, and des [...]tut of Friends could [...] be [...] Nay, there were several Witnesses at hand▪ † Ibid. p. 91. to prove also Oiteo's, wretched po­verty, but by not appearing presently at call, the 'Court went on to other matters. Besides Reader, you may imagine that Mr. Lang­horn's Friends and Acquaintance, were not a little confounded, to find Bedlow saying Thus. Pres. Tryal pag; 20. I saw him Register Colemauys Letter to his Studjl, whilst Coleman and I walk [...] in his Chamber; when as all knew (as he hints in his pag. 6. Memoires) That 'tis impossible to see one out of his Chamber writing in his Study.

Mr. Langhorn being askt, The Pres. Tryal. p. 26. what he had to say to all this, Answer'd, pag. 28. That he had been a close Prisoner from the Seventeenth of October, and never convers'd with any Friend to tell him news, nor could he fore-see what these men would testify; so that the main of his Defence was to lessen their Evidence, and thereupon he called the 19 St. Omer's Witnesses, &c. who proved as before, both Oates his being constantly at St. Omers from December to June, and that Sir Thomas [...]reston, Sir John Warner, &c. were not in England either in April or May. But here the Court too [...] great Exceptions at the Gardener of Watten, who was a Dutch man, and could scarce speak English, for being askt how he could be so [...]onctual as to Sir J. Warners being there all April and May, and not so in July and other Months. pag. 33. he Answer'd, because Sir John, in the Rector's absence (who went then into England,) supply'd his place; that he did not take so much notice of him (at other times: and besides, That the Question that he came for, did fall in those moneths and not in July, &c. whereupon the Court inferr'd▪ That he had his part given him, and the rest, and consequently, that there was no credit to be given to them. Now his meaning was this (and every body was thought to understand him so) viz. That all the World ringing by reason of the Printed Tryals and the like, with the noise, That Sir John was at London in such and such moneths, he had reflected on the seve­ral circumstances in relation to the said months, and therefore could [Page 46] positively speak to them, when as for the others he never consider'd or dreamt of them.

Then Mrs. Grove and her Maid a Protestant appeared, who wit­ness'd pag. 42, & 43. that Oates never lay there, for they knew him not; that all March, April, and May, the House was full of Lodgers, whom they knew; and that Mrs. Fitzherbert lay: then in that room which Oates pretended was his; but because the Mistress (being deman­ded who lay there in June and July) answer'd▪ that she was not to be examin'd further then April and May they were both slighted and dismist like the Gardiner, though the Maid positively pag. 43. nam'd Mrs Fitzberbert as there then; nor did Mrs. Grove mean any thing else by the words, but that April and May were the only months which Oates pretended to, as lodging at her house. * After this, Mr. Langhorn call'd for the Authentick Copy of the Record out of the Lords House, which though it were in the beginning of his Tryal granted not only by Oates, but by the Court also, that (if he had one) it should be pag. 15. read, yet now 'twas deny'd, and Chief-Justice North said▪ pag. 44. It was unreasonable to think a man should be prepared to justify all he has sworn in his life; besides 'twas absolutely deter­min'd, that he should not prove even by pag. ib. Witnesses, what Oates had said against him at another Tryal; which was thought very hard After this, came the Mistress of the White-Horse, a Protestant also, pag. 46. who said she had kept that Tavern Seven Years, that she had ne­ver seen Mr. Oates before. That it was a small inconsiderable House, that there was no room would hold above a dozen, and that she remembers not so great a company at one time, unless at a Parish Jury, pag. 47. who were divided into three rooms: Now Oates fearing much this Witness at first insisted on his priviledge of not answering to any question relating to a former Tryal, and therefore would not tell the Prisoner how many Jesuits met here; but the Chief Justice per­swading him to speak pag. 46. he answer'd at last, about Eighteen or Twenty (and not Fifty Reader, as formerly) and that these were also, in two or three several rooms; which not a few deem'd non-sense, and con­trary to the Nature of a Consult; for that requires that the Mem­bers should be together; and besides the Meeting according to this rate comes but to about three Clubs or Colloquies (as he calls them) which were still kept (according to his usual story) in other places, the general Randezvous being only here. But Oates was soon comforted; for upon the womans Evidence there stood up one that attested, that there were Rooms there, that would hold Thirty; and then ano­ther, that he was at a Wedding there, where Dined above Twenty, and so she made her Exit like the rest, and retir'd. But this ended not thus; for after the Tryal, several went to view this so much talkt of Tavern, and though it's back part be rebuilt since April 78. yet the Jesuits famous Room still remains, being about four Yards [Page 47] and a half square, and consequently not able with any convenience to contain above a dozen; no wonder therefore, if people can hard­ly comprehend how such a number of Polititians could meet there; or why they should choose the poorest Tavern in all London or West­minster, and where every extraordinary company, must necessarily be taken notice of; I say people cannot comprehend this, and espe­cially they that knew Mr. White's, Mr. Hartcourt's, and Mr. Ire­land's Chambers, either of which (besides the us doubtless of the respective Houses, upon any extraordinary occasion) is almost twice as big as the pretended one, and would have been 100 times more convenient to all intents and purposes whatsoever.

After this, the Prisoner askt Oates about his distributing the Com­missions who averred, that pag. 49. He (the said Prisoner) had told him in July or August, that he had distributed them, which▪ Mr. Langhorn urg'd to be quite contrary to his former Oath▪ as having sworn in Coleman's Tryal, Vid. Col. Tryal. p. 29. That he never saw him after the day in April, when he brought him the Result, and particulars of that grand Meet­ing as aforesaid. But this home Charge came to nothing, because there were no Witnesses ready to prove it viva voce; for as to the Print, (though publisht by the Chief▪ Justice.) it was refus'd, since a man was not (as Pres. Trial. pag. 50. Mr. Justice Pemberton Answer'd) to be Convicted by a History. The Prisoner urged again the Record of the Lords House, which could shew, that Bedlow had there sworn, pag. 48. that he had no persons more to accuse either in or out of the House▪ than those he had already mention'd; so that He Mr. Langhorn, not being one of them, the said Bedlow must be perjur'd; but this was deny'd him, as was also the hearing of Witnesses to prove, that Bedlow had own'd in Mr. Reading's Tryal, that he had formerly minc't his Evi­dence against Mr. Whitebread, which was plain perjury, since he then swore, to speak the whole. Truth, as well as nothing but Truth.

Mr. Langhorn (though he thought he had hard measure) pati­ently acquiest, for he was a very quiet and modest man; and then the Court called the Witnesses that proved (in the preceding Try­al) Oates's being here in April; but all of them in some material thing or other pag. 52. varied from their former Depositions; for, Walker the Minister (finding it necessary to advance in his computation a­bout the time when he drew Oates the next morning within the Scheme of his Knowledge (as he worded it in the former Tryal) tells us now, pag. 52. that he believes it was in April, and towards the middle of it, though in the said former Tryal he made it every whit as likely to be in the Vid. Whites Trial. p. 80. latter end of March; and yet half April could not then serve (you see) Oates his turn. But Cicily Mayo on the contrary (finding it as necessary to shorten her time) will have it, pag. 54. That it was a matter of a fortnight before Whitsuntide (as she remembers) when she saw Oates at the Doctor's; & yet before, she not only depos'd, [Page 48] That it was the week before Whit suntide (or May the 19) but that he came again to them a week after. As for the Doctor or Knight himself (who was to assure the Court that his servants told him of Oates his visits) he now tells us, that he was then sick in the pag. ib. Countrey, where­as before he swears in these words, vid. Whites Trial. p. 82. At that time (says he) that they have given in Evidence, I was abroad, as my business leads me often abroad into the Countrey; or this Treatise, p. 32. and then he add's a little after, that upon the visit of a Gentleman he fell ill, in which time Oates was gone, but upon his Recovery (to wit in June or July) He came to enquire for Dr. Tongue: So that if the said Doctor or Knight were sick and out of Town from February, to Whitsun week or latter end of May, as his Pres. Trial. pag. 53. Coach-man and pag. 54. He both now depose, what becomes of his Boy Page's Testimony, that re­membred (the day before) Oates to have been at his Masters in the beginning of May, because his said Master had a Patient in vid. Whites Tryal, p. 82. I slington Sick of a Feavor; nay, what shall be thought of the said Doctor him­self, who (to vouch the Boy, and to satisfy the Jury) swore then, that that Patient of his was Ibid. Aldram Milvers daughter, when as here we find him not in the Country about his business, but under the Care of Doctor Needham, and to be a Patient himself by his own Confession for a great many weeks together. The School-Master's also shewd that he understood his business; for having well consider'd Mr. Gavans late Inferences, he swore at present only, that it was on the first Mun­day in May, Present Tryal, p. 56. to the best, for sooth, of his Remembrance, and, as he takes it; which are expressions far different from the words Yes I do, when▪ the Judge askt him, vid. Whites Tryal, p. 84. if he swere positively and directly.

As for Clay the old Priest, he was confronted by Mr. Charles How­ard (the Duke of Norfolks Brother) who was only examin'd, though his wife and two servants were also present to attest, That Oates was never with them after April 77, till July, 78. Nor were these the sole witnesses that were past by; for it had often happened thus both in this and the Jesuits Tryal, there being above 30, who never came to their Examinations, either for want of hearing or of being called. Now because Mr. Howard fear'd his Testimony in Court might be alter'd by the Writers of the Tryal, he gave the fol­lowing account to several of his friends, under his own hand, one of which came accidentally into mine: Nay he sent one to Oates him­self, to the end no foul play might be us'd with him.

Besides, it must be remembred, that Mr. Howard (above a moneth before) had bin examin'd by a Committee of the Lords about this business, in the presence of Clay and Oates, where he satisfy'd their Lordships so well by the time of his Son Charles's Death (who had (as he told the said Lords) bin Examin'd or posed by Oates in April 77) and by many other Circumstances concerning the whole matter, that Clay himself confest he might be mistaken in time, and that since Mr. Howard (who had a better memory than he,) sayd Oates was not at his House in April 78. he would no longer gainsay it, or words to that purpose.

Mr. Langhorn being found Guilty, was Condemned with the five Jesuits that very day, and on the Fourteenth of July he was drawn to Tyburn, where he publickly declar'd his Innocence, as appears by the following Speech, which he left written under his own hand.

THese were Tryed at the Old Bayley on the 18. of July, against whom Dugdale first appearing, repeats his former Story of his knowing long ago somthing of the pag. 8. Plot, but more par­ticularly, about two years since; That the Killing of the King▪ and Duke of Monmouth was told him by the pag. 9. Priests and my L'd. Stafford. That Hartcourts Letters (besides others) were e­ver directed to him, frought with the Business of the Plot; That he open'd many of them privately, and that he kept those, he could not handsomly Seal again; which Reader, infinitly amaz'd the Auditory, as not being able to imagin, why if he were such a Privado, he should play such Tricks with his Fellows, and especially when there was no design or Advantage in it; for he had not one of them to produce, as the pag. 18. Prisoners urg'd; Nor could any body comprehend how the Conspirators themselves should have Letters of such Concern inter­cepted, and not be presently in an Uproar. Then he said pag. 9. that Sr. James Symons, Mr. Howard, Mr. Gerard and Mr. Adderley were to be Officers in the Army which was to be rais'd; That he saw St. Omer Acquittances of July last, of the Payment of the money for this Affair; That in a Letter directed to him, there was also caution given. That no Rumor should be of Armes, or any thing else, till the King were dispatch'd; but he could not now recollect, ei­ther who wrot it, or its Date, or from whence it came, and yet 'twas brought by the pag. 14. Common Post; all which seem'd very strange to the Court, nor did the Prisoners (besides the other mad Assertions) fail often to insist upon this Letter, so that Ibid. Dugdal (being perplex'd & Confounded) was forc'd to run to another (forsooth) brought by a par­ticular [Page 56] Messenger, and Communicated also to my Lord Aston, which at last prov'd as wild and odd as the former; for it came he said, from Pa­ris, and from Sr. John Warner as he thinks, promising them not only all Assistance, but advising them also to lay the Kings murther on the King-killing Presbiterians, which would make the Church of England joyn with the Papists, to cut them off; and that my Lord Stafford, Bel­lasis, and Arundel did approve of this Advice, by setting their very Ibid. Hands to it, which Reader was incredible. Moreover he affirmed (besides the notice of Sr. E. Godfreys Death as before) That my Lord Stafford (who came down about July last) offer'd him pag. 11. 500 l. as a present Encouragement for Killing the King, and to be receiv­ed at his Arrival at London in October; That they had all a great Confidence in him; for he had bin free of his Purse in giving the Priests pag. 13. 400 l. secur'd upon Lands, and 100 l. more on promise; a passage pag. 19. Mr. Corker made sport with, as thinking it very plea­sant and prety, for him to give 500 l. with one hand, for the pro­motion of the Cause, and then for Encouragement, to receive as much with the other. Nor had D [...]gdal any better Reply ready, than that my Lord Stafford (he supposes) knew not of the money given before by him; which was far from answering the Difficulty, why such a Zealot as he should have Encouragement for his bare per­sonal help, even out of the present publick Stock, especially when he pag. 13. confesses, the Contributions were so backward, that Mr. Peter' s com­plain'd to him of it. But the Evidence that made the most Mirth, both then and since, was Mr. Whites Letter, sent by the Common Post (as he also mentions in the former Tryal) to command Mr. Evers in express Terms, To Choose hardy persons to kill the King; for the p. 10, & 1 6. Expedient in case Letters did miscarry (which made not a few Laugh outright) was, That he the said Dugdal should be the only Person hang'd; the Jesuits having, (as he assures the pag. 10. Court so de­vised it, That they never subscib'd but two Letters of their names, and the packet being directed to him, he was upon all accidents to deny it, and to observe the Secrecy, (which they had at least ten times sworn him to) and then they could not be discover'd (he said) but must go pag. 16. free, seeing all was flung upon him.

This Evidence being thus without either Head or Taile, Rhyme, or Reason, the King's Counsel told the Prisoners. that it was not to affect any in particular, but to prove the Plot in general, where­upon pag. 12. Sr. G. Wakeman readily answered, That it was the worst made out, that ever any thing was, he believes. [...]rance therfore being next, repeats also his old Tale, pag. 20. and among the particulars, of my Lord Arundel's Butler's acquainting him That the King was to be killed by Mr. Messenger and then Mr. Messenger's Answering him after­wards in surprize when he found [...]rance knew it, That they were now off the Business: and then he adds as new, That Mr. Paston [Page 57] told him, that Sr. Henry Benningfield Mr. Stoner, and Mr. Talbot of Long-ford had Commissions to to raise an Army, which was to be Govern'd by the Ld's Bellasis, Powis, and Peters, as G [...]ove assur'd him, whilst he was buying silver Spoons of him for a Christning.

Then stood up a new Witness, to wit, Mr. Robert Jennison, who said, pag. 21. That Mr. Ireland told him in June 78, (his sister Anne Ireland being by,) that there was hope of the Restauration of their Re­ligion; that only one stood in the Gap; and that it was easie to poyson the King: That he (the said Witness) call'd it a horrid Acti­on; That Mrs Ireland did rebuke her Brother for talking so, who answered, That he thought it ought not to be done; That Mr. Jen­nison reply'd that Violence would never do the thing, it being a Scandal to their Religion, as appear'd by the Gun-powder Plot, which Mr. Ireland said, was a state-trick and Cicils Invention. That he was then a Papist though now a Protestant; pag. 22. That he went to Windsor on Saturday the 17th of August; That on Monday the 19th, he re­turn'd about Noon, and then positively saw Mr. Ireland in his Chamber in Russel street pulling off his Boots as newly come from Staffordshire. That Mr. Ireland (upon his the said Mr. Jenison's telling him, That the King in his fishing Divertisements at Windsor had usually but three or four with him,) answer'd pag. 23. He wondred he went with so few, for he might easiely be taken off; That he reply'd, God forbid; which Mr. Ireland qualifieing, he made no ill reflections on it, 'till after the discovery of the Plot, and then speaking of it to his Father and Sisters (for he went hence homewards on the 4th of September) he said, to them, pray God there be nothing in the Plot, for 'tis Suspitious by reason of My Cousin Ireland's discourse; Besides he writ (as he pre­tends) on the 19th of December last a Letter of these particulars to one pag. 24. Mr. Bowes, who produc'd it in Court, and is since printed in Mr. Chetwins Nar. p. 3. Narrative, where he declares, that all that He lays hold on in the Kings then Proclamation (for the Encouragement of Discoverers) was pardon for concealing the aforesaid Circum­stances; for 'tis all he can tell, as he hopes for the forgiveness of his sins, and eternal Salvation; nor did he ever hear (as he hopes for life everlasting,) either Mr. Ireland or any of them defend or maintain in the least, the damnable Doctrine of, Deposing Kings, which made him have no ill opinion then of the Expressions. One Circumstance (he says) there is more, which has (considering the times) an ill sound with it, Nar. p. 4. and then he will have clear'd his Soul; The Circum­stances is, That Mr. Ireland said 'Twice or Thrice at their parting, that he had some business to Communicate to him, but when he urg'd him to tell it, he answer'd, he would take some other occasion to do it, but never did.

Thus, is seen, what this Witness has said, or can credibly say as to this business; for he that in a Letter or otherwise, will with im­precations [Page 58] and Oaths declare, he has no more to say to a thing, is up­on any further Evidence as much a perjur'd man in Conscience, (and consequently as little to be believed) as he that deviating from his Recorded Despositions in a Court of Judicature, has been therefore punish'd with his Ears as the Law orders and awards. Now that you may also know what this person is, I must tell you his Father is a Gentleman in Durham of about 500 a year at most; he is the Eldest Son as to the Estate, in case his Brother Thomas (who they say is a Priest) turns not Protestant after his Example; so that his Temporal Gain depends wholly on the Spiritual loss, and Popish blindness of the other; who (by the way) is reputed a very notable and quick sighted Scholar in all learning, and yet is as unfit a man, (I'le assure you) for a Plot of this nature, as ever was; and truely so most of the Conspirators have been. His Father sent the aforesaid Robert a while agoe (with a small Allowance) to Greys Inn to study the Law, but instead of it, he has learn'd to run in Debt, and is a Proficient to that Degree (as all that know him can testifie), that no body would longer trust him, and therefore was forc'd to pawn all the little Necessaries he had. Besides he has had a Mother in Law, by whom his Father has a very plentifull stock of Children, and Consequently want's no Heirs; Nay there is a third Brother, be­sides daughters by the first venter, so that considering his late life and other Accidents, neither Oates nor Bedlow had more need of their pre­sent employment and profession than he. As for his knowledge of the Plot, or of Mr. Ireland's being here, take this short Account; That at Easter last, (the Lords providing for their Tryal) summon'd by an order of the House several persons of quality out of Stafford­shire, as Witnesses of Mr. Ireland's being there all August; and a­mong them Madam Harwell Mr. Jennison's Aunt, his Cousin her daughter, and others of his Acquaintance came to Town, whom he often visited, and show'd them also Letters newly received from his Brother Thomas in New-Gate, which mention'd several Witnesses that could prove him in Lincolnshire and else where in the Countrey, whilst Oates in his Narrative says he was at Consults here in London: nor did Mr. Robert fail of railing at the said Oates and Bedlow, and the rest of the Cabal for their Villainy; and was so far from pre­tending then, That Mr. Ireland was in Town on the 19th of August, that he knew his said Relations were come purposely to prove him with them that very day; Nay (on the 13 of June, or the Jesuits Try­al) He came to the three Cranes among the Crow'd of Witnesses, and even Usher'd into Court his young Cousin Harwell to that very end, who (besides several others) vid. White's Tryal, p. 73. averr'd (as it appears in the Print) That Mr. Ireland was to her knowledge every day (but the 23th.) in her mothers house, from the 17th of August to the 26th, the time he returned to Tixhal. Let the world therefore judge, [Page 59] what a Witness he is; and moreover it can, and shall be made ap­pear by two and Twenty persons (many of them of quality, and many also Protestants) that Mr. Ireland was on the said 19th with his Aunt in Hampton, as I now mention'd. The like ill luck also befell Sarah Paine, who pitch't (as you have seen) on the 12 of this Month, as the Day of her Saluting Mr. Ireland in Town; for then he was in the midst of his Holy well journey with 35 in company, as my Lady Southcot and her Family with several others of Note and fashion will Witnesse.

Here it was, that the King's Council admonish'd the Prisoners, pag. 25. That now it would behove them to take Notes, (as if, Reader, He­ctor himself with all his God's were at hand) and they no long­er to be dallied with: Whereupon Oates being called he began at the first onset with the most Stupendious Circumstance that ever was heard of; for he deposed, That Mr. Ash [...]y Arriving here ill from St Omers in July, Sir George order'd him to go to the Bath, and sending him a Letter of Physical Instructions how to govern himself (viz to take a Pint of Milk every Morning, and as much at night, and 100 stroakes of the Pump) He (the said Sir George) mention'd in it, not only, Poysoning the King, pag. 26. but that the Queen would also assist him in it. Then he proceed's saying, that he knew this to be Sir George's hand by another Letter a day or two after, which could not be but his, for Sir George had it before him in a Writing posture, and he saw him put by the Pen, and found the Ink not yet dry, nor was there any body else to write, Mr. Ashby being Lame. That Oates heard Ashby talk to him of the Commission he had received of being Physitian to the Army; That presently there came one Sir Richard or Sir Robert (a brisk man, about 45 years old) to call Fa­ther Keines, Langworth, Fenwick, Hartcourt, and another to wait on her Majesty at Somersethouse; That Oates accompany'd them, and staying in the Anti-Chamber whilst they went into her Room, he heard a Woman, (after expressing much zeal for her Religion and the violation of her Bed) say, That she would assist Sir George in poysoning the King; That when the Fathers came out, He (Oates) desir'd to see the Queen, who gave him a gracious Smile, and spoke to Mr. Hartcourt in the former voice about 1000 l. nor did he see there any other Woman; and Reader you may easily imagine how ridiculous this stuff seem'd to every body; That a Lady eminent in vertue, should not only make such a declaration in a publick Consult, (for the resolves of all Consults are known at one time or other) but also in the hearing of such a pittiful Wretch as Oates, who could help neither her nor any body else in any part of the Plot more than the first Kennel raker you meet with. After this, he tells the Court, That he heard Ashby (in express Terms) offer Sir George 10000 l. to poyson the King, which he refus'd, as too little for so great a Work. p. 27. & 28. That Mr. White sent [Page 60] to offer him 5000 l. more, which he accepted and received; for he saw it thus Register'd in the Jesuits Entry book, (which Langhorn sometimes kept), Mem. The—day of August 15000 l. was proposed to Sir George Wakeman; and then under it was written. Received of Mr. Hartcourt by the Order of Ed. Coleman 5000 l. in part. G. W. Now Reader he that can swallow such a Register, or such unnecessa­ry, and unheard of Entrys, and Memorandums, let him him never for the future think any thing either Romantick, or sottish. As for p. 31, & 34. Mr. Corker, he say'd he had a Patent, which Oates saw in his hand to be Bishop of London; That he, being p. 31, & 33. PRESIDENT of the Be­nedictines, did consent to the raising of the 6000 l. contributed by them. That he heard Mr. Corker dislike the Choice of Pickering to kill the King; pag. 33. because he commonly attended upon the Altar, and might miss an opportunity by being at High Mass; that Mr. Marshall knew of Pickering's Design; and that he went pag. 35. halves with Coniers that the King should eat no more Mince Pies. That Mr. Rumley was privy to the giving of 6000 l. That he saw Mr. Marshall at the Consult in August; but Mr. Marshall asking him what day, he answer'd, Ibid. [...]Twas a great priviledge he named the moneth. At last with much ado, he said, ' Twas either the day before, or day after the (15th or) Assumption. Whereupon Mr. Marshal answer'd with heat and brisk­ness, Now he hath avouch'd this positively; so that Oates fearing the Consequence, cry'd; Nay I will not be positive, and continu'd so all along as good as his word; only he said, that the Benedictin Con­sult, in which they had an account from A. B [...]. Talbot of the Irish Affaires, was positively on the pag. 36. one and Twentyeth if it fell on a Wednesday, as it did; which contradicts his former depositions (and therefore he is not to be blam'd if he refuses to be positive) for in Mr. Whites Tryal, ‖ vid Whites Trial. p. 15. he fixes the † Consult about sending the 80l. to the Ruffians on this day; and yet those two Consults are by his account on different dayes all along.

Bedlo succeeding Oates said, pag. 37. That being at Mr. Harcourts about the beginning of August, Sir George came in Angry and discontented at put offs, and askt Mr. H. if he had any thing for him; who after some words gave him a Bill of 2000 l. saying, it was brought him by a Gentleman. (whose name Bedlo had forgotten▪) who received it from such a one, that said it was by the Queen's Order; That the Bill was charg'd on a Gold­smith's (as he thinks) neer St Denstans, but his name he had forgotten also; That Sir George upon reading the Bill said [...]he found more encourage­ment from his good Mistress than from all the rest; Ibid. That Sir George asking Mr. Hartcourt▪ who Bedlo was, answered, A Friend long engag­ed in our business, and is to do the next great work; which Bedlo thought a sufficient answer to Sir George's wonder, ‖ pag. 40. † That upon the first sight of a man he should discover such high and dangerous secrets. Nay after Sir George's protesting he had never seen Bedlo before his [Page 61] now appearing in Court, for he had too remarkable a face (he said) to be forgotten, Bedlo replyed, That Sir George was his Physician three years before at the Bath; which by the premisses (Reader) is absolute­ly false you see; for how could Sir George ask Hartcourt now, who he was, or Bedlo need Mr. Hartcourts Character, if there had been such an page. 41. Acquaintance between them formerly, as he pretends? Bed­lo moreover says, pag. 37. That presently after this discourse in Mr. Hartcourts Chamber, pag. 38. Sir George told him the said Bedlo near the Temple, That the Bill was accepted and would be paid in the afternoon, † That upon asking Hartcourt a while after, he told him, That he the said Hartcourt had made up the former summ, 5000, l. it being for the old business; for, if they should fail at Windsor, then this way was to be taken, and if this fail, they should be sure to do it at New-Market; and that so was the Discourse with Sir George. That he had heard Corker speak of a Design, Army &c, and of Letters he had receiv'd from beyond Sea in relation to it; pag. 39. That Mr. Marshall was one that knew the Affairs; That he communicated all to Sir Francis Ratcliff, and used to be one of the Club that saw and examin'd the Let­ters he brought. That for pag. 40. Mr. Rumley, he heard he was one em­ploy'd, when Secret Letters were sent into the Countrey, and so knew of the Plot.

Here Sir George, asking Bedlo, (what day he had this Bill, he answer'd, He had no Dispensations (as formerly) to lie, and had no delight to damn his Soul, and therefore could only tell him, it was in the beginning of August or thereabouts, nor remembred he any names but those relating to his business. Now when the Evidence came to be stated, the pag. 45. C. Justice said, that Bedlo had heard (tis true) doubtfull words told Sir George, but that Hartcourt had not fully spoken of the business to him in the said Bedlow's presence; so that in effect 'twas no more than, That Sir George receiv'd from Hartcourt a Bill, he know's not upon whom, nor for what. But Bedlow being call'd to re­peat his former Evidence and finding now where he had been too short, pag. 46. declar'd, That Hartcourt ( pag. 47. in one intire discourse) said in his hearing to Sir George, This is to be well followed and closely observ'd, because so much depends on it, for if we should miss to kill him at Windsor, or you miss in your way, we will do it at New-Market. This impudent and Notorious addition; for if there were any Hint of such a design in Bedlow's before recited Evidence, it was (you see) only in doubtful words, or as a thing told Bedlo by Hartcourt; I say this impudent and Notorious addition amaz'd the C. Justice and most of the Auditory; but when Sir George saw that some seem'd in earnest to allow it, and consider'd the Fate of all that had been yet tryed, he turn'd himself to his Fellow-Prisoners, and with a Disdainfull smile said, There is my business done; But resolving nevertheless not to die a mute, he and they fell to their Defence, the main of which is as follows.

[Page 62] First Sir George proved by the present Mayor of Bath (his Apo­thecary,) pag. 49. who had read (and his Son did the like) the Letter of Di­rections for Mr. Ashby; That there was not the least mention of the p. 48, & 50. King or Queen besides the Baths called by their names. That he had the pag. 49. Physical part still by him, having torn it off the pag. 51. bottom of the said Letter, and that Milk was ridiculous, and never prescri­bed by any Physitian. Oates being thus pinch'd, would fain have the Milk to be Mr. Ashby's direction in Town, ‖ pag. 50. before his going to the Bath, and that there were then two Letters. To this pag. 48. Sir George reply'd that it was Non sense to think he should write pag. 51. two Let­ters of Directions for the same man at the same place; and that Mr. Ashby went to the Bath presently after the writing of them; so that what he had order'd was for him there, which he prov'd by young Madam Heningham, and his man Hunt; for he attested, that his p. 52, & 53. Master coming in late and weary, and understanding by him that Mr. Ashby was going next day to the Bath, the said Sir George made the Witness write his directions (Mrs. Heningham being also all the while present, who averr'd the same) and that he carried them that very night to Mr. Ashby; nor was there any mention of Milk, only Mr. Ashby told him the said Hunt, that a friend had advised, him to drink it. Besides pag. 30. Sir George told the Court, that Oates at his first examination before the King and Council, declar'd, he never saw him, and consequently could not see him write, that he charg'd him there so slightly that the Board thought it not fit so much as to Commit him. pag. 53. That he had his Liberty 24 days after his being accus'd before the Council▪ That when Oates had accus'd him a new at the Common's Bar, the Lords (as appear's by the Journal) examin'd Oates about this very pretended Letter; and when the Chancellor askt him, if he knew Sir George his hand, he answered, NO; and that he only knew it was his Letter by being subscrib'd, George Wakeman; which is (Reader) directly contrary to his present charge. Then Sir Philip Lloyd be­ing called by Sir George, he said, pag. 55. That on the 31 of September, Oates declared in Council, that Fenwick writ to St Omers, that Sir George had undertaken to poyson the King for 15000 l. of which 5000 l. was paid by Coleman; That Sir George deny'd the thing, and demanded Reparation; that the Board not likeing his Carriage, the Chancellor askt Oates, if he knew any thing personally more than by Hear say, desiring a sufficient ground for a Commitment; That he lifting up his hands, answer'd, NO; God forbid I should say any thing against Sir George, for I know nothing more against him; and the said Sir Philip, for the Truth of what he attested, appeal'd to the whole Board. To this killing stroak and unquestionable evidence; for every body knew Sir Philip durst not for his head have asserted a false thing, since the Council (before whom Oates had depos'd) would have cer­tainly question'd him; I say to this killing stroak, Oates had no other [Page 63] answer, but his former to Coleman, that he was weak by his two nights fatigue, and that he was not pag. 55. COMPOS MENTIS: Whereupon the C. Justice replyed pag. 56 That it requir'd not much strength to say he saw a Letter under Sir George's hand; which was a plain and full answer also to pag. 59. Sir Tho. Doleman, who witness'd, That Oates was in a very weak and feeble condition at the Council; for can any body (Reader) life up his hands, and cry, God forbid I should say more than I know, and yet be so feeble as not to be able to say, I know he has written Treason in a Letter? Now when Oates saw this foolish Excuse would not do, he openly cry'd; It was such a Council as would commit no body; which was not only a most Rascally Reflection, (and for it the Court reprehended him) but a most Notorious lye, since they secur'd every body, whom he personally accus'd; I say this was not only a Reflection, and a Lie, but enough to perjure him also; for if he thought that this partial Councel would not secure Sir George, then he has forsworn himself, by saying, that the remisness of his Accusati­on proceeded from forgetfulness and Lassitude. After this Sir George de­sir'd that the Record of the House of Lords might be read, but the Court pag. 61. refus'd it, and then Mr. Corker began his plea.

He told the Court, Ibid. That it was swearing with probable Circum­stances, that must render a man Guilty and not a ridiculous Charge by Scandalous men; for otherwise no-innocent person could ever es­cape an Oates, or a Bedlow, pag. 66. That the Record or Lords Journal shows that Oates acknowledg'd he had nothing to say against any man but those already accused, and that his name was not there; pag. 72. That when Oates came to seize on Mr. Pickering, He & the Officers ask't, who was in the House? and when the Names of Mr. Pickering, Mr. Corker, & Mr. Marshal were mention'd, they said they had nothing to do with any body but Mr. Pickering, as Ellen Rigby the House-Maid attested; which plain­ly mproves, that had Mr. Corker and Mr. Marsh been. Traytors to Oates his knowledge, they would have been apprehended also. That the said Mr. Corker was not President of the Benedictines as Oates had depos'd, and this he proved by three, to wit pag. 75. Madam Sheldon, Mrs Broad-head and the said Ellen Rigby, who declared, that Mr. Stapleton was in that Office, and had been so for many years. Besides, this El. Righby (who had also with others attended the Court the two former Tryals) witnest, pag. 73, That Oates last Summer came to their House a begging to Pickerings, and that Pickering bad her not let him come in any more; which shew'd to all the Court what a Plotter Oates was, being forc'd to beg even in the very heat of the Plot, and contemn'd also by his pretended Partisans.

Mr. Marsh. added also (and had the Messenger in Court) Ibid. That he sent for Witnesses out of the Countrey against his former Tryal, and that they were then here to disprove Oates's Charge, but that neither his purse was sufficient to keep them, nor could their busi­ness [Page 64] permit them to come up upon any uncertainty; bvt now the time being sure, if the Court would respite his Tryal for four days at most, they would be here he was confident. This being refus'd him, and the rest having done, he fell into an pag. 76. Harangue so pathetical, weighty, and moving, concerning the death of the former prisoners, and their present Case, that it affected the whole Assembly; but it being thought at last reflecting, the C. Justice gave him a Reprimand, and then summing up the whole Evidence he told the Jury in short, pag. 83. That if they were satisfyd that Oates and Bedlo swore true, they would do well to find them Guilty; if otherwise to acquit them; for they ought (he said) to consider their Conscience, and not what the world would say. The Jury then went out, resolving at the very first not to condemn them; but two or three being Timorous propos'd this expedient viz: to find it misprision, which they thought might satisfy the Clamorous, and yet be no such great inconvenience to the prisoners, especially since the King's merciful Temper was known to every body. But the Court declaring, that they must either be convicted of High-Treason or dis­charg'd, they presently brought them in, Not Guilty; for Prance and Dudgal (the two Collateral Witnesses) had made (you see) a most Lamentable, and (if possible) a more ridiculous story of it then ever; Bedlo's Impudent perjury, by his new and second evidenced) was also so manifest and shocking that all good people abhorrd it; and lastly Oates his Beggary; his falsly accusing Mr. Corker of being Pre­sident; his ignorance of him and Mr. Marshall when Pickering was apprehended; and his not knowing either Sir George, or his hand, (as the said Oates had himself declar'd to the Council, and to the House of Lords) was so Notorious, that no man could fear, that per­sons of repute and worth would do otherwise than they did; and more especially since the Scandalous and ill lives of these Accusers were now written with a Sun-beam, and no longer hidden from any body.

HAving (my Lords and Gentlemen) given you this exact and short account of the late Judicial Proceedings; for when should I have ended, had I not (in spight of the continual Follies that occurr'd) forc'd my self to Bounds? I say, ha­ving given you this short account. I know not whether you are now more surpris'd (for surpris'd I am sure you are) at the strang Incoherencies, nay, Impossibilties, in the Charge all along, or at the mighty weight of the Defence, though the Accusers themselves had bin men of Repute and Probity. For, after a sober and close Con­sideration (to which nothing can more conduce than an Abstract, or Compendium) what have they lay'd at the dores of Catholicks, that▪ by its [...]monstrous and disagreeing parts, shows not it self to be wholly vain and Chimerical? Or if any thing has at last bin re­duc'd to the Appearance of some little Proportion, by the Efforts, and skill of better Artists, yet how has the positive Testimony of so many Ʋntainted Persons still discover'd its Defects, and conse­quently prov'd the whole as Fabulous as before? Ʋntainted I call them, and with Justice I may do it, who are not only Masters of a Reputation by Law, but have also so liv'd among their Neigh­bors and Acquaintance, that their Word has on all occasions bin as readily taken, as any body's in the same Rank and Station; when as there is not one Witness against us, who has not either bin a­most Profligated Wretch, by the unanimous Consent of all that knew him, or given at least Prognosticks by his Poverty or Temper, that the first Opportunity would infallibly make him so.

Let us therefore consider a little the four Props or Pillars on which this Scene of so much Trouble, Of Oates. and Distraction to the whole King­dom stands; and having first taken a view of Oates; what can be said to his bare word, when I defy Man-kind to produce any one of Repute, who formerly knowing him, gave the least manner of Credit to it? Do's not Sir Denny Ashburnham (a Parliament man) de­clare as much in pag. 66. Irelands Trial? and do not the vid. Re­cords of the Session held there May 27. 167 [...]. Records of Hast­ings, and the Order of Council notoriously make it good; for, being Minister in that Town, he accused young Parker of Sodomy, and at­tested it at the Bar with all the Oaths and Impudence imaginable; [Page 66] but the Jury nevertheless brought in the Prisoner not Guilty, as remem­bring what an Accuser he had, and understanding by their Neig­bours, that he was making merry with some of them at the very time of the pretended Fact. This so enraged the very women of Hast­ings (as Oates complain's in a Bill of Equity, drawn for his Relief, after he was arrested by Parker, in an▪ Action of the Case) That they stood at the Hall dore with Rods to whip him, and Tubs of Wa­ter to wash him when bloody, that so they might whip him again. Did he not also accuse old Parker the Father (thereby to hinder the Son of all Assistance) of speaking scandalous and opprobrious words against the Lords of the Privy Council; which the King in Person examining, (as the then Vid. Order of Council April 28. 1675. Order testifies) he forthwith graciously discharged the old Man, having found by the Certificats of the neigbouring Justices, both his and Oates's true Caracter. Infinite are his Prancks of this nature in that very one Place, and therefore, no wonder that such a Witness should now (in the House of Lords) swear, that Mr. Preston (who is yet in Prison upon that account) was a Priest, and his Confessarius too; when as the poor Gentleman has not only a Wife, and has lived in Town with her these many years, even in the publick view of all Catholicks, but has several at hand, that can prove the very Marriage it self? Was not also his old preten­ded Camarade (Mr. Blundel, the Jesuit) taken by him with the like truth? for the Person is now found so far from being Blundel (and therefore one may plainly see how Oates know's those he accuses) that He is one of the Caryls, who never went so much as by the name of Blundel, nor has the least relation to the Jesuits.

There is no end of these kind of Perjuries, Of Bedl [...]w. as may be seen at first sight in his Charge all along, and which by and by we shall again touch upon; so that now we will Treat a litle of Bedlo, who by his former Villainies has long agoe forfited all his Lives, had he as many as Cats are said to have. For does not every body know how he has taken upon him names of my L. Cornwallis, Ger­ard, nay of almost every body else (whom Accidents made to abscond) the better to accomplish his pittiful Tricks and Designs? Has not Mr. Sanders of Oxfordshire known this by Experience? How often has he bin forc'd to fly from Chepstow by the Officers of Jus­tice, that would have apprehended him? Was not Captain Spal­ding, (the now Governor there) accus'd by him for a Traytor, and Papist (though no man could shew a more constant Zeal for the King and Protestant Religion, than He) only because, he seis'd up­on the Horses he had stoln, as he would have done on him, had he not then gotten away by chance? Has he not committed a hundred late mean and wretched Cheats here in London even for Bread? and has he not lain in Ga [...]l (as Frō 15 Dec. to 22 Jun. 7 [...] Books of the Marshalsea, show us) for seven Mouths this very last year, and reduc'd also to the Basket, though the [Page 67] Spark were then (forsooth) every Noble mans Privado, and the great Negotiator in the very Plot? H [...]s he not accus'd my Lord Brundel for a Grand Conspirator ( [...]s his several Depositions Testify, and most particularly in the Lords Journal) and yet, either his Lordships Conversion has made him as innocent as the Child un­horn, or else his Worship's Testimony is lookt upon as false as it ought to be. But what shall we say of this unheard of, nay, childish Perjury; that whilst he was shirking (as we see) for a meer livelyhood, and dipt also in the Plot (as he pretends) to the de­struction of the King and Government, he should scrupulously refuse 4000 l. to assist in the Murther of Sir E [...]. Godfrey, and 2000 l. for carrying away his very body, which had not bin Death, though known. But why should we wonder at any thing now, since a man could have the Impudence to take his Oath (in a high Court of Judica­ture) to say all the Truth, as well as nothing but the Truth, and yet at one Trial we shall find him (as you have seen in Mr. White's) lay several positive Treasons to his and Mr. Fen­wick's Charge, whenas in the former, he seemd hardly to know them?

Is not Prance also a Witness of great value, Of Prance. were there (besides the extravagancy of his Tale all along) no more to be urgd a­gainst him, than his notorious and solemn Recantation before the King and Councel? for what can render a Testimony invalid, if this will not? Nay, our very Law which grants and supposes that there may be Knights of the Post, leaves them no possibility, or way to stop the mischief when begun, but by making (as he has done) an humble and hearty Confession of their Villainy? But now, if on the one side, we consider the Advantages he was to have by continu­ing an Accuser (as Oates and Bedlo too plainly showd him) and on the other side, the Inconveniences, that would necessarily ensue by a Pali [...]ode or Retraction; for this was to make him a perjurd man [...]n Record; this was to submit him to all the Cruelties and hardships of a Prison; and this was to endanger his very Neck▪ as being an Actor (by his own Confession) in a great and horrid Murther; I say, if we consider all this, can there be any equality or proportion be­tween one Action and the other, let our greatest Enemies them­selves be the Judges? As Pain then and Terror drove this unhap­py Man (as has been already hinted in the Trial,) to proceed, contra­ry to the Touches of his own Conscience, in this wickedness, so the Motives that first induced him to it were Revenge, and Profit; for what mountains had the success and good fortune of the fore­mentioned Couple Created in his Fancy? and how quit did he imagin he should now be with the Queen, for refusing to let his Name (though he were only a Workman to the Chappel) be put into the List of her servants, after the late Proclamation had bani­shed [Page 68] all Catholick Artizans out of Town?

Now for Dugdal [...] the fourth Worrthy, Of Dugdale. both the Town and County of Stafford know not only what an idle and inconsiderable Compa­nion he was, but how ill he behav'd himself in my Lord Aston's ser­vice; Nay my Lord took him in flagranti at last; even making a Tenant a Debter, who had but just before show'd his Lordship the Ac­quittance for his Rent. This put the Fellow into the utmost Confusion, especially when call'd to give up his Accounts, which knowing he could not possibly do, He conveighed his things out of his Chamber, and went away privately by Night; so that skulking a while, he was in the end arrested by some Creditors, and then other great Actions be­ing▪ enter'd against him, He laid hold on the Kings Proclamation, and presently knew the whole Plot, with the management of it, as you [...] see, for several Years together.

'Tis with the utmost Regret (my Lords and Gentlemen) that I am forc'd upon this ungrateful subject; but since impending Dan­gers have made the very Dumb to speak, what Pen can stop in its Cariere, when the Writer sees not only himself and Relations under the Talons of such Bloody Vultures, but even his very Countrey at their Mercy also? For if whole Parties may be thus devoured, which of them, (and in England we know there are many) can assure it self, but the like trick may be put upon it; especially seeing be­sides our Transcendent Loyalty and service to the Crown (which two of our great Monarchs have amply own'd) there was a time when Episcopacy was as much hated as Popery, and a time too, when Pa­pists were far more esteem'd, than any sictary whatever? The Chan­ges and Chances of time are ineffable: And therefore, let him that thinketh that he stands, take heed least he falls; nor is the Caution unnecessary, when we consider the Precipice on which every good Protestant is at present plac'd; for how many of them have already been either sacrific'd to the private Malice of these Birds of Prey, or singled out by them to satisfy some Patron's Revenge? Nay what Patron can really deem himself secure, since several that have stifly abetted them, have also felt their unparallel'd Treachery and Fals­hood? Fallacious without doubt is the World in general, but most fallacious are such particular servants; yet how unconceivable is it, that these should impose or put the Dice on any man, since their abandond and prostituted Reputation was like a smoke by day, and a Flame by night, to give every body warning of them. But seeing the death of Sir Edmund bury-Godfrey, has with many bolster'd up their dying credit, some sew Considerations and Reflexions on that Affair, cannot but be at present very pertinent and necessa­ry.

Were it not a sufficient Assurance to any one, Of Sir E. Godfry's Death. even against the posi­tive Testimony of ten Travellers, though of some ordinary Credit, [Page 69] That the grand SEIGNIOR did not send the VISIER here to Kill this Knight; because, his Death being of no import to him, he would never order so vain a thing; and certainly the confirmation of it would be yet greater, were the Witnesses of different stories among themselves? If then (my Lords and Gentlemen) this be enough to show the falsity of such an Evidence, we have it in our present Con­cern, and infinitely more, which demonstrates the unspeakable wrong, that has been done us, or rather the poor nation in general. For does not every body know, that Sir Edmund-bury-Godfrey was so far from being our Enemy, that he was a friend to all, a most kind one to many, and in this affair, so extraordinary and particular, That he no sooner receiv'd Oates his Depositions, but he presently acquainted Mr. Coleman with them, who went to Windsor and divulg'd the whole matter to all he knew. If no Turk then can be thought (with Deli­beration and in cool blood) to kill another, that has neither done him harm, nor can bring him the least Emolument by his Death, what Christians can be imagin'd so nonsensically stupid, as to lay their heads together, in relation to the Murther of a Person, who was so far even from accidentally provoking, that he had perform'd the utmost service on our Behalf, that Friendship it self could suggest? But how unconceiveable is it now, that there should be such a num­ber, and Rabble of Conspirators, and that they should execute this Design, when not only his Death would (in the Judgment of any Fool) infallibly ruin us all, if known, but when his Life also was so infinitely useful to us? For he was able, and he had also courage to confront Oates, and consequently to Witness how impudently, and beyond all measure he had now deviated from his former De­positions.

No wonder then, that the Wits of our Enemies every where have been on the Rack to find pretences for this Murther; but af­ter all, how ridiculous and weak they are, let any man judge that will? Did Prance and his Friends offer at better reasons (and cer­tainly they had time and concern enough for invention) than, vid. Hill's Tryal, p. 14. That Sir Edmund-bury-Godfrey was a busy man in the opinion of the Priests, and that he had done, and would yet do us a great deal of mischief; when as in the first place his Kindness to us was (as I have already shown you) extraordinary, and in the next, what a work should we have on our hands, If we must Kill all that are Busy, and all that would do us harm?

As for Bedlow, let us consider his account, and we shall find in it, Ibid. p. 30. That Tongue's and Oates his Information, was their sole drift and aim: Nay the Conspirators tell him forsooth, That the Plot with­out these papers would be discover'd to that D [...]gree, that they should not be able to bring it to pass, till another Age. Is not this more than extravagant, and what Bedlams do they fancy the People to be, [Page 70] that believe them? for how could the Assassines hope (the Plot having been a full fortnight before the Councel, and several of the main Plotters in Prison) that Sir Edmund-bury-Godfrey had not al­ready (as de facto he did) deliver'd up those Papers to the Board, Or supposing the contrary, what expectation was there, that he should have them then in his pocket? and lastly if they had been a­bout him; What advantage could men imagin by the Action, when Oates was still at hand, to give (as often as the Ministers of State pleas'd) a perfect account of all he knew? Are these reasons for the Killing of a Dog, much less a Man, that had acquainted us with the Design even when it was a Secret? But now (my Lords & Gentlemen) what shall we say, when this is pretended to be done in Somerset House, notwith­standing the Queen's whole Court, and God knows how many Protestant Guards were there to be alarmed at the least noise; That this Knight should be presently strangled (though stout and strong) by a feeble Antient Man without resistance or bustle, and with a Cra­vat also; that he should be removed into many different places of the House (and that to no manner of purpose) without ever be­ing discover'd by any; That he should for the most part be hid in a little Lodging full of people, who neither saw him carried in or out, nor found him lying in the pretended Chamber, which was both over against their Dining-Room, and a place also where the whole Family, as it was vid. Trial. proved) were necessitated to go often every day; That he could being a very tall man, be crowded when stiff into a Sedan; nay that the Sedan could be not only conducted and carried out by men, That were then in other places (as several, testi­fied, (you see) at the Trial) but thorow the great Gate of the Pa­lace too, without being scen by the Centinels, though they never stirr'd a Pikes length from it? Can there be within the reach of fancy such impossibilities? YES (my Lords and Gentlemen) That Bedlo should be offered almost 4000. l. three times more for this Murther, than Grove was to have for killing the King, and (for the meer car­rying away the body) 2000. l. four times as much as Dugdal pretends for his Enterprise; and yet the said Bedlo refus'd (as I already mention'd both these vast summes, though he were then an actu­al Conspirator (if you will believe him) in the main of the Trea­son, and in such want also, that he was forc'd to hazard his neck, or at least his back, by Cheates and the like, for meer Bread and necessaries. To conclude in short; for I cannot now stay to trou­ble you with the different Actors, and all the several contradicti­ons which these two Sons of Belial mention in their respective Accounts; I say to conclude in short, can any man believe, if the Accused had bin Guilty, they would have denied (with the utmost Execrations) the fact at the Gallowes, when a single Confession had saved their Lives; and especially, when one of them to wit Berry, [Page 71] was a Convert to the Protestant Church, and such a one also (as the Ordinary of Newgate in his late The Beha­viour of the Malefactors pag. 17. Treatise declares) as did much lament his ever having bin of our Communion. Shew me then (my Lords and Gentlemen a plainer Demonstration since the Creation of the World for the Innocence of any man, or more Contradictions for the Detection of an Accusers Villany? Yet if Sir Edmund must have bin made away by a Consultation and Cabal, lay it then I beseech you at some bodys dore, that had reason to wish his De­struction; and enquire (as has bin formerly hinted to you) of Doctor Loyd, who it was that told him, even before the finding of the Body, that he lay Murder'd with two Wounds, and his own Sword through him, as he publickly declared in his printed pag. 24. fu­neral Sermon. But since I have mentioned the solemn Denyal made by those that were Executed for it, I must desire your considerations on a new Charge, I mean on the DISPENSATIONS, which they say we have for our LYING at our very Death; and truly before I begin I cannot but profess, that I know not whether I am more confounded with the infinit Arguments that crowd on all hands, or with the thought that Christians and those Englishmen too, should so­berly and in earnest Charge us with so sottish and senseles a Crime.

For first, Of Dispen­sations. was there ever a Party in this Nation, that has so emi­nently as ours refused (ever since the very Reformation) the Pre­ferments, to which their great Birth and Quality gave them pre­tences, or more Heroically underwent the Rage and Fury of all the other Lawes, when one Halt, or one false Step would have put them within the capacity of their Birth-right? Have not all our Pro­testant Parliaments, ownd this [...]mplicity by the penal Acts, which from time to time they have made; for he that denies it, makes them worse than Gotams, since every body now knows, that no Cuckow can be hedg'd in, that has wings to fly over the Enclosure? Nay did they not explicitly also confess it, when in the next Sessi­on, after the Act passed, for putting Catholicks out of 1673. Offices, they publicly congratulated the success of the Test, and then went on to new Rigors? Are not these then invincible Arguments, that there can be jugling with us in Religion? And do not they also amply prove, that we are (as I first hinted) the persons that stand most on Principles, seeing there was not one man, of any one party here besides our selves, that left the least Employment upon the score of the said Test, though it commanded not only a Kneeling at the Communion, and a Compliance with several other Popish Ceremonies, as they are call'd, but contained also some speculative Points, which many of the Church of England themselves thought very new and thwarting? Besides this I appeal to any man of Fashion or Cre­dit; that has bin of our Religion (and you may assure your selves [Page 72] he will not be over partial) whether he has heard, that a Catholick without Mortal Sin (and any ill man may do it at that rate) can deny the least point of Faith, or whether we do not look upon eve­ry Church Papist, or any one else, That for by-ends, and other pretences defer's to reconcile himself, to be in a far worse spiritual state and condition (let him be never so kind and advantagious to us by underhand Favours) than an open Protestant following the Dictates of his Conscience and Reason? If then we are so se [...]re in their life time with the Nicodemus's and Dissemblers in Religion (notwithstanding all the Good they can do us) what shall we be with those that sin at their Death, even by calling God as Witness to a Ly? We have therefore Reason certainly to complain of our late Usage, when thirteen Christian men of great probity (even among all their Protestant Friends) should be decry'd as most in­famous Lyars, because with their last breath, they solemnly asser­ted an Innocence, which was never question'd or blasted, but by the now Testimony of four Execrable Persons, who did not urge the least circumstance, matter or thing against them, that depends not wholly on their bare Word and Credit. Nay was there ever Imputation more weak and silly than this, that the Expression in their last Speeches, As Innocent as the Child Unborn, was misteri­ous and design'd and yet every body knows it to be the common Phrase of the Kingdom, and that Eighteen out of twenty will cer­tainly use it, when they are to assert either their own or anothers Inno­cence? Is it not also pleasant that there could be a Dispensation for Dis­sembling & Lyes, when these poor Men (on the one side) with their blood disown the Power both in the Pope and Church, and we on the other, deny it also with the loss of our Liberties and Estates, seeing we could save both in any storm, if (Water-men like) we could look one way and and row another. In the name of Jesus, let us not impose such Fa­natical Nonsense on our Countrey; for if you see that no person is at any time out of the reach of Law, but some young, or Loose­Man, that owns himself to the whole Nation a Convert and Deser­tor, where is the benefit of these Dispensations, if we had them? But perchance his Holiness is never thus Indulgent, you'l say, but when a Plot of State is to be concealed; and if so, I wonder first how he knows that no weak Brother in hopes of life, will discover the Design and Stratagem? For take but twelve Protestants casually, and they perchance will hardly find many Sureties, that all of them shall rather choose the Gallows, than the Alcora [...]; and yet Christia­nity is a far plainer Doctrine than the Pope's power of Dispensing, even in the Opinion of any Jesuit. No (my Lords and Gentlemen) there is nothing but Innocence can make us thus Resolute and Con­stant: Nay Humane Nature it self is too impotent and feeble for such an Enterprise; it being impossible that any number of Conspi­rators [Page 73] in the hands of Justice, should all upon the strength of Fan­cy, or their mutual Promises prefer Death to Confession, es­pecially when, besides Self-preservation (which their respective Tempers and Passions are still suggesting) each of them may reaso­nably fear the weakness of his Companion, and consequently deem it madness to be longer obstinate, and behind hand. In the next place, May I not truly say, of this pretended Fortitude of ours what Doctor Pierce once fondly said of our Religion, Non fuit sic abinitio, It was not formerly thus? for does not Judge Cook (the then Attorney) in his famous Speech against Garnet acknowledg, vid. Pro­ceedings a­gainst the Traytors pag. 117. that all the Treasons against her Majesty, viz. Squire's, William's, York's, &c. were freely CONFES'T by the parties themselves under their own hands, and that they remain'd yet extant to be seen? How easily in the beginning of King James's Raign, might the two Priests, Watson and Clerke (had the present Doctrin bin true) have sav'd the danger, or at least the Scandal, which was to fall on their Party? for, being drawn (you know) into that Protestant Conspiracy, by the Lord Grey, Cobham, Rawleigh, &c. the Queen's old Favourites (who dislike­ing this new Prince, fancy'd a couple of Priests sufficient to get them the Assistance of Spain and the other Catholick Princes) it had then bin but swearing they were Innocent, and taking it upon their Death, that these (their formerly known Enemies) had thrown the Calum­ny on them to discredit their Friends and Religion with the King at his first Coming; I say it had bin but doing thus, at least (I am sure) if their Consciences could have dispens'd with so horrid a thing, there was matter enough for Pretences; but on the contra­ry, how far were they from it, when they both publickly and hum­bly confest their Crime against his Majesty, and when Watson al­so acknowledged that infamous death to be a just Judgment for his former factious Writings and Designs, as may be seen in pag. 275. Father Moors History? Again, who had seal'd up their Plot with deep­er and solemner Oaths, than the Gunpowder Traytors; and if their Reli­gion could permit them (upon a sober consideration) to be obsti­nat, and to forswear themselves, what needed Fawkes to have made so particular a Confession and Discovery, as is printed in pag. 231. King James his Works? for there was no necessity that his Imprisonment, or the finding out of the Mine, (had the promise of Secrecy bin va­lid) must have discover'd his Complices; nay we find in the said Treatise that he hufft in the beginning like a Ibid. Scaevola, and declar'd he would confess nothing, laying all the blame upon himself, which the wise Lords of the Counsel laught at, knowing that the Gentleman being in Hold, they would, for all his Bravadoes, find presently (and so it happen'd) the depth of the whole Intrigue. 'Twas the know­ledg of this (I mean, that in a discover'd Treason there is no Re­liance on Oaths) that made Winter with both t [...]e Wrights, upon Fawkes [Page 74] his Apprehension post out of town, as he vid Win­ter' s Confes­sion. confess [...]s they did; for had they not bin desperate and without further hopes of secrecy and faith, they would never have run to seven or eight Gentlemen, sup­pos'd then in Armes, who had now up against them both King and Kingdom to their own particular knowledg; Nor coul'd Tresham himself escape you see, though he still continued (as K. Jam. pag. 880. How tells us) about the Court, that he might thereby seem wholy free and innocent. In fine their own Declarations were such, that the Publisher of the Proceedings against them in the very Epistle say's, That Justice pass'd on the several CONFESIONS of all the Capital Offenders, which they openly CONFES'D, and confirm'd at their Arraignments in the hear­ing of multitudes of People. And by the way, be pleased to re­member, that no Catholick ever denied this Treason, only some question, whether Protestant History it self dos not shew us, that Cecil (to ruin the Party) drew those fiery men into it by his subtil Tricks and Artifices.

This one would think were more than enough to show you, how you are by ill men deceiv'd, and we abus'd; but because no present Pretence shall be left untoucht, I will speak a word of the two Ex­amples which our weak Enemies deem so strong, and pertinent to prove this Calumny. The first is of one Curphy (an Irish Papist,) who being condemn'd (they say) in his Countrey for Burglary, de­ny'd it with great Asseverations at his Execution; † vid. Let­ter of E. of Ess [...]x prin­ted, 1679, but the Rope by chance breaking before he was quite dead, he thankt God, confes­sing the Fact, and then (in spight of the Sheriffs great Intercession) was again hanged by the Judge's special Order and Command. The next is of the before mention'd Tresham, who protested, (as they will have it) in writing upon his Salvation, and this just before his death, That he had not seen Garnet in 16 years, whereas Garnet and Mrs Vaux did both confess, that they had been often since that time together. As to Curphy then (though truly I know not why any Christian or Pa­gan, should be responsible for every Atheist or Libertine of his Pro­ [...]ession) give me leave to ask first, how our Adversaries can think this so Nicking a Blow? for since they themselves must acknowledge him already to have been an impudent Lyar and an ill man, why may it not be as possible, nay as probable also (and then how is the Ar­gument convincing) that seeing he could not save his Life by asser­ting a TRƲTH, he now hop'd to work on the Judge, by attacking him with a LYE on the other hand; for the denying of a Fact to death never pleases him, that gave sentence, especially if the Evidence be in the least questionable; nor was the said Curphy's Expectations it seems wholy frustrated, since the Sheriff and others did (as you see) earnestly intercede for him. Now for Tresham, the Case is plain, and at most but a poor simple womans Project, and Mr. Att. Cook cannot but vid Pro­ceedings &c. pag. 143. confess it in the aforesaid Speech; for there [Page 75] he tell's us, That Tresham's wife understanding with great Concer [...] ­ment, that he had confest all against Garnet, got him a little before his death (even when he could not WRITE himself), to dictate the PRO­TESTATION to her servant; so that 'tis no wonder (since the meer changing of a Word, nay a Figure might do it) if there were an Er­ror, as to the number of years in question. But (my Lords and Gent) if both the Examples were as our Adversaries would have them, what Resemblance or Analogy has the Action (I beseech you) of a single man once in a Century to Twelve that dyed together, who were not only free from the least matter or Circumstance, that could make them suspected, besides the Testimony of most nefarious Persons, but had also LIFE add PREFERMENT offer'd them upon their bare CONFESSION. Besides do they that thus charge us think their Religion so harmless, or us so ignorant, that we can show no Precedents against them of this nature? Certainly we can, and (as I suppose) much more to the purpose, Nay witnest also by Protestants themselves. For does not first that most learned New-Gate-Divine declare in the before mention'd pag. 30. Treatise, That in his late Experience (as Ordinary there) he knew some Malefactors condemn'd for Murther and Burglary to have gone out of the World with a Notorious asser­ting their Integrity, although they had twice or thrice confest to him, with some seeming remorse, that theywere justly condemn'd for the said Crimes; so that here Reader we have not only Protestant Penitents deny­ing the truth at their death, but a Protestant Confessarius revealing se­crets; and such another, or one at least very like him, Hind (the famous Robber) met with at Worcester, being there convicted and hang'd by the evidence of his spiritual Guide. But what do you think of a far more eminent Example, to wit that of my Lord Castle haven, who (as all the Writers of King Charles's Reign will tell you) was after a Netorious ill life Charg'd and condemn'd at last, for prostituting his Daughter in Law; for holding his own Wife whilst his servant forc'd her; and lastly for Sodomy it self; and yet though these Crimes were proved by several plain Circumstances, by his wife and daughters Testimony, and lastly by Brodway and Patrick, his abus'd Patizans (who were both hang'd for the facts, and own'd the Com­mitting of them to the last) he at his Execution most solemnly deny'd all, dying (as K. I. p. 160. Sanderson affirms) not only a true Protestant, but assisted also by his Ibid and H. L. Ch. I. 121. Chaplain's, to wit the Dean of St Paul's and Doctor Wickham. Thus then you see (besides the former evident and unanswerable Reasons) that we are not only free from this Imputa­tion our selves, but that the Protestant Doctrine is guilty of it, if the Actions of some few men are sufficient to determine and ad­judge the Point. In fine then was it not very pertinently askt by the Author of the New Plot; pag. 11. That seeing the Councel of Trent has positively declar'd, No Absolution available which is not preceded by [Page 76] Detestation of the sin committed, and seeing it is impossible freely to do a thing, and at the same time to detest it, how could it be imagin'd, that the late executed Catholicks should hope for any benefit by such an Absolution as is pretended, or be thought with the least ap­pearance of Reason to make use of so wretched an Artifice to cheat the World, and manifestly to damn their Souls, even according to their own profest Doctrine and Tenets? Besides do not our Adversaries (by this wild Dream) show not only their own Barbarity and Ignorance, but affront, and call Villains the greatest and the most eminent parts of the Civiliz'd World? and certainly should one of them say to a Knight of Maltha, or to a Teutonick Knight, or to any other Catholick Cava­lier, That he was not to be belie [...]ed, since he might by his principles lye an [...] forswear at pleasure, Of the Bi­shop of Lin­coln's Book. he would (I must tell him) be soon Kick'd and bastanado'd for it.

But (my Lords and Gent:) if this Calumny which carrys some Alleviation in it (as having the Ignorant and Rabble for it's chief Abettors) be never the less shocking, what must the Aspersion do, which is reviv'd by a Nobler and Learneder hand, I mean, by the present Bishop of Lincoln? Yet if it be a breach of CHRISTIANITY to crush the bruised Reed, and of GENEROSITY also to Trample on the Oppressed, I wish his Lordship may be found Guilty of neither, and that there never rise any such, who, in hopes of Applause, shall con­trary to the Light of their own Consciences reprint a Martyn-Marpre­late, a Cobler of Glocester, or any Scandalous Pasquil, should EPISCOPA­CY, by some foolish Accident or Misfortune, fall again within the Fury of the people. But who could think, that his Lordships heat against us, should force himeven to a TITLE that has confuted his whole Book, viz. That Popish Principles and Positions (when really believed) are destructive and dangerous to all Kings, especially Protestants; for he cannot Term them Principles of Faith, because they were never thus believ'd by any Catholick, nor never thus approved of by the Church, and consequently nothing to his purpose. But if on the other side he means, that there have been Popish Doctors of the Opinion, That Princes might be de­posed upon the Account of Religion, what advantage I would fain know, can that be to his Lordship or his Treatise, since not only­all the prime Leaders of the REFORMATION (as Luther, Calvin, Zaing­lus, Beza, &c.) have in express Termes held the same, and in pursuance of it rais'd Rebellions and Confusions, in all Countrys where they had foot­ing, but also since very great Pillars of the Church of England it self have taught it too, as appears in Queen Mary's Case, in that of the Queen of Scots (who was at least the Ʋnd [...]ubted Heir) and in later Efforts also of the same nature; and doubtless he that believes he can disinherit a Law­full Successor with Justice upon the account of Religion, will hardly find Arguments of Force to keep the Prince in being, on his Throne, when ever this happen's to be imputed to him. Nay we have several Pro­testants here, who cry up the Bishop of Lincoln's Book at a strange ra [...]e [Page 77] and yet avow this Vid Pere­at Papa. printed Doctrine: That God not only rais'd Jo­hu to purge the Idolaters of Ahab's House, &c. but That there is no Reformed Church from the first Waldenses to this Day, that have not held such a Procedure lawful. These things consider'd, (as they have been often (I dare say) by his Lordship) he expected not certain­ly of us to think, that he believ'd what he writ; for then we should (he knew) have requir'd him to shew us at least, some Catholick Poten­tate or other (nor want they Worldly Wit or Inclinations, we see) abandoning this pretended dangerous and troublesom Religion, either out of Ambition or Safety. No (my Lords and Gentlemen) that is now a thing hardly within the reach of Speculation; for, Who find them­selves so Flourishing and Great, as they? Or can it be said, That the Monarchy of England has gotten by the Reformation, when Pro­testants acknowledge, (and what desperate Enemies that has Created us, may be easily imagin'd) That nothing but Popery, or at least its Principles, can make it again emerge or lasting? Does not his Lordship therefore play at Cross-purposes with us? and is not his Meaning in truth this, That Protestant Principles (when really believ'd) are-destructive to all Kings, and especially to Catholick ones; since we see, that the Law­ful Monarchs and Princes of England, Scotland, Swedland, Denmark, the Ʋnited Provinces, Transilvania, Geneva, &c. have been actually Depos'd by their Protestant Subjects, not only as Florimundus Raimun­dus, and Popish Writers shew us, but as Dr. Heylin, and other Prote­stants have laboriously made it appear? Nor has the Pope, in all that time, pretended to the giving away of any Crowns, except those of France and England; For the Defence of which, several zealous and noted Catholicks appear'd as well with their Swords as Pens. Nor could this Imputation have been worse timed, as to his Lordships pur­pose by him, seeing there was a Protestant Rebellion then actually in Hungary, to the great Danger of Christendom; and another newly broken out in Scotland, for the Subversion of the English Monarchy; and this also usher'd in by the Barbarous Murther Of the Arch­Bishop of St. Andrews. What Parity then is there between ƲS, and our Adversaries, either in our Actions, or Books of this Nature? And truely; we are so far from holding the Depo­sing Power of the Church, an Article of Faith, that the Greatest De­fenders of it have absolutely declared the contrary. For does not Cardinal Peron, in his famous Speech to the Nobility of France, tell us, That the Proposition is PROBLEMATICAL? and does not C. Bellarmine, the Pope's great Champion, in his Answer to Barclay, (who writ so smartly against it) call the Assertion only Opusc. pag. 830. ARROGANT and TEMERARIOƲS. In short, There is no Writer, though ne­ver so zealous for the Opinion, that sayes, That Men of the contrary Sentiment are out of the State of Grace, (as in truth they are) that asse [...]t not to Articles of Faith. This also plainly shews, that no [Page 78] Council ever impos'd it on our Belief, seeing it has been, and is still without Censure denyed, even by those, that would dye for the Pope's Supremacy. Nay (besides former Authors) the Catholicks [...]f Eng­land have written 1. F. Caron. four Books (since the King's Restauration) to this ve­ry purpose; 2. Provinci­al Letters. I say, the Catholick's of England have done it, who are so scrupulous in Doctrines of Faith, that they deem it Damnation, to deny the least Article, 3. Reply to the Answer of the Ca­tholick Apo­logy. and therefore will not (you see) to save their Lives and Estates, profess one thing, and believe another. But his Lordship (which adds nothing to his Ingenuity) is so far from answering these Authors, by shewing their Fallacies and Errors, that he never so much as cites them to this purpose, so that we must con­clude them unanswerable; 4. Answer to the Je­suits Loyal­ty. for he could not but have heard of them, when we find him pretending to so great an Insight in all our Books, that (to shew his Reading) he has quoted our very Almanack. But since his Lordship has mention'd this notable Tome, I hope he will not take it ill, if I say, That his whole Work has been already answe­red by a Treatise of the price and value of an Almanack; I mean, by one of the Common Numb. [...]377. London-Gazets. For was it not a home Blow, and a just one also, that in the thus publishing of his Erroneous Book to the Nation, which pretends Popery so destructive to Kings, there should be there proclaimed, even in the very next Advertisement, The Trials of Twenty-nine Protestant Regicides, as Deposers and Murtherers of their Glorious Soveraign under the cloak of Justice; a Vil­lany of a Dye, which the worst of Papists never yet arriv'd to? But to go on yet further in our Vindication, Was there ever on the one side, any Catholick Country, or Pope, that has censur'd either Man or Book, for the denying the said Deposing-Power of the Church? And have not the Venetians on the other side, openly profest it in their ve­ry Writings? Has not Mariana's Opinion been Condemned in Spain, and yet his Lordship p. 75. &c. cites this Author against us? Has not vid. French Mercure, An. 1626. Sanc­tarellus's Book been censur'd in France, with all the Formality ima­ginable; as also Bellarmine, Suarez, Schoppius, and others of the same Subject? And have not the College of Sorbon, the Ʋniversities of Paris, Caen, Rheimes, Poitiers, and God knows how many others joyn'd in this Condemnation? Nay, does not Vid. Pref. K. I. Work [...]. Bishop Moutague himself tell us, That not only Becanus was Corrected at Rome, but that no State dis-own'd this (Independency) or Power of Kings. This then being Matter of Fact, and this being the publick Declaration of the Church of Rome, may I not with Justice call upon his Lordship to turn to our Religion, seeing in the very last Paragraph of this his Book, he professes, That if any Popish Priest, or Gentleman, can make it appear, that the Church of Rome by any publick Declaration, has disown'd such Principles, and damn'd them as Erroneous and Impious, he will turn (one of the worst sort of Christians) viz A Roman Catho­lick. Truly (my Lords and Gentlemen) I shall expect this of [Page 79] him, or he is not as good as his word: Besides, I do here declare, that supposing the Premisses, to wit, That the chief Reformed Doctors have speculatively taught this Deposing Doctrine; That they have actually depos'd and murder'd their Princes, upon account of Religion; That the Catholick Princes are more absolute, than the Protestant; That our Monarchy of England is not a whit safer or powerfuller, than formerly; That Catholick Kingdoms and States have condemned the said Doctrine: That no Catholick Country, or Pope, has censur'd any that have done so; and that no Council ever imposed it on our Faith: I say, granting these Premisses, (which are also of themselves evident) I do here declare, That I my self will turn Protestant, if his Lordship shews me but one Single Paragraph in all his Book, in re­lation to our dangerous Principles, (which is the Scope of the Whole) that is not here, either fully answer'd, or does not at least wound the whole Protestant Party by its consequence, more than Ʋs: And more-over, I must tell his Lordship, He may find a great deal more to this pur­pose, in the before-mention'd Sect. 6. Reply to the Answer of the Catholick Apology.

To conclude, Let me once more remind his Lordship of his Promise, and then tell him (for I know he is a Man of Parts) what Dr. Tay­lor said to a Friend of mine, concerning his Disswa [...]e from Po­pery, viz. That though 'twere lik'd, yet 'twas but turning the Tables, and he could write a Book twice as good.

HAving thus (my Lords and Gentlemen) run over in hast, the odd Pretences, and Accidents, that have been so advantagious to the Saviours of the Nation; I shall desire you before we part, to take a second Consideration of them, (for second Thoughts are still the best) and then you will find more Extravagancies in their Relations, than in any Romance extant. For 'bating the Ridiculousness Of the Army we were raising, when the King had Forty Thousand Men in pay, besides a very considerable Fleet; and 'bating the Wildness of Civil and Mi­litary Commissions, granted (as both Oates and Bedlow have it) to a whole Nation by the General or Superior of Religious Men, and seal'd with the very Seal of their Order; Things that would make not only a Canonist, but any Forreigner run mad to hear of: and 'bating the carrying on by Oates' s Narrative p. 24, & 25. Eighty-six Men and Women, the Fire of London, in as great a Method, as the Machins move in Ba [...]tholomew-Fair, with­out any Bodies being ever yet taken in the Action; and bating Vid. also Lords Jour­nal, par. 24. Oates his particular Story of the Jesuits Plundering during these Fires, to the value of several Thousands of Pounds; Of Magazins full of stolen Goods, order­ly brought and received; Ibid. Of their taking a thousand Carracts of Dia­monds from a Man, who escap'd and run away, after they had knock'd him down; and no words ever made in London, either of him, or the Loss: Ibid. Of their Banc [...] of One Hundred Thous [...]nd Pounds, and lend­ing [Page 80] it out at Fifty per Cent: vid. ire­land's, Whit's and Lang­horne's Try­als. Of Entry-Books for all the Treasonable Debates and Resolves; Of Acquittances of Money, received for Killing the King; Of poysoning of Silver-Bullets, by chawing of them: Of ga­thering Peter-pence; and of a Thousand such unconceivable Whimfies, Which appear in the Trials, in the Journal of the Lords, and in the Narrative Printed by Oates his Special Directions, and also solemnly sworn to by him: I say, [...]bating this ridiculous and unconceivable Stuff; How was it possible, that the Jesuits should make this Fellow so particular a Confident, when the whole World sees he is Master of no one thing, that could render him in the least Advantagious? For, being a Beggar, he could not tempt them with Money; being a Wea­ver's Son, and (like one of Jeroboam's Priests) of the meanest of the People, he had no Relations to Countenance, or help them; being no manner of Scholar, but as ignorant as any other poor Curate may be imagin'd, (for I will be a Bond Slave for ever, if he can Translate six Lines into Latin, without a Solaecism) these Jesuits could not have the least Hopes of him that way; Being no greater a Linguist than his Mo­ther made him, there was little Expectation of his proving a good Trouchman or Interpreter: In fine, Being also Ill in his Mine and Be­h [...]viour, Ill in his Elocution, Ill in his Writing, and Ill in every thing else, that can recommend one Man to another, How was it possible, (as I mention'd) That they should make him such a particular Con­fident, as he pretends; and especially, send one of this Guise Am­bassadour to the Crowns of Spain and France; I mean, to Don John, and Fa▪ La Chaise, as he has sworn? Now, though these English Fa­thers should be such easy and silly Men, How came it I would fain know, or what wonderful Advantages could be propos'd to the Ge­neral, and his Assistants at Rome, that they must grant him those Privi­leges, that were never before heard of, since the Institution of their Or­der; to wit, That a Lay-man should be admitted into their Congregations and Consults; and more-over, should have Power (as you have heard in p. 20. & 28. Mr. Col [...]man's Tryal) to open [...]their very Betters? But suppose, that the Refined Romans are in truth, as weak as the Tramontans, What did our Gentlemen, nay our Neblemen, and the Queen her self, find so admirable in Oates, that they should so unanimously also re­ceive him for a Privy-Councellor? Has the recommendation of a Jesuit, or two such power, as to make men of this Ranck, trust their Lives, Honours, and Estates▪ in the hands of one that could not be so serviceable to them, as any of their respective Foot­men; and yet no part of this Plot was thought fit (it seems) to be communicated to my Lord Shrewsbury, my Lord Arundel, my Lord Brudnel, my Lord Lumley, or to any of the other late Converts, who were (one would have thought) as likely to be then trusted with any thing that tended to the Wealfare of our Religion, as the Heroes, that now appear as our Accusers? But after all the [Page 81] mighty and great Employments, which this Fool boasts of, could any body have thought him yet so simple, as to declare upon Oath in the face of the World Irelands Trial. p. 20. That the business they sent him now in­to England about, was, to kill Doctor Tongue for having trans­lated the Iesuits morals; as if that forsooth were an Action so horrid and inconvenient to the whole Catholick Cause, that it de­serv'd such a punishment, even in the principal time of the Plot, and by his hand also, that manag'd the whole, and knew all the secrets of it; nor was his Reward (though one might be hang'd as well for Doctor Tongue as Sir Edmund-bury Godfrey) any more than fifty pound, as he swears in the Parag. 30. Lords Journal, and in his pag. 19. Narrative. Is not this a happy Poet, to flag thus in the very top, and flight of his Fancy? and does he not also, (do you think) well personate his former Offices and Caracter, when in the Lords Jour­nal he swears; That Collonel Roper gave him Ten Shillings for bringing him his Comission, a gift (one would have imagin'd fitter for an Ordinary Keeper, that brought him a Hanch of Venison, than a Present for a great Envoye and States-Man? But Money and he were ever such strangers (that according to his Idaea) the sums and business did fully quadrate and agree. Neither was his foresight greater in the Story about Collonel Howards, Commission, for in the Lords ‖ Journal he not only swears, That he himself delivered him one in Wild [...]Garden in May or June, but tells us also in his pag. 59. Nar­rative, (to make it a clear and indisputable Lye) That the said Co­llonel Deceast, CONFEST he had received and accepted his Com­mission; For, had this bin true, would not the King do you think) would not the Council, would not the Parliament, and would not the whole Nation have told us of it, as having now found out the thing, they had so long sought after. But why do I stand thus on a single Perjury, when there are undeniable and evident ones in every Trial. For in Mr. Coleman's, does he not (besides a Hun­dred other Falsities) accuse him, of sending relief from London to the Ruffians at Windsor, on the twenty first of AƲGƲST, when as all his Servants could attest, That he was then, and several days before in Warwick-shire? Does he not swear in Mr. Ireland's, That he the said Mr. Ireland was in Town between the eighth and twelveth of that Moneth, though he were notoriously and constantly absent from the THIRD to the FOƲRTEENTH of the following September, as I formerly show'd you? Is he not forsworn in Hills Tryal, for saying that Sir Ed. Godfrey told him, that he went in fear of his Life by the Popish Party; whenas he has since declared in the pre­sence of several, That this Knight was (he believed) a PAPIST; That he frequented the Benedictins▪ and was most cruelly threatned by a Protestant of great Power and Interest. Is he not also forsworn in Sir Geo. Wakeman's Trial by the Testimony of Sir Philip Lloyd, and the clear proof of Mr. Corkers not being President of the Benedict­ [...]ines, [Page 82] as he positively swore he was? And as for Mr. Langhorn's and the Jesuit's Tryal has he not among his other egregious Untruths De­pos'd, That he was in Town the twenty fourth of April with Sir Thomas Preston and Sir John Warner, whenas Six have plainly proved (you see) the last Perjury, and FOURTEEN the former.

But now, that I mention these St. Omer Witnesses let me ap­peal to you, Of the St. Omer Wit­nesses. my Lords and Gentlemen, if such Testimony be in­valid and not to be beleived (because they have studied under the Jesuits, or witness for their own Party.) Whether there can be any more Commerce between Nation and Nation, and whether it lies not in the power of a Villain to father what ridiculous Fact he plea­ses, on any man, as committed in the very Streets of Paris, without p [...]ssibility of Desproving him, though a thousand persons could testify the contrary to their own certain knowledge; for there are few there comparatively, that are not Catholicks, and of them also that study, most have bin taught by the Jesuits? Besides if this Doctrine had bin formerly allow'd of, how easily might all the Cavaliers in Eng­land have bin destroy'd in the late times? for (seeing Parties con­vers chiefly together) it had bin but finding out an Oates and a Bed­low, and then any Charge must have past muster, if the Testimony of other Cavaliers were to go for nothing? 'Tis not bare swearing (as Mr. Corker well observ'd) that makes an Evidence credible, but probable Circumstan­ces, together with an absolute and intire proportion, which is always the Concomitant of Truth. As for those Youths then, many of them were Gentleman, and of prime Families too,; many had left the School, and had no more to do with the Jesuits; nay some (as Oates tells us of Hildesley's usage in pag. 35. Ireland's Tryal) had Piques and Grud­ges against them; nor did they averr any private Intrigue, but a thing obvious to a whole College, which consists of about 200 per­sons, and might if false be contradicted to their shame when they least dream't of it; I say, they averrd a thing obvious to the whole Colledge; viz. That Oates was constantly there, but one night, from his first coming to his Expulsion or going away for good and all. Be­sides their Testmony was not single, and barely said, but confirmd by Sir John Warner and Sir Thomas Preston's not being in Town; by the before-mention'd improbabilities of Oates his admitance to the knowledge of such weighty Affairs; by his extreme poverty all along; by Mrs Grove and her Maid, where he pretended to have lodg'd; by the Mrs. of the White horse Tavern, who deny'd that any consi­derable company was then there, she being at that time in a very low Condition, and just leaving the Tavern; so that she could not have forgotten so unwonted a meeting, had there bin any; and lastly, by his palpable and impudent flinshing from his former Testi­mony in this Affair; I mean from his keeping himself then close and private as he publickly declared upon Oath in Mr. Ireland's Tryal; and from the time of his pretended stay in Town after the said Meet­ing, [Page 83] which was but three or four days, as he swore in his Narrative and before the Lords also, though now he would fain extend it to twenty; which two particulars prove sufficiently, without other Cir­cumstances (as I show'd you before) the downright perjury of the Witnesses, that saw then his Doctorship here so long, and so publickly also.

And since I have mention'd this Title or Dignity, it is truly so prodigiously odd and simple, that I cannot pass it by, without some few Reflexions: For if he were thus graduated, it was either out of favour, in relation to his particular Merits and Service in the present Affairs, Or upon the score of his Learning. As for the first, Can any one believe, (if there had been a Plot, and he employ'd it) that he would have been suffer'd, in the midst of his Negotiation and Business, to go out of his way, not only to lose time on so foolish an Errand, but to render himself suspected by so unusual a Grace? Nor could he himself hope to make any Advantage by a Dignity, since it was to be conceal'd (you may be sure) 'till after the Success of this won­derful Design in England; and then 'twould be wholly useless, see­ing he might (we suppose) expect far greater Honors and Prefer­ments. Now, if his Learning promoted him, (and you must remem­ber, That Doctors at Salamanca do defend in the open Schools, a whole Course of Divinity against every Body that will oppose them) let any Man that knows Oates, judge of his Doctorship by it; and as for those, that have no Acquaintance with him, or his Abilities. They are to understand, that he went to the English College at Valladolid, in April 77. to begin his LOGICK, and return'd Home in November follow­ing, as dismist for his good Qualities: Nor in truth, was he ever with­in many Miles of Salamanca in his Life. In short, We will joyn issue in this, for the Point may be easily decided, That he shall chuse One, and we will chuse another to be sent to this Ʋ [...]iversity; and if they find him to have Commenced there, or if they shall be deny'd the Sight of the Publick Registers, or perceive in them Blots, or any thing tending to a Falsi [...]ication, we will for the future, own him not only a Doctor, but to have prov'd once in his Life, a thing contradicted by us, which will give no little Lustre to his other Evidence.

But to end with him for the present. (though I confess, I have not half done; nay, (as I mention'd before) there is no end when one reflects on his strange Assertions and Follies) take this Circumstance as a Demonstration, That there is not one true Word in all his Charge: And therefore I may here well say to each of you,—

For on the one fide, he has declar'd in his very Vid E­pistle to the Reader. Narrative, That it was presented to the King on the Thirteenth of AUGUST, by the Means of Mr. Kirkby, who on the Twelfth was made acquainted with the Matters contained in it by Dr. Tongue, as appears in the little Pamphlet called, The page 1. Narrative or Manner of Discovery of the Plot [Page 84] to his Majesty. On the other side, If we consider the various Particu­lars, and the Number of Persons concern'd, 'twas impossible for him, and Dr. Tongue to digest and methodize the Whole under a Moneths time; so that we may suppose it to be begun about the XII. of JƲLY: Nor can we allow less than a Fortnight between his first De­bate about the Discovery, and his falling to work on the said Narrative; so that his Head was full of it, and consequently more particularly nice and observing, from the End of JƲNE at least, and especially in JƲLY, AƲGƲST, and SEPTEMBER; For then Protestants knew of the Treasor as well as himself. But now, when he comes to be prest about Time, Circumstances, Papers, and the like, in relation to what he urges against the Prisoners, He is so far (though the Matter happens within the said Moneths) from producing any one Note, (as certain­ly he might have done, had his Charge been true) that he will come to no positive Day, when the Accused at the Bar require it of him; and yet in his Flourishes, throughout his said Narrative, he is so ex­act, (for nothing there, he knows, can be brought as Evidence against him) that besides Consults, Accidents, and several Particularities, He remembers above a Hundred Letters, with their respective Dates, How, and Whence they came, and Who Subscribed them; though some­times Ten or Twelve do it together, according to his Relation: I say, He is so far from producing Letters or Notes, that at the Bar, he will come to no positive Day: And thus he has notoriously done in every Trial. For, in Mr. Coleman's, he shuffles you see, about the 21 th. of August, as soon as he perceiv'd, that the said Mr. Coleman was ab­sent in that Moneth; though since his Death, (and no further fear of the Business) he is again White' s Tryal, pag. 15. positive. The like you find in Mr. Ire­land's about the time of his being in Town that Moneth. As for the Jesuit's Trial, he absolutely Hang'd (you see) Mr. Gavan, by not stand­ing (as he first Accus'd him) to the Latter End of July, and Be­ginning of August, when he understood, that the said Mr. Gavan could prove himself then at Hampton. And here also he would fain have gotten off (you see) from the 2 d. of September, the Day po­sitive he pretended to have received Twenty Shillings from Ireland in London. In Mr. Langhorn's, (besides other Particulars) he was not certain, (though on so remarkable an occasion, and so little a while ago) Whether he came from Dover by Coach, or on Horse-back. And in the Last Trial, he had not only the Impudence to tell Mr. Marsh, (when the Dispute was about a Day in August) That it was a great priviledge, that he nam'd the Month; but flew also (as I shew'd you) from the Fifteenth, (though he once granted it) as soon as he began to suspect that there would be Counter-Witnesses. Is not this then (as I said) a clear Demonstration of their VILLAINY, and LYING all along? for was it possible for him, who had now Disco­ver'd all to the King himself, and was to make it good at a Bar, to go afterwards to Consults with the Conspirators, and not know [Page 85] the Time precisely; and to see and peruse several of their Papers and Letters, without being able to produce the least Scrip or Scroll, or to have any Circumstance, that has not been most evidently disprov'd? Whenas, on the contrary, notwithstanding the strict Searches, that have been made in all our Houses, and the Reading of our secret Let­ters, and notwithstanding our Examinations before Magistrates, and our Imprisonments afterwards; and by the way these Wretches have had a Sight of every private Writing, by which they came not only to know our Hands, but had oftentimes Hints, the better to frame their Accusations: I say notwithstanding all these Accidents, there has not been found▪ any ill Letter, any Commission, any Bill of Exchange, any Money, any Arms, any Horses, or any Thing else suspicious; but to the Confusion of our Enemies, an Innocency, a Patience, and a Loy­al Zeal beyond Example.

I have been (my Lords and Gent:) the more particular with Oates (though as I said, I have not half done) to the end you might see not on­ly how impossible it was, That he should have any knowledge of a Plot, had there been one; but that his whole Information also is a most vain Fiction; and consequently, if 100 Men (and all of them of some repute) should vouch and justify his Fopperies, it could but show us, what Encouragements and Temp­tations will do; For since he has most evidently Lyed all along, how can their Testimony make him to have spoken Truth? If therefore upon force you must judge thus of all, that shall witness for him, though their Credit should be a little Tollerable (of which I'le assure you, we have no Appre­hension) what are we to think of his declared Coadjutors and Partizans, who are so known, and not one whit behind him in any impudent or ap­parent falsity! As for Bedlow's part, nothing can be a greater proof of it, than that he should at first solemnly profess to the very Secretaries in his Examination upon Oath, That he knew nothing of the Plot further than of Sr. Edm. Godfreys Murther. Besides when he was askt, where they laid his Corps in Somerset house, he mention'd the Room next to that where the Duke of Albemarle lay in state; but being caught Tardy there, because it belong'd to my Lord Ossory's Protestant Servants, he went and show'd them another, in which he was yet more unfortunate, it being the common place for Pages and other forraign Attendants, and had to boot (during the Queens stay) Centinells still by it. Prance al­so you see (for I must be very brief in my Instances) acquaints us of God knows how many, that menton'd the killing the King to him, and this (as a trivial matter) even, whilst they were buying Spoons, Candlesticks, and the like. And to confirm the raising an Army by us, he come's to the very number of men it was to consist of, to wit, Fifty Thousand, and yet there are not so many Men, Wo­men and Children of our Religion in England; nor were we to expect much help from abroad seeing the Kings Navy was not only then in a good forwardness, but all forraign Princes were to­gether by the Eares, and wanted Recruits as they still do, who [Page 86] are in an actual War. But considering Dugdale is the Junior of all; for as to Jenison ▪ I shall only add this at present to what I have said pag. 57. before, That he has already demanded a PENSION for his Services; which shews both his plentiful Condition, and his Aim; I say as to Dugdale, he is no ill Proficient (I'le assure you) in pro­ceedures of this Nature, Having had▪ the luck (as well as the rest of the Fraternity) to be proved in Open Court a Villain; For at the last Staffor'd Assizes, Mr. Sambige a Protestant Gent, together with Mr. Philips the Parson of the Parish, represented to the Court, That Dugdal never mention'd to them the killing of a Justice of West­minster, as he deposes in Sir George Wakeman's Trial; and least such a Testimony should endanger the spilling of Innocent blood, they were willing to swear to the Truth of this Averment; nor could this ill man say any thing then to it, only (after some days search) he got two wretched fellows of his Gang, who privately made Oath, That Dugdal had told them, the said Deponents that Story; which contradicts nothing (had their Depositions been true) of what Sambige and Mr. Philips attested to his Confusion; and how Mr. Chetwin also (who makes Mr. Sambige in the Jesvits pag. 27. Trial his Author) will avoid this Blow, let any man tell me that can? Besides, were there no such persons as Mr. Sambige and M. Phi­lips living, is not yet the Lie most apparant and clear? for how is it possible (as I mention'd before) That Dugdale that was so greatly concern'd in the Plot, and so surpris'd and disturb'd (as ib. p. 26. he assures us) at this Murther, least it might ruin the whole business, should run the very next morning (after Mr. Ewers had forsooth with great Se­cresy told him of it) and proclame to no manner of purpose at an Al [...] before any man dreamt of it in the Country [...]

Thus stands our Case my Lords and Gent) & thus you see that no good Protestant can be safe, if such notorious Perjuries shall be countenanc'd. Nay if Popery should be thus deprest, could it be, do you think, either for the Honour or Interest of your Religion, since the History of all Country: as well as our own, (for no Tittle of this can fall to the ground and be unrecorded) will like the Ghost of a Murther'd man be ever haunting you, which must raise in yours, and your childrens thoughts great Detestation and Horror? For to what Height is the Effrontery of these Sons of Perdition come, when they can threaten Juries for not going against their Consciences, and tell Judges of WRITS of EASE, if they take notice of most apparent and impudent Contradictions. Have not they then destroy'd all Law? And will not our moderate and excellent Govern­ment (if these Precedents stand good) be the most despotical & uncertain one, that ever was but to add yet to our Amazement, who could have ever thought (unless it were to make the folly every where proportionable) that we who have so eminently hazarded our ALL for the King, that have so entirely Loved his person & have so constantly even doted on Monar­chy, should be accus'd as the grand Parricides, and that they that are ge­nerally [Page 87] reputed to hate King, and King-ship, should be now the Sticklers and Zealots for both. Is there not then some further Trick & Design in this new Loyalty? And may not the Papists (as the Dogs in the Fable) be thought too great a safety for the Fold? Yes certainly; for as the Reply, pag. 562. Apologist has long ago observ'd, The Prerogative never suffer'd; no great States man has ever been disgrac't; nor the Church of England it self, (n [...] the Liber­tyes of the People) ever wounded, but a fearful Out cry against Popery has still preceded. And now that I speak of the Liberties & Rights of the People, shew me an Instance in Story, even in the reputed Worst of Times (and therefore you may see, what Judgments ever follow the falling upon the Innocent) that whole Corporations (as appears now in the Buck­ingham case, & in other Places also) were ever before publickly Libell'd for their Choice, which takes away the chiefest Liberty and Priviledge we can possibly pretend. Therefore for Liberties sake, for Monarchies sake, for Religions sake; or in short, for the sake of all that is Good and Ho­ly, put a stop to this present Tempest, which bearing up Perjury, has not only destroy'd all Trade and Commerce among us, but render'd us a Laughing-stock to the whole world, and shaken the very Basis and Foun­dation of our Island.

WE the Mayor and Sherifs of the City of St Omer, being surpris'd at the Report, That the English Fathers residing with us, had about the beginning of the Present Year (by the Negotiation of one Titus Oates, in France and Eng­land) contrived and Plotted a wicked and bloody Treason against their natural Lord, the most excellent▪ King of Great Britain, and being the more amazed at it, since they had given through a long [...]cries of Years, a rare example among us, not only of Learning and Piety in particu­lar, but of Obedience in general, to all Civil Magistrates and Gover­nors; a thing which makes the whole Society of Jesus highly respected and esteemed, by most of the Christian Princes of the World: We say that being surpris'd at this report, we took (as far as we could) the Examination of the matter into hand, and therefore certify, That it has appeared to us by the Oaths of several of the best, and antientest Scholars of that Seminary (the Consisting of 200. Per­sons. whole College having offer'd to make the same Oath) That the said Titus Oates, was not only effectively in the said Seminary at the end of April and beginning of May, 1678 but did constantly reside there, from the tenth of December, 1677. to the twenty third of June following, without ever being absent from thence, except one night in January, at which time he was at Watten, two Leagues di­stant from us▪ The said Deponents, also have alledg'd as a reason of this their knowledge, That they Lodg'd, Convers'd, Drunk, and Eat with the said Oates, in the said Seminary, all that while, he being at a distinct table alone, and did parti [...]ularly take notice that he was [Page 88] there in April and May as abovesaid, as having seen him at that time constantly perform the Office of Reader in the Sodality of the Students in the said Seminary, and as being present at the departure of one Kil­lembeck alias Pool, an English Scholar, who went from this City the fifth day of the said Moneth of May New Stile, to take his journey into England. In Witness whereof we have caus'd the Seal of the said City to be hereunto put this 28 of December, 1678.

WE the Eschevines of the high Court of Justice of his most Serene Highness, in the City and Countrey of Liege, To all those to whom these presents shall come, greeting, do certify and attest, That a Petition being presented to us, in our ordinary Consistory in the Palace of his said Highness▪ on the behalf of Sir Thomas Preston Knight and Baronet, residing at the English College of this City; That whereas the said Sir Thomas Preston during the greatest part of the Year One Thousand Six Hundred Se­venty and Eight, and more especially in the Moneths of March, April▪ May, and June, did constantly reside in the said College, be the said Sir Thomas Preston having petition'd that we would in favour of the Truth, hear a great many Witnesses, which he had to produce, we condeseended unto his said Petition as reasonable and just, and have accordingly heard upon Oath, fourteen creditable persons, who have all unanimously upon their respective Oaths, declared and attested that the said Sir Thomas Preston Knight and Baronet, did reside all the time aforesaid, at the College aforesaid, and particularly in the Moneths of March, April, May, and June, in the Year 1678. and that he was not absent, s [...] much as one-night during the said time; and they further have attested that they knew this to be true, in that they resided all in the said College▪ and there saw, and convers'd dayly with Him.

THe like Certificate came from Watten about Sir John. Warner, the Witnesses names being

• Albert Bapthorpe
• William Bitchfielt.
• Tousaint Vanden Cruys.
• F. Caeles.
• Augustin Elmers
• Jaques Broos.
• Nicholas Willaert.
• Thomas Higgenson.
• Marc. Bartolet.
• Charles Verons.